Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 32 of 61 FirstFirst ... 222930313233343542 ... LastLast
Results 621 to 640 of 1213
Like Tree82Likes

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

  1. #621
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    Except for in the 2 cases I posted above....where normally responsible people killed 2 other people.

    And trying them and sentencing them....too late....they already killed.

    Apparently, in an area where carrying a gun is legal....that threat of the other guy having a gun doesn't stop shootings.

    Guns aren't the problem....people are. 2 guys who simply could have walked away....chose to shoot instead. Now we learn that 1 of them ordered pizza, left the scene, and never bothered to call 911. Not the guns fault.....people.

    We can discuss and argue all day for months...but we're getting no where. Background checks would not have stopped this. Restricting what firearms can be carried would not have stopped this. There was no history to indicate this guys weapons should have been confiscated. No laws, no punishments would have stopped this. It was a person's choice to act.
    There are thousands and thousands of shootings each year in this country. Neither side of this debate should use a single incident (or even a handful of incidents) as proof that their position is correct. No, there is no way to stop them all. Yes, some will fall through the cracks of any legislation. The all or nothing mentality is not realistic. The fact that some people will bypass the law is not a valid reason to throw away the law. If this were a valid arguement, WE WOULD HAVE NO LAWS AT ALL! It is really quite a silly position to take.

    Having no controls whatsoever would be just as wrong as an out right ban on gun ownership.

    Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Great slogan. Works well on bumper stickers. Gun violence is just one of many complex issues we face as a society. We won't solve this issue, or any other serious issue, with bumper stickers. Not to mention that the gun and the person need eachother. Otherwise there is no shooting. Remove either half of the equation to prevent the outcome.

    I believe background checks can help REDUCE gun violence.
    I believe that laws aimed at reducing the illegal smuggling of guns between states can help REDUCE gun violence.
    I DON'T believe that either of these measures pose an undue or unfair hardship on gun owners.


  2. #622
    Truckie SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    And I'm sure there were people who were prevented from owning weapons.
    Absolutely. Now if we could just get those pesky criminals to 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

  3. #623
    Truckie SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,514

    Default

    I believe background checks can help REDUCE gun violence.

    There has been a background check program and a federal waiting period for years. But until you agree to violate HIPPA or at minimum, get a national database that is effective, the program is at it's limits.
    I believe that laws aimed at reducing the illegal smuggling of guns between states can help REDUCE gun violence.

    The mere fact that it is "illegal" smuggling tells me there is laws already being broken. What's the solution, more laws to break?
    I DON'T believe that either of these measures pose an undue or unfair hardship on gun owners.

    Nor do most people. But lets honestly look at the real issue, the human. You may think that's a cure slogan, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people.", but you can not deny the fact it is 100% accurate.
    Last edited by SPFDRum; 02-10-2014 at 12:58 PM.
    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

  4. #624
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    But lets honestly look at the real issue, the human. You may think that's a cute slogan, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people.", but you can not deny the fact it is 100% accurate.
    In the cases we are discussing a more accurate slogan would be "people with guns kill people."
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  5. #625
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,895

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    So is the line that since criminals will get guns we should do nothing.

    Nobody said do nothing. Almost to a man those that disagree with you have called for one of the following; 1) Mandatory sentencing for gun crimes, 2) Harsher enforcement of gun laws already on the books. You are the only one crying the nonsense of doing nothing. Another diversion attempt.


    I have not advocated anything would prohibit individual ownership.

    No you just want to control what law abiding citizens get to own guns and what guns they can own.
    Do you own any firearms?
    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

  6. #626
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,895

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Making a valid analogy. I can see how you wouldn't comprehend it.
    No you diverted into ridiculousness because no one here has said do nothing. What they have said is they disagree with your baseless, hypothetical, answer to gun violence.
    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

  7. #627
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,812

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    In the cases we are discussing a more accurate slogan would be "people with guns kill people."
    Are you saying that the same people only killed to use a gun, and that without the gun, they'd not utilize other methods? Some of which could be more effective at taking human lives and less likely to result in the perps immediate need to commit suicide. So even if on the best day any measure reduces the number of guns available, how might we gauge the true number of people that it will save? Or are you only interested in stopping gun violence?

  8. #628
    Truckie SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    In the cases we are discussing a more accurate slogan would be "people with guns kill people."
    People with anything they can find, including their hands, kill people. Still, it's the people...
    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. #629
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,895

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    I believe background checks can help REDUCE gun violence.
    I have to agree with SPFDRum. Until those data bases have access to mental health records you could potentially have a person that is mentally ill, with no criminal record still buy a gun legally.

    I believe that laws aimed at reducing the illegal smuggling of guns between states can help REDUCE gun violence.
    Is there legal smuggling? There are already laws in place regarding transporting and selling guns to people with criminal records. Maybe if we spent more time enforcing laws on the books instead of writing more that won't be enforced unless it is politically expedient gun crime would drop.

    I DON'T believe that either of these measures pose an undue or unfair hardship on gun owners.
    Believe what you wish to. I am tired of my rights and privacy being eroded by the day and most people willingly saying "okay sure it's for the common good" when it never really accomplishes anything but to strengthen the government's hold on us.
    Just for curiousity captnjak, how is that magazine capacity law working on cutting down gun violence in New York? But then again you guys seem okay with giving up your rights...Size restrictions on sodas anyone?
    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

  10. #630
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,895

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    In the cases we are discussing a more accurate slogan would be "people with guns kill people."
    Would the kids at Sandy Hook be any less dead if the guy had tossed Molotov cocktails into the classroom? Or went after them with a chain saw? Or a baseball bat? Or if he was a suicide bomber. People set on killing will kill, the only thing that changes will be the weapon.
    SPFDRum likes this.
    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

  11. #631
    Truckie SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Just for curiousity captnjak, how is that magazine capacity law working on cutting down gun violence in New York? But then again you guys seem okay with giving up your rights...Size restrictions on sodas anyone?
    Maybe he is busy moving to the south side of Chicago. You know, that Utopian paradise of gun laws, strict restrictions, and out right bans...
    FyredUp likes this.
    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. #632
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Just for curiousity captnjak, how is that magazine capacity law working on cutting down gun violence in New York? But then again you guys seem okay with giving up your rights...Size restrictions on sodas anyone?
    New York City has gun laws as strict as probably anywhere in the country. Magazine capacity is the least of it. The gun laws are not working out very well, as you may have heard. A huge part of the reason is the liberal and/or unenforced laws in states to the south of NYC. A consistent and cohesive federal law addressing smuggling of guns could conceivably help. Not entirely eradicate the problem, but help nonetheless.

    I doubt I am any more okay with giving up rights than you are. The controls I endorse do not, in my opinion, force anyone to GIVE UP any rights. The government knows where our houses (or other properties) are. It knows where we live and probably keep at least some of our registerd vehicles. It knows where we keep our money and how much we have. Why is it that very few people are worried about them confiscating those things? Why is potential confiscation the reason to oppose gun laws? Where is the consistency? The logic?

    New York City's last mayor made a despotic attempt to limit the size of sodas sold in the city. There was great resistence and the courts threw the law out. Probably due, at least in part, to constitutional rights and freedoms. The system worked as designed. Just as it will more than likely work if President Obama or some other future president (or governor or whatever) should decide to confiscate your weapons.

    For the record, I live in New York State but not New York City.

    The kids in Sandy Hook would be no less dead had the guy use a molotov cocktail, a baseball bat or a suicide bomb. BUT HE DID NOT USE ANY OF THOSE THINGS: HE USED A GUN. Like many perpetrators of gun violence, he probably didn't have the balls to get up close and personal, as those things would have required.

    By the way, I am all for better enforcement of laws already on the books. New York City actually enforces gun laws strongly. Ask NFL superstar Plaxico Buress about enforcement levels. But NYC has no ability to dictate the law to states to the south who are supplying the illeagal guns to NY. Nor does it have the power to enforce existing laws in those places, which are often NOT enforced by those states.
    Last edited by captnjak; 02-10-2014 at 02:53 PM.

  13. #633
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    Maybe he is busy moving to the south side of Chicago. You know, that Utopian paradise of gun laws, strict restrictions, and out right bans...
    I would bet that the guns used in crimes on the south side of Chicago come from some other place-Utopian or not, but I suspect not-where gun laws are liberal, non-existent or under enforced. If you live in a place where there are few restrictions on the sale of guns, maybe you should be careful when crowing about the lack of gun violence locally. Your city, state or other locality may very well be enabling a lot of gun mayhem in other places. You have every right to tell those other places to clean up their own mess. But you may want to evaluate whether or not you have a real claim to the moral high ground.

