Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 142
  1. #121  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    Actually 1911 proves just how well the NRA rhetoric works to get money flowing to those politicians that will protect their right to bear arms. With over 260MM guns in this country it would be impossible to collect them all -yet to listen to the NRA with their "from my cold, dead hands" hyperbole you'd think the Dems are going to come looking for your guns door-to-door.

    So I don't advocate a banning of all guns simply because we're too far gone. We can and should act as democracy whereby we find a way to compromise for the betterment of society and in that regard both political parties and those extremist that support them have failed miserably.

    The net of it, EFFECTIVE gun control - not diluted by the NRA so that they can come back years later and claim gun laws don't work (how can they when they spend millions making sure they don't?) is possible in this country if rational people are willing to find common ground. Judging by this thread we have a long way to go....
    What compromise do you propose for the "betterment of society"? You see, every time I hear the word "compromise" it means that my rights get eroded. Let's hear your commonsense approach.
  2. #122  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    Do you? Do you really view it with suspicion? Or are you only suspicious when it suits you? http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...d.php?t=122312

    So let me get this straight - you're suspicious of our government (as well you should be) and want to own firearms to defend yourself against them and/or overthrow them if need be BUT it's OK if they illegally spy on you with warrantless surveillance?

    Why can they be trusted to spy on us without warrants (which the FBI just proved why the government cannot be trusted with warrantless powers) yet you don't trust that they will let them keep your guns? Or has it occured to you they might be spying on you because you own guns....oohhh...the plot thickens.
    The plot gets even thicker since I work in that world

    I judge the threat of being chemed/bioed/rad bombed by Islamo terrorists higher than the threat of the government. For now.
  3.    #123  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever View Post
    The plot gets even thicker since I work in that world

    I judge the threat of being chemed/bioed/rad bombed by Islamo terrorists higher than the threat of the government. For now.
    I thought they were Islamo facist? Guess I'm falling behind on the ever changing vernacular of FUD by the Bushies.

    In any event, I respect that you recognize the irony in your positions and respect your duty to your nation even more.
  4.    #124  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever View Post
    What compromise do you propose for the "betterment of society"? You see, every time I hear the word "compromise" it means that my rights get eroded. Let's hear your commonsense approach.
    I think I'll let your contradictory viewpoints speak for themselves.
  5. #125  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    I'm suggesting that not having a gun makes it much harder for a person with issues to become a mass murderer.
    And not having a p-nis makes it much harder to be a ******. You cutting yours off?
    If you have a couple dozen people who are depressed and hate society, would you expect that they would be mass murderers? Probably not. The barriers to entry in the mass murder business are high.
    Not particularly. Motivation is the biggest factor.
    Now how about if you give each of them a gun and ammunition?
    That would be stupid. Make them buy one on the black market like everyone else.
    Well, then it's no longer so difficult to imagine a couple of them doing something dangerous.
    Well, sure. Why not give them a campaign advisor? Well, then it's no longer so difficult to imagine a couple of them running for political office.

    But seriously, access alone means nothing. There is no 'magic bullet' where one quick law or act can fix all these ills. There's actually a fairly interesting article in this week's Newsweek that explores the subject and other things that make this sort of thing more likely to happen in the US.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  6. #126  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny
    So I don't advocate a banning of all guns simply because we're too far gone. We can and should act as democracy whereby we find a way to compromise for the betterment of society and in that regard both political parties and those extremist that support them have failed miserably.
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever View Post
    What compromise do you propose for the "betterment of society"? Let's hear your commonsense approach.
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    I think I'll let your contradictory viewpoints speak for themselves.
    Actually I was interested in your answer to this question. Would you be willing to answer it? I see the issues you have concerns about and would like to know how you feel we should address it realistically.
  7. #127  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Actually I was interested in your answer to this question. Would you be willing to answer it? I see the issues you have concerns about and would like to know how you feel we should address it realistically.
    Not posted to me, but I've always thought a system like driver's licenses could be implemented.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  8. #128  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Actually I was interested in your answer to this question. Would you be willing to answer it? I see the issues you have concerns about and would like to know how you feel we should address it realistically.
    Good luck


    Nay sayers are always "against" never "for". Its far easier to complain than to risk failure.
  9. #129  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    And not having a p-nis makes it much harder to be a ******.
    So you agree that not having a gun makes it harder for a nut to commit mass murder. That's all you had to say.
  10.    #130  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg View Post
    Good luck


    Nay sayers are always "against" never "for". Its far easier to complain than to risk failure.
    Not sure who you're talking about but I know it's not me. Or was that witty retort of yours aimed at someone else?

    As to the answer, or rather my list of ideas to be considered (meaning it would be interesting if others had ideas too rather than sitting back criticizing):

    - Re-evaluate existing gun laws. There are too many (state by state variances aside) and they are nearly as bad as the tax code due to extreme pressures by left and right. The net is a pile of confusing and in some cases, weakened laws.

    - Remove the NRA and the "ban all guns" groups from the discussion. Remove the extremes again to rationalize the problem before us without paid-for-PAC-lobby money.

    - I think proof of who you are and stronger background checks are something to look at again.

    - Since the government already restricts the spirit of the 2nd ammendment by restricting us from buying military grade weapons then we may as well be consistent. All assault and paramilitary weapons should be banned unless sold to a certified collector or dealer that takes classes and goes through an extensive background check (trying to find some middle ground here).

    - Teach gun safety in schools. Not just "turn around and run" but maybe they ought to be taught the basics of what they are and how to safely handle them so they do not go off. Sounds crazy but if kids are shown the wounds that guns cause, the damage to families left behind coupled with a safety course on weapons it may help curb accidental deaths. So again, I'd only support that if it were part of a "scared straight" program. With 260MM guns in this crazy country it is safe to assume kids will see one sooner or later.

    - Consider further background and/or psycho tests if there is the slightest misdemeanor in a buyers background. We use more stringent psycho testing for new job applicants at some companies than we do to buy guns.

    Now to more radical ideas...probably none that haven't been proposed before. You know like limiting the number of guns allowed in one household. Biometrics on the triggers. Or how about forcing the gun industry to run ads about gun safety like tobacco has to run about the dangers of smoking?

    These are a few ideas off the top of my head. Now lets see how many are more interesting in shredding them rather than trying to work with them or go out on a limb like I did and offer new ideas.
  11. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #131  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever View Post
    The plot gets even thicker since I work in that world

    I judge the threat of being chemed/bioed/rad bombed by Islamo terrorists higher than the threat of the government. For now.
    I'm much more concerned about domestic enemies - in - drag.
  12. #132  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    - Re-evaluate existing gun laws. There are too many (state by state variances aside) and they are nearly as bad as the tax code due to extreme pressures by left and right. The net is a pile of confusing and in some cases, weakened laws.
    Are you then for a fed gun law, taking away the power from the states? Or a fed minimum procedure with the freedom of states to do more? If so what would be the minimum that each state would have to do?

    - Remove the NRA and the "ban all guns" groups from the discussion. Remove the extremes again to rationalize the problem before us without paid-for-PAC-lobby money.
    I think lobby money is a cancer in our government and society.....but that is another thread.

    - I think proof of who you are and stronger background checks are something to look at again.
    I fully agree. Also for reasons like proof of identity is why I even think showing valid and verifiable proof of who you are and citizenship to get a drivers license is a must as well.

    - Since the government already restricts the spirit of the 2nd amendment by restricting us from buying military grade weapons then we may as well be consistent. All assault and paramilitary weapons should be banned unless sold to a certified collector or dealer that takes classes and goes through an extensive background check (trying to find some middle ground here).
    The devil is in the details. But as a whole I generally do not have much of an argument with restricting military grade assault weapons with perimeters (not banning). Again the details would be what is an assault rifle, ect... I have seen it where some have tried to classify any gun with a scope as an assault rife and so it must be banned.

    - Teach gun safety in schools. Not just "turn around and run" but maybe they ought to be taught the basics of what they are and how to safely handle them so they do not go off. Sounds crazy but if kids are shown the wounds that guns cause, the damage to families left behind coupled with a safety course on weapons it may help curb accidental deaths. So again, I'd only support that if it were part of a "scared straight" program. With 260MM guns in this crazy country it is safe to assume kids will see one sooner or later.
    This would certainly have political barriers to go around in order to teach it in schools. Again the devil is in the details, but this is an idea I would certainly be interested in seeing what would actually be developed. Would it be a nation curriculum? I used to teach At Risk kids. I have to say that there is a percentage that just never stopped an thought about the reality of their actions and how it effects not only their victims but them as well when they see the effects of their actions....after they already did it and it is too late.

