quote:

Let's see Israel is under constant threat by terrorists and neighboring countries that have one stated goal, the destruction of the State of Israel. They also have very lax gun control laws and little gun related crime.

quote:

Guns are not the problem.

quote:

The availability of guns is not the problem.

quote:

The problem is when an unstable individual takes weapons and uses them for some purpose known only to himself.

quote:

How in the fuck is this planned legislation going to do one fucking thing to stop gun related crime from all people that use guns to commit a crime?

quote:

IN other words, you and Feinstein and the crowd you belong to needs to get real and do something that actually solves or reduces the entire problem, not some part that amounts to less than two percent of gun related crimes.

quote:

Tazzy, it has been proved that everyone on the planet, given the right stimuli can suffer a psychotic break from reality. This is common with people with ptsd who suffered some form of abuse, and very common in returning combat vets.

quote:

A person suffering a psychotic break can react in two ways, lash out and commit violent acts against others, or simply take their own life.

Now since it cannot be predicted as to who will suffer such a break from reality, what do you suggest be done?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Look, I did an experiment with my weapons this week.

First, I got quite inebriated on New Year's eve to weaken my resistance to outside influences. I then spent a couple of hours in my den with two of my weapons with the highest rate of fire and a good number of loaded magazines.

I weighted for those weapons and that ammo to make me want to kill something.

It never happened.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Guns are not the problem.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
The availability of guns is not the problem.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
The problem is when an unstable individual takes weapons and uses them for some purpose known only to himself.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Now tazzy, answer me one simple question.

How in the fuck is this planned legislation going to do one fucking thing to stop gun related crime from all people that use guns to commit a crime?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
I am not referring to the individual that due to whatever influences and stimuli in his or her life grabs a weapon and goes out and kills a bunch of people, that is not the norm for gun related crime.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Focus on the whole picture. Tell me how this proposed bill will do more than possibly prevent the rarest of incidents. It failed to do so when they tried it the first time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
IN other words, you and Feinstein and the crowd you belong to needs to get real and do something that actually solves or reduces the entire problem, not some part that amounts to less than two percent of gun related crimes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
I and many who own guns are getting fucking tired of having fingers pointed in our direction and telling us that we are the problem, when we comply with the laws presently on the books.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Come up with a REALISTIC solution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

In the colonial days, South Carolina had banned the slave trade and Virginia had attempted to do the same, but the British government having given special protection to The Royal African Company, the colonies' efforts were ultimately futile.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

In the colonial days, South Carolina had banned the slave trade and Virginia had attempted to do the same, but the British government having given special protection to The Royal African Company, the colonies' efforts were ultimately futile.

You need to read why the two states wanted the slave trade banned. It wasnt exactly about the rights and wrongs of slavery.

In any evet South Carolina opened the slave trade again in 1803.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Tazzy, it has been proved that everyone on the planet, given the right stimuli can suffer a psychotic break from reality. This is common with people with ptsd who suffered some form of abuse, and very common in returning combat vets.

A person suffering a psychotic break can react in two ways, lash out and commit violent acts against others, or simply take their own life.

Now since it cannot be predicted as to who will suffer such a break from reality, what do you suggest be done?

In this situation, Joe Blow, responsible and law abiding gun owner, military vet is perfectly alright Monday. Tuesday something happens and bingo he is no longer responsible or able to handle firearms without harming himself or others.

The laws are already in place that prevent anyone mentally unstable to purchase firearms. The problem, as shown in Virginia with Cho, was that the mental health records that would have kept him from purchasing a firearm was not part of the back ground check information.

99% of gun owners store their weapons safely, and depending on the area in which they live, they may have one weapon within easy reach, like I do. Granted, the odds are that the person foolish enough to break into my home will be dealt with effectively by Princess. She is a cute little thing, cuddly and full of fun. She doesnt bark at people coming into the house, but if they come in and she does not recognize them, she proceeds to growl and stop them unless told otherwise by me or my sister.

