NATION

PASSWORD

How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
BunnySaurus Bugsii
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1232
Founded: Nov 15, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby BunnySaurus Bugsii » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:53 pm

greed and death wrote:
Brogavia wrote:
greed and death wrote:Unless you register it as a farm vehicle. then your exempt from EPA guidelines. Now how to haul hay with my tank with out ruining my field is the question.


It probably has less ground pressure than a tractor, you should be find.


if farming with an M1 Abrams is the only way to avoid EPA regulations.

Though technically EPA emissions standards are only for when you drive on public roads. and if your doing that your missing the entire point of owning a tank.


Settling disputes with your neighbours?
Lucky Bicycle Works ⊂ BunnySaurus Bugsii ⊂ Nobel Hobos

More sig:
Saboteur: A well-meaning idiot, walking into the future barefoot.
...

The moongoose step: a combination of can-can, goose-step, and moon-step. I haven't perfected it yet.

I can however do John Cleese's Silly Walk, with elements of falling on my arse.

...
When we hear our future selves, we are humbled. We are willing servants.

User avatar
BunnySaurus Bugsii
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1232
Founded: Nov 15, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby BunnySaurus Bugsii » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:57 pm

Secruss wrote:NVM.

I started a new topic.


Very very good idea. I detect a forum veteran ...
Lucky Bicycle Works ⊂ BunnySaurus Bugsii ⊂ Nobel Hobos

More sig:
Saboteur: A well-meaning idiot, walking into the future barefoot.
...

The moongoose step: a combination of can-can, goose-step, and moon-step. I haven't perfected it yet.

I can however do John Cleese's Silly Walk, with elements of falling on my arse.

...
When we hear our future selves, we are humbled. We are willing servants.

User avatar
Greed and Death
Post Czar
 
Posts: 48821
Founded: Mar 20, 2008
Compulsory Consumerist State

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Greed and Death » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:00 pm

BunnySaurus Bugsii wrote:
greed and death wrote:
if farming with an M1 Abrams is the only way to avoid EPA regulations.

Though technically EPA emissions standards are only for when you drive on public roads. and if your doing that your missing the entire point of owning a tank.


Settling disputes with your neighbours?

I was thinking skip the roads drive through houses.
"Trying to solve the healthcare problem by mandating people buy insurance is like trying to solve the homeless problem by mandating people buy a house."(paraphrase from debate with Hilary Clinton)
Barack Obama

User avatar
The South Islands
Diplomat
 
Posts: 983
Founded: Apr 02, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby The South Islands » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:00 pm

BunnySaurus Bugsii wrote:
greed and death wrote:
Brogavia wrote:
if farming with an M1 Abrams is the only way to avoid EPA regulations.

Though technically EPA emissions standards are only for when you drive on public roads. and if your doing that your missing the entire point of owning a tank.


Settling disputes with your neighbours?


You do know that private tank ownership in the US isn't a horribly rare thing, right?
IL Ruffino: The wind flows / The hair on TSI's ass glides as if airborn / Smell the freshly cut grass
Gravlen: If I can blame you? Of course I can! I mean, you're like a walking cathalyst for homosexuality, driving otherwise straight men to write haikus about your ass hair...

So it's a wonder that your presence alone in any thread don't derail them and lead to debates about world leaders and homoerotic desires.


Sarkhaan: You. Put your pants back on.

User avatar
Hanibar
Envoy
 
Posts: 250
Founded: Jun 01, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Hanibar » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:01 pm

i personally think we should be allowed to have guns unless if you commit a crime then i believe they can take your guns... and they shouldn't be allowed to buy guns anymore.

User avatar
NERVUN
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29375
Founded: Mar 24, 2005
Right-wing Utopia

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby NERVUN » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:06 pm

The South Islands wrote:
NERVUN wrote:
Parthenon wrote:as for the gun control debate... GUN CONTROL LAWS DON'T WORK. PERIOD.
It's the law abiding citizens these laws hurt, not the criminals.

Damn straight! It's why Japan, with its draconian gun control laws is such a haven for crime and it's gun shooting deaths are... er... wait... The whole nation has less gun deaths than New York City.

My bad.

To be fair, you are comparing apples and mangoes here. Japan is significantly different in History, Culture, and in general Socio-Economic conditions compared to the United States. Furthermore, compare firearms ownership in Sweden and Finland, where there are many firearms in civilian hands (a good portion unregistered), but orders of magnitude less gun crime (or crime in general).

Addressing crime by frivolous bans on firearms is nothing but a feeble attempt at addressing a symptom of a deeply rooted problem in American cities.

Very true, but it is also why I get annoyed with the gun nut crowd who scream that GUN CONTROL DOESN'T WORK! as well as the anti-gun nuts who scream "YES IT DOES!" and then both sides start cherry picking countries to back themselves up.
To those who feel, life is a tragedy. To those who think, it's a comedy.
"Men, today you'll be issued small trees. Do what you can for the emperor's glory." -Daistallia 2104 on bonsai charges in WWII
Science may provide the means while religion provides the motivation but humanity and humanity alone provides the vehicle -DaWoad

One-Stop Rules Shop, read it, love it, live by it. Getting Help Mod email: nervun@nationstates.net NSG Glossary
Add 10,145 to post count from Jolt: I have it from an unimpeachable source, that Dark Side cookies look like the Death Star. The other ones look like butterflies, or bunnies, or something.-Grave_n_Idle

Proud Member of FMGADHPAC. Join today!

User avatar
NERVUN
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29375
Founded: Mar 24, 2005
Right-wing Utopia

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby NERVUN » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:08 pm

Parthenon wrote:American criminals realize these aren't necessary given the abundance of people like you working to keep firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

Prove it.
To those who feel, life is a tragedy. To those who think, it's a comedy.
"Men, today you'll be issued small trees. Do what you can for the emperor's glory." -Daistallia 2104 on bonsai charges in WWII
Science may provide the means while religion provides the motivation but humanity and humanity alone provides the vehicle -DaWoad

One-Stop Rules Shop, read it, love it, live by it. Getting Help Mod email: nervun@nationstates.net NSG Glossary
Add 10,145 to post count from Jolt: I have it from an unimpeachable source, that Dark Side cookies look like the Death Star. The other ones look like butterflies, or bunnies, or something.-Grave_n_Idle

Proud Member of FMGADHPAC. Join today!

User avatar
NERVUN
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29375
Founded: Mar 24, 2005
Right-wing Utopia

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby NERVUN » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:09 pm

The South Islands wrote:You do know that private tank ownership in the US isn't a horribly rare thing, right?

I believe they are talking about a fully functional tank, which last I checked is indeed rare.
To those who feel, life is a tragedy. To those who think, it's a comedy.
"Men, today you'll be issued small trees. Do what you can for the emperor's glory." -Daistallia 2104 on bonsai charges in WWII
Science may provide the means while religion provides the motivation but humanity and humanity alone provides the vehicle -DaWoad

One-Stop Rules Shop, read it, love it, live by it. Getting Help Mod email: nervun@nationstates.net NSG Glossary
Add 10,145 to post count from Jolt: I have it from an unimpeachable source, that Dark Side cookies look like the Death Star. The other ones look like butterflies, or bunnies, or something.-Grave_n_Idle

Proud Member of FMGADHPAC. Join today!

User avatar
The South Islands
Diplomat
 
Posts: 983
Founded: Apr 02, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby The South Islands » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:11 pm

NERVUN wrote:
The South Islands wrote:You do know that private tank ownership in the US isn't a horribly rare thing, right?

I believe they are talking about a fully functional tank, which last I checked is indeed rare.


True, these can't shoot. But it can mess up your day if your cat happens to not be paying attention...
IL Ruffino: The wind flows / The hair on TSI's ass glides as if airborn / Smell the freshly cut grass
Gravlen: If I can blame you? Of course I can! I mean, you're like a walking cathalyst for homosexuality, driving otherwise straight men to write haikus about your ass hair...

So it's a wonder that your presence alone in any thread don't derail them and lead to debates about world leaders and homoerotic desires.


Sarkhaan: You. Put your pants back on.

User avatar
NERVUN
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29375
Founded: Mar 24, 2005
Right-wing Utopia

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby NERVUN » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:14 pm

The South Islands wrote:
NERVUN wrote:
The South Islands wrote:You do know that private tank ownership in the US isn't a horribly rare thing, right?

I believe they are talking about a fully functional tank, which last I checked is indeed rare.


True, these can't shoot. But it can mess up your day if your cat happens to not be paying attention...

I believe that's true with just about ANYTHING and the lack of attention of a cat. :lol2:
To those who feel, life is a tragedy. To those who think, it's a comedy.
"Men, today you'll be issued small trees. Do what you can for the emperor's glory." -Daistallia 2104 on bonsai charges in WWII
Science may provide the means while religion provides the motivation but humanity and humanity alone provides the vehicle -DaWoad

One-Stop Rules Shop, read it, love it, live by it. Getting Help Mod email: nervun@nationstates.net NSG Glossary
Add 10,145 to post count from Jolt: I have it from an unimpeachable source, that Dark Side cookies look like the Death Star. The other ones look like butterflies, or bunnies, or something.-Grave_n_Idle

Proud Member of FMGADHPAC. Join today!

User avatar
Parthenon
Senator
 
Posts: 3512
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Parthenon » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:19 pm

NERVUN wrote:
Parthenon wrote:American criminals realize these aren't necessary given the abundance of people like you working to keep firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

Prove it.

"About 25% of the adults in the United States personally own a gun, the vast majority of them men."
Cook, Philip J.; Ludwig, Jens (2003). Evaluating gun policy: effects on crime and violence. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. pp. s. 3,4. ISBN 0-8157-5311-X.

When you are dealing with a population where 3/4 of your potential targets are unarmed and the remaining 1/4th may not be carrying at the time of encounter you don't exactly need to have an RPG...
The Parthenese Confederation
Parthenon
Intergallactic Hell
The Bleeding Roses
West Parthenon
Former GDODAD/Metus Member

User avatar
NERVUN
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29375
Founded: Mar 24, 2005
Right-wing Utopia

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby NERVUN » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:23 pm

Parthenon wrote:
NERVUN wrote:
Parthenon wrote:American criminals realize these aren't necessary given the abundance of people like you working to keep firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

Prove it.

"About 25% of the adults in the United States personally own a gun, the vast majority of them men."
Cook, Philip J.; Ludwig, Jens (2003). Evaluating gun policy: effects on crime and violence. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. pp. s. 3,4. ISBN 0-8157-5311-X.

When you are dealing with a population where 3/4 of your potential targets are unarmed and the remaining 1/4th may not be carrying at the time of encounter you don't exactly need to have an RPG...

Nice, but you didn't bother to answer the question through. Prove that criminals know that they don't need heavy arms due to the efforts of gun control advocates to restrict guns.
To those who feel, life is a tragedy. To those who think, it's a comedy.
"Men, today you'll be issued small trees. Do what you can for the emperor's glory." -Daistallia 2104 on bonsai charges in WWII
Science may provide the means while religion provides the motivation but humanity and humanity alone provides the vehicle -DaWoad

One-Stop Rules Shop, read it, love it, live by it. Getting Help Mod email: nervun@nationstates.net NSG Glossary
Add 10,145 to post count from Jolt: I have it from an unimpeachable source, that Dark Side cookies look like the Death Star. The other ones look like butterflies, or bunnies, or something.-Grave_n_Idle

Proud Member of FMGADHPAC. Join today!

User avatar
Parthenon
Senator
 
Posts: 3512
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Parthenon » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:34 pm

NERVUN wrote:
Parthenon wrote:
NERVUN wrote:Prove it.

"About 25% of the adults in the United States personally own a gun, the vast majority of them men."
Cook, Philip J.; Ludwig, Jens (2003). Evaluating gun policy: effects on crime and violence. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. pp. s. 3,4. ISBN 0-8157-5311-X.

When you are dealing with a population where 3/4 of your potential targets are unarmed and the remaining 1/4th may not be carrying at the time of encounter you don't exactly need to have an RPG...

Nice, but you didn't bother to answer the question through. Prove that criminals know that they don't need heavy arms due to the efforts of gun control advocates to restrict guns.

We all have the capability of thinking like a criminal as all criminals are human. Its the Actus reus (In most cases) that makes a person a criminal, not the Mens rea.
Last edited by Parthenon on Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The Parthenese Confederation
Parthenon
Intergallactic Hell
The Bleeding Roses
West Parthenon
Former GDODAD/Metus Member

User avatar
NERVUN
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29375
Founded: Mar 24, 2005
Right-wing Utopia

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby NERVUN » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:37 pm

Parthenon wrote:We all have the capability of thinking like a criminal as all criminals are human. Its the Actus reus (In most cases) that makes a person a criminal, not the Mens rea.

Sorry, but "It stands to reason" claims hold no water here. If you're going to make a claim like that, you're going to have to back it up.
To those who feel, life is a tragedy. To those who think, it's a comedy.
"Men, today you'll be issued small trees. Do what you can for the emperor's glory." -Daistallia 2104 on bonsai charges in WWII
Science may provide the means while religion provides the motivation but humanity and humanity alone provides the vehicle -DaWoad

One-Stop Rules Shop, read it, love it, live by it. Getting Help Mod email: nervun@nationstates.net NSG Glossary
Add 10,145 to post count from Jolt: I have it from an unimpeachable source, that Dark Side cookies look like the Death Star. The other ones look like butterflies, or bunnies, or something.-Grave_n_Idle

Proud Member of FMGADHPAC. Join today!

User avatar
The Cat-Tribe
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5548
Founded: Jan 18, 2005
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby The Cat-Tribe » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:39 pm

Parthenon wrote:We all have the capability of thinking like a criminal as all criminals are human. Its the Actus reus (In most cases) that makes a person a criminal, not the Mens rea.


Um. No. Both actus rea AND mens rea are required for almost all crimes.
I quit (again).
The Altani Confederacy wrote:
The Cat-Tribe wrote:With that, I am done with these shenanigans. Do as thou wilt.

Can't miss you until you're gone, Ambassador. Seriously, your delegation is like one of those stores that has a "Going Out Of Business" sale for twenty years. Stay or go, already.*snip*
"Don't give me no shit because . . . I've been Tired . . ." ~ Pixies
With that, "he put his boots on, he took a face from the Ancient Gallery, and he walked on down the Hall . . ."

User avatar
Parthenon
Senator
 
Posts: 3512
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Parthenon » Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:49 pm

The Cat-Tribe wrote:
Parthenon wrote:We all have the capability of thinking like a criminal as all criminals are human. Its the Actus reus (In most cases) that makes a person a criminal, not the Mens rea.


Um. No. Both actus rea AND mens rea are required for almost all crimes.

In the US legal system that is true for conviction, however from a technical side, without actus reus, there is no crime committed.Taking this into account, a person is not a criminal for merely thinking like one but actually performing the deviant act. The ultimate purpose of Mens rea is for reaching "justice" in sentencing and "justice" is a fairly heated topic in legal theory.

