Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Current Events  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 bigshrek
Joined: 11/15/2007
Msg: 251
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = GREAT Idea Page 10 of 13    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13)
The Death Penalty is ONLY a Deterent when used QUICKLY. All this farting around with limitless appeals has taken the bite out of it. Give 'em One Appeal, and then zap 'em.

Add the lack of enough police and you have a situation which can ONLY be handled by private citizens taking care of themselves.

Add the lack of Honor or Personal Responsibility to that and you have the giant clusterfoobar which we currently call our Nation. Few understand either Honor and fewer still understand what Personal Responsibility is.
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 252
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 12/5/2008 9:53:55 AM

I presume you are speaking from experience, as one of those people.


LOL!!! Nice try.

I am speaking from experience all right, as someone who actually talks to and listens to those people.

Try it some time, you might find it enlightening!
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 253
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = GREAT Idea
Posted: 12/5/2008 10:02:09 AM

The Death Penalty is ONLY a Deterent when used QUICKLY. All this farting around with limitless appeals has taken the bite out of it. Give 'em One Appeal, and then zap 'em.


Would you feel the same way if someone stole one of your guns, shot a cop in the back with it (no witnesses and no fingerprints), and they tried you for the murder because they needed to close the case and you were a suspect they knew they could convict?

I don't like criminals, but I'm not willing to forego my due process rights just because there are some bad people out there. I have the right to use a gun to protect myself. That should be plenty of deterrence.

I do agree that the concept of honor has not been emphasized nearly enough, but I find it hard to put much credibility in calls for personal responsibility from a movement whose rallying cry implies that guns aren't dangerous and therefore need not be restricted in any way. Where is the honor in that?
 tallskier
Joined: 5/20/2005
Msg: 254
view profile
History
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 12/5/2008 10:05:51 AM

I am speaking from experience all right, as someone who actually talks to and listens to those people.

Try it some time, you might find it enlightening!


Try not making foolish assumptions.
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 255
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 12/5/2008 11:25:33 AM
A suggestion is not an assumption, nor is a conclusion based on the evidence of your own words. You haven't listened to a thing I've said since you first took offense in the gun control thread.

Foolish? As foolish as insisting that guns aren't dangerous? Pulleeeese.

Grow the hell up. I said you could expect better of me, and you can. Can I expect better of you? The evidence so far indicates that I cannot.
 bigshrek
Joined: 11/15/2007
Msg: 256
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = GREAT Idea
Posted: 12/5/2008 11:25:47 AM
Someone would have a VERY hard time of stealing one of my guns. I live in a former Missle Silo, the security is better than average.
If someone were to be able to get past the security features and past the concrete door, they then would have to face two rather large and very well trained dogs. If they managed to get past the dogs, the second level security features then come into play...one of which is rather mean, but effective.
My wife-to-be is retired from the Marines...she keeps house, doesn't like it outside, so the burglars would then have to deal with Her. Even I don't want that kinda heat aimed in my direction
Then after that, there are the booby trapped safes. Alarms and hazardous. We're talking HOURS to crack...and by that time, I'll be back home...and I carry a Glock 20...thank God for CCW's.
If someone survived all that and managed to get one of my guns, I'd be bloody amazed. I'd also probably be dead and not have to worry about it.

What tbe people in the Movement are saying is that there are already ENOUGH laws on the books. Nothing more need be added. The Gun Show Loophole is no longer existant. What you are seeking has alreadybeen written. But unfortunatley no matter HOW many laws are written, criminals are still going to commit crimes. Until we start disposing of them in a more Permanent Manner, criminals will continue to flourish.
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 257
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = GREAT Idea
Posted: 12/5/2008 11:29:27 AM

What tbe people in the Movement are saying is that there are already ENOUGH laws on the books. Nothing more need be added. The Gun Show Loophole is no longer existant. What you are seeking has alreadybeen written. But unfortunatley no matter HOW many laws are written, criminals are still going to commit crimes. Until we start disposing of them in a more Permanent Manner, criminals will continue to flourish.


Yes, criminals will continue unless they are stopped by force. But just because you've got good security doesn't invalidate the example. I'm not willing to put _your_ due-process rights at risk because doing so would mean that a government could trump up charges against you and kill you before you could establish reasonable doubt. You'd be one of their first targets as an identified gun owner.

So no, I'm not going to put you at risk for that just because you favor both owning guns and a quick resolution to criminal proceedings.
 bigshrek
Joined: 11/15/2007
Msg: 258
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = GREAT Idea
Posted: 12/5/2008 6:27:54 PM
Being former military & a 21-year volunteer firefighter, I think I'd be on the bottom of the list for the gov't to "Trump up" any charges against me. Besides, there are already have enough headaches in LE with things that officers do not bother to deal with unless there are other factors involved. Care to take any bets on how many cops would fail to enforce any new GC laws unless there were additional specific criminal circumstances that were being pursued??

If there is no reason to bother someone, LE generally don't. On the other hand, if there is reasonable cause...that's another thing entirely. They check you out from stem to stern, and if you are dirty, they'll fry you...but if you are sparkly clean, they then leave you alone. I prefer to be sparkly clean. It saves on headaches.

For those who are law abiding citizens...few headaches occur. A lot of people write scary crap about Power Corrupting cops...that rarely ever happens. Mostly they're just annoyed because people do the most insanely STUPID things you've ever seen in your life. If you always act within the law, and you don't get mouthy, you are perfectly safe. Most people have enough common sense not to cuss out a cop during a traffic stop/other incidents...some don't. They get shafted, and justifiably so because only a total moron, pothead, or other type of crook would do such a thing.

If the squishy hits the fan in the US and the gun grabbers go bananas, one can always go seabound where one can have the benefits of going wherever they please...as long as your taxes are paid, no worries. That's what retirement is for ;) The Carribean is nice this time of year and I hear Aruba is looking for a few college grads with Criminal Justice Majors...gee...just so happens I have two degrees in CJ...go figure. Pays to have a background that can be useful anywhere.

Of course, LE are pretty much immune from having to deal with any silly federal laws like HR1022...ask any officer about the Glock that's totally unavailable to the public ;) But LE can get 'em :)

One also can always go pirate hunting for Hollowpoint or Blackwater. They just LOVE us middle-aged retired bastiches that like a good fight now & again. Especially 2-person teams that can fight well together. BOLO.

 tallskier
Joined: 5/20/2005
Msg: 259
view profile
History
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 12/7/2008 3:17:40 PM
AceOfSpace wrote:


Foolish? As foolish as insisting that guns aren't dangerous? Pulleeeese.


Who made such a claim?


Grow the hell up. I said you could expect better of me, and you can.


The please show me. Start by responding with something better than allegations of posts I have not made.
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 260
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 12/7/2008 7:12:50 PM

"Guns don't kill, people do.

If that is the best they can come up with, I believe my concerns about the vast majority of untrained gun owners just might have some basis."



It seems you have a hard time dealing with factual things, such as the bumper sticker you quoted.


This was, I believe, our first exchange over in the gun control thread. And while I think we both agree that banning guns is generally a bad idea, where you and I seem to be at odds is in what responsible gun ownership is about.

The bumper sticker presents more than just a simple fact. It presents an implication that the guns themselves are harmless. Anything that can eject a high-velocity projectile if dropped or mishandled is dangerous. And so, I take exception to that false implication and believe using slogans that contain embedded lies makes gun-ownership advocates appear irresponsible. I believe such slogans diminish their credibility and reduce their chances of keeping even more restrictive laws from being enacted. And so, I object to them. And it puzzles me as to why you would defend them.

So we might well disagree on tactics, but not on the ultimate goal, which is to keep the population safe from the eventuality of a hostile government.
 tallskier
Joined: 5/20/2005
Msg: 261
view profile
History
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 12/8/2008 10:05:27 AM

The bumper sticker presents more than just a simple fact. It presents an implication that the guns themselves are harmless.


No, you choose to interpret it as meaning that.

Guns don't kill people any more than automobiles do. In either case, it takes the involvement of a human being for someone to get killed. That doesn't make either of them harmless. No one (other than you) has claimed that makes them "harmless".
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 262
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 12/8/2008 10:19:55 AM
What other reasonable interpretation is there?

When it comes to implications vs. inferences, Occam's razor applies. That is, the inference that requires the fewest number of assumptions based on the facts at hand is the most plausible.

What does the slogan _mean?_ Why do people use it? What is the hoped-for response to hearing it?

The hoped-for response is that people will back off from trying to ban guns. My claim is simply that the slogan won't work for the reasons I've given.

If you choose to keep using it that is your choice. But I don't think that I am nearly alone as seeing it as venal. And the fact that the gun grabbers keep coming is evidence that it really isn't working all that well.

But hey, you've got the right to speek freely, and to use whatever slogans make you happy. If you like fighting with gun grabbers, have at it and good luck!
 bigshrek
Joined: 11/15/2007
Msg: 263
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 2/4/2009 7:20:33 AM
Well...depends on how you look at it.


People who argue for the banning of arms are really asking for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Not just strength and numbers, but also meanness. For most of history, humans have been ruled by those who were ruthless and nasty, who not only did not mind torturing people and cutting off their heads, but who enjoyed those activities. In Principles of Personal Defense, Jeff Cooper made the case that mental attitude, as much as strength and numbers, determines the outcome of a fight. Even if all other things (i.e., size and numbers) are equal, people who enjoy hurting others have an advantage over those who are peaceable. The gun not only puts the weak on equal footing with the strong, it puts the peaceable on equal footing with the brutish. - Mark A. Moritz
 tallskier
Joined: 5/20/2005
Msg: 264
view profile
History
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 2/9/2009 11:56:46 AM

When it comes to implications vs. inferences, Occam's razor applies. That is, the inference that requires the fewest number of assumptions based on the facts at hand is the most plausible.


The stop making assumptions. Stop making inferences. Read what is written, not what you choose to see there.

WHEN did a gun EVER kill anyone by itself?

It's really that simple, Ace, stop trying to complicate it.

Guns DON'T kill people, PEOPLE do.
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 265
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 4/4/2009 4:20:25 PM
Does a memo go out with the NRA newsletter?

I'm asking because every time there's a forum anywhere about gun control, somebody tells a story about how waving a gun around saved their own/ their mother's/their children's/ a girl scout troops'/ a covey of nuns' lives.

It may very well be true in your case. But the similarities in the stories makes me sceptical every time I see another one of these stories.

I, like most Canadians, live within a few miles of the border and have made many trips across the line. The wild west that gun advocates portray in their tales just doesn't jibe with my experiences.
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 266
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 4/6/2009 6:24:00 PM
IR,

You strike me as the sort of person who is responsible about carrying. I don't have a problem with believing your story or applauding you for protecting yourself. Good for you.

Just let me ask you this. Would you feel safer knowing that everyone else who is also carrying has been trained and is as responsible as you? Or, would you feel safer in the long run knowing that many/most of them might not be?
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 267
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 4/6/2009 6:32:24 PM

WHEN did a gun EVER kill anyone by itself?

It's really that simple, Ace, stop trying to complicate it.


It is not that simplistic. And if you don't know any better than that, you should.

Guns are lethal. That is the reason that they are made. It is also the reason why no one group should have a monopoly on access to them. And that, my friend, is the entire point of the 2nd Amendment. If they did not pose a POTENTIAL DANGER, we wouldn't need a 2nd Amendment.

Guns in untrained/irresponsible hands do kill innocents. That's the bottom line.

Can you honestly deny the truth in my statement? Honestly?

If not, then your lovely little slogan is a sweet-sounding lie. Isn't it?
 neopol
Joined: 9/26/2006
Msg: 268
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 4/7/2009 7:48:51 AM

Just let me ask you this. Would you feel safer knowing that everyone else who is also carrying has been trained and is as responsible as you? Or, would you feel safer in the long run knowing that many/most of them might not be?


Let me answer this one.

1. YES. Everyone LEGALLY carrying a firearm is trained. Its much the same training that a 16 year old, and you, had when you got your drivers liscense. It costs money, & you must pass the course . Personal skills may be questionable, but the deterrent effect is NOT. Even with questionable skills, a LEGAL carrier needs only to brandish said firearm to deter a potential criminal attack or violation. 4 out of 5 times that is all that's needed.The firearm need not even be fired. Ask Grandma about that one.


2. YES. Everyone ILLEGALLY carrying a firearm is just that - ILLEGAL. That is more than enough justification alone for those LEGALLY carrying a firearm, for many obvious reasons.

Somehow you think that we aquire our liscense, then commence waving firearms around, firing them wildly & irresponsibly once we enter public buildings. You are confusing us with criminals who carry ILLEGALLY . Legal status & required training are what makes the 2 different groups totally different from eachother.
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 269
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 4/7/2009 11:49:46 AM

Somehow you think that we aquire our liscense, then commence waving firearms around, firing them wildly & irresponsibly once we enter public buildings. You are confusing us with criminals who carry ILLEGALLY . Legal status & required training are what makes the 2 different groups totally different from eachother.


Exactly. I think that people who are licensed to carry are LICENSED TO CARRY. They have passed their training and can be assumed to be safe and responsible. I am not worried about them.

The ones who worry me are the people who buy themselves a gun for "self protection" and never bother to get any credible training. They can't use their guns effectively, and if they don't store them properly, the guns can wind up in the wrong hands. Unlike a gun in the hands of a trained and responsible adult, those guns are disasters waiting to happen.
 neopol
Joined: 9/26/2006
Msg: 270
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 4/7/2009 2:27:14 PM

The ones who worry me are the people who buy themselves a gun for "self protection" and never bother to get any credible training. They can't use their guns effectively, and if they don't store them properly, the guns can wind up in the wrong hands. Unlike a gun in the hands of a trained and responsible adult, those guns are disasters waiting to happen.


But you are comparing 2 different groups of gun owners. The training & license is required to CONCEAL CARRY in PUBLIC. Buying a gun for home defense/self protection has nothing to do with that. That is a PRIVATE individual right as described by the 2nd amendment. It seems everyone forgets about that. Hmmm.


Its no different than owning a car. You may buy all the cars you want, drive them freely on your own property, speed, drive wrecklessly, run over your own livestock, flip them over, crash them into eachother, etc. But if you drive them on PUBLIC domain, you must be trained & licensed & obey public law.

This whole thread is about conceal/carry laws. Legally permitted individuals have the training to carry, & they do. It seems the only ones who think it is a terrible idea are those who are anti-gun, & those who are criminals who prey on unarmed people.
 bigshrek
Joined: 11/15/2007
Msg: 271
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 4/8/2009 10:27:27 AM
Cars are lethal. That is the reason they are completely over-horsepowered and made of steel instead of being covered in Nerf. If they didn't pose a Potential Danger, we wouldn't need drivers licenses.

Cars in irresponsible hands kill hundreds of thousands MORE than guns ever will in the US...but we sure can't seem to even get more regular testing done on those over 65...can we? And they're one of the three most high accident causing groups. Followed quickly by teenage males and black women. Going to regulate ANY of those other than by higher insurance costs?? Unlikely.

A gun poses no more threat than a car...both will kill you in an instant...it's just LESS likely that you'll ever be killed by a gun.
 bigshrek
Joined: 11/15/2007
Msg: 272
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 4/8/2009 4:15:43 PM
Must not have been that extensive a background check...mental problems, kicked out of Boot Camp...purchasing large amounts of firearms...etc...

Plenty of warning signs there.

I put it on the State who should have been paying attention...IF they had enough cops to do so, which they obviously do NOT.

First off, any mope who gets kicked out of Boot Camp is a lost cause anyway. You have to be one of the world's biggest screwups to get booted out of Boot. That's called a HINT. Why nobody paid attention, is beyond me.

Pennsylvania doesn't have half the police force it needs...most people would say that they don't have a fifth, truly, of what is needed. When it really counts, as was seen in the legal alien shooting by a madman who should have never been issued a permit for a firearm...police are just HOURS away from entering a building with an active shooter. You darned well better save yourself, because the yankee cops are going to LET YOU DIE!

But by our governments FAILURE to commit to nation-wide health care which INCLUDES Mental Health care and RESTRICTIONS & REPORTING for those mental care providers to report and RESTRAIN people who have mental problems...we will see more of the same, over and over again. And honestly, guns have relatively little to do with it other than a means to an end. Would you prefer the psychos went about tearing up subway tracks with a crowbar, then standing in front of the train to suicide while they kill others?

Blame the mismanaged health care system that leaves mental patients out of the loop. They're the REAL culprit.

Blame the do-nothing Congress who have continually allowed restrictions against the mentally ill to be DISCONTINUED. Blame them for not putting any teeth in the Baker Act...you can COMMIT anyone...they just don't have to stay if they don't want to...what the heck good is that??

