Will anything change? No

PkrBum wrote:" It is unclear whether officials in Georgia filed records about Houser's involuntary hospitalization, which would have been funneled to the FBI's database and therefore surfaced during a background check in any state, according to The Associated Press.

"Obviously somebody with this kind of history should have never been able to buy a gun," Jindal said, noting that Louisiana laws would have prevented Houser from legally buying a gun."

So, in other words,  a "gun control" measure which has already been enacted into law was touted as something that would prevent this?  But it didn't.
Have I got that right?

Bob wrote:

PkrBum wrote:" It is unclear whether officials in Georgia filed records about Houser's involuntary hospitalization, which would have been funneled to the FBI's database and therefore surfaced during a background check in any state, according to The Associated Press.

"Obviously somebody with this kind of history should have never been able to buy a gun," Jindal said, noting that Louisiana laws would have prevented Houser from legally buying a gun."

So, in other words,  a "gun control" measure which has already been enacted into law was touted as something that would prevent this?  But it didn't.
Have I got that right?

The same as that last mental kid... the fbi admitted screwing that up.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/charleston-church-shooting/fbi-says-dyann-roof-should-not-have-been-sold-gun-n390056

The FBI said Friday that the man accused of killing nine African American parishioners at a historically black church in Charleston should not have been able to purchase a gun.

Officials said a background check failure allowed Dylann Roof to illegally purchase a .45-caliber Glock handgun on April 11, eight days after he turned 21, at Shooter's Choice in West Columbia, South Carolina. Roof had previously acknowledged drug possession, according to the FBI.

FBI director James B. Comey called that assessment "a mistake in a matter of heartbreaking importance."

"We are all sick this happened," he said. "We wish we could turn back time."

Question.  

Let's get specific for a change.  Which specific "gun control" measure(s) being proposed would have stopped the Lafayette shooter or the Charleston shooter?
Can anyone here give us an answer on that?

Use technology to make this simple.

1  Register every gun in America and chip the gun in two locations.  Small drill holes, chip, epoxy.  Database has name, chip number, and gun description including photo of gun.  Licensed gun dealers would enter data, chip guns, and photograph the same.  Fee would be standardized, and Foid cards would be chipped and sycn up with each gun owned by owner.  A gun on a person, or in a car which was out of sync would send proximity conflict to monitors.

2.  biometeric trigger locks.   Would be fitted at time of chipping or transfer of a gun within five years of the law.  Multiple person biometric triggers using prints. (old and reliable technology)

3.  Mandatory transport containers for carrying on your person or in a vehicle.  containers would be bright orange.  Conceal and carry would be eliminated except for licensed LEO or PI.   Open carry in proper transport cases would be allowed.  No loaded weapons in transport but ammo can be kept in transport vehicles.

4.  Proximity sensors for chipped weapons would be available for all businesses.   Mandatory prison sentences for defacing chips or conceal and carry of non chipped weapon which does not sync with foid card.


I will debate anybody who thinks these safety measures will not reduce gun deaths in America.   All the safety features in Autos today save tens of thousands of lives a year, and these measures would do the same.  Would the shooter have been stopped before entering the theater, perhaps, but if it was spontaneous, most likely yes.  If he planned it out, and disabled chipped weapons, he was facing a mandatory jail sentence if stopped.  

OEM gun manufacturers would be required to add a third hidden chip in their weapons which have date, serial number of gun, manufacturer, and be tagged like a vin number on a vehicle.  This would be activated once sold and synced with new owner chips and registration.

2seaoat wrote:Question.  

Let's get specific for a change.  Which specific "gun control" measure(s) being proposed would have stopped the Lafayette shooter or the Charleston shooter?
Can anyone here give us an answer on that?

Use technology to make this simple.

1  Register every gun in America and chip the gun in two locations.  Small drill holes, chip, epoxy.  Database has name, chip number, and gun description including photo of gun.  Licensed gun dealers would enter data, chip guns, and photograph the same.  Fee would be standardized, and Foid cards would be chipped and sycn up with each gun owned by owner.  A gun on a person, or in a car which was out of sync would send proximity conflict to monitors.

2.  biometeric trigger locks.   Would be fitted at time of chipping or transfer of a gun within five years of the law.  Multiple person biometric triggers using prints. (old and reliable technology)

3.  Mandatory transport containers for carrying on your person or in a vehicle.  containers would be bright orange.  Conceal and carry would be eliminated except for licensed LEO or PI.   Open carry in proper transport cases would be allowed.  No loaded weapons in transport but ammo can be kept in transport vehicles.

4.  Proximity sensors for chipped weapons would be available for all businesses.   Mandatory prison sentences for defacing chips or conceal and carry of non chipped weapon which does not sync with foid card.


I will debate anybody who thinks these safety measures will not reduce gun deaths in America.   All the safety features in Autos today save tens of thousands of lives a year, and these measures would do the same.  Would the shooter have been stopped before entering the theater, perhaps, but if it was spontaneous, most likely yes.  If he planned it out, and disabled chipped weapons, he was facing a mandatory jail sentence if stopped.  

OEM gun manufacturers would be required to add a third hidden chip in their weapons which have date, serial number of gun, manufacturer, and be tagged like a vin number on a vehicle.  This would be activated once sold and synced with new owner chips and registration.

Just can't make these things up!

By the way, as you know the presence of a gun in Florida during the commission of a crime, results in a mandatory jail sentence.

All you other weird "requirements" will certainly further keep guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

Well you successfully mocked and laughed at that post, markle.

But you conveniently left out my post from your mockery. Here it is again. I'd be interested in learning how you'll try to spin this into your my-country-right-or-wrong mindset...
_________________________________

from wiki...

The 1953 Iranian coup d'état, known in Iran as the 28 Mordad coup, was the overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran Mohammad Mosaddegh on 19 August 1953, orchestrated by the United Kingdom (under the name "Operation Boot") and the United States (under the name TPAJAX Project).

All you other weird "requirements" will certainly further keep guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

I am a law abiding citizen who has owned guns my entire life.  I would comply with the regulations.  I am also a business owner who does not want guns in my establishment.  I have posted the necessary statutory signs in Illinois.  However, I would like to visibly see if a person is carrying a gun.  If they have it on their person properly contained in a container and empty, and come into my business, I can ask them to go back and put the weapon in their trunk.  I also like the idea of a monitor which can pick up a concealed weapon not in a container. 

When I go hunting, I transport my guns in cases and unloaded.  I have a valid foid card.  However, if you get stopped in most states with a weapon in the car where you have not committed a crime and have a valid foid card, there is no way to determine if that weapon is stolen.  Criminals are very smart.  They will seek a method to get around the regulations.  Lawful citizens will comply and take their guns with them just like they do now, and with the biometric trigger locks a gun will not be turned back on a citizen who is overpowered for a moment.  Children will not be able to fire the weapon.  No if a criminal is transporting a weapon and has a foid card they walk.......no mandatory.....under this plan they get a mandatory sentence.  You can laugh, but law abiding citizen who are not stupid and outdoorsmen will comply and keep their families safe.  The manufacture of guns will have potentially more profits, and criminals and children will be less of a problem.

Ya... cause when govt controls, restrictions, prohibitions, and solutions don't solve shit... the answer is always more.

My progressive militarized solutions make more sense... and I'm just kidding. As long as there's gunpowder you can shoot.

As long as there's gunpowder you can shoot.

agree.  I am not trying to solve all the problems, and much like auto safety one system never did it, but the redundancy of systems lowered auto deaths.  I would like to see ignition interlocks and realistic gun control.  I am not much into complete prohibitions rather simple logical and common sense regulation which the constitution allows.  Ten thousand Americans not being killed by drunk drivers, or ten thousand not being killed by guns......as Senator Dirksen used to say....a billion here.....and a billion there....pretty soon we are talking about real money.  People can open carry in authorized transport cases, and the biometric triggers protect all law abiding folks.

Most of your solutions nullify the main reason people carry a gun. Self defense. Wait till I get my gun out of this bright red case mr carjacker Or wait a minute my biometric thumb sensor has grease on it. Bull.

PkrBum wrote:A theater is not pitch black... and if you prefer to be defenseless that is certainly your right. I don't carry a gun either.

The progressive govt solution would be to go exactly where the vast majority of gun murders take place.

Roll tanks down the streets... send troops door to door... place snipers on roof tops. Problem solved.

Instead... we hear criticism that there are too many police in those places and that their tactics are discriminatory.

Oh... and that removing guns from law abiding citizens will fix the problem. That's a logical fallacy.

Do you really want the problem solved? Or have you just bought into an agenda? I say  shit happens... that's nature.

Crime and violent crime is already diminishing and will continue to as society becomes more and more educated.

A large part of the problem in inner cities is a lack of emphasis on education and a glorification of thug life.

theater is not pitch black... and if you prefer to be defenseless that is certainly your right. I don't carry a gun either.

So several people with guns, shooting, while others are running away and screaming is a good idea?  When the cops show up how do they know who the bad guy is?

The progressive govt solution would be to go exactly where the vast majority of gun murders take place.

Roll tanks down the streets... send troops door to door... place snipers on roof tops. Problem solved.

Instead... we hear criticism that there are too many police in those places and that their tactics are discriminatory.


I'm just going to assume you're kidding because you're usually very much against the government trampling on the rights of Americans.   Or maybe you assume that everyone in those neighborhoods is guilty of involvement in gun violence.  That assumption is discriminatory
(just read your other post that said you're kidding about that approach)


Oh... and that removing guns from law abiding citizens will fix the problem. That's a logical fallacy.

Do you really want the problem solved? Or have you just bought into an agenda? I say shit happens... that's nature.

Yes I want it solved.  (your next question is dumb-I don't react to gun violence based on the shooter's or victim's characteristics - wrong party).
I know you feel that we cannot do better.  I expect that any society can always do better.

I don't believe in taking guns away.  That's as logical and practical as deporting all illegal immigrants.
I believe we can have extensive background checks and more stringent laws regarding gun and ammo purchases and once in place, they should be followed diligently and consistently. Will it stop all shootings? No, but some, yes.
I believe we should invest in and provide greater access to mental health treatment.   Will it stop all shootings? No, but some, yes.
I believe we should invest in programs that address poverty and all issues surrounding it (i.e. education, housing, crime, gang prevention, etc?  Will it stop all shootings? No, but some, yes.

Crime and violent crime is already diminishing and will continue to as society becomes more and more educated.

We can and should be more proactive than that.

A large part of the problem in inner cities is a lack of emphasis on education and a glorification of thug life.

So we should invest in identifying the root causes and invest in correcting them

PkrBum wrote:I say  shit happens... that's nature.

The true essence of high-school libertarian thought.

Most of your solutions nullify the main reason people carry a gun. Self defense. Wait till I get my gun out of this bright red case mr carjacker Or wait a minute my biometric thumb sensor has grease on it. Bull.


In your entire life, how many times have you been in a situation where you had to pull a gun to defend yourself. I have never, and I have been bloodied in the process of fights and was jumped once by three who were breaking into cars, but not once have I required a gun. Now in your home, do your thing, but you still need the biometric trigger.......and if you hear a noise and reach for your gun, it will not be the biometric trigger involved in the failure to defend yourself. In my regard it would be not going to the range regularly and hitting what I am aiming at. I have shotguns now.....age and eyesight can be compensated for and in my regard the biometric trigger would be faster than I am now. Guns if they are out in public should be open carry and not loaded. If speed is what you are concerned with, pick a weapon which you can train to load quickly......but to me this is like talking about when I am going to bat in the All Star game....highly improbable.

As to the grease, you need to start whacking off with your other hand than the one you register on the trigger.

2seaoat wrote:Most of your solutions nullify the main reason people carry a gun. Self defense. Wait till I get my gun out of this bright red case mr carjacker Or wait a minute my biometric thumb sensor has grease on it. Bull.


In your entire life, how many times have you been in a situation where you had to pull a gun to defend yourself.   I have never, and I have been bloodied in the process of fights and was jumped once by three who were breaking into cars, but not once have I required a gun.  Now in your home, do your thing, but you still need the biometric trigger.......and if you hear a noise and reach for your gun, it will not be the biometric trigger involved in the failure to defend yourself.  In my regard it would be not going to the range regularly and hitting what I am aiming at.  I have shotguns now.....age and eyesight can be compensated for and in my regard the biometric trigger would be faster than I am now.   Guns if they are out in public should be open carry and not loaded.  If speed is what you are concerned with, pick a weapon which you can train to load quickly......but to me this is like talking about when I am going to bat in the All Star game....highly improbable.

As to the grease, you need to start whacking off with your other hand than the one you register on the trigger.

I ain't ambidextrous like you....I was attacked out in the country by a rottweiler while riding my bicycle and I couldn't out run him and his pack of 4 other dogs so I pulled out my gun fired one in the ground and they took off....incidentally loading it would have been hard on a bicycle...it was only a 22 snake shot but loud.

" So we should invest in identifying the root causes and invest in correcting them "

Then you need to focus on gangs and the inner cities... and stop supporting all encompassing gun controls.

boards of FL wrote:

PkrBum wrote:I say  shit happens... that's nature.

The true essence of high-school libertarian thought.

From the guy that wishes to send every firetruck out to backyard grills... while truman arms burns to the ground.

PkrBum wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

PkrBum wrote:I say  shit happens... that's nature.

The true essence of high-school libertarian thought.  

From the guy that wishes to send every firetruck out to backyard grills... while truman arms burns to the ground.

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, but OK. If making shit up and attributing it to me helps you feel smarter, have at it.

It's not as if you're going to get such validation anywhere else.