Also, I assume you understand Strict-Liability offenses? (I.e. Statutory rape)
Last edited by Parthenon on Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
The Parthenese Confederation
Parthenon
Intergallactic Hell
The Bleeding Roses
West Parthenon
Former GDODAD/Metus Member

User avatar
Allanea
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 23388
Founded: Antiquity
Capitalist Paradise

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Allanea » Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:00 am

We went 24 pages w/o a gun control debate because most of the permanent members have already made up their minds. Some are against it, some are for it. Which is not a bad thing. It's perfectly okay to have made up your mind on an issue.
#HyperEarthBestEarth

Sometimes, there really is money on the sidewalk.

User avatar
Brogavia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5271
Founded: Sep 03, 2008
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Brogavia » Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:11 am

greed and death wrote:
BunnySaurus Bugsii wrote:
greed and death wrote:
if farming with an M1 Abrams is the only way to avoid EPA regulations.

Though technically EPA emissions standards are only for when you drive on public roads. and if your doing that your missing the entire point of owning a tank.


Settling disputes with your neighbours?

I was thinking skip the roads drive through houses.


Basements tend to get in the way of that...
Playing NS since Jan of 2006

1010102, Unjustly Deleted

Agent of the Timegate, if you expose me I'll kill you

User avatar
The Cat-Tribe
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5548
Founded: Jan 18, 2005
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby The Cat-Tribe » Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:04 pm

Parthenon wrote:
The Cat-Tribe wrote:
Parthenon wrote:We all have the capability of thinking like a criminal as all criminals are human. Its the Actus reus (In most cases) that makes a person a criminal, not the Mens rea.


Um. No. Both actus rea AND mens rea are required for almost all crimes.

In the US legal system that is true for conviction, however from a technical side, without actus reus, there is no crime committed.Taking this into account, a person is not a criminal for merely thinking like one but actually performing the deviant act. The ultimate purpose of Mens rea is for reaching "justice" in sentencing and "justice" is a fairly heated topic in legal theory.

Also, I assume you understand Strict-Liability offenses? (I.e. Statutory rape)


Um. I don't want to harp endlessly on a side-point, but don't lecture me on the law when you don't know what you are talking about.

You said mens rea was not what makes a crime a crime "in most cases."

I said that both actus rea and mens rea are required for "almost all" crimes.

My statement is true. Yours is not.

Responding that there is no crime unless there is actus rea is not disagreeing with me. Both are almost always required.

Similarly, pointing to the relatively insignificant group of crimes that are strict-liability doesn't refute the fact that almost all crimes require BOTH mens rea AND actus rea. (Also, most crimes that are commonly pointed to as "strict liability" still require some type of mens rea -- just not criminal intent on some key point. For example, statutory rape doesn't require knowledge that the victim is underage, but does require intent to have sexual relations.)
I quit (again).
The Altani Confederacy wrote:
The Cat-Tribe wrote:With that, I am done with these shenanigans. Do as thou wilt.

Can't miss you until you're gone, Ambassador. Seriously, your delegation is like one of those stores that has a "Going Out Of Business" sale for twenty years. Stay or go, already.*snip*
"Don't give me no shit because . . . I've been Tired . . ." ~ Pixies
With that, "he put his boots on, he took a face from the Ancient Gallery, and he walked on down the Hall . . ."

User avatar
The Cat-Tribe
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5548
Founded: Jan 18, 2005
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby The Cat-Tribe » Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:15 pm

Back on the main topic, those that are contending that the right to bear arms is an unlimited right to any weapons are being ridiculously (alhtough dangerously) absurd.

Neither the Second Amendment nor any natural right to bear arms is absolute. Just like with free speech or any other right, there are some limitations on the right.

In the ground-breaking case of District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. ___ (2008), SCOTUS made clear for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm. BUT the Court limited the scope of its decision to the possession and legal use of handguns. FURTHER, the Court was very clear that such a right was far from absolute or applied to all weapons :

Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy 152-153; Abbott 333. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. See, e.g., State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann., at 489-490; Nunn v. State, 1 Ga., at 251; see generally 2 Kent *340, n. 2; The American Students' Blackstone 84, n. 11 (G. Chase ed. 1884). Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those "in common use at the time." 307 U. S., at 179. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of "dangerous and unusual weapons." See 4 Blackstone 148-149 (1769); 3 B. Wilson, Works of the Honourable James Wilson 79 (1804); J. Dunlap, The New-York Justice 8 (1815); C. Humphreys, A Compendium of the Common Law in Force in Kentucky 482 (1822); 1 W. Russell, A Treatise on Crimes and Indictable Misdemeanors 271-272 (1831); H. Stephen, Summary of the Criminal Law 48 (1840); E. Lewis, An Abridgment of the Criminal Law of the United States 64 (1847); F. Wharton, A Treatise on the Criminal Law of the United States 726 (1852). See also State v. Langford, 10 N. C. 381, 383-384 (1824); O'Neill v. State, 16 Ala. 65, 67 (1849); English v. State, 35 Tex. 473, 476 (1871); State v. Lanier, 71 N. C. 288, 289 (1874).

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service--M-16 rifles and the like--may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment's ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.
(emphasis added)
I quit (again).
The Altani Confederacy wrote:
The Cat-Tribe wrote:With that, I am done with these shenanigans. Do as thou wilt.

Can't miss you until you're gone, Ambassador. Seriously, your delegation is like one of those stores that has a "Going Out Of Business" sale for twenty years. Stay or go, already.*snip*
"Don't give me no shit because . . . I've been Tired . . ." ~ Pixies
With that, "he put his boots on, he took a face from the Ancient Gallery, and he walked on down the Hall . . ."

User avatar
Nordfire
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 19
Founded: Dec 12, 2008
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Nordfire » Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:22 pm

I think shotguns and hunting rifles should be available to farmers etc who actually put good use to weapons. Why would anyone else need a gun? I'm quite happy with the way things are over here.

User avatar
Parthenon
Senator
 
Posts: 3512
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Parthenon » Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:24 pm

The Cat-Tribe wrote:
Parthenon wrote:
The Cat-Tribe wrote:Um. No. Both actus rea AND mens rea are required for almost all crimes.

In the US legal system that is true for conviction, however from a technical side, without actus reus, there is no crime committed.Taking this into account, a person is not a criminal for merely thinking like one but actually performing the deviant act. The ultimate purpose of Mens rea is for reaching "justice" in sentencing and "justice" is a fairly heated topic in legal theory.

Also, I assume you understand Strict-Liability offenses? (I.e. Statutory rape)


Um. I don't want to harp endlessly on a side-point, but don't lecture me on the law when you don't know what you are talking about.

You said mens rea was not what makes a crime a crime "in most cases."

I said that both actus rea and mens rea are required for "almost all" crimes.

My statement is true. Yours is not.

Responding that there is no crime unless there is actus rea is not disagreeing with me. Both are almost always required.

Similarly, pointing to the relatively insignificant group of crimes that are strict-liability doesn't refute the fact that almost all crimes require BOTH mens rea AND actus rea. (Also, most crimes that are commonly pointed to as "strict liability" still require some type of mens rea -- just not criminal intent on some key point. For example, statutory rape doesn't require knowledge that the victim is underage, but does require intent to have sexual relations.)

As I have indicated time and time again in my posting, I am currently enrolled as a Juris Doctorate student at a tier one school in the american southeast. I know damn well what US law entails for conviction, however, that is not the point of my posting which you seem to be casually overlooking to make subsequent, unrelated, remarks.

