UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (28) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: PucksFool Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 63307  
Subject: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 1:10 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
My thoughts are with teachers and students today.

I am shocked to the point of numbness.

PF
Print the post Back To Top
Author: intercst Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46790 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 2:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 7
I guess we are all soldiers (even children) in the fight to maintain unrestricted access to firearms.

intercst

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46791 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 6:46 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
"I guess we are all soldiers (even children) in the fight to maintain unrestricted access to firearms."

Same for drunk driving. How well did that work out for prohibition?


What is it, 40,000 to 50000 slaughtered on the roads each year, half of them by drunk drivers?

Lots of innocent kids, too...wiped out by 7th conviction DUI types who intercst and the libs will never put in jail, nor remove their driving licenses other than for a slap on the wrist and a promise to get 'treatment'.....

How about it intercst? First conviction drunk driving - six months suspension and car impounded......second conviction - driving priveleges taken away for life, not allowed to own or possess a car, and a year in jail.

Let's solve the drunk driving problem. The average kid on the street or growing up is a lot more likely to be killed by a DUI driver - and now a pot head high on weed in CO and WA and who knows what other states. Same thing. First conviction six months in jail. Second conviction you don't ever drive again or own a car. Simple.



t.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: intercst Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46792 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 7:46 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
telegraph ask,

How about it intercst? First conviction drunk driving - six months suspension and car impounded......second conviction - driving priveleges taken away for life, not allowed to own or possess a car, and a year in jail.


I don't have a problem with a stiff penalty (including jail time) for first-time drunk drivers, heck I'd do the same with people who drive while talking on their cellphone.

intercst

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MissEdithKeeler Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46793 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 7:51 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 13
Same for drunk driving. How well did that work out for prohibition?


What is it, 40,000 to 50000 slaughtered on the roads each year, half of them by drunk drivers?

Lots of innocent kids, too...wiped out by 7th conviction DUI types who intercst and the libs will never put in jail, nor remove their driving licenses other than for a slap on the wrist and a promise to get 'treatment'.....



This is SUCH a stupid argument, and I'm tired of hearing it.

Learn something. Maybe even read the MADD website, which notes that 211 children were killed by drunk drivers, more than half of them were riding with the drunk driver.
http://www.madd.org/statistics/


Your number of 40-50K people "slaughtered on the roads" is ridiculous. The number was around 11,000, per the New York Times, whose numbers I trust more than yours.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/18/friends-still-let-f...

26 people killed today. 12 in Aurora. 6 at the Sikh temple. 7 in Oakland. 2 in New York. 5 in Minneapolis. 3 in Milwaukee. These are just the nationally-publicizeds shootings. That's 61 people dead right there and doesn't include all of the additional people who were injured.
http://news.yahoo.com/tiimeline-major-shooting-incidents-uni...

There were MORE than 31,000 deaths in the US in 2009 involving firearms. Of those, 11,000 were homicides.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf

If you read the statistics, about as many people die in traffic accidents (not just drunk driving accidents) as die in gun-related deaths each year.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/acc-inj.htm

In 2007, 87% of all households in the US owned at least 1 vehicle.
http://hedgescompany.com/auto-mailing-lists-and-marketing

So that's over 100 million vehicles on US roads.

We have 270 MILLION registered firearms in the US. That's TWICE as many cars than we have?? And those are just the ones that are registered and doesn't include the number of unregistered guns out there.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/28/us-world-firearms-...

My dad was a hunter. He hunted ducks and quail and then later only used his guns for skeet and trap.

I will agree with you that most gun owners are reasonably responsible (of course, that guy that shot his 7 year old recently was probably a responsible gun owner too). But not everyone is (like whoever owned the gun that a toddler found here in Memphis just this week and shot herself).
http://www.wmctv.com/story/20310440/2-year-old-shot-while-po...

One of our Memphis police officers was shot and killed just today. He was the 5th cop this year to be killed in the line of duty in Memphis.

I'm a pretty staunch gun control advocate. But even I'm willing to say let's not even bad all guns. Let's start with limiting the number you can own. My dad had dozens, which was ridiculous. Most people I know don't own guns, so with 90 guns to every 100 Americans, some people out there has a SPITLOAD. Let's limit the number to 5 guns per person, with no automatic or semi automatic action, and require that any gun sold in the US had an appropriate trigger guard.

Let's up the sentences for gun-related crimes. Let's fill our prisons with people doing gun crimes, rather than petty drug crap. Anyone found with an unregistered gun in their possession faces prison time. Period.

Let's start with that. Let's just do something rather than just wring our hands and pray for peace. Let's do something rather than say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." Yeah, people kill people. With guns at least one out of three times. And people kill a lot of people with automatic and semiautomatic guns.

Let's do something, rather than say "well, Prohibition didn't work...."

I'm sick of hearing these stories about innocent people being killed when some whacko goes off his meds.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: ariechert Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46794 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 9:06 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"telegraph ask, How about it intercst? First conviction drunk driving - six months suspension and car impounded......second conviction - driving priveleges taken away for life, not allowed to own or possess a car, and a year in jail."
---------------------------------------
"I don't have a problem with a stiff penalty (including jail time) for first-time drunk drivers, heck I'd do the same with people who drive while talking on their cellphone." - intercst

---------------------------------------------


Since I don't drink alcohol it's easy for me to agree to the stiff penalties for drunk drivers; and since I no longer smoke pot that would be all right with me also, ( and for the record I was never a "pot head". I only smoked it like about 4 or 5 times in my entire life.)

Now I have talked on cell phones while driving. I don't think it's against the law in Tennessee? If I knew itw was against the law I wouldn't do it. I also don't text while driving - well to tell the truth I've never written a text in my life. That technology is completely beyond me.

But I only answer my cell phone like if I'm stopped and then I just talk very quickly and tell whomever I'm talking to that I'll talk to them later. My friend John likes to call me and just chat and he calls me a couple of times a week.

I hated my stepmother who was an alcoholic so I am predjudiced against drunks. I know what the problem is - they are addicted and it is very difficult to get unaddicted - and also alcohol removes one's inhibitions so the inhibition to drive while drinking is also disengaged so that goes right out the window. So I don't know what the answer is.

And by the way I have two loaded guns in the house, a 410 shotgun loaded with highbrass #4 shot and a 22 bolt action rifle loaded with shorts. We don't have kids in the house and I mostly use my guns to hunt squirrels.

Art

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: ariechert Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46795 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 9:13 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"heck I'd do the same with people who drive while talking on their cellphone." - intercst
------------------------------


I went and looked up the laws for cell phones while driving in Tennessee. I'll make more of an effort to avoid cell phone usage while driving..... regardless.

Art


"Except for novice drivers, there is no prohibition on cell phone use while driving in Tennessee. However, all Tennessee drivers are prohibited from texting."

http://www.drivinglaws.org/tenn.php

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46796 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 9:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Three the libs go again...gun control, confiscation, and penalties


MissEdith:"I'm a pretty staunch gun control advocate. But even I'm willing to say let's not even bad all guns. Let's start with limiting the number you can own. My dad had dozens, which was ridiculous."


Now, really, does it make any difference after the first one? If you own a nice self protection gun, like a Glock, a semi automatic, you can fire off more than a dozen rounds and a proficient trained or practiced shooter can reload in 3 seconds and begin again. So what if he has 24 more guns at home?

Your argument is silly.

Your father probably had some target shooting pistols, some shotguns, some deer hunting guns, and self defense guns, some guns for duck hunting or bird hunting...maybe some 'collectibe' ones from way back when that used black powder. So what?

-------


-



MissEdith:" Most people I know don't own guns, so with 90 guns to every 100 Americans, some people out there has a SPITLOAD."

And some people own no cars and won't kill anyone by driving drunk, and others own 5 cars. Heck, with your lib arguments, you'd tell folks that because of global warming they can only have one car per person. Period. No one can have more than one. Right?

And of course, folks have target pistols, self defense pistols, shotguns, rifles, and maybe antique guns or ones they used during the war? Maybe they are a collector just like car collectors?

Why do you always go after the LEGAL gun owners? What's the deal? You got 'gun fright'?

-------




MissEdith:" Let's limit the number to 5 guns per person, with no automatic or semi automatic action, and require that any gun sold in the US had an appropriate trigger guard."

And why? There's no kids in my house. Why should I have to lock up the gun with a trigger lock, so it takes me ten seconds to defend myself and then I'm dead? or maybe my spouse is, if i had one?

And , let's limit cars to 1 per person. same for everything else that is dangerous. we could start with dogs. They bite people. Give them rabies!.....cause massive injuries to people. One dog per person. One cat per person! let's go nuts regulating things. Oh, and no more than one bottle of booze in your house, and no more than a six pack to limit drunk driving!......think of all those millions of bottles of booze causing domestic violence and drunk driving!..

you libs give me indigestion!


--------



MissEdith:"Let's up the sentences for gun-related crimes. Let's fill our prisons with people doing gun crimes,'

That's exactly the right answer. We turn lose perps in big cities for 3 timre armed robbery with 3 weeks in jail, and half of that off for good behavior. Some robbers have rap sheets 10 pages long and never seem to do time or stay in jail. Most criminals CANNOT own guns.....but get them anyway, and we don't punish them much.

when the feds got together to do zero tolerance enforcement in cities around the country, gun related crime plummeted to record lows. No plea bargains. The perps went to jail or fed prison. That's what is needed everywhere instead of bleeding heart libs setting them free time and time again.

And you'll find that half of gun crime is drug related. Gang and drug related in the cities.

They have gun control in England. The only ones now with guns are the criminals and drug gangs and they are running amok. There are thousands of robberies a week where the homeowners are stabbed and killed with KNIVES by gangs and the homeowners are defenseless. They target the elderly. Yeah..the police get there to find the dead bodies and dying elderly after they've been stabbed, clubbed over the head with iron bars.....maybe days later.....

If you don't want to own a gun, fine. I don't have booze in my house either. But don't stop others from using their second amendment rights.

t.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: PucksFool Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46797 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 9:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
I am sickend by this.

I taught for 37 years. I began my career at a Job Corp Center. It was a transformative experience for me. I always hoped it was for the students too. But violence among 16-21 year-old high school dropouts was not uncommon. One day two of my better students brought their problem into my room, and I stepped in-between them. I got hit in the shoulder. Instantly the fight was over. They knew if I picked up the phone and called security they were gone. I didn't. They stayed and graduated. We all learned a lesson.

15 years later, after changing to elementary education, I taught for a principal who believed in being proactive. While other schools were doing the normal fire and severe weather drills, he had us doing earthquake and intruder drills. He was a M*A*S*H fan; if w heard " Mr.O'Riely report to the office." come over the intercom, we knew to lock the doors, close the blinds, and get the kids into a corner of the room and quiet. All the teachers thought he was a bit of a worrywart/ And then there was Columbine. And then there was Jonesville. And by the time I retired, I'm sorry to say, I lost track.

I want today to have never happened. I'm sure the children, teachers, and parents of Newton, CT feel the same. Unfortunately, it's just pretty to think so.

PF

Print the post Back To Top
Author: salaryguru Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46799 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 10:49 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
I blame all of you for making me take tele off of ignore so I could see what strange parallels he tried to draw between drunk driving and gun violence.

So . . . Here's what I read:
Same for drunk driving. How well did that work out for prohibition?


Prohibition did not work out well, and I suspect that an attempt to outlaw guns would work out equally poorly . . . or worse.

But although we no longer have prohibition, we do have strict laws about drinking and driving. You may feel like they are not enforced sufficiently, but they exist. We also charge high license fees and apply strict regulations to establishments that sell and dispense alcohol.

In addition, we have fairly rigid requirements for being allowed to drive. I believe all states require that applicants pass a test. Further, cars are all required to be licensed and to pay an annual fee to be allowed on the road. Most states even require periodic safety and pollution tests for all cars. There is a readily accessible data base of all drivers and all legal automobiles that allows law enforcement officials to identify a driver or car and their associated records in a matter of minutes.

Let's start there for guns and gun ownership. Shall we? Require training and passing a test to become a gun owner. License all guns and track ownership. Require registration fees be paid on all guns every year.

What is it, 40,000 to 50000 slaughtered on the roads each year, half of them by drunk drivers?

This is a classic tele statement. Not only is the number completely made up and wrong, but it points to an issue where the gun nuts tend to be completely inconsistent. If there is an accident anywhere in America and one of the drivers is found to have elevated alcohol content in their blood, the accident and any injuries or deaths associate with it are officially identified as caused by alcohol. That is clearly not always true, but that's the way we record statistics. On the other hand, when someone takes a gun and opens fire killing other people, the first thing we hear from the gun nuts is, "Guns don't kill people. People kill people."

