The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » The press and the Gifford shooting (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..7~8~9~10~11..18..24..30..36..40~41~42 [Next]
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On 2011-01-16 22:05, acesover wrote:
Ask yourself this question.

Who can buy a gun?

Answer:

You have to be 18 or older to purchase a rifle or shotgun;
You have to be 21 or older to purchase a handgun;
You must buy your gun from a federally-licensed dealer in your state;
You must submit to a background check that the dealer will arrange, using an FBI database

Did you read the fourth statement? If not before you go any further read it.

You must submit to a background check that the dealer will arrange, using an FBI database.

So now if you are on file as a felon or have had an arrest for any serious crime or mentally incompetent and are filed with the FBI you are not going to be permitted to purchase a gun. Simple enough and very logical.

So why are some of these people not on the FBI's radar?

"In September, Mr. Loughner filled out paperwork to have his record expunged on the 2007 drug paraphernalia charge. Although he did not need to bother — he completed a diversion program, so the charge was never actually on his record — Judge Jose Luis Castillo, who handled the case in Pima County Consolidated Justice Court, said after the shooting that, in retrospect, it definitely “crossed my mind” that Mr. Loughner was worried that the charge would prevent him from buying a weapon."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/us/16loughner.html

I'm not familiar with what a diversion program is, but the above at least explains why his record was "clean" of the drug charge.

It also goes into a lot of detail about JL's activities over the past few years.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On 2011-01-17 12:18, acesover wrote:

So again it seems that we are punishing the seller and not the perp. By the way what happens to someone who purchases cigarettes when under age? My guess is nothing.

Well, your guess is wrong. Smile

A few years ago, the fine for underage smoking / tobacco possession in CA was $103. It depends on the / varies by jurisdiction, of course. You can search on "underage smoking ticket" if you want to read more. For example:

http://www.expertlaw.com/forums/showthre......8&page=1
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
819 Posts

Profile of acesover
Quote:
On 2011-01-17 13:12, balducci wrote:
Quote:
On 2011-01-17 12:18, acesover wrote:

So again it seems that we are punishing the seller and not the perp. By the way what happens to someone who purchases cigarettes when under age? My guess is nothing.

Well, your guess is wrong. Smile

A few years ago, the fine for underage smoking / tobacco possession in CA was $103. It depends on the / varies by jurisdiction, of course. You can search on "underage smoking ticket" if you want to read more. For example:

http://www.expertlaw.com/forums/showthre......8&page=1
\


Thanks for that info. I am glad to hear that. I did not know there were laws that prosecuted the underage offender and not just the seller.

Not sure if such a law exists in all states (wish it did). I would hope that where it exists it is enforced. However I am sure if some officer enforces it he will be bad mouthed by many and say and asked is that all you have to do? It is a shame for the police in this situation as they are in a no win situation.

By the way this was in no way trying to derail the present topic. Just showing the fact tht some laws are meant to make people feel good rather than prevent.

More laws is not the answer. Just enforce the ones we have.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Well, landmark, the flap over the blood libel comment is a media-orchestrated kerfuffle, so I will not comment more about it. The examples of right-wing violence you cite are trivial compared to the terroristic onslaught of the left over the past decade. I have already linked to long lists of violent actions by leftists in the US.

Again, to repeat, the fact that the National-Socialists eliminated the communists, socialists, and communist & socialist trade unions does not prove that the National-Socialists were not socialists. The communists also eliminated independent trade unions, social democrats, and anarchists in the Soviet Union. Both totalitarian parties were simply eliminating all competition. Now the fact the the appearance of private ownership and control are preserved in Fascist and National-Socialist economies does not make them any less statist or socialist. The real control of the entire economy was seized by the state in both Fascist and National-Socialist regimes. When the Fuehrer was asked how he could consider himself a socialist without nationalizing the industries, he replied that he had nationalized the people. National-Socialist Germany and Communist Russia resembled each other far more than either resembled a free economy.

The anarcho-syndicalist "democratic socialism" you espouse is a fantasy that is dangled in front of the credulous by Bolsheviks who would as quickly turn your worker's paradise into the same sort of hellhole they create wherever they go.

As for the rights of beer drinkers generally, I hold that the rights protected by the Constitution are those with which all men are endowed by their Creator. The right to life includes the right of self defense, and that includes the right to keep and bear arms. I would no more deprive you of your right to defend yourself than I would deprive you of your right to worship according to your conscience or speak your mind according to your lights. The left however would deprive us all of all of those rights, and they have done it every time they have taken power everywhere in the world. By their works, we know them.

Unarmed, defenseless victims everywhere in the world recognize that firearms are life-saving, genocide-preventing appliances. The hoplophobia ingrained in many people prevents them from thinking clearly about this subject. Armed people wave their stars, unarmed people wear them . . .

Woland
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
In case anyone here is still in interested in how badly the mainstream media did in reporting the initial story, there's this in the New York Times:

Quote:
{Loughner} became intrigued by antigovernment conspiracy theories, including that the Sept. 11 attacks were perpetrated by the government and that the country’s central banking system was enslaving its citizens. His anger would well up at the sight of President George W. Bush, or in discussing what he considered to be the nefarious designs of government.


The shooter probably never listened to Glenn Beck, Mark Levin, or Rush Limbaugh, and probably hates Sarah Palin, too. The press just made up the story they wanted you to believe.

It is a pity that so many people were so easily fooled.

Woland
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On 2011-01-17 14:12, Woland wrote:

Again, to repeat, the fact that the National-Socialists eliminated the communists, socialists, and communist & socialist trade unions does not prove that the National-Socialists were not socialists. The communists also eliminated independent trade unions, social democrats, and anarchists in the Soviet Union. Both totalitarian parties were simply eliminating all competition. Now the fact the the appearance of private ownership and control are preserved in Fascist and National-Socialist economies does not make them any less statist or socialist. The real control of the entire economy was seized by the state in both Fascist and National-Socialist regimes. When the Fuehrer was asked how he could consider himself a socialist without nationalizing the industries, he replied that he had nationalized the people. National-Socialist Germany and Communist Russia resembled each other far more than either resembled a free economy.

Woland, except for some revisionist talk show hosts and their followers and very few others, the Nazi party was far more right wing than it was left. The division between right and left is far more complicated than you appear to be stating (here or in a previously deleted thread). One way to look at it:

Image


Source: Slomp, Hans (2000). European Politics Into the Twenty-First Century: Integration and Division. Westport: Praeger. ISBN 0275968146.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Well, balducci, I understand that the graphic you use is the way the information is usually presented. But that division is heavily influenced by Communist agitprop against National-Socialism and Fascism. The Communists wished to obscure the similarities between the society they created and the societies created by the National-Socialists and Fascists. (Interestingly enough, National-Socialism is not found on your graphic at all.)

Rather than simply show us this sort of artificial schema which could have entities displayed on it anywhere, let's consider what elements comprise socialist economies and free economies. Make a list. Decide for yourself --based on observations of the facts on the ground, of what has actually existed in real countries, and not according to the propaganda of any of these groups who claim to tell you what their projects will mean-- what the characteristics of a free economy are, and what the characteristics of a centrally controlled socialist economy are. Decide for yourself what the political characteristics of actual real-life socialist regimes actually are.

Then look at non-Communist historical accounts of what life was like in Fascist Italy and National-Socialist Germany. Read about how their economies were managed, and how the lives of workers, peasants, and bureaucrats were organized. Then go down your checklist and decide for yourself whether National-Socialism and Fascism were more like Communism or more like free enterprise. It is very close to being a no-brainer.

Life in genocidal, racist, totalitarian National-Socialist Germany and life in genocidal, racist, totalitarian Soviet Russia were very similar. Both of these regimes were opposed to the same aspects of what they both contemptuously referred to as bourgeois capitalism. The fact that they were such bitter opponents of each other comes from the fact that they were rivals for the same ecological-political niche, not that their niches were so radically different.

Woland
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5024 Posts

Profile of landmark
"The fact that they were such bitter opponents of each other comes from the fact that they were rivals for the same ecological-political niche, not that their niches were so radically different. "

Are you willing to apply the same argument to the United States and the USSR at the height of the Cold War?
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5024 Posts

Profile of landmark
I like that word hoplophobia, though it seems to me the gun guys are the ones that always seem to be scared of something, always need to be protected from gun-toting criminals. The majority of us do fine without them.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Well, landmark, identifying the Communists and the National-Socialists as internecine rivals is not an argument, it is an observation. From the standpoint of China, I suppose, one might see the USA and the USSR as rivals, but then, the imperial regime established in ancient Chin had many socialist characteristics, as pointed out by Shafarevich. From the standpoint of a citizen in a free market, free society, the USSR was not a rival version of a similar program, but a radically different vision of the meaning of an individual's human life on earth. A vision that was very similar to the National-Socialist's vision.

Both the armed and unarmed law-abiding citizens need to be protected from criminals. The armed citizens are a little better equipped for the task, however.

Woland
Tom Bartlett
View Profile
Special user
Our southern border could use
763 Posts

Profile of Tom Bartlett
Defending our selves from criminals is only one reason to keep and bear arms. The main reason is to defend ourselves from a tyrannical government.
Our friends don't have to agree with me about everything and some that I hold very dear don't have to agree about anything, except where we are going to meet them for dinner.
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
Ohhhhhhhhh sh!t.
Tom Bartlett
View Profile
Special user
Our southern border could use
763 Posts

Profile of Tom Bartlett
Quote:
On 2011-01-17 16:29, MagicSanta wrote:
Ohhhhhhhhh sh!t.


Did I do that?

:rotf:
Our friends don't have to agree with me about everything and some that I hold very dear don't have to agree about anything, except where we are going to meet them for dinner.
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
Didn't you get the talking points? Only reference self defense and hunting!
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Guns don't shoot people. People shoot people. And Foxes.

"Fox shoots man"

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE70C5Q620110113
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Mr. Bartlett, you are perfectly correct. I consider that our individual and collective right to defense against a tyrannical government is a subset of our individual right to defend our selves. In the scheme of things, however, the necessity of arming the citizens against a tyrannical government was of paramount importance to the Founders.

And the world's experience during the XXth Century suggests that a tyrannical government is indeed something that we should fear.

Woland
EsnRedshirt
View Profile
Special user
Newark, CA
895 Posts

Profile of EsnRedshirt
Wait a sec, backup a bit.
Quote:
On 2011-01-17 14:12, Woland wrote:
Unarmed, defenseless victims everywhere in the world recognize that firearms are life-saving, genocide-preventing appliances. The hoplophobia ingrained in many people prevents them from thinking clearly about this subject. Armed people wave their stars, unarmed people wear them . . .
I can't believe you actually went there.

At any rate, what do you really think would have happened to anyone who brandished a firearm against the SS?
Self-proclaimed Jack-of-all-trades and google expert*.

* = Take any advice from this person with a grain of salt.
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
They would'a been dead with a gun in their hand?
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20614 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Guns don't kill people, bullets do. It is the gun that makes the go really fast though.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
EsnRedShirt,

There's a nice graphic by Oleg Volk (who maintains an excellent informational website here) that goes with that idea:

Image


By the time the National-Socialists had taken power, anyone who still had a weapon to brandish against them, and who brandished it, would have been killed. But just about everyone they wanted to kill was killed anyway.

The utility of an armed populace in preventing genocide is situated well before the tyrannical regime actually starts its policy of genocide. The National-Socialists were very careful to disarm those they intended to eliminate, but the actual process of elimination started very slowly, and very gently, and years after the forced disarmament had taken place.

Woland
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » The press and the Gifford shooting (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..7~8~9~10~11..18..24..30..36..40~41~42 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.23 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL