Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Survivors of Jan. 8 aid gun controls [View all]friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)36. You refuse to look at evidence offered, but claim I "have no reasonable objection"
Uh-huh.
Meanwhile, we are supposed to take on faith that the cupidity of the two examples given, and that of Chicago...
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/11726386#post7
7. "How much longer until Chicago politicians pass another law..."
We're already on our third version of it now and they are still fighting it in court.
Daley rammed through a new set of laws a day or two after the McDonald decision. They were equally unconstitutional. Things were included like you must qualify at an approved Chicago gun range, then they outlawed any gun range in the city limits. That was the Ezell case IIRC?
That got thrown out at the appellate level and now there are another set that still requires training at an approved range and no range permits have been issued.
The price tag to taxpayers is going to run at least the same as DC. if not higher. because they won't simply obey the court rulings and keep thinking they can come up with some cute game that will let them keep their defacto gun ban. But as usual, it's not like it's their money and every alderman, state representative, state senator as well as US representatives from Cook County is considered a "peace officer" and is allowed to carry concealed. So they covered their own ass...
We're already on our third version of it now and they are still fighting it in court.
Daley rammed through a new set of laws a day or two after the McDonald decision. They were equally unconstitutional. Things were included like you must qualify at an approved Chicago gun range, then they outlawed any gun range in the city limits. That was the Ezell case IIRC?
That got thrown out at the appellate level and now there are another set that still requires training at an approved range and no range permits have been issued.
The price tag to taxpayers is going to run at least the same as DC. if not higher. because they won't simply obey the court rulings and keep thinking they can come up with some cute game that will let them keep their defacto gun ban. But as usual, it's not like it's their money and every alderman, state representative, state senator as well as US representatives from Cook County is considered a "peace officer" and is allowed to carry concealed. So they covered their own ass...
...really, really, cross-my-heart-and-hope-to-die won't happen with other police departments if they're given power to vet gun licenses.
Sorry, I'm not going to buy it. However, I would suggest a purchase to you:
http://www.amazon.com/Obedience-Authority-Stanley-Milgram/dp/006131983X
And, since you're fond of cartoons:
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
213 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"make sure people like Loughner are not left unreported, untreated and/or free to roam."
ellisonz
Jan 2012
#3
They may be of that opinion, but they're wrong. Loughner went through the NICS to get his guns.
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2012
#6
Why don't *you* listen to the father of one of the victims, John Green?
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2012
#45
That's from 2 days after the shooting. He practically breaks down crying on the phone
ellisonz
Jan 2012
#46
So some special pleading is more relevant than other special pleading?
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2012
#56
You picked the wrong batch of victims, for the legislation you referred to.
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2012
#115
" If you wish to claim, I approve of a so-called "police state" then you clearly approve of...
PavePusher
Jan 2012
#58
Defining "high capacity" as "anything over 10 rounds" is very intentionally misleading.
benEzra
Jan 2012
#121
You refuse to look at evidence offered, but claim I "have no reasonable objection"
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2012
#36
"Is it any wonder that Chicago attempts desperate measures when all allowed else fails?"
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2012
#44
Looks like Chicago should have adopted Texas-style gun control years ago
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2012
#55
The parents are the reason Loughner wasn't denied the purchase of a firearm.
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2012
#148
Spoken truly like someone who obviously knows nothing about the time n/t
We_Have_A_Problem
Jan 2012
#209
"...as the Attorney General may require..." Pheww. There goes the 5th. As usual. nt
SteveW
Jan 2012
#129
I've no doubt of Prof. Nowak's sincerity, but his proposals will fare as well as...
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2012
#12
How would this new bill have stopped loughner, he went thru the background checks.
rl6214
Jan 2012
#19
Only cares about money? A LOT of NRA backed legislation was passed last year.
GreenStormCloud
Jan 2012
#71
LOL! You couldn't even make it through the first example without fabricating a quote!
DanTex
Jan 2012
#119
Suicides are 'gun violence'? Who knew! Are suicides by hanging 'rope violence'?
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2012
#110
Your failure to recognize the loss of liberty in most gun control laws is why you've been failing.
aikoaiko
Jan 2012
#62
Don't mean to freak you out, but new short barreled shotguns are already legal.
aikoaiko
Jan 2012
#98
It's called a trench coat. Willful denial on your part...just admit - it's shortened in many models.
ellisonz
Jan 2012
#174
Pistol grips provide a more ergonomic grip, and thus better control and safety.
PavePusher
Jan 2012
#102
When you spout off nonsense calling for a safety feature to be banned, you are not protecting the ri
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2012
#111
That's less than $0.25 per NRA member. Paul Helmke costs about $5 per BC member....
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2012
#197
Shame on you! Don't you know that's the *wrong* kind of victim testimony?
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2012
#72
I do not support this bill because it destroys firearm ownership anonymity.
Atypical Liberal
Jan 2012
#161