Another good guy with a gun
- Thread starter EType
- Start date
- Status
That was stupid. Does not help those of us who are concealed carry and have more sense.
Lethal force was clearly unjustified in this case...so, not so much good guy with a gun, more like moron with a gun...
JHZR2
Staff member
So how is one supposed to discern from a smart good guy with a gun, and a moron with a gun, without more government bureaucracy?
Quote:
Another good guy with a gun
This happened in February. Don't see the point of your title, or really the reason for posting (?)
Another good guy with a gun
This happened in February. Don't see the point of your title, or really the reason for posting (?)
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
So how is one supposed to discern from a smart good guy with a gun, and a moron with a gun, without more government bureaucracy?
The same could be said of those issued drivers licenses...whose stupidity is later revealed on the streets, despite passing the test...somehow..or, of those who manage to cast ballots despite being morons...
What other fundamental American rights should we subject to an IQ test?
So how is one supposed to discern from a smart good guy with a gun, and a moron with a gun, without more government bureaucracy?
The same could be said of those issued drivers licenses...whose stupidity is later revealed on the streets, despite passing the test...somehow..or, of those who manage to cast ballots despite being morons...
What other fundamental American rights should we subject to an IQ test?
Last edited:
if this happened in the end of March would the point be more easy to understood??/
??
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Quote:
Another good guy with a gun
This happened in February. Don't see the point of your title, or really the reason for posting (?)
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Quote:
Another good guy with a gun
This happened in February. Don't see the point of your title, or really the reason for posting (?)
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: salesrep
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
So how is one supposed to discern from a smart good guy with a gun, and a moron with a gun, without more government bureaucracy?
With less Govt bureaucracy and more enforcement of laws.
So what law exactly enforces the moron test?
Originally Posted By: Astro14
The same could be said of those issued drivers licenses...whose stupidity is later revealed on the streets, despite passing the test...somehow..or, of those who manage to cast ballots despite being morons...
What other fundamental American rights should we subject to an IQ test?
Youre absolutely right, difference is that in these situations there are regulations for safety, mandatory insurance and continued registration, random police presence, etc. So you want that for gun ownership? Not sure why the car privilege always comes into these discussions, as it is a very weak argument/angle.
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
So how is one supposed to discern from a smart good guy with a gun, and a moron with a gun, without more government bureaucracy?
With less Govt bureaucracy and more enforcement of laws.
So what law exactly enforces the moron test?
Originally Posted By: Astro14
The same could be said of those issued drivers licenses...whose stupidity is later revealed on the streets, despite passing the test...somehow..or, of those who manage to cast ballots despite being morons...
What other fundamental American rights should we subject to an IQ test?
Youre absolutely right, difference is that in these situations there are regulations for safety, mandatory insurance and continued registration, random police presence, etc. So you want that for gun ownership? Not sure why the car privilege always comes into these discussions, as it is a very weak argument/angle.
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: salesrep
All I am saying is less bureaucracy will allow better enforcement of the law. Overall morons will lose. Good morons will cower more and bad morons will get caught more often.
So what bureaucracy being gone is going to help this again? Is it removal of background checks? ATF? FBI? Or something else that is pertinent to the gun argument that will fix this?
All I am saying is less bureaucracy will allow better enforcement of the law. Overall morons will lose. Good morons will cower more and bad morons will get caught more often.
So what bureaucracy being gone is going to help this again? Is it removal of background checks? ATF? FBI? Or something else that is pertinent to the gun argument that will fix this?
“We should be focusing on violent criminals and that has not been the Obama Justice Department’s priority. In 2010, there were over 15,000 felons and fugitives who tried to illegally purchase firearms. Of those 15,000, the Obama Justice Department prosecuted just 44. Let me repeat those numbers because those numbers are staggering, 15,000, they only prosecuted 44.”
— Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tex.,
Federal data show that in 2010, people lied on federal forms and failed background checks more than 76,000 times. Only 44 of those people were prosecuted, because law enforcement officials say it's a low-priority crime. Proving that someone intended to lie on a federal form is often difficult, they say, and sentences are usually light.
Alysa Chang
— Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tex.,
Federal data show that in 2010, people lied on federal forms and failed background checks more than 76,000 times. Only 44 of those people were prosecuted, because law enforcement officials say it's a low-priority crime. Proving that someone intended to lie on a federal form is often difficult, they say, and sentences are usually light.
Alysa Chang
Last edited:
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: salesrep
“We should be focusing on violent criminals and that has not been the Obama Justice Department’s priority. In 2010, there were over 15,000 felons and fugitives who tried to illegally purchase firearms. Of those 15,000, the Obama Justice Department prosecuted just 44. Let me repeat those numbers because those numbers are staggering, 15,000, they only prosecuted 44.”
— Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tex.,
Federal data show that in 2010, people lied on federal forms and failed background checks more than 76,000 times. Only 44 of those people were prosecuted, because law enforcement officials say it's a low-priority crime. Proving that someone intended to lie on a federal form is often difficult, they say, and sentences are usually light.
Alysa Chang
But less bureaucracy means less background enforcement and less follow-up to crime. Or are you implying gut everything else and hire more law enforcement (police state), which negates the need for the population to have so many guns to self-protect.
Funny that you're concerned about 76000 improper buys when double that many guns are stolen each year from negligent owners who bought legally. Yet I'm sure that any enforcement to make theft harder would be bureaucracy that is unneeded, right?
“We should be focusing on violent criminals and that has not been the Obama Justice Department’s priority. In 2010, there were over 15,000 felons and fugitives who tried to illegally purchase firearms. Of those 15,000, the Obama Justice Department prosecuted just 44. Let me repeat those numbers because those numbers are staggering, 15,000, they only prosecuted 44.”
— Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tex.,
Federal data show that in 2010, people lied on federal forms and failed background checks more than 76,000 times. Only 44 of those people were prosecuted, because law enforcement officials say it's a low-priority crime. Proving that someone intended to lie on a federal form is often difficult, they say, and sentences are usually light.
Alysa Chang
But less bureaucracy means less background enforcement and less follow-up to crime. Or are you implying gut everything else and hire more law enforcement (police state), which negates the need for the population to have so many guns to self-protect.
Funny that you're concerned about 76000 improper buys when double that many guns are stolen each year from negligent owners who bought legally. Yet I'm sure that any enforcement to make theft harder would be bureaucracy that is unneeded, right?
JHRZ....ya just don't get it. and this went political so
IBTL
IBTL
JHZR2
Staff member
Citing statistics isn't political. The rhetoric from the senator is, so let's let that lie.
So what exactly don't I get? I asked valid questions and have yet to see a meaningful answer.
And that's the problem. As a gun owner, and being pro-gun myself, I dislike the removal of liberties that we are facing. Problem is that I dont see a concerted, robust and meaningful argument on the stupidity of many of the knee jerk reactions, and comments like we need more good guys with guns doesn't address the known fundamental problems in a meaningful way.
I see a lot of ostrich head in the sand kind of behaviors, especially since some of the proposed regulations were shot down. I don't see a solid, intelligent addressing of the challenges that are real, to offset the knee jerk responses that were thrown out (and mostly avoided).
So what exactly don't I get? I asked valid questions and have yet to see a meaningful answer.
And that's the problem. As a gun owner, and being pro-gun myself, I dislike the removal of liberties that we are facing. Problem is that I dont see a concerted, robust and meaningful argument on the stupidity of many of the knee jerk reactions, and comments like we need more good guys with guns doesn't address the known fundamental problems in a meaningful way.
I see a lot of ostrich head in the sand kind of behaviors, especially since some of the proposed regulations were shot down. I don't see a solid, intelligent addressing of the challenges that are real, to offset the knee jerk responses that were thrown out (and mostly avoided).
Didn't this happen once before at a Florida Wal Mart? I'm surprised the usual blame Wal Mart for the woes of the world crowd is not already blaming the retailer.
Anyway, I thought this was how things were supposed to work. Guy allegedly violates gun laws, guy will get to defend his actions in court. A jury in the community will make the final decision.
That's how we do things in a free country. We don't preemptively treat everyone like criminals. NSA excepted, of course.
Anyway, I thought this was how things were supposed to work. Guy allegedly violates gun laws, guy will get to defend his actions in court. A jury in the community will make the final decision.
That's how we do things in a free country. We don't preemptively treat everyone like criminals. NSA excepted, of course.
- Status
