On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:08:31 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


**** you off. :-)


Mostly because it would mean another tax

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 21:39:59 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 16:01:28 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:42:27 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:09:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration. If for some reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that firearm.

===

The usual argument against mandatory registration is that in can be
seen as a first step towards confiscation. That might seem ridiculous
to some but it has happened elsewhere, and it's very hard to put the
toothpaste back in the tube once the information and law is out there.
It would turn a large percentage of the population into law breakers,
sort of like prohibition and the 55 mph speed limit.


Not so farfetched an idea.

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/27/59725...cond-amendment

I'd go along with total repeal if they substituted term limits as the new amendment.

Two different issues but it does demonstrate why these guys should
retire. They are delusional.
Even if you could get a repeal out of congress and that is a huge
stretch, there is no way you get enough states, even if they do split
up California.


I'm just saying that I'd trade the one for the other. **** the guns, let's get the country away from
the permanent assholes on the hill.

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and out of
control.* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to be* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old, named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for as* "sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.* If for some reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a 7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!

On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and out of
control.Â* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to beÂ* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old, named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for asÂ* "sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."Â* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.Â* If for some reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.Â* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a 7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!



There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to
see implemented and enforced. Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime
laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed.

Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass
killings" so therefore it's not helpful, I'd like to make the point
that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's heads
they may be more careful in the control of who has access to their
firearms. I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings who got
the firearm from his mother who technically owned it.

It's more of an issue of reinforcing awareness of the responsibility
that goes with having firearms.

1 or 2 new laws certainly are not going to end mass shootings or
criminal activities using firearms. What is required is a cultural
change that includes those who are so adamant about their 2nd Amendment
rights and all the naysayers who find every reason in the world to argue
that any further attempt to control the use and ownership of firearms is
fruitless. Change has to start somewhere. Better to recognize and
accept that there's a serious problem and support those reasonable
attempts to at least have some potential affect than to turn a blind eye
and wake up someday to find that far more draconian measures have been
enacted.

I fully support the right to gun ownership for last resort self defense
and sporting activities. With that right comes responsibility however.

On 6/30/18 9:30 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t
they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and
out of
control.Â* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to beÂ* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy
from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old,
named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for as
"sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."Â* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are
banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the
shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is
legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings
but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.Â* If for some
reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not
registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that
firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.Â* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required
within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and
the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a
7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!



There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to
see implemented and enforced.Â* Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime
laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed.

Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass
killings" so therefore it's not helpful,Â* I'd like to make the point
that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's heads
they may be more careful in the control of who has access to their
firearms.Â* I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings who got
the firearm from his mother who technically owned it.

It's more of an issue of reinforcing awareness of the responsibility
that goes with having firearms.

1 or 2 new laws certainly are not going to end mass shootings or
criminal activities using firearms.Â* What is required is a cultural
change that includes those who are so adamant about their 2nd Amendment
rights and all the naysayers who find every reason in the world to argue
that any further attempt to control the use and ownership of firearms is
fruitless.Â* Change has to start somewhere.Â* Better to recognize and
accept that there's a serious problem and support those reasonable
attempts to at least have some potential affect than to turn a blind eye
and wake up someday to find that far more draconian measures have been
enacted.

I fully support the right to gun ownership for last resort self defense
and sporting activities.Â* With that right comes responsibility however.



I'd extend that responsibility to anyone who "gifts" a kid a firearm.

On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 09:30:52 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and out of
control.* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to be* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old, named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for as* "sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.* If for some reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a 7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!



There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to
see implemented and enforced. Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime
laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed.

Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass
killings" so therefore it's not helpful, I'd like to make the point
that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's heads
they may be more careful in the control of who has access to their
firearms. I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings who got
the firearm from his mother who technically owned it.

It's more of an issue of reinforcing awareness of the responsibility
that goes with having firearms.

