Ron

Unlike your crystal ball that lets you "know" so much? Get real, John. I expect more from a guy that claims to have a PhD. Here is a guy that killed 7. http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/06/08/japan.stabbing.spree/index.html You are also guessing that Zamora would not have done something else like built a bomb, or went on a stabbing spree. Also you never answered my question...so I will ask it again a third time. Would you support holding the Dr's harmless in case someone "approved" went nuts? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

No, you were trying to IMPLY without proof. When called on it you back peddle to your normal defense. I really expect better from a guy that has a PhD to not play stupid mind games and word tricks. Hey and I just asked a question and you got all upset...Ring a little too close to the truth? "Have any proof, or are you just spouting things? " "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

So you ARE just spouting things without proof...Got it. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

So you are guessing that an armed civilian would not have helped. You are also guessing that Zamora would not have done something else like built a bomb, or went on a stabbing spree. Also you never answered my question...so I will ask it again. Would you support holding the Dr's harmless in case someone "approved" went nuts? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

You KNOW that? Or are you guessing? So why just add new ones? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Have any proof, or are you just spouting things? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Yes, but knee jerk "solutions" don't solve the problem...As you have already stated. So you admit that the current rules don't work...But you are willing to just add to them? And I am surprised at how fast you folks are willing to add steps that have been proven not to work in the past just to feel like you are doing something. Ya know....This reminds me of the old WL issue. You were vehemently opposed to rules there in favor of education. Why are you so willing to impose them here? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Then how about enforcing the CURRENT rules before you add new ones? I disagree. Why not just have any medical Dr that feels a person is a violent risk to themselves or someone else make a phone call and submit a form that puts that person on a list. That way a person can apply to be removed later if the Doc clears him. As opposed to making anyone that wants a gun to have to go to a Dr and ask permission. And would you support holding the Dr's harmless in case someone "approved" went nuts? Because if not then not many Dr's would take that kind of risk. My version is A LOT less intrusive and only 'reports' those that could be an issue. Anyone that has been through a class III medical knows that it is a waste of time anyway. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

You know better. You know it was Obama. How do you feel about past drug use and character? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

You keep saying that, but it was a FAILURE of the current system to report those incidents. They didn't report them out of fear of violating his rights to privacy. You rail against domestic ease dropping, but seem to be ok with the govt making a file on you for many other things. Also the NRA supported the legislation that fixed the errors in reporting. It should be remembered that people didn't report his issues out of fear of stepping on his privacy. John, in your opinion, how much data should the govt be allowed to collect on a person, how should they be able to collect it, and who should have access to that data? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

How about admitted drug use? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

1. Pass a criminal check. A history of violent crimes disqualifies you. 2. Pass a background check. Any suicidal or violent mental issues disqualifies you. *This requires that personal information is held on individuals....A dangerous proposition. So this data is ONLY allowed to be used for the act of the background check and no records of requests are kept and the reason for rejection is never handed out. You pass those two things, you are allowed to buy an AOW (any other weapon). To carry you have to pass the above and a proficiency test and a written test (most States already have this). An RPG is not an arm that a regular troop would muster with. But as long as the NFA rules are followed I would not care if someone did own an RPG. I don't mind the current procedures for the procurement of an NFA weapon. I do wish that the LEO HAD to sign unless the background check came up with issues. The 200.00 tax is nothing more than a throw back to the "poll taxes" and should be removed. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

So not true. You do not need an FFL for a MG. You need: 1. A correctly filled out form 4. You take that form to your local LEO and he runs a quick background check for outstanding warrants. 2. Two completed fingerprint cards. 3. A check or money order made out to the ATF&E for the sum of 200.00 4. A statement of citizenship. 5. Mail all of it off to VA and they run a background check on you. In about 2 mths the guy that has possession of the weapon gets the signed/stamped form in the mail. He then gives the form and the weapon to you. The only time you need a FFL (Really a manufacturers license) is to make a FA weapon from a weapon that was manufactured after 3/86. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Obama has in fact said he wants to make handguns illegal. He has claimed he wants to make "assault" weapons illegal. You may try to say that leaves other types of firearms, but it is in fact trying to ban types of firearms. And I bet not even you agree with late term abortions. So you agree in banning certain types of abortions. The problem as always is "reasonable". That would not be an arm a soldier would muster with. But I do think civilians have the right to FA weapons provided they are qualified to own them. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I have not been around a while....But you really think you can claim that there are not people out there like that? The Second Amendment says "Shall not be infringed". What does the BoR's say about abortion? Look at DC, the SC ruled and now DC is dancing around still trying to prevent people from owning handguns. Calling any gun that has a bottom feeding magazine a machine gun!?!?!!?!? And Obama has said he will ban certain types of weapons. Just because it is not all weapons does not mean that it is not a ban and unconstitutional. As for abortion....Yes, the religious types are against it and want it reversed. I personally do not agree with it, but do not think my will should be pushed onto others. The irony here is that both groups think a ban will save lives. Both groups want to step on someone's rights. My stance is to allow abortions, and firearms. I don't think I should stop others from exercising their rights. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Wow, thank you John. Have you read H2640? Could it be that you and the gun lobby just do not agree on what you consider to be a plan that works? Why would anyone support something they don't think will work? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

You have claimed that the gun lobby and *I* have opposed all rational laws. You have been proven wrong with HR2640 was supported by the NRA that made improvements to the NICS. Now, man up and admit you were wrong, or prove otherwise. And you talked trash without any supporting evidence. Are you going to admit you were wrong (Like I ever expect that from you)...Or are you going to try and distract again? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Good then you know BS will not fly with me and you have to actually defend your position. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Just like you want to do all the time. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

People said the same thing when Roe came out. Mainly because it was just supporting a part of the BoR.'s They just upheld the Constitution over a City's law. BTW I support the right to choose....Even if I don't 100% agree with the act. Can you imagine the grief a city would get if they banned free speech? Or allowed any search? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

But guns bans don't work either. Registration does not work either. You have not been able to provide a workable solution that does not remove rights from law abiding citizens. You don't care about those rights, so you don't mind. I asked for an example and you FAILED to provide it. Instead you go off on some tangent. Please John, back up what you said, "Example - you claim to support the prohibition on mentally ill people purchasing guns, but steadfastly oppose every effective method of checking on purchasers." Go ahead, I am still waiting for you to back what you wrote. Either put up or admit you were wrong...It is not that hard John. You clearly don't really know the VT issue. The law did not fail...The Govt reporting failed, the school failed....You know privacy and all that? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/26/AR2007082601410_pf.html They had a one gun a mth rule and he just waited two mths. The Govt screwed up and failed to report he had been diagnosed as a threat. So the school and State screwed up. BTW the NICS was improved after that. HR2640 was supported by the NRA. (So much for the gun lobby not supporting SMART checks). BTW, I support the NICS as well. Once again...you have no idea what you are talking about. I await your apology. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Well, we are talking about the President trying to appoint judges that go along with their views. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I didn't watch the whole thing....My GF had it on in the other room and I paid some attention. He is not a great speaker. I did find it a shame that people felt they had to try and interrupt him. I thought the "ground clutter and static" line was a good way to deal with it. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I don't see the SC overturning Roe v Wade even then. And I am sure you would agree that Obama would push to ban firearms in his selections? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I don't consider three to be a bunch. And they are not "official" rules anyway. They really boil down to just one: 1. Remember that you have a tool that will kill if you are stupid...Don't be stupid, think safe. Well if you are ever my way, let me know. I have access to a few private ranges and some title II items. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334