On 11 Apr 2013 17:07:35 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:53:07 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/11/13 11:39 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...

On 4/11/13 8:30 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:




The Constitution does not exclude them.

But then again, a convicted felon forfeited some of his rights. Those
with serious mental health
issues could easily be considered a danger to themselves and/or
society. Alcoholics and drug
addicts? How would that he controlled. I doubt if AA or NA are going
to provide lists of members.
And besides, members don't 'sign up' or register to be a member.



I don't know what the regs are in a loose state like Virginia, but in
Maryland if you are buying a firearm, you have to fill out a
questionnaire for the state police on which you state under criminal
penalties whether you are of legal age, whether you are engaging in a
straw purchase, whether you've been convicted of a crime of violence,
whether you've been convicted of a misdemeanor act of domestic violence,
whether you are the respondent in a protective order, whether you've
been committed to a mental institution, whether you are a habitual
drunkard, et cetera. Say yes to any of 'em and your app is denied and
you might get arrested.

Anyone here a heavy drinker?

---------------------------------------------------------

Same here in MA. As I mentioned to John in another post habitual use
of drugs and/or alcohol can be cause for denial of a permit, but also
every time you buy a firearm from a dealer, a form similar to the one
you described .... probably the same one .... must be filled out. It
specifically asks about drug and alcohol abuse.





I have a difficult time understanding why so many on the right so
violently oppose just about anything that relates to throttling down gun
violence. I don't accept the fact that "Americans are just plain violent
and gun laws will never do anything to stop it."


Actually, the reasons are the same as the ones used by those on the left
who oppose just about
....etc. If you call something a fact, what is there to not accept about
it? It is a fact that there
are some crazy-assed folks out there who will kill people - with guns or
not with guns. A majority
of those on the right, including a majority of NRA members, agree with
the background checks. Many
of the other laws, such as the majority of the rules passed by Maryland,
are simply stupid. They'd
have done nothing to prevent the last child massacre.

However, a janitor with a concealed carry permit could have prevented it.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Mythical. The secret service and armed police could not prevent the
near-assassination of Reagan. What would you expect from a janitor whose
other job was to safeguard a large school full of kids.

No one mentioned anything about the janitor having 'another job', only a permit to carry a concealed
weapon. And, not necessarily a janitor. An armed guidance counselor could have done as well.

Shoot the gunner before he shot up twenty kids. Using your analogy, why have *any* security at the
schools or any type of gun control if in one instance it can be overcome?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

J Herring wrote:
On 11 Apr 2013 17:07:35 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:53:07 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/11/13 11:39 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...

On 4/11/13 8:30 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:




The Constitution does not exclude them.

But then again, a convicted felon forfeited some of his rights. Those
with serious mental health
issues could easily be considered a danger to themselves and/or
society. Alcoholics and drug
addicts? How would that he controlled. I doubt if AA or NA are going
to provide lists of members.
And besides, members don't 'sign up' or register to be a member.



I don't know what the regs are in a loose state like Virginia, but in
Maryland if you are buying a firearm, you have to fill out a
questionnaire for the state police on which you state under criminal
penalties whether you are of legal age, whether you are engaging in a
straw purchase, whether you've been convicted of a crime of violence,
whether you've been convicted of a misdemeanor act of domestic violence,
whether you are the respondent in a protective order, whether you've
been committed to a mental institution, whether you are a habitual
drunkard, et cetera. Say yes to any of 'em and your app is denied and
you might get arrested.

Anyone here a heavy drinker?

---------------------------------------------------------

Same here in MA. As I mentioned to John in another post habitual use
of drugs and/or alcohol can be cause for denial of a permit, but also
every time you buy a firearm from a dealer, a form similar to the one
you described .... probably the same one .... must be filled out. It
specifically asks about drug and alcohol abuse.





I have a difficult time understanding why so many on the right so
violently oppose just about anything that relates to throttling down gun
violence. I don't accept the fact that "Americans are just plain violent
and gun laws will never do anything to stop it."


Actually, the reasons are the same as the ones used by those on the left
who oppose just about
....etc. If you call something a fact, what is there to not accept about
it? It is a fact that there
are some crazy-assed folks out there who will kill people - with guns or
not with guns. A majority
of those on the right, including a majority of NRA members, agree with
the background checks. Many
of the other laws, such as the majority of the rules passed by Maryland,
are simply stupid. They'd
have done nothing to prevent the last child massacre.

However, a janitor with a concealed carry permit could have prevented it.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Mythical. The secret service and armed police could not prevent the
near-assassination of Reagan. What would you expect from a janitor whose
other job was to safeguard a large school full of kids.

No one mentioned anything about the janitor having 'another job', only a
permit to carry a concealed
weapon. And, not necessarily a janitor. An armed guidance counselor could
have done as well.

Shoot the gunner before he shot up twenty kids. Using your analogy, why
have *any* security at the
schools or any type of gun control if in one instance it can be overcome?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

You make a lot of assumptions but ignore the issues.

On 11 Apr 2013 18:27:10 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

J Herring wrote:
On 11 Apr 2013 17:07:35 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:53:07 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/11/13 11:39 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...

On 4/11/13 8:30 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:




The Constitution does not exclude them.

But then again, a convicted felon forfeited some of his rights. Those
with serious mental health
issues could easily be considered a danger to themselves and/or
society. Alcoholics and drug
addicts? How would that he controlled. I doubt if AA or NA are going
to provide lists of members.
And besides, members don't 'sign up' or register to be a member.



I don't know what the regs are in a loose state like Virginia, but in
Maryland if you are buying a firearm, you have to fill out a
questionnaire for the state police on which you state under criminal
penalties whether you are of legal age, whether you are engaging in a
straw purchase, whether you've been convicted of a crime of violence,
whether you've been convicted of a misdemeanor act of domestic violence,
whether you are the respondent in a protective order, whether you've
been committed to a mental institution, whether you are a habitual
drunkard, et cetera. Say yes to any of 'em and your app is denied and
you might get arrested.

Anyone here a heavy drinker?

---------------------------------------------------------

Same here in MA. As I mentioned to John in another post habitual use
of drugs and/or alcohol can be cause for denial of a permit, but also
every time you buy a firearm from a dealer, a form similar to the one
you described .... probably the same one .... must be filled out. It
specifically asks about drug and alcohol abuse.





I have a difficult time understanding why so many on the right so
violently oppose just about anything that relates to throttling down gun
violence. I don't accept the fact that "Americans are just plain violent
and gun laws will never do anything to stop it."


Actually, the reasons are the same as the ones used by those on the left
who oppose just about
....etc. If you call something a fact, what is there to not accept about
it? It is a fact that there
are some crazy-assed folks out there who will kill people - with guns or
not with guns. A majority
of those on the right, including a majority of NRA members, agree with
the background checks. Many
of the other laws, such as the majority of the rules passed by Maryland,
are simply stupid. They'd
have done nothing to prevent the last child massacre.

However, a janitor with a concealed carry permit could have prevented it.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Mythical. The secret service and armed police could not prevent the
near-assassination of Reagan. What would you expect from a janitor whose
other job was to safeguard a large school full of kids.

No one mentioned anything about the janitor having 'another job', only a
permit to carry a concealed
weapon. And, not necessarily a janitor. An armed guidance counselor could
have done as well.

Shoot the gunner before he shot up twenty kids. Using your analogy, why
have *any* security at the
schools or any type of gun control if in one instance it can be overcome?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

You make a lot of assumptions but ignore the issues.

Be so kind as to point out my errors.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

In article ,
says...

On 11 Apr 2013 18:27:10 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

J Herring wrote:
On 11 Apr 2013 17:07:35 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:53:07 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/11/13 11:39 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...

On 4/11/13 8:30 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:




The Constitution does not exclude them.

