obama not after your guns ?

callen

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

I've had my share of social blunders in the past. I think we all have.

When I proceed to bugger things up for myself, at some point I begin to realize it. It's around that point where I stop the train wreck and admit to fault. Typically, I'll admit to the error of my way and retreat with whatever dignity I might have at that point saying something like, "Shit. You know what? This president just really gets to me. He never did the job I hoped he would. When I get pissed thinking about that poor job I think he has done... I go off- which I just did. I never really intended to slam a bunch of good people here with my venomous tirade, but I'm getting the impression I just did. That wasn't my intention."

GF... honestly... this seems to be a bit of a meltdown for you: very confrontational, very antagonistic, and very unrelenting even in the face of a persuasive argument.

I think you are much better than what you have presented here. Ease off, man. I realize I'm sounding like a wise old man trying to give advice to his son. I'm not trying to come across as condescending- I could easily take much from you under different circumstances. I'm just trying to throw you a life raft here.

(Sorry for the shitty posts mocking your grammar and religion. I don't know why I jumped in the mud with you there? Sincerely now... have a good day!)

Yeah TB throw in the towel on DP. Know you want to.

PJ_Soul

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

PJ_Soul said:

As for this "if you're collecting SSI" thing.... I haven't been following that part of the conversation very closely, but from what I've gathered, I think that could open some iffy doors. Just because someone is collecting SS disability, it doesn't even come close to suggesting that the disability is related to mental illness, which should be the only concern here. As far as I know, older people are no more susceptible to mental illness that young people are, assuming you are including depressing in there as a mental illness (which it is). I think there needs to be specific indication of mental illness for anyone. Of course, if they are collecting disability, then I should think the government would know what that disability is, so it should be pretty easy to weed them out, just as it would be for someone of any age who is collecting disability. The social security aspect is neither here nor there, is it??

If I read correctly, the issue is with people on SS who have someone else handle their money because they are deemed unable for different reasons.

Ah, I see. Well then yes, I would think that anyone who has to have someone else handle their money is either completely incapable of properly holding and firing a gun, or completely incapable of being trusted to make a good decision about who or what the gun is pointing at. Honestly, once someone is in the position where someone else has to take over for them and they still want to shoot guns, they are probably pretty far gone mentally. Just the request would seem nuts at that point. I think zooming in on this particular point is splitting hairs. What difference does it make if they're determining one's mental state by looking at whether or not someone is handling their money (including their SS) or by looking at how much time they just spent in a mental hospital? Whatever is the most efficient way to determine mental illness should be okay IMO. And in the case of those who collect SS and have someone else managing it for them, that statistic is the easiest indicator to pinpoint. Great. People under the age of 65 or whatever the age is will be identified in some other way (like someone else is collecting their disability cheques for them, etc).

WhatYouTaughtMe

Bentleyspop said:

I can't believe people actually take godfoxer serious enough to try and reason with him, to debate him, and attempt to alert him to reality.

Give it up.

Based on his reponses I don't take it seriously, but I don't mind if he keeps invalidating his own argument by presenting no reasonable position.

WhatYouTaughtMe

PJ_Soul said:

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

PJ_Soul said:

As for this "if you're collecting SSI" thing.... I haven't been following that part of the conversation very closely, but from what I've gathered, I think that could open some iffy doors. Just because someone is collecting SS disability, it doesn't even come close to suggesting that the disability is related to mental illness, which should be the only concern here. As far as I know, older people are no more susceptible to mental illness that young people are, assuming you are including depressing in there as a mental illness (which it is). I think there needs to be specific indication of mental illness for anyone. Of course, if they are collecting disability, then I should think the government would know what that disability is, so it should be pretty easy to weed them out, just as it would be for someone of any age who is collecting disability. The social security aspect is neither here nor there, is it??

If I read correctly, the issue is with people on SS who have someone else handle their money because they are deemed unable for different reasons.

Ah, I see. Well then yes, I would think that anyone who has to have someone else handle their money is either completely incapable of properly holding and firing a gun, or completely incapable of being trusted to make a good decision about who or what the gun is pointing at. Honestly, once someone is in the position where someone else has to take over for them and they still want to shoot guns, they are probably pretty far gone mentally. Just the request would seem nuts at that point. I think zooming in on this particular point is splitting hairs. What difference does it make if they're determining one's mental state by looking at whether or not someone is handling their money (including their SS) or by looking at how much time they just spent in a mental hospital? Whatever is the most efficient way to determine mental illness should be okay IMO. And in the case of those who collect SS and have someone else managing it for them, that statistic is the easiest indicator to pinpoint. Great. People under the age of 65 or whatever the age is will be identified in some other way (like someone else is collecting their disability cheques for them, etc).

But zooming in on that one point is the purpose of this proposal, isn't it? Maybe I read it wrong, but I think that is the entire argument behind the proposed change.

PJ_Soul

But isn't that just the solution for that particular segment of the population? I don't take that to mean they wouldn't come up with similar, equal solutions for others as well. I think they're just portioning it off in ways that make sense in order to make the whole thing manageable, and this is the starting point.... I could be wrong, but that's what I'm assuming, since I have seen nothing at all to suggest that there is a big push towards ageism in this context.

Last-12-Exit

Can anyone tell me what C.Y.O.A . stands for?

goingtoverona

cover your own ass?
off topic kinda but who do you guys think is responsible for selling more guns and ammunition....liberal politicians that say they're going to introduce restrictive legislation, or conservative politicians that say the liberals are coming for guns you better stock up?

Last-12-Exit

Godfather. said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Why learn when it's so much easier to be filled with hate and ignorance?

C.Y.O.A right ? you have no idea.

Godfather.

Now knowing what CYOA means, this post makes less sense.

PJ_Soul

Last-12-Exit said:

Godfather. said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Why learn when it's so much easier to be filled with hate and ignorance?

C.Y.O.A right ? you have no idea.

Godfather.

Now knowing what CYOA means, this post makes less sense.

Choose your own adventure?

Gern Blansten

goingtoverona said:

cover your own ass?
off topic kinda but who do you guys think is responsible for selling more guns and ammunition....liberal politicians that say they're going to introduce restrictive legislation, or conservative politicians that say the liberals are coming for guns you better stock up?

That's an easy one...they did this same crap when Clinton was president. Scare the rednecks into thinking the gubmint is goin ta git yer gunz and it never happens....ever....yet they keep saying it over and over.

Edit: I still can't believe people put up the whole "being able to fight off tyranny" mantra regarding the need to have multiple guns. As if they will be any match for drones and tactical nukes.

Godfather.

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Bentleyspop said:

I can't believe people actually take godfoxer serious enough to try and reason with him, to debate him, and attempt to alert him to reality.

Give it up.

Based on his reponses I don't take it seriously, but I don't mind if he keeps invalidating his own argument by presenting no reasonable position.

good for you, how do not understand ? I have said twice that obamas admin stated PEOPLE ON SS.. .. and that is just opening the door to restricting people from owning guns because of thier age, what part of that do not understand ? it was a simple fucking statement, what if he had said black or brown people who can't control thier affairs can't own a gun...what would you think about that ?
or was it my obama name calling that got you and everybody else in a tizzy ?

Godfather.

WhatYouTaughtMe

Godfather. said:

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Bentleyspop said:

I can't believe people actually take godfoxer serious enough to try and reason with him, to debate him, and attempt to alert him to reality.

Give it up.

Based on his reponses I don't take it seriously, but I don't mind if he keeps invalidating his own argument by presenting no reasonable position.

good for you, how do not understand ? I have said twice that obamas admin stated PEOPLE ON SS.. .. and that is just opening the door to restricting people from owning guns because of thier age, what part of that do not understand ? it was a simple fucking statement, what if he had said black or brown people who can't control thier affairs can't own a gun...what would you think about that ?
or was it my obama name calling that got you and everybody else in a tizzy ?

Godfather.

So I will post again, hoping for an answer from the OP. In what circumstances would someone unable to handle their own business affairs be able to responsibly carry a firearm? I'm really asking without my mind made up. Is there any situation you would deem this to be safe?
Yup, a real "tizzy" I am in.

mickeyrat

Gern Blansten said:

goingtoverona said:

cover your own ass?
off topic kinda but who do you guys think is responsible for selling more guns and ammunition....liberal politicians that say they're going to introduce restrictive legislation, or conservative politicians that say the liberals are coming for guns you better stock up?

That's an easy one...they did this same crap when Clinton was president. Scare the rednecks into thinking the gubmint is goin ta git yer gunz and it never happens....ever....yet they keep saying it over and over.

Edit: I still can't believe people put up the whole "being able to fight off tyranny" mantra regarding the need to have multiple guns. As if they will be any match for drones and tactical nukes.

GOP sells that brsnd of fear. Dems another kind.

benjs

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Godfather. said:

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Bentleyspop said:

I can't believe people actually take godfoxer serious enough to try and reason with him, to debate him, and attempt to alert him to reality.

Give it up.

Based on his reponses I don't take it seriously, but I don't mind if he keeps invalidating his own argument by presenting no reasonable position.

good for you, how do not understand ? I have said twice that obamas admin stated PEOPLE ON SS.. .. and that is just opening the door to restricting people from owning guns because of thier age, what part of that do not understand ? it was a simple fucking statement, what if he had said black or brown people who can't control thier affairs can't own a gun...what would you think about that ?
or was it my obama name calling that got you and everybody else in a tizzy ?

Godfather.

So I will post again, hoping for an answer from the OP. In what circumstances would someone unable to handle their own business affairs be able to responsibly carry a firearm? I'm really asking without my mind made up. Is there any situation you would deem this to be safe?
Yup, a real "tizzy" I am in.

I asked the same thing: don't anticipate an answer!

And Godfather, how do you not understand? You have said twice INCORRECTLY that Obama's admin stated people on SS - they stated people on SS who are INCAPABLE OF COLLECTING THEIR OWN DISABILITY CHEQUES AND REQUIRE REPRESENTATIVES TO DO SO ON THEIR BEHALVES, IMPLYING MENTAL OR PHYSICAL ILLNESS TO A DEBILITATING POINT WHERE (as the theory goes) ONE IS ALSO CLEARLY NOT FIT TO CARRY A FIREARM.

So, Godfather, can you humour WhatYouTaughtMe and myself and give one single situation where someone would wrongfully have the right to bear arm stripped? All it takes is ONE instance and you have a leg to stand on.

Godfather.

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Godfather. said:

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Bentleyspop said:

I can't believe people actually take godfoxer serious enough to try and reason with him, to debate him, and attempt to alert him to reality.

Give it up.

Based on his reponses I don't take it seriously, but I don't mind if he keeps invalidating his own argument by presenting no reasonable position.

good for you, how do not understand ? I have said twice that obamas admin stated PEOPLE ON SS.. .. and that is just opening the door to restricting people from owning guns because of thier age, what part of that do not understand ? it was a simple fucking statement, what if he had said black or brown people who can't control thier affairs can't own a gun...what would you think about that ?
or was it my obama name calling that got you and everybody else in a tizzy ?

Godfather.

So I will post again, hoping for an answer from the OP. In what circumstances would someone unable to handle their own business affairs be able to responsibly carry a firearm? I'm really asking without my mind made up. Is there any situation you would deem this to be safe?
Yup, a real "tizzy" I am in.

that would depend on the person, but really anybody with all those problems that obama identified already have been blocked from gun ownership, it just pissed me of that he would use SS as a baseis to restrict gun ownership on anybody. but to answer your question I believe anybody with violent mental issues should not own a gun but the only way to find that problem is to do a medical or criminal background check.......not target people bassed on the source of thier legal income.

Godfather.

Godfather.

mickeyrat said:

Gern Blansten said:

goingtoverona said:

cover your own ass?
off topic kinda but who do you guys think is responsible for selling more guns and ammunition....liberal politicians that say they're going to introduce restrictive legislation, or conservative politicians that say the liberals are coming for guns you better stock up?

That's an easy one...they did this same crap when Clinton was president. Scare the rednecks into thinking the gubmint is goin ta git yer gunz and it never happens....ever....yet they keep saying it over and over.

Edit: I still can't believe people put up the whole "being able to fight off tyranny" mantra regarding the need to have multiple guns. As if they will be any match for drones and tactical nukes.

GOP sells that brsnd of fear. Dems another kind.

it's better to have a gun and not need it rather than need a gun and not have it.


Godfather.

WhatYouTaughtMe

Godfather. said:

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Godfather. said:

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Bentleyspop said:

I can't believe people actually take godfoxer serious enough to try and reason with him, to debate him, and attempt to alert him to reality.

Give it up.

Based on his reponses I don't take it seriously, but I don't mind if he keeps invalidating his own argument by presenting no reasonable position.

good for you, how do not understand ? I have said twice that obamas admin stated PEOPLE ON SS.. .. and that is just opening the door to restricting people from owning guns because of thier age, what part of that do not understand ? it was a simple fucking statement, what if he had said black or brown people who can't control thier affairs can't own a gun...what would you think about that ?
or was it my obama name calling that got you and everybody else in a tizzy ?

Godfather.

So I will post again, hoping for an answer from the OP. In what circumstances would someone unable to handle their own business affairs be able to responsibly carry a firearm? I'm really asking without my mind made up. Is there any situation you would deem this to be safe?
Yup, a real "tizzy" I am in.

that would depend on the person, but really anybody with all those problems that obama identified already have been blocked from gun ownership, it just pissed me of that he would use SS as a baseis to restrict gun ownership on anybody. but to answer your question I believe anybody with violent mental issues should not own a gun but the only way to find that problem is to do a medical or criminal background check.......not target people bassed on the source of thier legal income.

Godfather.

Sure, but people who have developed these issues without any prior history wouldn't be flagged from owning a gun. This might be one of the only ways to catch some people. Even if it's a fairly small number of people in relation to our population, wouldn't you want them to be prevented from owning a gun if they have issues that prevent them from making simple everyday decisions?

Do you take issue with the DMV determining if people are capable of driving cars?

Gern Blansten

Godfather. said:

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Godfather. said:

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Bentleyspop said:

I can't believe people actually take godfoxer serious enough to try and reason with him, to debate him, and attempt to alert him to reality.

Give it up.

Based on his reponses I don't take it seriously, but I don't mind if he keeps invalidating his own argument by presenting no reasonable position.

good for you, how do not understand ? I have said twice that obamas admin stated PEOPLE ON SS.. .. and that is just opening the door to restricting people from owning guns because of thier age, what part of that do not understand ? it was a simple fucking statement, what if he had said black or brown people who can't control thier affairs can't own a gun...what would you think about that ?
or was it my obama name calling that got you and everybody else in a tizzy ?

Godfather.

So I will post again, hoping for an answer from the OP. In what circumstances would someone unable to handle their own business affairs be able to responsibly carry a firearm? I'm really asking without my mind made up. Is there any situation you would deem this to be safe?
Yup, a real "tizzy" I am in.

that would depend on the person, but really anybody with all those problems that obama identified already have been blocked from gun ownership, it just pissed me of that he would use SS as a baseis to restrict gun ownership on anybody. but to answer your question I believe anybody with violent mental issues should not own a gun but the only way to find that problem is to do a medical or criminal background check.......not target people bassed on the source of thier legal income.

Godfather.

wait....so you advocate a mental health test for ANYONE who wants a gun permit rather than weeding out those who have already admitted it through SSI benefits?

benjs

Godfather. said:

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Godfather. said:

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Bentleyspop said:

I can't believe people actually take godfoxer serious enough to try and reason with him, to debate him, and attempt to alert him to reality.

Give it up.

Based on his reponses I don't take it seriously, but I don't mind if he keeps invalidating his own argument by presenting no reasonable position.

good for you, how do not understand ? I have said twice that obamas admin stated PEOPLE ON SS.. .. and that is just opening the door to restricting people from owning guns because of thier age, what part of that do not understand ? it was a simple fucking statement, what if he had said black or brown people who can't control thier affairs can't own a gun...what would you think about that ?
or was it my obama name calling that got you and everybody else in a tizzy ?

Godfather.

So I will post again, hoping for an answer from the OP. In what circumstances would someone unable to handle their own business affairs be able to responsibly carry a firearm? I'm really asking without my mind made up. Is there any situation you would deem this to be safe?
Yup, a real "tizzy" I am in.

that would depend on the person, but really anybody with all those problems that obama identified already have been blocked from gun ownership, it just pissed me of that he would use SS as a baseis to restrict gun ownership on anybody. but to answer your question I believe anybody with violent mental issues should not own a gun but the only way to find that problem is to do a medical or criminal background check.......not target people bassed on the source of thier legal income.

Godfather.

Actually, from the full version of the article you posted and neglected posting a link to (http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/la-na-gun-law-20150718-story.html):

"The law requires gun stores to run the names of prospective buyers through the computerized system before every sale.

The system's databases contain more than 13 million records, which include the names of felons, immigrants in the U.S. illegally, fugitives, dishonorably discharged service members, drug addicts and domestic abusers.

State agencies, local police and federal agencies are required to enter names into the databases, but the system has been hampered by loopholes and inconsistent reporting since its launch.

The shortcomings became clear in the wake of the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting, in which Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people. Cho had been declared mentally ill by a court and ordered to undergo outpatient treatment, but at the time the law did not require that he be added to the databases.

Congress expanded the reporting requirements, but Social Security determined it was not required to submit records, according to LaVenia LaVelle, an agency spokeswoman."

I really am left dumbfounded when I hear about gun rights activists who wish for background checks which only target those who have been 'marked' as unfit to bear arms, as though someone mentally unsound enough to potentially destroy for destruction's sake could possibly be under the radar of the impervious checks and balances in the American health industry.

mickeyrat

Godfather. said:

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Godfather. said:

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Bentleyspop said:

I can't believe people actually take godfoxer serious enough to try and reason with him, to debate him, and attempt to alert him to reality.

Give it up.

Based on his reponses I don't take it seriously, but I don't mind if he keeps invalidating his own argument by presenting no reasonable position.

good for you, how do not understand ? I have said twice that obamas admin stated PEOPLE ON SS.. .. and that is just opening the door to restricting people from owning guns because of thier age, what part of that do not understand ? it was a simple fucking statement, what if he had said black or brown people who can't control thier affairs can't own a gun...what would you think about that ?
or was it my obama name calling that got you and everybody else in a tizzy ?

Godfather.

So I will post again, hoping for an answer from the OP. In what circumstances would someone unable to handle their own business affairs be able to responsibly carry a firearm? I'm really asking without my mind made up. Is there any situation you would deem this to be safe?
Yup, a real "tizzy" I am in.

that would depend on the person, but really anybody with all those problems that obama identified already have been blocked from gun ownership, it just pissed me of that he would use SS as a baseis to restrict gun ownership on anybody. but to answer your question I believe anybody with violent mental issues should not own a gun but the only way to find that problem is to do a medical or criminal background check.......not target people bassed on the source of thier legal income.

Godfather.

Which includes that medical background. Fully and exhaustively documented.