'Tis the season: Guns ! Guns ! Guns!

#76
#76
lawgator1 said:
Obviously, by now we are all aware of reports that more than 10 children may be dead. Elementary school kids, in class.

Even if that is not the case, we can only pray that this incident, and the others over the last few years, convince our political leaders to stop listening to the gun lobby and to stand up and do what is right, which is to dramatically restrict the possession of, sale of, or access to, hand guns.

The argument that they are often stolen is small consolation here. If people could not lawfully buy them in the first place, they would not be there to be stolen. And its not like that is a rare thing. We know what the problem is -- its the initial purchase.

As far as I'm concerned, the entire gun lobby right now ought to take a long had look at the horror their "hobby" is causing.
Click to expand...

You never cease to amaze me with how retarded you are, if you actually believe the crap you post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#77
#77
therealUT said:
If the jury does not levy a fine because the jury thinks that there was actually sufficient evidence to bring about a trial, then I fail to see what the problem is.
Click to expand...

Okay, so what if the jury believes there was sufficient evidence to bring the individual to trial and still decide not to levy a fine. What's next?
 
#78
#78
hndog609 said:
Be able to demonstrate SOME kind of reason. Seat a Grand Jury or something if you must but the idea that "So and so wants to drag you to trial for murder 'cause they want to". doesn't work for me. YMMV
Click to expand...

I am not opposed the idea of having grand jury proceedings, so long as one is still given the option to file complaints that will then go to the grand jury. But, in a case like this, an individual will not even have the option to file a complaint. The grand jury process is even rule out.

hndog609 said:
We're kinda back on that "In TRUT's parallel universe." bit again. Making statements about actual events in our reality and the rules currently in place but really meaning "if it were happening in my world" makes for awkward conversation. Mila Kunis "ought to" be in my lap as I type this as far as I'm concerned. That's not the current reality of things. I don't think your "everybody should be charged thusly" works well in the current reality of things either.
Click to expand...

When I am using words like "ought" or "should", I am usually speaking of how things ideally ought to function.

hndog609 said:
I'm not even sure I understand this last one unless it's entirely encapsulated in "TRUT's World" again. If I'm expected to be in court for murder when I'm walking through a ticker tape parade in my honor for saving (though I had to kill some very bad people in the process) that bus load of oncology kids on their Make a Wish Foundation trip, something is all hell kinds of wrong.
Click to expand...

I do not see why it is all kinds of wrong. Understand that when I say that one ought to be able to charge, I am not in any way implying that the accused is guilty or that the accused should be found guilty.
 
#79
#79
Vol4LifeLCA said:
Other problem is asking lay people to try and interpret the law. The law is complicated and unless you mandate the jurors have law degrees, then how can you expect lay people to understand whether or not there is sufficient evidence.
Click to expand...

The law is complicated. In fact, the law is unnecessarily complicated. I think the many of the complications in the law, just like complications in tax codes, are unjust. Again, this is not a system that would be designed to be installed piecemeal. It would take an entire overhaul of the legal system.
 
#80
#80
I was just introduced to a new perspective:

The Second Amendment was written in a time that muskets were the best choice of weapon.

I'd welcome conceal and carry laws for muskets...
 
#81
#81
VOLatile said:
I was just introduced to a new perspective:

The Second Amendment was written in a time that muskets were the best choice of weapon.

I'd welcome conceal and carry laws for muskets...
Click to expand...

they had "handguns" too
 
#82
#82
Gannon Goodson said:
Okay, so what if the jury believes there was sufficient evidence to bring the individual to trial and still decide not to levy a fine. What's next?
Click to expand...

What do you mean what is next? If twelve out of twelve (or ten out of twelve) individuals are convinced that there is enough reason to warrant a trial, then do you think that there ought not be a trial because the police think that there should not be a trial?
 
#83
#83
Now a source is saying 30 dead, mostly children.

Incomprehensible.

I hope the manufacturer of the gun is held liable and put of business. I hope whoever originally bought the gun is held criminally liable and sent to prison as an accessory to murder. Sentences to run consecutively. Then maybe people thinking about buying a gun won't be so cavalier about its storage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#84
#84
lawgator1 said:
Obviously, by now we are all aware of reports that more than 10 children may be dead. Elementary school kids, in class.

Even if that is not the case, we can only pray that this incident, and the others over the last few years, convince our political leaders to stop listening to the gun lobby and to stand up and do what is right, which is to dramatically restrict the possession of, sale of, or access to, hand guns.
The argument that they are often stolen is small consolation here. If people could not lawfully buy them in the first place, they would not be there to be stolen. And its not like that is a rare thing. We know what the problem is -- its the initial purchase.

As far as I'm concerned, the entire gun lobby right now ought to take a long had look at the horror their "hobby" is causing.
Click to expand...

You said restrict, not ban. Who do we restrict? What methods do you suggest? Felons, domestic abusers, and the mentally ill are restricted. Who else do you add to the list?
 
#87
#87
Gannon Goodson said:
You said restrict, not ban. Who do we restrict? What methods do you suggest? Felons, domestic abusers, and the mentally ill are restricted. Who else do you add to the list?
Click to expand...


I'd personally love a ban, but that is not feasible.

For starters, I want people who buy guns to have some kind of tracer placed on them connecting them to the gun such that, if it is stolen or misused by another, the original buyer may be held civilly and perhaps criminally liable for that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#88
#88
lawgator1 said:
Now a source is saying 30 dead, mostly children.

Incomprehensible.

I hope the manufacturer of the gun is held liable and put of business. I hope whoever originally bought the gun is held criminally liable and sent to prison as an accessory to murder. Sentences to run consecutively. Then maybe people thinking about buying a gun won't be so cavalier about its storage.
Click to expand...

Your lack of knowledge on this subject is astounding and frankly your viewpoint is horrifying. I hope you're trolling.
 
#89
#89
Through_The_T said:
LG, you pushing your agenda at a time like this is absolutely disgusting.
Click to expand...


If it happened once every blue moon, I'd probably agree. But it is happening with increasingly alarming frequency.

What is disgusting is the incomprehensibly dumb NRA lobby to see what it is doing.
 
#90
#90
lawgator1 said:
Now a source is saying 30 dead, mostly children.

Incomprehensible.

I hope the manufacturer of the gun is held liable and put of business. I hope whoever originally bought the gun is held criminally liable and sent to prison as an accessory to murder. Sentences to run consecutively. Then maybe people thinking about buying a gun won't be so cavalier about its storage.
Click to expand...

If a person hits and kills a person, should the car manufacturer be held liable? That said, they said the guns were bought legally.
 
#93
#93
utvolpj said:
they had "handguns" too
Click to expand...

A rather crude single shot pistol, right? I don't exactly know the history of guns.

I just honestly see no practical use for assault weapons or automatic weapons. I also don't view recreation as a practical use. I know that this instance is rumored to be a .226-caliber rifle.
 
#94
#94
lawgator1 said:
Now a source is saying 30 dead, mostly children.

Incomprehensible.

I hope the manufacturer of the gun is held liable and put of business. I hope whoever originally bought the gun is held criminally liable and sent to prison as an accessory to murder. Sentences to run consecutively. Then maybe people thinking about buying a gun won't be so cavalier about its storage.
Click to expand...

Ain't gonna happen you mental prostitute.

To mentally deficient Leftists like you, spoons make people fat and cars make people drive drunk. Hey, should we put GM out of business because an idiot went out for a night on the town, got wasted, and slammed his new Chevy Volt into the side of mommy and her kids?

The person is responsible. Period. Guns are inanimate objects incapable of inflicting harm without the use of a person.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#96
#96
And restrictions only keep those who are honest... honest. They do nothing against the guys who really want to put on the hurt. Anytime one of these things happen my first thought is not what should be restricted or opened up, but more of a what in our moral compass needs to be fixed? This is a moral/society issue more than it is a weapon of choice issue in my books. And frankly this is a discussion the Government just needs to excuse itself from and let the grown ups handle it. We as a society need to ball up and actually decide where we are headed.
 
#97
#97
lawgator1 said:
I'd personally love a ban, but that is not feasible.

For starters, I want people who buy guns to have some kind of tracer placed on them connecting them to the gun such that, if it is stolen or misused by another, the original buyer may be held civilly and perhaps criminally liable for that.
Click to expand...

To call you an idiot is an insult to idiots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#98
#98
VOLatile said:
A rather crude single shot pistol, right? I don't exactly know the history of guns.

I just honestly see no practical use for assault weapons or automatic weapons. I also don't view recreation as a practical use. I know that this instance is rumored to be a .226-caliber rifle.
Click to expand...

it is extremely unlikely this was an assault rifle. Just because you see no need doesn't mean one doesn't exist.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top