BS: Shooting tragedies and guns

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: olddude
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:52 PM

The solution is to take the responsibility of handgun law and control out of the states and into a federal handgun carry law and ownership law. Then we see consistent effective control.   Greg is right, some states you are required nothing, others it is very hard .. But again as long as there are gun shows you can keep making laws with a huge loophole that negates all of them. That is what we have now

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:54 PM

Huckabee is a complete asshole, Bruce. Always was, always will be.

Problem is, there are a several million assholes just like him - ignorant, fundagelical, bain dead demagogic opportunists & their followers.

Howinhell do we neutralize THEM???

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:57 PM

I dunno, Dan - how the hell do we organize effectively to promote a rational approach & reasonable legislation ???

Been wondering this since I took my NRA life membership card 35 years ago, sent it back to them, and told 'em to shove it up their arse.

ASny suggestions appreciated!!

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: olddude
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 03:58 PM

We can't Greg, the freedom of speech works for good guys and shits also sadly. I try to ignore his crap.

Jack
Kendall was a state law enforcement officer. He has forgotten more about firearms and their safe use then you could ever learn. Knock it off cause you are talking about something you know nothing at all about

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:02 PM

Yeah, Greg... In essence that's what I did with my NRA membership card, too... In reality, I just ignored them...

Today's NRA is not the one I was proud to be part of in the 50s and 60s... Back then the NRA was 100% about safety and responsibility... Today's NRA is 100% about $$$ and political power...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: olddude
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:09 PM

Greg
lawmakers that will do the right thing and not cave in to the NRA pacs
sadly I don't think that will happen. We have few lawmakers that look at the good of the people anymore, just those who care about getting elected and the money it costs to run

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: olddude
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:10 PM

I was a certified NRA handgun instructor till I told them to shove their membership up their kaboose also years ago. It ain't about the sportsman anymore. It is now about power and money

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: gnu
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:34 PM

I couldn't be arsed to research any of it (I am a Canuck) but surely there must be a group of reasonable people who are trying to get the USA feds to make some good gun laws? If not, why don't youse take up the cause? A website don't cost much... the expertise exists among you... oh... wait... I said this before a couple of times... nevermind... just like NObody did before.

Oh... yeah... until you whiners and compaliners get off yer collective asses and DO something, I'll give up my guns when you pry them from my cold, dead fingers on accounta if you lazy, unorganized sods can't get your shit together on something as important as saving 5 year old children from being shot... read my finger.

Go ahead... make my day.

Jeri... how's THAT or dirty talk? Hehehehee.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: kendall
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:43 PM

John, most of the things you listed are in effect and have been for some time.
The problem is bad guys don't give a squat about laws!

It's not just a mantra, gund don't kill people, PEOPLE kill people.

I don't have the answer, but taking my gun aint it.
BY the way, Olddude, I was also a federal lawman.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:46 PM

Jeri, here's a crash course on how to read gnu's fingers.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:49 PM

We don't want ***your*** gun, Capt'n...

That's the knee-jerk reaction any time anyone talks about making a few sensible changes to gun ownership...

"Obama is going to take my gun away!"...

No, he's not... He might ask you register it and prove you know how to handle it safely...

Too much to ask???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 04:55 PM

It's certainly true that it's no longer about the sportsman--if it ever was.   Why would a sportman need a pistol anyway? I understand that in the UK, for target shooting, the weapon is borrowed and returned.   A much more civilized approach than ours.



The NRA needs its teeth pulled. This can only be done if enough citizens pressure their reps to stand up to that group and its obsession with the 2nd Amendment.

We can start by pointing out that the 2nd Amendment has lost any usefulness it ever had--and its theory of national defense via militia was a disaster from the start.

Instead of a sensible situation, we have the idiocy in which you can order guns--not just rifles--from a catalogue. ( Jan gets one of these.)   What kind of security is that for the general public against nuts with guns?

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:03 PM

Please, Kendall - nobody's talking about "taking your gun" - that's NRA propaganda to whip up hysteria among those that don't know any better. I wouldn't have placed you in that category.

And by the way, guns don't kill people - BULLETS kill people.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: theleveller
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:10 PM

"gund don't kill people, PEOPLE kill people"

Same old shite we get time after time. Listen, moron, just ask yourself two simple questions:

1. What is a gun designed to do?
2. Why do you own a gun if you're not prepared to use it for the purpose for which it was designed?

To my mind every single person in the US who owns a gun is responsible for this atrocity. I hope you can live with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:15 PM

I am fed up of the pathetic guns don't kill people, people do line.

fOr the brain dead....

The ownership of guns means that those who have the propensity to kill people makes it easier to kill people, and/or kill more people.

So, repeating what I said in another thread.


Dear NRA,

Are you celebrating your latest wonderful acheivement? You must be proud!!!!

WELL????

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:16 PM

"1. What is a gun designed to do?"

Shoot projectiles a long distance with sufficient force to penetrate an object.

"2. Why do you own a gun if you're not prepared to use it for the purpose for which it was designed?"

I owned many when I hunted deer, moose, rabbit, etc. I hope that answers your questions.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: pdq
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:34 PM

...from the NRA website:

NRA offers America's preeminent shooting, training, education and public service programs that foster the safe, responsible ownership and use of firearms.

Some of you folks don't quite "get it", but private gun ownership is guaranteed by the US Constitution and the NRA demands that we keep the traditional standard of "reasonable restrictions" in place.

The NRA educates more people about the safe and sane use of firearms than all other US organizations combined. Sorry they ain't perfect, you know, like the Post Office, FEMA or Microsoft.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 05:52 PM

I just read an article that said each of the kids--6 or 7 years old--was shot three to eleven times with a rifle. The first person killed was the principal.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Dorothy Parshall
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:00 PM

This group covers the bases:

"September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows
Andrea's reminder that guns are only part of the problem:

Yesterday's tragedy strikes at our hearts and leaves us - again - shattered with pain for the shear needlessness of it. There are no words that will assuage the victims' families grief. The wounds will remain. It will take a very long time to know how to hold the sadness and the rage and also, eventually, learn to go on living with the loss. We struggle to understand what happened out of our need for an explanation of what has violated all sense of rightness.

We need to understand that the gunman and his family are victims too. Perhaps victims of the society we have responsibility for.

This tragedy did not come out of nowhere. We need to frame our thoughts as we go forward around the the fact that guns are an expression of the violence we as a culture condone. We do not want to divide over whether we campaign for gun legislation OR focus on the culture that promotes violence which cuts spending for mental health, education, and ending poverty and includes justifications for foreign policy decisions and the support of a war machine that produces and provides weapons to governments as well as homegrown gunmen. It trains young people to kill primarily innocent people in wars that bring no peace and then come home broken in body and mind, changed by what they've seen and done. It promotes as news and entertainment that which normalizes and glorifies violence. It is big business!

There are many many forms of violence. Guns and the culture of violence are of a piece. Eliminating the tools of destruction is only part of the solution."

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:02 PM

100% with you on that one, Dorothy.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:04 PM

No, pdq, the United States military trains more people on the safe and sane use of firearms, followed by the various police academies...

The NRA runs a distant 3rd and guess what??? It pisses off more people than it could train who want no part of them...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: pdq
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:09 PM

The statement is about private organizations and that should be obvious.

The military and law enforcement play by different rules and you know that.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:15 PM

Go to the NRA's site. What they talk about first and foremost is "protecting the second amendment."

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:19 PM

""I owned many when I hunted deer, moose, rabbit, etc. I hope that answers your questions.""

Oh come on Bruce. How many deer, moose, or rabbit did you shoot with a Sig Sauer 9mm, or a Glock, or an AR 15?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: pdq
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:22 PM

If the 2nd Amendment is ended, there will be no reason to give civilian gun safety classes. Logical, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:29 PM

Same worn out argument about the 2nd amendment...

Reality is that the NRA has cherry-picked the 2nd amendment all to hell and back... They refuse to ***allow*** for a full discussion of the entire amendment or the fact that the 2nd amendment is a single sentence...

No, all we hear is the same old worn out blah, blah and more blah from the NRA and it's supporters...

In other words??? The only discussion we are going to have is our talking points, not anyone elses, and we have the money to shut you up or have you voted out...

The NRA way or the highway...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Howard Jones
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:32 PM

The Kennesaw, Georgia example is interesting. I live in a village of about the same size where householders are prohibited from owning firearms without a stringently-controlled licence (and where handguns are banned outright) and I would guess that our crime rate is probably the same or even less. We haven't had any murders either, so far as I'm aware, and don't seem to think that this is in any way remarkable. There have been a few burglaries, but I'm 100% confident that the burglars won't have carried guns.

I realise we are not comparing like with like, and this is a simplistic comparison. Nevertheless the fact remains that it is possible to live safely without having guns, if a society chooses to do so. America seems reluctant to make that choice, even in the most appalling circumstances.

And yes, we do understand it's about the 2nd Amendment. However you're no longer a frontier society, you're the richest country in the world, with the most powerful military - you don't need a militia any more to keep the redcoats away. Isn't it time that, as a society, you started to grow up?

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:41 PM

If the 2nd Amendment is ended,

Stop with the bullshit, PeeDee - no one is talking about "ending the second ammendment".

Try to at least hold on to a modicum of reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: pdq
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 06:45 PM

Thank you for reading that article, Howard Jones.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:06 PM

Most parents aren't fit to raise a gerbil.
I want a gun to protect myself from their children.
=(:-( l)

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: kendall
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:06 PM

leveler, I'll match my IQ to yours or anyone else on this forum.
Greg I'm NOT in that category! I've said it may times the NRA is trying to scare people into thinking their right to own a gun is in danger, HELL NO!

Guns dont kill people   god damn it People kill people! Use your frigging head! No gun gives a shit whether you live or die, that whacko behind it might.

I suggest certain people lay off the insults, you know damn well they are not allowed here. If you can't make your point without insulting someone, shut up.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: kendall
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:17 PM

I've said this before and I'll repeat it; if I had my way there would be no such thing as a semi auto or full auto firearm.

If I could do it, I would make every gun in the world disappear. I am NOT a gun nut, I AM a realist.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:18 PM

"...,private gun ownership is guaranteed by the US Constitution... "

That is one interpretation of what the 2nd amendment says!

It also says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State"

The entire POINT was that competent citizens were expected be part of a **militia** when the NEED arose... and they were expected to bring arms, because there were no mass-produced standardized weapons at that time! Those who wrote that amendment had NO idea what would happen after 1865 or so when guns began to be made that would take mass produced ammunition!
In 1790, guns were seldom used except to defend home & country or to hunt.
Now, that vaguely worded document is interpreted in such a way as to allow any yahoo who is of age and not a felon or 'proven' crazy to stock up on assault rifles! And conservative presidents appoint judges who uphold that silly old idea! The framers would be appalled!
We HAVE a militia! And they are ISSUED the guns they need at the appropriate times!

Sadly, we also have thousands of wanna-be militias who just 'like' owning big, fancy things that go "BANG". It is a HOBBY! A BELIEF! Not a NEED!
They lie to themselves about the reasoning ...until they believe it, so they can pretend to 'tell the truth' to everyone else!

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: pdq
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:21 PM

BTW, there is another thread specifically about the Newtown incident.

This thread is more generic and was started so the ususal suspects in "gun grabbing" could vent without being disrespectful to the Newton victims.

I doubt that anyone posting here knows what the Federal gun laws really say.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: bobad
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:23 PM

CIRCULAR REASONING: This fallacy uses a claim as its own grounds. A popular bumper sticker reads:
"Guns don't kill people; people kill people." This argument is circular—nobody ever claimed guns go around all by
themselves shooting people. Of course people kill people. But this "begs the question" as to whether guns make it
easier to do so. In fact, circular reasoning is often called "begging the question." Many times we fail to examine our
most strongly held beliefs, so that when they are challenged, we resort to circular reasoning as a defense.

As Eddie Izzard said: "They say that 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people.' Well I think the gun helps. If you just stood there and yelled BANG, I don't think you'd kill too many ..."

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:28 PM

If you take a room full of people without guns there is a 0% chance of anyone shooting anyone...

Can't say that if half of folks in there have guns...

People with guns kill people...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: pdq
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:41 PM

2nd Amendment Annotations

"Prior to the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller,1 the courts had yet to definitively state what right the Second Amendment protected. The opposing theories, perhaps oversimplified, were (1) an 'individual rights' approach, whereby the Amendment protected individuals' rights to firearm ownership, possession, and transportation; and (2) a 'states' rights' approach, under which the Amendment only protected the right to keep and bear arms in connection with organized state militia units. Moreover, it was generally believed that the Amendment was only a bar to federal action, not to state or municipal restraints.

However, the Supreme Court has now definitively held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that weapon for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Moreover, this right applies not just to the federal government, but to states and municipalities as well.

In Heller, the Court held that (1) the District of Columbia's total ban on handgun possession in the home amounted to a prohibition on an entire class of 'arms' that Americans overwhelmingly chose for the lawful purpose of self-defense, and thus violated the Second Amendment; and (2) the District's requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock also violated the Second Amendment, because the law made it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense.

The Court reasoned that the Amendment's prefatory clause, i.e., '[a] well regulated

Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,' announced the Amendment's purpose, but did not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause, i.e., 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'"


{Bill D wants to turn a prefatory clause into a Santa Clause}

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 07:56 PM

The Supreme Court has cowered from the NRA... Not only does the NRA have lots of $$$ but they have other (wink, wink) ways of scaring people...

One day the sun will come out and we'll all see that the emperor has no clothes and a future Supreme Court will get it correct, rather than "right"...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: gnu
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:02 PM

Kendall... how dare you inject simple logic! Why, that only means another hundred posts to a ANOTHER gun thread that has seemed to become about people who want to vent and have no logic. Oh, they make conjectures and leaps of faith and inferences and state statistics, but when you bring simple logic into the discussion, you confuse them. You must confuse them because they keep trying to prove such logic false based on arguements and statistics which don't prove such logic wrong.

LISTEN to Kendall and so many others, readers. A gun CANNOT kill a person. IT IS A FACT. YOU CANNOT DISPUTE THAT.

So... ya wanna be a part of getting rid of gun crimes? Get your shit together and do something about it and stop telling legal and responsible gun owners you want to take their guns away (go ahead and say you don't... we don't believe you and WE got guns so fuck off with that shit). Wake up... stop whining... and DO something about it that makes SOME SENSE!... for a CHANGE! Join the legal and responsible gun owners and press for good gun laws. Until you all get a grip... gun nuts and anti-gun nuts, wee children will be shot. It's shameful that you all cut off yer noses to spite yer faces.

Stop your bullshit bickering and DO SOMETHING about it. I've said it before. I'll say it once more. If any of you really care, you'll take responsibilty and DO SOMETHING about it. It ain't rocket science. It's just common sense... it's simple logic. You have the wherewithall but have you got a spare minute or the balls to try to do what is right?

Put up or shut up, fer fuck sake!

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:04 PM

Although I don't own a firearm, I guess I would say that rifles or shotguns could be considered necessary tools in many rural locations in America - for varmit control or hunting, not for use against human intruders. Still, there were one or two times that I wished I had a rifle in hand when I approached strangers on my property. Having a big, friendly, black dog at my side worked pretty well, though.

My next-door neighbors killed a couple of bears on their property last year, and I keep wondering whether that was necessary. The bears really haven't been much of a problem. They raided our garden a couple of times, but I've only seen a bear once in the ten years I've been here - and that was a thrill. And yes, you hear about mountain lions, but I've never seen one.

There are also reports of rabid raccoons in the area - that does scare me a bit, and might be the one thing that might make me want a rifle. There are rattlesnakes around, but they haven't been a problem - and I have only seen one snake that might have been a rattler. I think I'd call the rattlesnake removal service if one took up residence around the house.

And even though I see some justification in owning firearms in a rural area, I have to say it makes me really nervous. More than once I've encountered people shooting into the area where I'm legally hiking. Now, THAT is disconcerting.

But in urban locations, I just can't really see the need for a firearm. There is a certain amount of risk of violent crime anywhere in America, but I really don't think it's all that bad. I worked for thirty years as an unarmed federal investigator, and I took pride in the fact that I never avoided work in any location because I thought it too dangerous. I used my head and stayed away from certain areas at certain times of the day, but I always did my job and knocked on the doors and did my honest best to find the people I needed to get my work done. Other investigators would write off certain areas, but I never did. I met only one situation where people pointed guns at me, and I admit that was a little disconcerting. They were in a remote location, an area where I admit it might be justifiable to have a gun. I have an appointment, but then these people had second thoughts and were afraid I might be the person who had threatened to kill them. So, I had to talk them down. I think if I had shown a firearm, they would have shot me.

It's a difficult issue. Gun owners are absolutely correct when they say that the vast majority of gun owners are responsible, and would be responsible in a dangerous situation. The trouble is, there is a good percentage of people who have attitudes that would make them irresponsible and dangerous as gun owners. Many of them wanted to be cops, and it was my job to investigate them and weed out the ones who would be irresponsible. One year, I had two Border Patrol Agent applicants who had shot themselves in the buttocks, trying to tuck their guns under their belts. I don't believe those applicants got the job. I had coworkers who carried firearms despite the fact that they were not supposed to - these were people who thought their badges didn't give them enough authority. I had one coworker and a number of applicants who used their firearms to put power behind their road rage.

Admittedly, it's a small number of gun owners that are troublesome - but the troublesome ones can be very dangerous if they have a sidearm. I'm sorry that the troublesome ones make it difficult for all gunowners; but it seems to me that the danger presented by the small minority of irresponsible and dangerous gunowners, outweighs the safety brought about by the many responsible people who carry firearms. So for the general good of society, I think that handguns should be outlawed and rifles and shotguns should be strictly regulated. Semi-automatic and automatic firearms (anything with a magazine) should be outlawed altogether. Taking time to load forces a shooter to take time to think before shooting.

