Another US Shooting - This time a shopping Mall

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

(not trying to trap you. just wanting to see if I can define the limits of what you think owner responsibility is)

If AQ managed to steal one of those russians nuclear suitcases and blow it in NY, many people would be screaming about owner responsability. Even if Russia really did all they could to prevent it.

Spiderman said that with great power comes great responsability, so i think it is not crazy to somehow link gun ownership with crimes commited with said gun independently of precautions taken.

Maybe a middle point would be that economical penalties (fines, compensations, etc) goes to the gun owner, as well as the one pulling the trigger, and criminal penalties (jail, etc) if the owner cannot prove that he did everything reasonable to avoid the outcome...

Not that I disagree with you but what is "reasonable" in this context ?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,991]

>Spiderman said that with great power comes great responsability . . .

And someone a little less famous - "from everyone who has been given much, much will be required."

[rushmc 23]

Luke 12:48

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

Actually, a woman with a gun

Oh, I am sorry. I stand corrected if thats the case. Good shot anyway.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

If your front door is open and it's in your kitchen drawer, drawer open, loaded - then yes, you failed to secure a dangerous weapon.

In the history of America, has a bad guy ever acquired a gun this way?

We usually keep our doors closed, and usually locked. And loaded guns in drawers usually have said drawer closed.

And then that analog to a hole in the sidewalk - about as ridiculous as ever for you, Bill. Walking down the sidewalk is a normal, legal, expected activity. Breaking into someone else's home is not any of the 3.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

So, I know this is older but this is the part that caught my eve in the article.

Mr. Schumer found that although about 80 percent of the 104,000 licensed gun dealers did not have a single crime gun traced to their stores last year, 1,160 dealers were the source of 34,626 guns seized in crimes. And 0.1 percent of the dealers, or 137 of them, accounted for more than 13,000 guns traced to crimes in 1998. Some of these dealers each sold more than 1,000 guns that were used in crimes from 1996 through 1998.


Now, this may have been dealt with by now but to me it says two things.

Bad dealers cause more of the problems (than I thought anyway) and stolen guns my be less than you good Dr would like to think

I think it may simple show that most guns are sold by a small number of dealers. I bet you'd find that the majority of stolen TVs were sold by Walmart and Bestbuy. Conclusion....?

If the dealers illegally sold the weapons later used in crime, yeah, shut them down. But I've never seen that said - all they say is "Traders sold xxx guns used in crimes," with nothing said about how many guns they sold, and how many everyone else sold, or how many guns were used in crimes.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

So, I know this is older but this is the part that caught my eve in the article.

Mr. Schumer found that although about 80 percent of the 104,000 licensed gun dealers did not have a single crime gun traced to their stores last year, 1,160 dealers were the source of 34,626 guns seized in crimes. And 0.1 percent of the dealers, or 137 of them, accounted for more than 13,000 guns traced to crimes in 1998. Some of these dealers each sold more than 1,000 guns that were used in crimes from 1996 through 1998.


Now, this may have been dealt with by now but to me it says two things.

Bad dealers cause more of the problems (than I thought anyway) and stolen guns my be less than you good Dr would like to think

I think it may simple show that most guns are sold by a small number of dealers. I bet you'd find that the majority of stolen TVs were sold by Walmart and Bestbuy. Conclusion....?

If the dealers illegally sold the weapons later used in crime, yeah, shut them down. But I've never seen that said - all they say is "Traders sold xxx guns used in crimes," with nothing said about how many guns they sold, and how many everyone else sold, or how many guns were used in crimes.

Good points. I had not thought of looking at it in that way.

Thanks

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I've made a concrete suggestion to make it more difficult for loonies to get hold of firearms. You haven't - all you've done is grumble about being held responsible for your own weapon and come up with no idea of your own.

Actually, you made a proposal to wipe away a founding principle of this country - the presumption of innocence. Since that is clearly unconstitutional, you have proposed jack shit.

Wouldn't address the problems of loonies anyway - it is criminals that acquire weapons by theft. You can only address the statistical anomolies like crazed shooters by implementing measures more draconian than the Patriot Act.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

California recognizes the importance of safe storage by requiring that all firearms sold in California be accompanied by a DOJ-approved firearms safety device or proof that the purchaser owns a gun safe that meets regulatory standards established by the Department.

Largely known as a meaningless $13 tax on a gun purchase.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

(To kallend) Actually, you made a proposal to wipe away a founding principle of this country - the presumption of innocence. Since that is clearly unconstitutional, you have proposed jack shit.

Wouldn't address the problems of loonies anyway - it is criminals that acquire weapons by theft. You can only address the statistical anomolies like crazed shooters by implementing measures more draconian than the Patriot Act.

And isn't it ironic how kallend cries about the intrusions upon civil liberties of the Patriot Act in one breath, and in the very next breath he wants to do those same types of things, and go even further, against gun owners.

I guess we can only conclude that kallend fears law-abiding gun owners more than he fears terrorists.

[pop 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

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.

