Man kills self at Dicks Sporting Goods

[seth72]

WTF? Did you really just say that? Did I read ANY of that right?

You read all of it right. The government does not protect an imaginary "right to live". And, maybe this is going to be hard for you to grasp. But, you are going to die. That would make your imaginary "right to live" pretty damn impossible, don't ya think?

Have you any education whatsoever? Honest question: What is your level of education? Not that it matters. Plenty of college grads have become more ignorant by the indoctrination of their liberal professors. And, they tend to spout the same type of ignorant BS.

 

[HTRN]

Great post. One thing to think about is one line you wrote: "Our institutions have made a determination that they are ready to rejoin society"
THAT'S part of the problem. In many cases, they haven't. The person has just done their time and is let go because there is no other option. We don't have a way of identifying people who are truly dangerous to society and even after we have, we don't have the political will to do something about it -- until they kill (or whatever) again.

That's another great argument for universal firearm ownership.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Quiet]

Because some of these guys come from the extreme anti 2A crowd and are trying to make an argument for gun control.

Not me Jason. I'm all for much MUCH looser controls, I'm just not an absolutist. My wife and I plan on moving out of this hell hole and heading to Texas. I just can't take this absolutist stuff and be silent anymore. It won't get us anywhere politically.

 

[ColdDayInHell]

Great post. One thing to think about is one line you wrote: "Our institutions have made a determination that they are ready to rejoin society"
THAT'S part of the problem. In many cases, they haven't. The person has just done their time and is let go because there is no other option. We don't have a way of identifying people who are truly dangerous to society and even after we have, we don't have the political will to do something about it -- until they kill (or whatever) again.

That's a strange logic right there. So how are we supposed to know when an imprisoned person is ready to be introduced into society? Be willing to vote for Obama? (kidding) I'd like to peel that onion back and find out your solution to this monumental problem at hand. Sounds like more restrictive measurements are in order?

 

[seth72]

All life is sacred, but I'll make an exception for those who kill either prison guards (what else is there to protect them?) and police officers in the line of duty.

Why am I not surprised that you are someone who believes that some of us are more equal than others?

The fact that you find murdering one person any more worthy of the death penalty than the murdering of another, based on their employment, speaks volumes for your mentality.

So I guess we should tell the husband of the bank teller who was shot in the face that her life was sacred, but not enough to warrant her murderer to be put to death. But, if he'd killed a cop who responded to the attack, well that would be a different story.

I'm done talking to you. You're just too conflicted internally to make any kind of valid argument.

 

[Quiet]

That's another great argument for universal firearm ownership.

HaHA! Well, I look at the fact and say it would be a good thing to try to keep weapons out of his hands, and you look at it and say let's form a posse. lol

 

[ColdDayInHell]

Why am I not surprised that you are someone who believes that some of us are more equal than others?

The fact that you find murdering one person any more worthy of the death penalty than the murdering of another, based on their employment, speaks volumes for your mentality.

So I guess we should tell the husband of the bank teller who was shot in the face that her life was sacred, but not enough to warrant her murderer to be put to death. But, if he'd killed a cop who responded to the attack, well that would be a different story.

I'm done talking to you. You're just too conflicted internally to make any kind of valid argument.

+1

Well said Seth.

 

[Quiet]

Why am I not surprised that you are someone who believes that some of us are more equal than others?

The fact that you find murdering one person any more worthy of the death penalty than the murdering of another, based on their employment, speaks volumes for your mentality.

So I guess we should tell the husband of the bank teller who was shot in the face that her life was sacred, but not enough to warrant her murderer to be put to death. But, if he'd killed a cop who responded to the attack, well that would be a different story.

I'm done talking to you. You're just too conflicted internally to make any kind of valid argument.

Oh that's sad. you made some good points along the way.

The reasoning is this: It's the only deterrent left to protect the cop and the prison guard.
That's why. It's not because they are special people. It's because the people they are dealing with have nothing else to lose.

 

[ColdDayInHell]

Oh that's sad. you made some good points along the way.

The reasoning is this: It's the only deterrent left to protect the cop and the prison guard.
That's why. It's not because they are special people. It's because the people they are dealing with have nothing else to lose.

 

[xtry51]

Oh that's sad. you made some good points along the way.

The reasoning is this: It's the only deterrent left to protect the cop and the prison guard.
That's why. It's not because they are special people. It's because the people they are dealing with have nothing else to lose.

There's that circular logic rearing it's ugly head again....

 

[Quiet]

That's a strange logic right there. So how are we supposed to know when an imprisoned person is ready to be introduced into society? Be willing to vote for Obama? (kidding) I'd like to peel that onion back and find out your solution to this monumental problem at hand. Sounds like more restrictive measurements are in order?

Well, they try to do it with parole boards; they try to figure out if a prisoner can be released from their incarceration early. but when the sentence is up, it's up and there's nothing that can be done.

I don't have all the answers, heck I don't even have all the questions.

 

[ChevyGuy91]

Oh that's sad. you made some good points along the way.

The reasoning is this: It's the only deterrent left to protect the cop and the prison guard.
That's why. It's not because they are special people. It's because the people they are dealing with have nothing else to lose.

So you want law to protect LEO's from people who have nothing to lose and are already committed to breaking law to hurt them?

 

[GunGrey]

There's that circular logic rearing it's ugly head again....

that circular logic would happen to look like this

 

[ColdDayInHell]

Well, they try to do it with parole boards; they try to figure out if a prisoner can be released from their incarceration early. but when the sentence is up, it's up and there's nothing that can be done.

I don't have all the answers, heck I don't even have all the questions.

Mexicans love jumping the border. They often try to jump and sometimes they are caught and sometimes they get away. It's the border patrol's job to patrol our border.

I don't know what we can do and I don't know all the answers.

See how this sounds?

 

[Quiet]

There's that circular logic rearing it's ugly head again....

How is that circular? maybe we have different definitions of circular.

The job of laws is to protect society. The threat of imprisonment for 25 to life is (usually) enough to deter people from killing one another.

But a lifer can't be further punished with more time in prison. What deterrent is there to protect the prison guards from lifers?

Same with cops. Someone who has killed has nothing to lose getting into a shootout with the police. The *only* deterrent beyond that is the death penalty.

Now do I think people stop in the middle of a crime spree and ponder these things? No. But maybe a prisoner who was planning such a thing might. It's just the last thing we as a society can offer as protection for the people who put their lives on the line for us.

 

[Quiet]

Mexicans love jumping the border. They often try to jump and sometimes they are caught and sometimes they get away. It's the border patrol's job to patrol our border.

I don't know what we can do and I don't know all the answers.

See how this sounds?

I see what you're trying to say, but I thought that my points were a little bit better connected than that. Maybe not.

 

[xtry51]

How is that circular? maybe we have different definitions of circular.

The job of laws is to protect society. The threat of imprisonment for 25 to life is (usually) enough to deter people from killing one another.

But a lifer can't be further punished with more time in prison. What deterrent is there to protect the prison guards from lifers?

Same with cops. Someone who has killed has nothing to lose getting into a shootout with the police. The *only* deterrent beyond that is the death penalty.

Now do I think people stop in the middle of a crime spree and ponder these things? No. But maybe a prisoner who was planning such a thing might. It's just the last thing we as a society can offer as protection for the people who put their lives on the line for us.

Circular, because as another pointed out you're saying we need stricter laws to convince people who are already violating strict laws (like murder), and you somehow think that JUST ONE MORE LAW will somehow convince a criminal to stop being a criminal.

In one swoop you completely disregarded all logic AND created a second, supposedly superior class of citizen, the cop.

Every time I hear you, Primal and others say "I do love and want freedom!" and then follow it with this mindless drivel this happens:

 

[PrimusTactical]

We confine or incarcerate people who have displayed behavior that is dangerous to themselves, or more importantly, to others. Once confined/incarcerated many of their rights are removed - freedom to move, travel, associate, etc. Even their 1st Amendment rights become limited to a great extent. I don't have a problem with limiting their 2nd Amendment rights while they are incarcerated or confined. Society has legal and mental health systems in place to determine when a person should be confined. Once the person has been determined to no longer be a danger they are released and their rights should be restored. All of their rights.

What I'm seeing in this thread are a lot of good arguments as to why the legal and mental health systems need a good overhaul. I also realize that no system is ever going to be perfect, which is why it is important that ordinary citizens should have every opportunity to possess the tools to defend themselves when the system does make an error.

Not everyone who is released from prison reoffends. Our institutions have made a determination that they are ready to rejoin society, but we treat all of them like second class citizens when it comes to the 2nd Amendment. The real irony is that those people who are released, who shouldn't have been, won't have an issue with violating any 2nd Amendment restrictions anyway. The only ones who are going to be limited by those restrictions are the ones who are now following the laws. Since they are now law-abiding, shouldn't they regain all of their rights? Or do we punish them forever?

It doesn't make sense to me.

Well said.. I agree with all points.

 

[ColdDayInHell]

It's ironic that you don't realize you're doing it and then deny the circular post by xtry51.

Well said.. I agree with all points.

Center441, you win the internet.

 

[PrimusTactical]

You read all of it right. The government does not protect an imaginary "right to live". And, maybe this is going to be hard for you to grasp. But, you are going to die. That would make your imaginary "right to live" pretty damn impossible, don't ya think?

Have you any education whatsoever? Honest question: What is your level of education? Not that it matters. Plenty of college grads have become more ignorant by the indoctrination of their liberal professors. And, they tend to spout the same type of ignorant BS.

Life.. Liberty.. Pursuit to Happiness? No? Anyone? Whats that first word? Ok so you say no one has a right to life... so why do you want a bazooka? To protect something youn don't have a right to? Your going to die anyways right? I honest to god wish someone else would read your posts right now. After all the bashing on here about Rights and Natural rights and everthing else and you say this? Amazing...

 

[wiskie762]

Why wouldn't you sell to them? It's their right to have that firearm. Even after telling you all that crazy stuff. That's the premise your telling me....And c'mon, if the police rolled up and placed him in cuffs you'd be out there screaming profanities at the police, then on here going "HA see what the evil empire did today with their minions! Look I have photos of JBTs infringing this guys rights!".

Have you ever worked in a gun shop? I do. I have seen sales refused a number of times. Mainly cause some one comes in and says something on the line of what you posted before. It is the that private entity rights to refuse that sale.

Do I Believe that peoples rights should be restored when they are released from prison, yes I do. the serverd their time on that crime. if A man goes to jail for drunk driving serves his time and is released he can get his license back ( and thats a privilege not a right) should that same man be prohibited from his 2a rights?

 

[PrimusTactical]

Well said.. I agree with all points.

All points in regards to the broken mental health and prison system. But go ahead fire away.

- - - Updated - - -

Have you ever worked in a gun shop? I do. I have seen sales refused a number of times. Mainly cause some one comes in and says something on the line of what you posted before. It is the that private entity rights to refuse that sale.

Do I Believe that peoples rights should be restored when they are released from prison, yes I do. the serverd their time on that crime. if A man goes to jail for drunk driving serves his time and is released he can get his license back ( and thats a privilege not a right) should that same man be prohibited from his 2a rights?

That makes sense and I agree.. my issue was with teh guys who said in plain english that the crazy guy who said that still has the RIGHT to that gun.

 

[PrimusTactical]

Alright... wow wow wow... lets flip this on it's head. So the solution isn't to try and keep guns out of bad people's hands. The solution isn't any type of laws or regulations. So what is the proposed solution? Less laws? No laws? Give EVERYONE a gun? Serious question.

 

[HTRN]

Alright... wow wow wow... lets flip this on it's head. So the solution isn't to try and keep guns out of bad people's hands. The solution isn't any type of laws or regulations. So what is the proposed solution? Less laws? No laws? Give EVERYONE a gun? Serious question.

Solution to what exactly? Please clearly define the problem before any discussion of a solution.

Yes, universal firearm ownership is a good starting point. That's what allows the individual to protect his life and property.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Jason Flare]

How is that circular? maybe we have different definitions of circular.

The job of laws is to protect society. The threat of imprisonment for 25 to life is (usually) enough to deter people from killing one another.

But a lifer can't be further punished with more time in prison. What deterrent is there to protect the prison guards from lifers?

Same with cops. Someone who has killed has nothing to lose getting into a shootout with the police. The *only* deterrent beyond that is the death penalty.

Now do I think people stop in the middle of a crime spree and ponder these things? No. But maybe a prisoner who was planning such a thing might. It's just the last thing we as a society can offer as protection for the people who put their lives on the line for us.

The job of laws is to protect society. Not really. Laws provide punishment so law abiding people can feel better.

The threat of imprisonment for 25 to life is (usually) enough to deter people from killing one another. If murder were legalized the murder rate wouldn't change dramatically. Murder is wrong by nearly everyone's definition of good and evil. As for consequences, remember that in a society where murder is legal, the murderer is also subject.

What deterrent is there to protect the prison guards from lifers? Bars.


It's just the last thing we as a society can offer as protection for the people who put their lives on the line for us. Comparatively cops don't put their lives on the line for us every day. Police officer is not even in the top ten most dangerous jobs in America. The most dangerous occupation in the U.S. is fishing, and the second is logging, etc.

 

[xtry51]

Alright... wow wow wow... lets flip this on it's head. So the solution isn't to try and keep guns out of bad people's hands. The solution isn't any type of laws or regulations. So what is the proposed solution? Less laws? No laws? Give EVERYONE a gun? Serious question.

No laws at all restricting firearm or any other offensive/defensive weapons. 2A is NOT gun specific.

Anyone who is not in jail should be allowed to purchase a firearm.

The only problem with criminals I see is we don't incarcerate long enough or kill the really violent ones. Also the vast majority of "criminals" in jail today are there for doing things that shouldn't be illegal. Like drugs.

 

[PrimusTactical]

The job of laws is to protect society. Not really. Laws provide punishment so law abiding people can feel better.

The threat of imprisonment for 25 to life is (usually) enough to deter people from killing one another. If murder were legalized the murder rate wouldn't change dramatically. Murder is wrong by nearly everyone's definition of good and evil. As for consequences, remember that in a society where murder is legal, the murderer is also subject.

What deterrent is there to protect the prison guards from lifers? Bars.


It's just the last thing we as a society can offer as protection for the people who put their lives on the line for us. Comparatively cops don't put their lives on the line for us every day. Police officer is not even in the top ten most dangerous jobs in America. The most dangerous occupation in the U.S. is fishing, and the second is logging, etc.

Unfortunately, LEO is the only job I know of in the US that people actively want/try to kill you. You say that laws don't do any good? I just wonder how many guys on here would love to take a shot at myself or anyone else that disagrees with them. Now what is stoping them? I would say it's the fact if they did hurt another human in the US they would probably spend some time in jail away from their family. And they ask "Is it worth finding and hurting this guy and spending time in jail?" C'mon someone please see this reason. What stops people from stealing? Road rage ramming somone off the road? Destroying property? Etc. Laws do.... I know as a human there have been MANY times where I've had to take a breath and remind myself that if I do X I will get in trouble and POSSIBLY go to jail. I'm just some dude, so I know there are others on here that have done the same. What stops guys from getting in their pick up trashed? (the ones the don't)? Probably the loss of license and court fees if they get caught... I can go on all night with this but I won't. Either you get it or you don't. If you don't, I'm not mad and don't your a bad person.

 

[ColdDayInHell]

No laws at all restricting firearm or any other offensive/defensive weapons. 2A is NOT gun specific.

Anyone who is not in jail should be allowed to purchase a firearm.

The only problem with criminals I see is we don't incarcerate long enough or kill the really violent ones. Also the vast majority of "criminals" in jail today are there for doing things that shouldn't be illegal. Like drugs.

This should be in the NES agreement policy when registering.

 

[Quiet]

The job of laws is to protect society. Not really. Laws provide punishment so law abiding people can feel better.

The threat of imprisonment for 25 to life is (usually) enough to deter people from killing one another. If murder were legalized the murder rate wouldn't change dramatically. Murder is wrong by nearly everyone's definition of good and evil. As for consequences, remember that in a society where murder is legal, the murderer is also subject.

What deterrent is there to protect the prison guards from lifers? Bars.


It's just the last thing we as a society can offer as protection for the people who put their lives on the line for us. Comparatively cops don't put their lives on the line for us every day. Police officer is not even in the top ten most dangerous jobs in America. The most dangerous occupation in the U.S. is fishing, and the second is logging, etc.

I disagree on #1 and #2.

#3 -- good one! Made me chuckle. Then made me think. You might be right. Yeah, we can treat them more like rats than we already do. Or execute them. Or both. Might tip me over to pro-capital punishment. I'll have to think more on it.

#4, interesting factoid. I'm not sure it pertains, but interesting. Lemme ponder that as I type a response...

hmmmm... fishing and logging and other are more dangerous occupations than police work so we shouldn't try to protect the police officer?

I've held this anti-death-penalty with these two exceptions for many years now. It's an interesting thing to go back and revisit personal convictions once in a while. Thanks.

 

[PrimusTactical]

This should be in the NES agreement policy when registering.

Then this wouldn't be called NorthEastShooters. It'd be called 2a party forum or something like that. "Only come here if you agree with everything we say, if not don't come on". Stupid me thoght it was a forum about shooting, not a radical club of some sort where if you disagree with ANYTHING then you shall be lynched at first oppurtune time by the first available guy from the club to come on and see your post...