quade 4 #1 March 28, 2013 http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/27/justice/arizona-loughner-details/index.htmlquade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #2 March 28, 2013 Some of the more famous pro-gun supporters here.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #3 March 28, 2013 QuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here."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
lawrocket 3 #4 March 28, 2013 Okay. So the parents knew he was nuts. After two years of intense scrutiny of everything this comes out. So how does this change anything? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #5 March 28, 2013 QuoteOkay. So the parents knew he was nuts. After two years of intense scrutiny of everything this comes out. So how does this change anything? Folks like you have no problem with people like Loughner having 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
lawrocket 3 #6 March 28, 2013 Wrong. Folks like me have a problem figuring out how to keep guns from someone like him without being a police state, internment, tyranny. That pesky Constitution... Note: just twenty years ago, homosexuality was a mental disorder under the DSM-III. Should we have stripped all gays of guns because they were nuts? Yes, most homosexuals over the age of 40 would therefore have a history of mental illness. What are your thoughts on that? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skypuppy 1 #7 March 28, 2013 Quotehttp://www.cnn.com/2013/03/27/justice/arizona-loughner-details/index.html what's insane is that the college police force knew there was something wrong with him and his parents knew enough to take away one gun from him, and no one thought to notify the state police or medical authorities or to commit him which could have sparked a check to find out he had bought the handgun. That's what's crazy. the system would have worked without taking away other people's rights if his parents had committed him.If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #8 March 28, 2013 Something must be done, then. We cannot trust that crazy people will be reported for commitment and it's a travesty. Commit everybody who is not law enforcement. That way, people's rights can be maintained. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #9 March 28, 2013 Quote What are your thoughts on that? Crazy people shouldn't 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
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #10 March 28, 2013 QuoteQuote What are your thoughts on that? Crazy people shouldn't have easy access to guns. Well, the thread was originally about Loughner. And he was subjected to the standard background checks that you want applied to every transfer. So was Holmes in Colorado and Cho in Virginia. And Lanza stole the weapons from his mom, whom he murdered. Those weapons had been purchased with the standard checks. How would expanding the background checks to every transfer have stopped any of those? How do you expect to identify "Crazy People" who haven't committed any violent act?"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #11 March 28, 2013 QuoteQuote What are your thoughts on that? Crazy people shouldn't have easy access to guns. Problem: As far as law enforcement and the government were concerned, Loughner was no more or less crazy than you. So, how do you propose fixing that? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #12 March 28, 2013 QuoteHow do you expect to identify "Crazy People" who haven't committed any violent act? There's the question that he hasn't answered. His response is rote - made it hard for crazy people to access guns. Kallend sounds like a politician. Lofty announced goals with no rational ideas about how to actually fix it. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 897 #13 March 28, 2013 I can see the surprise in your expression. Oh wait, there is none. Never mind. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #14 March 28, 2013 QuoteProblem: As far as law enforcement and the government were concerned, Loughner was no more or less crazy than you. So, how do you propose fixing that? How do you? Oh, that's right, you don't. The fact is people in Loughner's life knew he was a menace. The system for ensuring Loughner didn't hurt others wasn't robust enough or easy enough for them to use. You're a lawyer. The law is what you're supposed to be good at. Come up with a solution.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #15 March 28, 2013 QuoteYou're a lawyer. The law is what you're supposed to be good at. Come up with a solution. The assumption that the only solution is a legal one is really interesting. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #16 March 28, 2013 QuoteQuoteYou're a lawyer. The law is what you're supposed to be good at. Come up with a solution. The assumption that the only solution is a legal one is really interesting. The assumption people should find illegal solutions to problems is also interesting.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #17 March 28, 2013 QuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Quote Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here."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 quade 4 #18 March 28, 2013 Quote QuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Quote Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 897 #19 March 28, 2013 You need to talk to Kallend about the magical see into the future and see when an unknown loony snaps so we can intervene prior to that machine thingy. I cannot see any possible way for a universal background check to discover the future like that. Yet anyway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wolfriverjoe 1,523 #20 March 29, 2013 QuoteQuote QuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Quote Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket. He said that Loughner wasn't considered insane as far as law enforcement and the government were concerned. And he wasn't . He hadn't done anything to show up on their radar. Should his parents have had him committed? Maybe. Should the government do "insanity tests" on all prospective gun purchasers? Sounds good, but how? It's already been established that it's very difficult (if not impossible) to determine who is going to be violent in the future. And then there's that little thing called "privacy", you know the "obstacle" Obama referred to. So how do you protect the public from the few without infringing on the rights of the many?"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,148 #21 March 29, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuote QuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Quote Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket. He said that Loughner wasn't considered insane as far as law enforcement and the government were concerned. Thank you for pointing out very effectively the obvious and clear deficiency in the status quo.... 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 OHCHUTE 0 #22 March 29, 2013 Loughners parents knew their kid was out of it. They witness him talking to himself as if there were two persons there. They needed to get the guy in treatment, and if he refused go to court to have him put away. They didn't do that and look what happened. Parents, teachers, citizens need be more viligant. This has nothing to do with gun control but community policing doing its job to ensure public safety. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites champu 1 #23 March 29, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket. I'm actually having trouble finding where lawrocket said he didn't think Loughner was/is insane. Recently he listed him amongst examples of insane people to contrast with murderers that didn't appear to be insane. And why say "some" if you just meant lawrocket? Or is this thread just about him (i.e. another poster)? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #24 March 29, 2013 In other threads law rocket has tried to parse this "insane" issue to a strictly what would get a person off in a "not guilty by reason of insanity" defense. Others have agreed with him and want to limit gun owners who have ONLY been previously declared insane by the courts as being eligible to have their gun rights revoked. Loughner is a prime example of why that strategy simply doesn't work.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skypuppy 1 #25 March 29, 2013 QuoteLoughners parents knew their kid was out of it. They witness him talking to himself as if there were two persons there. They needed to get the guy in treatment, and if he refused go to court to have him put away. They didn't do that and look what happened. Parents, teachers, citizens need be more viligant. This has nothing to do with gun control but community policing doing its job to ensure public safety. The original article states clearly that the initial cause for concern for the parents was when college police told them he was a possible danger to himself or others. These college police have to bear some of the blame. Just as the college in the aurora shooter should bear some - the college psychiatrist was aware of problems there, too.If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 1 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
quade 4 #18 March 28, 2013 Quote QuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Quote Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 897 #19 March 28, 2013 You need to talk to Kallend about the magical see into the future and see when an unknown loony snaps so we can intervene prior to that machine thingy. I cannot see any possible way for a universal background check to discover the future like that. Yet anyway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wolfriverjoe 1,523 #20 March 29, 2013 QuoteQuote QuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Quote Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket. He said that Loughner wasn't considered insane as far as law enforcement and the government were concerned. And he wasn't . He hadn't done anything to show up on their radar. Should his parents have had him committed? Maybe. Should the government do "insanity tests" on all prospective gun purchasers? Sounds good, but how? It's already been established that it's very difficult (if not impossible) to determine who is going to be violent in the future. And then there's that little thing called "privacy", you know the "obstacle" Obama referred to. So how do you protect the public from the few without infringing on the rights of the many?"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,148 #21 March 29, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuote QuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Quote Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket. He said that Loughner wasn't considered insane as far as law enforcement and the government were concerned. Thank you for pointing out very effectively the obvious and clear deficiency in the status quo.... 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 OHCHUTE 0 #22 March 29, 2013 Loughners parents knew their kid was out of it. They witness him talking to himself as if there were two persons there. They needed to get the guy in treatment, and if he refused go to court to have him put away. They didn't do that and look what happened. Parents, teachers, citizens need be more viligant. This has nothing to do with gun control but community policing doing its job to ensure public safety. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites champu 1 #23 March 29, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket. I'm actually having trouble finding where lawrocket said he didn't think Loughner was/is insane. Recently he listed him amongst examples of insane people to contrast with murderers that didn't appear to be insane. And why say "some" if you just meant lawrocket? Or is this thread just about him (i.e. another poster)? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #24 March 29, 2013 In other threads law rocket has tried to parse this "insane" issue to a strictly what would get a person off in a "not guilty by reason of insanity" defense. Others have agreed with him and want to limit gun owners who have ONLY been previously declared insane by the courts as being eligible to have their gun rights revoked. Loughner is a prime example of why that strategy simply doesn't work.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skypuppy 1 #25 March 29, 2013 QuoteLoughners parents knew their kid was out of it. They witness him talking to himself as if there were two persons there. They needed to get the guy in treatment, and if he refused go to court to have him put away. They didn't do that and look what happened. Parents, teachers, citizens need be more viligant. This has nothing to do with gun control but community policing doing its job to ensure public safety. The original article states clearly that the initial cause for concern for the parents was when college police told them he was a possible danger to himself or others. These college police have to bear some of the blame. Just as the college in the aurora shooter should bear some - the college psychiatrist was aware of problems there, too.If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 1 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
normiss 897 #19 March 28, 2013 You need to talk to Kallend about the magical see into the future and see when an unknown loony snaps so we can intervene prior to that machine thingy. I cannot see any possible way for a universal background check to discover the future like that. Yet anyway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #20 March 29, 2013 QuoteQuote QuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Quote Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket. He said that Loughner wasn't considered insane as far as law enforcement and the government were concerned. And he wasn't . He hadn't done anything to show up on their radar. Should his parents have had him committed? Maybe. Should the government do "insanity tests" on all prospective gun purchasers? Sounds good, but how? It's already been established that it's very difficult (if not impossible) to determine who is going to be violent in the future. And then there's that little thing called "privacy", you know the "obstacle" Obama referred to. So how do you protect the public from the few without infringing on the rights of the many?"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,148 #21 March 29, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuote QuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Quote Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket. He said that Loughner wasn't considered insane as far as law enforcement and the government were concerned. Thank you for pointing out very effectively the obvious and clear deficiency in the status quo.... 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 OHCHUTE 0 #22 March 29, 2013 Loughners parents knew their kid was out of it. They witness him talking to himself as if there were two persons there. They needed to get the guy in treatment, and if he refused go to court to have him put away. They didn't do that and look what happened. Parents, teachers, citizens need be more viligant. This has nothing to do with gun control but community policing doing its job to ensure public safety. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites champu 1 #23 March 29, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket. I'm actually having trouble finding where lawrocket said he didn't think Loughner was/is insane. Recently he listed him amongst examples of insane people to contrast with murderers that didn't appear to be insane. And why say "some" if you just meant lawrocket? Or is this thread just about him (i.e. another poster)? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #24 March 29, 2013 In other threads law rocket has tried to parse this "insane" issue to a strictly what would get a person off in a "not guilty by reason of insanity" defense. Others have agreed with him and want to limit gun owners who have ONLY been previously declared insane by the courts as being eligible to have their gun rights revoked. Loughner is a prime example of why that strategy simply doesn't work.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skypuppy 1 #25 March 29, 2013 QuoteLoughners parents knew their kid was out of it. They witness him talking to himself as if there were two persons there. They needed to get the guy in treatment, and if he refused go to court to have him put away. They didn't do that and look what happened. Parents, teachers, citizens need be more viligant. This has nothing to do with gun control but community policing doing its job to ensure public safety. The original article states clearly that the initial cause for concern for the parents was when college police told them he was a possible danger to himself or others. These college police have to bear some of the blame. Just as the college in the aurora shooter should bear some - the college psychiatrist was aware of problems there, too.If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 1 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
kallend 2,148 #21 March 29, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuote QuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Quote Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket. He said that Loughner wasn't considered insane as far as law enforcement and the government were concerned. Thank you for pointing out very effectively the obvious and clear deficiency in the status quo.... 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 OHCHUTE 0 #22 March 29, 2013 Loughners parents knew their kid was out of it. They witness him talking to himself as if there were two persons there. They needed to get the guy in treatment, and if he refused go to court to have him put away. They didn't do that and look what happened. Parents, teachers, citizens need be more viligant. This has nothing to do with gun control but community policing doing its job to ensure public safety. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites champu 1 #23 March 29, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket. I'm actually having trouble finding where lawrocket said he didn't think Loughner was/is insane. Recently he listed him amongst examples of insane people to contrast with murderers that didn't appear to be insane. And why say "some" if you just meant lawrocket? Or is this thread just about him (i.e. another poster)? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #24 March 29, 2013 In other threads law rocket has tried to parse this "insane" issue to a strictly what would get a person off in a "not guilty by reason of insanity" defense. Others have agreed with him and want to limit gun owners who have ONLY been previously declared insane by the courts as being eligible to have their gun rights revoked. Loughner is a prime example of why that strategy simply doesn't work.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skypuppy 1 #25 March 29, 2013 QuoteLoughners parents knew their kid was out of it. They witness him talking to himself as if there were two persons there. They needed to get the guy in treatment, and if he refused go to court to have him put away. They didn't do that and look what happened. Parents, teachers, citizens need be more viligant. This has nothing to do with gun control but community policing doing its job to ensure public safety. The original article states clearly that the initial cause for concern for the parents was when college police told them he was a possible danger to himself or others. These college police have to bear some of the blame. Just as the college in the aurora shooter should bear some - the college psychiatrist was aware of problems there, too.If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 1 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
OHCHUTE 0 #22 March 29, 2013 Loughners parents knew their kid was out of it. They witness him talking to himself as if there were two persons there. They needed to get the guy in treatment, and if he refused go to court to have him put away. They didn't do that and look what happened. Parents, teachers, citizens need be more viligant. This has nothing to do with gun control but community policing doing its job to ensure public safety. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #23 March 29, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteSome of the more famous pro-gun supporters here. Who? Show us the post that backs up your claim here. Scroll up. See Lawrocket. I'm actually having trouble finding where lawrocket said he didn't think Loughner was/is insane. Recently he listed him amongst examples of insane people to contrast with murderers that didn't appear to be insane. And why say "some" if you just meant lawrocket? Or is this thread just about him (i.e. another poster)? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #24 March 29, 2013 In other threads law rocket has tried to parse this "insane" issue to a strictly what would get a person off in a "not guilty by reason of insanity" defense. Others have agreed with him and want to limit gun owners who have ONLY been previously declared insane by the courts as being eligible to have their gun rights revoked. Loughner is a prime example of why that strategy simply doesn't work.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skypuppy 1 #25 March 29, 2013 QuoteLoughners parents knew their kid was out of it. They witness him talking to himself as if there were two persons there. They needed to get the guy in treatment, and if he refused go to court to have him put away. They didn't do that and look what happened. Parents, teachers, citizens need be more viligant. This has nothing to do with gun control but community policing doing its job to ensure public safety. The original article states clearly that the initial cause for concern for the parents was when college police told them he was a possible danger to himself or others. These college police have to bear some of the blame. Just as the college in the aurora shooter should bear some - the college psychiatrist was aware of problems there, too.If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
