4 firefighters shot, 2 dead, after responding to blaze

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Don't know about Texas, but my Air Force base has a gun counter, and the ones I work at in Utah, and Florida sell them also. Caveat - they are about sold out of everything since the panic buy started.

I would imagine Army posts have them also, since it is all part of AAFES.

Here in Scott, they don't sell them on base, you would have to go outside for that. They do have a shooting range here on base though.

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

The second quote is particularly weak. Last I checked, parents are responsible for the actions of their minor children. Now, we can argue about the age to which that extends fully but I believe that the responsibility for an 11 year old going to school with daddy's gun in his backpack is 100% on daddy and 0% on the kid. So, it's daddy - the lawful owner of the lawfully obtained firearm - the good, law-abiding gun owner as everyone would call him whose second amendment rights are to be respected above all else that all of a sudden isn't all that law abiding anymore. Is it the course of the law to seize his firearms and ban him from ever owning any in the future? Of course not. That could actually save lives. Who would want that?

As to the first quote - gun shows and internet firearms sales are legal venues that openly invite, foster and enable illegal gun trades. Everyone knows it and yet, nothing is done about it. Again, lives could be saved if we were to put away with these venues but we don't care to save lives.

you asked if one committed burglary - that's up to the lawyers to determine. said kiddo broke the law by taking it.

Don't know about Texas, but my Air Force base has a gun counter, and the ones I work at in Utah, and Florida sell them also. Caveat - they are about sold out of everything since the panic buy started.

I would imagine Army posts have them also, since it is all part of AAFES.

ft leavenworth does too - and it's all sold out.

[SMOKE 1,426]

Hopefully that will change very soon.

i hope so. i'm gonna make a fortune selling reloads.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

you asked if one committed burglary - that's up to the lawyers to determine.

I did not ask. I stated that no burglary was committed. You can't really burglarize your own residence.

said kiddo broke the law by taking it.

Said kiddo is 11 years old. The reponsibility falls on the parent who - at a minimum - failed to prevent access to the gun. Of course, this happened in Utah and there's no obligation placed on a parent to prevent a child from having access to firearms.

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

I did not ask. I stated that no burglary was committed. You can't really burglarize your own residence.

so what legal term would you apply to someone in this case, where they are prohibited by law from possessing it yet they did so anyways?

Said kiddo is 11 years old. The reponsibility falls on the parent who - at a minimum - failed to prevent access to the gun. Of course, this happened in Utah and there's no obligation placed on a parent to prevent a child from having access to firearms.

how would you know the parents didn't? i saw a news report about the sandy hook shooter - those firearms were secured, yet he defeated the locking mechanism.

[Teddy B 17,252]

so what legal term would you apply to someone in this case, where they are prohibited by law from possessing it yet they did so anyways?

how would you know the parents didn't? i saw a news report about the sandy hook shooter - those firearms were secured, yet he defeated the locking mechanism.

"Defeated the locking mechanism"? You mean he had the combination to the gun safe? Lanza used to take the guns and go shooting at the range on his own, without the Mother. He had easy access to the guns.

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

"Defeated the locking mechanism"? You mean he had the combination to the gun safe? Lanza used to take the guns and go shooting at the range on his own, without the Mother. He had easy access to the guns.

the news report wasn't specific.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Hopefully that will change very soon.

What part of the 2nd amendment allows the people to acquire whatever weapons they see fit?

you know that whole 'right to bear arms' part.

If you want to be technical, go to an armory. Anything and everything in that armory is protected under the constitution for individuals to have and to carry. Including RPGs, Hand Grenades, Smoke, Flashbangs, etc...

[Teddy B 17,252]

you know that whole 'right to bear arms' part.

If you want to be technical, go to an armory. Anything and everything in that armory is protected under the constitution for individuals to have and to carry. Including RPGs, Hand Grenades, Smoke, Flashbangs, etc...

That whole "right to bear arms" part is not specific as to what arms one can bear, it can be and has been changed in the past.

Really? RPG's and hand grenades are protected under the constitution for individual citizens to carry? Whose constitution? Cause it's certainly not the US constitution.

Edited December 26, 2012 by Teddy B

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

you know that whole 'right to bear arms' part.

If you want to be technical, go to an armory. Anything and everything in that armory is protected under the constitution for individuals to have and to carry. Including RPGs, Hand Grenades, Smoke, Flashbangs, etc...

Edited December 26, 2012 by Bad_Daddy

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

so what legal term would you apply to someone in this case, where they are prohibited by law from possessing it yet they did so anyways?

Well, if that someone was prohibited by law from having firearms, then I would think that a lawful owner of firearms that the person shares a residence with should make damn sure that no access to these firearms is possible. The "responsible gun owner" failed miserably on that end and 20 children didn't make it past their 6th and 7th birthdays and 6 educators were snuffed out because of that lawful gun owner who fell short in her responsibility. The legal term I would apply is accessory to a mass homicide.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

how would you know the parents didn't? i saw a news report about the sandy hook shooter - those firearms were secured, yet he defeated the locking mechanism.

That means these firearms were less secure than they needed to be, doesn't it? As for the 11 year old kid in Utah - what part of parents bearing responsibility for the actions of their children is so hard to understand? What is it with right wingers talking a good game on personal responsibility but always declining to ever take any? Walk the talk.

[Harsh_77 718]

That means these firearms were less secure than they needed to be, doesn't it? As for the 11 year old kid in Utah - what part of parents bearing responsibility for the actions of their children is so hard to understand? What is it with right wingers talking a good game on personal responsibility but always declining to ever take any? Walk the talk.

Locking up the firearm is not always the wise choice but as a parent there are simple things that can be done when you have guns present in the house and kids at the sametime.

Like keeping the gun unloaded, keeping the magazine out of the firearm, educating the children that weapons are not toys etc.

Also as a parent it should be their responsibility to know what their kids are upto is the most important thing.

[Dakine10 5,452]

you know that whole 'right to bear arms' part.

If you want to be technical, go to an armory. Anything and everything in that armory is protected under the constitution for individuals to have and to carry. Including RPGs, Hand Grenades, Smoke, Flashbangs, etc...

The reason the "right to bear arms" part is very broad is because the "well regulated militia" part is very specific. The regulated militia is well defined in the constitution, and before that in the articles of confederation.

Unfortunately that part seems to be conveniently forgotten in the discussion. There was never an intent for ex-felons, teenagers, and people with mental health issues to have access to firearms. There was never an intent for people to own guns without knowing how to use them, or leave them lying around carelessly for anyone to pick up and use.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

The reason the "right to bear arms" part is very broad is because the "well regulated militia" part is very specific. The regulated militia is well defined in the constitution, and before that in the articles of confederation.

Unfortunately that part seems to be conveniently forgotten in the discussion. There was never an intent for ex-felons, teenagers, and people with mental health issues to have access to firearms. There was never an intent for people to own guns without knowing how to use them, or leave them lying around carelessly for anyone to pick up and use.

If an ex felon wants their gun rights back they can go to court. As far as teenagers having access to guns...; a lot of us had several guns before we turned age 13. Age 18 to join the military.