(May 23, 2014 at 12:46 pm)Minimalist Wrote: That's really a very good question. Perhaps one of the gun nuts can offer an opinion on whether or not anyone was ever shot by an unloaded gun.

Seems unlikely to me but always ask an expert.

I am aware that bore loaded cannon sometimes shot and killed the swabbers who push a mop like swab down the bore to wipe away the previous shot's embers and unburnt powder which, when suddenly pushed to the bottom with an insufficiently moist swab, would explode killing the swabber by blowing off his arms and any other body parts that were in-line at the time.

I suppose it could happen to other bore loaded black powder firearms, but owing to their waning popularity, It's sure to be very rare.

So I heard some kid in California went around and shot a bunch of people even though the state has the strictest gun control laws in the country. So tell me, how's that gun control workin' out for ya?

That is like saying because of vaccine did not one hundred percent protect every single person who took it from a disease means that it was not worth having the vaccine at all.

Do you even listen to yourself?

(May 26, 2014 at 1:18 am)Moros Synackaon Wrote: That is like saying because of vaccine did not one hundred percent protect every single person who took it from a disease means that it was not worth having the vaccine at all.

Do you even listen to yourself?

So if, say 99% of all gun owners don't hurt anyone, and if 99% of those that do the proposed gun laws wouldn't have stopped, then having the unfettered freedom is justified?

Percent effectiveness cuts both ways..

Part of the reason we have those laws to begin with is because "unfettered freedom" wasn't justified.

Think about it -- how many handguns are justified in a low-to-nil crime area?

How much ammo is justified?

Should anyone be able to obtain a handgun?

Unfettered freedom doesn't give a shit if a psychologically unfit jerk purchases more guns than can reasonably be used in self defence.

And every attempt to make gun laws more nuanced and dynamic to fit local areas better has been shot down.

You're asking for the surgeon to use a chainsaw to extract a cyst, then you get upset when he cuts more flesh out than necessary.

Great idea -- let's just remove the surgeon all together and pretend we don't have a problem.

Efficacy can only be improved if we're allowed to experiment and apply different approaches.

Would you care for that?

Or is "unfettered freedom" your only goal, no matter how many nutcases decide to go murdering others?

Gun owners recognize to need for common sense reasonable regulation. There is no serious push to remove laws that prohibit the mentally unstable or to the underage. Reasonable and effective toward a defined goal is the requirement from most gun owners.

While the debate rages, chalk up another one.

http://www.abc15.com/news/region-norther...in-payson-

Quote:Toddler shot, killed after he and 3-year-old brother find gun inside Payson apartment

Payson is one of those quiet little towns in Northern AZ where everyone is apparently packing heat...just for the fuck of it.


And Brakeman. Are you sure about that?

http://azstarnet.com/news/science/enviro...e8a57.html

Quote:In January 2011, after a wildly psychotic Jared Loughner shot 19 people in Tucson, the National Rifle Association still wanted to make it easier for people judged mentally ill to rearm themselves.

Arizona's Legislature was considering ways for people committed by a judge to mental-health treatment to later request their gun rights back.

The Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, populated by police chiefs and prosecutors, wanted a high standard for the person to show he deserved to have his gun rights restored: clear and convincing evidence.

The NRA wanted a lower standard: preponderance of the evidence. In fact, the NRA had demanded this in a variety of states where the issue arose, and at least one, Idaho, adopted it as law.

---

It's been a good day in Carnage-land. Let's add in one more.

http://news.crowdignite.craveonline.com/...e=1&slot=0

Quote:A Georgia teenager was killed Thursday when a rifle went off as he and his father geared up for a fishing trip, the Athens Banner-Herald reported.

Madison County sheriff's Capt. Jimmy Patton said the victim, 15-year-old Brian Newsome, died at the scene. He told the newspaper that Newsome's father was "extremely distraught" and said an investigation, which was still ongoing, indicated the shooting was accidental.

(May 28, 2014 at 1:36 am)Minimalist Wrote: And Brakeman. Are you sure about that?

http://azstarnet.com/news/science/enviro...e8a57.html

Quote:In January 2011, after a wildly psychotic Jared Loughner shot 19 people in Tucson, the National Rifle Association still wanted to make it easier for people judged mentally ill to rearm themselves.

Arizona's Legislature was considering ways for people committed by a judge to mental-health treatment to later request their gun rights back.

The Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, populated by police chiefs and prosecutors, wanted a high standard for the person to show he deserved to have his gun rights restored: clear and convincing evidence.

The NRA wanted a lower standard: preponderance of the evidence. In fact, the NRA had demanded this in a variety of states where the issue arose, and at least one, Idaho, adopted it as law.

I don't think the article's author was unbiased at all. I thought the article was very poor. However, I think that this article from the beast's mouth is much more accurate.

http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/fact-s...?s=&st=&ps=

One can agree with your claim without having to read between the lines too much.

I'd like to say that the reluctance to tighten the standards is born from fear of over-reach from the anti-gun crowd. I'd also like to say that the NRA's opinion isn't necessarily the gun owning majorities opinion. I'd like to say both, and I believe there is a good part of both of those factors in play, but I must instead say that I am ashamed of them. While I detest gun control measures that would be ineffective and arduous, I don't see that tightening standards for the mentally disturbed should be that contentious.

Uh-huh....whereas anything written by the fucking NRA has to be the unvarnished TRUTH, right?

Meanwhile.... The Onion nails it again.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/no-way-...his,36131/

Quote:‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens

(May 28, 2014 at 1:36 am)Minimalist Wrote: It's been a good day in Carnage-land. Let's add in one more.

http://news.crowdignite.craveonline.com/...e=1&slot=0

Read that:

Quote:“There is a place where a lot of people put in boats. They had a rifle they took along in case they saw a wild hog,” he told the Banner-Herald. “Evidently they did this a lot."

They took a loaded rifle when they went fishing frequently?

What the hell.