or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Virginia Tech killing: more than 30 dead
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Virginia Tech killing: more than 30 dead - Page 11

post #401 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

Yes. It should. It is horrid that he was declared insane and sold a gun.

I second that. It would take very little to add this to the NICS system. THAT is common-sense criminal control, rather than ineffective gun control.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #402 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

For a break to the lighter side, what do you bet "Mr ?" made his DVD on a Mac? I wonder if he read these forums??

<chills> And now for something completely different...
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #403 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

<chills> And now for something completely different...

Perhaps that post was darker than I thought
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #404 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

Perhaps that post was darker than I thought

No.. not that dark... just gives pause to the "silent types" we all know that might be a little, well "too silent," ya know. I remember when I first learned that I drove by Charlie Whitman's house every day on the way to work without knowing it. Makes you think.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #405 of 524
Understood.
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #406 of 524
It makes me sad to think of a little child growing up to be a madman killer. The more I study those images, the sadder I get.
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #407 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

It makes me sad to think of a little child growing up to be a madman killer. The more I study those images, the sadder I get.

Yep. Maybe it was a CIA Black Op. He wasn't born, he was made. Sounds like some kind of film that he would have liked.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #408 of 524
And speaking of Black Ops, kudos to you Fellowship for putting that link to Alex Jones in your sig. I'm glad he's back on the air in Austin.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #409 of 524
Alex Jones?!!! hooboy...


The Cho Seung-Hui Video Show


" If we are to believe the emerging timeline of events, Cho Seung-Hui killed a woman and her RA in a dorm, went back to his dorm and captured a QuickTime video rant, burned a DVD, trekked to the post office with two 9mm weapons in tow, mailed the DVD, along with photos and miscellaneous writings to NBC, and then marched over to Norris Hall and killed another thirty or so people execution-style.

Add to this a bevy of experts on television this evening declaring Cho Seung-Hui to be obviously paranoid schizophrenic. Excuse me, but paranoid schizophrenics, minus medication, have a difficult time stitching two coherent sentences together, let alone methodically engaging in homicide, managing to escape undetected, and then recording thoughts after the fact and conjuring up the wherewithal to send out a press release.

I'm not buying it.

But what I can buy, or at least entertain, is the possibility Cho Seung-Hui is, for lack of a better term, a Manchurian Candidate. Do a Google search on Project Bluebird, the very real CIA experiments in brainwashing and multiple personality engineering. "

, and double

Jones, the same attention whore who brought us Bohemian Grove and...oh wait, half of his links on his site don't work...OMGOMGOMG9!!CARRIERLOSTCARRIERLOSTCARRIERLO ST

post #410 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Alex Jones?!!! hooboy...


The Cho Seung-Hui Video Show


" If we are to believe the emerging timeline of events, Cho Seung-Hui killed a woman and her RA in a dorm, went back to his dorm and captured a QuickTime video rant, burned a DVD, trekked to the post office with two 9mm weapons in tow, mailed the DVD, along with photos and miscellaneous writings to NBC, and then marched over to Norris Hall and killed another thirty or so people execution-style.

Add to this a bevy of experts on television this evening declaring Cho Seung-Hui to be obviously paranoid schizophrenic. Excuse me, but paranoid schizophrenics, minus medication, have a difficult time stitching two coherent sentences together, let alone methodically engaging in homicide, managing to escape undetected, and then recording thoughts after the fact and conjuring up the wherewithal to send out a press release.

I'm not buying it.

But what I can buy, or at least entertain, is the possibility Cho Seung-Hui is, for lack of a better term, a Manchurian Candidate. Do a Google search on Project Bluebird, the very real CIA experiments in brainwashing and multiple personality engineering. "

, and double

Jones, the same attention whore who brought us Bohemian Grove and...oh wait, half of his links on his site don't work...OMGOMGOMG9!!CARRIERLOSTCARRIERLOSTCARRIERLO ST


Yea... it does make for great radio and entertainment, as long as you don't take everything he says for gospel. I do like how I hear about things that are buried on page six and really mean something to understanding the global elite and how they work. They rule, you know.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #411 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

...oh wait, half of his links on his site don't work...OMGOMGOMG9!!CARRIERLOSTCARRIERLOSTCARRIERLO ST

That was funny. I love these forums sometimes.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #412 of 524
My favorite is that he was a North Korean sent here as a child and programmed by his "handlers" (who you thought were his parents) to do this at the command of the NK leadership. Yep, they believe it. Heard it several times over the past few days.

"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #413 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

My favorite is that he was a North Korean sent here as a child and programmed by his "handlers" (who you thought were his parents) to do this at the command of the NK leadership. Yep, they believe it. Heard it several times over the past few days.


Manchurian Candidate?

<starts singing I'm A Seoul Man...>
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #414 of 524
Jeez, I wasn't gone for a minute and Alex changed the title...



Where's Sirhan Sirhan when we need him...
post #415 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

And speaking of Black Ops, kudos to you Fellowship for putting that link to Alex Jones in your sig. I'm glad he's back on the air in Austin.

AJ? Now you really ARE starting to scare me!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #416 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

STFU? That's not very nice. Tsk. Tsk.

You are woefully misinformed. Or just pushing your hatred of guns. I'm a proud NRA Life Member, Instructor, and gun owner. And will be forever. You are just another utopian socialist that is carrying Michael Bloomberg's water.

Anyone that disagrees is a socialist. Gotcha.

Quote:
Let me help you here. What follows registration? In Australia? In California? In Africa? In 1939 Germany? yep- CONFISCATION. Sorry, but that is historical fact. Deal with it. I have precedent for thinking that people like you want to eventually TAKE MY GUNS.

Registration only equals confiscation in the minds of folks who are zealots. Lets see...registration of NFA weapons means...confiscation. No...seems like all Class 3 license holders still have their NFA weapons. California...still seems to be gun owners there.

The NRA's official position is for gun registration. But here's a lifer that hates it. Hmmm...and folks wonder why no one believes the NRA's official position?

Scratch the surface a little and BOOM...rampant paranoia where we live in a gestapo nation out to get our guns. State laws are just that...state laws. If you live in a gun friendly state like VA or TX registration will never be followed by confiscation.

The 2nd amendment should preclude a national (total) ban on guns.

Quote:
BTW- Who has given away more gun locks than the VPC and Brady combined? In fact more than any other group in the nation? That's right- the N-R-A!

...

If your car is stolen and used in a crime by a criminal... are you responsible even though you locked the doors? Give me a break.

Gun locks don't stop theft and you KNOW that. Gun locks keeps kids from getting hurt. If your guns aren't on your person they should be in a safe. In the nightstand when you're IN the bed is sufficient for me as "on your person". In the nightstand when you're out of the house aint.

If a manufacturer continues to supply a source that is known to have problems with controls (like the one that "lost" thier AR to the sniper) then, yes, I'd say they were being negligent. If the industry self-policed better with sales and access there wouldn't be much cause for increased regulation.

Quote:
You can have your totalitarian wet-dream all day about shipping us all off to our own little country, or whatever the hell you are babbling about. It's indicative of the fantasy world you'd like to live in, and are trying to force on the rest of us.

It was a joke you loon. Well half a joke...

Quote:
Please, stay the hell out of Texas.

Well heck yeah. Been there, done that, don't need to do that again.

Quote:
If guns themselves are the problem, why are there no shootings at gun shows? Thousands of guns just lying around? Because the good people have guns TOO.

You go to gun shows that allow loaded weapons on the floor? Riiiight. Like gun shows these days that allow loaded weapons can get flipping insurance for the show.

Don't bullshit a bullshitter.

Vinea
post #417 of 524
Please let me know where you find that the NRA's position is FOR registraion. I'm fascinated.

This would portend otherwise.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #418 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

I am a precious stone dealer. Among other things. People in my line of work are killed weekly by gun-law violating criminals.

Well, YOU need a gun. But most folks don't.

Family used to be in the jewelry business. Lucrative but invariably vigilence wears off and you can lose years of work in an instant. Like a cousin in law...went into a 7-11 and came back to find his van looted. Was gone just long enough to buy a soda. Had to start back at square one and rebuild.

Road shows suck. If I were doing road shows I'd be carrying too and I can't hit anything with a handgun except with a contender using shot. Not exactly a very good self defense gun. Hmmm...there are .410 revolvers...

Vinea
post #419 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Registration only equals confiscation in the minds of folks who are zealots.

Tell that to the victims of Pol Pot. The Jews under Hitler. Our own gun grabber Gray Davis. The Australian people. It has HAPPENED TIME AND TIME AND TIME AGAIN. Such amazing denial of history. You cannot go get them, until you know where they are.

Please do your homework:

California, 1992: Gray Davis and Bill Lockyer
Here and Here and Here

Quote:
people who were actually charged with a felony, then, pursuant to the statute, registered their firearm, had the felony charge reduced to an infraction, and got their gun back. These people also got a letter from DOJ saying their registration was invalid and instructing them to turn in their firearm to law enforcement or face prosecution (again).
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #420 of 524
The NRA is against gun registration.
post #421 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Well, YOU need a gun. But most folks don't.

Family used to be in the jewelry business. Lucrative but invariably vigilence wears off and you can lose years of work in an instant. Like a cousin in law...went into a 7-11 and came back to find his van looted. Was gone just long enough to buy a soda. Had to start back at square one and rebuild.

Road shows suck. If I were doing road shows I'd be carrying too and I can't hit anything with a handgun except with a contender using shot. Not exactly a very good self defense gun. Hmmm...there are .410 revolvers...

Vinea

Well, then you understand my point. What bureaucrat is going to decide who "needs" a gun and who should just try 911 instead?

Susanna Hupp was not in a dangerous line of work... but she "needed" a gun when a maniac killed her parents in cold blood in front of her, while her gun was only feet away.

Who determines "need"?
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #422 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Please let me know where you find that the NRA's position is FOR registraion. I'm fascinated.

Hmm...I'm a dork. There was some response piece I remebered about how the NRA has always supported responsible gun use over the years, including supporting the existance of BATF, called for better enforcement yadda yadda yadda...but you're right. The official position is against registration and I was wrong.

Well F me...the one time I don't google to doublecheck an opinion I find myself talking out of my ass.

Hmm...I bet it was that the NRA supported the 1934 NFA and the 1968 GCA...and I rememeber someone whinging at me about project exile supporting registration or somesuch (the NRA sold out, yadda yadda yeadda). Back before I got tired of it all and walked away.

So, my bad and all...so when are you going to acknowledge that you goofed on the nazi thing or answer about gun safes and shows?

Vinea
post #423 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Tell that to the victims of Pol Pot. The Jews under Hitler. Our own gun grabber Gray Davis. The Australian people. It has HAPPENED TIME AND TIME AND TIME AGAIN. Such amazing denial of history. You cannot go get them, until you know where they are.

Please do your homework:

California, 1992: Gray Davis and Bill Lockyer
Here and Here and Here

A letter saying you missed the deadline so you need to turn in your gun is exactly like banging on every door to get guns. Well, not so much.

The letters imply what? That all the folks that correctly registered their guns...still had them...

And ONLY with legislation that bans guns would guns be taken away. That would never happen in TX or VA unless enough voters agreed. Hell freezing over comes to mind for that possibility.

Vinea
post #424 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Well, then you understand my point. What bureaucrat is going to decide who "needs" a gun and who should just try 911 instead?

Susanna Hupp was not in a dangerous line of work... but she "needed" a gun when a maniac killed her parents in cold blood in front of her, while her gun was only feet away.

Who determines "need"?

If susanna hupp is as well trained as you then she can have a gun. Simple, no?

Here's the deal...without knowing you lets say I provisionally trust that you are competent with a gun from what you say here.

Tell me that you don't know some owners that you don't think are accidents waiting to happen? I'm at the range and there's an idiot with a hammer mark on his forehead sprawled out because he bought a desert eagle without a clue how to shoot. There are morons that walk around with loaded guns, waving them about as they talk because hey, its safe...they have the safety on...oh...gee...no they didn't...sorry.

And honestly? It always made me a bit nervous when my cousin-in-law carried. The guy is not really the sharpest tool in the shed. And I know I sure as hell shouldn't be carrying unless I'm in Texas.

Vinea
post #425 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

And ONLY with legislation that bans guns would guns be taken away. That would never happen in TX or VA unless enough voters agreed. Hell freezing over comes to mind for that possibility.

Vinea

I was pointing out that you can do your best to remain legal, and still get the "gotcha" treatment. Citizens were acting in good faith to be legal and lost their guns. There is a lot of anger left within the gun owner community for the things that ATF pulled during the Clinton years... we have long memories and remember those abuses. We also saw the gun confiscations in New Orleans, where citizens who could not call the police for help had their guns taken when they needed them most for protection. (Article here)We recently saw the ATF (under Bush no less) violating the privacy rights and 2nd Amendment freedoms of citizens in Richmond, VA. (Congressional Hearings on that Here)

The issue is not the state bans. We NRA bubbas ceded California and the northeast a long time ago in many respects. We are talking about Feinstein, Schumer, McCarthy, and the gang making federal laws that affect everyone. Should gun laws be different in rural Montana than in downtown NYC? Maybe. But the Bradys and their accomplices are looking to force their will on every citizen in the nation, from Kalispell to NYC.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #426 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

If susanna hupp is as well trained as you then she can have a gun. Simple, no?

Here's the deal...without knowing you lets say I provisionally trust that you are competent with a gun from what you say here.

Tell me that you don't know some owners that you don't think are accidents waiting to happen? I'm at the range and there's an idiot with a hammer mark on his forehead sprawled out because he bought a desert eagle without a clue how to shoot. There are morons that walk around with loaded guns, waving them about as they talk because hey, its safe...they have the safety on...oh...gee...no they didn't...sorry.

And honestly? It always made me a bit nervous when my cousin-in-law carried. The guy is not really the sharpest tool in the shed. And I know I sure as hell shouldn't be carrying unless I'm in Texas.

Vinea

At the time of her parents' murders, concealed carry was illegal in Texas. She and Jerry Patterson wrote the law and got it passed when she was elected to the State House.

Gun owners who are accidents waiting to happen are not allowed anywhere near my range. People have to pass a written test to even get to the firing line with me. And yes, there are people who should get some IQ before they have a gun, or a car, or a working penis, or a lot of things. I have ZERO tolerance for carelessness around me, and I've turned in people with guns who were using them in a reckless way. It's certainly not like "well, good luck, y'all" when we go to the range or even are carrying daily. People who do not act responsibly are a huge liability to themselves, those around them, and MY RIGHTS when something goes wrong. It is why I became an instructor, not just a gun owner.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #427 of 524
If this can't defend your home, nothing can!!

How about one for your SUV? Tailgate THIS!


*I know, full autos are tightly controlled and regulated, and outside the scope of this discussion, and those SUVs are being produced for contractors in Iraq; but I have to admit to being impressed whenever I got to see a live round shoot in the military...
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #428 of 524
Here's an idea!

How about we NOT repeal gun control laws; especially the ones that help to deter procession of semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons.

Yea... something tells me that work help.
post #429 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

Here's an idea!

How about we NOT repeal gun control laws; especially the ones that help to deter procession of semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons.

Yea... something tells me that work help.

No no no. We simply need to keep everything as it is, but add one simple requirement: all girls between the ages of 13 and 21 must be required by law to carry at all times a semi-automatic pistol loaded with hollowpoints.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #430 of 524
Seriously, if we Americans had to get off our lazy asses in order to kill someone instead of a gun doing all the work, we'd see a hell of a lot less killing.
post #431 of 524
Joe is deperate and wants to rob a liquor store.

He's not a seasoned criminal. He doesn't have a "posse", he's not a "gangsta" and he doesn't have any idea on earth how to get a gun illegally.

But he can go to Big 5 and get one on 2 weeks.

Please explain how this right makes us safer.
post #432 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Joe is deperate and wants to rob a liquor store.

He's not a seasoned criminal. He doesn't have a "posse", he's not a "gangsta" and he doesn't have any idea on earth how to get a gun illegally.

But he can go to Big 5 and get one on 2 weeks.

Please explain how this right makes us safer.

Gina is being stalked by a former acquaintance. She is not near a police station. She does not have gun-owning friends or neighbors who can help her if she is attacked. She can go to her local sporting goods store and obtain the means to defend herself.

Please explain how ending her right to a firearm makes her safer.

See how that works? And BTW, the fastest growing group of gun owners in America are single women in urban and suburban areas.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #433 of 524
Now which hypothetical situation do you honestly believe is more common?
post #434 of 524
Thank God I'm already married; dating will soon be a very dangerous business: "Is that a gun in your pocket or are you not what I think you are?"


BTW : Your story about Gina has a very odd timeline. If she is being stalked "now" and can get to a sporting goods store, she can call the police and wait a few minutes. She would not be able to learn how to use the gun effectively in the same period of time. Also, if she did have the gun and shot and missed, her life would be at far greater risk than if she had not had the gun.

What if Gina is not yet old enough to buy a gun, say 17? Her "right" doesn't do her any good. She could have started learning judo at an early age and that would do a lot more for her than something she cannot legally obbtain yet.

What if Gina is of age but is a grad student in something say, like medicine. She will not have the time to go to a range and practice and thus would be unprepared, putting her, again, at greater risk.

What if the stalker grabs her and she drops the gun? Without the defensive tool she has now spent many hours training on, she is now defenceless.

Sorry, but my training and experience has taught me that to rely on a tool for your defence is not the best way to defend yourself. If the tool augments the other training (a taser, for example), that is a different scenario and indeed may work in her favor.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #435 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Gun owners who are accidents waiting to happen are not allowed anywhere near my range. People have to pass a written test to even get to the firing line with me. And yes, there are people who should get some IQ before they have a gun, or a car, or a working penis, or a lot of things. I have ZERO tolerance for carelessness around me, and I've turned in people with guns who were using them in a reckless way. It's certainly not like "well, good luck, y'all" when we go to the range or even are carrying daily. People who do not act responsibly are a huge liability to themselves, those around them, and MY RIGHTS when something goes wrong. It is why I became an instructor, not just a gun owner.

Great. Now reconcile this reasonable statement with no mandatory testing and licensing (aka registration)?

How do you have confidence that the person on the bus with you with a gun is a trained, competent owner and not a yahoo you wouldn't want on your range without mandatory testing and registration?

Can't.

Just like with driving, I'm willing to lose my "right" to drive unless I'm able to show I can do so safely. I sure as heck do not want to share the road with folks that can't show they can drive competently.

I bet everyone would feel safer if we all knew that the folks who legally owned guns were safe with them...whatever the intended use. That means a lot less mainstream support for bad gun control laws.

Vinea
post #436 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Thank God I'm already married; dating will soon be a very dangerous business: "Is that a gun in your pocket or are you not what I think you are?"


BTW : Your story about Gina has a very odd timeline. If she is being stalked "now" and can get to a sporting goods store, she can call the police and wait a few minutes. She would not be able to learn how to use the gun effectively in the same period of time. Also, if she did have the gun and shot and missed, her life would be at far greater risk than if she had not had the gun.

What if Gina is not yet old enough to buy a gun, say 17? Her "right" doesn't do her any good. She could have started learning judo at an early age and that would do a lot more for her than something she cannot legally obbtain yet.

What if Gina is of age but is a grad student in something say, like medicine. She will not have the time to go to a range and practice and thus would be unprepared, putting her, again, at greater risk.

What if the stalker grabs her and she drops the gun? Without the defensive tool she has now spent many hours training on, she is now defenceless.

Sorry, but my training and experience has taught me that to rely on a tool for your defence is not the best way to defend yourself. If the tool augments the other training (a taser, for example), that is a different scenario and indeed may work in her favor.

Sure... I'll take the bait. She, as we all, would be very well served by knowing judo, conflict resolution, how to use a taser, call for help, avoid situations, all that nice stuff that goes along with basic personal safety. I have never indicated that a gun was the only way to remain safe- it just has a little more chance of being able to overcome the threat of whatever size. Your brain is the most powerful weapon you have, and then whatever tools you choose to augment that ability. As I said before, there are six ways to get off the force path before someone's gotta go.

BTW- most stalkers make multiple contacts over weeks or months before a violent act takes place. But being a LEO, you knew that.

Would we all know the name Kitty Genovese if she had been in possession of a firearm?
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #437 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

How do you have confidence that the person on the bus with you with a gun is a trained, competent owner and not a yahoo you wouldn't want on your range without mandatory testing and registration?

Can't.

Balderdash. Poppycock.

Again, you have misrepresented my argument. The person on the bus carrying in Texas has been through 8 hours of classroom instruction, at least 2 hours supervised and tested at the range, and is personally registered, fingerprinted, and all that with the State of Texas. The State sets the mandatory standards. I have confidence because I have met hundreds of instructors, and we know that one clown can cause an accident and thus a PR nightmare that could cost us our rights. I've even seen CHL instructors throw people out of their classes because it was not being taken seriously. Not one person in Texas, in decade plus since we got CHL, has been even indicted for unlawful use of their firearm while engaging in concealed carry. Not one. That in itself is a thumb in the eye of all the liberals who said we'd have "the wild west" and "shootouts over parking spaces."

If they are carrying WITHOUT a license, then they should be put away because it is a state jail felony. At that point, they are acting criminally.

You seem to be putting forth that I want everyone to carry without a license and with no restrictions whatsoever. That's not it at all. Licensing someone to carry a concealed weapon is one thing. Registering what is in my gun safe is quite another. One is insuring standards and public safety. The other has no purpose other than to eventually confiscate my firearms.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #438 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Just like with driving, I'm willing to lose my "right" to drive unless I'm able to show I can do so safely. I sure as heck do not want to share the road with folks that can't show they can drive competently.

You know, I would be willing to entertain mandatory gun safety lectures for gun buyers. I know that when you buy a Glock, you are required to sign that you have read and received the company's safety materials and warnings. Almost every gun sold these days has a lock right in the box standard. I don't want reckless, ignorant people to have guns, they make it much easier to take my right away. I think that a 15 minute lecture on safety should be a part of every gun sale, to make sure the person understands the safety features and basic operation of the firearm. I can get on board with that. But when you get into another database of one kind or another, I can tell you that there is going to be a lot of resistance from people who do not trust that the info will not be used wrongly.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #439 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post


BTW- most stalkers make multiple contacts over weeks or months before a violent act takes place. But being a LEO, you knew that.



Did you notice that I wrote "now", as in at that one moment in time?

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #440 of 524
A 15-minute lecture?

My JHS spent two hours lecturing us on the dangers of smoking and half my classmates now smoke. Go figure.

Drivers' Ed classes give lots of air time to driving the speed-limit. How many drivers really seem to have listened?

Hot air ain't gonna do nuthin.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Virginia Tech killing: more than 30 dead