Aurora Might Do What Fast & Furious Couldn't

[Woody]

The dude had weapons and magazines that were illegal according to the law.  He built booby traps for the police in his apartment.  Laws were of no concern to this guy.  All you propose, while not up unreasonable, would not have stopped him.


Aurora is a bad example for you to sensationalize. 


In Ireland and britain guns were/are illegal.  So the IRA used bombs.  So gun laws are not going to stop these people.

[clistensprechen]

He was wearing bullet-proofing so even if every member of the audience was "carrying", that wouldn't have stopped him either. Given that he was at an exit, nobody was sitting near him either.

And yet something must be done. You're saying NOTHING can be done.

Something MUST be done.

Like closing gunshow loopholes and tracking every gun ever made, beginning with the manufacturers, so that transfer of ownership of illegal types of guns can be tracked to an illegal purchaser and removed from the purchaser immediately after purchase.  If cops can see whose auto insurance has expired right away, it's possible to see when any armament has transferred into unauthorized hands.

I will repeat:

1. License all guns like states do automobiles.

2. License all gun owners by testing for gun handling competency, like a driver's license.

3. Close all gun show loopholes and track every fire arm ever sold, including between private individuals.

4. Criminals are already denied rights to guns and voting, so criminality isn't the issue--the only offenses on the Aurora shooter's record were a couple of traffic tickets, so claiming that only criminals break laws with guns makes claim to a falsehood.

5. Laws against things don't prevent **** from happening, so the idea is to make such ideas become a bad idea even to those who would contemplate such things. 

Further, for every citizen to be "carrying", it is constitutional to defend against a personal attack against the carrier--but it remains UNconstitutional for any citizen to act as judge, jury, and executioner defending any other person, as this usurps the Due Process clause.

[Woody]

He was wearing bullet-proofing so even if every member of the audience was "carrying", that wouldn't have stopped him either. Given that he was at an exit, nobody was sitting near him either.

And yet something must be done. You're saying NOTHING can be done.

Something MUST be done.

Like closing gunshow loopholes and tracking every gun ever made, beginning with the manufacturers, so that transfer of ownership of illegal types of guns can be tracked to an illegal purchaser andremoved from the purchaser immediately after purchase.  If cops can see whose auto insurance has expired right away, it's possible to see when any armament has transferred into unauthorized hands.

Umm, in this case the problem was not guns, but the criminal.  What part of that do you not understand?  How many guns did McVeigh use? 


The point being if your intent is to kill people in this manner gun laws are not going to stop you.  Remember, YOU TITLED this thread. 


So YOU tell us how in the US you stop a mass murderer?

[clistensprechen]

I listed how I would change things, and respectfully submit that your option of doing nothing is not acceptable. SOMETHING must be done--what have YOU got?

[Woody]

I listed how I would change things, and respectfully submit that your option of doing nothing is not acceptable. SOMETHING must be done--what have YOU got?

Bring on the discussion of how insane the 2nd Amendment is in today's age. Guns don't kill people--gun nuts with guns kill people. Lots of them. In a theatre about to premier The Dark Knight Rises.

Was the Aurora CO gun nut a fan of Limbaugh's and thought that Bain/Bane was an issue worth murdering over? Nuts, by definition, make no sense, but nuts do have a trigger.

NRA: the Protector of Nuts and Organized Crime. Time for sane people to do something to curtail the insane in power positions.

That is your premise.  Changing what you described as the insane second amendment would have done nothing to stop this man from killing 12 and wounding 55+ at that theater.  He was deranged, a criminal, and was bound and determined to kill.  He would gave chosen another tool to accomplish this.


So yes, I posit, based on the fact known about Aurora so far you could not have stopped this.

[RWE]

Further, for every citizen to be "carrying", it is constitutional to defend against a personal attack against the carrier--but it remains UNconstitutional for any citizen to act as judge, jury, and executioner defending any other person, as this usurps the Due Process clause.

Yeah, but you don't have a problem usurping the "shall not be infringed" clause. So in your version of the constitution, if a police officer see's an assailant shooting people, then the officer can not act as "judge, jury, and executioner" by shooting the killer in the act of killing.

[clistensprechen]

I listed how I would change things, and respectfully submit that your option of doing nothing is not acceptable. SOMETHING must be done--what have YOU got?

Bring on the discussion of how insane the 2nd Amendment is in today's age. Guns don't kill people--gun nuts with guns kill people. Lots of them. In a theatre about to premier The Dark Knight Rises.

Was the Aurora CO gun nut a fan of Limbaugh's and thought that Bain/Bane was an issue worth murdering over? Nuts, by definition, make no sense, but nuts do have a trigger.

NRA: the Protector of Nuts and Organized Crime. Time for sane people to do something to curtail the insane in power positions.

That is your premise.  Changing what you described as the insane second amendment would have done nothing to stop this man from killing 12 and wounding 55+ at that theater.  He was deranged, a criminal, and was bound and determined to kill.  He would gave chosen another tool to accomplish this.


So yes, I posit, based on the fact known about Aurora so far you could not have stopped this.

...under current law. Captain Obvious has arrived.
Under what I propose, though, regarding tracking, the sale of the illegal guns would have flagged the buyer for enforcement the second the sale was made, thus landing the buyer in jail for selling to an unauthorized person (and it's conceivable that the seller illegally posessed the firearm, too....and in that event, the seller would already be in jail as would every other person illegally in possession of an illegal fire arm from the day the armament leaves the factory). Without a seller selling contraband, the prospective buyer is out of luck.

What would have stopped the Aurora event would be actual gun control.

[Woody]

I listed how I would change things, and respectfully submit that your option of doing nothing is not acceptable. SOMETHING must be done--what have YOU got?

Bring on the discussion of how insane the 2nd Amendment is in today's age. Guns don't kill people--gun nuts with guns kill people. Lots of them. In a theatre about to premier The Dark Knight Rises.

Was the Aurora CO gun nut a fan of Limbaugh's and thought that Bain/Bane was an issue worth murdering over? Nuts, by definition, make no sense, but nuts do have a trigger.

NRA: the Protector of Nuts and Organized Crime. Time for sane people to do something to curtail the insane in power positions.

That is your premise.  Changing what you described as the insane second amendment would have done nothing to stop this man from killing 12 and wounding 55+ at that theater.  He was deranged, a criminal, and was bound and determined to kill.  He would gave chosen another tool to accomplish this.


So yes, I posit, based on the fact known about Aurora so far you could not have stopped this.

...under current law. Captain Obvious has arrived.
Under what I propose, though, regarding tracking, the sale of the illegal guns would have flagged the buyer for enforcement the second the sale was made, thus landing the buyer in jail for selling to an unauthorized person (and it's conceivable that the seller illegally posessed the firearm, too....and in that event, the seller would already be in jail as would every other person illegally in possession of an illegal fire arm from the day the armament leaves the factory). Without a seller selling contraband, the prospective buyer is out of luck.

What would have stopped the Aurora event would be actual gun control.

The point I am making is if stricter gun control was in place he would have found other means. 

[clistensprechen]

Sure, but he would also be priced out of that market, too. Finding the means compared to thinking it's a good idea are two different things. Making other means look stupid is the idea.

[Woody]

How did you solution work out in Norway?

To own a gun in Norway, one must document a use for the gun. By far the most common grounds for civilian ownership are hunting and sports shooting, in that order. Other needs can include special guard duties or self defence, but the first is rare unless the person shows identification confirming that he or she is a trained guard or member of a law-enforcement agency and the second is practically never accepted as a reason for gun ownership.
There are special rules for collectors of guns. They are exempt from many parts of the regulation, but, in turn, they must meet even more narrow qualifications. Collectors may purchase, but not fire without permission, all kinds of guns in their respective areas of interest, which they have defined in advance.
Ownership is regulated in paragraph 7,[1] and responsibility for issuing a gun ownership license is given to the police authority in the applicant's district.
Rifle and shotgun ownership permission can be given to "sober and responsible" persons 18 years or older. The applicant for the permission must document a need for the weapon. Two exceptions exist to this age qualification. Persons under the age of 18, but over 16 may apply for rifle or shotgun ownership licence with the consent of parents or guardian. For handguns, the lowest ownership age is 21 with no exceptions allowed. For inherited weapons, it is up to the local police chief to make a decision based on the individual facts of the case.
An applicant must have a clean police record in order to obtain an ownership license.

[[/color]edit][/color][/font]

[RWE]

2. License all gun owners by testing for gun handling competency, like a driver's license.

Your plan is racist. Since State legislators and governors have started passing laws that say you must have ID to vote, we've been told by the left that it's not that easy for minorities and poor people to obtain ID. So, your plan would prevent access to gun rights under the 2nd Amendment to those citizens.

[kentay]

"What America can learn from Switzerland is that the best way to reduce gun misuse is to promote responsible gun ownership."
http://www.guncite.com/swissgun-kopel.html

Could reasonable registration of assault weapons, rounds of ammo, gun clip rounds and posting names of right to carry permit names,  help to controls guns without violation of our Constitutional rights?  We are not acting like a strong people but a bunch of wimps who are afraid of their own shadows. How come some of the most and loudest advocates of guns are the least likely to join the military and fight.  kentay

[kentay]

Sen. Ron Johnson: 100-Round Rifle Magazine Is a 'Basic Freedom'
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/david/sen-ron-johnson-100-round-rifle-magazine-bas

6000 rounds of ammo was purchased  by 50 different orders from the Internet. Can anyone tell me the purpose for US Citizen to have 100 round or multiple round clips for assault weapons?  I know on my shotgun I can only load and hold 3 shells while hunting. That's because the law only applies if you are in the field hunting and that's what I use my gun for. It has to do with conservation and keeping sport in sport hunting. My common sense question, if it good enough for sports hunting why isn't it good enough for hunting people. kentay

[RWE]

6000 rounds of ammo was purchased  by 50 different orders from the Internet. Can anyone tell me the purpose for US Citizen to have 100 round or multiple round clips for assault weapons? kentay

Hey kentay, have you read your tagline lately? You're predicting a civil war, remember? So, to answer your question...US citizens need high capacity magazines and 6000 rounds of ammo to make sure your side loses.

[Ted S]

6000 rounds of ammo was purchased  by 50 different orders from the Internet.

Federal authorities were told over a half-dozen times that Bernie Madoff was up to no good and yet they did nothing.  But for some reason you expect that a pencil pusher in some federal agency is going to notice that a guy in CO is ordering ammo from different suppliers?  Dream on.

Can anyone tell me the purpose for US Citizen to have 100 round or multiple round clips for assault weapons?

Can you tell me why anyone should be allowed to race automobiles?  There is no reason for it.  Nobody is going to die if they don't get to see auto racing.  Maybe it should it be banned too.

In America people have the right to do things as long as they don't harm others.  Buying lots of ammo doesn't harm anyone and that's why it is legal.  Shooting people is harmful and that's why it is illegal.

If you're going to have a free society then there is a price to pay.