But then again, a convicted felon forfeited some of his rights. Those
with serious mental health
issues could easily be considered a danger to themselves and/or
society. Alcoholics and drug
addicts? How would that he controlled. I doubt if AA or NA are going
to provide lists of members.
And besides, members don't 'sign up' or register to be a member.



I don't know what the regs are in a loose state like Virginia, but in
Maryland if you are buying a firearm, you have to fill out a
questionnaire for the state police on which you state under criminal
penalties whether you are of legal age, whether you are engaging in a
straw purchase, whether you've been convicted of a crime of violence,
whether you've been convicted of a misdemeanor act of domestic violence,
whether you are the respondent in a protective order, whether you've
been committed to a mental institution, whether you are a habitual
drunkard, et cetera. Say yes to any of 'em and your app is denied and
you might get arrested.

Anyone here a heavy drinker?

---------------------------------------------------------

Same here in MA. As I mentioned to John in another post habitual use
of drugs and/or alcohol can be cause for denial of a permit, but also
every time you buy a firearm from a dealer, a form similar to the one
you described .... probably the same one .... must be filled out. It
specifically asks about drug and alcohol abuse.





I have a difficult time understanding why so many on the right so
violently oppose just about anything that relates to throttling down gun
violence. I don't accept the fact that "Americans are just plain violent
and gun laws will never do anything to stop it."


Actually, the reasons are the same as the ones used by those on the left
who oppose just about
....etc. If you call something a fact, what is there to not accept about
it? It is a fact that there
are some crazy-assed folks out there who will kill people - with guns or
not with guns. A majority
of those on the right, including a majority of NRA members, agree with
the background checks. Many
of the other laws, such as the majority of the rules passed by Maryland,
are simply stupid. They'd
have done nothing to prevent the last child massacre.

However, a janitor with a concealed carry permit could have prevented it.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Mythical. The secret service and armed police could not prevent the
near-assassination of Reagan. What would you expect from a janitor whose
other job was to safeguard a large school full of kids.

No one mentioned anything about the janitor having 'another job', only a
permit to carry a concealed
weapon. And, not necessarily a janitor. An armed guidance counselor could
have done as well.

Shoot the gunner before he shot up twenty kids. Using your analogy, why
have *any* security at the
schools or any type of gun control if in one instance it can be overcome?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

You make a lot of assumptions but ignore the issues.

Be so kind as to point out my errors.


Salmonbait

Where did anyone say you had "errors"?

On 4/11/2013 2:27 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
J Herring wrote:
On 11 Apr 2013 17:07:35 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:53:07 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/11/13 11:39 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...

On 4/11/13 8:30 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:




The Constitution does not exclude them.

But then again, a convicted felon forfeited some of his rights. Those
with serious mental health
issues could easily be considered a danger to themselves and/or
society. Alcoholics and drug
addicts? How would that he controlled. I doubt if AA or NA are going
to provide lists of members.
And besides, members don't 'sign up' or register to be a member.



I don't know what the regs are in a loose state like Virginia, but in
Maryland if you are buying a firearm, you have to fill out a
questionnaire for the state police on which you state under criminal
penalties whether you are of legal age, whether you are engaging in a
straw purchase, whether you've been convicted of a crime of violence,
whether you've been convicted of a misdemeanor act of domestic violence,
whether you are the respondent in a protective order, whether you've
been committed to a mental institution, whether you are a habitual
drunkard, et cetera. Say yes to any of 'em and your app is denied and
you might get arrested.

Anyone here a heavy drinker?

---------------------------------------------------------

Same here in MA. As I mentioned to John in another post habitual use
of drugs and/or alcohol can be cause for denial of a permit, but also
every time you buy a firearm from a dealer, a form similar to the one
you described .... probably the same one .... must be filled out. It
specifically asks about drug and alcohol abuse.





I have a difficult time understanding why so many on the right so
violently oppose just about anything that relates to throttling down gun
violence. I don't accept the fact that "Americans are just plain violent
and gun laws will never do anything to stop it."


Actually, the reasons are the same as the ones used by those on the left
who oppose just about
....etc. If you call something a fact, what is there to not accept about
it? It is a fact that there
are some crazy-assed folks out there who will kill people - with guns or
not with guns. A majority
of those on the right, including a majority of NRA members, agree with
the background checks. Many
of the other laws, such as the majority of the rules passed by Maryland,
are simply stupid. They'd
have done nothing to prevent the last child massacre.

However, a janitor with a concealed carry permit could have prevented it.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Mythical. The secret service and armed police could not prevent the
near-assassination of Reagan. What would you expect from a janitor whose
other job was to safeguard a large school full of kids.

No one mentioned anything about the janitor having 'another job', only a
permit to carry a concealed
weapon. And, not necessarily a janitor. An armed guidance counselor could
have done as well.

Shoot the gunner before he shot up twenty kids. Using your analogy, why
have *any* security at the
schools or any type of gun control if in one instance it can be overcome?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

You make a lot of assumptions but ignore the issues.


What we do know is in almost every mass shooting since 1980, the
shooters stopped or killed themselves as soon as they were encountered
or reasonably challenged... Several cases would have been stopped just
by the presence of another armed guard or teacher, etc...

On 4/11/13 3:57 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 4/11/2013 2:27 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
J Herring wrote:
On 11 Apr 2013 17:07:35 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:53:07 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/11/13 11:39 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...

On 4/11/13 8:30 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:




The Constitution does not exclude them.

But then again, a convicted felon forfeited some of his rights.
Those
with serious mental health
issues could easily be considered a danger to themselves and/or
society. Alcoholics and drug
addicts? How would that he controlled. I doubt if AA or NA are
going
to provide lists of members.
And besides, members don't 'sign up' or register to be a member.



I don't know what the regs are in a loose state like Virginia,
but in
Maryland if you are buying a firearm, you have to fill out a
questionnaire for the state police on which you state under criminal
penalties whether you are of legal age, whether you are engaging
in a
straw purchase, whether you've been convicted of a crime of
violence,
whether you've been convicted of a misdemeanor act of domestic
violence,
whether you are the respondent in a protective order, whether you've
been committed to a mental institution, whether you are a habitual
drunkard, et cetera. Say yes to any of 'em and your app is denied
and
you might get arrested.

Anyone here a heavy drinker?

---------------------------------------------------------

Same here in MA. As I mentioned to John in another post
habitual use
of drugs and/or alcohol can be cause for denial of a permit, but
also
every time you buy a firearm from a dealer, a form similar to the
one
you described .... probably the same one .... must be filled
out. It
specifically asks about drug and alcohol abuse.





I have a difficult time understanding why so many on the right so
violently oppose just about anything that relates to throttling
down gun
violence. I don't accept the fact that "Americans are just plain
violent
and gun laws will never do anything to stop it."


Actually, the reasons are the same as the ones used by those on the
left
who oppose just about
....etc. If you call something a fact, what is there to not accept
about
it? It is a fact that there
are some crazy-assed folks out there who will kill people - with
guns or
not with guns. A majority
of those on the right, including a majority of NRA members, agree with
the background checks. Many
of the other laws, such as the majority of the rules passed by
Maryland,
are simply stupid. They'd
have done nothing to prevent the last child massacre.

However, a janitor with a concealed carry permit could have
prevented it.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Mythical. The secret service and armed police could not prevent the
near-assassination of Reagan. What would you expect from a janitor
whose
other job was to safeguard a large school full of kids.

No one mentioned anything about the janitor having 'another job', only a
permit to carry a concealed
weapon. And, not necessarily a janitor. An armed guidance counselor
could
have done as well.

Shoot the gunner before he shot up twenty kids. Using your analogy, why
have *any* security at the
schools or any type of gun control if in one instance it can be
overcome?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

You make a lot of assumptions but ignore the issues.


What we do know is in almost every mass shooting since 1980, the
shooters stopped or killed themselves as soon as they were encountered
or reasonably challenged... Several cases would have been stopped just
by the presence of another armed guard or teacher, etc...


How the hell would you know that?

On 4/11/2013 2:27 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
J Herring wrote:
On 11 Apr 2013 17:07:35 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:53:07 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/11/13 11:39 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...

On 4/11/13 8:30 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:




The Constitution does not exclude them.

But then again, a convicted felon forfeited some of his rights. Those
with serious mental health
issues could easily be considered a danger to themselves and/or
society. Alcoholics and drug
addicts? How would that he controlled. I doubt if AA or NA are going
to provide lists of members.
And besides, members don't 'sign up' or register to be a member.



I don't know what the regs are in a loose state like Virginia, but in
Maryland if you are buying a firearm, you have to fill out a
questionnaire for the state police on which you state under criminal
penalties whether you are of legal age, whether you are engaging in a
straw purchase, whether you've been convicted of a crime of violence,
whether you've been convicted of a misdemeanor act of domestic violence,
whether you are the respondent in a protective order, whether you've
been committed to a mental institution, whether you are a habitual
drunkard, et cetera. Say yes to any of 'em and your app is denied and
you might get arrested.

Anyone here a heavy drinker?

---------------------------------------------------------

Same here in MA. As I mentioned to John in another post habitual use
of drugs and/or alcohol can be cause for denial of a permit, but also
every time you buy a firearm from a dealer, a form similar to the one
you described .... probably the same one .... must be filled out. It
specifically asks about drug and alcohol abuse.





I have a difficult time understanding why so many on the right so
violently oppose just about anything that relates to throttling down gun
violence. I don't accept the fact that "Americans are just plain violent
and gun laws will never do anything to stop it."


Actually, the reasons are the same as the ones used by those on the left
who oppose just about
....etc. If you call something a fact, what is there to not accept about
it? It is a fact that there
are some crazy-assed folks out there who will kill people - with guns or
not with guns. A majority
of those on the right, including a majority of NRA members, agree with
the background checks. Many
of the other laws, such as the majority of the rules passed by Maryland,
are simply stupid. They'd
have done nothing to prevent the last child massacre.

However, a janitor with a concealed carry permit could have prevented it.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Mythical. The secret service and armed police could not prevent the
near-assassination of Reagan. What would you expect from a janitor whose
other job was to safeguard a large school full of kids.

No one mentioned anything about the janitor having 'another job', only a
permit to carry a concealed
weapon. And, not necessarily a janitor. An armed guidance counselor could
have done as well.

Shoot the gunner before he shot up twenty kids. Using your analogy, why
have *any* security at the
schools or any type of gun control if in one instance it can be overcome?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

You make a lot of assumptions but ignore the issues.


The average number of people killed in mass shootings when stopped by
police is 14.29

The average number of people killed in a mass shooting when stopped by a
civilian is 2.33

From the article he
http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31...ge-statistics/


Have a happy day harry, please keep playing with your guns...

On 4/11/13 4:02 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 4/11/2013 2:27 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
J Herring wrote:
On 11 Apr 2013 17:07:35 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:53:07 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/11/13 11:39 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...

On 4/11/13 8:30 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:




The Constitution does not exclude them.

But then again, a convicted felon forfeited some of his rights.
Those
with serious mental health
issues could easily be considered a danger to themselves and/or
society. Alcoholics and drug
addicts? How would that he controlled. I doubt if AA or NA are
going
to provide lists of members.
And besides, members don't 'sign up' or register to be a member.



I don't know what the regs are in a loose state like Virginia,
but in
Maryland if you are buying a firearm, you have to fill out a
questionnaire for the state police on which you state under criminal
penalties whether you are of legal age, whether you are engaging
in a
straw purchase, whether you've been convicted of a crime of
violence,
whether you've been convicted of a misdemeanor act of domestic
violence,
whether you are the respondent in a protective order, whether you've
been committed to a mental institution, whether you are a habitual
drunkard, et cetera. Say yes to any of 'em and your app is denied
and
you might get arrested.

Anyone here a heavy drinker?

---------------------------------------------------------

Same here in MA. As I mentioned to John in another post
habitual use
of drugs and/or alcohol can be cause for denial of a permit, but
also
every time you buy a firearm from a dealer, a form similar to the
one
you described .... probably the same one .... must be filled
out. It
specifically asks about drug and alcohol abuse.





I have a difficult time understanding why so many on the right so
violently oppose just about anything that relates to throttling
down gun
violence. I don't accept the fact that "Americans are just plain
violent
and gun laws will never do anything to stop it."


Actually, the reasons are the same as the ones used by those on the
left
who oppose just about
....etc. If you call something a fact, what is there to not accept
about
it? It is a fact that there
are some crazy-assed folks out there who will kill people - with
guns or
not with guns. A majority
of those on the right, including a majority of NRA members, agree with
the background checks. Many
of the other laws, such as the majority of the rules passed by
Maryland,
are simply stupid. They'd
have done nothing to prevent the last child massacre.

However, a janitor with a concealed carry permit could have
prevented it.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Mythical. The secret service and armed police could not prevent the
near-assassination of Reagan. What would you expect from a janitor
whose
other job was to safeguard a large school full of kids.

No one mentioned anything about the janitor having 'another job', only a
permit to carry a concealed
weapon. And, not necessarily a janitor. An armed guidance counselor
could
have done as well.

Shoot the gunner before he shot up twenty kids. Using your analogy, why
have *any* security at the
schools or any type of gun control if in one instance it can be
overcome?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

You make a lot of assumptions but ignore the issues.


The average number of people killed in mass shootings when stopped by
police is 14.29

The average number of people killed in a mass shooting when stopped by a
civilian is 2.33

From the article he
http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31...ge-statistics/


Have a happy day harry, please keep playing with your guns...


Daily Anarchist? Oh, well...in that case.

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 16:09:18 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/11/13 4:02 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 4/11/2013 2:27 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
J Herring wrote:
On 11 Apr 2013 17:07:35 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:53:07 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/11/13 11:39 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...

On 4/11/13 8:30 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:




The Constitution does not exclude them.

But then again, a convicted felon forfeited some of his rights.
Those
with serious mental health
issues could easily be considered a danger to themselves and/or
society. Alcoholics and drug
addicts? How would that he controlled. I doubt if AA or NA are
going
to provide lists of members.
And besides, members don't 'sign up' or register to be a member.



I don't know what the regs are in a loose state like Virginia,
but in
Maryland if you are buying a firearm, you have to fill out a
questionnaire for the state police on which you state under criminal
penalties whether you are of legal age, whether you are engaging
in a
straw purchase, whether you've been convicted of a crime of
violence,
whether you've been convicted of a misdemeanor act of domestic
violence,
whether you are the respondent in a protective order, whether you've
been committed to a mental institution, whether you are a habitual
drunkard, et cetera. Say yes to any of 'em and your app is denied
and
you might get arrested.

Anyone here a heavy drinker?

---------------------------------------------------------

Same here in MA. As I mentioned to John in another post
habitual use
of drugs and/or alcohol can be cause for denial of a permit, but
also
every time you buy a firearm from a dealer, a form similar to the
one
you described .... probably the same one .... must be filled
out. It
specifically asks about drug and alcohol abuse.





I have a difficult time understanding why so many on the right so
violently oppose just about anything that relates to throttling
down gun
violence. I don't accept the fact that "Americans are just plain
violent
and gun laws will never do anything to stop it."


Actually, the reasons are the same as the ones used by those on the
left
who oppose just about
....etc. If you call something a fact, what is there to not accept
about
it? It is a fact that there
are some crazy-assed folks out there who will kill people - with
guns or
not with guns. A majority
of those on the right, including a majority of NRA members, agree with
the background checks. Many
of the other laws, such as the majority of the rules passed by
Maryland,
are simply stupid. They'd
have done nothing to prevent the last child massacre.

However, a janitor with a concealed carry permit could have
prevented it.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Mythical. The secret service and armed police could not prevent the
near-assassination of Reagan. What would you expect from a janitor
whose
other job was to safeguard a large school full of kids.

No one mentioned anything about the janitor having 'another job', only a
permit to carry a concealed
weapon. And, not necessarily a janitor. An armed guidance counselor
could
have done as well.

Shoot the gunner before he shot up twenty kids. Using your analogy, why
have *any* security at the
schools or any type of gun control if in one instance it can be
overcome?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

You make a lot of assumptions but ignore the issues.


The average number of people killed in mass shootings when stopped by
police is 14.29

The average number of people killed in a mass shooting when stopped by a
civilian is 2.33

From the article he
http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31...ge-statistics/


Have a happy day harry, please keep playing with your guns...


Daily Anarchist? Oh, well...in that case.

What, in the article, do you disagree with?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

On 4/11/13 4:57 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 16:09:18 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/11/13 4:02 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 4/11/2013 2:27 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
J Herring wrote:
On 11 Apr 2013 17:07:35 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:53:07 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/11/13 11:39 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...

On 4/11/13 8:30 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:




The Constitution does not exclude them.

But then again, a convicted felon forfeited some of his rights.
Those
with serious mental health
issues could easily be considered a danger to themselves and/or
society. Alcoholics and drug
addicts? How would that he controlled. I doubt if AA or NA are
going
to provide lists of members.
And besides, members don't 'sign up' or register to be a member.



I don't know what the regs are in a loose state like Virginia,
but in
Maryland if you are buying a firearm, you have to fill out a
questionnaire for the state police on which you state under criminal
penalties whether you are of legal age, whether you are engaging
in a
straw purchase, whether you've been convicted of a crime of
violence,
whether you've been convicted of a misdemeanor act of domestic
violence,
whether you are the respondent in a protective order, whether you've
been committed to a mental institution, whether you are a habitual
drunkard, et cetera. Say yes to any of 'em and your app is denied
and
you might get arrested.

Anyone here a heavy drinker?

---------------------------------------------------------

Same here in MA. As I mentioned to John in another post
habitual use
of drugs and/or alcohol can be cause for denial of a permit, but
also
every time you buy a firearm from a dealer, a form similar to the
one
you described .... probably the same one .... must be filled
out. It
specifically asks about drug and alcohol abuse.





I have a difficult time understanding why so many on the right so
violently oppose just about anything that relates to throttling
down gun
violence. I don't accept the fact that "Americans are just plain
violent
and gun laws will never do anything to stop it."


Actually, the reasons are the same as the ones used by those on the
left
who oppose just about
....etc. If you call something a fact, what is there to not accept
about
it? It is a fact that there
are some crazy-assed folks out there who will kill people - with
guns or
not with guns. A majority
of those on the right, including a majority of NRA members, agree with
the background checks. Many
of the other laws, such as the majority of the rules passed by
Maryland,
are simply stupid. They'd
have done nothing to prevent the last child massacre.

However, a janitor with a concealed carry permit could have
prevented it.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Mythical. The secret service and armed police could not prevent the
near-assassination of Reagan. What would you expect from a janitor
whose
other job was to safeguard a large school full of kids.

No one mentioned anything about the janitor having 'another job', only a
permit to carry a concealed
weapon. And, not necessarily a janitor. An armed guidance counselor
could
have done as well.

Shoot the gunner before he shot up twenty kids. Using your analogy, why
have *any* security at the
schools or any type of gun control if in one instance it can be
overcome?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

You make a lot of assumptions but ignore the issues.


The average number of people killed in mass shootings when stopped by
police is 14.29

The average number of people killed in a mass shooting when stopped by a
civilian is 2.33

From the article he
http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31...ge-statistics/


Have a happy day harry, please keep playing with your guns...


Daily Anarchist? Oh, well...in that case.

What, in the article, do you disagree with?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.



I don't read articles in publications with names like "The Daily Anarchist."

By the way, do you suppose there are so few murders in this country
where the weapon is a hand grenade has anything to do with the fact that
hand grenades are not easy to obtain?