~ A Sad Story of Woe . . .

[namedpipes]

Wait! This isn't the wedding invitation thread?!

 

[Bill Katt]

Wait! This isn't the wedding invitation thread?!

Sorry but no. lol

 

[namedpipes]

Oh right. The Prohibited Person Meltdown thread...


New tag line: If BRANDON can't have a gun, NOBODY can have a gun!

 

[Bill Katt]

Oh right. The Prohibited Person Meltdown thread...


New tag line: If BRANDON can't have a gun, NOBODY can have a gun!

Yup, I think that's about where this started.

 

[Acme.Armament]

[FONT=Tahoma, Calibri, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, Calibri, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, Calibri, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif]It looks that way because some on here believe there is nothing more important in life then a firearm. [/FONT]

Occasionally they are more important. But a majority of gun owners know that food is more important.

Oh right. The Prohibited Person Meltdown thread...


New tag line: If BRANDON can't have a gun, NOBODY can have a gun!

Then a lot of business will close. Brandon

But what do I know I'm a idiot!

Knowing it is half the battle.

 

[Nicole]

As multiple people have pointed out - a person with wicked intentions can do plenty of damage with a knife, an axe, a couple gallons of gasoline, some fertilizer, a car, or any number of other things. Why are guns special

It may be a little difficult to walk into a school and kills dozens of people with any of those items you mentioned so the crazies use guns which they cancel and reload quickly.

So your saying that if you can't be trusted with a gun when your let out of prison then you should be kept in prison? And who makes that decision the government or do we have a second trial to see if they are fit to re enter society. Maybe your missing the point then when you are let out of prison you have very little chance of doing anything good with your life in terms of getting a decent paying job and countless other things. That makes it so they re offend and may progress into worse crimes and can be a vicious circle for these people. How about if you just get probation do you keep your firearms rights? or do you want for the government to sign off and say your good to go.

Your last response sounded like it came from a un educated person not from some one with a Phd.
But what do I know I'm a idiot!

Well others have already shown you that your assertion that only guns can be used in attacks on schools is a lie. People are tool using animals. They are very good at it. If someone wants to kill people, there is certainly no shortage of options, which is part of my point.

So you are claiming that people who are let out of jail will reoffend - they will rob, rape, and murder again out of desperation? The laws are something which they will not respect? And you think the solution is to tell them they aren't allowed to have a gun?! You admit that you want to keep them from having a gun because you are afraid they won't obey the law that says "No killing people allowed." They can kill you without a gun if they want to. And further, why would they listen to your instructions that they stay away from guns? They are already fine with KILLING...why do you think they are going to obey ANY proscription?

I believe that dangerous people are dangerous. They will be dangerous with a pointy stick and they will be dangerous with a gun. There are certain actions that, in my opinion, demonstrate one cannot ever be trusted again. If, during a trial by a jury of your peers, you are found guilty of such a crime, then you should not be allowed to reenter society.

If your actions didn't meet that threshold and your peers think you can be trusted to remain in or return to society, then what is the point in denying you one of your fundamental rights? If you are a wicked person, you will find a way to be wicked and the laws against it won't stop you. If you are a good person, then denying you your rights accomplishes nothing except to enlarge Leviathan, weaken our rights as a whole, and make a mockery of our aspirations to be a society of free individuals.

As for your last comment. Thank you. Being called uneducated by someone with your command of their native tongue is delightfully ironic. My amusement is tempered only by nostalgia for Scriv and a wistful longing to see him in action with such a deserving target.

 

[Nicole]

[FONT=Tahoma, Calibri, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, Calibri, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, Calibri, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif]It looks that way because some on here believe there is nothing more important in life then a firearm. [/FONT]

Au contraire. I think if you scratch the surface you will find that most here believe there are few things in life more important than keeping the government in its proper role. When it usurps power that it should not be trusted with, in any arena, it has a history of spiralling out of control. At that point, the things which ARE most important in life are forfeit to the whims of the state.

