Gun confiscation

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Maximise

We do just fine without guns in my part of the world. I cannot see a case for wanting to own one.

Ireland has a higher sense of individual responsibility than the US. Even if you guys had guns, I doubt that you'd have anything close to the US homicide rates.

I've often thought that I'd enjoy living there.

[Natural Elements]

Man Fired For Looking At Gun Web Sites from Planco, a subsidiary of Hartford, Conn.-based insurance company
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/10...y5373168.shtml

[Allen Farlow]

That is absolutely outrageous that a judge would agree with Planco over this! Someone should look into the judges thoughts about gun ownership.

That's discrimination if I've ever seen it. I sincerely hope this makes its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, because this is an affront to every gun owner in this country who expects to be gainfully employed with any company or corporation.

What will be on the applications now? "Are you a gun owner?" "Are you a member of any pro-firearm groups such as the National Rifle Association?"

To infer that someone will assault and possibly kill coworkers simply by virtue of looking at gun websites at work is to say that anyone looking at websites of new or used cars at work is considering buying one just to run over their coworkers!

Anyone looking at cutlery websites at work should be very careful. You may be reported as a coworker thinking about buying a butcher knife and stabbing everyone in the office!

See how utterly stupid this is? If anyone should be fired it should be that woman who reported him and the people in human resources...for being so stupid!

Will they begin firing people because they are too fat? I mean, seriously! They could intentionally sit on and kill someone!

Morons, idiots and imbeciles are loose among us and this is the result.

[Natural Elements]

"To infer that someone will assault and possibly kill coworkers simply by virtue of looking at gun websites at work is to say that anyone looking at websites of new or used cars at work.

"Will they begin firing people because they are too fat? I mean, seriously! They could intentionally sit on and kill someone! is considering buying one just to run over their coworkers!"

Right on Allen, that is outrageous!

When some workers will check news of their relative on a military website serving their country, do they get fired from anti-guns corporations too?

[Allen Farlow]

Well, look at what potential employers are already doing, going online and 'Googling' applicants to see what is online about them! Since when did what we do in our private lives become a criteria for employment?! Saying the slightest thing on facebook, myspace, twitter, can leave you hanging out in the cold, and only because one person 'feels' that what you said would be detrimental to the company you want to work for.

Imagine how it will be for all of us once our medical records are online..."Oh, I see you've had a couple strokes but you failed to mention that during the interview, even though I never asked. I guess you were not honest and forthcoming, so... thanks for coming in."

And now people are getting fired not because they are browsing online during 'company time' but because of the websites they are looking at?! (Of course, the company will do its best to fabricate some other excuse to can you, since it just doesn't look good that they fire you for looking at gun part websites. But in this case, I think it has been rather clearly stated that that is actually the reason this man lost his job.)

And to have a judge agree with the company against this man?! Who is that guy, Sotomeyor's brother?!

In what year did we lose all common sense in the United States? This is nothing less than harrassment at work and firing without just cause, which by the way will effect his future ability to get a job anywhere!

I hope he wins a huge settlement, starts his own business and puts Planco out of business. That would be sweet justice.

[Zap]

Originally Posted by Allen Farlow

Imagine how it will be for all of us once our medical records are online..."Oh, I see you've had a couple strokes but you failed to mention that during the interview, even though I never asked. I guess you were not honest and forthcoming, so... thanks for coming in."

I think you might be confused about the concept of having medical records accessible online.
It's not like every Tom, Dick or Harry will have access to them.
A potential employer would not be able to just search your medical history.
That's not how it works.

And, if that's what is being proposed down there, then you guys have a serious problem not at all related to medical records.

[Allen Farlow]

Originally Posted by Zap

I think you might be confused about the concept of having medical records accessible online.
It's not like every Tom, Dick or Harry will have access to them.
A potential employer would not be able to just search your medical history.
That's not how it works.

And, if that's what is being proposed down there, then you guys have a serious problem not at all related to medical records.

Uh, okay. As if major corporations can't employ hackers in their IT departments... Believe me, if it's online, it's accessible to someone...

When hackers can get past the firewalls of the Pentagon (they've done it), that really leaves me feeling good about just how secure my medical records will be once they are put online, against my wishes, I might add...

Makes me wanna pick up a gun and just start shooting... (I'm kidding! But this is a gun thread, right?)

[Zap]

Originally Posted by Allen Farlow

Uh, okay. As if major corporations can't employ hackers in their IT departments... Believe me, if it's online, it's accessible to someone...

When hackers can get past the firewalls of the Pentagon (they've done it), that really leaves me feeling good about just how secure my medical records will be once they are put online, against my wishes, I might add...

Just where, would you propose, that these major corporations put these hackers? In the hacking division? Or would they get their own department? The hacking department? And would their desks be near the blackmail department or the extortion department or maybe out back with the body disposal department?

Seriously, Dude. I don't think that someone who's looking to hire a new employee is going to risk their entire business because they illegally want to find out about the last time you got acne medication.

That sounds more like the premise for a really bad Leslie Neilson movie.

[robjones]

The other side of the gun ownership: Responsible Citizens
Always amazed that people opposed to firearms immediately conclude that ownership is all about fear or violent urges. I grew up in Texas where gun ownership has long been pretty common, and an incident I was involved in might highlight the flipside.

While in college I was on the way to practice for a western gunfighter skit that was to be entertainment for a party. On the seat beside me was a single action pistol to be used in the skit... a repro .36 Colt Navy (the one you always see in the cavalry movies or in Hickoks hands).

While en route to a rehearsal, all traffic stopped on the road, both ways. A fight had spilled out of a bar, and two guys were in the middle of the street fighting. One was on top of the other with an upraised knife... the guy on the bottom was about to be DRT (Dead Right There) unless somebody interceded... and the friendly nearby cop everyone assumes will save the day wasnt there in the middle of the highway beside him.

I was literally a few yards from the fight, so I used what was available to END the violence, the pistol. When the guy with the knife heard me speak, he turned and saw the business end of a barrel and heard the cylinder turn. He dropped the knife and waited for the police.

Nobody bled, and TWO lives were saved, cause you murder someone in Texas... the state WILL return the favor.

I was fresh out of Quantico (USMC) and in sterling shape, but (hey, call me cautious)... stopping the violence without even opening my cardoor seemed a tad more sensible than going hand-to-hand with a guy holding a knife. Not everyone that owns a gun is evil... most of us are just normal people that use them responsibly and might be handy to have around in a pinch. Firearms stop more fights without a shot than you can imagine.

So, Which guy you suppose wants gun control now?
Of the men in the fight... which probably wants firearms out of the hands of the public?

-a- The attacker? or
-b- The one that owes his life to a citizen that bluffed his attacker with an unloaded pistol.

Even when they cant fire... they make very effective visual aids.

[Natural Elements]

Originally Posted by robjones

The other side of the gun ownership: Responsible Citizens
Always amazed that people opposed to firearms immediately conclude that ownership is all about fear or violent urges. I grew up in Texas where gun ownership has long been pretty common, and an incident I was involved in might highlight the flipside.

While in college I was on the way to practice for a western gunfighter skit that was to be entertainment for a party. On the seat beside me was a single action pistol to be used in the skit... a repro .36 Colt Navy (the one you always see in the cavalry movies or in Hickoks hands).

While en route to a rehearsal, all traffic stopped on the road, both ways. A fight had spilled out of a bar, and two guys were in the middle of the street fighting. One was on top of the other with an upraised knife... the guy on the bottom was about to be DRT (Dead Right There) unless somebody interceded... and the friendly nearby cop everyone assumes will save the day wasnt there in the middle of the highway beside him.

I was literally a few yards from the fight, so I used what was available to END the violence, the pistol. When the guy with the knife heard me speak, he turned and saw the business end of a barrel and heard the cylinder turn. He dropped the knife and waited for the police.

Nobody bled, and TWO lives were saved, cause you murder someone in Texas... the state WILL return the favor.

I was fresh out of Quantico (USMC) and in sterling shape, but (hey, call me cautious)... stopping the violence without even opening my cardoor seemed a tad more sensible than going hand-to-hand with a guy holding a knife. Not everyone that owns a gun is evil... most of us are just normal people that use them responsibly and might be handy to have around in a pinch. Firearms stop more fights without a shot than you can imagine.

So, Which guy you suppose wants gun control now?
Of the men in the fight... which probably wants firearms out of the hands of the public?

-a- The attacker? or
-b- The one that owes his life to a citizen that bluffed his attacker with an unloaded pistol.

Even when they cant fire... they make very effective visual aids.

Firearms stop more fights without a shot than you can imagine.
That's very true, I experienced this once in my country, and it worked very well.

[anonymously]

Originally Posted by robjones

[B].

I was literally a few yards from the fight, so I used what was available to END the violence, the pistol. When the guy with the knife heard me speak, he turned and saw the business end of a barrel and heard the cylinder turn. He dropped the knife and waited for the police.

Having seen that incident, perhaps his mate said to himself, "I aint gonna carry a knife when someone might have a gun, I'd better get a gun just in case someone gets the drop on me, next time I'm in a fight"

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by anonymously

Having seen that incident, perhaps his mate said to himself, "I aint gonna carry a knife when someone might have a gun, I'd better get a gun just in case someone gets the drop on me, next time I'm in a fight"

Possible, many criminals do carry guns. All the more reason for law abiding folks to carry guns.

[ranter]

Robjones, man, that was beautiful.
As soon I stop crying I’ll be posting something.

In a mean while…
What would you do if that man in your story turned around and attacked you?
Would you shoot him?

[Cricket]

Don't mess with Texas

[robjones]

Rofl... would I have shot him if he attacked me? Well, if the gun had been loaded I might've. It wasn't.

I'd been training at Quantico training under the beneficent tutelage of the USMC until a few weeks prior... I'd have worked it out in a nice civil manner. Jarheads are known for such kindness. It's all about "winning hearts & minds" you know.

[m42]

Originally Posted by robjones

I'd been training at Quantico training under the beneficent tutelage of the USMC until a few weeks prior... I'd have worked it out in a nice civil manner. Jarheads are known for such kindness. It's all about "winning hearts & minds" you know.

I thought you were older for some reason.

Either way, it may be a bit early, but thanks for serving our country. I owe you a beer or ten.

[robjones]

Older? Yep. I'm all covered in cobwebs, & my internet connection is two soup cans and a string. When the string's wet, the reception sucks.
Aging is mandatory, getting old's voluntary. You can give the beer to my kid... he just exited the Corps 2 years ago (in one piece, thankfully).

[robjones]

...perhaps his mate said to himself, "I aint gonna carry a knife when someone might have a gun, I'd better get a gun..

What is your suggested alternative... mind my own business and let the fella get carved up when I could stop it? Remember, your model depends on the police being handy, and they werent. They did get there in the long run, but the difference between the short run and the long run is a corpse.

Where I was raised, self-reliance is valued. Helping a neighbor is valued. Transfering responsibility for my safety to the police is a foreign concept... but that's your choice to make. Here we take care of ourselves and each other. Just a cultural difference.

On the bright side... you arent interested in our way, I have none in yours. We're allowed to disagree, and I have no say in the UK, nor does the UK have a say here.

[Cricket]

Unfortunately I am absolutely terrible at debating gun control topics because I always come back to exactly what has been mentioned here. It doesn't matter what statistics ya show me because in the end, I am responsible my own safety and the safety of my child. Our country gives me that right.

[robjones]

Originally Posted by Cricket

Unfortunately I am absolutely terrible at debating gun control topics .../.... It doesn't matter what statistics ya show me because in the end, I am responsible my own safety and the safety of my child.

A good enough argument by itself.

Our country gives me that right.

Even better, according to the underlying docs... the right already existed... the constitution merely safeguards it.

Those that don't wish to own guns for whatever reason, need not. They are to a degree protected by the fact that someone that'd break in with a family home don't know which house they live in and which one houses someone that'd blow them outta the water unless they unwittingly post a sign declaring their home a gun free zone.

Stats have born out that violent crimes decrease, not increase, in states where concealed carry laws are enacted. Conversely places in the US with the strictest anti-gun laws have serious violent crime problems.

It isn't a coincidence that the worst slaughters in our country occur in places declared "gun free zones". Gun free zones were a noble idea, but in effect are merely workplace safety laws protecting potential murderers.