Gun Politics

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 20333
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Skinypupy »

Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:00 pm
LordMortis wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 4:30 pm Delta doesn't back off...

http://time.com/5182755/delta-airlines- ... a-georgia/
Delta Air Lines CEO Ed Bastian issued a company-wide memo Friday addressing the recent fallout between the carrier and the National Rifle Association in the wake of the deadly Parkland, Fla. school shooting.

Bastian, who opted to end Delta’s discount program for NRA members as online petitions urged companies to boycott the group, said in the memo sent to employees that Delta was not trying to take sides in the ongoing gun control debate. But Bastian said the Georgia-based company stands by its decision to cut ties with the NRA despite backlash from state lawmakers, who passed legislation in retaliation Thursday to kill tax exemptions on jet fuel Delta uses.

“Our decision was not made for economic gain and our values are not for sale,” Bastian wrote in the memo. “We are in the process of a review to end group discounts for any group of a politically divisive nature.”
“None of this changes the fact that our home is Atlanta and we are proud and honored to locate our headquarters here,” Bastian wrote. “And we are supporters of the 2nd Amendment, just as we embrace the entire Constitution of the United States.”
I'm sure the 13 people that actually used the discount will be heartbroken.
Which makes legislative action to punish Delta over it totally justified, obviously.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26891
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Rip »

Skinypupy wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:32 pm
Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:00 pm
LordMortis wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 4:30 pm Delta doesn't back off...

http://time.com/5182755/delta-airlines- ... a-georgia/
Delta Air Lines CEO Ed Bastian issued a company-wide memo Friday addressing the recent fallout between the carrier and the National Rifle Association in the wake of the deadly Parkland, Fla. school shooting.

Bastian, who opted to end Delta’s discount program for NRA members as online petitions urged companies to boycott the group, said in the memo sent to employees that Delta was not trying to take sides in the ongoing gun control debate. But Bastian said the Georgia-based company stands by its decision to cut ties with the NRA despite backlash from state lawmakers, who passed legislation in retaliation Thursday to kill tax exemptions on jet fuel Delta uses.

“Our decision was not made for economic gain and our values are not for sale,” Bastian wrote in the memo. “We are in the process of a review to end group discounts for any group of a politically divisive nature.”
“None of this changes the fact that our home is Atlanta and we are proud and honored to locate our headquarters here,” Bastian wrote. “And we are supporters of the 2nd Amendment, just as we embrace the entire Constitution of the United States.”
I'm sure the 13 people that actually used the discount will be heartbroken.
Which makes legislative action to punish Delta over it totally justified, obviously.
About as justified as removing the discount in the first place.

Lose-Lose
“A simple democracy is the devil’s own government.”
— Benjamin Rush
--
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43491
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Blackhawk »

El Guapo wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:34 pm
I think there are a few different categories of shooting deaths that people are concerned about:

(1) Mass shootings
(2) Accidental deaths (especially of children);
(3) Domestic violence related firearms deaths
(4) Crime related homicide other than 1 and 3 above, which is a likely a far larger number than 1+3 combined.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70100
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LordMortis »

Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:00 pm
LordMortis wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 4:30 pm Delta doesn't back off...

http://time.com/5182755/delta-airlines- ... a-georgia/
Delta Air Lines CEO Ed Bastian issued a company-wide memo Friday addressing the recent fallout between the carrier and the National Rifle Association in the wake of the deadly Parkland, Fla. school shooting.

Bastian, who opted to end Delta’s discount program for NRA members as online petitions urged companies to boycott the group, said in the memo sent to employees that Delta was not trying to take sides in the ongoing gun control debate. But Bastian said the Georgia-based company stands by its decision to cut ties with the NRA despite backlash from state lawmakers, who passed legislation in retaliation Thursday to kill tax exemptions on jet fuel Delta uses.

“Our decision was not made for economic gain and our values are not for sale,” Bastian wrote in the memo. “We are in the process of a review to end group discounts for any group of a politically divisive nature.”
“None of this changes the fact that our home is Atlanta and we are proud and honored to locate our headquarters here,” Bastian wrote. “And we are supporters of the 2nd Amendment, just as we embrace the entire Constitution of the United States.”
I'm sure the 13 people that actually used the discount will be heartbroken.
And yet people all over the US are pissed at Delta because 13 were using that discount and Georgia. GOP flexed their might because 13 people were using the discount. And conservatives wonder why closeted conservative leaning folk would see the GOP dismantled and how we could side such horrible anti freedom anti capitalist anti responsibility anti moral snowflakes. Delta didn't make this political. The GOP did. Jesus Pancake, I've been hearing all over social media how the NRA aren't even a political group. They don't donate money and they support pro gun democrats and yet look at where we are...

13 people...

https://twitter.com/CaseyCagle/status/9 ... wsrc%5Etfw
Last edited by LordMortis on Fri Mar 02, 2018 9:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70100
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LordMortis »

Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:38 pm
Skinypupy wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:32 pm
Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:00 pm
LordMortis wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 4:30 pm Delta doesn't back off...

http://time.com/5182755/delta-airlines- ... a-georgia/
Delta Air Lines CEO Ed Bastian issued a company-wide memo Friday addressing the recent fallout between the carrier and the National Rifle Association in the wake of the deadly Parkland, Fla. school shooting.

Bastian, who opted to end Delta’s discount program for NRA members as online petitions urged companies to boycott the group, said in the memo sent to employees that Delta was not trying to take sides in the ongoing gun control debate. But Bastian said the Georgia-based company stands by its decision to cut ties with the NRA despite backlash from state lawmakers, who passed legislation in retaliation Thursday to kill tax exemptions on jet fuel Delta uses.

“Our decision was not made for economic gain and our values are not for sale,” Bastian wrote in the memo. “We are in the process of a review to end group discounts for any group of a politically divisive nature.”
“None of this changes the fact that our home is Atlanta and we are proud and honored to locate our headquarters here,” Bastian wrote. “And we are supporters of the 2nd Amendment, just as we embrace the entire Constitution of the United States.”
I'm sure the 13 people that actually used the discount will be heartbroken.
Which makes legislative action to punish Delta over it totally justified, obviously.
About as justified as removing the discount in the first place.

Lose-Lose


Offering the discount in the first place was where Delta lost. Somewhere along the line they tried to score points and points they likely never were rewarded are penalizing them for realizing it was mistake to offer the disocunt in the first place.
Last edited by LordMortis on Fri Mar 02, 2018 9:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo »

Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:38 pm
About as justified as removing the discount in the first place.

Lose-Lose
So... Private entities acting on their own based on market pressure is the same as governmental blackmail of private entities because of those actions?

You've come a long way, comrade. With a little luck they'll make it illegal for Delta to not provide discounts to the NRA.
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Pyperkub »

LordMortis wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 9:17 pm
Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:38 pm
Skinypupy wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:32 pm
Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:00 pm
LordMortis wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 4:30 pm Delta doesn't back off...

http://time.com/5182755/delta-airlines- ... a-georgia/
Delta Air Lines CEO Ed Bastian issued a company-wide memo Friday addressing the recent fallout between the carrier and the National Rifle Association in the wake of the deadly Parkland, Fla. school shooting.

Bastian, who opted to end Delta’s discount program for NRA members as online petitions urged companies to boycott the group, said in the memo sent to employees that Delta was not trying to take sides in the ongoing gun control debate. But Bastian said the Georgia-based company stands by its decision to cut ties with the NRA despite backlash from state lawmakers, who passed legislation in retaliation Thursday to kill tax exemptions on jet fuel Delta uses.

“Our decision was not made for economic gain and our values are not for sale,” Bastian wrote in the memo. “We are in the process of a review to end group discounts for any group of a politically divisive nature.”
“None of this changes the fact that our home is Atlanta and we are proud and honored to locate our headquarters here,” Bastian wrote. “And we are supporters of the 2nd Amendment, just as we embrace the entire Constitution of the United States.”
I'm sure the 13 people that actually used the discount will be heartbroken.
Which makes legislative action to punish Delta over it totally justified, obviously.
About as justified as removing the discount in the first place.

Lose-Lose


Offering the discount in the first place was where Delta lost. Somewhere along the line they tried to score points and points they likely never were rewarded are penalizing them for realizing it was mistake to offer the disocunt in the first place.
Eh, I don't see it as a mistake to originally offer it, it depends on when they started. It's likely been in place for decades, prior to the time the NRA became about Identity Politics and Culture Wars, and was more focused on Hunting and Sportsmen.

Now, if it has been less than a decade, then yeah, they may have thought it through better.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26891
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Rip »

LordMortis wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 9:17 pm
Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:38 pm
Skinypupy wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:32 pm
Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:00 pm
LordMortis wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 4:30 pm Delta doesn't back off...

http://time.com/5182755/delta-airlines- ... a-georgia/
Delta Air Lines CEO Ed Bastian issued a company-wide memo Friday addressing the recent fallout between the carrier and the National Rifle Association in the wake of the deadly Parkland, Fla. school shooting.

Bastian, who opted to end Delta’s discount program for NRA members as online petitions urged companies to boycott the group, said in the memo sent to employees that Delta was not trying to take sides in the ongoing gun control debate. But Bastian said the Georgia-based company stands by its decision to cut ties with the NRA despite backlash from state lawmakers, who passed legislation in retaliation Thursday to kill tax exemptions on jet fuel Delta uses.

“Our decision was not made for economic gain and our values are not for sale,” Bastian wrote in the memo. “We are in the process of a review to end group discounts for any group of a politically divisive nature.”
“None of this changes the fact that our home is Atlanta and we are proud and honored to locate our headquarters here,” Bastian wrote. “And we are supporters of the 2nd Amendment, just as we embrace the entire Constitution of the United States.”
I'm sure the 13 people that actually used the discount will be heartbroken.
Which makes legislative action to punish Delta over it totally justified, obviously.
About as justified as removing the discount in the first place.

Lose-Lose


Offering the discount in the first place was where Delta lost. Somewhere along the line they tried to score points and points they likely never were rewarded are penalizing them for realizing it was mistake to offer the disocunt in the first place.
They could have just dropped it and not said anything and no one would have noticed. Making a big announcement of it is nothing but political.

Never let a good crisis go to waste.
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26891
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Rip »

GreenGoo wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 9:39 pm
Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:38 pm
About as justified as removing the discount in the first place.

Lose-Lose
So... Private entities acting on their own based on market pressure is the same as governmental blackmail of private entities because of those actions?

You've come a long way, comrade. With a little luck they'll make it illegal for Delta to not provide discounts to the NRA.
No one seemed to mind when they were bribing them with tax breaks. The entire system of the tax break crap is a large parts of what helped kill off small businesses. Everyone wants to suck the big business dong for the jobs then bitch and moan about big conglomerates putting all the small guys under.
User avatar
Victoria Raverna
Posts: 5012
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:23 am
Location: Jakarta

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Victoria Raverna »

em2nought wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:54 pm 'Banning assault rifles is silly if you want to cut down on firearms deaths because handguns are used to kill far more people per year.
Ban handguns!!!
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 20333
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Skinypupy »

Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 10:26 pm
GreenGoo wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 9:39 pm
Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:38 pm
About as justified as removing the discount in the first place.

Lose-Lose
So... Private entities acting on their own based on market pressure is the same as governmental blackmail of private entities because of those actions?

You've come a long way, comrade. With a little luck they'll make it illegal for Delta to not provide discounts to the NRA.
No one seemed to mind when they were bribing them with tax breaks. The entire system of the tax break crap is a large parts of what helped kill off small businesses. Everyone wants to suck the big business dong for the jobs then bitch and moan about big conglomerates putting all the small guys under.
And yet you aseeemed so in favor of that massive overall corporate tax break that just passed. Weird.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26891
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Rip »

Skinypupy wrote: Sat Mar 03, 2018 11:00 am
Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 10:26 pm
GreenGoo wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 9:39 pm
Rip wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:38 pm
About as justified as removing the discount in the first place.

Lose-Lose
So... Private entities acting on their own based on market pressure is the same as governmental blackmail of private entities because of those actions?

You've come a long way, comrade. With a little luck they'll make it illegal for Delta to not provide discounts to the NRA.
No one seemed to mind when they were bribing them with tax breaks. The entire system of the tax break crap is a large parts of what helped kill off small businesses. Everyone wants to suck the big business dong for the jobs then bitch and moan about big conglomerates putting all the small guys under.
And yet you aseeemed so in favor of that massive overall corporate tax break that just passed. Weird.
I love tax breaks when they are for everyone/business. When they are for a single business or a small group of people not so much.
User avatar
em2nought
Posts: 5307
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:48 am

Re: Gun Politics

Post by em2nought »

Victoria Raverna wrote: Sat Mar 03, 2018 8:36 am
em2nought wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:54 pm 'Banning assault rifles is silly if you want to cut down on firearms deaths because handguns are used to kill far more people per year.
Ban handguns!!!
It's hard to conceal carry a Barrett .50 cal rifle for protection from the democrat supporting criminals who will still have handguns after you ban them. :violin:
Technically, he shouldn't be here.
User avatar
Victoria Raverna
Posts: 5012
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:23 am
Location: Jakarta

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Victoria Raverna »

em2nought wrote: Sat Mar 03, 2018 1:18 pm
Victoria Raverna wrote: Sat Mar 03, 2018 8:36 am
em2nought wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:54 pm 'Banning assault rifles is silly if you want to cut down on firearms deaths because handguns are used to kill far more people per year.
Ban handguns!!!
It's hard to conceal carry a Barrett .50 cal rifle for protection from the democrat supporting criminals who will still have handguns after you ban them. :violin:
Maybe try to move to somewhere safer so that you don't need to carry firearm to protect yourself from criminals.
User avatar
Jag
Posts: 14435
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:24 pm
Location: SoFla

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Jag »

Victoria Raverna wrote: Sat Mar 03, 2018 1:21 pm
em2nought wrote: Sat Mar 03, 2018 1:18 pm
Victoria Raverna wrote: Sat Mar 03, 2018 8:36 am
em2nought wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:54 pm 'Banning assault rifles is silly if you want to cut down on firearms deaths because handguns are used to kill far more people per year.
Ban handguns!!!
It's hard to conceal carry a Barrett .50 cal rifle for protection from the democrat supporting criminals who will still have handguns after you ban them. :violin:
Maybe try to move to somewhere safer so that you don't need to carry firearm to protect yourself from criminals.
It's not even criminals. In FL many people carry to protect themselves from other people who carry. I hear daily stories of interactions that would normally result in a scuffle are almost always resolved by one or both shooting at each other.
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo »

Doesn't Florida apply Castle doctrine to the person? I.e. wherever you are is your castle? I'm defending this parking spot, shooting is justified.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur »

Can't tell if serious:

Florida
776.013 Home protection; use or threatened use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(1) A person who is in a dwelling or residence in which the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and use or threaten to use:
...
(2) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using or threatening to use defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used or threatened was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle;
...
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 20333
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Skinypupy »

Jag wrote: Mon Mar 05, 2018 10:03 am
Victoria Raverna wrote: Sat Mar 03, 2018 1:21 pm
em2nought wrote: Sat Mar 03, 2018 1:18 pm
Victoria Raverna wrote: Sat Mar 03, 2018 8:36 am
em2nought wrote: Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:54 pm 'Banning assault rifles is silly if you want to cut down on firearms deaths because handguns are used to kill far more people per year.
Ban handguns!!!
It's hard to conceal carry a Barrett .50 cal rifle for protection from the democrat supporting criminals who will still have handguns after you ban them. :violin:
Maybe try to move to somewhere safer so that you don't need to carry firearm to protect yourself from criminals.
It's not even criminals. In FL many people carry to protect themselves from other people who carry. I hear daily stories of interactions that would normally result in a scuffle are almost always resolved by one or both shooting at each other.
So this, basically.

But I'm the good guy with a gun!
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
User avatar
msteelers
Posts: 7157
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Port Saint Lucie, Florida
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by msteelers »

GreenGoo wrote:Doesn't Florida apply Castle doctrine to the person? I.e. wherever you are is your castle? I'm defending this parking spot, shooting is justified.
It’s the Stand Your Ground law, and it is applied wherever, not just your home. Essentially, you don’t have a duty to retreat. Gun nuts love the law, because it makes it easier for them to fulfill their cops and robbers fantasies. You can review the Trayvon Martin shooting for an example.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur »

msteelers wrote: Mon Mar 05, 2018 10:38 am
GreenGoo wrote:Doesn't Florida apply Castle doctrine to the person? I.e. wherever you are is your castle? I'm defending this parking spot, shooting is justified.
It’s the Stand Your Ground law, and it is applied wherever, not just your home. Essentially, you don’t have a duty to retreat. Gun nuts love the law, because it makes it easier for them to fulfill their cops and robbers fantasies. You can review the Trayvon Martin shooting for an example.
Despite the state legislature's efforts, it requires the defendant to prove that they were defending themselves.
A judge in Florida ruled Monday that the state's updated "stand your ground" law, which required prosecutors to disprove a defendant's self-defense case at pretrial hearings, is unconstitutional, setting up a showdown that could make its way to the state's top court.
...
The Florida Supreme Court had ruled in 2015 to shift the burden to defendants, requiring them to prove in pretrial hearings that they were defending themselves in order to avoid prosecution on charges for a violent act.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
msteelers
Posts: 7157
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Port Saint Lucie, Florida
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by msteelers »

That doesn’t change the fact that you don’t have a duty to retreat.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur »

You are correct.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

GreenGoo wrote: Mon Mar 05, 2018 10:07 am Doesn't Florida apply Castle doctrine to the person? I.e. wherever you are is your castle? I'm defending this parking spot, shooting is justified.
That's not what Castle Doctrine is. Castle Doctrine only applies to legally occupied property owned/leased by an individual such as their house, and in some cases their car. It doesn't mean that wherever you are is your castle.



Like msteelers said, you're thinking of Stand Your Ground. It eliminates or eases the duty to retreat but is isn't exactly the get out of jail free card that it is made out to be.


In very vague and simplified terms, there are 5 elements required for a justified self defense shooting . Lack of ability to retreat is only part of one of them (avoidance). Avoidance means that you must retreat or flee if you can do so safely and without risk of ha to yourself or others. Even with Stand Your Ground there is still some requirement of avoidance. Like you can't walk away, go to your car, get your gun and come back and re-engage with someone.

The others are:
Innocence, meaning you aren't the agressor or involved in a mutual conflict, like a fight. Like you can't try to rob someone and they pull a knife and you pull a gun and shoot them in self defense.

Proportionality, meaning that your use of deadly force is only enough to stop the attack. That's why you can't shoot someone 10 times after they're on the ground not moving. If they are stopped and not a threat, any additional use of force is not justifiable.

Imminence, meaning that serious harm or death to yourself or others is imminent without use of deadly force.

Reasonableness, meaning that it the hypothetical "reasonable person" would agree that there was indeed threat of serious harm or death.

Shooting someone over a parking spot or just because they are also armed isn't usually going to go over well. Obviously it varies by location and prosecutor but if you have the option of not shooting someone, that is almost always the best option.



Problem is, in many states where anyone can carry without any training, there are lots of people who get their carry training from hearsay, Charles Bronson movies, and maybe Law and Order.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Jag
Posts: 14435
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:24 pm
Location: SoFla

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Jag »

Isgrimnur wrote: Mon Mar 05, 2018 10:46 am
msteelers wrote: Mon Mar 05, 2018 10:38 am
GreenGoo wrote:Doesn't Florida apply Castle doctrine to the person? I.e. wherever you are is your castle? I'm defending this parking spot, shooting is justified.
It’s the Stand Your Ground law, and it is applied wherever, not just your home. Essentially, you don’t have a duty to retreat. Gun nuts love the law, because it makes it easier for them to fulfill their cops and robbers fantasies. You can review the Trayvon Martin shooting for an example.
Despite the state legislature's efforts, it requires the defendant to prove that they were defending themselves.
A judge in Florida ruled Monday that the state's updated "stand your ground" law, which required prosecutors to disprove a defendant's self-defense case at pretrial hearings, is unconstitutional, setting up a showdown that could make its way to the state's top court.
...
The Florida Supreme Court had ruled in 2015 to shift the burden to defendants, requiring them to prove in pretrial hearings that they were defending themselves in order to avoid prosecution on charges for a violent act.
Actually
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (Reuters) - Florida Governor Rick Scott signed amended“stand your ground” legislation on Friday, making it easier for defendants in the state to successfully claim they were protecting themselves when they commit violence.

Previously, the law required defendants to prove that they were using force in self-defense. The new law shifts the burden of proof in pretrial hearings to prosecutors, rather than defendants, to prove whether force was used lawfully.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur »

Your article is from June. Mine is from July.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur »

Texas
U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has enough support to pass his “Fix NICS” gun control bill without the possibility of a filibuster, his office said Friday morning.

It’s not yet clear when the bill might get a vote, but a staff member said there are now 62 sponsors of the bill — a significant milestone. The bill would hold government agencies accountable for failing to properly document individuals’ criminal histories in the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Cornyn and U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., first launched that bill in November after the Sutherland Springs shooting that killed more than two dozen people. But it has stalled in the Senate since then, despite having dozens of senators sign on as co-sponsors recent weeks.

The bill has bipartisan support, though Texas' other U.S. senator, Republican Ted Cruz, is not among the co-sponsors.
...
Cornyn's bill would require federal agencies and states to design plans for ensuring information is accurately reported to the database, and it would allocate resources to those agencies to help them do so. It would also set up a system of incentives and penalties for agencies who comply or fail to comply.
Why does John Cornyn hate small government?
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Moliere
Posts: 12295
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 10:57 am
Location: Walking through a desert land

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Moliere »

Gun ban in subsidized housing gets court challenge from East St. Louis woman
A woman from East St. Louis filed a federal lawsuit here Wednesday that seeks to overturn a policy banning guns in subsidized housing.

The Second Amendment Foundation and the Illinois State Rifle Association joined in the suit against the East St. Louis Housing Authority.

The woman, who is not named in the suit out of fear of an abusive ex-husband, wants a handgun for protection but can’t have one for fear of getting kicked out of her home, the suit says.

She was beaten and raped in her home last year in an attack that stopped only when her children brandished a gun, the suit says. She has since given up that gun.

The woman is a customer service representative for a medical supply distributor, has a valid firearm owner’s identification card and has been “trained and educated in the safe use of firearms,” the suit says.

The suit says the housing authority’s rules violate the Second Amendment and her constitutional right to equal protection.
"The world is suffering more today from the good people who want to mind other men's business than it is from the bad people who are willing to let everybody look after their own individual affairs." - Clarence Darrow
User avatar
em2nought
Posts: 5307
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:48 am

Re: Gun Politics

Post by em2nought »

Looks like that white collar criminal Rick Scott must be planning to switch parties, ala Charlie Christ, and run for the senate as a democrat after taking away 2nd amendment rights from those under 21 in Florida. I've never liked seeing him wear that "NAVY" ball cap, I've never voted for him as a Republican either.
Technically, he shouldn't be here.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Gun sales are booming.


One online retailer:
Spoiler:
WE APOLOGIZE THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY CLOSED. DUE TO THE RECENT SPIKE IN FIREARM SALES THE LEADING CREDIT CARD PROCESSOR IN THE FIREARM INDUSTRY "BLUE DOG" HAS BECOME CONCERNED FOR THEIR RISK THAT RETAIL CUSTOMERS WILL DISPUTE CHARGES IF MANUFACTURES AND WHOLESALERS GET BEHIND ON SHIPPING TIMES. THESE ACCOUNT SUSPENSIONS ARE INDUSTRY WIDE FOR US DEALERS UNFORTUNATE ENOUGH TO BE THEIR CUSTOMER. THEY ARE CURRENTLY RESEARCHING THEIR RISK WHILE WE ARE ALL WAITING. WE HOPE THEY ARE AS FAST AT RESEARCH AS THEY ARE IRRATIONAL DECISIONS. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY EXTREMELY INCONVENIENT TO BOTH YOU AS OUR CUSTOMER AND US AS A BUSINESS AND AGAIN, WE APOLOGIZE. THAT BEING SAID, THEIR FEAR IS UNFOUNDED AND ALL CURRENT ORDERS WILL SHIP ON TIME WE ARE JUST NOT ABLE TO ACCEPT NEW ORDERS AT THE MOMENT.


Another:
Spoiler:
Due to the current gun control climate, there has been a higher than usual order volume. Orders placed with Standard Shipping will experience a delay of up to, or possibly exceeding, 10 business days. We apologize for any inconvenience. We are working to process and ship each order as quickly as possible.

Pretty much like that across the board
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo »

Just how many more guns do the 30% need to own? Where do they put them all? How are gun safe sales doing?
User avatar
killbot737
Posts: 5660
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:19 pm
Location: Next to America Jr.

Re: Gun Politics

Post by killbot737 »

If there was a national gun buy-back I would totally sell 20% of my guns. One the one hand because I can't center the thing (high,right) to save anyone's life, and second it kind of counts as an "assault" weapon. The rest, well, come and get them. I'm saying this as a far-far left leaning American. If you come for the guns by force, you will be sorry.
There is no hug button. Sad!
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo »

killbot737 wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 7:08 pm If there was a national gun buy-back I would totally sell 20% of my guns. One the one hand because I can't center the thing (high,right) to save anyone's life, and second it kind of counts as an "assault" weapon. The rest, well, come and get them. I'm saying this as a far-far left leaning American. If you come for the guns by force, you will be sorry.
'kay.
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51302
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Gun Politics

Post by hepcat »

That was...yeah, I got nothin’.
Covfefe!
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Max Peck »

killbot737 wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 7:08 pm If you come for the guns by force, you will be sorry.
Probably not as sorry as you would be. If Trump sends someone to take your guns, they'll bring their big-boy toys. :coffee:
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
Carpet_pissr
Posts: 19978
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Carpet_pissr »

killbot737 wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 7:08 pm I'm saying this as a far-far left leaning American. If you come for the guns by force, you will be sorry.
So far left, you're right, perhaps? :think:
User avatar
$iljanus
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13676
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:46 pm
Location: New England...or under your bed

Re: Gun Politics

Post by $iljanus »

I was sadly amused by the asshat in chief trashing the usefulness of a commission to study opioid abuse with all sorts of hyperbole at a campaign rally in PA and the formation of a commission to study school shootings headed by Sec of Education De Vos.

Black lives matter!

Wise words of warning from Smoove B: Oh, how you all laughed when I warned you about the semen. Well, who's laughing now?
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51302
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Gun Politics

Post by hepcat »

Trump right after the Florida shooting: I'm not afraid of the NRA.

Trump today: I'm afraid of the NRA.
Covfefe!
User avatar
Carpet_pissr
Posts: 19978
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Carpet_pissr »

hepcat wrote: Mon Mar 12, 2018 8:57 am Trump right after the Florida shooting: I'm not afraid of the NRA.

Trump today: I'm afraid of the NRA.
NOT A PUPPET!!
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Max Peck wrote: Mon Mar 12, 2018 7:56 am
killbot737 wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 7:08 pm If you come for the guns by force, you will be sorry.
Probably not as sorry as you would be. If Trump sends someone to take your guns, they'll bring their big-boy toys. :coffee:
If it we're to happen, how it would happen is local law enforcement would be tasked with the job. If they have military surplus gear like Bradleys they'll use them but there will be a lot of regular cops sent to front doors with the very unenviable job of collecting firearms. Only after that goes predictably pear, will they send in federal units. National Guard commanded by the ATF? FBI? I have no idea.

And honestly, despite all the hype about "assault weapons", even just a regular old bolt action rifle is not something LEOs want to face. So unless by "big boy toys" you mean MBTs, drones and Hellfire missiles, it could easily get ugly for law enforcement. They'd ultimately win every time, sure, but it'd be ugly. And that's why no one wants to do it.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Max Peck »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:29 pm
Max Peck wrote: Mon Mar 12, 2018 7:56 am
killbot737 wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 7:08 pm If you come for the guns by force, you will be sorry.
Probably not as sorry as you would be. If Trump sends someone to take your guns, they'll bring their big-boy toys. :coffee:
If it we're to happen, how it would happen is local law enforcement would be tasked with the job. If they have military surplus gear like Bradleys they'll use them but there will be a lot of regular cops sent to front doors with the very unenviable job of collecting firearms. Only after that goes predictably pear, will they send in federal units. National Guard commanded by the ATF? FBI? I have no idea.

And honestly, despite all the hype about "assault weapons", even just a regular old bolt action rifle is not something LEOs want to face. So unless by "big boy toys" you mean MBTs, drones and Hellfire missiles, it could easily get ugly for law enforcement. They'd ultimately win every time, sure, but it'd be ugly. And that's why no one wants to do it.
In the fantasy world where they come to pry your guns from your cold, dead hands, one presumes they will take advantage of the available resources to do a proper job of it. In the real world it simply isn't going to happen, so I didn't give the logistics much thought beyond pondering whether the typical gun-owner has anything that will counter an armored personnel carrier. :)
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
Post Reply