Another mass shooting...

Quote from: Canadabear on November 06, 2017, 09:41:33 AM

Quote from: disputeone on November 05, 2017, 08:44:00 PM

This was horrible.

Honestly the medias constant fear mongering and scare campaigns I feel are partly responsible for this.


From his Facebook page.

More than cleverness, we need kindness. For all of the law is fulfilled in one word.

Our hearts thoughts and prayers go out to the victims and families.

what do you want to say with this picture?
that he was an atheist and that is why he did what he did?

I hope I am wrong with this interpretation of your post.

Not even Trump has said something that disgusting. 

My guess is that D1 is inferring that cnn has brainwashed him into massacring a church.

Trump is only saying that the guy was a deranged person and the whole thing does not have anything to do with gun control.
on the other hand he was last time very quick of yelling to close the border for Islamic person and emigrants.
why does he not yell to imprison all mentally instable persons.

I think there should be a stricter gun control of who is allowed to get a weapon.
it would even be good to implement a constant control if a person is still able to be allowed to have a gun.
like a checkup every 2 years if a person is still physical and mental able to handle a weapon.

If it was up to me yes.

Freedom > Security.

You don't have very many people that you really care about, do you?

Trump is only saying that the guy was a deranged person and the whole thing does not have anything to do with gun control.
on the other hand he was last time very quick of yelling to close the border for Islamic person and emigrants.
why does he not yell to imprison all mentally instable persons.

I think there should be a stricter gun control of who is allowed to get a weapon.
it would even be good to implement a constant control if a person is still able to be allowed to have a gun.
like a checkup every 2 years if a person is still physical and mental able to handle a weapon.

No, no, they need the facts first!

https://www.theonion.com/nation-to-wait-for-more-facts-on-texas-shooting-before-1820186609

If he was dishonorably discharged then he is already in violation by owning a firearm. He was in illegal possession of the furearm he used.

He wasn't.

Following his prison sentence, Kelley was reduced in rank and released from the military with a bad conduct discharge in 2014.

A BCD doesn't necessarily have all of the same penalties as a dishonorable discharge.
https://military-law.lawyers.com/veterans-benefits/discharges-and-their-effect-on-veteran-benefits.html

If it was up to me yes.

Freedom > Security.

What about the freedom of living? Should the freedom of owning a gun be prioritised over the freedom of living?

My own take.

I would feel a lot LESS safe with a gun if it meant everyone else potentially had a gun

I feel MORE safe, not having a gun, knowing the chances of anyone else having one is SFA.

If an intruder breaks into my house armed with a baseball bat, I can still have a chance of defending myself. If I am allowed to have a gun, chances are he will too and it wouldn't be a baseball bat anymore, but a gun I have to defend myself against.

Quote from: crutonius on November 06, 2017, 06:05:28 AM

Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on November 05, 2017, 02:36:44 PM

What gun control law would've stopped this?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/11/06/who-is-devin-patrick-kelley-gunman-who-officials-say-killed-churchgoers-in-sutherland-springs/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-high_mm-gunman-603am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.11be91c8ec12

Quote

he was court-martialed and sentenced to a year in military prison for assaulting his wife and child

There actually is a common sense gun law that might have prevented this. https://everytownresearch.org/guns-domestic-violence/

It's just not particular well enforced or implemented.

If he was dishonorably discharged then he is already in violation by owning a firearm. He was in illegal possession of the furearm he used.

The point I was trying to make was that domestic violence is a very good predictor of someone whose likely to kill people.  A number of states actually have laws preventing people from getting firearms that have convictions of domestic violence.  Texas is among them.

http://lawcenter.giffords.org/domestic-violence-and-firearms-in-texas/

I don't have the article handy but I read that when this guy got his guns there was a form that asked him if he was legally allowed to own a firearm.  He checked 'yes'.  Awesome system we have there.

My own take.

I would feel a lot LESS safe with a gun if it meant everyone else potentially had a gun

I feel MORE safe, not having a gun, knowing the chances of anyone else having one is SFA.

If an intruder breaks into my house armed with a baseball bat, I can still have a chance of defending myself. If I am allowed to have a gun, chances are he will too and it wouldn't be a baseball bat anymore, but a gun I have to defend myself against.

I would feel more safe if I have a gun and there is a good gun control and I know that other person with guns are also gone thru the good gun control and can be trusted with a gun and they know how to handle it.

with an intruder you never know if that person has a gun or not, does anybody really think that a person that breaks in into private homes to steal stuff with the change that people are in it, care about gun law. they can have guns even if they are total illegal. that would not stop them for having a gun.

Quote from: Shifter on November 06, 2017, 12:47:11 PM

My own take.

I would feel a lot LESS safe with a gun if it meant everyone else potentially had a gun

I feel MORE safe, not having a gun, knowing the chances of anyone else having one is SFA.

If an intruder breaks into my house armed with a baseball bat, I can still have a chance of defending myself. If I am allowed to have a gun, chances are he will too and it wouldn't be a baseball bat anymore, but a gun I have to defend myself against.

I would feel more safe if I have a gun and there is a good gun control and I know that other person with guns are also gone thru the good gun control and can be trusted with a gun and they know how to handle it.

That a pretty massive IF even for a fantasy land.

Also, I might be fine today and able to pass any check with flying colours. Tomorrow my life could turn upside down, lose everything, spiral into a deep depression and drink/drug away all my problems. No one is going to say I have to return those guns even if I would massively fail the checks with my new situation

The best a background checks does is basically say, this person at some point in their life passed a background check. There is no requirement after that to conduct yourself in a manner that would continue to see you pass background checks.

Also, with guns so prevalent, who is to say someone who didn't pass the check just didn't go out and steal one?

Guns don't kill people.
People kill people.
Ban people, problem fixed.

I have no interest in going one on one with an intruder in the middle of the night.
I assume she didn't enter my home because she was concerned about my safety.

I would not shoot at a shadow, but, anything less than her running out the door is going to be very bad for her.

Quote from: Canadabear on November 06, 2017, 01:25:54 PM

Quote from: Shifter on November 06, 2017, 12:47:11 PM

My own take.

I would feel a lot LESS safe with a gun if it meant everyone else potentially had a gun

I feel MORE safe, not having a gun, knowing the chances of anyone else having one is SFA.

If an intruder breaks into my house armed with a baseball bat, I can still have a chance of defending myself. If I am allowed to have a gun, chances are he will too and it wouldn't be a baseball bat anymore, but a gun I have to defend myself against.

I would feel more safe if I have a gun and there is a good gun control and I know that other person with guns are also gone thru the good gun control and can be trusted with a gun and they know how to handle it.

That a pretty massive IF even for a fantasy land.

Also, I might be fine today and able to pass any check with flying colours. Tomorrow my life could turn upside down, lose everything, spiral into a deep depression and drink/drug away all my problems. No one is going to say I have to return those guns even if I would massively fail the checks with my new situation

The best a background checks does is basically say, this person at some point in their life passed a background check. There is no requirement after that to conduct yourself in a manner that would continue to see you pass background checks.

Also, with guns so prevalent, who is to say someone who didn't pass the check just didn't go out and steal one?

therefore the repeated check if someone is able to have a gun.

easier to control than a total ban of guns.
what about hunter or security personal or sports?
if you want to ban fire arms what about bow and cross bow?

if you want to ban fire arms what about bow and cross bow?

Seriously?

Ban rocks and sticks too. They can do a lot of damage or even kill.

Ban rocks and sticks too. They can do a lot of damage or even kill.

How about second story windows?

Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on November 06, 2017, 08:19:57 AM

Quote from: crutonius on November 06, 2017, 06:05:28 AM

Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on November 05, 2017, 02:36:44 PM

What gun control law would've stopped this?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/11/06/who-is-devin-patrick-kelley-gunman-who-officials-say-killed-churchgoers-in-sutherland-springs/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-high_mm-gunman-603am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.11be91c8ec12

Quote

he was court-martialed and sentenced to a year in military prison for assaulting his wife and child

There actually is a common sense gun law that might have prevented this. https://everytownresearch.org/guns-domestic-violence/

It's just not particular well enforced or implemented.

If he was dishonorably discharged then he is already in violation by owning a firearm. He was in illegal possession of the furearm he used.

The point I was trying to make was that domestic violence is a very good predictor of someone whose likely to kill people.  A number of states actually have laws preventing people from getting firearms that have convictions of domestic violence.  Texas is among them.

http://lawcenter.giffords.org/domestic-violence-and-firearms-in-texas/

I don't have the article handy but I read that when this guy got his guns there was a form that asked him if he was legally allowed to own a firearm.  He checked 'yes'.  Awesome system we have there.

Once he fills out the form, they run it through NCIS. Any information that doesn't line up to his answers can delay or outright deny him. Depending on what he answered, he could be charged with perjury.

You are never free.

Thanks for your opinion, I disagree.

Ban rocks and sticks too. They can do a lot of damage or even kill.

Ban assault trucks, high capacity gas tanks and fully automatic transmissions!!

Common sense assault truck laws now!!!!

Quote from: Shifter on November 06, 2017, 02:19:36 PM

Ban rocks and sticks too. They can do a lot of damage or even kill.

Ban assault trucks, high capacity gas tanks and fully automatic transmissions!!

Common sense assault truck laws now!!!!

Trucks have many uses other than killing people.  What uses do assault rifles have other than killing people?

A fire arm is an effective uni-tasker.

Quote from: disputeone on November 06, 2017, 07:20:16 PM

Quote from: Shifter on November 06, 2017, 02:19:36 PM

Ban rocks and sticks too. They can do a lot of damage or even kill.

Ban assault trucks, high capacity gas tanks and fully automatic transmissions!!

Common sense assault truck laws now!!!!

Trucks have many uses other than killing people.  What uses do assault rifles have other than killing people?

what about guns for hunter or sport.

as I said, I think the better thing to do would be to have a stricter gun control not a gun ban.
a gun ban would not help anything,

All this nonsense about gun control is idiotic.   Finland and Switzerland have more guns per head of population than the USA,  the problem isn't guns,  it's the American Psyche, it seems that it isn't mature enough to handle guns. 

How many people who own guns, think they are some kind of vigilante rambo?   Enough to be a problem it seems.

America has lost the plot.   Too many internet conspiracy nutters and lack of self control.

All this nonsense about gun control is idiotic.   Finland and Switzerland have more guns per head of population than the USA,  the problem isn't guns,  it's the American Psyche, it seems that it isn't mature enough to handle guns. 

That's actually bullshit pro gun propaganda, at least for switzerland I'm rather sure that most of the people there do have guns only, without ammunition. Pretty sure it's the same for finland.

How many people who own guns, think they are some kind of vigilante rambo?   Enough to be a problem it seems.

America has lost the plot.   Too many internet conspiracy nutters and lack of self control.

'muricans are not among the smartest, it is known.

the problem isn't guns,  it's the American Psyche, it seems that it isn't mature enough to handle guns. 

 

Quote from: Definitely Not Official on November 06, 2017, 04:55:23 AM

You are never free.

Thanks for your opinion, I disagree.

Ok. Give me one example of a society where you THINK are truly free and I will tell you why you aren't. 

Once he fills out the form, they run it through NCIS. Any information that doesn't line up to his answers can delay or outright deny him. Depending on what he answered, he could be charged with perjury.

OOOH, THAT WILL PUT HIM IN HIS PLACE NOW!

Finland and Switzerland have more guns per head of population than the USA

Uhmm, sauce?

This is what I found: http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmin/docs/A-Yearbook/2007/en/Small-Arms-Survey-2007-Chapter-02-annexe-4-EN.pdf

Your statement seems to be completely false. And other surveys show roughly the same trend.

Quote from: Rayzor on November 07, 2017, 04:33:55 AM

Finland and Switzerland have more guns per head of population than the USA

Uhmm, sauce?

This is what I found: http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmin/docs/A-Yearbook/2007/en/Small-Arms-Survey-2007-Chapter-02-annexe-4-EN.pdf

Your statement seems to be completely false. And other surveys show roughly the same trend.

Your survey shows only civilian firearms. Switzerland and finland citizens have military firearms at home. So your survey says absolutely nothing.

Quote from: Master_Evar on November 07, 2017, 05:02:30 AM

Quote from: Rayzor on November 07, 2017, 04:33:55 AM

Finland and Switzerland have more guns per head of population than the USA

Uhmm, sauce?

This is what I found: http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmin/docs/A-Yearbook/2007/en/Small-Arms-Survey-2007-Chapter-02-annexe-4-EN.pdf

Your statement seems to be completely false. And other surveys show roughly the same trend.

Your survey shows only civilian firearms. Switzerland and finland citizens have military firearms at home. So your survey says absolutely nothing.

Huh?

Quote from: markjo on November 06, 2017, 07:26:37 PM

Quote from: disputeone on November 06, 2017, 07:20:16 PM

Quote from: Shifter on November 06, 2017, 02:19:36 PM

Ban rocks and sticks too. They can do a lot of damage or even kill.

Ban assault trucks, high capacity gas tanks and fully automatic transmissions!!

Common sense assault truck laws now!!!!

Trucks have many uses other than killing people.  What uses do assault rifles have other than killing people?

what about guns for hunter or sport.

Where I live, most hunting is done with shotguns, bows and muzzle loaders.