|
|
Post by warrior1972 on Dec 16, 2013 7:36:10 GMT -8
"In this case, I am "howling" for a better system of background checks.' What would a "better background check" have revealed? Not a question of this latest outrage alone, 101. I've ALWAYS been in favor of more thorough background investigations.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Dec 16, 2013 9:22:32 GMT -8
"In this case, I am "howling" for a better system of background checks.' What would a "better background check" have revealed? Not a question of this latest outrage alone, 101. I've ALWAYS been in favor of more thorough background investigations.
"More thorough" in what way? In the case of the VT shooter all the required checks of state and federal records was done but the information on his mental state wasn't there, no one made any reports to the Virginia State Police. Similar stories are there about several other shooters including the guy who shot Gabby Giffords and (IIRC) the dude who shot up the theater in you neighborhood. The data wasn't there to be pulled up when the firearms purchase background checks were run, and in Newtown those guns were essentially stolen from the shooter's mother (who he shot BTW) and at Columbine those two squirrels stole their weapons as well. Background checks would not have revealed anything about family members. Or is that the kind of "additional check" you want, checks expanded to include adult and minor children as well? Should checks therefore be run on Mrs Sailor and both of my kids if I decide I want to buy another weapon? Or on Mrs Warrior and any little Warriors? Or little, little Warriors and Sailors (grandkids)? |
|
|
|
Post by warrior1972 on Dec 16, 2013 9:34:39 GMT -8
"In this case, I am "howling" for a better system of background checks.' What would a "better background check" have revealed? Not a question of this latest outrage alone, 101. I've ALWAYS been in favor of more thorough background investigations.
"More thorough" in what way? In the case of the VT shooter all the required checks of state and federal records was done but the information on his mental state wasn't there, no one made any reports to the Virginia State Police. Similar stories are there about several other shooters including the guy who shot Gabby Giffords and (IIRC) the dude who shot up the theater in you neighborhood. The data wasn't there to be pulled up when the firearms purchase background checks were run, and in Newtown those guns were essentially stolen from the shooter's mother (who he shot BTW) and at Columbine those two squirrels stole their weapons as well. Background checks would not have revealed anything about family members. Or is that the kind of "additional check" you want, checks expanded to include adult and minor children as well? Should checks therefore be run on Mrs Sailor and both of my kids if I decide I want to buy another weapon? Or on Mrs Warrior and any little Warriors? Or little, little Warriors and Sailors (grandkids)? You know as well as I do that I didn't say any of that. I don't claim that it's a solution, didn't say that it would have prevented anything, and won't claim that investigation of everybody and his mother would solve anything. I simply want more thorough background checks. f you are against everything that is a restriction, then let's get rid of gun permits, licenses to carry concealed, and make it legal to own fully automatic weapons. Saw-off shotguns will be legal, as will silencers, armor piercing ammunition, magazines of any size, and belt feeds. Weapons will be legal on airplanes, in bars, and at the work place., and carrying a loaded gun of any kind in a car is permissible. The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon.
Yeah. You didn't say any of that, either, did you?
Now, where were we? Oh, yes. Background checks. |
|
|
|
Post by tankcommander on Dec 16, 2013 17:50:44 GMT -8
Colorado recently enacted some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, and we see how well that's working out.
Columbine, Aurora, and now ANOTHER school shooting. The problem isn't guns, or the number of rounds in a magazine..... It's the number of kooks in Colorado.
