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  > Politics  > Gun Control      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 TimPommell
Joined: 1/13/2005
Msg: 326
view profile
History
Re: Gun ControlPage 14 of 50    (10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50)

One small movement, and that is all the investment and effort you need. Either by accident, or design, that simple fact makes firearms a MUCH greater danger.

Again, the logic escapes me ... you make it sound as though everyone in the US has a loaded weapon on their coffee table, and is simply waiting for someone to shoot. My guns have never attempted to injure anyone in the 30+ years I've owned them and kept them right with me here in the house or in my vehicle, responsible gun owners are the rule, not the exception.
As for the logic that bludgeoning someone to death is somehow more intimate and therefore less appealing to a potential murderer than shooting them is absurd... Refer back to the first muder weapon used in the history of mankind ... violent crimes that occur in the heat of passion occur with whatever weapon is handy, be it a lamp, fireplace poker, trophy, or ashtray.
It's easier to steal stuff than it is to work and pay for it, but we don't take issue with the personal accountability related to theft, only the already illegal use of firearms ... simply mind boggling.
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 327
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/27/2005 7:09:41 AM


An "ex" who is stalking a woman, should have all of his gun privileges revoked because
2) this registered gun owner is now obviously posing, "a threat to public safety".


What makes you think the stalker, who is already breaking the law by being a stalker, cares whether his possession of a gun is legal or not? Furthermore, in order to revoke his gun rights he'd have to be conviced of a felony first. A gun, if she knows how to use it, would increase her chances of survival.



And btw., your prisons are presently holding many women who have been found guilty and
sentenced for killing abusive husbands even though the abuse was documented.


I never said our Court system made any sense. But at least they're still alive.



Would you care to elaborate [on the SC decision that police are not responsible for our safety]?


The case is Castle Rock v.s. Gonzales. Here's a link to the decision if you want to read the ugly details.

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/27jun20051200/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-278.pdf

In this case a woman had a restraining order against her husband. While she was gone from the house he abducted their children and later phoned his wife and told her that he had the kids. All this was in clear violation of the restraining order. She repeatedly phoned the police and informed them about what happened but they blew her off. Eventually the husband walked into the police station and opened fire and was killed. In his truck they found the bodies of the children. Gonzales then sued the city (and 3 police officers, but they were given qualified immunity) for not enforcing the restraining order (and in fact not even attempting to). Eventually the case went to the Supreme Court which overwhelmingly voted in favor of the city.



The gun related deaths would be considered, "negligible" , to anyone who has no
respect for life and the health and safety of their fellow citizens.


You're an intelligent woman so why can't you understand plain English? I did not say the deaths were negligible, I said the percentages (which you brought up) were negligible. You seemed to think the percentages were more important than the numbers of people who die from guns and cars. If the people who died from guns are important then why aren't the (more) people who die from cars important? If they are important why don't we ban cars? Certainly we'd save thousands of lives each year.
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 328
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/27/2005 7:14:24 AM


He is, presently, doing 'life' in prison because police did eventually get him, for later murdering another young guy, with an illegal firearm, ... i'd heard, over some ridiculously small debt.


Obviously since he used an illegal firearm he didn't much care what gun laws you people have up there. Do you think your friend or this young guy would still be alive if he had used a legal hammer instead of an illegal firearm?
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 329
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/27/2005 7:20:08 AM


Killing someone with a knife or a rock or a baseball bat takes a little effort, and gets rather messy. A gun allows you to eliminate someone in much the same way you flip a switch. You can even be a good distance away, with the right set-up.


You can kill someone from far away with a knife, rock, or (admittedly less likely) baseball bat too. Even if you don't kill them right away you can incapacitate them or slow them down.
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 330
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/27/2005 9:56:03 PM
timpommell



timpommell
" If you can't understand the principals of evolution on society, perhaps you should limit the amount of logic that you obtain from 10 year olds, clearly they aren't able to see the big picture. "






( ~lola, "Outlaw "fast-food " ? ... Prohibit "alcohol " ? ... along with guns ?
here's another one of those, ... real odd, comparisons again. )

" Why is it so odd, all deal with penalizing the masses because a select few shouldn't be provided with the implements that some how, by your take, encourage them to act irresponsibly.
Early deaths related to obesity and alcohol abuse far exceed those caused by the illegal use of firearms. Not to mention the financial impact it has on health care that ALL of us have to share in. Since your goal is to remove elements that allow people to act irresponsibly, they are logical "next steps"."


... "my take", is not that the availability of guns encourage people to act irresponsibly.
... "my take", is that the unfettered availablity of guns to all, or most people will increase
the probability that, this highly lethal weapon, will be used by the inevitable number of
irresponsible people.
... And the social cost to the Majority of non-gun owning citizens doesn't warrant
the benefit ..... to the Minority of priveleged gun owning citizens.

In regard, to the social impact of obesity levels and alcohol abuse versus that resulting
from the widespread availability of firearms. It may be a good time to point out that
all societies regulate behavior towards others, while behaviors toward's oneself is always
comparitively less regulated. And for good reason.
As well, the social costs, financially, resulting from a prevalence of obesity and
alcohol abuse, ... in terms of impact, are relatively minor in comparison to the cost of
life, health and security that results from the availabilty of firearms.

I fear i have given you an impression that i am inflexible. ... So, just to prove to you
i'm not. i'd be willing to contemplate all of your plentiful expert
suggestions, ... as a gun owner, concerning ways to garantee that in future,
No guns wind up in the hands of the stupid, the irresponsible or the criminal
members of society.


" As for the logic that bludgeoning someone to death is somehow more intimate and therefore less appealing to a potential murderer than shooting them is absurd... "


You're right, to some, bludgeoning would be, ... even ... more appealing.
I think the point is more about the ease with which one accomplishes their objective.





"... any criminal who used a gun recieved an automatic 25 years sentence in addition to the sentence they would receive had they not used a gun. "


Yeah ! i like it, ... i like it alot ! But in terms of deterrence ?

Problem 1) The one thing that most of these clowns share is almost a unanimous belief
that they will Never get caught.

2) This increases the temptation to blow away any witnesses.

3) Or just Shoot their way out of any situation gone bad.





" If someone wants to take a life badly enough, they will do so with whatever means is available, whether the weapon is an AK47 or a Q-tip."


i'll take my chances with the Q-tips.



" There's even a story in there about a mass murderer using the jaw bone of an ass... "



i'll bet it was a reeeaal ass, who did that.


p.s. tell that kid to keep the dog away from his homework.


p.p.s Thanks Gary
 bcboy72
Joined: 3/16/2005
Msg: 331
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/27/2005 10:20:13 PM
Ok...I don't have the time to read through all of this...but I will tell you one thing...and you can hate me for it...I don't mind...

You will pry (from me) my guns from my cold dead fingers.


Just my opinion, that I am hopefully still allowed to have.

-edit...because I still have a couple of minutes..

I own rifles, I use them all for hunting/trapping purposes...none are ever loaded unless they are in my hands..they are locked, so are the bullets..if people would just be a bit more responsible, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 332
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/27/2005 11:21:18 PM
CountIbli



" What makes you think the stalker, who is already breaking the law by being a stalker, cares whether his possession of a gun is legal or not? "


Never said he did. I did say that any evidence of stalking should lead to the removal
of any registered guns. Stalking Is a crime where you live, right?




" Furthermore, in order to revoke his gun rights he'd have to be convicted of a felony first."


Well that's just a penny short and a day late,
... when restraining orders don't have to follow the conviction of a felony.




( ~ lola ...prisons are presently holding many women who have been found guilty and
sentenced for killing abusive husbands even though the abuse was documented.)

> " I never said our Court system made any sense. But at least they're still alive."


I'd rather be in a shelter.



" I did not say the deaths were negligible, I said the percentages (which you brought up) were negligible. "


And i disagree.




" If the people who died from guns are important then why aren't the (more) people who die from cars important? If they are important why don't we ban cars? Certainly we'd save thousands of lives each year. "


I've already explained this to you in a previous post. Try having another look because
i don't think i can explain it more simply than i already have.



" Obviously since he used an illegal firearm he didn't much care what gun laws you people have up there."


~ Ya think ? ... Mind you, murdering someone with it was a bit of a tip-off ...too.



" Do you think your friend or this young guy would still be alive if he had used a legal hammer instead of an illegal firearm? "


Can't comment on the young guy given that i don't know the details. As for my friend ?
... i think taking her life, by chasing her moving car through a tunnel,
with a hammer, would ... have been more challenging.

p.s thanks for the link.
i have already stated my opinion on restraining orders. => (paper)
They can't save anyone.
They have value as a potential deterrence and as a tool for prosecution.
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 333
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/27/2005 11:46:11 PM
hi Beach, sure.
(... a nice moderator shared them with me,
he'd probably laugh that someone has started asking me for tips )





POF tags

quote, italic, bold, and underline(only in edit) are the only tags available to members.
Please do not use any other tags, they are reserved for Admin and mods.

(quote) stuff you want to quote(/quote) " replacing ( ) with [ ]

( b )bold( /b ) no spaces
( i )italic( /i ) "

replace ( ) with [ ]

(u) underline (/u) ... "underline", must be added "in edit", after posting, with "< >" replacing ( )




<=== off to sleep

Edit : some of the tags didn't work here. I'm trying something, if it doesn't work i'll email you.
It worked ! :)
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 334
view profile
History
Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 5:26:56 PM
thankyou evanism , for your contribution of 1 informative post,
however redundant, ... as this clarification had been made 3 or 4 posts back.
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 335
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 5:36:55 PM
Pariah666



" If a parent lacks the intellect to keep a loaded firearm out of the reach of a child, then the child who gets possession of the weapon and kills themselves with it is likely just as lacking and therefore warrants removal from the gene pool. "


And if your lil boy was shot by that lil boy instead, would you concede that he was, "just as lacking and therefore warrants removal from the gene pool " given poor judgement in choice of friends ?




" If you're suicidal, and simply having a gun around would have made you kill yourself, then once again natural selection applies. "


If that suicidal guy is your brother, perhaps, sharing the natural selection theory at his eulogy would help clarify the situation for everybody.



" Perhaps if someone who WAS a law abiding citizen was armed at the time that this terrible crime happened, they would have been able to respond properly and likely saved lives. "


Tip: ... try reading details before you comment. ( <== )
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 336
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 5:44:55 PM
bcboy72



" You will pry (from me) my guns from my cold dead fingers."


Such Drama. (sigh) ~ lemme know when you've parted the Dead Sea though, k , cus ... That (!) ... Will, impress me !

For now, i am sufficiently impressed by your responsible gun ownership.
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 337
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 6:00:05 PM
awww... nursie, don't take it out on lola, just because she has a (yes, I DARE say it) an opinion.
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 338
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 6:00:34 PM
Flamin ! .... Absolutely flamin !!


<------ runs for marshmallows !
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 339
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 6:01:40 PM
I'll bring the graham and the hershey's, and I'll share if you do!
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 340
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 6:09:36 PM
uh, ... k, all this, trying to save lives stuff is fine, but i wanna have some fun too !!



" hershey's " mmmmmmm !
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 341
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 6:37:47 PM
(You ARE familiar with s'mores, aren't you?!!!)
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 342
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 7:03:30 PM

evanism
" Do your part to stimulate the economy. Buy more guns, cigarettes and booze. "


Yeah, ... luuuuv that combination ! .... ( Not ! )

... the economy ?
Well damn, if that isn't actually 2 posts in a row with some factual content !
You, ... Are ... on a roll !!! ... Don't stop now !

 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 343
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 7:11:24 PM
Nittany, " s'mores " ??? .... NO ! (*cries*) ---> Canada

Can meet cha at the Vermont border though !


( And ta ... All smugglers ! ) -------> More S'mores, ... Less Guns !!!



nursie ? uhmmm .... good luck with that .... uhmmmm "itch" (profile)
And welcome to the Forums !
That was one hell of a ... Sensational ! ... 1st post. ;)
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 344
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 7:26:54 PM
Just say not to guns; just say yes to s'mores! (the recipe is in your inbox, lola!)
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 345
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 7:32:51 PM
Who knew nursies could be that aggressive ? I am not sure if I can abide with armed people being that hostile. Maybe it's just her way of ensuring her job security.

On a side note - try Nanimo bars. If you are lucky enough to know of a Dutch store in your area ( we have one in old Pointe Claire village in Montreal, called Euro Plus Cafe) try stroopwafels. They are , quite simply, to die for - especially when first laid over a steaming cup of hot coffee. You should also try Dutch drop, a salty licorice.

What the above has to do with firearms ?

Absolutely nothing.....
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 346
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 7:40:08 PM
Let's start a guns for chocolate program.
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 347
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 7:44:53 PM
OR...pass a new law requiring that all fireams for domestic use must be MADE out of chocolate.
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 348
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 7:46:17 PM

Montreal Guy
" Who knew nursies could be that aggressive ? "


... thinkin it might have somethin to do with that "itch" .

~ " stroopwafels " ? ... " Dutch drop " ? ... Pointe Claire Village.

(takin notes) offers MG a


errrrr ... On Topic. -----> Guns are bad ! Chocolate guns are .... Greeeaat !
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 349
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 7:51:13 PM
I think halftimedad is onto something!!!
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 350
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/28/2005 7:58:49 PM
L-o-l-a LOLA !



Thanks, I needed that.

Here it is :
http://www.helloneighbour.com/partner/020500A

Remember...no firearms allowed.
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > Gun Control