Capt.Slog

"MOST LIKELY" You are just confirming your "Guilty until proven innocent" and "Sentence first, trial later" attitude to justice.

Good freekin' lord . . . you really have bought into crap hook, line and sinker. Lemme ask you this; what transportation -should- the person that is 3rd in line of succession in the US take, commercial flights? (sigh) She has NO choice in the matter. She is pretty much required to take military flights. She is pretty much required to be driven and is given the same sort of protection both the President and Vice President get. She's the freekin' Speaker of the House FFS. FROM OVER TWO YEARS AGO WHEN BUSH WAS STILL IN CHARGE! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17035721/ Don't bother the righties with facts. Facts make their heads explode.

My analogy? You brought up driving the wrong way on the highway, not me. Link, because your memory is so short. You brought up licensing which doesn't exist in the firearm world Just because you don't like the direction YOUR analogy took, doesn't mean it was a bad analogy.

Fixed it.

Last time I checked this was an OPEN forum. Seems like you, JohnRich, mnealtx and kelpdiver are all in cahoots too. Do you use the same script?

You are now claiming that there are millions of mentally ill people with guns? And you support this? There are millions of veterans. . I hope you are not claiming that veterans, as a class, are mentally ill.

YET ANOTHER STRAW MAN. No-one has suggested repealing the 2nd Amendment. The suggestion is properly enforcing existing restrictions on the mentally disturbed. Since you're so worried about checking, are you mentally disturbed?

No, the suggestion is that something (unspecified) must be done to ensure this doesn't happen. Since the gun control movement has never been about enforcing current laws (Brady checks for example), it's fair to assume that the unspecified improvement will be a doozy. Your straw man arguments do not help your case. Neither do JR's. www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3535486#3535486 Neither do Warpedskydiver's www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3535242#3535242

You act as though someone suggested confiscating all guns and putting their owners in concentration camps. The only suggestion that's been made is to more rigorously enforce the EXISTING restrictions on mentally unstable people. Restrictions that are, incidentally, supported by the NRA. Your straw man arguments are not helping your case.

Do you want people to be denied constitutional rights without an official court hearing to protect their rights and give them fair due process? What judge protected the rights of the innocent victims of the FOUR gunmen who perpetrated mass shootings in the last 9 days?

I'm not sure bundling in the two incidents with cops should be done, but whatever. Yes, you have 53 deaths involving 6 people. . It's now FOUR mass shootings since March 30, SEVEN in the last month. www.timesdaily.com/article/20090407/NEWS/904079990?Title=Four-dead-in-Greenhill-shooting-search-on-for-Morgan-County-man Not to worry, our system works just fine.

Like those three mass school shootings in your home of Germany in the last nine years? Yeah, your gun laws are working just great! versus six mass shootings in the USA in the past month. Your comparison is unfavorable to your cause. Stay on similar comparisons - school to school. Factor in the difference in population and that delta is pretty close on. Comparing only mass murders committed by people named "Cho", the US is in a dominatiing lead. Similar comparisons, and all that. IOW, what a LAME justifcation you made. BTW, we're up to SEVEN mass shootings in the US. This just in. Makes you proud, I'm sure.

16 months and counting - the longest recession since before WWII. (Of course, you are on record as not believing it). A soon as anyone invokes Hitler ,they lose, of course.

Like those three mass school shootings in your home of Germany in the last nine years? Yeah, your gun laws are working just great! versus six mass shootings in the USA in the past month. Your comparison is unfavorable to your cause.

A common-sense proposal is to require something stronger than self-certification of sanity when buying a gun. We already have that. If a person has been found to be mentally unstable by a judge, then he can't buy a gun. Most states already put those findings on the gun prohibition database. Good for "most states". And what about people who move to new states? What about states that don't bother? What fraction of the mentally ill go before a judge for adjudication of their condition, John? The utter failure of the current system (which you think is wonderful) is shown by SIX mass shootings in the past month.

What's your proposal? I doubt you'd like my proposal. I guess it surprises me that you defend the right of nutters to own guns, when they bring such discredit on gun owners in general. What's your proposal? Whether I like it or not is immaterial. If you have an idea you think will work, put it out here for everyone to review. Do you have the faith in your idea to do that? You like to sit back and snipe at everything gun owners say - do you have the guts to put forth your ideas and stand up and defend it? I don't defend the rights of nuts to own guns. If they've been judged mentally incompetent, I don't want them to have guns. That's the current law, and I agree with that. Nuts bring no discredit upon normal law-abiding gun owners whatsoever. They do not represent gun owners in general. The fact that you equate the two as somehow being connected shows that you have an irrational and unwarranted bias in the matter. There have been a number of proposals suggested here over the last few years. You (plural) always dismiss them as infringing on some supposedly absolute right, and then pretend they never were made. A common-sense proposal is to require something stronger than self-certification of sanity when buying a gun.

What item(s) in his background would you like to see added as lawful reasons to deny gun ownership? How about his membership of the set of "nutters who shouldn't be allowed to have guns". Fascinating that you defend his gun ownership.

The minute you can show me how I personally can directly kill people with my words . . . sure. Go for it. Give it a shot. Show me. Show me how I can lay in wait for a cop to come to my door and kill him by talking. You're grasping at straws. How about those directed mind-rays you've been working on?

Do you recall how many tries it took for the US to launch its first satellite in the 1957-58 period? Led to the following version of Perry Como's hit song: Catch a falling star an’ put it in your pocket,: Never let it fade away If you catch a Sputnik put it in a box and send it to the USA.

You never have to wait long for the body count to increase. By WILLIAM KATES The Associated Press Friday, April 3, 2009; 3:09 PM BINGHAMTON, N.Y. -- Gov. David Paterson says "12 or 13" people were killed in an attack on an immigration services center in Binghamton, N.Y. A federal law enforcement official who spoke on condition of anonymity also says the shooter has been found dead in the building. Officials and media reports have said as many as 41 hostages were taken. The law enforcement official says the gunman entered the building through the front while firing. He had already blocked the back door

Blame shifting isn't terribly productive. I wasn't happy with the Bush administration's overspending. I'm not happy with the Obama administration's overspending. It's just insane that when someone (like me) says they don't like government spending, the knee jerk response appears to be "but that other guy you didn't like did it, too!" No one man--George Bush, Barack Obama, or the King of Siam--has the power to throw the whole world into a recession. Blaming any one person is generally a futile exercise in partisan finger pointing. What short memories you have. Suggest you do a search on "Clinton recession" and see how many times you righties used the expression over the past 8 years. GOTCHA!

I don't recall much outrage from you when Bush was spending far more than the govt was receiving in revenues. I don't recall your having any problem with a government run by a guy (GWB) who HAD run businesses, several of them, and run them into the ground like he did the country. You seem to have forgotten that we are in "The Bush Recession" right now.

Now you say: You call my logic messed up? Are you reading what you are typing? I cut and pasted your terms. I even kept the format of your post. This is on you. His 2 statements are not inconsistent with each other. Your response makes no sense.

Good job he didn't get to spend 20+ years on death row as a result of over zealous prosecutors, like some innocent people have.

abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=7208201&page=1 And the failure of a CEO should not walk away from the wreck with $20M.