Total posts: 3,383
-->
@HistoryBuff
I didn't read anything about him profiting from this deal, has he profited yet? can you break a law before actually breaking it?
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Trump is instructing the US government to pay him millions of dollars.
citation? proof?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
you don't think it's a slippery slope? have you listen to the democrat candidates?
I want to hear again how no one is coming to take your guns, I love faerie tails
Sorry if this is a dumb question, but why can't they just manufacture shorter magazines that you physically cannot fit more than 10 bullets into? None of this spacer nonsense.
it's not a dumb question actually, they do manufacture shorter magazines, the problem is there's no practical reason to, again only law abiding citzens will comply.
the follower on a magazine can be, has been 3d printed so the outer shell would be the next logical thing to produce, it's just not economical to.
what you'll do is make this creative market stronger and larger to circumvent the laws/restrictions legally, just like they have done in NY
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
you see, I don't need to know what you look like etc, but we share some values and probably interests, that's all that really matters to most people. Even real racists if given time and the proper environment would see that as well. This is why people generally say racism isn't what the media makes it out to be. But racial division is good for news and politics. People must choose not to participate in their bullshit games.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
see I don't care for diversity all that much, at least not so much difference that it's incompatible with my values etc. skin color, race, sex all that doesn't mean anything to me, what does is how people conduct themselves and their values. Go marry a tree i.d.g.a.f. so long as it doesn't negatively impact me. People need to be more libertarian like, not absolute mind you, just more. Don't meddle or insert yourself into other's lives uninvited. That is one reason Trump was elected btw. He was least likely to inject more government into our lives.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
eh? isn't tumblr just for porn?
who do the democratic candidates pander to? the gays, confused and the right minorities (just 2 groups of minorities), everyone else they don't give a shit about.
this is as plain as the nose on your face.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
because you owned slaves by proxy, assuming you skin tone is light enough and your racists under the same criteria. Accept your responsibility and punishment for things you never did or had control over sheesh, get on board already.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
he probably sleeps well in his multi-million dollars homes, protected by walls, so much irony.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
BTW there's a cease fire.
wish I had stock in adult diapers, I bet the democrats pissed themselves. This only has to last until the next election, if it does that's a HUGE win and a middle finger to everyone who as against this move. This is so much better than "reality" tv.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
hmmm, well, decide on the size and whether they are community fish or not, then go from there. Bunch of small ones or just a couple of big ones?
at one time I had a 55, 40 and 2 20 gallon set up.
angelfish.....check out the breeders on youtube, some amazing fish.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
stupidity, comedy
basic biology says males produce sperm, females eggs, both together = conception. the end.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
it's easier to send people to fight then it is to tell the their family their son/husband/father/mother/brother/sister was killed, that job they leave for someone else.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
fish, oh my....I use to have cichlids (sp) there was one I can't remember the species but they are yellow with black top fins, but there are so many really cool cichlids, guppies of course, I love the cobra skin ones. Neons and there's another, royal neon? something like that they are bit bigger.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
I'm not sure I believe that given the crime filled cities some of them control, like the tale for 2 Baltimores, the poster child Chicago. If it was really about safer places more could be done and easily I would think. There have been very few places taking measures to better secure schools for instance. There's no money for schools but there is money for things like studying how shrimp walk and other b.s. wastes. You are a better person than I am because I don't believe they really have hearts or really care about safety more than the control they really want. I think their actions speak for themselves. Look at their net worth before getting into government and what it is after they have been in for a while. Public servants LOL such a funny term, self servants is more like it.
There is NO way you can ban ar15 or ak47 because they will be redesigned and called something else, this is what always happen when they try to ban cosmetics. The magazine limits are a joke too. They put in a spacer to limit them to 10 rounds, it takes less than a minute to take it out so it would accept the full 30 rounds.
I've been saying long before now, there should be a searchable database, if I want to sell someone a gun privately, I should be able to see if they have a criminal record or not. These records are public knowledge. Briefly there was talk about an app for this purpose. There is no problem with that imo if it's public record anyway, making it easier for people to use is just common sense as they say. Why hasn't didn't that happen long ago?
You see all the things I have come up with are easy and I'm not that smart. Yet these things don't happen. If safety is the real issue why haven't these things been done already?
Can you see my skepticism? cynicism?
Created:
-->
@dustryder
I would agree with that. The feeling pain thing does bother me personally, but none of this really bothers me enough that I would protest or anything like that.
When you learn and or see how these things are actually done, it can change your perspective, it did mine.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
But they are very similar scenarios.
right in one case the person is terminal and would die w/o the equipment, it's a quality of life issue, the other has a potential healthy life ahead of themselves, yeah very similar. Only in one case is the person/thing injected with a substance to stop it's heart, or has their spine severed and removed in pieces, I see no real similarities.
By the 3rd trimester they have all the characteristics of a person.
how about 1 week before the 3rd trimester is there something magical that happens in that time frame of 7 days?
Do you pretend that you do know precisely what the right answer is?
I sure don't but if you think about all the ways and times we err on the side of caution because we don't know it seems that would apply to this subject as well.
It would still be forcing a medical procedure one a woman who doesn't want it.
if the baby is too big it will be delivered either vaginally or by c-section, so they will have that medical procedure, there is no way around that.
I don't pretend I know exactly where that line needs to be.
neither do I, not exactly, definitely not after the 3rd, I'd have to check the stats and development rate but I'd say even sooner than the 3rd. I have no issue with things like plan-B, when it's very early.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
they are not a statistical problem and they should be honest, if it wasn't the ar it would be something else. all these voids they create are filled with something else very similar, bump stock is a prime example of that. NY banded pistol grips because well....you know....pistol grips are deadly? anyway they redesigned the stock to be "legal" and still have essentially a pistol grip, go figure.
Because of Trump the gun market was hurting, until September that is, best thing to lower sales is just keeping your mouth shut about guns I guess.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
They are not that different.
they are totally different omg I can't believe you even said that. Letting something happen vs actively causing something is very different. Letting die vs killing. I'm just blow away you don't know the difference.
I would argue it is before the 3rd trimester but I don't know precisely where it should be.
why do you object to 3rd trimester killings
why don't know know precisely where it should be? because you could be mistaken?
Forcing that on someone against their will is cruel and brutal.
so you believe these rights are absolute?
are you pro death penalty?
Forcing a women to continue a pregnancy she doesn't want is forcing a medical procedure on her IE the birth of the child.
is that what it is or is it preventing the death of a child?
if you are against 3rd trimesters and she changes her mind you'd force a medical procedure on her because she can't have on in the 3rd trimester.
Going through a pregnancy and a birth can have serious negative impacts on a woman's health.
being killed has some serious negative impacts on health, more so than pregnancy and birth.
Are you saying that we shouldn't kill anything, ever, because they feel pain?
nope just wondering if that bothered you since doing it to a potential human doesn't
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
It isn't murder to pull the plug. But you could easily keep them alive indefinitely.
that's true, DNR is far different that doing a procedure to kill them however, that would be murder. Letting "nature take its course" is not murder.
The law will never be settled.
it should be restricted to a certain extent right? or are you ok with killing it the day before it's due?
taking away a person's right to control their own body
they are killing the woman's body? I thought you agreed it wasn't her body but a separate entity?
Whether or not it is capable of feeling pain is in no way relevant.
is causing pain to an animal because you don't want it anymore ok with you
what do you think about people who toss a bag full of kittens into a river, that ok?
you seem to say what isn't a person but not what is, you know when it's not a person, but you don't know when it is a person?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
you said a buyout wouldn't work in the U.S. which I agreed and expanded a bit on.
and
It's the AR that is filling a niche in their collection.
thus the many options currently available in the ar platform
the continued bungling by the democrats pandering to the anti gun crowd which actually increases sales.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
hahah I didn't, I should have just for fun, hope you score big!
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
well no, if there's a 50% chance of survival then it will live, if it lives what is it?
If it has unique human DNA and is either male or female what is it?
it's only a "dangerous metric" to those would advocate for killing.
As I have said before in similar topics, why couldn't the child be born alive and then immediately adopted? That does happen after all and people wanting to adopt are readily available. Doesn't that fix the issue, the female is no longer pregnant, w/o a child, those wanting to adopt have a child available. Even if this is only applied to what would be considered "late term" why couldn't that be the new norm?
always changing.
I'm glad you brought that up. At one time people were buried because they thought they were dead, only they weren't. We can detect things like brain waves much earlier than before. What if in x# of years we can detect that these babies feel pain earlier than we thought? Do you think we should err on the side of caution? Does that bother you that something with unique human dna, male or female, brain waves, heart beat and can feel pain could just summarily be killed?
I think it's rather barbaric.
Do you believe in the "right to try" which Trump put into effect?
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
intent changes so that doesn't seem like a very realistic criteria, nor could it really be proven in this context.
if there's a 50/50 chance of survival after being removed from the female, would that gestational age be considered a person?
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
I am also quite sure that a baby on the day it is born is one.
hmm
According to studies between 2003 and 2005, 20 to 35 percent of babies born at 24 weeks of gestation survive, while 50 to 70 percent of babies born at 25 weeks, and more than 90 percent born at 26 to 27 weeks, survive. It is rare for a baby weighing less than 500 g (17.6 ounces) to survive.
so the actual act of removing, detaching a baby from the female makes it a baby/person? And so long as it remains attached it's ok to kill it?
I'm not sure anyone argues that the fetus is the woman.
so you agree it's a separate entity, but what it is you haven't or can't really say right?
there is no reason that a pregnant females shouldn't be allowed to use drugs and alcohol while pregnant because it's not a person, correct?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
a forced buy back, again how do you buy back something you never owned.....would never work in the U.S.
imo as a result of the ban threats etc many more versions of the scary black gun are gaining in popularity which means lower prices and more availability. For instance the AR9, .224, 300 blackout, .224 wylde, AR in 10mm, 45 acp, AR10, 454, probably some others I have forgotten.
except for a couple of them they all use the same lower, all you have to do is swap out the upper which is the barrel and bolt carrier group. BTW the lower is very easy to assemble, I've done it myself, check youtube.
the buyout program would only work in certain and probably rare instances. There is a reason the ar platform is called leggos for adults.
oh btw I heard Sept was a record breaking month for background checks, you can thank Beta and Dumbassacuss, more gun ban talk, restrictions = increase sales, thought that was obvious after 8 years of the best gun salesman ever, guess they just can't help shooting themselves in the foot, pun intended.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
not exactly, what I'm saying is if someone is pro-death (abortion) because, their body, their choice, then that must extend to whatever they wish to put into their bodies. it would be hypocritical to say you can't do x because it would be bad/harmful to the baby, but if you want us to kill it, we can do that for you.
a pregnant female who uses drugs,alcohol etc puts the unborn at risk for potential problems, it's a risk, not a guarantee, death is a guarantee.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
Yeah, but can you ever pay back that child for the brain trauma that the alcohol might cause? This obviously interferes with the "life" inalienable right when you decrease their quality of life and possibly their life expectancy.
really there is no way they wouldn't be a burden to society (me) Basically the criteria I mentioned isn't really attainable. I see little difference between being pro illegal drug use while pregnant and being pro death (abortion). The risks of birth defects and other abnormalities are not 100%, death is 100%.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
that's not how I understand his idea would work, there is a "blue book" for used guns. A lot of it is based on supply, demand what new ones of the same model sell for etc. If you were to sell the gun to a pawn shop you wouldn't get much at all but that's how that business operates. Local gun shops will also take them on trade or buy them, but at a discount naturally since they need a profit margin resell them. As I understand his idea the program would essentially be competing in the used gun market specifically for the scary rifles in the hopes it would reduce the number of them in circulation.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
If someone wants to take that risk they can but only if, you pay all the costs associated with it, otherwise I have a say in what you can and can't do since it effects me, my money, whatever. There's a saying (paraphrase) Your rights end when they interfere with mine, something like that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
did you even read about protest permits?
there are many, many ways to protest, many of which do not require any permit.
protest permits restrict or put limits in certain areas, certain circumstances, NOTHING like your gun license, apples and oranges
permits to protest are SOMETIMES needed your license would ALWAYS be needed.
too much of a stretch.
given that you can't deny that safety requirements can be accomplished without any need for license it makes you angry and brings out the child in you, typical lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
This is incorrect. State level licensing would achieve the same goal.
You can't make every state use a licensing scheme unless it's federally mandated, so that makes no sense.
there is already such behaviour in other amendments. For example protest permits.
wait I thought you were talking about licenses, make up your mind.
They may not be as effective or comprehensive simply because the bar is set to comprehensive and complete licensing for new owners of guns.
lol right it's the completeness, comprehensive whatever of the control scheme, so whether it's a license or permit, certificate etc based is irrelevant, since the criteria for any of those can be set to whatever level is decided, what form or piece of paper is required isn't important.
what license do you just need to get once and never renew or reapply for?
I don't believe you ever indicated it was something to be renewed or retested but rather a one and done process.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
Some states require a permit to conceal or open carry, if you want to call that a license it doesn't matter to me. However you are advocating for a federal license because of some irrational fear and irrational trust that the federal government is going to save you in the extremely remote chance you'd need their protection. Even though it would be state police and not federal that would come and investigate the crime. They only show up in the nick of time on tv. Driver's licenses vary from state to state and is not a federal license.
you can pull up some old threads about rights, rights are not granted they are recognized even if they are not absolute, if you have to apply or get a license for one that is not a right, you are asking permission which may or may not be granted. I'm not interested in taking the time to explain it to you further because it's already been discussed many times.
You are proposing a combination of roundabout methods that may not be as effective or comprehensive, simply because you have delusions that your government is out to get you.
I disagree with your opinion that it may not be as effective or comprehensive, simply because you have delusions that your government is going to save you.
licensing and registration schemes are in part up to the states, often they just get tied up in court and most thrown out, https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44618.pdf
page 41 NY state is a good example of all the schemes they have tried and are trying to really not avail or effect on crime.
there are states with almost no laws or regulations other than required by the NICS checks and they have some of the lowest or lowest murder rates which shouldn't be the case if laws work and the absence of laws/licenses decrease murders.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Imabench
Here is some potential I just thought about based on your idea. It's a bit off topic but a buy out system (buy out because you can't buy back something you never owned, people just don't like that term) for people who panic purchase or regret their purchase, estates or families of the deceased who now have to deal with guns and don't want to. For instance I have a couple of guns that I don't really use or have much interest in. I could take them to a pawn shop or try to sell them myself but these are not expensive guns and I'd rather keep them then take a big loss on selling them. Since what I might get is pretty small, $100 or less it's not worth the time or effort for me when I can just keep them and who knows maybe at some point I'll give them away or something. Now if I could get close to what I paid for them then I would probably sell them. This is probably true for other people, even people who have purchased inexpensive ar's etc. If that idea could be worked out, it could be useful I think.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
licensing will be effective in increasing safety.
sure but for safety it's not needed because it could be accomplished without an actual license, you haven't proven the other methods wouldn't accomplish the same safety requirements because the other methods or combination of would be just as effective.
determining whether a particular gun found at a location actually belongs to a person.
how is that useful? You are given a bill of sale along with the serial number so should it be stolen or lost you already have all the info needed.
Or perhaps determining who the owns the gun found at the crime scene.
the usefulness of that is questionable at best, much like Maryland's bullet casing data base, similar idea, never solved one crime, cost tax payers 5 million + before they stopped that completely stupid idea.
you don't have a constitutional right to own a car, but you do a gun, so that comparison isn't valid unless you first abolish the 2a which is a different topic altogether.
Licensure: A process by which a governmental agency grants time-limited permission to an individual to engage in a given occupation after verifying that he or she has met predetermined and standardized criteria (usually education, experience, and examination).
Certification: A voluntary process by which a nongovernmental agency grants a time-limited recognition to an individual after verifying that he or she has met predetermined and standardized criteria.
Certificate: A voluntary process by which a person or organization acquires a document serving as evidence, or as written testimony, of status, qualifications, privileges, or the truth of something.
Accreditation: A voluntary process by which a nongovernmental entity grants a time-limited recognition or credentials to an organization after verifying that predetermined and standardized criteria are met.
I think those definitions apply and show the differences, so obviously a license is unconstitutional and is not needed to prove completion of a safety program.
when firearms are sold the serial number is recorded and is actually put into a data base which can only be accessed under certain circumstances like crime scenes. You don't hear about it much because it is rarely useful, but it can be done.generally speaking.
they only thing a license would that isn't or can't already be done is allowing the government to "grant permission", rights are not granted.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
did you hear the story about 3 teens who broke into a house, guy defends himself, kills all 3 with his ar15
more recent 5 guys break into a home to rob him, maybe worse, kills 3 of them wounds the other 2 with his ak47
you have to look for those stories since you won't hear about them in the fake news networks.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
ok I think I understand you now as to why you want licenses. With a license you think it will increase safety AND the government can keep track of who has them for eventual confiscation or whatever. You started out focusing primary on the accidental gun deaths which is covered by a hybrid of safety in school, no cost training, pre purchase safety + test etc, but that doesn't give you the tracking and big brother control a license would.
you can save your childish condescending comments btw.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
While a certificate of completion would be similar to a license in many regards, in that it would indicate that one has completed training, it would be just a weaker form of licensing. For example, if someone were caught with guns in their car, with a license or lack thereof you could very easily check if that person should or should not possess guns.
yeah weaker as in you couldn't go to someone's house and confiscate it, I know exactly why people want licensing lol, why would people be caught, with a gun unless they were already doing something illegal?
"a light form of gun control" lol that's rich
If you go to a private indoor range you must sit through a safety course and take a test before purchasing range time and or renting guns. The NRA ranges give you a card, like a membership card so you don't have to do it every time. Before you fill out the background check from for places who use the electronic version you have to watch a short video first about it being a crime to purchase a gun for someone else, 10 years jail time etc, safety instructions could easily be incorporated with that process as well. A hybrid of these ideas accomplishes everything you said a license would without haven't an actual registry, if in fact it's about safety which you try to use as an argument but be honest it's really about control and for confiscation/registration.
many important jobs do not require a license just a certificate, nurse's aids and medical assistants just to name a couple so the importance of a license is not what as you say and in some cases they are about tracking, controlling and or taxing.
I'm try this again in hopes you understand, it's not "x causes more death than y, therefore ignore y" it's you don't care with the same level of passion about x which causes more death because they aren't caused by guns, therefore I don't believe you actually care about deaths but rather disguise it to push for more gun control which can't be proven to have any statistical impact. People who make these gun grabbing arguments aren't concerned about lowering preventable deaths because they never put any attention or effort into those things which kill far more people, especially children than guns do, selective moral outrage.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Imabench
that's probably the most creative idea I have ever heard, sorry I have a but here, but when looking at voluntary buy backs (how you buy something back you never owned makes no sense) they trade in broken, or junk guns for more money than they would get otherwise.
Here's an example
this fires the same round as an ar15 .223/5.56
same gun different cosmetics
people being slick, crafty whatever might sell their ar depending on how much they could get and then upgrade with something similar.
I appreciate the thoughtful idea you presented and I hate to be a downer but being the devil's advocate any programs like this will be taken advantage of and with the unintended consequences will make what is attempting to be fixed, worse imo
Consider the NY cosmetics bans. Stocks and parts were redesigned to be legal and yet virtually the same thing as what was attempted to be banned. All these things ever end up doing is creating new markets and products. Bump stock is a pretty good example I would say, which apparently may make a come back if the rumors are true, that the courts says they have to jurisdiction over them, something like that anyway.
I track gun prices and gun parts, more of a curiosity but if there's a great deal I may take advantage of that. The prices are at an all time low. You can get an ar15 for under $400 if you buy the parts and assemble it yourself, waiting for rebates, sales etc, it would be closer to $300. It's almost to the point that it's cheaper to buy an ar then a decent semi auto handgun. Supply and demand, bottom line. Colt can no longer sell their very expensive ar rifles to make them financially viable to keep producing for civilians. So they stopped making them, the market made them stop.
Ironically where Obama was the best president for the gun manufacturers, Trump is one of the worst, go figure.
If someone has spent $1500 on an ar they are a serious enthusiast and a serious gun owner. Of all the people to fear or be concerned about, this person would not be one of them.
Created:
-->
@Christen
probably self deleted or suspended, whatever you call it, he's turn it off I think.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
The key point that I've made which you've yet to respond to is that those who have acquired the knowledge necessary to obtain a license are on average "better" than those who are not.
I have suggested many ways to increase education which doesn't require a license, which is useless for the reasons I've given. Again a license is not require, many things gain you a certificate of completion, a license is an obvious step for confiscation which is why you push it so hard.
Currently some states have requirements that a course is completed to get a concealed carry permit (not a license), and obviously hunting licenses require a course and a big part of that is safety.
There are already such licenses. For bikes, cars require licenses because by and large, they are the causes of fatalities involving bikes. Public pools, as businesses obviously require licenses.
there is no bicycle license requirement in the U.S., as far as pools go they are personal ones that people own on their property, I never mentioned cars, you are simply trying to muddy the issue, it won't work.
The argument x is more probable than y, therefore ignore y is obviously not a valid argument.
my position is this isn't about safety but rather a veiled attempt at gun control, obviously if it was about safety then there would be focus and concern about the very things which cause much more death, especially to children, or at the very least safety in schools, no cost training etc
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
That's great, but we aren't comparing car deaths to gun deaths. By this logic, the risk for licensed pilots is much less than for licensed drivers, and hence pilots shouldn't need licenses?
it proves a license doesn't prove what you think it does. and even with a license accidents happen. Given the extremely small number of accidental gun deaths, voluntary, no cost safety and training would have a better outcome than forced licensing.
a license is the only demonstrable way of determining who has gone through that process of learning.
um, no a certificate of completion, but regardless a license is meaningless in this context, these accidents are super rare, the burden and infringement of a license will never be implemented, nor should it. How about making it mandatory in school, like a health class, needed for graduation?
let's see things that accidentally kill people which no license is required.....
In 2015 in the United States, over 1,000 bicyclists died
- From 2005-2014, there were an average of 3,536 fatal unintentional drownings (non-boating related) annually in the United States — about ten deaths per day.1 An additional 332 people died each year from drowning in boating-related incidents.2
licenses for bicycles and pools too?
drowning is the number one cause of unintentional death for children between the ages of 1 and 4.
I can't help but think you advocate for gun licensing because you think it will have some kind of control factor, you even saidWhen it comes to my safety, I'm not going to take your solemn oath that you know your shit.
yet you are at much more risk for so many other things hurting you than a firearm accident. Of those accidental gun deaths the % of the person other than the one who has the gun being killed is probably much smaller than the already small rate of accidental gun deaths. You'd probably have a better chance of being stuck by lightning, don't go outside.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
Licenses are evidence that you know your shit.
LOL I know and see people all the time with a driver's license who can't drive for shit let alone drive safely but still managed to get a license. Tell me, you've been taught right, wrong, safe, unsafe, do/did you follows what you learned 100% did you ever knowingly, foolishly do something you know wasn't safe? Would having a license changed your choice then? Do you see why I think this is absurd, license, not safety.
as you know I think, as part of a driving license you are taught safety and laws as well, specifically using a cell phone while driving, yes?
4,637 people died in car crashes in 2018 due to cell phone use.
accidental gun deaths have been going down generally, most recent I could find was 2015 which was an uptick year, 489 for that year
but sure I'm all for gun safety, however the personal risk is much much higher from a licensed automobile driver than an unlicensed gun owner.
The implication being that they can be initially screened for severe psychological defects which are unlikely to change throughout their lives.
what is the estimate for the number of screening that would be needed per year?
would this be taxpayer funded? or a burden on the would be purchaser, if they can afford it and pass it they can buy one? how would that work?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
hey buddy, nice to see you, but wrong person? ;)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
If some of the requirements for the gun license include extensive instruction in gun safety, as well as a passing mark in some sort of gun safety test I think it is a pretty fair and reasonable assumption that on average they are going to know more about gun safety than those who have not gone through the instruction and tests required to get the gun license
you haven't shown how gun safety requires a license, btw you don't need a driver's license to drive on your own property, nor do you need a hunting license.
You could require a gun safety course designed however is best without any need of a license.
safety is important I agree with that and have given ideas how that could easily be accomplished, no license needed.
It's about proactive vs reactive methods, in addition to a multi-layered approach.
sure like the Minority report, we can have Tom Cruise do it.
in 2018 there were over 26 MILLION NICS checks, you propose to do over 26 million mental health assessments per year? Tell me how that is remotely possible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
You can't charge someone with the "crime" of abortion without violating due process (violating personal privacy).
correct
IF DNR protects a mother from potential criminal charges associated with miscarriage, then DNR also protects the same mother from potential criminal charges for abortion.
not in the context of natural miscarriage, miscarriage not willfully caused.
I'm pretty sure it's considered "reckless endangerment".
perhaps, but not manslaughter, if it's intentional it's not manslaughter right? I think intent is a deciding factor.
Please explain how patient/doctor confidentiality applies to all patient/doctor interactions EXCEPT one.
At the state level, the extent of the privilege varies depending on the law of the applicable jurisdiction. For example, in Texas there is only a limited physician–patient privilege in criminal proceedings, and the privilege is limited in civil cases as well.[4]
the right can be broken, through a court order that breaks doctor-patient confidentiality. So there you have it: physician-patient confidentiality isn't exactly as absolute - or perfect
If miscarriages are permissible and medically supervised abortions are not, then people will do what they've done for thousands and years and simply induce miscarriages WITHOUT a medical professional's supervision. Or fly to a country where the procedure is safe and legal.
same argument used for guns hehehe
again it is who is doing what and to whom.
If a woman intentionally causes her own miscarriage, she doesn't have to admit or consent to anything per the constitution, because of that investigating would be futile and pointless
Making it illegal for doctors to perform abortions however would be different in that they could not bill nor get paid for those services. Should the woman need hospital or other services as a result of the doctor's actions a potential investigation could possibly be done without or need to disclose the patient.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
a license isn't required to teach someone safety, nor does having a license mean you understand safety
how does a license for a gun prevent crime?
The basic idea of a screening is to prevent undesirable people from acquiring something.
hhmm I guess so, so like if a certain group commits a disproportionate percentage of murders we should not allow them to have guns because they are undesirable? People with disabilities because of the reduce physical dexterity? Women because they are generally more emotional? You may want to rethink how this could even work at all, talk about a slippery slope.
there are legal ways to make a determination if someone is mentally unable/unfit to own a firearm so I have no idea what more you are asking for.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
so now we just need to hire investigators to determine IF each miscarriage was theoretically preventable!
due process
If this woman had gone to see a doctor immediately after discovering she was pregnant, they COULD HAVE prevented her miscarriage!
D.N.R. healthcare proxy
If this woman had stopped drinking alcohol after she was impregnated, she COULD HAVE prevented her miscarriage!
I don't think that could be proven definitely.
If this woman had NOT taken one of those "morning after pills", she COULD HAVE prevented her miscarriage!
ban the pill, however taking the pill is an intentional, willful act so...
there is patient/doctor confidentiality which you've talked about but I don't believe that extends to the willful actions of a doctor performing and abortion.
In other words they could make it illegal for Doctors to perform non medically need abortions and still maintain the confidentiality for women who have them illegally.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
well by intentional I mean it was caused or of un-natural events.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Ok, so do you believe that abortion = murder ?
I believe abortion = death
Miscarriage is often the result of malnutrition (high calorie/low nutrient diet), strenuous physical activity or anxiety, or drug and or alcohol use.
Studies reveal that anywhere from 10-25% of all clinically recognized pregnancies will end in miscarriage. Chemical pregnancies may account for 50-75% of all miscarriages.
from what you have specified now it is intentional miscarriages = manslaughter therefore it would be logical to say if abortion = murder than intentional miscarriages = manslaughter. I think I would agree with that, for now, I'll think on it more.
Created: