Orlando police ID man who killed 'Voice' singer Christina Grimmie.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a6/08/b9/a608b9306af13d142a8482757d3ac57a.jpg

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/11/entertainment/orlando-christina-grimmie-shot/index.html

Another innocent person killed by a mad man with a gun.



Orlando, Florida (CNN)Police in Orlando, Florida, on Saturday answered one of the major questions in the slaying of Christina Grimmie, the 22-year-old singer who made her name on NBC's "The Voice."
The man who shot and killed Grimmie was Kevin James Loibl, 27, of St. Petersburg, Florida, police said.
But they didn't give any background on Loibl or offer a possible motive.
The 22-year-old singer was signing autographs late Friday after a show at the The Plaza Live theater when a man approached and opened fire, police spokeswoman Wanda Miglio said. Grimmie was rushed to a hospital, where she died.

The madman:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160611164932-keven-james-loi-mugshot-medium-plus-169.jpg

Incredibly sad.

Murder is illegal in the USA they still have the death penalty for convicted murderers in some states.

What does this have to do with USA gun laws?

Quote:

Between 1993 and 2000, the gun homicide rate dropped by nearly half, from 7.0 homicides to 3.4 per 100,000 people. Despite these trends,most US adults think gun crimes have increased, in our 2013 survey more than half of Americans (56%) said the number of gun crimes had gone up compared with 20 years ago, Another 26% said the number of gun crimes remained the same, and just 12% said gun crimes had declined pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/21/gun-homicides-steady-after-decline-in-90s-suicide-rate-edges-up

Firearm homicides have halved in the USA since 1993, not many are aware of this fact.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 12^th, 2016 at 11:53am:

Murder is illegal in the USA they still have the death penalty for convicted murderers in some states. What does this have to do with USA gun laws?

Madmen can get hold of guns.
Obviously the laws are not strict enough.

They have that amendment in their constitution that says they are able to bare arms.

I wonder if you could let them bare arms , but ban ammunition and still be constitutional.

Of course no one would ever do that.

NRA opposes expanding firearm background check systems, because background checks don’t stop serious criminals from getting guns and because NRA opposes gun registration.

https://www.nraila.org/issues/background-checksnics/

Clearly the NRA prefers to defend it's ideology rather than save lives

The_Barnacle wrote on Jun 12^th, 2016 at 1:13pm:

NRA opposes expanding firearm background check systems, because background checks don’t stop serious criminals from getting guns and because NRA opposes gun registration. https://www.nraila.org/issues/background-checksnics/ Clearly the NRA prefers to defend it's ideology rather than save lives

The USA has 3-4 times higher death rate from motor vehicles compared to firearm homcides, nobody talks about violating their 4th amendment rights to bring in Random Drug and Alcohol testing like we have to reduce road deaths.
RBT and drug testing violates their 4th amendment which is why they don't have it.

The USA would save far more lives by violating their 4th amendment rights.

New Zealand abolished long gun registration in 1982 the police said it cannot prevent or solve gun crimes, Canada abolished long gun registration after spending $2 billion on it saying it cannot solve or prevent gun crimes.
Canada and New Zealand abolished long gun registration yet the NRA get singled out for opposing what the Canadians described as a massive waste of money that could have been better spent putting more police on the streets.

Background checks don't stop criminals from getting guns, the Lindt and Parramatta- Paris shooters didn't have any trouble getting guns.

The Americans should enforce the laws they already have-

Quote:

California unable to disarm 19,700 felons and mentally ill people California authorities are empowered to seize weapons owned by convicted felons and people with mental illness, but staff shortages and funding cuts have left a backlog of more than 19,700 people to disarm. articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/29/local/la-me-California-guns-20130130

The_Barnacle wrote on Jun 12^th, 2016 at 1:13pm:

NRA opposes expanding firearm background check systems, because background checks don’t stop serious criminals from getting guns and because NRA opposes gun registration. https://www.nraila.org/issues/background-checksnics/ Clearly the NRA prefers to defend it's ideology rather than save lives

The Yanks are crazy - they have more guns than people -

over 300 million guns.

miketrees wrote on Jun 12^th, 2016 at 12:51pm:

They have that amendment in their constitution that says they are able to bare arms. I wonder if you could let them bare arms , but ban ammunition and still be constitutional. Of course no one would ever do that.

Lucky it's summer up there, I wouldn't bare arms here tonight.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 12^th, 2016 at 3:54pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jun 12th, 2016 at 1:13pm: NRA opposes expanding firearm background check systems, because background checks don’t stop serious criminals from getting guns and because NRA opposes gun registration. https://www.nraila.org/issues/background-checksnics/ Clearly the NRA prefers to defend it's ideology rather than save lives The Yanks are crazy - they have more guns than people - over 300 million guns.

Mass Public Shooting in Florida occurred in ANOTHER gun-free zone:
50+ dead in a shooting at an Orlando nightclub

http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/gun-free-zone.gif



Source: https://tinyurl.com/hkhebrp   
Quote:

The suspected, confirmed by his own word in a 911 call during the seige, Islamic extremist who killed about 50 people after taking party-goers hostage inside a gay club in Orlando has been identified.     Law enforcement sources have identified the shooter, who was wielding an assault rifle and a handgun, as US citizen Omar Mateen, from Port St. Lucie in Florida.     The gunman, who was born to Afghan parents, was carrying a suspicious device, possibly a suicide vest, when he opened fire on the dance floor inside Pulse in the early hours of this morning.     At least 50 people were killed and 53 others were injured in the shooting in the deadliest mass shooting in US history. . . . On Friday singer Christina Grimmie’s was murdered in a gun-free zone in Orlando. Early this morning, at least 50 people were fatally shot at an Orlando night club — also a gun-free zone.  In both cases the media has yet to report that these attacks occurred where general citizens couldn’t defend themselves. Since at least 1950, only slightly over 1 percent of mass public shootings have occurred where general citizens have been able to defend themselves. Police are extremely important in stopping crime, but even if they had been present at the time of the nightclub shooting, they may have had a very difficult time stopping the attack. Attackers will generally shoot first at any uniformed guards or officers who are present (the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris last year illustrates that point).  Alternatively, they will move on to another place without uniformed officers. In this particular case the police only arrived on the scene after the attack occurred. That illustrates another point: it is simply impossible for the police to protect all possible targets. It is hard to ignore how these mass public shooters consciously pick targets where they know victims won’t be able to defend themselves........continued(link)

50+ Americans might be dead today simply because they are law abiding......they didn't carry their lawfully permitted firearms within the club because the club was a "Gun Free Zone".

This Islamic Terrorist had firearms because he was a member of a high tech armed security firm, & he had a special firearm permit. What can't be understood is even though he was on the FBI WATCH-LIST....actively questioned at least twice (2x)....considered a possible Islamic threat, why did he still retain his permit.....why was he still permitted to keep his firearms.

I'm not saying how many lives would have been saved, but I'm sure that if those law abiding Americans had the choice to carry their permitted firearms in the club, they would have, & if they did the outcome might had been different.

Gun Free Zones Kill!

In times of insanity , perhaps what seems like insanity may be the answer.
Make sure people are allowed to carry guns

miketrees wrote on Jun 13^th, 2016 at 10:31am:

In times of insanity , perhaps what seems like insanity may be the answer. Make sure people are allowed to carry guns

In America, places where firearm laws are the most stringent, you will find they have the most violent firearm crime irregardless of the stringent anti-firearm laws.

Why, could it be because the criminals don't fear being opposed by armed civilians?.......I think it's a distinct possibility  probability.

Interviewed hardcore violent criminals, when asked what they fear the most, they say they don't fear the police, they fear ordinary armed people who would probably be less restrained from shooting them than cops.

The NRA peddles guns on the basis that citizens need them to defend themselves.  That is obviously and clearly working ..... self evident, isn't it?

Aussie wrote on Jun 13^th, 2016 at 4:56pm:

The NRA peddles guns on the basis that citizens need them to defend themselves.  That is obviously and clearly working ..... self evident, isn't it?

& yet an insane terrorist had no trouble getting military weapons.

Ban muslims and guns.

GordyL wrote on Jun 13^th, 2016 at 5:14pm:

Ban muslims and guns.

Let's see what Trump will do if he wins.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 13^th, 2016 at 5:05pm:

Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 4:56pm: The NRA peddles guns on the basis that citizens need them to defend themselves.  That is obviously and clearly working ..... self evident, isn't it? & yet an insane terrorist had no trouble getting military weapons.

Yeas he did Bobby......but......where were the other people who ought to have been armed to the teeth to defend themselves with guns, as they have a right to says the NRA which opposes gun control so that citizens can be armed for self defence against this sort of attack.

Aussie wrote on Jun 13^th, 2016 at 5:17pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:05pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 4:56pm: The NRA peddles guns on the basis that citizens need them to defend themselves.  That is obviously and clearly working ..... self evident, isn't it? & yet an insane terrorist had no trouble getting military weapons. Yeas he did Bobby......but......where were the other people who ought to have been armed to the teeth to defend themselves with guns, as they have a right to says the NRA which opposes gun control so that citizens can be armed for self defence against this sort of attack.

I thought the night clubs had armed guards?

Bobby. wrote on Jun 13^th, 2016 at 5:20pm:

Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:17pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:05pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 4:56pm: The NRA peddles guns on the basis that citizens need them to defend themselves.  That is obviously and clearly working ..... self evident, isn't it? & yet an insane terrorist had no trouble getting military weapons. Yeas he did Bobby......but......where were the other people who ought to have been armed to the teeth to defend themselves with guns, as they have a right to says the NRA which opposes gun control so that citizens can be armed for self defence against this sort of attack. I thought the night clubs had armed guards?

That club is a gun free zone, all these shootings tend to happen in the gun free zones.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 13^th, 2016 at 5:31pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:20pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:17pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:05pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 4:56pm: The NRA peddles guns on the basis that citizens need them to defend themselves.  That is obviously and clearly working ..... self evident, isn't it? & yet an insane terrorist had no trouble getting military weapons. Yeas he did Bobby......but......where were the other people who ought to have been armed to the teeth to defend themselves with guns, as they have a right to says the NRA which opposes gun control so that citizens can be armed for self defence against this sort of attack. I thought the night clubs had armed guards? That club is a gun free zone, all these shootings tend to happen in the gun free zones.

In 1997 I went to a night club in downtown  L.A.  -

there was security just like at an airport:

an archway with a metal detector to walk through,
security scan with a metal detector wand,
armed guards with pistols.

What the hell was going on in Orlando?

Bobby. wrote on Jun 13^th, 2016 at 5:36pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:31pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:20pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:17pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:05pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 4:56pm: The NRA peddles guns on the basis that citizens need them to defend themselves.  That is obviously and clearly working ..... self evident, isn't it? & yet an insane terrorist had no trouble getting military weapons. Yeas he did Bobby......but......where were the other people who ought to have been armed to the teeth to defend themselves with guns, as they have a right to says the NRA which opposes gun control so that citizens can be armed for self defence against this sort of attack. I thought the night clubs had armed guards? That club is a gun free zone, all these shootings tend to happen in the gun free zones. In 1997 I went to a night club in downtown  L.A.  - there was security just like at an airport: an archway with a metal detector to walk through, security scan with a metal detector wand, armed guards with pistols. What the hell was going on in Orlando?

Florida law doesn't allow those with concealed carry permits to carry in places that are licensed to sell alcohol.

It's just another attack like Charlie Hebdo or Bataclan, France has strict gun laws they did nothing in those cases.

LA has tough gun laws they banned assault rifles in 1994, have a look at Californias gun laws.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 13^th, 2016 at 5:31pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:20pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:17pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:05pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 4:56pm: The NRA peddles guns on the basis that citizens need them to defend themselves.  That is obviously and clearly working ..... self evident, isn't it? & yet an insane terrorist had no trouble getting military weapons. Yeas he did Bobby......but......where were the other people who ought to have been armed to the teeth to defend themselves with guns, as they have a right to says the NRA which opposes gun control so that citizens can be armed for self defence against this sort of attack. I thought the night clubs had armed guards? That club is a gun free zone, all these shootings tend to happen in the gun free zones.

Self evidently, not.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 13^th, 2016 at 5:43pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:36pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:31pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:20pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:17pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:05pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 4:56pm: The NRA peddles guns on the basis that citizens need them to defend themselves.  That is obviously and clearly working ..... self evident, isn't it? & yet an insane terrorist had no trouble getting military weapons. Yeas he did Bobby......but......where were the other people who ought to have been armed to the teeth to defend themselves with guns, as they have a right to says the NRA which opposes gun control so that citizens can be armed for self defence against this sort of attack. I thought the night clubs had armed guards? That club is a gun free zone, all these shootings tend to happen in the gun free zones. In 1997 I went to a night club in downtown  L.A.  - there was security just like at an airport: an archway with a metal detector to walk through, security scan with a metal detector wand, armed guards with pistols. What the hell was going on in Orlando? Florida law doesn't allow those with concealed carry permits to carry in places that are licensed to sell alcohol. It's just another attack like Charlie Hebdo or Bataclan, France has strict gun laws they did nothing in those cases. LA has tough gun laws they banned assault rifles in 1994, have a look at Californias gun laws.

I don't know about the laws in the USA.

I know that I felt safe in the night club in LA -
as no one could get in there with a knife or a gun.

We need security like that here now - after this -
not that I ever go to clubs anymore.

Let's see what our leader - Malcolm - does?

After one of these attacks, the first thing the left want to do is attack the gun. The scary black .223 hunting rifle, with the folding stock, metal rails, & military aura about it.

Silly as it sounds, they blame the gun.

Did the gun charge into the crowded nightclub, & start randomly killing people all by it's lonesome?

My moneys on that at some point in time, someone had to pull it's trigger......more than once.....but the left has no answer to that......they blame the gun. It was the gun.

What about the millions upon millions of guns that are never used to commit a mass shooting?

What about the millions upon millions of their owners that never commit, & will never commit, mass shootings?

But the left tries to float their false assumptions that all that is necessary is to ban the sale of assault rifles (which is a false description, but it sounds scarey so it might work).

The AR15 was banned in 1994. Did that law stop mass shootings after the ban? The answer is no. Why didn't mass shootings stop? Because the shooters went on to use different firearms.

Actually, the use of the AR15 was hardly ever used by mass shooters, but the left figured they were scarey, so passing laws against them might work.

How many semiautomatic rifles are in public hands today in America?

If you estimated over 6 million, you might be correct.

If you estimated over 3 million, you might be correct.

If you estimated over 4,347,193 you might be correct.

Wait a minute, how can all these estimates be correct?

Why? Because the true number is unknown, so we can only estimate how many their might be.

Nobody knows the exact number, or even close to the exact number of semiautomatic rifles are in American hands.

And just for your information, the U.S. Federal Government would probably be the last to know, because maintaining records like that in America is against the law.

Awww, that can't be true. Can it?

Absolutely can be, & is.

So, how can you ban guns when you don't know who owns them, where they are, & how many may or may not exist.

Short answer.......you can't.

Also, for your information, the only bad guns, & the only bad gun owners are those that have used their firearms illegally, which means that well in excess of 99.9999+% of all semiautomatic weapons are owned by people that haven't used them illegally in mass shootings.

So, if you listen to the left by banning all those firearms, it still wouldn't have stopped the Orlando Nightclub shooter. Those 50+ dead Americans would still be dead, & no one in America would be any safer.

I just wanted to add, the law is yet to be devised that would guarantee 100% participation, & criminals never participate.   ;)

Next, I need to hear from the left who has a good estimate on how many American semiautomatic firearms owners.....you know the law abiding legal ones.....how many of those Americans will be willing to gather up their semiautomatics & drop on over to a firearm dump site, & hand in their firearms like they did here?

10%.......15%......20%......25%......28%......How many of those unknown owners will turn in their firearms, & then of the rest, how is the Government going to convince those hardcore's to play nice & turn in firearms they the  Government don't even know they have?

Oh, & forget the hundreds upon hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition the Government doesn't know about either, for those same unknown semiautomatics. ;)

But ask the left, they have all the answers, it's just a bag full of legislation out of their grasp.

Brooklyn Bridge anyone.....I'd be willing to throw in the Sphinx as a sweetener! https://i.imgsafe.org/a7da108.gif

OK Panther - you're right - America is finished -

nothing can be done about mass shootings.
it's a war zone & many more 1000s of people will die.

Already - over 30,000 Americans die every year from guns -
a lot of them from suicides.

I am glad we live here.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 14^th, 2016 at 6:14pm:

OK Panther - you're right - America is finished - nothing can be done about mass shootings. it's a war zone & many more 1000s of people will die. Already - over 30,000 Americans die every year from guns - a lot of them from suicides. I am glad we live here.

Very understandable, & there are over 320 million over there that feel exactly the same way too.

An honest answer, to a serious problem, can be summed up with this:

Lord, grant me the Serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the Courage to change the things I can,  & the Wisdom to know the difference.

Panther wrote on Jun 14^th, 2016 at 6:39pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 14th, 2016 at 6:14pm: OK Panther - you're right - America is finished - nothing can be done about mass shootings. it's a war zone & many more 1000s of people will die. Already - over 30,000 Americans die every year from guns - a lot of them from suicides. I am glad we live here. Very understandable, & there are over 320 million over there that feel exactly the same way too. An honest answer, to a serious problem, can be summed up with this: Lord grant me the Serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the Courage to change the things I can,  And the Wisdom to know the difference.

Yes - people will just have to accept that being gunned down by a madman could happen to them
& get on with their lives as -
there is nothing they can do about it.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 14^th, 2016 at 6:42pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 14th, 2016 at 6:39pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 14th, 2016 at 6:14pm: OK Panther - you're right - America is finished - nothing can be done about mass shootings. it's a war zone & many more 1000s of people will die. Already - over 30,000 Americans die every year from guns - a lot of them from suicides. I am glad we live here. Very understandable, & there are over 320 million over there that feel exactly the same way too. An honest answer, to a serious problem, can be summed up with this: Lord grant me the Serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the Courage to change the things I can,  And the Wisdom to know the difference. Yes - people will just have to accept that being gunned down by a madman could happen to them & get on with their lives as - there is nothing they can do about it.

Exactly.......

What is, is......what will be, will be.......America will, like always, will get up.....brush itself off.....& continue on...& on....& on....   ;)

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 13^th, 2016 at 5:31pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:20pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:17pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:05pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 4:56pm: The NRA peddles guns on the basis that citizens need them to defend themselves.  That is obviously and clearly working ..... self evident, isn't it? & yet an insane terrorist had no trouble getting military weapons. Yeas he did Bobby......but......where were the other people who ought to have been armed to the teeth to defend themselves with guns, as they have a right to says the NRA which opposes gun control so that citizens can be armed for self defence against this sort of attack. I thought the night clubs had armed guards? That club is a gun free zone, all these shootings tend to happen in the gun free zones.

Tend to or do?

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 14^th, 2016 at 9:43pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:31pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:20pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:17pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:05pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 4:56pm: The NRA peddles guns on the basis that citizens need them to defend themselves.  That is obviously and clearly working ..... self evident, isn't it? & yet an insane terrorist had no trouble getting military weapons. Yeas he did Bobby......but......where were the other people who ought to have been armed to the teeth to defend themselves with guns, as they have a right to says the NRA which opposes gun control so that citizens can be armed for self defence against this sort of attack. I thought the night clubs had armed guards? That club is a gun free zone, all these shootings tend to happen in the gun free zones. Tend to or do?

If say 30% of the shootings took place elsewhere, IMHO you must use tend to. That applies to shootings, but if you define it as shootings where 3 or more victims were killed...not just shot at, the incidence within "Gun Free Zones" is even higher than 68%. ;)

Tend To......my drug crazed equine....Tend to.  The overwhelming majority (you can look it up) of mass shootings by firearm in America took place in "Gun Free Zones"

Here is a short read you might find interesting, but by all means do your own research.

Panther wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 11:13am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 14th, 2016 at 9:43pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:31pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:20pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:17pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 5:05pm: Aussie wrote on Jun 13th, 2016 at 4:56pm: The NRA peddles guns on the basis that citizens need them to defend themselves.  That is obviously and clearly working ..... self evident, isn't it? & yet an insane terrorist had no trouble getting military weapons. Yeas he did Bobby......but......where were the other people who ought to have been armed to the teeth to defend themselves with guns, as they have a right to says the NRA which opposes gun control so that citizens can be armed for self defence against this sort of attack. I thought the night clubs had armed guards? That club is a gun free zone, all these shootings tend to happen in the gun free zones. Tend to or do? Tend To......my drug crazed equine....Tend to.  The overwhelming majority (you can look it up) of mass shootings by firearm in America took place in "Gun Free Zones" Here is a short read you might find interesting, but by all means do your own research.

I did


I found this


http://www.armedwithreason.com/debunking-the-gun-free-zone-myth-mass-murder-magnets/

Just watched Bill O'Reilly on Colbert say some form of gun control was reasonable.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 11:22am:

Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 11:13am: Tend To......my drug crazed equine....Tend to.  The overwhelming majority (you can look it up) of mass shootings by firearm in America took place in "Gun Free Zones" Here is a short read you might find interesting, but by all means do your own research. I did I found this http://www.armedwithreason.com/debunking-the-gun-free-zone-myth-mass-murder-magnets/

So, you stopped there?......How convenient, but not out of character.

The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the Anti-Gun left that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about GFZs.

Why?

Simply because it knocks the Anti-Gunner's socks off, & they can't, as much as they wish they could, they can't rewrite history in order to refute the factual "Gun Free Zone" statistics.

That one you picked wasn't even their most creative.....you've disappointed me, I'd had thought you would have cherry picked the best.  https://i.imgsafe.org/3cbdeb1.gif


Quote:

....In the Aurora case, the shooter gave no indication that the theater’s gun-free policy played a part in his motives......

Yet, the shooter passed up many other tempting targets, that weren't GFZs, singling out the only "Gun Free Zone" location of the lot....why?

Get the transcripts of the trial to get the broader picture, instead of the notes that were cherry picked by the defense.

The defense was attempting to keep him from going to trial for reasons of insanity, & making the judgment he did, choosing the "Gun Free Zone" location proved him, amongst other reasons of course, proved him able enough to stand trial.

For further information, they found scores of literature in his possession on how to claim insanity, & thereby avoid trial for murder, where I would suspect keeping a diary with bogus information to throw off prosecution, most probable......That's not a proven fact though, that's just my honest opinion.

Polling the actual jurors would be the only certain way to know for sure.   ;)

Panther wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 12:04pm:

. The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the Anti-Gun left that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about GFZs. [/i][/font][/size]

The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the pro-gun right that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about the benefits of gun control

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 12:33pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:04pm: . The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the Anti-Gun left that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about GFZs. [/i][/font][/size] The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the pro-gun right that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about the benefits of gun control

Name one American Gun Control law that would have absolutely stopped the Islamic Terrorist Gay Shooter in Orlando?

One (1)......

If you can't, then author one & pass it on to an American Congressman, & make sure he earmarks it for immediate action, consideration, & passage so it can be enforced ASAP. ;)

Panther wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 2:15pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:33pm: Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:04pm: . The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the Anti-Gun left that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about GFZs. [/i][/font][/size] The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the pro-gun right that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about the benefits of gun control Name one American Gun Control law that would have absolutely stopped the Islamic Gay Shooter in Orlando? One (1)...... If you can't, then author one & pass it on to an American Congressman, & make sure he earmarks it for immediate action, consideration, & passage so it can be enforced immediately. ;)

Stopped him from what? Shooting 50 people? Easy, ban automatic weapons like the AR-15. WOuld he still have shot people, possibly, but not 50.

But hey even that left wing nutjob Bill O'Reilly agrees with me.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 2:17pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:15pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:33pm: Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:04pm: . The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the Anti-Gun left that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about GFZs. [/i][/font][/size] The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the pro-gun right that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about the benefits of gun control Name one American Gun Control law that would have absolutely stopped the Islamic Gay Shooter in Orlando? One (1)...... If you can't, then author one & pass it on to an American Congressman, & make sure he earmarks it for immediate action, consideration, & passage so it can be enforced immediately. ;) Stopped him from what? Shooting 50 people? Easy, ban automatic weapons like the AR-15. WOuld he still have shot people, possibly, but not 50.

How can they do that?....the US Government doesn't even know how many AR15s are out there, much less who owns them & where they are. So decreeing a blanket ban on the AR15 wouldn't have stopped him if he wanted to get an AR15 to use.

BTW....they had a ban on AR15s (Semi-Automatic Rifles which are scarry) back in 1994......it didn't work, so they abandoned the law.



Quote:

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) — officially, the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act — is a subsection of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, a United States federal law that included a prohibition on the manufacture for civilian use of certain semi-automatic firearms it defined as assault weapons, as well as certain ammunition magazines it defined as "large capacity." The ten-year ban was passed by the U.S. Congress on September 13, 1994, and signed into law by President Bill Clinton the same day. The ban only applied to weapons manufactured after the date of the ban's enactment, and it expired on September 13, 2004, in accordance with its sunset provision. Several constitutional challenges were filed against provisions of the ban, but all were rejected by reviewing courts. There were multiple attempts to renew the ban, but none succeeded.

So, I only blame myself for your failure here....try again, but this time us this:

Name one Realistic American Gun Control law that would have absolutely stopped the Islamic Gay Shooter in Orlando?

Panther wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 2:23pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:17pm: Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:15pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:33pm: Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:04pm: . The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the Anti-Gun left that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about GFZs. [/i][/font][/size] The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the pro-gun right that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about the benefits of gun control Name one American Gun Control law that would have absolutely stopped the Islamic Gay Shooter in Orlando? One (1)...... If you can't, then author one & pass it on to an American Congressman, & make sure he earmarks it for immediate action, consideration, & passage so it can be enforced immediately. ;) Stopped him from what? Shooting 50 people? Easy, ban automatic weapons like the AR-15. WOuld he still have shot people, possibly, but not 50. How can they do that?....the US Government doesn't even know how many AR15s are out there, much less who owns them & where they are. So decreeing a blanket ban on the AR15 wouldn't have stopped him if he wanted to get an AR15 to use. BTW....they had a ban on AR15s (Semi-Automatic Rifles which are scarry) back in 1994......it didn't work, so they abandoned the law. So, I only blame myself for your failure here....try again, but this time us this: Name one Realistic American Gun Control law that would have absolutely stopped the Islamic Gay Shooter in Orlando?

Ban semi-automatic weapons. Nothing you stated actually deflects from the argument. Agiain that left wing nutjob Bill O'Reilly agrees wiuth me, and even says Australia is an example.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 2:26pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:23pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:17pm: Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:15pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:33pm: Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:04pm: . The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the Anti-Gun left that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about GFZs. [/i][/font][/size] The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the pro-gun right that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about the benefits of gun control Name one American Gun Control law that would have absolutely stopped the Islamic Gay Shooter in Orlando? One (1)...... If you can't, then author one & pass it on to an American Congressman, & make sure he earmarks it for immediate action, consideration, & passage so it can be enforced immediately. ;) Stopped him from what? Shooting 50 people? Easy, ban automatic weapons like the AR-15. WOuld he still have shot people, possibly, but not 50. How can they do that?....the US Government doesn't even know how many AR15s are out there, much less who owns them & where they are. So decreeing a blanket ban on the AR15 wouldn't have stopped him if he wanted to get an AR15 to use. BTW....they had a ban on AR15s (Semi-Automatic Rifles which are scarry) back in 1994......it didn't work, so they abandoned the law. So, I only blame myself for your failure here....try again, but this time us this: Name one Realistic American Gun Control law that would have absolutely stopped the Islamic Gay Shooter in Orlando? Ban semi-automatic weapons. Nothing you stated actually deflects from the argument. Agiain that left wing nutjob Bill O'Reilly agrees wiuth me, and even says Australia is an example.

So, lets say there are 8 million AR15s out there (as good a number as any because nobody really knows....not even Bill O'Rielly), & you introduce, pass, & enforce your ban immediately. Your counting on all criminals & all law abiding Americans to conform with your law immediately. Thats the REALISTIC law you propose?

Panther wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 2:35pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:26pm: Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:23pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:17pm: Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:15pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:33pm: Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:04pm: . The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the Anti-Gun left that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about GFZs. [/i][/font][/size] The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the pro-gun right that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about the benefits of gun control Name one American Gun Control law that would have absolutely stopped the Islamic Gay Shooter in Orlando? One (1)...... If you can't, then author one & pass it on to an American Congressman, & make sure he earmarks it for immediate action, consideration, & passage so it can be enforced immediately. ;) Stopped him from what? Shooting 50 people? Easy, ban automatic weapons like the AR-15. WOuld he still have shot people, possibly, but not 50. How can they do that?....the US Government doesn't even know how many AR15s are out there, much less who owns them & where they are. So decreeing a blanket ban on the AR15 wouldn't have stopped him if he wanted to get an AR15 to use. BTW....they had a ban on AR15s (Semi-Automatic Rifles which are scarry) back in 1994......it didn't work, so they abandoned the law. So, I only blame myself for your failure here....try again, but this time us this: Name one Realistic American Gun Control law that would have absolutely stopped the Islamic Gay Shooter in Orlando? Ban semi-automatic weapons. Nothing you stated actually deflects from the argument. Agiain that left wing nutjob Bill O'Reilly agrees wiuth me, and even says Australia is an example. So, lets say there are 8 million AR15s out there (as good a number as any because nobody really knows....not even Bill O'Rielly), & you introduce, pass, & enforce your ban immediately. Your counting on all criminals & all law abiding Americans to conform with your law immediately. Thats the REALISTIC law you propose?

Yes. WOrked here didn't it. Or are you saying Americans are so criminally minded they will keep them for nefarious purposes.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 2:36pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:35pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:26pm: Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:23pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:17pm: Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 2:15pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:33pm: Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 12:04pm: . The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the Anti-Gun left that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about GFZs. [/i][/font][/size] The internet is awash with dubious claims/postings by the pro-gun right that attempt to deny the verifiable facts about the benefits of gun control Name one American Gun Control law that would have absolutely stopped the Islamic Gay Shooter in Orlando? One (1)...... If you can't, then author one & pass it on to an American Congressman, & make sure he earmarks it for immediate action, consideration, & passage so it can be enforced immediately. ;) Stopped him from what? Shooting 50 people? Easy, ban automatic weapons like the AR-15. WOuld he still have shot people, possibly, but not 50. How can they do that?....the US Government doesn't even know how many AR15s are out there, much less who owns them & where they are. So decreeing a blanket ban on the AR15 wouldn't have stopped him if he wanted to get an AR15 to use. BTW....they had a ban on AR15s (Semi-Automatic Rifles which are scarry) back in 1994......it didn't work, so they abandoned the law. So, I only blame myself for your failure here....try again, but this time us this: Name one Realistic American Gun Control law that would have absolutely stopped the Islamic Gay Shooter in Orlando? Ban semi-automatic weapons. Nothing you stated actually deflects from the argument. Agiain that left wing nutjob Bill O'Reilly agrees wiuth me, and even says Australia is an example. So, lets say there are 8 million AR15s out there (as good a number as any because nobody really knows....not even Bill O'Rielly), & you introduce, pass, & enforce your ban immediately. Your counting on all criminals & all law abiding Americans to conform with your law immediately. Thats the REALISTIC law you propose? Yes. WOrked here didn't it. Or are you saying Americans are so criminally minded they will keep them for nefarious purposes.

Well, lets say.....again nobody really knows how many there are, but lets conservatively estimate that there are 125,000,000 legal firearm owners in America, & conservatively over 1 million criminal owners of firearms in America.

You would expect 100% compliance with a firearm ban?...remember they sleep with their firearms in America.....they cherish their firearms......they love their firearms......you REALISTICALLY expect more than 80% compliance?

Seriously?

No you're right, Yanks are idiots, so no I dont. If they had any intelligence, then yes, I'd expect it but way too many people like yourself there that just accpet google search numbers as proof.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 3:05pm:

No you're right, Yanks are idiots, so no I dont. If they had any intelligence, then yes, I'd expect it but way too many people like yourself there that just accpet google search numbers as proof.

White Flag accepted.......There are no laws anywhere in the world that will stop a crazed individual from obtaining & using a firearm for mass murder if they are intent on doing so......just because it hasn't happened here yet, doesn't mean it never will.....there are plenty of illegal semiautomatics here too, so don't kid yourself Mr. Ed.

The best bet on why it hasn't happened here since 1996 is that our crazies just aren't as smart or as cunning as their crazies are.



Officials have no clue on how many types of illegal guns are in Australia


Source: The Business Insider   
Quote:

A parliamentary inquiry has found that Australian authorities have no true data on how many illegal guns are in the country. The Senate committee’s report says that despite the Australian Crime Commission estimating there are approximately 260,000 illegal guns, the figure is seen as a “conservative” guess. The uncertainty around the size of the illicit market has prompted the Senate to call for improvements in the country’s record-keeping of firearms, including how it is collected and how accurate it is, as well as cracking down on the regulations around 3D printing. The Sydney Morning Herald reports that the inquiry found that much of the data kept by authorities was out of date and that there was a discrepancy between the types of data sets kept by the ACC and the Australian Institute of Criminology – the only organisations in Australia to keep such information........

Panther wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 3:11pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 3:05pm: No you're right, Yanks are idiots, so no I dont. If they had any intelligence, then yes, I'd expect it but way too many people like yourself there that just accpet google search numbers as proof. White Flag accepted.......There are no laws anywhere in the world that will stop a crazed individual from obtaining & using a firearm for mass murder if they are intent on doing so......just because it hasn't happened here yet, doesn't mean it never will.....there are plenty of illegal semiautomatics here too, so don't kid yourself Mr.Ed.

Yes, just because it hasnt happened in the 20 years since the ban was placed, theres no evidence to suggest it won't happen tomorrow. You could give lessons in logic to Boole.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15^th, 2016 at 3:13pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 3:11pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15th, 2016 at 3:05pm: No you're right, Yanks are idiots, so no I dont. If they had any intelligence, then yes, I'd expect it but way too many people like yourself there that just accpet google search numbers as proof. White Flag accepted.......There are no laws anywhere in the world that will stop a crazed individual from obtaining & using a firearm for mass murder if they are intent on doing so......just because it hasn't happened here yet, doesn't mean it never will.....there are plenty of illegal semiautomatics here too, so don't kid yourself Mr. Ed. The best bet on why it hasn't happened here since 1996 is that our crazies just aren't as smart or as cunning as their crazies are. Officials have no clue on how many types of illegal guns are in Australia Source: The Business Insider    Quote: A parliamentary inquiry has found that Australian authorities have no true data on how many illegal guns are in the country. The Senate committee’s report says that despite the Australian Crime Commission estimating there are approximately 260,000 illegal guns, the figure is seen as a “conservative” guess. The uncertainty around the size of the illicit market has prompted the Senate to call for improvements in the country’s record-keeping of firearms, including how it is collected and how accurate it is, as well as cracking down on the regulations around 3D printing. The Sydney Morning Herald reports that the inquiry found that much of the data kept by authorities was out of date and that there was a discrepancy between the types of data sets kept by the ACC and the Australian Institute of Criminology – the only organisations in Australia to keep such information........ Yes, just because it hasnt happened in the 20 years since the ban was placed, theres no evidence to suggest it won't happen tomorrow. You could give lessons in logic to Boole.

Nor any evidence that it couldn't happen here in Australia......why it hasn't would be pure speculation on our part, beyond an educated guess, but I would have to say IMHO we are all enjoying a borrowed luxury.....a gift from above, & that gift has an unknown expiry date.  https://i.imgsafe.org/8d154a7.gif

JFYI......The egg is all over the MSM's faces yet again.

The Extreme-Left Gun Grabbing Wackos got it all wrong again.

The Orlando Shooter.....the Islamic Terrorist that shot up that Orlando Gay Dance Club in the name of ISIS......didn't use an AR15 after all.......you know the demonized hunting rifle they want so badly to criminalize as an Assault Rifle, which it isn't.........he used a Military Grade Sig Sauer MCX:

http://www.sigsauer.com/upFiles/catalog/product/RMCX-300B-16B-TFSAL-P-large.jpg
Military Sig Sauer MCX.




Below is the AR15 Hunting Rifle the Left errantly calls an "Assault Rifle". The AR15 is the most popular hunting rifle, not only in America, but the most popular hunting rifle in the world:

https://i.imgsafe.org/2708f881b3.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8YuPPWuGW8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hs2aDCGSzLc


In their haste to judgment.......to blame the gun.........they got caught by the short & curlies in their latest lie, & their credibility is now being dashed in every news media (Radio, TV, & News Print) all across America! 

Sorry gun-grabbers, back to yer split-tongued drawing boards.....you can't use the corpses of those dead Orlando victims for your Gun-Grabbing LGBT Crusade of Deceit any longer. https://i.imgsafe.org/2fcdabb.gif

 

Good for you, Are you a professional animal culler?

Panther - who cares what gun it was?

It's what happened that matters.

forgiven

namaste

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 16^th, 2016 at 9:10pm:

Good for you, Are you a professional animal culler?

In America, the center focus of the OP's original post if you recall, they have something you may have heard of......it's the Second Amendment of the US Constitution.....the Law of the Land......the law which tells the government...not the people....it tells the government what it, the government, is permitted to do, & what it, the government can't do, & what it, the government must do.

An American needs only a simple phrased statement.....all the rest is immaterial.....

Q.....Why do you need a gun, any gun.......why do you want a gun, any gun?

A......The simple answer is: 

"It doesn't matter why I do, or why I don't. I don't need to justify my position with need - only my desire to own."

Crazy Yankee Gun Laws they say........but, laws that are, & law it is.   ;)

The Right to Keep & Bear Arms ........That's a right guaranteed in the American Constitution......the Law of the Land, end of discussion. ;)

So reassuring for the victims of firearms violence, Panther.   ::) ::)

So, can a criminal therefore get access to a firearm legally in the USA?

So, can a child therefore get access to a firearm legally in the USA?

So, can anyone have access to a fully automatic firearm legally in the USA?

If you answer no, what does that suggest about the supposed universality of the US second amendment?   ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 16^th, 2016 at 9:45pm:

So reassuring for the victims of firearms violence, Panther.   ::) ::) So, can a criminal therefore get access to a firearm legally in the USA? So, can a child therefore get access to a firearm legally in the USA? So, can anyone have access to a fully automatic firearm legally in the USA? If you answer no, what does that suggest about the supposed universality of the US second amendment?   ::) ::)

The Second Amendment does not give or parse rights......it instructs the government in what it can't do......the government can not infringe on an Americans right to Keep & Bear Arms.....the police have to curtail the criminal such as felons who by law have lost their right to keep & bear firearms..........the parents need to curtail their children who have limited rights until they reach 18 years of age, & the Courts have  decided that in some cases.....automatic weapons for example.....the government can restrict ownership of some weapons.....grenades are another example.....since 1986 fully automatic weapons have been restricted.....the courts revisit this every year, but to date, AFAIK, little resistance from the public keeps this restriction active. ;)

Panther wrote on Jun 16^th, 2016 at 9:59pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 16th, 2016 at 9:45pm: So reassuring for the victims of firearms violence, Panther.   ::) ::) So, can a criminal therefore get access to a firearm legally in the USA? So, can a child therefore get access to a firearm legally in the USA? So, can anyone have access to a fully automatic firearm legally in the USA? If you answer no, what does that suggest about the supposed universality of the US second amendment?   ::) ::) The Second Amendment does not give or parse rights......it instructs the government in what it can't do......the government can not infringe on an Americans right to Keep & Bear Arms.....the police have to curtail the criminal such as felons who by law have lost their right to keep & bear firearms..........the parents need to curtail their children who have limited rights until they reach 18 years of age, & the Courts have  decided that in some cases.....automatic weapons for example.....the government can restrict ownership of some weapons.....grenades are another example.....since 1986 fully automatic weapons have been restricted.....the courts revisit this every year, but to date, AFAIK, little resistance from the public keeps this restriction active. ;)

Maybe they need reeducation, or bewing Yanks an education

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 16^th, 2016 at 10:04pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 16th, 2016 at 9:59pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jun 16th, 2016 at 9:45pm: So reassuring for the victims of firearms violence, Panther.   ::) ::) So, can a criminal therefore get access to a firearm legally in the USA? So, can a child therefore get access to a firearm legally in the USA? So, can anyone have access to a fully automatic firearm legally in the USA? If you answer no, what does that suggest about the supposed universality of the US second amendment?   ::) ::) The Second Amendment does not give or parse rights......it instructs the government in what it can't do......the government can not infringe on an Americans right to Keep & Bear Arms.....the police have to curtail the criminal such as felons who by law have lost their right to keep & bear firearms..........the parents need to curtail their children who have limited rights until they reach 18 years of age, & the Courts have  decided that in some cases.....automatic weapons for example.....the government can restrict ownership of some weapons.....grenades are another example.....since 1986 fully automatic weapons have been restricted.....the courts revisit this every year, but to date, AFAIK, little resistance from the public keeps this restriction active. ;) Maybe they need reeducation, or bewing Yanks an education

Draft a curriculum, & submit it to the United States Department of Education.......you might succeed, if they decide to open the envelope.  https://i.imgsafe.org/5f6a4cf.gif

Panther wrote on Jun 16^th, 2016 at 10:08pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 16th, 2016 at 10:04pm: Panther wrote on Jun 16th, 2016 at 9:59pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jun 16th, 2016 at 9:45pm: So reassuring for the victims of firearms violence, Panther.   ::) ::) So, can a criminal therefore get access to a firearm legally in the USA? So, can a child therefore get access to a firearm legally in the USA? So, can anyone have access to a fully automatic firearm legally in the USA? If you answer no, what does that suggest about the supposed universality of the US second amendment?   ::) ::) The Second Amendment does not give or parse rights......it instructs the government in what it can't do......the government can not infringe on an Americans right to Keep & Bear Arms.....the police have to curtail the criminal such as felons who by law have lost their right to keep & bear firearms..........the parents need to curtail their children who have limited rights until they reach 18 years of age, & the Courts have  decided that in some cases.....automatic weapons for example.....the government can restrict ownership of some weapons.....grenades are another example.....since 1986 fully automatic weapons have been restricted.....the courts revisit this every year, but to date, AFAIK, little resistance from the public keeps this restriction active. ;) Maybe they need reeducation, or bewing Yanks an education Draft a curriculum, & submit it to the United States Department of Education.......you might succeed, if they decide to open the envelope.  https://i.imgsafe.org/5f6a4cf.gif

Wel;l my linked in says curriculum development so yes i will

E.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 16^th, 2016 at 9:30pm:

Panther - who cares what gun it was? It's what happened that matters. forgiven namaste

the point is he was able to fire repeatedly not giving anyone a chance.....and these guns are available to anyone who can afford them...

just walk out of a mental hospital and walk in and buy one.they are just hanging off the walls........

.. its their right...


makes sense to some.

cods wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 6:53am:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 16th, 2016 at 9:30pm: Panther - who cares what gun it was? It's what happened that matters. forgiven namaste the point is he was able to fire repeatedly not giving anyone a chance.....and these guns are available to anyone who can afford them... just walk out of a mental hospital and walk in and buy one.they are just hanging off the walls........ .. its their right... makes sense to some.

That's correct Cods - so the Yanks do have crazy gun laws.
We can't buy such weapons here.

cods wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 6:53am:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 16th, 2016 at 9:30pm: Panther - who cares what gun it was? It's what happened that matters. forgiven namaste the point is he was able to fire repeatedly not giving anyone a chance.....and these guns are available to anyone who can afford them... just walk out of a mental hospital and walk in and buy one.they are just hanging off the walls........ .. its their right...

No, cods you're wrong.

In America if you have been diagnosed as mentally ill, & treated as mentally ill you are precluded from purchasing a legal firearm. You wouldn't pass the stringent background checks, where you would be in the database as unfit to purchase a firearm.

Now, does it mean a mentally ill person can't by an illegal firearm. Well cods, just like here, anyone can buy just about anything they want anywhere, as long as they have the desire & determination to do so, & the cash to back that up.

So, in short, a mentally ill person can purchase an illegal firearm....it's against the law, but the law is only as good as the force you employ to back it up....to enforce it.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 6:56am:

cods wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 6:53am: Bobby. wrote on Jun 16th, 2016 at 9:30pm: Panther - who cares what gun it was? It's what happened that matters. forgiven namaste the point is he was able to fire repeatedly not giving anyone a chance.....and these guns are available to anyone who can afford them... just walk out of a mental hospital and walk in and buy one.they are just hanging off the walls........ .. its their right... makes sense to some. That's correct Cods - so the Yanks do have crazy gun laws. We can't buy such weapons here.

Bobby, please don't tell me you are so naive to believe we don't have a "black market" here, & please don't tell me you're so naive to say that we don't have those types of weapons here.

Sorry, the government has been forced to admit they don't know how many illegal weapons exist within our borders, or what kind of weapons there are, so please....this Camelot approach you take.....that we are free from evil here..... doesn't wash in the real world.....unfortunately, you are sadly mistaken. Those weapons may be more difficult to procure yes, but not impossible by a long shot if one is so disposed....excuse the pun.

http://www.champagnecomedy.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/shirty.jpg

I found a pic of you Panther

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 3:17pm:

http://www.champagnecomedy.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/shirty.jpg I found a pic of you Panther

And I found one of you just after you digested a Ute full of mushrooms:

https://i.imgsafe.org/38edfb6ddc.jpg

Panther wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 3:47pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 3:17pm: http://www.champagnecomedy.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/shirty.jpg I found a pic of you Panther And I found one of you just after you digested a VW Ute full of mushrooms: https://i.imgsafe.org/38edfb6ddc.jpg

True I'm hung like a horse.

Panther wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 7:38am:

Bobby, please don't tell me you are so naive to believe we don't have a "black market" here, & please don't tell me you're so naive to say that we don't have those types of weapons here. Sorry, the government has been forced to admit they don't know how many illegal weapons exist within our borders, or what kind of weapons there are, so please....this Camelot approach you take.....that we are free from evil here..... doesn't wash in the real world.....unfortunately, you are sadly mistaken. Those weapons may be more difficult to procure yes, but not impossible by a long shot if one is so disposed....excuse the pun.

Get real - it's super easy to get hold of military weapons in the USA.
It's not here.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 7:32pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 7:38am: Bobby, please don't tell me you are so naive to believe we don't have a "black market" here, & please don't tell me you're so naive to say that we don't have those types of weapons here. Sorry, the government has been forced to admit they don't know how many illegal weapons exist within our borders, or what kind of weapons there are, so please....this Camelot approach you take.....that we are free from evil here..... doesn't wash in the real world.....unfortunately, you are sadly mistaken. Those weapons may be more difficult to procure yes, but not impossible by a long shot if one is so disposed....excuse the pun. Get real - it's super easy to get hold of military weapons in the USA. It's not here.

So, it's not super easy here.....as you say it is in the US......but, are you saying it's impossible?.....if not, how can you assess a degree of probability when the number & kind of illegal weapons here isn't actually known?

You can't say something is impossible, or not easy, to get a hold of especially if you don't know if it exists here or not, now can you.

Right or wrong.....true or false.....being these weapons exist all over the world, it would be safe to assume they probably exist here ....somewhere.... too, especially if the state of our weapons database is in disarray.

I'm not trying to make you look foolish, but you need to pay little more attention to the laws of possibility, & probability before making black & white assumptions.

Panther wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 8:23pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 7:32pm: Panther wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 7:38am: Bobby, please don't tell me you are so naive to believe we don't have a "black market" here, & please don't tell me you're so naive to say that we don't have those types of weapons here. Sorry, the government has been forced to admit they don't know how many illegal weapons exist within our borders, or what kind of weapons there are, so please....this Camelot approach you take.....that we are free from evil here..... doesn't wash in the real world.....unfortunately, you are sadly mistaken. Those weapons may be more difficult to procure yes, but not impossible by a long shot if one is so disposed....excuse the pun. Get real - it's super easy to get hold of military weapons in the USA. It's not here. So, it's not super easy here.....as you say it is in the US......but, are you saying it's impossible?.....if not, how can you assess a degree of probability when the number & kind of illegal weapons here isn't actually known? You can't say something is impossible, or not easy, to get a hold of especially if you don't know if it exists here or not, now can you. Right or wrong.....true or false.....being these weapons exist all over the world, it would be safe to assume they probably exist here ....somewhere.... too, especially if the state of our weapons database is in disarray. I'm not trying to make you look foolish, but you need to pay little more attention to the laws of possibility, & probability before making black & white assumptions.

Come on - you can't be serious?

maybe you're a troll?

Bobby. wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 9:02pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 8:23pm: Bobby. wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 7:32pm: Panther wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 7:38am: Bobby, please don't tell me you are so naive to believe we don't have a "black market" here, & please don't tell me you're so naive to say that we don't have those types of weapons here. Sorry, the government has been forced to admit they don't know how many illegal weapons exist within our borders, or what kind of weapons there are, so please....this Camelot approach you take.....that we are free from evil here..... doesn't wash in the real world.....unfortunately, you are sadly mistaken. Those weapons may be more difficult to procure yes, but not impossible by a long shot if one is so disposed....excuse the pun. Get real - it's super easy to get hold of military weapons in the USA. It's not here. So, it's not super easy here.....as you say it is in the US......but, are you saying it's impossible?.....if not, how can you assess a degree of probability when the number & kind of illegal weapons here isn't actually known? You can't say something is impossible, or not easy, to get a hold of especially if you don't know if it exists here or not, now can you. Right or wrong.....true or false.....being these weapons exist all over the world, it would be safe to assume they probably exist here ....somewhere.... too, especially if the state of our weapons database is in disarray. I'm not trying to make you look foolish, but you need to pay little more attention to the laws of possibility, & probability before making black & white assumptions. Come on - you can't be serious? maybe you're a troll?

Ok.....am I missing something....what do you mean? I disagree with that you've been taught, so I'm a threat....so it's time for names?

Is that what you mean, because I am very serious about what I've said....I've seen what's out there, & Bobby.....it's dangerous....more dangerous than you say, & obviously have come to know if you honestly believe it. (a guess on my part).

BTW.....I know what a Troll is on the internet....in forums.....but somehow I think you might have another meaning for the word. No?

https://www.facebook.com/METalInternational/videos/10151578316252446/



if anyone knows how to put up this video file it would be much appreciated

https://www.facebook.com/METalInternational/videos/10151578316252446/

Panther wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 9:32pm:

Ok.....am I missing something....what do you mean? I disagree with that you've been taught, so I'm a threat....so it's time for names? Is that what you mean, because I am very serious about what I've said....I've seen what's out there, & Bobby.....it's dangerous....more dangerous than you say, & obviously have come to know if you honestly believe it. (a guess on my part). BTW.....I know what a Troll is on the internet....in forums.....but somehow I think you might have another meaning for the word. No?

The mass murderer in Orlando was able to buy a military type
weapon from a local gun shop.
We can't do that here.

It's as simple as that.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 9:41pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 9:32pm: Ok.....am I missing something....what do you mean? I disagree with that you've been taught, so I'm a threat....so it's time for names? Is that what you mean, because I am very serious about what I've said....I've seen what's out there, & Bobby.....it's dangerous....more dangerous than you say, & obviously have come to know if you honestly believe it. (a guess on my part). BTW.....I know what a Troll is on the internet....in forums.....but somehow I think you might have another meaning for the word. No? The mass murderer in Orlando was able to buy a military type weapon from a local gun shop. We can't do that here. It's as simple as that.

So, if you really wanted one......where there's a will there's a way (link).



Meanwhile, Camelot crumbles......

Army's assault rifles sold to bikie gangs


Source: The Australian   
Quote:

STAFF at one of the Australian Defence Force's largest weapon storage facilities have for years allegedly been involved in stealing and rebirthing military issue firearms and selling them to outlaw motorcycle gangs. The claims are made in secret police intelligence documents that have been leaked to The Australian. Despite the seriousness of the allegations, no one has been identified or charged over the allegations. The documents show that Defence officials knew almost a decade ago that the National Storage Distribution Centre, at Moorebank, in Sydney's southwest, had become a target for numerous thefts of machine guns and automatic assault rifles. The confidential report says that "staff in the armoury" at the Moorebank centre were involved in the theft and rebirthing of military firearms and some staff "were in collusion with outlaw motorcycle gangs". "The Army Intelligence and Security Unit has indicated that problems have been experienced in weapon storage units ... and between 1980 and March 1994 there were 104 separate incidents of theft of firearms," the report says. Although Australian Federal Police were called in to investigate, not only has no one been charged, but none of the weapons have been recovered. The revelations about the extent of the thefts and the failure to recover the weapons comes as NSW and federal police continue their hunt for six stolen rocket launchers which, with the suspected help of a bikie group, allegedly ended up in the hands of a criminal gang and an accused terror suspect, Mohammad Elomar. The Australian has also discovered that NSW police had seized another rocket launcher from a gang in Sydney's southwest in 2001. Members of the strikeforce hunting for the missing weapons are now going back over police files to determine whether that rocket launcher is linked to the others. A Defence spokeswoman said that investigations in 1999 into the weapon thefts had not "concluded that any Steyr (assault rifles) ... were lost, stolen or missing". However, there was criticism about Defence's poor practices and procedures in relation to storage, distribution and disposal of weapons......continued(link)

https://i.imgsafe.org/2019839.gifThose weapons, & many more like them, are out there, & surely available on the "Black Market".    https://i.imgsafe.org/2019839.gif

I certainly hope one of them don't show up at a crime scene in say Sydney, like they did in Orlando, but if they did, it would probably be...........As devastating as shootin' ducks in a pond!  

Good on Senator Christopher S. Murphy for trying to do something about it. 15hrs of straight talking isn't an easy feat. Considering he had to go through that just to allow voting on such MINOR changes shows just how broken the US system is.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/us/politics/senate-filibuster-gun-control.html?_r=0


and in the meantime, during his 15 hr speech, another 48 people were shot across the USA

http://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11952166/filibuster-gun-control-shootings

John Smith wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 9:17am:

Good on Senator Christopher S. Murphy for trying to do something about it. 15hrs of straight talking isn't an easy feat. Considering he had to go through that just to allow voting on such MINOR changes shows just how broken the US system is. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/us/politics/senate-filibuster-gun-control.html?_r=0 and in the meantime, during his 15 hr speech, another 48 people were shot across the USA http://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11952166/filibuster-gun-control-shootings

And over 2,000 died in auto accidents in the same time period......So, whats your point?

John Smith wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 9:17am:

and in the meantime, during his 15 hr speech, another 48 people were shot across the USA http://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11952166/filibuster-gun-control-shootings

The states with the toughest gun laws had the most shootings, is that supposed to be an example of how gun laws work?

Chicago has tough gun laws to go with their high crime rates, I guess black lives only matter when white people are shooting them.
heyjackass.com

Blacks have a 6-7 times higher homicide rate than white man, Senator Allen West said blacks kill more blacks every six months than what the KKK could do in 83 years.

Panther wrote on Jun 18^th, 2016 at 9:07am:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 9:41pm: Panther wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 9:32pm: Ok.....am I missing something....what do you mean? I disagree with that you've been taught, so I'm a threat....so it's time for names? Is that what you mean, because I am very serious about what I've said....I've seen what's out there, & Bobby.....it's dangerous....more dangerous than you say, & obviously have come to know if you honestly believe it. (a guess on my part). BTW.....I know what a Troll is on the internet....in forums.....but somehow I think you might have another meaning for the word. No? The mass murderer in Orlando was able to buy a military type weapon from a local gun shop. We can't do that here. It's as simple as that. So, if you really wanted one......where there's a will there's a way (link). Meanwhile, Camelot crumbles...... Army's assault rifles sold to bikie gangs Source: The Australian    Quote: STAFF at one of the Australian Defence Force's largest weapon storage facilities have for years allegedly been involved in stealing and rebirthing military issue firearms and selling them to outlaw motorcycle gangs. The claims are made in secret police intelligence documents that have been leaked to The Australian. Despite the seriousness of the allegations, no one has been identified or charged over the allegations. The documents show that Defence officials knew almost a decade ago that the National Storage Distribution Centre, at Moorebank, in Sydney's southwest, had become a target for numerous thefts of machine guns and automatic assault rifles. The confidential report says that "staff in the armoury" at the Moorebank centre were involved in the theft and rebirthing of military firearms and some staff "were in collusion with outlaw motorcycle gangs". "The Army Intelligence and Security Unit has indicated that problems have been experienced in weapon storage units ... and between 1980 and March 1994 there were 104 separate incidents of theft of firearms," the report says. Although Australian Federal Police were called in to investigate, not only has no one been charged, but none of the weapons have been recovered. The revelations about the extent of the thefts and the failure to recover the weapons comes as NSW and federal police continue their hunt for six stolen rocket launchers which, with the suspected help of a bikie group, allegedly ended up in the hands of a criminal gang and an accused terror suspect, Mohammad Elomar. The Australian has also discovered that NSW police had seized another rocket launcher from a gang in Sydney's southwest in 2001. Members of the strikeforce hunting for the missing weapons are now going back over police files to determine whether that rocket launcher is linked to the others. A Defence spokeswoman said that investigations in 1999 into the weapon thefts had not "concluded that any Steyr (assault rifles) ... were lost, stolen or missing". However, there was criticism about Defence's poor practices and procedures in relation to storage, distribution and disposal of weapons......continued(link) https://i.imgsafe.org/2019839.gifThose weapons, & many more like them, are out there, & surely available on the "Black Market".    https://i.imgsafe.org/2019839.gif I certainly hope one of them don't show up at a crime scene in say Sydney, like they did in Orlando, but if they did, it would probably be...........As devastating as shootin' ducks in a pond!

Yet the bikie gangs don't seem to use those weapons.

We're worried about insane nutcases from lunatic asylums getting militarily weapons.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 10:32am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 9:17am: and in the meantime, during his 15 hr speech, another 48 people were shot across the USA http://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11952166/filibuster-gun-control-shootings The states with the toughest gun laws had the most shootings, is that supposed to be an example of how gun laws work? Chicago has tough gun laws to go with their high crime rates, I guess black lives only matter when white people are shooting them. heyjackass.com Blacks have a 6-7 times higher homicide rate than white man, Senator Allen West said blacks kill more blacks every six months than what the KKK could do in 83 years.

Every time a gun law goes into effect, one thing is guaranteed........There will be more violent crime.

When criminals know that people probably aren't armed, they become more suitable targets for violent crime.

Criminals don't like people being able to shoot at them.....matter in fact they are more afraid of armed citizens than they are of armed police.....& that's a fact you can bank on.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 9:41pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 9:32pm: Ok.....am I missing something....what do you mean? I disagree with that you've been taught, so I'm a threat....so it's time for names? Is that what you mean, because I am very serious about what I've said....I've seen what's out there, & Bobby.....it's dangerous....more dangerous than you say, & obviously have come to know if you honestly believe it. (a guess on my part). BTW.....I know what a Troll is on the internet....in forums.....but somehow I think you might have another meaning for the word. No? The mass murderer in Orlando was able to buy a military type weapon from a local gun shop. We can't do that here. It's as simple as that.

Well maybe Australians should agitate for more guns to meet global political climate...eh? Simple as that!
Personally I prefer to live in a community that has lots of guns - I trust my neighbors, I do not trust psychopathic Government.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 17^th, 2016 at 9:41pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 17th, 2016 at 9:32pm: Ok.....am I missing something....what do you mean? I disagree with that you've been taught, so I'm a threat....so it's time for names? Is that what you mean, because I am very serious about what I've said....I've seen what's out there, & Bobby.....it's dangerous....more dangerous than you say, & obviously have come to know if you honestly believe it. (a guess on my part). BTW.....I know what a Troll is on the internet....in forums.....but somehow I think you might have another meaning for the word. No? The mass murderer in Orlando was able to buy a military type weapon from a local gun shop. We can't do that here. It's as simple as that.

We can buy military type rifles here, Qld changed the law in 2012 allowing landowners to have one Cat D license with 2 Cat D firearms.
There have been no mass shootings in Qld since they reversed the ban on semi auto centrefire.

Check out the Cat C and D Firearms available in Australia bobby, they have a Colt AR15 for sale-
cleaverfirearms.com

In Australia the authorities tell us to be a good victim and comply with the demands criminals make.

Watch how fast these criminals run when an old man with a gun doesn't comply with their demands
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwrgvqlc8DA

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 12^th, 2016 at 1:32pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jun 12th, 2016 at 1:13pm: NRA opposes expanding firearm background check systems, because background checks don’t stop serious criminals from getting guns and because NRA opposes gun registration. https://www.nraila.org/issues/background-checksnics/ Clearly the NRA prefers to defend it's ideology rather than save lives The USA has 3-4 times higher death rate from motor vehicles compared to firearm homcides, nobody talks about violating their 4th amendment rights to bring in Random Drug and Alcohol testing like we have to reduce road deaths. RBT and drug testing violates their 4th amendment which is why they don't have it. The USA would save far more lives by violating their 4th amendment rights. New Zealand abolished long gun registration in 1982 the police said it cannot prevent or solve gun crimes, Canada abolished long gun registration after spending $2 billion on it saying it cannot solve or prevent gun crimes. Canada and New Zealand abolished long gun registration yet the NRA get singled out for opposing what the Canadians described as a massive waste of money that could have been better spent putting more police on the streets. Background checks don't stop criminals from getting guns, the Lindt and Parramatta- Paris shooters didn't have any trouble getting guns. The Americans should enforce the laws they already have- Quote: California unable to disarm 19,700 felons and mentally ill people California authorities are empowered to seize weapons owned by convicted felons and people with mental illness, but staff shortages and funding cuts have left a backlog of more than 19,700 people to disarm. articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/29/local/la-me-California-guns-20130130

The USA has 3-4 times higher death rate from motor vehicles compared to firearm homcides, nobody talks about violating their 4th amendment rights to bring in Random Drug and Alcohol testing


No problem do both at the same time and save more lives.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 11:12am:

In Australia the authorities tell us to be a good victim and comply with the demands criminals make. Watch how fast these criminals run when an old man with a gun doesn't comply with their demands http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwrgvqlc8DA

Good find!!! So true..... https://i.imgsafe.org/920fbda.gif

Tough Criminals become whimpering cowards    https://i.imgsafe.org/4ef35f2.gif   when confronted with the same choices they give their victims!    

Dnarever wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 11:40am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 12th, 2016 at 1:32pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Jun 12th, 2016 at 1:13pm: NRA opposes expanding firearm background check systems, because background checks don’t stop serious criminals from getting guns and because NRA opposes gun registration. https://www.nraila.org/issues/background-checksnics/ Clearly the NRA prefers to defend it's ideology rather than save lives The USA has 3-4 times higher death rate from motor vehicles compared to firearm homcides, nobody talks about violating their 4th amendment rights to bring in Random Drug and Alcohol testing like we have to reduce road deaths. RBT and drug testing violates their 4th amendment which is why they don't have it. The USA would save far more lives by violating their 4th amendment rights. New Zealand abolished long gun registration in 1982 the police said it cannot prevent or solve gun crimes, Canada abolished long gun registration after spending $2 billion on it saying it cannot solve or prevent gun crimes. Canada and New Zealand abolished long gun registration yet the NRA get singled out for opposing what the Canadians described as a massive waste of money that could have been better spent putting more police on the streets. Background checks don't stop criminals from getting guns, the Lindt and Parramatta- Paris shooters didn't have any trouble getting guns. The Americans should enforce the laws they already have- Quote: California unable to disarm 19,700 felons and mentally ill people California authorities are empowered to seize weapons owned by convicted felons and people with mental illness, but staff shortages and funding cuts have left a backlog of more than 19,700 people to disarm. articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/29/local/la-me-California-guns-20130130 The USA has 3-4 times higher death rate from motor vehicles compared to firearm homcides, nobody talks about violating their 4th amendment rights to bring in Random Drug and Alcohol testing No problem do both at the same time and save more lives.

In safety-sensitive work places random drug & alcohol testing should be ok....to a degree......but anywhere else, if someone is being tracked for erratic behavior behind the wheel I don't think there would be many Americans who would argue & protest with drug & alcohol testing.

That said, as I've always believed, random testing without a reasonable suspicion of criminal behavior should be completely banned & eradicated if implemented, & if not yet introduced, fought at every quarter. I think long lines of cars pulled over for random testing without any reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing is a National Disgrace,  no better than Nazi Germany in 1939.

Life without freedom is an empty life.........life at the will of government guarantees a life of cower & submission, not liberty.

Without firearms for self-defense, the biggest enemy in America would eventually become government, who will seek to control them & their families at every turn, & they would be helpless to stop them.

Embrace Freedom & Liberty..........Americans should never submit!

Panther wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 11:52am:

Dnarever wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 11:40am: Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 12th, 2016 at 1:32pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Jun 12th, 2016 at 1:13pm: NRA opposes expanding firearm background check systems, because background checks don’t stop serious criminals from getting guns and because NRA opposes gun registration. https://www.nraila.org/issues/background-checksnics/ Clearly the NRA prefers to defend it's ideology rather than save lives The USA has 3-4 times higher death rate from motor vehicles compared to firearm homcides, nobody talks about violating their 4th amendment rights to bring in Random Drug and Alcohol testing like we have to reduce road deaths. RBT and drug testing violates their 4th amendment which is why they don't have it. The USA would save far more lives by violating their 4th amendment rights. New Zealand abolished long gun registration in 1982 the police said it cannot prevent or solve gun crimes, Canada abolished long gun registration after spending $2 billion on it saying it cannot solve or prevent gun crimes. Canada and New Zealand abolished long gun registration yet the NRA get singled out for opposing what the Canadians described as a massive waste of money that could have been better spent putting more police on the streets. Background checks don't stop criminals from getting guns, the Lindt and Parramatta- Paris shooters didn't have any trouble getting guns. The Americans should enforce the laws they already have- Quote: California unable to disarm 19,700 felons and mentally ill people California authorities are empowered to seize weapons owned by convicted felons and people with mental illness, but staff shortages and funding cuts have left a backlog of more than 19,700 people to disarm. articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/29/local/la-me-California-guns-20130130 The USA has 3-4 times higher death rate from motor vehicles compared to firearm homcides, nobody talks about violating their 4th amendment rights to bring in Random Drug and Alcohol testing No problem do both at the same time and save more lives. Life without freedom is an empty life.........life at the will of government guarantees a life of cower & submission, not liberty. Without firearms for self-defense, the biggest enemy becomes government, who will seek to control you & your family at every turn, & you will be helpless to stop them. Embrace Freedom & Liberty..........Never submit!

Guns provide no defence against government nor do they have anything to do with freedom ? Rather makes the whole assertion invalid.

Dnarever wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 11:57am:

Panther wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 11:52am: Dnarever wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 11:40am: Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 12th, 2016 at 1:32pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Jun 12th, 2016 at 1:13pm: NRA opposes expanding firearm background check systems, because background checks don’t stop serious criminals from getting guns and because NRA opposes gun registration. https://www.nraila.org/issues/background-checksnics/ Clearly the NRA prefers to defend it's ideology rather than save lives The USA has 3-4 times higher death rate from motor vehicles compared to firearm homcides, nobody talks about violating their 4th amendment rights to bring in Random Drug and Alcohol testing like we have to reduce road deaths. RBT and drug testing violates their 4th amendment which is why they don't have it. The USA would save far more lives by violating their 4th amendment rights. New Zealand abolished long gun registration in 1982 the police said it cannot prevent or solve gun crimes, Canada abolished long gun registration after spending $2 billion on it saying it cannot solve or prevent gun crimes. Canada and New Zealand abolished long gun registration yet the NRA get singled out for opposing what the Canadians described as a massive waste of money that could have been better spent putting more police on the streets. Background checks don't stop criminals from getting guns, the Lindt and Parramatta- Paris shooters didn't have any trouble getting guns. The Americans should enforce the laws they already have- Quote: California unable to disarm 19,700 felons and mentally ill people California authorities are empowered to seize weapons owned by convicted felons and people with mental illness, but staff shortages and funding cuts have left a backlog of more than 19,700 people to disarm. articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/29/local/la-me-California-guns-20130130 The USA has 3-4 times higher death rate from motor vehicles compared to firearm homcides, nobody talks about violating their 4th amendment rights to bring in Random Drug and Alcohol testing No problem do both at the same time and save more lives. Life without freedom is an empty life.........life at the will of government guarantees a life of cower & submission, not liberty. Without firearms for self-defense, the biggest enemy becomes government, who will seek to control you & your family at every turn, & you will be helpless to stop them. Embrace Freedom & Liberty..........Never submit! Guns provide no defence against government nor do they have anything to do with freedom ? Rather makes the whole assertion invalid.

In America guns are the only thing between the people's Constitutional Rights, & a tyrannical government. The first 10 Amendments of the US Constitution is the Bill of Rights. The second amendment instructs government that they must not infringe upon the people's right....their Natural Right....to self-defense.....the government is forbidden to infringe upon the right ot keep & bear arms.

Without that right, how then would Americans be able to defend all the other 9 guaranteed rights from being taken away from them by a tyrannical government?

The Founding Fathers intended Americans to be able to defend their rights if necessary....with weapons....firearms. And if government disobeys their directives within the Constitution, the people will then have the power & right to rise up & overthrow such a government, & replace it with one of their liking as described by the Founding Fathers.

The US Constitution tells government what it must do, & what it is forbidden to do.

The US Constitution does not provide government with the strength to rule.....it merely permits government to govern by strict rules as prescribed within it, in the service of, & only at the service of, the people.

The US Constitution is the Law of the Land. All laws must pass the test of Constitutionality or they aren't laws in America........full stop.

Panther wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 11:43am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 11:12am: In Australia the authorities tell us to be a good victim and comply with the demands criminals make. Watch how fast these criminals run when an old man with a gun doesn't comply with their demands http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwrgvqlc8DA Good find!!! So true..... https://i.imgsafe.org/920fbda.gif Tough Criminals become whimpering cowards    https://i.imgsafe.org/4ef35f2.gif   when confronted with the same choices they give their victims!

Unfortunately it didn't work at Orlando.

The murderer shot the armed guards at the entrance.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 12:33pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 11:43am: Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 11:12am: In Australia the authorities tell us to be a good victim and comply with the demands criminals make. Watch how fast these criminals run when an old man with a gun doesn't comply with their demands http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwrgvqlc8DA Good find!!! So true..... https://i.imgsafe.org/920fbda.gif Tough Criminals become whimpering cowards    https://i.imgsafe.org/4ef35f2.gif   when confronted with the same choices they give their victims!     Unfortunately it didn't work at Orlando. The murderer shot the armed guards at the entrance.

That's what he knew to do, being that that armed guard is the only one permitted to carry a firearm in a "Gun Free Zone", which the club was.

If the patrons of that club were permitted to carry their legally permitted firearms inside the club, there would have probably been a different outcome.

All the Islamic Terrorist had to do was kill the only armed person who could stop him, & then stand at the only exit & fire into the crowd indiscriminately.....which he did.

He moved about with impunity killing at will, fearing nothing, because the law was on his side, & nobody else would be armed to shoot him. 

Bobby. wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 12:33pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 11:43am: Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 11:12am: In Australia the authorities tell us to be a good victim and comply with the demands criminals make. Watch how fast these criminals run when an old man with a gun doesn't comply with their demands http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwrgvqlc8DA Good find!!! So true..... https://i.imgsafe.org/920fbda.gif Tough Criminals become whimpering cowards    https://i.imgsafe.org/4ef35f2.gif   when confronted with the same choices they give their victims!     Unfortunately it didn't work at Orlando. The murderer shot the armed guards at the entrance.

The Orlando offender was in the club for 3 hours before the police did something.

It worked in Texas when 2 muslims tried to shoot up a draw Muhammad contest, the result was 2 dead jihadis before they even made it to the front door, both jihadis were armed with similar weapons to Orlando

@Sir Bobby

I posted this elsewhere, but you must have missed it, so here it is again.....Read it, then read it again, then again until it sinks in!!!


Why terrorists target gun-free zones


Source: The New York Post   
Quote:

When will politicians finally recognize that they can’t protect all the possible shooting targets? Possibly the largest mass public shooting in US history occurred early on Sunday morning, leaving 50 dead. On Friday, also in Orlando, singer Christina Grimmie was murdered after a concert. Both of these shootings had something in common: They both occurred in places where private citizens were banned from carrying permitted concealed handguns. With the exception of Donald Trump, over the last few days politicians have talked about everything but gun-free zones. Hillary Clinton and President Obama have been talking background checks on the private transfers of guns or banning people who are on the “no-fly lists” from buying guns. But not one of the mass shootings since at least 2000, including Sunday’s, would’ve been stopped by these laws. Nor would renewing the federal “assault weapons” ban solve the problem; even research paid for by Bill Clinton’s administration found no evidence the ban reduced any type of crime. Just a couple of months ago, a young ISIS sympathizer planned a shooting at one of the largest churches in Detroit. An FBI wire recorded him explaining why he had picked the church as a target: “It’s easy, and a lot of people go there. Plus people are not allowed to carry guns in church. Plus it would make the news.” Police are probably the single most important factor in stopping crime, but stopping a mass public shooting is an extremely dangerous proposition for officers and security guards alike. Attackers will generally first shoot any uniformed guards or officers who are present. During the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris last year, the first person killed was the guard who was protecting the magazine’s offices. Being able to choose the time and place of the attack gives terrorists a major strategic advantage. Last year, France learned that the hard way. In a city of 2.3 million people, there are simply too many possible targets for the police and military to protect. Parisians could take cellphone videos of terrorists just 12 yards away, but could do nothing but watch the slaughter. In the United States, we have about 628,000 police to protect 320 million Americans. PoliceOne, a private organization with 450,000 members (380,000 full-time active law enforcement and 70,000 retired), polled its members in 2013 shortly after the Newtown, Conn., massacre. Eighty percent of respondents said allowing legally armed citizens to carry guns in places such as Newtown and Aurora would have reduced the number of casualties. Another 6 percent thought the presence of legally armed civilians would “likely” have prevented the innocent casualties altogether. According to police and prosecutors, there have been dozens of cases of permit holders clearly stopping what would have been mass public shootings. It’s understandable these killers avoid places where they can’t kill a large number of people. Research I have conducted with economist Bill Landes looked at 13 different types of gun-control laws. Right-to-carry laws were the only type that made a difference in the rate and severity of these mass public shootings. Such laws are like those that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against last week, when it determined that California’s citizens didn’t have the right to protect themselves in public with concealed guns. (The open carry of guns is already illegal in California.) President Obama has said mockingly, “Some here believe that having more guns makes us all safer.” He says we wouldn’t have these mass public shootings if that were true. However, just because there are a lot of guns in the United States doesn’t mean that people always have access to them for protection. It ought to be common sense — even the most ardent gun-control advocate would never put “Gun-Free Zone” signs on their homes. Let’s finally stop putting them elsewhere......

Panther wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 12:42pm:

That's what he knew to do, being that that armed guard is the only one permitted to carry a firearm in a "Gun Free Zone", which the club was. If the patrons of that club were permitted to carry their legally permitted firearms inside the club, there would have probably been a different outcome. All the Islamic Terrorist had to do was kill the only armed person who could stop him, & then stand at the only exit & fire into the crowd indiscriminately.....which he did. He moved about with impunity killing at will, fearing nothing, because the law was on his side, & nobody else would be armed to shoot him.

Are you saying that the night club should have allowed
drunken homosexuals to carry guns on a normal night?

No pub or club wants drunks with firearms.

Tell me - are you on medication or have you stopped taking your medication?

*

Bobby. wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 1:05pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 12:42pm: That's what he knew to do, being that that armed guard is the only one permitted to carry a firearm in a "Gun Free Zone", which the club was. If the patrons of that club were permitted to carry their legally permitted firearms inside the club, there would have probably been a different outcome. All the Islamic Terrorist had to do was kill the only armed person who could stop him, & then stand at the only exit & fire into the crowd indiscriminately.....which he did. He moved about with impunity killing at will, fearing nothing, because the law was on his side, & nobody else would be armed to shoot him.  Are you saying that the night club should have allowed drunken homosexuals to carry guns on a normal night? No pub or club wants drunks with firearms.

Homosexuals shoot just as good as straights, so I wouldn't mind trusting one to watch my back. You should get over that fear...... ;)

In the USA, unlike here obviously by your astonishment, it's illegal to serve alcohol to a drunk person, or a person even suspected of being drunk, & obviously unlike here, it's strictly adhered to.

Establishment owners & staff (who btw would also be allowed to carry their firearms in the club along with the many other non-drunks if it were not a "Gun Free Zone") get mandatory training regarding service procedures, & are ever vigilant when it comes to possible patron intoxication.

Outside that, I suggest you stop watching those late night Italian spaghetti westerns on TV. https://i.imgsafe.org/a7da108.gif

Get three coffins ready - A Fistful of Dollars 1964


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ_7br_3y54

Panther wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 10:27am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 9:17am: Good on Senator Christopher S. Murphy for trying to do something about it. 15hrs of straight talking isn't an easy feat. Considering he had to go through that just to allow voting on such MINOR changes shows just how broken the US system is. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/us/politics/senate-filibuster-gun-control.html?_r=0 and in the meantime, during his 15 hr speech, another 48 people were shot across the USA http://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11952166/filibuster-gun-control-shootings And over 2,000 died in auto accidents in the same time period......So, whats your point?

only an id1ot would liken someone being shot to an automobile accident

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 10:32am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 9:17am: and in the meantime, during his 15 hr speech, another 48 people were shot across the USA http://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11952166/filibuster-gun-control-shootings The states with the toughest gun laws had the most shootings, is that supposed to be an example of how gun laws work? Chicago has tough gun laws to go with their high crime rates, I guess black lives only matter when white people are shooting them. heyjackass.com Blacks have a 6-7 times higher homicide rate than white man, Senator Allen West said blacks kill more blacks every six months than what the KKK could do in 83 years.

state legislation won't work whilst people can drive an hour, cross a border, buy their gun and then drive back ... all without anyone or anything to stop them.

You may as well tell me you're banning guns in campeltown but not in Picton .... :D :D

John Smith wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 2:32pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 10:27am: John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 9:17am: Good on Senator Christopher S. Murphy for trying to do something about it. 15hrs of straight talking isn't an easy feat. Considering he had to go through that just to allow voting on such MINOR changes shows just how broken the US system is. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/us/politics/senate-filibuster-gun-control.html?_r=0 and in the meantime, during his 15 hr speech, another 48 people were shot across the USA http://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11952166/filibuster-gun-control-shootings And over 2,000 died in auto accidents in the same time period......So, whats your point? only an id1ot would liken someone being shot to an automobile accident

More people die from Transport accidents than guns in the USA.

The 4th amendment is why they can never have RBT or RDT.

They would save more lives by ignoring the 4th amendment.

Panther wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 12:42pm:

That's what he knew to do, being that that armed guard is the only one permitted to carry a firearm in a "Gun Free Zone" If the patrons of that club were permitted to carry their legally permitted firearms inside the club, there would have probably been a different outcome.,

yet the USA has more guns and gun owners than any other country in the world ................ and they also have the highest number of gun deaths :D :D

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 2:38pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:32pm: Panther wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 10:27am: John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 9:17am: Good on Senator Christopher S. Murphy for trying to do something about it. 15hrs of straight talking isn't an easy feat. Considering he had to go through that just to allow voting on such MINOR changes shows just how broken the US system is. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/us/politics/senate-filibuster-gun-control.html?_r=0 and in the meantime, during his 15 hr speech, another 48 people were shot across the USA http://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11952166/filibuster-gun-control-shootings And over 2,000 died in auto accidents in the same time period......So, whats your point? only an id1ot would liken someone being shot to an automobile accident More people die from Transport accidents than guns in the USA. The 4th amendment is why they can never have RBT or RDT. They would save more lives by ignoring the 4th amendment.

I agree, it should be changed ...... but I still don't see what one has to do with the other.

John Smith wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 2:44pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:38pm: John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:32pm: Panther wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 10:27am: John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 9:17am: Good on Senator Christopher S. Murphy for trying to do something about it. 15hrs of straight talking isn't an easy feat. Considering he had to go through that just to allow voting on such MINOR changes shows just how broken the US system is. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/us/politics/senate-filibuster-gun-control.html?_r=0 and in the meantime, during his 15 hr speech, another 48 people were shot across the USA http://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11952166/filibuster-gun-control-shootings And over 2,000 died in auto accidents in the same time period......So, whats your point? only an id1ot would liken someone being shot to an automobile accident More people die from Transport accidents than guns in the USA. The 4th amendment is why they can never have RBT or RDT. They would save more lives by ignoring the 4th amendment. I agree, it should be changed ...... but I still don't see what one has to do with the other.

The Americans have a constitutional right to firearms.

If you don't like it move to Mexico they have tough gun laws.

You would make a good green supporter you think your opinions are valid outside of Australia

Gentlemen, please forgive me......I've mistakenly said 2,000 people died on the roads in response.........the number should had been 200 in that 15 hour time frame....not 2,000.....Sorry for that!

See, I lower the road toll in America without ignoring the 4th amendment, which BTW is a wonderful amendment protecting American's right to go about their lives without being molested by the goose steppin' coppers, unless they have just cause to do so!

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 2:47pm:

The Americans have a constitutional right to firearms.

that's another load of crap that's open for debate ... the 2nd amendment calls for a right to a well regulated militia ....

either way ...  change the constitution if that's what it takes

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 2:47pm:

If you don't like it move to Mexico they have tough gun laws.

are you in Mexico or the USA?

John Smith wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 2:52pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:47pm: The Americans have a constitutional right to firearms. that's another load of crap that's open for debate ... the 2nd amendment calls for a right to a well regulated militia .... either way ...  change the constitution if that's what it takes

It also says the RTKBA shall not be infringed.

Any law in an infringement.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 2:55pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:52pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:47pm: The Americans have a constitutional right to firearms. that's another load of crap that's open for debate ... the 2nd amendment calls for a right to a well regulated militia .... either way ...  change the constitution if that's what it takes It also says the RTKBA shall not be infringed. Any law in an infringement.

like i said, it's open to debate ... and it's not something I want to debate right now regardless.

Change the constitution if that's what it takes

John Smith wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 2:53pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:47pm: If you don't like it move to Mexico they have tough gun laws. are you in Mexico or the USA?

Sydney

If you don't like American gun laws try Mexico they have strict gun laws with a 15.7 per 100K homicide rate

John Smith wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 2:56pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:55pm: John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:52pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:47pm: The Americans have a constitutional right to firearms. that's another load of crap that's open for debate ... the 2nd amendment calls for a right to a well regulated militia .... either way ...  change the constitution if that's what it takes It also says the RTKBA shall not be infringed. Any law in an infringement. like i said, it's open to debate ... and it's not something I want to debate right now regardless. Change the constitution if that's what it takes

It's not our constitution so nothing for us to debate, the leftards think their worthless opinions are valued.

How about changing the laws in Islamic countries that have the death penalty for atheists and homosexuals any lefties want to do that, why do the lefties think they can change laws in one country and not another?

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 2:57pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:53pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:47pm: If you don't like it move to Mexico they have tough gun laws. are you in Mexico or the USA? Sydney If you don't like American gun laws try Mexico they have strict gun laws with a 15.7 per 100K homicide rate

Mexico and most of southern America is run by the drug barons. They have bigger problems than gun laws.

John Smith wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 2:52pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:47pm: The Americans have a constitutional right to firearms. that's another load of crap that's open for debate ... the 2nd amendment calls for a right to a well regulated militia .... either way ...  change the constitution if that's what it takes

Go for it.......I'll take all bets against that happening before we are dusted bones!!

Oh,,& before you go spouting on about something....like the word regulated......a cursory search would show you that word meant something very different (it meant trained, not government supervised or controlled) back in the 1700's.....& what it meant then determines it's interpretation today.....it's called "Original Intent"......in Constitutional law it's everything....so chill sparky! https://i.imgsafe.org/f487d37.gif

Panther wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 3:02pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:52pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:47pm: The Americans have a constitutional right to firearms. that's another load of crap that's open for debate ... the 2nd amendment calls for a right to a well regulated militia .... either way ...  change the constitution if that's what it takes Go for it.......I'll take all bets against that happening before we are dusted bones!! Oh,,& before you go spouting on about something....like the word regulated......a cursory search would show you that word meant something very different (it meant trained, not government supervised or controlled) back in the 1700's.....& what it meant then determines it's interpretation today.....it's called "Original Intent"......in Constitutional law it's everything....so chill sparky! https://i.imgsafe.org/f487d37.gif

so how is Joe Blow being allowed to walk in off the street with no background checks and no waiting period make him 'well trained'?  :D :D :D :D

John Smith wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 3:05pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 3:02pm: John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:52pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:47pm: The Americans have a constitutional right to firearms. that's another load of crap that's open for debate ... the 2nd amendment calls for a right to a well regulated militia .... either way ...  change the constitution if that's what it takes Go for it.......I'll take all bets against that happening before we are dusted bones!! Oh,,& before you go spouting on about something....like the word regulated......a cursory search would show you that word meant something very different (it meant trained, not government supervised or controlled) back in the 1700's.....& what it meant then determines it's interpretation today.....it's called "Original Intent"......in Constitutional law it's everything....so chill sparky! https://i.imgsafe.org/f487d37.gif so how is Joe Blow being allowed to walk in off the street with no background checks and no waiting period make him 'well trained'?  :D :D :D :D

They have background checks in the USA the lefties pluck any old bullshit from their asses.

Our police are supposed to be well trained

Lindt siege- Killed one innocent woman and wounded 4 others while trying to shoot a single offender with a beard

Hornsby- 3 innocent bystanders wounded when police tried to shoot a man with a knife

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 3:09pm:

Our police are supposed to be well trained Lindt siege- Killed one innocent woman and wounded 4 others while trying to shoot a single offender with a beard Hornsby- 3 innocent bystanders wounded when police tried to shoot a man with a knife

my comment was in response to panthers refined definition of 'regulated'

John Smith wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 3:05pm:

Panther wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 3:02pm: John Smith wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:52pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 2:47pm: The Americans have a constitutional right to firearms. that's another load of crap that's open for debate ... the 2nd amendment calls for a right to a well regulated militia .... either way ...  change the constitution if that's what it takes Go for it.......I'll take all bets against that happening before we are dusted bones!! Oh,,& before you go spouting on about something....like the word regulated......a cursory search would show you that word meant something very different (it meant trained, not government supervised or controlled) back in the 1700's.....& what it meant then determines it's interpretation today.....it's called "Original Intent"......in Constitutional law it's everything....so chill sparky! https://i.imgsafe.org/f487d37.gif so how is Joe Blow being allowed to walk in off the street with no background checks and no waiting period make him 'well trained'?  :D :D :D :D

He doesn't need to be well trained, the statement says the Militia should be, & that's not a prerequisite to ownership, but again individual training regulations vary State to State. Look them up....they're easy to find if you want to know more.

The militia clause you seem to have misunderstandings about, simply stipulates that the Militia needs to be well trained, but the right to own & bear arms does not require belonging to a militia, as per the writings of the Founding Fathers....The Federalist Papers...etc, etc....& most importantly the findings & rulings.....like them or not.....the findings & rulings of the United States Supreme Court.....the last word on Constitutional interpretation.

The second clause is the clause the expresses the self-defense/individual statement....the individual right, in which the government is forbidden to infringe upon....an individuals Natural Right to Keep & Bear Arms. The Constitution does not give or authorize the right to the people, it just states that the inalienable right exists, bestowed on the people by a 'higher power than government', & the government is forbidden to infringe upon that right.

Again, well documented by the Founding Father's documents of the time, & codified by the Supreme Court.

I've been over this topic many times in the other firearms threads, & if you need further documentation pertaining to the facts I've outlined already today, & then some, by all means feel free to hunt them up & have a read....follow the links I provided...etc...etc.

Have fun, & Enjoy ;)

Panther wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 1:29pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 1:05pm: Panther wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 12:42pm: That's what he knew to do, being that that armed guard is the only one permitted to carry a firearm in a "Gun Free Zone", which the club was. If the patrons of that club were permitted to carry their legally permitted firearms inside the club, there would have probably been a different outcome. All the Islamic Terrorist had to do was kill the only armed person who could stop him, & then stand at the only exit & fire into the crowd indiscriminately.....which he did. He moved about with impunity killing at will, fearing nothing, because the law was on his side, & nobody else would be armed to shoot him.  Are you saying that the night club should have allowed drunken homosexuals to carry guns on a normal night? No pub or club wants drunks with firearms. [size=11][font=Georgia][i] Homosexuals shoot just as good as straights, so I wouldn't mind trusting one to watch my back. You should get over that fear...... ;) In the USA, unlike here obviously by your astonishment, it's illegal to serve alcohol to a drunk person, or a person even suspected of being drunk, & obviously unlike here, it's strictly adhered to. Establishment owners & staff (who btw would also be allowed to carry their firearms in the club along with the many other non-drunks if it were not a "Gun Free Zone") get mandatory training regarding service procedures, & are ever vigilant when it comes to possible patron intoxication.

A mixture of alcohol & guns would be a disaster.

Quote:

Mexico and most of southern America is run by the drug barons. They have bigger problems than gun laws.

"Most of southern America"??

You mean like Kentucky on down or what?

The4thEstate wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 5:43pm:

Quote: Mexico and most of southern America is run by the drug barons. They have bigger problems than gun laws. "Most of southern America"?? You mean like Kentucky on down or what?

no, I mean the South Americas

I know he's a comedian, but this seems to disagree with what Panther says about the history of the 2nd amendment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B56Dr1Q5Z0k

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 10:53am:

I know he's a comedian, but this seems to disagree with what Panther says about the history of the 2nd amendment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B56Dr15Z0k

https://i.imgsafe.org/19a04c7.gif  https://i.imgsafe.org/3cbdeb1.gif  https://i.imgsafe.org/080eb5d.gif  https://i.imgsafe.org/1018e24.gif  https://i.imgsafe.org/19a04c7.gif

Yes, he is a comedian.........an American Comedian.

Funny, he offered not one shred of historical documentation from any Constitutional scholars supporting any points of his humorous recital.

He's a comedian, he wouldn't need to, nor be expected to have any.

Just a sting of rambling jokes & satire.

Then again, that's his job, & his job is portraying humorous entertainment, not intellectual fact in any degree.

This comedian exercised his First Amendment Right to his protected Freedom of Speech, which permits him to speak as he chooses about any topic he chooses, without worry of retaliation from his government.

That Right is his unalienable right to Free Speech, the right of the People, not granted by the government, & which is a right that can't be taken away by any American government or government Representative.

If he wishes to speak publicly about something before the Courts, no Judge can stop him from speaking about it, regardless of what he speaks about. 

The First Amendment prohibits government, & any of it's Representatives, from doing so.

The Second Amendment protects the First Amendment.

The Second Amendment also protects itself, & all the other Rights contained in the First 10 Amendments to the US Constitution.........better known as "The Bill of Rights".

That was the Founding Father's main reason for inserting the Second Amendment into the Bill of Rights, to affirm the American People's Unalienable Rights, & protect those Unalienable Rights forever.

Many governments around the world are so afraid of their People, that when they were formed, their crafters refused to affirm their Citizen's Rights in a basic Bill of Rights.

Any Constitution without an affirmation of the Citizens basic unalienable rights, IMHO, is incomplete, & one must ask why......what is the reason that it has none.

Here is a video, that isn't narrated by a comedian, but rather by someone who takes his narration seriously.

It's not the only video regarding this issue.

The facts contained in this video are supported by documentation, & supported by numerous Constitutional lawyers & scholars who have exhaustively studied & researched the notes, writings, & other documentation of America's Founding Fathers to know their "Original Intent" when crafting the Second Amendment, as well as all the other original Amendments to the US Constitution.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1uG3uKABOE

Bill O'Reilly has some interesting views on the right to bear arms. He favours a law that stipulates what those bearable firearms are. That seems reasonable. What is the cut-off category. A 50 calibre on a tripod? Grenade launcher? Let's face it, its damned unsportsmanlike to take out a deer or a kangaroo with a machine gun. So you cannot come on with the sporting shooter bullsh!t. Personally, I think sport ends with the open sight. Can't make the shot without a scope? Poor baby! 

Any banned semi-automatic, or single action version of weapons that are based on an automatic design, can be modified to fully automatic; some quite easily. So there is a problem right there.

And when it comes to relying on the background checks and other official review, we have just seen a huge massacre in Florida by a person who had been refused his purchase, and was then reported to the police. The guy had a record, and the police did nothing to check up on what he was doing. What's the point in reporting a suspected terrorist?

Anyone who thinks the American gun ownership issue can be corrected with a few laws, should look more carefully. Its easy to pontificate at this distance. In the mean time, depending on the year, Australia is the 6th to 8th largest importer of firearms. Around 140,000 firearms a year not counting the military. Police account for 5%. Its funny how Americans like O'Reilly think we cannot buy guns here.

And I think thats the key issuevoter, no ones really suggesting ban all guns but surely reasonable limitations are fine. Keep your handguns but get rid of more powerful stuff and have stroing background checks and enforce them

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 10:53am:

I know he's a comedian, but this seems to disagree with what Panther says about the history of the 2nd amendment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B56Dr1Q5Z0k

If more young adults had JOBS this little beta male metrosexual wouldn't have much of an audience.  His gun show bubbas look very much like props.

We don't want an Australia like this - Yanky land is enough.



Get three coffins ready - A Fistful of Dollars 1964


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ_7br_3y54

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 9:26pm:

And I think thats the key issuevoter, no ones really suggesting ban all guns but surely reasonable limitations are fine. Keep your handguns but get rid of more powerful stuff and have stroing background checks and enforce them

you're kidding? they can't even accept a one hour waiting period without crying about the 2nd amendment ... they have no idea what reasonable is

We don't want an Australia like this - Yanky land is enough.



Get three coffins ready - A Fistful of Dollars 1964


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ_7br_3y54

John Smith wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 10:17am:

The4thEstate wrote on Jun 19th, 2016 at 5:43pm: Quote: Mexico and most of southern America is run by the drug barons. They have bigger problems than gun laws. "Most of southern America"?? You mean like Kentucky on down or what? no, I mean the South Americas

Ah, OK. Gotcha.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 11:08pm:

We don't want an Australia like this - Yanky land is enough. Get three coffins ready - A Fistful of Dollars 1964 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ_7br_3y54

Do you realize that it is a fictional movie filmed in Italy?

John Smith wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 11:07pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 9:26pm: And I think thats the key issuevoter, no ones really suggesting ban all guns but surely reasonable limitations are fine. Keep your handguns but get rid of more powerful stuff and have stroing background checks and enforce them you're kidding? they can't even accept a one hour waiting period without crying about the 2nd amendment ... they have no idea what reasonable is

But why should we believe that tougher gun laws will prevent further acts of Islamic terrorism on U.S. soil? Besides guns, Muslim terrorists have already used or prepared to use pressure cookers, box cutters, shoe bombs (unsuccessfully) and pipe bombs (stockpiled in San Bernardino).

Obama and his fellow lefties love to talk tough about guns ... because it takes attention away from the fact that he's done a lousy job of protecting the homeland against Islamic terrorism.

Remember the attacks at Fort Hood and Chattanooga? Did you know that military personnel stationed there were not permitted to carry sidearms for their own defense? That's right -- the current White House wanted those military properties to be "gun-free zones."

And former Department of Homeland Security official Philip Haney has just alleged in a new book (“See Something Say Nothing”) that under Obama, files pertaining to the investigation of Islamic terrorist suspects were deliberately deleted in the name of “civil rights and civil liberties." Haney even believes that one of his pending investigations might have disrupted the Orlando massacre before it ever started.

In any case, let's talk about the words Obama refuses to say -- "radical Islamic terrorism" -- before we waste time thinking we can get 5 million AR-15s off the streets.

Orlando was never about the guns, it was always about the red flags that the Feds ignored!

Mortdooley wrote on Jun 21^st, 2016 at 12:06am:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 11:08pm: We don't want an Australia like this - Yanky land is enough. Get three coffins ready - A Fistful of Dollars 1964 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ_7br_3y54 Do you realize that it is a fictional movie filmed in Italy?

yes.

Mortdooley wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 11:00pm:

If more young adults had JOBS this little beta male metrosexual wouldn't have much of an audience.  His gun show bubbas look very much like props.

If only more Texuuns ate less food the rest of those young adults wouldn't have to pay for their medical expenses that burden the rest of the country
http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/4c3c7a547f8b9a6a778f0200/americans-eat-so-much-theyd-have-to-run-an-hour-each-day-to-burn-it-off.jpg

The4thEstate wrote on Jun 21^st, 2016 at 12:11am:

But why should we believe that tougher gun laws will prevent further acts of Islamic terrorism on U.S. soil?

As I understand it, the pro gun lobby even protests restrictions on the sale of weapons to people on the 'no fly' list (suspected of links to terrorism)

how friggen stupid is that? Surely they can't all be Texicans?

John Smith wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 11:07pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 9:26pm: And I think thats the key issuevoter, no ones really suggesting ban all guns but surely reasonable limitations are fine. Keep your handguns but get rid of more powerful stuff and have stroing background checks and enforce them you're kidding? they can't even accept a one hour waiting period without crying about the 2nd amendment ... they have no idea what reasonable is

Here Are The 4 Gun Proposals The Senate Is Voting On (Again)

June 20, 201610:43 AM ET


Source: NPR   
Quote:

Just over a week after the deadly nightclub rampage in Orlando, the Senate will take up four amendments Monday related to guns and terror — two from Democrats and two from Republicans. Such a quick vote after a tragedy is not remarkable. Proposals were put forth — and rejected — right after the murders of children and teachers in Sandy Hook Elementary School 2 1/2 years ago. Bills very similar to those coming up for a vote now were actually taken up just one day after the mass killing in San Bernardino in December. They too failed. So there's little reason for optimism on the part of advocates of tougher gun laws this time around, when defeat is once again the most likely outcome for these latest proposals......continued

Guns aren't the problem, the people pulling the triggers are.

That's why useless, false hope generating gun control laws will never pass......& if by some unfortunate miracle they do, they won't stop the next mass killing, nor the next, nor the next, nor the next, nor the next, nor the next, nor the next....... ;)

Panther wrote on Jun 21^st, 2016 at 9:40am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 11:07pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 9:26pm: And I think thats the key issuevoter, no ones really suggesting ban all guns but surely reasonable limitations are fine. Keep your handguns but get rid of more powerful stuff and have stroing background checks and enforce them you're kidding? they can't even accept a one hour waiting period without crying about the 2nd amendment ... they have no idea what reasonable is Here Are The 4 Gun Proposals The Senate Is Voting On (Again) June 20, 201610:43 AM ET Source: NPR    Quote: Just over a week after the deadly nightclub rampage in Orlando, the Senate will take up four amendments Monday related to guns and terror — two from Democrats and two from Republicans. Such a quick vote after a tragedy is not remarkable. Proposals were put forth — and rejected — right after the murders of children and teachers in Sandy Hook Elementary School 2 1/2 years ago. Bills very similar to those coming up for a vote now were actually taken up just one day after the mass killing in San Bernardino in December. They too failed. So there's little reason for optimism on the part of advocates of tougher gun laws this time around, when defeat is once again the most likely outcome for these latest proposals......continued

And yet those seem at least minor reasonable steps, but look at LaPierre popping his head up again.

And once again money talks, common sense walks. Anyone who thinks America is a democracy need their head read.


The US Senate has blocked Republican and Democratic proposals on background checks on gun purchases, the first two of four measures to curb guns that senators are expected to reject after last week's mass shooting in an Orlando nightclub

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-21/gun-control-bid-fails-in-us-senate-after-orlando-massacre/7528396

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 21^st, 2016 at 9:42am:

Panther wrote on Jun 21st, 2016 at 9:40am: John Smith wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 11:07pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 9:26pm: And I think thats the key issuevoter, no ones really suggesting ban all guns but surely reasonable limitations are fine. Keep your handguns but get rid of more powerful stuff and have stroing background checks and enforce them you're kidding? they can't even accept a one hour waiting period without crying about the 2nd amendment ... they have no idea what reasonable is Here Are The 4 Gun Proposals The Senate Is Voting On (Again) June 20, 201610:43 AM ET Source: NPR    Quote: Just over a week after the deadly nightclub rampage in Orlando, the Senate will take up four amendments Monday related to guns and terror — two from Democrats and two from Republicans. Such a quick vote after a tragedy is not remarkable. Proposals were put forth — and rejected — right after the murders of children and teachers in Sandy Hook Elementary School 2 1/2 years ago. Bills very similar to those coming up for a vote now were actually taken up just one day after the mass killing in San Bernardino in December. They too failed. So there's little reason for optimism on the part of advocates of tougher gun laws this time around, when defeat is once again the most likely outcome for these latest proposals......continued And yet those seem at least minor reasonable steps, but look at LaPierre popping his head up again.

https://i.imgsafe.org/cc53b28.gif They won't pass. https://i.imgsafe.org/aca6f67.gif

God Bless the NRA! 
https://i.imgsafe.org/f29b32b.gif

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 19^th, 2016 at 2:47pm:

If you don't like it move to Mexico they have tough gun laws.

If only Mexico had stricter chainsaw and knife laws
http://shoebat.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/mexican_drug_cartel_deaths_007.jpg

Marla wrote on Jun 21^st, 2016 at 9:29am:

Mortdooley wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 11:00pm: If more young adults had JOBS this little beta male metrosexual wouldn't have much of an audience.  His gun show bubbas look very much like props. If only more Texuuns ate less food the rest of those young adults wouldn't have to pay for their medical expenses that burden the rest of the country http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/4c3c7a547f8b9a6a778f0200/americans-eat-so-much-theyd-have-to-run-an-hour-each-day-to-burn-it-off.jpg

Those aren't Texans, they look like Marla's Colorado  relatives.

Wow. What a educated Texuun comeback. If only you F A T buggers would quit moving here. Save some food for the rest of us.

John Smith wrote on Jun 21^st, 2016 at 9:32am:

The4thEstate wrote on Jun 21st, 2016 at 12:11am: But why should we believe that tougher gun laws will prevent further acts of Islamic terrorism on U.S. soil? As I understand it, the pro gun lobby even protests restrictions on the sale of weapons to people on the 'no fly' list (suspected of links to terrorism) how friggen stupid is that? Surely they can't all be Texicans?

If someone is mistakenly placed on the No Fly list it takes years to correct their information.

Panther wrote on Jun 21^st, 2016 at 9:54am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 21st, 2016 at 9:42am: Panther wrote on Jun 21st, 2016 at 9:40am: John Smith wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 11:07pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 9:26pm: And I think thats the key issuevoter, no ones really suggesting ban all guns but surely reasonable limitations are fine. Keep your handguns but get rid of more powerful stuff and have stroing background checks and enforce them you're kidding? they can't even accept a one hour waiting period without crying about the 2nd amendment ... they have no idea what reasonable is Here Are The 4 Gun Proposals The Senate Is Voting On (Again) June 20, 201610:43 AM ET Source: NPR    Quote: Just over a week after the deadly nightclub rampage in Orlando, the Senate will take up four amendments Monday related to guns and terror — two from Democrats and two from Republicans. Such a quick vote after a tragedy is not remarkable. Proposals were put forth — and rejected — right after the murders of children and teachers in Sandy Hook Elementary School 2 1/2 years ago. Bills very similar to those coming up for a vote now were actually taken up just one day after the mass killing in San Bernardino in December. They too failed. So there's little reason for optimism on the part of advocates of tougher gun laws this time around, when defeat is once again the most likely outcome for these latest proposals......continued And yet those seem at least minor reasonable steps, but look at LaPierre popping his head up again. https://i.imgsafe.org/cc53b28.gif They won't pass. https://i.imgsafe.org/aca6f67.gif God Bless the NRA!  https://i.imgsafe.org/f29b32b.gif

SO why are you against the legislation?

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 21^st, 2016 at 10:13am:

SO why are you against the legislation?

Because he so desperately wants to be a redneck American.

Mortdooley wrote on Jun 21^st, 2016 at 10:10am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 21st, 2016 at 9:32am: The4thEstate wrote on Jun 21st, 2016 at 12:11am: But why should we believe that tougher gun laws will prevent further acts of Islamic terrorism on U.S. soil? As I understand it, the pro gun lobby even protests restrictions on the sale of weapons to people on the 'no fly' list (suspected of links to terrorism) how friggen stupid is that? Surely they can't all be Texicans? If someone is mistakenly placed on the No Fly list it takes years to correct their information.

and if a terrorist sympathiser buys an automatic weapon and kills 100 people, how many years does it take for the victims to remove their names from the 'dead' list?

Marla wrote on Jun 21^st, 2016 at 10:09am:

Wow. What a educated Texuun comeback. If only you F A T buggers would quit moving here. Save some food for the rest of us.

Texans have been improving Colorado for the last 150 years by moving there. Your Capital is even a scaled down version of ours!