Imagine how angry you'd have to get to do something like that. It's frightening to think that people like that, volatile and unpredictable people, can own guns so easily.A man has been arrested on suspicion of shooting and wounding a golfer after an errant ball broke a window at his home.Jeff Fleming, 53, is accused of firing at a pair of golfers at the 16th hole on Thursday, striking the one who hit the home in Reno. The golfer was treated for minor injuries to an arm and both legs.
The fact is they can. And the fact is those who own guns suffer from the same ills as everybody else. That's why gun ownership needs to be better controlled.
What do you think? Please leave a comment.
This is probably a golf-course community, where houses line the fairways. This moron bought a house near a golf course. Now he is shooting people up.
ReplyDeleteI read a line somewhere about how a golf course is a waste of a good rifle range.
ReplyDeleteThe trouble with your position, Mikeb, is that it's impossible to predict actions like this in advance--at least within the limits of a free society. To make your ideas work, either private citizens have to be banned from owning guns altogether, or we have to give law enforcement the power to take away rights on suspicion. Whether you will admit it or not, we know that your side wants the former, and we've seen how control freaks through history have been pleased with the latter.
You have no other effective solution to offer. Your attempts at half-ass won't work. To achieve the kind of gun control that you want would require the bans and onerous restrictions that we see in Britain. It would also require violations of many basic rights--far beyond just the right to own and carry firearms.
Are you ready to call for that? You won't get anywhere with it. We'll keep our rights. But at least you will finally be consistent about your goals and how to get to them.
Time to bring in the pre-cogs and start doing to pre-crime police work.
DeleteGreg, you keep talking like I want to eliminate this kind of thing 100%. That would require a complete elimination of all guns. But, of course I don't want that, or think it's possible.
DeleteThis is an example of your dishonesty. You know god damn well that's not what I'm talking about but you keep saying it.
My "solution" is to significantly raise the bar as to who can own guns. This would eliminate many of the future trouble makers without identifying them specifically or trying to predict the future.
But, it wouldn't be a 100% solution, only an improvement.
1. I don't believe you. When you or the Brady Bunch claim that you don't want to eliminate all guns, I consider that a lie or a case of self-deception. Given all the restrictions that you call for, you certainly do want almost no one to have a gun.
Delete2. But the only way to eliminate gun crime is to remove all guns from private hands--by force, since we won't surrender them. This is how you're delusional. There are at least 300,000,000 guns in this country. Most of them are unregistered, and many have moved beyond their original ATF paperwork. They won't disappear by magic. We won't turn them in. Your half-assed solutions won't work. Now what are you going to do?
Greg..... a solution is not a either/or situation. The suspect in question, if found negligent or guilty should forfeit his right to own a gun.... forever. A real solution would be to acknowledge that it requires more regulation to own a license for operating a motor vehicle than it does a firearm. A thought, see, for a solution that is NOt either/or. It is not a hard concept to grasp.
ReplyDelete1. I had to pass no background checks to get a driver's license. No one took my fingerprints when I've bought a car. I can drive on any public road in America with one license. If I get into a wreck, most times, I won't lose my license. Gun control people have a funny definition for the word "more."
Delete2. States like California, Illinois, New Jersey, and New York have exactly the kind of control advocated here, and yet they continue to whine about how unsafe they are. Despite the clear failure of strict gun control, advocates call for new restrictions, rather than admitting that prohibition doesn't work.
3. The whole notion of licensing and other such onerous restrictions on a right is an offense against liberty. When you get that, you'll understand our side much better.
gees Greg.... get real. pretty damn hard to get pissed off at a golfer and throw your car at them, now isn't it.
DeleteYou're the one who needs to get real, OKjimm. Did I say that what this man did was good? Did I call his action acceptable? He allegedly committed a crime, and upon conviction, I hope he gets punished. So much for him.
DeleteBut speaking of getting real, I note that you've answered none of my points. As is typical for control advocates, the illusion of safety created by big-sounding laws is all that you want.
Throw? Yes, that would be hard. It would so much easier to just drive over them,,,,,,, several times. Now tell us that has never happened.
Deleteokjimm said..."A real solution would be to acknowledge that it requires more regulation to own a license for operating a motor vehicle than it does a firearm."
DeleteReally? Well, not so much. You see, I can operate any motor vehicle I want on my private property, without a license. I can transport any of my motor vehicles across public property without a license, and transport any of my motor vehicles across state lines without having to check on local laws. There is no limit on the size, capacity, or horsepower of my motor vehicles that I operate on my private property. I don't have to acquire a license to purchase a former military vehicle and I don't have to have a license to operate that military vehicle on my private property. My private collection of military assault vehicles don't require insurance, as long as I operate them on my private property. In the event of an emergency, I can operate my motor vehicles, even the military assault vehicles, upon public property without a license, insurance or registration. So, explain to me how there's more regulation to owning and operating a motor vehicle than a firearm.
okjimm is absolutely correct. In Arizona you have Constitutional Carry, for crying out loud. It requires more to drive a car there than it does to own and legally carry a concealed gun.
DeleteNevada being one of the northern counties of Arizona?
Deletemikeb said..."In Arizona you have Constitutional Carry, for crying out loud. It requires more to drive a car there than it does to own and legally carry a concealed gun."
DeleteA background check (and valid ID) is still required to purchase a new firearm, but there is no background check (or ID requirement) to purchase a new automobile. You can't purchase used military firearms, but you can certainly buy used military motor vehicles. What happens if your ID expires? Can't buy a firearm, but you can walk down to your local car dealer, drop some cash, and leave with your new car, all without an ID, even in Arizona. What happens if you have a PO Box listed on your ID, you'd have to jump through hoops to purchase a firearm, if the dealer is willing to sell to you, not the same with an automobile. What happens if you move and don't update the address on your ID? It becomes invalid and you can't purchase a firearm, again, not so with an automobile. Yes, I can see how much easier it is to purchase a firearm than a motor vehicle.
While it may be easier to carry a firearm in public, than to operate a motor vehicle in public, (in Arizona) it's certainly harder to purchase the firearm.
Bill, in Arizona you are allowed to do private purchases of guns without a background check. That little fact makes your whole comment one big lie.
DeleteSorry, try your bullshit somewhere else. It does not fly around here.
"That little fact makes your whole comment one big lie."
Deletekinda like your lie
"It requires more to drive a car there than it does to own and legally carry a concealed gun."
MikeB, you can't get a new gun through a private purchase.
DeleteWho in the fuck says it has to be a new gun, genius?
DeleteBill, instead of just calling me what I called you, why don't you use your head, get honest and admit when you're wrong.
In AZ I can buy a gun from a private seller. Then I can carry it concealed. No paperwork, no licensing, no nothing.
That's easier than buying a car and driving it.
Mikeb, try to pay attention: Is Nevada a county in Arizona?
DeleteOK, Greg, I said Arizona when I meant Nevada. How much effort and how many comments are you going to invest to point out this mistake. Are you that petty, or is your argument that weak that this is the best you can do?
DeleteBut Nevada requires a license to carry a concealed handgun. Residents of Clark County even have to register their handguns. You were trying to claim that Arizona's laws are followed in Nevada, and now you're getting annoyed that I've called you on the error.
DeleteNo, we were talking about private sales, not concealed carry. In that matter Arizona and Nevada are the same as most other states. Anyone can buy a gun with no paperwork and no background check.
DeleteThat was my point.
well, Greg, you did not respond to mine in a rational way, either. More of an ad Hominem ... Tu Quoque. But let's see.... no deranged student ever took his old Honda Civic to school and killed fellow students. A deranged gun nut never took his SUV to the movies and killed dozens. A soccer mom never took her mini-van to the Sikh temple and killed six...... gosh, see, what I AM SAYING is that there is a problem ... and there does need be a solution. Do you have one... or the spate of recent mass shootings is not a problem? C'mon!! Gotta go.... my favorite liberal cause kicks off against the 49ers soon. Toodles.
ReplyDeleteokijimm said..."no deranged student ever took his old Honda Civic to school and killed fellow students."
DeleteI can assure you that yes, most school shooters did, in fact, take their private motor vehicle to school to kill his fellow students. He may not have used his motor vehicle to cause the deaths, but certainly the motor vehicle was used to facilitate the deaths. Perhaps we should have more laws on operating a motor vehicle, including background checks, monthly drug tests, psychological tests, etc. Without the motor vehicle, there would be nearly zero drive by shootings, abductions would be rare, Bank robberies would be nearly non-existent and the drug trade would be so severely impacted, drug dealers just might get a real job. Perhaps we should ban together and get motor vehicles outlawed.
Okjimm, I addressed your comments, such as they were, without attacking you as a person. If I point out flaws in your reasoning, that's not an ad hominem attack. But on your latest comment, how many people have committed mass acts of murder with a firearm? Those incidents get lots of attention, but they're rare. By contrast, how many of the persons named kill themselves or others in drunk driving crashes?
DeleteBut note something else. Mikeb has declared his fascination with boxing, while you apparently enjoy American football. What is it with you anti-gun people and your love of sports whose origin and nature is violent?