Laozi
-
Posts
2546 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Laozi
-
-
Darius Dar ~ Limp Wristed Black Lighted Bowel Movement (Wish You Were Here)
-
Yeah, way to go Laozi. Encourage him to post some more images, see if he can crash the boards.
Hey, at least I'm trying
-
Read a bunch of Dostoevsky and Harold Pinter so I could write up a few test from them. I'm not sure which one of those task had me the most depressed. Luckily someone showed up and pulled me out of it.
-
who did the story boards then and do you have any that we can compare to?
-
Being the son of an ex-marine recon vietnam vet/Game Warden, there really isn't too many guns I haven't fired, from standard issue military and law enforcement stock to target/range rifles and handguns. My father was certified expert marksman in the corp. and still to this day qualifies Game Warden. I have a beretta 9mm I use when I shoot left handed and .40 that I use righty
-
Gorgon was just taking his position, just about anything American = Badness
-
The Whitest Boy Alive ~ Golden Cage
-
Modest Mouse ~ Novocain Stain
-
alright, someone else? anybody?
-
F.Y.P. ~ Secret Track
I should've cursed this world they put between us.
Because when I was nine you were a fetus.
-
I don't like the idea of punishing a company for the bad acts of individuals who happen to end up with their products. If I were to rob a bank and in the process shoot a guard with a Ruger pistol, fining Sturm-Ruger would make as much sense as fining Chevrolet if I used one of their cars as a get away, or Nike if I was wearing their shoes as I ran out.
Once again a gun and a pair of shoes obviously aren't the same thing and the fact that our government, when chartered, put specific wording in its Bill of Right pertaining to guns shows that they saw a pretty big difference. If you leave your car parked out in front of you house or a pair of shoes on your front porch and they're used in a crime theres no culpability, but if you leave your gun lying around then you'd be lucky if you just lost your shirt in civil litigation.
The point of fining companies isn't to abstract large amounts of money from them, its to make them highly motivated to take an active hand in what happens to their products when they hit the market. That way when law enforcement is like, We've got a Taurus .45 used in a car jacking, they can go to the Taurus and find out how the gun ended up where it did. If the gun company can show that someone else broke the law in the criminal's acquisition of the gun (very likely) then the company wouldn't be subject to fine. This is a pretty tangible responsibility if you're selling a product that allows someone to kill 12-15 people with something that fits into a jacket pocket. Plus doing this way puts up a wall between the information of who has guns and state and federal governments forcing them to show that a crime has been committed before accessing the information.
-
ha ha, slate
-
F.Y.P ~ All Grown Up
-
Darius Dar ~ To the Breadbasket
-
I dunno, if he could get you into some sort of jungle environment all the advantages are his
-
Chuck Berry ~ No Particular Place To Go
-
Joking aside, I'm sure McCain could tell people more about the political happenings in Finland then you could. He made a mistake, anyone who has had to repetitively get up and talk in front of people can attest to how facts you know by heart can get lost in the jumble of points your trying to express.
-
Give the guy a break, he's like 87 years old.
-
The British could never have afforded to field a long term occupation army once it became clear that the colonies would be perpetually contested.
Right, thus creating the idea in American's heads guns = freedom. Without a gun how are you to keep the King of England out of your face?
My father in a lifelong member of the NRA and we've talked about how gun company's interest put gun ownership right in danger, while at the same time controlling the debate in Congress. My father, like most members of the NRA, supports some time restrictions on "assault weapons" and things of that nature, but are fearful of giving up any type of freedom because such a thing would set a precedence to take greater freedom away.
-
Gun ownership might have more to do with being on the wrong end of European Imperalism
-
Well, first an amendment is suggested or proposed
it needs a 2/3 vote in both house of congress or to be proposed in a special national convention to be approved for the ratification process
then it need to make its way through congress carrying a 3/4 majority to be ratified, or it can be approved in special state conventions if 3/4 of the states approve
Once an amendment is proposed it has 7 yrs. to be ratified before it just goes away.
The special state conventions will never happen because we could technically abolish the constitution in them if we were inclined
Not quite. The sequence is a 2/3rds vote by both houses of Congress, then the ratification by 3/4ths of the states, either via their legislatures or by conventions. (Most past amendments have gone the legislature route-- the only one that I recall using state conventions is the 21st, which ended Prohibition.)
right, I should have said 3/4 vote in the state legislature, good catch
-
Gun manufactures ship their guns out of the country knowing full well they're selling to people who plan to make those guns available on the black market in the US. By fining them you force them to take a active hand in the distribution of their products. Also making it illegal to export guns wouldn't be a bad idea.
Its simple and heavy handed, Taks, and I understand your argument, but guns are pretty unique in what they're used for, pretending that all products are the same until they get to the hands of the consumer just doesn't really fly here.
I'd answer Tale's post too, but he's a tard
This is the US. Gun manufacturers don't ship guns out of the country for the guns to get shipped back in. The Black Market for guns in the US comes from guns sold to licensed dealers that are then improperly sold or from guns that are stolen.
Issues with licensed dealers improperly selling guns is a problem of licensing and enforcement. Not the sale from manufacturers.
not all illegal guns are obtained in the same way, duh
But even if every gun in the US that was used in a crime was acquired the way you say it is, then if the manufactures were fined don't you think that they'd have a bigger interest in keeping track of who has their guns and keeping their guns away from dealers who make a habit of selling them improperly?
-
Well, first an amendment is suggested or proposed
it needs a 2/3 vote in both house of congress or to be proposed in a special national convention to be approved for the ratification process
then it need to make its way through congress carrying a 3/4 majority to be ratified, or it can be approved in special state conventions if 3/4 of the states approve
Once an amendment is proposed it has 7 yrs. to be ratified before it just goes away.
The special state conventions will never happen because we could technically abolish the constitution in them if we were inclined
-
Oh, and I heard the other day that they did manage to pry Charleston Heston's gun from his cold dead hand.
Supreme Court says Americans have right to guns
in Way Off-Topic
Posted · Edited by Laozi
It wouldn't work, we have to pretend people aren't really specialized primates and they don't need to be protected from themselves, its like a law or something. I dunno, I see where things take a jump in logic most probably aren't willing to make. We make people take on extra responsibilities to drive a car or own a handgun or in a lot of states to get married, I think we could do something similar, take on a bit more responsibility and such and such