Woldan Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 (edited) licketysplit And how are you going to tell if a person is going to make a terrible mistake in lets say 10 years from now? Maybe you are such person and shouldn't be allowed to own any dangerous things? Do you want a mandatory physical evaluation of every citizen every 3 days? There is theory and there is real life, and we're not in the movie ''Minority Report.'' Yes, complete nut cases should NOT be allowed to own guns and there should be a mandatory mental health check before anyone can buy a gun (we have such system here in Austria), but people change and are completely unpredictable. Edited December 31, 2014 by Woldan I gazed at the dead, and for one dark moment I saw a banquet.
Malcador Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 Currently, do you have go through training to get a gun licence in the US ? Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra
Hurlshort Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 Currently, do you have go through training to get a gun licence in the US ? Depends on the state, the gun, etc.
Woldan Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 Currently, do you have go through training to get a gun licence in the US ?You mean a concealed carry permit? I gazed at the dead, and for one dark moment I saw a banquet.
licketysplit Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 Currently, do you have go through training to get a gun licence in the US ? No. Although hunters safety courses are required in most states. Maybe all of them, not sure.
500MetricTonnes Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 (edited) This is why i'm for stricter gun laws in the states. These tragedies happen way too often and careless idiots are allowed to own guns and store them without any safety measures whatsoever. Maybe it's because I hunt and treat guns with the respect they deserve. I get the feeling people who buy guns only for protection are making a huge mistake. That's why the whole "responsible use" canard irritates me so much. You know how to use firearms responsibly? That's good...but thousands and thousands of people don't, and we ought to consider what is available to them. Just because some people can use something "responsibly" does mean it should be legal. Here in Canada, at least, people wishing to obtain a firearms licence are generally required to take the Canadian Firearms Safety Course. I suspect that for Americans, however, even legislation akin to this would be considered an unacceptable encroachment on their "freedom." Edited December 31, 2014 by 500MetricTonnes 2 "There is no greatness where simplicity, goodness and truth are absent." - Leo Tolstoy
Blarghagh Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 Need a license to drive a car? Okay. Need a license for a gun? My human rights! Waaaah! 2
Malcador Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 Wouldn't hurt to have the same kind of approach to gun licenses if there isn't already for the kind of carry and weapon. Tonnes of people pass driving tests yet clearly can not do so, so who knows Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra
Woldan Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 Need a license to buy gasoline? Nah. Need a license to buy dangerous drugs? Nah. Need a license to have sex? Nah. Need a license to have kids? Nah.And the list goes on. I gazed at the dead, and for one dark moment I saw a banquet.
Blarghagh Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 Except you need a license for a car which is most likely what you would buy gasoline for, dangerous drugs are mostly either illegal or prescribed by a professional, and people don't get their panties in a twist when other people's kids get taken away by child services if they've been treated irresponsibly but they do if somebody else's guns get taken away (mah conshtitutinal rites!). Also, did you just equate sex with guns, gasoline, cars and drugs? Even if those things weren't true, it's still a meaningless point to make. I was pointing out the hypocrisy that people are fine with one thing requiring a license but not the other, and you've only just gone "well, other things also don't require licenses". Why would you be against having to get a license for being allowed to use guns in the first place? Is it really that unreasonable to you that someone who wants to own a piece of machinery that could kill others be expected to take a couple of lessons in how to handle that thing? I mean, good for you that you know how to but how can you expect a new gun owner to already be an expert? The only change for you would be that instead of you being able to bitch about how "bah, irresponsible people can't handle guns" in this thread this conversation wouldn't be possible because this crap never would have happened. But-but-but the inconvenience!
Volourn Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 "Need a license to drive a car? Okay." Considering the number of accidents or misuses of cars by legal license holders, not a good exmaple on your part. DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Blarghagh Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 See, that is a much better counter argument from Volo. But my point is, cars are dangerous machinery the use of which could potentially kill you or others and there should be something to force you to learn how to handle it before you get to use it. How are guns any different? I'm sure there would be a lot more car accidents if you didn't need a license.
kgambit Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 (edited) "Need a license to drive a car? Okay." Considering the number of accidents or misuses of cars by legal license holders, not a good exmaple on your part. It's not a perfect analogy since driver's licenses require that you demonstrate at least some minimum competency before the license is issued. Plus the license can be revoked if the owner demonstrates repeated incompetence (repeated speeding violations; points systems etc.). Afaik Maryland (and possibly California) requires a hand gun safety test/course before a license is issued. (And long gun/rifle safety courses are actually limited to Hunting safety courses required for hunting permits - no other safety course is required in any state). I think Woldan's gasoline argument is that gasoline for a car is somewhat analogous to ammunition for a gun. Unfortunately his argument now fails in California (and Connecticut) where you need a permit to buy ammunition as well: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/355697/californias-state-senate-passes-ammunition-purchase-permit-bill-charles-c-w-cooke Edited December 31, 2014 by kgambit 1
Longknife Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 Why do people love their guns so much? 1 "The Courier was the worst of all of them. The worst by far. When he died the first time, he must have met the devil, and then killed him." Is your mom hot? It may explain why guys were following her ?
Luridis Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 Well... there goes the thread. Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt. - Julius Caesar #define TRUE (!FALSE) I ran across an article where the above statement was found in a release tarball. LOL! Who does something like this? Predictably, this oddity was found when the article's author tried to build said tarball and the compiler promptly went into cardiac arrest. If you're not a developer, imagine telling someone the literal meaning of up is "not down". Such nonsense makes computers, and developers... angry.
Hurlshort Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 (edited) "Need a license to drive a car? Okay." Considering the number of accidents or misuses of cars by legal license holders, not a good exmaple on your part. It's not a perfect analogy since driver's licenses require that you demonstrate at least some minimum competency before the license is issued. Plus the license can be revoked if the owner demonstrates repeated incompetence (repeated speeding violations; points systems etc.). Afaik Maryland (and possibly California) requires a hand gun safety test/course before a license is issued. (And long gun/rifle safety courses are actually limited to Hunting safety courses required for hunting permits - no other safety course is required in any state). I think Woldan's gasoline argument is that gasoline for a car is somewhat analogous to ammunition for a gun. Unfortunately his argument now fails in California (and Connecticut) where you need a permit to buy ammunition as well: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/355697/californias-state-senate-passes-ammunition-purchase-permit-bill-charles-c-w-cooke I don't think you understand the bill, the permit is required by the vendor. I assure you I can walk into and authorized vendor and buy personal ammo without needing anything extra. But hey, people love to bash California. There was another bill that required all vendors to take down certain information on people that they sell to, but that failed to pass. Edited January 1, 2015 by Hurlshot
Woldan Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Why do people love their guns so much?Why do people love their *insert random hobby object* so much? I gazed at the dead, and for one dark moment I saw a banquet.
Woldan Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Also, this is a quite good vid. I gazed at the dead, and for one dark moment I saw a banquet.
kgambit Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 (edited) "Need a license to drive a car? Okay." Considering the number of accidents or misuses of cars by legal license holders, not a good exmaple on your part. It's not a perfect analogy since driver's licenses require that you demonstrate at least some minimum competency before the license is issued. Plus the license can be revoked if the owner demonstrates repeated incompetence (repeated speeding violations; points systems etc.). Afaik Maryland (and possibly California) requires a hand gun safety test/course before a license is issued. (And long gun/rifle safety courses are actually limited to Hunting safety courses required for hunting permits - no other safety course is required in any state). I think Woldan's gasoline argument is that gasoline for a car is somewhat analogous to ammunition for a gun. Unfortunately his argument now fails in California (and Connecticut) where you need a permit to buy ammunition as well: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/355697/californias-state-senate-passes-ammunition-purchase-permit-bill-charles-c-w-cooke I don't think you understand the bill, the permit is required by the vendor. I assure you I can walk into and authorized vendor and buy personal ammo without needing anything extra. But hey, people love to bash California. There was another bill that required all vendors to take down certain information on people that they sell to, but that failed to pass. I understood the original bill just fine. It appears that the section requiring an ammunition purchase license was removed and the bill was passed without the license requirement. (California State Senate bill 53) I stand corrected. Ammunition sales are still restricted in several states: Washington D.C. generally prohibits the possession of ammunition unless the person is at a firearm safety class or possesses a registration certificate for a firearm. Four states (Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Jersey) require a license for all ammunition purchasers or possessors and require a background check before issuance of a license. Massachusetts also requires a firearm permit or license to purchase or possess ammunition, with different types of licenses entitling the holder to purchase and possess different kinds of ammunition New York enacted a law in 2013 that will require every “commercial transfer” of ammunition, including sales by firearms dealers and other ammunition vendors to individuals, to be preceded by a background check through a statewide license and record database New Jersey generally prohibits any person from acquiring any handgun ammunition unless the transferee possesses a permit and first exhibits the permit to the seller or transferor In 2013, Connecticut enacted a law that authorizes a state agency to issue “ammunition certificates,” and prohibits the sale or transfer of ammunition unless the transferee presents a firearms purchase or carry permit or an ammunition certificate Multiple states restrict access to ammunition to the same people who are restricted from purchasing firearms. http://smartgunlaws.org/ammunition-regulation-policy-summary/ Hurlshot, I fail to see how you interpret my comment as bashing California. My comment was simply to disprove Waldon's claim that ammunition sales don't require premits/licenses. Edited January 1, 2015 by kgambit
Hurlshort Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Hurlshot, I fail to see how you interpret my comment as bashing California. My comment was simply to disprove Waldon's claim that ammunition sales don't require premits/licenses. My bad, it's an automatic response I give whenever someone mentions my state.