  14. #634
    Truckie SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    I would bet that the guns used in crimes on the south side of Chicago come from some other place-Utopian or not, but I suspect not-where gun laws are liberal, non-existent or under enforced. If you live in a place where there are few restrictions on the sale of guns, maybe you should be careful when crowing about the lack of gun violence locally. Your city, state or other locality may very well be enabling a lot of gun mayhem in other places. You have every right to tell those other places to clean up their own mess. But you may want to evaluate whether or not you have a real claim to the moral high ground.
    No moral high ground, but what you are telling me, criminals will still find a way to illegally obtain guns, no matter what local or federal laws are in place. What laws are you advocating to add to prevent this? It all falls back to the notion of how many laws broken is enough to realize that there are people hell bent on murder and destruction. Gun or no gun?
    Using the logic that scared New Yorker's into stricter guns laws, should there be a near zero incidence of gun crime?
    You used constitutional rights as a possible reason the soda size law was struck down in New York. With this in mind, what does "shall not be infringed upon" mean to you?
    Last edited by SPFDRum; 02-10-2014 at 03:04 PM.
    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

  15. #635
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,895

    Default

    Just to set the record straight...The Sandy Hook shooter STOLE the weapons he used from his mother, that he also murdered. Background checks would not have stopped that horrible crime.
    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

  16. #636
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,895

    Default

    captnjak,

    I just find it interesting that New York and Chicago's gun violence isn't the fault of criminals in those cities but law abiding gun owners resisting universal background checks in other states.

    Maybe if judges and law enforcement would do their jobs and arrest and prosecute gun criminals instead of pointing fingers the crime rate would drop.

    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.
    Last edited by FyredUp; 02-10-2014 at 05:35 PM. Reason: mis-typed a word
    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

  17. #637
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    In the cases we are discussing a more accurate slogan would be "people with guns kill people."
    "People with knives kill people".
    "People with baseball bats kill people".
    "People with tire irons kill people".
    "People with ropes kill people".
    "People with poison kill people".
    "People with cars kill people".
    "People with all kinds of other weapons kill people"

    Ban them all?

    The fact is guns kill a small majority of the folks in this country compared to other weapons. And mass killings are actually down compared to 20-30 years ago.

    So why is there no great push to ban the stuff that kills the majority of the people?

    Again Restricting the ownership of guns to law abiding people will do squat to stop murders in this country, unless of course you believe the Kool-Aid that the left is serving.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  18. #638
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Ban them all?
    We're discussing guns.

    According the FBI. In 2009 there were 13,600 homicides in the US. Of those, about 9,000 were committed by individuals using guns.

    So once again, facts don't support you.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  19. #639
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    captnjak,

    I just find it interesting that New York and Chicago's un violence isn't the fault of criminals in those cities but law abiding gun owners resisting universal background checks in other states.

    Maybe if judges and law enforcement would do their jobs and arrest and proescute gun criminals instead of pointing fingers the crime rate would drop.

    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.
    Gun violence absolutely IS the fault of the criminals in NYC, working in concert with not the law abiding gun owners in other states, but with the non law abiding gun sellers in other states. With the problem being differing levels of both law enactment and law enforcement between the states.

    Gun laws in NYC are enforced and are quite effective. IN NYC, one cannot walk into a so called "gun show" in an American Legion or Elk's Hall, whip out a couple of grand in cash and buy a bunch of guns. Yet it is possible for one to do so in other places. Those guns can then be sold in NYC on the street at a huge profit.

    If we only passed laws that would work to perfection, we would have NO laws.

    Maybe the only gun crime in your area is the illegal sale of guns to criminals in Chicago.

  20. #640
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Just to set the record straight...The Sandy Hook shooter STOLE the weapons he used from his mother, that he also murdered. Background checks would not have stopped that horrible crime.
    What if the background checked inquired, without identifying the individual or the diagnosis, if any known mentally ill people lived in the household or would ever have access to the weapons? Can you tell me this could not stop some gun violence?

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, 10:39 AM
  2. Not Exactly Fire Related, But It Fits.
    By MalahatTwo7 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-28-2004, 10:48 AM
  3. Might there be hope?!!
    By BC79er_OLDDELETE in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 02-09-2004, 11:04 AM
  4. Any Hope?
    By Kiernan in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-26-2003, 08:48 PM
  5. Hope for the best?
    By Bones42 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-15-2003, 08:57 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