How about Kill the ones that kill. This will help with the numbers in the FSAQuote:
Originally Posted by Lowellhturner
Printable View
How about Kill the ones that kill. This will help with the numbers in the FSAQuote:
Originally Posted by Lowellhturner
But wouldn't further their agenda of disarming Americans....request denied.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big H trucking
A car decides on its own to kill. Never heard of banning cars when one was used to kill, just prosecute the one who used it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowellhturner
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger R61
LT believes "Christine" is the real deal.
It's shown that you don't have to have any "competency" to vote, so I'm not at all in favor of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by bwillaub
That is a general requirement in Europe. I could go with that much myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by bwillaub
How would you propose this? Some sort of phsycological test? I'm betting that the majority of our veterans couldn't pass a physcological test.Quote:
Originally Posted by no1son
1st question on the test....Have you ever been involved in a violent act involving a firearm? Answer....Yes. FAIL!
Most European systems test both competency with the firearm desired, generally acquired through training including at a firing range with rented units, and some sort of assurance of responsible behavior. In most cases military veterans are positively credited in those considerations for their service, with honorable military service being considered sufficient by itself in many places.
Cars don't decide to kill, but each is licensed and each operator is also licensed and limited to a particular level of vehicle and then in most places only after documented training, including having to carry a photo id during operation. It is far more difficult for plane pilots who must also be licensed and qualified for specific levels of aircraft. The qualifications are significantly higher for aircraft operation. The aircraft are subject to rigorous and regular inspections and can be ordered grounded and pilots can not only be removed from aircraft for violations of conditions, they are also subject to criminal prosecution for those violations just like car operators are.
I do not see all that much difference between either of them and firearms. No where in the Constitution are firearms for civilian use singled out for special consideration on their own anyway. It isn't there. That is a recent re-interpretation rejected by the Supreme Court for over 200 years and rejected in fact by the framers of the 2nd Amendment at the time it was written. It was proposed and debated at that time too, as were several other related proposals, but the purpose of the 2nd Amendment that was finally agreed upon and ratified was to protect the militias in the new States from being absorbed into the Federal government. There has always been some opposition to complete gun control, but it has been implemented multiple times in multiple ways all over the country, when it was felt to be needed both federally and state by state. Only now in recent years has the current Supreme Court reversed all previous rulings and that by only a scratch majority. It remains a shaky standard. The American people want some official control and in the past they have always been able to implement it, too,when they felt they needed it. We will just have to wait a bit to see how long this aberrant ruling lasts.
Well put AGAIN, No1son. Your logic and perception are good. As far as my OWN personal beliefs on "penalties" towards crime, will say it yet again. I BELIEVE in the DEATH PENALTY becoming MANDATORY for ANY murder not commited in direct SELF DEFENSE. Also DEATH for treason, rape, robbery, car jacking, kidnapping, arson, KNOWINGLY and DELIBERATELY polluting on a vast scale, KNOWINGLY and DELIBERATELY defrauding on a vast scale. Having or threatening to use a weapon (gun, knife, baseball bat) to commit a crime whether you actually USE it or not. There`s a couple others. Oh yeah, and no prison sentences longer than 10 yrs. If longer than 10 yrs, you are PUT TO DEATH. I do not believe in "warehousing" convicts at taxpayer expense. The ONLY 'proven" cure for most criminal behavior is DEATH, plus you have ZERO "repeat offenders, EVER. Can I make that any CLEARER?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowellhturner
Wow....
You forgot conspiracy. Since it only takes two witnesses to prove someone's guilt, I'm not all for your KILL everyone theory. Many people have been wrongly imprisoned and, dare I say, put to death because two people didn't like another.