Summary of the 2013 AWB legislation

[Loon Scare: Agenda 21]

Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation:

Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:

120 specifically-named firearms

Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can
accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic
Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can
accept more than 10 rounds

Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:
Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test
Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors
from the characteristics test

Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to
address attempts to “work around” prior bans

Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting
more than 10 rounds.

Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment
Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting
or sporting purposes and Exempting antique, manually-operated, and
permanently disabled weapons
Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National
Firearms Act, to include:
Background check of owner and any transferee;
Type and serial number of the firearm;
Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that
possession would not violate State or local law; and

Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration


OWN IT GUN HUGGERSs ! Your destruction of America is coming to
an end.





--
"UN Agenda 21 - Coming to a Neighborhood near You , SOON"

[ColdWarDinosaur]

Whats next, banning fast cars and motorbikes that have caused 5:1 more
deaths than guns?

Just curious.

Fix the laws of ownership and make it a criminal offense to allow your
legal guns to fall into the hands of criminals or lunatics if you have
not secured them properly. Couple of simple fixes make the majority of
these problems go away. No insane kids simply taking granpops
unsecured firearms and committing mayhem.



--
~~
HW
__________________
The GOP Claim TO Be Christian but:
Are Capitalist Extremists.
Support Law of the Jungle, Survival of the Richest.
Are Racists.
Are Pro-War.
Are Pro-Torture.
Are Pro-Execution.
Are Pro-Money-lender.
Despise Human Rights.
Despise The Poor.
Despise Women.
Despise the Disabled.
They appear to be against everything Jesus stood for.
Who are these people really??

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 12/28/2012 4:56 PM, Loon Scare: Agenda 21 wrote:
>

> Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation:
>
> Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
>
> 120 specifically-named firearms
>
> Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can
> accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic
> Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can
> accept more than 10 rounds
>
> Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:
> Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test
> Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors
> from the characteristics test
>
> Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to
> address attempts to “work around” prior bans
>
> Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting
> more than 10 rounds.
>
> Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:

The second amendment isn't "the RIGHT to hunt".... it's the right to
keep and bear arms. And there is NO acceptable arms list.

Either there is a Right or there is NOT.

Where is the RIGHT to an education written into the constitution or the
RIGHT to health care? How much education is too much and makes people
dangerous like an assault weapon does, is there an "assault education"
that holds too much education?

The problem isn't the guns the problem is GOVERNMENT'S inability to do
their job, government is incompetent and wasteful and after paying
themselves and giving government the highest paying jobs and retirement
they have no money to secure the schools that they force children to attend.

Government needs to cut their own perks and start taking care of the
children that they are forcing into their government schools, the should
have had an ADT business alarm monitoring system at the school that
tells the ADT security monitoring staff when someone is breaking in or
is in an area that is actively being monitored.


Doing what the average business does for safety could have saved those
kids in Massachusetts. It was government incompetence pure and simple
since the HOMELAND SECURITY didn't pass down a directive for public
schools to secure their building against terrorists. There should be
electronic security and zone security so that no one can get to where
children are until they pass several levels of security checks.


Obama managed to get the Ambassador of Libya killed and now Obama has
all but personally killed 20 students at that school by his own
incompetence as Commander in Chief

--



*Rumination*
#5 - You can't have Social Justice and Equal Justice at the same time,
they are 'mutually exclusive'.

[Loons jerk off daily on Sarah Palin book cover]

>
> Fix the laws

Where the sellers and manufactures of weapons are prosecuted too.





--


Loon Party: http://www.twitpic.com/8zi369/full

[What DID a Frothy Mixture of Shit do to be associated with Santorum ?]

On 12/28/2012 4:24 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>
> Obama managed to get the Ambassador of Libya killed
>

YES HE DID !

AND YOU CAN'T PROVE IT !

NOR DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT !


hahahahahahah .

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 12/28/2012 6:09 PM, What DID a Frothy Mixture of Shit do to be

associated with Santorum ? wrote:
> On 12/28/2012 4:24 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>>
>> Obama managed to get the Ambassador of Libya killed
>>
>
>
> YES HE DID !
>
> AND YOU CAN'T PROVE IT !
>
> NOR DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT !
>
>
> hahahahahahah .
>

I'm not sure I want to do anything about it....


But when he repeats his incompetence and his Homeland security does
nothing to secure government building full of school children from
terrorist attacks, I'm starting to get interested in seeing Obama
impeached.


Just because Obama is *THE HARVARD VILLAGE IDIOT* doesn't mean he is
incapable of being President, hell we had President Gerald Ford who was
no genius......



But Obama is building up a list of being incompetent that makes Jimmy
Carter and Gerry Ford look like they were geniuses.


Anyone can make a few mistakes but when they have a hard time doing a
just a few things correct it's NOT a good track record. And I'm sure
the Ambassadors wife kids and the parents of the Massachusetts school
shooting victims/children are about tired of Obama's endless excuses for
his incompetence.



But I'm "all for letting Obama get some more people killed before we do
anything".


--



*Rumination*
#2 - Life is like a "Waring Blender" you can toss a little bullshit in
with the ice cream, and as long as you weren't watching, it all tastes
like milkshake.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 12/28/2012 6:09 PM, What DID a Frothy Mixture of Shit do to be
associated with Santorum ? wrote:

> On 12/28/2012 4:24 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>>
>> Obama managed to get the Ambassador of Libya killed
>>
>
>
> YES HE DID !
>
> AND YOU CAN'T PROVE IT !
>
> NOR DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT !
>
>
> hahahahahahah .
>

I'm not sure I want to do anything about it....


But when he repeats his incompetence and his Homeland security does
nothing to secure government building full of school children from
terrorist attacks, I'm starting to get interested in seeing Obama
impeached.


Just because Obama is *THE HARVARD VILLAGE IDIOT* doesn't mean he is
incapable of being President, hell we had President Gerald Ford who was
no genius......



But Obama is building up a list of being incompetent that makes Jimmy
Carter and Gerry Ford look like they were geniuses.


Anyone can make a few mistakes but when they have a hard time doing a
just a few things correct it's NOT a good track record. And I'm sure
the Ambassadors wife kids and the parents of the Massachusetts school
shooting victims/children are about tired of Obama's endless excuses for
his incompetence.



But I'm "all for letting Obama get some more people killed before we do
anything".

ANOTHER IDEA would be to force the Politicians to give equal or better
security to ALL other government building as the ones "they personally
occupy".

That would mean that NO kids would be at risk because Obama and the
county commission and the Homeland Security just don't care about the kids.

They would automatically get all the security that the county commission
gets. And if someone is actually ON SITE and caring about the kids
safety because it's their job, maybe they will have a real voice that
cares about "them" to get the things they need like an ADT type of
electronic security monitoring.

Looks to me like Homeland Security is just about a useless organization.

[ColdWarDinosaur]

On 12/28/2012 6:08 PM, Loons jerk off daily on Sarah Palin book cover
wrote:

>
>>
>> Fix the laws
>
> Where the sellers and manufactures of weapons are prosecuted too.

Imagine Ford and Nissan being prosecuted for traffic accident deaths
that are caused by the drivers of their cars. Are you some ambulance
chasing attorney or something?

[Frank]

On 12/28/2012 4:56 PM, Loon Scare: Agenda 21 wrote:
>

You do know that Harry Reed is A rated by the NRA.
Do you think someone that has not passed a budget bill in 4 years will
let this come to a vote? If passed it would be Harry's last term as a
Nevada senator.

[ColdWarDinosaur]

On 12/29/2012 8:47 AM, Thanks for all the free stuff. I need lawn care
n wrote:

> On Saturday, December 29, 2012 7:03:24 AM UTC-6, ColdWarDinosaur wrote:
>> On 12/28/2012 6:08 PM, Loons jerk off daily on Sarah Palin book cover
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> Fix the laws
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Where the sellers and manufactures of weapons are prosecuted too.
>>
>>
>>
>> Imagine Ford and Nissan being prosecuted for traffic accident deaths
>>
>> that are caused by the drivers of their cars. Are you some ambulance
>>
>> chasing attorney or something?
>>
>>

> they have been held liable for millions of dollars of bad products.
>
> See "pinto ".
>
>
Total non-sequitur. The right answer would be to be held accountable
if the gun blows up in your face when you fire it. What you're
proposing is a sleazy ambulance chaser attempt to sue the
manufacturers which would open the door to lawsuits against car makers
for traffic accidents that have nothing to do with the safety or
"pinto" issues of cars. Its a slimeball attempt to make money.

[ColdWarDinosaur]

On 12/29/2012 11:15 AM, Baxter wrote:
> -
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "ColdWarDinosaur" <wynnehenry!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:kbmpne$ja1$1...@dont-email.me...

>> On 12/28/2012 6:08 PM, Loons jerk off daily on Sarah Palin book cover
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Fix the laws
>>>
>>> Where the sellers and manufactures of weapons are prosecuted too.
>>
>> Imagine Ford and Nissan being prosecuted for traffic accident deaths
>> that are caused by the drivers of their cars. Are you some ambulance
>> chasing attorney or something?
>>

> But then cars aren't designed to kill - it's misuse-use of the car that
> leads to death. OTOH, using a gun the way it was intended/designed leads to
> death. Tobacco companies argued in much the same way about their product.

No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact. All the US needs
is to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals and the insane and
toughen up the penalties for allowing your guns to fall into the wrong
hands if you have failed to control your weapons with due care and
diligence.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 12/29/2012 12:39 PM, ColdWarDinosaur wrote:
> On 12/29/2012 11:15 AM, Baxter wrote:
>> -
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> "ColdWarDinosaur" <wynnehenry!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:kbmpne$ja1$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> On 12/28/2012 6:08 PM, Loons jerk off daily on Sarah Palin book cover
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Fix the laws
>>>>
>>>> Where the sellers and manufactures of weapons are prosecuted too.
>>>
>>> Imagine Ford and Nissan being prosecuted for traffic accident deaths
>>> that are caused by the drivers of their cars. Are you some ambulance
>>> chasing attorney or something?
>>>
>> But then cars aren't designed to kill - it's misuse-use of the car that
>> leads to death. OTOH, using a gun the way it was intended/designed leads to
>> death. Tobacco companies argued in much the same way about their product.
>
> No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact. All the US needs
> is to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals and the insane and
> toughen up the penalties for allowing your guns to fall into the wrong
> hands if you have failed to control your weapons with due care and
> diligence.

So they can allow guns to be stolen (as the government does now) and
then have a government exchange for weapons to give people gift cards in
exchange for the stolen weapon and the government is essentially
contributing to the stealing of your weapon since they don't return them
to their rightful owners that reported them stolen.....?

So you want the government to set the guidelines by which you can engage
in your right and then remove that right all together when you fail to
meet their government preconditions they set for your rights?


Isn't this a little like FAST AND FURIOUS gun running that was supposed
to get the people calling for Obama to limit/restrict gun sales?

The government creates the problem and then to fix the problem they
intended to create, they limit your rights the way they have been
wanting to limit your rights for 100 years?




--



*Rumination*
#45 - If you haven't found the lie in what a Liberal told you, then you
didn't dig deep enough.

[Scout]

"Loon Scare: Agenda 21" <lo...@asdasd.com> wrote in message
news:50de1571$0$10360$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net...

>
> Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation:
>
> Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
>
> 120 specifically-named firearms

So, they change the names, make a few minor cosmetic changes, and they are
go to do.

So other than banning a name, what has been accomplished?

> Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can
> accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic

Hmmm.. such as using a metallic cartridge?

percussion cap?

rifling?

interchangeable parts?

Name any gun that doesn't have at least one characteristic in common with
some military weapon.

Seems to me this could potentially allow them to ban all guns. Granted they
would probably do it incrementally, but the potential seems to be there.

> Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can
> accept more than 10 rounds

So much for .22lr then.

> Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by: Moving
> from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test

Is black a characteristic?

How dangerous are these cosmetic features you would ban?

> Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors
> from the characteristics test

Cool so we can still have bayonet mounts and flash suppressors.

> Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to
> address attempts to “work around” prior bans

IOW, they are pissed that people complied with the law and now want to ban
features that have nothing to do with assault weapons.

But ok, we open up the top of the thumbhole make it like a competition stock
were you have a pistol grip section with the rest of the stock mounted at
the bottom of the pistol grip like section.

Going to ban Match and Olympic rifles now?

> Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting
> more than 10 rounds.

And how exactly do they propose to round up all the high capacity magazines,
much less compensate their owners not only for the value of the magazine but
for the lose in value of their firearms that result?

And what's so special about 10 rounds?

Do you think criminals will obey the law?

> Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
> Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment

So basically you haven't eliminated anything.

> Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting
> or sporting purposes and Exempting antique, manually-operated, and
> permanently disabled weapons

And if there are weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes which aren't
on the list?

Oh, that's right, this is list made up by people without a clue of what is
used for hunting and sport shooting.

And if you have something custom then you're screwed. All those custom bench
rest rifles will now be illegal.

> Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National
> Firearms Act, to include:
> Background check of owner and any transferee;
> Type and serial number of the firearm;
> Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
> Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that
> possession would not violate State or local law; and
>
> Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration
>
>
> OWN IT GUN HUGGERSs ! Your destruction of America is coming to
> an end.

Right, meanwhile back in reality....... it will die in committee.

[Bill Shatzer]

ColdWarDinosaur wrote:

- snip -

>>But then cars aren't designed to kill - it's misuse-use of the car that
>>leads to death. OTOH, using a gun the way it was intended/designed leads to
>>death. Tobacco companies argued in much the same way about their product.
>
>
> No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact.

Not even! In 2010 (the most recent year available) there were 32,885
motor vehicle fatalities and 31,513 firearm fatalities.

IOW, just about 1:1 - and motor vehicle deaths are rather steadily
trending downwards while firearm fatalities are rather consistently rising.

We require that motor vehicles be registered, licensed and insured while
deadly firearms require none of these things.

> All the US needs
> is to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals and the insane and
> toughen up the penalties for allowing your guns to fall into the wrong
> hands if you have failed to control your weapons with due care and
> diligence.

What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza for
allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?

peace and justice,

[Gunner]

On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 22:03:31 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
wrote:

>>
>> No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact.
>
>Not even! In 2010 (the most recent year available) there were 32,885
>motor vehicle fatalities and 31,513 firearm fatalities.
>
>IOW, just about 1:1 - and motor vehicle deaths are rather steadily
>trending downwards while firearm fatalities are rather consistently rising.

Ah..wrong.

Firearms fatalities are falling and have been for 15 yrs.

Now nearl all motor vehicle fatalities are the result of accident.

Firearms fatalities are sometimes the result of accidents, but most
often the result of intentional use.

There were 11,101 firearms related fatalities in 2011.
Of that number, 4,446 were suicides,, 4,852 unlawful homicides and
the balance were lawful homicides visa vis self defense and so
forth.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf

I dont know where you got your numbers from..but from the looks of
it...you should have wiped your ass better when you were done.

Gunner


The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 12/30/2012 9:05 AM, Gunner wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 22:03:31 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact.
>>
>> Not even! In 2010 (the most recent year available) there were 32,885
>> motor vehicle fatalities and 31,513 firearm fatalities.
>>
>> IOW, just about 1:1 - and motor vehicle deaths are rather steadily
>> trending downwards while firearm fatalities are rather consistently rising.
>
> Ah..wrong.
>
> Firearms fatalities are falling and have been for 15 yrs.
>
> Now nearl all motor vehicle fatalities are the result of accident.
>
> Firearms fatalities are sometimes the result of accidents, but most
> often the result of intentional use.

Like suicide, a part of the Liberal utopia.



How many Abortions were done by doctors, maybe we should ban all
doctors, they are the number one killer of children, more than guns cars
and 5 gallon buckets put together....

The most dangerous thing on the planet for a human life in the uterus is
a doctor.



Disease in children was once the danger but now it's the Progressives
Medical industry.

--



*Rumination*
#55 - The most important thing in life is showing-up.

[ColdWarDinosaur]

I recognize that you want NO laws or rules covering gun ownership and
that makes you as loony as Adam Lanza to me.

[ColdWarDinosaur]

On 12/30/2012 11:44 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> On 12/30/2012 9:05 AM, Gunner wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 22:03:31 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact.
>>>
>>> Not even! In 2010 (the most recent year available) there were 32,885
>>> motor vehicle fatalities and 31,513 firearm fatalities.
>>>
>>> IOW, just about 1:1 - and motor vehicle deaths are rather steadily
>>> trending downwards while firearm fatalities are rather consistently rising.
>>
>> Ah..wrong.
>>
>> Firearms fatalities are falling and have been for 15 yrs.
>>
>> Now nearl all motor vehicle fatalities are the result of accident.
>>
>> Firearms fatalities are sometimes the result of accidents, but most
>> often the result of intentional use.
>
> Like suicide, a part of the Liberal utopia.
>
>
>
> How many Abortions were done by doctors, maybe we should ban all
> doctors, they are the number one killer of children, more than guns cars
> and 5 gallon buckets put together....

Except that you have your own fucked up definition of murder. One that
not even the Old or the New Testament or even Jesus mentioned. You are
a demented lunatic.

>
> The most dangerous thing on the planet for a human life in the uterus is
> a doctor.

False.

> Disease in children was once the danger but now it's the Progressives
> Medical industry.

Please go and live in Iran or Pakistan, you'll fit right in.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

Except you're the one on the meds, telling the rest of the world they're
crazy.

What's it like to be "the only sane person" on an entire planet, is it
like the "Omega Man"?

The FBI should be tracking you with an ankle bracelet since your
medication has you believing those voices in your head telling you that
you're on the outside of the fence looking in at the psych patients,
when reality says it's the other way around. That pleasant little gun
free world you're living in.... it was artificially created for people
like you, by mental health professionals.

Crazy people aren't held accountable for their activity.... so the
responsibility falls to the government that is "SANE" and failed in
every way and was so incompetent "NOT INSANE" that the government
allowed 20 children to be murdered with so few obstacles that a crazy
kid managed to escape all detection.


If it's unconstitutional to ban guns (and it is) then at least ban crazy
people from getting into schools where the government forces children to
congregate.


The common thread in VA Tech and the Theater and this CT school is the
crazy people that were seeing a shrink for their problems and they were
mainstreamed and allowed access to places and doors that should have
been more closely maintained and secure, in short it was a lack of
security that could have kept them out had that security been in place.

The gun free zones those people entered voluntarily or forced by
government, was essentially entering a suicide pact that said if someone
crazy with a gun comes into where we are then we will all die without
defending themselves.


We do have terrorists that do these things that government is already
tracking down.... why no security to guard against that? It was
government incompetence and from the top down with Homeland security
being a major disappointment in the government that was supposed to
prevent these type of killings.

Since Obama says there are no terrorists... why not call them all
insane people and lump them in with the crazy people that do it for fun.
If there was no guards to stop crazy kids what was there to stop
terrorists? And how do we know that this kid was not contacting an
online terrorist like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_al-Zawahiri
Who told him to do this as happened with the FORT HOOD SHOOTER?


Why did this kids erase his hard drive at home before this killing spree?


--



*Rumination*
#56 - You have a right to your own opinions, but NOT to your own facts.

[Wayne]

"Bill Shatzer" wrote in message news:kbolfk$mrv$1...@dont-email.me...

ColdWarDinosaur wrote:

- snip -

>>>But then cars aren't designed to kill - it's misuse-use of the car that
>>>leads to death. OTOH, using a gun the way it was intended/designed leads
>>>to death. Tobacco companies argued in much the same way about their
>>>product.
>>
>>
>> No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact.

>Not even! In 2010 (the most recent year available) there were 32,885 motor
>vehicle fatalities and 31,513 firearm fatalities.

>IOW, just about 1:1 - and motor vehicle deaths are rather steadily trending
>downwards while firearm fatalities are rather consistently rising.

>We require that motor vehicles be registered, licensed and insured while
>deadly firearms require none of these things.

We could require that cellphones, computers, and cameras to be registered,
licensed and insured.

Is that the kind of world you want to live in?

>> All the US needs
>> is to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals and the insane and
>> toughen up the penalties for allowing your guns to fall into the wrong
>> hands if you have failed to control your weapons with due care and
>> diligence.

>What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza for
>allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?

No penalty whatsoever. Adam was the one doing all the crimes.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

>Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

>What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza for
>allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?

How did she "allow" it?

[BeamMeUpScotty]

>> Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>
>> What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza for
>> allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?
>

The death penalty is off the table.

And "stupid" isn't illegal yet......


So maybe "conspiracy to commit"?



Then sentence her to eternal damnation?.





Maybe use her head stone as a urinal?

Bury her next to here son the killer?


--



*Rumination*
#22 - Sometimes you eat the bear, sometimes the bear eats you.

[AmyLeVere]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" wrote in message
news:7h01e8tfhab0mmqdu...@4ax.com...

>^^^^
Easy peasy! He murdered his mom!
That's allowed...right?

[BeamMeUpScotty]

You will need to buy the after market kit that has a drill and set screw
mount rather than the factory stamped and pressed mounting adapter.....

Store it on a different shelf of your closet so they aren't linked as
going together. Then when you pick the school that you want to attack
you can wait till an hour before you go and put on the bayonet and flash
suppressor.

But this kid didn't us a bayonet and if he had a flash suppressor, it
served no real function in this particular usage of the weapon so why
would they ban those articles from the gun?

Has anyone ever used the bayonet mount in a mass shooting?

[Gunner]

Why would you think that? Im sure everyone here agrees that laws
preventing felons and the insane from owning firearms or weapons is a
very good thing.

Which leaves most Leftwingers unable to own weapons of any sort btw.

[Scout]

"ColdWarDinosaur" <wynnehenry!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message

news:kbpr65$lcu$1...@dont-email.me...

Nice straw man, do that much?

[Gunner]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 11:52:05 -0500, ColdWarDinosaur
<wynnehenry!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>>
>> How many Abortions were done by doctors, maybe we should ban all
>> doctors, they are the number one killer of children, more than guns cars
>> and 5 gallon buckets put together....
>
>Except that you have your own fucked up definition of murder. One that
>not even the Old or the New Testament or even Jesus mentioned. You are
>a demented lunatic.

So what is the definition of murder? According to most reference
sources:

mur·der (mûrdr)
n.
1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with
premeditated malice.
2. Slang Something that is very uncomfortable, difficult, or
hazardous: The rush hour traffic is murder.
3. A flock of crows. See Synonyms at flock1.
v. mur·dered, mur·der·ing, mur·ders
v.tr.
1. To kill (another human) unlawfully.
2. To kill brutally or inhumanly.
3. To put an end to; destroy: murdered their chances.

The big criteria is that "unlawful " portion.

Given that killing an unborn child via abortion is legal...then the
murders of 9 million Jews, Gypsies, gays and other groups was
Legal..then they really werent murdered were they?

>
>>
>> The most dangerous thing on the planet for a human life in the uterus is
>> a doctor.
>
>False.

Actually...the most dangerous thing on the planet is the medical
industry as a whole. Quite true indeed.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=deaths-from-avoidable-medical-error-2009-08-10

"Preventable medical mistakes and infections are responsible for about
200,000 deaths in the U.S. each year, according to an investigation by
the Hearst media corporation. The report comes 10 years after the
Institute of Medicine's "To Err Is Human" analysis,"

When that happens with a firearm...its called Negligent Homocide or
Manslaughter.

>
>> Disease in children was once the danger but now it's the Progressives
>> Medical industry.
>
>Please go and live in Iran or Pakistan, you'll fit right in.

Denial is not a river in Egypt.

Take your meds and go lay down for the rest of the day.

[Gunner]

By dying?

[Bill Shatzer]

Gunner wrote:

> On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 22:03:31 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
> wrote:
>
>
>>>No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact.
>>
>>Not even! In 2010 (the most recent year available) there were 32,885
>>motor vehicle fatalities and 31,513 firearm fatalities.
>>
>>IOW, just about 1:1 - and motor vehicle deaths are rather steadily
>>trending downwards while firearm fatalities are rather consistently rising.
>
>
> Ah..wrong.
>
> Firearms fatalities are falling and have been for 15 yrs.
>
> Now nearl all motor vehicle fatalities are the result of accident.
>
> Firearms fatalities are sometimes the result of accidents, but most
> often the result of intentional use.
>
> There were 11,101 firearms related fatalities in 2011.

There were that many fireqarm homicides alone!

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

> Of that number, 4,446 were suicides,, 4,852 unlawful homicides and
> the balance were lawful homicides visa vis self defense and so
> forth.

There were 11,000 gun -homicides- alone. Add in the suicides and the
"accidental" discharges and you're up to 31,500 firearm fatalities with
no problem.

"The CDC reports that 31,513 people in the U.S. died in 2010 from guns,
up from 31,347 the year before. Homicides involving guns were down
(11,105 in 2010 from 11,493 the year before), as were homicides
generally. Gun deaths from accidents and suicides accounted for the
overall increase. A gun is still nearly twice as likely to be used in a
successful suicide than in a homicide."

http://appliedrationality.blogspot.com/2012/01/gun-deaths-up-in-2010.html

> http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf

I can find NOTHING in your cite which supports your numbers.

> I dont know where you got your numbers from..but from the looks of
> it...you should have wiped your ass better when you were done.

Someone should have his ass whipped and it ain't me.

-irrational rant snipped -

peace and justice

[Bill Shatzer]

Wayne wrote:

>
>
> "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message news:kbolfk$mrv$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> ColdWarDinosaur wrote:
>
> - snip -
>
>>>> But then cars aren't designed to kill - it's misuse-use of the car
>>>> that leads to death. OTOH, using a gun the way it was
>>>> intended/designed leads to death. Tobacco companies argued in much
>>>> the same way about their product.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact.
>
>
>> Not even! In 2010 (the most recent year available) there were 32,885
>> motor vehicle fatalities and 31,513 firearm fatalities.
>
>
>> IOW, just about 1:1 - and motor vehicle deaths are rather steadily
>> trending downwards while firearm fatalities are rather consistently
>> rising.
>
>
>> We require that motor vehicles be registered, licensed and insured
>> while deadly firearms require none of these things.

> We could require that cellphones, computers, and cameras to be
> registered, licensed and insured.

We could, but why would we want to. Disregarding the ocassional
distracted cell phone user who walks in front of a bus, the fatality
rate for cell phones, computers, and cameras must approach or equal zero.

> Is that the kind of world you want to live in?

I've got no problem with registering my computer, cell phone, and
camera. Why would you?

Although, SFAIK, no one has suggested such a thing. When computers start
causing a significant number of fatalities, maybe it would be time to
consider such thing but 'til then, whatever would be the purpose and who
would want to.

>>> All the US needs
>>> is to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals and the insane and
>>> toughen up the penalties for allowing your guns to fall into the wrong
>>> hands if you have failed to control your weapons with due care and
>>> diligence.


>> What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza
>> for allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?

> No penalty whatsoever. Adam was the one doing all the crimes.

Then whatever did the OP mean when he proposed to "toughen up the
penalties for allowing your guns to fall into the wrong hands?

How could we "thoughen up" the penalties against Mrs. Lanza who
obviously allowed her guns to fall into the (very) wrong hands?

peace and justice,

[Bill Shatzer]

Her guns were obviously inadequately secured.

peace and justice,

[Gunner]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 20:48:57 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>

wrote:

>Gunner wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 22:03:31 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact.
>>>
>>>Not even! In 2010 (the most recent year available) there were 32,885
>>>motor vehicle fatalities and 31,513 firearm fatalities.
>>>
>>>IOW, just about 1:1 - and motor vehicle deaths are rather steadily
>>>trending downwards while firearm fatalities are rather consistently rising.
>>
>>
>> Ah..wrong.
>>
>> Firearms fatalities are falling and have been for 15 yrs.
>>
>> Now nearl all motor vehicle fatalities are the result of accident.
>>
>> Firearms fatalities are sometimes the result of accidents, but most
>> often the result of intentional use.
>>
>> There were 11,101 firearms related fatalities in 2011.
>
>There were that many fireqarm homicides alone!
>
>http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

Sorry..I gave you numbers from 2011. You keep posting numbers from
2009

Your list shows Homicide being #15 on causes of death. In 2011..its
not in the top 15.

>
>> Of that number, 4,446 were suicides,, 4,852 unlawful homicides and
>> the balance were lawful homicides visa vis self defense and so
>> forth.
>
>There were 11,000 gun -homicides- alone. Add in the suicides and the
>"accidental" discharges and you're up to 31,500 firearm fatalities with
>no problem.

Homicide means "humans dying by gun" Whether legitimately or
unlawfuly or by suicide..its a "homicide". If it was a murder..its an
Unlawful Homicide. It its a bad guy getting killed..its a Justifiable
Homicide.

I would think that you really really should go back to whatever school
you didnt take classes at and try again.

>
>"The CDC reports that 31,513 people in the U.S. died in 2010 from guns,
>up from 31,347 the year before. Homicides involving guns were down
>(11,105 in 2010 from 11,493 the year before), as were homicides
>generally. Gun deaths from accidents and suicides accounted for the
>overall increase. A gun is still nearly twice as likely to be used in a
>successful suicide than in a homicide."

See in your link...11,105 were homicides? Id work on that if I were
you.

>
>http://appliedrationality.blogspot.com/2012/01/gun-deaths-up-in-2010.html
>
>> http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf
>
>I can find NOTHING in your cite which supports your numbers.

I suggest you aquire a pug or pekinese and have him act as your guide
dog when out of your house, blind as you appear to be.

>
>> I dont know where you got your numbers from..but from the looks of
>> it...you should have wiped your ass better when you were done.
>
>Someone should have his ass whipped and it ain't me.

Want my address?
>
-irrational rant snipped -

As for where the numbers came from..

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr

A far more reliable data source than from the historically antigun
CDC.

Perhaps you were still sucking on the tit when the CDC was nailed to
the wall for their regular and fraudulant gun stats and then finally
admitted to "errors"

"CDC admits there is no evidence that gun control reduces crime. The
Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has long been criticized for
propagating questionable studies which gun control organizations have
used in defense of their cause. But after analyzing 51 studies in
2003, the CDC concluded that the "evidence was insufficient to
determine the effectiveness of any of these [firearms] laws."'

Yet you want everyone to believe CDC numbers? Few believe CDC numbers
when it comes to firearms..or just about anything else these
days..given how regularly wrong they are.

Google :"Cdc errors" 7.8 million hits
"cdc flawed" 780k hits

A single example

http://cdm16064.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p266901coll4/id/2443/rec/13

So dont come in here spewing CDC data as if it actually means
something.

Its so consistantly bogus, flawed and wrong...it simply shows you to
be an ignorant buffoon of the worst sort.

Gunner

[Gunner]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 21:06:05 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
wrote:

>

>> We could require that cellphones, computers, and cameras to be
>> registered, licensed and insured.
>
>We could, but why would we want to. Disregarding the ocassional
>distracted cell phone user who walks in front of a bus, the fatality
>rate for cell phones, computers, and cameras must approach or equal zero.

You truely are stupid..or simply ignorant.

2009 Cell Phone and Distracted Driving Statistics

In 2009, 5,474 people were killed in the U.S. because of accidents
that involved distracted driving. Another 448,000 were injured.
Of the 5,474 killed because of distracted driving, 995 involved
reports of a cell phone as a factor. However, the number of fatalities
caused by cell phone use could be much higher. For those who were
injured, 24,000 involved reports of cell phone use as a distraction.
The under-20 age group had the highest percentage of distracted
drivers; 16% of drivers under 20 years old involved in fatal crashes
were distracted while driving.
The 30- to 39-year-old age group had the highest percentage of
cell phone use in fatal crashes.
More people are driving while distracted when they are involved in
fatal crashes. The percentage of fatalities associated with distracted
drivers increased from 10% in 2005 to 16% in 2009.
In 2009, 867 fatal crashes were reported to have involved cell
phones as a means for driver distraction (18% of all fatal
distracted-driving crashes).

30 seconds search and most of that while waiting for the page to load.

[Gunner]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 21:08:47 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
wrote:

Define "adequatly secured"

Ill wait.

While Im waiting..Ill be browsing the number of safe crackings in
2010....


>
>peace and justice,
>
The only justice you can expect..will result in the peace of the
grave.

2013..will be an "interesting " year.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

>Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

>Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>>>Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>
>>
>>>What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza for
>>>allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?
>
>> How did she "allow" it?
>
>Her guns were obviously inadequately secured.

Why is it obvious? I haven't seen ANY details on how he got the guns.
Have you?

Are you saying it's impossible to get any gun that's "adequately
secured?"

[Gunner]

On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 02:38:47 -0800, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Correction. Homicide means "humans killed by other humans" I should
have caught that when I first wrote it. Sorry

[SaPeIsMa]

"ColdWarDinosaur" <wynnehenry!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message

news:kbn9to$eqt$2...@dont-email.me...

> On 12/29/2012 11:15 AM, Baxter wrote:
>> -
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> "ColdWarDinosaur" <wynnehenry!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:kbmpne$ja1$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> On 12/28/2012 6:08 PM, Loons jerk off daily on Sarah Palin book cover
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Fix the laws
>>>>
>>>> Where the sellers and manufactures of weapons are prosecuted too.
>>>
>>> Imagine Ford and Nissan being prosecuted for traffic accident deaths
>>> that are caused by the drivers of their cars. Are you some ambulance
>>> chasing attorney or something?
>>>

>> But then cars aren't designed to kill - it's misuse-use of the car that
>> leads to death. OTOH, using a gun the way it was intended/designed leads
>> to
>> death. Tobacco companies argued in much the same way about their
>> product.
>

> No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact. All the US needs

> is to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals and the insane and
> toughen up the penalties for allowing your guns to fall into the wrong
> hands if you have failed to control your weapons with due care and
> diligence.
>
>

You mean like the guy in Toronto, who was charged with negligent storage
when criminals had to work more than 2 days to get into his safe ??
Those kind of "penalties" ?
You're no better than the other shithead.

[SaPeIsMa]

"ColdWarDinosaur" <wynnehenry!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message

news:kbpr65$lcu$1...@dont-email.me...

I recognize that you're a shithead reduced to a strawman non-sequitur to
salve your ego after it was drop-kicked.

[SaPeIsMa]

"ColdWarDinosaur" <wynnehenry!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message

news:kbprg8$lcu$3...@dont-email.me...

> On 12/30/2012 11:44 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>> On 12/30/2012 9:05 AM, Gunner wrote:
>>> On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 22:03:31 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact.
>>>>
>>>> Not even! In 2010 (the most recent year available) there were 32,885
>>>> motor vehicle fatalities and 31,513 firearm fatalities.
>>>>
>>>> IOW, just about 1:1 - and motor vehicle deaths are rather steadily
>>>> trending downwards while firearm fatalities are rather consistently
>>>> rising.
>>>
>>> Ah..wrong.
>>>
>>> Firearms fatalities are falling and have been for 15 yrs.
>>>
>>> Now nearl all motor vehicle fatalities are the result of accident.
>>>
>>> Firearms fatalities are sometimes the result of accidents, but most
>>> often the result of intentional use.
>>
>> Like suicide, a part of the Liberal utopia.
>>
>>
>>
>> How many Abortions were done by doctors, maybe we should ban all
>> doctors, they are the number one killer of children, more than guns cars
>> and 5 gallon buckets put together....
>
> Except that you have your own fucked up definition of murder. One that
> not even the Old or the New Testament or even Jesus mentioned. You are
> a demented lunatic.
>

Actually the Old Testament does mention abortion and the penalty for it

>>
>> The most dangerous thing on the planet for a human life in the uterus is
>> a doctor.
>
> False.
>

Where abortion is allowed, that argument stands

>> Disease in children was once the danger but now it's the Progressives
>> Medical industry.
>
> Please go and live in Iran or Pakistan, you'll fit right in.
>

Nice weasel
Even nicer surrender.

