Gun control and mass shootings

[extragreen]

No you are just advocating doing something for the sake of doing something.

Once again, ptp has shown to reduce weapons getting into hands of criminals. When ptp was repealed in Mississippi (?), the murder rate went up. Ptp there was shown to help neighboring states as well. That's not just doing something for the sake of doing something.

 

[extragreen]

The shooter passed every check / state and federal - you are not going to legislate someone from accomplishing what he did. He could have accomplished basically the same thing with only one altered fire arm ( as long as it did not heat up too much) and multiple magazines.

All in all this was one hell of a set up ( not condoning by any means what he did) but from an elevated position with multiple lines of fire , automatic weapons , massive amount of ammo. A well planned and orchestrated attack.

You want to blame someone for this add the hotel to the list as they apparently did not think one person with 10 suitcases was unusual , housekeeping reported nothing , room service reported nothing ( sure he may not have utilized housekeeping or room service but none the less I would imagine multiple and massive law suits will be pending against the hotel.

Hotels dont kill people, people do.
Sounds familiar?

 

[murox]

I haven't attempted to do so. I don't know anyone else who has. I've suggested an action that would likely reduce the possibility. But you go ahead and advocate doing nothing.

You've suggested an action that restricts freedom (no surprise there) and does absolutely nothing to address the issue. Prohibition doesn't work. I just doesn't. Your feel good proposal will take guns out of the hands of responsible, law-abiding gun owners and no one else.

 

[extragreen]

You've suggested an action that restricts freedom (no surprise there) and does absolutely nothing to address the issue. Prohibition doesn't work. I just doesn't. Your feel good proposal will take guns out of the hands of responsible, law-abiding gun owners and no one else.

Don't start your faux libertarian malarkey. You aren't any more for freedom than most people. You're the guy who lives in a HOA neighborhood that restricts freedoms and you've advocated for disallowing all non landowners the right to vote.

Secondly, how does the Permit To Purchase take guns out of responsible and law abiding citizens?

 

[i am herdman]

Don't start your faux libertarian malarkey. You aren't any more for freedom than most people. You're the guy who lives in a HOA neighborhood that restricts freedoms and you've advocated for disallowing all non landowners the right to vote.

Secondly, how does the Permit To Purchase take guns out of responsible and law abiding citizens?

You compare a HOA in a private neighborhood to freedoms guaranteed by the constitution and limits the federal govt? Are you serious? Where do you come up with these comparisons? They make no damn sense sometimes.

 

[extragreen]

You compare a HOA in a private neighborhood to freedoms guaranteed by the constitution and limits the federal govt? Are you serious? Where do you come up with these comparisons? They make no damn sense sometimes.

You don't like my comparisons simply because you can't effectively argue them. Period. A person who pretends to be all about freedoms but participates and advocates the opposite is full of malarkey. You know, just like you do.

And I have not proposed something that would infringe upon your second amendment rights any more than your rights to drive a car by having to register it, license it, and insure it.

 

[MARSHALL77]

X-tra - the hotel has a duty to provide a safe environment. Too many red flags raised , 10 suitcases for one person , hotel staff ( chambermaid's etc ) did not detect anything unusual with the guy not leaving ( apparently not ) the room for three days. Hallway security cameras did not detect him setting up his own cameras. Windows knocked out without any alarm to indicate this type of activity. Just throwing out potential grounds and questions that I just feel as if a good or even half way decent personal injury atty will run with in a heartbeat.

Heck in the end the gun manufacturer , gun shops , ammo company , hotel et al will be sued.

 

[extragreen]

X-tra - the hotel has a duty to provide a safe environment.

We do too.

 

[i am herdman]

You don't like my comparisons simply because you can't effectively argue them. Period. A person who pretends to be all about freedoms but participates and advocates the opposite is full of malarkey. You know, just like you do.

And I have not proposed something that would infringe upon your second amendment rights any more than your rights to drive a car by having to register it, license it, and insure it.

Oh, I like you comparison. I need a good laugh and it shows how idiotic some of your remarks are.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

Read the thread.

Your answer to my question was "read the article". Make up your fvcking mind, should I read the article, read the thread, or just go ahead and assume you have no real answers (as the thread is proving anyway).

 

[Dreh_Nagi_HC_IM]

 

[ThunderCat98]

Follow-up questions:

Why not establish a nationwide PTP system and/or a national registry?

How would you even begin to enforce laws requiring background checks on private sells? There doesn't seem to be any realistic means to do so, imho.

 

[extragreen]

Your answer to my question was "read the article". Make up your fvcking mind, should I read the article, read the thread, or just go ahead and assume you have no real answers (as the thread is proving anyway).

Both, moron.

 

[extragreen]

Follow-up questions:

Why not establish a nationwide PTP system and/or a national registry?

How would you even begin to enforce laws requiring background checks on private sells? There doesn't seem to be any realistic means to do so, imho.

Seems you could only do it with guns that are registered. If someone was caught with a gun registered to you and you didnt report selling it to them through proper channels, bad news for seller and purchaser?

 

[ThunderCat98]

Seems you could only do it with guns that are registered. If someone was caught with a gun registered to you and you didnt report selling it to them through proper channels, bad news for seller and purchaser?

When you say "caught," do you mean in connection with a crime, or do you contemplate a system in which law enforcement can simply approach an individual - say a hunter - and ask to see their registration/licensure?

Not trying to spilt hairs, just thinking through the practicalities of such changes.

