The Attack on the 2nd Amendment Continues

85 guns in one safe that were stolen. Yeah, the criminals should be imprisoned and not get off lightly. But lets also talk about this gun owner household itself? Wow.

The gun grabber version of "If she didn't want it she shouldn't have dressed that way."

What does it matter where he stole them. The point is he had to steal them. There are now four guns available to be used in a crime. You have repeatedly stated you believe people are responsible for the illegal use of their firearms through some warped view of liability. So if it was any of the thousands of stolen police and government firearms in criminal circulation the kills anybody whose fault is that? Who should be facing civil and criminal liability since you are so willing to say that private citizens are somehow responsible for their guns committing crimes when they have been taken from their possession.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You know i would guess that in the last 10 years suicidal airline pilot have killed more people than all the AR-15 that have been sold to the public since 1964 when the AR were first sold to the public. should we ban all airline pilots ?
You ban the assault airplane.

You attempt to foment bigotry against those who prefer to travel by air through labels and the use of broad stereotypes. You might even call them "aerosexuals" in reference to some fantasy of inadequacy compensated for by boarding jets.

Or you hold Airbus and Boeing responsible through tort litigation, you know, if you can't ban them.

Don't forget, you need to show pictures of the children, and scream down anyone who points out the benefits of travel for young people, or facts pertaining to how safe air travel is.
 
You know i would guess that in the last 10 years suicidal airline pilot have killed more people than all the AR-15 that have been sold to the public since 1964 when the AR were first sold to the public. should we ban all airline pilots ?

No. But I'd be okay with psychological testing that tests depression and disclose a history of it from a medical standpoint, SO AS LONG AS there is one national uniform standard for all pilots and a recourse/second opinion in case of a faulty test/diagnosis that isn't as crystal clear. In the case of the Germanwings FO, the history was well established and quite clear.
 
No. But I'd be okay with psychological testing that tests depression and disclose a history of it from a medical standpoint, SO AS LONG AS there is one national uniform standard for all pilots and a recourse/second opinion in case of a faulty test/diagnosis that isn't as crystal clear. In the case of the Germanwings FO, the history was well established and quite clear.

So, you're arguing an anomaly, albeit tragic, doesn't necessarily require wholesale bans or new legislation. You're calling for regulations which exist, and the Germanwings FO had a clear history which in the US would have been actionable and kept him from holding a certificate? So enforcement of current regulations is all thats required, Interesting.
 
So, you're arguing an anomaly, albeit tragic, doesn't necessarily require wholesale bans or new legislation. You're calling for regulations which exist, and the Germanwings FO had a clear history which in the US would have been actionable and kept him from holding a certificate? So enforcement of current regulations is all thats required, Interesting.

Just remember, as Ron White said, You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever
 
If you really feel you NEED an AR15 just to feel safe for you/family, perhaps it's time you move. I would never live in a place in which I felt that I NEEDED an AR15 just to be safe.

In the hands of a trained marksman, this weapon can cause more damage and death than an AR in the hands of a Joe Bagadonuts.

15549451_2.jpg


I have more deadly weapons in my safe than a ubiquitous AR.
 
So, you're arguing an anomaly, albeit tragic, doesn't necessarily require wholesale bans or new legislation. You're calling for regulations which exist, and the Germanwings FO had a clear history which in the US would have been actionable and kept him from holding a certificate? So enforcement of current regulations is all thats required, Interesting.

No, I just said after these couple suicidal pilots that I'd be okay with psychological testing to prevent it in the future, so as long as it was nationally consistent with a uniform set of standards. Difference is I'm at least okay to this suggestion, knowing FULL well, it may very well ground/disqualify certain pilots. But the gun nutters can't do this because inside, they know for fact, that many of their fellow gun nutters would be grounded from legally buying a gun, and then in their minds they think, "I'm next! Or, what's next until I can't legally purchase a gun?" and that's why they'll never support legislation for a psychological evaluation / mental health review for legal purchase of a gun.

As an airline pilot, I'm ok with psych/mental health testing to weed out the Germanwing FO types.... so...... are you as a gun owner?

Cue the resounding NOOOOOO! :rolleyes:
 
It's amazing that the 100% of anti-2nd A folks don't know that we already have a myriad of laws. Not all are enforced or prosecuted.

But yet we should legislate more.

Nothing that checks or enforces anything on mental health when it comes to purchasing a legal handgun.
 
You know i would guess that in the last 10 years suicidal airline pilot have killed more people than all the AR-15 that have been sold to the public since 1964 when the AR were first sold to the public. should we ban all airline pilots ?


BAN ASSUALT PILOTS!
 
OMB-1140-0020 4473

Question 11F.

It is illegal to answer that question dishonestly, resulting in fines and possible jail time.

First of all, one freakin question on an application is meaningless. Pilots get asked the "you ever tested positive for drugs/alochol." And "are you under the influence of drugs now" questions, but still, the airline makes them take a piss test and blow test. That's the real meat of the matter, the real proof.

And second,

"Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective (which includes a determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that you are a danger to yourself or to others or are incompetent to manage your own affairs) OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution?"

Mental institutions are almost non-existant. I don't think the Germanwings FO ever was institutionalized. And the other part is about being adjudicated defective by a court/board/commision/law.... in other words, not in a medical office or hospital. Law is entirely different! I could go to a doc who says hey, you do have a mental defect and you probably need medication and help. Go do this and this otherwise you might be a threat to yourself and others." And no courts are ever involved, and no judge/commission/board knows anything.



The sheer fact that gun nutters think that Question 11F. is the thing that is supposed to stop the mentally sick from buying a gun......... should probably get themselves examined first.
 
First of all, one freakin question on an application is meaningless. Pilots get asked the "you ever tested positive for drugs/alochol." And "are you under the influence of drugs now" questions, but still, the airline makes them take a piss test and blow test. That's the real meat of the matter, the real proof.

And second,

"Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective (which includes a determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that you are a danger to yourself or to others or are incompetent to manage your own affairs) OR have you ever beencommitted to a mental institution?"

Mental institutions are almost non-existant. I don't think the Germanwings FO ever was institutionalized. And the other part is about being adjudicated defective by a court/board/commision/law.... in other words, not in a medical office or hospital. Law is entirely different! I could go to a doc who says hey, you do have a mental defect and you probably need medication and help. Go do this and this otherwise you might be a threat to yourself and others."



The sheer fact that gun nutters think that Question 11F. is the thing that is supposed to stop the mentally sick from buying a gun......... should probably get themselves examined first.

It's illegal to answer that question dishonestly. If one is quickly willing to break the law and lie on the application, it would be fair to assume that they probably won't adhere to any other laws regarding gun ownership.

Once again, laws only punish those who follow them
 
First of all, one freakin question on an application is meaningless. Pilots get asked the "you ever tested positive for drugs/alochol." And "are you under the influence of drugs now" questions, but still, the airline makes them take a piss test and blow test. That's the real meat of the matter, the real proof.

And second,

"Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective (which includes a determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that you are a danger to yourself or to others or are incompetent to manage your own affairs) OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution?"

Mental institutions are almost non-existant. I don't think the Germanwings FO ever was institutionalized. And the other part is about being adjudicated defective by a court/board/commision/law.... in other words, not in a medical office or hospital. Law is entirely different! I could go to a doc who says hey, you do have a mental defect and you probably need medication and help. Go do this and this otherwise you might be a threat to yourself and others." And no courts are ever involved, and no judge/commission/board knows anything.



The sheer fact that gun nutters think that Question 11F. is the thing that is supposed to stop the mentally sick from buying a gun......... should probably get themselves examined first.

The fact that the anti sheeple like yourself want to take away freedoms because you have an irrational fear of a object means you probably need to go to a mental hospital. But hey, once you ban guns, is your next move on speech or assembly, to further your nanny state
 
No, I just said after these couple suicidal pilots that I'd be okay with psychological testing to prevent it in the future, so as long as it was nationally consistent with a uniform set of standards. Difference is I'm at least okay to this suggestion, knowing FULL well, it may very well ground/disqualify certain pilots. But the gun nutters can't do this because inside, they know for fact, that many of their fellow gun nutters would be grounded from legally buying a gun, and then in their minds they think, "I'm next! Or, what's next until I can't legally purchase a gun?" and that's why they'll never support legislation for a psychological evaluation / mental health review for legal purchase of a gun.

As an airline pilot, I'm ok with psych/mental health testing to weed out the Germanwing FO types.... so...... are you as a gun owner?

Cue the resounding NOOOOOO! :rolleyes:
Actually no, you used an example of a suicidal pilot who was able to commit a heinous act due to the failure of authorities to act within their power to do so.

It is analogous to the countless lives lost to criminals who are ineligible to possess firearms yet are released daily and not prosecuted for gun crime.

When asked why the administration fails to push the DOJ to aggressively follow up on felons with guns they don't even offer a direct answer of as you put it, "nooooooo", they just shout down the offer of a ready, common sense solution with teary eyed screams lamenting a fantasized "gun culture".

Felons in possession of guns are committing a federal crime. When aggressively pursued violence committed with firearms drops. It's a proven effective and readily available tool, no EO's or legislation required. All it would take is for MDA, Brady and the rest to push this administration for solutions rather than divisive politicking to further the validity of their astroturf existence.

As far as psychological evaluations are concerned, you as a pilot should understand the issues, ramifications and potential consequences of such measures more than most.

We could discuss these issues however failing to prosecute felons and the punitive aspects of every so called "Universal Background Check" bill illustrates the goal isn't to discuss ways to save lives, it's to criminalize otherwise harmless legal behavior.

Which is why these threads go on, and on, and on.

They can be fun when bored though.
 
First of all, one freakin question on an application is meaningless. Pilots get asked the "you ever tested positive for drugs/alochol." And "are you under the influence of drugs now" questions, but still, the airline makes them take a piss test and blow test. That's the real meat of the matter, the real proof.

So you agree the commission of a crime is the only real way to ascertain an individuals propensity to commit a crime. Interesting.

[/QUOTE]And second,

"Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective (which includes a determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that you are a danger to yourself or to others or are incompetent to manage your own affairs) OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution?"

Mental institutions are almost non-existant. I don't think the Germanwings FO ever was institutionalized. And the other part is about being adjudicated defective by a court/board/commision/law.... in other words, not in a medical office or hospital. Law is entirely different! I could go to a doc who says hey, you do have a mental defect and you probably need medication and help. Go do this and this otherwise you might be a threat to yourself and others." And no courts are ever involved, and no judge/commission/board knows anything.[/QUOTE]

Very interesting, you assert there is a mental health care problem, which we all agree on. Would it be better to tackle this issue with humane solutions than scream at each other over non solutions and inanimate objects literally millions of Americans safely use daily for responsible, legal uses?



[/QUOTE] sheer fact that gun nutters think that Question 11F. is the thing that is supposed to stop the mentally sick from buying a gun......... should probably get themselves examined first.[/QUOTE]

Wow, we're getting somewhere here, so people who commit crimes, do so even though the law says it's a crime, and it carries penalties? Further, people who might be sick will hide said illness from authorities if it may tend to prevent them from making a living, or accessing a civil right? Particularly when help is nonexistent to difficult to get, and costly?

Personally I'd rather have pilots continue to fly and gun owners spending a day at the range who are seeking treatment and receiving effective monitored care rather than being driven underground with their demons for fear of losing everything.

Good to know you agree with us, solutions are out there, like fixing the mental health system and working to change the stigma of receiving care. Good too is you recognize criminalizing harmless behavior does nothing to prevent criminality and merely creates more criminals, and effective solutions are not found in more laws but in fixing difficult social problems.

See, we agree.
 
It's illegal to answer that question dishonestly. If one is quickly willing to break the law and lie on the application, it would be fair to assume that they probably won't adhere to any other laws regarding gun ownership.

Once again, laws only punish those who follow them

It's not an effective law when the only way of stopping said individual is with a pen that is used to check a box for either Yes or No. If this is the kind of law that pro gunners like, no wonder we are already in trouble.


How many people did this alligator kill in Wendys? I can tell you how many one man killed at a McDonalds in San Diego with his shotgun, handgun, and Uzi.
 
Back
Top