[SaPeIsMa]

"Bill Shatzer" <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in message
news:kbr6fu$51n$1...@dont-email.me...

> Wayne wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message news:kbolfk$mrv$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>> ColdWarDinosaur wrote:
>>
>> - snip -
>>
>>>>> But then cars aren't designed to kill - it's misuse-use of the car
>>>>> that leads to death. OTOH, using a gun the way it was
>>>>> intended/designed leads to death. Tobacco companies argued in much
>>>>> the same way about their product.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact.
>>
>>
>>> Not even! In 2010 (the most recent year available) there were 32,885
>>> motor vehicle fatalities and 31,513 firearm fatalities.
>>
>>
>>> IOW, just about 1:1 - and motor vehicle deaths are rather steadily
>>> trending downwards while firearm fatalities are rather consistently
>>> rising.
>>
>>
>>> We require that motor vehicles be registered, licensed and insured while
>>> deadly firearms require none of these things.
>
>> We could require that cellphones, computers, and cameras to be
>> registered, licensed and insured.
>
> We could, but why would we want to. Disregarding the ocassional distracted
> cell phone user who walks in front of a bus, the fatality rate for cell
> phones, computers, and cameras must approach or equal zero.
>
>> Is that the kind of world you want to live in?
>
> I've got no problem with registering my computer, cell phone, and camera.
> Why would you?
>

Which just goes to show what a sheeple you are

> Although, SFAIK, no one has suggested such a thing. When computers start
> causing a significant number of fatalities, maybe it would be time to
> consider such thing but 'til then, whatever would be the purpose and who
> would want to.
>

Computers cause as many fatalities as cars or guns
NONE AT ALL
It's the PEOPLE misusing them that are responsible for the fatalities
Only children, animists and idiots blame inanimate objects for things that
happen.

[Bill Shatzer]

Gunner wrote:

> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 21:08:47 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
> wrote:

>>Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:

>>>>Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

>>>>What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza for
>>>>allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?

>>>How did she "allow" it?

>>Her guns were obviously inadequately secured.

> Define "adequatly secured"

Sufficiently secured that Adam Lanza couldn't get his hands on them and
shoot her (and 26 other people) dead.

> Ill wait.

No need.

> While Im waiting..Ill be browsing the number of safe crackings in
> 2010....

Whatever floats your boat.

peace and justice,

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

>Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

>Gunner wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 21:08:47 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
>> wrote:
>
>>>Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>>>>>Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>
>>>>>What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza for
>>>>>allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?
>
>>>>How did she "allow" it?
>
>>>Her guns were obviously inadequately secured.
>
>> Define "adequatly secured"
>
>Sufficiently secured

No, that doesn't cut it.

Try again...

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

>Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

>> While Im waiting..Ill be browsing the number of safe crackings in
>> 2010....

How about 2012?

https://www.google.com/search?q=safe+stolen&oq=safe+stolen&aqs=chrome.0.57j60l3.2963&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

[RD Sandman]

Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in

news:kbt16b$tui$1...@dont-email.me:

> Gunner wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 21:08:47 -0800, Bill Shatzer
>> <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
>
>>>Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>>>>>Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>
>>>>>What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza
>>>>>for allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?
>
>>>>How did she "allow" it?
>
>>>Her guns were obviously inadequately secured.
>
>> Define "adequatly secured"
>
> Sufficiently secured that Adam Lanza couldn't get his hands on them
> and shoot her (and 26 other people) dead.

Which would have been how in your opinion? Or were just offering up a
platitude?



--
Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman

If law school is so hard to get through....
how come there are so many lawyers?

[Gunner]

On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:47:54 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>

wrote:

>Gunner wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 21:08:47 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
>> wrote:
>
>>>Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>>>>>Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>
>>>>>What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza for
>>>>>allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?
>
>>>>How did she "allow" it?
>
>>>Her guns were obviously inadequately secured.
>
>> Define "adequatly secured"
>
>Sufficiently secured that Adam Lanza couldn't get his hands on them and
>shoot her (and 26 other people) dead.
>

So she should have encapsulated them in concrete and then dropped them
in the Marianas Trench in your opinion then?

>> Ill wait.
>
>No need.

Still waiting.

>
>> While Im waiting..Ill be browsing the number of safe crackings in
>> 2010....
>
>Whatever floats your boat.
>

>peace and justice, a lie Lefwings tell about themselves.

Gunner

[Gunner]

that one lifted out through the roof of the seafood joint is
fascinating.

78 Million hits.

Where is that "sufficently secured" guy again?

Gunner

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

>Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

>On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:53:36 -0800, Klaus Schadenfreude
><klausscha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>>Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>
>>
>>>> While Im waiting..Ill be browsing the number of safe crackings in
>>>> 2010....
>>
>>
>>How about 2012?
>>
>>https://www.google.com/search?q=safe+stolen&oq=safe+stolen&aqs=chrome.0.57j60l3.2963&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
>
>
>that one lifted out through the roof of the seafood joint is
>fascinating.
>
>78 Million hits.
>
>Where is that "sufficently secured" guy again?

It's OK. All those stolen safes are at the landfill, unopened.

[clw]

In article <kbt16b$tui$1...@dont-email.me>,

Perhaps the idiot will regale us with a list of the people killed during
a safe cracking.

[Gunner]

Which idiot would that be? As for me..I know of 2 that died trying to
crack safes..and know of a number that were killed by the robbers
stealing safes

[RD Sandman]

Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:ip74e8topch8g8b39...@4ax.com:

> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:47:54 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
> wrote:
>
>>Gunner wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 21:08:47 -0800, Bill Shatzer
>>> <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>>Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>
>>>>>>Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>
>>>>>>What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy
>>>>>>Lanza for allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?
>>
>>>>>How did she "allow" it?
>>
>>>>Her guns were obviously inadequately secured.
>>
>>> Define "adequatly secured"
>>
>>Sufficiently secured that Adam Lanza couldn't get his hands on them
>>and shoot her (and 26 other people) dead.
>>
> So she should have encapsulated them in concrete and then dropped them
> in the Marianas Trench in your opinion then?

LOL!! I hadn't thought of that one.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 15:56:04 -0600, Loon Scare: Agenda 21
<lo...@asdasd.com> wrote in
Message-ID: <50de1571$0$10360$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>

> Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National
>Firearms Act, to include:
> Background check of owner and any transferee;
> Type and serial number of the firearm;
> Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
> Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that
>possession would not violate State or local law; and

There is the camels nose under the tent. The start of a universal gun
registry that will expand by bits to include slingshots and rubber
bands. When they have their list, confiscation will begin.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 12/31/2012 10:22 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
> Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:ip74e8topch8g8b39...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:47:54 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Gunner wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 21:08:47 -0800, Bill Shatzer
>>>> <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>
>>>>>>> What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy
>>>>>>> Lanza for allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?
>>>
>>>>>> How did she "allow" it?
>>>
>>>>> Her guns were obviously inadequately secured.
>>>
>>>> Define "adequatly secured"
>>>
>>> Sufficiently secured that Adam Lanza couldn't get his hands on them
>>> and shoot her (and 26 other people) dead.
>>>
>> So she should have encapsulated them in concrete and then dropped them
>> in the Marianas Trench in your opinion then?
>
> LOL!! I hadn't thought of that one.
>

Before you give 55% of any of your wealth to the government as a death
tax, you should take a trip to the Marianas trench and throw every penny
you have into the deepest ocean and laugh....


If half of us do that then Obama and democrats are fucked.... they'll
get zero increased revenue from that tax increase. The ideal thing is
that rather than leaving a penny behind, you should make sure you use
your last dollar by the day you die and screw the government.

Drugs and hookers are tax exempt because they are illegal. That's a
good choice.

Or leave the country and spend all you have while on your last voyage.

Die in poverty. Buy a billion in gold and drop it one piece at a time
in the deepest ocean.

Even when they can get it, it will cost nearly as much as it's worth to
find and salvage it.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 12/31/2012 4:47 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
> Gunner wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 21:08:47 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
>> wrote:
>
>>> Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>>>>> Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>
>>>>> What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza
>>>>> for allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?
>
>>>> How did she "allow" it?
>
>>> Her guns were obviously inadequately secured.
>
>> Define "adequatly secured"
>
> Sufficiently secured that Adam Lanza couldn't get his hands on them and
> shoot her (and 26 other people) dead.

And you hold the same standard for car keys and installing windows that
won't break in cars so no one can steal them and joy ride and kill
people....?


How about drugs? Is it your fault?


how about nitrogen or your cleaning solutions or ammonia and grease that
are used to make explosives. Should you lock your cleaning supplies??



How about your car and the 20 gal of gas that will make a bunch of
bombs? Should you lock up that gasoline every night.


Someone could steal your gas tonight with a pocket knife and some pans.
They don't care if your gas tank is ruined and it costs you $400 to
get a new gas tank installed. They'll have he gasoline to use to make
their bombs.

You know they can get hydrogen, and it's very explosive..... from tap
water?

*IS YOUR TAP WATER ALL LOCKED AWAY*

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 12/31/2012 4:47 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:

> Gunner wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 21:08:47 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
>> wrote:
>
>>> Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>>>>> Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>
>>>>> What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza
>>>>> for allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?
>
>>>> How did she "allow" it?
>
>>> Her guns were obviously inadequately secured.
>
>> Define "adequatly secured"
>
> Sufficiently secured that Adam Lanza couldn't get his hands on them and
> shoot her (and 26 other people) dead.

And you hold the same standard for car keys and installing windows that
won't break in cars so no one can steal them and joy ride and kill
people....?


How about drugs? Is it your fault?


how about nitrogen or your cleaning solutions or ammonia and grease that
are used to make explosives. Should you lock your cleaning supplies??



How about your car and the 20 gal of gas that will make a bunch of
bombs? Should you lock up that gasoline every night.


Someone could steal your gas tonight with a pocket knife and some pans.
They don't care if your gas tank is ruined and it costs you $400 to
get a new gas tank installed. They'll have he gasoline to use to make
their bombs.

You know they can get hydrogen, and it's very explosive..... from tap
water?

*IS YOUR TAP WATER ALL LOCKED AWAY*

It would seem the *WISE* thing to do is to protect "the target" and that
way you stop all of these potential weapons including guns from being used.


Do they ban ONLY people with guns from accessing the President of the
USA or do they ban everyone and set up a security system that limits any
access and then only allow access on a limited as needed basis?



The Socialist approach to Security of making everyone guilty is a
failure, as is all of Socialism.

[Scout]

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
message news:50E2DA67...@blackhole.nebulax.com...

> On 12/31/2012 10:22 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:ip74e8topch8g8b39...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:47:54 -0800, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Gunner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 21:08:47 -0800, Bill Shatzer
>>>>> <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>>
>>>>>>>> What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy
>>>>>>>> Lanza for allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?
>>>>
>>>>>>> How did she "allow" it?
>>>>
>>>>>> Her guns were obviously inadequately secured.
>>>>
>>>>> Define "adequatly secured"
>>>>
>>>> Sufficiently secured that Adam Lanza couldn't get his hands on them
>>>> and shoot her (and 26 other people) dead.
>>>>
>>> So she should have encapsulated them in concrete and then dropped them
>>> in the Marianas Trench in your opinion then?
>>
>> LOL!! I hadn't thought of that one.
>>
>
>
>
> Before you give 55% of any of your wealth to the government as a death
> tax, you should take a trip to the Marianas trench and throw every penny
> you have into the deepest ocean and laugh....

Na, all you have to do is arrange things such that any wealth you have
already belongs to your heirs.

For example. Your house.

You can 'sell' it to your children with the provision you have a lifelong
unconditional lease.

They own it on paper, but in every other way that matters it's still your
property.

Virtually everything you have can be handled in such a way to minimize or
eliminate the 'death tax'.

Do a search on how to avoid death or inheritance taxes.

It does take prior planning and you have to insure adequate safe guards
exist to protect your interests while you're alive, but there are plenty of
ways to all but eliminate having to submit to this tax.

[RD Sandman]

"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
news:kbvvkc$ak5$1...@dont-email.me:

Or you can make it part of an estate and make them the executors of the
estate if you have passed on.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

You trust your insane heirs to use your money?



The Libs say you need to stop people from inheriting so much money, so
they will have to work like the rest of us......


But then shouldn't we do the same to Government and quit gifting our
wealth to government at death and make the government work for the money
they get rather than sitting back and wasting their government life and
energy having it easy by spending my money?


I think the government needs to go out and work hard to get the money
that they need to run the government, and to that end you should trow
all your money in the form of gold and silver and other commodities into
the deepest oceans. By making the government work to get their money
rather than collecting it at my death, means they aren't sitting on
their ass letting the country go to hell, they need a raging economy to
get enough tax on incomes to keep themselves getting a paycheck.


*FUCK THE GOVERNMENT*

[ColdWarDinosaur]

On 12/30/2012 12:33 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:

> On 12/30/2012 11:46 AM, ColdWarDinosaur wrote:
>> On 12/29/2012 1:19 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>>> On 12/29/2012 12:39 PM, ColdWarDinosaur wrote:
>>>> On 12/29/2012 11:15 AM, Baxter wrote:
>>>>> -
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>

>>>>> "ColdWarDinosaur" <wynnehenry!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message

>>>>> news:kbmpne$ja1$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> On 12/28/2012 6:08 PM, Loons jerk off daily on Sarah Palin book cover
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fix the laws
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where the sellers and manufactures of weapons are prosecuted too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Imagine Ford and Nissan being prosecuted for traffic accident deaths
>>>>>> that are caused by the drivers of their cars. Are you some ambulance
>>>>>> chasing attorney or something?
>>>>>>

>>>>> But then cars aren't designed to kill - it's misuse-use of the car that
>>>>> leads to death. OTOH, using a gun the way it was intended/designed leads to
>>>>> death. Tobacco companies argued in much the same way about their product.
>>>>

>>>> No, but they kill way more than guns do! 5:1 in fact. All the US needs

>>>> is to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals and the insane and
>>>> toughen up the penalties for allowing your guns to fall into the wrong
>>>> hands if you have failed to control your weapons with due care and
>>>> diligence.
>>>
>>>
>>>

>>> So they can allow guns to be stolen (as the government does now) and
>>> then have a government exchange for weapons to give people gift cards in
>>> exchange for the stolen weapon and the government is essentially
>>> contributing to the stealing of your weapon since they don't return them
>>> to their rightful owners that reported them stolen.....?
>>>
>>> So you want the government to set the guidelines by which you can engage
>>> in your right and then remove that right all together when you fail to
>>> meet their government preconditions they set for your rights?
>>>
>>>
>>> Isn't this a little like FAST AND FURIOUS gun running that was supposed
>>> to get the people calling for Obama to limit/restrict gun sales?
>>>
>>> The government creates the problem and then to fix the problem they
>>> intended to create, they limit your rights the way they have been
>>> wanting to limit your rights for 100 years?
>>
>> I recognize that you want NO laws or rules covering gun ownership and
>> that makes you as loony as Adam Lanza to me.
>>
>>
>
>

> Except you're the one on the meds, telling the rest of the world they're
> crazy.
>
> What's it like to be "the only sane person" on an entire planet, is it
> like the "Omega Man"?
>
> The FBI should be tracking you with an ankle bracelet since your
> medication has you believing those voices in your head telling you that
> you're on the outside of the fence looking in at the psych patients,
> when reality says it's the other way around. That pleasant little gun
> free world you're living in.... it was artificially created for people
> like you, by mental health professionals.
>
> Crazy people aren't held accountable for their activity.... so the
> responsibility falls to the government that is "SANE" and failed in
> every way and was so incompetent "NOT INSANE" that the government
> allowed 20 children to be murdered with so few obstacles that a crazy
> kid managed to escape all detection.
>
>
> If it's unconstitutional to ban guns (and it is) then at least ban crazy
> people from getting into schools where the government forces children to
> congregate.
>
>
> The common thread in VA Tech and the Theater and this CT school is the
> crazy people that were seeing a shrink for their problems and they were
> mainstreamed and allowed access to places and doors that should have
> been more closely maintained and secure, in short it was a lack of
> security that could have kept them out had that security been in place.
>
> The gun free zones those people entered voluntarily or forced by
> government, was essentially entering a suicide pact that said if someone
> crazy with a gun comes into where we are then we will all die without
> defending themselves.
>
>
> We do have terrorists that do these things that government is already
> tracking down.... why no security to guard against that? It was
> government incompetence and from the top down with Homeland security
> being a major disappointment in the government that was supposed to
> prevent these type of killings.
>
> Since Obama says there are no terrorists... why not call them all
> insane people and lump them in with the crazy people that do it for fun.
> If there was no guards to stop crazy kids what was there to stop
> terrorists? And how do we know that this kid was not contacting an
> online terrorist like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_al-Zawahiri
> Who told him to do this as happened with the FORT HOOD SHOOTER?
>
>
> Why did this kids erase his hard drive at home before this killing spree?
>
>
No, we have the DSM and Psychiatrists to tell us who is loony. Lanza
clearly was. Are you a guns store owner or something?

--
~~
HW
__________________
The GOP Claim TO Be Christian but:
Are Capitalist Extremists.
Support Law of the Jungle, Survival of the Richest.
Are Racists.
Are Pro-War.
Are Pro-Torture.
Are Pro-Execution.
Are Pro-Money-lender.
Despise Human Rights.
Despise The Poor.
Despise Women.
Despise the Disabled.
They appear to be against everything Jesus stood for.
Who are these people really??

[Scout]

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[remove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA13C534BC...@216.196.97.131...

I believe in that case the death tax still kicks in, since it's still an
inheritance.

[Scout]

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
message news:50E4BCB6...@blackhole.nebulax.com...

Use? No.

Have them be able to get it after my death without paying through the ass in
taxes?

Yes.

After all, absolutely nothing says that you can't take action to minimize or
eliminate any tax burden.

If you CHOSE to be fucked over by the government and have them bleed away
the bulk of the wealth you would leave your heirs....then who's fault is
that?

> The Libs say you need to stop people from inheriting so much money, so
> they will have to work like the rest of us......

And we certainly see how many of the rich liberals are giving all their
wealth to charity upon their deaths.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

Do you work for an enemy of our constitution? The second amendment is
part of the constitution and regardless of whether "you" like it, our
second amendment deserves the equal protection and defense as any other
part of the constitution. Until it's no longer part of the constitution.

What kind of car did Lanza use in this murder spree, should that model
car be banned? Who's car was it, and should they be charged with
conspiracy to murder since the keys weren't locked up with the gun? Why
don't we get any information as to the other people that were connected?
How did Lanza the mentally ill kid manage to kill 26 people in only 5
minutes, that means he killed one person every 12 seconds on average and
that is better than I think the SEALS did at the Ben Laden Raid managed
to do.....

Did Obama and his movie about killing Bin Laden manage to spark this
kids interest in this school raid. It looks like a Paramilitary Raid
where Terrorists may have used the internet or some other clandestine
path to coach this kid to commit the crime.

Manipulating a retarded kid or Socially retarded kid, would probably not
be all that hard.





--



*Rumination*
#40 - The truth is always the truth, it doesn't matter if it's
discovered by accident or by genius, it's always the truth.

[RD Sandman]

"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in news:kc2i4c
$1gv$1...@dont-email.me:

Yes, but the death tax is on a rather high number. How much of an estate
do you plan on leaving? The current exemption is $5M. After that it is
taxed by amount received. Assume 6 people or 6 shares and a $11M estate.
The first $5M is exempted, Each share would then be worth $1M. The
amount of tax would be $345K on that $1M......the first 1/6th of the $5M
being essentially free. On a $4.5M estate it would be essentially tax
free.

[SaPeIsMa]

"Gunner" <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fpg1e8d2k2e6d48t6...@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 11:52:05 -0500, ColdWarDinosaur
> <wynnehenry!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Except that you have your own fucked up definition of murder. One that
>not even the Old or the New Testament or even Jesus mentioned. You are
>a demented lunatic.
>

Really ?

You need to read up on the 10 Commandments, dummy
The original text reads
"Thou shall not murder"
I believe it was the King James Bible that came up with the "Thou shall not
kill" translation.

[SaPeIsMa]

"Bill Shatzer" <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in message
news:kbr6kv$51n$2...@dont-email.me...

> Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>>>Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>
>>
>>>What penalty would you propose could be imposed against Nancy Lanza for
>>>allowing her son Adam to get his hands on her guns?
>
>> How did she "allow" it?
>
> Her guns were obviously inadequately secured.
>

> peace and justice,
>
>

"Obviously"
There have been no reports yet on how she stored her guns

Apparently you are of the same school as the Toronto Police who charged a
gun owner with "unsafe storage" even though the police reported that the
burglars had to work over 2 days to get into his safe.