mnealtx 0 #126 February 22, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteTake a look. [url "http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000922----000-.html"]Take a look - specifically where it says: (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person— (4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution; So, you may now apologize for insinuating that I did not have the law correct. Straw man. Your problem is not that you don't know the law, it's that you defend an ineffective law; one that allows nutters like Cho easy access to guns. And you defend one that allows nutters like Cho easy access to unarmed victims.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #127 February 22, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteTake a look. [url "http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000922----000-.html"]Take a look - specifically where it says: (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person— (4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution; So, you may now apologize for insinuating that I did not have the law correct. Straw man. Your problem is not that you don't know the law, it's that you defend an ineffective law; one that allows nutters like Cho easy access to guns. And you defend one that allows nutters like Cho easy access to unarmed victims. Yes, for very good reasons that were very well explained by GeorgiaDon. There is NO good reason that nutters should have easy access to guns.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #128 February 22, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteTake a look. [url "http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000922----000-.html"]Take a look - specifically where it says: (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person— (4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution; So, you may now apologize for insinuating that I did not have the law correct. Straw man. Your problem is not that you don't know the law, it's that you defend an ineffective law; one that allows nutters like Cho easy access to guns. And you defend one that allows nutters like Cho easy access to unarmed victims. Yes, for very good reasons that were very well explained by GeorgiaDon. There is NO good reason that nutters should have easy access to guns. And there's no good reason that nutters should have easy access to unarmed victims.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #129 February 22, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteTake a look. [url "http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000922----000-.html"]Take a look - specifically where it says: (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person— (4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution; So, you may now apologize for insinuating that I did not have the law correct. Straw man. Your problem is not that you don't know the law, it's that you defend an ineffective law; one that allows nutters like Cho easy access to guns. And you defend one that allows nutters like Cho easy access to unarmed victims. Yes, for very good reasons that were very well explained by GeorgiaDon. There is NO good reason that nutters should have easy access to guns. And there's no good reason that nutters should have easy access to unarmed victims. Yes, there is. Not everyone wishes to carry a gun all the time just in case some nutcase goes off the deep end and thanks to the obstructive efforts of people like you, has a gun.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #130 February 22, 2010 Quote Yes, there is. Not everyone wishes to carry a gun all the time just in case some nutcase goes off the deep end and thanks to the obstructive efforts of people like you, has a gun. When one has been a victim of a 2 legged predator in life, one tends to want to prevent that sort of thing from EVER happening again. I am REALLLY horrible at turning the other cheek and hoping for the best. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #131 February 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteAnd there's no good reason that nutters should have easy access to unarmed victims. Yes, there is. Not everyone wishes to carry a gun all the time just in case some nutcase goes off the deep end and thanks to the obstructive efforts of people like you, has a gun. And nobody wants to die at the hands of some nutter that can still get a gun, laws or no, thanks to the obstructive efforts of people like you that guaranteed the victims would be disarmed.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #132 February 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteAnd there's no good reason that nutters should have easy access to unarmed victims. Yes, there is. Not everyone wishes to carry a gun all the time just in case some nutcase goes off the deep end and thanks to the obstructive efforts of people like you, has a gun. And nobody wants to die at the hands of some nutter that can still get a gun, laws or no, thanks to the obstructive efforts of people like you that guaranteed the victims would be disarmed. Evidence shows that even trained, armed victims get killed by nutters with guns. The 4 dead cops in the restaurant showed that (along with numerous other examples). Your solution is proven ineffective.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #133 February 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAnd there's no good reason that nutters should have easy access to unarmed victims. Yes, there is. Not everyone wishes to carry a gun all the time just in case some nutcase goes off the deep end and thanks to the obstructive efforts of people like you, has a gun. And nobody wants to die at the hands of some nutter that can still get a gun, laws or no, thanks to the obstructive efforts of people like you that guaranteed the victims would be disarmed. Evidence shows that even trained, armed victims get killed by nutters with guns. The 4 dead cops in the restaurant showed that (along with numerous other examples). Your solution is proven ineffective. MY solution has half a million crimes a year or MORE being prevented by armed citizens. YOURS has victims killed by nutters in zones where they're guaranteed to have a free rein. I think I'll stay with my solution, thanks.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #134 February 23, 2010 Criminals are all in favor of strict gun control laws. Criminals want governments to ban all firearms. It makes their job easier. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #135 February 23, 2010 QuoteCriminals are all in favor of strict gun control laws. Criminals want governments to ban all firearms. It makes their job easier. And safer"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #136 February 24, 2010 Each year there are scores of people shot and killed by people with "a history of mental illness". Google those words and you'll see the score. Your solution is to accept those homicides as some kind of unavoidable collateral damage, and to have enough armed people around to shoot and kill the loonies after they've started their killing sprees. My solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place. It seems that a fundamental difference between our approaches to life is revealed in this thread.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
millertime24 8 #137 February 24, 2010 QuoteMy solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place. That's not a solution. It's an end-game. What idea do you have to complete this solution? What would YOU do to stop these "nutters" (I find this term funny) from getting their hands on ILLEGAL guns? Give a GOOD, VALID position and I'll argue with you on this. If you can't, then you're just blowing the proverbial smoke of your own personal agenda. PS, what is your definition of the term "nutter" (or better yet who on this site coined the phrase? It makes me think of a sandwich.)?Muff #5048 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #138 February 24, 2010 Quote Each year there are scores of people shot and killed by people with "a history of mental illness". Google those words and you'll see the score. Your solution is to accept those homicides as some kind of unavoidable collateral damage, and to have enough armed people around to shoot and kill the loonies after they've started their killing sprees. My solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place. It seems that a fundamental difference between our approaches to life is revealed in this thread. And your solution , as you have pontificated before, is to, for the most part, take guns away from everyone. I will agree with you on one point, the fundamental differences between your approaches and those who support the 2nd Amendment (as well as all the Amendments) is CLEARLY revealed in this thread."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #139 February 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteMy solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place. That's not a solution. It's an end-game. What idea do you have to complete this solution? What would YOU do to stop these "nutters" (I find this term funny) from getting their hands on ILLEGAL guns? Give a GOOD, VALID position and I'll argue with you on this. If you can't, then you're just blowing the proverbial smoke of your own personal agenda. PS, what is your definition of the term "nutter" (or better yet who on this site coined the phrase? It makes me think of a sandwich.)? He did quite clearly "expose" his "preferred" solutions on this site. I doubt he will ever do so, so clearly again"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
millertime24 8 #140 February 24, 2010 QuoteAnd your solution , as you have pontificated before, is to, for the most part, take guns away from everyone. And Ill play fair and argue with you as well. Again, this is only an end-game. How does the state go about accomplishing this task? There are MANY firearms in the US that are not registered. How does the state go about tracking all these "hypothetically illegal firearms" down?Muff #5048 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #141 February 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteAnd your solution , as you have pontificated before, is to, for the most part, take guns away from everyone. And Ill play fair and argue with you as well. Again, this is only an end-game. How does the state go about accomplishing this task? There are MANY firearms in the US that are not registered. How does the state go about tracking all these "hypothetically illegal firearms" down? Laws Laws that make ownership of weapons so onerous as to be damned near impossible to keep without running afoul of the law. Starts with registration, then laws so strict that having one would make it useless because of of storage requirements. Laws that make an owner who has had weapons stolen and used in crimes as much of a criminal as the thief. He has spoken to some states that have more stringent than other states requirement for concealed carry. While that is not as big an issue one has to ask why? Those licensed to carry are more law abiding than the general population. There will now, always be guns available in the US, regardless of the laws. Making it harder for the law abiding, legal to own gun people will leave guns more in the hands of the criminals than the rest of us. I have went back to try and find the thread where kallend spelled out his ideas and then defended them in the following onslaught but, there are some many gun threads to go through I finally gave up. But ask him for specifics. You will get generalizations today, not much more"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
millertime24 8 #142 February 24, 2010 You still haven't addressed the UNLICENSED but perfectlty legal guns that people already own (myself included). QuoteHe has spoken to some states that have more stringent than other states requirement for concealed carry. While that is not as big an issue one has to ask why? Those licensed to carry are more law abiding than the general population. Agreed! Some states require much more than others to obtain this privelage. As far as concealed carry, if you want to discuss this further I would be happy to trade pm's with you on my veiwpoints on the regulation of this subject. The discussion here is about people being able to gain access to ILLEGAL firearms. QuoteThere will now, always be guns available in the US, regardless of the laws. Making it harder for the law abiding, legal to own gun people will leave guns more in the hands of the criminals than the rest of us. Its true that there are already so many guns in the US that pretty much anyone can get one if the price is right[, but that doesnt answere the question of "how does one keep guns out of the hands of "nutters". QuoteBut ask him for specifics. You will get generalizations today, not much more Your opinion. Worth exactly what I paid for it. (told you I would be fair)Muff #5048 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
millertime24 8 #143 February 24, 2010 QuoteStarts with registration, then laws so strict that having one would make it useless because of of storage requirements. I'm going to need legit sources (not blogs) before I can earnestly take on this position.Muff #5048 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #144 February 24, 2010 QuoteQuote Each year there are scores of people shot and killed by people with "a history of mental illness". Google those words and you'll see the score. Your solution is to accept those homicides as some kind of unavoidable collateral damage, and to have enough armed people around to shoot and kill the loonies after they've started their killing sprees. My solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place. It seems that a fundamental difference between our approaches to life is revealed in this thread. And your solution , as you have pontificated before, is to, for the most part, take guns away from everyone. Please provide a link to any post I've made where I have suggested that? (This is a repeat of a challenge I've made before when you have claimed the exact same thing. Of course, you never can provide such a link).... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #145 February 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteMy solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place. That's not a solution. It's an end-game. What idea do you have to complete this solution? What would YOU do to stop these "nutters" (I find this term funny) from getting their hands on ILLEGAL guns? Give a GOOD, VALID position and I'll argue with you on this. If you can't, then you're just blowing the proverbial smoke of your own personal agenda. PS, what is your definition of the term "nutter" (or better yet who on this site coined the phrase? It makes me think of a sandwich.)? A very good start would be to tighten existing rules so that people like Cho, already known to be a nutter, can't legally buy guns. Then close obvious purchasing loopholes that allow anyone to avoid a NICS check if they want to.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
millertime24 8 #146 February 24, 2010 QuoteA very good start would be to tighten existing rules so that people like Cho, already known to be a nutter, can't legally buy guns. You still haven't answered my question. Tighen what "rules" exactly? Can you provide a link of the "rules" that you dont agree with? Cho WAS a "nutter" (still think thats a funny term), but what records do YOU have that tells he was a "nutter" before he aquired his firearms he used to murder a bunch of innocent people? (I dont think I have to ask a college prof to cite his sources). QuoteThen close obvious purchasing loopholes that allow anyone to avoid a NICS check if they want to. Other than "Straw Purchasing" (which is highly illegal, and gun shops are trained to watch for and report suspissions), I'm very curious to know EXACTLY what loopholes you are reffereing to. Again I want valid, unbiased citing.Muff #5048 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #147 February 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteA very good start would be to tighten existing rules so that people like Cho, already known to be a nutter, can't legally buy guns. You still haven't answered my question. Tighen what "rules" exactly? Can you provide a link of the "rules" that you dont agree with? Cho WAS a "nutter" (still think thats a funny term), but what records do YOU have that tells he was a "nutter" before he aquired his firearms he used to murder a bunch of innocent people? (I dont think I have to ask a college prof to cite his sources). QuoteThen close obvious purchasing loopholes that allow anyone to avoid a NICS check if they want to. Other than "Straw Purchasing" (which is highly illegal, and gun shops are trained to watch for and report suspissions), I'm very curious to know EXACTLY what loopholes you are reffereing to. Again I want valid, unbiased citing. Asked and answered previously. Now, why don't you exercise your own brain and see if YOU can figure out what was wrong with a system that allowed a KNOWN nutcase like Cho to LEGALLY buy the guns with which he slaughtered 32 people. You might also try thinking carefully about the following: www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22history+of+mental%22+shooting&sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS363US363&ie=UTF-8... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #148 February 24, 2010 Quote Each year there are scores of people shot and killed by people with "a history of mental illness". Google those words and you'll see the score. And every year, there are scores of people shot in gun free zones. Google those words and you'll see the score. QuoteYour solution is to accept those homicides as some kind of unavoidable collateral damage, So is yours. Quoteand to have enough armed people around to shoot and kill the loonies after they've started their killing sprees. So far, gun owners have stopped several loonies - unfortunately, AFTER they rampaged in the unarmed victim zones you endorse. Quote My solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place. Looks like your solution works about as well for loonies as it does for the rest of the criminals. QuoteIt seems that a fundamental difference between our approaches to life is revealed in this thread. Yes - I prefer the victims have a chance to defend themselves, and you would rather they just line up and die like good little drones.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #149 February 24, 2010 QuotePlease provide a link to any post I've made where I have suggested that? Done and done - look down a couple posts.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #150 February 24, 2010 Quote(kallend)Please provide a link to any post I've made where I have suggested that? See immediately below. QuoteA very good start would be to tighten existing rules so that people like Cho, already known to be a nutter, can't legally buy guns. Then close obvious purchasing loopholes that allow anyone to avoid a NICS check if they want to. Sounds like you don't support the existing laws as much as you SAY you do - but, of course, we already knew that.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
