EvilMonkey

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Jun 16, 2014 -> 04:33 PM) Off the top of my head... Nationalize the standards. Make a minimum level of competence to legally own a firearm across the country. But then you would have states where they keep trying to pass STRICTER gun laws having a s***fit because how dare you preempt them on states rights, etc. Include some sort of training on what to do in a crisis (especially to conceal and carry). It's very different to hit a target at 5-10 yards in a controlled setting and hitting an active shooter with bystanders in the area. Include a written test to test the response of the applicant to certain gray area scenarios. My understanding is that gun classes teach you to retreat if at all possible before resorting to shots fired. I think a minority of gun owners are emboldened by having a gun leading to situations escalating that should not escalate (see George Zimmerman... if the dude never gets out of his car, Martin is still alive... and I'm skeptical he ever gets out of the car if he's not armed). Require people to renew their license every 5 years or so. If my 80 year old grandfather suffers dementia, he should have his license to own firearms revoked (I'm not sure of the logistics that come with enforcement). Basically, I think owning a gun is a pretty important responsibility because of just how dangerous guns can be to others if they are used improperly. Accordingly, we should be taking as many steps as possible to ensure people don't take on that responsibility lightly. Off the top of my head... Nationalize the standards. Make a minimum level of competence to legally own a firearm across the country. But then you would have states where they keep trying to pass STRICTER gun laws having a s***fit because how dare you preempt them on states rights, etc. Unless it is a national ban, however, and then they are all for it. Include some sort of training on what to do in a crisis (especially to conceal and carry). It's very different to hit a target at 5-10 yards in a controlled setting and hitting an active shooter with bystanders in the area. Not a bad idea, although a few of the CCL classes instruct about that, not teach it. Include a written test to test the response of the applicant to certain gray area scenarios. My understanding is that gun classes teach you to retreat if at all possible before resorting to shots fired. I think a minority of gun owners are emboldened by having a gun leading to situations escalating that should not escalate (see George Zimmerman... if the dude never gets out of his car, Martin is still alive... and I'm skeptical he ever gets out of the car if he's not armed). Most classes do tell you that retreat safely is usually best. However as in any business, there are some very bad CCl teachers out there that need to be closed down. Require people to renew their license every 5 years or so. If my 80 year old grandfather suffers dementia, he should have his license to own firearms revoked (I'm not sure of the logistics that come with enforcement). You do have to renew a CCL every 5 years. I do not know what is required other than money and an updated background check to do so. Basically, I think owning a gun is a pretty important responsibility because of just how dangerous guns can be to others if they are used improperly. Accordingly, we should be taking as many steps as possible to ensure people don't take on that responsibility lightly.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Jun 16, 2014 -> 03:26 PM) Right. I proposed what I think is a pretty reasonable restriction on gun ownership... you know, some sort of proof that you can competently handle the weapon before you own one. You responded by bringing up false equivalencies to voting and speech. Which are obviously distinguishable. I'd prefer we get to the meat of the argument. I'm genuinely curious why making people show they can operate a firearm before they can own one would be an overly onerous restriction. EDIT: Basically everyone I know who own and use guns, whether it's for hunting, protection, use at the range, whatever, respect firearms for what they are... a tool that can be pretty dangerous is used incompetently, but provide utility if used properly. I see plenty of reasonable uses for firearms. I don't need/want one, but I don't begrudge those that do. I just think people that own firearms should be competent with them before they can own one. Some states have that, at least for concealed carry. You have to pass a test in Illinois. There are several states that are more strict and some that have no restrictions whatsoever. One thing you will never overcome is the slippery slope argument, give them an inch, they take a mile. Because you know they will. Temporary income tax hike? Sure it is. Seat belt laws will NEVER be enforced on their own. Border security after amnesty? Yeah, ok, let's go with that...And on and on. What do you base the proficiency tests on? Police training? Harder? Easier? Who gets to decide? here is what you need just to apply in Illinois: A Valid Driver’s License or State Identification card. A valid FOID card. A head and shoulder electronic photograph taken within the last 30 days. Be able to provide the last ten years of residency. Fingerprints – Electronic fingerprints will expedite your application! Specify to the Live Scan vendor that your fingerprint application is for the Concealed Carry application (ORI = IL920707Z, Purpose Code = CCW).NOTE: Applicants will be assigned a transaction control number (TCN) at the time of fingerprinting and will be required to retain that TCN to complete the application. $150.00 payable with a credit card or electronic check. To obtain the Certificate of Completion, applicants MUST attend their required level of training and successfully pass the live fire proficiency exam. The live fire proficiency exam consists of 30 rounds total with a concealable handgun. 10 rounds at 10 yards, 10 rounds at 7 yards and 10 rounds at 5 yards with 70% of the shots hitting the scoring rings of the B27 target. Is that enough for you? If not, what would you consider to be correct? Serious question, not snark.

'Trailer park' seems to be a phrase coming to my mind after reading this... Just kidding, congrats.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jun 16, 2014 -> 12:39 PM) I'm ok with an off-duty cop doing it, vs. Random Joe Citizen You think cops have better aim or something?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 16, 2014 -> 08:15 AM) I've never had this happen in my area...my packages are always delivered by UPS/FedEX themselves. It happens a lot in very rural areas where FedEx and UPS don't want to spend the time to deliver to. Since USPS is going there anyway...

QUOTE (Tex @ Jun 15, 2014 -> 07:58 PM) Nixon's secretary accidentally erased 5 minutes of a crucial tape and another 18 minutes were missing from another. Stuff like that happens all the time. It doesn't mean it was on purpose. 5 minutes of tape vs several MONTHS of emails? not even the same league. You don't accidentally lose that much email data. It gets deleted on purpose.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 15, 2014 -> 02:13 PM) There was one example in the news last week, the one where the 2 perpetrators were using a kid as a human hostage...I think both the man and wife fired at them, and it sounds like the woman didn't even come close with her shots. It says she didn't hit them. Nice editorializing on her aim. The man killed his target.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Jun 15, 2014 -> 01:48 PM) Do you mean people have/buy guns with the general intention of protecting their families, or that there are actual occurrences everyday where people protect themselves or their families with guns? Not jerking your chain, legitimately curious. And if it's the latter, can you give me some examples of what you mean? I'm just imagining bad guys bursting in the door and there's a gun-wielding homeowner standing in the way, and that seems far-fetched, at least to happen frequently. It happened weekly in Detroit for a while, until Yahoo stopped putting the stories in their feed. There are always cases where someone with a gun protects themselves/family and it never gets reported because the bad guys go away without shots fired. Do you seriously think that people don't defend themselves with guns? I was in a situation where I was about 10 seconds away from having to do that myself. I thank God every day that I didn't have to, but I was ready to if I had to. There was no way those bastards were getting inside my house and at my wife and kids.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 15, 2014 -> 05:42 AM) I remember that under Bush, no emails or tapes of torture were ever lost or intentionally destroyed. I have a buddy who is very high up in the MIS dept at a government agency, and he LOVES him some Obama, but he confided to me yesterday that there is no way that ALL those emails could be lost unless they were erased intentionally. At most they could be lacking 2 days of backups with the systems that are in place. He is very depressed about it because he so wanted to defend the admin but on this one thing, he said he can't. Either they are lying and they are there, or they are lying and someone erased them on purpose. And StangeSox, even if what you say is true, how does throwing it out here make what the IRS has done any better? Is it OK because 'the republicans did it too!'? If it is wrong, it is wrong.

Dunn

QUOTE (Jake @ Jun 14, 2014 -> 07:25 PM) How dear do we hold gun ownership in comparison to other things, like safety? For many people gun owner ship equals safety. You can't discount that, despite the many times anti gunners try to. People DO use guns to protect themselves and their families. All the time. As for a few of the other things you mentioned, I am sure many people would think twice about the license plate scanning and all the camera if they were given a choice. Many times those things were implemented without public knowledge until AFTER the fact.

Connor G

Abreu

Eaton

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 11, 2014 -> 07:03 PM) I'm all for more tax dollars for highways, but if they're going to cut post office funding than at least cut service back to five days. Wow, that would be like eliminating the caboose from trains. Unions will have a s***fit!

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 11, 2014 -> 02:13 PM) precogs only see possibilities! They arent 100 percent truth! Wouldn't stop Tom Cruise from arresting you.

We need precogs. Let's get some government grants issued and start on that right away!

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 11, 2014 -> 01:13 PM) Nope, D for effort. edit: but it does highlight that regardless of what proposals anyone comes up with, they'll be decried as ineffectual and needless by people who oppose gun restrictions. I think some of the mental health related ones may have a slight impact. So there blows that statement all to hell.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 11, 2014 -> 11:50 AM) What I personally want isn't the issue. You were criticizing Obama for not making a policy speech and for not offering anything. witesox was criticizing him for pointing fingers at an unwilling society. But Obama and Congress made proposals after Newtown in early 2013 that were shot down by the gun lobby. As your link notes, there have been 1500 state-level gun laws proposed, some which are more restrictive. We had the whole Manchin-Toomey bill. It's not like ideas aren't out there and haven't been presented. So you would rather just b**** about nothing being done, or not enough being done. Yes, Obama offered nothing in his speech and conversation other than 'we need to do something'. Well, some things have been done. And none of them would have stopped what he claims they would have. Some things have been proposed, most were pretty absurd and also would not have stopped Sandy Hook. other than the mental health ones, what else out there do you think we need?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 11, 2014 -> 11:35 AM) Total number of gun bills doesn't say anything one way or another. One of those in that count would be Illinois' CC bill. Another would be Georgia's "Guns Everywhere" bill. As the graphic in your own link shows, it's almost a 2:1 ratio of loosening gun laws. And when states like Colorado passed some tightening measures, the small-but-intense pro gun groups launched successful recall campaigns. And if you'll notice, at least one of your examples isn't an enacted law: This is marked as "vetoed" on the interactive graphic. New York did pass some relatively strict laws, but overall, we haven't done s*** since Newtown to restrict guns. More often than not, we've made it easier to get and carry them. I found this one odd, though: So if some security force for say a nuclear facility wanted to equip their force with .50 caliber rifles, would some individual within the company need to get a permit? What happens if they leave? Why not just let the company get the permit? Well what more would YOU like to do?

Eh, we haven't done s*** since Newtown. It's not for lack of proposals from Obama and others in Congress or overwhelming popular approval; it's because of a small but intense guns rights lobby and backers. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/12...wtown.html?_r=0 Passed are such gems as New Jersey - Encodes permit holders' information on new identification cards and requires gun buyers to show that they have undergone safety training. Maine - Makes it a crime to possess firearms in public and refuse to provide information at the request of law enforcement officers. Connecticut - Requires background checks for all gun, ammunition and magazine sales, and creates a registry of weapons offenders. Maryland - Requires applicants for handgun licenses to submit fingerprints to the state police. California - Adds all semiautomatic rifles with detachable magazines to a list of banned assault weapons. (So now a Marlin .22 semi auto is classified as an assault gun. LOL) New York - Strengthens a ban on assault weapons and restricts magazines to seven bullets. California - Makes it illegal to leave a loaded firearm in a place where a child may gain access to it. Well DUH! California - Requires owners of long guns to earn safety certificates like those required of handgun owners. None of which would have prevented Sandy Hook, or almost any of the other shootings. There were several states that strengthened their reporting laws for people with mental issues, but many more of those are being tied up by the ACLU and mental health advocates. So they have done something. Just nothing that would have made a difference.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Jun 11, 2014 -> 12:00 AM) Yes, point to one instance where it may have come in handy. Does that suddenly outweigh all the other times it hasn't? What's the net result here? What did Obama say that you actually disagree with? Are you assuming that is the only one? I just posted that because it popped onto my news feed last night. The net result is THAT family is alive today, and at least one of the bad guys is not. There were weekly stories coming from detroit for a while where home owners were using firearms to successfully defend themselves from armed and dangerous invaders. There are many instances where it doesn't even make it into papers or news because the mere presence of a gun causes the bad guys to leave. “My biggest frustration so far is the fact that this society has not been willing to take some basic steps to keep guns out of the hands of people who can do just unbelievable damage,” Obama said. “We’re the only developed country where this happens…It happens once a week. And it’s a one-day story.” What basic steps do you want? You have states where you have gotten everything that the antis claim would curb violence, yet it hasn't curbed violence. After a while the proposed steps are just too much. A background check every time you want to buy ammo? An FFl just to loan a gun to a friend while at a range? Yeah, that's going to stop crime. The president said he is astonished that the Sandy Hook shooting a year and a half ago did not result in a change in gun laws. (A bill to strengthen background checks failed in the Senate last year.) Again, what did he want passed that would have stopped that? Already laws requiring firearms to be locked up, etc. Yet he broke the law (and his mom ignored the law) and was successful in killing people anyway. “I have been in Washington for a while now and most things don’t surprise me. The fact that 20 6-year-olds were gunned down in the most violent fashion possible, and this town couldn’t do anything about it was stunning to me,” Obama said, referring to Washington, D.C. Also stunning was the speed at which the anits jumped on the situation to try and push their side before the bodies were even cold. Worse than ambulance chasers. And again, what would he have had done that would have stopped THAT? He added: “The country has to do some soul searching about this.” Many people have. People have a right to defend themselves. The family I posted previously had every right to live as those kids did. You just want to be able to choose the victors. Police have NO duty to protect you. I was in a situation where I almost had to use my gun to protect me and my family. I called police, and they came by a minute after the bad guys left. Had they continued up my driveway, they would have been 50 seconds too late to prevent shots being fired. My biggest issue with what he said was that he said nothing. 'We need to pass something. We need to do something. blah blah blah.' Propose something. Propose something that would solve the problem you CLAIM to want to solve (Obama, not you), not f*** over people who want to protect themselves.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 10, 2014 -> 05:20 PM) Obama finally speaks today to Tumblr users. ... Obama asked about school shootings said ... “My biggest frustration so far is the fact that this society has not been willing to take some basic steps to keep guns out of the hands of people who can do just unbelievable damage,” Obama said. “We’re the only developed country where this happens…It happens once a week. And it’s a one-day story.” The president said he is astonished that the Sandy Hook shooting a year and a half ago did not result in a change in gun laws. (A bill to strengthen background checks failed in the Senate last year.) “I have been in Washington for a while now and most things don’t surprise me. The fact that 20 6-year-olds were gunned down in the most violent fashion possible, and this town couldn’t do anything about it was stunning to me,” Obama said, referring to Washington, D.C. He added: “The country has to do some soul searching about this.” -- Yay! I approve of his statements! Here are some people glad that you and Obama haven't taken away their guns just yet. http://news.yahoo.com/two-men-girl-human-s...-040007545.html

Viceado will spank the kitty.

It's pronounced GorDON.