Topix Chitown Regulars

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Braidwood, IL

#77025 Dec 12, 2012
dahgts

United States

#77026 Dec 12, 2012
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
About the only thing we can do is prevent folks with criminal records and who have shown mental instability from buying them. I think that's already the case. What more would you want to do?
It's not already the case. At least 60% of gun sales are made at gun shows which don't do background checks. That's reform that needs to happen.

“...,to wit”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#77027 Dec 12, 2012
dahgts wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not already the case. At least 60% of gun sales are made at gun shows which don't do background checks. That's reform that needs to happen.
So why don't we reuire gun insurance like we require car insurance. Make the coverage run with the product The initial requirement would be on the manufacturer and first distributor or seller( store or gun show).After that it would be on teh registered owner. The only way you could get out of buying insurance would be to have a valid bill of sale and teh buyer show he has coverage. Same kind of card as we all have for car insurance.
This would not interfere with teh right to own and carry but would put teh cost of injury on the people responsible for safe usage of the guns.

Just a thought

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#77028 Dec 12, 2012
dahgts wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not already the case. At least 60% of gun sales are made at gun shows which don't do background checks. That's reform that needs to happen.
Example: THe shooter in Arizona who killed several people and wounded Giffords.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#77029 Dec 12, 2012
Also, private gun sales do not require a background check.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#77030 Dec 12, 2012
PEllen wrote:
<quoted text>
So why don't we reuire gun insurance like we require car insurance. Make the coverage run with the product The initial requirement would be on the manufacturer and first distributor or seller( store or gun show).After that it would be on teh registered owner. The only way you could get out of buying insurance would be to have a valid bill of sale and teh buyer show he has coverage. Same kind of card as we all have for car insurance.
This would not interfere with teh right to own and carry but would put teh cost of injury on the people responsible for safe usage of the guns.
Just a thought
I think it's a very good idea.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#77031 Dec 12, 2012
Didy ou see ont he news that a gas station in NJ got a delivery of JET FUEL instead of gasoline?

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#77032 Dec 12, 2012
And glad you were not at the mall, moon! Scary stuff!

“Where is Tonka?”

Since: Feb 09

Neda, stay with me! Charlie

#77033 Dec 12, 2012
Whoot!
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
They are being inducted this year too, Mimi:
http://m.rollingstone.com/...

“Where is Tonka?”

Since: Feb 09

Neda, stay with me! Charlie

#77034 Dec 12, 2012
Wrong!
If a backround check is required, then one is conducted, even at gun shows. You may not take possession of the weapon until it comes back.
Most of the time you do not need a backround check for a rifle, but for hand guns you do.
People with CWP are exempt since they have already had this check done.

The only thing I am not sure on is the 3 day wait. I know in Broward county, there is a 3 day wait, but I believe that is only for the local gun shops. I dont think out of towners (who work the gun shows) are held to this.
dahgts wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not already the case. At least 60% of gun sales are made at gun shows which don't do background checks. That's reform that needs to happen.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Melrose Park, IL

#77035 Dec 12, 2012
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
<quoted text>
I think it's a very good idea.
It's a terrible idea. Requiring insurance is a violation of the second amendment.

Since: Mar 09

Miami, FL

#77036 Dec 12, 2012
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
Didy ou see ont he news that a gas station in NJ got a delivery of JET FUEL instead of gasoline?
Whoops!

Since: Mar 09

Miami, FL

#77037 Dec 12, 2012
So A told me on Monday night that her boyfriend will be up here this weekend and we talked about all of us going out either Friday or Saturday night. There's a lot going on this weekend so I wanted to firm up the plans so I asked her this morning which day she prefers (hindsight: I shouldn't have - I should have just said whichever day works for me, even though at this point either one does... I should have just picked one). Now she's saying he's "surprised" that she's assuming he'll be up here. Shocker - not. They're supposed to discuss their weekend plans tonight but I'm definitely not putting my other plans on hold. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. And all that.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#77038 Dec 12, 2012
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a terrible idea. Requiring insurance is a violation of the second amendment.
I promise you that the Second Amendment does not forbid insurance mandates.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#77039 Dec 12, 2012
j_m_w wrote:
So A told me on Monday night that her boyfriend will be up here this weekend and we talked about all of us going out either Friday or Saturday night. There's a lot going on this weekend so I wanted to firm up the plans so I asked her this morning which day she prefers (hindsight: I shouldn't have - I should have just said whichever day works for me, even though at this point either one does... I should have just picked one). Now she's saying he's "surprised" that she's assuming he'll be up here. Shocker - not. They're supposed to discuss their weekend plans tonight but I'm definitely not putting my other plans on hold. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. And all that.
I'm confused. Why is he surprised that she expected him to visit? He's glommed onto her plenty. I think he's purposely playing mind games with her. Now that he hasn't driven her away with his stupid crap (as he's likely driven away women before), now he's twisting screws to get her to agree to visit HIM this weekend, thus avoiding meeting you again.

Since: Mar 09

Miami, FL

#77040 Dec 12, 2012
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm confused. Why is he surprised that she expected him to visit? He's glommed onto her plenty. I think he's purposely playing mind games with her. Now that he hasn't driven her away with his stupid crap (as he's likely driven away women before), now he's twisting screws to get her to agree to visit HIM this weekend, thus avoiding meeting you again.
Honestly, the only explanation I have for any of his behavior and comments anymore is that he's a douchy nutjob.

I'm waiting to talk to my friend L about this weekend - and I don't mind waiting for her because she doesn't d1ck me around - but then I have to RSVP to two Christmas parties, one on Friday night and one on Saturday afternoon.

Dolphins game on Sunday! This weekend AND next, the first is a company outing and the second is extra tickets that my boss's boss gave me.:)

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#77041 Dec 12, 2012
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
And glad you were not at the mall, moon! Scary stuff!
I haven't worked there for years, but that is where Bear and I met, I was running a children's gift shop and he was a supervisor at a pet store, opposite ends of the mall.
I was wrong about the store it happened outside of, the map in my head was turned around. It was right where we'd meet during breaks, not at my end of the mall.(Macy has two stores in the mall, and I thought it happened outside the one closer to my shops but it was the main store, not the furniture branch)
But yeah, I've been in one armed robbery, and that's enough of that sort of action for me for a lifetime, thank you very much.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#77042 Dec 12, 2012
dahgts wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not already the case. At least 60% of gun sales are made at gun shows which don't do background checks. That's reform that needs to happen.
How many of these folks who do these killings would have been blocked from getting a gun had they done background checks?

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#77043 Dec 12, 2012
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a terrible idea. Requiring insurance is a violation of the second amendment.
I agree. Sorry, I'm not putting my constitutional rights in the hands of insurance companies. <sarcasm>

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#77044 Dec 12, 2012
strike the sarcasm comment. I was gonna say something sarcastic, but changed it, lol.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 13 min Dr Guru 230,912
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 45 min Cheech the Conser... 1,457,546
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 2 hr Basil Fomeen 62,297
last post wins! (Dec '10) 3 hr honeymylove 2,740
Johnny Murray a/k/a Johnny's Marine 3 hr Elder James Johnson 34
last post wins! (Apr '13) 4 hr They cannot kill ... 1,953
Why does Chicago want to harbor illegal criminals 5 hr YIM 9

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages