RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (Full Version)

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



Message


MasterDrakk -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 2:44:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech


quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

What I don't get is why the pro-gun crowd keeps saying 'it would work if only all of these millions of people across the country always did their job perfectly every single time and never made mistakes' without recognizing that the issue is that a system where they are expected to do so is exactly the problem.


One of the frequent issues is nut cases arming themselves due to bureaucrats not doing their job in a timely manner. We don't need perfection but a system of due diligence in getting the job done. The thesis of so many legal gun owners is that we don't need more legislation but more enforcement of legislation that already exists.

Why should more laws what are going to be enforced in a slip-shod manner at best be enacted? Fix the machinery in place before talking about buying more expensive machinery.

And he doesn't understand that the NICS system was designed (when the Dems had a veto prove congress ) to fail.
It doesn't matter how well they do their jobs, if entry into the system is not mandatory it is doomed to fail. we want to fix the system.
Giving thr government more power when they can't handle what the have is stupid.


Proof but fail anyhow. 1998 the Reps owned both houses. the NICS system was designed to be hobbled by the amendments that were agreed to by the Dems to pass it in 93 and wouldnt have went anywhere without Reagand pushing and shoving it and shaming the republicans to vote for it after they had cut it to death.




BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 2:57:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

Update, on the psycho shooter, add another victim, and the number is up to at least 5.

His wife, was found under the floorboards in his home.


Daily Mail-Shooters wife found under floorboards

People like this, are able to purchase weapons in the states.

From the article in the Daily Mail:

Officials say Kevin Hanson Neal, 43, began firing at 7.52am on Tuesday
Police raided his home Wednesday and found his wife's remains concealed under floorboards
They believe the killing of his wife is what started his rampage on Tuesday
He opened fire near his home on Bobcat Lane in Rancho Tehama then drove off
On his way through the town, he shot a woman and her child in their truck
The mother suffered life-threatening wounds and remains in hospital
A second child was hurt at Rancho Tehama Elementary School and airlifted
He was identified as Alejandro Hernandez, 6, and is expected to recover
Neal attempted to gain entry to the school, but it was on lockdown
Police shot the gunman was found dead near the school after a brief gunfight
Ten people, including the two children injured, remain in the hospital


wow, just wow



Please note, people like this are NOT legally allowed to possess or carry deadly weapons in the United States.
The person obtained weapons illegally because some bureaucrats didn't report his legal issues so he could be flagged as having had his rights restricted under law.

Not only that but he was under a court order to turn over his guns, all of which he possessed illegally.
Even though the neighbors filed a complaint against him shooting in his backyard the sheriffs office did nothing. Another example of malpractice by the sheriffs office.
Had the Sheriff done any part of their job t5his would not have happened,
got the guns illegally an these people want to pretend that not only did he get them legally, and not only did the sheriff's office screw up at every turn, but
that this nut was a typical gun owner.




DesideriScuri -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 3:36:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech
A local issue here. I'll open that can of worms and see what the commentary is.
If a person has a valid concealed carry permit; should the person still have to go through the NICS background check every time they purchase a firearm?

To get a concealed carry permit here you have to meet some requirements.
A> An FBI background check not just a NICS database check.
B> Meet training requirements. (Passing a state approved firearms class, being a law enforcement officer or a licensed armed security guard, or documenting firearms training in the military all meet the training requirement. If using military records, you have a written quiz to pass demonstrating understanding of state law pertaining to concealed carry.)
C> Pass an interview with State Highway patrol during the initial application. (You have to do the application in person and the interviewer can flag you for further investigation if they think it is needed.)
D> Pay the fees for the investigation.
E> Meet federal and state requirements to legally own a firearm.
It usually takes 4-6 weeks for investigation and permit processing.

Since it requires a much more extensive investigation for a concealed permit; legislators are noting it is redundant to do an instant NICS check on persons who have already been verified. As the revocation of a concealed permit is actually handled much more succinctly than a NICS entry for issues; this would actually be more restrictive in preventing a permit holder from purchasing a firearm after disqualified.
In practice, using a concealed permit would have a FFL holder calling the local police to verify the permit is still valid instead of paying a per transaction fee for a call to the NICS database.

Opinions anyone?


Does your concealed carry permit require regular renewals? In Ohio, they expire after 5 years. Renewal requires proof of competency, which can be a previous permit, or a certificate from an approved instructor.

If you have a valid concealed carry permit, I wouldn't think another NICS check would be necessary as long as the local police verified the permit is still valid.




kdsub -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 4:11:42 PM)

Just move to Missouri... you do not need a conceal and carry licence... This even thought the people of Missouri voted conceal and carry down. The Republican legislature said fuck you we ware over riding the will of the people.

Butch




BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 5:19:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech
A local issue here. I'll open that can of worms and see what the commentary is.
If a person has a valid concealed carry permit; should the person still have to go through the NICS background check every time they purchase a firearm?

To get a concealed carry permit here you have to meet some requirements.
A> An FBI background check not just a NICS database check.
B> Meet training requirements. (Passing a state approved firearms class, being a law enforcement officer or a licensed armed security guard, or documenting firearms training in the military all meet the training requirement. If using military records, you have a written quiz to pass demonstrating understanding of state law pertaining to concealed carry.)
C> Pass an interview with State Highway patrol during the initial application. (You have to do the application in person and the interviewer can flag you for further investigation if they think it is needed.)
D> Pay the fees for the investigation.
E> Meet federal and state requirements to legally own a firearm.
It usually takes 4-6 weeks for investigation and permit processing.

Since it requires a much more extensive investigation for a concealed permit; legislators are noting it is redundant to do an instant NICS check on persons who have already been verified. As the revocation of a concealed permit is actually handled much more succinctly than a NICS entry for issues; this would actually be more restrictive in preventing a permit holder from purchasing a firearm after disqualified.
In practice, using a concealed permit would have a FFL holder calling the local police to verify the permit is still valid instead of paying a per transaction fee for a call to the NICS database.

Opinions anyone?


Does your concealed carry permit require regular renewals? In Ohio, they expire after 5 years. Renewal requires proof of competency, which can be a previous permit, or a certificate from an approved instructor.

If you have a valid concealed carry permit, I wouldn't think another NICS check would be necessary as long as the local police verified the permit is still valid.


Here the permit can be renewed for one to three years. And of course it is invalidated if you have violated the terms.




DesideriScuri -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 6:01:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Does your concealed carry permit require regular renewals? In Ohio, they expire after 5 years. Renewal requires proof of competency, which can be a previous permit, or a certificate from an approved instructor.
If you have a valid concealed carry permit, I wouldn't think another NICS check would be necessary as long as the local police verified the permit is still valid.

Here the permit can be renewed for one to three years. And of course it is invalidated if you have violated the terms.


Ohio, too, has procedures for invalidating your CCW.

Check out some of the Ohio Revised Code regarding concealed carry:
    quote:

    (B) No person who has been issued a concealed handgun license shall do any of the following:
      (1) If the person is stopped for a law enforcement purpose and is carrying a concealed handgun, fail to promptly inform any law enforcement officer who approaches the person after the person has been stopped that the person has been issued a concealed handgun license and that the person then is carrying a concealed handgun;
      (2) If the person is stopped for a law enforcement purpose and is carrying a concealed handgun, knowingly fail to keep the person's hands in plain sight at any time after any law enforcement officer begins approaching the person while stopped and before the law enforcement officer leaves, unless the failure is pursuant to and in accordance with directions given by a law enforcement officer;
      (3) If the person is stopped for a law enforcement purpose, if the person is carrying a concealed handgun, and if the person is approached by any law enforcement officer while stopped, knowingly remove or attempt to remove the loaded handgun from the holster, pocket, or other place in which the person is carrying it, knowingly grasp or hold the loaded handgun, or knowingly have contact with the loaded handgun by touching it with the person's hands or fingers at any time after the law enforcement officer begins approaching and before the law enforcement officer leaves, unless the person removes, attempts to remove, grasps, holds, or has contact with the loaded handgun pursuant to and in accordance with directions given by the law enforcement officer;
      (4) If the person is stopped for a law enforcement purpose and is carrying a concealed handgun, knowingly disregard or fail to comply with any lawful order of any law enforcement officer given while the person is stopped, including, but not limited to, a specific order to the person to keep the person's hands in plain sight.


Ohio Revised Codes even has a section for Duties of a Licensee.






Marini -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 7:25:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

Update, on the psycho shooter, add another victim, and the number is up to at least 5.

His wife, was found under the floorboards in his home.


Daily Mail-Shooters wife found under floorboards

People like this, are able to purchase weapons in the states.

From the article in the Daily Mail:

Officials say Kevin Hanson Neal, 43, began firing at 7.52am on Tuesday
Police raided his home Wednesday and found his wife's remains concealed under floorboards
They believe the killing of his wife is what started his rampage on Tuesday
He opened fire near his home on Bobcat Lane in Rancho Tehama then drove off
On his way through the town, he shot a woman and her child in their truck
The mother suffered life-threatening wounds and remains in hospital
A second child was hurt at Rancho Tehama Elementary School and airlifted
He was identified as Alejandro Hernandez, 6, and is expected to recover
Neal attempted to gain entry to the school, but it was on lockdown
Police shot the gunman was found dead near the school after a brief gunfight
Ten people, including the two children injured, remain in the hospital


wow, just wow



Please note, people like this are NOT legally allowed to possess or carry deadly weapons in the United States.
The person obtained weapons illegally because some bureaucrats didn't report his legal issues so he could be flagged as having had his rights restricted under law.


I could repeat the following 100 million times, and many will not understand this point.

Since most state and federal governments are doing such a piss poor job of screening and preventing psycho's from getting guns, BY FUCKING DEFAULT--that voids the law most of time, making it legal for many nut jobs to buy guns.

Many of you don't understand oxymorons.

Laws that are easily broken, and hard to enforce, make such laws often unenforceable.
If laws are unenforceable, they are close to being useless.

As long as those with serious criminal records, those clinically insane, etc. can fairly easily "beat" the system and purchase guns and high powered weapons, there really are no laws.


Laws that "easily" broken, "easily" manipulated, and OFTEN unenforceable, are BULLSHIT in my world.




servantforuse -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 7:56:51 PM)

To the OP, Tomorrow morning at 6 AM here in Wisconsin, 600,000 deer hunters with high power rifles will be in the woods. No one will get murdered. To the anti gun liberals here. It is not the guns. Get a clue




jlf1961 -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 8:02:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

I could repeat the following 100 million times, and many will not understand this point.

Since most state and federal governments are doing such a piss poor job of screening and preventing psycho's from getting guns, BY FUCKING DEFAULT--that voids the law most of time, making it legal for many nut jobs to buy guns.

Many of you don't understand oxymorons.

Laws that are easily broken, and hard to enforce, make such laws often unenforceable.
If laws are unenforceable, they are close to being useless.

As long as those with serious criminal records, those clinically insane, etc. can fairly easily "beat" the system and purchase guns and high powered weapons, there really are no laws.


Laws that "easily" broken, "easily" manipulated, and OFTEN unenforceable, are BULLSHIT in my world.



Let me explain this one more time to you, since clearly, your reading comprehension fails to grasp the subtleties of the english language.

When congress passed the brady bill, the law that makes mandatory bank ground checks necessary for the purchase of firearms, Congress in its infinite group fed wisdom (and probably the desire to spend more taxpayer money) decided that the system needed a whole new database that the states and local jurisdictions did not have to use to update information so that nut jobs and criminals could not buy guns.

The congressional group consciousness did not grasp the simple fact that such a database that IS mandatory for all law enforcement and court jurisdictions to update information about individual criminal convictions, restraining orders, protective orders and everything else that disqualifies a person from purchasing a fire arm already existed.

In fact, prior to the signing of the Brady Bill and it going into effect, 3 such independent databases with all that information existed.

So they mandated and funded a fourth that was not mandatory, not going to work as it was supposed to, and allow people to go to a retailer, give their names and information with the knowledge that the system probably would not catch the fact they were not supposed to buy a gun in the first place.

Then, after a few years, and a multitude of lawsuits against retailers who sold guns to prohibited individuals based on the flawed back ground database, Congress got together again, and instead of passing a law to fix the problem, passed a law to prevent people from suing gun retailers who sold guns based on a inaccurate result on the back ground check, acknowledging in the process that the back ground check database was flawed and needed to be fixed.

Now, their idea to fix the system is a real wonderful idea that means spending even more tax dollars by paying the states to actually input the information into the back ground check database so that this kind of thing wont happen again in the future.

Again, ignoring the fact that there are three other Department of Justice maintained criminal databases that have all that information that is updated every time a clerk in a courthouse inputs data on individuals into the computerized court record.

In this respect, the United States Congress is exactly like the joke about a Camel being a horse designed by committee.

Instead of actually fixing the problem, in such a manner that utilizes assets already in the Department of Justice that actually work, they want to pay states to do something that the should have been forced to do in the first damn place.

This also proves a theory put forth by a well known comedian some years ago.

You elect a genius to congress in the United States and he will become an idiot over night.

Even funnier, is that when you get a bunch of people together and calmly point out what is wrong with the system, with a police officer present with his nice little laptop that is carried in the average patrol car, and run the same name in the back ground check database and then in the one the police use to run checks on a person's ID when they are stopped, 40% of the time you get two very different results.

A couple of days after the church shooting here in Texas, I attended a meeting of pro gun and anti gun church members who were calmly trying to come to some point of agreement.

One of the members of the congregation is a local police officer, another is a local gun store owner.

The ran the same name, a local man who was recently convicted of the murder of a police officer.

The background check for buying a gun came back 'sale approved,' the police system came back with his conviction.

The reason, the local state district court was not mandated to input the information into the back ground check but it was required to input the data to the National Crime Database.

Two different databases, with two different results.

The kicker is that a gun retailer is not legally allowed to access the national crime database.




Marini -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 8:03:56 PM)

lol
No need to get nasty.
When people can't exchange messages, without being insulting, that shows who they are.
I can read your crap, and not agree with it.
It has nothing to do with my "reading comprehension", and more to do with not agreeing with the crap you are typing.

The system/systems are so fucked up, gun laws are almost unenforceable.
Thanks for making my point.

[sm=abducted.gif]




jlf1961 -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 8:09:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

lol
No need to get nasty, big guy.

The system/systems are so fucked up, gun laws are almost unenforceable.
Thanks for making my point.

[sm=abducted.gif]



The system is fucked up because politicians dont think, they either throw money at a problem or create more.

Of course, the preferred way of doing something in the United States at the congressional level is to throw money at it, ignore the obvious fix, and then scream about the federal budget.

I think a Constitutional amendment requiring all elected officials pass a test to prove common sense before actually running for office is a good idea.




BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 9:56:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

Update, on the psycho shooter, add another victim, and the number is up to at least 5.

His wife, was found under the floorboards in his home.


Daily Mail-Shooters wife found under floorboards

People like this, are able to purchase weapons in the states.

From the article in the Daily Mail:

Officials say Kevin Hanson Neal, 43, began firing at 7.52am on Tuesday
Police raided his home Wednesday and found his wife's remains concealed under floorboards
They believe the killing of his wife is what started his rampage on Tuesday
He opened fire near his home on Bobcat Lane in Rancho Tehama then drove off
On his way through the town, he shot a woman and her child in their truck
The mother suffered life-threatening wounds and remains in hospital
A second child was hurt at Rancho Tehama Elementary School and airlifted
He was identified as Alejandro Hernandez, 6, and is expected to recover
Neal attempted to gain entry to the school, but it was on lockdown
Police shot the gunman was found dead near the school after a brief gunfight
Ten people, including the two children injured, remain in the hospital


wow, just wow



Please note, people like this are NOT legally allowed to possess or carry deadly weapons in the United States.
The person obtained weapons illegally because some bureaucrats didn't report his legal issues so he could be flagged as having had his rights restricted under law.


I could repeat the following 100 million times, and many will not understand this point.

Since most state and federal governments are doing such a piss poor job of screening and preventing psycho's from getting guns, BY FUCKING DEFAULT--that voids the law most of time, making it legal for many nut jobs to buy guns.

Many of you don't understand oxymorons.

Laws that are easily broken, and hard to enforce, make such laws often unenforceable.
If laws are unenforceable, they are close to being useless.

As long as those with serious criminal records, those clinically insane, etc. can fairly easily "beat" the system and purchase guns and high powered weapons, there really are no laws.


Laws that "easily" broken, "easily" manipulated, and OFTEN unenforceable, are BULLSHIT in my world.

NICS is enforceable if fixed and is easy to fix.
What you are saying is easy to understand but based on a complete
Lack of understanding.




heavyblinker -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/18/2017 7:18:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

You can talk about the constitution all you like... I don't have to mindlessly agree with the constitution.
It isn't the 10 commandments.
It isn't a sacred document.
God didn't write it.

The second amendment was written by people who had no idea what the 21st century would be like.


"How are Gun Rights God-Given and Inalienable?"

quote:

...In pointing out the problems with Jill Lepore’s attempt to undermine the Second Amendment and justify more gun control, I focused on the fact that our right to keep and bear arms is a God-given right. As such, it preceded not only the Second Amendment but also the founding of the United States. In other words: We don’t have the right to keep and bear arms because the Bill of Rights says so; rather, the Bill of Rights says so because the right to keep and bear arms is intrinsic to our very being: it is a right with which we were endowed by our Creator.

In response to this point, someone emailed and asked for an explanation regarding the claim that this right is “God-given.” Far from being argumentative, the individual simply stated that he could not find any explicit reference to the right to keep and bear arms in the Bible and wondered where the justification was for claiming that God himself endowed us with such a right.

The email raised a great question. And the short answer is that part of the foundation for keeping and bearing arms rests in laws that lend order to nature. These are laws that God ordained and implemented just as certainly as he implemented and ordained the moral law (the 10 Commandments). This point is worth explaining because it’s fundamental to an understanding of how our inalienable rights flow to us from God rather than from government. As such, the foundation of those rights transcends government, which is why the right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed.”

There are two sets of law authored and maintained by God: Divine Law, consisting of the 10 Commandments and the outworking of those commandments in the New Testament, and Natural Law, consisting of the order intrinsic to nature and the universe around it. We know Divine Law from reading the Bible, and we know aspects of Natural Law because it is written upon our hearts and consciences. The Apostle Paul indicated this in Romans 2:14-15: “When Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness.”

And because Divine Law and Natural Law both flow from God, they are in agreement with one another. Thus, whereas Divine Law teaches “Thou shall not kill,” Natural Law provides us with the intuitive knowledge that killing in cold blood is wrong. And whereas Divine Law teaches “Thou shall not steal,” Natural Law provides us with the intuitive knowledge that stealing is wrong. This explains why people who have never read a Bible or heard a sermon on the Bible do their stealing in secret or in the cover of night — for they have an intuitive knowledge that it’s something that must be hidden.

Yet it goes much deeper. For the same laws of nature of that warn our consciences against killing in cold blood or stealing, also incline us toward owning our own things and protecting the things we own. And perhaps most importantly, they also teach that our greatest property is our own life, and that such a property must be defended. In fact, because God has given us life, we have a duty to defend it.

When enlightenment philosopher John Locke wrote his great exposition on Natural Law in “Two Treatises of Government,” he made these points clearly:

The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent and infinitely wise Maker; all the servants of one sovereign master, sent into the world by his order.

And of those who violate the laws of nature and act criminally toward their fellow man:

In transgressing the law of nature, the offender declares himself to live by another rule than that of reason and common equity, which is that measure God has set to the actions of men, for their mutual security; and so he becomes dangerous to mankind.

Locke went on to explain that nature teaches us that once a man is proven dangerous to us, we are justified in using force, including lethal force, to remove the danger and protect our lives. He even contended that someone who commits a lesser violation of those laws — for instance, theft — may justly face lethal force even if he means me no physical harm, for he is attempting “to get me into his power,” and having done that, he may go further. (I have posted those verses here 2-3 times)

This is how Locke put it:

quote:

This makes it lawful for a man to kill a thief who has not in the least hurt him, nor declared any design upon his life, any farther than by the use of force, so to get him in his power as to take away his money, or what he pleases, from him; because using force, where he has no right to get me into his power, let his pretence be what it will, I have no reason to suppose that he who would take away my liberty would not, when he had me in his power, take away everything else.


The bottom line: The gift of life is inalienable, coming to us from God through nature. And the right to defend that life is also inalienable because it comes to us from God through nature as well.



http://dailycaller.com/2012/05/10/how-are-gun-rights-god-given-and-inalienable/

quote:

AWR Hawkins is a conservative columnist who has written extensively on political issues for HumanEvents.com, Pajamas Media, Townhall.com, [oh no comrades!] and Andrew Breitbart’s BigPeace.com, BigHollywood.com, BigGovernment.com, and BigJournalism.com. He holds a Ph.D. in U.S. military history from Texas Tech University, and was a visiting fellow at the Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal in the summer of 2010.



This is truly, deeply deranged and I am shocked that even you would repost it.
Gun culture isn't just about defending yourself, it's also about creating an environment where guns are easily procured to be used in crimes.

If I have a natural, God-given right to defend myself, then I say the best, most obvious way to do so is to cut down the number of guns in circulation (or at least make it more difficult for them to end up in the hands of killers), and your bullshit is depriving me of that right.




WhoreMods -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/18/2017 8:13:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
I think a Constitutional amendment requiring all elected officials pass a test to prove common sense before actually running for office is a good idea.

Sounds a good idea to me, but I'm sure you'd get some whining that it's violating the constitutional right to vote for any imbecile who takes the electorate's fancy.
(How would you assess that, btw? A high IQ isn't the same thing as more practical problem solving skills, let alone an ability to apply intelligence in a non-cretinous fashion.)




BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/18/2017 8:19:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
I think a Constitutional amendment requiring all elected officials pass a test to prove common sense before actually running for office is a good idea.

Sounds a good idea to me, but I'm sure you'd get some whining that it's violating the constitutional right to vote for any imbecile who takes the electorate's fancy.
(How would you assess that, btw? A high IQ isn't the same thing as more practical problem solving skills, let alone an ability to apply intelligence in a non-cretinous fashion.)

A high IQ does not promise good judgement.




DesideriScuri -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/18/2017 8:20:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker
This is truly, deeply deranged and I am shocked that even you would repost it.
Gun culture isn't just about defending yourself, it's also about creating an environment where guns are easily procured to be used in crimes.


Right. So, how do we prevent the second while allowing for the first?

quote:

If I have a natural, God-given right to defend myself, then I say the best, most obvious way to do so is to cut down the number of guns in circulation (or at least make it more difficult for them to end up in the hands of killers), and your bullshit is depriving me of that right.


So, completely ignore the repeated calls for improving the background check system. That's going to help.

How would you propose we "cut down the number of guns in circulation?"






WhoreMods -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/18/2017 8:28:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
I think a Constitutional amendment requiring all elected officials pass a test to prove common sense before actually running for office is a good idea.

Sounds a good idea to me, but I'm sure you'd get some whining that it's violating the constitutional right to vote for any imbecile who takes the electorate's fancy.
(How would you assess that, btw? A high IQ isn't the same thing as more practical problem solving skills, let alone an ability to apply intelligence in a non-cretinous fashion.)

A high IQ does not promise good judgement.

That's what I said in the post you're quoting, you fuckwit.




BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/18/2017 9:27:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

Update, on the psycho shooter, add another victim, and the number is up to at least 5.

His wife, was found under the floorboards in his home.


Daily Mail-Shooters wife found under floorboards

People like this, are able to purchase weapons in the states.

From the article in the Daily Mail:

Officials say Kevin Hanson Neal, 43, began firing at 7.52am on Tuesday
Police raided his home Wednesday and found his wife's remains concealed under floorboards
They believe the killing of his wife is what started his rampage on Tuesday
He opened fire near his home on Bobcat Lane in Rancho Tehama then drove off
On his way through the town, he shot a woman and her child in their truck
The mother suffered life-threatening wounds and remains in hospital
A second child was hurt at Rancho Tehama Elementary School and airlifted
He was identified as Alejandro Hernandez, 6, and is expected to recover
Neal attempted to gain entry to the school, but it was on lockdown
Police shot the gunman was found dead near the school after a brief gunfight
Ten people, including the two children injured, remain in the hospital


wow, just wow



Please note, people like this are NOT legally allowed to possess or carry deadly weapons in the United States.
The person obtained weapons illegally because some bureaucrats didn't report his legal issues so he could be flagged as having had his rights restricted under law.


I could repeat the following 100 million times, and many will not understand this point.

Since most state and federal governments are doing such a piss poor job of screening and preventing psycho's from getting guns, BY FUCKING DEFAULT--that voids the law most of time, making it legal for many nut jobs to buy guns.

Many of you don't understand oxymorons.

Laws that are easily broken, and hard to enforce, make such laws often unenforceable.
If laws are unenforceable, they are close to being useless.

As long as those with serious criminal records, those clinically insane, etc. can fairly easily "beat" the system and purchase guns and high powered weapons, there really are no laws.


Laws that "easily" broken, "easily" manipulated, and OFTEN unenforceable, are BULLSHIT in my world.

Nobody "beat" the system. In Tx there was an easily fix problem, and the military is fixing their part of it.
In Ca the Sheriff and his department were a bunch of Barneys.
The courts did what they were supposed to but the cops were guilty of malpractice.
Define powerful weapons. You have already indicated you want people to prove they "need"
Semi-automatic weapons. I have a Ruger 10/22 with a 25 round magazine do you really think
that this is more dangerous than my 7 round model 94?




PeonForHer -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/18/2017 9:51:24 AM)

quote:




This is truly, deeply deranged and I am shocked that even you would repost it.
Gun culture isn't just about defending yourself, it's also about creating an environment where guns are easily procured to be used in crimes.

If I have a natural, God-given right to defend myself, then I say the best, most obvious way to do so is to cut down the number of guns in circulation (or at least make it more difficult for them to end up in the hands of killers), and your bullshit is depriving me of that right.


As a general thing, I don't think people think so much about what's good for society in the USA, so much as what's good for this or that individual. It tends to come back to 'How will I defend myself?' rather than 'how do we reduce the need to defend ourselves from gun attacks in US society?'. Just my impression.




BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/18/2017 10:16:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:




This is truly, deeply deranged and I am shocked that even you would repost it.
Gun culture isn't just about defending yourself, it's also about creating an environment where guns are easily procured to be used in crimes.

If I have a natural, God-given right to defend myself, then I say the best, most obvious way to do so is to cut down the number of guns in circulation (or at least make it more difficult for them to end up in the hands of killers), and your bullshit is depriving me of that right.


As a general thing, I don't think people think so much about what's good for society in the USA, so much as what's good for this or that individual. It tends to come back to 'How will I defend myself?' rather than 'how do we reduce the need to defend ourselves from gun attacks in US society?'. Just my impression.

You can look at how bad the cops in Ca were and wonder why people think they need to look at protecting themselves?




Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.09375