Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456789 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 128

Thread: Suggs and Guns

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,744

    Re: Suggs and Guns



    JAB I see your point and I think it's well intended.

    Let me ask you this. If I or someone fails an evaluation whether it be slightly fail or totally fail, but the person performing it misunderstood what I was saying, what recourse would I have?

    Along with a psych eval. and criminals are those the only things you'd want to determine if someone is fit?
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  2. #77
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,526

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Like I said, we're not going to convince one another.

    You favor more governmental intervention.

    As a Libertarian, I do not.

    Since 1996, less folks are killed by guns per capita than any other time in our history, all the while there are more guns than ever in circulation.

    Since 1996, the number of states which allow concealed carry went from zero to 46 2012. The violent crime rate per capita in these states is vastly lower than in states which have stricter controls.

    Since 1996, the overall crime stats for the nation have been in a steady decline across the board with violent crime being amongst the largest drops.

    So no, we do not need any more laws and there's a strong case to be made, as numerous Economists have made, that more guns equals less crime.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  3. #78

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Like I said, we're not going to convince one another.

    You favor more governmental intervention.

    As a Libertarian, I do not.

    Since 1996, less folks are killed by guns per capita than any other time in our history, all the while there are more guns than ever in circulation.

    Since 1996, the number of states which allow concealed carry went from zero to 46 2012. The violent crime rate per capita in these states is vastly lower than in states which have stricter controls.

    Since 1996, the overall crime stats for the nation have been in a steady decline across the board with violent crime being amongst the largest drops.

    So no, we do not need any more laws and there's a strong case to be made, as numerous Economists have made, that more guns equals less crime.
    nothing wrong with libertarian views, i typically am in line with them. This is one issue im not really liberal or conservative. I just think theres a line where youre saying some laws are ok but this or maybe any more is where youre drawing the line, which is perfectly fine. I still think at the end of the day we want the same things just disagree a little on how to go about it.
    -JAB




  4. #79

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    JAB I see your point and I think it's well intended.

    Let me ask you this. If I or someone fails an evaluation whether it be slightly fail or totally fail, but the person performing it misunderstood what I was saying, what recourse would I have?

    Along with a psych eval. and criminals are those the only things you'd want to determine if someone is fit?
    Seeing as this is my hypothetical solution, imo, if someone failed or was flagged and deemed not fit to own, id say a second opinion would be warranted in an appeal so to speak. My wife works in the nuclear industry and had to take one. Some of her co-workers were flagged for their answers on the written test and had to see a shrink. All of them were cleared once allowed to explain. I would think the majority would fall under that category. Seemed to be a pretty basic test/process that wasnt to intrusive while still surving the purpose intended.

    I wouldnt even say all mentally unstable. Its very possible one could be bi-polar or depressed but medicated and completely normal. Id say the psych eval would allow those that are diagnosed and properly medicated to still own even. And yes i dont think the current laws against convicts would hurt.
    -JAB




  5. #80
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,744

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    Seeing as this is my hypothetical solution, imo, if someone failed or was flagged and deemed not fit to own, id say a second opinion would be warranted in an appeal so to speak. My wife works in the nuclear industry and had to take one. Some of her co-workers were flagged for their answers on the written test and had to see a shrink. All of them were cleared once allowed to explain. I would think the majority would fall under that category. Seemed to be a pretty basic test/process that wasnt to intrusive while still surving the purpose intended.

    I wouldnt even say all mentally unstable. Its very possible one could be bi-polar or depressed but medicated and completely normal. Id say the psych eval would allow those that are diagnosed and properly medicated to still own even. And yes i dont think the current laws against convicts would hurt.
    Under your hypothetical, I could see possibly taking some sort of written test (a very basic are you competent test) for someone who wanted to carry a weapon, but not for simple ownership to protect your house.

    I haven't taken the concealed carry course here in NC yet, but I'd imagine there is something on there that would cover something like that.

    But for simple ownership, I would say that passing a driver's test, doing the things necessary to keep a license, getting up everyday and going to a job, paying your bills, owning a home etc. passing a background check is enough proof that you're a mentally competent person to own a gun and keep it in your house.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  6. #81

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    Under your hypothetical, I could see possibly taking some sort of written test (a very basic are you competent test) for someone who wanted to carry a weapon, but not for simple ownership to protect your house.

    I haven't taken the concealed carry course here in NC yet, but I'd imagine there is something on there that would cover something like that.

    But for simple ownership, I would say that passing a driver's test, doing the things necessary to keep a license, getting up everyday and going to a job, paying your bills, owning a home etc. passing a background check is enough proof that you're a mentally competent person to own a gun and keep it in your house.
    we just disagree that there isnt more that could be done to make it safer, as your obviously fine with it as is. You argued that, demented people will find a way to make Aurora, VT, etc happen regardless. Id agree and feel if you stop them from committing such heinous crimes with guns, people would stop pointing to the gun as the culprit and possibly loosen up on "gun control" in general. I dont think theres any question that Aurora and VT would not pass a simple psych eval, when listening to people around them they usually described them as "weird" or an "outcast", which is all id be trying to eliminate. no different than the background check already looking for mentally ill or insane, its just checking to see if they are but undiagnosed.
    -JAB




  7. #82
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Detroit Michigan
    Posts
    1,908
    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    I dont think theres any question that Aurora and VT would not pass a simple psych eval, when listening to people around them they usually described them as "weird" or an "outcast", which is all id be trying to eliminate. no different than the background check already looking for mentally ill or insane, its just checking to see if they are but undiagnosed.
    Good luck trying to spot the sociopaths. The majority of them are extremely well adjusted and you would not be able to expose them. And they're just as lethal as any psychopath.
    “Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.”

    –Eleanor Roosevelt




  8. #83
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,526

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by Sirdowski View Post
    Good luck trying to spot the sociopaths. The majority of them are extremely well adjusted and you would not be able to expose them. And they're just as lethal as any psychopath.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  9. #84
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Detroit Michigan
    Posts
    1,908
    A real scare to those who want to control humanity: It's believed that 1 in 25 people in the world are sociopaths. People who are by definition uncontrollable.

    That's 1 in 25 people who are incapable of feeling guilt, shame, or empathy, and chances are you'll never know who they are. They are masters of charm and deception. Makes you wonder how many politicians are sociopaths.... Seriously.

    So let those who want to legally obtain weapons obtain them with little limitation. There's nothing to the government could ever do to stop those who want to do harm. They are deranged but calculating, if there is a will they will find a way. Taking guns out of our hands only makes us vulnerable to those who can and will harm us by any means necessary. Even without the help of guns.
    “Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.”

    –Eleanor Roosevelt




  10. #85
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,526

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Well said Sir, and reminds me of an old but favorite of mine ....

    Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

    In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

    When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

    The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

    There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society. But, a firearm makes it easier for an armed mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat – it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed.

    People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

    Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

    People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force, watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier, works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

    The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply would not work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

    When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation–and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act. —MK
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  11. #86

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    I feel like you all are still screaming "dont take our guns" and thats not the end result or intention of anything I said.

    Sociopaths get diagnosed by... a psych eval just like any other psychological problem. There is no 100% full proof method that will get every insane or harmful person (and im not naive enough to say there is) but theres no question more would be stopped in that case than if you just "allow everyone to get a gun".

    why do Police have to pass a Psych Eval but the common gun owner doesnt? to me its giving the same power without the proper screening.
    -JAB




  12. #87
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Detroit Michigan
    Posts
    1,908
    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Well said Sir, and reminds me of an old but favorite of mine ....
    You can't really phrase it any better than that article.

    It really is a simple issue that is unnecessarily made out to be otherwise because of emotion and stereotypes. But what else is new.
    “Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.”

    –Eleanor Roosevelt




  13. #88
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Detroit Michigan
    Posts
    1,908
    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    I feel like you all are still screaming "dont take our guns" and thats not the end result or intention of anything I said.

    Sociopaths get diagnosed by... a psych eval just like any other psychological problem. There is no 100% full proof method that will get every insane or harmful person (and im not naive enough to say there is) but theres no question more would be stopped in that case than if you just "allow everyone to get a gun".

    why do Police have to pass a Psych Eval but the common gun owner doesnt? to me its giving the same power without the proper screening.
    If someone wants a gun, even if those reasons aren't malicious for wanting it, they will hide whatever they need to to pass the psych evaluation, because they want a gun. Frankly, the only people who wouldn't realize what not to say are mentally challenged people who I imagine have limitations against getting a gun anyhow.

    There would have to be some sort of appeal process anyways, and whatever the person may have said wrong they would adjust with some BS reason as to why.

    The psych may stop a few people here and there, but evaluation process would never be successful enough to be able to justify itself. In the end it would be too arbitrary and litigious.
    “Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.”

    –Eleanor Roosevelt




  14. #89
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,744

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    I feel like you all are still screaming "dont take our guns" and thats not the end result or intention of anything I said.

    Sociopaths get diagnosed by... a psych eval just like any other psychological problem. There is no 100% full proof method that will get every insane or harmful person (and im not naive enough to say there is) but theres no question more would be stopped in that case than if you just "allow everyone to get a gun".

    why do Police have to pass a Psych Eval but the common gun owner doesnt? to me its giving the same power without the proper screening.
    Short of locking someone up who fails a psych eval, there is no way to stop someone from doing harm to others. You've agreed people who can not obtain one legal whether criminal/ mentally unfit or what have you, will either get a gun or use something else.

    Seeing how the average 911 response time is 23 minutes, the best option is to not make citizens jump through more hoops to arm themselves.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  15. #90

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Even though we clearly all feel you should be able to get whatever gun you want, this is obviously something were not going to agree upon. I wont ever think "every one get a gun" is the right mind set, just because criminals will always get guns and police dont respond quick enough.

    you guys asked for a system that focuses on the person and not the tool but dont want to be burdened by getting looked into as a person. its a little hypocritical sounding to me, and i can understand it, as you all just want your gun with as much ease as possible (because your not whats being screened for in the first place), but I dont think that means its whats best for everyone.

    at the end of the day, good debate even though we disagree. Hope santa claus brings you all as many guns as you can carry... safely.
    -JAB




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland