Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I disapprove of selling guns to criminals regardless of whether their background is checked.
We had a cop here give one to a felon in exchange for fixing his car. My feeling is that it's too late to close the barn door. There are so many guns on the street.
I do wish we had better background checks though. My brother in law is a person who should not be carrying, but it is his legal right to do so. And he does. He's brandished his weapon publicly while stoned out of his gourd on morphine.
When he got out of jail, they gave him back his gun. No legal recourse to do otherwise.
He was held on a legal 2000 (mental health hold) and still carries.
Well, the incident in Santa Barbara was pretty chilling.
The guy's parents and mental health professionals contacted the cops, but since he was "nice" they didn't look at his arsenal or his manifesto. He bought those guns legally, even though he was diagnosed with severe mental illness.
I'm not into banning guns, but the background check system we have now isn't working.
It isn't working because the mentally ill are not being put into the database. Wonder why?
It is because of bleeding heart liberals who helped do away with mental institutions, and the ACLU that somehow think divulging their mental illness is a violation of their civil rights/privacy.
As to your reply to my question as to why the OP used the term illegal, posting a sign on private property is not a law, therefore it was not illegal. Even if your employer has a rule about no guns on premises, it is not a violation of the law, rather just a violation of the employers rules. You may lose your job, and it MAY be upheld in civil court, but then again it has been ruled a violation of the employees right to bear arms as well.
The bottom line is that this doctor was well within his rights to protect himself and others from the lunatic. He would clearly be dead if he was unarmed.
Like the old saying goes, "I'd rather be judged by 12, than carried by 6".
It isn't working because the mentally ill are not being put into the database. Wonder why?
It is because of bleeding heart liberals who helped do away with mental institutions, and the ACLU that somehow think divulging their mental illness is a violation of their civil rights/privacy.
As to your reply to my question as to why the OP used the term illegal, posting a sign on private property is not a law, therefore it was not illegal. Even if your employer has a rule about no guns on premises, it is not a violation of the law, rather just a violation of the employers rules. You may lose your job, and it MAY be upheld in civil court, but then again it has been ruled a violation of the employees right to bear arms as well.
The bottom line is that this doctor was well within his rights to protect himself and others from the lunatic. He would clearly be dead if he was unarmed.
Like the old saying goes, "I'd rather be judged by 12, than carried by 6".
Also, it was Reagan who gutted mental health institutions from our budget. While Reagan would be considered liberal by today's GOP extremist standards he is still the one who cut mental health budgets, and placed these individuals in to our penal system.
Not only is it not OK, it is ILLEGAL. Now. Why do you play so dense tonight? Richard Plott was a felon and still carried his gun to the hospital. Why don't you get upset over that? BTW, this must just boil your blood. It has set your movement back many years.
"In a statement issued Friday, Mercy Fitzgerald Hospital sent a statement saying: "We are thankful for the swift action of Dr. Lee Silverman, Dr. Jeffrey Dekret, John D'Alonzo and the other colleagues and visitors who took brave and difficult action during yesterday's tragic event. We extend our condolences to Theresa Hunt's family, and we are praying for Dr. Silverman's speedy recovery. We look forward to Dr. Silverman's return to serving patients at our hospital. We will do all we can to support the victims during this difficult time."
I'm glad you agree, and in 33 states no background checks are required at gun shows by non FFL sellers. The ATF study Following the Gun stated:
Felons were associated with selling or purchasing firearms in 46 percent of the gun show investigations. Firearms that were illegally diverted at or through gun shows were recovered in subsequent crimes, including homicide and robbery, in more than a third of the gun show investigations.
The anti-gun crowd is going to sweep this one under the rug partially and say "How did the psycho shooter get a gun"? And not focus on the doctors actions to stop him. Regardless of how he got one, he had one and the doctor used his legally owned one (with a permit) to stop the psycho shooter. I just hope that the psycho shooter and/or his family does not try to come back and civilly sue the doctor. In this litigation crazy world we live in unfortunately this is a distinct possibility. This story won't make major news because it portrays owning/carrying a legal firearm in a positive light.
I'm glad you agree, and in 33 states no background checks are required at gun shows by non FFL sellers. The ATF study Following the Gun stated:
Felons were associated with selling or purchasing firearms in 46 percent of the gun show investigations.
Once again, felons are not permitted to buy guns anywhere. They don't have to go gun shows to get them. Yes, I am aware that private transactions at gun shows do not go through background checks but who says they have to make the sale at the gun show. They can go out and do it in the parking lot. You may have a valid point here but everybody knows as soon as you get this you are going to move on to another demand. Next up, ammo sales. Why not background checks for ammo sales, no sale through the mail. Why would anybody oppose it, you will ask? There is no end to it. That is why no more gun laws for you until you enforce what you have foisted on the American people so far.
This is not a study about guns, but rather homicide rates. It says that when asking arrestees that 2% reported buying at gun shows. While most came from street transactions. The ATF study proves they do in fact come from gun shows, and are sold in street transactions.
I'm glad you agree, and in 33 states no background checks are required at gun shows by non FFL sellers. The ATF study Following the Gun stated: Felons were associated with selling or purchasing firearms in 46 percent of the gun show investigations. Firearms that were illegally diverted at or through gun shows were recovered in subsequent crimes, including homicide and robbery, in more than a third of the gun show investigations.
Well of course 46% they were -- BATFE isn't entirely stupid, they only started "gun show investigations" when they suspected the buyer or seller was involved in a crime.
If anything, your Following the Gun statistic shows that more than half (54%) of the people who had their lives and businesses disrupted or destroyed by BATFE were probably innocent victims of America's most irresponsible police organization. But hey, at least the report doesn't mention the agents propensity for shooting and stomping pets and flooding bathrooms, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DauntlessDan
The anti-gun crowd is going to sweep this one under the rug partially and say "How did the psycho shooter get a gun"? And not focus on the doctors actions to stop him. Regardless of how he got one, he had one and the doctor used his legally owned one (with a permit) to stop the psycho shooter. I just hope that the psycho shooter and/or his family does not try to come back and civilly sue the doctor. In this litigation crazy world we live in unfortunately this is a distinct possibility. This story won't make major news because it portrays owning/carrying a legal firearm in a positive light.
Dr. Silverman doesn't fit the narrative, so he gets swept under the rug.
Obviously one of those evil white gun nuts, with his sneaky hidden .32 seecamp semi-automatic Saturday night special. How dare that 1%er elitist carry a gun that costs more than some people make in a week?
Also, it was Reagan who gutted mental health institutions from our budget. While Reagan would be considered liberal by today's GOP extremist standards he is still the one who cut mental health budgets, and placed these individuals in to our penal system.
You are either being obtuse, or are ignorant on the two subjects you replied on. The ACLU takes on many causes, some me even be perceived as politically conservative. However the overwhelming number of cases and positions they advocate for are socially liberal.
As to Reagan being responsible for budget cuts, he was for cutting virtually everything except for defense. So there is a big difference between abolishing programs vs. finding other revenue streams which is Congress responsibility. The liberals of this country had been against mental institutions for a long time. So where they found other money to continue to fund their social welfare projects despite Reagan's cuts, they were happy to see mental wards disappear.
Heck if there was some way to federally defund the death penalty, and a (R) was the POTUS at the time, his fiscal budget cuts could be spun by the left as if it was his doing. In reality, liberals would just not find funding to keep it going because they are fundamentally opposed to it.
Will you stop at nothing to attempt to make your point? This is an outright lie, and this study has to do with LEO deaths on the job, and nothing about gun show trafficking.
Quote:
Well of course 46% they were -- BATFE isn't entirely stupid, they only started "gun show investigations" when they suspected the buyer or seller was involved in a crime.
If anything, your Following the Gun statistic shows that more than half (54%) of the people who had their lives and businesses disrupted or destroyed by BATFE were probably innocent victims of America's most irresponsible police organization. But hey, at least the report doesn't mention the agents propensity for shooting and stomping pets and flooding bathrooms, right?
So let me get this straight. Your argument consists of government studies, and your false statistics cherry picked to meet your ideal, and you discredit the one study that outlines the real facts?
You are either being obtuse, or are ignorant on the two subjects you replied on. The ACLU takes on many causes, some me even be perceived as politically conservative. However the overwhelming number of cases and positions they advocate for are socially liberal.
As to Reagan being responsible for budget cuts, he was for cutting virtually everything except for defense. So there is a big difference between abolishing programs vs. finding other revenue streams which is Congress responsibility. The liberals of this country had been against mental institutions for a long time. So where they found other money to continue to fund their social welfare projects despite Reagan's cuts, they were happy to see mental wards disappear.
Heck if there was some way to federally defund the death penalty, and a (R) was the POTUS at the time, his fiscal budget cuts could be spun by the left as if it was his doing. In reality, liberals would just not find funding to keep it going because they are fundamentally opposed to it.
Nice try though.
There are plenty of liberals who are gun owners and second amendment supporters. Many also support the death penalty. I'm one of 'em.
What we need is a better way to keep crazy azzhats like my brother in law from being heavily armed.
As to the mental institutions, there were promises made of halfway houses and other programs for the mentally ill. Those budgets got whacked and we are seeing the results.
Now we house the mentally ill in prison or on the streets. And we all get to suffer for those choices with higher taxes (prison is expensive) and more dangerous streets.
Then we let the Brady Bill protections expire, so they can go ahead and buy an AR-15 if they'd like.
I wish we could all stop labeling each other, and work together to find solutions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
