Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast
Results 73 to 84 of 128

Thread: Suggs and Guns

  1. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,200

    Re: Suggs and Guns



    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    I think youre reaching if youre saying that a large majority of shrinks are pro-gun control and wouldnt pass anybody if thats what youre implying. Ill admit its possible a few would have agendas but in the grand scheme of things their Drs and have taken a Hippocratic oath to help people.
    No I am not saying that ALL are. Maybe a few could be, maybe not.

    But leaving it in the hands of someone else to decide I'm unfit based on their opinion - no thanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    And I am not comfortable with my government, the same government that makes mistakes an art form, deciding something as subjective as sanity without due process.

    You really think a state like Maryland would give gun owners a fair shake? All it would take would be one study from some yahoo at a university saying "Gun ownership is a sign of mental defect" and the state has all the license it needs to stop you from making the purchase.

    At some point you cross the line from sensible to burdensome (and then into unconstitutional).
    This.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  2. #74
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    21,640

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    so your answer is any law leads to more laws, so we should have no laws? This law is ok, but this one isnt. thats basically my argument.
    No. I am arguing that "good intentions" lead to wholly unnecessary laws in the name of security, all the while eroding liberty.

    It's an axiom that's played out time and time again over our history yet we, as humans, never learn from it.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  3. #75

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    so the government, state or otherwise, using the private sector to distinguish ones sanity is not wanted because the government makes mistakes. I would say as is the human condition to be flawed but to each their own. Having said Dr. label others beforehand and enforcing the same diagnosis that was made before trying to purchase a gun is acceptable, but asking for that diagnosis at time of purchase isnt? To me thats basically arguing that we should be fighting for convicts and mental patients rights to own guns as well, because they could have been wrongly accused or diagnosed which im sure has happened. The answer isnt no laws and the answer isnt a billion laws and neither of us are really proposing either. if you take the bill of rights at face value i dont know how you can distinguish between regulating for some but not others and saying im the one on a slippery slope for saying there should be a stricter screening process.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    No. I am arguing that "good intentions" lead to wholly unnecessary laws in the name of security, all the while eroding liberty.

    It's an axiom that's played out time and time again over our history yet we, as humans, never learn from it.
    well im sure wed agree on plenty of good intention laws that are completely unnecessary to the average american. id argue laws arent for the average but for the outliers however.
    Last edited by JAB1985; 12-11-2012 at 04:23 PM.
    -JAB




  4. #76
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,200

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    JAB I see your point and I think it's well intended.

    Let me ask you this. If I or someone fails an evaluation whether it be slightly fail or totally fail, but the person performing it misunderstood what I was saying, what recourse would I have?

    Along with a psych eval. and criminals are those the only things you'd want to determine if someone is fit?
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  5. #77
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    21,640

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Like I said, we're not going to convince one another.

    You favor more governmental intervention.

    As a Libertarian, I do not.

    Since 1996, less folks are killed by guns per capita than any other time in our history, all the while there are more guns than ever in circulation.

    Since 1996, the number of states which allow concealed carry went from zero to 46 2012. The violent crime rate per capita in these states is vastly lower than in states which have stricter controls.

    Since 1996, the overall crime stats for the nation have been in a steady decline across the board with violent crime being amongst the largest drops.

    So no, we do not need any more laws and there's a strong case to be made, as numerous Economists have made, that more guns equals less crime.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  6. #78

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Like I said, we're not going to convince one another.

    You favor more governmental intervention.

    As a Libertarian, I do not.

    Since 1996, less folks are killed by guns per capita than any other time in our history, all the while there are more guns than ever in circulation.

    Since 1996, the number of states which allow concealed carry went from zero to 46 2012. The violent crime rate per capita in these states is vastly lower than in states which have stricter controls.

    Since 1996, the overall crime stats for the nation have been in a steady decline across the board with violent crime being amongst the largest drops.

    So no, we do not need any more laws and there's a strong case to be made, as numerous Economists have made, that more guns equals less crime.
    nothing wrong with libertarian views, i typically am in line with them. This is one issue im not really liberal or conservative. I just think theres a line where youre saying some laws are ok but this or maybe any more is where youre drawing the line, which is perfectly fine. I still think at the end of the day we want the same things just disagree a little on how to go about it.
    -JAB




  7. #79

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    JAB I see your point and I think it's well intended.

    Let me ask you this. If I or someone fails an evaluation whether it be slightly fail or totally fail, but the person performing it misunderstood what I was saying, what recourse would I have?

    Along with a psych eval. and criminals are those the only things you'd want to determine if someone is fit?
    Seeing as this is my hypothetical solution, imo, if someone failed or was flagged and deemed not fit to own, id say a second opinion would be warranted in an appeal so to speak. My wife works in the nuclear industry and had to take one. Some of her co-workers were flagged for their answers on the written test and had to see a shrink. All of them were cleared once allowed to explain. I would think the majority would fall under that category. Seemed to be a pretty basic test/process that wasnt to intrusive while still surving the purpose intended.

    I wouldnt even say all mentally unstable. Its very possible one could be bi-polar or depressed but medicated and completely normal. Id say the psych eval would allow those that are diagnosed and properly medicated to still own even. And yes i dont think the current laws against convicts would hurt.
    -JAB




  8. #80
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,200

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    Seeing as this is my hypothetical solution, imo, if someone failed or was flagged and deemed not fit to own, id say a second opinion would be warranted in an appeal so to speak. My wife works in the nuclear industry and had to take one. Some of her co-workers were flagged for their answers on the written test and had to see a shrink. All of them were cleared once allowed to explain. I would think the majority would fall under that category. Seemed to be a pretty basic test/process that wasnt to intrusive while still surving the purpose intended.

    I wouldnt even say all mentally unstable. Its very possible one could be bi-polar or depressed but medicated and completely normal. Id say the psych eval would allow those that are diagnosed and properly medicated to still own even. And yes i dont think the current laws against convicts would hurt.
    Under your hypothetical, I could see possibly taking some sort of written test (a very basic are you competent test) for someone who wanted to carry a weapon, but not for simple ownership to protect your house.

    I haven't taken the concealed carry course here in NC yet, but I'd imagine there is something on there that would cover something like that.

    But for simple ownership, I would say that passing a driver's test, doing the things necessary to keep a license, getting up everyday and going to a job, paying your bills, owning a home etc. passing a background check is enough proof that you're a mentally competent person to own a gun and keep it in your house.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  9. #81

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    Under your hypothetical, I could see possibly taking some sort of written test (a very basic are you competent test) for someone who wanted to carry a weapon, but not for simple ownership to protect your house.

    I haven't taken the concealed carry course here in NC yet, but I'd imagine there is something on there that would cover something like that.

    But for simple ownership, I would say that passing a driver's test, doing the things necessary to keep a license, getting up everyday and going to a job, paying your bills, owning a home etc. passing a background check is enough proof that you're a mentally competent person to own a gun and keep it in your house.
    we just disagree that there isnt more that could be done to make it safer, as your obviously fine with it as is. You argued that, demented people will find a way to make Aurora, VT, etc happen regardless. Id agree and feel if you stop them from committing such heinous crimes with guns, people would stop pointing to the gun as the culprit and possibly loosen up on "gun control" in general. I dont think theres any question that Aurora and VT would not pass a simple psych eval, when listening to people around them they usually described them as "weird" or an "outcast", which is all id be trying to eliminate. no different than the background check already looking for mentally ill or insane, its just checking to see if they are but undiagnosed.
    -JAB




  10. #82
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Detroit Michigan
    Posts
    1,906
    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    I dont think theres any question that Aurora and VT would not pass a simple psych eval, when listening to people around them they usually described them as "weird" or an "outcast", which is all id be trying to eliminate. no different than the background check already looking for mentally ill or insane, its just checking to see if they are but undiagnosed.
    Good luck trying to spot the sociopaths. The majority of them are extremely well adjusted and you would not be able to expose them. And they're just as lethal as any psychopath.
    “Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.”

    –Eleanor Roosevelt




  11. #83
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    21,640

    Re: Suggs and Guns

    Quote Originally Posted by Sirdowski View Post
    Good luck trying to spot the sociopaths. The majority of them are extremely well adjusted and you would not be able to expose them. And they're just as lethal as any psychopath.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  12. #84
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Detroit Michigan
    Posts
    1,906
    A real scare to those who want to control humanity: It's believed that 1 in 25 people in the world are sociopaths. People who are by definition uncontrollable.

    That's 1 in 25 people who are incapable of feeling guilt, shame, or empathy, and chances are you'll never know who they are. They are masters of charm and deception. Makes you wonder how many politicians are sociopaths.... Seriously.

    So let those who want to legally obtain weapons obtain them with little limitation. There's nothing to the government could ever do to stop those who want to do harm. They are deranged but calculating, if there is a will they will find a way. Taking guns out of our hands only makes us vulnerable to those who can and will harm us by any means necessary. Even without the help of guns.
    “Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.”

    –Eleanor Roosevelt




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland