Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

@revelette,

revelette wrote:

There is no need for me to test it for myself, I would be totally lost at either option.

You are totally lost when it comes to sharing facts about this topic, so I expect you would also be lost at either option I suggested.

0 Replies

@revelette,

Quote:

domestic abusers,

Of course domestic abusers can be gun carrying police officers with the requirement that they leave the firearms at the police station after a tour of duty.

Police officers have one hell of a divorce rate and before the idea of someone who plea out to a misdemeanor domestic abused charge that carry little punishment would not be allow to own firearms a lot of police officers did so instead of fighting the charges.

In any case when the government look at the number of police officers who would not be allowed to be officers they found a loop hole of having them turn the guns in at the end of their duty tours.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

The Lautenberg Amendment has this effect on military and law enforcement. (pulled from wikipedia)

Effects on the United States military
This law effectively mandated the discharge of service members who had been convicted of domestic violence and implicitly mandates the discharge of all service members who are convicted of domestic violence in the future. This is not due to the letter of the law, but is a side effect of service members' loss of access to the firearms needed to carry out their duties. A service member discharged this way is sometimes said to be "Lautenberged."

Effects on law enforcement officers
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) sent a notice to every law enforcement agency when this law went into effect. Police officers with misdemeanor convictions for domestic violence, sometimes from years earlier, were no longer permitted to be in possession of firearms under the new federal law. Several officers were discharged for offenses[citation needed] committed before the law was passed. Several gun magazines printed a copy of this new ATF order at the time.

Exemptions
Under the federal law governing possession of firearms by police or military while on duty (18 U.S.C. § 925(a)(1)), an officer under a current protection order, or even one who has a conviction for murdering a spouse, may legally be in possession of a service firearm, but an officer convicted of one of the misdemeanor violations listed in the Lautenberg Amendment (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9)) is prohibited from possessing any firearms or ammunition at any time under any circumstances.[7]

0 Replies

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/318049_234853076647909_1411619537_n.jpg

0 Replies

https://vimeo.com/64432171

Whoopty-*******-doo cobbers!

2 Replies

@hingehead,

Looks like the NRA got to your site.

0 Replies

@hingehead,

Still available here, Hinge.

Former Australian PM John Howard on gun control - 21/01/13

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLMqo1TP7fY

===================

I think removing war criminals like John Howard from society would make it less likely that new war criminals would pop up.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Actually it was a link to the first part of John Oliver's 3 parter on the Daily Show about the lessons the USA can ignore about Australia's experience with gun control law. No doubt removed because these videos are restricted to US borders - but if you're in another country you will probably get a customised message about the local web site of the comedy channel

Part 1
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-april-18-2013/gun-control-whoop-de-doo

Part 2
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-april-23-2013/gun-control---political-suicide

Part 3
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-april-25-2013/australia---gun-control-s-aftermath

3 Replies

@hingehead,

I find it interesting that millions of people want to come to the US but our politicians those Constitutional changers want to make the US more like other countries. From what I can tell we are doing quite well with how things work now. Guns are not even responsible for taking that many lives in comparison to other non-lethal objects.

1 Reply

@hingehead,

Quote:

No doubt removed because these videos are restricted to US borders - but if you're in another country you will probably get a customised message about the local web site of the comedy channel

Note anyone can download tor from torproject.org and in the file name torc placed the following line exitnode [us] and as far as any website is concern you are in the US.

0 Replies

@hingehead,

hingehead wrote:

Actually it was a link to the first part of John Oliver's 3 parter on the Daily Show about the lessons the USA can ignore about Australia's experience with gun control law.

The most grave result of the law is the fact that Australia is no longer a free nation. We mourn their enslavement.

But in addition to that, who can ever forget the five-year-long spike in robbery rates (both armed and unarmed) that followed the disarming of the Australian people?

I don't think we'll ignore those lessons. And we'll never give up our freedom.

1 Reply

As long as we're learning lessons, let's learn the one that shows that, now that we have a decade-plus of experience, we see that robberies, both armed and unarmed, in Australia hav e steadily declined from that spike, to the poin where they are at or below the start of the gun buyback. And the trend is downward. Guess that means it worked. Too bad, oralloy. The Aussies look at you as if you've lost your mind.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

As long as we're learning lessons, let's learn the one that shows that, now that we have a decade-plus of experience, we see that robberies, both armed and unarmed, in Australia have steadily declined from that spike, to the point where they are at or below the start of the gun buyback. And the trend is downward. Guess that means it worked.

