“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#94 May 5, 2013
animaniactoo wrote:
Giving the benefit of the doubt that you're simply reading it through a filter of your dirty lens on these issues, before I repeat what I said with minor clarification, please go back and read what I wrote again and see where your replies do not relate to what I wrote.
I'm fully away of what you said and responded as such. If you are unable to successfully retort my responses, that's on you and don't try to turn it around and backpedal by saying I'm reading through a dirty filter.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#95 May 5, 2013
PEllen wrote:
These are not snarky questions, BTW.
Then I'll respond to the ONE question you actually posed: Stopping road rage is not my concern.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#96 May 5, 2013
Ferrerman wrote:
<quoted text>If you saw 20/20 last night, a man armed with a pistol and a video camera did not make for a polite society when he confronted neighbors who were partying too late and too loud. He believed the state of Texas gave him the right to "stand his ground" even though he had left his home for the express purpose of telling the neighbors a couple doors down to be quiet. It turned out he was a bit of a bully in the neighborhood, who ALWAYS wore his gun. He had even shot and killed a dog before he graduated to humans.
Loud neighbors suck but, prison and funerals suck worse.
And how exactly would stricter gun laws have prevented this?

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#97 May 5, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong.
<quoted text>
Wrong.
<quoted text>
Educate yourself.
You educate yourself. Most states do not require registration.

Start alphabetically. Here's Alabama:

http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/p/gu...

"Permit to purchase rifles and shotguns? No
Registration of rifles and shotguns? No
Licensing of owners of rifles and shotguns? No
Permit to carry rifles and shotguns? No

Permit to purchase handgun? No
Registration of handguns? No
Licensing of owners of handguns? No
Permit to carry handguns? Yes"

BTW, handguns and revolvers are not required to be registered by the National Firearms Act.

“boredom made me do it”

Since: Aug 08

ny, ny

#98 May 5, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm fully away of what you said and responded as such. If you are unable to successfully retort my responses, that's on you and don't try to turn it around and backpedal by saying I'm reading through a dirty filter.
No. I'm not backpedaling or anything of the sort. You're talking about shooting sprees and things I never mentioned. You're telling me that I'm wrong about where most gun crime comes from when I never said a word about where most comes from, and *only* spoke about there being *too much* in a specific area. This is not the same as claiming that most comes from that area.

With that info, please go back and re-read. Seriously. This is not me backpedaling this is your lack of reading comprehension and while I'm willing to discuss this topic because the majority of this conversation has been relatively mature, I am NOT willing to have to go back repeatedly and reply to assertions I never made.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#99 May 5, 2013
animaniactoo wrote:
what gun registries are in place that will allow a law enforcement official to look up and identify what weapons a person owns?
Oh, and why should law enforcement officials need to know in the first place?

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#101 May 5, 2013
Toj wrote:
Start alphabetically. Here's Alabama:
Alabama can require amputee lactating midget orgies for all I care.
Toj wrote:
"Permit to purchase rifles and shotguns? No
I'm fine with that.
Toj wrote:
Registration of rifles and shotguns? No
I'm fine with that.
Toj wrote:
Permit to carry rifles and shotguns? No
Permit to hunt? Yes.
Toj wrote:
Permit to purchase handgun? No
Fine by me.
Toj wrote:
Registration of handguns? No
Good.
Toj wrote:
Licensing of owners of handguns? No
Good.
Toj wrote:
BTW, handguns and revolvers are not required to be registered by the National Firearms Act.
Good. I do not agree with registries. Why do you keep spouting about this? Have you ever bought a gun? Rifle, shotgun, handgun, anything? If so, you would know that there is paperwork filed. Files are kept. If you haven't ever purchased a gun, it's easy to buy into the false information that there are no records of any type for gun purchases. I will not argue about this anymore. Learn your facts, and stop coming to me spouting garbage and falsehoods about something you know nothing about.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#102 May 5, 2013
animaniactoo wrote:
No. I'm not backpedaling or anything of the sort. You're talking about shooting sprees and things I never mentioned. You're telling me that I'm wrong about where most gun crime comes from when I never said a word about where most comes from, and *only* spoke about there being *too much* in a specific area. This is not the same as claiming that most comes from that area.
I would suggest YOU go back and reread what you wrote. And try doing so without your OWN filters.

My response to your post is exactly what I took from it. If you would like to reiterate and explain what you MEANT rather that what you SAID, by all means....

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#103 May 5, 2013
Ferrerman wrote:
How do any laws prevent any crime?
Explain the millions of gun owners who don't rob liquor stores or go on shooting sprees....

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#105 May 5, 2013
Ferrerman wrote:
Did you mean that question for another thread? I can't see that statement being germane anywhere but I know it doesn't fit here.
Sorry you think so. Pose your previous question to the 99.3% of Americans not in prison.

“boredom made me do it”

Since: Aug 08

ny, ny

#106 May 5, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
I would suggest YOU go back and reread what you wrote. And try doing so without your OWN filters.
My response to your post is exactly what I took from it. If you would like to reiterate and explain what you MEANT rather that what you SAID, by all means....
Tell you what, you show me exactly what words refer to shooting sprees, and what words I wrote refer to who commits most gun violence, and I'll back up. Because I've reread my post, and nothing I wrote did, so I take that to mean that what I meant was what I said.

I will be more than happy to revisit if you can show me where I referred to the things that you spoke of in your replies. Exact quotes please.

“boredom made me do it”

Since: Aug 08

ny, ny

#107 May 5, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, and why should law enforcement officials need to know in the first place?
Answer to this question, for me, is imo that firearms are lethal and deserve to be tracked. This in no way violates any constitutional right and if other records are available to law enforcement for usage, dmv records, property records, credit reports, etc. then I see no reason for this information not to *also* be tracked and available in a similar manner. Plus when someone starts stockpiling weapons - I want it to both be harder to stockpile, and I want somebody to be looking at that person, based on an awareness of such stockpiling and monitoring them.

What would be the issue with law enforcement having access to this information? How would it be likely to an individual or their rights for such information to be available?

“...,to wit”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#108 May 5, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, and why should law enforcement officials need to know in the first place?
That's easy. For the same reason firemen need to know what combustibles may be in a building to which they are responding, cops need to know if they are answering a call at a location with a known cache of weapons.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#109 May 5, 2013
animaniactoo wrote:
firearms are lethal and deserve to be tracked.
Your government did this to guns they sent to Mexico and people still died and the perpetrators have not been caught.
animaniactoo wrote:
when someone starts stockpiling weapons - I want it to both be harder to stockpile, and I want somebody to be looking at that person, based on an awareness of such stockpiling and monitoring them.
I disagree. Why does the government need to know any of this?
animaniactoo wrote:
What would be the issue with law enforcement having access to this information? How would it be likely to an individual or their rights for such information to be available?
Again, why does law enforcement need to know? And before you postulate any opinion, should you first submit said opinion to a government agency and await their approval before posting said opinion?(Re: freedom of speech)

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#110 May 5, 2013
PEllen wrote:
That's easy. For the same reason firemen need to know what combustibles may be in a building to which they are responding, cops need to know if they are answering a call at a location with a known cache of weapons.
While my house has never been on fire, so I can't speak from personal experience, I am unaware that before firefighters put hoses on a house fire, they must fist gather information on any and all combustibles that might be in said house.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#111 May 5, 2013
animaniactoo wrote:
I will be more than happy to revisit if you can show me where I referred to the things that you spoke of in your replies. Exact quotes please.
Not gonna bother, not wasting my time pointing out what's already in print for all to see, try again.

“boredom made me do it”

Since: Aug 08

ny, ny

#112 May 5, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Not gonna bother, not wasting my time pointing out what's already in print for all to see, try again.
That's a copout. You're the one asserting it is in there. Therefore the burden of proof is on you to prove that it is, not on me to prove a negative. If you won't make the effort to do this, I expect you not to refer to it again.

“boredom made me do it”

Since: Aug 08

ny, ny

#113 May 5, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Your government did this to guns they sent to Mexico and people still died and the perpetrators have not been caught.
<quoted text>
I disagree. Why does the government need to know any of this?
<quoted text>
Again, why does law enforcement need to know? And before you postulate any opinion, should you first submit said opinion to a government agency and await their approval before posting said opinion?(Re: freedom of speech)
Can you tell me where free speech is on average as dangerous as a firearm is? When looking at such things, one of the factors is a probability determination.

Do you have any links you can point me to on the Mexico stuff?

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#114 May 5, 2013
animaniactoo wrote:
Can you tell me where free speech is on average as dangerous as a firearm is?
No. Didn't realize that was the point.
animaniactoo wrote:
When looking at such things, one of the factors is a probability determination.
Whatever this means.
animaniactoo wrote:
Do you have any links you can point me to on the Mexico stuff?
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/natio...

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#115 May 5, 2013
animaniactoo wrote:
That's a copout. You're the one asserting it is in there. Therefore the burden of proof is on you to prove that it is, not on me to prove a negative. If you won't make the effort to do this, I expect you not to refer to it again.
"For a conceal carry you might need to pass a gun safety class, but I maintain that human nature guarantees that the people who are *most* dangerous are those who own a weapon, feel threatened, and carry the gun *without getting the conceal carry license*, figuring they're just going to carry it for a day or 2 while whatever situation is taken care of. This is a function of human nature. It's too late to get the permit when they feel threatened and they are going to figure that the shot of them getting caught carrying the weapon is slim, unless they have to use it and that if they have to use it, they'd rather be alive tyvm. If that even matters since their intention is more likely to be to threaten with it, not to actually shoot it.

THAT person is the one most likely to accidentally shoot someone's foot off. Due to nothing more than lack of competent training with their weapon.

There is too much gun violence that is "first time offender" by "previously law-abiding citizen" for me to stand here and say "oh! the system works fine! all law-abiding citizens maintain their law-abiding standing and this is rarely a problem!"

There is NO SUCH THING as a perfectly law-abiding citizen who has never broken a single law. We all do it in little ways where we determine the risk is worth it. Jaywalking, a red light that we took a shot on being able to make it while it was yellow, curfews, the day that separating the recycling is too much of a pain, taking an extra week to renew the registration on our car because we just couldn't get to the garage, so we drive around with an expired inspection sticker. Ordering from out of state and not declaring the purchase to avoid paying sales tax. That's now a closed loophole with new laws about when the sales tax is collected.

There are far too many loopholes in terms of background checks being performed AND what information is included in such a check.

Gun registries? Really? Please explain to me what gun registries are in place that will allow a law enforcement official to look up and identify what weapons a person owns? As a matter of practice in every state? Seriously. Prove to me that they exist and I'll drop that objection."

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, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min red and right 1,207,082
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 9 min Jacques Ottawa 185,922
Abby 3-30-15 22 min tiredofit 10
Amy 3-30-15 44 min Sublime1 30
News Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 1 hr CDC 51,885
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr zion 52,366
News Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 2 hr Sam 71,701
Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]