Honest opinion w/o the bullshit.......

[was thatguy]

Omar was a bad ass!

Remember when Lester figures out where Chris and Snoop are putting all the bodies?

 

[Grandpa mac]

Be

So no?

Why is it If a civilian fails to secure a weapon that leads to a shooting it's a crime.

- but when the state fails to secure or deny per the law leading to the same results - somehow it isn't?



UD

Because to the best of my knowledge the state legislature of Illinois has not made a failure to act by civil servants a crime. Perhaps they should but you can’t enforce it retroactively, only going forward. There must be a law to break before you can call an action of inaction criminal.

 

[Grandpa mac]

Poor Bunk. All them new bodies to clear.

 

[was thatguy]

Be

Because to the best of my knowledge the state legislature of Illinois has not made a failure to act by civil servants a crime. Perhaps they should but you can’t enforce it retroactively, only going forward. There must be a law to break before you can call an action of inaction criminal.

Civil servants are above the law?

 

[Uncle Dave]

Be

Because to the best of my knowledge the state legislature of Illinois has not made a failure to act by civil servants a crime. Perhaps they should but you can’t enforce it retroactively, only going forward. There must be a law to break before you can call an action of inaction criminal.

correct - when your family is murdered you get a shoulder shrug.

...and there is the problem with disarming me or any other law-abiding citizen.

There is no accountability on the side of the law - they fail to enforce and aren't held accountable.

When it comes right down to it - the protection of your family and loved ones rest exclusively on you

Yet it seems you support disarming, or disallowing, or even retrieving weapons from law abiding citizens. (don't want to put words in your mouth )

UD

 

[Grandpa mac]

Civil servants are above the law?

The law hasn’t been written yet. You gotta pass the law before you start enforcing it.

 

[Grandpa mac]

correct - when your family is murdered you get a shoulder shrug.

...and there is the problem with disarming me or any other law-abiding citizen.

There is no accountability on the side of the law - they fail to enforce and aren't held accountable.

When it comes right down to it - the protection of your family and loved ones rest exclusively on you

Yet it seems you support disarming, or disallowing, or even retrieving weapons from law abiding citizens. (don't want to put words in your mouth )

No accountability? Where they have a duty to act, fail to act, and you suffer damages you are entitled to sue the government and it’s employees. If you think their actions or inactions should be criminal, get a law passed which stipulated exactly what the crime is, the elements of the crime, and the penalty. We live in a country where it ain’t a crime until an EXISTING law is broken and “should be a crime” doesn’t matter.

 

[Uncle Dave]

No accountability? Where they have a duty to act, fail to act, and you suffer damages you are entitled to sue the government and it’s employees.

Hey good idea! Except you cant. No one has ever won a failure to act/protect suit.



UD

 

[Uncle Dave]

Civil servants are above the law?

Yes. In several ways.

There is no accountability - and no recourse for non-performance/ failure to act

This is very difficult for people in general to understand even after numerous court examples and the supreme court rulings.

I wonder how many would so willingly abdicate their gun rights if they actually understood this?



Some good reading.

https://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html

 

[500bbc]

No accountability? Where they have a duty to act, fail to act, and you suffer damages you are entitled to sue the government and it’s employees. If you think their actions or inactions should be criminal, get a law passed which stipulated exactly what the crime is, the elements of the crime, and the penalty. We live in a country where it ain’t a crime until an EXISTING law is broken and “should be a crime” doesn’t matter.

The Talking Turd, COTUS and the disgraced Eric Holder killed Brian Terry and thousands of other people in Mexico.

Who held them accountable?

Fucking noodling idiot.

 

[Old Texan]

Yep, they fucked up the enforcement in Illinois. Having a law is just the first step, then you need to prioritize enforcement. Locally a law was just passed requiring people to secure firearms but the sheriff has announced that his deputies won’t be enforcing it at this time. That’s a big problem, but not with the law itself.

Sorry pops, idiot laws like this are exactly why we have issues. No one can enforce people securing their firearms unless they go into the homes and do inspections. That is a gestapo tactic if I've ever heard of one.

It all boils down to liberalism not supporting law enforcement of actual bad guys rather than fucking with responsible citizens. More bad laws on the book for no other reason than to throw more laws onto the books, hasn't worked and won't. Liberals won't allow LE to do their jobs and here we are......Aurora is an example if the whole of the story is laid out an analyzed.

 

[Old Texan]

You have to have a crime to Indict- I see potential civil liabilty and a lawsuit but no crime by govt officials.

Your answer is a complete cop out.....That's why we have the issues. Govt not doing their jobs by telling those they are in charge of, not do theirs. It's what sanctuary cities and municipalities have done to cause so many of the issues. Again, if Aurora is researched, good chance LE was told, to not worry about it. This arrogance by gov officials "should" be made a felony and enforced stringently, then maybe we'd solve some issues.

 

[94Nautique]

Civil servants are above the law?

Yeppers

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T377A using Tapatalk

 

[Grandpa mac]

Hey good idea! Except you cant. No one has ever won a failure to act/protect suit.



UD

There has to be a legal duty to act such as teachers etc have a legal obligation to report child abuse. If that does not exist, sounds like a good starting point.

 

[Grandpa mac]

Your answer is a complete cop out.....That's why we have the issues. Govt not doing their jobs by telling those they are in charge of, not do theirs. It's what sanctuary cities and municipalities have done to cause so many of the issues. Again, if Aurora is researched, good chance LE was told, to not worry about it. This arrogance by gov officials "should" be made a felony and enforced stringently, then maybe we'd solve some issues.

Then petition for a law to be passed, but you can’t convict anybody of a law which ain’t been written- no matter how obvious you consider the offense.

 

[was thatguy]

Then petition for a law to be passed, but you can’t convict anybody of a law which ain’t been written- no matter how obvious you consider the offense.

True...but you are for disarming people for actions that haven’t happened.

Can’t charge without a broken law...can’t disarm without proving intent.

 

[Uncle Dave]

There has to be a legal duty to act such as teachers etc have a legal obligation to report child abuse. If that does not exist, sounds like a good starting point.

There isn't.

I understand you may believe there is, most people believe this as well ( I wish you were right) , but you are misinformed, and your example facile.

Because the police have no general duty to protect individuals, judicial remedies are not available for their failure to protect.
Despite a long history of such failed attempts, however, many, people persist in believing the police are obligated to protect them, attempt to recover when no protection was forthcoming, and are emotionally demoralized when the recovery fails. Legal annals abound with such cases.

It is, therefore, a fact of law and of practical necessity that individuals are responsible for their own personal safety, and that of their loved ones.
Police protection must be recognized for what it is: only an auxiliary general deterrent.

Your teacher example misses the mark. "Reporting" something and "preventing" something through action are completely different.
Teachers dont respond to 911 or call for help from the general public, robberies, shootouts, burglars, kidnappers, rapists.

When politicians run on the platform of getting serious about civil protection - I'll support them.

Until then I'll support the 2nd and organizations that are pro law abiding citizen that do as well.

UD

 

[Hullbilly]

There has to be a legal duty to act such as teachers etc have a legal obligation to report child abuse. If that does not exist, sounds like a good starting point.

It’s never too late

 

[Grandpa mac]

True...but you are for disarming people for actions that haven’t happened.

Can’t charge without a broken law...can’t disarm without proving intent.

Police can shoot you without “proving intent”. All that is required is probable cause to believe that you have the ability, opportunity, and intent to cause them serious physical harm. Likewise if a judge agrees there is probable cause to believe a husband intends to use a gun to harm his estranged ex-wife, it should be taken away.

 

[was thatguy]

Police can shoot you without “proving intent”. All that is required is probable cause to believe that you have the ability, opportunity, and intent to cause them serious physical harm. Likewise if a judge agrees there is probable cause to believe a husband intends to use a gun to harm his estranged ex-wife, it should be taken away.

Do you think that will stop said ex husband?

 

[Grandpa mac]

There isn't.

I understand you may believe there is, most people believe this as well ( I wish you were right) , but you are misinformed, and your example facile.

Because the police have no general duty to protect individuals, judicial remedies are not available for their failure to protect.
Despite a long history of such failed attempts, however, many, people persist in believing the police are obligated to protect them, attempt to recover when no protection was forthcoming, and are emotionally demoralized when the recovery fails. Legal annals abound with such cases.

It is, therefore, a fact of law and of practical necessity that individuals are responsible for their own personal safety, and that of their loved ones.
Police protection must be recognized for what it is: only an auxiliary general deterrent.

Your teacher example misses the mark. "Reporting" something and "preventing" something through action are completely different.
Teachers dont respond to 911 or call for help from the general public, robberies, shootouts, burglars, kidnappers, rapists.

When politicians run on the platform of getting serious about civil protection - I'll support them.

Until then I'll support the 2nd and organizations that are pro law abiding citizen that do as well.

UD

I’m not saying a duty to act exists, I’m saying a duty to act is a necessary element to a civil negligence lawsuit. Duty to act can be imposed by statute. I’m also not particularly in favor of imposing a duty to act on frequently underfunded and overtasked police officers. I’m a gun owner too and keep a Sig .40 in a biometric box under my bed. I consider myself to be quite responsible but society also has a right to assess if/when I become a threat and take that gun away from me if I can’t be trusted with it.

 

[Hullbilly]

Police can shoot you without “proving intent”. All that is required is probable cause to believe that you have the ability, opportunity, and intent to cause them serious physical harm. Likewise if a judge agrees there is probable cause to believe a husband intends to use a gun to harm his estranged ex-wife, it should be taken away.

Holy fuck once again you have let your big fat stupid mouth out think your tiny little squirrel brain....complete bullshit exceeding #fakenews

Gmac the true rdp fraud, keep up the good shill work

 

[Old Texan]

Then petition for a law to be passed, but you can’t convict anybody of a law which ain’t been written- no matter how obvious you consider the offense.

That is what I said, when I said "should" be. As far as we sit currently, gov officials forcing LE to ignore certain laws "is" an offense and needs to be enforced with those officials being removed from office.

Your exuberance to be right, causes "facts" to pass over your head time and again on the topics you argue.

 

[boatdoc55]

That is what I said, when I said "should" be. As far as we sit currently, gov officials forcing LE to ignore certain laws "is" an offense and needs to be enforced with those officials being removed from office.

Your exuberance to be right, causes "facts" to pass over your head time and again on the topics you argue.

Most every time Tex!!!

 

[Uncle Dave]

I’m not saying a duty to act exists, I’m saying a duty to act is a necessary element to a civil negligence lawsuit. Duty to act can be imposed by statute. I’m also not particularly in favor of imposing a duty to act on frequently underfunded and overtasked police officers. I’m a gun owner too and keep a Sig .40 in a biometric box under my bed. I consider myself to be quite responsible but society also has a right to assess if/when I become a threat and take that gun away from me if I can’t be trusted with it.

If - "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts - we'd all have a merry Christmas.

..... if someday there is an imposed duty to act, civil servants may be held accountable Im still waiting to see anyone win any case.
I doubt I'll see that in my lifetime as status quo has lasted well over 200 years now.

I commend your personal safety protocols, and position of reason should you become a threat - of course you may not be so reasonable at that time but at least you have an open mind to it today.

I would personally go a step further and proactively tie firearm possession and purchase to prescription anti-depressants.
You want on the "happy pills" - turn over your weapons. You want the weapons back -go 12 months without them.

UD

 

[Grandpa mac]

Do you think that will stop said ex husband?

It makes it a little harder- particular if he’s one of those exes who decided to go and kill his wife’s whole family or shoot up her place of employment. Firearms are definitely the weapon of choice for cowards who want to inflict the maximum carnage and then go down in a shootout with the cops.

 

[Grandpa mac]

If - "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts - we'd all have a merry Christmas.

..... if someday there is an imposed duty to act, civil servants may be held accountable Im still waiting to see anyone win any case.
I doubt I'll see that in my lifetime as status quo has lasted well over 200 years now.

I commend your personal safety protocols, and position of reason should you become a threat - of course you may not be so reasonable at that time but at least you have an open mind to it today.

I would personally go a step further and proactively tie firearm possession and purchase to prescription anti-depressants.
You want on the "happy pills" - turn over your weapons. You want the weapons back -go 12 months without them.

UD

See now you’ve gone even a step beyond me. My mother is “adjudicated mentally ill” as an schizophrenic and court ordered into an institution and despite her objections on principle it is a no brainer that she should NOT have a gun. But somebody taking a mild antidepressant like Seetraline for seasonal affective disorder, PTSD, or mild depression? That seems an excessively low bar even to me. I think rather than a one size fits all you need a judge making a competency ruling based on probable cause. But my mind is open if you want to make the case.

 

[Uncle Dave]

See now you’ve gone even a step beyond me. My mother is “adjudicated mentally ill” as an schizophrenic and court ordered into an institution and despite her objections on principle it is a no brainer that she should have a gun. But somebody taking a mild antidepressant like Seetraline for seasonal affective disorder, PTSD, or mild depression? That seems an excessively low bar even to me. I think rather than a one size fits all you need a judge making a competency ruling based on probable cause. But my mind is open if you want to make the case.

Perhaps.

She should or shouldn't have a gun? I think you are making a case she shouldn't, but didn't word it correctly.

Analysis of school and mass shooting data links SSRI use and or withdrawal. ( I discussed this specific type/catagory of drugs earlier in the thread but generalized the response above)

I'm unfamiliar with seetraline and its effects and believe there are likely options that dont have the same effects as the SSRI family.

- how's this - if you are under drug prescribed psychiatric care the doctor should be able to flag you/ the system depending on what you are prescribed.
I'm ok with certain happy drugs bringing with them forfeiture, or ability to acquire deadly weapons.


UD

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

It makes it a little harder- particular if he’s one of those exes who decided to go and kill his wife’s whole family or shoot up her place of employment. Firearms are definitely the weapon of choice for cowards who want to inflict the maximum carnage and then go down in a shootout with the cops.

Those and rental vans. We should ban vans too, they are after all automatics.

 

[Grandpa mac]

Perhaps.

She should or shouldn't have a gun? I think you are making a case she shouldn't, but didn't word it correctly.

Analysis of school and mass shooting data links SSRI use and or withdrawal. ( I discussed this specific type/catagory of drugs earlier in the thread but generalized the response above)

I'm unfamiliar with seetraline and its effects and believe there are likely options that dont have the same effects as the SSRI family.

- how's this - if you are under drug prescribed psychiatric care the doctor should be able to flag you/ the system depending on what you are prescribed.
I'm ok with certain happy drugs bringing with them forfeiture, or ability to acquire deadly weapons.


UD

Yes, “SHOULD NOT” have a gun. My typo.

I still think I’d base it on the specific mental health diagnosis rather than just what kinda meds you’re on, but I’m 100% with you that mental health providers should be able to red flag people. In fact, I’d love it if they were mandated to report. I can tell you mom had several visits to the ER for crazy before she was finally adjudicated mentally ill. The first trip to ER with delusional behavior should have been flagged. She was never a gun person, though she did have a couple antique long guns inherited with my grandfathers possessions. But I vividly remember her bitterness at being told it was now illegal for her to possess a firearm. Forbidden fruit and the stigma of mental illness, I suppose.

 

[Grandpa mac]

Those and rental vans. We should ban vans too, they are after all automatics.

Or require a license to operate, registration with the state, taxes on vehicle and gasoline, and revocation of privilege for bad driving or physical/mental condition which prevents safe operation.

You really want to draw comparison between guns (which incidentally were designed to kill himans and are really fucking good at that) to cars? I’m more than happy to see the regulations more closely mirrored.

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

Or require a license to operate, registration with the state, taxes on vehicle and gasoline, and revocation of privilege for bad driving or physical/mental condition which prevents safe operation.

You really want to draw comparison between guns (which incidentally were designed to kill himans and are really fucking good at that) to cars? I’m more than happy to see the regulations more closely mirrored.

One is a right under the constitution and the other is not... so sure.. draw whatever parallels you want. People kill way more other people in cars than they do with guns.

Don't be obtuse and bring gun or car suicides into the mix.

 

[Hullbilly]

Or require a license to operate, registration with the state, taxes on vehicle and gasoline, and revocation of privilege for bad driving or physical/mental condition which prevents safe operation.

You really want to draw comparison between guns (which incidentally were designed to kill himans and are really fucking good at that) to cars? I’m more than happy to see the regulations more closely mirrored.

You are a complete fraud, a liar and a coward....why anyone wastes their time trying to have a semi serious debate with you is amazing. Your posts are complete bullshit.

 

[Grandpa mac]

S

Perhaps.

She should or shouldn't have a gun? I think you are making a case she shouldn't, but didn't word it correctly.

Analysis of school and mass shooting data links SSRI use and or withdrawal. ( I discussed this specific type/catagory of drugs earlier in the thread but generalized the response above)

I'm unfamiliar with seetraline and its effects and believe there are likely options that dont have the same effects as the SSRI family.

- how's this - if you are under drug prescribed psychiatric care the doctor should be able to flag you/ the system depending on what you are prescribed.
I'm ok with certain happy drugs bringing with them forfeiture, or ability to acquire deadly weapons.


UD

Sertraline incidentally just slows body’s normal uptake of serotonin, the “wellness” hormone. So if you’re under a lot of stress and you’re making stress hormone instead of serotonin, settaline just allows what serotonin your body naturally produces to stay in your system a little longer and brings you back up to normal levels. Pretty much a zero side effect drug for people in a slump for almost any reason.

 

[Grandpa mac]

You are a complete fraud, a liar and a coward....why anyone wastes their time trying to have a semi serious debate with you is amazing. Your posts are complete bullshit.

Remind me again of your professed expertise and credentials?

 

[Grandpa mac]

One is a right under the constitution and the other is not... so sure.. draw whatever parallels you want. People kill way more other people in cars than they do with guns.

Don't be obtuse and bring gun or car suicides into the mix.

Deliberately and with malice aforethought?

 

[Hullbilly]

Remind me again of your professed expertise and credentials?

PM me your .gov address anytime sweetheart and we’ll compare resumes.

 

[Grandpa mac]

One is a right under the constitution and the other is not... so sure.. draw whatever parallels you want. People kill way more other people in cars than they do with guns.

Don't be obtuse and bring gun or car suicides into the mix.

You know what else used to be a right enshrined in the Constitution? Owning slaves- and that was a bad idea too.

 

[Grandpa mac]

PM me your .gov address anytime sweetheart and we’ll compare resumes.

Oh yeah, I found it.

 

[Hullbilly]

View attachment 729292
Oh yeah, I found it.

You prove at every turn what a coward and fraud you are....As I said PM me you .gov address and we’ll compare resumes. No hiding behind screen names.

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

You know what else used to be a right enshrined in the Constitution? Owning slaves- and that was a bad idea too.

Free speech is a bad idea as well, amirite???

 

[Old Texan]

Yes, “SHOULD NOT” have a gun. My typo.

I still think I’d base it on the specific mental health diagnosis rather than just what kinda meds you’re on, but I’m 100% with you that mental health providers should be able to red flag people. In fact, I’d love it if they were mandated to report. I can tell you mom had several visits to the ER for crazy before she was finally adjudicated mentally ill. The first trip to ER with delusional behavior should have been flagged. She was never a gun person, though she did have a couple antique long guns inherited with my grandfathers possessions. But I vividly remember her bitterness at being told it was now illegal for her to possess a firearm. Forbidden fruit and the stigma of mental illness, I suppose.

Well, that removes any doubt, you do come from a line of mentally ill people......Speaks for itself when trying to figure out the bullshit you post

 

[Old Texan]

Remind me again of your professed expertise and credentials?

I'll vouch for the fact he can spot an idiot troll, posting to do nothing but create irritation and nonsense. You fit the profile to a T, ya f'ing liberal loon

 

[SNiC Jet]

You know what else used to be a right enshrined in the Constitution? Owning slaves- and that was a bad idea too.

Bull Shit! The Constitution did not "enshrine the right" to own slaves, that is 100% Bull Shit!!!..... it simply did not prevent the practice until the 13th Amendment.
and, not only does the Constitution not mention blacks or whites, but it also doesn’t mention slaves or slavery.

The only mention in the Constitution prior to the 13th amendment, was as to how these "other persons" should be counted in a state's total population.

Perhaps this is why you Liberals trash our Constitution and want to change it....it simply doesn't fit your agendas!

You know what I think is a "bad idea"?.....Trolls like you trashing our Constitution!

 

[Hullbilly]

I'll vouch for the fact he can spot an idiot troll, posting to do nothing but create irritation and nonsense. You fit the profile to a T, ya f'ing liberal loon

Would you be shocked if I told ya no PM with his email.....like I said he’s a fraud and a coward.

 

[500bbc]

You know what else used to be a right enshrined in the Constitution? Owning slaves- and that was a bad idea too.

Which is why the West abolished slavery yet it still exists in every other country across the globe.

Fucking Boy Scout noodling idiot...

 

[94Nautique]

Yes, “SHOULD NOT” have a gun. My typo.

I still think I’d base it on the specific mental health diagnosis rather than just what kinda meds you’re on, but I’m 100% with you that mental health providers should be able to red flag people. In fact, I’d love it if they were mandated to report. I can tell you mom had several visits to the ER for crazy before she was finally adjudicated mentally ill. The first trip to ER with delusional behavior should have been flagged. She was never a gun person, though she did have a couple antique long guns inherited with my grandfathers possessions. But I vividly remember her bitterness at being told it was now illegal for her to possess a firearm. Forbidden fruit and the stigma of mental illness, I suppose.

If things were based on mental health diagnosis, you would not be allowed near pencils or spoons, way Too dangerous.

Not sure where mental health diagnosis exists in the constitution as part of the govt shall not infringe, but you probably added it with crayon...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T377A using Tapatalk

 

[Grandpa mac]

This story is just breaking and illustrates perfectly what terrifies me about gun violence in America. There are plenty of individuals on both sides of the ideological divide whom I trust RIGHT NOW with guns. But time and again we see that no race, class, profession, political party is entirely free of evil people. In parallel to that, people who are sane today when they buy a gun will have it for the next 50 years and they may not be sane down the road. The schizophrenia my mother has a genetic component and, although it normally manifests itself by your 20’s, who fucking knows. A kid I was friends with in high school murdered his mother with a hammer. You never fucking know.

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/02/20/po...ng-hit-list/index.html?r=https://www.cnn.com/

 

[Grandpa mac]

Bull Shit! The Constitution did not "enshrine the right" to own slaves, that is 100% Bull Shit!!!..... it simply did not prevent the practice until the 13th Amendment.
and, not only does the Constitution not mention blacks or whites, but it also doesn’t mention slaves or slavery.

The only mention in the Constitution prior to the 13th amendment, was as to how these "other persons" should be counted in a state's total population.

Perhaps this is why you Liberals trash our Constitution and want to change it....it simply doesn't fit your agendas!

You know what I think is a "bad idea"?.....Trolls like you trashing our Constitution!

The 3/5 Amendment much like the Apostle Paul’s guidance to 1st Century Christians on how to be a good slave owner amounts to tacit acceptance of slavery by our Founding Father’s and your religious book both.

 

[Hullbilly]

This story is just breaking and illustrates perfectly what terrifies me about gun violence in America. There are plenty of individuals on both sides of the ideological divide whom I trust RIGHT NOW with guns. But time and again we see that no race, class, profession, political party is entirely free of evil people. In parallel to that, people who are sane today when they buy a gun will have it for the next 50 years and they may not be sane down the road. The schizophrenia my mother has a genetic component and, although it normally manifests itself by your 20’s, who fucking knows. A kid I was friends with in high school murdered his mother with a hammer. You never fucking know.

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/02/20/politics/coast-guard-mass-killing-hit-list/index.html?r=https://www.cnn.com/

Youre a fraud...shut up