I know gun owners think otherwise, but the rest of us consider them to be a serious danger to our personal safety. The fact that my neighbors have guns makes me feel nervous, not secure. What guarantees that their bullets are staying on their property.

I'm saying this as one who has worked unarmed in law enforcement for a thirty-year career. And by the way, I qualified as an Expert Marksman in the U.S. Army.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: pdq
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:06 PM

The 2nd Amendment has always meant that. Witness the fact that all the Founding Fathers, including the very people who wrote the Constitution, owned guns.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: kendall
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:07 PM

It will still take 2/3rds of congress to amend the constitution.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:17 PM

A gun CAN kill a person, despite the logical error the NRA has been peddling for generations. It is one of several causal elements in every gunshot death. If any one of those elements is missing, the death will not occur. It's impossible to sort out which people are likely to kill and which or not - but it is possible to eliminate or at least strictly control guns. Since it's impossible to control the people, maybe we need to control the guns.

And yes, pdq, it is true that the 1781 Constitution allows Americans to keep and bear arms. Within the context, it appears that this is for the purpose of maintaining a militia - but this is debatable. Nonetheless, in 21st century urban America, does it make sense for members of a closely-packed population to be armed?

Seems like too many people consider the U.S. Constitution to be infallible nowadays, even though they aren't afraid to question the Bible anymore.

As for me, I think questioning both of them, is healthy. And even if a 2/3 majority can't be found to change it, I still believe that slavish adherence to the Constitution can be wrong, wrong, wrong.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:18 PM

Jeri said: "People here go hunting, and they have guns to shoot vermin--in most cases that's some sort of animal they consider dangerous or obnoxious that strays too close to their homes."

I don't see a big problem with that. With regulations, hunting rifles and shotguns could be checked out before and during season; surely they are not needed in the home itself.

Vermin are most often disposed of with small caliber weapons- like a .22. And a 22 also works as a defensive weapon in the home. Contrary to the movies an injured person doesn't shrug it off when he or she is hit even with a small caliber like that. It just plain doesn't feel good. A 22 can even kill- it's just less likely to be lethal.

I don't even see a problem with a gun collector collecting his heart out. As long as he keeps them in the equivalent of a bank safe deposit box.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: olddude
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:24 PM

like I said we can agree to disagree. I am all for arming good and rational people against the mad dog killers out there today to protect others in shopping malls or on the street just minding their own business. However, only if the proper training and background checks are done. Until the 2nd Amendment is changed, I support it as I do all of the Constitution. Keeping a firearm away from a complete law abiding person who has been trained and knows safety and has no BG issues doesn't do anything but help the mad dog killers. Me I am sick of burying our kids by these people. My heart breaks for those families and their loss

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: olddude
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:30 PM

When a person carries a firearm they are acting in a manner of a police officer. The same rules and training need to be applied across all the states. That would make sense instead of a bunch of loopholes that only arm criminals. Police officers weapons are secure at home. Their kids don't get them and do this stuff because they are trained. Likewise most folks that have carry permits in the states where they are hard to get. Sadly it varies so much and with all the loopholes it is far to easy. Get a federal law. The ATF regulates auto weapons they can on handgun carry also. Close the gun shows ... we would all be safer

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: kendall
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:31 PM

The 2nd amendment is obsolete. We have enough gun laws now to paper the Washington monument. They are not working! Bad guys can't read.

So, everyone here has an opinion, and you know what they say about opinions. We need answers. Realistic answers. Stiffer penalties? strict controls? The prisons are full now, and every time the subject of building a new jail or prison comes up there is a hoo rah about N.I.M.B.I. and too much money, it will raise taxes.etc.

Now, if the "Know it alls" will address this?

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: pdq
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:32 PM

...perhaps it needs to be displayed more clearly:

The Court reasoned that the Amendment's prefatory clause, i.e., "[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," announced the Amendment's purpose, but did not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause, i.e., "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:35 PM

For the thousandth time: We don't need to change the constitution... We just need judges with the courage to interpret the 2nd amendment in it's entirety and not just half of it...

Plus, with this polarized country there will be no more amendments to the constitution... As a democracy, you can put a fork in US... We're done...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: gnu
Date: 15 Dec 12 - 08:45 PM

Kendall... again with the logic? To hell with that. I wanna see anyone step up to the plate and propose a new org... the NRRA? National Rifle Regulations Association? The NFA... National Firearms Association? Come on ALL you anti/gun nuts! DO something. Don't ween... git er dunn! You can start it, here, tonight. Right NOW. Who's willing to step up to the plate and take a swing at the ball?