mnealtx 0 #126 January 15, 2011 QuoteI learned as an instructor in the USAF that you have to teach to a common core of knowledge. In this case its the only thing the fringe right posters here can understand. I would not like to confuse the poor little dears. You go full-bore attack mode whether you're responded to politely or not, so that ain't flyin, sorry. QuoteI seek to use that which will get the point across to some posters who have a problem dealing with what America is supposed to be about and not some McCarthyist Heaven that they wish it to become. Which, of course, is why you're not advocating witchhunts over Youtube videos. Oh, wait...you are. Nevermind!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #127 January 15, 2011 It is fascinating how steadfastly you defend a status quo that has proven so hopelessly inadequate to prevent massacres by the likes of Cho and Loughner.... 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
mnealtx 0 #128 January 15, 2011 Quote It is fascinating how steadfastly you defend a status quo that has proven so hopelessly inadequate to prevent massacres by the likes of Cho and Loughner. Still no numbers? Pity.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #129 January 15, 2011 Quote It is fascinating how steadfastly you defend a status quo that has proven so hopelessly inadequate to prevent massacres by the likes of Cho and Loughner. I would like to know the REAL numbers.. not just the ones with the biggest body counts.. but the day to day numbers, how many of the daily toll of murders are from nutbags that should have gotten treatment long long ago. ITs cerrtainly a dicotomy... all those who were RAH RAH RAH for the Patriot Act..( well I guess as long as it is used for silencing political opponents of the Bush Administration that was ok to circumvent Americans rights.) are who crying crocodile tears for people who need DESPARATELY to be on the NCIC. Personally I think their lives would be a hell of a lot more fullfilling if they have not murdered a few people and will be put to death.. or incarcerated for life. I guess that is a better outcome in Mike and Little Johnnies eyes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #130 January 15, 2011 QuoteITs cerrtainly a dicotomy... all those who were RAH RAH RAH for the Patriot Act..( well I guess as long as it is used for silencing political opponents of the Bush Administration that was ok to circumvent Americans rights.) are who crying crocodile tears for people who need DESPARATELY to be on the NCIC. It's certainly a dichotomy .... all those who were so BOO HOO HOO against the Patriot Act are who are now cheering on its' use to put people on NICS sans evaluation, or to use it as evidence for forced treatment.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #131 January 15, 2011 QuoteQuoteITs cerrtainly a dicotomy... all those who were RAH RAH RAH for the Patriot Act..( well I guess as long as it is used for silencing political opponents of the Bush Administration that was ok to circumvent Americans rights.) are who crying crocodile tears for people who need DESPARATELY to be on the NCIC. It's certainly a dichotomy .... all those who were so BOO HOO HOO against the Patriot Act are who are now cheering on its' use to put people on NICS sans evaluation, or to use it as evidence for forced treatment. Reading comprehension is not one of your strong points is it. You are seeing what you want to see not what I have said. Try again... Go back and actually READ what I wrote. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #132 January 15, 2011 QuoteTry again... Go back and actually READ what I wrote. Ok. Re-read it ... comment still stands. Actually, no...that's not fair - what you're espousing is even worse.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #133 January 15, 2011 QuoteQuoteTry again... Go back and actually READ what I wrote. Ok. Re-read it ... comment still stands. Actually, no...that's not fair - what you're espousing is even worse. What I am "espousing" is that people who are exibiting behavior as Jared was doing ... needs to be referred for evaluation, observation and treatment. When he no longer poses a threat to himself or to others, then restore his right to purchase a weapon if that is what he wishes to do. During the time of his treatment he has no business with access to weapons so he can act out any kind of maniacal plan to get the highest death toll he can. Follow the laws in existence, if they are too lax strengthen them in places where you can be a total lunatic and still buy a weapon no matter what... as you are advocating. During that time he is in treatment or if he never can rejoin normal people without being a threat to them he needs to be on the NO WAY JOSE DO YOU GET A GUN list... capiiche???? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #134 January 15, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteTry again... Go back and actually READ what I wrote. Ok. Re-read it ... comment still stands. Actually, no...that's not fair - what you're espousing is even worse. What I am "espousing" is that people who are exibiting behavior as Jared was doing ... needs to be referred for evaluation, observation and treatment. That would be the behavior that was insufficient for the police to bring him in for evaluation, yes? QuoteWhen he no longer poses a threat to himself or to others, then restore his right to purchase a weapon if that is what he wishes to do. During the time of his treatment he has no business with access to weapons so he can act out any kind of maniacal plan to get the highest death toll he can. Agreed. Quote Follow the laws in existence, if they are too lax strengthen them in places where you can be a total lunatic and still buy a weapon no matter what... as you are advocating. You were doing so well up until this point, too. Unfortunately for your statement, you have no evidence that the laws were too lax (since he was never evaluated), hence no evidence that 'you can be a total lunatic and still buy a weapon no matter what', and *absolutely* none that I have advocated that. QuoteDuring that time he is in treatment or if he never can rejoin normal people without being a threat to them he needs to be on the NO WAY JOSE DO YOU GET A GUN list... capiiche???? That's already the law, based on what I've read....capiche?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #135 January 15, 2011 Quote That's already the law, based on what I've read....capiche? Jared and Cho show conclusively that the law as enacted, implemented and enforced is totally ineffective. In case you hadn't noticed (or just don't care) the law allowed them access to weapons that killed and/or wounded dozens of people.... 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
kallend 1,635 #136 January 15, 2011 QuoteQuote It is fascinating how steadfastly you defend a status quo that has proven so hopelessly inadequate to prevent massacres by the likes of Cho and Loughner. Still no numbers? Pity. It is indeed a pity that the body count is so high.... 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
mnealtx 0 #137 January 15, 2011 QuoteQuote That's already the law, based on what I've read....capiche? Jared and Cho show conclusively that the law as enacted, implemented and enforced is totally ineffective. Since you're on record saying that experts have to figure out what changes need to be made, your little outburst means exactly squat. QuoteIn case you hadn't noticed (or just don't care) the law allowed them access to weapons that killed and/or wounded dozens of people. Nice baseless smear, doc - I realize that's all you're left since you can't PROVE any of your points, but it's time to get a new schtick.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #138 January 15, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote It is fascinating how steadfastly you defend a status quo that has proven so hopelessly inadequate to prevent massacres by the likes of Cho and Loughner. Still no numbers? Pity. It is indeed a pity that the body count is so high. More a pity that all you can come up with are attempted smears.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #139 January 15, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote It is fascinating how steadfastly you defend a status quo that has proven so hopelessly inadequate to prevent massacres by the likes of Cho and Loughner. Still no numbers? Pity. It is indeed a pity that the body count is so high. More a pity that all you can come up with are attempted smears. Welll That pegged the ole IRONY meter right out of our Milky Way GALAXY on its way to Andromeda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #140 January 15, 2011 QuoteJared and Cho show conclusively that the law as enacted, implemented and enforced is totally ineffective. In case you hadn't noticed (or just don't care) the law allowed them access to weapons that killed and/or wounded dozens of people. Well, what law exactly are you talking about here? I'll assume those along the lines of "Mentally ill can't have weapons". Were either of them declared to be "mentally ill" prior to the weapon purchase? If yes, I would agree that the laws need to be tightened up in this area: -mandatory reporting from mental health workers with severe penalties for failure maybe? -stricter oversight of that reporting requirement? -improved database tie-in updates and maintenance, eh? -removal of access to weapons by anyone? If no, then those laws did not apply to them just as they don't apply to you or me. Even if the guy was jumping up and down screaming "Monkey Shit! Monkey Shit! Monkey Shit!" for days on end he could still buy a weapon if he hadn't been declared to be mentally ill...so says our constitution. Now granted, if he was doing that and nobody picked up on it and noted it to authorities (whoever that is) then, somebody needs a good bitch-slap, eh? John, you're an educator. Let me ask you: If one of your students was acting "weird"... -What do YOU currently do? -What specific criteria do you use to determine "weird/not wieird" or, ... -What behavior would a student have to display in order for you to report him to mental health people for evaluation? I'll go out on a limb as say that would be a very tough call.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #141 January 15, 2011 Quote John, you're an educator. Let me ask you: If one of your students was acting "weird"... -What do YOU currently do? -What specific criteria do you use to determine "weird/not wieird" l. I report the student to the Dean of Students, whose staff includes experts in evaluating behavior. There is a good reason we have experts in our society. I suspect that you would know when you have severe abdominal pain, but would get a surgeon to remove your infected appendix rather than doing it yourself.... 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
tsisson 0 #142 January 15, 2011 People, people, people...we are focusing on the wrong way to solve this issue. We need to focus our time, energy, and resources into developing gun resistant force fields. If the technology advances enough, we could create them in pocket sized models that could be carried by anyone who needs protection. Or we could pass a law outlawing firearms, like we've been discussing for 75 years or so...because we all know, prohibition of anything as been so effective in history. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #143 January 15, 2011 SAME LAME old strawman.... 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
mnealtx 0 #144 January 15, 2011 Quote SAME LAME old strawman. Then why do you keep using it?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #145 January 15, 2011 QuoteQuote It is fascinating how steadfastly you defend a status quo that has proven so hopelessly inadequate to prevent massacres by the likes of Cho and Loughner. I would like to know the REAL numbers.. not just the ones with the biggest body counts.. but the day to day numbers, how many of the daily toll of murders are from nutbags that should have gotten treatment long long ago. So to review - you have no idea what the scope of the problem is, but you've shown no hesitation in proposing a half baked solution to 'solve' it. (though in reality, you can't even articulate the proposal) Congratulations - this is the method by which most crappy legislation gets passed in our country. The irony is that you are brazen enough to then talk about the bad Patriot Act, when your idea is just as offensive to true Americans. "Won't SOMEONE think of the poor CHILDREN!?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #146 January 15, 2011 Quote"Won't SOMEONE think of the poor CHILDREN!?" why do you hate on rich, middle class, 'decently well off' and 'getting along ok' children? ... 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
kelpdiver 2 #147 January 15, 2011 QuoteQuote"Won't SOMEONE think of the poor CHILDREN!?" why do you hate on rich, middle class, 'decently well off' and 'getting along ok' children? because they have their own Glocks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #148 January 15, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote It is fascinating how steadfastly you defend a status quo that has proven so hopelessly inadequate to prevent massacres by the likes of Cho and Loughner. I would like to know the REAL numbers.. not just the ones with the biggest body counts.. but the day to day numbers, how many of the daily toll of murders are from nutbags that should have gotten treatment long long ago. So to review - you have no idea what the scope of the problem is, but you've shown no hesitation in proposing a half baked solution to 'solve' it. (though in reality, you can't even articulate the proposal) Congratulations - this is the method by which most crappy legislation gets passed in our country. The irony is that you are brazen enough to then talk about the bad Patriot Act, when your idea is just as offensive to true Americans. "Won't SOMEONE think of the poor CHILDREN!?" I am not one of the EXPERTS.. not that you will even ACCEPT that they exist out there. I guess YOU are the EXPERT in DOING SQUAT rather than trying to come up with anything at all. It seems you are unwilling to accept there are EXPERTS out there that can determine the scope and propose changes to the ANYTHING GOES system you want. The problem with that is one of these days YOU might be there one looking down one of those barrels with someone behind it that has no respect for your or anyone elses life... but at that point they have their RIGHT to put a few bullets in you ... and YOUR rights no longer mean squat Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #149 January 15, 2011 QuoteIt seems you are unwilling to accept there are EXPERTS out there that can determine the scope and propose changes to the ANYTHING GOES system you want. Like the expert who has already posted on the subject, who's expertise you denigrated because it didn't align with your opinion on the subject? Seems like you're unwilling to accept anything that goes against the system YOU want.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #150 January 16, 2011 Quote I am not one of the EXPERTS.. not that you will even ACCEPT that they exist out there. I guess YOU are the EXPERT in DOING SQUAT rather than trying to come up with anything at all. They must be hiding in a cave with Bin Laden then. They didn't emerge after Columbine, or VTech, or Ft Hood. Or more likely, as I already stated, their consensus is that your cure is worse than the disease. Quote It seems you are unwilling to accept there are EXPERTS out there that can determine the scope and propose changes to the ANYTHING GOES system you want. The problem with that is one of these days YOU might be there one looking down one of those barrels with someone behind it that has no respect for your or anyone elses life... but at that point they have their RIGHT to put a few bullets in you ... and YOUR rights no longer mean squat It's possible. California doesn't allow me a useful right to self defense outside of the home. But at least at home I have options, as well as the freedom to be a bit kooky if I want. I don't believe it's our government's job to guarantee my safety. You do have some options out there if that is what you desire. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
