Gun control/being safe out there....

[Mystic]

I can post here the same as anybody else. And I will continue to post.

I do not follow what is 'in.' I follow a moral code and I do what I think is right.

Any logical human being should be able to figure out the police are no different than anybody else. But some are trying to put down the police at any opportunity. Some in the news media are doing that and police have actually been refused service at various fast food locations and so forth.

It is illogical to try to claim that every single police officer is bad. Most are just trying to do their jobs. There are a small number of bad cops who usually eventually get weeded out, just like in any other profession.

Most of the police I have had any interaction with were professional, decent people. I have met only a few cops who were real jerks. And even in the case of the few who acted like jerks, maybe they were just having a bad day. It is sort of hard for a human being to be 100% perfect 100% of the time. For sure there have been crooked cops but a cop who is crooked normally does not last very long in a police department or sheriff department.

But if somebody keeps coming out with one negative post about police after another I sort of wonder about that. Maybe you had a really bad experience with police. If you suddenly really needed the police because of something that happened maybe you would appreciate the police better.

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: Benito
Originally Posted By: Win
Not at all.

I'm asking a simple question, phrased simply: Which rights do you want people to pay a fee to the government to exercise?


I think I've answered it to the best of my ability. Where there is a law of the land that is associated with the exercise of a right, where there is a cost associated with following that law, and where the cost of exercising that right in relation to the law can be identified, then the person exercising that right should pay the fee.


Okay, it's abundantly clear that you are unwilling to just come out and say that you want government to charge people to exercise the right to bear arms.

If I choose to strap a 1911 on my hip and walk down to Wendy's, it costs the government absolutely nothing.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: Benito
Originally Posted By: Astro14
There are some great ways to address this tragedy, like Eddie Eagle, like responsible gun ownership, without trampling the rights of responsible, legal owners.



Well Canada seems to have some regulations around what "responsible gun ownership" means. Maybe we can learn from them and not just Eddie Eagle.


We have some serious regulations. Some, like NFA, have been with us for 80+ years.

But they are meaningless without enforcement.

Let's try enforcement first, let's punish the criminals before going after people who, by definition, are already obeying the law.

 

[Mystic]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: Benito
Originally Posted By: Astro14
There are some great ways to address this tragedy, like Eddie Eagle, like responsible gun ownership, without trampling the rights of responsible, legal owners.



Well Canada seems to have some regulations around what "responsible gun ownership" means. Maybe we can learn from them and not just Eddie Eagle.


We have some serious regulations. Some, like NFA, have been with us for 80+ years.

But they are meaningless without enforcement.

Let's try enforcement first, let's punish the criminals before going after people who, by definition, are already obeying the law.


Yes, there are already plenty of laws on the books. The criminals are the ones who are shooting people and breaking the laws. By definition, these mass shooters are criminals.

The last people I worry about are law abiding citizens just minding their own business at a shooting range or hunting with a hunting license. Some of the nicest people I have ever met were friendly people at shooting ranges. A while back guys at a shooting range let me shoot their shotguns at clay targets. Including a black powder shotgun.

Guns are a hobby for many people. We should leave those people alone and go after the criminals who murder other human beings.

 

[Benito]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: Benito
Originally Posted By: Astro14
There are some great ways to address this tragedy, like Eddie Eagle, like responsible gun ownership, without trampling the rights of responsible, legal owners.



Well Canada seems to have some regulations around what "responsible gun ownership" means. Maybe we can learn from them and not just Eddie Eagle.


We have some serious regulations. Some, like NFA, have been with us for 80+ years.

But they are meaningless without enforcement.

Let's try enforcement first, let's punish the criminals before going after people who, by definition, are already obeying the law.


I'm all for enforcement of existing regulations.

I'm just interested in what OVERKILL said about what sounded like common sense regulations in Canada on responsible storage - which would also need enforcing. Maybe we can save 8 year old girls from being shot or maybe her life doesn't matter because she was poor and from a trailer park?

 

[Benito]

Originally Posted By: Win
Okay, it's abundantly clear that you are unwilling to just come out and say that you want government to charge people to exercise the right to bear arms.

If I choose to strap a 1911 on my hip and walk down to Wendy's, it costs the government absolutely nothing.



I only want govt to charge to cover any actual costs of enforcing regulations associated with gun ownership.

If you're saying there are zero costs for any govt at any level for enforcing gun regulations, then there would be zero fee.

 

[Benito]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
Guns are a hobby for many people. We should leave those people alone


Apart from the National Gun Registry which you support.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: Mystic

The last people I worry about are law abiding citizens just minding their own business ...


Most of these mass shooters where law abiding until they snapped, to later find out they had some interpersonal and mental issues going on.

So the question is, how do you identify those people and do something about it before they have a chance to act? That is the million dollar question.

 

[Rust_Belt_Pete]

Originally Posted By: Al
Originally Posted By: Rust_Belt_Pete


Actually that is a form of poll tax which has been made illegal due to it being commonly used to deny the poor and minorities the right to vote.

Actually the 24th Amendment to the Constitution outlawed the Poll Tax. Nice try.


So why am I still effectivley paying this poll tax to exercise my constitutional right?

 

[Mystic]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Mystic

The last people I worry about are law abiding citizens just minding their own business ...


Most of these mass shooters where law abiding until they snapped, to later find out they had some interpersonal and mental issues going on.

So the question is, how do you identify those people and do something about it before they have a chance to act? That is the million dollar question.


Well, maybe momma should have taken her son for some mental health treatments. According to what was reported on the news, the son sometimes was pounding his head into a wall. That might be an indication of a problem. Just saying. He also could not make it in the military. He lasted about a month. And he displayed antisocial behavior and people observed how he was very unfriendly. Now somebody is of course not required to be friendly. But you add everything up and there were issues. I think if I had a son who was sometimes pounding his head into a wall I would have done something.

In the case of several of these other shooters, people DID see issues. But nobody said anything. Lots of people noticed problems with the Virginia Tech shooter and the Sandy Hook guy. The theater shooter in Colorado was displaying problems but the woman treating him did not want to violate patient confidentiality. Same situation with the guy in Germany who flew the passenger plane into a mountain.

The fact of the matter is, several of these people did display warning signs.

There probably needs to be moderations to the patient confidentially. If the mental health worker feels that a person can be potentially dangerous maybe the mental health worker should be required to do something. Patient confidentiality is going too far when other people's lives are in danger. Because other human beings besides the patient have rights.

 

[BRZED]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Mystic

The last people I worry about are law abiding citizens just minding their own business ...


Most of these mass shooters where law abiding until they snapped, to later find out they had some interpersonal and mental issues going on.

So the question is, how do you identify those people and do something about it before they have a chance to act? That is the million dollar question.


Minority Report? Human unpredictability will remain unpredictable. Sure, there are people who can, due to prominent behavior or past acts, be identified as prone to violently snapping, but there are many others who spontanously become unpredictable and commit violent acts in the heat of the moment, or even worse, who go mentally off the rails (develop a mental illness) at some point and hatch a violent plan that they intend to bring to fruition. Rememeber, the most dangerous people are not those drooling and foaming with rage, muttering to themselves and yellking at people, but quiet people who remain unconspicuous often long until after they have snapped. I'm not saying people should not have to undergo some kind of psychological tyesting if they are to operate potentially lethal machinery, or materials like cars, airplanes trains, ferry boats, nuclear power plants, guns etc that are capable of causing harm to many people, but I'm saying that testing has its limits.

 

[Benito]

Originally Posted By: BRZED
Minority Report? Human unpredictability will remain unpredictable. Sure, there are people who can, due to prominent behavior or past acts, be identified as prone to violently snapping, but there are many others who spontanously become unpredictable and commit violent acts in the heat of the moment, or even worse, who go mentally off the rails (develop a mental illness) at some point and hatch a violent plan that they intend to bring to fruition. Rememeber, the most dangerous people are not those drooling and foaming with rage, muttering to themselves and yellking at people, but quiet people who remain unconspicuous often long until after they have snapped. I'm not saying people should not have to undergo some kind of psychological tyesting if they are to operate potentially lethal machinery, or materials like cars, airplanes trains, ferry boats, nuclear power plants, guns etc that are capable of causing harm to many people, but I'm saying that testing has its limits.


Interesting.

Those who blow hot and cold bother me the most. You know, the ones who go quiet for months at a time and then suddenly become very vocal.

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted By: Benito


Interesting.

Those who blow hot and cold bother me the most. You know, the ones who go quiet for months at a time and then suddenly become very vocal.


Interesting.

According to your join date, you've only been here since May 27th of this year. Yet you talk as if you have been here for far longer. It begs the question of what name you used to use, and why you no longer post under that previous screen name..

 

[Benito]

Originally Posted By: 02SE
Originally Posted By: Benito


Interesting.

Those who blow hot and cold bother me the most. You know, the ones who go quiet for months at a time and then suddenly become very vocal.


Interesting.

According to your join date, you've only been here since May 27th of this year. Yet you talk as if you have been here for far longer. It begs the question of what name you used to use, and why you no longer post under that previous screen name..


What have I said that suggests I have a previous screen name as opposed to the capacity to search and read or lurk prior to May 27th?

 

[BRZED]

Originally Posted By: Benito
Originally Posted By: BRZED
Minority Report? Human unpredictability will remain unpredictable. Sure, there are people who can, due to prominent behavior or past acts, be identified as prone to violently snapping, but there are many others who spontanously become unpredictable and commit violent acts in the heat of the moment, or even worse, who go mentally off the rails (develop a mental illness) at some point and hatch a violent plan that they intend to bring to fruition. Rememeber, the most dangerous people are not those drooling and foaming with rage, muttering to themselves and yellking at people, but quiet people who remain unconspicuous often long until after they have snapped. I'm not saying people should not have to undergo some kind of psychological tyesting if they are to operate potentially lethal machinery, or materials like cars, airplanes trains, ferry boats, nuclear power plants, guns etc that are capable of causing harm to many people, but I'm saying that testing has its limits.


Interesting.

Those who blow hot and cold bother me the most. You know, the ones who go quiet for months at a time and then suddenly become very vocal.


Considering that I didn't post for about two months, middle of June till middle of August, does that make me all of a sudden prone to violence? I swear, I was only on vacation.

 

[Benito]

Originally Posted By: BRZED
Considering that I didn't post for about two months, middle of June till middle of August, does that make me all of a sudden prone to violence? I swear, I was only on vacation.


That's what you say, but how can you be believed? We need your long form vacation certificate.

 

[BRZED]

Originally Posted By: Benito
Originally Posted By: BRZED
Considering that I didn't post for about two months, middle of June till middle of August, does that make me all of a sudden prone to violence? I swear, I was only on vacation.


That's what you say, but how can you be believed? We need your long form vacation certificate.


This was about erratic posting frequence as an indicator of a mental meltdown. Or so I thought.

 

[Benito]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
Well, maybe momma should have taken her son for some mental health treatments.


Momma was a gun nut. Just like Lanza's momma.

 

[Benito]

Originally Posted By: BRZED
Originally Posted By: Benito
Originally Posted By: BRZED
Considering that I didn't post for about two months, middle of June till middle of August, does that make me all of a sudden prone to violence? I swear, I was only on vacation.


That's what you say, but how can you be believed? We need your long form vacation certificate.


This was about erratic posting frequence as an indicator of a mental meltdown. Or so I thought.


Vacation is a valid excuse. How do we know that you weren't logging in but not posting. They have internet in Yemen or wherever the [censored] you went on vacation.

 

[BRZED]

Originally Posted By: Benito
Originally Posted By: BRZED
Originally Posted By: Benito
Originally Posted By: BRZED
Considering that I didn't post for about two months, middle of June till middle of August, does that make me all of a sudden prone to violence? I swear, I was only on vacation.


That's what you say, but how can you be believed? We need your long form vacation certificate.


This was about erratic posting frequence as an indicator of a mental meltdown. Or so I thought.


Vacation is a valid excuse. How do we know that you weren't logging in but not posting. They have internet in Yemen or wherever the [censored] you went on vacation.

What do you know about Yemen? Are you stalking me? Naw, Yemen was a one time thing, or so I hope. I don't fancy quat and I don't enjoy goats in the streets and on my plate, although I did feel safe due to everyone carrying automatic weapons everywhere all the time.