Drowsy Emperor Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 It would appear that this time the change from the routine was what did it. Her husband gave her the purse with the gun compartment. She was probably used to carrying it around in a holster. Switched it to the bag, let it slip out of her mind and tragedy ensued. И погибе Српски кнез Лазаре,И његова сва изгибе војска, Седамдесет и седам иљада;Све је свето и честито билоИ миломе Богу приступачно.
Meshugger Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Need a license to drive a car? Okay. Need a license for a gun? My human rights! Waaaah! I might be having a hangover, but are you suggesting that we should add an amendment in the constitution for the right to drive a car? 2 "Some men see things as they are and say why?""I dream things that never were and say why not?"- George Bernard Shaw"Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man."- Friedrich Nietzsche "The amount of energy necessary to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it." - Some guy
teknoman2 Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 when it comes to banning or not firearms when i throw a rock off a cliff and it lands on somebody's head, is it the rock that is at fault? people dont kill people because they have guns. they kill people because they are ignorant-irresponsible-uneducated-savages with unrestricted access to guns. without access to guns they would still kill using other weapons. if they became responsible, educated and civilized, they would refrain from violent behaviour even if they had unrestricted access to nukes The words freedom and liberty, are diminishing the true meaning of the abstract concept they try to explain. The true nature of freedom is such, that the human mind is unable to comprehend it, so we make a cage and name it freedom in order to give a tangible meaning to what we dont understand, just as our ancestors made gods like Thor or Zeus to explain thunder. -Teknoman2- What? You thought it was a quote from some well known wise guy from the past? Stupidity leads to willful ignorance - willful ignorance leads to hope - hope leads to sex - and that is how a new generation of fools is born! We are hardcore role players... When we go to bed with a girl, we roll a D20 to see if we hit the target and a D6 to see how much penetration damage we did. Modern democracy is: the sheep voting for which dog will be the shepherd's right hand.
aluminiumtrioxid Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Why do people love their guns so much? Something something phallic something? Honestly though, no idea. But "my right to own a gun trumps the huge probability of stuff going literally life-threateningly wrong if every idiot can also have a gun" is a fairly irresponsible position to take, I think. 2 "Lulz is not the highest aspiration of art and mankind, no matter what the Encyclopedia Dramatica says."
Hurlshort Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 (edited) when it comes to banning or not firearms when i throw a rock off a cliff and it lands on somebody's head, is it the rock that is at fault? people dont kill people because they have guns. they kill people because they are ignorant-irresponsible-uneducated-savages with unrestricted access to guns. without access to guns they would still kill using other weapons. if they became responsible, educated and civilized, they would refrain from violent behaviour even if they had unrestricted access to nukes I'm pretty sure that two year old wasn't rummaging around looking for a suitable weapon to kill his mom, and he probably wasn't going to get the job done with a pocket knife. Education isn't an issue either, the mother was well educated and had experience and training. Also no one here has seriously discussed banning firearms. At most they've talked about licensing. Edited January 1, 2015 by Hurlshot
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now