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

texasmomof3

(108 posts)
26. it's the indian not the arrows
Sat Nov 3, 2012, 10:25 AM
Nov 2012

A gun, knife, rope, bat, pillow, wrench or any thing else has never ever committed murder by itself. By the way, what do you do about kitchen knives or box cutters or scissors? All possible weapons. I have a lamp too that might work. I would think anyone "unsafe" to own a gun probably needs all of these other things taken out of their homes as well. Who decides and on what scale who is safe and unsafe? Who determines "bad guy" behavior. There are some people that feel that spanking children is abuse. If I spank my children should I be restricted from owning anything that could be a weapon because those who determine such things are against spanking? Because my family enjoys hunting that is seen by some as anger or abuse of animals therefore I might be a hidden criminal? Better yet, what if I enjoy target practice or shooting clay as a sport. Does that make me more likely to hurt someone with a gun because I love hitting the target and find it relaxing? Maybe the fact that I have 3 cups of coffee every morning and am "jacked up on caffeine" makes me unstable. Seriously who determines the "bad guy" behavior and based on what?

Maybe let's even go for people who drink because alcohol makes you very unstable and can bring out anger that might be simmering under the surface. Lot's of crimes are committed when alcohol is present. How do you want to determine that one? Should every body only be allowed 1 drink a night particularly in their own homes because that is where many crimes with guns occur? There are lots of bar fights too so let's limit that as well. How do you want to enforce that? Cameras maybe or a breath test before you go to bed every night? Maybe surprise door to door visits by the "hidden criminal" task force would help monitor potentially dangerous situations. Aww, hell lets just go ahead and be watched 24/7 for any and all behavior that could lead to any kind of harm. The catch is YOU have to do it too. I know, I know you consider yourself a good guy but in fairness to all of your fellow citizens and so as not to appear racist everyone needs to be monitored equally. We don't want any profiling based on gender, education, economics, race, sexual orientation now do we?

I think the idea of labeling "hidden criminals" is a dangerous one. The presumption of guilt or future guilt goes against everything our justice system stands for. This is the real issue with your line of thinking, the presumption of future guilt. You are basically convicting people before they do anything. Would putting them on a watch list make you feel better? What do you want to base that on? Who and how will you enforce it? Would "hidden criminals" be turned away at Home Depot when they try to buy a shovel for yard work? How do you know that everything in your life is considered good and not dangerous in any way by whoever makes these decisions? You are foolish to think that given the ability to restrict people based on possible future crimes won't bite you right in the ass one day too! Welcome to the soviet union, comrade.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

-1 darkangel218 Nov 2012 #1
The "bad guys" are not in the system. The "bad guys" obtain weapons from many sources. geckosfeet Nov 2012 #2
As soon as you can quantify "many" then we can talk hack89 Nov 2012 #3
Isnt it Meta where you go and complain about locked threads? darkangel218 Nov 2012 #4
I figured I'd keep it "in the family". DanTex Nov 2012 #5
Im not the host of this group, i trust they know what theyre doing. darkangel218 Nov 2012 #9
Yes it should be glacierbay Nov 2012 #10
I think they're tired of him, lol. nt Union Scribe Nov 2012 #73
We all know why you're starting this thread glacierbay Nov 2012 #6
It's "you're". DanTex Nov 2012 #7
No it's not glacierbay Nov 2012 #11
LOL. Priceless! Definitely gonna bookmark this one! DanTex Nov 2012 #12
My mistake glacierbay Nov 2012 #15
LOL. So you thought my post #7 was referencing your post #10? DanTex Nov 2012 #18
Look right above post 6 genius. glacierbay Nov 2012 #23
LOL. Look at your post #11 -- you spelled it "your" again. DanTex Nov 2012 #25
Because the rules of engagement require no admission of error. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #27
Ohhhhhhhhhhh glacierbay Nov 2012 #30
I purposely left it like that so you would have glacierbay Nov 2012 #29
Ah, the good ol' "I did it on purpose"!!! DanTex Nov 2012 #31
Yep. nt. glacierbay Nov 2012 #36
Is this the kick you were looking for this morning? darkangel218 Nov 2012 #17
PS. It's "grammar". DanTex Nov 2012 #13
Wow glacierbay Nov 2012 #16
You gotta admit, "I certainly don't need a grammer lesson from you" is pretty funny... DanTex Nov 2012 #19
Let me guess glacierbay Nov 2012 #24
Host cant lock it if it's on topic. nt rrneck Nov 2012 #61
Well before this one gets locked too... Clames Nov 2012 #8
There is no way the original post (not this op) was not in the sop. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #32
well, well--look who makes the rare appearence to GC&RKBA Tuesday Afternoon Nov 2012 #40
You all have nothing but personal attacks. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #43
How did he attack you? He even called you Mr :) darkangel218 Nov 2012 #46
He? Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #48
She then? darkangel218 Nov 2012 #50
Post removed Post removed Nov 2012 #14
It shouldn't have been locked. He expresses his opinion, you express yours. DanTex Nov 2012 #20
It got locked for good reason(s). Clames Nov 2012 #35
The gungeon is not a safe haven for pro-gun people. DanTex Nov 2012 #42
It's not a safe haven for wannabe troll hunters... Clames Nov 2012 #52
I expect that's what he's gonna do glacierbay Nov 2012 #21
LMAO!!!! darkangel218 Nov 2012 #22
it's the indian not the arrows texasmomof3 Nov 2012 #26
Outstanding post!!!!!!!!! glacierbay Nov 2012 #34
The Soviet Union? LOL. You're going to fit right in with the extremists in here! DanTex Nov 2012 #37
Google Switzerland and gun laws texasmomof3 Nov 2012 #49
Switzerland does not have the lowest gun crime rate in the world. DanTex Nov 2012 #54
And the answer is? Clames Nov 2012 #51
Posts like this should be rec'd on their own. Clames Nov 2012 #38
Welcome! discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2012 #44
The real point... discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2012 #28
Minority Report At Your Service. Locking. Tuesday Afternoon Nov 2012 #33
The Precogs are never wrong. But, occasionally... they do disagree. n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2012 #41
I assume it was locked because... krispos42 Nov 2012 #39
You're kidding. You are actually supporting the locking? DanTex Nov 2012 #45
Then I suggest we review all locked OPs because I think I have had several that Tuesday Afternoon Nov 2012 #47
No, it doesn't deal with gun control laws. krispos42 Nov 2012 #59
Of course it does. DanTex Nov 2012 #60
YOUR post does krispos42 Nov 2012 #64
So what law(s) would you propose to allow the background check oneshooter Nov 2012 #65
The Astute Reader(TM) will note that DanTex put this thread up just so he could whine about it... slackmaster Nov 2012 #74
You would be correct. shadowrider Nov 2012 #55
Just a pile of flamebait in the RKBA group today. What's the deal? nt rDigital Nov 2012 #53
That's exactly what it is. nt. glacierbay Nov 2012 #56
OH THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS SIMPLE fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #57
Locking shadowrider Nov 2012 #58
A background check is NEVER GOING TO CATCH EVERYONE. Atypical Liberal Nov 2012 #62
Not exactly russ1943 Nov 2012 #67
That is really not the point of Kates' work. Atypical Liberal Nov 2012 #68
It was exactly my point in posting. russ1943 Nov 2012 #69
under federal law gejohnston Nov 2012 #70
Are you drunk or high? russ1943 Nov 2012 #71
Not at all, gejohnston Nov 2012 #72
You are right. Atypical Liberal Nov 2012 #75
Dan, are you suggesting using something other than purely objective criteria to determine... slackmaster Nov 2012 #63
Guilty until proven innocent? Straw Man Nov 2012 #66
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Many gun owners are hidde...»Reply #26