The fact that the massive wave of armed and unarmed robbery came to an end after five years, is supposed to be a sign of some sort of success???

That's kind of like saying that a science experiment which just blew up 2/3 of your house was a success because there is still 1/3 of your house left standing.

It would have been better, I think, to not have triggered a massive multi-year crime spree to begin with.

MontereyJack wrote:

Too bad, oralloy. The Aussies look at you as if you've lost your mind.

Because I wish they were still free?

0 Replies

No, because they are still free aand you have this silly belief that they're not and becaue you think they should behave the way you want them to and believe what you want them to and they have no intention of doing so. They're far too sane for that.

And, I might add, it was not a "massive wave". The numbers were fairly small before and even at the peak it wasn't all that big. Snopes has a nice analysis of the slanting of the statistics. It's like if you have two out of a thousand and then you have four. That's a 100% increase, but it's still not very big.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Quote:

Guns are not even responsible for taking that many lives in comparison to other non-lethal objects.

Wow, I'm curious that you classify guns as non-lethal. Your logic is all over the place, the only object I can think of that takes more lives is cars, and thanks to sensible regulation enforcement of standards they take a lot fewer lives than they did proportionately. Extending your argument nuclear weapon ownership should be extended to citizens- they've killed so few Americans.

Did you see how many foxnews talking heads wanted to change the constitution post Boston bombings? Bug mosques, piss off Miranda rights, jail the wife for wearing a hijab. But the second amendment is sacred.
Weird.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Z_Bj4EIxVV4/UXeBQyTS0gI/AAAAAAAABJ4/eZ-CGtWEK68/s1600/all-in-workplace-gun-deaths.jpg

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

No, because they are still free

Hardly. Free people have the right to be armed for self defense.

MontereyJack wrote:

and you have this silly belief that they're not

Nothing silly about me pointing out reality.

MontereyJack wrote:

and because you think they should behave the way you want them to and believe what you want them to and they have no intention of doing so.

Dictatorships always proclaim that their subjects love the dictator.

Strangely, they always seem to actually expect that others will accept this claim as if it were even remotely plausible.

I doubt the people who were required to give up their guns for no reason were anywhere near as happy about it as you pretend.

That said, I don't recall posting any expectations of behaviors or beliefs. Were you imagining that I made some additional post?

MontereyJack wrote:

They're far too sane for that.

You are equating "dislike of freedom" with "sanity". And you are assuming that all Australians have a dislike of freedom.

Nonsense.

MontereyJack wrote:

And, I might add, it was not a "massive wave". The numbers were fairly small before and even at the peak it wasn't all that big.

Easy to say when you weren't the one being robbed.

MontereyJack wrote:

Snopes has a nice analysis of the slanting of the statistics.

Snopes has already been busted for lying about the gun issue.

MontereyJack wrote:

It's like if you have two out of a thousand and then you have four. That's a 100% increase, but it's still not very big.

Right. Doubling the rates of both armed and unarmed robbery, for five straight years, is nothing significant.

Move along everyone. Nothing to see here. Just a routine eradication of freedom. Move along and don't ask any questions.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

As a Australian I find your comments exactly what a gun nut and single minded person would write. I'm proud of the fact that my country has a police force of Australians that has protected every human being in my country since it's inception and my country's armed forces to protect us outside our country's boundaries and I know we are freer than you poor bastards over in the USA.

1 Reply

@tenderfoot,

tenderfoot wrote:

As a Australian I find your comments exactly what a gun nut and single minded person would write.

And as a Freedom Hater, you are horrified at the thought that there is a nation out there who refuses to abolish freedom.

tenderfoot wrote:

I'm proud of the fact that my country has a police force of Australians that has protected every human being in my country since it's inception and my country's armed forces to protect us outside our country's boundaries

Did they go on strike for five years when you guys abolished freedom?

tenderfoot wrote:

and I know we are freer than you poor bastards over in the USA.

Free people have the right to carry handguns for self defense when they go about in public.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Free people have the right to carry handguns for self defense when they go about in public.

So freedom is only to be found in Somalia, Afghanistan, Kongo ... .

In real life, oralloy, you are what is generally known as a 'warlord', isn't it?

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

And we'll never give up our freedom....

..to be silly, self-regarding, self-deluding, purblind dicks.

3 Replies

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know