Example: the lunatic mother who just today killed her son and then killed herself after renting a gun at a gun range in Casselberry, Florida. She'd been Baker'd and the LET GO because the hospital CANNOT keep Mental Patients against their will!!! If they do, they get charged with KIDNAPPING!! Screwed up laws, eh? Even worse, there is NO background check required for rentals...only your drivers license is required...they don't even do a local check for writs & warrants unless you look like a thug. And even if they DID require a background check...it STILL wouldn't include information from hospitals/mental care facilites due to Patient Confidentiality Laws. Thank Congress' HIPPA Laws for that!

You want to solve nutcases going around and killing people, LOCK THEM UP!!

otherwise, you are wasting EVERYONE'S TIME with BS laws that still DO NOT WORK because they DO NOT ADDRESS the PROBLEM!! Even the 65 Pro-Gun Democrats who recently wrote a letter to Obama saying that they wouldn't agree to pass the AWB again because IT HAD ZERO EFFECT THE LAST TIME!! It was a 'feel-good" piece of junk legislation that FOCUSED itself on a .22 rifle called the Ruger 10/22...and lets be honest shall we?? When was the last time you heard of a madman killer using a .22 rifle with a 30-shot magazine that Boy Scouts use to get their Merit Badges with???

Nutcases are Nutcases and they need to be locked up...it's the same dang fools who said that criminals need to be rehabilitated and not punished that are pulling the same stupid stuff with anti-gun laws which really only affect those willing to follow the laws...those criminals who do NOT follow the laws now aren't going to change their ways just because yet another dumb-arse law is written.

 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 273
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 4/8/2009 6:19:44 PM

But you are comparing 2 different groups of gun owners.


I'm not so sure about that. Certainly CCL owners are a subset of gun owners, but I don't see their motivations for owning guns as necessarily or substantially different from owners who keep them at home. What makes them different is, for one thing, their willingness to be responsible and accountable for the privilege of carrying.


That is a PRIVATE individual right as described by the 2nd amendment. It seems everyone forgets about that. Hmmm.


As with every other right, there are limits. The freedom of one person to exercise the right ends when it endangers the rights of another. It is not an infringement of a right to hold people accountable or to require that they meet some sort of prerequisite. For example, everyone has the right to vote, but not before they attain an age at which they are presumed to be responsible.

Leaving a gun lying around for some untrained person to find, take, and use, amounts to criminal negligence. Whether it is on my property or not, it needs to be secured or supervised at all times. As private gun ownership is a right, we as citizens are entitled to know how to exercise it safely and effectively--just like our right to vote. That is why I favor universal training in school.

If I flip my car on my own property and die, but don't kill any innocent bystanders, that might well be tragic (or not, depending on your POV). However, the minute I put other people at risk, even on my own property, I become liable--and rightly so.

We require people to be licensed to drive cars on the public streets even though they have a right to own them. If negligent storage of guns and ignorance of the rules for legal discharge puts innocents at risk, those innocents have a right to petition the government for protection. Freedom of speech doesn't mean you can yell FIRE in a crowded theater.

If too many people are being killed by negligent operation of cars, then we either have the political will to make the cars and driving regulations safer, or we don't. But if we don't, that doesn't mean we have no right to reduce other threats if the political will is there.

Still, the best argument against restrictive gun laws is the reduced crime and gun-related death stats in will-issue jurisdictions. My guess is that the reduction comes from the increased proportion of owners who are trained in their safe storage and legal use.
 tallskier
Joined: 5/20/2005
Msg: 274
view profile
History
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 4/30/2009 12:23:03 PM

If too many people are being killed by negligent operation of cars, then we either have the political will to make the cars and driving regulations safer, or we don't. But if we don't, that doesn't mean we have no right to reduce other threats if the political will is there.


Well, since automobile deaths outnumber firearms deaths by about 3 to 1, perhaps you should focus on that!
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 275
Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 5/1/2009 12:41:43 AM

Cars in irresponsible hands kill hundreds of thousands MORE than guns ever will in the US...but we sure can't seem to even get more regular testing done on those over 65...can we? And they're one of the three most high accident causing groups. Followed quickly by teenage males and black women. Going to regulate ANY of those other than by higher insurance costs?? Unlikely.


Actually, in California and other states teenagers under 18 now get provisional driver's licenses that restrict what they can do. No night driving without adult supervision. No multiple kids in unsupervised cars. Etc.

If the AARP is still fighting more frequent driver's tests for older drivers, they should knock it off. It doesn't do an older person much good to get into a crash.

What kind of insurance should we require for gun owners? In California, you can't drive legally without insurance.
Show ALL Forums  > Current Events  >