Guns From Vending Machines
I like to bring this up from time to time for the newbies who fall under the spell of the neanderthals here who gipe, bitch, moan, complain, find fault, insult and also claim that if you are to be a TRUE American, and TRUE believer in the US Constitution and a TRUE man then you must support having absolutely no gun laws what-so-ever.
Now this attitude of theirs has generated countless hours of arguments and debate about who is right. I merely want to post a single simple sentence about this.
If you agree with their position, that means handguns can legally be sold out of vending machines to anyone with the money.
If you think that attitude is to crazy and nobody here actually believes it (such as the yellow canary asses) then just you ask them and find out.
So, is that what everyone here wants? Let's separate the crazy people from the at least half-way sane on this matter.
Now this attitude of theirs has generated countless hours of arguments and debate about who is right. I merely want to post a single simple sentence about this.
If you agree with their position, that means handguns can legally be sold out of vending machines to anyone with the money.
If you think that attitude is to crazy and nobody here actually believes it (such as the yellow canary asses) then just you ask them and find out.
So, is that what everyone here wants? Let's separate the crazy people from the at least half-way sane on this matter.
0
-
What a wonderful idea.
Children and young adults that had been raised by idiots could access a firearm, kill themselves or commit some other grievous offense and be locked away before they were able to breed. Natural selection with a bit of help from people with common sense.
Parents have a lot on their plates to protect their children from. That is what being a parent is all about. Unless of course you prefer the state raising your children.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Beeramid
TR - Do you favor laws forcing people to go through an ffl for private sells?
No, I do not favor that ;nor do I even favor the government requiring FFL licenses' as part of the gun selling business. Heck, when I was growing up I don't believe FFL's even existed. I could have bought about any kind of gun I wanted at the local hardware store (even some drug stores sold guns I believe) or I could have ordered a gun by US Mail.
But I do favor a law saying that a small child, a convicted violent criminal cannot LEGALLY purchase or posses a firearm. Why do I feel this way? Well, it sure is not because such a law written on nothing but paper and stored in the courthouse will actually stop a small child or a convicted violent criminal from obtaining a fireare.
NO, I favor such a law because when and if the child/violent felon does somehow come to possess a firearm and is seen walking down your street, something can legally be done to stop that person before they harm you. Stopped by you, your neighbor or the police. Without the law I am mentioning, that armed child/violent felon cannot legally be stopped until they commit a crime. If that crime is against you and you didn't see it coming, then you are dead and only then can something legally be done about that child/violent criminal having a firearm.
Bottom line is that those here who feel they believe in absoutely no gun laws simply have to support the idea, for example, of letting guns be sold from vending machines. Despite the fact that if guns were to be sold from vending machines, the first time on of those guns harmed those who support vending machine gun sales, that victim would suddenly not like the vending machine idea so much.
In otherwords, if the ones here who claim to support the vending machine idea were to change their minds and decide to side against the freedom of selling guns from vending machines, then they would have to admit that they DO SUPPORT gun control; at least in this case a small amount of gun control. But still they would be supporting gun control. And they cannot bear to do that because they would be outing themselves as a hypocrite.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
OH, don't worry. I'm got some upcoming stuff. I just don't have much time to waste on you guys.
But I will soon find some.
Moveon.org is more your style.0 -
quote:Originally posted by ringchild
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
.
So do you favor selling firearms from vending machines? Yes or no please.
have i been unclear?
YES(as long as they're packaged to prevent scuffing when they drop into the pickup slot).
now....
do you favor making law abiding american citizens pay for the crimes of others by unconstitutionally limiting their access to firearms?
In red above. Thank you for asking. But I believe you and a lot of others don't understand where I am on this. I don't think "law abiding American citizens" should have limits on their access to firearms. I've never said that and as a law a law abiding American citizen I certainly don't want my access to firearms limited. But not allowing me to buy firearms out of a vending machine is fine with me. I'll just go to the gun store and buy one face to face with the firearm seller.0 -
Isn't the Constitution our first and strongest form of law? You are right TR we must have law as a society or we have nothing but chaos and no standards to live by. There are too many gun laws, I'm sure we would all agree, and we would probably all agree on much more if some could get past the personal attacks coming from the same people on most any issue, except those posted by there good old buddies. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by COBmmcmss
I believe you haven't noticed that the world has changed since we were all young. I also lived through a era when as a grade school kid, I could have lied about my age and, if I had the money bought almost any kind of firearm (except full auto) and ammo through the US Mail. But for some reason we seem to have a much greater number of murderous, criminally inclined and just plain evil people out in society.
Fox, you are partially right. We do have a larger number but I doubt any larger percentage. What we do have is a culture change from those who are personally responsible - to those who say "...it's not my fault, they caused me to do this..." or "...let the government take care of it..."
Now maybe one answer to dealing with those criminal people is to arm every good and decent person and have them deal with the crazies as they encounter them. But until that is tried and it works, then the only alternative is to at least NOT let just anyone who wants a gun to walk into the local drug store and purchase one. At the very least try and force those crazies to have to put some time, work and effort in order to find a gun. And, when and if they are caught with that gun, then they would automatically be arrested and taken off the street
It has been tried and was extremely successful. Even during the days of the "wild west" or the early days of the Yukon, people stood for their principles and your "crazies" were dealt with by the Darwinian principle. Stupid hurts and sometimes permanently.
The most gentile time in our U.S. history is the 1930's as many carried and you never knew what someone else was carrying. This unarmed "civilized society" we have now propagates the boldness of the druggies or crazies. Look at Fort Hood for an example. It's a shame that on a military base of that size, it took so long for someone to show up carrying a weapon. When a crazy knows there is no one to fight back, they are emboldened to higher levels.
All the trouble you talked about going through to get the weapons... DOES NOT APPLY to criminals or crazies. In case you don't realize it, they don't do the paperwork, or the thumbprint, or anything. So what does it accomplish? Nothing more than generate the time, work and effort consuming records for law abiding citizens. Like I said, nothing of value.
You are missing the value of having at least some laws/rules on firearm purchases, carrying, ownership, etc. The value is NOT in attempting to place paperwork, etc. barriers in the way of the criminals wanting to illegally obtain a firearm. Everybody knows that we have laws against importing illegal drugs, illegal aliens, etc., yet that does not prevent people from going ahead and doing it. So of course the same is true regardless of what guns laws might be put in place.
But here is where the IS some value in those laws and barriers. When the criminally inclined go ahead and obtain a firearm illegally, at least when they are noticed they and their illegally obtained firearm will be taken off the street. In addition, the gun laws frankly do worry some people in that they fear breaking those laws by illegally providing firearms to people who cannot legally own them. In addition, I believe there might even be a small number of the criminally inclined that decided to not risk additional prison time, when they commit their crimes, by illegally obtaining, carrying or using a gun.
So, without any gun control laws at all, a 10 year old child who obtained the money (stole it from parents, borrowed credit card, etc.) could purchase a handgun from a vending machine in your full view. Yet you would have no legal justification to do one damn thing about it (there would be no gun laws, remember?) nor would it do any good to notify anyone (maybe the kids parents if you knew who/where they were) because what could law enforcement do about a 10 year old buying/carrying a gun? No gun laws, remember?
The same thing is true if you observe a known violent criminal buying a handgun from a vending machine. What could you do about it? Nothing. No gun laws remember?
I think it is foolish to advocate for absolutely no gun laws. If you do so advocate, then one thing you are advocating for is someone selling guns from a vending machine and that is just plain crazy.
Wow, all this guncontrol talk. You really are an NRA shill.[:D]
RTKABA.0 -
quote:Originally posted by swift
Isn't the Constitution our first and strongest form of law? You are right TR we must have law as a society or we have nothing but chaos and no standards to live by. There are too many gun laws, I'm sure we would all agree, and we would probably all agree on much more if some could get past the personal attacks coming from the same people on most any issue, except those posted by there good old buddies.
Just like the "good old buddies" in the NRA that supported and championed most gun laws on the books at the present time?
Lance0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
[I believe you and a lot of others don't understand where I am on this.
just because i don't understand your logic doesn't mean i don't know where you're at on this.
i know exactly where you stand.
it is your opinion that there needs to be some form of regulation in order to protect us from violent criminals, crazies, and errant children.
i happen to disagree.
i think that the violent need to be properly punished (i.e., sentence has NOTHING to do with jail capacity, or lack thereof), crazies need to be institutionalized, and children need to be taught respect and responsibility by their parents.
i believe in second chances, if the behavior and lack of severity of the original crime warrant re-entry into society.
debt paid, full rights restored.
screw up again, you're gone.
the fact is, i wasn't the shooter at columbine, va tech, or hood.
i had nothing to do with any real or claimed flow of weapons from u.s. gun shops to mexico.
my ship is tight, and unauthorized persons have no access to my weapons. even if they did, i would be willing to accept full personal responsibility for any damage that my actions have caused to another.
the point of all this?
it is dead wrong to use any justification, other than my own actions, to limit my accessibility to the tools that i may need, for whatever purpose i may need them.
vending machines, swap meets, mail order, whatever.
they say that the hijackers used box cutters.
do we now need a law saying that minor children can no longer work in warehouses, or must be given plastic tools if they do take such employment?
repeal all gun laws.
appropriately punish the criminals who misuse guns.
"allow" (i threw up in my mouth a little typing that one) avg citizens to legally carry whenever we want.
"shall not be infringed", remember?
what you seem to be missing (either by circumstance or design), is that it is the argument that you put forth which, if followed to it's logical conclusion, will see us avg citizens disarmed in furtherance of our servants' own agenda.
sure, maybe our republic will outlive you, and you won't have to be a witness to what happens to us lowly, serfs when the powers that be don't get their way easily.
is that any kind of future to leave to your heirs?
don't you find it an interesting coincidence that, as gun restrictions have grown, the erosion of our other rights happens a little quicker?
do you really think that there is no connection?
wake up, man.0 -
Zink -Just like the "good old buddies" in the NRA that supported and championed most gun laws on the books at the present time?
Since you brought it up, please tell us just how many laws are there and how many were placed by the NRA?
I personally support GOA.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by ringchild
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
.
So do you favor selling firearms from vending machines? Yes or no please.
have i been unclear?
YES(as long as they're packaged to prevent scuffing when they drop into the pickup slot).
now....
do you favor making law abiding american citizens pay for the crimes of others by unconstitutionally limiting their access to firearms?
In red above. Thank you for asking. But I believe you and a lot of others don't understand where I am on this. I don't think "law abiding American citizens" should have limits on their access to firearms. I've never said that and as a law a law abiding American citizen I certainly don't want my access to firearms limited. But not allowing me to buy firearms out of a vending machine is fine with me. I'll just go to the gun store and buy one face to face with the firearm seller.
So that means you support gun control.......0 -
quote:Originally posted by Beeramid
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by ringchild
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
.
So do you favor selling firearms from vending machines? Yes or no please.
have i been unclear?
YES(as long as they're packaged to prevent scuffing when they drop into the pickup slot).
now....
do you favor making law abiding american citizens pay for the crimes of others by unconstitutionally limiting their access to firearms?
In red above. Thank you for asking. But I believe you and a lot of others don't understand where I am on this. I don't think "law abiding American citizens" should have limits on their access to firearms. I've never said that and as a law a law abiding American citizen I certainly don't want my access to firearms limited. But not allowing me to buy firearms out of a vending machine is fine with me. I'll just go to the gun store and buy one face to face with the firearm seller.
So that means you support gun control.......
I am unsure why so many want to paint me with a totally negative image when, if the truth were told, many here share, at least a degree of how I feel.
I don not support gun control on the lawful, responsible citizens. There is the answer to your question.
So let's ask you the same question in a different way.
Do you want to make it legal for illegal aliens to purchase, possess and carry firearms?
If "no," then you support gun control. Same thing if you don't want 10 year old kids to legally be able to walk into a store and walk out with a firearm. If you don't want that to be a legal action on the kid's part, then you support gun control.
Do you want someone who is obviously crazy to legally be able to purchase, own and carry a firearm? If not then you support gun control.
Do you want it to be illegal for someone to casually lay a loaded firearm down in public, say on a picnic table in the park? If you don't agree with then then you support gun control.
I am interested in your answers to this.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
I am unsure why so many want to paint me with a totally negative image when, if the truth were told, many here share, at least a degree of how I feel.
I do not support gun control on the lawful, responsible citizens. There is the answer to your question.
So let's ask you the same question in a different way.
Do you want to make it legal for illegal aliens to purchase, possess and carry firearms?
If "no," then you support gun control. Same thing if you don't want 10 year old kids to legally be able to walk into a store and walk out with a firearm. If you don't want that to be a legal action on the kid's part, then you support gun control.
Do you want someone who is obviously crazy to legally be able to purchase, own and carry a firearm? If not then you support gun control.
Do you want it to be illegal for someone to casually lay a loaded firearm down in public, say on a picnic table in the park? If you don't agree with then then you support gun control.
I am interested in your answers to this.
no, i don't want illegals to have guns, cars, or even a frickin' big mac from my local mickey d's.
they don't belong here, there is a law against them being here, and i want them all deported.
if an illegal alien should happen to gain access to a firearm and use it against a citizen......
death penalty, and then deport the carcass.
limiting MY access to firearms based on the idea of keeping them out of the hands of illegals is even more asinine than your previous examples (if that's possible).
are you actually saying that a law abiding citizen's access needs to be limited because our government refuses to follow the law when it comes to illegals?
now you're just being plain silly.
illegals kill lots of innocent citizens with illegally driven cars.
should we all have to clear background checks to buy those?
if, as you stated above, you do not support gun control on lawful, responsible citizens (funny, you didn't mention a minimum age requirement), then the idea of a vending machine is fair play.
the control needs to be placed on the bad guys, not lawful citizens.
if you disagree with that, then you support collective punishment.0 -
quote:Originally posted by ringchild
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
I am unsure why so many want to paint me with a totally negative image when, if the truth were told, many here share, at least a degree of how I feel.
I do not support gun control on the lawful, responsible citizens. There is the answer to your question.
So let's ask you the same question in a different way.
Do you want to make it legal for illegal aliens to purchase, possess and carry firearms?
If "no," then you support gun control. Same thing if you don't want 10 year old kids to legally be able to walk into a store and walk out with a firearm. If you don't want that to be a legal action on the kid's part, then you support gun control.
Do you want someone who is obviously crazy to legally be able to purchase, own and carry a firearm? If not then you support gun control.
Do you want it to be illegal for someone to casually lay a loaded firearm down in public, say on a picnic table in the park? If you don't agree with then then you support gun control.
I am interested in your answers to this.
no, i don't want illegals to have guns, cars, or even a frickin' big mac from my local mickey d's.
they don't belong here, there is a law against them being here, and i want them all deported.
if an illegal alien should happen to gain access to a firearm and use it against a citizen......
death penalty, and then deport the carcass.
limiting MY access to firearms based on the idea of keeping them out of the hands of illegals is even more asinine than your previous examples (if that's possible).
are you actually saying that a law abiding citizen's access needs to be limited because our government refuses to follow the law when it comes to illegals?
now you're just being plain silly.
illegals kill lots of innocent citizens with illegally driven cars.
should we all have to clear background checks to buy those?
if, as you stated above, you do not support gun control on lawful, responsible citizens (funny, you didn't mention a minimum age requirement), then the idea of a vending machine is fair play.
the control needs to be placed on the bad guys, not lawful citizens.
if you disagree with that, then you support collective punishment.
Actually you are the one being "just plain silly." Either that or just looking for an excuse, any excuse to throw a temper tantrum. If you are not an illegal alien why the hell do you care if I want a law making it illegal for an illegal alien to buy or possess a gun?
What are you? Some kind of illegal alien gun rights lobbyist?0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
Actually you are the one being "just plain silly." Either that or just looking for an excuse, any excuse to throw a temper tantrum. If you are not an illegal alien why the hell do you care if I want a law making it illegal for an illegal alien to buy or possess a gun?
What are you? Some kind of illegal alien gun rights lobbyist?
i stopped throwing tantrums as a child.
i realized that they did no good.
the reasons why i care if you make a law prohibiting illegals from owning a firearm are:
1: it misses the mark. send them the hell home.
2: your "law" would undoubtedly mean proving citizenship at the time of sale. another hoop for me to jump thru because no one has the guts to do what's really needed (see #1 above).
3: no matter how well intentioned, any restrictions on my right to buy what i want, when i want, will ultimately be abused by our "servants".
i suppose, under your plan, it would be fine for a cop to walk up to any brown skinned person at the range, make them stop what they are doing, and shake them down for their "papers"?
direct your energy to where it is truly needed:
demand your politicians enforce the laws regarding illegal aliens.
demand that your neighbor teach their kids respect and responsibility.
demand that murderers and sexual predators be put to death, and that violent criminals remain locked up.
what you are advocating is allowing illegals, crazies, and violent offenders to walk freely among us while demanding that we law abiding citizens sacrifice freedom to allow their "safe" integration into society.
you think the way to fix pedro's erratic driving by demanding that everyone take the bus.
and you say i'm being silly?
seriously, dude.
put down the crack pipe.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by Beeramid
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by ringchild
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
.
So do you favor selling firearms from vending machines? Yes or no please.
have i been unclear?
YES(as long as they're packaged to prevent scuffing when they drop into the pickup slot).
now....
do you favor making law abiding american citizens pay for the crimes of others by unconstitutionally limiting their access to firearms?
In red above. Thank you for asking. But I believe you and a lot of others don't understand where I am on this. I don't think "law abiding American citizens" should have limits on their access to firearms. I've never said that and as a law a law abiding American citizen I certainly don't want my access to firearms limited. But not allowing me to buy firearms out of a vending machine is fine with me. I'll just go to the gun store and buy one face to face with the firearm seller.
So that means you support gun control.......
I am unsure why so many want to paint me with a totally negative image when, if the truth were told, many here share, at least a degree of how I feel.
I don not support gun control on the lawful, responsible citizens. There is the answer to your question.
So let's ask you the same question in a different way.
Do you want to make it legal for illegal aliens to purchase, possess and carry firearms?
If "no," then you support gun control. Same thing if you don't want 10 year old kids to legally be able to walk into a store and walk out with a firearm. If you don't want that to be a legal action on the kid's part, then you support gun control.
Do you want someone who is obviously crazy to legally be able to purchase, own and carry a firearm? If not then you support gun control.
Do you want it to be illegal for someone to casually lay a loaded firearm down in public, say on a picnic table in the park? If you don't agree with then then you support gun control.
I am interested in your answers to this.
What you don't seem to get, is that if an illegal wants a gun, they'll get one regardless of the law. They shouldn't be here in the first place and should be driven back to where they came from. Illegal's have already decided that the laws don't apply to them, so how is making another going to help anything?0 -
quote:Originally posted by Beeramid
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by Beeramid
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by ringchild
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
.
So do you favor selling firearms from vending machines? Yes or no please.
have i been unclear?
YES(as long as they're packaged to prevent scuffing when they drop into the pickup slot).
now....
do you favor making law abiding american citizens pay for the crimes of others by unconstitutionally limiting their access to firearms?
In red above. Thank you for asking. But I believe you and a lot of others don't understand where I am on this. I don't think "law abiding American citizens" should have limits on their access to firearms. I've never said that and as a law a law abiding American citizen I certainly don't want my access to firearms limited. But not allowing me to buy firearms out of a vending machine is fine with me. I'll just go to the gun store and buy one face to face with the firearm seller.
So that means you support gun control.......
I am unsure why so many want to paint me with a totally negative image when, if the truth were told, many here share, at least a degree of how I feel.
I don not support gun control on the lawful, responsible citizens. There is the answer to your question.
So let's ask you the same question in a different way.
Do you want to make it legal for illegal aliens to purchase, possess and carry firearms?
If "no," then you support gun control. Same thing if you don't want 10 year old kids to legally be able to walk into a store and walk out with a firearm. If you don't want that to be a legal action on the kid's part, then you support gun control.
Do you want someone who is obviously crazy to legally be able to purchase, own and carry a firearm? If not then you support gun control.
Do you want it to be illegal for someone to casually lay a loaded firearm down in public, say on a picnic table in the park? If you don't agree with then then you support gun control.
I am interested in your answers to this.
What you don't seem to get, is that if an illegal wants a gun, they'll get one regardless of the law. They shouldn't be here in the first place and should be driven back to where they came from. Illegal's have already decided that the laws don't apply to them, so how is making another going to help anything?
What you don't seem to get is that without a law saying an illegal alien cannot buy or possess a firearm, if you or the law catches that illegal with a firearm, you cannot legally take it from him. Because of NO GUNS LAWS remember? This would be especially true if it took you a while to even determine that he WAS an illegal. But in regards to the possessing a gun, you can DETERMINE that the minute it is found on him and with a gun law in place you can DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
Now why is that so hard for you and others here to "get it?"0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
What you don't seem to get is that without a law saying an illegal alien cannot buy or possess a firearm, if you or the law catches that illegal with a firearm, you cannot legally take it from him. Because of NO GUNS LAWS remember? This would be especially true if it took you a while to even determine that he WAS an illegal. But in regards to the possessing a gun, you can DETERMINE that the minute it is found on him and with a gun law in place you can DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
Now why is that so hard for you and others here to "get it?"
I fail to see how you are going to do anything different with or without gun laws while determining if he is or is not illegal. Are you suggesting that he will have to have his CCW on him, or, if it is a longarm, are you suggesting that a 'citizen legal to possess firearms' card be mandatory?
Lastly, what is the problem? An illegal with a firearm is just as illegal as one without one. The response is to deport him. Let him keep the firearm, who cares?0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
What you don't seem to get is that without a law saying an illegal alien cannot buy or possess a firearm, if you or the law catches that illegal with a firearm, you cannot legally take it from him. Because of NO GUNS LAWS remember? This would be especially true if it took you a while to even determine that he WAS an illegal. But in regards to the possessing a gun, you can DETERMINE that the minute it is found on him and with a gun law in place you can DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
Now why is that so hard for you and others here to "get it?"
I fail to see how you are going to do anything different with or without gun laws while determining if he is or is not illegal. Are you suggesting that he will have to have his CCW on him, or, if it is a longarm, are you suggesting that a 'citizen legal to possess firearms' card be mandatory?
Lastly, what is the problem? An illegal with a firearm is just as illegal as one without one. The response is to deport him. Let him keep the firearm, who cares?
Damn, it is quite flattering that you guys so carefully read my posts. Thanks you for that and for coming back with a polite, real response. I frankly didn't think anyone would read my post closely enough to catch the flaw in my reasoning.
Well, I care if an illegal alien possess a firearm. Firearm possesion is the possession of a power that is only guaranteed to US Citizens by the constitution. I don't want some illegal using my country as if it were his and I don't want him to have the same constitutional rights as I do.
In regards to catching him with it, you are correct that to know he had it illegally you would also at the same time have to know if he was an illegal or not. So, assuming you stopped that illegal for some visible or suspected illegal act (otherwise why stop him?) then if you find a gun in his possession and hold him long enough to determine that he is an illegal, he needs to be punished much more than just being deported along with his firearm. If he knowingly and illegally possesses a firearm there is a good likelyhood that he has or will commit a crime against an American citizen. If that can be determined then he needs to go to prison or be shot by one of his intended victims.
But with no gun laws, he could legally have that firearm and legally take it back to Mexico with him. He should not be treated so gently.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
Damn, it is quite flattering that you guys so carefully read my posts. Thanks you for that and for coming back with a polite, real response. I frankly didn't think anyone would read my post closely enough to catch the flaw in my reasoning.
Well, I care if an illegal alien possess a firearm. Firearm possesion is the possession of a power that is only guaranteed to US Citizens by the constitution. I don't want some illegal using my country as if it were his and I don't want him to have the same constitutional rights as I do.
In regards to catching him with it, you are correct that to know he had it illegally you would also at the same time have to know if he was an illegal or not. So, assuming you stopped that illegal for some visible or suspected illegal act (otherwise why stop him?) then if you find a gun in his possession and hold him long enough to determine that he is an illegal, he needs to be punished much more than just being deported along with his firearm. If he knowingly and illegally possesses a firearm there is a good likelyhood that he has or will commit a crime against an American citizen. If that can be determined then he needs to go to prison or be shot by one of his intended victims.
But with no gun laws, he could legally have that firearm and legally take it back to Mexico with him. He should not be treated so gently.
I'll try to remain polite, Mr. Fox.
You really need to think about your motivation here.
You suggest that possession of a firearm makes it more likely for an individual to have committed or being planning to commit a crime.
You suggest that he should be treated differently if in possession of a firearm, just like murder with a firearm is worse that murder with chopsticks, or murder with racial overtones is worse than murder without it.
Can we increase the punishment if he is carrying beer as well? I know that illegals drinking beer is driving up the cost for us good Americans, dammit.
Does not make any sense to me. It strikes me that you advocate the creation of gun laws for the purpose of enforcing them. Kind of like the entire CCW permit process. What is the real point?
edit:
Perhaps, Mr. Fox, you advocate a government issued card to confirm citizenship? A card that must be presented on demand if you have a firearm in your possession?
The bottom line is that there is no good 'gun law'. Gun laws do not and will never protect people from people or people from government. Their sole purpose is to protect government from people.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox Originally posted by tr fox
What you don't seem to get is that without a law saying an illegal alien cannot buy or possess a firearm, if you or the law catches that illegal with a firearm, you cannot legally take it from him. Because of NO GUNS LAWS remember? This would be especially true if it took you a while to even determine that he WAS an illegal. But in regards to the possessing a gun, you can DETERMINE that the minute it is found on him and with a gun law in place you can DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
Now why is that so hard for you and others here to "get it?"
but that brings up an interesting point:
if our right to posess and carry is actually a god-given right which is only included in the bor as a matter of clarity....
are not all men endowed by their creator with the same rights?
i don't want illegals running around with guns, either, but due to the argument that i make whenever someone wants to put another restrictionn on ownership or purchase, i would be a hypocrite to suggest anything other than deportation....and that would be for being here illegally in the 1st place.
you can't fault a man for wanting to exercise his god-given right to protect himself and his family, and that includes illegal aliens.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
Damn, it is quite flattering that you guys so carefully read my posts. Thanks you for that and for coming back with a polite, real response. I frankly didn't think anyone would read my post closely enough to catch the flaw in my reasoning.
Well, I care if an illegal alien possess a firearm. Firearm possesion is the possession of a power that is only guaranteed to US Citizens by the constitution. I don't want some illegal using my country as if it were his and I don't want him to have the same constitutional rights as I do.
In regards to catching him with it, you are correct that to know he had it illegally you would also at the same time have to know if he was an illegal or not. So, assuming you stopped that illegal for some visible or suspected illegal act (otherwise why stop him?) then if you find a gun in his possession and hold him long enough to determine that he is an illegal, he needs to be punished much more than just being deported along with his firearm. If he knowingly and illegally possesses a firearm there is a good likelyhood that he has or will commit a crime against an American citizen. If that can be determined then he needs to go to prison or be shot by one of his intended victims.
But with no gun laws, he could legally have that firearm and legally take it back to Mexico with him. He should not be treated so gently.
I'll try to remain polite, Mr. Fox.