Well, now we understand why you were so hesitant to voice your true opinion.

1) You want rural low-crime areas like Montana, to have the same gun laws as urban high-crime areas like Washington, D.C. That does a disservice to a lot of people. Montana shouldn't have to suffer because of what some criminals do in D.C. Besides, the Constitution doesn't grant the federal government the power to impose state gun laws - only on interstate commerce.

2) Registration doesn't reduce gun crime, proven by numerous examples around the world. Just as auto registration doesn't stop speeding or drunk driving. It's a worthless waste of law enforcement time and money, which could better be spent actually patrolling to catch criminals. The Brits and Canadians are the latest folks to find this out.

3) Punishing the innocent once again. Would this philosophy also apply to cars that get stolen? Knives? Liquor? In your zeal to punish gun criminals, you would turn America into a totalitarian state where innocents are swept up into jail.

Yeah, "inconvenient" is a good word for it. Also "unfair", "ridiculous", and "unconstitutional".

It's been enlightening to finally hear your true thoughts. Perhaps you'll go back to being coy again after this.

Quote

So what's YOUR proposal, John? Don't like mine, give us yours. Put YOUR money where your mouth is.

Or do you feel quite happy with a few loonies with guns offing a bunch of people from time to time?

Did you really think you were gonna get a response?

7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

[kallend 2,026]

Quote

Quote

I've made a concrete suggestion to make it more difficult for loonies to get hold of firearms. You haven't - all you've done is grumble about being held responsible for your own weapon and come up with no idea of your own.

Actually, you made a proposal to wipe away a founding principle of this country - the presumption of innocence. Since that is clearly unconstitutional, you have proposed jack shit.

Wouldn't address the problems of loonies anyway - it is criminals that acquire weapons by theft. You can only address the statistical anomolies like crazed shooters by implementing measures more draconian than the Patriot Act.

Well, this one counterexample disproves your theory. That was TOO easy.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I've made a concrete suggestion to make it more difficult for loonies to get hold of firearms. You haven't - all you've done is grumble about being held responsible for your own weapon and come up with no idea of your own.

Actually, you made a proposal to wipe away a founding principle of this country - the presumption of innocence. Since that is clearly unconstitutional, you have proposed jack shit.

Wouldn't address the problems of loonies anyway - it is criminals that acquire weapons by theft. You can only address the statistical anomolies like crazed shooters by implementing measures more draconian than the Patriot Act.

Well, this one counterexample disproves your theory. That was TOO easy.

You are in my mirror again!!! Get out!!!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

so now you're a fan of anecdotal information as evidence?

No response on the constitutional question, of course.

---
The answer to your bigger question is simple. If the only solutions to a problem are to violate people's rights, we don't enact any of them. The status quo is preferable to bad solutions. Doing something for the act of doing something is not good policy.

[kallend 2,026]

Quote

Quote

(To kallend) Actually, you made a proposal to wipe away a founding principle of this country - the presumption of innocence. Since that is clearly unconstitutional, you have proposed jack shit.

Wouldn't address the problems of loonies anyway - it is criminals that acquire weapons by theft. You can only address the statistical anomolies like crazed shooters by implementing measures more draconian than the Patriot Act.

And isn't it ironic how kallend cries about the intrusions upon civil liberties of the Patriot Act in one breath, and in the very next breath he wants to do those same types of things, and go even further, against gun owners.

I guess we can only conclude that kallend fears law-abiding gun owners more than he fears terrorists.

It seems that carelessness by "law abiding gun owners (TM)" in safeguarding their guns has led to rather more deaths in the USA than did all the terrorist attacks in the USA this decade.

If "law abiding gun owners" could get their acts together then we wouldn't be having this debate at all.

So for the umpteenth time, JR, what do YOU propose to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally unstable? Time to answer, you've been avoiding the question for too long with your COY GAMES.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,026]

Quote

so now you're a fan of anecdotal information as evidence?

No response on the constitutional question, of course.

---
The answer to your bigger question is simple. If the only solutions to a problem are to violate people's rights, we don't enact any of them. The status quo is preferable to bad solutions. Doing something for the act of doing something is not good policy.

Your proposal is WHAT, then? Sacrifice a few thousand people every year so that you can continue to play with your guns wtih no inconvenience?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

so now you're a fan of anecdotal information as evidence?

No response on the constitutional question, of course.

---
The answer to your bigger question is simple. If the only solutions to a problem are to violate people's rights, we don't enact any of them. The status quo is preferable to bad solutions. Doing something for the act of doing something is not good policy.

Your proposal is WHAT, then? Sacrifice a few thousand people every year so that you can continue to play with your guns wtih no inconvenience?

I know you have stated that owner should be responcible but, I feel you have danced around what you think would be the best finial solution.

While I agee in principal the practicallity of the matter is much different.

As I stated before, the shootings discussed lhere ately are symptoms. (and I am not talking about symptoms of gun ownership and responcible handling) I think the anwer lies out side the gun issue all together. Thoughts?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

So for the umpteenth time, JR, what do YOU propose to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally unstable? Time to answer, you've been avoiding the question for too long with your COY GAMES.

I'm not playing coy games, nor avoiding anything. I was out having fun all weekend, instead of being hunched over my computer, like you. I made four jumps on Saturday followed by a great outdoors BBQ dinner, had a shooting match on Sunday, then did some chores at home fixing a patio screen door and working on my canoe. All of that was more important than watching dropzone.com all weekend.

You, on the other hand continue your coy games, by demanding responsible gun storage, but refusing to define what that means. Once again, you don't have the guts to say what you mean, so that you won't have to defend a position.

The thread was also worth avoiding because it turned into a slugfest between you and one other person, whereby all you did was keep repeating the same thing over and over again, through a hundred posts. Sheesh. Put your ego aside and let such things stop when they're repetitious. Just be satisfied that you had the opportunity to voice your opinion, and let it go at that. You don't always have to say the last word. Repetition does not add validity.

Between the beaten dead-horse repetition and your continued coy games, this thread really didn't deserve any more of my attention. But I'll entertain you one last time here.

Here's my answer to your question.

You can't keep guns out of the hands of nuts. The failed history of gun control all around the world has proven that such a task is impossible. Your safe-storage and gun-registration proposals sure as heck won't do it.

If you try, all you will succeed in doing is depriving honest citizens of their liberty, and all for nothing.

Therefore, the best thing you can do is to allow the good guys to have guns so that the means exists to stop the bad guys as soon as they start their evil deeds. Once the bad guys see that they will be shot down the moment they attempt mass murder, then they'll realize that their quest for infamy through mass murder is fruitless, because their odds of succeeding will be slim. And that will be a deterrent.

Ever notice how all the mass shootings happen in gun-free zones, like schools, churches and shopping malls? Do you wonder why these nuts choose such places? Because they expect no one there to oppose them. I've never heard of a mass shooting in a gun store, at a police station, or at an NRA convention. Have you?

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

It seems that carelessness by "law abiding gun owners (TM)" in safeguarding their guns has led to rather more deaths in the USA than did all the terrorist attacks in the USA this decade.

So once again it is a law abiding citizen who's guns are killing people and not the criminal who pulled the trigger. You can't get all the criminals off the street so how about trying to scare people with prison from owning a firearm in the first place fearing jailtime of there own if it gets stolen and used by a criminal. What a great idea!

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[kallend 2,026]

Quote

Quote

Quote

so now you're a fan of anecdotal information as evidence?

No response on the constitutional question, of course.

---
The answer to your bigger question is simple. If the only solutions to a problem are to violate people's rights, we don't enact any of them. The status quo is preferable to bad solutions. Doing something for the act of doing something is not good policy.

Your proposal is WHAT, then? Sacrifice a few thousand people every year so that you can continue to play with your guns wtih no inconvenience?

I know you have stated that owner should be responcible but, I feel you have danced around what you think would be the best finial solution.

While I agee in principal the practicallity of the matter is much different.

As I stated before, the shootings discussed lhere ately are symptoms. (and I am not talking about symptoms of gun ownership and responcible handling) I think the anwer lies out side the gun issue all together. Thoughts?

How come other western democratic societies have, almost without exception, a lower gun homicide rate than the US and stricter gun laws than the US. Pure coincidence? I think not.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,026]

Quote

Quote

It seems that carelessness by "law abiding gun owners (TM)" in safeguarding their guns has led to rather more deaths in the USA than did all the terrorist attacks in the USA this decade.

So once again it is a law abiding citizen who's guns are killing people and not the criminal who pulled the trigger. You can't get all the criminals off the street so how about trying to scare people with prison from owning a firearm in the first place fearing jailtime of there own if it gets stolen and used by a criminal. What a great idea!

If YOU can't be responsible for the security of your gun, YOU shouldn't have one.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

If YOU can't be responsible for the security of your gun, YOU shouldn't have one.

You still HAVE NOT stated exactly what you said is responsible. Do you want everything I have in a 2 ton safe? Great! What do you suggest I use for home security? If it's in a safe you just rendered what I use for that cause useless because I cannot get to it in time. And why are you so concerned about my firearms? Never once have any of mine ever been aimed at anyone or killed any person. So After 15 years and not 1 incident I would think is pretty damn responsible in my mind. What more do you want?

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[pop 0]

Quote

How come other western democratic societies have, almost without exception, a lower gun homicide rate than the US and stricter gun laws than the US. Pure coincidence? I think not.

Question is why are Americans so damned violent that other Americans think we need to have guns at places like churchs, schools, libraries,. etc. Are we violent because our constitution says everyone can have a gun? If that's not it....what is it?

7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

[SpeedRacer 1]

Most of us aren't, so it's hard to answer that question.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[pop 0]

Quote

Most of us aren't, so it's hard to answer that question.

You are right. As individuals most arent, but as masses, and statistically compared to other countries we are violence hungry.

7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer