How do we protect kids in school?

How do we protect kids in school?

There are 6103 comments on the Ruidoso News story from Jan 8, 2013, titled How do we protect kids in school?. In it, Ruidoso News reports that:

During a newsroom discussion about guns about a decade ago, a woman piped up: "I don't understand what the big deal is.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Ruidoso News.

factologist

Huntsville, AL

#5247 Jul 3, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>I don't even own a credit card. I only use credit to buy houses and cars. Anything else.....if I don't have the cash I wait 'til I do. I pay cash or we don't do business. Credit is for people who don't want, or aren't intelligent enough, to manage their money The barkeep is perfectly within his rights to refuse service to anyone he wishes just as I'm perfectly within my rights to tell him to pissoff and take my business elsewhere. Try again......
So it would be within the owner of a gun store const. rights to refuse sale of a gun to someone util they pass a test made up by the owner. Isn't that true?
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#5248 Jul 3, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>No, you obviously don't see a damn thing. I'm not ignoring issues, I'm POINTING OUT ISSUES that you and your leftist bullshit create for law abiding citizens who have done nothing wrong. I'm not running anywhere, I'm right here in your face. Don't like it? Toughshit, it's still a free country and this is a public forum. You control nothing.
So why did you hide and not answer this question?

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/farmington-nm...

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#5249 Jul 3, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>So it would be within the owner of a gun store const. rights to refuse sale of a gun to someone util they pass a test made up by the owner. Isn't that true?
You are correct, the owner of a business has the right to refuse service. The government DOES NOT. The second amendment was to written to restrict private businessmen, it was written to restrict GOVERNMENT. I strongly suspect that any businessman who demands something that unreasonable as a prerequisite to doing business will be doing very little business at all while his competitors will be doing more than ever. It's called free enterprise. If I don't like the way someone does business, do I have the right to take my business elsewhere?

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#5250 Jul 3, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>So why did you hide and not answer this question?
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/farmington-nm...
Sorry, I don't read everything you post.....I skip over a lot of it. But since you asked...again....The erroneous decision of a judge or a court does not "make something constitutional". It may make it law temporarily but the error will eventually be corrected. Judge Scalia is not infallible, not even close. There are limits on our rights built into the constitution. It's called reciprocation, you're within your rights until you violate the rights of someone else. You know.....like you're trying to violate the rights of all law abiding gun owners.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#5251 Jul 3, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>You are correct, the owner of a business has the right to refuse service. The government DOES NOT. The second amendment was to written to restrict private businessmen, it was written to restrict GOVERNMENT. I strongly suspect that any businessman who demands something that unreasonable as a prerequisite to doing business will be doing very little business at all while his competitors will be doing more than ever. It's called free enterprise. If I don't like the way someone does business, do I have the right to take my business elsewhere?
Typo - <wasn't> written to restrict businessmen
xando

United States

#5252 Jul 3, 2013
Can you name those policies?
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Why should any law abiding citizen be required to submit to a background check just because you and your leftist masters can't keep track or control of your pet criminals/psychos? You enable the murder of school children with your liberal policies and then want me to submit to a background check in order to exercise my constitutional rights? Screw you!
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#5253 Jul 3, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>You are correct, the owner of a business has the right to refuse service. The government DOES NOT. The second amendment was to written to restrict private businessmen, it was written to restrict GOVERNMENT. I strongly suspect that any businessman who demands something that unreasonable as a prerequisite to doing business will be doing very little business at all while his competitors will be doing more than ever. It's called free enterprise. If I don't like the way someone does business, do I have the right to take my business elsewhere?
Very good. Now let's assume a new company starts up. An enormous retail gun chain owned only by a multi billionaire; lets call it Wal-Arms. Now let's suppose the owner's business model puts him in control of domestic as well as foreign wholesale purchases from all the gun mfgs. such that he buys and sells 90% of all LEGAL guns sold in the US.
Now lets suppose he installs a condition of purchase that requires all potential purchasers to take and pass a background check in order to purchase a gun.
Is this within in his "rights"?
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#5254 Jul 3, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, I don't read everything you post.....I skip over a lot of it. But since you asked...again....The erroneous decision of a judge or a court does not "make something constitutional". It may make it law temporarily but the error will eventually be corrected. Judge Scalia is not infallible, not even close. There are limits on our rights built into the constitution. It's called reciprocation, you're within your rights until you violate the rights of someone else. You know.....like you're trying to violate the rights of all law abiding gun owners.
I didn't say it did. Reread my link and try again. Leave Scilia's name out if you want and just assume the common definition of the word infringed changed over a 250 year period. Which definition would apply? The original or the current?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#5255 Jul 3, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>So it would be within the owner of a gun store const. rights to refuse sale of a gun to someone util they pass a test made up by the owner. Isn't that true?
your correct.

Store owner cancels Mark Kelly gun buy

By KEVIN ROBILLARD | 3/26/13 6:19 AM EDT

The owner of a gun store in Tucson, Ariz., has canceled Mark Kelly’s purchase of an AR-15 because the gun control advocate doesn’t plan on keeping the assault weapon.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/mark-ke...

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#5256 Jul 3, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>You are correct, the owner of a business has the right to refuse service. The government DOES NOT. The second amendment was to written to restrict private businessmen, it was written to restrict GOVERNMENT. I strongly suspect that any businessman who demands something that unreasonable as a prerequisite to doing business will be doing very little business at all while his competitors will be doing more than ever. It's called free enterprise. If I don't like the way someone does business, do I have the right to take my business elsewhere?
And here is a good example why he refused to sell the Pseudo Liberal Democrat.

Store owner cancels Mark Kelly gun buy

By KEVIN ROBILLARD | 3/26/13 6:19 AM EDT

The owner of a gun store in Tucson, Ariz., has canceled Mark Kelly’s purchase of an AR-15 because the gun control advocate doesn’t plan on keeping the assault weapon.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/mark-ke...
xando

United States

#5257 Jul 3, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text> Just try to FORCE me to show ID for a beer and see what happens.
What would happen?

In what scenario would you be "forced" to show ID?
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#5258 Jul 3, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>You are correct, the owner of a business has the right to refuse service. The government DOES NOT. The second amendment was to written to restrict private businessmen, it was written to restrict GOVERNMENT. I strongly suspect that any businessman who demands something that unreasonable as a prerequisite to doing business will be doing very little business at all while his competitors will be doing more than ever. It's called free enterprise. If I don't like the way someone does business, do I have the right to take my business elsewhere?
Very good. Now let's assume a new company starts up. An enormous retail gun chain owned only by a multi billionaire named Sam; lets call it Wal-Arms. Now let's suppose the owner's business model puts him in control of domestic as well as foreign wholesale purchases from all the gun mfgs. such that he buys and sells 90% of all LEGAL guns sold in the US.
Now lets suppose he installs a condition of purchase that requires all potential purchasers to take and pass a background check in order to purchase a gun.According to you, this would be within in "rights" to do. Is this correct?
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#5259 Jul 3, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, I don't read everything you post.....I skip over a lot of it. But since you asked...again....The erroneous decision of a judge or a court does not "make something constitutional". It may make it law temporarily but the error will eventually be corrected. Judge Scalia is not infallible, not even close. There are limits on our rights built into the constitution. It's called reciprocation, you're within your rights until you violate the rights of someone else. You know.....like you're trying to violate the rights of all law abiding gun owners.
I didn't say it did. Reread my link and try again. Leave Scilia's name out if you want and just assume the common definition of the word infringed changed over a 250 year period. Which definition would YOU say applied? The original or the current? Not a judge YOU.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#5260 Jul 3, 2013
Atomic Cafe wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, yes he does.
Doesn't, PaintChips.

And you don't have a right to touch a gun, if you d, I'll turn you into the front desk.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#5261 Jul 3, 2013
Atomic Cafe wrote:
My question is, why do liberals have to constantly name call during plain old conversation?
Why do you have to cry when someone throws back into your face what you are dishing out?

It makes you look like a real P*.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#5262 Jul 3, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Exactly the response one would expect from a scummy POS gutter-snipe like you.
Exactly the kind of response a spooge breath limp wristed fairy like yourself deserves to get, Shug.
statistic monger

Albuquerque, NM

#5263 Jul 3, 2013
xando wrote:
The mother of the Sandy Hook shooter was a gun-toting survivalist who home schooled.
Can't get much more "conservative."
Have you checked out the statistical accomplishments provided by the FBI? According to their statistics...the deaths by guns are a fraction of that when compared to that of deaths by...kicking to death...stabbing...blunt force trauma, vehicular homicide...the one that brings the most interest is the 'kicking to the head'...statistics...check it out....so you think that the most deaths occur because of a firearm? Uhh...wrong. It's the weapon of choice...whatever's handy....Now, as to the premeditated homicidal maniacs....they have no excuse...they deserve the death penalty. Period. Kill innocent Americans? Plan to kill innocent Americans? You die. We will find you..we will prosecute you...you will die. Period.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#5264 Jul 4, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>Very good. Now let's assume a new company starts up. An enormous retail gun chain owned only by a multi billionaire; lets call it Wal-Arms. Now let's suppose the owner's business model puts him in control of domestic as well as foreign wholesale purchases from all the gun mfgs. such that he buys and sells 90% of all LEGAL guns sold in the US.
Now lets suppose he installs a condition of purchase that requires all potential purchasers to take and pass a background check in order to purchase a gun.
Is this within in his "rights"?
That would be a monopoly and it is ILLEGAL so no he would not be within his rights. You see? there is the reciprocation thing again, you're within your rights until you violate the rights of someone else. Let's assume that all of the other venders of firearms file a class action law suit citing unfair business practices and put Wal Arms out of business. Remember free enterprise?

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#5265 Jul 4, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly the kind of response a spooge breath limp wristed fairy like yourself deserves to get, Shug.
Nah, you're just a scummy POS gutter-snipe and don't know any other way to communicate. Face it Twinkle Toes......you are what you are and you've established quite clearly that you are a nasty POS. Not my fault........you did to yourself.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#5266 Jul 4, 2013
xando wrote:
Can you name those policies?
<quoted text>
Liberal policies on sentencing, parole, and dealing with the criminally insane.

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.

Blanco Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News DMV experience a painful one (Oct '10) Wed Blinded by the ugly 86
Redburn tires Aug 11 Faker 2
News 'Thump junkie' Tommy Bolack preps for show (Jul '11) Aug 5 Livin Az 23
Goodbye OilfIeld and Coal Companies Aug 5 Inside Line 3
Barack Obama COUNTDOWN Clock 1000 days left & c... (Apr '14) Jul 25 Richies Cool Man ... 736
News County's justice system corrupt (Oct '10) Jul '17 the victim 52
News NM bill outlaws smoking in vehicles with kids (Feb '09) Jun '17 sadeyes982003 362

Blanco Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Blanco Mortgages