Like I said, she is a small dog, 75% timber wolf and 25% Siberian husky. There is a picture of her in my photos on my profile.

So she will probably be very effective at dealing with the intruder and me and my 1911 colt will probably be more redundant than effective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Tazzy, it has been proved that everyone on the planet, given the right stimuli can suffer a psychotic break from reality. This is common with people with ptsd who suffered some form of abuse, and very common in returning combat vets.

A person suffering a psychotic break can react in two ways, lash out and commit violent acts against others, or simply take their own life.

Now since it cannot be predicted as to who will suffer such a break from reality, what do you suggest be done?

In this situation, Joe Blow, responsible and law abiding gun owner, military vet is perfectly alright Monday. Tuesday something happens and bingo he is no longer responsible or able to handle firearms without harming himself or others.

The laws are already in place that prevent anyone mentally unstable to purchase firearms. The problem, as shown in Virginia with Cho, was that the mental health records that would have kept him from purchasing a firearm was not part of the back ground check information.

99% of gun owners store their weapons safely, and depending on the area in which they live, they may have one weapon within easy reach, like I do. Granted, the odds are that the person foolish enough to break into my home will be dealt with effectively by Princess. She is a cute little thing, cuddly and full of fun. She doesnt bark at people coming into the house, but if they come in and she does not recognize them, she proceeds to growl and stop them unless told otherwise by me or my sister.

Like I said, she is a small dog, 75% timber wolf and 25% Siberian husky. There is a picture of her in my photos on my profile.

So she will probably be very effective at dealing with the intruder and me and my 1911 colt will probably be more redundant than effective.

You are a mental health expert? Oh you also mean people like James Holme, Jared Loughner, they had mental problems but had no trouble buying/getting guns and ammo. As for Adam Lanza, his mother was a very responsible gun owner, left guns out, that how her son got ahold them. Mental Illness just does not happen, with each there is a long history. I also wonder how a person in a canatonic state does either kill themselves or others...as you say. Oh and as to Cho the problem was not that part of the application was left blank, Cho did not sign a release of information as required.

quote:

If you knew the federal firearms laws, you would know that anyone that has a severe mental illness is not eligible to purchase a firearm. However, the states are responsible for putting that information on the record so that it shows up on the back ground check.

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver


You mean South Carolina thought too many African born slaves were a danger to the colony and Virginia wanted to ban it foreconomic reasons?

Thomas Jefferson made many disingenuous tirades against the British about the slave trade but when he had the power to do something about it, he did less than nothing, being a slave owner himself, he never freed any but did apparently fuck a few.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

If you knew the federal firearms laws, you would know that anyone that has a severe mental illness is not eligible to purchase a firearm. However, the states are responsible for putting that information on the record so that it shows up on the back ground check.

What background checks are there with private sales/"gifts"?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

The reasoning was simple, to keep the government of the people in the hands of the people.

a. A well regulated militia---The goal
b. being necessary to the security of a free State,---The reason
c. the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.---The means of accomplishing the goal.

quote:

"Whereas civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as military forces, which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms." Tench Coxe, one of the framers of the amendment.

quote:

"Congress may give us a select militia which will, in fact, be a standing army - or Congress, afraid of a general militia, may say there shall be no militia at all. When a select militia is formed, the people in general may be disarmed."

-John Smilie

Then of course there are the words of Mao, the political power comes from the right to own firearms. As long as the people maintain that right, the government is held in check.

The original version of the 2nd amendment was as follows:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well-armed and well-regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of baring arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

Congress moved the individual rights to be secondary to the security of a free country, and of course dropped the religious exemption all together.

What this means is that the security of the state is primary, the rights of the individual are secondary but not eliminated. In the modern United States, the National Guard can be nationalized over the objections of the state's governors by executive order, which President Bush used a few times to call up the national guard units of various states for duty in Afghanistan and Iraq.

For this reason, under the Militia Act of 1903, many states established State Defense Forces, the members of which supply their own firearms, ammo and gear. While these forces are intended to support the National Guard, they are not subject to call by the federal government.

Jon Roland made some points in his paper "The Constitutional Militia."

quote:

Essentially, a militiaman is any citizen in his capacity as a defender of the state. By "state" we do not mean "the government", but a community of citizens in possession of a territory. A citizen whose behavior makes him an enemy of the state is not a militiaman, because he cannot both defend the state and attack it at the same time. Furthermore, he may have official duties, such as serving in an executive, judicial, or legislative position, or as a member in the armed forces, which take precedence over general militia duties. Therefore, in the broadest sense, the Militia is all citizens who are not enemies of the state and who do not have official duties that take precedence over their militia duties. That may include officials when they are off-duty.

If you defend yourself against a criminal attack, what you are really doing is not just defending yourself. You are calling up the militia, consisting of yourself, to defend a member of the community, also consisting of yourself, and thereby forming a militia of one. If you ask someone else to help you, you are calling up the militia consisting of the two of you.

Although every citizen has the duty to defend the state, that duty extends only as far as he is able to carry it out. No one has the duty to do what is impossible for him. On the other hand, he has the duty to exercise his abilities to make them as great as he can. His duty does not begin when a situation arises that requires him to act. He also has a duty to prepare to respond to any reasonably foreseeable contingencies.
Complete Article.

All these thoughts on the Second Amendment implies that the state militia and those members of the citizenry are responsible for the defense of the state, and to fulfill this requirement, it stands to reason that they should be able to arm themselves with weapons comparable to, if not exact weapon model, those of the military.

However, there have been restrictions placed on who can own firearms that have stood against the second amendment.

The 1968 Gun Control Act became part of Title 18 of the U.S. Code (Criminal Code), and prohibited the selling of firearms to anyone suspected of being:

under indictment or convicted of a felony

a fugitive from justice

a drug user

a mental defective or having been in a mental institution

unfit for any other reason

Thus when the shooter in the Virginia Tech incident purchased his weapons that he used to commit the act, it was not breakdown of the system that allowed him to purchase weapons that under the law he was not legally allowed to own.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

If you knew the federal firearms laws, you would know that anyone that has a severe mental illness is not eligible to purchase a firearm. However, the states are responsible for putting that information on the record so that it shows up on the back ground check.

What background checks are there with private sales/"gifts"?

I told you what I thought of private sales, I would make those sales illegal and if someone wanted to sell a gun, they would have to consign it to a licensed dealer, like I did when I sold off part of my collection.

I would suggest that in the gift situation, the gun could not be transferred until background check had been done.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

If you knew the federal firearms laws, you would know that anyone that has a severe mental illness is not eligible to purchase a firearm. However, the states are responsible for putting that information on the record so that it shows up on the back ground check.

What background checks are there with private sales/"gifts"?

I told you what I thought of private sales, I would make those sales illegal and if someone wanted to sell a gun, they would have to consign it to a licensed dealer, like I did when I sold off part of my collection.

I would suggest that in the gift situation, the gun could not be transferred until background check had been done.

You do realize that is part of Fienstein's bill. The only way to ensure this is done is to register the weapons.

quote:

Act. 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44.

Adjudicated as a mental defective. (a) A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease:

(1) Is a danger to himself or to others; or

(2) Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.

(b) The term shall include—

(1) A finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case; and

(2) Those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility pursuant to articles 50a and 72b of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. 850a, 876b.

quote:


<SNIP>If you knew the federal firearms laws, you would know that anyone that has a severe mental illness is not eligible to purchase a firearm. However, the states are responsible for putting that information on the record so that it shows up on the back ground check.

A person suffering from a psychotic break is not in a catatonic state every time. As for the release of information, under the HEPA laws, that only applies to family members, other health agencies etc. It does not apply when it is in reference to a firearm purchase. Read the appropriate federal statutes. The information goes to the state, which is responsible for making that information available for a back ground check.

Hell I didnt sign a fucking release for anything and my stay in a detox center shows up every time I buy a firearm. Explain that one mr know it all.