If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Giving photogs a bad name?
On 5/28/14 PDT, 7:24 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
A problem with any "fix" is that it has to pass Supreme Court muster, and the Court has been taking a dim view of any deprivation of rights that does not involve at least a judge and usually a jury. If you are going to disarm someone because he is crazy you are going to have to define "crazy" in a way that the courts will accept and put a procedure in place for making the determination that the courts will accept. A very good point, and critical. Anyone with a solution— or a reasoned rebuttal? -- John McWilliams |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Giving photogs a bad name?
On 5/29/2014 12:48 PM, John McWilliams wrote:
On 5/28/14 PDT, 7:24 PM, J. Clarke wrote: A problem with any "fix" is that it has to pass Supreme Court muster, and the Court has been taking a dim view of any deprivation of rights that does not involve at least a judge and usually a jury. If you are going to disarm someone because he is crazy you are going to have to define "crazy" in a way that the courts will accept and put a procedure in place for making the determination that the courts will accept. A very good point, and critical. Anyone with a solution— or a reasoned rebuttal? What some courts will accept may depend on who you are. Nobody can say, with certainty, what definition any court will accept, on any given day. Having said that, we need not use the term "crazy." Just a person, who is more likely than not, constitute a danger to himself, or others, as a starting point. It is easy to write a definition. The problem is writing one that the NRA won't oppose. As an industry lobbying group the NRA places money above human lives. -- PeterN |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Giving photogs a bad name?
On 5/29/2014 5:17 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Thu, 29 May 2014 16:20:00 -0400, PeterN wrote: On 5/29/2014 12:48 PM, John McWilliams wrote: On 5/28/14 PDT, 7:24 PM, J. Clarke wrote: A problem with any "fix" is that it has to pass Supreme Court muster, and the Court has been taking a dim view of any deprivation of rights that does not involve at least a judge and usually a jury. If you are going to disarm someone because he is crazy you are going to have to define "crazy" in a way that the courts will accept and put a procedure in place for making the determination that the courts will accept. A very good point, and critical. Anyone with a solution— or a reasoned rebuttal? What some courts will accept may depend on who you are. Nobody can say, with certainty, what definition any court will accept, on any given day. Having said that, we need not use the term "crazy." Just a person, who is more likely than not, constitute a danger to himself, or others, as a starting point. It is easy to write a definition. The problem is writing one that the NRA won't oppose. As an industry lobbying group the NRA places money above human lives. Florida has the Florida Mental Health Act of 1971, commonly known as the Baker Act, that allows involuntary confinement for mental health screening. A person can be held up to 72 hours if suspected to have a mental illness that would result in a danger to that person or others. So far, Marion Hammer has not been taken into custody by way of the Baker Act although she presents a clear and present danger to Floridians. http://www.meetthenra.org/nra-member/Marion-P-Hammer Most States have a similar act. That's where I got the language from -- PeterN |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Giving photogs a bad name?
In article ,
says... On Wed, 28 May 2014 22:26:09 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 28 May 2014 13:51:55 -0400, PeterN wrote: On 5/28/2014 2:04 AM, Tony Cooper wrote: On Tue, 27 May 2014 21:49:59 -0700, Savageduck wrote: ...and at this time I believe any substantive Constitutional change to the Second Amendment is just wishful thinking. There are very philosophically opposite sectors of the public involved here and I seriously doubt that there will be a meeting of minds to fix the real problem of gun violence and unnecessary deaths and injuries. That is a completely different issue to the right to bear arms and the Second Amendment. That said, no way am I giving up my guns!! I'm an advocate of gun control, but I don't harbor any desire or hopes of a change in the Constitution or the Second Amendment. Nor do I wish to take away your guns. There are some who think that gun control advocates want to confiscate all the guns, and some who think that anyone who owns a gun and hasn't shot and killed someone is just a person who hasn't had a chance. I don't think either is the case with the majority of either group. That thought is implanted through a campaign of disinformation, sponsored by the NRA. Exactly. Case in point: Ted Nugent. He threatened the president's life, and nobody took his weapons. If ever they had a case, that was it. And they left him alone. The NRA, who once fought for gun control in the 60s, has sunk to levels that are incredibly low. What "gun control" did the NRA "fight for"? When the Black Panthers were armng, the NRA tried to limit their acquisitions. The NRA is nothing more than a collection of insane hyprocites now. It's a shame what that organization has degenerated into, really. Here's a couple of links: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...f-guns/308608/ http://www.theroot.com/articles/poli...ip_flop. html For the NRA, black people with guns is bad, white people with guns is good. They are a joke. I don't see any evidence in either of those articles that the NRA actually "supported" anything. There are vague assertions and one statement that the NRA supported banning mail-order sales. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Giving photogs a bad name?
|
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Giving photogs a bad name?
On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 7:09:52 PM UTC-4, Bowser wrote:
On Tue, 27 May 2014 16:13:05 -0400, "PAS" wrote: Someone might convince me of the gun grab. What the administration is doing is unprecedented. Pressuring banks to not provide service to gun dealers? .. Pressuring banks? Really? First I've heard that one. Can you point me to an article on it? I've not heard it before either, so I took a quick look. I only found the usual fringe lunatic claims; nothing from any source that I'd consider credible, let alone objectively authoritative. Anyone else find anything tangibly real to support this allegation? -hh |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Giving photogs a bad name?
On Fri, 30 May 2014 05:12:34 -0700 (PDT), -hh
wrote: On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 7:09:52 PM UTC-4, Bowser wrote: On Tue, 27 May 2014 16:13:05 -0400, "PAS" wrote: Someone might convince me of the gun grab. What the administration is doing is unprecedented. Pressuring banks to not provide service to gun dealers? .. Pressuring banks? Really? First I've heard that one. Can you point me to an article on it? I've not heard it before either, so I took a quick look. I only found the usual fringe lunatic claims; nothing from any source that I'd consider credible, let alone objectively authoritative. Anyone else find anything tangibly real to support this allegation? -hh I looked, as well. And the "official" statement from the NRA says they have no evidence of such a program. As usual, just more internet bull****. "And I leave behind This hurricane of ****ing lies" Green Day |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Giving photogs a bad name?
"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
... On Wed, 28 May 2014 20:27:05 -0700, Savageduck wrote: If you want to define "reasonable precautions" at a level achievable to a normal person with a modest income, and prosecute anybody who failed to take those precautions that's one thing, but prosecuting anybody whose firearms are stolen no matter what precautions they took is ludicrous. A gun owner SHOULD have the responsibility to reasonably secure any of his weapons not directly under his/her control. All of my weapons are in a safe, with the exception of my Kimber CDP 1911, which I will just say is readily at hand. The concept of prosecution of a firearms owner for theft of his guns was Tony's not mine. That said, the gun owner should be able to demonstrate that they had taken reasonable precautions to deter, or prevent any such weapons theft. In not there is a responsibility for them to bear. What are the options other than prosecution? If you feel that the gun owner should take responsibility, but the gun owner doesn't, then what options are there other than prosecution? If you leave your car in the street and someone steals it and then runs down a pedestrian, you should be prosecuted for criminal negligence. MY handgun is locked in a safe and in a locked home. Someone can still break into my home and break into my safe and steal my handgun if they want to. I should be prosecuted if this happens? |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Giving photogs a bad name?
"-hh" wrote in message
... On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 7:09:52 PM UTC-4, Bowser wrote: On Tue, 27 May 2014 16:13:05 -0400, "PAS" wrote: Someone might convince me of the gun grab. What the administration is doing is unprecedented. Pressuring banks to not provide service to gun dealers? .. Pressuring banks? Really? First I've heard that one. Can you point me to an article on it? I've not heard it before either, so I took a quick look. I only found the usual fringe lunatic claims; nothing from any source that I'd consider credible, let alone objectively authoritative. Anyone else find anything tangibly real to support this allegation? -hh To clarify what you posted, the accounts of businesses who have their accounts terminated are "the usual fringe lunatic claims"? Just checking. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Giving photogs a bad name? | Eric Stevens | Digital Photography | 9 | May 20th 14 12:43 AM |
Giving photogs a bad name? | Savageduck[_3_] | Digital Photography | 4 | May 18th 14 09:30 PM |
Giving up. | Pablo | Digital Photography | 56 | November 7th 12 02:50 PM |
Giving up | Badasghan Lukacina | APS Photographic Equipment | 0 | August 22nd 04 09:11 AM |
Giving up | Beneactiney Redgrave | Film & Labs | 0 | August 21st 04 10:59 PM |