CCW Holder Kills Door-To-Door Salesman

Quote from TRNT : You used that phrase so why don't you tell us?

Well you seemed to be using it by some other meaning than what I meant, so that's why I asked.
An outright ban means a complete ban across the board of all guns.
A ban that would be specific, like a hig capacity m,agazine ban or an assault weapon ban, or a ban on PPT's without a dealer.
You get the idea right?
You seemed like you were so confused I thought I'd ask what you though the difference was.

Quote : I am convinced you would say whatever you thought was helpful at the time.

.

You are convinced of a lot of things.
I don't play games like you so quit projecting.

Quote : but honesty and having certain views are not intertwined. David duke is an honest man. He is also a bigot. You made a claim that is unsupported by logic and is clearly wrong. Buy you are too proud to admit you were wrong. How sad.

I admit I'm wrong when I'm wrong.
This isn't one of those times.

Quote from TRNT : is it your understanding/assumption that "100s of millions" is definitely larger than 270 million? Very much higher? (I love language nuances.)

I don't understand the question except for it's literal interpretation. 100s of millions could be less than 270 million. Was that baiting out of context or did I misunderstand your question? Because, the context of the statement I quoted and commented on was for black market guns. I do not believe anyone here thinks black market guns comprise over 200 million (minimum of 100s of millions) of the 270 million total I linked. That would infer only 70 million non-black market guns owned legally.

EDIT: Sorry, I get it now. You didn't click on the actual link I provided and you thought my 270 million was relating to black market guns and not total guns. Next time I will word it better. I was on a conference call and wasn't being clear for those that wouldn't look at the facts on their own.

2 quick notes.

First, TRNT, you are starting to personally attack others. You kind took a shot at me for some of my previous wording in a reply before skiman showed up with some comments/observations. If it mattered enough to point out my previous wording, I would think you might feel better if you didn't do the same thing.

Second, I would agree on one point that has been belabored here from the other side. Some gun laws are ineffective and I don't believe they are something we can just say "let's enforce them before we make new laws". Some laws are just plain silly and any attempt to enforce is met with common sense that proves the laws were silly to begin with and should never have been enacted. That said, I would hope those proposing new processes and laws might take a few minutes to realize that their changes may one day be in the same bucket and slickdealers 20 years from now might be doing the same song and dance over them in this very forum. LONG LIVE SD!

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/0...-property/


Roop was known as the neighborhood crazy. My solution, bi-annual psych evaulations for the privilage of carrying a concealed weapon. And or 2 certified letters from known neighbors as character references.

too much ?

Quote from skiman : Again, "easy" is a very relative term. If it were truly cheap and easy, that's how most people would be acquiring guns now. Why spend money on something that's an "easy" DIY. So why are people buying guns today? And, as for those craftsmen who would willingly arm criminals, if we could limit availability to that level of productivity, what a problem to have!

The same reason that most people don't build their own televisions anymore. If it's cheaper to get it done professionally and mass produced, people won't bother making their own. But if guns were banned, people would start doing it in masse.

Quote from easyperl : 2 quick notes. First, TRNT, you are starting to personally attack others. You kind took a shot at me for some of my previous wording in a reply before skiman showed up with some comments/observations. If it mattered enough to point out my previous wording, I would think you might feel better if you didn't do the same thing.

This is a debate about guns. Of course I took shots at people.

If I insulted you it was either unintended or out of frustration. Please accept my apology. Also please bring it to my attention when you feel you have been insulted. Give me a chance to rectify/explain the situation.

From memory and before skiman's entry I recall several put downs by you. I even referred to them as "put downs". My intention is to not make a negative personal comment about posters. However I am not perfect.

You are a reaoable poster and good times can be had debating stuff. I am looking forward to it.

Quote from HEATBaller : http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/0...-property/ Roop was known as the neighborhood crazy. My solution, bi-annual psych evaulations for the privilage of carrying a concealed weapon. And or 2 certified letters from known neighbors as character references. too much ?

Yes, too much.

Millions of guns, millions of gun-owners..

If they were all psycho like some of you are trying to make them out to be, there'd be a lot of dead people in the streets..

Truth is, bad guys are bad, psycho people are psycho.. Do you think you need a gun to commit a crime, a murder?

Deny CCW to a psycho and they'll just find another way to cause harm..

Lets try your way for a while..Yes, pieces of paper in thick books on lawyers or judges desks stop bad guys from robbing or killing..

Quote from tooshorttoplay : Millions of guns, millions of gun-owners.. If they were all psycho like some of you are trying to make them out to be, there'd be a lot of dead people in the streets.. Truth is, bad guys are bad, psycho people are psycho.. Do you think you need a gun to commit a crime, a murder? Deny CCW to a psycho and they'll just find another way to cause harm.. Lets try your way for a while..Yes, pieces of paper in thick books on lawyers or judges desks stop bad guys from robbing or killing..

lets stipulate that this is true.


is it then your contention that we should not deny ccw to psychos?

Quote from TRNT : lets stipulate that this is true. is it then your contention that we should not deny ccw to psychos?

Assuming that people don't need to pass mental exam to get a CCW, you'd have to know they were a psycho in the first place, which you won't, so you'd have to assume you're denying CCW to a normal person, which they were not, but it doesn't matter, they'd just find another way to cause mayhem.

Quote from tooshorttoplay : Assuming that people don't need to pass mental exam to get a CCW, you'd have to know they were a psycho in the first place, which you won't, so you'd have to assume you're denying CCW to a normal person, which they were not, but it doesn't matter, they'd just find another way to cause mayhem.

You missed my point. Given that:

Quote : Deny CCW to a psycho and they'll just find another way to cause harm..

Why do we deny CCW to psychos?