Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Guns, Carried Openly or Concealed, Threaten Our Safety [View all]Straw Man
(6,958 posts)93. I love it when you talk dirty.
I'm the one constantly trying to educate people around here to the fact that there is a right to a driver's licence ... and constantly being told it's a privilege. R.O.F.L.
The published criteria and standard test are not "be 16 and have no criminal record". The basic driver's licence test comes first. Then the training course. Then the special driver's licence. Then the whole job interview process, probation, on the job training ... Just like for carrying a gun around in public in the US!!!
The published criteria and standard test are not "be 16 and have no criminal record". The basic driver's licence test comes first. Then the training course. Then the special driver's licence. Then the whole job interview process, probation, on the job training ... Just like for carrying a gun around in public in the US!!!
Nice dodge, but the issue wasn't what criteria exist, but whether the issuing body has complete discretionary authority to disregard the criteria and deny the applicant, as they do in "may issue" states. But thanks for playing.
I urge you again to find a dictionary.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/oversight
Let's see: a : watchful and responsible care b : regulatory supervision
OK, sounds to me as if there's oversight. Oh, you don't agree that it's sufficiently "watchful" and "responsible"? Well, that would be an opinion, wouldn't it? And the last time I checked, opinions don't have the status of facts.
It's possible you'll need to look up "equivocation", too.
Oh, goody! We're playing "Word of the Day"! Shall I also look up "adumbrate," "fractious," and "querulous"? Learning is such fun!
Perhaps you had a point you wished to make?
Yeah. Especially if nobody knows about the mental illness or catches you committing that crime ...
So we're back to prescient law enforcement as the sine qua non. Whatever floats your little authoritarian boat.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
134 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"the murder itself would be extremely unlikely to have been committed absent a firearm"
rl6214
Apr 2012
#29
And you have proof that the " facts and figures" put put by the RCMP are reliable?
oneshooter
Apr 2012
#81
Sorry - didn't realize you supported the public ownership of handguns and other weapons. Sorry. nt
hack89
Apr 2012
#101
So the "actual rate of death and injury" due to drunk drivers is low enough to be acceptable
hack89
Apr 2012
#114
So it is not about facts or evidence but simply "feelings"? At least you are honest about it. nt
hack89
Apr 2012
#116
In many areas LE is required to be armed. They are actually considered to be "on duty" 24-7.
oneshooter
Apr 2012
#39
Well good for you. If you don't want a question answered, then don't ask it.
oneshooter
Apr 2012
#50
In the US federal law mandates that they be allowed to carry at all times.
AtheistCrusader
Apr 2012
#95