Like Tree82Likes

Thread: If the demographic fits, hope they don't acquit

  1. #676
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    Infringed upon means to be encroached or tresspassed upon. Encroach means to approach BEYOND ESTABLISHED LIMITS. So we can establish limits without "infringing upon the right to bear arms".
    And those limits are the right to keep and bare arms.
    You say a militia is "of the people"? Where is the rest of the definition. A militia is directly related to a group of people who are trained as soldiers or are subject to be called upon to act as soldiers. Let's not forget the part about being "well regulated". I would think that well regulated could mean "subject to regulations". Is that so far-fetched?
    If you want to throw around definitions, that's fine with me but you don't get to make up your own.
    So a militia is not of the people, who is it of? You asked what I, me, thought the definition meant. I gave you MY definition. Just exactly what am I making up?
    You guarantee that you are well regulated. By whom exactly?
    By my very own moral compass. Since I have the ability to purchase firearms, I guess I am well regulated according to our current laws.
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  2. #677
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    Holy Crap! The theatre had a sign? A SIGN? That's you arguement against restrictions on the selling of guns? I am shocked that sign didn't work. I guess nothing will ever work!
    You stated earlier that every place that had a mass shooting had wepons bans in effect. Now you say you don't know about Colorado. Which is it?

    So the reports didn't say "If we would have done x, y wouldn't have happened". Maybe that's because the reports can't responsibly deal in pure CONJECTURE.
    But conjecture is all you and SC have. You have no facts to support what you want in place.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  3. #678
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Not the point at all. Enforce the laws on the books. If people are making straw purcases to bring guns into NYC they are criminals and laws on the books already can and should deal with that.
    But laws on the books can't deal with it. Because the laws on each end are different. And you can only enforce your own laws in your own jurisdiction. An illegal gun sale takes two parties. Buyer and seller. NYC can't go after a seller in Virginia.

  4. #679
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    Infringed upon means to be encroached or tresspassed upon. Encroach means to approach BEYOND ESTABLISHED LIMITS. So we can establish limits without "infringing upon the right to bear arms".

    You say a militia is "of the people"? Where is the rest of the definition. A militia is directly related to a group of people who are trained as soldiers or are subject to be called upon to act as soldiers. Let's not forget the part about being "well regulated". I would think that well regulated could mean "subject to regulations". Is that so far-fetched?
    If you want to throw around definitions, that's fine with me but you don't get to make up your own.

    You guarantee that you are well regulated. By whom exactly?
    The definition of "a well regulated militia" is irrelevant here. The US Supreme Court has already ruled that the right to bear arms has NOTHING to do with being in a militia. That right rests with the individual citizen. A militia and the right to bear arms are two SEPARATE points of the 2nd Amendment.

  5. #680
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    By my very own moral compass. Since I have the ability to purchase firearms, I guess I am well regulated according to our current laws.
    So definitions are what YOU say they are. And regulations are what YOU say they are. Do you know that you live in society? With other people? That you aren't the only one out there? I am sorry to burst your bubble but it is not "the world according to SPFDRum".

  6. #681
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    But conjecture is all you and SC have. You have no facts to support what you want in place.
    Isn't it also conjecture that the government will come take your guns?

    Hint: The answer is yes.

  7. #682
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsb View Post
    The definition of "a well regulated militia" is irrelevant here. The US Supreme Court has already ruled that the right to bear arms has NOTHING to do with being in a militia. That right rests with the individual citizen. A militia and the right to bear arms are two SEPARATE points of the 2nd Amendment.
    The Supreme Court interpreted "militia" to mean the entire population. The court did not say that the right to bear arms and being in a militia had nothing to do with eachother. The "well regulated" part is entirely relevant. If it were not, how could any locality have any gun control laws? All gun control laws would then be unconstitutional.

  8. #683
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    Holy Crap! The theatre had a sign? A SIGN? That's you arguement against restrictions on the selling of guns? I am shocked that sign didn't work. I guess nothing will ever work!
    Along with the numerous other laws broken. So of all the laws that where broken, which one do you suggest would have worked?
    You stated earlier that every place that had a mass shooting had wepons bans in effect. Now you say you don't know about Colorado. Which is it?
    Name me a single school or campus that allows guns? As far as Colorado, the state conceal carry law forbid those with a conceal carry permit from bringing their guns into establishments that post that sign. At the municipal level, its an outright ban on conceal carry.
    So the reports didn't say "If we would have done x, y wouldn't have happened". Maybe that's because the reports can't responsibly deal in pure CONJECTURE.
    You really do need to get a new play book.
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  9. #684
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Federal gun laws are federal gun laws and MUST be followed no matter where the purchase is made. Straw purchases violate federal gun law. Now what? Good Lord this is so easy.
    Yes federal gun laws should be followed. But they are not being folowed and obviously are ineffective. So maybe we can change some of these laws to make them more easily enforced.

  10. #685
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    By my very own moral compass. Since I have the ability to purchase firearms, I guess I am well regulated according to our current laws.
    True. Universal background checks won't infringe upon that right.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  11. #686
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    So definitions are what YOU say they are. And regulations are what YOU say they are. Do you know that you live in society? With other people? That you aren't the only one out there? I am sorry to burst your bubble but it is not "the world according to SPFDRum".
    Somebody got their panties in a bunch? You asked me who I was regulated by in this instance, I gave you my answer. There is no bubble to burst I never said I was the "only one out there", nor did I state my view was the one and only. Hell I don't even care if you or anyone agrees with it. That's what make it MY opinion. Don't like it, don't ask. No skin off my nose, pal.
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  12. #687
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    You really do need to get a new play book.
    Which one of the laws that were broken do I suggest would have worked? Obviously none of them. They were all too easily broken. That's why I endorse changing some gun laws to make it harder for the wrong people to get guns. There are clearly people who pose as run of the mill buyers that then turn around and resell the guns illegally. They are in effect acting as dealers, but without the license. I am not a gun dealer or a ATF agent so I can't tell you specifically what needs to change. But it is my opinion that something does need to change. The fact that current laws are ineffective does not lead me to believe that no law could EVER be effective. The types of changes I endorse would not stop law abiding citizens from owning guns.
    Those are my opinions. They come out of no playbook that I am familiar with.
    Last edited by captnjak; 02-10-2014 at 11:48 PM.

  13. #688
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    True. Universal background checks won't infringe upon that right.
    What makes your "universal" background check different then the one already in place?
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  14. #689
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    Somebody got their panties in a bunch? You asked me who I was regulated by in this instance, I gave you my answer. There is no bubble to burst I never said I was the "only one out there", nor did I state my view was the one and only. Hell I don't even care if you or anyone agrees with it. That's what make it MY opinion. Don't like it, don't ask. No skin off my nose, pal.
    It's not that I don't like your opinion. It's that you supported your opinion with made up and/or incomplete definitions.

  15. #690
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    What makes your "universal" background check different then the one already in place?
    They would be required for all firearms transactions. Something that isn't the case now. Many states have no waiting period. So if a background check shows the individual shouldn't have been sold a firearm it is too late.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  16. #691
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    Which one of the laws that were broken do I suggest would have worked? Obviously none of them. That's why I endorse changing some gun laws to make it harder for the wrong people to get guns. There are clearly people who pose as run of the mill buyers that then turn around and resell the guns illegally. They are in effect acting as dealers, but without the license. I am not a gun dealer or a ATF agent so I can't tell you specifically what needs to change. But it is my opinion that something does need to change. The fact that current laws are ineffective does not lead me to believe that no law could EVER be effective. The types of changes I endorse would not stop law abiding citizens from owning guns.
    Those are my opinions. They come out of no playbook that I am familiar with.
    Well then I guess I will wait until some new law miraculously makes all criminals suddenly quit breaking the law.
    Because so far, they are doing a wonderful job not paying attention to the numerous ones already on the books. Unfortunately because of our court system, many get more then one chance.....
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  17. #692
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,700

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    captnjak,...Explain to me why, with such a high number of guns in my area, there isn't rampant gun crime. Because by your and SC's logic we should be damn near Dodge City.
    Interesting question. Would the answer hold true for my area, where there are very few guns? With the extremely rare occurrence a couple months ago of a guy shooting himself...the last gunshot in town was about 15 years ago when a cop had to put a dog down.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  18. #693
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    It's not that I don't like your opinion. It's that you supported your opinion with made up and/or incomplete definitions.
    A militia is not of the people? What of that is made up? I guess it really don't matter as the Supreme Court said it was separate.
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  19. #694
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    Interesting question. Would the answer hold true for my area, where there are very few guns? With the extremely rare occurrence a couple months ago of a guy shooting himself...the last gunshot in town was about 15 years ago when a cop had to put a dog down.
    Density of firearms ownership has nothing to do with the proliferation of criminal activity. There are many factors.

    None of those in low crime areas will be prevented from owning firearms with universal background checks.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  20. #695
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,700

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    And most guns are not purchased for killing people.

    Target shooting. Hunting. Defense.

    And yes, in some cases, but few, very few, killing people.

    So that argument doesn't hold water.

    ...
    Many guns purchased are pistols, meant to be carried by the owner. These are carried for "defense". Question...when you are being taught to fire a pistol as defense...are you taught to shoot to wound or shoot to kill?

    Call it defense all you want....that gun's purpose is to kill the attacker.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  21. #696
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    They would be required for all firearms transactions. Something that isn't the case now. Many states have no waiting period. So if a background check shows the individual shouldn't have been sold a firearm it is too late.
    Solid and complete, for the law abiding citizen. What of those that won't follow the law?
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  22. #697
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    Solid and complete, for the law abiding citizen. What of those that won't follow the law?
    Then they are doing something illegal and will be prevented from owning a firearm via the legal process.

    Will it stop all of them? No, but it makes the acquisition more difficult.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  23. #698
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    None of those in low crime areas will be prevented from owning firearms with universal background checks.
    Then we don't need them. Now we can agree on something.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  24. #699
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Then we don't need them. Now we can agree on something.
    I didn't say that. Since you agree it won't make any difference there is no harm in them.

    Unless you launch off on some tyranny rant again.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  25. #700
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Then they are doing something illegal and will be prevented from owning a firearm via the legal process.

    Will it stop all of them? No, but it makes the acquisition more difficult.
    But in all these mass shootings, what of this process would have prevented it? Or those in the future?
    What of the mental health component?
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. PG soon.....we hope!?
    By arhaney in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-23-2007, 11:39 AM
  2. Not Exactly Fire Related, But It Fits.
    By MalahatTwo7 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-28-2004, 11:48 AM
  3. Might there be hope?!!
    By BC79er_OLDDELETE in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 02-09-2004, 12:04 PM
  4. Any Hope?
    By Kiernan in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-26-2003, 09:48 PM
  5. Hope for the best?
    By Bones42 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-15-2003, 09:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register