PF Question

A lot of liability for that sort of issue went out the window when the SCOTUS found that prescribing that guns must be locked up or have trigger locks was unconstitutional.

 

Just because a trigger lock or gun safe mandate is unconstitutional does not mean the liability doesn't exist, just that it is up to gun owners themselves to be vigilant about the care and custody of their own firearms. If a firearm owner is not vigilant, I could still see him held liable. It is also a crime in many jurisdictions to not report a lost or stolen firearm.

 

None. I did not shoot anyone.

Again, I did not shoot anyone.

If it's intentional, I'm a murderer and fully liable. If not, I might be liable for manslaughter.

Manslaughter.

Is this another pathetic attempt at justifying banning guns?

 

Criminal liability was significantly reduced and civil liability is harder to prove. I agree that reporting a lost or stolen firearm is a must. As to being vigilant, kind of hard to do when not at home.

 

False.

Yeah, so? Just proves that even jokes speak of the sole purpose of gun use-- survival.

And they still are. A strong 2nd amendment will keep tyrants at bay. So why do hoplophobic folks like yourself seek to weaken it?

Arrogance and ignorance all in one package? How special. LOL
I see your no student of US history.

Yeah, right... you can keep your guns and you can keep your ammo......

Ahhhh poor little Barry.....that damn Constitution and its Bill of Rights. It's not any other President had to deal with dissent.... LOL

Sorry, my bad.

True, people should know the answers to such questions, but they are no the typical questions asked by prospective gun owners that the OP profess them to be.

Agreed, but no more restriction than we assign to the lesser "privilege" of a car.

Yeah, in excrement.

False. So when some one is shot and they don't die, is that a misuse of a gun?

Defense is not always about deflecting projectiles in mid-air. That example is just down right childish stupid. I have often just presented my sidearm as defense from others. So much for your knowlege of guns.

Your inane statement of the guns sole purpose being to kill defines your anti-gun bias...or at least your ignorance of proper gun use and personal protection.

Such big words for such a small mind! LOL

Yes, at the privilege of the state.

Yes, to that which is of perceived danger or threat to ones survival. That's called self-defense-- an individuals natural right.

The question is the depth of your understanding-- not mine. I have demonstrated my depth and your lack thereof. No one need fear me except my enemies.

Quit your sniveling. Any one who thinks that the guns sole purpose is to kill says a great deal about a person and their understanding, or lack thereof, of their environment and the world.

And your ranting like a whiny brat child who doesn't know doo doo about anything.

No, it is not obvious. What is smarter about it? How does their system past muster with the US Constitution? I am familiar with the Swiss system. I have male family living in Geneva so you better go do your research.

So?

 

What part of that statement is false? That the purpose of a kitchen knife is not to kill, or that firearms are designed to kill?

The purpose of a firearm is to kill.

No matter how many guns you have, if the Government wants your guns, they will take them. If you resist, they have the Army. If you resist the Army, they could just call an Air Force F-16 and put a JDAM through your house and end the problem once and for all.

You can't see crap about me, old man. I have studied more American history than you've probably ever known. Ever heard of Tom Scott? Do you have any idea why this little-known President of the Pennsylvania Railroad is so significant to American history?

I thought not. He was the man who masterminded the deregulation of the corporate charter system that led to the birth of the modern corporation.

There has been no mass confiscation of either since Obama took office. Quite the opposite, the arms industry in the United States has been booming for the past six years.

No other President has had to deal with as much lies as Obama has had to deal with.

That damn Constitution isn't as ironclad as you'd like to think.

She's a gun owner and she's asked them. I'm a prospective gun owner, and I've asked them. I've also had to ask my property manager other questions as well just to cover both my ass and his.

OH THE IRONY!!!!!!!! THANK YOU FOR THAT! YOU JUST MADE MY ENTIRE POINT!

You have to be licensed to drive a car, and your car has to be registered with the government.

You should have probably thought out your words more carefully. You just endorsed my entire philosophy vis a vis firearms.

You do not know my experience with firearms at all, so it is insulting to me that you think you know me.

No, a bad shot.

Also, there is such a thing as Compartment Syndrome and another syndrome that the 5.56x45 NATO round the M16/M4/AR-15 family fires that says that if you are shot in the leg, you could have systemic organ failures due to the shock. I forget the exact name of the disorder.

Yeah, I could imagine seeing anyone who knows you running in fear. You shouldn't have a firearm if your posts on this site are any indication of your mental stability.

So you're telling me if three guys broke into a house, the owner of the house shouldn't shoot to kill?

Smaller things can often be more potent. If you don't believe me, you should go play with a baby diamondback rattlesnake. Go on, they're cute.

See my response above....

I am not disputing that.

My lack thereof? You do not know me, thus you lack the ability to judge my understanding.

I'm not sniveling. Firearms are considered lethal force by every law enforcement agency in the United States.

I'm not ranting. You're the one rambling incoherently and with distinct and blatant misuses of homonyms.

The right to keep and bear arms expressed within the Second Amendment is contingent upon the states having a militia. The states have the power to establish a militia guaranteed them within the Constitution. If voluntary enlistment is not sufficient enough to meet the defense needs of the state, conscription has been used multiple times throughout American history and has been deemed entirely Constitutional.

Furthermore, the United States Congress is granted within Article One, Section Eight, the power to regulate and arm the state Militias. Thus, the Congress could easily say every state Militiaman is required to be issued an M16A4, ammunition, sights, and all other accoutrements that would normally be issued an infantryman within the United States Army.

Those two realities, when coupled together, can mean that a Swiss system would be entirely feasible within the United States. In fact, their Constitution of 1848 was influenced directly by the United States Constitution.

 

The purpose of a firearm is to launch some form of projectile at high speed.

 

It's called paranoid delusion plain and simple.

 

And he claims its not an anti-gun thread. LOL

 

Yeah, I'm done with "wise guy"

Though, just to stick it in his craw, this is my bookshelf. Does this look like the book of a hoplophobe?



You can't really see from that angle, but there are at least five or six books from Tom Clancy's nonfiction series on the shelves. There is also a few other books on combat. The top shelf is almost every one of Tom Clancy's fiction works. Off the top of my head, the only fiction Clancys I don't own are Red Rabbit, Dead or Alive, and Threat Vector. Executive Orders is not shown because I read it so much that the book split, so I am waiting to get a hardcover copy. I have books from other authors as well.

 

Books, TV.....its all fiction, not training and knowledge, just like I said.