Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-12-2015, 04:52 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(04-12-2015 04:36 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Damn. Could you imagine if we had all of those requirements to exercise any of the other rights in the Constitution? Background checks for free speech? Limits on how many times you can go to church in a week?

Yes, because they are so similar. Let me see if I can find a headline where two people opened up and let loose a barrage of free speech and killed 14 and wounded 17. Dodgy

(04-12-2015 04:36 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  How about we stop limiting rights of everyone because others can’t do the right thing?

I didn’t see anything on that lists that says you can’t own a firearm.

(04-12-2015 04:36 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  If you want the things you listed, change the Constitution. Because most of those things you listed are INFRINGEMENTS, and are prohibited.

And yet there are already laws that place prohibitions on firearms
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act
so either your premise is wrong or your premise is wrong.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
04-12-2015, 04:54 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(04-12-2015 04:25 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(04-12-2015 04:21 PM)Chas Wrote:  They are public dangers; the law even has a term for things like those - "attractive nuisance". Kids will investigate them and many injuries and deaths will occur.

They are pretty much nothing like guns inside the house.

I’m glad you said that. If there ever was a better example of an “attractive nuisance” than a gun inside a house for kids to play with I don’t know of one.

Except the discussion is about the guy with 1200 guns and no kids.

Quote:I’m going to forgo the citing of deaths and injuries caused by guns in the hands of children, I’m sure we both know that whatever that number is, it is too many.

Good, because the discussion is about the guy with 1200 guns and no kids.

Quote:ps The doctrine (of attractive nuisance) has been applied to hold landowners liable for injuries caused by abandoned cars, piles of lumber or sand, trampolines, and swimming pools. However, it can be applied to virtually anything on the property of the landowner.

The 1200 guns weren't 'on the property' - they were inside the house and do not come under the definition of 'attractive nuisance'.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-12-2015, 04:57 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(04-12-2015 04:31 PM)Brian37 Wrote:  
(04-12-2015 03:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  You keep repeating that refrain.
Isn't about time for you to offer some sort of constructive solution? Or at least steps in that direction?

I have, you just are too selfish to consider doing something different. Now, here it is again for the ADD aflicted.

1. Guns are not humans, guns are objects, stop treating an object as if it is living.

2. We need to stop making so many. Limit the amount made per year.

3. Nobody needs a spray weapon or big clip.

4. None of the above or even the rest of this list is saying "ban all guns"

5. Keep them out of the wrong hands, I think anyone would agree with that.

6. That means having no criminal record when you buy it isn't enough, the SB shooters had no record, the Va Tech shooter had no record.

7.Not just universal background checks, but mandatory psych evaluation.

8. Mandatory stress training, not just target hitting.

9. Periodic review for both mental and stress capability.

7. Liability insurance for injury or death

10. Ban on online sales.

11. Close gunshow loophole

12. Traceable ammo, limit on ammo.

13. Move to manufacturing smart guns

14. Mandatory 7 day waiting period and limit on total number of guns in a household.

15. Re read 4 until you stop being paranoid. None of that says "ban all guns".

And related to all that, investment in mental health care, and health care in general. Livable wages. Cheaper or free higher education. End corporate welfare.

Where did I say anything like that? Right, I didn't. Drinking Beverage

Calm the fuck down.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-12-2015, 05:02 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(04-12-2015 04:52 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(04-12-2015 04:36 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Damn. Could you imagine if we had all of those requirements to exercise any of the other rights in the Constitution? Background checks for free speech? Limits on how many times you can go to church in a week?

Yes, because they are so similar. Let me see if I can find a headline where two people opened up and let loose a barrage of free speech and killed 14 and wounded 17. Dodgy
[Image: kkk-rally.jpg]
Quote:
(04-12-2015 04:36 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  How about we stop limiting rights of everyone because others can’t do the right thing?

I didn’t see anything on that lists that says you can’t own a firearm.

That's not what 'limiting' means. Dodgy

Quote:
(04-12-2015 04:36 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  If you want the things you listed, change the Constitution. Because most of those things you listed are INFRINGEMENTS, and are prohibited.

And yet there are already laws that place prohibitions on firearms
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act
so either your premise is wrong or your premise is wrong.

Reasonable restrictions are reasonable. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-12-2015, 05:05 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(04-12-2015 04:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(04-12-2015 04:25 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  I’m glad you said that. If there ever was a better example of an “attractive nuisance” than a gun inside a house for kids to play with I don’t know of one.

Except the discussion is about the guy with 1200 guns and no kids.

Quote:I’m going to forgo the citing of deaths and injuries caused by guns in the hands of children, I’m sure we both know that whatever that number is, it is too many.

Good, because the discussion is about the guy with 1200 guns and no kids.

Quote:ps The doctrine (of attractive nuisance) has been applied to hold landowners liable for injuries caused by abandoned cars, piles of lumber or sand, trampolines, and swimming pools. However, it can be applied to virtually anything on the property of the landowner.

The 1200 guns weren't 'on the property' - they were inside the house and do not come under the definition of 'attractive nuisance'.

You’re the one who brought up the “attractive nuisance” angle. I only followed it to its logical conclusion, that firearms inside a home fall under the definition. This discussion while it may have begun about the guy with the 1200 weapons also encompasses what constitutes the overall safety of the public.

Throw away the 1 of 3 examples I made, I ammend the other two so that the guy with the gasoline and the guy with the pyrotechnics have no kids either. Remember I said one stores it in his basement and the other in his garage.

Can you seriously tell me that those actions do not endanger the lives of others? We know that they are just as “inanimate” as the guns.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-12-2015, 05:08 PM (This post was last modified: 04-12-2015 05:18 PM by Full Circle.)
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(04-12-2015 05:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  Reasonable restrictions are reasonable. Drinking Beverage

And herein lies the crux of the matter. What is and isn’t reasonable.

1200 guns = reasonable. Dodgy

I’m going to assume you don’t think any of the other suggestion on Brian37’s list were “reasonable”.

Drinking Beverage

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-12-2015, 05:19 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(04-12-2015 03:54 PM)onlinebiker Wrote:  
(04-12-2015 03:48 PM)JDog554 Wrote:  My question is why is it only a gun problem when it happens in the U.S.

Because the other countries have already passed draconian gun laws, and they fail to work.....

MAYBE if we get them passed in the US it will FINALLY work............

[/sarcasm]
What do you mean they don't work?

They DO work. US has the biggest murder rate of all developed countries in the world.

Take Japan as an example. They have really really strict gun laws. Maybe even one of the strictest in the world.
And they have 0.3 murder rate , and US has 3.8.

You have bigger murder rate then fuckin' Kosovo ffs.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Slowminded's post
04-12-2015, 05:21 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(04-12-2015 04:52 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(04-12-2015 04:36 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Damn. Could you imagine if we had all of those requirements to exercise any of the other rights in the Constitution? Background checks for free speech? Limits on how many times you can go to church in a week?

Yes, because they are so similar. Let me see if I can find a headline where two people opened up and let loose a barrage of free speech and killed 14 and wounded 17. Dodgy

(04-12-2015 04:36 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  How about we stop limiting rights of everyone because others can’t do the right thing?

I didn’t see anything on that lists that says you can’t own a firearm.

(04-12-2015 04:36 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  If you want the things you listed, change the Constitution. Because most of those things you listed are INFRINGEMENTS, and are prohibited.

And yet there are already laws that place prohibitions on firearms
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act
so either your premise is wrong or your premise is wrong.

Limiting the type of firearm is the same as a de facto ban. I specifically see "spray weapon" on that list which I assume to be auto and semi auto firearms.

Since the point of the second amendment is "well regulated" militia, and the individual citizen makes up the militia, the average citizen is entitled to the "regular" arms equal to the military. These would include all "small arms." "Regular" troops at the time of the Constitutions' writing were foot soldiers with rifles. I see no problem with limiting citizens to this standard. The writers of the constitution obviously didn't expect militia members to own canons. Today's military small arms are easily purchased by the average citizen, just as it should be. (In most states)

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-12-2015, 05:38 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(04-12-2015 05:08 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(04-12-2015 05:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  Reasonable restrictions are reasonable. Drinking Beverage

And herein lies the crux of the matter. What is and isn’t reasonable.

1200 guns = reasonable. Dodgy

I’m going to assume you don’t think any of the other suggestion on Brian37’s list were “reasonable”.

Drinking Beverage

I have, as anyone who has followed these debates here knows, advocated better controls. Brian's list has many of those ideas, but some that are pointless or not practicable.

Any proposed laws must address an actual problem. Just restricting access 'just because' is not reasonable.

So, when people call for this or that law, I ask "what problem are you trying to solve?" and "how does that address it?"

N.B. There is no "gun show loophole".

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-12-2015, 05:52 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
So, it was an ISIS-inspired terror attack.

Someone called it early. Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: