America’s Shooting Gallery 6-12-2008

[rdenney]

America’s Shooting Gallery 6.12

* LA: Bobby Brantley, 32, threatened to kill his estranged wife, Theresa Brantley, 31. Twelve hours later, Brantley fulfilled his fatal promise, murdering her and her mother inside her family's home before shooting himself after a standoff as police entered the house to save a 4-month-old boy.
* FL: A 14-year-old boy saw his father shoot his mother in the leg before ultimately killing her with a final shot. The father then turned the gun on himself. The Seminole County Sheriff's Office found Darryl Brooks, 44, and Peggy Brooks, 45, dead from a murder-suicide.
* NC: A murder-suicide might explain why the bodies of Richard Locklear, 23, and Thomas Ray “Tom” Grant, 37, were found shot to death at a Scotland County home. A third man, Byron Phipps was shot in the stomach and remains in intensive care. The shootings are believed to be the result of a domestic incident that happened during a party at the house.
* OH: The Fairfield County Sheriff's department believes a medical or emotional condition led an elderly man, Richard Behmer, 75, to kill his wife Velma, 70, and then himself in Amanda.
* WV: George Perkinson, 47, shot his wife Robin seven times while she was cleaning the school bus she drove before he turned the gun on himself, then went into the family home where his 15 year old son was sleeping. He died before firing any more shots.
* TX: Gerardo Maravilla-Luna, 15, who had just become a father, accidentally shot himself in the head while he was showing a handgun to five friends at his house when one shot was fired and killed him. He leaves behind his 2-day-old daughter, Lebette Chantelle, and a devastated family.
* ID: An apparent accidental shooting led northern Idaho authorities to a home where they discovered three people with plastic bags containing an estimated 50 marijuana plants. The gunshot victim later told police he suffered the wound when one of the defendant's dog knocked a gun off a desk and the weapon discharged.
* FL: On June 7th, Joshua Plecenik and two friends -- including Justin Bowen -- who went to locate Jacob Fenley for the purpose of confronting him. Then Plecenik jumped out of a Chevy truck with a 12 gauge shotgun, firing a single shot into the air among a crowd of people, yelling “who wants some.” Jacob's father, Keith Fenley, grabbed Plecenik and attempted to disarm him when the shotgun fired and struck Justin Bowen in the head, who died at the scene.
* VA: Albemarle County officers say they received a 911 call from a middle-aged man saying he'd been shot in the chest after an unintentional shooting.
* NJ: Russell Jackson, 22, shot and killed himself at the Red Bank Primary School after calling police to say he was suicidal last night. Jackson shot himself at about 11pm as police officers approached him.
* NV: The bodies of two men were found 80 miles north of Las Vegas, each had been shot in the head from a 12-gauge shotgun. Investigators are waiting for autopsy results to determine if the cause was a murder-suicide or double homicide.

More at:

http://www.gunguys.com/

[ben_meyers]

1. Baltimore Rocked By 9 Shootings In 5 Hours

Of course these were all law abiding licensed to carry citizens.

Mike Hellgren BALTIMORE (WJZ) ― A wave of violence rocked Baltimore this weekend with nine shootings in one five hour span. Mike Hellgren reports on the new push for peace, unveiled as these shooting investigations unfolded on city streets.

The scenes are all too familiar--crime tape, police, bloodshed--after a series of unrelated shootings these weekend.

It's heartbreaking for the Reverend Wanda Bynum-Duckett. Her church is in a southwest Baltimore neighborhood targeted by a new anti-violence effort, but she's keeping faith.

"It kind of inspires you to move on in the face of that, because you can't give up because of that. It makes you just want to work even harder," she said. "It's a life and death health issue. It's an epidemic."

Just hours before the wave of shootings, city leaders launched Project Safe Streets, which does tackle crime as a health issue. It aims to change a culture of violence by making retaliation as socially unacceptable as smoking or not wearing a seatbelt.

"We need to use peaceful methods to achieve an enduring peace," Mayor Sheila Dixon said.

http://wjz.com/local/violence.baltimore.2.748685.html

[blue sky at night]

2. this will never change....

i don't see any political will in this mess of a country to ever go against the fucking gun lobby. So, welcome to our world, one in which life is as cheap as a 12 gauge round.

[rdenney]

3. Americans have a "right" that NO other country has IRT guns, yet they have NO right to healthcare...

ya gotta go figure on that one ?!?!

Get shot in the US with NO national health-care insurance and _YOU_ get to pay the Emergency Room, Surgery and Hospital room bills, in addition to all the other bills (colostomy bags, pain medications, and other EXPENSIVE medical bills including repeated doctor visits). Good way to go bankrupt, IMO.

No, These "brave" (puke) gun-nuts don't think it through to the total reality of what happens when they get shot by one their loved and precious firearms. (and that doesn't even get into all the legal aspects of a shooting case under our laws, including getting shot by someone else).

As has been posted before: "Only in America", land of the moronic wage-slave!

[benEzra]

5. Healthcare reform would be a lot further along in this country...

had the DLC not thrown away Congress in '94 over the stupid Feinstein law that didn't do anything except annoy the law-abiding (and triple sales of so-called "assault weapons").

[gorfle]

7. And the reason for this is.

Americans have a "right" that NO other country has IRT guns, yet they have NO right to healthcare ya gotta go figure on that one ?!?!

The reason for this is simple. America, from its beginnings, has been about independence, not dependence. Thus firearm ownership is a natural consequence. Having a firearm means you are independent of others for the defense of yourself and your family, instead of relying on the collective for such defense.

The same thing is true of health care. We have, for a long time, largely been of the mindset that people need to take care of themselves, rather than relying on the collective to take care of them.

I think the reason why such collective ideas are finally getting serious traction now, even from anti-collective-welfare folks, is because we see trillions of American dollars being spent on Iraqi welfare and wonder why there is no welfare for things like Social Security and health care for Americans.

If we've got trillions for Iraqis, I don't want to hear anymore that "There won't be Social Security when you retire", and I don't want to here about the costs of social health care.

Also, if you think the gun lobby is powerful, take a look at the medical lobby.

[AtheistCrusader]

12. You make a lot of assumptions

Just to start with one, where I live in the US, EMT, and emergency room care is covered out of my property taxes. Costs are recouped as possible, via insurance and such, but if you cannot pay, you still get emergency care.

[rdenney]

16. Are you kidding? Yeah you get EMERGENCY Healthcare, but the billing dept still comes looking for ...

payment and can put liens against you to collect.

[AtheistCrusader]

20. Too many assumptions.

You don't live where I live. NE state I believe? I live in Washington.

If you can pay, here, you are expected to, but there are considerations made for people with no insurance, or low income. EMS is not nation-wide, services and costs vary greatly from location to location. I even know exactly how much of my property taxes goes toward those services. I know how much my insurance was expected to cover last time I used it. I know how much I paid out of pocket when I was 'low income' and what I paid now that I am not.

This is something your local legislators have power over. You don't have to wait for a change in the White House, the money and coverage can be local. You can fix it for where you live, even if the rest of the country burns.

[rdenney]

60. It differs in ALL states but most will come after your assets, if any, if you don't have insurance.

Hopefully that will change, as will as the NICS system, once Obama is elected, come November.

After that defeat, you gunners will be on a four-year "Open Season" permit! :-)

[SteveM]

77. Your characterizations are a walking billboard for the GOP. nt

[virginia mountainman]

6. Their is "little political will" because ...

It is political suicide in about 90% of the nation, to be "Anti-civil" rights.

And rightly so...

Now excuse me, as a prepare to take my WWII era German P-38 Pistol, and a few other select weapons, out to the farm, to enjoy MY sport, and MY rights.

[rdenney]

8. Odd that you memtion a P-38 the same gun the police said Robert Blake used to kill his wife's bloody

soaked body, and just like with OJ, no one is looking for the killers, but the killers themselves.

[michreject]

9. Was Blake convicted?

I musta missed that part.

[rdenney]

14. OJ wasnt convicted but the cops are not looking for anyone else, just like with Blake.

but like always its never the fact that a gun was involved, no matter which shooting it was.

[michreject]

21. OJ used a gun?

Wow!! I musta missed that part also.

You seem a tad confused. You're not doing to well as of yet.

[iverglas]

22. somebody sure is confused

I didn't see anybody saying that OJ used a gun. Maybe you did ...

[AtheistCrusader]

25. I cannot parse

"but like always its never the fact that a gun was involved, no matter which shooting it was."

this any other way. Civil court DID find OJ liable. That's why he's in the poor house, relatively speaking, he has a large outstanding judgment due to the Goldman family.

Really very little comparison to the Blake trial.

Edit: I take that back, Blake was also found liable for her death, in Civil court.

[iverglas]

27. I don't actually think

yes, some might agree ...

[AtheistCrusader]

30. I don't think you read the thread in order...

RDenny is the one that brought up OJ, and made a comparison in that 'only the accused are looking for the killers' and then the extremely random point about guns, considering one of the two cases has nothing to do with guns.

I didn't bring it up.

Edit: Post 14

[iverglas]

33. I read it in order, and I observed the clever attempt

... or the completely dunderheaded attempt ... to derail it.

Reconstructing sequences is just so tedious.



"Odd that you memtion a P-38 the same gun the police said Robert Blake used to kill his wife's bloody
soaked body, and just like with OJ, no one is looking for the killers, but the killers themselves."

"Was Blake convicted?
I musta missed that part."


Fascinating little red herring. Whether someone was convicted has precisely fuck all to do with whether someone did something. Pointless diversion and non-responsive to what the poster said.


"OJ wasnt convicted but the cops are not looking for anyone else, just like with Blake.
but like always its never the fact that a gun was involved, no matter which shooting it was."


There is no statement there that OJ Simpson shot anyone. There are two separate and complete thoughts:

- in response to the question of whether Blake was convicted, the reference to OJ Simpson as a metaphor for the concept that I just expressed: that whether someone was convicted has precisely fuck all to do with whether someone did something. "OJ Simpson" works here as "Darmak and Jalal": a cultural referrent, in this case for "someone who did it and got off but everybody knows what really happened".

- reversion to the poster's own point, from before someone attempted to derail the discussion: that no matter which shooting it was, no one will talk about the fact that there was a gun involved.


I seriously just cannot see, anywhere in this, anything suggesting that OJ Simpson shot anyone.

And I just keep on wondering how dim / disingenuous someone would have to be, to see / claim to see such a thing.

[AtheistCrusader]

34. Nothing disingeniuous about it.

I see "no matter which shooting it was.", in the literal english it appears to be, comparing two shootings. However, one was not a shooting.


So unfortunate grammar aside, It's hard to say who's responsible for the original derail here, Mountainman for mentioning going shooting, legally with his P-38, or RDenny musing about that type of gun being used to kill Ms. Blake, and something about nobody looking for the killers, except the killers themselves(?).

[michreject]

29. You need to go back to sleep

and wake up again.

[rdenney]

36. It must be the lead poisoning that effects their comprehsion

it seems so common when dealing with gun nuts. :-)

[Tejas]

24. Probably knows who shot JR too

I don't have cable so I'll never know, maybe RD will enlighten me.


:rofl:

[rdenney]

37. No one said OJ used a gun. You need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

[michreject]

40. From your own words

rdenney (407 posts) Mon Jun-16-08 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. OJ wasnt convicted but the cops are not looking for anyone else, just like with Blake.
Edited on Mon Jun-16-08 05:45 PM by rdenney
but like always its never the fact that a gun was involved, no matter which shooting it was.


My reading comp is just fine. Thank you very much.

[Tejas]

41. anti's should learn from Helmke,

at least he can remember what lies he tells. Helmke is much more consistent with falsehoods concerning an important subject such as gun control than the wannabe-antis here in the Gungeon.

:rofl:

[rdenney]

43. Not at all I mentioned its never the fact that a gun was involved no matter which SHOOTING it was...

I never said OJ shot anyone or had a gun, did I. Go back to school.

[michreject]

44. WTF

You leave me speechless.:crazy:

[iverglas]

45. lucky for you

Makes it more difficult to continue making an ass of yourself.


It's been a busy day for this kind of doltish demagoguery hereabouts. My other favourite:


- The founding fathers didn't contemplate the kind of weaponry teenagers have at their fingertips these days either, no doubt.

- Nobody is arguing for the right of TEENAGERS to own guns.


Mindbogglingly dumb. If deliberate, mindbogglingly dishonest.


Where is Rosanna Rosannadanna when you need her?

[michreject]

48. I see I'm joined by asses up north

Which founding father's would that be?

The United States, which doesn't concern you. Or Canada's , which I have no concern for.

[iverglas]

49. And I see you're talking out yours

... with possibly some interference from a powerful liquid ...


If you're referring to what I quoted, it was about the USofA, all about the USofA and about nothing but the USofA.

If anybody up north here started a sentence with "our founding fathers", s/he would be covered in rotten tomatoes and being dragged off stage with a hook before the sentence was finished, as people roared with laughter and slapped their knees. The idea that a sentence that started that way belonged in the political discourse of the 21st century, well, that would just be too bizarre even to prompt horror.

Mind you, we do still talk about our founding peoples. Of course, they haven't been dead for 200 years.


But yo, congratulations on the demonstration.

My point was so far from being about yer founding fathers that you may as well be on the moon.




typotypotypo

[michreject]

50. bla bla bla

Nothing more.

[rdenney]

59. You think 230 year old dead men have anything to do with the world of today?

Brush up sonny-boy, cause no one had the weapons that are available today, back in the 1700's.

It's another world right now; not just with your little killing-toys, called firearms,
but with the entire Bill of Rights, going well past your little death-dealing toys that you
uneducated simpletons call "guns", nowadays.

[michreject]

62. They constructed a document

That's still in force today. It matters not if you agree with it or not. It allows me to own all of my 50+ guns and even carry some of them on my person while in public.

[rdenney]

63. Not anywhere near me you won't. I see a concealed or other gun , I call 911 and YOU go to jail.

and I get to watch as the police "cuff and stuff you". :-)

[michreject]

66. I have a permit

and you won't see it.

Sorry. No jail time for me.

[rdenney]

67. Good. Because if I see your gun, it isn't concealed: I dial 911 and you go to jail..

particularly if you are in my store,with all the "NO GUNS ALLOWED AT ALL" signs!

Guess what happens then? (BTW, our police chief doesn't give out C-C permits , thankfully.)


I hope you like the menu down at the jail-house for violating the guns laws that we have in place here for a reason!

Don't drop the soap, big-boy! <bg>

[michreject]

69. In Michigan, I can ignore the sign

The state sets the places where we can and cannot go.

BTW. Accidental exposure doesn't equal brandishing. Not a crime. It has to be drawn or shown will malice intent. Such as pulling your shirt open to show that you have a gun.

Do you just make up these laws as you go along?

[AtheistCrusader]

72. Here in Washington

Worst case scenario is a trespassing charge, if I refuse to leave someone's property when I'm carrying. Of course, since I'm not a dick, I would leave without hesitation if asked to.

Out of curiousity, what state do you live in where the mere sight of a firearm that isn't being brandished, results in this hypothetical police state response?

[DrCory]

76. You demonstrate...

an almost giddy attitude towards sending folk to prison, and your "humor" regarding inmate rape seems almost approving. I would expect such sentiments from a right-winger, but from a dem it's disgusting.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

81. First you advocate vigilante justice now you glorify prison rape.

You are a real piece of work.

David

[pipoman]

87. It would be interesting

to see how well your signs work against someone bringing a gun in who actually means you harm...good luck with that.

[rdenney]

75. Sorry but everyone has the right to kick you out of their property

and refuse service. Also your permit is no good in my state so you would go to jail.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

82. Then what are you bitching about?

[rdenney]

88. That there should be NO laws prohibiting gun-owners from pack where they are NOT wanted.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

91. Do you actually read your posts before you post them?

This is a triple negative that is arguing against your stated position and you meant packing, as in carrying, not pack.

David

[AtheistCrusader]

73. 20 shot rifle available in 1780

11 years prior to the ratification of the 2nd Amendment. Used, on the battlefield, while everyone else was running around with single shot muskets.

Your claims do not match easily discoverable history. To say nothing of private ownership of cannon and other larger 'arms'.

Can you point to something in the Bill of Rights other than the 2nd Amendment that you feel is antiquated or no longer applies as originally intended?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

84. What other rights do you want to take away?

[solinvictus]

54. You know what..

when I was in high school in the late 1980's, it was understood that many students had shotguns and rifles in their cars and trucks on Fridays during hunting season. I guess it was an odd anomaly because we never had slaughter in the halls. Seriously; I never once had to duck during a shooting spree. What happened at my school? I would've thought the mere presence of firearms would've induced someone to go on a killing spree. I guess we were defective or something.

[iverglas]

57. I know a lot of stuff

What could have possibly induced you into thinking that the pixels you just put on the page were somehow sufficiently related to something I said to qualify as a "reply" thereto -- that, I just don't know at all.

[rdenney]

64. This ain't the 1980's dude. You pack a gun you get called in on a cell phone to the police....

get used to that picture, cause it ain't going away.

[rdenney]

58. Of course I do. You didn't do your homework, junior.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

83. This coming from someone who has never backed up anything.

[rdenney]

89. How many people have you backed over? Makes as much sense as you gun-nuts claiming I said OJ used a

gun, when I said no such thing.

Oh, and BTW, I cant wait for "Heller" soon. You nuts are in for a rude awakening. :-)

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

90. What you saying you would kill your father if he accidently killed your son?

You said that. I have no idea how SCOTUS will rule on Heller. I don't think it will be as far reaching as some think. I also don't think it will be labeled a collective right and give the government carte blanche to regulate as they see fit. So I don't think anyone is going to be to happy about it.

David

[AtheistCrusader]

23. Nichole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were knifed to death.

I fail to see the connection.

OJ was not found criminally liable for the deaths, but he was found liable in civil court, which has a lower standard of confidence on the part of the jury.

[rdenney]

38. But a gun could have saved them, right? I mean after all "if only they had a gun" is a tune you gun-

nuts use so often I am surprised that you had not mentioned it previously.

[AtheistCrusader]

39. Potentially.

I am not a psychic, nor a time traveler. They were attacked with a knife, certainly a gun could have been a force equalizer.

Obviously, not having a gun didn't help them. They were not just killed, they were mutilated.

[virginia mountainman]

53. WOW...LOL

You worried about what someone else did with the same type of gun??

That is quite a reach....too bad you did not make it.

[rdenney]

18. It could change but it wont for the next few generations. Young Americans are turning against guns.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

85. Care to back that up.

[pipoman]

86. Of coarse not

[SteveM]

78. So, have you dropped the "gun control" issue? Or do you still support it? (nt)

[benEzra]

4. Meanwhile, several hundred thousand people once again went shooting this week and didn't harm anyone

...and ~80 million gun owners, 35 to 40 percent of U.S. households, and a quarter to a third of U.S. Dems and indies managed to survive another week with guns in their homes. OMG. And in benEzra's house, several guns sat peacefully in a safe and did NOT kill anyone, did NOT threaten to kill anyone, did NOT go off by accident, and didn't make anyone except Paul Helmke cry.

I was one of those who went shooting this weekend. Had a beautiful day at the range exercising my freedom to peaceably disagree with you and own guns. Spent some times shooting playing cards at 50 yards with the "AK", then backed it up to 200 yards before heading over to the pistol side. Discussed civilian AK's with the older man next to me, who had a nice Saiga in 7.62x39mm.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

10. Aren't you the guy that said you'd kill your father if he accidently killed your kid.

Odd that you'd be posting these cases after stating that. Seems inconsistent to post these when you advocate vigilante justice.

David

[rdenney]

17. Never said that. Pretty pathetic when you have to resort to slander. nt

[AtheistCrusader]

19. Quoting you

"Good points! Had that been my son, Grandpa would find out what a sharp Gerber can do,......
But thats the redneck state of Texas that we are speaking of where its OK to kill your grandson, in a "mishap" of whatever proportions. " -RDenny

I'm not sure what else that might say.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=175533&mesg_id=175797

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

31. Damn you beat me to it.

Besides it would have been libel not slander. If he hadn't said it of course, which he did, so I guess it's ok.

David

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

32. Post #254 in the link below.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x175533#175797

I believe that will remove all doubt.


David

[Tejas]

42. NICS check for knives

That little explosion of anger by an anti right there is a good argument for such.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AtheistCrusader]

13. Everyone has a right to choose

their own mode of self-defense. Since Iverglas lives what she preaches, I don't see any point painting bloody scenarios as a scare tactic.

It's actually kind of offensive to watch.

[Wickerman]

15. not to mention that she isn't in the thread

calling her out is a clear violation of DU rules.

[iverglas]

26. what have I missed? what have I missed?

Dang, I hate it when that happens.

[AtheistCrusader]

28. Low hanging fruit.

No big deal.

I didn't know the post could be reported for that though. That was nice.

[kahlotus]

35. Today's stabbing gallery

Man charged in stabbing death of Chicago street artist
http://www.suntimes.com/news/24-7/1007464,CST-NWS-stab16.article

Charges filed in stabbing at KC homeless shelter
http://www.kansascity.com/news/breaking_news/story/666173.html

$1 million bond in Des Plaines stabbing death
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=208289&src=1

Police find couple of interest in stabbing
http://news.mainetoday.com/updates/028957.html

Bail set at $1 million for man accused of stabbing father
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700235206,00.html

Stabbing at baptism party
http://www.montereyherald.com/breaking/ci_9604821

Illegal immigrant gets 14 years for stabbing common-law wife
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-cordero-bothjun17,0,1277564.story

Court date set for Nev. lawmaker in stabbing case
http://www.ktvn.com/Global/story.asp?S=8499868&nav=menu549_2

Man pleads no contest in fatal cookout stabbing
http://www.fortmilltimes.com/124/story/196928.html

Meth binge leads to Arapco stabbing, woman's arrest
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_9602110

Cafe regular killed in stabbing
http://www.examiner.com/a-1443281~Cafe_regular_killed_in_stabbing.html?cid=temp-popular

Man charged in Father's Day stabbing
http://www.gazette.net/stories/061608/montnew151428_32381.shtml

Police at scene of triple stabbing
http://www.thedailyjournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080616/NEWS01/80616012/1002

Two brothers charged with stabbing Aberdeen man
http://www.fayobserver.com/article?id=296848

When are we going to enact some common sense knife ownership laws? How many more must die before we say enough is enough and take on the powerful cutlery lobby? Companies such as Henckels, Kershaw, KitchenAid, Gerber, etc are profiteering from the use of their deadly weapons. These companies make millions off easily accessible sales to anyone with the money. In this day and age, only licensed cutlery professionals have any use for these deadly weapons. I have a right to feel safe from being stabbed!

[Thelvyn]

46. Collateral Damage

I posted this in the thread where the Grandpa shot his grandson on an accident, but I meant to post it here.

Those shootings are sad, just like the one where the kid's Grandpa accidently killed him. But the fact of the matter is having a 2nd Amendment means some people are going to die. It's a price worth paying to have the right to self-defense; so they're all collateral damage. Plain and simple. Whether that collateral damage is a 50 year old or a 5 year old, it's worth having the right to own arsenals and having the right to stay alive against criminals.

And the another fact is this: Even if the people who want to ban guns (or ban certain guns) are right and we are wrong, it doesn't matter. Congress won't touch the gun issue with a ten foot pole. Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid want nothing to do with another assault weapon ban. Democrats have learned from their follies in 1994 and they don't want them repeated in 2010. They have also filled their seats with pro-gun Dems, when they took over congress in 2006. Then of course we are about to get an individual ruling from the SCOTUS with in the next week or two. So even if the gun grabbers are right, even if they are morally right, they can't do a darned thing about it. We will be keeping our handguns, we will be keeping our AK-47s, and we will continue to buy them, and that is that. They can continue to draw up all the bills they want, but those bills will not make it out of committe and for sure won't be passed. We, the "gun nuts", have won.

[AtheistCrusader]

47. There are things we can do

To reduce crime, and needless deaths however.

I think it's time to move toward something like registration, perhaps coupled with some sort of grandfathering guarantee that no firearm will be declared illegal and seized based on some future law. Accurate tracking would go a LONG way toward getting guns out of the hands of various criminals.

There are also things we should do to punish negligence. There's an awful lot of that going around lately, with less than a hand slap in response to the most abusively, blatantly irresponsible behavior I have ever seen.

We can do all that, and not run afoul of our civil rights. Step one would be to separate common sense regulation, from incrementalist gun prohibition.

Edit for: Holy crap I can't spell Guarantee

[iverglas]

51. right-wing horseshit

Let's just call it what it is, eh?

The speech of someone who says that SOMEONE ELSE'S GRATUITOUS, UNNECESSARY, PAINFUL, TRAGIC DEATH is "collateral damage", is the "price" of something s/he wants to do in his/her own pigging piggish self-centred self-absorbed interest, is right-wing speech.

And the reeking stink from the pure ugly sophistry of it lets us know it's horseshit.


I wish somebody would let me know where the contract is by which one of these dead people agreed to trade his/her life for somebody els's pigging piggish self-centred self-absorbed demands. How much did s/he get for it?



As for the rest of the screed: yup, could be right. The right wing has dominated the discourse so effectively and for so long that nobody will dare to stand against it, for the people who matter, on any issue where the interests of the people who matter are at stake. Congratulations, chum.



typotypotypo

[Thelvyn]

52. Thanks For The Congragulations!

You're right, it's horsecrap; but it's not just right-wing. There was no contract, but it has been forced upon them. Both pro-gun Democrats & pro-gun Republicans have won the issue. Will there always be somebody who is careless with their weapons by accidently shooting someone, by letting a kid get a hold of them, or by not locking them up properly and then they are stolen? Yes. But I'd rather have the right to wake up every morning to my firearms and have a % of people die per year from having that right, than to wake up every morning with no ability to defend myself and not having a % of people per year dying from a 2nd Amendment right.

You might not like that way of looking at it, but it's reality. Some collateral damage is worth the price for the greater good. Crap happens.

But thanks for the Congragulations on the gun owner's side victory. "High Five"?

[iverglas]

55. hat the fuck are you talking about?

There was no contract, but it has been forced upon them.

The only CONTRACT mentioned in my post was the one I want to see -- the one between the collateral damage dead people and you, in which they agree to give up their lives in return for _______________.

No, "my guns" won't cut it as the answer. What did THEY get, that THEY chose, that THEY agreed to?


You might not like that way of looking at it, but it's reality. Some collateral damage is worth the price for the greater good. Crap happens.

Just as long as it doesn't happen to you.

And you're here ... why?

[iverglas]

56. you really are missing the comprehension gene, eh?

Or hmm, perhaps not.

I say:

The right wing has dominated the discourse so effectively and for so long that nobody will dare to stand against it, for the people who matter, on any issue where the interests of the people who matter are at stake. Congratulations, chum.

You reply:

But thanks for the Congragulations on the gun owner's side victory.

So hey, I guess we're perfectly ad idem.

Well, not perfectly. I don't equate "gun owners" and "right wing". You plainly do.

But hey, if you want to accept congratulations for right wing dominance of political discourse, don't let me stop you.

[rdenney]

65. Not to worry: It;s that pesky 2nd amendment and 75 years of leaded gasoline thats taken its toll on

American's.

One day we will come to our wits and join the civilized league of nations, such as Canada, but not before allot of ball-busting, like we had to do so that Blacks had they same civil rights as a white-man.

[SteveM]

79. It took a Texan (LBJ) to pass the '64 CR Act to eliminate racist gun control (nt)

[rdenney]

61. Fine, pal. Next time you get on a jury trial with some gun-nut at the helm, you vote "not guilty:

Just wait until you get your fellow jurors in a closed jury room and CONVINCE them that you are right, and *they* are wrong.

It will be a misheld jury, at best,when the judge admonishes you, if he/she doesn't throw you out on your kiester in the cold harsh weather.

"Some collateral damage is worth the price for the greater good." Is that what you say?

Wait until it's YOUR "collateral damage" that gets shot to death before you make that statement, your foolishness.

[Thelvyn]

71. You have me all wrong on letting criminals off the hook.

First off, I don’t remember where it says that a juror is required to cast their verdict according to what the judge or anyone else feels they should. If they did, there would be no fair trials. So if an advocate gets through the jury selection, that’s the fault of the lawyers not the advocate.

But you have me all wrong anyway. Take a case like a father leaving a gun on top of a cabinet and his kid gets it and shots another kid, I would vote guilty. That’s gross negligence and he should be jailed for it. However, that doesn’t change the fact that the dead kid is still collateral damage. The whole of gun owner’s civil rights should not be taken away for sake of the dead kid.

You don’t dictate what lawful society can or can’t do based on what criminals or negligent people do. Society should dictate what criminals or negligent people can or can’t do. You don’t punish the whole of lawful society, you punish the criminals or the negligent.

And like I said in my first post to this thread, there isn’t a darned thing you gun grabbers can do about it; as far as outright gun bans are concerned. Those days are over with. But you’ll still be able to “harass” gun owners in other small ways. Just like a little kid likes to annoy his/her big brother/sister, gun grabbers will always be there to pull some kind of shenanigans and tomfoolery. And that is what it is: You don’t care about lowering crime or anything like that, you just get enjoyment out off playing your little games with gun owners…..pulling your hooligans and trickery.

[michreject]

74. You really are clueless

It will be a misheld jury, at best,when the judge admonishes you, if he/she doesn't throw you out on your kiester in the cold harsh weather.

You should get a job writing comedy for a living. You're quite good at it.

If I were on a jury, I could make a judgment anyway I saw fit. My fellow jurists or the presiding judge couldn't say shit about it. If the State chooses, a mistrial can be declared and the trial can start over with a new jury.

Have you ever heard "By a jury of your peers?"

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

80. You believe in vigilante justice, so what's wrong with jury nullification.

You did say you would murder a man if he accidently killed your son. We are supposed to take legal advice from you???

David

[Irreverend IX]

68. Freedom carries with it an equal measure of danger.

I enjoy having the freedom to speak and assemble and freedom from arbitrary police searches and seizures, diminished though those freedoms may be in the post-Patriot Act USA. Many violent crimes and other misdeeds could be prevented if no warrants or probably cause were required for police searches and if the police had the power to broadly restrict citizens' movement. Am I being "pigging piggish self-centred self-absorbed?" Think how many crimes could be prevented if all citizens were implanted with RFID microchips to track their movements.

P.S., do you consider support for drug legalization to be "right-wing speech?" Drug legalization would certainly bring about some amount of collateral damage in the form of overdoses and accidents involving people under the influence, but anyone with a brain knows it's preferable to a state of affairs in which people are jailed for altering their consciousness.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.