At least this latest loser didn't have an AR for the MSM, and gun grabbers to rant about. Appearantly he took V.P. Joe Biden's advice to.... "Buy a shotgun."
|
|
|
|
Post by warrior1972 on Dec 17, 2013 5:31:28 GMT -8
Colorado recently enacted some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, and we see how well that's working out. Columbine, Aurora, and now ANOTHER school shooting. The problem isn't guns, or the number of rounds in a magazine..... It's the number of kooks in Colorado. At least this latest loser didn't have an AR for the MSM, and gun grabbers to rant about. Appearantly he took V.P. Joe Biden's advice to.... "Buy a shotgun." |
|
|
|
Post by tankcommander on Dec 17, 2013 8:15:36 GMT -8
You rememeber what you, told me about picking on your home state? OK, point taken. It was just a knee jerk reaction to your personal attacks in our last discussion when you called me "ignorant", and told me I "know nothing." I had hoped that after our PM discussions we could talk about tough subjects without the hostility, and name calling. For the record..... There are probably no more "kooks in Colorado" than there are anywhere else. But the rest of what I said in that post, about the Colorado gun laws, and the AR still stands. I understand you sometimes frustration at dealing with us since you are something of a different political vent. And, I give you props for hanging in there and taking the flak. But you know you love us..... If you didn't you wouldn't be here, you would be posting over at some place like Democracy Forums, talking to idiots like PBTime about things like his warped idea about the true meaning of Memorial Day! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by warrior1972 on Dec 17, 2013 8:21:31 GMT -8
You rememeber what you, told me about picking on your home state? OK, point taken. It was just a knee jerk reaction to your personal attacks in our last discussion when you called me "ignorant", and told me I "know nothing." I had hoped that after our PM discussions we could talk about tough subjects without the hostility, and name calling. For the record..... There are probably no more "kooks in Colorado" than there are anywhere else. I understand you sometimes frustration at dealing with us since you are something of a different political vent. And, I give you props for hanging in there and taking the flak. But you know you love us..... If you didn't you wouldn't be here, you would be posting over at some place like Democracy Forums, talking to idiots like PBTime about his warped idea about the true meaning of Memorial Day! ;D As you may have guessed, I have more than my share of bones to pick with so-called "liberals". When the History Channel Message Board was around, I found that far more in common with moderate conservatives than fire-breathing liberals. |
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Dec 17, 2013 18:03:01 GMT -8
"More thorough" in what way? In the case of the VT shooter all the required checks of state and federal records was done but the information on his mental state wasn't there, no one made any reports to the Virginia State Police. Similar stories are there about several other shooters including the guy who shot Gabby Giffords and (IIRC) the dude who shot up the theater in you neighborhood. The data wasn't there to be pulled up when the firearms purchase background checks were run, and in Newtown those guns were essentially stolen from the shooter's mother (who he shot BTW) and at Columbine those two squirrels stole their weapons as well. Background checks would not have revealed anything about family members. Or is that the kind of "additional check" you want, checks expanded to include adult and minor children as well? Should checks therefore be run on Mrs Sailor and both of my kids if I decide I want to buy another weapon? Or on Mrs Warrior and any little Warriors? Or little, little Warriors and Sailors (grandkids)? You know as well as I do that I didn't say any of that. I know that. I was asking, not saying that was what you were saying. That's why I put a damned QUESTION MARK at the end. What kind of "more thorough" investigation do you want? You MUST have something in mind ... No? No, I didn't. However, once upon a time firearms were allowed on passenger aircraft when carried by off duty police officers and there were no screenings as such prior to the time when wackos started hijacking planes to Cuba. I'm sure you remember. The "safety at any cost" crowd have gotten us so fucking risk adverse that my late mother, at 80 years old would have to go through that fucking pat down and take off her shoes to fly, kids in wheelchairs searched invasively and so on and so forth. Life is a risk, getting out of bed is a risk. There is no such fucking thing as perfect safety and yet that is the target, freewill and rights be damned. "More thorough" background checks can get as invasive as any dictator could dream of and never be perfect enough, thorough enough to prevent 100% of all risks of attack, whether that attack is by some screwed up kid with a head full of bad wiring or some diaperhatted Islamic "warrior" who wants to earn Heaven by killing a bunch of helpless "infidels." And you know it. Thus ends the rant, and I'm moving on. Have a good night bro. |
|
