The Bedwetting Gungrabbers Are Out In Force

This forum is for discussion of politics, diplomacy, law, and justice
User avatar
Vonz90
Posts: 3469
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: The Bedwetting Gungrabbers Are Out In Force

Post by Vonz90 » Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:54 pm

MiddleAgedKen wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:20 pm
I can easily imagine what I think it should be: no law at all. I will work for that, but I will not be a party to the negotiation of "acceptable" infringements.
Who is talking about infringing anything? I am talking about improving things (in part to prevent infringement going on now) and you guys are assuming something completely different.

News flash, criminal conspiracyis already a felony, if you make that the standard for confiscation (or similar) then you are also eliminating prior restraint based on feelings or whatever. That is the point I am going with this.

We either move the ball forward or the other side will. That appears to be okay with you.

User avatar
randy
Posts: 7551
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:33 pm
Location: EM79VQ

Re: The Bedwetting Gungrabbers Are Out In Force

Post by randy » Tue Aug 13, 2019 3:05 pm

...even before I read MHI, my response to seeing a poster for the stars of the latest Twilight movies was "I see 2 targets and a collaborator".

MarkD
Posts: 3951
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:59 pm

Re: The Bedwetting Gungrabbers Are Out In Force

Post by MarkD » Tue Aug 13, 2019 3:35 pm

Vonz90 wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:06 pm
MarkD wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 1:47 pm
The more I think about it, no. In fact not just no, but fuck no. Because it WILL be abused (as in my NJ example, imagine THAT on a Federal level).

So you have legislation that allows someone to have his guns confiscated if they show themselves to be a danger to themselves or someone else. Fine. Now suppose there's a situation where someone really DOES give his brother a gun to shoot his estranged wife. Oh nos! Now EVERYONE who has a family member going thru a divorce can be legally disarmed, because if it happened once it can happen again, and the combination of gun ownership and family divorce is a danger we just can't ignore.

If you're too much of a danger, to yourself or someone else, to possess a firearm, you're too much of a danger to possess gasoline, rope, knives, bleach, rat poison, a car, hammers, long screwdrivers, wood chipper, angle grinder, in fact you're too much of a danger to be out in public unattended. I keep lengthening the list of things you're too dangerous to possess, but I've know some folks that, if they were pissed at you, you wouldn't want them to have access to pencils or dental floss.

So if the future-ex-Mrs-Jackwagon is REALLY frightened that her husband will shoot her, let her (a) apply for a restraining order, (b) because of a, expedite her own CCW and (c) provide her with free training so she can effectively use the CCW. And violation of the restraining order provides prima facie justification for acting in self defense. If she refuses to arm herself in her own defense, allow her to be taken into protective custody.

Because (as we've pointed out right on this forum SO many times) the gun is just the tool, it's the PERSON who kills, and if the person is determined to harm someone they'll find a way.
You are very much missing my point, but all good, I guess the current laws are perfect and never abused and no changes could be considered with out destroying their Aristotelian pefection. ;)
What I see you saying is "Red flag laws are already abused in some states, so let's see if we can put something better in ALL states".

At what point are we justified in confiscating someone's property, BEFORE they actually DO anything, because they MAY harm someone, but the danger is insufficient to warrant arresting/committing them for further evaluation? So if I own a gun, and someone deems me to be a threat, my gun can be taken from me, but I'm still permitted to have access to knives/tools/gasoline. I've been saying for YEARS that anyone with an IQ higher than that of a retarded cockroach, who wished to kill as many people as possible, could accomplish his goal FAR better with a few gallons of gasoline, a couple cases of empty beer bottles, some old t-shirts and a BIC lighter than he EVER could with ANY firearm, certainly with any firearm currently available to the vast majority of civilians. In fact, that's exactly how the largest mass murder in NYC history (second only to 9/11) was committed, Happy Land Social Club.

Crazy people gonna crazy, and sometimes they harm people. Take away their guns and you've pissed them off AND not restricted them from finding some other way to commit mayhem.

You want to talk about changing the point at which we can arrest or commit someone who's acting in a threatening manner to determine if they're an actual danger, I'm willing to have that conversation. I'm not willing that a couple uniforms show up at my doorstep to confiscate my guns because of something someone said that I said. Or worse, a SWAT team.

User avatar
Vonz90
Posts: 3469
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: The Bedwetting Gungrabbers Are Out In Force

Post by Vonz90 » Tue Aug 13, 2019 4:27 pm

MarkD wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 3:35 pm
I am not going to go over everything you said, because in part I mostly agree with it. However, I will say again, you are very much, entirely, completely, on the other side if reality, missing my point. Under the assumption that I am not making my point well, I will try to restate it more completely.

I am against prior restraint and depriving people of their rights based on hearsay. Any law I would support would have to specifically address those points.

I am also against felons having guns. Terroristic threats, criminal conspiracy, and such are already felonies, and they do not involve doing anything (besides talk) thatbitself is criminal. They will already not just get your guns taken away, they will send you to prison. I see no issue in packaging these together in a bill and saying that if these (and possibly related) issues together and saying if you get an indictment and are prosecuting someone for these, take their damn guns (and whatever else). Call it a red flag Bill (marketing), if the police want to take someone's guns, then make them do their jobs and actually build a criminal case. If the cannot or will not do that, then they can fuck off. Perhaps having a hotline or something too?

This moves the ball in the direction we wants and should end the BS prior restraint stuff.

As to federal or state, I am open to arguments either way. Since the RTKBAs is a federal right, it should be covered under Federal law. There is a legal mechanism such that Federal laws can allow mirroring at the state level but preclude greater levels of restrictions, and that I would favor.

User avatar
D5CAV
Posts: 2068
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:48 am

Re: The Bedwetting Gungrabbers Are Out In Force

Post by D5CAV » Tue Aug 13, 2019 5:18 pm

Look in the mirror and tell yourself "I am a criminal". It is liberating.

Free yourself.

It is coming. It is inevitable. Either with Trump's "red flag laws" or Kamala's outright confiscation, it does not matter.

You are all criminals. Embrace it.

Yeah, I know. "I'm retired LEO, I get to keep my (revolver) gun," or "I know the local CLEO, I get to keep my (side by side shotgun) gun."

For now...
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
It's over. The time to speak out passed 20 years ago.

Prepare yourselves.
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

User avatar
Vonz90
Posts: 3469
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: The Bedwetting Gungrabbers Are Out In Force

Post by Vonz90 » Tue Aug 13, 2019 5:47 pm

D5CAV wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 5:18 pm
Look in the mirror and tell yourself "I am a criminal". It is liberating.

Free yourself.

It is coming. It is inevitable. Either with Trump's "red flag laws" or Kamala's outright confiscation, it does not matter.

You are all criminals. Embrace it.

Yeah, I know. "I'm retired LEO, I get to keep my (revolver) gun," or "I know the local CLEO, I get to keep my (side by side shotgun) gun."

For now...
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
It's over. The time to speak out passed 20 years ago.

Prepare yourselves.
No, RTKBA is in the best shape it has been in the last 100 years.

BDK
Posts: 1391
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:14 pm

Re: The Bedwetting Gungrabbers Are Out In Force

Post by BDK » Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:41 pm

Its an interesting dichotomy. HK didn't have the war on private capital, which the Socialists have been waging on us for years* - but is now facing physical tyranny and genocide. (That the UK didn't liberalize HK's gun laws for a decade before the take over, is a shame.)

*(Bit tired of being a field n***r working for a small percentage... Yes, its an ugly word. Its a damnably ugly concept.)

User avatar
D5CAV
Posts: 2068
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:48 am

Re: The Bedwetting Gungrabbers Are Out In Force

Post by D5CAV » Tue Aug 20, 2019 6:55 pm

Vonz90 wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 5:47 pm
No, RTKBA is in the best shape it has been in the last 100 years.
Hmmm... 1919...

No background checks. No FA restriction (Prior to GCA of 1936). Returning veterans could keep their issued combat rifle after paying us.gov about $10 (I've seen the receipts with some collector 1903s). Not really any RTKBA restrictions to speak of; only NYC had any restrictions at all (Sullivan Act required permit for concealed firearm as of 1911).

So... on which planet would this statement be accurate?
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

User avatar
Vonz90
Posts: 3469
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: The Bedwetting Gungrabbers Are Out In Force

Post by Vonz90 » Tue Aug 20, 2019 9:23 pm

D5CAV wrote:
Tue Aug 20, 2019 6:55 pm
Vonz90 wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 5:47 pm
No, RTKBA is in the best shape it has been in the last 100 years.
Hmmm... 1919...

No background checks. No FA restriction (Prior to GCA of 1936). Returning veterans could keep their issued combat rifle after paying us.gov about $10 (I've seen the receipts with some collector 1903s). Not really any RTKBA restrictions to speak of; only NYC had any restrictions at all (Sullivan Act required permit for concealed firearm as of 1911).

So... on which planet would this statement be accurate?
There were fewer laws (as there was in general) - but there was virtually no recognition of it as a true right, which is why the so that black codes effectively kept blacks from RKBA and if course is why the Sullivan Act (and the wave of similar laws that followed) were able to stand.

Post Reply