Gun Legislation

[neoplacebo]

Well, just call me nostalgic I guess.

[Mr.B]

"Ok, just wondering. In these days of firearm bravado from every corner, the lack of pickup truck firearm bravado just seems to be tragically missing."

Driving away from the larger cities of the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, and a few other Mid-Western states, you still see rifles mounted in the backs of pick-up trucks. Generally a parked truck has a dog inside that you really wouldn't want to challenge....but, then again, most of the folks there tend to have a measure of respect, that is hard-pressed to find elsewhere, for the property of others.

"If it ain't your'n, 'ya best leave it be..."

[Mr.B]

Lowest rates of property crime:

6....South Dakota: 2,060.1.

With the exception of the above, none of the states I spoke of were in those lists.

[Mr.B]

"Why are you applauding yourself?.......The point that you are ducking......Your biases"

Can you not post any comment without being accusatory or condescending? Why must you always have to show others your "superiority"?
Come down to Earth and join the human race.

The subject was states that still see rifles in p/u trucks that don't get stolen. Who gives a flying rat's butt about crime rate statistics in the US?

[Mr.B]

The pattern:

Mr.B posts an unfounded bias.
I debunk his bias, but give him a boost by adding the North Dakota that he missed.
Mr.B ducks and pretends his bias has not been debunked.
I ask a simple and accurate question, "Why are you applauding yourself?" since he did. Mr.B whines that it's "accusatory".
I scoff at his pretense that his bias has not been debunked.
Mr.B whines that "biases" is "condescending" when it isn't at all. We've all got them, like mine against red states.
Mr.B continues to ignore his flub and whines at me for pursuing the tangent - supposed states with "a measure of respect" - that he initiated.
Next up - Ignoring all this and saying that it's somehow all my fault for "twisting" things.

Trying to convince yourself?

"all my fault....."....

[O Really]

It's a tragedy those Pennsylvania state cops getting shot outside their office. If only they had been armed and trained. I guess it's just another attack on a gun-free zone... oh, wait. Ummm, nevermind.

[Mr.B]

"It's a tragedy those Pennsylvania state cops getting shot outside their office. If only they had been armed and trained.
I guess it's just another attack on a gun-free zone... oh, wait. Ummm, never mind."

You've been reading Vrede's posts too long.

[neoplacebo]

"It's a tragedy those Pennsylvania state cops getting shot outside their office. If only they had been armed and trained.
I guess it's just another attack on a gun-free zone... oh, wait. Ummm, never mind."

You've been reading Vrede's posts too long.

Nah, you miss the point; the wingnuts squeal about how there should be no gun free zones, as well as squealing and squawking about how the only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. In this case, several good guys with guns were present but as we see again and again, nothing prevents or is a defense against armed full blown lunacy. Restriction of availability of firearms to wingnuts, unstables, wobblies, and others with tendencies of grand lunacy is a reasonable concept, but the uh, gun enthusiasts are rabidly, and stupidly, against that. I guess they want more people shot instead. Who's next? What's really hilarious about that is that I guarantee a lot of those gun, uh, enthusiasts actually know people who should not be able to have a gun.

[O Really]

You are correct. A lot of the hardcore gun, ummm, "enthusiasts" start with the premise that "bad guys" are reasonable and smart and will not attack someone or somewhere that is armed. That totally disregards the fact that many shootings are among those who are all "bad guys" and shooting each other - knowing full well that everyone is armed to the teeth, or maybe to the tooth. People don't shoot up schools because they're "gun free" - they shoot them up because they're schools. Or they shoot up their employers place of business without regard as to whether it's "gun free." No disrespect intended to the cops who were shot - simply pointing out the obvious that the NRA line is utterly stupid and anyone who buys it probably shouldn't be allowed to breed.

[Mr.B]

"Your sad obsession with me"

har har!

[Mr.B]

Does this mean we're not "immature" buds anymore?

[bannination]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/28/opini ... inion&_r=1

Interesting...



FTA:

Sure, there are cases where guns are successfully used for self-defense, but a study in the journal Injury Prevention found that the purchase of a handgun was associated with 2.4 times the risk of being murdered and 6.8 times the risk of suicide. Several other studies confirm that a gun in the house significantly increases the risk that a person in the home will be murdered or commit suicide.

Just since 1968, it has been calculated, more Americans have died from gunfire than have died in all the wars in our country’s history.

[O Really]

The arrest warrant states that while Gajadhar was in Richland County, certified through SLED as a CWP instructor, he provided a CWP training certificate without proper training by state law.

...



I'm shocked and disappointed. Roland Deschain had me persuaded that CWP holders are well trained, law abiding and honorable. Maybe he meant every single one of them besides these more than 350.

As if even "proper training by state law" was ever anything but a farce. Fifty shots? Puh-leeze. But yeah, Roland thought everyone who had a CWP was expert and reliable enough to wander around loose shooting at any scary person in a hoodie.

[Mr.B]

Robbers Learn Who Not To Rob

[O Really]

That can't be true. Probably liberal propaganda. I'm pretty sure Nascar and Mad made it perfectly clear that "good guys" don't shoot their families or friends.

[O Really]

Jury Finds Michael Dunn Guilty in Loud-Music Killing Retrial

...first-degree murder...The verdict was reached after less than six hours of deliberations...

"self-defense" my ass. Sometimes juries can speak louder than legislators.

[O Really]

Knowing very little about criminal law, here's my guess - pre-meditation starts when the shooter has the opportunity to do something else but chooses instead to shoot the other guy. That is complicated by Florida's insane "stand your ground" law, that doesn't require a person to retreat, but there's still a place to show the entire sequence of action.

[O Really]

Makes sense, I just don't know where the line is between premeditation and 'heat of the moment'.

The jury must have heard the defense's best case and still chose first-degree murder.

Of course, there was no "heat of the moment" before Dunn started being a jerk.

[Boatrocker]

If intent is to be judged/interpreted as vaguely as SYG, then it could (IMO) be reasonably argued that simply carrying a weapon on your person is indicative of a certain level of premeditation. I'm sure that's not legally viable.

[rstrong]

Some interesting notes on the Ottawa nutjob's gun and related gun laws: CBC