EvilMonkey

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 12:34 PM) The building where I work is a gun free zone. I might have to tell my boss I cannot work under these conditions. The building is a killing zone. i would hope they have some sort of security for you.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 12:08 PM) Some proposed legislation might not have a real impact, but doing absolutely nothing will definitively have no impact. If it won't have a real impact, why do it? Just doing something for the sake of doing something is crap and usually ends up making things worse for everyone else. You are then just virtue signalling.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 11:11 AM) You insulted Quin's intelligence and claimed that constitutional scholars much smarter than him have decided this issue. You even provided a link! 1) The link was to a crank website 2) The quote is from some random guy with no scholarly background on the constitution 3) The language of the second amendment and really the entire Constitution is far from settled among actual, legitimate Constitutional scholars and court members. I'm not sure what I'm even supposed to be looking for on Google, or why your "lazy ass" can't support your own arguments. Poor choice for a first link. I was rushed and should have looked at that one more. His points on there are still good ones. Oh wait, I forgot. You don't believe anyone who isn't credentialed in a way that you agree with. My bad.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 11:08 AM) The easy way out would just be pointing to Scalia's opinion in Heller. No need to site some weird website that quotes a random dude with no credentials and claim he's some sort of super smart Consitutional scholar. Looks like you did look it up then. Bravo for you.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 11:04 AM) I did. He appears to be (or was, back in the 1990's) associated with the Cognitive Studies Department at UW-Milwaukee. His PhD seems to be about cognitive issues, not anything to do with Constitutional analysis or law in general. What do you think his credentials actually are? Why is this site to be trusted as a definitive source? Who is Brian T. Halonen and why does he have the final say on what "well-regulated militia" means? I meant the meaning. That was just the first link I found. I am sure with your Googlefu you can find it. Capitalism calls.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 10:58 AM) The current background check system is crap, and the forms are rarely enforced and sent in at gun shows. I've had a guy literally stand there and tell me it doesnt matter. The electronic auditing and records from these sales are an area where there is tons of room for improvement. private sales are something that for sure should be stopped or augmented. At the end of the day, the RIGHT people should be able to own and operate a gun for personal defense or sport AFTER they pass a check, instruction, and certification IMO. They can tell you that, but ATF finds out they can lose their license. Only problem with your last statement is who decides who the 'right people' are? In NYC it is very hard to get a gun permit. Unless you are a 'right person' with lots of money and a lawyer that knows whos palms to grease. In states that are a 'May Issue' for concealed carry, the local law enforcement official gets final say. If he doesn't like your politics, your long hair or the color of your skin, he can reject you and not have to give you a reason.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 10:59 AM) This guy does not appear to be a constitutional scholar. Look it up, lazyass.

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 10:52 AM) I don't think it's the guns that are illegal. I think it's something about the person that changed. Like if they got a domestic violence conviction after they purchased a gun, they are no longer legally allowed to own one. They had that one as well, I think. However they put such a low value on it that they only assigned a few people to be the ones removing them, resulting in a huge backlog.

QUOTE (Quin @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 10:47 AM) So, let's ignored the "well regulated" part of the second amendment. Desire to own gun >>> the actual second amendment Constitutional scholars way smarter than you have already tackled that so yo get no response from me. http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 10:43 AM) You also cant get a license without education, testing and certification. Buying a gun is as easy as walking into a walmart in some places, or even just a gun show. And if they make my shotgun or handgun illegal, I would be ok with a buy back, but not confiscation. You are forgetting the background check you need to purchase the gun. Form 4473 needs to be filled out and sent in to get your background check, even at Walmart and gun shows. The ONLY way you can get one legally without it is a private sale. You want to make an argument for that, you might have something. However as usual, every attempt at this so far have over-reached. In Seattle they tried to enact something like that but they worded it so broadly that a 'transfer' could be me handing you my new gun to check out or try a few shots while at the range.

QUOTE (Quin @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 10:41 AM) So you support people illegally owning guns? I don't support banning guns for stupid reasons.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 10:34 AM) So what did the guy in the church do? Seems he didn't know what anyone had and he went in guns blazing at every target. Gun free zone, go figure.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 10:37 AM) WHy wouldn't we want illegal guns confiscated? I want people owning guns who should own guns. It should be just as hard to get a gun than to get a driver's license if not harder. An electronic records system would be the absolute minimal action taken by the government. But they weren't 'illegal' when they were purchased, they just changed the law to make them illegal. You ban guns, now they are illegal. Go round em up! Last I heard you can't get a gun with a domestic violence conviction, but you can still drive. You can even drive with a DUI on your record.

QUOTE (Quin @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 10:15 AM) That's the weakest argument against having a registry I've ever seen if you think that a registry won't lead to some sort of confiscation you are mistaken. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/19/c..._n_3117238.html The California state legislature passed a bill Thursday approving $24 million to expedite the confiscation of the estimated 40,000 handguns and assault weapons illegally owned by Californians.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 10:22 AM) Hasn't one of the big arguments the NRA has used is people won't mess with you if they know you are packing? The safest place to be is somewhere everyone is armed? Why wouldn't you want them to know your entire stash? They would never bother you. Not quite. if a robber looks at 5 people and knows that 3 of them are armed, he might think twice about robbing ANY of them. if he looks at them and knows which 3 are armed, he can either go for the soft targets or just go guns blazing at the hard targets.