RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense?

RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

capthook55 -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 8:18:33 PM)
Although gun control advicates fail to mention it (how surprizing), it is a fact the stricter gun control laws are the HIGHER the crime rate is. Until the courts struck down DC's gun control law it was (and still) one of the highest crime rates in the country, New York and Chicago (also almost impossible to own a gun) are also among the highest. When anyone may be armed criminals think twice

Guido1911 -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 9:09:57 PM)
Greetings...I'm from Texas. In Texas, all us law abiding citizens carry guns. When we see someone committing a crime, we shoot them. The police confiscate their gun and destroy it. guns are not the problem, they are the solution. Take personal resposibility for your safety and the safety of your community and shoot criminals. If you find yourself on a grand jury deciding whether or not to bring charges against someone who shot a crimial, ignore whatever law you are told to deal with and let the person go. word will spread and crime in your community will go down. Require all citizens over the age of 21 to apply fo a handgun carry permit and make the permit hard to get in order to insure that everyone who carries a gun wil actually be able to use it effectively in a tight situation. Soon, the police will not need to trace guns since there will be little crime. Simplistic? If not for politics, it would be.

rulemylife -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 9:21:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: capthook55 Although gun control advicates fail to mention it (how surprizing), it is a fact the stricter gun control laws are the HIGHER the crime rate is. Until the courts struck down DC's gun control law it was (and still) one of the highest crime rates in the country, New York and Chicago (also almost impossible to own a gun) are also among the highest. When anyone may be armed criminals think twice Yeah, it's just absolutely amazing that three of the largest cities in America have high crime rates. [8\|]

rulemylife -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 9:29:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Guido1911 Greetings...I'm from Texas. In Texas, all us law abiding citizens carry guns. When we see someone committing a crime, we shoot them. The police confiscate their gun and destroy it. guns are not the problem, they are the solution. Take personal resposibility for your safety and the safety of your community and shoot criminals. If you find yourself on a grand jury deciding whether or not to bring charges against someone who shot a crimial, ignore whatever law you are told to deal with and let the person go. word will spread and crime in your community will go down. Require all citizens over the age of 21 to apply fo a handgun carry permit and make the permit hard to get in order to insure that everyone who carries a gun wil actually be able to use it effectively in a tight situation. Soon, the police will not need to trace guns since there will be little crime. Simplistic? If not for politics, it would be. No, it's completely simplistic and ill thought. Are you really advocating a society of vigilantes?

Real0ne -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 9:55:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: jack8007 quote: legal or lawful eh? do you even know the difference? Please educate us. I've only been practicing 25 years, I want to hear this. Kool! I enjoy teaching attorneys the law :) Legal or Lawful? It is crucial to define the difference between legal and lawful. The generic Constitution references genuine law. The present civil authorities and their courts use the word legal. Is there a difference in the meanings? The following is quoted from A Dictionary of Law 1893: *Lawful.* In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted, sanctioned, or justified by law. “Lawful” properly implies a thing conformable to or enjoined by law; “Legal”, a thing in the form or after the manner of law or binding by law. A writ or warrant issuing from any court, under color of law, is a “legal” process however defective. See legal. *Legal.* Latin legalis. Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration, the science and the practice of law: as, the legal profession, legal advice; legal blanks, newspaper. Implied or imputed in law. Opposed to actual “Legal” looks more to the letter [form/appearance], (presumptions) and “Lawful” to the spirit [substance/content], (substantive merits) of the law. “Legal” is more appropriate for conformity to positive rules of law; “Lawful” for accord with ethical principle. “Legal” imports rather that the forms [appearances] (in other words bullshit fictions) of law are observed, that the proceeding is correct in method, that rules prescribed have been obeyed; “Lawful” that the right is actful in substance, that moral quality is secured. “Legal” is the antithesis of equitable, and the equivalent of constructive. 2 Abbott’s Law Dic. 24. be nice now :) oh what area do you practice btw? Ok People now we get to see how attorneys play ball.... this is gonna be fun! quote: ORIGINAL: jack8007 quote: Legal or Lawful? So what's the difference?!?! I have to agree, you are leagues from clear. Now I would expect anyone who is not in the law profession to say that but for you to say that immediately throws up big red flags. You have 2 adjectives that are largely interchangeable, even if by grammatical convention lawyers may often refer to an act as "lawful" or not - I've never heard ANYBODY try to make the distinctions you're trying to make, nor even give a shit. Why would they give a shit? There is no money in it. Bullshit make turn on me's and the corrupt courts lots of money. In fact, when I translate my prose from legalese for my clients, I translate "lawful" as "legal", because real people don't say "lawful". Ok here, this should be perfectly clear to you. Quantum syntax translation just for you no charge, understandable read in either direction and dierctly translatable into 5000 dialects. quote: LAW: For the law is with the substance and morals. LEGAL: For the legal is with the false construction and void morals. Dont tell me I already know... you dont get it LOL. Black's isn't free online, and I sure don't give enough of a shit to break mine open & copy it. Bottom of the barrel toilet paper dictionary by comparison. I have every damn one of them and when I am lazy I qoute from them, but they are bottom of the barrel dictoinaries. The dictionaries you cited are - well, let's say unknown - Black's is the *only* generally recognized legal dictionary. ah huh! LOL Like I said a POS, the supreme court uses bouviers btw LOL But most importantly, you haven't tried to explain what difference it makes to your original point. yes I did, why are you pretending. Maybe you arent a real attorney.... Lots of people say they are a lot of things. An attorney would have had no problem understanding the distinctions so whats your malfunction? I will grant, you won't see job openings for "lawful secretaries", but how does that make a difference to your point? It looks to me like we are left with your distinction without a difference, in which case I refer you to CA Civil Code sec. 3533, "The law disregards trifles." See also, "sea lawyer". Yeh modern legal roman law disregards lots of shit. 50 words all mean the same thing. turn on me's to dumb to make distinctions. See misfeasance and trespass on the case. Oh shit that last one is common law! quick get your cross!! And don't be listening to any of them common law boys about strawmen, etc, or you'll wind up sharing a cell with Wesley Snipes. Come on dont come on here and tell everyone you are a fucking attorney and you dont even know the difference between civil, common and commercial law. damn. speaking of common law..... quote: WISCONSIN CONSTITUTION: ARTICLE XIV. Common law continued in force. SECTION 13. Such parts of the common law as are now in force in the territory of Wisconsin, not inconsistent with this constitution, shall be and continue part of the law of this state until altered or suspended by the legislature. failure to respond with peculiar specificity to the merits in fact is tacit acquiescence that you agree with everything I have said. there is a legal construction just for you turn on me!

jack8007 -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 9:57:56 PM)
quote: Co. Litt. 161 b, 162 a; Crompt. Just. P. 65; Cunn. Dict. h.t. I gotta admit, I've never heard of that reporter - and if your judge's clerk can't find it on Westlaw, it doesn't exist. No you can't kill as easily with a knife as a firearm, and it's complete NRA bullshit to claim that. If it were true, the NRA would be fine with giving up guns as long as they could have knives. When was the last time you heard of some moron accidentally discharging a knife, and killing some fool down the street? What's more, any moron that can squeeze a couple pounds worth can kill anybody as far out as that round will carry. How many people would Loughner have killed with a knife? Do you want a duel with any knife you want, and your opponent gets any gun he wants? Of course you're trying to make the slippery slope argument, that cars or books or bacteria kill people too - and I'm telling you that if you don't understand the differences, you don't have the common sense to be trusted with a firearm. Your slippery slope is imaginary, and anybody that can't deal with life's routine dilemmas sure can't be trusted with a weapon. Don't bullshit yourself or anybody else. Life is too short.

jack8007 -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 10:04:04 PM)
quote: there will be little crime http://www.census.gov/statab/ranks/rank21.html

jack8007 -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 10:05:53 PM)
quote: how attorneys play ball The 1st thing they do is not get in arguments with idiots.

Real0ne -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 10:07:15 PM)
anybody can throw a blasting cap into a 5 pound bag of flour and level the whole damn building too, so lets outlaw flour! flour kills! now you want to pretend slippery slope does not exist? more rights being trampled every day by your bullshit fucking by-laws and corrupt fucking courts. it started out will not be infringed then well we can infringe a little bit then its a privilege to own cant conceal carry cant carry at all can own nah slippery slope its all our imagination aint it chief.

Real0ne -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 10:09:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jack8007 quote: how attorneys play ball The 1st thing they do is not get in arguments with idiots. I accept your concession!

jack8007 -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 10:12:21 PM)
quote: stricter gun control laws are the HIGHER the crime rate You assume that correlation is cause, which is one of the 1st fallacies of statistics. You haven't and can't prove that crime rates weren't higher and wouldn't be higher without local laws.

Real0ne -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 10:14:37 PM)
its already been proven, you just dont seem to get around much.

jack8007 -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 10:16:19 PM)
quote: I accept You should probably get your meds adjusted. People will be friendlier.

Real0ne -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 10:22:19 PM)
you should stop pretending to be something you arent. People might actually believe you. The best way to do that is get back on your meds.

Real0ne -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/2/2011 10:24:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: capthook55 Although gun control advicates fail to mention it (how surprizing), it is a fact the stricter gun control laws are the HIGHER the crime rate is. Until the courts struck down DC's gun control law it was (and still) one of the highest crime rates in the country, New York and Chicago (also almost impossible to own a gun) are also among the highest. When anyone may be armed criminals think twice Yeah, it's just absolutely amazing that three of the largest cities in America have high crime rates. [8\|] crime rates are properly measured per capita

joether -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/3/2011 12:46:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: capthook55 Although gun control advicates fail to mention it (how surprizing), it is a fact the stricter gun control laws are the HIGHER the crime rate is. Until the courts struck down DC's gun control law it was (and still) one of the highest crime rates in the country, New York and Chicago (also almost impossible to own a gun) are also among the highest. When anyone may be armed criminals think twice You only have the facts, half correct. The FBI has reported (on several occasions), that criminals have purchased firearms in states with very laxed gun laws, then travelled to states with strict gun laws, to commite the crime. So which state is at fault for its gun laws? The State the criminal obtain the firearm with practical easy? Or the State with the strict gun control. Yes, DC had a high crime rate. If you leave the tourist/goverment parts of DC, most of it is slums (read: the poor). Poor neighborhoods, generally means very small amounts of money for a proper police presence (aka high crime rate). Maybe your unfamiliar with D.C.'s location in the USA. It borders a state with a very loose gun control laws (compared to D.C. before the SCOTUS's ruling). Do you know which state that is? (Hint: Its not Maryland) If everyone was armed....so are the criminals. If you want to live in a place with no gun laws, no goverment regulations, and no taxes; Move to Somalia (the southern part).

Politesub53 -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/3/2011 3:55:18 AM)
quote: Realone Bottom of the barrel toilet paper dictionary by comparison. I have every damn one of them and when I am lazy I qoute from them, but they are bottom of the barrel dictoinaries. As "dictoinaries" go, you were quick enough to spout that Blacks was the "be all and end all" a few weeks ago. I am certain that someone unable to spell "dictionary" will ever understand the meaning of its contents.

Real0ne -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/3/2011 4:17:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether If everyone was armed....so are the criminals. If you want to live in a place with no gun laws, no goverment regulations, and no taxes; Move to Somalia (the southern part). yeh if everyone was armed then it wouldnt be just the criminals that had guns. combining government and law and taxes and regulation is a total misnomer. you do not need government to have law, and regulations are not law and taxes are or become extortion money.

truckinslave -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/3/2011 6:00:12 AM)
tg, I'm not sure what your point is here. But thanks anyway. Interestingly, though, either they changed the designations or my memory flags (I gave up my licenses over 15 years ago). Anyway, I must have had a Class 6, not a Class 7. It's commonly called a "Reloaders License"; I reloaded and sold ammo. As an aside: there was a big scare during the BC years when he pushed for... something; I forget what he called it. An Armory License? Anyway, a dozen or so of my friends and I thought the thresholds were more than just mildly humorous; our cars normally would have qualified, and the cars of every handgun competitor we knew would have qualified on match day. Anyway, primers ran scarce and we decided we would each try to order 100,000, mixed between Large Pistol, Small Pistol, and Small Rifle. Anyway, 3 of us got lucky that night, and I doubled my order. We didn't have to buy primers for a while.... Those were the days. Now the shipping regs are such that we'd probably have to have that many shipped on a placarded (hazmat) truck, get $500 worth of licenses, register with the Sheriff, and insure the whole damned county; and we were just some guys that shot a little on the weekends....

truckinslave -> RE: What kind of Gun Regulation Makes Sense? (3/3/2011 6:14:01 AM)
quote: losses your neighborhood suffers from financial scams by privateers? Like the mortgage meltdown? One of the dumbest arguments common today is that the banks are somehow to blame when people cannot pay their mortgages. I suppose it's a great argument for control/elimination of firearms, though. If the banks hadn't owned guns they couldn't have held them to the heads of good hardworking citizens and made them buy houses they couldn't afford, right? My brother got nailed in that, btw, but at least he is honest enough to blame himself. Three spec/rent houses, not 5% total down payment, a gamble based on the ironclad fact, he told me, that houses in Savannah Ga would go up 15% every year from then on. It was a sure thing. Hell, I looked at a deal with a guy I knew in Phoenix. He finally told me, thank God, that his brothers and his uncle wanted to keep it in the family. So, instead of losing my ass in real estate I got to lose it in trucking. Just lucky I guess [:)]

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875