regulations were followed. Put another way, the same regulations that govern cars do not stop anyone from using them as a weapon. People who intend to commit crimes aren’t really worried about the law.
So it doesn’t do any good to whittle away at law abiding citizens rights in order to affect someone who ignores such laws.
I have to say I’m not worried that this is going to happen a whole lot.
Then please don’t misrepresent what I said.
.
One example is not proof of anything. Plus, your anecdote could just as easily be spun as there isn’t enough regulation. Do we have anecdotes about all the times folks didn’t use guns because of the sensible regulations in place? of course not, because you cannot keep track really of something that doesn’t happen.
Fair enough. You said “the agenda of the anti-gun crowd is to get rid of guns.”
I’m sorry. I took that to mean all guns.
Yes, I would probably agree that some of the Gun Control (anti-gun?) forces do have an agenda to get rid of some assault guns. Whether or not that is a good idea is debatable.
However, too often I hear that those in favor of gun control are doe-eyed zeolots ready to remove all arms from the citizenry. Just as often I hear that gun owners are disfunctional scared individuals ready to shoot the evil government coming to their door. Neither case is remotely true, of course.
Most people involved in the gun debate are decent folks who have the best interest of the country at heart. That’s not sarcasm, it is so.
You do know that real voodoo priests do not: create zombies, sacrifice infants, or shrink Michael Keaton’s head, right? They’re usually Haitian guys who, yes, have practices which seem weird to us, but are hardly dangerous (unless you’re a chicken). Stranger danger seems a little high.
I didn’t read all 4 pages of comments, so this may be a repeat. The “Today” show ran this news story, and included the fact that some permit holders were deceased, or had changed addresses. Does that constitute “misinformation” on the part of the newspaper, i.e. wrongful reporting?
I’m not sure how you are defining those terms exactly, but no. They reported the names and addresses associated with those handgun registrations. As the paper noted:
Such as?
If you are a gun owner, and you do not favor legislation to combat gun proliferation due to a paranoid fantasy of governmental coups and blood revolt, then yes, you are a lunatic. Prove me wrong, tell the NRA it has to have gun licenses, safety locks, registration, and training. That’s the least it would do to prove that you’re not a lunatic. I’m not saying you’re not a lunatic, but if you don’t agree to sensible reforms, then you are a lunatic. My question then would be: Are you for sensible reforms?
Pit-style antagonizing is saying that 20 kids got shot and we should have more guns in schools. Oh, and nobody should register their guns, or have any training, or the government can’t regulate it at all.
I’d like to meet this fictional YogSosoth of yours
I expected no less. Most gun owners are not very empathetic individuals
Oh I’m sure they do, they are filled with guns after all. But if I really wanted a gun, I’d steal it from a source I know has them rather than burglarize a dozen houses hoping to find one. Then again, I suppose since I’m not a criminal, I can’t think like them very well
Anyone who owns a firearm should understand that having that kind of power requires being responsibility. That responsibility should come in the form of registration, licensing, and training, so that the rest of us unarmed flailing melee attackers can know where to pile up the bulletproof vests when you go crazy
You really should quote people in context and use full sentences. Then you’d know what I’m talking about
I think it affects me enough that I deserve to know. Same thing with birthers.
In this case, it should equal the same thing. And yes, you’re gonna say, “should” does not equal “does”. :rolleyes:
With guns, I think that having one hidden is indirectly an unequal flow of information since its got the potential to cause such harm. And no, please don’t bring up knives, that’s a stupid argument. Guns are one of the few things I would support to have full disclosure on. When you move into a neighborhood, you should have to declare what and how many you have. Same thing with certain crimes, or membership in Scientology.
I’m gonna stop you right there. The point is, we SHOULD know it. That’s why I’m glad about what the newspaper did, it conforms to what I believe should happen in a just world. There’s nothing more to it than that. I know there’s no law that says you have to do it, and there are plenty of other things that maybe others think should be disclosed, but guns are one thing I think should be known, because they are dangerous enough for me to change how I live and who I associate with over it. It makes it doubly worse that many of the people who own it think its none of my business. Fine, think what you want. I will think what I want. And I think I am very happy that the newspaper did this
It lets you avoid the crazies. Or if you’re a stickler like Martin Hyde who think I’m painting gun owners with too broad a brush, it lets me avoid those who think that their gun ownership is no business of anyone’s. This way, had I been living there and knew any of those people on that map, I would ask them point blank if they are a sensible gun owner, one who is pro-gun control, who favors safety locks, registration, etc. or if they are a budding Montana Freeman just itching to show up The Man
They think having a gun is protection. I think avoiding those with guns is protection. One of these beliefs won’t lead to me accidentally shooting myself with my own protection
I just wanted to type the word voodoo.
I agree.
And I agree with that also. But you forgot to say that they need to inform everyone in the county that they have a gun because there’s no reason to conclude they need to do that..
:rolleyes:
If I’d understood what you were saying, I wouldn’t have asked what you were talking about (and you still haven’t explained it). You said “They want to pretend to be soccer moms and dads while owning a firearm, but not the responsibility of letting people know.” You didn’t explain how owning a gun makes them not a soccer mom/dad or what they are pretending to do. They are parents, and they also own guns. Some of them may be nuts, but just based on statistics, most of them aren’t. What is the pretense?
So do you think people with opinions you dislike should be required to register their opinions with the government and inform the public? That makes it sound like you’re a fan of the First Amendment or the concept of a right to privacy.
That’s not unequal, it’s just not telling you something you want to know. So to repeat myself, what information are gun owners demanding from you?
That’s not a few things. Like I said, you don’t appear to be much of a fan of the First Amendment (you are arguing in favor of a lot of compelled speech!) or of the right to privacy. Even sex offenders don’t need to inform everyone in two nearby counties, which is what the newspaper did. It’s hard to argue that someone with a gun in Westchester is a threat to anyone in Rockland.
You actually want a lot more information than the newspaper published. They only published handgun registrations, not the number or type, and it was only handguns. If you lived in Rockland or Westchester and assumed nobody else had a gun, you’d be wrong a large percentage of the time.
I think you should disclose your opinions to more people and see what happens. Or you could walk up to your neighbors and demand they tell you their religion, political beliefs, gun ownership status and whatever other information you want because you are keeping a list and it’s your right to know. Then they can demand that information from you and you can get the ball rolling that way.
“Doubly worse?” Please. You’re judging people based on poor logic, demanding information without much justification, then implying it’s “doubly worse” that they won’t tell you something you’ve decided you need to know. Convince them it’s your business and maybe you’ll find out. If you want to do that, you might have to stop calling them liars and maniacs.
No, it doesn’t.
It doesn’t do that either, since most people would probably answer your questions with something like “buzz off.”
really? You have a cite for that or are you psychic? I’d love to hear your explanation of why people who think it’s a good idea to actively protect children are not empathetic. Because as far as I can tell, those who oppose this idea think guns can be removed from the same society that can’t get a handle on hard drug use. It’s an unrealistic solution to the problem.
YogSosoth does have some superhuman knowledge about people who own guns. But if he were psychic, why would he need the government to identify all the people who belong to the wrong religion or have the wrong political views? Couldn’t he just sense them himself?
Well:
And your direct response:
So you say “I’ll be glad the kids of these gun nuts will be more likely to be shot and killed.” Someone says “I guess dead kids can be good, so long as you don’t like their parents.” Your response, “yup.”
So please forgive me if somehow in that string of moral, respectable opinions and comments of yours I’ve somehow misrepresented your reasonable, humane stance on the children of gun owners.
wow, I missed this exchange. Holy fuck YogSosoth, what is the matter with you?
That all current regulations were adhered to, but gasp someone with no regard for regulations acquired one anyway.
What new, reasonable, law would have prevented that? Or would have prevented the same person from using a different firearm that wasn’t prohibited under whatever restriction you propose as reasonable.
Which would of course lead to another round of ‘reasonable’ restrictions. ad nauseam
Are there any reliable statistics on the percentage of gun crimes committed by those with registered v unregistered guns? I can’t find any.
I live very close to Flint, Michigan, perennially one of the top three highest homicide-by-gun-per-capita cities in the US. No cite on hand, but as a daily news-reader, I’m guessing the gun deaths in Flint attributed to unregistered, “illegally” owned firearms is easily 90-plus percent.
Note that this is a state with a strong rural farming and hunting culture. Well over half the white collar/professional/non-criminal/law abiding, kind, family people I know own at the very least a hunting rifle or two.
I do understand the emotion behind YogSosoth et al’s emotional responses here but they are seriously not grounded in reality. I’m guessing a very sheltered life.
Thought I’d bump this a bit just to update on current events. The newspaper has hired armed guards to protect its employees, and they recently had an anthrax scare. A county clerk in a neighboring county in New York is refusing to disclose the names as requested by the newspaper, as they had requested them to expand their map.
I don’t think letting people just file a request to get thousands of records is ideal in this situation. Given the outcry from the residents of these counties, I’d think the State law needs changed. (It should be pointed out, at least from what I’ve read, New York State law defaults to public records being available unless they are explicitly deemed protected by statute, so I do not even believe the original legislation intended this kind of disclosure.) In Ohio they had a similar issue some years ago, some small newspaper started publishing the public gun permit records. They then modified it so that anyone could go to see a list of gun owners in a jurisdiction in Ohio. And literally, just see it. Meaning you get shown a list, you cannot write down the names or copy the list in any way, so basically only what you can remember can be taken out with you.
I had heard about Putnam county refusing to supply the list, but the armed guards are news to me.
And I really like Ohio’s provision for accessing the list. Not as much as not making the list available at all, but better than nothing.
Too late for ETA, but.
ETA: And if Putnam county is forced to produce the list, I hope they are able to provide it printed in really horrid CAPTCHA.
Oh, the irony.