streamfisher
Northeast
Yes. Yes there is. But, there are still two firemen dead and you haven't yet responded constructively to the question - how do we improve the likelyhood that this type of transaction does not occur.
Give us a try!
Welcome back to the new NEFF. Take a break from Twitter and Facebook. You don't go to Dicks for your fly fishing gear, you go to your local fly fishing store. Enjoy!
For the anti gun Hollywood crowd
- Thread starter CTobias
- Start date
Yes. Yes there is. But, there are still two firemen dead and you haven't yet responded constructively to the question - how do we improve the likelyhood that this type of transaction does not occur.
LyNcH
Dries, wets, nymphs and streamers...it's all good!
This has to be the dumbest posts I have read in a long time. Everything is not being looked at here, only one thing is, adding more restrictions to restrictive gun laws that won't work. The parental piece? You can't fix a bad parent, so no more really needs to be discussed there. Mental illness? Yes, this is a serious issue, however, it's way to complex to allow the federal government to rubber stamp of people for life. Spend some time working with the type of people that commit these crimes, whether it be the mentally ill or criminal, and then let's have a conversation. The people committing these murders are not responsible gun owners/loaners/thieves. I am not sure how making a flash suppressant or collapsible stock illegal on an AR-15 is going to stop this from happening, which is all the assault weapons ban pushed for in the 90's, and will be pushing for again. Then the anti-gunners will feel good again.
I don't even own an "assault rifle" (any firearm is an assault firearm if it is used to assault people) and don't see myself buying one, but adding a few restrictions to what they can and can't have on them won't solve anything. The only thing it'll do is restrict those who already follow the laws imposed. I live in NY, we have restrictive gun laws, our state adopted the same wording as the Brady Bill and it is still in effect today, guess what, people still murder in NY.
Guns are not the problem here, people are the problem......they pull the trigger, they turn the key in the car, they build the bombs and fly the jets etc. If someone has it in their mind they are going to commit murder/mass murder/stab someone/beat someone with a bat/set a house on fire, they are going to do it, a few new empty feel good gun laws will not prevent it, just like it didn't in the 90's. Wake up Streamfisher. Evil is evil, the government can't stop it.
Your last sentence has to be the most ignorant thing I have read this year.
LyNcH
Dries, wets, nymphs and streamers...it's all good!
What more response is required than that there already is a law, and it sounds like 2 people may have broke it. It sucks what happened in Webster, my brother was right down the road when it occurred and no-one on here is condoning a neighbor illegally buying a gun for a convicted felon. This tragedy only solidifies my point that if someone wants to commit murder, they will. If the Gander clerk had acted responsibly, acted on those red flags waving in front of him and didn't allow the transaction to occur, do you really think the shooter would not have changed up his premeditated plan by going to plan B, C or D? Evil is evil.
Trouser Trout
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
Streamfisher, what specifically do you suggest be done? You clearly aren't happy with the status quo, and are looking to those who believe we already have enough gun legislation to dream up some more. what do you suggest?
LyNcH
Dries, wets, nymphs and streamers...it's all good!
streamfisher
Northeast
Lynch said:
C'Mon Lynch... The reason you believe that everything is not being discussed is YOU and the reason you feel the last sentence is ignorant. I just brought up the 'Everything' in this thread and YOU are the one who shut it down. You were given the opportunity to discuss everything and YOU are the one who shut those conversations down.
Your comment on 'Evil is evil' and the gov can't stop it. Great. What are YOU doing to stop it? Here's my view on the Evil perspective: The problems of men are men's problems, not god or the devil. That means they're solvable. For example, It's been reported that the Newtown shooter may have had a rare condition called Congenital Insensitivity to Pain with Anhidrosis, also known as CIPA. Have you considered how disconnected you might be from a world that you can't feel? That you were never able to feel? This condition, known to be accompanied by violence, combined with other conditions can create the dysfunction we witnessed. For the first time, permission has been requested to perform genetic testing on this person. So, your wrong about the only thing being looked at is guns. You're only reading articles that smell like gun powder. This request for genetic research is a milestone and perhaps even more scary than restricting guns. But, maybe they discover a cure for this neurological disorder and result in a human being that can contribute to society as opposed to destroying it.
I'm not looking to those who support status quo gun laws... this is a fishing forum. I'm looking to those who want to find solutions to criminal behavior. I could give a shit about guns but I support the right to own one.
LyNcH
Dries, wets, nymphs and streamers...it's all good!
Clearly you and I differ on the views of what evil is, which is fine with me. I can't stop evil, neither can you, and the government especially cannot. It is also clear to me that you know how to cut and paste on the internet but have no real world experience working with those who are mentally ill or criminal minded. In terms of what I do, as stated, I can't stop evil, but I can guarentee you that I do more on a weekly basis than you have done in the last year to attempt to change behavior in people so they don't hurt others. I've committed the last 17 years of my life working with people in order to protect the innocent. We can attempt to change people all we want, however, they ultimately make the decision how they act. All of my comments that I have said regarding this topic are from real world experience, not an article.
So let's ask you the same question. What you YOU doing to stop it?
So let's ask you the same question. What you YOU doing to stop it?
streamfisher
Northeast
Where did I Cut and Paste (besides making sure I post the name of the CIPA condition accurately? With all due respect, you are saying these things are evil and that would place them, conveniently, out of your purview I appreciate what you describe as having committed yourself to criminal behavior, which is where I believe these issue lie - not in evil. Is it possible that your 17 years have disillusioned you a bit in to a place of futility? What can I do to stop it? Well, for one thing, I'm trying to talk about it... With 17 years behind you, I would think you'd have a lot to contribute to the dialog. Why aren't you?
btw... I worked in, what you might call, a mental hospital for 12 years.
CTobias
Professional BS'r
Pssshhhhhh. .45!! Loaded with hydro shocks now.
CTobias
Professional BS'r
Bring back death penalties. Bring God back into America and teach morales and values in schools. The left has ruined the public education system. Now all they do is push their ideals and teach kids how they want them to think instead of how to think on their own.
CTobias
Professional BS'r
You worked for the Democratic Party?
streamfisher
Northeast
Well.. after talking with some of the residents through the hours/days/months/years, you could be convinced you need your own bed.
An I can assure you, much to Ctobias' simple and probably mocking response about god morals and values... you can not teach these things to psychopaths or those with other conditions that compromise the their capacity to experience empathy. I suspect Lynch might agree with this. But, you can't call it evil. It's a condition. I do agree with his view on the death penalty. Dare I say it - but - once a dog has bitten a human, they gotta go.
lightenup
A fan of Boobery
First of all that would be no fun,... @CTobias, I do not need a deity to teach me moral values, or my son moral values, I can do that. Third....I do not want the school system teaching my kid what they feel are proper moral high ground...I may disagree with some of what they teach, stick to facts in the school system.....
Other than that I agree with the right to own guns, but lets remember when the second amendment was written it took at least 30 seconds to load, level and fire a weapon..notice I didn't say aim....the Kentucky long rifle was about the only thing that could be aimed at the time, but if not maintained meticulously was useless.....so with the lethality and availability of today's firearms, maybe, just maybe, some sort of debate should be taking place. What the answer is, I have no idea..maybe there isn't one, but more laws will not help, they never do.....
Trout Nazi
And...Boom goes the dynamite.
Holy shit man, you all still don't get it. The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with how long it takes to load a weapon or hunting. It has be everything to do with giving citizens the ability to prevent the formation of an oppressive and tyrannical government. If you can't wrap your head around this, we can't have a discussion.
trico mike
make mine wild
I love the whole gun debate ,it is my absolute favorite.It seems that we need to find a middle ground on the issue instead of being absolute on one side or another.The whole second amendment isuue and its purpose of protecting ourselves from a tyranical gov is funny. Who here actually thinks that an ar is going to protect them if and when the gov comes knocking with all the fire power it has. These are the same people that call for an even bigger military budget. Kind of ironic that we want to give the gov more and bigger guns with our tax dollars then we want the right to protect ourselves from them with pea shooters.Alot of these guys are the ones that work for said gov either on a state, federal or military level. There are a few simple solutions to the gun issue.More responsable gun ownership would have prevented the newtown shooting.Guns should be kept locked and secure were only the registered owner has access to them.I would also be able to get on board with some kind of clip restriction to lessen the damage if a gun does fall into the wrong hands.I also think all states should be open carry, I have the right to protect myself from people who would do me harm.I don't own hand guns,they are useless in nj because you can't carry them. My 12 gauges with double o buck is good enough for home defense.We also need to look at waiting periods backround checks and limits on the amount of ammo that can be purchased in a given time frame,this may have prevented the colorado shooting.Gun companies also have to get serious about technology that would prevent anyone but the registered owner of the gun from shooting it.It may also do some good to look at society itself and try to figure out why,after a horrible mass murder there was a rush to go out and buy the same type of gun that was used.There are always going to be sick people out there that want to do others harm and they will always find a way so we have to be able to protect ourselves.A few common sense laws may go along way in preventing or lessening the amount of people killed at one time,but simply banning guns is not the answer because they are all ready out there.
lightenup
A fan of Boobery
Trico Mike, once again, has said it better than I can...........extremism in anything is bad.....things have changed in the world of guns and how they operate...There were no speed limits or road signs or rules when cars went 20 miles an hour either...it has everything to do with the modernization, and lethality of today's weapons....and, I believe that you don't "get it"....I support the right to be arms, but within reason....you can't own a Bazooka, anywhere in this country....lethality has everything to do with the debate....
MACFLY
Too many streams too little time
Actually history has proven that an armed citizenry can keep a government in check quite well. It's when citizens are disarmed that the governement can exercise unchecked tyranny. Thanks
CTobias
Professional BS'r
More people killed each year with hammers and clubs than with rifles.
Time to create a hammer and blunt object registry.
FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year Than Rifles - Gun Rights - Fox Nation
http://nation.foxnews.com/gun-right...-people-killed-hammers-clubs-each-year-rifles
Time to create a hammer and blunt object registry.
FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year Than Rifles - Gun Rights - Fox Nation
http://nation.foxnews.com/gun-right...-people-killed-hammers-clubs-each-year-rifles
trico mike
make mine wild
Hey Mac, ask David Koresh how that statement worked out for him,oh thats right he was an extremist wacko,or was he?
LyNcH
Dries, wets, nymphs and streamers...it's all good!
Let's understand something. A person who lacks the capacity of experience empathy is a far cry from some who experiences a serious psychiatric condition. Working in a mental hospital (do you mean psychiatric facility?) and working with the psychiatric patients in a therapeutic/clinical setting in such facility are 2 different things, and you haven't shared in what capacity you did so. With that 12 years of experience and your clear understanding of the past/current guns laws, you already should know that anyone that has been hospitalized for any psychiatric condition is automatically excluded from not being able to purchase/obtain a firearm legally. So where is this line that should be drawn in the DSM IV as to what diagnosis does or does not exclude someone owning a firearm, and who makes this diagnosis? From your 12 years of experience, you must have seen countless times where psychologists and psychiatrists regularly disagreed on how someone should be disgnosed. Should any diagnosis in the DSM IV automatically exclude someone from owing a gun? I would hope not, because at one some point in almost everyones life, you would fit the criteria for a diagnosis, even if it's ADHD. I will surely admit that I don't have the qualifications to make these types of determinations. I can also say that this dialog won't influence defining those lines either.
My 17 years have not disillusioned anything, it has only brought clarity that people make choices, good and bad. There are not many out there who don't have this ability, and those who can't, have most likely already been in an institutional setting at some point.
lightenup
A fan of Boobery
No absolutely not, but only one person can be killed at a time at very close range with a club or hammer, unlike an assault rifle that can kill many from far very quickly. As I have stated numerous times, I am not against guns or gun ownership, but I am all for debate, open minded thinking, and trying to stop mass killings....I believe there should be a discussion....close minded extremism is bad no matter what the discussion is about.....and not to beat a dead horse....new laws won't fix any problem.....
Mac, I don't think Trico Mike is for dis-arming the citizens of the country, but he does have a point....If the government decided to become a more tyrannical and oppressive entity and has the armed forces behind them, the gun owners of the country would not be able to stop them.......but debate and differing opinions are what makes America great!!! So keep it coming....
MACFLY
Too many streams too little time
Mike if you take a snapshot in time you will always find examples to back your view but if you take a larger look at history it's just true that when government disarms it's citizens tyranny can follow. This is part of what happened to the jews by the nazis. Mao did the same thing to the Chinese people.Hey Mac, ask David Koresh how that statement worked out for him,oh thats right he was an extremist wacko,or was he?
What happened at Waco was completely unnecessary btw
streamfisher
Northeast
You seem to be spending more of your time trying to discredit my words instead of providing your own. You can't keep trying to vet me out especially if you won't do the same. I did not throw my experience out there and try to present myself as an authority, you did. And yet, you still have provided nothing constructive.
Not having empathy is a major contributor to immoral behavior at all levels. Please notice that, when I referenced the Newtown shooter I also suggested he had other issues. Not having empathy and feeling like everything in front of you is not real because you can't physically feel it are clearly heading down a dangerous path as well as a demonstrated history of violent behavior.
Yes, psychiatric residency. Voluntary and involuntary. Also, I do not have a good handle on gun laws but I know guys who own guns and are very confused about the current gun laws especially when, as I was told, the laws can be different between counties and that causes them anxiety about whether or not they are in the right or wrong after only driving a few miles.
If you think tagging people to the DSM is scary, you can't fully appreciate how scary the genetic work is that they will be doing.
trico mike
make mine wild
Mac, I think you misunderstood me.I dont think we should disarm, just the opposite.My statement about making all states open carry was pretty clear. If the gov feels a threat they will stop it and there is nothing we can do i.e. waco. We already live under a oppresive regime just look at how much money the gov takes from us not just incme tax but proprtey, sales tax ect ect, but as long as we ar able to buy the latest greatest gizmo from overseas made for pennies on the dollar and big corp are getting rich off of are blood sweat and tears are guess we are all happy.
streamfisher
Northeast
Question: In this country, who do you believe would align with the government if citizens rose up, the police force, military or both or neither?
Rusty Spinner
Active member
Just a note for those that remain confused on the 2nd Amendment: there is in no way a limit stated such as "the right to own muzzle loading smooth bore rifles", it is: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
The Founding Fathers were careful to ensure the Constitution would remain a viable, living document well into the future. And they were crystal clear in their debates that only an armed citizenry could prevent the tyranny that our country faced in light of British rule at the time. The 2nd Amendment is not to protect hunters and those that like to target shoot, it is to prevent tyranny and to protect our soil from foreign invaders. If that tyranny rises its ugly head in my lifetime to a point where I feel the need to defend my God given liberties, guaranteed by our Constitution and the Bill of Rights, then I'll go down fighting that tyranny and it's really none of your business what weapon I do it with.
So if you think there is wiggle room for someone like myself to allow further weapons or capacity bans, you'd be wrong. I actually believe that the words of our Constitution mean something. In the meantime, if you feel you need to label me, so be it. I won't lose a wink of sleep over what someone thinks about my political views or my interpretation of our Constitution.
The Founding Fathers were careful to ensure the Constitution would remain a viable, living document well into the future. And they were crystal clear in their debates that only an armed citizenry could prevent the tyranny that our country faced in light of British rule at the time. The 2nd Amendment is not to protect hunters and those that like to target shoot, it is to prevent tyranny and to protect our soil from foreign invaders. If that tyranny rises its ugly head in my lifetime to a point where I feel the need to defend my God given liberties, guaranteed by our Constitution and the Bill of Rights, then I'll go down fighting that tyranny and it's really none of your business what weapon I do it with.
So if you think there is wiggle room for someone like myself to allow further weapons or capacity bans, you'd be wrong. I actually believe that the words of our Constitution mean something. In the meantime, if you feel you need to label me, so be it. I won't lose a wink of sleep over what someone thinks about my political views or my interpretation of our Constitution.
MACFLY
Too many streams too little time
Don't know and hope we never find out. I suspect it would depend on the circumstances at the time
