|
Another ...
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 21:00:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 6/30/2018 8:31 PM, wrote: It's kinda fun watching you come up with every reason in the world to do nothing. At a certain point I think we have squeezed the gun issue about as hard as we can. It is time to start trying to just stop the crazy people who think it is OK to kill a bunch of innocent victims. I have said many times, guns are for lazy people but it is far from the only deadly thing out there. Some can be even more devastating. There are plenty of industrial gasses that are totally unregulated and have the ability to really do some damage. How many people would recognize the smell of acetylene and know to run like hell if they smelled it coming out of the vents in a building? I guess this is what is called today as "having a conversation". Nothing is really accomplished but points of view are identified. When the conversation only concerns more gun laws and there is no attempt to look at the social problems, it isn't a conversation, it is just a rant by people who, as a rule, would never own a gun in the first place. They don't mind being surrounded by security people with guns tho. |
Another ...
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 21:15:38 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote: The same video games and movies pretty much are played and watched in democracies around the world. Why don't those societies have the sort of mass shootings we do? Could it be the easy availability of guns and a gun culture? We have a much more violent culture over all. We have more people beating other people to death with their bare hands than most of those other countries have, total murders, in any given year. To those other countries, Grand Theft Auto is just a fantasy. If you live in Baltimore or Chicago, it looks a lot like your daily life and you probably know guys who steal cars for a living. I know the news only wants to report white people getting killed at school or at work but if that was the only murders we had, we would look better than Sweden. The fact remains drug and gang violence, just like those video games, is what drives our murder rate. Next time I get bored I will load the new 2016 FBI crime data set into a database manager and give you all some "views" you don't see on TV. If I just slice out "europeans" killing "europeans" I bet we start looking a lot more like Europe. Of course then you will call me a racist. |
Another ...
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 16:02:27 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 6/30/2018 3:44 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 14:36:59 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: The laws governing the purchase of a shotgun in Florida are stricter than those in Maryland. I bought a shotgun in Florida back when we wintered down there after we found a 4-5 foot rattlesnake coiled up at our front door one day. Like Maryland, they did a quick telephone background check, rang me up but I had to wait several days to pick it up and take it home. Maryland lets you take it home the same day after the quick phone background check. === Are you sure about that? I've never had to wait for anything other than the background check and that only takes a few minutes, if that. Filling out the form takes longer. I am sure. It was back in 2003 though, so perhaps the rules have changed. They did the instant (phone) background check, I paid for the the shotgun but the store had to hold it for something like 5 days before I could pick it up. Bought it at a WalMart of all places. Winchester 20 gauge. It could also have been because I was not a permanent Florida resident. Don't know. I never had a Florida driver's license. Florida was kinda strange. I bought and registered a pickup truck down there with Florida tags but I didn't need a Florida driver's license to do it. I still have the shotgun. Never been fired. But now I have a minor problem. Because I bought it in Florida (well before I had a LTC permit in Massachusetts) it is technically illegal for me to have it up here. I didn't know all the rules and laws back then and it may be difficult for me to legally transfer or sell it. This state has no record that I have it. I am sure if I just turned it over to the town police (which is probably what I'll do when the time comes) they will just take it with no questions asked. === I'm a Florida resident and have a Florida CCW so that may play into it in some way. The first gun that I bought in Florida was a 22 which was purchased at a Walmart. Before I could leave the store with it, it had to be completely boxed up and sealed. Then the store manager had to carry it out to my car. There was no waiting period however. Since then I've purchased several hand guns from other dealers with no waiting period and no escort to the car. |
Another ...
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 21:16:19 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote: On 6/30/18 8:31 PM, wrote: At a certain point I think we have squeezed the gun issue about as hard as we can. It is time to start trying to just stop the crazy people who think it is OK to kill a bunch of innocent victims. It's time to start thinking about ways to change out gun culture. It might be better to change our "murder" or just our "violence"culture. In 2016 there were 4066 murders that did not involve guns at all and 544136 aggravated assaults that did not involve guns but many left people gravely injured. It is clear we have more than just a gun problem. (I have started loading the 2016 UCR) ;-) |
Another ...
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 21:18:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote: On 6/30/18 9:00 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: At a certain point I think we have squeezed the gun issue about as hard as we can. It is time to start trying to just stop the crazy people who think it is OK to kill a bunch of innocent victims. I have said many times, guns are for lazy people but it is far from the only deadly thing out there. Some can be even more devastating. There are plenty of industrial gasses that are totally unregulated and have the ability to really do some damage. How many people would recognize the smell of acetylene and know to run like hell if they smelled it coming out of the vents in a building? I guess this is what is called today as "having a conversation". Nothing is really accomplished but points of view are identified. Fretwell's point on industrial gases is...absurd. A couple years ago if I said fireworks and pressure cookers you would have said that was absurd too. Boston has a different opinion. I really don't want to be the one who gives anyone any ideas but have you ever filled a balloon with oxy/acetylene and lit it? One the size of a bowling ball will be about like an old time M-80 and if you filled a building ... no more building. It would make your regular methane explosion (nat gas) look like a firecracker. People would recognize a gas leak because we are trained to know that artificially introduced scent. Acetylene might just get a "is that your after shave"? These things are always absurd until they happen. You can just look at Maryland. You have an assault weapons ban, so the guy used a shotgun. If you have a shotgun ban they will use something else. If we are more interested in gun control instead of nut control we are setting ourselves up for another "absurd" attack. |
Another ...
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 21:33:02 -0400, John H.
wrote: On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 19:19:31 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/30/2018 6:19 PM, John H. wrote: On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 16:02:27 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/30/2018 3:44 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 14:36:59 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: The laws governing the purchase of a shotgun in Florida are stricter than those in Maryland. I bought a shotgun in Florida back when we wintered down there after we found a 4-5 foot rattlesnake coiled up at our front door one day. Like Maryland, they did a quick telephone background check, rang me up but I had to wait several days to pick it up and take it home. Maryland lets you take it home the same day after the quick phone background check. === Are you sure about that? I've never had to wait for anything other than the background check and that only takes a few minutes, if that. Filling out the form takes longer. I am sure. It was back in 2003 though, so perhaps the rules have changed. They did the instant (phone) background check, I paid for the the shotgun but the store had to hold it for something like 5 days before I could pick it up. Bought it at a WalMart of all places. Winchester 20 gauge. It could also have been because I was not a permanent Florida resident. Don't know. I never had a Florida driver's license. Florida was kinda strange. I bought and registered a pickup truck down there with Florida tags but I didn't need a Florida driver's license to do it. I still have the shotgun. Never been fired. But now I have a minor problem. Because I bought it in Florida (well before I had a LTC permit in Massachusetts) it is technically illegal for me to have it up here. I didn't know all the rules and laws back then and it may be difficult for me to legally transfer or sell it. This state has no record that I have it. I am sure if I just turned it over to the town police (which is probably what I'll do when the time comes) they will just take it with no questions asked. Why not just register it? The way I read this, it's permissable: "Although registration is not specifically required by law, transfers of firearm ownership are required to be recorded with the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS): by the seller if in state, or by the buyer if out of state. The Massachusetts EOPSS also provides the option to register a firearm, although, other than obtaining a firearm from out of state (a transfer of ownership), this is not required by law." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Massachusetts Thanks. I'll look into this. I asked the owner of the gun shop where I have purchased my other guns here in MA. He's an FFL and he didn't know what I should do. He said he couldn't buy it from me even if I almost gave it away. No records of how I obtained it, he said. You're the buyer in an out-of-state transfer. Seems pretty clear. He's a dealer. They're governed differently than individuals. Actually since Richard knows where he bought it and presumably the approximate date he could have his dealer call that dealer and get the details of the transaction from his "bound book". Since it is Walmart, it may even be in their computer system. This gets a lot tougher if you are talking about a dealer that went out of business and may not have turned over all of his "bound books". Then there is the old "we had a fire". I am sure there are plenty of those transactions that are simply lost and gone forever. I doubt BATF would thumb through all of those books anyway unless it was someone really important who was shot. That is why we don't hear a lot about gun traces if the gun has been around a while. |
Another ...
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 19:38:41 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 6/30/2018 7:30 PM, Bill wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/30/2018 3:56 PM, Bill wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/30/2018 2:39 PM, Bill wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote: On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote: On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote: On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote: Mr. Luddite ... shooting in Annapolis, MD ? .......... This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t they? Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and out of control.* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't surprise me if he turns out to be* a right wing nutcase. Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy from photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old, named Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement sources, who apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland. Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim in 2012 against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor conviction for "harassment" some years ago. Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny, since Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws. They have most of the things people are clamoring for as* "sensible" or "common sense" gun laws * handgun license to buy one * handgun de facto registration *Assault Weapons ban * high cap magazine ban * universal background checks on all sales * red flag law Do they still have that stupid fired case law? As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws. There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification license."* Even an idiot like Alex could get one. I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means. There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are banned if they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the shelf, and any number of different semi-auto rifles. Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is legal, as is buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland. I have no idea what a "red flag" law is. Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings but they didn't. Thanks for pointing out the futility tho. Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip! I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most places already have them. The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for many here ... is a required registration of all guns and strict enforcement of the required registration.* If for some reason you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not registered to you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that firearm. The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held responsible for it and it's use.* If stolen, sold or legally transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required within 48 hours. Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles. So to some ... go take an antacid. It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me. I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All firearms, no exceptions. That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all. They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer within hours. What would registration do? I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and the attendant paperwork and bureaucracy. The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a 7/11, shoots someone, and leaves his gun on the counter as he departs. Now get off this negative attitude! There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to see implemented and enforced. Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record, regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the crime committed. Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass killings" so therefore it's not helpful, I'd like to make the point that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's heads they may be more careful in the control of who has access to their firearms. I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings who got the firearm from his mother who technically owned it. It's more of an issue of reinforcing awareness of the responsibility that goes with having firearms. 1 or 2 new laws certainly are not going to end mass shootings or criminal activities using firearms. What is required is a cultural change that includes those who are so adamant about their 2nd Amendment rights and all the naysayers who find every reason in the world to argue that any further attempt to control the use and ownership of firearms is fruitless. Change has to start somewhere. Better to recognize and accept that there's a serious problem and support those reasonable attempts to at least have some potential affect than to turn a blind eye and wake up someday to find that far more draconian measures have been enacted. I fully support the right to gun ownership for last resort self defense and sporting activities. With that right comes responsibility however. So, someone steals your car, and uses it in a bank robbery. What charges against you will you accept? What does that have to do with anything? The car was stolen. All I said was that a record of transfer for a firearm, be it stolen, lost or sold be kept. My mention of Maritime law was related to the fact that in certain circumstances a former boat owner can be held responsible for damage in the future if it's transfer is not properly documented. There was a case like this years ago when the former owner of a yacht caused significant damage to a coral reef or protected salt water grass or something. The transfer of ownership was apparently not properly done and the former owner got hit with a huge fine. He fought it but still ended up settling for $20K. You are stating the former/or owner of the gun should be held liable for its use if there is no paperwork filed. Guy steals your gun and next day shoots someone. You do not even know there has been a theft. What charges will you accept? I stated that a transfer ... stolen, sold or lost should be reported within 48 hours. As long as that is done, you are not held responsible. If you have a gun stolen from you and you don't even notice it's missing, I don't think you should have had that gun in the first place. That is more to the point of what I am suggesting. More awareness. You are out of town for a week? I don't write the laws. I just come up with ideas. :-) I suppose exceptions would have to exist for situations such as that. === The devil is always in the details, and as you try to package everything up in bureaucratic red tape, new details emerge which require another layer of regulations and exceptions. That continues ad infinitum until the real root cause is addressed: We've got to get better at identifying the crazies amongst us and rendering them harmless. |
Another ...
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 18:55:58 -0700 (PDT), True North
wrote: ohn H - hide quoted text - On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 16:44:54 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote:Â* Mr. LudditeÂ* Â* - show quoted text -Â* Â* "This is why we need uniform gun laws rather than the patchwork system weÂ*Â* have now"Â* Â* Â* Â* Bingo!Â* Federal laws should regulate firearms and the laws exactly the same from Hillbilly Heaven, Virginia to Boston's finest neighbourhoods.Â* "You've no idea what the **** you're talking about." Really? We get more of your news on cable tv than we need or want. .... But the cable news is pretty much just the view from out of a New York, DC, LA or Atlanta office building window or where they can drive a news van to in a shift. How much do you understand about Rural America. I bet you don't even know much about Rural Canada. Do you really think they have the same attitude about guns in Alberta as you do in Nova Scotia? My bet is they are more closely aligned to Montana. |
Another ...
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 02:06:10 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote: wrote: So, someone steals your car, and uses it in a bank robbery. What charges against you will you accept? For that matter what if they just borrowed your car? A fellow worker at NCR told about his car being stole. He lived in Florida near the border. Georgia highway patrol sees the car and it will not pull over. They put like 150 rounds in the car. Car crashes in to the chain and posts along the highway. His insurance company had to pay for the 150’ of destroyed fence as his car was responsible. He said would have been cheaper to give the thief the car. That is because the insurance follows the car, not the driver or even the owner. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:15 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com