Firearms. Who or what is dangerous?


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Firearms. Who or what is dangerous?

Previous · 1 . . . 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 . . . 25 · Next
Author Message
Message 1328115 - Posted: 17 Jan 2013, 0:30:26 UTC

Should not The People Surrounding Wyatt Earp, Today, been The Real Victims Of Firearm Crazyness? A bunch Of Young Black Men In Hoodies. They are dying at the rate of A Mass Killing A Week.

Especially In Wyatt Earp's Home Of Chicago. Pitiful.

Anyways, I Feel Safer Already. Don't You?

Yepper, it is Small, Incremental, DISCRETE Steps needed For Our Safety.

23 Federal Today. States Chiming In(NY) with theirs. Soon Soon Soon, Duck and Cover, like In The Nuke Scares Of Yesteryear, will Be A Thang Of The Past.

So, As Hustlin' Hussein, aka Wyatt Earp is Slowly Increasing Our Safety, maybe by Election Day 2016, The Gruesome Daily News, will Be History.

We Can Only Hope, For The Change.

PROFessor S. Say: High Noon Will Soon Be, Just Another Time For A Relaxing Drink and Tasty Meal.
____________


Message 1328131 - Posted: 17 Jan 2013, 1:39:18 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 18:56:01 UTC

--

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9258
Credit: 1,547,289
RAC: 949
United States
Message 1328132 - Posted: 17 Jan 2013, 1:57:39 UTC - in response to Message 1328074.

Or better yet, shall we go the way of Hitler and get rid of the mentally infirm using a more permanent method?

I didn't expect Godwin's law out of you Es?


So, you're saying Hitler (or Stalin) made no such attempts?
Sorry, but most times, Godwin's Law probably applies. There are, however, times when the response is germane to the conversation.

Profile Es99Project donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 9094
Credit: 259,333
RAC: 85
Canada
Message 1328146 - Posted: 17 Jan 2013, 3:13:26 UTC - in response to Message 1328074.

Or better yet, shall we go the way of Hitler and get rid of the mentally infirm using a more permanent method?

I didn't expect Godwin's law out of you Es?

I was driven to it because what you were suggesting was so appalling...I am sure you are aware I wouldn't invoke a Hitler comparison lightly. Sometimes it is appropriate.
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9258
Credit: 1,547,289
RAC: 949
United States
Message 1328168 - Posted: 17 Jan 2013, 4:59:33 UTC - in response to Message 1328132.

Or better yet, shall we go the way of Hitler and get rid of the mentally infirm using a more permanent method?

I didn't expect Godwin's law out of you Es?


So, you're saying Hitler (or Stalin) made no such attempts?
Sorry, but most times, Godwin's Law probably applies. There are, however, times when the response is germane to the conversation.


P.S.-when I asked you a few weeks back or so what experience you had with the mentally ill, and you responded with passing by them on the streets often enough (though I wonder if homeless and drunk or whatever is enough to make that designation), I meant what experience with family members or friends suffering a mental illness (to whatever degree).

Profile Es99Project donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 9094
Credit: 259,333
RAC: 85
Canada
Message 1328197 - Posted: 17 Jan 2013, 6:29:40 UTC - in response to Message 1328168.

Or better yet, shall we go the way of Hitler and get rid of the mentally infirm using a more permanent method?

I didn't expect Godwin's law out of you Es?


So, you're saying Hitler (or Stalin) made no such attempts?
Sorry, but most times, Godwin's Law probably applies. There are, however, times when the response is germane to the conversation.


P.S.-when I asked you a few weeks back or so what experience you had with the mentally ill, and you responded with passing by them on the streets often enough (though I wonder if homeless and drunk or whatever is enough to make that designation), I meant what experience with family members or friends suffering a mental illness (to whatever degree).

Personally I think there there is something very wrong with a society that would lock up innocent people for something they 'might' do rather than restrict access to guns.

So much for land of the free.
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 13000
Credit: 7,666,058
RAC: 6,265
United States
Message 1328199 - Posted: 17 Jan 2013, 6:38:58 UTC - in response to Message 1328146.

Or better yet, shall we go the way of Hitler and get rid of the mentally infirm using a more permanent method?

I didn't expect Godwin's law out of you Es?

I was driven to it because what you were suggesting was so appalling...I am sure you are aware I wouldn't invoke a Hitler comparison lightly. Sometimes it is appropriate.

I simply replaced the word GUN with CRAZY in the strident calls for gun control I hear. You are right that the thought process behind such bans is appalling.

I do see Obama addressed some of the Crazy recognition issues with his batch of orders. I also forgive you for not realizing in the USA how screwed up we are because of HIPAA and other such medical privacy laws in assessing crazies. Without the ability to share information -- never mind a requirement to do so -- on crazies it becomes impossible to evaluate them. Say there are 10 acts a person has done, but treated by 10 different professionals. Without the professionals permitted to share the 10 acts, each might assume that the person isn't crazy, just having a really bad day. Put them together and the picture may be "a clear and present danger to himself or others." That is the reason that it requires police action before many crazies are diagnosed and by the time the police become involved it is already too late.

____________

Karl-Heinz
Send message
Joined: 5 Dec 12
Posts: 1
Credit: 30,062
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1328523 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 4:30:14 UTC - in response to Message 1318917.

This ID dude is seriously thinking that guys in the woods with guns are an army.

What good will a deer rifle do against heat-seeking, laser and satellite guided armed drones?
Does ID really think by squatting in a cave in the woods with that rifle, he will stave off the US army or a foreign invasion of troops using the latest military technology?

Pull your head out of your arse man! Do rightists ever think anything through to it's conclusion?


yes that is the way people thinking in the US you absolute right!!

Profile Es99Project donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 9094
Credit: 259,333
RAC: 85
Canada
Message 1328541 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 6:59:20 UTC - in response to Message 1328199.
Last modified: 18 Jan 2013, 7:00:50 UTC


I simply replaced the word GUN with CRAZY in the strident calls for gun control I hear. You are right that the thought process behind such bans is appalling.

Who would treat people as if they were guns? I am afraid I don't understand your analogy.

I do see Obama addressed some of the Crazy recognition issues with his batch of orders. I also forgive you for not realizing in the USA how screwed up we are because of HIPAA and other such medical privacy laws in assessing crazies. Without the ability to share information -- never mind a requirement to do so -- on crazies it becomes impossible to evaluate them. Say there are 10 acts a person has done, but treated by 10 different professionals. Without the professionals permitted to share the 10 acts, each might assume that the person isn't crazy, just having a really bad day. Put them together and the picture may be "a clear and present danger to himself or others." That is the reason that it requires police action before many crazies are diagnosed and by the time the police become involved it is already too late.

You really are seriously talking about legislating people and tracking them rather than legislating and tracking guns?

Are you aware how bizarre that is?
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8748
Credit: 25,598,847
RAC: 8,151
United Kingdom
Message 1328615 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 12:10:28 UTC - in response to Message 1328199.
Last modified: 18 Jan 2013, 12:15:43 UTC

How do you classify people as crazy?
And if you do find a test that fits the hypothesis how will it work out?

Go see if you can watch a BBC Horizon program called "Are you good or Evil" and see if you idea's are valid. I very much doubt it, you would end up locking up 1000's just to stop a couple of "crazies". Amongst those you would lock up would be "Captains of Industry" and Scientists.

http://bilstonjay.wordpress.com/2011/09/07/bbc-horizon-are-you-good-or-evil-i-don%E2%80%99t-know-any-more-after-watching-your-documentary-maybe%E2%80%A6/

edit] Also go look up the warrior gene.

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 13000
Credit: 7,666,058
RAC: 6,265
United States
Message 1328654 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 14:59:37 UTC - in response to Message 1328541.

You really are seriously talking about legislating people and tracking them rather than legislating and tracking guns?

You want to lock guns up. Fine. Who gets the key? Suddenly we are back to people. It always has been about people. We might as well quit beating around the bush and accept that it is a people control/tracking issue.
____________

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 13000
Credit: 7,666,058
RAC: 6,265
United States
Message 1328656 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 15:02:13 UTC - in response to Message 1328615.

WK, if the titans of the Banks would have been locked up, then it sounds like it is sorting correctly.

____________

Profile Es99Project donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 9094
Credit: 259,333
RAC: 85
Canada
Message 1328687 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 16:54:16 UTC - in response to Message 1328654.

You really are seriously talking about legislating people and tracking them rather than legislating and tracking guns?

You want to lock guns up. Fine. Who gets the key? Suddenly we are back to people. It always has been about people. We might as well quit beating around the bush and accept that it is a people control/tracking issue.

Gary, a gun doesn't suffer if they are locked up, it doesn't have a civil liberties to violate. If you insist that a gun is tracked and registered, it won't consider itself as being treated unfairly. Its a gun. Not a person.

I am sure that you don't consider it unreasonable to be expected to have a license to drive a car, or have to take a test to drive that car. After all, sometimes we have to take a bit of hit to protect others. If those others are children, then it really is a no brainer.

You inconvenience yourself just a little, and if you any sense of responsibilty you stop whining and act like an adult.

As far as I can see, all the pro-gun people in this debate are acting like self entitled whiny children who are having their favourite toy taken from them and throwing any excuse they can to keep what they consider their 'right'.

All I hear is "mine, mine, mine".

It is not pretty, and quite honestly, pretty disgusting when you consider the reason that people want to regulate guns in the first place.
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

rob smithProject donor
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 03
Posts: 8752
Credit: 61,653,565
RAC: 35,321
United Kingdom
Message 1328703 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 17:47:19 UTC

Well said Esme.
____________
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

Profile James Sotherden
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 16 May 99
Posts: 9043
Credit: 36,978,914
RAC: 15,239
United States
Message 1328710 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 18:02:41 UTC

Its not the honest gun owner. Its the crazys and the hoods. Take Chicago. Toughest gun lasw in the nation and yet they have more killed than in Afganastan every year. Why you ask. Because the state lets the perps walk. The police can frisk you on no cause and if they find weapons , they either dont prosacute or just wack your wrist and let you walk.

How about any person who is found to have an illegal weapon , or uses one in a crime, or buys one for a known felon or a crazy gets 10 years right off the bat with no parole.

A big step would be for a federal penalty not a state crime. Another thing that is BS is that you cant bring up a perps past criminal history when he goes to trial again. So the jury never knows that poor little Johnny has 10 prior arrests for using a gun in armed robberies.
____________

Old James

Message 1328739 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 19:13:42 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 18:55:45 UTC

--

Profile JulieProject donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 23360
Credit: 4,066,419
RAC: 3,179
Belgium
Message 1328746 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 19:28:24 UTC

Ok, completely off topic, but...are you serious with that screen name, Guy??
____________


rOZZ

Profile Es99Project donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 9094
Credit: 259,333
RAC: 85
Canada
Message 1328749 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 19:32:14 UTC - in response to Message 1328746.

Ok, completely off topic, but...are you serious with that screen name, Guy??

Perhaps he should change it to David Koresh?
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile JulieProject donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 23360
Credit: 4,066,419
RAC: 3,179
Belgium
Message 1328751 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 19:36:40 UTC - in response to Message 1328749.

Ok, completely off topic, but...are you serious with that screen name, Guy??

Perhaps he should change it to David Koresh?


The final prophet...hmmm

Nevermind, carry on...
____________


rOZZ

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 13000
Credit: 7,666,058
RAC: 6,265
United States
Message 1328827 - Posted: 18 Jan 2013, 21:39:53 UTC - in response to Message 1328687.

I am sure that you don't consider it unreasonable to be expected to have a license to drive a car, or have to take a test to drive that car. After all, sometimes we have to take a bit of hit to protect others. If those others are children, then it really is a no brainer.

Again, you say one thing and use an example of the other.

Do you need a drivers license to buy a car? NO!

It is people you want to track, even if you can't see it.


____________

Previous · 1 . . . 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 . . . 25 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Firearms. Who or what is dangerous?

Copyright © 2014 University of California