I think that could be part of a valid conversation.
Considering that we received gun rights to defend ourselves against the government, yes. We are entitled to an arsenal of weapons if one chooses that way. Again, there's nothing scary about someone with a large arsenal or a major cache of ammunition.
Considering that they can't take such a gigantic reserve when mobile, it's a rather meaningless indicator in the real world.
Considering that they can't take such a gigantic reserve when mobile, it's a rather meaningless indicator in the real world.
What if they convinced family and friends that the local Taco Bell was the an actor in smuggling illegals and it was time to send them to the border, so to speak?
You go ahead and defend the lunatics with dozens of firearms and 10's of thousands rounds of ammo, with no hunting license. If I identify one I'll be whistle blowing and hopefully preventing ruining a lot of people's lives in the mean time.
As told to you before, there is nothing illegal with owning as many guns and as much ammo as you want. You are way out of line with this line of thought. Have you had yourself checked out by a mental health professional for your obvious irrational paranoia?
And I heard you before. I never said there was anything illegal about having as many guns and as much ammo as you want.
I'm just saying as a responsible person using my common sense, I'll be blowing the whistle if I ever recognize a lunatic on the edge with a small arsenal on hand.
So unless you're a lunatic with a small arsenal you have nothing to worry about.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.
What I think is a better and more effective way is to require a psych evaluation as part of getting a gun license along with a mandatory criminal background check.
I don't see anything wrong with ensuring that those who are buying guys are mentally sound.
I don't either but it's not hard to see how that system could be rigged by whoever gets to set up the standards for what is "mentally sound"... and then what is the agenda of whoever is doing the review...
So I can see this from both sides. One one hand, NOBODY wants people with real mental issues walking around with guns... on the other hand, this could be a back door attempt at making it EXTREMELY difficult for anybody to own a gun.
Just like a registration/licensing fee... in theory I don't think it's a bad idea but you can also see them doing to guns what they are doing to cigarettes... well let's make the registration fee $300 per gun... So we technically haven't infringed on your rights, you still have the right to buy it and own it... if you can afford it.
You go ahead and defend the lunatics with dozens of firearms and 10's of thousands rounds of ammo, with no hunting license. If I identify one I'll be whistle blowing and hopefully preventing ruining a lot of people's lives in the mean time.
The problem with all profiling is violation of presumption of innocence. We don't profile Muslims at the airport for this reason, and people get rightfully upset at cops pulling over African Americans for this reason. If we extrapolate that someone with X number of guns is likely mentally ill, then we've already presumed their guilt based on nothing but feelings.
You go ahead and defend the lunatics with dozens of firearms and 10's of thousands rounds of ammo, with no hunting license. If I identify one I'll be whistle blowing and hopefully preventing ruining a lot of people's lives in the mean time.
As told to you before, there is nothing illegal with owning as many guns and as much ammo as you want. You are way out of line with this line of thought. Have you had yourself checked out by a mental health professional for your obvious irrational paranoia?
And I heard you before. I never said there was anything illegal about having as many guns and as much ammo as you want.
I'm just saying as a responsible person using my common sense, I'll be blowing the whistle if I ever recognize a lunatic on the edge with a small arsenal on hand.
So unless you're a lunatic with a small arsenal you have nothing to worry about.
It seems to me that you are inferring that anyone with more guns and ammo than you decide is proper is a lunatic.
You go ahead and defend the lunatics with dozens of firearms and 10's of thousands rounds of ammo, with no hunting license. If I identify one I'll be whistle blowing and hopefully preventing ruining a lot of people's lives in the mean time.
As told to you before, there is nothing illegal with owning as many guns and as much ammo as you want. You are way out of line with this line of thought. Have you had yourself checked out by a mental health professional for your obvious irrational paranoia?
And I heard you before. I never said there was anything illegal about having as many guns and as much ammo as you want.
I'm just saying as a responsible person using my common sense, I'll be blowing the whistle if I ever recognize a lunatic on the edge with a small arsenal on hand.
So unless you're a lunatic with a small arsenal you have nothing to worry about.
I disagree with you, but I do respect your point of view because I do think at the heart of it is a genuine concern. The problem is that what you are promoting is something purely subjective based. And things that are subjective based tend to have their rules changed at any given time depending on who's in power.
"Hey, I'm a reasonable guy. But I've just experienced some very unreasonable things." -Jack Burton
-It looks like the Harvard Boys know what they are doing after all.
You go ahead and defend the lunatics with dozens of firearms and 10's of thousands rounds of ammo, with no hunting license. If I identify one I'll be whistle blowing and hopefully preventing ruining a lot of people's lives in the mean time.
As told to you before, there is nothing illegal with owning as many guns and as much ammo as you want. You are way out of line with this line of thought. Have you had yourself checked out by a mental health professional for your obvious irrational paranoia?
And I heard you before. I never said there was anything illegal about having as many guns and as much ammo as you want.
I'm just saying as a responsible person using my common sense, I'll be blowing the whistle if I ever recognize a lunatic on the edge with a small arsenal on hand.
So unless you're a lunatic with a small arsenal you have nothing to worry about.
It seems to me that you are inferring that anyone with more guns and ammo than you decide is proper is a lunatic.
Nope that assumption is dead wrong. I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does. Actually all of us could figure that out IMO.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.
You go ahead and defend the lunatics with dozens of firearms and 10's of thousands rounds of ammo, with no hunting license. If I identify one I'll be whistle blowing and hopefully preventing ruining a lot of people's lives in the mean time.
As told to you before, there is nothing illegal with owning as many guns and as much ammo as you want. You are way out of line with this line of thought. Have you had yourself checked out by a mental health professional for your obvious irrational paranoia?
And I heard you before. I never said there was anything illegal about having as many guns and as much ammo as you want.
I'm just saying as a responsible person using my common sense, I'll be blowing the whistle if I ever recognize a lunatic on the edge with a small arsenal on hand.
So unless you're a lunatic with a small arsenal you have nothing to worry about.
I disagree with you, but I do respect your point of view because I do think at the heart of it is a genuine concern. The problem is that what you are promoting is something purely subjective based. And things that are subjective based tend to have their rules changed at any given time depending on who's in power.
Who's in power never changes anything. I'll quote Smokey the Bear. "Only you can prevent forest fires." Meaning all of us. If I see smoke I'm dialing 911.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.
Nope that assumption is dead wrong. I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does. Actually all of us could figure that out IMO.
If you say his assumption is wrong then I will take your word for it... but from what you said earlier, I also made the assumption that just having a lot of guns and ammo was one of your criteria for determining if they are a lunatic.
Nope that assumption is dead wrong. I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does. Actually all of us could figure that out IMO.
If you say his assumption is wrong then I will take your word for it... but from what you said earlier, I also made the assumption that just having a lot of guns and ammo was one of your criteria for determining if they are a lunatic.
No, he is the new "Shadow".
Who knows what evil lurks in the heart and minds of men, The Shadow knows...
Nope that assumption is dead wrong. I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does. Actually all of us could figure that out IMO.
If you say his assumption is wrong then I will take your word for it... but from what you said earlier, I also made the assumption that just having a lot of guns and ammo was one of your criteria for determining if they are a lunatic.
His assumption is dead wrong. Once again I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.
Nope that assumption is dead wrong. I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does. Actually all of us could figure that out IMO.
If you say his assumption is wrong then I will take your word for it... but from what you said earlier, I also made the assumption that just having a lot of guns and ammo was one of your criteria for determining if they are a lunatic.
His assumption is dead wrong. Once again I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does.
Would it be fair to ask citizens about a reasonable number of guns to own through a petition or referendum?
Would it be fair to ask citizens about a reasonable number of guns to own through a petition or referendum?
Would it be fair to ask about a reasonable number of cars? I know a married couple who go to Dodge events and they have over 65 Vipers:
The problem with "reasonable" is that reasonable when it comes to assets is different for everyone. I own 4 guns. For some that is reasonable, for others that is way too many. I also own 2 cars and there are some people out there who consider that excessive, considering my wife and I both work from home. Yet it is my freedom to decide how I want to acquire and allocate resources.
The majority of car deaths are accidents and are rarely used to hold up liqueur stores (which may be an oversight for some car owners) and although an arsenal is also rarely used for liqueur looting I think there is a valid concern if your neighbor's garage is full of guns rather than cars.
Nope that assumption is dead wrong. I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does. Actually all of us could figure that out IMO.
If you say his assumption is wrong then I will take your word for it... but from what you said earlier, I also made the assumption that just having a lot of guns and ammo was one of your criteria for determining if they are a lunatic.
His assumption is dead wrong. Once again I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does.
Still wouldn't have stopped lanza in Sandy Hook. He was not the gun owner.
I don't really see where the number of guns a person owns is all that big of a deal. I know some shooters have managed to use 2, maybe even 3 guns in a mass shooting... but if you owned 8, 10, 20... you can't carry them all so what's the big deal?
Nope that assumption is dead wrong. I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does. Actually all of us could figure that out IMO.
If you say his assumption is wrong then I will take your word for it... but from what you said earlier, I also made the assumption that just having a lot of guns and ammo was one of your criteria for determining if they are a lunatic.
His assumption is dead wrong. Once again I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does.
Would it be fair to ask citizens about a reasonable number of guns to own through a petition or referendum?
No.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.
Nope that assumption is dead wrong. I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does. Actually all of us could figure that out IMO.
If you say his assumption is wrong then I will take your word for it... but from what you said earlier, I also made the assumption that just having a lot of guns and ammo was one of your criteria for determining if they are a lunatic.
His assumption is dead wrong. Once again I have a pretty good idea what a lunatic does and what a responsible law abiding gun owner does.
Still wouldn't have stopped lanza in Sandy Hook. He was not the gun owner.
It would have if his mother, father, family member or an acquaintance dropped a dime on him. Bet if they had the chance today they would call it in.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.
How many guns would you say I could own, and how much ammo can I own?
Are you a lunatic?
No, I'm not. Trust me, I'd know. So, I can own all I want, right?
It's hard to trust anyone I really don't know. Ask a friend , relative, next door neighbor, and a co-worker that exact question and let me know what they say.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.
How many guns would you say I could own, and how much ammo can I own?
Are you a lunatic?
No, I'm not. Trust me, I'd know. So, I can own all I want, right?
It's hard to trust anyone I really don't know. Ask a friend , relative, next door neighbor, and a co-worker that exact question and let me know what they say.
I asked myself, and I was pretty confident that I'm not a lunatic.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
How many guns would you say I could own, and how much ammo can I own?
Are you a lunatic?
No, I'm not. Trust me, I'd know. So, I can own all I want, right?
It's hard to trust anyone I really don't know. Ask a friend , relative, next door neighbor, and a co-worker that exact question and let me know what they say.
I asked myself, and I was pretty confident that I'm not a lunatic.
Read "Catch 22"
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.
lol, just a pocket full of pennies is good enough to stop a door from opening.
Yes, but a wedge that goes under the door is probably much quicker to deploy. Many people have developed quick deploying door stops that go over the hydraulic door closers.
Do you have numbers on how many school killings by knife and sword vs by guns?
How many people killed by gun violence vs knife in the US.
I don't think they can do as much damage and aren't used as much because of that fact. Especially in the US because it's so easy to get guns here. But I get that point. We'll never stop it completely. But we can make it damn hard for lunatics to get their hands on guns yet we just talk about it.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.
Do you have numbers on how many school killings by knife and sword vs by guns?
How many people killed by gun violence vs knife in the US.
I don't think they can do as much damage and aren't used as much because of that fact. Especially in the US because it's so easy to get guns here. But I get that point. We'll never stop it completely. But we can make it damn hard for lunatics to get their hands on guns yet we just talk about it.
No, I sure don't have those numbers. I'd assume the gun is the preferred weapon of choice in this country, as they are legal. Then again, even countries where guns aren't legal are subject to the same violence.
I found those examples in a 5 second search on the internet. My point is that people will find a way to kill if they have a mind to kill, no matter the choice of weapon. Banning guns is not the answer.
How many guns would you say I could own, and how much ammo can I own?
Are you a lunatic?
No, I'm not. Trust me, I'd know. So, I can own all I want, right?
It's hard to trust anyone I really don't know. Ask a friend , relative, next door neighbor, and a co-worker that exact question and let me know what they say.
I asked myself, and I was pretty confident that I'm not a lunatic.
Read "Catch 22"
I have.
Last edited by PrplPplEater; 10/06/1504:52 PM.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
The one thing that separates this story from others so depressingly similar to it, is the one thing I find most interesting about it:
I still don't know "the shooter's" name.
And I'm actually quite OK with it. Truth be told, I hope I never encounter it for as long as I live. My brain has already dedicated too many memory engrams to the likes of Timothy McVeigh, Osama Bin Laden, Charles Manson and John Hinckley Jr... and my soul has always suffered for it, in some small ways.
I'm no pollyanna, trust me. I know that a quick Google search could probably provide me with a name in about .015 seconds. That isn't the point. The point is: I get to choose whether I want this person's name in my 'organic database.'
I choose to not know... and I thank the Law Enforcement Official in charge of the press conference for giving me that choice. He gave me something I've never had before in instances like these. Speaking only for myself, I find that to be an important (and positive) thing. Something new to consider, in an altogether too familiar news theme.
I also like the fact that no major news outlet (that I know of) has succumbed to the urge to be the first to divulge this miscreant's name. It's almost as if they are all simultaneously engaging in a real-time experiment: "how much news can you deliver about this story without glorifying its villain?" They are working harder than I've seen them work in more than 30 years... and it piques my interest.
This is very different than what we've seen in the past 40-50 years.
Electronic Media has given these people 'instant fame' ever since Lee Harvey Oswald was taken into custody. An entire cult of Charles Manson sycophants is now 2 generations old. New "mass shooters" are on record saying that they were inspired to improve upon the 'kill numbers' of previous losers/attention-seekers that had made the headlines.
There's a piece of me that wonders: "How many fewer of these stories would we have, if the Dylann Roof's of this world were denied the publicity they so desperately sought?
_________________________
We've had this same conversation waaaaay too many times over the years. Every single time it happens (and it happens way too much foor a so-called 'civilized society'), there is a small slice of the thread dedicated to 'press coverage.' In every one of those threads, at least one of us floats out the idea that: "Maybe The Press shouldn't publicize the name/motivations of the shooter..." in every single one of those (altogether too frequent) threads, Dawgs from every political stripe have expressed support for that idea.
This is the very first time that we Dawgs get a chance to see how that 'first attempt' plays out. This aspect of the story actually intrigues me more than knowing the name of the shooter does...
...because it's the first time that we've actually focused on "the rest of us," instead of focusing on the asshat that did this to the rest of us.
______________________________
If there's even a chance that a nation-wide (mainstream) news policy like this one could diminish the number of 'copycat killers,' I'd be willing to try it on for size. I don't miss out on the important facts, I don't miss out on the breaking news item... I only miss out on the name of someone who wants me to know his name- for ALL THE WRONG REASONS.
You want me to know who you are/were?
Become Jonas Salk. Become Marie Curie. Become Martin Luther King, Jr. Become Leonardo DaVinci. Become Malala Yousephzai.
Maybe then, you can talk to me about why your name should be be retained in my memory engrams with the ones I've just listed.
Until then, you're no more important than I am... and I'm trying to make this world a better place in which to live.
![[Linked Image from s2.excoboard.com]](http://s2.excoboard.com/forums/25521/user/302752/484538.gif)
