kallend 2,027
Recommended Posts
rehmwa 2
QuoteQuoteQuoteIAnyone who has ever written anything to the effect of "they will always get guns so we needn't do anything" is in denial.
I'm not in denial. I just honestly don't think banning them will produce the results desired. )
Did anyone suggest a ban?
you didn't, but his point is that the "they will always get guns......" response is almost always in reply to someone promoting a total ban. It's almost never just put out there on it's own.
...
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
rushmc 23
Denying a solution is to be in denial.
I already stated that I don't know of a solution that would be acceptable to those who are not prepared to have ANY inconvenience to themselves.
I already stated that I don't know of a solution that would be acceptable to those who are not prepared to have ANY inconvenience to themselves.
This is your post
""For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong"."
You have now just stated that you dont know of any solution and nearly in the same breath accused others of being in denial??????
Care to clarify?
Sorry if my questions are bothersonme but I am just curious and a little confused of your answers
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
kallend 2,027
Quote
Denying a solution is to be in denial.
I already stated that I don't know of a solution that would be acceptable to those who are not prepared to have ANY inconvenience to themselves.
This is your post
""For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong"."
You have now just stated that you dont know of any solution and nearly in the same breath accused others of being in denial??????
Care to clarify?
Sorry if my questions are bothersonme but I am just curious and a little confused of your answers
If you read the whole thing you would not be so confused.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
rushmc 23
QuoteQuote
Denying a solution is to be in denial.
I already stated that I don't know of a solution that would be acceptable to those who are not prepared to have ANY inconvenience to themselves.
This is your post
""For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong"."
You have now just stated that you dont know of any solution and nearly in the same breath accused others of being in denial??????
Care to clarify?
Sorry if my questions are bothersonme but I am just curious and a little confused of your answers
If you read the whole thing you would not be so confused. Idid sir.
It had to end I guess
![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
billvon 2,991
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>One of the (many) issues with the Virginia Tech shooting was what is
>"mentally disturbed" and did depression count?
Up to a state-licensed psychiatrist to make that determination, I would think.
>And who do the psychs report it to?
The police. They decide what to do from there. If he has been diagnosed with schizophrenia, and is being treated on an inpatient basis, maybe nothing - just maintain a list. If he's been buying a lot of guns and telling his psychiatrist that he's going to "put an end to all the voices" - perhaps they need to visit his home and confiscate them.
>And what rights do the patients have for confidentiality?
They have the right to privacy until that right puts others at risk.
>Will that limit access to mental health?
Do you mean mental health _care_? If so, I don't think so. People who have severe enough schizophrenia that they are no longer responsible for their actions are not (IMO) going to consider HIPPA implications before getting treatment - or at least, that will play a very small role in their decision.
>AND... what rights do those living with that patient have? Are they
>allowed to call the doc/psych and ask "Is he/she crazy? Do I need to
>move my firearms?" What HIPPA violations does that cause?
I would say they can call the police and ask them if they have been reported as no longer responsible for their actions. No other details.
>If this person truly had a felony conviction, then the possession of that
>rifle in and of itself, was illegal.
Right - which indicates you need a system to ensure these people cannot buy weapons as well. Same system should work with people who have been diagnosed as not responsible for their actions.
>"mentally disturbed" and did depression count?
Up to a state-licensed psychiatrist to make that determination, I would think.
>And who do the psychs report it to?
The police. They decide what to do from there. If he has been diagnosed with schizophrenia, and is being treated on an inpatient basis, maybe nothing - just maintain a list. If he's been buying a lot of guns and telling his psychiatrist that he's going to "put an end to all the voices" - perhaps they need to visit his home and confiscate them.
>And what rights do the patients have for confidentiality?
They have the right to privacy until that right puts others at risk.
>Will that limit access to mental health?
Do you mean mental health _care_? If so, I don't think so. People who have severe enough schizophrenia that they are no longer responsible for their actions are not (IMO) going to consider HIPPA implications before getting treatment - or at least, that will play a very small role in their decision.
>AND... what rights do those living with that patient have? Are they
>allowed to call the doc/psych and ask "Is he/she crazy? Do I need to
>move my firearms?" What HIPPA violations does that cause?
I would say they can call the police and ask them if they have been reported as no longer responsible for their actions. No other details.
>If this person truly had a felony conviction, then the possession of that
>rifle in and of itself, was illegal.
Right - which indicates you need a system to ensure these people cannot buy weapons as well. Same system should work with people who have been diagnosed as not responsible for their actions.
rushmc 23
Right - which indicates you need a system to ensure these people cannot buy weapons as well. Same system should work with people who have been diagnosed as not responsible for their actions.
What do you envision that system to look like or, how would it function?
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
JohnRich 4
QuoteI already stated that I don't know of a solution that would be acceptable to those who are not prepared to have ANY inconvenience to themselves.
Why don't you quit beating around the bush, in your characteristic fashion, and just say what you want to say.
What solution do you propose to stop crazy people from getting guns? Convenient or not. Spit it out. Dare to put your idea up for public scrutiny.
If you don't have the guts to say it, then quit wasting our time with your coy games.
rehmwa 2
Quotecoy games.
that's probably about as insightful a single word definition of JK's DZ.com personality as I've seen
...
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
crozby 0
QuoteWhat solution do you propose to stop crazy people from getting guns? Convenient or not. Spit it out. Dare to put your idea up for public scrutiny.
Any time a kid takes their parents/guardians gun I would prosecute the gun owner as an accessory to the crime.
QuoteAny time a kid takes their parents/guardians gun I would prosecute the gun owner as an accessory to the crime.
So a 19 year old steals a gun. Goes and commits murder with it and your answer is to go after the parents and say they are at fault?
If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!
Zipp0 1
QuoteQuoteAny time a kid takes their parents/guardians gun I would prosecute the gun owner as an accessory to the crime.
So a 19 year old steals a gun. Goes and commits murder with it and your answer is to go after the parents and say they are at fault?
Yes, if they didn't have their weapon properly secured. I keep my guns in an approved steel gun cabinet, and I only know where the key is. Now, if someone took a hacksaw/crowbar/plasma cutter to it, I think I should be OK, since I took reasonable precautions to prevent misuse.
--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.
JohnRich 4
QuoteAny time a kid takes their parents/guardians gun I would prosecute the gun owner as an accessory to the crime.
Ah yes, punishing the innocent is always a popular cry after a mass shooting.
If he had used molotov cocktails to kill people with fire bombs, would you want to prosecute the gas station clerk who sold him the flammable liquid?
JohnRich 4
QuoteYes, if they didn't have their weapon properly secured.
There are very few places where there are any laws mandating gun storage requirements. Thus, "properly secured" has no real meaning generally speaking. I imagine that Nebraska has no such laws.
And of course, a gun that's locked up is a gun that's unavailable for self defense.
Are you prepared to give gun owners an income tax deduction for the cost of a gun safe to encourage their purchase and use?
QuoteQuoteQuoteAny time a kid takes their parents/guardians gun I would prosecute the gun owner as an accessory to the crime.
So a 19 year old steals a gun. Goes and commits murder with it and your answer is to go after the parents and say they are at fault?
Yes, if they didn't have their weapon properly secured. I keep my guns in an approved steel gun cabinet, and I only know where the key is. Now, if someone took a hacksaw/crowbar/plasma cutter to it, I think I should be OK, since I took reasonable precautions to prevent misuse.
So 19 yo residents in the house shouldn't be able to access the guns in the home should it be necessary for self defense? Or everyone in the house needs to have their own secured weapons for such events?
yeah, this policy is as stupid as it sounds.
rushmc 23
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAny time a kid takes their parents/guardians gun I would prosecute the gun owner as an accessory to the crime.
So a 19 year old steals a gun. Goes and commits murder with it and your answer is to go after the parents and say they are at fault?
Yes, if they didn't have their weapon properly secured. I keep my guns in an approved steel gun cabinet, and I only know where the key is. Now, if someone took a hacksaw/crowbar/plasma cutter to it, I think I should be OK, since I took reasonable precautions to prevent misuse.
So 19 yo residents in the house shouldn't be able to access the guns in the home should it be necessary for self defense? Or everyone in the house needs to have their own secured weapons for such events?
yeah, this policy is as stupid as it sounds.
First off know I agree with you however, in this case wasnt it said the boy was a felon and had known mental problems?
Now, I still do not think that the parent should be gone after even in this case, but I see where the argument comes from
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
billvon 2,991
>What do you envision that system to look like or, how would it function?
Well, each state might implement it differently. The one common thing you need is a database that lists felons/insane. And since we have the felon database already, I don't think you'd need a major overhaul.
Well, each state might implement it differently. The one common thing you need is a database that lists felons/insane. And since we have the felon database already, I don't think you'd need a major overhaul.
kallend 2,027
QuoteQuotecoy games.
that's probably about as insightful a single word definition of JK's DZ.com personality as I've seen
Having trouble counting today?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
kallend 2,027
QuoteQuoteI already stated that I don't know of a solution that would be acceptable to those who are not prepared to have ANY inconvenience to themselves.
Why don't you quit beating around the bush, in your characteristic fashion, and just say what you want to say.
What solution do you propose to stop crazy people from getting guns? Convenient or not. Spit it out. Dare to put your idea up for public scrutiny.
If you don't have the guts to say it, then quit wasting our time with your coy games.
1. Uniform nationwide gun laws, no patchwork that allows easy circumvention.
2. Registration. Anyone found with an unregistered gun goes to jail.
3. Gun owners 100% responsible for any harm done with a gun registered to them. Burden of proof on owner to show that precautions against theft and misuse had been taken.
Inconvenient though.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Quote1. Uniform nationwide gun laws, no patchwork that allows easy circumvention.
Already have them! NEXT!
Quote2. Registration. Anyone found with an unregistered gun goes to jail.
2 for 2 so far.
Quote3. Gun owners 100% responsible for any harm done with a gun registered to them. Burden of proof on owner to show that precautions against theft and misuse had been taken.
So lets say I had a friend over who stole a firearm of mine and went out and shot somebody with it. You want me to be prosecuted? Nice John, at least we know how you stand here. Completely wrong, but still nice to know.
If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!
rushmc 23
QuoteQuoteQuoteI already stated that I don't know of a solution that would be acceptable to those who are not prepared to have ANY inconvenience to themselves.
Why don't you quit beating around the bush, in your characteristic fashion, and just say what you want to say.
What solution do you propose to stop crazy people from getting guns? Convenient or not. Spit it out. Dare to put your idea up for public scrutiny.
If you don't have the guts to say it, then quit wasting our time with your coy games.
1. Uniform nationwide gun laws, no patchwork that allows easy circumvention.
What laws are easily circumvented today?
2. Registration. Anyone found with an unregistered gun goes to jail.
Registration is the first step to confiscation. There in no argument you can have to denie that. Also, how well has registration worked in other countries? Answer, it hasnt
3. Gun owners 100% responsible for any harm done with a gun registered to them. Burden of proof on owner to show that precautions against theft and misuse had been taken.
Wow, I did not know you was a loby for the lawyers. Do you have any idea the mess you would create with this?
Inconvenient though.
Not inconvienent, irrelavant maybe. Pandoras box of guns in the US already exists, nothing can change that.
Also, it seem ironic to me that you want all guns resgistered yet you scream about anything that invades ones privacy. Cant have it both ways
In any event, I know we will not agree. Saying your solutions are "inconvienent" is bogus so that reply is not worthy.
Now, should you be able to change the US constitution Article 2, then the conversation begins anew. But that is another thread
Edited to add,
I respect your view, I just dont agree. Thanks for the honest reply
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
kallend 2,027
QuoteQuote1. Uniform nationwide gun laws, no patchwork that allows easy circumvention.
Already have them! NEXT!
What nation are you living in? We have way different laws in some cities than in others in the USA.
Quote
Quote2. Registration. Anyone found with an unregistered gun goes to jail.
2 for 2 so far.
What nation are you living in? There is no uniform nationwide requirement for registration in the USA.
Quote
Quote3. Gun owners 100% responsible for any harm done with a gun registered to them. Burden of proof on owner to show that precautions against theft and misuse had been taken.
So lets say I had a friend over who stole a firearm of mine and went out and shot somebody with it. You want me to be prosecuted? Nice John, at least we know how you stand here. Completely wrong, but still nice to know.
Only if they couldn't prove they'd taken precautions. See above (I guess you missed that bit in your hurry to post something).
Inconvenient, eh?
Now how would YOU do it?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
kallend 2,027
Quote
Now, should you be able to change the US constitution Article 2, then the conversation begins anew. But that is another thread
Edited to add,
I respect your view, I just dont agree. Thanks for the honest reply
Nothing I wrote is contrary to the 2nd Amendment. Uniform laws aren't, registration isn't, responsibility for misuse isn't.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Did anyone suggest a ban?
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites