House of Reps. member Giffords shot in Arizona today

he says the most ironic things, doesn't he?

0 Replies

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

so you are OK with selling guns to folks with a blatant problem, like this kid...?

so he can be safe...

I support = protection of the laws.
We shoud return to the status quo ante as in the 1700s,
the 1800s and the first 1/4 of the 1900s, to wit: no discrimination in sales of defensive weapons.
Government has never had any legitimate jurisdiction over civilian possession of defensive weapons.
However, if a man shows himself to constitute an intolerable threat to peace & safety,
then HE can be prevented from having contact therewith.

Rockhead wrote:

do you need to go take your medication? all of a sudden you seem very dense.

a personal insult?
Have u taken your medication?

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I was giving you an easy out for dodging the question, counselor.

very archaic, those standards...

(another one for phonetic spellers everywhere)

1 Reply

Still waiting for an answer from Lash to my question.

The question was...
Is there any level of rhetoric by tv or radio pundits that would ever rise to the level of incitement, in your estimation?

1 Reply

@littlek,

Here's a list of those killed.

Quote:

Authorities said the dead included U.S. District Judge John Roll, 63; Christina Greene, 9; Giffords aide Zimmerman, 30; Dorothy Morris, 76; Dorwin Stoddard, 76; and Phyllis Scheck, 79.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Yeah; u hope THAT and someone else on this board hopes that rape will be legalized.
Anyone can hope anything.

farmerman wrote:

This is why many of your arguments fall flat Dave,
the premises and the "givens" are usually screwed up

R u more clearly LOGICAL
when u make a presentation to your clients ?

David wrote:

Dangerous people shoud be ISOLATED from the decent people;
preferably not on the North American Continent

farmerman wrote:

However, when are they determined to be dangerous?
Only after theyve done something like Laufer. Your argument falls flat again.

What u say is FALSE, Farmer.
Regardless of your opinions on A2K,
MY side WON in the USSC 2ice!!!!!

Your side lost, Farmer. U lost;
talk about falling flat, or round or any other way.

David

0 Replies

Denouncing gun possession because of murders
is like denouncing car possession because of traffic collisions.

David

2 Replies

@H2O MAN,

H2O MAN wrote:

There is no good reason for this shooting.

No; but injustice is always justified, violence included.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

If he WAS, does that impair MY rights ??

disgusting.

You rarely miss an opportunity to spin things into a question about you.

disgusting.

done

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

I was giving you an easy out for dodging the question, counselor.

very archaic, those standards...

Arkaic is OK.
It is better than modern standards in many instances.

Rockhead wrote:

(another one for phonetic spellers everywhere)

Surely fonetic spellers will bear u much good will.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Drivers licenses are
-only gotten after taking a test
- aren't issued to people who have certain problems which interfere with driving
- can be revoked if you screw up

1 Reply

@littlek,

Quote:

Law enforcement officials said members of Congress reported 42 cases of threats or violence in the first three months of 2010, nearly three times the 15 cases reported during the same period a year earlier. Nearly all dealt with the health care bill, and Giffords was among the targets.

0 Replies

@littlek,

littlek wrote:

Drivers licenses are
-only gotten after taking a test
- aren't issued to people who have certain problems which interfere with driving
- can be revoked if you screw up

No one has a Constitutional Right to drive.
EVERYONE has a Constitutional Right to defend his life from the violence of man or beast.

However, compulsory education of competent gunnery practice,
along with arithmetic and geografy might be OK,
if we assume that compulsory education is constitutional.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Denouncing gun possession because of murders
is like denouncing car possession because of traffic collisions.

Thats a stupid comparison. It was only brought up by Hawkeye (I believe) and it continues to be a stupid comparison. WE DO have rules coNTROLLING DRIVING PRIVILEGES.

DRIVERS TESTS
AGE LIMITATIONS (YOUND AND OLD)

Cessation of privileges due to medical conditions .

Cessation of privi;leges due to certain crimes and habits

Rules of operations

Insurance required to drive (MOST IF NOT ALL STATES)

federal rules against driving over state lines for puposes of crime.

Vehicles and driving privileges ARE controlled , unlike guns, ownership of which seem to carry immunity from concern for your fellow citizens

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

dave, I don't think you are coming off in the fashion you think you are...

it's getting kinda gross now.

remember the alamo...

1 Reply

@littlek,

May they rest in peace.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

David wrote:

Denouncing gun possession because of murders
is like denouncing car possession because of traffic collisions.

farmerman wrote:

Thats a stupid comparison.

WHAT is stupid about it??

farmerman wrote:

It was only brought up by Hawkeye (I believe) and it continues to be a stupid comparison.

I am capable of original thawt. That came (proudly) from ME.
Maybe Hawkeye commented on its merit b4; I dunno.

farmerman wrote:

WE DO have rules coNTROLLING DRIVING PRIVILEGES.

DRIVERS TESTS
AGE LIMITATIONS (YOUND AND OLD)

Cessation of privileges due to medical conditions .

Cessation of privi;leges due to certain crimes and habits

Rules of operations

Insurance required to drive (MOST IF NOT ALL STATES)

federal rules against driving over state lines for puposes of crime.

Vehicles and driving privileges ARE controlled , unlike guns, ownership of which seem to carry immunity from concern for your fellow citizens

I re-iterate:
No one has a Constitutional Right to drive.
EVERYONE has the right to emergency equipment
to defend his life (meaning weapons).
THAT is the social/political contract,
whether u like it or not.

For that reason,
gun ownership IS IMMUNE from interference by government.

David

0 Replies

dave.

proud to be stupid for most of a century.

praise the lord and pass the ammunition...

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

dave, I don't think you are coming off in the fashion you think you are...

it's getting kinda gross now.

remember the alamo...

U mean the anti-freedom side is losing the argument?

David

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

I don't think this kid should have been allowed to purchase a hand gun.

That is easy to say from our vantage point today, Lougher had a couple of minor skirmishes with the law which resulted in charges that, essentially, were dismissed. He had some issues with the junior college he attended, which were resolved by his removal from the school. He attempted to enlist in the military but was rejected for undisclosed reasons. And, of course, there was all the U-Tube stuff.
The dots were there but were never connected to "prove" that he should have been been denied the ability (by whom?) to buy a gun.
I think there is a similar situation in the VA Tech shootings. Various offices had snippets of information, but those were not (and arguably should not/could not be) shared.

2 Replies

House of Reps. member Giffords shot in Arizona today

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know