    - Consider further background and/or psycho tests if there is the slightest misdemeanor in a buyers background. We use more stringent psycho testing for new job applicants at some companies than we do to buy guns.
    Especially if they have any criminal record, or sever mental history I would fully agree.

    Now to more radical ideas...probably none that haven't been proposed before. You know like limiting the number of guns allowed in one household.
    I do not like this idea. For example when I use to hunt, I had 2 blackpowder rifles, shotgun, .306, a 22 rifle and pistol, along with a 9mm. 7 guns for even a casual hunter is not unusual.

    Biometrics on the triggers.
    Interesting, but I want my son, wife, my dad, and my hunting partner to be able use my gun too.

    I think that there needs to be more regulations on the security of storing guns. I have also seen proposals for more accountability for the owner of a gun if they have not taken those safety storage precautions that created an opportunity that lead to a tragic situation. But again....the details.

    Or how about forcing the gun industry to run ads about gun safety like tobacco has to run about the dangers of smoking?
    Since I feel it is the lack of responsibility and accountability that is often times more at issue than the means used, I would be interested in this. Heck, I think it would go a long way for a positive political image if they did this on their own.
  13.    #133  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Are you then for a fed gun law, taking away the power from the states? Or a fed minimum procedure with the freedom of states to do more? If so what would be the minimum that each state would have to do?

    I think lobby money is a cancer in our government and society.....but that is another thread.

    I fully agree. Also for reasons like proof of identity is why I even think showing valid and verifiable proof of who you are and citizenship to get a drivers license is a must as well.

    The devil is in the details. But as a whole I generally do not have much of an argument with restricting military grade assault weapons with perimeters (not banning). Again the details would be what is an assault rifle, ect... I have seen it where some have tried to classify any gun with a scope as an assault rife and so it must be banned.

    This would certainly have political barriers to go around in order to teach it in schools. Again the devil is in the details, but this is an idea I would certainly be interested in seeing what would actually be developed. Would it be a nation curriculum? I used to teach At Risk kids. I have to say that there is a percentage that just never stopped an thought about the reality of their actions and how it effects not only their victims but them as well when they see the effects of their actions....after they already did it and it is too late.

    Especially if they have any criminal record, or sever mental history I would fully agree.

    I do not like this idea. For example when I use to hunt, I had 2 blackpowder rifles, shotgun, .306, a 22 rifle and pistol, along with a 9mm. 7 guns for even a casual hunter is not unusual.

    Interesting, but I want my son, wife, my dad, and my hunting partner to be able use my gun too.

    I think that there needs to be more regulations on the security of storing guns. I have also seen proposals for more accountability for the owner of a gun if they have not taken those safety storage precautions that created an opportunity that lead to a tragic situation. But again....the details.

    Since I feel it is the lack of responsibility and accountability that is often times more at issue than the means used, I would be interested in this. Heck, I think it would go a long way for a positive political image if they did this on their own.
    Wow...I think I did OK for a first shot at some ideas.

    With respect to your comments about "devil is in the details" - of course it is and I appreciate that you understand these are ideas that would need other ideas and lots of iterations until they are implemented. As far as assault weapons...I don't consider a scope on a rifle an assault weapon. I consider the ones that are sold - with full knowledge they can easily be modified by filing down the sear pin (for instance) - and were designed for combat to be assault weapons.
  14.    #134  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Are you then for a fed gun law, taking away the power from the states? Or a fed minimum procedure with the freedom of states to do more? If so what would be the minimum that each state would have to do?
    Good question. Probably a base line federal law with some flexibility for each of the states. Specifically, national background check database must be used by all. Maybe specific bans/restrictions on certain weapons. But leave it up to the states how many can be owned, penalties for poorly handling/locking up a weapon, that sort of stuff...

    This would certainly have political barriers to go around in order to teach it in schools.
    No doubt about it.

    Again the devil is in the details, but this is an idea I would certainly be interested in seeing what would actually be developed. Would it be a nation curriculum?
    There would be federal standards for the curriculum and the gun manufacturers can pay for the educating. Seriously, I think the Fed would need to be involved for consistency and frankly, to help curb states from spending federally allocated funds to pet projects rather than actually implementing the program.

    I used to teach At Risk kids. I have to say that there is a percentage that just never stopped an thought about the reality of their actions and how it effects not only their victims but them as well when they see the effects of their actions....after they already did it and it is too late.
    It's really not that out there IMO in this society. I don't have guns in my house (although I was raised with them and have been awarded military sharp shooter medals...but thats another story) but I will teach my kids about gun safety and they will learn what a 44 magnum will do to someone if they are shot.

    Especially if they have any criminal record, or severe mental history I would fully agree.
    In this day of monitoring and tracking I find it hard to believe we don't have a national database of criminal records. They could give access to licensed dealers to conduct checks much the way a credit check is processed. They won't see the details but will see that you are ranked as a risk, low risk, no risk, should run for President, whatever....

    I do not like this idea. For example when I used to hunt, I had 2 blackpowder rifles, shotgun, .306, a 22 rifle and pistol, along with a 9mm. 7 guns for even a casual hunter is not unusual.
    Well work with me on this. The point is to prevent stockpiling by some deranged a-hole. So perhaps a base level hunter-class permit allows for up to 10 guns. A collector can own up to 50. And if you need more than you submit to deeper background checks that you'll pay for. Something like that... Of course if the identity/background checks were of any real use then this may be moot since someone would know how many weapons you own anyway.

    Interesting, but I want my son, wife, my dad, and my hunting partner to be able use my gun too.
    Then mandate that each gun can store up to 10 biometric signatures. The point is to get that 5,000 child death rates down and this is a system that could help. It won't stop suicides though I suppose...but will stop stolen guns from being used for crimes.

    I think that there needs to be more regulations on the security of storing guns. I have also seen proposals for more accountability for the owner of a gun if they have not taken those safety storage precautions that created an opportunity that lead to a tragic situation. But again....the details.
    They should be held accountable so I agree with you. If someone leaves a loaded gun on the night stand and their kid kills themself accidently then they ought to be prosecuted for manslaughter IMO.

    Since I feel it is the lack of responsibility and accountability that is often times more at issue than the means used, I would be interested in this. Heck, I think it would go a long way for a positive political image if they did this on their own.
    Pretty sure they won't volunteer, anymore than the tobacco industry did. But here is where we as a society should stand up to them and make them do it.
  15. #135  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    Not sure who you're talking about but I know it's not me. Or was that witty retort of yours aimed at someone else?

    As to the answer, or rather my list of ideas to be considered (meaning it would be interesting if others had ideas too rather than sitting back criticizing):

    - Re-evaluate existing gun laws. There are too many (state by state variances aside) and they are nearly as bad as the tax code due to extreme pressures by left and right. The net is a pile of confusing and in some cases, weakened laws.

    - Remove the NRA and the "ban all guns" groups from the discussion. Remove the extremes again to rationalize the problem before us without paid-for-PAC-lobby money.

    - I think proof of who you are and stronger background checks are something to look at again.

    - Since the government already restricts the spirit of the 2nd ammendment by restricting us from buying military grade weapons then we may as well be consistent. All assault and paramilitary weapons should be banned unless sold to a certified collector or dealer that takes classes and goes through an extensive background check (trying to find some middle ground here).

    - Teach gun safety in schools. Not just "turn around and run" but maybe they ought to be taught the basics of what they are and how to safely handle them so they do not go off. Sounds crazy but if kids are shown the wounds that guns cause, the damage to families left behind coupled with a safety course on weapons it may help curb accidental deaths. So again, I'd only support that if it were part of a "scared straight" program. With 260MM guns in this crazy country it is safe to assume kids will see one sooner or later.

    - Consider further background and/or psycho tests if there is the slightest misdemeanor in a buyers background. We use more stringent psycho testing for new job applicants at some companies than we do to buy guns.

