It's time!

[Wry Catcher]

"JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday"

Gosh...I wonder what "experts" think a terrorist is? Stupid comment.

Your use of the word "terrorist" is more expansive than most of us believe. I doubt any political motive existed in the troubled mind of the shooters in our four most recent mass murders (Arizona, Colorado, Washington and Connecticut) nor were they (apparently) religious zealots (like Roeder, Rudolph) or revolutionary crackpots like the far left three decades ago (SLA, Weatherman).

Motivation matters not,no security means no security.

And YOU know this how?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Your use of the word "terrorist" is more expansive than most of us believe. I doubt any political motive existed in the troubled mind of the shooters in our four most recent mass murders (Arizona, Colorado, Washington and Connecticut) nor were they (apparently) religious zealots (like Roeder, Rudolph) or revolutionary crackpots like the far left three decades ago (SLA, Weatherman).

Motivation matters not,no security means no security.

And YOU know this how?

Because 'no security means no security' is a TRUISM and he doesnt need a libtard to sign off on it for him before he knows its true.

You might consider thinking about this kind of thing more, but I doubt it.

 

[asterism]

Most Americans would agree - except for the fringe - that some people in society must have the right to keep and bear arms infringed. Felons, those with serious mental illnesses; those who use and abuse drugs and alcohol, domestic violence offenders, etc.

Those who commit atrocious acts of violence, mass murder as we all saw yesterday, do not necessarily show up on LE Radar and thusly are not flagged in background checks.

We need to come up with pragmatic solutions to a recurring problem and cannot do so unless both sides come to the table; a goal of reaching a compromise able to limit the ability of a crazed shooter to inflict the amount of carnage which we saw yesterday would seem palatable to all; all but the aforementioned fringe.

We never hear ideas to prevent such tragic events as happened yesterday from one side of the debate. They generally post over and over about their rights but rarely acknowledge the rights of the victims of gun violence (that includes those who died, their families and friends, first responders, journalists, and the general public who watched yesterday's crime unfold on TV).

Getting back to your stated intent of this thread, what pragmatic solutions have you decided might be workable?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Motivation matters not,no security means no security.

And YOU know this how?

Because 'no security means no security' is a TRUISM and he doesnt need a libtard to sign off on it for him before he knows its true.

You might consider thinking about this kind of thing more, but I doubt it.

No security means no security is a tautology. An argument can be made that security and freedom are dichotomies. That maybe too abstract for you.

 

[skookerasbil]

And YOU know this how?

Because 'no security means no security' is a TRUISM and he doesnt need a libtard to sign off on it for him before he knows its true.

You might consider thinking about this kind of thing more, but I doubt it.

No security means no security is a tautology. An argument can be made that security and freedom are dichotomies. That maybe too abstract for you.

Philosopher assholes are gay..........and funny........coming from a resident of one of the most racist cities in America where blacks are being pushed out of the city in droves via racist public policy supported by assholes like Wry Catcher......and he's lecturing us on how society would be better off!!!

The Bay Area Reporter Online | Tenants, activists <br>protest Ellis Act evictions

 

[Wry Catcher]

Most Americans would agree - except for the fringe - that some people in society must have the right to keep and bear arms infringed. Felons, those with serious mental illnesses; those who use and abuse drugs and alcohol, domestic violence offenders, etc.

Those who commit atrocious acts of violence, mass murder as we all saw yesterday, do not necessarily show up on LE Radar and thusly are not flagged in background checks.

We need to come up with pragmatic solutions to a recurring problem and cannot do so unless both sides come to the table; a goal of reaching a compromise able to limit the ability of a crazed shooter to inflict the amount of carnage which we saw yesterday would seem palatable to all; all but the aforementioned fringe.

We never hear ideas to prevent such tragic events as happened yesterday from one side of the debate. They generally post over and over about their rights but rarely acknowledge the rights of the victims of gun violence (that includes those who died, their families and friends, first responders, journalists, and the general public who watched yesterday's crime unfold on TV).

Getting back to your stated intent of this thread, what pragmatic solutions have you decided might be workable?

1, Each state would be wise to license every adult who wants to own, possess, or have in their possession and control a firearm. Said license should be suspended or revoked for cause and be valid only for in the state of issue unless other states choose otherwise.

2. Upon revocation for cause all weapons in the possession of the licensee can be confiscated and criminal penalties for subsequent possession of a firearm shall include a mandatory 10 prison sentence and lifetime supervised release (probation or parole).

3. Anyone convicted of giving, selling, loaning or otherwise providing a firearm to an unlicensed person shall, upon conviction, be sufficient cause for the revocation of their license.

4. All licensed gun owners shall be required to insure each firearm they own for liability, and are civilly liable for any misuse of that gun which harms another. Any firearm not properly secured which results in the death or injury of another shall also be charged with a criminal penalty and upon conviction have their license revoked and be placed on probation to verify all guns are properly disposed of and any restitution to the victim(s) is paid in full.

No one convicted of a crime of violence or driving under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol shall be able to secure a firearm license until they have completed a one year drinking/drug impaired driver program; domestic abusers will have their license revoked. Any current licensed person shall have their license suspended or revoked for such convictions.

No one detained and civilly committed as a danger to themselves or others shall be licensed, and any licensee shall have their license revoked and their guns confiscated.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday"

Gosh...I wonder what "experts" think a terrorist is? Stupid comment.

Yeah, in Israel if someone starts shooting up a school the guards have to ask, "Are you a terrorists" before returning fire

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Most Americans would agree - except for the fringe - that some people in society must have the right to keep and bear arms infringed. Felons, those with serious mental illnesses; those who use and abuse drugs and alcohol, domestic violence offenders, etc.

Those who commit atrocious acts of violence, mass murder as we all saw yesterday, do not necessarily show up on LE Radar and thusly are not flagged in background checks.

We need to come up with pragmatic solutions to a recurring problem and cannot do so unless both sides come to the table; a goal of reaching a compromise able to limit the ability of a crazed shooter to inflict the amount of carnage which we saw yesterday would seem palatable to all; all but the aforementioned fringe.

We never hear ideas to prevent such tragic events as happened yesterday from one side of the debate. They generally post over and over about their rights but rarely acknowledge the rights of the victims of gun violence (that includes those who died, their families and friends, first responders, journalists, and the general public who watched yesterday's crime unfold on TV).

Getting back to your stated intent of this thread, what pragmatic solutions have you decided might be workable?

1, Each state would be wise to license every adult who wants to own, possess, or have in their possession and control a firearm. Said license should be suspended or revoked for cause and be valid only for in the state of issue unless other states choose otherwise.

2. Upon revocation for cause all weapons in the possession of the licensee can be confiscated and criminal penalties for subsequent possession of a firearm shall include a mandatory 10 prison sentence and lifetime supervised release (probation or parole).

3. Anyone convicted of giving, selling, loaning or otherwise providing a firearm to an unlicensed person shall, upon conviction, be sufficient cause for the revocation of their license.

4. All licensed gun owners shall be required to insure each firearm they own for liability, and are civilly liable for any misuse of that gun which harms another. Any firearm not properly secured which results in the death or injury of another shall also be charged with a criminal penalty and upon conviction have their license revoked and be placed on probation to verify all guns are properly disposed of and any restitution to the victim(s) is paid in full.

No one convicted of a crime of violence or driving under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol shall be able to secure a firearm license until they have completed a one year drinking/drug impaired driver program; domestic abusers will have their license revoked. Any current licensed person shall have their license suspended or revoked for such convictions.

No one detained and civilly committed as a danger to themselves or others shall be licensed, and any licensee shall have their license revoked and their guns confiscated.

But asking someone to present valid photo ID at a voting booth is an undue burden, amiright?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Getting back to your stated intent of this thread, what pragmatic solutions have you decided might be workable?

1, Each state would be wise to license every adult who wants to own, possess, or have in their possession and control a firearm. Said license should be suspended or revoked for cause and be valid only for in the state of issue unless other states choose otherwise.

2. Upon revocation for cause all weapons in the possession of the licensee can be confiscated and criminal penalties for subsequent possession of a firearm shall include a mandatory 10 prison sentence and lifetime supervised release (probation or parole).

3. Anyone convicted of giving, selling, loaning or otherwise providing a firearm to an unlicensed person shall, upon conviction, be sufficient cause for the revocation of their license.

4. All licensed gun owners shall be required to insure each firearm they own for liability, and are civilly liable for any misuse of that gun which harms another. Any firearm not properly secured which results in the death or injury of another shall also be charged with a criminal penalty and upon conviction have their license revoked and be placed on probation to verify all guns are properly disposed of and any restitution to the victim(s) is paid in full.

No one convicted of a crime of violence or driving under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol shall be able to secure a firearm license until they have completed a one year drinking/drug impaired driver program; domestic abusers will have their license revoked. Any current licensed person shall have their license suspended or revoked for such convictions.

No one detained and civilly committed as a danger to themselves or others shall be licensed, and any licensee shall have their license revoked and their guns confiscated.

But asking someone to present valid photo ID at a voting booth is an undue burden, amiright?

Nope, not at all. Now is the time to pass legislation to both provide and require a free official Gov't ID to exercise one's right to vote. Honest and informed citizens understood the effort in the months before the election was focused on suppressing the vote for Obama; notice, since the election not a peep from the supporters of voter ID. Even someone as dumb as you Frank would admit this, if they were honest.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

1, Each state would be wise to license every adult who wants to own, possess, or have in their possession and control a firearm. Said license should be suspended or revoked for cause and be valid only for in the state of issue unless other states choose otherwise.

2. Upon revocation for cause all weapons in the possession of the licensee can be confiscated and criminal penalties for subsequent possession of a firearm shall include a mandatory 10 prison sentence and lifetime supervised release (probation or parole).

3. Anyone convicted of giving, selling, loaning or otherwise providing a firearm to an unlicensed person shall, upon conviction, be sufficient cause for the revocation of their license.

4. All licensed gun owners shall be required to insure each firearm they own for liability, and are civilly liable for any misuse of that gun which harms another. Any firearm not properly secured which results in the death or injury of another shall also be charged with a criminal penalty and upon conviction have their license revoked and be placed on probation to verify all guns are properly disposed of and any restitution to the victim(s) is paid in full.

No one convicted of a crime of violence or driving under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol shall be able to secure a firearm license until they have completed a one year drinking/drug impaired driver program; domestic abusers will have their license revoked. Any current licensed person shall have their license suspended or revoked for such convictions.

No one detained and civilly committed as a danger to themselves or others shall be licensed, and any licensee shall have their license revoked and their guns confiscated.

But asking someone to present valid photo ID at a voting booth is an undue burden, amiright?

Nope, not at all. Now is the time to pass legislation to both provide and require a free official Gov't ID to exercise one's right to vote. Honest and informed citizens understood the effort in the months before the election was focused on suppressing the vote for Obama; notice, since the election not a peep from the supporters of voter ID. Even someone as dumb as you Frank would admit this, if they were honest.

All those Democrats arrested for voter fraud in the bluest states last week kept the matter fresh for a lot of us.

 

[Katzndogz]

There is absolutely nothing that can be done about random insane people. Up until the time they pull the trigger they have committed no crime. We still have innocent until proven guilty and to prove someone guilty, there must first be an act committed. We cannot make judgments on others and report bizarre behavior that would cause them to be incarcerated against their will. If a family were to recognize that a member was mentally ill and confine them, the family would be in prison and the mentally ill person on the streets. We do not put people in attics or basements any longer.

A woman sleeping at a bus stop was set on fire this morning. Some crazy person bought a bottle of alcohol, poured it over her and set her on fire. Could that have been stopped by any means other than making a judgment that the perpetrator is too sick to be on the streets and made that judgment BEFORE he hurt anyone? Bring on the department of pre-crime.

 

[Wry Catcher]

There is absolutely nothing that can be done about random insane people. Up until the time they pull the trigger they have committed no crime. We still have innocent until proven guilty and to prove someone guilty, there must first be an act committed. We cannot make judgments on others and report bizarre behavior that would cause them to be incarcerated against their will. If a family were to recognize that a member was mentally ill and confine them, the family would be in prison and the mentally ill person on the streets. We do not put people in attics or basements any longer.

A woman sleeping at a bus stop was set on fire this morning. Some crazy person bought a bottle of alcohol, poured it over her and set her on fire. Could that have been stopped by any means other than making a judgment that the perpetrator is too sick to be on the streets and made that judgment BEFORE he hurt anyone? Bring on the department of pre-crime.

The idea that no solution exists never occurs to them, and in this lies their strength. We can't cure many social ills, we can work to mitigate their harm.

No where in the Constitution is government disallowed the authority to license those who want to own, possess, etc guns; only the Congress is restained from infringing the right to bar arms. Hence, each state seems to have the authority to licnese those who choose to own, etc. That is a first step.

In you second paragraph you describe a horrific event albiet not related to gun violence. However, such behavior seems not to be a first act by a mad person. I suspect there are precursors, harm to animals, other arsons, as precusrsors to such an act. There is no doubt in my mind that the LPS statute needs some update. See:

Lanterman

 

[JimBowie1958]

There is absolutely nothing that can be done about random insane people. Up until the time they pull the trigger they have committed no crime. We still have innocent until proven guilty and to prove someone guilty, there must first be an act committed. We cannot make judgments on others and report bizarre behavior that would cause them to be incarcerated against their will. If a family were to recognize that a member was mentally ill and confine them, the family would be in prison and the mentally ill person on the streets. We do not put people in attics or basements any longer.

A woman sleeping at a bus stop was set on fire this morning. Some crazy person bought a bottle of alcohol, poured it over her and set her on fire. Could that have been stopped by any means other than making a judgment that the perpetrator is too sick to be on the streets and made that judgment BEFORE he hurt anyone? Bring on the department of pre-crime.

The idea that no solution exists never occurs to them, and in this lies their strength. We can't cure many social ills, we can work to mitigate their harm.

No where in the Constitution is government disallowed the authority to license those who want to own, possess, etc guns; only the Congress is restained from infringing the right to bar arms. Hence, each state seems to have the authority to licnese those who choose to own, etc. That is a first step.

In you second paragraph you describe a horrific event albiet not related to gun violence. However, such behavior seems not to be a first act by a mad person. I suspect there are precursors, harm to animals, other arsons, as precusrsors to such an act. There is no doubt in my mind that the LPS statute needs some update. See:

Lanterman

What a load of malarkey.

Since the 14th amendment was passed the courts have ruled that the restrictions placed on the federal government regarding individual rights also applies to the states.

The states can no more license a right than they can license free speech.

 

[Goodoledays]

Come and take my guns away, asswipe.

I bet if he tried he would do so carrying a gun. And he would still be shaking.

 

[Goodoledays]

We never hear ideas to prevent such tragic events as happened yesterday from one side of the debate.

That's because there is no way to prevent such tragic events. That's the point. Even in countries with outright bans on civilian ownership of firearms, it happens.

It happens too often in our country to be ignored or dismissed as a problem without a solution.

How about illegal drugs. Have they come up with a solution for that yet? Do you really think they can come up with a solution for it overnight?

And even if they did ban guns...its not going to stop the nutheads from getting their hands on them. Just like drugs...if they want them bad enough they will get them.

 

[Goodoledays]

There are some questions coming up about the guns registered to his mother.

How likely is it that a mother would have such high powered weaponry unsecured in a home where she knew she had a mentally disturbed son?

Well dude...maybe her son was driving her crazy...maybe she didn't catch it in time.

 

[Goodoledays]

Those are YOUR babies.

These were someone else's babies:

Names of victims in Connecticut shooting released

limpwristers are gay.............

I cannot even imagine the emptiness that must take the place of your soul that you brag about "your babies" the day after such a tragedy takes away some REAL innocent babies.

May the gods have mercy on your "soul".

Sounds more like that he is a gun owner with no intent of using it illegally. And it sounds like you want to judge him as one who would do such a thing just because he owns a gun. Your trying to make it look like anyone with a gun is on the wrong side of society. Sorry it doesn't run that way. It would be better if you look at the ones that are misuseing guns and have our society look for better ways to handle it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

There is absolutely nothing that can be done about random insane people. Up until the time they pull the trigger they have committed no crime. We still have innocent until proven guilty and to prove someone guilty, there must first be an act committed. We cannot make judgments on others and report bizarre behavior that would cause them to be incarcerated against their will. If a family were to recognize that a member was mentally ill and confine them, the family would be in prison and the mentally ill person on the streets. We do not put people in attics or basements any longer.

A woman sleeping at a bus stop was set on fire this morning. Some crazy person bought a bottle of alcohol, poured it over her and set her on fire. Could that have been stopped by any means other than making a judgment that the perpetrator is too sick to be on the streets and made that judgment BEFORE he hurt anyone? Bring on the department of pre-crime.

The idea that no solution exists never occurs to them, and in this lies their strength. We can't cure many social ills, we can work to mitigate their harm.

No where in the Constitution is government disallowed the authority to license those who want to own, possess, etc guns; only the Congress is restained from infringing the right to bar arms. Hence, each state seems to have the authority to licnese those who choose to own, etc. That is a first step.

In you second paragraph you describe a horrific event albiet not related to gun violence. However, such behavior seems not to be a first act by a mad person. I suspect there are precursors, harm to animals, other arsons, as precusrsors to such an act. There is no doubt in my mind that the LPS statute needs some update. See:

Lanterman

What a load of malarkey.

Since the 14th amendment was passed the courts have ruled that the restrictions placed on the federal government regarding individual rights also applies to the states.

The states can no more license a right than they can license free speech.

So say you; please post your points and authorities in support of your opinion that the States can't require a license for someone to keep arms.

XIV, to wit: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of law.

Are not Gun Dealers licensed? How has the Supreme Court not outlawed such licensing if your contention is true?

 

[Goodoledays]

The Second Amendment made sense when ratified in 1791; then no police departments existed, no 911 telephone service existed and most citizens lived in rural communities. A musket firing a ball may have protected a community from an oppressive government, but today small arms cannot stand up to any 21st military and it is beyond foolish to believe they can stand up to ours.

No one needs a high velocity weapon able to fire 30 or more rounds as quickly as they can pull the trigger; such a firearm was inconceivable to those in the 18th century.

It's time to pass sensible gun regulations.

Right. Why not. Lets take it back to the 18th century. Good idea. Well why not...it seems our gov't is doing that to our economy anyways...so why not.

 

[Goodoledays]

The Second Amendment made sense when ratified in 1791; then no police departments existed, no 911 telephone service existed and most citizens lived in rural communities. A musket firing a ball may have protected a community from an oppressive government, but today small arms cannot stand up to any 21st military and it is beyond foolish to believe they can stand up to ours.

No one needs a high velocity weapon able to fire 30 or more rounds as quickly as they can pull the trigger; such a firearm was inconceivable to those in the 18th century.

It's time to pass sensible gun regulations.

We already have sensible gun regulations. What you want is banning and/or confiscation of several classes of common firearms designed for civillian use. What you also crave are useless regulations that will do nothing to deter criminals, and just make it harder for law "abiding citizens to purchase the weapons they want.

At least be honest about it, gun grabber.

At least be honest??? What is this:

No civilian needs a high velocity weapon able to fire 30 or more rounds as quickly as they can pull the trigger"!

You're damn right I want these weapons out of the hands of civilians - how many mass killers were law abiding before they killed others? I really wonder, as fucked up - and I mean that clinically - some of you gun huggers are if you shouldn't be examined to see if you're psychologically fit to own any firearm.

And it sounds like you also need an examination believeing a ban is really going to stop the criminals from getting their hands on these guns. You really want to ban these firearms...make sure you get some good body gear for protection.