You really need to think about your motivation here.
You suggest that possession of a firearm makes it more likely for an individual to have committed or being planning to commit a crime.
You suggest that he should be treated differently if in possession of a firearm, just like murder with a firearm is worse that murder with chopsticks, or murder with racial overtones is worse than murder without it.
Can we increase the punishment if he is carrying beer as well? I know that illegals drinking beer is driving up the cost for us good Americans, dammit.
Does not make any sense to me. It strikes me that you advocate the creation of gun laws for the purpose of enforcing them. Kind of like the entire CCW permit process. What is the real point?
edit:
Perhaps, Mr. Fox, you advocate a government issued card to confirm citizenship? A card that must be presented on demand if you have a firearm in your possession? If you need to prove citizenship, a copy of your birth certificate (you have one right?) has always been proof enough. Why do you suggest making it more complicated with a "government issued card?"
The bottom line is that there is no good 'gun law'. Gun laws do not and will never protect people from people [size If a convicted violent felon is in route to your house to kill you and somehow gets stopped by the police and that felon possesses a gun against the law, then that felon can be stopped at that point. Before he trys to kill you. Without a gun law in this case, the police must left him go on his way with the gun and do as he pleases. In that respect a gun law has helped people [/size=2] or people from government. Their sole purpose is to protect government from people.0 -
This is exactly why we will NEVER stand on the same side of that line. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
Damn, it is quite flattering that you guys so carefully read my posts. Thanks you for that and for coming back with a polite, real response. I frankly didn't think anyone would read my post closely enough to catch the flaw in my reasoning.
Well, I care if an illegal alien possess a firearm. Firearm possession is the possession of a power that is only guaranteed to US Citizens by the constitution. I don't want some illegal using my country as if it were his and I don't want him to have the same constitutional rights as I do.
In regards to catching him with it, you are correct that to know he had it illegally you would also at the same time have to know if he was an illegal or not. So, assuming you stopped that illegal for some visible or suspected illegal act (otherwise why stop him?) then if you find a gun in his possession and hold him long enough to determine that he is an illegal, he needs to be punished much more than just being deported along with his firearm. If he knowingly and illegally possesses a firearm there is a good likelyhood that he has or will commit a crime against an American citizen. If that can be determined then he needs to go to prison or be shot by one of his intended victims.
But with no gun laws, he could legally have that firearm and legally take it back to Mexico with him. He should not be treated so gently.
I'll try to remain polite, Mr. Fox.
You really need to think about your motivation here.
You suggest that possession of a firearm makes it more likely for an individual to have committed or being planning to commit a crime.
You suggest that he should be treated differently if in possession of a firearm, just like murder with a firearm is worse that murder with chopsticks, or murder with racial overtones is worse than murder without it.
Can we increase the punishment if he is carrying beer as well? I know that illegals drinking beer is driving up the cost for us good Americans, dammit.
Does not make any sense to me. It strikes me that you advocate the creation of gun laws for the purpose of enforcing them. Kind of like the entire CCW permit process. What is the real point?
edit:
Perhaps, Mr. Fox, you advocate a government issued card to confirm citizenship? A card that must be presented on demand if you have a firearm in your possession? If you need to prove citizenship, a copy of your birth certificate (you have one right?) has always been proof enough. Why do you suggest making it more complicated with a "government issued card?"
The bottom line is that there is no good 'gun law'. Gun laws do not and will never protect people from people [size If a convicted violent felon is in route to your house to kill you and somehow gets stopped by the police and that felon possesses a gun against the law, then that felon can be stopped at that point. Before he trys to kill you. Without a gun law in this case, the police must left him go on his way with the gun and do as he pleases. In that respect a gun law has helped people [/size=2] or people from government. Their sole purpose is to protect government from people.
The slope be slippery, Mr. Fox.
To your first point: Are you suggesting that everyone who chooses to have a firearm with him be mandated to carry a birth certificate to prove citizenship? No, that would be silly, would it not? I do not carry mine with me, do you?
Your scenario was that the possession of a rifle by an illegal adds to his crime. To enforce that law, every citizen who is in possession of a rifle will have to prove citizenship upon demand. I know, if you have nothing to hide..... Possession of a firearm does not aggravate the crime of being in this country illegally. The creation of a law to make it so will simply add the burden of proof of citizenship to all.
Your second point is equally specious. Any armed person could be on their way to kill me, regardless of their history. It would be best for the police to stop the ones I wouldn't suspect, as I would recognize the threat posed by a violent criminal immediately and have a much better chance than if it was, say, George down the street who doesn't like the way I mow my lawn.
Far better to stop George, force him to prove his citizenship, and then force him to explain why he is in possession of a rifle.
But the real answer is that we all be responsible in the protection of ourselves and our loved ones, and not have government assume that responsibility. Some grabbers fear all armed citizens, and some seem to focus on fearing an armed ex-offender. I simply choose not to live in fear.0 -
OK, Don, I will approach this from an entirely different angle.
If you, and others here, insist that having at least a minimual amount of guns laws can never do any good, then you have to say the very same thing about laws against rape, robbery, murder, tax cheating, child poronography, etc. etc. This cannot be denied.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
OK, Don, I will approach this from an entirely different angle.
If you, and others here, insist that having at least a minimual amount of guns laws can never do any good, then you have to say the very same thing about laws against rape, robbery, murder, tax cheating, child poronography, etc. etc. This cannot be denied.
Oh contrare my fine Fox. It can be denied and is. There is no right to rape, murder, etc. in the Constitution. You again attempt to state something as fact that totally misrepresents the truth. Try again.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
OK, Don, I will approach this from an entirely different angle.
If you, and others here, insist that having at least a minimual amount of guns laws can never do any good, then you have to say the very same thing about laws against rape, robbery, murder, tax cheating, child poronography, etc. etc. This cannot be denied.
I deny it; but more importantly, common sense and the U.S. Constitution deny it.
Laws against harming someone are an issue for the individual states, and the Constitution does not prevent states from making those laws. Prosecuting someone for harming others or theft is perfectly within the rights of the states, and is to be encouraged.
Possessing a firearm is a right guaranteed by the Constitution, hurts no one and should not be a crime in and of itself. If one uses a firearm during the commission of a crime, he should be prosecuted for the crime committed, not how he committed it.
The concept of 'Gun Crimes' and 'Hate Crimes' are birds of a feather, and appeal to the emotional, not the reasonable.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
OK, Don, I will approach this from an entirely different angle.
If you, and others here, insist that having at least a minimual amount of guns laws can never do any good, then you have to say the very same thing about laws against rape, robbery, murder, tax cheating, child poronography, etc. etc. This cannot be denied.
I had held out "some" hope for you Larry. But with this statement it becomes abundantly clear. You just do not get it, and you NEVER WILL. [V]0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
OK, Don, I will approach this from an entirely different angle.
If you, and others here, insist that having at least a minimual amount of guns laws can never do any good, then you have to say the very same thing about laws against rape, robbery, murder, tax cheating, child poronography, etc. etc. This cannot be denied.
I deny it; but more importantly, common sense and the U.S. Constitution deny it.
Laws against harming someone are an issue for the individual states, and the Constitution does not prevent states from making those laws. Prosecuting someone for harming others or theft is perfectly within the rights of the states, and is to be encouraged.
Possessing a firearm is a right guaranteed by the Constitution, hurts no one and should not be a crime in and of itself. If one uses a firearm during the commission of a crime, he should be prosecuted for the crime committed, not how he committed it.
The concept of 'Gun Crimes' and 'Hate Crimes' are birds of a feather, and appeal to the emotional, not the reasonable.
Regardless what entity makes the laws (federal, state, city, county) if laws cannot protect us against gun violence, then of course it would have to be true that laws cannot protect women against rape.
So, let's eliminate laws against rape and all other crimes (robbery, murder, kidnapping, etc.)0 -
quote:Originally posted by pickenup
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
OK, Don, I will approach this from an entirely different angle.
If you, and others here, insist that having at least a minimual amount of guns laws can never do any good, then you have to say the very same thing about laws against rape, robbery, murder, tax cheating, child poronography, etc. etc. This cannot be denied.
I had held out "some" hope for you Larry. But with this statement it becomes abundantly clear. You just do not get it, and you NEVER WILL. [V]
I believe you gave up hope on me a long time ago. And yes, I "do not get" what you and the others are selling.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by pickenup
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
OK, Don, I will approach this from an entirely different angle.
If you, and others here, insist that having at least a minimual amount of guns laws can never do any good, then you have to say the very same thing about laws against rape, robbery, murder, tax cheating, child poronography, etc. etc. This cannot be denied.
I had held out "some" hope for you Larry. But with this statement it becomes abundantly clear. You just do not get it, and you NEVER WILL. [V]
I believe you gave up hope on me a long time ago. And yes, I "do not get" what you and the others are selling.
Fox,
You again try to state an opinion as a fact of undeniable truth. Until you are able to tell the difference between the seven Common Law Torts of crimes against persons as opposed to the rights of the individuals to lead a peaceful life, you will continue to mistate and mislead those around you.
If you do not choose to buy reality, I'd be happy to rent you the sandcastle in the sky. I could always use another example of capitalism over socialism.
COB0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
68 comments