Maybe as a second step, we should try being more consistent and accurate about both types of incidents.

Lots of innocent kids, too...wiped out by 7th conviction DUI types who intercst and the libs will never put in jail, nor remove their driving licenses other than for a slap on the wrist and a promise to get 'treatment'.....

This is just tele fantasy. I don't know of anybody - liberal or conservative - who has ever advocated allowing multiple DUI offenders to continue driving. I'm sure there is someone, somewhere who has advocated such a thing, but I've never met them or heard them propose such nonsense. And I would certainly be surprised if we could round up more than a dozen such people if we would find them to be predominantly liberal. Until tele provides some evidence for such a claim, I will simply assume it's another case of him needing a plexiotomy.

How about it intercst? First conviction drunk driving - six months suspension and car impounded......second conviction - driving priveleges taken away for life, not allowed to own or possess a car, and a year in jail. 

Let's solve the drunk driving problem. . .


Go for it. It might help if you understood the problem first, and I think you are incredibly naïve if you think you can achieve that goal simply by requiring steeper penalties. One of the things that some researchers have noted is that when the penalties get too steep, law enforcement officials can become reluctant to arrest. No one wants to ruin the life of a good person for having a bad day. Most experts think the road to safer highways is through better education and training. Social pressure, not fear of arrest, is ultimately more effective. In fact, they will point to improvements in traffic safety that have come through such efforts. Too bad we can't approach the gun violence issue in the same way because of the fanatic gun nuts. Instead, we have to pretend that guns have nothing to do with gun violence and watch our children and others be gunned down by people carrying multiple guns capable of rapid fire and high ammunition capacity.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: MissEdithKeeler Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46800 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 10:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 21
They have gun control in England. The only ones now with guns are the criminals and drug gangs and they are running amok. There are thousands of robberies a week where the homeowners are stabbed and killed with KNIVES by gangs and the homeowners are defenseless. They target the elderly. Yeah..the police get there to find the dead bodies and dying elderly after they've been stabbed, clubbed over the head with iron bars.....maybe days later.....



Check out the statistics on firearm related deaths in various countries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-re...

9 firearm related deaths per 100,000 people in the US. 2.98 firearm related homicides in the US.
.22 firearm related deaths per 100,000 people in the UK. .03 firearm related homicides.

Check out the homicide rates by country:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentiona...

4.2 homicides per 100,000 people in the US
1.2 homicides per 100,000 people in the UK.

Your argument is unsupported by the actual facts. You insinuate there are just as many murders in the UK as there are in the US, only by means other than guns. Simply isn't true.

And , let's limit cars to 1 per person. same for everything else that is dangerous. we could start with dogs. They bite people. Give them rabies!.....cause massive injuries to people. One dog per person. One cat per person! let's go nuts regulating things. Oh, and no more than one bottle of booze in your house, and no more than a six pack to limit drunk driving!......think of all those millions of bottles of booze causing domestic violence and drunk driving!..



Seriously dude? This is the argument you're making? First of all, a lot of municipalities do have ordinances which set the number of pets you're able to have. Where I used to live, it was 4 pets per household. You have to register your pets, make sure they have rabies shots, etc. You know, so they don't spread rabies, which can hurt people. If your dog bites someone, you may have to surrender it because it hurt people. So we regulate pets, which have the capacity to hurt people, but in most cases, do not. But you're not allowed to own a lion, right? You're not allowed to keep a tiger in your backyard.

We regulate booze. A lot of places you can't buy it on Sunday, or after a certain time of day. There are regulations governing the alcohol content of booze. Booze is taxed heavily. Do some people drink and drive? Yes. The majority of people enjoy alcohol fairly responsibly. But 190 proof and even 151 proof alcohol is not available everywhere--there are regulations prohibiting it.

Guns are specifically designed to hurt people and animals. Sure, they can be used for target practice, skeet shooting, etc. And there are certainly regulations that govern guns. And I know that a lot of gun owners are very responsible. And again, I'm not personally advocating that all guns in the US be banned. First of all, I'm smart enough to know that will NEVER happen, and second, I do recognize that sportsmen use guns, etc. But do we need so many? How hard is it to understand the simple argument that fewer guns mean fewer gun accidents? Fewer gun murders? Ban automatics and semi automatics, and maybe the whacko at least has to work a little harder to get a hold of one before he can go out and shoot someone.

I don't understand how someone can see the news today and not want to try to do SOMETHING to make it a little more difficult for the next crazy dude to take guns into a school or a crowded theater or a mall to kill innocent people.

But I also know there's no point in arguing with you about it. You will continue to believe things that simply are untrue, and I suppose that I'm one of those horrible liberals who believes that you have every right to continue to be as stupid as you want to be.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: CountUpp Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46801 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 11:23 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
And by the way I have two loaded guns in the house, a 410 shotgun loaded with highbrass #4 shot and a 22 bolt action rifle loaded with shorts. We don't have kids in the house and I mostly use my guns to hunt squirrels.

Art


Not the best for home defense. A 12 gauge would be better than the 410.

22 shorts aren't much better than bb's. Even on squirrels.

Count Upp

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lindytoes Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46802 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 11:40 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
And by the way I have two loaded guns in the house, a 410 shotgun loaded with highbrass #4 shot and a 22 bolt action rifle loaded with shorts. We don't have kids in the house and I mostly use my guns to hunt squirrels. Art

Not the best for home defense. A 12 gauge would be better than the 410.
22 shorts aren't much better than bb's. Even on squirrels.
Count Upp
----------------------
I doubt seriously that Art has those guns for home defense. I've never heard him express his need for a gun for defense. In fact, given that he moves real slow now, I doubt he could get his gun and use it against a home invasion.

He likes guns and he shoots squirrels. EOS.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46803 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 11:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
SG" But although we no longer have prohibition, we do have strict laws about drinking and driving."


YOu wouldn't know it from the deaths on the road. Here , two Cowboys decided to party hardy - one is dead, the other in jail for Intoxication Manslaugher"

Tell me about the 10,000 killed - even though you think we have strict laws. In many places, there are folks driving after SEVEN convictions, never having spent a week in jail. They even drive without a license while theirs is suspended. NO one is going to take their car because, well, they 'need' it'.

-------------

SG:" You may feel like they are not enforced sufficiently, but they exist."

Tell that to the family of the dead Dalls Cowboy and the other 10,000 killed each year in drunk driving accidents.

-----------

G: We also charge high license fees and apply strict regulations to establishments that sell and dispense alcohol."

Does that stop teenagers from drinking? You don'[t think they drink on campus? you don't think they drink in frat houses? Gimme a break.

Half the teenagers in this country have bogus drivers licenses to get into drinking establishments or buy beer.

----------

SG:"In addition, we have fairly rigid requirements for being allowed to drive."

Yeah...rush the border, escape the border patrol, and in CA, you are issued a drivers license. Got it. Don't even need to speak English.


---------
SG: I believe all states require that applicants pass a test."

Yeah..I passed one almost 50 years ago. SOme states are easy. Some are a bit harder.

I don't recall anywhere on the test they check to see if you've been texting or 'have been under the influence'. hair follicle test? Gimme a break.

Driving while sober is a lot different than driving while drunk. I'd bet all those 'drunk drivers' passed their test. So?

Didn't stop drunk driving , did it?

---------



SG": Further, cars are all required to be licensed and to pay an annual fee to be allowed on the road.:

Heh heh..in TX half the cars are uninsured and 25% are probably unregistered or have phony plates on them.

That also hasn't stopped drunk driving accidents, has it?

It's not 'cars that kill' but drunk or deranged people who drive them! Got it? People kill, cars don't.

Other than Christine (the car in the movie) I don't know of any car that has gone out and killed anyone. Same for a gun. Please let me know if you know of a deranged gun going out and shooting someone.

------------



SG" There is a readily accessible data base of all drivers and all legal automobiles that allows law enforcement officials to identify a driver or car and their associated records in a matter of minutes."

Yeah...after the death by DUI. Great going, Watson. tell that to the family of the dead Cowboy and the other 10,000 victims a year of drunk driving.

And I'm sure the police aren't checking your garage and you at every turn to find out who you are and where you are driving.....right?

Nor do they limit how many cars you have, or where you can drive them.

YOu can own a 1000 HP race car that is 'street legal' and do 0 to 100 in 8 seconds if you want......right? Or a 10,000 behemoth mega SUV that is 10 feet tall and 8 feet wide? Or maybe a 30,000 lb motorhome 40 feet long?

Despite all your 'inspection, registration, control'....we still kill 10,000 plus in drunk driving accidents a year......and it doesn't matter if you are killed by a licensed driver in a licensed car with a drunk driver or unlicensed driver in unregistered car, does it? You're just as dead.

-------



--------

SG:"Let's start there for guns and gun ownership. Shall we? Require training and passing a test to become a gun owner. License all guns and track ownership. Require registration fees be paid on all guns every year."

That is exactly how gun confiscation has been done in every country in the world. Register ever gun and gun owner. Then confiscate them or tax them out of existence. Oh, it's only $50 a gun a year..>Oh, the gov't needs money. Now it is $100 a gun a year. THen 250 a year.

Silly, the criminals won't pay any gun registration fees. M ost of them legally can't own a gun!......Now will they take gun classes.

Maybe we should make gun safety part of every HIGH SCHOOL curriculum? You know, when I was a kid, every Boy Scout had to learn firearms safety. Mandatory. ANd every kid in my town was a scout. We didn't have a lib weenies there. There was a shooting range UNDER the elementary school in the basement. My dad was an NRA instructor.

You think that would solve anything? Any kid could get the computer program and master the gun safety deal in 30 minutes. Learn it on line, take the simulated test on line, and pass with flying colors. Get his gun license when he got his drivers license .....

whoopie do....oh, you want to make it impossible to get a gun license? We got your number. Got to jump through 27 hoops. Get your fingerprints registered and leave DNA behind. Get 97 references and file them. Pull up your juvie history file - if you missed class - tough luck. Check your Facebook page. I got it...... and then of course, the $500 fee to get a license, the $100 annual fee to keep your license, the $250 per gun to keep a gun.......

Sorry, I don't buy into your story.

Remember, this kid who went bonkers likely could have passed any test like a drivers license test. oh? YOu now want more tests? Gotta pass a six hour psychological test? Well, that's going to cost $2500 for the doc.....and we'll add overhead and now it is $4000 to apply for your gun permit. Gotcha!......

Where does it stop? With libs, it is when NO ONE qualities to own a gun. Oh, you live near a school? Sorry, you can't own a gun! (even no it's only a 5 minute drive to the next one).....

It never ends!.....

I don't buy into it.

ONce you start gun 'control' your way, it's like taxes...they never go down..and gun control always ratchets up till you have no guns at all.


t.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: ariechert Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46804 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 11:51 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Guns are specifically designed to hurt people and animals." - MissEdithKeeler


Yep, that's kind of the idea. I like killing animals and eating them. A lot. I'm also guessing you don't and you are a vegetarian? No killing and eating animals? You know they use a captive bolt to stun cows on the kill floor of abattoirs before slitting their throats to let the blood drain out? In chicken processing plants they use electricity to stun chickens before slicing their throats open with rotating knives to let them bleed out?

Also by your comment I'm guessing you are against using guns to protect yourself in your own house against armed intruders? If so that is your prerogative but there are those of us who would protect our families and ourselves with guns.

I have been shooting and using guns my whole life. I am an excellent shot. I'm talking I can hit a dime at 30 yards with my 22 rifle.

Different kinds of guns are used for different kinds of hunting. You are right, handguns are made primarily to shoot people. They aren't much use in hunting. It is a lot more difficult to aim a handgun. I still would like to own one. I'd like a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun. My rationalization for the handgun is home protection but more honestly - I just like shooting stuff.

If I had the money I'd buy a whole lot more guns.

Art

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46805 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 11:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
MissEdith:"How hard is it to understand the simple argument that fewer guns mean fewer gun accidents? Fewer gun murders? Ban automatics and semi automatics, and maybe the whacko at least has to work a little harder to get a hold of one before he can go out and shoot someone. "


Really, you forgot the part where it takes only one gun owned by a crazy nutcase to kill someone. If he has 25 at home, your simple argument falls apart, right?

ANd, of course, fewer cars means fewer accidents and drunk driving deaths! Your argument is silly!

Nearly all guns owned today are semi automatic. Just like you likely drive an AUTOMATIC (perish the thought) transmission car!.......and no, you just take along a six shot revolver and fast loader.......(which isn't a semi automatic). .....

And likely , your 'whacko' could have passed any gun test......and, just like you can buy pot in any town in the country, for $50 or $100 or $200 , you can buy yourself a cheap semi-auto pistol in any town in this country 'on the streets'.....if you can't keep out a million pounds of pot each year, what makes you think you could keep out tens of thousands of 1 lb guns?

We'll find out where this whacko got his guns.....and can go from there.


HEck, remember it was Obama and his drones that flooded Mexico with illegal FULLY automatic weapons...where there is ONLY one legal gun store in all of Mexico..and 50,000 people were killed by gun violence last year. Tell me how well gun registration and control works in Mexico. please!........private citizens can't own guns there. They are being slaughtered by the thousands.

Most of your gun violence here is drug related...look at Chicago....gangs and drugs....drugs and gangs.......solve one
problem you solve the other.



t.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: ariechert Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46806 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 11:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Not the best for home defense. A 12 gauge would be better than the 410. 22 shorts aren't much better than bb's. Even on squirrels." -
Count Upp

-----------------


Not the way I shoot. Ask Lindytoes. <grin>

The other day I was watching Burn Notice on the USA channel with my wife. People were shooting guns all over the place and no one was getting hit and dying! I was flabbergasted. I told my wife that if I was there shooting there'd be dead people all over the place. Seriously if I can hit a squirrel's head at 30 yards while it's scampering around how difficult can it be to hit a human in the chest area at the same or less distance?

Those people on those shows are the worst shots in the world!

Artie

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ariechert Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46807 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/14/2012 11:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"In fact, given that he moves real slow now, I doubt he could get his gun and use it against a home invasion. He likes guns and he shoots squirrels. EOS." - Lindytoes


The 410 is loaded with high brass #4 shot. It would put a hurting on someone pretty bad.

By the way, I'm thinking about buying some more guns. I'd also like a 17 HMR rifle, a 20 gauge shotgun, and a 9 mm semi-automatic pistol.

Art

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46808 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/15/2012 12:05 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
""Guns are specifically designed to hurt people and animals." - MissEdithKeeler"



Actually, guns are made to KILL animals, birds, snakes, and other things.

if it weren't for hunting, millions of deer would starve to death each year. YOu need hunting for animal population control. Already we kill thousands and thousands in collisions with deer.

in the past 3 months, 3 of my friends have been involved in collisions with deer!.....one got me about 4 years ago in MO...did $1500 damage to my car.......

a lot of low income folks count on getting that deer to help their food situation and feed their kids.

That's exactly what hunting guns are for!.......and for protection. when the big bear is breaking down your cabin door.....you don't call for 9--1-1 to send a ranger out in 3 hours to find your dead body. well, maybe you do since you won't own a gun.

And ....nearly 99.99% of the time, just having a gun is enough to scare off a potential burglar or perp. They don't stick around when they see a gun or know you have one.

t.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lindytoes Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46809 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/15/2012 12:10 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
salaryguru: I blame all of you for making me take tele off of ignore so I could see what strange parallels he tried to draw between drunk driving and gun violence.
.........
Until tele provides some evidence for such a claim, I will simply assume it's another case of him needing a plexiotomy.


Hey! Don't blame me! I have no idea what he's ranting about now but I'm sure he has said it here about 10,000 times.

And thanks for the urban dictionary lesson (which I didn't know literally existed online)
Plexiotomy
Having a piece of plexiglass inserted into ones abdomen to make seeing the world possible due to the head being that far up one's aSS.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Plexiotomy

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lindytoes Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46810 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/15/2012 12:15 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The 410 is loaded with high brass #4 shot. It would put a hurting on someone pretty bad.

By the way, I'm thinking about buying some more guns. I'd also like a 17 HMR rifle, a 20 gauge shotgun, and a 9 mm semi-automatic pistol.

Art

----------

Don't do that. What's the use? You've got two guns. Enough is enough.

Save that money for a root canal. I had to pay $1350 on the spot for mine this week. They file insurance but they don't intend to wait for the money for months. I get to wait for whatever piddly bit MetLife is going to send me.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ariechert Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46811 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/15/2012 12:29 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"Save that money for a root canal. I had to pay $1350 on the spot for mine this week. They file insurance but they don't intend to wait for the money for months. I get to wait for whatever piddly bit MetLife is going to send me." - lindytoes


yeah but guns are so beautiful! Works of Art. There's a gun show in Murfreesboro this weekend. Maybe I should go to it? Take a few hundred out of the bank and buy me a Ruger 10-22? <grin!>

By the way a Ruger 10-22 is a semi-automatic .22 rifle and I want one.

This is Tennessee by God!

Art

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MissEdithKeeler Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46812 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/15/2012 12:47 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
Actually, guns are made to KILL animals, birds, snakes, and other things.

if it weren't for hunting, millions of deer would starve to death each year. YOu need hunting for animal population control. Already we kill thousands and thousands in collisions with deer.

in the past 3 months, 3 of my friends have been involved in collisions with deer!.....one got me about 4 years ago in MO...did $1500 damage to my car.......

a lot of low income folks count on getting that deer to help their food situation and feed their kids.



Please work on your reading comprehension. You're arguing with yourself. At what point did I say "ban all guns?" At what point did I say "People shouldn't hunt?" What point is it that you are trying to make?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: salaryguru Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46813 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/15/2012 1:05 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Those people on those shows are the worst shots in the world!

Only until the last five minutes of the show. The stars always become very good shots in the last five minutes.

Seriously though, you might find that your aim isn't as good if your targets were shooting back at you. At least that's what police statistics show:

http://faculty.ncwc.edu/mstevens/205/205lect02a.htm

However, there seems to be a consensus among practitioners and researchers alike that police marksmanship in real-life (scene of a crime) situations is less than desirable, something along the order of one hit for every six shots (Morrison 2002). This means that in gunfighting with actual criminals, the average police officer effectiveness is at the level of 17% proficiency. This is much less, as you will have noticed, than the 84% proficiency level required for qualification in police training. It also illustrates the problem, that real-life situations are so vastly different from training situations.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46815 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/15/2012 8:50 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
lindylib thinks she knows it all:"Don't do that. What's the use? You've got two guns. Enough is enough."

Bet she has more than 2 of things. Like pots and pans. Heck, you only need two pots and two pans. THe rest should be redistributed to the poor folks around the world who have none!

------



lindylib:"Save that money for a root canal. I had to pay $1350 on the spot for mine this week."


Yeah, if you spent more time brushing, not drinking Colas and flossing, you probably wouldn't need expensive root canals....


lindylib:" They file insurance but they don't intend to wait for the money for months."


Be happy you have insurance.


Lindylib:" I get to wait for whatever piddly bit MetLife is going to send me. "

Hey, you could have gotten yourself a 'full coverage' policy, right? You choose not to. Most people have to pay out of pocket for dental care.

BE happy modern medicine allows you to get one. 100 years ago they would have simply yanked your tooth. So over the last 0.00001% of yeras of humans on the planet, you're in that small percent that has the technology to 'save teeth'.


t.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46816 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/15/2012 8:54 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"At what point did I say "ban all guns?" At what point did I say "People shouldn't hunt?" What point is it that you are trying to make? "


When folks demand gun registration - that leads quickly to gun confiscation. Country after country.

And, your statement that 'guns injure animals'...oh, bleeding heart lib. A good hunter KILLS the animal instantly. Dead. Meat on the table.

Sorry, your statement that 'guns injure animals'.....like a 3rd grader!......

And of course, your statement that you only need 'a gun'.....

and the rants about 'automatics' when it is illegal now to own one without and expensive hard to get federal permit?


t.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ariechert Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46818 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/15/2012 12:37 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
"And, your statement that 'guns injure animals'...oh, bleeding heart lib. A good hunter KILLS the animal instantly. Dead. Meat on the table." - tele


I shot a squirrel through the eye the other day. <grin!> I always aim for the head or the shoulder. And yes I eat them.

First I cut off the feet and head and then I skin them by making an incision through the skin on the back and then take my fingers on both hands and pulling opposite ways pull the skin off the squirrel. Then I gut them and then rinse them off real good. It's best to leave them set in the fridge for a few days so they have time to go through rigor mortis.

Then I cut them up into pieces and fry them in bacon fat and then salt and pepper them. I don't usually dip them in flour before frying.

Yepper, squirrels are delicious!

Art

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ariechert Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 46819 of 63307
Subject: Re: Connecticut Date: 12/15/2012 12:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
I have my bolt action Marlin 22 sighted in (Simmons 4 X 9 Scope) to where I can hit a dime at 30 yards.

Art

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (28) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement