CDZ The Gun Supply Chain: People who should not have been allowed near a gun, much less to buy one

[yiostheoy]

Is execution the "appropriate manner" of punishment that you'd stipulate for all crimes that "cast doubt on whether the offender should be allowed" to exercise their 2nd Amendment right?

This issue of appropriateness was the whole reason that Hammurabi carved his stele and set them up throughout Babylonia.

Appropriateness is measured by the offense.

Hammurabi said "no more than an eye for an eye" in other words don't execute someone for a mayhem incident.

While Moses excused accidental manslaughters, murder has always carried a sentence of capital punishment with it.

The Chinese are even smarter than anyone else -- they harvest organs from murderers so that other patients' lives can be extended at the expense of the execution of the murderer who obviously took a life illegally and cannot restore it but can restore life to others. Of course in some cases like AIDS or hepatitis the organs are useless even then.

It would be creepy going into surgery knowing you were not going to ever awake from it again, but the price to be paid for murdering someone should be high. Otherwise everyone would be doing it.

 

[yiostheoy]

Before I can worry about who gets hold of a gun, I have to be sure that "upstanding" folks are the only ones who buy them.

The Second Amendment doesn't say anything about “the right of 01470145upstanding’ folks”. It speaks of “the right of the people”. That means every free, adult, American citizen. Everyone who is not currently confined to prison or a mental hospital, and who is not under any such condition as probation or parole. It even includes those that you might judge to not be “‘upstanding’ folks”.

Yes, well, you keep that in mind while you review the founders' writings looking for remarks that indicate they intended, or at least were acquiescent about, "the people" who aren't "upstanding" enough not to abuse the fact that they have a 2nd Amendment right "flipping out" and using the object acquired via that right to kill other citizens.

They didn't want the government oppressing the people...had they been able to see the mass murders committed by governments against their peoples in the future, they would not have just protected the right to bear arms, but would have mandated that every home have the best small arms available....and disarmed the government......

Neither of you two has provided any data or sources supporting your personal anecdotal views.

Fallacy. No support.

 

[yiostheoy]

Some states have "use a gun -- go to prison" laws. That solves the problem for the time the perp is behind bars.

The problem then arises again once the perp is free again.

The problem is that if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns.

And the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a better gun who is also a better shot.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Some states have "use a gun -- go to prison" laws. That solves the problem for the time the perp is behind bars.

The problem then arises again once the perp is free again.

The problem is that if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns.

And the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a better gun who is also a better shot.

The sentences for gun crimes is woefully inadequate

All gun crimes should be a federal offense prosecuted independently of any other charges with a minimum 25 year sentence
Anyone who does not respect the law, rights and safety of others by either committing violent crimes or by the illegal use of a firearm does not belong on the streets with the rest of us

 

[yiostheoy]

Some states have "use a gun -- go to prison" laws. That solves the problem for the time the perp is behind bars.

The problem then arises again once the perp is free again.

The problem is that if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns.

And the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a better gun who is also a better shot.

The sentences for gun crimes is woefully inadequate

All gun crimes should be a federal offense prosecuted independently of any other charges with a minimum 25 year sentence
Anyone who does not respect the law, rights and safety of others by either committing violent crimes or by the illegal use of a firearm does not belong on the streets with the rest of us

I would not kick stuff up to the Federal level just because you hate the crime.

States still have jurisdiction over their own residents who commit crimes within their own borders / state lines.

Federal is usually interstate or drugs.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Some states have "use a gun -- go to prison" laws. That solves the problem for the time the perp is behind bars.

The problem then arises again once the perp is free again.

The problem is that if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns.

And the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a better gun who is also a better shot.

The sentences for gun crimes is woefully inadequate

All gun crimes should be a federal offense prosecuted independently of any other charges with a minimum 25 year sentence
Anyone who does not respect the law, rights and safety of others by either committing violent crimes or by the illegal use of a firearm does not belong on the streets with the rest of us

I would not kick stuff up to the Federal level just because you hate the crime.

States still have jurisdiction over their own residents who commit crimes within their own borders / state lines.

Federal is usually interstate or drugs.

The abuse of a federally protected right should be a federal offense.

The only way to get the uniformly proper punishment for gun crimes is to make it a federal offense.

People want the federal government to implement some kind of gun control. There is no better gun control than the incarceration of those who abuse the right.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

All gun crimes should be a federal offense prosecuted…

The abuse of a federally protected right should be a federal offense.

The only way to get the uniformly proper punishment for gun crimes is to make it a federal offense.

People want the federal government to implement some kind of gun control. There is no better gun control than the incarceration of those who abuse the right.

Absolutely not!

Unless a crime takes place across state lines, or otherwise involves things that legitimately fall under federal authority, it's none of the federal government's business.

See the Tenth Amendment.

One of the most destructive things that has been done to this country has been to allow the federal government to stick its nose in all sorts of places that it has no business sticking it.

 

[Skull Pilot]

All gun crimes should be a federal offense prosecuted…

The abuse of a federally protected right should be a federal offense.

The only way to get the uniformly proper punishment for gun crimes is to make it a federal offense.

People want the federal government to implement some kind of gun control. There is no better gun control than the incarceration of those who abuse the right.

Absolutely not!

Unless a crime takes place across state lines, or otherwise involves things that legitimately fall under federal authority, it's none of the federal government's business.

See the Tenth Amendment.

One of the most destructive things that has been done to this country has been to allow the federal government to stick its nose in all sorts of places that it has no business sticking it.

Kidnapping is a federal crime even if the victim is not taken across state lines. Child pornography is a federal crime. Illegal wiretappin is a federal crime. None of these have to be done across state lines to be federally prosecuted

It makes sense to add gun crimes to the list so we can have uniformity in sentencing.

Either that or the fed should put financial pressure on the states as it does with drinking ages and speed limits and deny all federal funding unless states adopt appropriate gun crime sentencing

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Kidnapping is a federal crime even if the victim is not taken across state lines. Child pornography is a federal crime. Illegal wiretappin is a federal crime. None of these have to be done across state lines to be federally prosecuted

It makes sense to add gun crimes to the list so we can have uniformity in sentencing.

Either that or the fed should put financial pressure on the states as it does with drinking ages and speed limits and deny all federal funding unless states adopt appropriate gun crime sentencing

None of these are legitimately the business of the federal government. Again, see the Tenth Amendment.

None of these fall under the powers that the Constitution assigns to the federal government, so they are all the sole authority of the states.

You haven't made any argument here that would apply just as well to any other power that you might want the federal government to illegally usurp, in violation of thw Constitution.

 

[2aguy]

The solution is long, hard sentences, for those convicted of serious violent crimes, to keep them out of the free population.

That is a reactive not proactive measure. It does nothing to prevent one's being shot or to mitigate the severity of one's wounds after having been shot.

There is no way to do this...since criminals do not obey the law. Criminals get around current federal background checks at gun stores by using straw buyers, with clean records who can pass the background checks....or they steal the guns........since they pass background checks you can't stop them.

They will use the same method to get around background checks on private sales......


Criminals cannot get a license to own a gun, since they can't legally own a gun if they have a conviction on their record...so licensing normal, law abiding gun owners won't stop them.

Felons do not have to register illegal guns according to Haynes v. United States...so registering guns will only effect normal, law abiding gun owners, the ones not shooting people in the first place....

So please.....tell us which proactive measures that will prevent one's being shot or mitigate the severity of one's wounds after having been shot.....

We are waiting for your wisdom.......

The only way to stop criminals.......the way you deal with all other crime....you send in undercover police officers, use snitches and use actual police work.......you guys have this detached view of reality that seems to believe that guns are different than other criminal activity........

I have posted the arrest of gun traffickers in other threads...how are they caught......snitches......and the police are doing that right now....

This technique does not require universal background checks, licsesning gun owners, registering guns, limiting magazines or weapons....and it works everytime it is tried....

 

[320 Years of History]

And here we have a fine illustration of there being folks who own a gun and who are not naturally of a mind to use it in a responsible manner. Apparently the member's being unaffiliated with either major party is enough to potentially warrant one's being shot.

As an independent (Massachusetts calls us "unaffiliated") voter, if anyone from either party shows up at my home they're liable to get shot. I'd guess it's the same in North Carolina. Maybe the GOP is just trying to keep their workers safe.

That was the member's remark about the possible outcome political volunteers, in canvassing his neighborhood to garner support for their candidate, might suffer merely for showing up at the member's home....not knocking on the door, just being there is apparently enough to expose them to a real risk of being shot. One must wonder whether it's only the member's home or whether it's the entire neighborhood where that level of risk exists.

 

[Anathema]

That was the member's remark about the possible outcome political volunteers, in canvassing his neighborhood to garner support for their candidate, might suffer merely for showing up at the member's home....not knocking on the door, just being there is apparently enough to expose them to a real risk of being shot. One must wonder whether it's only the member's home or whether it's the entire neighborhood where that level of risk exists.

The Democratic, Republican and Green parties have all been informed (by registered letter) that their drones are not allowed on my property. They put their own drones in danger if they fail to inform.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And here we have a fine illustration of there being folks who own a gun and who are not naturally of a mind to use it in a responsible manner. Apparently the member's being unaffiliated with either major party is enough to potentially warrant one's being shot.

As an independent (Massachusetts calls us "unaffiliated") voter, if anyone from either party shows up at my home they're liable to get shot. I'd guess it's the same in North Carolina. Maybe the GOP is just trying to keep their workers safe.

That was the member's remark about the possible outcome political volunteers, in canvassing his neighborhood to garner support for their candidate, might suffer merely for showing up at the member's home....not knocking on the door, just being there is apparently enough to expose them to a real risk of being shot. One must wonder whether it's only the member's home or whether it's the entire neighborhood where that level of risk exists.

You need to turn on your internet bullshit filter

 

[Wilbur Right]

You need to turn on your internet bullshit filter

The Democratic, Republican and Green parties have all been informed (by registered letter) that their drones are not allowed on my property. They put their own drones in danger if they fail to inform.

Why you think the guy is bullshitting anyone? People HAVE been shot for showing up at the wrong door at the wrong time.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You need to turn on your internet bullshit filter

The Democratic, Republican and Green parties have all been informed (by registered letter) that their drones are not allowed on my property. They put their own drones in danger if they fail to inform.

Why you think the guy is bullshitting anyone? People HAVE been shot for showing up at the wrong door at the wrong time.

I guess unlike you I don't believe everything I read on an anonymous internet message board

 

[320 Years of History]

You need to turn on your internet bullshit filter

The Democratic, Republican and Green parties have all been informed (by registered letter) that their drones are not allowed on my property. They put their own drones in danger if they fail to inform.

Why you think the guy is bullshitting anyone? People HAVE been shot for showing up at the wrong door at the wrong time.

I guess unlike you I don't believe everything I read on an anonymous internet message board

As part of being respectful of others, I take people at their word until they show me why I should not via any of several methods:

• An emoticon/emoji showing their comment isn't meant to be taken as it's delivered.
• An abbreviation -- LOL, JK, etc. -- that indicates they aren't serious.
• Contradicting themselves about themselves.

I mean really. What is to be gained by writing about oneself in a political forum and misrepresenting oneself, one's would be, past or present actions or one's ideas? There's nothing to be gained there....no "there" there.

 

[Jarlaxle]

That was the member's remark about the possible outcome political volunteers, in canvassing his neighborhood to garner support for their candidate, might suffer merely for showing up at the member's home....not knocking on the door, just being there is apparently enough to expose them to a real risk of being shot. One must wonder whether it's only the member's home or whether it's the entire neighborhood where that level of risk exists.

The Democratic, Republican and Green parties have all been informed (by registered letter) that their drones are not allowed on my property. They put their own drones in danger if they fail to inform.

That was the member's remark about the possible outcome political volunteers, in canvassing his neighborhood to garner support for their candidate, might suffer merely for showing up at the member's home....not knocking on the door, just being there is apparently enough to expose them to a real risk of being shot. One must wonder whether it's only the member's home or whether it's the entire neighborhood where that level of risk exists.

The Democratic, Republican and Green parties have all been informed (by registered letter) that their drones are not allowed on my property. They put their own drones in danger if they fail to inform.

After reading this psycho's murder fantasies, I wonder if maybe it really is time for mandatory gun confiscation, with house-to-house searches for guns and summary executions for anyone not turning them in.

 

[320 Years of History]

And here we have a fine illustration of there being folks who own a gun and who are not naturally of a mind to use it in a responsible manner. Apparently the member's being unaffiliated with either major party is enough to potentially warrant one's being shot.

As an independent (Massachusetts calls us "unaffiliated") voter, if anyone from either party shows up at my home they're liable to get shot. I'd guess it's the same in North Carolina. Maybe the GOP is just trying to keep their workers safe.

That was the member's remark about the possible outcome political volunteers, in canvassing his neighborhood to garner support for their candidate, might suffer merely for showing up at the member's home....not knocking on the door, just being there is apparently enough to expose them to a real risk of being shot. One must wonder whether it's only the member's home or whether it's the entire neighborhood where that level of risk exists.

You need to turn on your internet bullshit filter

My BS filter here is tuned to catch:

• Misrepresentations of material and/or objective facts
• Implausible and/or improbable conjecture

When it comes to folks' attestations that are purely about their own acts and beliefs, I have no basis for disbelieving them.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

After reading this psycho's murder fantasies, I wonder if maybe it really is time for mandatory gun confiscation, with house-to-house searches for guns and summary executions for anyone not turning them in.

I have to wonder if you're even aware of the irony and hypocrisy in your posting. One can hope that you meant it to be sarcastic, but I'm not optimistic. If sincere, it certainly qualifies as a vivid expression of a “psycho's murder fantasies”, as well as an expression of deep contempt for this nations' Constitution and for the rule of law thereunder. In one sentence, you openly call for the violation of the Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Have you read the crap that psycho boy posts here?