It's the actus reus that is the the actual deviant behavior. There is no disputing this fact, hell, its the definition of it.
Mens rea merely refers to the mental state of the person committing the act (insanity, justifiable, etc...) It is required for conviction in the US legal system for certain offenses and is used for determining sentencing, however, discussion of conviction is not the intent of my original posting (a point that is plainly understandable to anyone that isn't just trolling for an argument). The point being conveyed was that we are all capable of deviant thinking, however, we are all not criminals as we have not performed any deviant acts.
The Parthenese Confederation
Parthenon
Intergallactic Hell
The Bleeding Roses
West Parthenon
Former GDODAD/Metus Member

User avatar
Secruss
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1232
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Secruss » Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:31 pm

"Neither the Second Amendment nor any natural right to bear arms is absolute. Just like with free speech or any other right, there are some limitations on the right."

Image

Yeah. The Supreme Court can disarm the populace just as well as the Redcoats or Pol Pot.


Image

http://www.itwillpass.com/guns_gun_registration.shtml


"I think shotguns and hunting rifles should be available to farmers etc who actually put good use to weapons. Why would anyone else need a gun? I'm quite happy with the way things are over here."

Which country are you from?
Last edited by Secruss on Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"How now!" cried Jupiter "Are you not yet content? You have what you asked for and so you have only yourselves to blame for your misfortunes."

User avatar
The Cat-Tribe
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5548
Founded: Jan 18, 2005
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby The Cat-Tribe » Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:34 pm

Parthenon wrote:As I have indicated time and time again in my posting, I am currently enrolled as a Juris Doctorate student at a tier one school in the american southeast. I know damn well what US law entails for conviction, however, that is not the point of my posting which you seem to be casually overlooking to make subsequent, unrelated, remarks.

It's the actus reus that is the the actual deviant behavior. There is no disputing this fact, hell, its the definition of it.
Mens rea merely refers to the mental state of the person committing the act (insanity, justifiable, etc...) It is required for conviction in the US legal system for certain offenses and is used for determining sentencing, however, discussion of conviction is not the intent of my original posting (a point that is plainly understandable to anyone that isn't just trolling for an argument). The point being conveyed was that we are all capable of deviant thinking, however, we are all not criminals as we have not performed any deviant acts.


I won't continue to belabor a point that I recognize is a side-issue -- even if you still have the wrong end of the stick.

As for your being a law student, you could claim to be Chief Justice Roberts and you would still be wrong. Regardless, if you want to compare bona fides, I graduated from law school and was admitted to the bar about 11 years ago. Having actually worked as both a prosecutor and a defense attorney, I'm not going to bow down to your alleged expertise.
I quit (again).
The Altani Confederacy wrote:
The Cat-Tribe wrote:With that, I am done with these shenanigans. Do as thou wilt.

Can't miss you until you're gone, Ambassador. Seriously, your delegation is like one of those stores that has a "Going Out Of Business" sale for twenty years. Stay or go, already.*snip*
"Don't give me no shit because . . . I've been Tired . . ." ~ Pixies
With that, "he put his boots on, he took a face from the Ancient Gallery, and he walked on down the Hall . . ."

User avatar
The Cat-Tribe
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5548
Founded: Jan 18, 2005
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby The Cat-Tribe » Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:36 pm

Secruss wrote:*snip ridiculousness*


Thank you for demonstrating a complete failure to understand the content of my post.

I am an American citizen that supports the right to bear arms with reasonable restrictions.

You may fantasize all you want about owning a tank. You don't have a right to own one, however.
I quit (again).
The Altani Confederacy wrote:
The Cat-Tribe wrote:With that, I am done with these shenanigans. Do as thou wilt.

Can't miss you until you're gone, Ambassador. Seriously, your delegation is like one of those stores that has a "Going Out Of Business" sale for twenty years. Stay or go, already.*snip*
"Don't give me no shit because . . . I've been Tired . . ." ~ Pixies
With that, "he put his boots on, he took a face from the Ancient Gallery, and he walked on down the Hall . . ."

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Duvniask, FelrikTheDeleted, Greater Loegria, Kaztropol, Locus Praemonstratus, Nakena, Novus America, The New California Republic, Vilhelumea, Visionary Union

Advertisement

Remove ads