Gun Permit

[Sociobiology]

see Australia. It can be implemented just fine.
And again if they turn violent they deserve to have their guns taken from them by force.

the same scare he would get if you had a baseball bat, or are referring to being shot which would be and should be illegal.

There it is again.

Killing an intruder by blunt force trauma to the head: a-ok.

Killing an intruder with a firearm: should be illegal.

no, killing an intruder who is not attempting physical violence is and should be illegal.
killing someone is not scaring them.

[Galloism]

There it is again.

Killing an intruder by blunt force trauma to the head: a-ok.

Killing an intruder with a firearm: should be illegal.

no, killing an intruder who is not attempting physical violence is and should be illegal.

Then you should support the right for homeowners to have guns. With such a monopoly on force (element of surprise + deadly weapon) it would seem logical the criminal would be less likely to attempt violence.

Compared to a baseball bat, anyway, where the criminal might assume he/she can get the upper hand, particularly if the homeowner is elderly and/or smaller than the perp.

In short: you should want a gun in every home.

[Sociobiology]

no, killing an intruder who is not attempting physical violence is and should be illegal.

Then you should support the right for homeowners to have guns. With such a monopoly on force (element of surprise + deadly weapon) it would seem logical the criminal would be less likely to attempt violence.

Compared to a baseball bat, anyway, where the criminal might assume he/she can get the upper hand, particularly if the homeowner is elderly and/or smaller than the perp.

In short: you should want a gun in every home.

and requiring a permit prevents this how?

which if anything would make it less likely that the robber would be armed.

[Galloism]

Then you should support the right for homeowners to have guns. With such a monopoly on force (element of surprise + deadly weapon) it would seem logical the criminal would be less likely to attempt violence.

Compared to a baseball bat, anyway, where the criminal might assume he/she can get the upper hand, particularly if the homeowner is elderly and/or smaller than the perp.

In short: you should want a gun in every home.

and requiring a permit prevents this how?

which if anything would make it less likely that the robber would be armed.

It adds cost, complexity, uncertainty, and being required to go on yet another federal "list" which people are justifiably paranoid of.

[Pope Joan]

Tony Bennett: "Why is it harder in this country to get a library card than to get a gun?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tony-benn ... 12398.html

His question makes sense to me. Do we really truly want psychotic felons running around with anti personnel weapons?

But maybe there is no right to keep and bear books, huh?

[Galloism]

Tony Bennett: "Why is it harder in this country to get a library card than to get a gun?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tony-benn ... 12398.html

His question makes sense to me. Do we really truly want psychotic felons running around with anti personnel weapons?

But maybe there is no right to keep and bear books, huh?

Proof that its harder to get a library card than a gun. I'll wait.

No some talking head saying it doesn't count. Show the steps of each.

[Pope Joan]

Tony Bennett: "Why is it harder in this country to get a library card than to get a gun?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tony-benn ... 12398.html

His question makes sense to me. Do we really truly want psychotic felons running around with anti personnel weapons?

But maybe there is no right to keep and bear books, huh?

Proof that its harder to get a library card than a gun. I'll wait.

No some talking head saying it doesn't count. Show the steps of each.

First, I love Tony Bennett.
Second, the wisdom of Yahoo: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index ... 408AA6RXa3
I like the reply which says "You wouldn't know because you never got a gun or a book."

[Galloism]

Proof that its harder to get a library card than a gun. I'll wait.

No some talking head saying it doesn't count. Show the steps of each.

First, I love Tony Bennett.
Second, the wisdom of Yahoo: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index ... 408AA6RXa3
I like the reply which says "You wouldn't know because you never got a gun or a book."

Proof. It's lacking.

Tony Bennett full of shit. News at 11.

[Greed and Death]

and requiring a permit prevents this how?

which if anything would make it less likely that the robber would be armed.

It adds cost, complexity, uncertainty, and being required to go on yet another federal "list" which people are justifiably paranoid of.

And in New York having your name address and fire arm ownership status published every time someone in the local paper gets upset that you dare to exercise your 2nd amendment right.

[Ironrite]

Completely for mandatory background checks. Think about it, although it might not stop every single crime, it would stop some, and what harm could it do?

[Greed and Death]

Tony Bennett: "Why is it harder in this country to get a library card than to get a gun?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tony-benn ... 12398.html

His question makes sense to me. Do we really truly want psychotic felons running around with anti personnel weapons?

But maybe there is no right to keep and bear books, huh?

If Tony Bennett wants to start a revolt because other people own guns he is welcome to it, but you know what he might need some guns to even have a snowball's chance in hell.

[Greed and Death]

Completely for mandatory background checks. Think about it, although it might not stop every single crime, it would stop some, and what harm could it do?

Same reason we don't require mandatory background checks for speaking politically, the bureaucratic system will deny people the ability to carry out their rights. Through errors, and the like.
I mean no one ever falsely gets listed as dead when they are not.
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/investigatio ... 87321.html
Or as a felon when they are not.
http://articles.latimes.com/2001/may/21/news/mn-620

[Samozaryadnyastan]

I agree with most of your list except that generally tazers can't kill people without prolonged use, far more than would be used in a simple robbery.

True. We could try an information campaign for criminals to use tazers to threaten people with, in order to reduce the number of deaths resulting from robberies.

Guns for tazers program, anyone?

No.
It's a piss-poor bordering useless defensive weapon.

It's a control weapon.

Source?

66% of the populace support
"Requiring gun owners to register with the state or local government and provide a set of fingerprints"
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

and more than 90% support background checks for all sales.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/160085/americans-back-obama-proposals-address-gun-violence.aspx

Both of those polls consist about a thousand people. Fewer than the NSG "assault weapon ban" thread.
All three polls (including the two you mentioned and the NSG AWB poll" differ wildly in opinion.

They're all pretty pointless and until they're expanding to 1-3 million surveyed, could frankly be considered loaded.

no I compare it to owning dynamite, and should have similar licencing.

I think the first problem is that you find a handheld ranged weapon that hits one target at a time similar in nature to explosives that can take out a whole city block at once.

I'm more concerned by a person that purchases and owns firearms for self defence and then somehow believes that dynamite can be used in the same recreational terms as a firearm.

[Sociobiology]

It's a control weapon.

66% of the populace support
"Requiring gun owners to register with the state or local government and provide a set of fingerprints"
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

and more than 90% support background checks for all sales.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/160085/americans-back-obama-proposals-address-gun-violence.aspx

Both of those polls consist about a thousand people. Fewer than the NSG "assault weapon ban" thread.
All three polls (including the two you mentioned and the NSG AWB poll" differ wildly in opinion.

They're all pretty pointless and until they're expanding to 1-3 million surveyed, could frankly be considered loaded.

go ahead and find a poll with an N that high. When you find any poll with an N of several million, on any subject you can come back. Just because you are ignorant of how polling and statistics work does not mean the rest of us are. A good survey (which Gallup is known for) with an N of 1000 is accurate for the population of the US with a ~5% margin of error.

I think the first problem is that you find a handheld ranged weapon that hits one target at a time similar in nature to explosives that can take out a whole city block at once.

I'm more concerned by a person that purchases and owns firearms for self defence and then somehow believes that dynamite can be used in the same recreational terms as a firearm.

I'm more concerned with someone who thinks a stick of dynamite is more powerful than many missiles.

[Sociobiology]

Completely for mandatory background checks. Think about it, although it might not stop every single crime, it would stop some, and what harm could it do?

Same reason we don't require mandatory background checks for speaking politically, the bureaucratic system will deny people the ability to carry out their rights. Through errors, and the like.
I mean no one ever falsely gets listed as dead when they are not.
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/investigatio ... 87321.html
Or as a felon when they are not.
http://articles.latimes.com/2001/may/21/news/mn-620

when you can kill people by speaking to them you might have a point.

[Sociobiology]

Tony Bennett: "Why is it harder in this country to get a library card than to get a gun?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tony-benn ... 12398.html

His question makes sense to me. Do we really truly want psychotic felons running around with anti personnel weapons?

But maybe there is no right to keep and bear books, huh?

Proof that its harder to get a library card than a gun. I'll wait.

No some talking head saying it doesn't count. Show the steps of each.

I have to fill out a form to get a library card.
I don't even have to do that to buy many guns.

[Sociobiology]

and requiring a permit prevents this how?

which if anything would make it less likely that the robber would be armed.

It adds cost, complexity, uncertainty, and being required to go on yet another federal "list" which people are justifiably paranoid of.

so it doesn't prevent it but makes you uncomfortable.
yeah that certainly overrides the benefit of having less firearms in the hands of criminals and fewer homicides and suicides.

[Sociobiology]

It adds cost, complexity, uncertainty, and being required to go on yet another federal "list" which people are justifiably paranoid of.

And in New York having your name address and fire arm ownership status published every time someone in the local paper gets upset that you dare to exercise your 2nd amendment right.

which might be an argument if anything in my proposal included that. If anything it makes it more difficult to do this.

[Galloism]

It adds cost, complexity, uncertainty, and being required to go on yet another federal "list" which people are justifiably paranoid of.

so it doesn't prevent it but makes you uncomfortable.
yeah that certainly overrides the benefit of having less firearms in the hands of criminals and fewer homicides and suicides.

A supposition lacking proof there.

Prove your plan (or a demonstrably similar plan) when implemented has successfully reduced homicides or the number of guns in the hands of criminals. I'll wait.

Regarding suicides: if a person sincerely does not wish to live longer, it is unthinkably unconscionable for us to stand in their way. Only a cruel person would do that. Even if you could prove suicides would be reduced (which I doubt), that is not an argument in your favor.

[Galloism]

Proof that its harder to get a library card than a gun. I'll wait.

No some talking head saying it doesn't count. Show the steps of each.

I have to fill out a form to get a library card.
I don't even have to do that to buy many guns.

Really? What guns can you buy without filling out a form (or providing your info to someone who fills out the form)?

[Sociobiology]

I have to fill out a form to get a library card.
I don't even have to do that to buy many guns.

Really? What guns can you buy without filling out a form (or providing your info to someone who fills out the form)?

private sales.

[Galloism]

Really? What guns can you buy without filling out a form (or providing your info to someone who fills out the form)?

private sales.

Ah yes, much like you can buy or borrow private books without getting a library card.

[Sociobiology]

private sales.

Ah yes, much like you can buy or borrow private books without getting a library card.

when book homicides make up 70% of homicides we will consider requiring a form to purchase a book.

again far easier to buy a gun then get a library card.
If you are going to move the goalpost to books, please say so up front.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

It's a control weapon.
Both of those polls consist about a thousand people. Fewer than the NSG "assault weapon ban" thread.
All three polls (including the two you mentioned and the NSG AWB poll" differ wildly in opinion.

They're all pretty pointless and until they're expanding to 1-3 million surveyed, could frankly be considered loaded.

go ahead and find a poll with an N that high. When you find any poll with an N of several million, on any subject you can come back. Just because you are ignorant of how polling and statistics work does not mean the rest of us are. A good survey (which Gallup is known for) with an N of 1000 is accurate for the population of the US with a ~5% margin of error.

Then why do similar polls differ wildly?

I'm fully aware that would never happen, without a state-approved census. Doesn't change the fact that 1000 is in no way representative of nigh on 315 million people these days.

[Galloism]

Ah yes, much like you can buy or borrow private books without getting a library card.

when book homicides make up 70% of homicides we will consider requiring a form to purchase a book.

again far easier to buy a gun then get a library card.
If you are going to move the goalpost to books, please say so up front.

This is presuming you find a private gun for sale, which generally requires hunting one down. After all, you can't advertise them on Craigslist, buy them on eBay, or anything of the sort. That leaves the classifieds (and a few online classifieds sites) to hunt down the gun you want.

Dunno if you've looked at your local paper, but even in the Deep South where I live, I don't see classifieds for guns hardly at all, and when I do see them, they're hunting rifles (a type of weapon almost never used in crimes).

I mean, sure, you might stumble upon a coworker who's selling a gun or something, then it's easier. Otherwise, finding a private seller of a firearm that suits your needs is harder than filling out that little postcard sized thing you fill out to get a library card.