1 or 2 new laws certainly are not going to end mass shootings or
criminal activities using firearms. What is required is a cultural
change that includes those who are so adamant about their 2nd Amendment
rights and all the naysayers who find every reason in the world to argue
that any further attempt to control the use and ownership of firearms is
fruitless. Change has to start somewhere. Better to recognize and
accept that there's a serious problem and support those reasonable
attempts to at least have some potential affect than to turn a blind eye
and wake up someday to find that far more draconian measures have been
enacted.

I fully support the right to gun ownership for last resort self defense
and sporting activities. With that right comes responsibility however.



In any of these shootings has the owner of record not been determined?

Change started way back when...when the first gun control laws were established. Those changes, and
there've been many of them, have not seemingly reduced the shootings in this country. The idea that
folks have a 'do nothing' attitude is simply wrong, in my opinion. We all want to *do* something,
but don't know what. Like Greg has said, none of the laws in effect have prevented the shootings,
and more paperwork laws won't either. Look at Chicago. There is living proof that paperwork laws and
absolutely strict gun control doesn't help much. And, each and every law is, in fact, an
infringement on 2nd Amendment rights.

However, I can put up with some infringement. Personally, I'd like to see a high school diploma
requirement and an age requirement for the purchase of any gun - 21 years old sounds about right.
And I'd like to see enforcement of the laws already on the books. Read some of the articles about
how the laws are 'unenforced' in Chicago and you'll understand what I mean.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/u...B98851&gwt=pay

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/...growing-crime/

On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 10:34:17 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 6/30/18 9:30 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t
they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and
out of
control.* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to be* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy
from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old,
named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for as
"sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are
banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the
shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is
legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings
but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.* If for some
reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not
registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that
firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required
within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and
the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a
7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!



There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to
see implemented and enforced.* Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime
laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed.

Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass
killings" so therefore it's not helpful,* I'd like to make the point
that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's heads
they may be more careful in the control of who has access to their
firearms.* I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings who got
the firearm from his mother who technically owned it.

It's more of an issue of reinforcing awareness of the responsibility
that goes with having firearms.

1 or 2 new laws certainly are not going to end mass shootings or
criminal activities using firearms.* What is required is a cultural
change that includes those who are so adamant about their 2nd Amendment
rights and all the naysayers who find every reason in the world to argue
that any further attempt to control the use and ownership of firearms is
fruitless.* Change has to start somewhere.* Better to recognize and
accept that there's a serious problem and support those reasonable
attempts to at least have some potential affect than to turn a blind eye
and wake up someday to find that far more draconian measures have been
enacted.

I fully support the right to gun ownership for last resort self defense
and sporting activities.* With that right comes responsibility however.



I'd extend that responsibility to anyone who "gifts" a kid a firearm.

Absolutely. There should be a record of the transaction.

On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 11:03:47 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 09:30:52 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and out of
control.* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to be* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old, named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for as* "sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.* If for some reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a 7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!



There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to
see implemented and enforced. Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime
laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed.

Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass
killings" so therefore it's not helpful, I'd like to make the point
that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's heads
they may be more careful in the control of who has access to their
firearms. I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings who got
the firearm from his mother who technically owned it.

It's more of an issue of reinforcing awareness of the responsibility
that goes with having firearms.

1 or 2 new laws certainly are not going to end mass shootings or
criminal activities using firearms. What is required is a cultural
change that includes those who are so adamant about their 2nd Amendment
rights and all the naysayers who find every reason in the world to argue
that any further attempt to control the use and ownership of firearms is
fruitless. Change has to start somewhere. Better to recognize and
accept that there's a serious problem and support those reasonable
attempts to at least have some potential affect than to turn a blind eye
and wake up someday to find that far more draconian measures have been
enacted.

I fully support the right to gun ownership for last resort self defense
and sporting activities. With that right comes responsibility however.



In any of these shootings has the owner of record not been determined?

Change started way back when...when the first gun control laws were established. Those changes, and
there've been many of them, have not seemingly reduced the shootings in this country. The idea that
folks have a 'do nothing' attitude is simply wrong, in my opinion. We all want to *do* something,
but don't know what. Like Greg has said, none of the laws in effect have prevented the shootings,
and more paperwork laws won't either. Look at Chicago. There is living proof that paperwork laws and
absolutely strict gun control doesn't help much. And, each and every law is, in fact, an
infringement on 2nd Amendment rights.

However, I can put up with some infringement. Personally, I'd like to see a high school diploma
requirement and an age requirement for the purchase of any gun - 21 years old sounds about right.
And I'd like to see enforcement of the laws already on the books. Read some of the articles about
how the laws are 'unenforced' in Chicago and you'll understand what I mean.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/u...B98851&gwt=pay

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/...growing-crime/

===

You make a lot of good points, particularly the lack of strict
enforcement of existing gun laws.

Hese's another aspect however: Horrific as some of these shooting
events have been, the casualty numbers still pale in insignicance
compared to drug overdose deaths and drug related shooting crimes.

Another thing that concerns me about this latest incident is that a
convicted stalker/harasser was allowed to legally purchase a firearm,
and was allowed to continue with threatening behavior. We've got to
somehow get these nut cases off the street.

Keyser Soze

- show quoted text -

"I'd extend that responsibility to anyone who "gifts" a kid a firearm."Â*


I agree wholeheartedly and unequivocally with this post.
I would add that ex military types, who should know better, get double the punishment.

On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 11:24:37 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:

On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 11:03:47 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 09:30:52 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and out of
control.* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to be* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old, named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for as* "sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.* If for some reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a 7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!



There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to
see implemented and enforced. Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime
laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed.

Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass
killings" so therefore it's not helpful, I'd like to make the point
that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's heads
they may be more careful in the control of who has access to their
firearms. I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings who got
the firearm from his mother who technically owned it.

It's more of an issue of reinforcing awareness of the responsibility
that goes with having firearms.

1 or 2 new laws certainly are not going to end mass shootings or
criminal activities using firearms. What is required is a cultural
change that includes those who are so adamant about their 2nd Amendment
rights and all the naysayers who find every reason in the world to argue
that any further attempt to control the use and ownership of firearms is
fruitless. Change has to start somewhere. Better to recognize and
accept that there's a serious problem and support those reasonable
attempts to at least have some potential affect than to turn a blind eye
and wake up someday to find that far more draconian measures have been
enacted.

I fully support the right to gun ownership for last resort self defense
and sporting activities. With that right comes responsibility however.



In any of these shootings has the owner of record not been determined?

Change started way back when...when the first gun control laws were established. Those changes, and
there've been many of them, have not seemingly reduced the shootings in this country. The idea that
folks have a 'do nothing' attitude is simply wrong, in my opinion. We all want to *do* something,
but don't know what. Like Greg has said, none of the laws in effect have prevented the shootings,
and more paperwork laws won't either. Look at Chicago. There is living proof that paperwork laws and
absolutely strict gun control doesn't help much. And, each and every law is, in fact, an
infringement on 2nd Amendment rights.

However, I can put up with some infringement. Personally, I'd like to see a high school diploma
requirement and an age requirement for the purchase of any gun - 21 years old sounds about right.
And I'd like to see enforcement of the laws already on the books. Read some of the articles about
how the laws are 'unenforced' in Chicago and you'll understand what I mean.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/u...B98851&gwt=pay

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/...growing-crime/

===

You make a lot of good points, particularly the lack of strict
enforcement of existing gun laws.

Hese's another aspect however: Horrific as some of these shooting
events have been, the casualty numbers still pale in insignicance
compared to drug overdose deaths and drug related shooting crimes.

Another thing that concerns me about this latest incident is that a
convicted stalker/harasser was allowed to legally purchase a firearm,
and was allowed to continue with threatening behavior. We've got to
somehow get these nut cases off the street.

Agree. Wonder if he lied on the ATF Form 4473, or was even required to complete one.