birdlike

That shitbag's voice is worse than nails on a chalkboard, to me. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Hate to say it (or is it that I love to say it?) but GUNS and SHOOTINGS are on the rise in London, too. Lotta good their attempts to control the crimes by banning the tools have been doing. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Yeah, something keeps telling me that even if we were to ban guns from the face of the earth, we wouldn't get even an inch closer to solving our real problems. Psychos find a way... Minor fender-bender leads to murderous rampage I guess we can add this to the folder that contains the stories about 4, 7, 8 people stabbed to death in mass murders in places like Japan and China, with strict gun control so that at least they don't get murdered with GUNS! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Aw, man, I'm sorry to read your dog's health is failing. Be a comfort to her and just ... remembering that you loved each other. When it's time for her to go, that's all you really need to know, apart from the fact that everyone has to go eventually. Best wishes. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

What am I missing? Is there a concealed insult in "BH Obama"? Honestly askin', here... Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Great post. Excellent play on how Obama managed to tell us that he won't tolerate people saying he doesn't love America without actually saying that it's not true. He's putting his foot down, I guess. This is the toughguy we need to safeguard America from the "tayor-ists," I tells ya. Reminds me of the Simpsons when Homer announced to Marge that he was putting his foot down about something, and did so literally, and then when she challenged him he said, "Sorry, Marge -- the foot has spoken!" Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Nope.. only you and Lush Rimjob....not that you guys ever think he "had it" What an informed reply you gave there. Yes, I am continually awed by how non-angry her posts portray her as being. Soooo very rational. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

I take it this relates to "require trigger locks on guns in the home"? But if you're talking about careless people, they are not going to use them! This is obvious. You can mandate that trigger locks be sold with the guns, but you will still have people who decline to use them. The simple fact is that responsible people keep their guns away from unauthorized users on their own, without the need for unenforceable laws telling them to do so. Why would you want to put more laws on the books, Billvon, that no one would ever be able to enforce except for after a kid gets killed, or by violation of search and seizure law? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

You forget that the U.S. accidental shooting death rate has steadily declined for all the time since records of it have been kept, despite the constant growth of the number of firearms in private hands in the U.S. How do you account for that? More guns, but nonetheless, fewer accidental deaths! Big hole in your philosophy--but it wasn't put there by a gun. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

I suspect you knew very well that he meant to compare the way people want to do away fully with guns. Where is there a political party of any note in this country that has historically stood for doing away with alcohol the way Democrats have stood for doing away (if piece by piece) with gun rights? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Why would anyone's policy be required to pay to fix a person who was shot legally by a person exercising his right of self defense? If I shoot a guy who's attacking me, I am not going to have to pay for his funeral, and I am not going to lose a civil lawsuit that tries to force me to do so. Why would my insurance company be any more liable? And if I were a gang member and shot someone criminally, my policy (as if I'd have a policy to cover a gun I was a criminal for owning) would likewise be held harmless. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Insurance is a requirement to operate a car on public roads (and on quite a few private lands as well), so I don't see how that would not be part of a discussion on treating guns and cars equally. certainly not a strawman. State insurance boards exist in part to regulate the insurance companies so that they can't charge "a thousand zillion dollars" just to profit hugely. Likewise, IF the anti-gunners conceded to have gun owners enjoy all the benefits of car-like licensure (which they never would agree to when they'd see how much we'd gain) I imagine a state gun insurance board would be created to keep the premiums realistic instead of amounting to a de facto ban. I disagree for the previously stated reasons (in this and my previous post). Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

I could easily go for that. You might be forgetting that the insurance premiums will likely be so high that only Bill Gates and Warren Buffet will be able to own guns and take them off private property. The insurance premiums would be determined largely by what the companies expect to have to pay out. Would your car insurance cover you for damage you did deliberately and criminally with your car? No, I don't think so. When the insurance companies discovered that they were not on the hook for every gang-banger's drive-by shooting, or bank or 7-Eleven robbery, but only for damage done by people who were not committing crimes with their guns (and in some states it's a crime ex post facto if you left your gun where a kid eventually got at it and had an accident with it), we would see just how few HONEST people are causing damage with guns. I proffer that the premiums would be not so high as you are implying. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

It "solves" the problem in the same way that CCW licenses "solve" the problem of bad guys going around with guns: it allows honest people to show that they're honest, and dishonest people to continue to show that they're dishonest. And as I've pointed out (well, really, the newspaper repeatedly points out for me), our system does not reliably send these people to jail until they are ten, twelve, eighteen-time offenders!! Sorry, the safety I'm talking about is about MISUSE, ABUSE, or CARELESS USE of cars. Not about wheels falling off, Billvon, and I think you knew that. I'm not concerned here with "helping victims of accidents"--I thought we were talking about what would help prevent the accidents in the first place. Most people who are concerned about guns being misused criminally are not going to be happy if you do nothing about bad guys using them, but cheerfully tell them that "we have first-rate medical professionals standing by to help you once you've been shot." I knew you were thinking trigger locks and wanted to have fun with your response first. Billvon, are you saying that somehow we're going to get criminals to put trigger locks on the guns they're carrying around illegally? Or that any of the guns that honest citizens are keeping around for self defense should be kept with trigger locks on them? Statistically speaking, Billvon, there are under 1000 deaths due to accidental shootings each year in this country--an insignificant number compared to the overall gun owner or guns-owned figures. (note: I am not saying that any family member's death is "insignificant," only pointing out that in any system with monumental numbers you will have deaths that cannot be practically avoided) I doubt that many of the accidental shooting deaths occur because someone somehow did not know you could lock a gun away from a child. They occur because that person didn't care to. How would you enforce a law requiring trigger lock use if not by unannounced inspections and searches of households containing guns? Otherwise, it's back to square one, where you have a guy who knows that the law will punish him ex post facto if his kid shoots himself, but you can't make him put the trigger lock on before the fact. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

The "unequate-able-ness" of it typically is unfavorable to those suggesting car-like restrictions on guns. I am certain that JohnRich has given the treatement of, "Oh, so you want to license guns like cars, huh?" somewhere on this forum. Let's start with, "A gun license would then mean you could take your gun anywhere you can legally go," and work from there... Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Licensing CLEARLY allows incompetents on the road, and simply has no power to prevent those who have no licenses to get out on the road and drive anyway. And law enforcement efforts don't nab but a fraction of those. And then, why do you think we have a term "habitual offender"? Because even those unlicensed drivers we do catch still go out and drive again and again, even after being repeatedly caught and..."punished." Registration of vehicles is purely for revenue purposes, and has no bearing on safety whatsoever. If you want us to put seatbelts, brake lights and tail lights on guns, I would be obligated to ask why. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

So what do you propose that would have a prayer of successfully ending this? Mind you, it has to pass constitutional muster. And if your ideas run to "confiscate all the guns" please remember that the last guns that will remain to be confiscated will most certainly be those belonging to violent criminals. And if you confiscate property, the Constitution mandates that you give fair compensation to those from whom it is taken. Let's see, 300,000,000 guns... assume an average of $500 per gun... (Some are about $100, and then again, some cost thousands!) We're a cash-strapped nation right now, so where are you gonna get $150,000,000,000 to do this? A search of the archives will reveal my suggestion, and it is NOT confiscation so your rant is wasted. No, I still had fun. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

I'm lookin' at the photo of him just to the left of your post and he could easily be fielding a reporter's question, saying, "How do I feel about a gang-bang? Well, I..." Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Then you go and watch a movie like "Idiocracy" and in the first five minutes, after the "documentary" footage about stupid people far outbreeding smart people, and even though you know it's a "fictional" movie you know it's TRUE. And so you become like me, and lose all hope for the future of mankind, and understand that if we don't have very very limited time left, and we're going to endure, it's just going to be in the same hobbling, sorry, just-barely-getting-by state we've always been in. Does anyone see us ever becoming the progress-oriented, unified, wisened kind of society, without stupid, artificial divisions between us that cause strife, like they depict in our future in "Star Trek"? I don't. I think that basic, intrinsic flaws in human nature will always plague us. We have not overcome anything, where driving out our undesirable traits is concerned. Every bad thing about humans that was so thousands of years ago is with us today, from greed to envy to hatred to laziness to ignorance and stupidity... The internet has given us new ways to put it on display whereas it used to remain relatively hidden, and known only to those close to us. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/child_bankrupts_make_a_wish_0 Unbelievable! And you think of all the kids who won't benefit now! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Please answer this question: Being who you are, if you began to suffer from "bad economics" in a severe way, would that or would that not be sufficient to make you willing to stick a knife or a gun in someone's face and demand her money? See, I'm just not buyin' the whole, "The economy is making people go out and be vicious criminals" bullshit. You either have that in your makeup or you don't. I have plenty of guns, and in my day have had plenty of debt and lean times. But I never said, "Screw it, I'm gonna go out with this gun and take what's not mine from some innocent person." I would accept your attempt to blame RAP MUSIC long before I would accept your blaming the economy for crime. You make it sound like you believe if everyone had plenty, there wouldn't be greedy criminals wanting more than plenty. No, but Moore's movie certainly does. By the way, he loves to compare completely disparate cities across our northern border in order to show that Americans are just special in their proclivity for violence. It's nonsense. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

So what do you propose that would have a prayer of successfully ending this? Mind you, it has to pass constitutional muster. And if your ideas run to "confiscate all the guns" please remember that the last guns that will remain to be confiscated will most certainly be those belonging to violent criminals. And if you confiscate property, the Constitution mandates that you give fair compensation to those from whom it is taken. Let's see, 300,000,000 guns... assume an average of $500 per gun... (Some are about $100, and then again, some cost thousands!) We're a cash-strapped nation right now, so where are you gonna get $150,000,000,000 to do this? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

First of all, sounds like more of the same: punish and impinge on the law-abiding because of what the criminals do. (That's essentially what gun laws boil down to, of course.) Second, how would that address those who do live in the area who are committing crimes there? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Access to US Ports (all part of homeland security). g And these fast-track people through security because... terrorists will never be able to counterfeit them? How's it work? What's to say that they won't become worthless if/when someone figures a way to make fakes? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire