quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

And yet, every thread, there it is. Same guys. Same arguments. Endless.

So how about you, Caped Crusader? YOU got anything on the actual topic?

Or just trolling around to make sure no one's wrong about guns on the Internet?

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
All it would have taken was one phone call to the cops to stop this.

So.... why didn't somebody do that?? [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
It was known that he shouldn't be carrying but nobody told the authorities, that is the problem.

Really? You know that for absolute positive sure?
Because from the reports I've seen, heard, and read from various media, he was perfectly entitled to carry.
It has ONLY come into question AFTER he shot those people.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Legitimate owners shouldn't fear registration, I guess you missed the post about NO, CA, and NY all telling people that and then using the registration to confiscate firearms.

No, I didn't miss it at all.
If they confiscated those firearms after registration, then something must have been wrong otherwise they would have been allowed to have kept them.
I'm all for it. I think that paper exercise should be repeated across the country, nationwide.
Perhaps then, some of the illegal (or illegally obtained) guns might get taken off the streets.
After that, test each and every gun owner with a health check to see if they still qualify to own a gun.
Legit and law abiding car/truck owners do it every year with their vehicles don't they?
Why not with guns? Makes sense to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant
Tell you what freedom...you show me a state where it days that a car owner must show a valid physical examination each year to keep their license to drive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pacifico23

See... I used to be like you people. A major gun advocate, going on forums fighting the good fight, actually was dumb enough to even donate to the NRA. Been a 10 year california gun member and 8year 2A foundation member. Honestly debating the anti's..... who cares. You will NEVER convince them, and they will never convince you. Let them jack off to the smart guns. Not like any intelligent firearm owner would ever purchase one. Nor would the ever be mandated into law that all handguns require it.

Just buy your guns, buy a few thousand rounds and a good safe and some classes. Let everyone else debate. They WILL NOT be coming for your guns any time soon whatsoever. More guns in America then Citizens. For your grand kids guns? Maybe? But who cares at that point, America is already broken and on the way to complete globalization. My life has been so much better since I got my head out of the stupid gun debate and liberal vs conservatism crap. Who cares. Enjoy life.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
All it would have taken was one phone call to the cops to stop this.

So.... why didn't somebody do that?? [8|]

And THAT is where the real problem lies. An inanimate object (the gun, if you haven't figured that out) didn't go flying through the air to the victim's residence and start spewing out lead pellets all on it's own. A PERSON that lacked the mentality to know when it was appropriate to use that inanimate object was the problem. And to me, THAT is where the focus needs to be. NOT on the millions of responsible gun owners for which that isn't a problem.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
It was known that he shouldn't be carrying but nobody told the authorities, that is the problem.

Really? You know that for absolute positive sure?
Because from the reports I've seen, heard, and read from various media, he was perfectly entitled to carry.
It has ONLY come into question AFTER he shot those people.

He was perfectly entitled to carry because no one reported his possibly being mentally incapable of safely and lawfully using the firearm. SOMETIMES people do and will slip by. That happens with all manner of things and circumstances. In spite of lots of laws and regulations people do die in car accidents due to carelessness and misuse, and people do die from accidents in swimming pools. To try to eliminate ALL deaths by firearms is as ridiculous of a goal as trying to eliminate all deaths associated with cars and swimming pools.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Legitimate owners shouldn't fear registration, I guess you missed the post about NO, CA, and NY all telling people that and then using the registration to confiscate firearms.

No, I didn't miss it at all.
If they confiscated those firearms after registration, then something must have been wrong otherwise they would have been allowed to have kept them.

Yes, something WAS wrong...the guns were registered! That was part of the slippery slope. First they require all firearms to be registered, THEN they make them illegal once they know where they are located.


I'm all for it. I think that paper exercise should be repeated across the country, nationwide.
Perhaps then, some of the illegal (or illegally obtained) guns might get taken off the streets.

And you would be wrong. Why? Because criminals are called criminals for a reason. Just because a law is passed requiring guns to be registered, there is no reason to expect them to comply with that law since they have already shown a predilection toward ignoring the law. And if a law is passed requiring them to turn in their guns there is no reason to believe they will comply with that law either. A very few illegal guns will slowly...VERY slowly...be taken off the streets as various criminals are arrested with those firearms in their possession. Funny thing is, THAT is already happening, and having little to no over all effect.


After that, test each and every gun owner with a health check to see if they still qualify to own a gun.
Legit and law abiding car/truck owners do it every year with their vehicles don't they?

No, car/truck owners do NOT have to be checked every year. At least not in all states. Maybe not in any state. Here in my state, an automobile owner has to make sure their car is registered. You have the option of doing this once every year or every two years. Your choice. Driver's licenses are renewed every 5 years, and the only test for that is the eye exam, done right there where you apply for the license. The only testing on the car itself is an emissions test to make sure it is in compliance with air quality standards. Cars over a certain age are exempt from the air emissions test. There are certain driving and written tests for certain people depending on age and (I think) their driving record. Myself, I have not needed to take a written or driving test of any kind since 1993.

Why not with guns? Makes sense to me.

There is a saying that seems very appropriate here. It is, "I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you." I'm sure you don't understand. I'm also pretty sure that you don't even try.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

No,I don't intend to discuss those fixes with you.
This is a gun thread and the issue is the easy access to weapons.
Now what you bring up is worthy of discussion but in no way mitigates the need to restrict the market of firearms in this country.
Have the intellectual courage to discuss that problem ,on this thread,than feel free to start another,deflection thread of your own.
By the way what you suggest is not,in fact,easy....not without the national database that the NRA stands in the way of.
Another thing...do you know how many gun stores and wal mart's we have in this country.....I highly doubt that,at current staffing numbers,we can afford to station officers in each and every point of sale venue.
Not with all the venue's we have....which brings us right back to restricting the market for gun sales [:)]

Any thing that addresses the problem of criminal use of firearms is part of the discussion with or without your permission.
Actually this is a thread about a bully who could have been stopped if the guy he pulled a gun on had called the cops. It isn't about guns or gun control.

quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003
the slippery slope.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pacifico23

Surprised no one has mentioned the debacle of Ameritex yet. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=896247&highlight=smart+gun The supposed first micro stamped smart guns.

I really dont want to get into the debate, but seems any are misinformed about this technology and its down pits. Thank god for Gene Hoffman, for fighting the fight against this crap in California. And to the posters who say they will ban firearms for smartguns is complete hearsay and a lie. There are over 300 million firearms, the logistics is impossible for that gun grab to do without violating rights of citizens. Im in Califonia we dealt with this a few years back. Even if microstamping worked, there will not be any laws mandating it on every firearm any time soon. Now.. if micro stamping was given the go ahead, and depts were using them as standard issue. Only then would I start worrying that all new guns would require it. But at that point if the technology is perfected in a manner that anyone in my house can use. If it works through, bodily injury, Liquids such a blood, or extreme weathers, as well if the gun can operate if not properly held.Then Ide be open to it. There are major benefits to it is the tech worked perfectly. Majority of homicides are done with stolen firearms. This would reduce those numbers drastically. But the guns you already own? Not like they will take them away. Additonally, if you want a model 87, glocks, sig P, 1911's series still. Screw it they will be going in the curio relics section of firearms at that point. Just buy them through those markets.

If I were you guys outside of california, ide be more worried about the bullet button, 10 round magazine capacity limits, and the god awful warning labels on the new handguns. My new p226 is completely ruined due to the stupid warning crap on the side. So annoying.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

You get up everyday, look around in a cold sweat, and worry "OK...who's out there trying to take my guns today?!"

Don't you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
All it would have taken was one phone call to the cops to stop this.

So.... why didn't somebody do that?? [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
It was known that he shouldn't be carrying but nobody told the authorities, that is the problem.

Really? You know that for absolute positive sure?
Because from the reports I've seen, heard, and read from various media, he was perfectly entitled to carry.
It has ONLY come into question AFTER he shot those people.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Legitimate owners shouldn't fear registration, I guess you missed the post about NO, CA, and NY all telling people that and then using the registration to confiscate firearms.

No, I didn't miss it at all.
If they confiscated those firearms after registration, then something must have been wrong otherwise they would have been allowed to have kept them.
I'm all for it. I think that paper exercise should be repeated across the country, nationwide.
Perhaps then, some of the illegal (or illegally obtained) guns might get taken off the streets.
After that, test each and every gun owner with a health check to see if they still qualify to own a gun.
Legit and law abiding car/truck owners do it every year with their vehicles don't they?
Why not with guns? Makes sense to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

Now if the person did not have a firearm, he could have physically attacked the couple. Maybe kill one or more; but the likely outcome would be getting beaten up and him arrested.

Time, for me, is the key thing. A minute, a few seconds even, to let the rage pass. Or to shout and maybe hit inanimate objects, rather than reach for a weapon.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Must be nice to have such faith in government,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Don't they have eye tests in your state?

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
All it would have taken was one phone call to the cops to stop this.

So.... why didn't somebody do that?? [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
It was known that he shouldn't be carrying but nobody told the authorities, that is the problem.

Really? You know that for absolute positive sure?
Because from the reports I've seen, heard, and read from various media, he was perfectly entitled to carry.
It has ONLY come into question AFTER he shot those people.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Legitimate owners shouldn't fear registration, I guess you missed the post about NO, CA, and NY all telling people that and then using the registration to confiscate firearms.

No, I didn't miss it at all.
If they confiscated those firearms after registration, then something must have been wrong otherwise they would have been allowed to have kept them.
I'm all for it. I think that paper exercise should be repeated across the country, nationwide.
Perhaps then, some of the illegal (or illegally obtained) guns might get taken off the streets.
After that, test each and every gun owner with a health check to see if they still qualify to own a gun.
Legit and law abiding car/truck owners do it every year with their vehicles don't they?
Why not with guns? Makes sense to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Must be nice to have such faith in government, what was wrong was in two cases the government lied, and just got the registration so they would be able to collect them.
In the other the mayor, who didn't care enough about his citizens to use school buses to evacuate them used looting as an excuse to grab guns of the people most likely to be victims.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Threatening two different people with a gun because you don't like where they park, and you don't think it was clear he had serious problems?
You need to think before you tell us what to do.