Spot Checks

[VaporTrail]

Everything that concerns gun control is a stupid idea to you, but no one has answered my simple question: who is going to pay for mental health reform? Who?

 

The same people that would pay for this. I don't understand how the government divvies up the money, and they seem to be able to create it out of thin air. Balancing the budget doesn't concern me at all when discussing these (or any) solutions. Therefore, I'd argue that the costs for overhauls of each proposal would be similar. The benefits of them couldn't be further from each other.

 

What are the benefits of a spot check? A bunch of people who are greatly inconvenienced and giving up a constitutionally guaranteed liberty (see the fourth amendment). The only people who will have to go through this hassle are those who legally purchased guns (even though we know that the vast majority of gun crimes are from illegal guns). You're saying it's a privilege to own a gun, that's fine, but if you legally own a gun, you're not seeing these checks as a privilege, you're seeing them as a punishment for following the law. Meanwhile, the money spent conducting spot checks on law-abiding citizens could rather be spent on trying to get illegal guns off the street (which your solution to the problem ignores).

 

The benefits of a mental health system overhaul? Firstly, you're not challenging any of the constitution by putting money into healthcare, unlike spot checks (which as I stated earlier would be opposed by the NRA AND the ACLU). How many violent crimes is it going to stop? Who knows. But what it will do is help reduce the stigma of mental illnesses such as depression (which 20% of Americans have!), and make treatment more available for those who are afflicted.

 

My point is, you don't know the effect either proposal will have on gun crimes, but you can take a look at what else will change. A spot check system would just be a huge inconvenience for people who follow the law and a surrender of constitutional rights. At least with a mental health overhaul, more people will be able to get the treatment they need for mental illness.

[The Cysko Kid]

The same people that would pay for this. I don't understand how the government divvies up the money, and they seem to be able to create it out of thin air. Balancing the budget doesn't concern me at all when discussing these (or any) solutions. Therefore, I'd argue that the costs for overhauls of each proposal would be similar. The benefits of them couldn't be further from each other.

 

What are the benefits of a spot check? A bunch of people who are greatly inconvenienced and giving up a constitutionally guaranteed liberty (see the fourth amendment). The only people who will have to go through this hassle are those who legally purchased guns (even though we know that the vast majority of gun crimes are from illegal guns). You're saying it's a privilege to own a gun, that's fine, but if you legally own a gun, you're not seeing these checks as a privilege, you're seeing them as a punishment for following the law. Meanwhile, the money spent conducting spot checks on law-abiding citizens could rather be spent on trying to get illegal guns off the street (which your solution to the problem ignores).

 

The benefits of a mental health system overhaul? Firstly, you're not challenging any of the constitution by putting money into healthcare, unlike spot checks (which as I stated earlier would be opposed by the NRA AND the ACLU). How many violent crimes is it going to stop? Who knows. But what it will do is help reduce the stigma of mental illnesses such as depression (which 20% of Americans have!), and make treatment more available for those who are afflicted.

 

My point is, you don't know the effect either proposal will have on gun crimes, but you can take a look at what else will change. A spot check system would just be a huge inconvenience for people who follow the law and a surrender of constitutional rights. At least with a mental health overhaul, more people will be able to get the treatment they need for mental illness.

 

 

Wishful thinking. When it comes time to pay for it I guarantee republicans stymie it.

 

Btw. Ive said before in this very thread that home inspections would have to be but one of a wide range of initiatives designed to slow murderous gun rampages.

 

Also the NRA doesn't want mass shootings to stop. At all. It's good for their business after all.

 

Meanwhile there were more school shootings today. A five year old is being held in a bunker by a gunman today, and he will be killed I have no doubt. A prosecuter was gunned down on Texas. There was a shooting at a mediation yesterday.

 

If someone is cutting their own wrists is your priority to get the knife away first? Or examine what caused it first?

[DieHardBrownsFan]

Wishful thinking. When it comes time to pay for it I guarantee republicans stymie it.

 

Btw. Ive said before in this very thread that home inspections would have to be but one of a wide range of initiatives designed to slow murderous gun rampages.

 

Also the NRA doesn't want mass shootings to stop. At all. It's good for their business after all.

 

Meanwhile there were more school shootings today. A five year old is being held in a bunker by a gunman today, and he will be killed I have no doubt. A prosecuter was gunned down on Texas. There was a shooting at a mediation yesterday.

 

If someone is cutting their own wrists is your priority to get the knife away first? Or examine what caused it first?

 

I think that Cysco wants to establish a George Orwell type of Government i.e., 1984. We can have telescreens, thought police the whole nine yards. Give away all kinds of freedoms so them crazy bastards can't buy a gun.

[The Cysko Kid]

I think that Cysco wants to establish a George Orwell type of Government i.e., 1984. We can have telescreens, thought police the whole nine yards. Give away all kinds of freedoms so them crazy bastards can't buy a gun.

 

I'm surprised you've even heard of orwell. In your fear of a dystopian future you're ignoring the dystopian future we live in.

[Westside Steve]

Yeah, I'm completely unwilling to go along with this idea. What exactly are they gonna check for, the owners being too black? Being a registered gun owner should NOT mean that you are submitting yourself to mandatory searches and potential seizures.

Actually if they look too Filipino.

 

But seriously you have a license, a registration, for a firearm.

Just like you do for your car.

With your car the cops can pull you over for anything and submit you to test, right?

So they spot check the house, much in the same manner.

Hello sir we know that you have 39 millimeter pistols registered here could we see where they are being kept?

Uh let's see ones under the kids bed the other 1 is over by the crack pipe.

 

But actually you know what I mean if they're not safely secured as required they can get flned.

Or they can get the license revoked.

 

Think about it you can't even drive or start your car if a passenger in the back seat has an open beer.

 

Those spot checks are completely legitimate, at least under today's law.

WSS

[Browns149]

Check points on the roads are perfectly constitutional whether you've done something wrong or not.

 

These are only allowed when the police make it public knowledge were these checkpoints will be. They just can't set one up anywhere or anytime. Atleast not in Ohio.

[Browns149]

Everything that concerns gun control is a stupid idea to you, but no one has answered my simple question: who is going to pay for mental health reform? Who?

Legalize pot and use the taxes from that to pay for it. 2 problems solved with one joint

[The Cysko Kid]

Legalize pot and use the taxes from that to pay for it. 2 problems solved with one joint

 

 

Sin tax ammunition to ten times its actual worth like they've done to cigarettes. Using that to help reform mental health will make a positive statement.

[The Cysko Kid]

I'm for the legalization of pot btw. Why not? It's a lot less harmful than alcohol.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

I'm surprised you've even heard of orwell. In your fear of a dystopian future you're ignoring the dystopian future we live in.

 

I read Orwell in the 1960's dude. Get real.

[The Cysko Kid]

I read Orwell in the 1960's dude. Get real.

 

 

Who gives a shit?

[DieHardBrownsFan]

Who gives a shit?

 

Obviously you asshole.

[The Cysko Kid]

Obviously you asshole.

 

You, the guy who says you're welcome to poor people using an e.b.t. card, calling anyone an asshole is humorous. And here I thought cal was the more clever wingnut. Kudos.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

You, the guy who says you're welcome to poor people using an e.b.t. card, calling anyone an asshole is humorous. And here I thought cal was the more clever wingnut. Kudos.

 

Cysco quite frankly you come off as somewhat crazy in your posts. But whatever dude. Keep em coming!

[VaporTrail]

 

With your car the cops can pull you over for anything and submit you to test, right?

 

No, actually. They need your permission to search the car unless they have reason to do so (like you get pulled over for speeding and they see an open beer can in the back). The ACLU has a field day with cases like that where the person did nothing wrong and the cops search without a warrant and without reasonable cause.

[The Cysko Kid]

Cysco quite frankly you come off as somewhat crazy in your posts. But whatever dude. Keep em coming!

 

Pot, meet kettle.

[calfoxwc]

The NRA wants mass murders?

 

This, Cysko, is where you are looking like a moron.

 

Taxing ammo to ten times ...what?

 

That type of simpleton emotional outburst will accomplish:

 

1. More hundreds of thousands of people joining the NRA. The NRA grows to even greater size, greater power. Cool.

 

2. Ammo is flying off the shelves already, talk of using price as a weapon will ramp up production, and increase ammo hoarding. Nice job.

 

3. Bashing the NRA is a diversion from true solutions, making the left, as usual, not only counter-productive and their own worst enemy...

but also a major reason mass murders still take place - the left puts political victories ahead of unborn children, why not up their bet

and put them ahead of gun violence victimes, right?

 

4. You aren't making any rational sense. I'm thinking you should try some of those chewy vitamins and a stool softener, because for the most part of this

discussion, you are full of it and may be suffering from maltrution - just a guess.....

[ballpeen]

You, the guy who says you're welcome to poor people using an e.b.t. card, calling anyone an asshole is humorous. And here I thought cal was the more clever wingnut. Kudos.

 

 

I am the one who say's you're welcome....

[The Cysko Kid]

I am the one who say's you're welcome....

 

 

...my bad diehard. I was mistaken and I'm sorry.

[The Cysko Kid]

The NRA wants mass murders?

 

This, Cysko, is where you are looking like a moron.

 

Taxing ammo to ten times ...what?

 

That type of simpleton emotional outburst will accomplish:

 

1. More hundreds of thousands of people joining the NRA. The NRA grows to even greater size, greater power. Cool.

 

2. Ammo is flying off the shelves already, talk of using price as a weapon will ramp up production, and increase ammo hoarding. Nice job.

 

3. Bashing the NRA is a diversion from true solutions, making the left, as usual, not only counter-productive and their own worst enemy...

but also a major reason mass murders still take place - the left puts political victories ahead of unborn children, why not up their bet

and put them ahead of gun violence victimes, right?

 

4. You aren't making any rational sense. I'm thinking you should try some of those chewy vitamins and a stool softener, because for the most part of this

discussion, you are full of it and may be suffering from maltrution - just a guess.....

 

 

The nra is a business. Every mass murder is good for the business, bottom line.

 

 

texting ammo is a great idea you don't like it so it sounds crazy to you

 

not having any form of gun control sounds crazy to me.

[Westside Steve]

No, actually. They need your permission to search the car unless they have reason to do so (like you get pulled over for speeding and they see an open beer can in the back). The ACLU has a field day with cases like that where the person did nothing wrong and the cops search without a warrant and without reasonable cause.

While that's technically the case I don't think many officers need more than the weaving excuse.

We were at a winery, Susan had nothing to drink, and about a mile or 2 from it we were pulled over for, get this, going the speed limit.

There was a curve and a yellow triangular sign with 25 as in miles per hour on it.

She slowed to 25 and the officer pulled us over wanting to know why we were driving so slowly.

 

As for searching your car it's perfectly alright to search anything they can see through the windows.

And in most, if not all, States it is illegal to tint your windows so they can't see in.

 

But at the end of the day do you think drunk driving is serious or not?

If Susan had been drunk that officer might have saved someone's life.

And it was probably a good guess seeing a car leaving a winery, ya think?

 

So I'd say that stands true for gun violence.

It's not too weird to imagine that a hell of a lot of guns fall into the wrong hands because the owners don't keep them secure, how about it?

 

WSS

[VaporTrail]

While that's technically the case I don't think many officers need more than the weaving excuse.

We were at a winery, Susan had nothing to drink, and about a mile or 2 from it we were pulled over for, get this, going the speed limit.

There was a curve and a yellow triangular sign with 25 as in miles per hour on it.

She slowed to 25 and the officer pulled us over wanting to know why we were driving so slowly.

 

As for searching your car it's perfectly alright to search anything they can see through the windows.

And in most, if not all, States it is illegal to tint your windows so they can't see in.

 

But at the end of the day do you think drunk driving is serious or not?

If Susan had been drunk that officer might have saved someone's life.

And it was probably a good guess seeing a car leaving a winery, ya think?

 

So I'd say that stands true for gun violence.

It's not too weird to imagine that a hell of a lot of guns fall into the wrong hands because the owners don't keep them secure, how about it?

 

WSS

 

Yeah, but she wasn't drunk. I'd rather a checkpoint be set up than to get pulled over for leaving a bar. Of course I think drunk driving is a problem, but your story doesn't justify why spot checks should exist. Most of the time, the cop's not going to find shit if he's just pulling people over for doing the speed limit. Either way, a car search is much, much different than a home search.

[Westside Steve]

Yeah, but she wasn't drunk. I'd rather a checkpoint be set up than to get pulled over for leaving a bar. Of course I think drunk driving is a problem, but your story doesn't justify why spot checks should exist. Most of the time, the cop's not going to find shit if he's just pulling people over for doing the speed limit. Either way, a car search is much, much different than a home search.

Of course announcing a check ahead of time sort of negates any usefulness.

And of course we're not talking about a search of the house, just hello sir could we check to see the weapons you have registered are secured?

 

Any of you guys, not necessarily you, who think there should be laws requiring firearms to be registered and secured, how else?

After the fact? After your lunatic 22 year old or you're stupid 14 year old take it out of your nightstand and shoot themselves or somebody else?

 

Charging someone posthumously seems like cold comfort to me.

WSS

[VaporTrail]

Of course announcing a check ahead of time sort of negates any usefulness.

And of course we're not talking about a search of the house, just hello sir could we check to see the weapons you have registered are secured?

WSS

 

1 - What do you mean by secure? What if the guy says they're in the gun cabinet? Is he going to bring the gun out to the officer? Of course not! Therefore, it'd be a search of the house.

 

2 - How often do you expect these checks to take place? The likelihood of these checks occurring between the time a gun gets stolen by a crazy and used to commit a massacre at a school seems astronomically low.

 

I just fail to see how anyone would benefit from that.

[Westside Steve]

1 - What do you mean by secure? What if the guy says they're in the gun cabinet? Is he going to bring the gun out to the officer? Of course not! Therefore, it'd be a search of the house.

 

2 - How often do you expect these checks to take place? The likelihood of these checks occurring between the time a gun gets stolen by a crazy and used to commit a massacre at a school seems astronomically low.

 

I just fail to see how anyone would benefit from that.

Same way the gas company comes in to check your meter. It's not a search of the house. Just looking at the meter.

 

Just talking about trying to change behavior a little bit, sorry. Many of the people here have expressed a desire to make it mandatory that your weapons be secure in your home, not laying around accessible to anyone.

If there's no possible way to enforce that then why bother with the law?

 

Except to provide some sanctimonious politicians with a little air time.

 

WSS

[VaporTrail]

Same way the gas company comes in to check your meter. It's not a search of the house. Just looking at the meter.

 

Just talking about trying to change behavior a little bit, sorry. Many of the people here have expressed a desire to make it mandatory that your weapons be secure in your home, not laying around accessible to anyone.

If there's no possible way to enforce that then why bother with the law?

 

Except to provide some sanctimonious politicians with a little air time.

 

WSS

 

Steve, the gas man checking the meter is completely different than a cop ensuring your guns are "secured." Last time I checked, I don't think anyone stores their guns outside of their house.

[Westside Steve]

The gas meters when they are in the basement.

 

So do you think there should be a law requiring you take measures to secure your weapons in your home or not?

It's fine with me if you don't, just curious.

 

Do you think the health department should you spot checks in public eateries?

WSS

[DieHardBrownsFan]

Sorry Steve, it's a horrible idea. And quite different from comparing gas/electric meter readers to someone coming into your home unannounced to inspect your weapons. I just think it is a ridiculous idea.

[The Cysko Kid]

Sorry Steve, it's a horrible idea. And quite different from comparing gas/electric meter readers to someone coming into your home unannounced to inspect your weapons. I just think it is a ridiculous idea.

 

Why is it ridiculous? Do you just leave your weapons lying around where they could be stolen anytime you're not home? That would be highly irresponsible.

 

How about this? They mandate a law where a gun safe is necessary and it sends a signal to a monitoring company via gsm radio, phone or internet whenever the gun safe is opened, prompting them to call you and verify that you've removed the weapons. If you don't answer they call the cops.

 

Same as any alarm system?

 

Would that be too invasive for you? What if it were part of your home insurance?

[The Cysko Kid]

This would be not so much a gun control measure but more a way to keep them from being stolen, whether by a robber, or by Adam Lanza, and the greico family killer, who are the real problem.

 

How about you only have to have it if you have dependants, of any kind, living in the house, how about that?