jclalor 12 #76 September 21, 2011 Quote Quote Quote ***Seems you are fine owning weapons without YOU going through the process you seem to want OTHERS to go through. That is the very definition of hypocrisy. Yes And is ti also the mind set of a liberal And the mind set of the Conservative Christian Family Values of murdering... oh sorry.... defending your property... is right there for anyone else to see, Hey... Go shoot whoever you want to to maintain those fine upstanding valuesI am amazed so many of you are willing to set yourself up as judge and jury and executioner when it comes to other peoples lives. Fine Christian Values indeed. They see no irony what so ever, they reads things like you wrote and scratch their heads in bewilderment trying to figure out what you meant. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #77 September 21, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhat I hear YOU saying is that a person should have to submit to the board BEFORE they can own a gun. Nope. Not even close. Again, referring to the post I made with my suggestions. ... So let's say there's an altercation of some sort where one party (cops, family, healthcare professionals) thinks the guy is unstable. They go to a court and get a temporary separation between the guy and anything that might be a concern. During this temporary separation, a panel of mental health professionals, 3, run the person through some standardized tests. It's pretty clear here in your process that the guy loses his right without due process. Now you say it's just temporary, but we've already seen how routine restraining orders in divorce proceedings are not temporary at all. And it still appears that the burden of proof is going to fall on the guy to prove himself. Is this panel going to side on the side of individual rights or public safety? And are they going to rule on the spot - very unlikely. It will take time to schedule these evaluations, give them time to review, and then to present findings to a judge. Sounds like a 3-6 month process. And the key detail is the one you didn't provide- what is the standard of proof to start the process...what does it take to suggest that someone is incompetent and should be subjected to this treatment? You have a right to vote but you have to go through a registration process to show that you are eligible to exercise that right.... 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
Gravitymaster 0 #78 September 21, 2011 Considering the societal impact of voting, would you support removing someones right to vote temporarily if they have been reported to have mental problems? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #79 September 21, 2011 Quote Considering the societal impact of voting, would you support removing someones right to vote temporarily if they have been reported to have mental problems? Why... you guys can't even get politicians in your party to not put their mental problems on display daily so their fellow travellers aka Christian Conservatives will vote for them.Consider the societal impact your elected nutters have wrought on our country already..... who needs to worry about deficits... all the "good people" will be miracled out and not have to repay those godless heathens back. What a great fiscal farce the GOP has been since 1981. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #80 September 21, 2011 QuoteConsidering the societal impact of voting, would you support removing someones right to vote temporarily if they have been reported to have mental problems? Incredibly stupid question: different rights call for different processes.... 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
DaVinci 0 #81 September 21, 2011 QuoteI don't know why I even bothered to engage in this assinine arguement.. Well, I don't either since it is clear you cannot hold a position without making your own argument look silly. You want YOU to have a gun for protection without having to submit to mental health evaluations... But OTHER must submit to them. You were FINE with YOU having a gun for self defense, but you were not fine with anyone ELSE having the same right. Quotego shoot whoever the fuck you want bubba... it seems you guys dig that sort of action.. I do not. Out of this discussion.... Only one of us has said they were ready to shoot someone.... Hint: It was not ME. QuoteJust more great RED STATE Christian Family Values on display Where have I ever claimed to be Christian? Or are you just making things up again? What I AM is a uniform supporter of the Bill of Rights.... You seem to only support it when it only applies to YOU. So, did you go through a mental health screening like you want others to go through? Cause if not, you are a hypocrite. I am glad you were able to defend yourself.... Shame you don't want others to have that same right. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #82 September 21, 2011 QuoteQuoteI don't know why I even bothered to engage in this assinine arguement.. Well, I don't either since it is clear you cannot hold a position without making your own argument look silly. You want YOU to have a gun for protection without having to submit to mental health evaluations... But OTHER must submit to them. You were FINE with YOU having a gun for self defense, but you were not fine with anyone ELSE having the same right. Quotego shoot whoever the fuck you want bubba... it seems you guys dig that sort of action.. I do not. Out of this discussion.... Only one of us has said they were ready to shoot someone.... Hint: It was not ME. QuoteJust more great RED STATE Christian Family Values on display Where have I ever claimed to be Christian? Or are you just making things up again? What I AM is a uniform supporter of the Bill of Rights.... You seem to only support it when it only applies to YOU. So, did you go through a mental health screening like you want others to go through? Cause if not, you are a hypocrite. I am glad you were able to defend yourself.... Shame you don't want others to have that same right. You first bubba.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #83 September 21, 2011 QuoteAnd the mind set of the Conservative Christian Family Values of murdering... oh sorry.... defending your property... is right there for anyone else to see, But YOU just said: "Yes I did.. but why was it up to me to defend my life or the lives of those around me... to shoot the stupid fucker dead on the spot when he was menacing with a deadly weapon.." So YOU just contradicted yourself. Or are you are a "Conservative Christian" espousing "Family Values"????? QuoteI am amazed so many of you are willing to set yourself up as judge and jury and executioner when it comes to other peoples lives Again, YOU just said you were ready to defend yourself.... Irony score of the chart!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #84 September 21, 2011 QuoteIncredibly stupid question: different rights call for different processes. right, so while you may have to register to vote, that DOES NOT mean you should have to register to own or carry a gun.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #85 September 21, 2011 Quote Quote And the mind set of the Conservative Christian Family Values of murdering... oh sorry.... defending your property... is right there for anyone else to see, But YOU just said: "Yes I did.. but why was it up to me to defend my life or the lives of those around me... to shoot the stupid fucker dead on the spot when he was menacing with a deadly weapon.." So YOU just contradicted yourself. Or are you are a "Conservative Christian" espousing "Family Values"????? Quote I am amazed so many of you are willing to set yourself up as judge and jury and executioner when it comes to other peoples lives Again, YOU just said you were ready to defend yourself.... Irony score of the chart!!!!!!!!!!!! Reading comprehension skills really are lacking in RED STATE school systems Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #86 September 21, 2011 Quoteright, so while you may have to register to vote, that DOES NOT mean you should have to register to own or carry a gun.... Which also means that the determination of mental capacity for owning a gun, voting and excercising free speech is different. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #87 September 21, 2011 QuoteYou first bubba.... Out of debate tactics so soon? For the record, I have never hunted and never owned a truck. You have said you have done both. That makes you more a Bubba than me. Again, have you gone through the mental screenings you demand that others go through to own a firearm? Cause if not, then you are a hypocrite. You are also a hypocrite for saying that others that YOU THINK would defend themselves have mental issues... Yet you were ready to defend yourself with a gun yet claim you do not. Stick to a side of your own argument. Either EVERYONE should have to get a mental health screening to own a gun TO INCLUDE YOU. Or not. Either you are mentally issued for wanting to defend yourself, or you are not. But right now you are claiming that everyone BUT YOU should go through a mental health check to own a firearm. And everyone BUT YOU is crazy for wanting to be able to defend themselves. That is, by the very definition.... A Hypocrite. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #88 September 21, 2011 QuoteQuoteright, so while you may have to register to vote, that DOES NOT mean you should have to register to own or carry a gun.... Which also means that the determination of mental capacity for owning a gun, voting and excercising free speech is different. Right, voting for a politician who promises free handouts and destroys our economy is just fine and has no impact on society. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #89 September 21, 2011 QuoteWhich also means that the determination of mental capacity for owning a gun, voting and excercising free speech is different. Luckily, we already have a process in place for each example you have given. But he is trying to claim that one method does not apply to all.... Which means that just because you have to register to vote does not mean the same standard should apply anywhere else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #90 September 21, 2011 QuoteQuoteConsidering the societal impact of voting, would you support removing someones right to vote temporarily if they have been reported to have mental problems? Incredibly stupid question: different rights call for different processes. Actually, it pointed out an incredibly stupid double standard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #91 September 21, 2011 QuoteReading comprehension skills really are lacking in RED STATE school systems Oh look, when out of intellectual ammo, you try to start insulting people. The fact is that you have claimed that people should have to have mental health checks, but you have not had them. You have claimed that people who want to be able to defended themselves have issues... Yet YOU were willing to do it yourself. Do not blame me that you are unable to see past your own hypocrisy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #92 September 21, 2011 Quote Quote You first bubba.... Out of debate tactics so soon? For the record, I have never hunted and never owned a truck. You have said you have done both. That makes you more a Bubba than me. Again, have you gone through the mental screenings you demand that others go through to own a firearm? Cause if not, then you are a hypocrite. You are also a hypocrite for saying that others that YOU THINK would defend themselves have mental issues... Yet you were ready to defend yourself with a gun yet claim you do not. Stick to a side of your own argument. Either EVERYONE should have to get a mental health screening to own a gun TO INCLUDE YOU. Or not. Either you are mentally issued for wanting to defend yourself, or you are not. But right now you are claiming that everyone BUT YOU should go through a mental health check to own a firearm. And everyone BUT YOU is crazy for wanting to be able to defend themselves. That is, by the very definition.... A Hypocrite. Oh look a completely specious argument, again... go figureLast I checked there is a lot of difference between responsible gun ownership... and especially nutters like Cho and Laughner who had pretty long histories on nutter behavior. I would take one in a heartbeat if it would keep nutters from getting them... so.. would you bloodthirsty want to shoot someone for entering your property because that is grounds for "he needed killin" in Okieland take the same eval... or would you continue to hide behind your completely dishonest and duplicitous support for everyone having guns, so that YOU can enrich yourself at the cost of others lives.... no matter how fucking crazy they have acted towards everyone in their lives from teachers to their own families. Talk about hypocrisy bubba, its ooozin all over that gun shop. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #93 September 21, 2011 QuoteRight, voting for a politician who promises free handouts and destroys our economy is just fine and has no impact on society. Do you really want to compare the damage that could be done with one vote in a polling station compared to the damage that could be done with one firearm in a polling station? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #94 September 21, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteConsidering the societal impact of voting, would you support removing someones right to vote temporarily if they have been reported to have mental problems? Incredibly stupid question: different rights call for different processes. Actually, it pointed out an incredibly stupid double standard. Nope, it pointed out the need for appropriate standards. Just like we don't give out commercial pilot licenses to someone for demonstrating that they passed a drivers' license test.... 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
DaVinci 0 #95 September 21, 2011 Quote Oh look a completely specious argument, again... go figur I am just pointing out that you have a double standard... One standard for you, and another for anyone that is not you. I am pointing out that you are insulting anyone that would defend themselves, while you admitting to being ready to defend yourself. Again, do not blame me for your inconsistencies. QuoteLast I checked there is a lot of difference between responsible gun ownership... and especially nutters like Cho and Laughner who had pretty long histories on nutter behavior. True, and BOTH with the current laws should not have been allowed to posses weapons. This speaks more to the failures of Govt to govern than the laws in question. QuoteI would take one in a heartbeat if it would keep nutters from getting them... But there is no proof it would... Cho and others for example. Quotewould you bloodthirsty want to shoot someone for entering your property because that is grounds for "he needed killin" in Okieland take the same eval See, you were willing to kill, yet you call me "bloodthirsty". see the issue here? Only one of us has ever stated they were in a position ready to kill someone.... And it was not me. And would I take an eval? Well I took several in the Military. But no... I think that the current process if used properly works fine. Quoteor would you continue to hide behind your completely dishonest and duplicitous support for everyone having guns, so that YOU can enrich yourself at the cost of others lives All of this is nothing more than a personal attack on me..... Pathetic. How exactly am I "enriching myself at the cost of others"????? Also, I have never said everyone should have guns. I don't think that if you don't want one, you should be forced to have one. I don't think people with criminal records should have them. I don't think people who have been judged mentally deficient should have them. So simply put... You are wrong on your BS claims about me. QuoteTalk about hypocrisy bubba, its ooozin all over that gun shop. 1. You are the hunter with a truck. I have never hunted nor ever owned a truck. that makes you more "Bubba than me" 2. I have no gun shop. In fact, I have only ever sold one firearm in my life... to a person who needed a firearm because of a crazy person who was making threats to him. Once again, you have shown you have no idea what you are talking about and shown your hypocrisy... ie calling me a Bubba when you are the hunter with a truck. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #96 September 21, 2011 QuoteDo you really want to compare the damage that could be done with one vote in a polling station compared to the damage that could be done with one firearm in a polling station? Firearms are not allowed at polling stations. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #97 September 21, 2011 QuoteQuoteDo you really want to compare the damage that could be done with one vote in a polling station compared to the damage that could be done with one firearm in a polling station? Firearms are not allowed at polling stations. Shooting congresswomen in shopping malls is not allowed either.... 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
DaVinci 0 #98 September 21, 2011 Quote Shooting congresswomen in shopping malls is not allowed either. Exactly. So maybe the trick is to prevent the shooter with a history of mental problems from doing it... As opposed to preventing honest citizens from being allowed to carry there would be the right move? Would you approve of the SAME standard being applied to get a model rocket motor as you propose for guns? And the SAME standard to keep and use them? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #99 September 21, 2011 QuoteQuote Shooting congresswomen in shopping malls is not allowed either. Exactly. So maybe the trick is to prevent the shooter with a history of mental problems from doing it... As opposed to preventing honest citizens from being allowed to carry there would be the right move? I made that exact point earlier today in a different thread. Do try to keep up, dear boy.... 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
DaVinci 0 #100 September 21, 2011 QuoteI made that exact point earlier today in a different thread. Do try to keep up, dear boy. You must understand ... With all your dodging and tap dancing... It makes it difficult to really understand what you are trying to say. See, that is why people ask you specific questions... But, like always, you refuse to answer them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
