Notre Dame Football News And Talk  


Come check out the news feed! DD Front Page

Go Back   Notre Dame Football News And Talk > Message Board > Open Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 06-16-2016, 04:48 PM
Soko Soko is offline
Junior Member
Domer Domain Sophomore
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NDMJ1984 View Post
Both of these statements are patently false.

Convicted criminals can buy alcohol, but can't buy guns. Drug addicts can buy alcohol, but can't buy guns. Someone committed to a mental institution at any point in their life can buy alcohol, but can't buy a gun. Military personnel who were dishonorably discharged can buy alcohol, but can't buy guns. Spousal abusers can buy alcohol, but can't buy guns. Stalkers can buy alcohol, but can't buy guns. Illegal immigrants can buy alcohol, but can't buy guns.

From December 2015 - "Its Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them." https://newrepublic.com/article/1254...-guns-yes-them

The Firearms Control Act of 1975, which banned gun ownership for D.C. Residents: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firear...ns_Act_of_1975

From Tuesday - "Why It's Time to Repeal the Second Amendment"
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...-arms-20160613

Now, tell me again that no one wants to take away guns?
If you asked me whether the world is a better place with or without guns then it is clearly a gun free environment. However even the most ardent gun control activist knows that is completely out of the question but there has to be some common sense invoked with regards to how and where guns are sold and to whom. The fact that people's rights regarding guns now allow them to open carry in bars and restaurants in some states just blows my mind.

Personally I don't see the fascination and I'll never own one nor have one in my house but that doesn't mean you can't do as you please. Responsible citizens and gun owners would have nothing to worry about so I'm not sure why they get in such a tizzy whenever this is brought up.
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Don't like this ad? Register to make it go away!

  #52  
Old 06-16-2016, 04:51 PM
Rocketsan's Avatar
Rocketsan Rocketsan is offline
Tenured
Domer Domain Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,724
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NDMJ1984 View Post
Why wouldn't it be that easy/quick? The reporter, a law abiding American citizen with no criminal record or tenure in a mental health institution, exercised her right to keep and bear arms. The efficiency of the system, which seems to have so many people outraged, has no bearing on its efficacy. I can't find a single article where someone who should have failed a background check was legally in possession of a gun while committing a crime. It's a right enshrined in our constitution, and based on its location in our Bill of Rights, presumably the second most important right in the eyes of the founders.
Ease up...I'm Canadian. I didn't know it was that simple in the US...
__________________
http://imageshack.com/a/img546/3410/0at9.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 06-16-2016, 04:55 PM
nickman54's Avatar
nickman54 nickman54 is offline
Member
Domer Domain Junior
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NE Indiana
Posts: 2,767
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soko View Post
If you asked me whether the world is a better place with or without guns then it is clearly a gun free environment. However even the most ardent gun control activist knows that is completely out of the question but there has to be some common sense invoked with regards to how and where guns are sold and to whom. The fact that people's rights regarding guns now allow them to open carry in bars and restaurants in some states just blows my mind.

Personally I don't see the fascination and I'll never own one nor have one in my house but that doesn't mean you can't do as you please. Responsible citizens and gun owners would have nothing to worry about so I'm not sure why they get in such a tizzy whenever this is brought up.
Responsible citizens are the ones that get punished because of criminals, that why we get into a tizzy...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 06-16-2016, 05:07 PM
Jim2Dokes Jim2Dokes is offline
Junior Member
Domer Domain Sophomore
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,049
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NDMJ1984 View Post
That's odd, these two little known government agencies seems to disagree with you:
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ni...ied-or-delayed

http://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-profess...ICS/index.html
You failed to read my post and also the hipaa article. What I am saying is that for all the above mentioned reasons in the fbi article those would have to be on record. Note that the Hipaa article you posted specifically states that most people receiving treatment would not qualify to be reported. It also states that states continue to have the right to have their own laws in regards to this. In most states it continues to not be required to report to law enforcement institutionalizations and especially someone who has a drug addiction. Furthermore, how would someone with a drug addiction be reported? There are plenty of people who have went to jail for DUI carry guns.

And the found fathers are over 200 years ago. I would have hoped we have advanced as a society and don't need to worry about redcoats or carry muskets around. It is too open of a right in today's society. And going by your logic of following that amendment then none of the laws you mentioned that people who have drug addictions or criminal records ect should be barred as well. Considering it is the right of all citizens

Last edited by Jim2Dokes; 06-16-2016 at 05:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 06-16-2016, 05:16 PM
nickman54's Avatar
nickman54 nickman54 is offline
Member
Domer Domain Junior
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NE Indiana
Posts: 2,767
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim2Dokes View Post
You failed to read my post and also the hipaa article. What I am saying is that for all the above mentioned reasons in the fbi article those would have to be on record. Note that the Hipaa article you posted specifically states that most people receiving treatment would not qualify to be reported. It also states that states continue to have the right to have their own laws in regards to this. In most states it continues to not be required to report to law enforcement institutionalizations and especially someone who has a drug addiction. Furthermore, how would someone with a drug addiction be reported? There are plenty of people who have went to jail for DUI carry guns.

And the found fathers are over 200 years ago. I would have hoped we have advanced as a society and don't need to worry about redcoats or carry muskets around. It is too open of a right in today's society. And going by your logic of following that amendment then none of the laws you mentioned that people who have drug addictions or criminal records ect should be barred as well. Considering it is the right of all citizens
https://www.atf.gov/file/61446/download
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 06-16-2016, 05:29 PM
jessemoore97 jessemoore97 is offline
Member
Domer Domain Junior
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 3,590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soko View Post
If you asked me whether the world is a better place with or without guns then it is clearly a gun free environment. However even the most ardent gun control activist knows that is completely out of the question but there has to be some common sense invoked with regards to how and where guns are sold and to whom. The fact that people's rights regarding guns now allow them to open carry in bars and restaurants in some states just blows my mind.

Personally I don't see the fascination and I'll never own one nor have one in my house but that doesn't mean you can't do as you please. Responsible citizens and gun owners would have nothing to worry about so I'm not sure why they get in such a tizzy whenever this is brought up.
No there doesn't need to be common sense, because that is entirely a subjective position. It is based off emotion and people's beliefs rather than fact. Who's common sense do we look to? Many find it highly disrespectful that their common sense is considered lesser than another's. My job would be extraordinarily easier and complicated at the same time if I could just arrest or cite people for common sense violations.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 06-16-2016, 05:42 PM
jessemoore97 jessemoore97 is offline
Member
Domer Domain Junior
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 3,590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim2Dokes View Post
You failed to read my post and also the hipaa article. What I am saying is that for all the above mentioned reasons in the fbi article those would have to be on record. Note that the Hipaa article you posted specifically states that most people receiving treatment would not qualify to be reported. It also states that states continue to have the right to have their own laws in regards to this. In most states it continues to not be required to report to law enforcement institutionalizations and especially someone who has a drug addiction. Furthermore, how would someone with a drug addiction be reported? There are plenty of people who have went to jail for DUI carry guns.

And the found fathers are over 200 years ago. I would have hoped we have advanced as a society and don't need to worry about redcoats or carry muskets around. It is too open of a right in today's society. And going by your logic of following that amendment then none of the laws you mentioned that people who have drug addictions or criminal records ect should be barred as well. Considering it is the right of all citizens
How is it too open of a right, to keep and bear arms, in the past, now, or in the future when done by law abiding American citizens? I haven't seen one rational, fact based argument brought up by gun control advocates that has refuted any of the legitimate points made by gun supporters.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 06-16-2016, 05:43 PM
echo88's Avatar
echo88 echo88 is offline
Tenured
Domer Domain Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soko View Post
If you asked me whether the world is a better place with or without guns then it is clearly a gun free environment. However even the most ardent gun control activist knows that is completely out of the question but there has to be some common sense invoked with regards to how and where guns are sold and to whom. The fact that people's rights regarding guns now allow them to open carry in bars and restaurants in some states just blows my mind.

Personally I don't see the fascination and I'll never own one nor have one in my house but that doesn't mean you can't do as you please. Responsible citizens and gun owners would have nothing to worry about so I'm not sure why they get in such a tizzy whenever this is brought up.
In what state is it legal to carry a concealed weapon in bars (and drink)? Private businesses are allowed to ban concealed weapons if they choose to do so. And CC laws are pretty clear about the fact that you cannot consume alcohol while carrying. So if someone is carrying in a bar, they aren't drinking. And if they're carrying in a restaurant, it's because the restaurant is cool with the CC laws of that state.
__________________
"If a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy." - Flemming Rose
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 06-16-2016, 06:32 PM
Jim2Dokes Jim2Dokes is offline
Junior Member
Domer Domain Sophomore
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,049
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickman54 View Post
Duuude! read my post, it doesn't matter if it's on the form. People can still put whatever down. Until it is on record there is nothing that can be done. You also can't join the military if have HIstory of mental illness, however there is no way for the military to know unless one tells them.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 06-16-2016, 08:40 PM
jessemoore97 jessemoore97 is offline
Member
Domer Domain Junior
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 3,590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by echo88 View Post
In what state is it legal to carry a concealed weapon in bars (and drink)? Private businesses are allowed to ban concealed weapons if they choose to do so. And CC laws are pretty clear about the fact that you cannot consume alcohol while carrying. So if someone is carrying in a bar, they aren't drinking. And if they're carrying in a restaurant, it's because the restaurant is cool with the CC laws of that state.
In Iowa it was ok. The State Legislature enacted uniform laws for CC some years back. It used to be that each County sheriff issued CC permits based entirely on their whims. We had some that issued permits as long as you passed all the qualifications and background checks, while others wouldn't issue any or very few based on whatever reason even if you were good for everything else. Iowa has 99 counties, and we basically had 99 different ways to get permits.

The legislature in an effort to finally make things uniform, made laws to cover CC across the state basically saying you could anywhere but schools and the like. Well in their efforts they were a little short sighted about carrying in bars, drinking, and the like. It's been remedied since.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 06-16-2016, 09:28 PM
Jim2Dokes Jim2Dokes is offline
Junior Member
Domer Domain Sophomore
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,049
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jessemoore97 View Post
How is it too open of a right, to keep and bear arms, in the past, now, or in the future when done by law abiding American citizens? I haven't seen one rational, fact based argument brought up by gun control advocates that has refuted any of the legitimate points made by gun supporters.
Because in those days it was intended so that you could walk around in your knight suit with spears. You can't even have a knife that ejects with a button nowadays but you can have a gun with the safety on the trigger (makes a lot of sense). It's outdated and had entirely different reasoning in its intention. Amendments get revised, deleted and added throughout our history.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 06-16-2016, 10:03 PM
jessemoore97 jessemoore97 is offline
Member
Domer Domain Junior
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 3,590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim2Dokes View Post
Because in those days it was intended so that you could walk around in your knight suit with spears. You can't even have a knife that ejects with a button nowadays but you can have a gun with the safety on the trigger (makes a lot of sense). It's outdated and had entirely different reasoning in its intention. Amendments get revised, deleted and added throughout our history.
In your knight suit with spears? Who's walked around in a suit of armor since say the 1500's? Last I checked only nobility or the military had or could afford armor. Which BTW guns pretty much made armor obsolete.

Are you criticising the functionality of guns with the safety on the trigger? Not sure I am following you on that point.

Yes there have been new ammendments added and obsolete ones taken away. It can be done, and there are articulatable reasons why they happened. I still haven't seen the reason or facts why from anyone for doing it to the 2nd with regard to law abiding American citizens.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 06-16-2016, 10:05 PM
Kelly Gruene Kelly Gruene is offline
Junior Member
Domer Domain Sophomore
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Dallas/Fort Worth
Posts: 1,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim2Dokes View Post
Because in those days it was intended so that you could walk around in your knight suit with spears. You can't even have a knife that ejects with a button nowadays but you can have a gun with the safety on the trigger (makes a lot of sense). It's outdated and had entirely different reasoning in its intention. Amendments get revised, deleted and added throughout our history.
I am not a gun rights advocate, don't own a gun.
But...
I think the reasoning and intention of the second amendment was to prevent a centralized authority from dominating the citizenry through force. If citizens were able to be armed, that would at least cause a central authority to pause in its domination, if that were to be its intent. For example, suppose a general in a military garners huge support of the military and takes over the government, then tries to shape things the way he/she sees fit (see what I did there?). It would be one thing to do that against a citizenry who has nothing more than "knight suit with spears" to fight back with, but something altogether different to attempt to do that when the citizenry has significant means at its disposal.
As unlikely as this scenario seems, it may be argued that it is unlikely precisely because of the arms the citizens currently have.
I don't think that the reasoning and intention of the 2nd amendment has changed at all. I do think that there could be some effective, fair, balanced regulation of armaments in this country. I'm not conversant enough in this to know what those regulations might be or how to implement them.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 06-16-2016, 10:20 PM
nickman54's Avatar
nickman54 nickman54 is offline
Member
Domer Domain Junior
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NE Indiana
Posts: 2,767
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim2Dokes View Post
Duuude! read my post, it doesn't matter if it's on the form. People can still put whatever down. Until it is on record there is nothing that can be done. You also can't join the military if have HIstory of mental illness, however there is no way for the military to know unless one tells them.
I wasn't trying to make a point with that Jim. I wasn't sure if anyone had seen the form and thought I would post it. I'm not really debating this with anyone because I know from past experiences minds are rarely changed on the subject.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 06-16-2016, 10:48 PM
davislove's Avatar
davislove davislove is offline
Senior Member
Domer Domain All American
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,234
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickman54 View Post
I wasn't trying to make a point with that Jim. I wasn't sure if anyone had seen the form and thought I would post it. I'm not really debating this with anyone because I know from past experiences minds are rarely changed on the subject.
You know you are my favorite person on this board and anyone who has read your post about guns know that you know your stuff. That said, do you think most gun owners share your knowledge base?
__________________
A couple news stories don't represent a whole population of people.

FaithInIrishForever--March 21, 2017
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 06-16-2016, 11:23 PM
echo88's Avatar
echo88 echo88 is offline
Tenured
Domer Domain Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davislove View Post
You know you are my favorite person on this board and anyone who has read your post about guns know that you know your stuff. That said, do you think most gun owners share your knowledge base?
Unfortunately, in this country you dont need to demonstrate knowledge to act on your entitlements---voting, having children, and owning a firearm are some of the more important ones...

If I had my way, everyone purchasing a gun would have to go through a safety course similar to the class required for the concealed carry permit...
__________________
"If a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy." - Flemming Rose
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 06-16-2016, 11:56 PM
Jim2Dokes Jim2Dokes is offline
Junior Member
Domer Domain Sophomore
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,049
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jessemoore97 View Post
In your knight suit with spears? Who's walked around in a suit of armor since say the 1500's? Last I checked only nobility or the military had or could afford armor. Which BTW guns pretty much made armor obsolete.

Are you criticising the functionality of guns with the safety on the trigger? Not sure I am following you on that point.

Yes there have been new ammendments added and obsolete ones taken away. It can be done, and there are articulatable reasons why they happened. I still haven't seen the reason or facts why from anyone for doing it to the 2nd with regard to law abiding American citizens.
It's in the definition to bear arms (wear a suit of armor) and the intent was not for guns alone but for other weapons as well such as spears, guns were not very common during the revolution time period a musket here and there. Essentially you had the right to defend your land with weapons if the redcoats or any other govt types tried to take it. We call this eminent domain nowadays and the government uses paperwork not guns but that's a diff topic. Anyways I was pointing out the irony of switch blades being illegal but you can own a gun that the safety is legally allowed to be on the trigger.

Last edited by Jim2Dokes; 06-16-2016 at 11:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 06-17-2016, 12:25 AM
nickman54's Avatar
nickman54 nickman54 is offline
Member
Domer Domain Junior
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NE Indiana
Posts: 2,767
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davislove View Post
You know you are my favorite person on this board and anyone who has read your post about guns know that you know your stuff. That said, do you think most gun owners share your knowledge base?
I don't claim to be an expert on guns, and I don't expect everyone to know everything about every weapon system. That being said I would say no. I've been to enough gun shows and gun shops to see some real morons talking out of their asses. i don't believe not knowing a ton about firearms precludes someone from owning them though. As long as the four basic rules of safety while handling guns are followed an inexperienced individual is not putting anyone in anymore danger than most daily activities. IMO
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 06-17-2016, 12:43 AM
jessemoore97 jessemoore97 is offline
Member
Domer Domain Junior
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 3,590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by echo88 View Post
Unfortunately, in this country you dont need to demonstrate knowledge to act on your entitlements---voting, having children, and owning a firearm are some of the more important ones...

If I had my way, everyone purchasing a gun would have to go through a safety course similar to the class required for the concealed carry permit...
I have also batted around that concept along with giving out trigger locks with every gun purchase too. Problem is that even the CC courses have been end arounded because you can take an online course instead of classroom. In the classroom instructors are able to ask and answer questions from people face to face, and can help to walk through scenarios etc explaining to people what is legal for them to do. Secondly it allows the instructors the opportunity to actually make sure a person can safely handle a firearm, shoot it, and so forth. It gives them a chance to make sure correct guidance is given, because as you said you can act on your entitlements without knowledge of what the heck you're doing.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 06-17-2016, 12:47 AM
jessemoore97 jessemoore97 is offline
Member
Domer Domain Junior
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 3,590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim2Dokes View Post
It's in the definition to bear arms (wear a suit of armor) and the intent was not for guns alone but for other weapons as well such as spears, guns were not very common during the revolution time period a musket here and there. Essentially you had the right to defend your land with weapons if the redcoats or any other govt types tried to take it. We call this eminent domain nowadays and the government uses paperwork not guns but that's a diff topic. Anyways I was pointing out the irony of switch blades being illegal but you can own a gun that the safety is legally allowed to be on the trigger.
In reality the only true safety is to have your booger hook off the trigger, safeties fail and I don't trust them.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 06-17-2016, 02:49 AM
coltssb coltssb is offline
Member
Domer Domain Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 4,031
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by echo88 View Post
Unfortunately, in this country you dont need to demonstrate knowledge to act on your entitlements---voting, having children, and owning a firearm are some of the more important ones...

If I had my way, everyone purchasing a gun would have to go through a safety course similar to the class required for the concealed carry permit...
Now this I can agree with. Even getting your license you have to drive with somebody for 6 months or so, have some knowledge about how to drive, the rules, take a test and have to be able to show competentance of driving. My girlfriend who's never fired or held a gun can simply walk in and probably have a gun within hours. It does seem a little crazy to think about.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 06-17-2016, 10:56 AM
davislove's Avatar
davislove davislove is offline
Senior Member
Domer Domain All American
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,234
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by echo88 View Post
Unfortunately, in this country youu dont need to demonstrate knowledge to act on your entitlements---voting, having children, and owning a firearm are some of the more important ones...

If I had my way, everyone purchasing a gun would have to go through a safety course similar to the class required for the concealed carry permit...
A citizen can't commit mass murder with a vote or pregnancy.

In this country we change things that no longer fit. It just makes sense that you should be competent and sane to own a gun
__________________
A couple news stories don't represent a whole population of people.

FaithInIrishForever--March 21, 2017
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 06-17-2016, 02:37 PM
echo88's Avatar
echo88 echo88 is offline
Tenured
Domer Domain Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davislove View Post
A citizen can't commit mass murder with a vote or pregnancy.

In this country we change things that no longer fit. It just makes sense that you should be competent and sane to own a gun
Actually, if you're an unfit parent, you can create offspring who commit mass murder....or who turn to a life of criminal activity....both have the potential to affect me--the law-abiding citizen--and I intend to protect myself with a weapon. I doubt you'd argue that most criminals/mentally ill had a healthy upbringing.

If you're an idiot who gets to vote, you can elect politicians whose foreign policy can encourage lone wolf attacks... or whose PC-fueled madness expands the chasm of racial animosity....or take away your right to protect yourself when you encounter criminals or radicalized nutjobs who were raised by unfit parents.

It's all related.

In this country, we don't change things that no longer fit. We have become a nation of misplaced blame. Nothing is anyone's fault. We've ushered in an era where persons are no longer responsible for their own actions. And if people aren't to blame, then what is left?
__________________
"If a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy." - Flemming Rose

Last edited by echo88; 06-17-2016 at 02:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 06-17-2016, 02:40 PM
echo88's Avatar
echo88 echo88 is offline
Tenured
Domer Domain Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickman54 View Post
I don't claim to be an expert on guns, and I don't expect everyone to know everything about every weapon system. That being said I would say no. I've been to enough gun shows and gun shops to see some real morons talking out of their asses. i don't believe not knowing a ton about firearms precludes someone from owning them though. As long as the four basic rules of safety while handling guns are followed an inexperienced individual is not putting anyone in anymore danger than most daily activities. IMO
You could kill just as many people, if not more, with a bic lighter and some gas in a populated building. Lots of everyday objects, in the hands of an irresponsible or determined individual, can be turned into a weapon.
__________________
"If a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy." - Flemming Rose
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 06-17-2016, 03:29 PM
nickman54's Avatar
nickman54 nickman54 is offline
Member
Domer Domain Junior
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NE Indiana
Posts: 2,767
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by echo88 View Post
You could kill just as many people, if not more, with a bic lighter and some gas in a populated building. Lots of everyday objects, in the hands of an irresponsible or determined individual, can be turned into a weapon.
Yep.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Land_fire
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

Also visit IrishEnvy, our Notre Dame Football partner site

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:00 AM.

Last Updated: July 20, 2019

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.