    Now to more radical ideas...probably none that haven't been proposed before. You know like limiting the number of guns allowed in one household. Biometrics on the triggers. Or how about forcing the gun industry to run ads about gun safety like tobacco has to run about the dangers of smoking?

    These are a few ideas off the top of my head. Now lets see how many are more interesting in shredding them rather than trying to work with them or go out on a limb like I did and offer new ideas.
    It wasn't directed at you or any one individual for that matter. It's just the common theme to complain about what others are doing and/or not doing, and pointing fingers at failing or failure regardless of their intentions, without any legitimate solutions of thier own.


    That being said, I am impressed with bilateral qualities in your post.
  16. #136  
    - Consider further background and/or psycho tests if there is the slightest misdemeanor in a buyers background. We use more stringent psycho testing for new job applicants at some companies than we do to buy guns.
    If I were to pick a flaw in the current system, it would be this.

    Background checks are only required if you are buying from a retailer. I am not sure if its true in all states, but at least in mine, a private owner can sell to anyone without regard to the buyers background or a record of the transaction.

    I would be in support of correcting this loophole in the system.
    Last edited by sxtg; 04/24/2007 at 11:47 PM.
  17.    #137  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg View Post
    If I were to pick a flaw in the current system, it would be this.

    Background checks are only required if you are buying from a retailer. I am not sure if its true in all states, but at least in mine, a private owner can sell to anyone without concern of the buyers background or a record of the transaction.

    I would be in support of correcting this loophole in the system.
    Thank you. I respect your opinion in this regard.

    You know, there are at least three very different people in this thread that were able to arrive at consensus on something that if enabled in and of itself could save lives. The mere fact that a few guys on a smartphone forum can do this...well it frustrates me beyond belief that we don't stand up to the lobbyist and the PACs that steal away our representation and pit blue against red while they all live it up in piles of green!
  18. #138  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg View Post
    If I were to pick a flaw in the current system, it would be this.

    Background checks are only required if you are buying from a retailer. I am not sure if its true in all states, but at least in mine, a private owner can sell to anyone without regard to the buyers background or a record of the transaction.

    I would be in support of correcting this loophole in the system.
    Every time I have sold a gun, I have recorded the serial number and would only sell it if they agreed to show proof of ID along with a bill to verify contact info. I then recorded all of their contact information (name, address, phone, drivers license number), date of sell, amount, etc... I would not except cash and only a cashier's check or money order for a record of the sell. This is all on a simple fill in the blank sheet I printed from Word. I would have him sign and date it saying all info is correct and he is the new owner.

    I know this may sound stupid, but there are just some crazy and/or just simply stupid people out there and I do not want to held liable for anything that may happen with the gun after it leaves my possession. And how can I prove when it actually left my possession if the accident or crime was committed in a state with original ownership responsibility and liability?

    I will never put myself in a I said, he said situation resulting in virtually drawing lots to see who gets the manslaughter charge for the accidental death of a discharged weapon that was loaded and not secured.
  19. #139  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    I think I'll let your contradictory viewpoints speak for themselves.
    Ah. Yes. As opposed to your contradictory viewpoint trust the government to be the sole possessor of lethal force, but don't let them listen in on terrorist communications.
  20. #140  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Every time I have sold a gun, I have recorded the serial number and would only sell it if they agreed to show proof of ID along with a bill to verify contact info. I then recorded all of their contact information (name, address, phone, drivers license number), date of sell, amount, etc... I would not except cash and only a cashier's check or money order for a record of the sell. This is all on a simple fill in the blank sheet I printed from Word. I would have him sign and date it saying all info is correct and he is the new owner.

    I know this may sound stupid, but there are just some crazy and/or just simply stupid people out there and I do not want to held liable for anything that may happen with the gun after it leaves my possession. And how can I prove when it actually left my possession if the accident or crime was committed in a state with original ownership responsibility and liability?

    I will never put myself in a I said, he said situation resulting in virtually drawing lots to see who gets the manslaughter charge for the accidental death of a discharged weapon that was loaded and not secured.
    Outstatnding! However, it is not required for you do to any of this. I think the sale should need to be recorded with the county just like the sale of an auto. The only negative would be the occuring charges
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions