Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-07-2015, 02:25 PM
 
34,619 posts, read 21,635,782 times
Reputation: 22232

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment View Post
Most Republicans today after descendants of Dixiecrats, they don't even know their own history. Thanks for pointing that out, many Republicans don't know there history of the political parties.
So, when Barbara Jordan was running for the Texas House of Representatives as a Democrat in 1962 in Texas, does that mean she was actually a Republican?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-07-2015, 02:29 PM
 
3,216 posts, read 2,086,755 times
Reputation: 1863
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
Chuck,

I think a proper background check (that includes medical history) would have (could have, should have) prevented it....here is why

1. the mother is diagnosed as aspergers, and bi-polar
2. the young man (son) is bi-polar and aspergers
3. the young man flunked out of basic training for the military (would love to see what his exit code is)
4. mother has said he had anger issues, and refuse to take his medicine


all of these could and should be red flags to prevent him or his mother from buying guns or at least a delay in their ability to purchase

again this is just like adam lanza, where the young man COULD have been institutionalize IF the doctors and his mother had actually done their jobs


JMHO

wch
I didn't know that the mother would have been precluded from purchasing a firearm if her medical history were available. For med history to be part of the background check we will have to get around the HIPPA privacy laws.
When filling out the 4473 paperwork for the BC, it asks if you have been diagnosed with a mental condition. If she lied on this form, she should be held liable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2015, 02:30 PM
 
Location: OCEAN BREEZES AND VIEWS SAN CLEMENTE
19,893 posts, read 18,454,615 times
Reputation: 6465
Wishful thinking on the behalf of some. Nothing will stop a manic or mentally challenged person or someone who is just mean and vicious from doing these things.

My family knows this first hand. From the mouth that killed one of our family members. I have had two family members murdered so I think I know how these people think from the mouth of the killer himself.

As he put it to us once a person has the intent to kill or do harm, they will. And yes he said it is so easy for criminals and gang members mafia people to get their hands on guns and of course illegally. He told us how easy it is so we know. He also said if not a gun, then he would of strangled my family member, used a knife, his fists, his hands, a hammer, you get the picture. These are not rationale people thinking here, obviously. I wish with all my heart so that other people do not have to go thru with our family did, an innocent family member murdered, for no reason at all and still young with the rest of there life to live.

But I do not, and sad to say, wish I could believe with all my heart that something will stop this madness, but I do not believe anything will. And so much of the time friends or family of these people, know something but stay quiet why is that.

We have always had guns for protection after those facts, and know how to shoot and will use the gun, if my family members are threatened or myself. No family ought to have to bury a person for no reason except for the facts, that some vicious mean hatred of a person, wants to do harm, and I believe gain notoriety.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2015, 02:33 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,829,035 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaseMan View Post
How about making any crime committed with a firearm a felony, with a minimum 10 year prison sentence and no parole? How about making failure to secure a firearm, which is then used in a crime, a felony as well, with a minimum 10 year prison sentence and no parole?

Don't think for a minute the NRA would support either of those ideas.
Gun owners already support tough sentences for people who use guns in a crime, anti gun liberals are the ones that want to release these people from jail. Even here in California they just made stealing a gun a misdemeanor.

Any gun in your home is already secured. Any gun locked in your car is already secured. Do you find that many crime guns are stollen from someone's lawn?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2015, 02:37 PM
 
3,216 posts, read 2,086,755 times
Reputation: 1863
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaseMan View Post
How about making any crime committed with a firearm a felony, with a minimum 10 year prison sentence and no parole? How about making failure to secure a firearm, which is then used in a crime, a felony as well, with a minimum 10 year prison sentence and no parole?

Don't think for a minute the NRA would support either of those ideas.
NRA came out years ago with this idea of mandatory minimums for felony use of a gun. We support it fully. It's our courts that are failing us by allowing plea bargains in the interest of expedience.

We have a revolving door justice system. Up to 70% of all violent criminals are previous offenders. Our prison recidivism rate is ridiculous.

Many states have laws to keep guns out of the hands of unsupervised children. If you leave a gun around the house and a child shoots someone with it, you can face prosecution. The problem is that it is seldom enforced because the courts feel the parents have suffered enough.

If I lock my doors and someone breaks into my house, steals my gun and commits a felony, I am not liable because my firearm was secure since my door was locked. There is an expectation of privacy in my own home.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2015, 03:25 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,123,991 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
your playing semantics there....

Nixon was the first to use THE TERM "war on drugs"...but a simular term was started in the 30's....

The pledge to wage “relentless warfare†on drugs was, first made in the 1930s, by a man who has been largely forgotten today......Harry Anslinger head of Federal Bureau of Narcotics

The Unbelievable Story of How America's War on Drugs Started | Alternet


and it has been happening for decades before nixon

1906=====The Pure Food and Drug Act requires that certain specified drugs, including alcohol, cocaine, heroin, morphine, and cannabis, be accurately labeled with contents and dosage

1911===== United States first Opium Commissioner argues that of all the nations of the world, the United States consumes most habit-forming drugs per capita

1914====== The first recorded instance of the United States enacting a ban on the domestic distribution of drugs is the Harrison Narcotic Act of 1914. This act was presented and passed as a method of regulating the production and distribution of opiate-containing substances under the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution, but a section of the act was later interpreted by law enforcement officials for the purpose of prosecuting doctors who prescribe opiates to addicts

A war on narcotics alone—cocaine and heroin, outlawed in 1914—wasn’t enough

1925====== United States supported regulation of cannabis as a drug in the International Opium Convention. and by the mid-1930s all member states had some regulation of cannabis.

1935====== President Roosevelt hails the International Opium Convention and application of it in US. law and other anti-drug laws in a radio message to the nation.

1937=======Congress passed the Marijuana Tax Act. Presented as a $1 nuisance tax on the distribution of marijuana, this act required anyone distributing the drug to maintain and submit a detailed account of his or her transactions, including inspections, affidavits, and private information regarding the parties involved. This law, however, was something of a "Catch-22", as obtaining a tax stamp required individuals to first present their goods, which was an action tantamount to confession. This act was passed by Congress on the basis of testimony and public perception that marijuana caused insanity, criminality, and death.

1951======= The 1951 Boggs Act increased penalties fourfold, including mandatory penalties.

1956======= The Daniel Act increased penalties by a factor of eight over those specified in the Boggs Act. Although by this time there was adequate testimony to refute the claim that marijuana caused insanity, criminality, or death, the rationalizations for these laws shifted in focus to the proposition that marijuana use led to the use of heroin, creating the gateway drug theory

source :wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs
Nixon coined the term and created the DEA.... I'd say the war on drugs started with him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2015, 03:37 PM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
11,142 posts, read 10,718,210 times
Reputation: 9799
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
Nixon coined the term and created the DEA.... I'd say the war on drugs started with him.
Then you are ignoring history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2015, 05:18 PM
 
Location: OCEAN BREEZES AND VIEWS SAN CLEMENTE
19,893 posts, read 18,454,615 times
Reputation: 6465
I will say it over and over again. None, as long as we have criminals, gang members, mafia types, teen hoodlums that can and do get guns at their will.
These sort will never have problems getting guns. Never. Tell me someone who has had family members murdered by punks, how you will stop them. I was told to my face, how easy it is, so do not play or waste my time.

Bad elements will never have problems getting their hands on guns Never. Tell me how your going to stop criminals from getting them. Really would like to hear this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2015, 07:37 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,500,230 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
Nixon coined the term and created the DEA.... I'd say the war on drugs started with him.
again not sure what you are trying to prove


because HISTORY (TIMELINE) shows you are not correct


WHICH CAME FIRST???....

1970's====Nixon coined the term and created the DEA

or

1930's====Harry Anslinger .....The pledge to wage “relentless warfare” on drugs ......Harry Anslinger head of Federal Bureau of Narcotics



math says 30's came before 70's


btw Nixon did NOT create the DEA since the DEA was ORIGINALY the FBN
Quote:
The Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) was an agency of the United States Department of the Treasury. Established in the Department of the Treasury by an act of June 14, 1930 consolidating the functions of the Federal Narcotics Control Board and the Narcotic Division. it was merged in 1968 with the Bureau of Drug Abuse Control, an agency of the Food and Drug Administration, to form the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, an agency of the United States Department of Justice. The BNDD was a predecessor agency of the current Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)..... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federa...u_of_Narcotics
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2015, 07:44 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,500,230 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlandochuck1 View Post
I didn't know that the mother would have been precluded from purchasing a firearm if her medical history were available. For med history to be part of the background check we will have to get around the HIPPA privacy laws.
When filling out the 4473 paperwork for the BC, it asks if you have been diagnosed with a mental condition. If she lied on this form, she should be held liable.
I don't think Hippa laws have to come into play here

it could be something as simple as {"red flag" for medical condition} , this way nothing personal needs to be revealed
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top