 

[ThunderCat98]

Also, wouldn't there also be a fallback defense where the seller can merely claim the gun was stolen?

 

[extragreen]

When you say "caught," do you mean in connection with a crime, or do you contemplate a system in which law enforcement can simply approach an individual - say a hunter - and ask to see their registration/licensure?

Not trying to spilt hairs, just thinking through the practicalities of such changes.

Both ways. Looks to me like if we can have road checks on the highway, we can have gun checks in forest and field.

 

[extragreen]

Also, wouldn't there also be a fallback defense where the seller can merely claim the gun was stolen?

Would need stipulation that gun owner file a stolen gun report or face consequences.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

Both, moron.

Then you should have said both, dipshit.

 

[extragreen]

Then you should have said both, dipshit.

I shouldn't have to, moron.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

I shouldn't have to, moron.

Yes, you don't have to do anything, but if you would like to be taken seriously you might want to give the correct response to a question.

 

[i am herdman]

Would need stipulation that gun owner file a stolen gun report or face consequences.

All my guns were lost during the boating accident.

 

[extragreen]

Yes, you don't have to do anything, but if you would like to be taken seriously you might want to give the correct response to a question.

Read before asking a question, moron.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

Read before asking a question, moron.

I'm talking to you, not everyone else here. YOU are the one defending a certain proposal. No one else is. Therefore, my question was directed at YOU. It is on YOU to answer, either with your own knowledge or a link. YOU chose to refer me to the article, which in no way answered my question. Therefore, it is YOU that is either deflecting or a moron. Or both, dipshit.

 

[extragreen]

I'm talking to you, not everyone else here. YOU are the one defending a certain proposal. No one else is. Therefore, my question was directed at YOU. It is on YOU to answer, either with your own knowledge or a link. YOU chose to refer me to the article, which in no way answered my question. Therefore, it is YOU that is either deflecting or a moron. Or both, dipshit.

I provided a link to the article, the article has a link to a study showing that PTP works. You and others ignore it. That's on you, pill head.

 

[murox]

You don't like my comparisons simply because you can't effectively argue them. Period. A person who pretends to be all about freedoms but participates and advocates the opposite is full of malarkey. You know, just like you do.

And I have not proposed something that would infringe upon your second amendment rights any more than your rights to drive a car by having to register it, license it, and insure it.

God you are fvcking retarded. Living in an HOA-restricted neighborhood is VOLUNTARY, you imbecile. It's no different than me not caring if you voluntarily chose to live in a commune. Go for it. I don't care what you do so long as it doesn't affect me.

Sometimes I wonder if you're stupid just because you're uneducated. Then you confirm that it's just a lack of gray matter.

 

[extragreen]

Living in an HOA-restricted neighborhood is VOLUNTARY, you imbecile.

I know that, moron. That's what makes it so hypocritical. You CHOOSE to live in a neighborhood that has MORE restrictions while claiming to be some special advocate for freedom.

You favor only those freedoms that benefit you. You would eliminate the freedom to vote for non landowners, eliminate the freedom of collective bargaining, and you would eliminate any freedom of others between you and that next dollar you want to make.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

That being said, what further gun laws/ control can be implemented that would prevent something like the Vegas shooting from happening?

I provided a link to the article, the article has a link to a study showing that PTP works.

Nothing in the article shows that PTP would have prevented this incident, done by a wealthy, successful businessman with zero interactions with his local police and only one citation from police nationally. A ticket, that's it. You are the one that claimed PTP could "prevent something like the Vegas shooting from happening." But no, it would not have. I'm not ignoring anything, including you lack of intelligence, dipshit. This is another case where you should just man up and admit you are wrong.

 

[Sean Hammond]

I know that, moron. That's what makes it so hypocritical. You CHOOSE to live in a neighborhood that has MORE restrictions while claiming to be some special advocate for freedom.

You favor only those freedoms that benefit you. You would eliminate the freedom to vote for non landowners, eliminate the freedom of collective bargaining, and you would eliminate any freedom of others between you and that next dollar you want to make.

I don't think you understand the concept of freedom. You capitalize the word "choose" like it somehow makes your argument. The fact that he can CHOOSE is freedom. Living in an HOA gives you restrictions, but also gives you protections from neighbors building grotesque structures on their property, makes them keep their grass cut, trees trimmed, leaves raked, etc. Members can vote on road repairs, whether or not to add speed bumps, who does their snow removal, etc. (if it's a private HOA maintained road), so the members also have a voice.

If someone CHOOSES to give up some of their own personal freedoms to have protections from their neighbors, that is still freedom because it's by CHOICE/PREFERENCE.

 

[extragreen]

I don't think you understand the concept of freedom. You capitalize the word "choose" like it somehow makes your argument. The fact that he can CHOOSE is freedom. Living in an HOA gives you restrictions, but also gives you protections from neighbors building grotesque structures on their property, makes them keep their grass cut, trees trimmed, leaves raked, etc. Members can vote on road repairs, whether or not to add speed bumps, who does their snow removal, etc. (if it's a private HOA maintained road), so the members also have a voice.

If someone CHOOSES to give up some of their own personal freedoms to have protections from their neighbors, that is still freedom because it's by CHOICE/PREFERENCE.

And that choice is nevertheless, for MORE restrictions. And then there's the rest of my post: "You favor only those freedoms that benefit you. You would eliminate the freedom to vote for non landowners, eliminate the freedom of collective bargaining, and you would eliminate any freedom of others between you and that next dollar you want to make."