You have, shockingly, found us passionate about the second amendment. I venture you'd find us equally vociferous if you made similar arguments with respect to our other fundamental rights, particularly those specifically enumerated in the BOR.

 

[Terminator03]

Occasionally they are more important. But a majority of gun owners know that food is more important.

Yeah, but that just moves the guns back into number one position for us, since we can use those guns to procure the food!

Then a lot of business will close. Brandon



Knowing it is half the battle.

perfect setup!

 

[Terminator03]

Well others have already shown you that your assertion that only guns can be used in attacks on schools is a lie. People are tool using animals. They are very good at it. If someone wants to kill people, there is certainly no shortage of options, which is part of my point.

So you are claiming that people who are let out of jail will reoffend - they will rob, rape, and murder again out of desperation? The laws are something which they will not respect? And you think the solution is to tell them they aren't allowed to have a gun?! You admit that you want to keep them from having a gun because you are afraid they won't obey the law that says "No killing people allowed." They can kill you without a gun if they want to. And further, why would they listen to your instructions that they stay away from guns? They are already fine with KILLING...why do you think they are going to obey ANY proscription?

I believe that dangerous people are dangerous. They will be dangerous with a pointy stick and they will be dangerous with a gun. There are certain actions that, in my opinion, demonstrate one cannot ever be trusted again. If, during a trial by a jury of your peers, you are found guilty of such a crime, then you should not be allowed to reenter society.

If your actions didn't meet that threshold and your peers think you can be trusted to remain in or return to society, then what is the point in denying you one of your fundamental rights? If you are a wicked person, you will find a way to be wicked and the laws against it won't stop you. If you are a good person, then denying you your rights accomplishes nothing except to enlarge Leviathan, weaken our rights as a whole, and make a mockery of our aspirations to be a society of free individuals.

As for your last comment. Thank you. Being called uneducated by someone with your command of their native tongue is delightfully ironic. My amusement is tempered only by nostalgia for Scriv and a wistful longing to see him in action with such a deserving target.

Nicole, I agree with everything you are pointing out in your rebuttal, except for the statement that I highlighted. In that particular event, I can see why Brandon (or most gun grabbers for that matter) would use that example. The simple fact is that these "tools" which we are talking about are the easiest method to dispatch multiple targets efficiently, as well as from being a good distance away. Sure, you could argue that someone could run around stabbing people, but that requires being up close and personal with your victims, and also cuts down significantly on how times you could get away with it before someone would disarm you, or just plain get far enough away that you are no longer a threat. Then explosives could be used. Well, once again, we have that pesky little physics problem - effective range. To take out more than yourself, and maybe a couple of others you would need an IED too big to easily conceal (think 55 gallon drum here). As I said, I understand and agree with the intent of your argument, but there are very few, if any (that I know of) "tools" that are more efficient, and effective to get a job like that accomplished. I will also point out that people that do things like that are generally cowards that wouldn't be able to succeed in a hand to hand combat type scenario where knives would be the tool of choice, and those very same people would likely be prohibited persons anyway, so gun control laws would have no effect on them anyway. They would just buy their "tool" in the black market, steal it, etc. just like 99% of anyone committing a gun related crime does.

 

[OlSparky11B]

Being called uneducated by someone with your command of their native tongue is delightfully ironic.

Perhaps he believes that all the red, squiggly lines under his sentences, (when composing his rants), merely highlight how awesome and concise his arguments are?

 

[ntomsw]

He's pissed because he is a PP, and that's it. Nothing more. No one is taking my guns, because they are not allowed to have any. Give me a break. I can't believe you're still going about this. You're wrong, deal with it. Move on.

 

[Brandon1317]

He's pissed because he is a PP, and that's it. Nothing more. No one is taking my guns, because they are not allowed to have any. Give me a break. I can't believe you're still going about this. You're wrong, deal with it. Move on.

If that was the case then I would be saying no one should have guns. You guys just want to twist everything into "they are out to take our guns away". I said not every one should be allowed to have guns and you guys flip out. If you think every one is capable and should have guns your f*cked in the head. Mantally ill and hardcore criminals shouldn't have guns. But your repsonse to that is well they just need to stay locked up. So if one of your loved ones has a mental illness you want them locked up for their whole life?

 

[ntomsw]

 

[Jsfitzgerald85]

If that was the case then I would be saying no one should have guns. You guys just want to twist everything into "they are out to take our guns away". I said not every one should be allowed to have guns and you guys flip out. If you think every one is capable and should have guns your f*cked in the head. Mantally ill and hardcore criminals shouldn't have guns. But your repsonse to that is well they just need to stay locked up. So if one of your loved ones has a mental illness you want them locked up for their whole life?

hardcore criminals shouldnt be allowed to have guns but your orginial argument was this guy who accidentaly shot his friend should have his rights taken away. It was an accident and the man shot recognized it as such. The man is not a criminal, stupid yes, criminal No. I think your problem is you fall into the trap that many people fall into and that is....... no matter what someone needs to go to jail, accidents do not exist, the victim in this case did not press charges and that should be the end of it, but you like many others still want this man punished more than he already has been.

 

[namedpipes]

. . . I said not every one should be allowed to have guns . . .

Just the people you deem suitable.

So, Brandon, do YOU feel that YOU are suitable?

I can tell you that based on your performance (and I use the word performance deliberately), *I* do not find you suitable. The difference is, *I* am not telling you to hand in your guns. (well, the state did, but not me)

 

[Brandon1317]

hardcore criminals shouldnt be allowed to have guns but your orginial argument was this guy who accidentaly shot his friend should have his rights taken away. It was an accident and the man shot recognized it as such. The man is not a criminal, stupid yes, criminal No. I think your problem is you fall into the trap that many people fall into and that is....... no matter what someone needs to go to jail, accidents do not exist, the victim in this case did not press charges and that should be the end of it, but you like many others still want this man punished more than he already has been.

Ok so you agree with that but most of the peole that responded on this thread say no matter what if your not in prison you should be able to have gun which is crazy talk. It was my opinion that he should not be able to have a gun after pointing at some one and pulling the trigger. So any one who commits a crime for their first time should just get a pass if they say they didn't mean to do it? If every gun owner was that un safe with there weapons we wouuld all be in trouble. The more "accidents" there are with guns the harder is to convince non gun owners that poeple should be able to own them with no governemnt sanctions.

 

[Jsfitzgerald85]

Ok so you agree with that but most of the peole that responded on this thread say no matter what if your not in prison you should be able to have gun which is crazy talk. It was my opinion that he should not be able to have a gun after pointing at some one and pulling the trigger. So any one who commits a crime for their first time should just get a pass if they say they didn't mean to do it? If every gun owner was that un safe with there weapons we wouuld all be in trouble. The more "accidents" there are with guns the harder is to convince non gun owners that poeple should be able to own them with no governemnt sanctions.

the man shot didnt want to press charges therefore no crime was committed, the guy was not charged. The man checked to make sure the weapon was cleared and accidently chambered the round, now everyone is in agreement the man is beyond dumb for pointing it as his friend. But last time i checked stupidity is not a crime.

 

[Bill Katt]

Brandon, you're advocating the exact same garbage that got you into the position that you're in now. I don't understand your reasoning. You're pissed about not being able to bear arms yet you're pushing for that infringement to be imposed on others.

 

[Jsfitzgerald85]

Brandon, you're advocating the exact same garbage that got you into the position that you're in now. I don't understand your reasoning. You're pissed about not being able to bear arms yet you're pushing for that infringement to be imposed on others.

Misery loves company maybe?

 

[Bill Katt]

Misery loves company maybe?

Could be.

 

[namedpipes]

Misery loves company maybe?

More like criminal stupidity.

 

[jasons]

Ok so you agree with that but most of the peole that responded on this thread say no matter what if your not in prison you should be able to have gun which is crazy talk. It was my opinion that he should not be able to have a gun after pointing at some one and pulling the trigger. So any one who commits a crime for their first time should just get a pass if they say they didn't mean to do it? If every gun owner was that un safe with there weapons we wouuld all be in trouble. The more "accidents" there are with guns the harder is to convince non gun owners that poeple should be able to own them with no governemnt sanctions.

"Hardcore criminals" should either be in "hardcore prisons" or in a pauper's grave. Why do you want "hardcore criminals" on the street?


(And what exactly is the difference between "hardcore" and whatever other bullshit category we're making up this morning?)

 

[jamesvt]

"Hardcore criminals" should either be in "hardcore prisons" or in a pauper's grave. Why do you want "hardcore criminals" on the street?


(And what exactly is the difference between "hardcore" and whatever other bullshit category we're making up this morning?)

This. If a person is free they should be able to own ANY object they want. If you can trust them to be a part of society then you have to trust them with owning guns. A felon that wants a gun will get one no matter what the laws say. Some felons do "turn their lives around" and end up becoming law abiding citizens after serving their time, but because of laws they are not able to own guns. The felons you have to worry about won't follow the laws anyways. If someone is such a danger to society then they should be locked up.

 

[Brandon1317]

This. If a person is free they should be able to own ANY object they want. If you can trust them to be a part of society then you have to trust them with owning guns. A felon that wants a gun will get one no matter what the laws say. Some felons do "turn their lives around" and end up becoming law abiding citizens after serving their time, but because of laws they are not able to own guns. The felons you have to worry about won't follow the laws anyways. If someone is such a danger to society then they should be locked up.

And I will ask the same question that I asked beore, who is to say these people are ready to be let back out? The parole board (we all know how well those work), A judge? 40% of people reoffend with 3 years after getting out of prison. So that is a poor agrument to say that they should have their gun rights back as soon as they are let out. Not all criminals have access to guns some criminal's are white collar type crimes but after getting out of prison may turn to robbing banks or stores since he can't do anything else with his life, so it would be alot easier to walk into a gun shop and buy a gun then tryingto find one some place else. Even states that restore firearms rights to ex felons having waiting periods and that makes sense.

 

[jasons]

And I will ask the same question that I asked beore, who is to say these people are ready to be let back out? The parole board (we all know how well those work), A judge? 40% of people reoffend with 3 years after getting out of prison. So that is a poor agrument to say that they should have their gun rights back as soon as they are let out. Not all criminals have access to guns some criminal's are white collar type crimes but after getting out of prison may turn to robbing banks or stores since he can't do anything else with his life, so it would be alot easier to walk into a gun shop and buy a gun then tryingto find one some place else. Even states that restore firearms rights to ex felons having waiting periods and that makes sense.

First, a criminal who wants one can buy (or steal) an illegal gun at least as fast as I can buy a legal one. Laws, prohibited person crap, background checks, all of that crap does NOTHING to stop a criminal who wants a gun.

Second, the fact that our prisons are basically summer school for the criminal element just goes to show that we're not "rehabilitating" anyone and in fact have no interest in doing so. We send kids to jail for selling natural products that people want and they come out as gang bangers. That's a problem for sure, but it has nothing to do with gun laws.

 

[Jsfitzgerald85]

And I will ask the same question that I asked beore, who is to say these people are ready to be let back out? The parole board (we all know how well those work), A judge? 40% of people reoffend with 3 years after getting out of prison. So that is a poor agrument to say that they should have their gun rights back as soon as they are let out. Not all criminals have access to guns some criminal's are white collar type crimes but after getting out of prison may turn to robbing banks or stores since he can't do anything else with his life, so it would be alot easier to walk into a gun shop and buy a gun then tryingto find one some place else. Even states that restore firearms rights to ex felons having waiting periods and that makes sense.

walk into a gun shop and buy a gun is easier than trying to find one someplace else? You cant just walk into a gun shop and buy a gun. In MA you have to present a drivers license, A LTC, then submit to a background check then provide a fingerprint scan. Who is to say these people are ready to be let back out? Who is to say they arent? Its a crap shoot, is a prisoner rehabilitated, only the prisoner knows that. Are you gonna keep ever criminal locked up for life out of fear that they are gonna commit a crime again? You can make judgements based on information that you have no way of knowing. Some criminals you can, but not all.

 

[namedpipes]

. . . Not all criminals have access to guns some criminal's are white collar type crimes but after getting out of prison may turn to robbing banks or stores since he can't do anything else with his life, so it would be alot easier to walk into a gun shop and buy a gun then tryingto find one some place else. . . .

Sounds like a job for the DOJ's Pre Crime Division!

 

[drgrant]

And I will ask the same question that I asked beore, who is to say these people are ready to be let back out? The parole board (we all know how well those work), A judge? 40% of people reoffend with 3 years after getting out of prison. So that is a poor agrument to say that they should have their gun rights back as soon as they are let out.

If you had a clue you would realize that it is not a poor argument, the concept of "paying ones debt to society" has been a long standing a tenet of our justice system. If you don't like it you should probably move to Venezuela or one of those other places where they do everything ass backwards.

Now, if you think that the punishment is inadequate for a given crime, I probably won't disagree with you on that in many cases. (For example, violent crimes are generally punished poorly in much of the US, particularly moonbat territory).

Your argument is also posited on the "feel-good" garbage that somehow denying a person rights will prevent them from committing a violent crime, or getting a gun. Look at the criminals who are "frequent flyers" with prison. Nearly all of them are prohibited persons- and all of them still get caught with guns. They obviously have no trouble getting them despite the fact that they are legally barred from doing so. The law accomplishes nothing except punishing everyone else who doesn't commit violent crimes. We all pay for it, even those of us who aren't prohibited persons- by being forced to go through background checks and other heinous crap that shouldn't be required to begin with.

Not all criminals have access to guns some criminal's are white collar type crimes but after getting out of prison may turn to robbing banks or stores since he can't do anything else with his life,

Why the **** is that my problem? Why should my rights be stomped on because other people abuse theirs?

BTW people rob stores and banks WITHOUT guns all the time. Apparently you never watch/read the news.

so it would be alot easier to walk into a gun shop and buy a gun then tryingto find one some place else.

You obviously have no clue about how criminals get guns. What happens is whenever the economy is bad (which is most of the time) people who aren't prohibited persons end up strawing guns out into the black market, and there is no way to prevent that without the "solution" resulting in further infringement on someone's rights on the other end. Criminals also break into houses and cars and steal guns, and those guns easily make it to their market.

Also, if you are a criminal with ill intent, why would you buy a gun over the counter, which is still (even in a free society) going to have a paper trail attached to it? If one was a criminal, they would be better off buying a gun off the street because it is way less traceable.

Even states that restore firearms rights to ex felons having waiting periods and that makes sense.

I think it was MLK that said "A right delayed is a right denied". No, "waiting periods" don't make sense, if you think about it for a minute, but it's pretty apparent to me you don't think much about anything.

-Mike

 

[namedpipes]

Brandon, you can't possibly be this stupid. You're not even TRYING anymore.

Put some effort into it. Have some effing pride.

 

[Brandon1317]

walk into a gun shop and buy a gun is easier than trying to find one someplace else? You cant just walk into a gun shop and buy a gun. In MA you have to present a drivers license, A LTC, then submit to a background check then provide a fingerprint scan. Who is to say these people are ready to be let back out? Who is to say they arent? Its a crap shoot, is a prisoner rehabilitated, only the prisoner knows that. Are you gonna keep ever criminal locked up for life out of fear that they are gonna commit a crime again? You can make judgements based on information that you have no way of knowing. Some criminals you can, but not all.

I'm saying if with go with the opinion of you guys on here that as soon as they get out of prison they can own guns legally again and yes it would take a little longer in MA. Yes exactly who is to say. But that seems to be the opinion on here to leave them locked up if we think they are to dangerous and as mentioned by others here either leave them locked up or they can have guns. That is a stupid statement and idea.