Arizona Congresswoman, shot in the head

[quade 3]

Quote

Take away their ability to use firearms and maybe they will start making bombs.

At least it would slow them down and maybe they blow themselves up while making them.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Quote

Take away their ability to use firearms and maybe they will start making bombs.

At least it would slow them down and maybe they blow themselves up while making them.

. . . Or they get lucky and take out a couple of hundred or a thousand people, instead of just 6 or 7, because now they had to build a bomb instead or having a rifle.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

maybe they blow themselves up while making them

Some will, many won't. Some might blow themselves up while using their bombs. Now where have we seen that happen before?

Why are you so fixated on the inanimate object? Shouldn't you be more concerned with "Why did Jared Loughner want Gabrielle Giffords dead"? I don't know about you, but I am curious. Hopefully he will talk and hopefully soon we will get to the bottom of this mess and find a way to move forward. I sure the fuck don't want to live in a society where assassinations become the norm. But I will patiently wait for the real evidence to surface instead of joining in on the media's witch hunt.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[bigbearfng 9]

Quote

Quote

At least we have acknowledgement FINALLY that the issue is the person, not the tool.

Well, uhm, actually . . . in this case it turns out to be both and what's ironic is that the "tool" so many people have touted as being able to stop this sort of crime wasn't used to stop it and the specific gun part that goes on to this "tool" (a high capacity magazine) had been previously banned and it was ONLY because this particular crazy person had to reload that the event ended.

It would have ended earlier if he had to reload earlier.

Sorry guys, facts are facts and in this case it looks as if the previous ban on magazine size was, in fact, a good idea.

And here's the kicker, it wasn't ended by a CC holder, but instead a middle-aged woman that grabbed the fresh magazine he was swapping in.

Dear Quade-it seems you just can't get past some things.
I was really appealing to you for some constructive feedback, I figured you or Kallend could have had some type of constructive critizism, ideas to apply the current DMV method of identifying persons that are not safe to be driving to firearm purchase background checks, I would of appreciated it.

Fact is a determined person can kill some one with a common kitchen fork.

If you can legally deal with the person, then it doesn't matter about the object-as brought up before if the "looney" gets a hold of anything from a semi-truck to fertilizer then the results are even more catastrophic; and you can't reasonably "legislate" away the semi-truck or the fertilizer.

So I was trying to address the concerns on how to identify the "crazy person" which you have totally ignored and keep going back to the "object".

OK, as the saying goes, you can't reason with a two year old, I'm done here.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

At least we have acknowledgement FINALLY that the issue is the person, not the tool.

Well, uhm, actually . . . in this case it turns out to be both and what's ironic is that the "tool" so many people have touted as being able to stop this sort of crime wasn't used to stop it and the specific gun part that goes on to this "tool" (a high capacity magazine) had been previously banned and it was ONLY because this particular crazy person had to reload that the event ended.

It would have ended earlier if he had to reload earlier.

Sorry guys, facts are facts and in this case it looks as if the previous ban on magazine size was, in fact, a good idea.

And here's the kicker, it wasn't ended by a CC holder, but instead a middle-aged woman that grabbed the fresh magazine he was swapping in.

Dear Quade-it seems you just can't get past some things.
I was really appealing to you for some constructive feedback, I figured you or Kallend could have had some type of constructive critizism, ideas to apply the current DMV method of identifying persons that are not safe to be driving to firearm purchase background checks, I would of appreciated it.

Fact is a determined person can kill some one with a common kitchen fork.

If you can legally deal with the person, then it doesn't matter about the object-as brought up before if the "looney" gets a hold of anything from a semi-truck to fertilizer then the results are even more catastrophic; and you can't reasonably "legislate" away the semi-truck or the fertilizer.

So I was trying to address the concerns on how to identify the "crazy person" which you have totally ignored and keep going back to the "object".

OK, as the saying goes, you can't reason with a two year old, I'm done here.

I think all loonies should be able to get firearms whenever they want... and as much ammo as they need to make that big splash.

Its all the rage.. a new growth industry for the lawyers.. god forbid their rights to murder as many people they wish should be infringed upon.

Maybe they are actually the solution... Jared did manage to off one lawyer ... hey ... baby steps

[lawrocket 3]

First - since this is SC, if someone ever does come for me, I'll say the blood os on you. A crazy person may ne reading this and view it as a suggestion. [Sly]

But, with regards to "doing nothing." Yeah. I prefer doing "nothing" to doing "something" when it looks like everything suggested stomps on people's rights. As I said, I SUPPORT the reasons why the mental patients were released. I SUPPORT the release of Gitmo prisoners if they aren't going to be prompty tried.

I would not support anybody going after you to make you prove you are sane or a prove you are not a threat.

I further do not support the creation of a system that punishes people for seeking or receiving treatment for a mental illness. "Well, it says here that in 1994 you were diagnosed with depression. As a person who has suffered mental illness, we are required to confiscate your weapons."
"That's a Colt Peacemaker I've had since 1963."
"Well, under the rules you are considered a threat."
"I reported myself, was treated for six months and I've had no problems since."
"Well, if you can prove you will never be a threat, you can get your weapon back."

Shoud we have a system where we punish people for seeking treatment? Because I'm telling you, it's what happens.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

Robert Heinlein was wrong.....

Our armed society is not a polite society


Live with it since you wish to do absolutely nothing about it.

[Poerett 0]

Quote

Take away their ability to use firearms and maybe they will start making bombs.

Hmmm ... where have we seen that before?

Once again you seem rather fixated on the inanimate object where really you should be asking yourself, what possessed Jared Loughner to commit his premeditated murderous crime? But if you do find yourself asking yourself that question, do yourself a favor and remove yourself from any media sources because they will want you to believe that Sarah Palin, Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh are the ones to blame, even though there is not a shred of evidence to back up their libel.

I disagree! I believe the media will ultimately lay this crime at the feet of gun owners.

The stark truth is that this crime illustrates one of two things.
Either it reveals the impotency or the incompetence of our police forces to protect us( I mean really, if they can't be bothered to protect a Congress woman , do you really think they are patrolling around with a mind to protect you?).

I hear ya!

"Treetop" you said that this crime illustrates one of two things.

Figure it out and get back to me .

"Treetop" a.k.a. LORD OF THE SKY

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Take away their ability to use firearms and maybe they will start making bombs.

At least it would slow them down and maybe they blow themselves up while making them.

. . . Or they get lucky and take out a couple of hundred or a thousand people, instead of just 6 or 7, because now they had to build a bomb instead or having a rifle.

This shooter didn't have a rifle. It was a handgun with a large capacity magazine.

As stated before though, building a bomb is at least an order of magnitude more difficult and purchasing the materials required to blow up "thousands" would most certainly set off a major investigation.

Meanwhile, it appears as if just about any nut that wants to can easily go into a gun store.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Jared did manage to off one lawyer ... hey ... baby steps

Perhaps he was a fan of Shakespeare? Or perhaps it was only a coincidence.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Jared did manage to off one lawyer ... hey ... baby steps

Perhaps he was a fan of Shakespeare? Or perhaps it was only a coincidence.

Meh

Too bad about the collateral damage though... I guess they should all have been armed to pretect themselves...

Lord knows the police are not there to protect anyone

[quade 3]

Quote

Fact is a determined person can kill some one with a common kitchen fork.

When you can list the number of assassinations that have been carried out with kitchen forks and show me it's bigger than the one with guns . . . you'll have made a point.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

it reveals the impotency or the incompetence of our police forces to protect us

Rather naive of you to think the police will be there to protect you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYkEe3HEwew

You probably also think we live in a democracy.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[quade 3]

Quote

You probably also think we live in a democracy.

God only knows what the F you have up in CANADA.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

God only knows what the F you have up in CANADA.

Our politics are pretty fucked up. But as fucked up as we are, we are not nearly as bad as the USA and even though it can get rather cold for some of us for half of the year, we do live in one of the better countries in the world, which is also really fucked up since Canada is fucked up. But not as bad as the USA.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[bigbearfng 9]

Quote

First - since this is SC, if someone ever does come for me, I'll say the blood os on you. A crazy person may ne reading this and view it as a suggestion. [Sly]

But, with regards to "doing nothing." Yeah. I prefer doing "nothing" to doing "something" when it looks like everything suggested stomps on people's rights. As I said, I SUPPORT the reasons why the mental patients were released. I SUPPORT the release of Gitmo prisoners if they aren't going to be prompty tried.

I would not support anybody going after you to make you prove you are sane or a prove you are not a threat.

I further do not support the creation of a system that punishes people for seeking or receiving treatment for a mental illness. "Well, it says here that in 1994 you were diagnosed with depression. As a person who has suffered mental illness, we are required to confiscate your weapons."
"That's a Colt Peacemaker I've had since 1963."
"Well, under the rules you are considered a threat."
"I reported myself, was treated for six months and I've had no problems since."
"Well, if you can prove you will never be a threat, you can get your weapon back."

Shoud we have a system where we punish people for seeking treatment? Because I'm telling you, it's what happens.

Very valid points-thank you.
I was thinking more along the lines of the DMV example.
You already have a drivers license. Now they have to have a current retest that you failed before they can pull it.

As for a psych test and who would administer it-that's an important question/issue.
And yes even then it wouldn't be perfect- I've worked with deputies that passed the psych same as me, that then ended up doing some atrocious things.
You would have to be a mind reader and all knowing to make it a perfect system.
And again, very valid points-would it deter people from seeking treatment? What would the effects of an H&S5150 on your record be? How long ago was it?
I am just trying to genuinely address what was brought up-and attempt to infuse some reality to the knee jerk reaction of-"ban the object".

[Poerett 0]

Quote

Quote

it reveals the impotency or the incompetence of our police forces to protect us

Rather naive of you to think the police will be there to protect you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYkEe3HEwew

You probably also think we live in a democracy.

Personally I would classify our current state of oppresion as a facist oligarchy . It is a far cry from the Constitutional Republic our forefathers fought and died to provide.

Po E. Rett

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

As for a psych test ... You would have to be a mind reader and all knowing to make it a perfect system.

I would be curious to see a psych test on the late Andy Kaufman. That guy was something. He didn't actually like thinking of himself as a comedian. No what he really enjoyed doing was "messing with other people's minds". Some even think he is still alive since he used to joke about faking his own death. But I think he is dead since he did lose a lot of weight prior to the world being told he was dead.

Anyway I only bring him up because who would actually be administering the psych test. Would the so called expert be doing the test on Andy Kaufman or would Andy Kaufman be doing the psych test on the so called expert?

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Personally I would classify our current state of oppresion as a facist oligarchy.

I think we can find some common ground for some sort of agreement here.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[quade 3]

Quote

I am just trying to genuinely address what was brought up-and attempt to infuse some reality to the knee jerk reaction of-"ban the object".

Understand, I've NEVER said we should ban guns in general or even handguns. That said, in this very particular case, had the previous ban on high capacity magazines had remained in effect the shooter would not have been able to purchase one in his local gun shop. It would have forced him to either find a different source, which would have slowed his plan, or do without, which, again in this particular case probably would have meant fewer bullets fired and fewer people hit by them.

As to any sort of DMV-style solutions to removing handguns from people thought to be incompetent; I'm all for that. However, as stated MANY posts ago, strict 2nd Amendment proponents would never allow such a thing since it pretty much means all gun owners would have to be de facto licensed. I'm not opposed to that at all, it's the exact same way we handle any one of a number of things; cars, airplanes, nuclear power . . . unfortunately, the strict 2nd Amendment folks have a conniption anytime the thought of a license is even mentioned so that's just not going to happen.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Poerett 0]

[

Quote

As stated before though, building a bomb is at least an order of magnitude more difficult and purchasing the materials required to blow up "thousands" would most certainly set off a major investigation.

One would think.

But then one considers the dragging of feet by the Bush administration to set up a formal investigation into 9-11.
When they finally did set up a commission to "investigate", they made damn sure the investigating commission had no real power.
Bush and Cheney were allowed to testify together and no transcripts were to be made!
What were they afraid of?
Now I understand that George is scared to go to the bathroom alone but couldn't Gannon/Guckert have held his hand?

"Treetop" a.k.a. LORD OF THE SKY

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

I am just trying to genuinely address what was brought up-and attempt to infuse some reality to the knee jerk reaction of-"ban the object".

Understand, I've NEVER said we should ban guns in general or even handguns. That said, in this very particular case, had the previous ban on high capacity magazines had remained in effect the shooter would not have been able to purchase one in his local gun shop. It would have forced him to either find a different source, which would have slowed his plan, or do without, which, again in this particular case probably would have meant fewer bullets fired and fewer people hit by them.

As to any sort of DMV-style solutions to removing handguns from people thought to be incompetent; I'm all for that. However, as stated MANY posts ago, strict 2nd Amendment proponents would never allow such a thing since it pretty much means all gun owners would have to be de facto licensed. I'm not opposed to that at all, it's the exact same way we handle any one of a number of things; cars, airplanes, nuclear power . . . unfortunately, the strict 2nd Amendment folks have a conniption anytime the thought of a license is even mentioned so that's just not going to happen.

Seems they have a conniption about keeping guns out of the hands of loonies as well.

The whole there are laws on the books to prevent that is completely and utterly specious and they know it.

If you prevent the loonies from being identified in the first place.. when its pretty fucking easy to ascertain who the problem kids are while they are school age and perhaps actually help them to not turn into the maladjusted whackadoodles that our legal system relys on to keep all the bills paid. Lawrocket wants to protect them... god forbid a potential client is prevented from developing into a mass murderer that will require thousands of billable hours to defend.

At least the current system provides a target rich environment for everyone... the loonies get to take out the innocent unarmed ... and CCW permit holders can pray for the chance to be a hero by shooting one of them.. IF they are on hand to replace the police who most people think are actually going to pretect them.
Personally.... I think that is kinda whacked.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Understand, I've NEVER said we should ban guns in general or even handguns. That said, in this very particular case, had the previous ban on high capacity magazines had remained in effect the shooter would not have been able to purchase one in his local gun shop. It would have forced him to either find a different source, which would have slowed his plan, or do without, which, again in this particular case probably would have meant fewer bullets fired and fewer people hit by them.

But a smaller magazine would not have prevent his assassination attempt on Gabrielle Giffords. It really sucks that other people died or were wounded. But the same rhetoric would still be with us. He targeted Ms Giffords with a premeditated assassination attempt. For some reason he has been pissed off at Ms Giffords for a number of years now. Why? Maybe we will find out one day soon, maybe we won't.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Take away their ability to use firearms and maybe they will start making bombs.

At least it would slow them down and maybe they blow themselves up while making them.

. . . Or they get lucky and take out a couple of hundred or a thousand people, instead of just 6 or 7, because now they had to build a bomb instead or having a rifle.

This shooter didn't have a rifle. It was a handgun with a large capacity magazine.

As stated before though, building a bomb is at least an order of magnitude more difficult and purchasing the materials required to blow up "thousands" would most certainly set off a major investigation.

Meanwhile, it appears as if just about any nut that wants to can easily go into a gun store.

So, hypothetically, Bill(we'll call him Bill for this excersize), legally gets a gun and 40 years later has a psychotic break waves the gun around and then shoots the mailman and then himself.

Are you saying that we should have some way to fetter out who is and who is not going to have a psychotic break and lose it? You must be a fan of Tom Cruise . . .


>>>>This shooter didn't have a rifle. It was a handgun with a large capacity magazine.
He also didn't have a bomb, or a fork. What is your point?

Mine is that if the need is bad enough in his head - he could find a way.

Your straw man about stats of Fork Assassinations is rediculous, BTW - I reallt thought you would have offered better.

Life dictates that death is a part of it.
As we grow as a society death becomes both less and more prevalent.
Less as medicines evolve and hopefully socially we evolve to manage the population in a more responsible
way.
More because the media and the population is fascinated with it.

If this had been a same level politician from Argentina - the media would have had a front page article for 2 days and then some other killling would have taken over. Then a follow up in a few weeks and one more for trial.

there are THREE HUNDRED MILLION PEOPLE in the USA. 6 is a pretty small percentage. It seems that the system works pretty good most of the time.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Poerett 0]

Quote

the strict 2nd Amendment folks have a conniption anytime the thought of a license is even mentioned so that's just not going to happen.

And with due cause! No "infringement" is how I believe it is written.
That's how my Right is enumerated in the Constitution.

Anyone want to attempt to deny me my Right?

"Treetop" a.k.a. LORD OF THE SKY