31
   

Guns And The Laws That Govern Them

 
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2013 12:12 am
https://sphotos-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/1175200_10151875124922722_1697367708_n.jpg
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2013 01:46 am
@RexRed,
RexRed wrote:
https://sphotos-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/1175200_10151875124922722_1697367708_n.jpg
That is a lot of BALONEY!!!
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2013 01:52 am
@RexRed,

I DEMAND action to end gun violence
by each and all members of the citizenry, of all ages, being required
to be defensively fully armed, when in public.

Violation of this law shud be punishable by a fine of $1,OOO (first offense) or 1O days in jail;
or $2,OOO (2nd offense) and 2O days in jail; or $5,OOO (3rd offense) or 5O days in jail.





David
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2013 03:01 am
@OmSigDAVID,
David, pick a wild flower from the field and arm yourself with that....
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2013 03:08 am
@RexRed,
RexRed wrote:

David, pick a wild flower from the field and arm yourself with that....


After that last suggestion of David's...perhaps he picked a wild mushroom from the field...and ate it!

"More guns in the hands of more people"...is an absurd suggestion to the problem of too many shootings in our country.
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2013 07:27 pm
@RexRed,
RexRed wrote:
David, pick a wild flower from the field and arm yourself with that....
HOW does the feral flower operate,
during a defensive emergency, Rex ?
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2013 07:32 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

RexRed wrote:

David, pick a wild flower from the field and arm yourself with that....


After that last suggestion of David's...perhaps he picked a wild mushroom from the field...and ate it!

"More guns in the hands of more people"...is an absurd suggestion to the problem of too many shootings in our country.
We shud go back to the way things were
before liberals, i.e., distortionists, began raping the Constitution, Frank. Restore the status quo ante.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2013 07:43 pm

On Wednesday, a man walked into a pawn shop on the West Side
of Manchester and pointed a gun in the face of the shop owner.
That owner, Luke Nelson, then did something hundreds of thousands
of Americans do every year. He used a legal handgun to defend
himself from a criminal.

"I pulled out my gun from under the counter, pointed it at him,
and told him to get on the ground or I was going to shoot him,"
he said. The would-be robber fled.

Police later arrested Jonathan Rodriguez and charged him with
armed robbery (four counts), first degree assault, simple assault,
criminal threatening, resisting arrest and falsifying physical evidence.
But for Nelson's gun, the attempted robbery might have gone very differently.

Earlier this year, President Obama ordered the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention to undertake a study of firearms-related
violence in America.

The report, written by a team of experts for the National Research Council,
was completed in June, but you probably have heard nothing about it.
Its conclusions were not to the Obama administration's liking.

One of its conclusions reads: "Almost all national survey estimates
indicate that defensive gun use by victims are at least as common
as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging
from 500,000 to more than 3 million per year..."

Furthermore, the study found that "Studies that directly assessed the
effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incindents in which a gun
was "used" by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening
an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among
gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used
other self-protective strategies."

The idea that guns are almost exclusively used by bad guys
to kill good guys is a myth.

The irresponsible and criminal use of firearms is a major problem,
to be sure, but it's the user, not the gun, that is the issue - which
is why the anti-gun administration let this report slip quietly into obscurity.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Fri 13 Sep, 2013 02:17 am
@RexRed,

A pregnant woman was inside her home in Palmview, Texas
when a pair of burglars approached the house. One burglar went
to the front door and rang the doorbell, while the other moved to
a back door. After spotting the burglars, the homeowner retrieved
a handgun and the telephone, and called the police. Eventually
the woman fired at the intruders, causing them to flee.

The thieves were captured a short time later after police cornered
them in a nearby home. Following the incident, the homeowner
told a reporter that she had initially been against her husband
purchasing the handgun she used to defend herself, but noted
that after the shooting she told him, “thank you for doing that.”

(KGBT, Harlingen, Texas 09/09/13)
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Sep, 2013 10:23 am
Quote:
Law allowing the blind to carry guns: Pro-guns gone too far
By Robin Abcarian
September 12, 2013

Except for intermittent floods and quadrennial presidential contests, Iowa doesn’t generally make a lot of news.

But people around the world in general, and CNN’s Piers Morgan in particular, went crazy this week after Iowa's premier newspaper, the Des Moines Register, published a story about how the state’s new gun law allows blind people to own and carry firearms in public.

You read right: Blind people may not be able to drive to the gun store, or even sign the permit application without assistance, but they may legally carry a gun in public.

The Register story, which included video of a blind Altoona man named Michael Barber gun shopping with his wife, was part of a much bigger series that looked at the effect of the state’s new gun law, which prohibits sheriffs from denying weapons permits except in very limited cases. Previously in Iowa, sheriff’s could deny gun permits at their discretion.

Jason Clayworth, the Register reporter who wrote the series, told me he got interested in the new law after watching Iowa lawmakers ram the legislation through in 2010.

“I knew from sitting in a few legislative meetings on this bill that legislators had overlooked tons of issues,” Clayworth said in an email. “And I felt like the bill had been unbelievably rushed, especially considering the gravity of the issue.”

Because there was no clearinghouse for gun information in Iowa, Clayworth had to contact each of Iowa’s 99 sheriffs, often more than once, to ferret out the effects of the law. He discovered that in the two years after the law’s enactment, 99.6% of gun permit applications had been approved.

And though the law requires training in the handling and use of firearms, Clayworth discovered that for many Iowans, that training consists of a free, online course offered by the state of Maryland that involves no shooting practice at all.

He also discovered that background checks on mentally ill are nearly impossible to perform, that law enforcement has no way to verify whether a permit is legitimate and that people who have committed violent acts or sex offenses are sometimes allowed to buy and carry guns. (There’s a video interview with one convicted sex offender who demonstrates how he tucks his gun under his shirt to conceal it.)

But of course, it was the stories about blind people carrying guns that got the most attention. The idea seems so insane on its face. But is it?

Many defend the right of disabled people to carry weapons, saying a prohibition would violate the Americans with Disabilities Act. Others, including some advocates for the blind, think it’s not such a great idea.

One defender, Cedar County, Iowa, Sheriff Warren Wethington, says he can teach a blind person to safely use a gun. In a Register video, Wethington coached his 18-year-old sight-impaired daughter Bethany as she shot a handgun at a couple of targets in a barren field. She didn't do badly, but she was standing kind of close to the white targets.

“Obviously there are limitations,” Wethington told the Register. “They’re not going to be able to defend themselves against every situation, but then again, a sighted person can’t either. If we had some sort of a conflict in a dark room, you’re not going to be able to do anything that a blind person couldn’t.”

If blind people want to hunt or shoot targets with seeing companions to guide them, by all means, they should be allowed to do so. This is America, dammit. Everybody gets to shoot a gun.

But should a blind person be out in the public square carrying a gun for protection?

No. Please. Get a German shepherd, not a Glock.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-blind-carry-guns-in-public-20130911,0,2320246,print.story

0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Fri 13 Sep, 2013 12:15 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Who performs most of the shootings in this country? What type of shooting are you referring to? All shootings, murder, suicide, defensive?

Let me guess you still want all guns gone right?
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Sep, 2013 01:15 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:

Who performs most of the shootings in this country?


People with guns.

Quote:
What type of shooting are you referring to?


The kinds of shootings that involve guns.

Quote:
All shootings, murder, suicide, defensive?


I do not understand that "question"...if it was a question. What I wrote was:

Quote:
"More guns in the hands of more people"...is an absurd suggestion to the problem of too many shootings in our country.


And it is. Or do you think you can make a case for "more guns in the hands of more people will mean fewer shootings?"

If you think you can, I will certainly consider it.

Quote:

Let me guess you still want all guns gone right?


Not at all. I don't even advocate for fewer guns...even though I think fewer guns would probably lead to fewer shootings.

MY GUESS: The guns are here...we are not ever going to be rid of them.


spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Sep, 2013 01:35 pm
@Frank Apisa,
The more guns there are the more it makes sense to have one.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Sep, 2013 02:14 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

The more guns there are the more it makes sense to have one.


Could be...but that is not what was being discussed.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Sep, 2013 05:07 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Well--it looks to me like a law that governs gun proliferation.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Sep, 2013 07:09 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Well--it looks to me like a law that governs gun proliferation.


Could be...but that was not what was being discussed when you injected your comment.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Sep, 2013 04:06 am
@Frank Apisa,
"Guns And The Laws That Govern Them." is the subject under discussion.

There are natural laws.

The NRA is a significant player in determining the "law" on guns and it seems to argue that the more guns there are the more sense it makes to have one. And some on here have more than stressed the point.

Contributors decide what is discussed. Not you.

We all "inject" comment.

Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Sep, 2013 05:00 am
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

"Guns And The Laws That Govern Them." is the subject under discussion.

There are natural laws.

The NRA is a significant player in determining the "law" on guns and it seems to argue that the more guns there are the more sense it makes to have one. And some on here have more than stressed the point.

Contributors decide what is discussed. Not you.

We all "inject" comment.




Could be...in fact, "absolutely."

But your comment upon which I commented upon which you re-commented and upon which I re-commented...

...was not about what you were talking about when you were talking about what you originally commented on what I originally commented and which you then re-commented and I re-commented also.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Sep, 2013 09:37 am
@Baldimo,
Would you draw the line at allowing blind people to carry guns? Should they be able to obtain gun permits?
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-blind-carry-guns-in-public-20130911,0,2320246,print.story
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Sep, 2013 05:21 pm
@firefly,
As long as they had high capacity magazines they would have a decent chance against attackers.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

NRA: Arm the Blind! - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Thoughts on gun control..? - Discussion by komr98
The Gun Fight in Washington. Your opinons? - Question by Lustig Andrei
Gun control... - Question by Cyracuz
Does gun control help? - Discussion by Fatal Freedoms
Why Every Woman Should Carry a Gun - Discussion by cjhsa
Congress Acts to Defend Gun Rights - Discussion by oralloy
Texas follows NY Newspaper's lead - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/28/2024 at 07:11:32