If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: "For Sale"
In article , tonycooper214
@gmail.com says... On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 20:33:08 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , tonycooper214 says... On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 17:04:59 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , tonycooper214 says... On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 08:26:11 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: It is only one, very limited, form of reality. A state law could require Grandma to sell the gun on consignment through a licensed retail gun seller. There certainly is no shortage of them in this state. Fine, you pass that law. Since Grandma has no interest in guns and gun laws and wasn't paying attention the day you passed it, she has no idea that there is such a law and goes ahead and lists the guns on Craigslist anyway. Now what? Grandma is probably quite unaware of many extant laws. If Grampa's estate include meth lab equipment, a stash of marijuana, a computer loaded with image files of naked children, or anything obtained illegally, she might innocently offer them for sale. We don't pass or not pass laws based on people's knowledge of what is, or is not, legal. Meaningless noise. Grandma has disobeyed your law. Now what do you do? Prevent it. Require the refusal of any advertisement for a gun in any medium unless the advertiser is an authorized seller of guns. We already have restrictions in place on advertisers that the medium must observe. We require certain contractors to have a license number to advertise. We require sellers of automobiles who are dealers to reveal that they are dealers. There are many other restrictions in place. Fine, pass such a law and figure out a way to make it stick. Hint-- internet search engines are not necessarily hosted in your state or even in the US. If they're not in the US there is absolutely nothing that US law can do about them. What do internet search engines have to do with anything I've suggested? What I've suggested would have to be state laws. The NRA knows this, and that's why the NRA concentrates on state legislators and showers them with campaign fund donations and threats of support for cooperative candidates in future elections. The fish in the small pond are cheaper to buy. You seem to be big on passing more and more and more and more laws, without regard to whether any of them actually accomplish anything other than killing trees. More and more? Where does that come from? I would prefer to kill a few trees if it saves a few human lives. You're the one who is portraying firearms purchasers as being automatically suspect and unsafe to be around. If that is the case then you should be suspicious of yourself and your motives. Why _do_ you need guns anyway? I haven't portrayed firearms purchasers in any way. I do think that the people who look to purchase guns from private individuals at flea markets and through Craigslist are somewhat suspect because they may be trying to avoid the requirements that they would face by buying a gun through an authorized firearms dealer. It's not like authorized gun dealers are short of supply. I don't *need* a gun. I inherited a .38 Colt revolver from my father. I purchased a .22 rifle. The .38 is stored away, but the .22 has been used several times. My son and I have done some target shooting with it. Can you dispute it? With a straight face? Have you ever looked beyond "80 to 90 percent" to find out what "stricter gun controls" they want? And then compared those to the laws actually in force? I don't think there's a consensus. Some want stricter requirements for purchase, some want registration of all guns, some want specific restrictions enforced. All want more than there is. Dragging this back to photography, I've met these gun owners: http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Hobbie...ction-Shooting So that's what mother-stabbers and father-rapers look like. I always pictured them more like Arlo Guthrie. You aren't very good at presenting any kind of argument in your favor. Throwing in offensive terms that have nothing to do with the subject isn't convincing in any way. Tony, until you can read your own words and see how crazy they are, there's no point to continuing this. You don't even see the implications of your own statements. You need to learn to totally drop the argument that "the legislature is owned by". I have heard that it is owned by the Japanese, the Arabs, the Jews, the Chinese, the automakers, the banks, the defense contractors, Hollywood, and just aboaut any other entity with which someone disagrees. People other than you have long since figured out that such assertions are the mark of a crackpot. But you go right on with them. As for "offensive terms", all I can say is "whoosh". |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: "For Sale"
On 9/17/2013 3:24 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 14:49:31 -0400, PeterN wrote: On 9/17/2013 1:40 PM, Tony Cooper wrote: On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:41:57 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2013-09-17 08:23:10 -0700, George Kerby said: On 9/16/13 9:33 AM, in article , "Bowser" wrote: On Sat, 07 Sep 2013 10:25:25 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2013.09.06 22:13 , PeterN wrote: On 9/6/2013 4:45 PM, Alan Browne wrote: On 2013.09.05 22:25 , Michael Benveniste wrote: On 9/5/2013 1:21 PM, Bowser wrote: Let's see what you've got. For Sale is due October 6th, 2013. I won't be in Washington D.C. this month, so I can't submit a picture of the Capitol or the White House. They sold out a long time ago. True. But it's on ongoing sale. Confirmed then: they are prostitutes. Now, now, there's no need to insult prostitutes. I'll take them over politicians any day. Is there a difference? Have you ever been satisfied with any encounter with a politician? With a prostitute there is always the promise of some sort of satisfaction, however fleeting that might be. Actually, I've had one experience in dealing with a politician, and no experience at all dealing with a prostitute. My US Representative did meet with me, and did take care of a problem for me. He was quite efficient. that was one politician that help. Well, I asked one to help and he did so. When over 90% of the people surveyed want to ban gun ownership to people with mental problems, whey hasn't backround check legislation passed. http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm That isn't an example of a experience with a politician. While I agree with you on the need - although I would take it further and have much more stringent gun controls - you brought up comparing a personal experience with a politician vs a personal experience with a prostitute. If I told you some of my personal experiences with politicians, it would really drive the discussion too far OT. Remember, I had a partner who was one, had some who were my clients, and used to go on the rubber chicken circuit, as well as go the the $2,000 a person cocktail parties. -- PeterN |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: "For Sale"
On 9/17/2013 5:37 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article , tonycooper214 @gmail.com says... On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 14:49:31 -0400, PeterN wrote: On 9/17/2013 1:40 PM, Tony Cooper wrote: On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:41:57 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2013-09-17 08:23:10 -0700, George Kerby said: On 9/16/13 9:33 AM, in article , "Bowser" wrote: On Sat, 07 Sep 2013 10:25:25 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2013.09.06 22:13 , PeterN wrote: On 9/6/2013 4:45 PM, Alan Browne wrote: On 2013.09.05 22:25 , Michael Benveniste wrote: On 9/5/2013 1:21 PM, Bowser wrote: Let's see what you've got. For Sale is due October 6th, 2013. I won't be in Washington D.C. this month, so I can't submit a picture of the Capitol or the White House. They sold out a long time ago. True. But it's on ongoing sale. Confirmed then: they are prostitutes. Now, now, there's no need to insult prostitutes. I'll take them over politicians any day. Is there a difference? Have you ever been satisfied with any encounter with a politician? With a prostitute there is always the promise of some sort of satisfaction, however fleeting that might be. Actually, I've had one experience in dealing with a politician, and no experience at all dealing with a prostitute. My US Representative did meet with me, and did take care of a problem for me. He was quite efficient. that was one politician that help. Well, I asked one to help and he did so. When over 90% of the people surveyed want to ban gun ownership to people with mental problems, whey hasn't backround check legislation passed. http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm That isn't an example of a experience with a politician. While I agree with you on the need - although I would take it further and have much more stringent gun controls - you brought up comparing a personal experience with a politician vs a personal experience with a prostitute. Besides, background check legislation was enacted 20 years ago, so the politicians can be forgiven for not passing the same law again. Cows and horses can easily jump through the holes in that legislation. -- PeterN |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: "For Sale"
On 9/18/2013 11:15 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 08:26:11 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: It is only one, very limited, form of reality. A state law could require Grandma to sell the gun on consignment through a licensed retail gun seller. There certainly is no shortage of them in this state. Fine, you pass that law. Since Grandma has no interest in guns and gun laws and wasn't paying attention the day you passed it, she has no idea that there is such a law and goes ahead and lists the guns on Craigslist anyway. Now what? Grandma is probably quite unaware of many extant laws. If Grampa's estate include meth lab equipment, a stash of marijuana, a computer loaded with image files of naked children, or anything obtained illegally, she might innocently offer them for sale. We don't pass or not pass laws based on people's knowledge of what is, or is not, legal. That would probably be safer for Grandma. For Grandma to offer the gun on Craigslist and meet with a total stranger is putting Grandma in danger. Worse, if Grandma is so naive to allow the stranger to come to her home. Nor do we want Grandma toting the gun to a flea market to sell it. rolling eyes Do you hear yourself? Yeah, gotta protect grandma from all those mean ugly looking mother-stabbing father raping strangers if she wants to dispose of grandpa's guns. Why don't you pass a law that says that she has to take his cameras or golf clubs or fishing tackle to a gunshop and get a background check run on the buyer as well? Wouldn't that be safer for her as well? If you want to make a case for something, do it with some connection to a logical reason for your position. There is no logical connection for a background check on the sale of fishing equipment. While I would not advise Grandma to advertise expensive items of any sort on Craigslist if the sale involves strangers coming to Grandma's house when only Grandma is there, there are certain items that are more likely to attract the attention of those "mean ugly looking" people. Guns is one such category. Heck, just ban private sales of everything unless they happen at a gun shop. Gotta protect Grandma you know. Yeah, that goes along with the NRA bull**** about "only outlaws will have guns". Congress deals with the reality that the NRA dreams up. You go on believing that. Like something like 80 to 90 percent of the population, I believe in the need for stricter gun controls. The NRA, though, has dreamed up the "reality" that our representatives should not represent us. The dream is accompanied by generous donations to campaign funds and threats that they will support any opposing candidate in the next election. And indeed the NRA was behind the recall of two CO congresspeople. -- PeterN |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: "For Sale"
On 2013-09-18 21:29:55 -0700, PeterN said:
On 9/18/2013 11:15 AM, Tony Cooper wrote: On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 08:26:11 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: It is only one, very limited, form of reality. A state law could require Grandma to sell the gun on consignment through a licensed retail gun seller. There certainly is no shortage of them in this state. Fine, you pass that law. Since Grandma has no interest in guns and gun laws and wasn't paying attention the day you passed it, she has no idea that there is such a law and goes ahead and lists the guns on Craigslist anyway. Now what? Grandma is probably quite unaware of many extant laws. If Grampa's estate include meth lab equipment, a stash of marijuana, a computer loaded with image files of naked children, or anything obtained illegally, she might innocently offer them for sale. We don't pass or not pass laws based on people's knowledge of what is, or is not, legal. That would probably be safer for Grandma. For Grandma to offer the gun on Craigslist and meet with a total stranger is putting Grandma in danger. Worse, if Grandma is so naive to allow the stranger to come to her home. Nor do we want Grandma toting the gun to a flea market to sell it. rolling eyes Do you hear yourself? Yeah, gotta protect grandma from all those mean ugly looking mother-stabbing father raping strangers if she wants to dispose of grandpa's guns. Why don't you pass a law that says that she has to take his cameras or golf clubs or fishing tackle to a gunshop and get a background check run on the buyer as well? Wouldn't that be safer for her as well? If you want to make a case for something, do it with some connection to a logical reason for your position. There is no logical connection for a background check on the sale of fishing equipment. While I would not advise Grandma to advertise expensive items of any sort on Craigslist if the sale involves strangers coming to Grandma's house when only Grandma is there, there are certain items that are more likely to attract the attention of those "mean ugly looking" people. Guns is one such category. Heck, just ban private sales of everything unless they happen at a gun shop. Gotta protect Grandma you know. Yeah, that goes along with the NRA bull**** about "only outlaws will have guns". Congress deals with the reality that the NRA dreams up. You go on believing that. Like something like 80 to 90 percent of the population, I believe in the need for stricter gun controls. The NRA, though, has dreamed up the "reality" that our representatives should not represent us. The dream is accompanied by generous donations to campaign funds and threats that they will support any opposing candidate in the next election. And indeed the NRA was behind the recall of two CO congresspeople. I believe they were members of the Colorado State Legislature, the State Senate to be exact, not Congress. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...tes-heres-why/ -- Regards, Savageduck |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: "For Sale"
In article ,
"J. Clarke" wrote: Tony, put some more tinfoil in your hat and wipe the foam off your mouth. I really don't see why you're trying to "discuss" these things with Tony to begin with... He can never be wrong, didn't you know that? -- Sandman[.net] |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: "For Sale"
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 21:40:14 -0400, "J. Clarke"
wrote: In article , tonycooper214 says... On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 19:28:19 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , tonycooper214 says... On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 17:04:59 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , tonycooper214 says... On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 08:26:11 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: It is only one, very limited, form of reality. A state law could require Grandma to sell the gun on consignment through a licensed retail gun seller. There certainly is no shortage of them in this state. Fine, you pass that law. Since Grandma has no interest in guns and gun laws and wasn't paying attention the day you passed it, she has no idea that there is such a law and goes ahead and lists the guns on Craigslist anyway. Now what? Grandma is probably quite unaware of many extant laws. If Grampa's estate include meth lab equipment, a stash of marijuana, a computer loaded with image files of naked children, or anything obtained illegally, she might innocently offer them for sale. We don't pass or not pass laws based on people's knowledge of what is, or is not, legal. Meaningless noise. Grandma has disobeyed your law. Now what do you do? Prevent it. Require the refusal of any advertisement for a gun in any medium unless the advertiser is an authorized seller of guns. We already have restrictions in place on advertisers that the medium must observe. We require certain contractors to have a license number to advertise. We require sellers of automobiles who are dealers to reveal that they are dealers. There are many other restrictions in place. Have you been successful in enforcing those rules on Craiglist? What rules? No rules exist today. There should be rules, but no rules will ever be put into effect in Florida. The NRA owns the Florida legislature. This is the state that tried to pass a law that a pediatrician should be fined $1 million - that's no typo - for initiating any discussion with a patient or patient's family about gun safety practices in the home...the "Docs and Glocks" law that was struck down by the courts. This is also the state that passed legislation that forbade cities from passing any local ordinances regarding gun control. No city in Florida can pass a local ordinance banning the carrying - open or concealed - a weapon in a children's park or school. Any gun law must be a state law. How about community bulletin boards? There are many commonplace venues for advertising that are not subject to editorial control. All I'm advocating is that *some* reasonable restrictions on the sale of guns should be imposed. There is no anticipation that all avenues can - or should be - closed. I think it's reasonable to ban gun sales at flea markets where anyone can walk up and purchase any weapon of any kind. I don't think it's reasonable to attempt to ban, by law, that "Grandma" can't sell her deceased husband's handgun to a friend or relative. And, by the way, I would exempt collector items like this one: http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...6-21-07-XL.jpg I inherited it from my father, but have since given it to my daughter. That would probably be safer for Grandma. For Grandma to offer the gun on Craigslist and meet with a total stranger is putting Grandma in danger. Worse, if Grandma is so naive to allow the stranger to come to her home. Nor do we want Grandma toting the gun to a flea market to sell it. rolling eyes Do you hear yourself? Yeah, gotta protect grandma from all those mean ugly looking mother-stabbing father raping strangers if she wants to dispose of grandpa's guns. Why don't you pass a law that says that she has to take his cameras or golf clubs or fishing tackle to a gunshop and get a background check run on the buyer as well? Wouldn't that be safer for her as well? If you want to make a case for something, do it with some connection to a logical reason for your position. There is no logical connection for a background check on the sale of fishing equipment. Your argument is that Grandma selling something on Craigslist is dangerous for Grandma. Now it is up to you to explain why selling a firearm on Craigslist is more dangerous to Grandma than selling a camera or a bicycle or a fishing rod. Up to me? All it takes is a modicum of common sense to understand why advertising the fact that you have a gun for sale can attract people who would not respond to an ad for a camera or a fishing rod. Craigslist has a search option, and the bad guys aren't searching for "Nikon" or "Daiwa". I see. So the only people who might want to buy a gun are criminals. Gotcha. Nothing about the suggestion prohibits anyone from selling or buying a gun. All it does is impose a restriction on where the gun is bought or sold. Guns could still be sold through or to, and bought from, authorized sellers that follow the laws. Tony, put some more tinfoil in your hat and wipe the foam off your mouth. What has he written that made you write that last sentence? -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: "For Sale"
On 2013-09-19 03:18:12 -0700, Eric Stevens said:
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 21:40:14 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , tonycooper214 @gmail.com says... On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 19:28:19 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , tonycooper214 @gmail.com says... On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 17:04:59 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , tonycooper214 @gmail.com says... On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 08:26:11 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: It is only one, very limited, form of reality. A state law could require Grandma to sell the gun on consignment through a licensed retail gun seller. There certainly is no shortage of them in this state. Fine, you pass that law. Since Grandma has no interest in guns and gun laws and wasn't paying attention the day you passed it, she has no idea that there is such a law and goes ahead and lists the guns on Craigslist anyway. Now what? Grandma is probably quite unaware of many extant laws. If Grampa's estate include meth lab equipment, a stash of marijuana, a computer loaded with image files of naked children, or anything obtained illegally, she might innocently offer them for sale. We don't pass or not pass laws based on people's knowledge of what is, or is not, legal. Meaningless noise. Grandma has disobeyed your law. Now what do you do? Prevent it. Require the refusal of any advertisement for a gun in any medium unless the advertiser is an authorized seller of guns. We already have restrictions in place on advertisers that the medium must observe. We require certain contractors to have a license number to advertise. We require sellers of automobiles who are dealers to reveal that they are dealers. There are many other restrictions in place. Have you been successful in enforcing those rules on Craiglist? What rules? No rules exist today. There should be rules, but no rules will ever be put into effect in Florida. The NRA owns the Florida legislature. This is the state that tried to pass a law that a pediatrician should be fined $1 million - that's no typo - for initiating any discussion with a patient or patient's family about gun safety practices in the home...the "Docs and Glocks" law that was struck down by the courts. This is also the state that passed legislation that forbade cities from passing any local ordinances regarding gun control. No city in Florida can pass a local ordinance banning the carrying - open or concealed - a weapon in a children's park or school. Any gun law must be a state law. How about community bulletin boards? There are many commonplace venues for advertising that are not subject to editorial control. All I'm advocating is that *some* reasonable restrictions on the sale of guns should be imposed. There is no anticipation that all avenues can - or should be - closed. I think it's reasonable to ban gun sales at flea markets where anyone can walk up and purchase any weapon of any kind. I don't think it's reasonable to attempt to ban, by law, that "Grandma" can't sell her deceased husband's handgun to a friend or relative. And, by the way, I would exempt collector items like this one: http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...6-21-07-XL.jpg I inherited it from my father, but have since given it to my daughter. That would probably be safer for Grandma. For Grandma to offer the gun on Craigslist and meet with a total stranger is putting Grandma in danger. Worse, if Grandma is so naive to allow the stranger to come to her home. Nor do we want Grandma toting the gun to a flea market to sell it. rolling eyes Do you hear yourself? Yeah, gotta protect grandma from all those mean ugly looking mother-stabbing father raping strangers if she wants to dispose of grandpa's guns. Why don't you pass a law that says that she has to take his cameras or golf clubs or fishing tackle to a gunshop and get a background check run on the buyer as well? Wouldn't that be safer for her as well? If you want to make a case for something, do it with some connection to a logical reason for your position. There is no logical connection for a background check on the sale of fishing equipment. Your argument is that Grandma selling something on Craigslist is dangerous for Grandma. Now it is up to you to explain why selling a firearm on Craigslist is more dangerous to Grandma than selling a camera or a bicycle or a fishing rod. Up to me? All it takes is a modicum of common sense to understand why advertising the fact that you have a gun for sale can attract people who would not respond to an ad for a camera or a fishing rod. Craigslist has a search option, and the bad guys aren't searching for "Nikon" or "Daiwa". I see. So the only people who might want to buy a gun are criminals. Gotcha. Nothing about the suggestion prohibits anyone from selling or buying a gun. All it does is impose a restriction on where the gun is bought or sold. Guns could still be sold through or to, and bought from, authorized sellers that follow the laws. Tony, put some more tinfoil in your hat and wipe the foam off your mouth. What has he written that made you write that last sentence? Are you blind, just stubborn, or injecting yourself into a thread regarding opinions on US gun control which has nothing to do with Swedes? Just read the thread rather than ask what Tony has written. It appears in the line above the comment you are asking about. Your request makes you appear like a petulant girl refusing to speak to somebody standing right next to her and using an intermediary to conduct a conversation. "I'm not speaking to him, so you tell me what he said, and I'll tell you what I want him to hear." Sheeesh! -- Regards, Savageduck |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: "For Sale"
On 9/19/2013 12:45 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-09-18 21:29:55 -0700, PeterN said: On 9/18/2013 11:15 AM, Tony Cooper wrote: On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 08:26:11 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: It is only one, very limited, form of reality. A state law could require Grandma to sell the gun on consignment through a licensed retail gun seller. There certainly is no shortage of them in this state. Fine, you pass that law. Since Grandma has no interest in guns and gun laws and wasn't paying attention the day you passed it, she has no idea that there is such a law and goes ahead and lists the guns on Craigslist anyway. Now what? Grandma is probably quite unaware of many extant laws. If Grampa's estate include meth lab equipment, a stash of marijuana, a computer loaded with image files of naked children, or anything obtained illegally, she might innocently offer them for sale. We don't pass or not pass laws based on people's knowledge of what is, or is not, legal. That would probably be safer for Grandma. For Grandma to offer the gun on Craigslist and meet with a total stranger is putting Grandma in danger. Worse, if Grandma is so naive to allow the stranger to come to her home. Nor do we want Grandma toting the gun to a flea market to sell it. rolling eyes Do you hear yourself? Yeah, gotta protect grandma from all those mean ugly looking mother-stabbing father raping strangers if she wants to dispose of grandpa's guns. Why don't you pass a law that says that she has to take his cameras or golf clubs or fishing tackle to a gunshop and get a background check run on the buyer as well? Wouldn't that be safer for her as well? If you want to make a case for something, do it with some connection to a logical reason for your position. There is no logical connection for a background check on the sale of fishing equipment. While I would not advise Grandma to advertise expensive items of any sort on Craigslist if the sale involves strangers coming to Grandma's house when only Grandma is there, there are certain items that are more likely to attract the attention of those "mean ugly looking" people. Guns is one such category. Heck, just ban private sales of everything unless they happen at a gun shop. Gotta protect Grandma you know. Yeah, that goes along with the NRA bull**** about "only outlaws will have guns". Congress deals with the reality that the NRA dreams up. You go on believing that. Like something like 80 to 90 percent of the population, I believe in the need for stricter gun controls. The NRA, though, has dreamed up the "reality" that our representatives should not represent us. The dream is accompanied by generous donations to campaign funds and threats that they will support any opposing candidate in the next election. And indeed the NRA was behind the recall of two CO congresspeople. I believe they were members of the Colorado State Legislature, the State Senate to be exact, not Congress. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...tes-heres-why/ Yes. I said that from memory. My example was misstated, but the principal is the same. -- PeterN |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: "For Sale"
On 2013-09-19 07:59:37 -0700, Tony Cooper said:
On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 05:09:25 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2013-09-19 03:18:12 -0700, Eric Stevens said: On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 21:40:14 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , tonycooper214 @gmail.com says... On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 19:28:19 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , tonycooper214 @gmail.com says... On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 17:04:59 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , tonycooper214 @gmail.com says... On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 08:26:11 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: It is only one, very limited, form of reality. A state law could require Grandma to sell the gun on consignment through a licensed retail gun seller. There certainly is no shortage of them in this state. Fine, you pass that law. Since Grandma has no interest in guns and gun laws and wasn't paying attention the day you passed it, she has no idea that there is such a law and goes ahead and lists the guns on Craigslist anyway. Now what? Grandma is probably quite unaware of many extant laws. If Grampa's estate include meth lab equipment, a stash of marijuana, a computer loaded with image files of naked children, or anything obtained illegally, she might innocently offer them for sale. We don't pass or not pass laws based on people's knowledge of what is, or is not, legal. Meaningless noise. Grandma has disobeyed your law. Now what do you do? Prevent it. Require the refusal of any advertisement for a gun in any medium unless the advertiser is an authorized seller of guns. We already have restrictions in place on advertisers that the medium must observe. We require certain contractors to have a license number to advertise. We require sellers of automobiles who are dealers to reveal that they are dealers. There are many other restrictions in place. Have you been successful in enforcing those rules on Craiglist? What rules? No rules exist today. There should be rules, but no rules will ever be put into effect in Florida. The NRA owns the Florida legislature. This is the state that tried to pass a law that a pediatrician should be fined $1 million - that's no typo - for initiating any discussion with a patient or patient's family about gun safety practices in the home...the "Docs and Glocks" law that was struck down by the courts. This is also the state that passed legislation that forbade cities from passing any local ordinances regarding gun control. No city in Florida can pass a local ordinance banning the carrying - open or concealed - a weapon in a children's park or school. Any gun law must be a state law. How about community bulletin boards? There are many commonplace venues for advertising that are not subject to editorial control. All I'm advocating is that *some* reasonable restrictions on the sale of guns should be imposed. There is no anticipation that all avenues can - or should be - closed. I think it's reasonable to ban gun sales at flea markets where anyone can walk up and purchase any weapon of any kind. I don't think it's reasonable to attempt to ban, by law, that "Grandma" can't sell her deceased husband's handgun to a friend or relative. And, by the way, I would exempt collector items like this one: http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...6-21-07-XL.jpg I inherited it from my father, but have since given it to my daughter. That would probably be safer for Grandma. For Grandma to offer the gun on Craigslist and meet with a total stranger is putting Grandma in danger. Worse, if Grandma is so naive to allow the stranger to come to her home. Nor do we want Grandma toting the gun to a flea market to sell it. rolling eyes Do you hear yourself? Yeah, gotta protect grandma from all those mean ugly looking mother-stabbing father raping strangers if she wants to dispose of grandpa's guns. Why don't you pass a law that says that she has to take his cameras or golf clubs or fishing tackle to a gunshop and get a background check run on the buyer as well? Wouldn't that be safer for her as well? If you want to make a case for something, do it with some connection to a logical reason for your position. There is no logical connection for a background check on the sale of fishing equipment. Your argument is that Grandma selling something on Craigslist is dangerous for Grandma. Now it is up to you to explain why selling a firearm on Craigslist is more dangerous to Grandma than selling a camera or a bicycle or a fishing rod. Up to me? All it takes is a modicum of common sense to understand why advertising the fact that you have a gun for sale can attract people who would not respond to an ad for a camera or a fishing rod. Craigslist has a search option, and the bad guys aren't searching for "Nikon" or "Daiwa". I see. So the only people who might want to buy a gun are criminals. Gotcha. Nothing about the suggestion prohibits anyone from selling or buying a gun. All it does is impose a restriction on where the gun is bought or sold. Guns could still be sold through or to, and bought from, authorized sellers that follow the laws. Tony, put some more tinfoil in your hat and wipe the foam off your mouth. What has he written that made you write that last sentence? Are you blind, just stubborn, or injecting yourself into a thread regarding opinions on US gun control which has nothing to do with Swedes? Just read the thread rather than ask what Tony has written. It appears in the line above the comment you are asking about. Your request makes you appear like a petulant girl refusing to speak to somebody standing right next to her and using an intermediary to conduct a conversation. "I'm not speaking to him, so you tell me what he said, and I'll tell you what I want him to hear." Sheeesh! Sheesh yourself! Eric does not have me killfiled, and presumably has read my posts. Eric is a Kiwi, not a Swede. I think you intended this reply to Jonas' post, not to Eric's. You are correct, and I extend my apologies to all concerned, especially Eric. Eric's question is entirely reasonable. My comments have been reserved and rational. They have not been critical of gun owners or of the ownership of guns. I have supported what most Americans support: some restrictions on the sale of guns. The big issue and loophole in the background checks is the mental health question. The majority of firearms in the USA are not used in crime or insane shootings, but are owned by mostly responsible, law abiding citizens. Even drug addled criminals armed with illegally obtained guns, aren't crazy enough to shoot up a school, movie house, or military establishment. The problem with this type of discussion is that some, but not all, pro gun people feel that *any* suggestions of *any* tightening of our gun laws is tantamount to suggesting that federal troops confiscate all guns and are therefore the suggestion of a tinfoil-hat-wearing left-wing liberal crackpot. There are some truly stupid provisions in some of the suggested restrictions on the weapons and configuration of weapons. The key is background checks and enforcement of the current laws. A big issue is how to enforce the gun control laws which are already on the books, especially when a disqualifying factor comes into play after an earlier approval. An individual might not be a convicted felon, or have a documented mental health issue when they first successfully pass the background check. I know that the California DOJ is unable to fully enforce the current laws by matching gun registrations with recent felony convictions. Mental health professionals are not compelled to advise the DOJ of a patient's mental health status due to confidentiality laws. Then in California we have the issue of individuals with restraining orders placed against them where the Law prohibits them from possessing a firearm. Again, there is no check between the Courts and the California DOJ firearms owner database, and no manpower to enforce the restriction. Until mental health professionals are able to file a report indicating they believe a patient has stability issue and/or violent tendencies, and the various State law enforcement agencies are able to make a gun ownership check against a database, and act on that knowledge. As has been pointed out, the DC shooter, the Colorado movie house shooter, the Newtown school shooter, the Giffords Arizona shooter, all had profound undocumented mental health issues and were able to sail through the background checks. The DC shooter was even able to avoid disqualification even though he was involved in two prior shooting incidents where he showed irrational behavior. -- Regards, Savageduck |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[SI] New Mandate - The letters "F", "G" and "S" | Bowser | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | August 27th 12 12:22 PM |
[SI] New Mandate - The letters "F", "G" and "S" | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 3 | August 26th 12 02:20 PM |
"Corset-Boi" Bob "Lionel Lauer" Larter has grown a "pair" and returned to AUK................ | \The Great One\ | Digital Photography | 0 | July 14th 09 12:04 AM |
[SI] Weekly Reminder. The current mandate ("open") is due 2008.08.31 | Alan Browne | Digital SLR Cameras | 9 | August 18th 08 02:21 AM |