Obnoxious, ignorant teens now demand curbs on guns

[Cyber Liberty]

@Wingnut

Um... Thanks, sorta... I think.

 

Like many of Wing's compliments, sometimes it's difficult to know if they really are compliments....

[WingNot]

@Wingnut

Um... Thanks, sorta... I think.

 

No problem...
I was going to say Assless chaps.  But I was informed a while back by another Briefer that by their nature they come that way, so... that would have been redundant! 

Giddy up cowboy!

[roamer_1]

I believe the sale of such guns are already illegal (I'm in CA so perhaps I'm wrong about this). Are you proposing we pass a law to register illegal guns?

No. Perfectly legal, except in that I may, from time to time, be purchasing stolen goods unawares... Not really my fault, and par for the course. I try to buy from decent looking people, and shy away from deals that look fishy.

[roamer_1]

Really?  So you can guarantee 100% that the gun will never be stolen from you, and used in a crime.  If you have the ability to predict the future with 100% accuracy, perhaps you should be trading stocks instead of wasting time here.

What possible difference would that make, except to make previous owners liable for the crime they did not commit? So someone steals my truck, goes on a drunken tear, and runs over some grandma, and that is MY FAULT?

Pure bullshit.

[mountaineer]

I'm heartbroken to learn my time here is wasted!

[XenaLee]

I'm heartbroken to learn my time here is wasted!

Never fear.... it's not.

How'd that coffeecake come out?  (stomach growling as we speak)

[roamer_1]

Mandatory auto insurance deters the most irresponsible and destitute from owning cars, so the same would hold for firearms.

Geez... You need to get out more.  MANY people are on the road in untitled uninsured cars. My boy sold a truck, and several years later, was called on the phone and instructed to get that truck off the side of the road, or it would be towed.... He was the last registered owner, and no paper, no insurance, was carried on that truck in the meantime.


And do you mean to say that the destitute do not have the right to defense?

[Cyber Liberty]

I'm heartbroken to learn my time here is wasted!

#Me too.

[Jazzhead]

So someone steals my truck, goes on a drunken tear, and runs over some grandma, and that is MY FAULT?

It should be.  It's you're truck, you're responsible for it - until such time as you report it stolen.   

[roamer_1]

As for the rest of the future, the only thing I'll guarantee with 100% accuracy at this moment is that in a few minutes I will go downstairs and bake a coffee cake.

Oh yeah... With walnuts and them little crumblies on top...
 

[mountaineer]

How'd that coffeecake come out?  (stomach growling as we speak)

It looks and smells wonderful.  Resisting the urge to eat some before dinner.

[roamer_1]

So they can find deep pockets to sue if a weapon that once belonged to somebody wealthy gets used in a violent crime.  Leftists can be pretty creative to finding ways to separate people from their money, in order to fuel the Leviathan.

Yeah right... the criminal walks away because he's been so misunderstood, and has had such a rough time... and some poor bastard gets sued out of existence because he had the misfortune to have owned something once upon a time...

Perfectly in tune with the liberal mindset...

[Frank Cannon]

It should be.  It's you're truck, you're responsible for it - until such time as you report it stolen.   

There is no law to report a vehicle stolen. You only do it because A) you want it back or B) you are filing a claim with the insurance company.

Your arguments are ridiculous because you have no idea what the hell you are talking about just like every other simple minded gun grabbing jackass in the country. That is why your plans and schemes fail to garner any support.

[roamer_1]

The fact that some poor people cannot afford to own a car due to the insurance requirement is unfortunate, but as a negative it is far outweighed by the costs of allowing people to drive without insurance.  The same applies to guns.

So again= Poor people don't get to defend themselves. Hard scrabble hillbillies don't get to keep the skunk out of the chicken coop. Nor do they get to go hunting - their very subsistence.

Tough nuts, eh?

[XenaLee]

It should be.  It's you're truck, you're responsible for it - until such time as you report it stolen.   

Riiight..... (typical leftie idiocy).  So if I'm sound asleep and someone steals my car out front and goes off and robs a bank, kills a few folks and totals the car while I'm asleep, it is somehow MY fault? 

And you have the nerve to call someone (anyone) 'else' nuts.  [shaking head in disbelief]

[roamer_1]

I'm concerned about gun violence generally, not just mass shootings.   Registration and insurance will provide a means of assigning legal liability to the registered gun owner and encourage gun owners to transfer firearms lawfully and to swiftly report stolen guns.   Insurance can also, as with auto insurance, encourage safe practices and create a fund for the compensation of victims of gun violence. 

No it won't.
What it does is leave you a list of people to pay for a crime they didn't commit.
A transference of liability. Somebody's got to pay, dammit. Might as well be that eeeeevil previous owner who did not report to uncle nanny.

[WingNot]

I'm heartbroken to learn my time here is wasted!

#Me too.

Pound Metoo.

[roamer_1]

There is no effective difference from the standpoint of lawful regulation, except that a "right" cannot be denied, at least not arbitrarily.    But requiring you to register and insure your firearms doesn't deny you the ability to be "armed properly" to address an intruder.   But self-defense isn't what bothers you - you are a gun hobbyist, who doesn't want to pay the cost to insure the dozens of weapons in your collection.   Sorry, CL, some hobbies cost money.   But the cost to insure the gun you need for self-defense cannot by definition be prohibitive, or it would infringe upon on the right itself.   

And just who the hell are you to determine what I need for my own defense?

[roamer_1]

You are making the claim that because I have a collection there is no self-defense value to my weapons, therefore I am not deserving of the right to defend myself against predators. 

You are full of it.  You are, in fact, full of what you seem to be made of.

That's right.

[roamer_1]

Three little words, leftie.  GFY.   ^-^

...With a shovel.

 

[INVAR]

I maintain if government is put in charge of setting gun insurance premiums, the exact same, non actuarial system will be used to set premiums, and the outcome is likely to be a defacto ban on peoples right to keep and bear arms.  Which is the lefts final goal.

Not just the "Left".

All Statists regardless of their particular flavor of Collectivism or Patriotic Obedience to the State, have as their goal - the disarming of a people they want to rule and control.

[Jazzhead]

And just who the hell are you to determine what I need for my own defense?

I don't give a shit what you need for your own self-defense, you paranoid hillbilly.   One gun or a hundred.  Just so long as you register and insure 'em. 

I know, I know.  If they come for your guns, you'll kill 'em all.    

[INVAR]

You're a Commie Pinko Lib. Every post you make is a damn embarrassment of stupidity.

It low quality people like you who are making this country into a shithole.

Careful, you are simply illustrating yourself to be a selfish, absolutist gun fetishist in the mind of our resident Leftist.

[roamer_1]

No that is not what I am claiming.  But you do not need a collection to "defend yourself against predators".  Your collection is a luxury, and you fear having to insure your collection because it would cost you money.  That's selfish.

You literally don't know your ass from a hole in the ground.

You have no idea what it takes to defend oneself from predators... Nor provide from the land.

[edpc]

I know, I know.  If they come for your guns, you'll kill 'em all.

@INVAR


I’d recommend the low deductible.