If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Orlando Sentinel)   Fifteen-year-old boy who murdered two people with a handgun got the weapon from his father, who took him gun shopping and let him pick out which gun he wanted. Naturally police have arrested the father   (orlandosentinel.com) divider line 318
    More: Florida, handguns, Osceola County  
•       •       •

10132 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Aug 2013 at 9:17 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



318 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-20 10:30:22 PM
There's nothing that could have been done to prevent this.

If the kid hadn't got a firearm and ammunition from his father, he probably just would have got one from somewhere else or shot those people with a knife or something
 
2013-08-20 10:30:28 PM
This is a semi-auto gun that fires a .45 ACP (a pistol round) and people in this thread have called it an assault rifle? Dear God.
 
2013-08-20 10:31:02 PM
My father started me shooting at six with a ppk at the local gun range.

At age 10 I was given a .177 crossman air rifle that shot pellets or bbs.

At age 12 I was given a 22, single shot, that was bolt action, but you it had a spring loaded firing pin, so you had to chamber the round and pull back the spring loaded bolt with the firing pin.  Literally 2 minutes between shots.

At 13 I qualified as a Sharpshooter with the NRA.

I never shot anyone.  I do not hunt.

At 22 I bought a Glock.  Kept it for a month before selling it, realizing that it was bad news if I carried it.  Since dad sent the whole family through the concealed carry course.

Ironically of our dead-eye family, mom is rated as an Expert.  But that is due to her father giving her a bow as a six year old and her uncanny eye site.

I have 2 lightweight 38s in the house with shaved hammers and plastic handles.  They are both hidden in false panels, one upstairs and the other downstairs.

It takes a responsible citizen and training to learn how to own and handle fire arms but the small percentage that does not use them correctly tarnish it for the rest of us.
 
2013-08-20 10:31:48 PM

ben_reddy: The kid got his pick of guns and he goes with a Hi-Point?


I'm guessing budgetary constraints kept him from the SCAR-H.
 
2013-08-20 10:34:32 PM

JosephFinn: Supplied a minor with an illegal weapon.  Both he and the shop owner should be arrested.


Father bought it in his name, took it home.   Gun shop owner has nothing to do with this.

Do you think if a father bought his son a Ford pickup and the kid used it to run over people, that the dealership needs to be sued?  Or if my father buys a knife from Macys, and I stab someone with it, Macy's is responsible?
 
2013-08-20 10:36:04 PM

theflatline: Ironically of our dead-eye family, mom is rated as an Expert. But that is due to her father giving her a bow as a six year old and her uncanny eye site.


Sounds like a couple I knew.  With a rifle, the husband was the best, no argument.  He was a sniper in the army.  With a pistol, the wife  She pretty much out shot everyone at the range.  And she did it wearing a miniskirt and spiked heels.
 
2013-08-20 10:36:37 PM

JosephFinn: Supplied a minor with an illegal weapon.  Both he and the shop owner should be arrested.


Was it, in fact, illegal?

/Not trying to defend the dad, sounds like an appropriate charge.
 
2013-08-20 10:37:36 PM

theflatline: JosephFinn: Supplied a minor with an illegal weapon.  Both he and the shop owner should be arrested.

Father bought it in his name, took it home.   Gun shop owner has nothing to do with this.

Do you think if a father bought his son a Ford pickup and the kid used it to run over people, that the dealership needs to be sued?  Or if my father buys a knife from Macys, and I stab someone with it, Macy's is responsible?


Wait....Macy's sells knives?

Which department? I'm always stuck sitting in a chair when my girlfriend shops.
 
2013-08-20 10:37:51 PM

theflatline: JosephFinn: Supplied a minor with an illegal weapon.  Both he and the shop owner should be arrested.

Father bought it in his name, took it home.   Gun shop owner has nothing to do with this.

Do you think if a father bought his son a Ford pickup and the kid used it to run over people, that the dealership needs to be sued?  Or if my father buys a knife from Macys, and I stab someone with it, Macy's is responsible?


If the kid had already purposely ran over someone with that Ford pickup and the father didn't take away the damn keys, then yeah.

The gun dealer, however, can't be held at fault so long as it was sold legally.
 
2013-08-20 10:38:28 PM

scottydoesntknow: theflatline: JosephFinn: Supplied a minor with an illegal weapon.  Both he and the shop owner should be arrested.

Father bought it in his name, took it home.   Gun shop owner has nothing to do with this.

Do you think if a father bought his son a Ford pickup and the kid used it to run over people, that the dealership needs to be sued?  Or if my father buys a knife from Macys, and I stab someone with it, Macy's is responsible?

Wait....Macy's sells knives?

Which department? I'm always stuck sitting in a chair when my girlfriend shops.


Kitchen department.  D'uh.
 
2013-08-20 10:39:07 PM
WTF is wrong with people! My son has a pellet rifle that he doesn't use without me present. That father should be charged with accessory to murder.
 
2013-08-20 10:39:35 PM

OgreMagi: theflatline: Ironically of our dead-eye family, mom is rated as an Expert. But that is due to her father giving her a bow as a six year old and her uncanny eye site.

Sounds like a couple I knew.  With a rifle, the husband was the best, no argument.  He was a sniper in the army.  With a pistol, the wife  She pretty much out shot everyone at the range.  And she did it wearing a miniskirt and spiked heels.


...  and she wore sleeveless shirts and showed a lot of cleavage.
And seemed to really enjoy getting fresh burns from the hot brass.

/Spice it up a little more, bro.
 
2013-08-20 10:40:21 PM

theflatline: My father started me shooting at six with a ppk at the local gun range.

At age 10 I was given a .177 crossman air rifle that shot pellets or bbs.

At age 12 I was given a 22, single shot, that was bolt action, but you it had a spring loaded firing pin, so you had to chamber the round and pull back the spring loaded bolt with the firing pin.  Literally 2 minutes between shots.

At 13 I qualified as a Sharpshooter with the NRA.

I never shot anyone.  I do not hunt.

At 22 I bought a Glock.  Kept it for a month before selling it, realizing that it was bad news if I carried it.  Since dad sent the whole family through the concealed carry course.

Ironically of our dead-eye family, mom is rated as an Expert.  But that is due to her father giving her a bow as a six year old and her uncanny eye site.

I have 2 lightweight 38s in the house with shaved hammers and plastic handles.  They are both hidden in false panels, one upstairs and the other downstairs.

It takes a responsible citizen and training to learn how to own and handle fire arms but the small percentage that does not use them correctly tarnish it for the rest of us.


On mobile.

Smart.

It took me 2 times to qualify on the M16. First time I had ever handled a firearm. The next time, I fired expert on the M60. That was about the same time a distant cousin of mine blew his own brains out accidentally in front of his new bride doing God knows what.....


Training, training, training. Or is that for elitists?
 
2013-08-20 10:40:31 PM

OgreMagi: scottydoesntknow: theflatline: JosephFinn: Supplied a minor with an illegal weapon.  Both he and the shop owner should be arrested.

Father bought it in his name, took it home.   Gun shop owner has nothing to do with this.

Do you think if a father bought his son a Ford pickup and the kid used it to run over people, that the dealership needs to be sued?  Or if my father buys a knife from Macys, and I stab someone with it, Macy's is responsible?

Wait....Macy's sells knives?

Which department? I'm always stuck sitting in a chair when my girlfriend shops.

Kitchen department.  D'uh.


Damn...and I was thinking hunting knives. Thought they were expanding their merchandise.
 
2013-08-20 10:43:09 PM

poot_rootbeer: There's nothing that could have been done to prevent this.

If the kid hadn't got a firearm and ammunition from his father, he probably just would have got one from somewhere else or shot those people with a knife or something


Well there are stories like this one of a few teens ganging up on an innocent and killing them, and often involve other weapons than guns.  No one ever went after the dad who bought his kid a ball bat that was used to club a kid to death.

However, in cases involving guns the dad should be locked up.  That gun should've stayed in a gun safe till dad took him to a range.  But don't think these kids couldn't have killed without a gun, for it is more about the mentality than the weapon on hand.
 
2013-08-20 10:43:34 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: OgreMagi: theflatline: Ironically of our dead-eye family, mom is rated as an Expert. But that is due to her father giving her a bow as a six year old and her uncanny eye site.

Sounds like a couple I knew.  With a rifle, the husband was the best, no argument.  He was a sniper in the army.  With a pistol, the wife  She pretty much out shot everyone at the range.  And she did it wearing a miniskirt and spiked heels.

...  and she wore sleeveless shirts and showed a lot of cleavage.
And seemed to really enjoy getting fresh burns from the hot brass.

/Spice it up a little more, bro.


Naw, she learned her lesson about cleavage at the range early on.  A woman only makes that mistake once.  She did have incredible boobies, though.  Double Ds (after having them reduced).
 
2013-08-20 10:43:34 PM

MFAWG: Elegy: TuteTibiImperes: Absolutely I would think you should bear some liability if your gun was used in a crime, even if it was stolen from your home, your vehicle, or taken from you while you were carrying concealed.  If that liability seems like too much for some people, maybe they will reconsider owning guns.  Depending on the circumstances I could see civil vs criminal penalties, but the threat of a weapon being stolen is reason enough to own a gun safe.  If you can't afford a gun safe, you can't afford a gun.

First, you're farking insane. In this hypothetical, you want to arrest me, the victim of a crime, for no other reason than being the victim of a crime.

So if someone stills my car and commits a crime with it, am I liable even though the doors were locked.

Second, do you have any idea how much a gun safe costs? Oh sure, a cheap sears model goes for $200, but you can get through those pretty easily. I have a feeling you want those guns really locked up, so you would need the heavy-walled, armored version, which start around $500.

Congratulations, you just priced poor people out of the market. Since many black people are poor, you also disenfranchised a significant percentage of African-Americans out of their constitutional rights, while allowing white people to purchase access to the same rights.

What's next, a poll-tax, you racist fark?

Holy crap, really?


Lets look at some of the more pertinent amendments from bill of rights.

1st: Freedom of Speech. Hate speech is proven to be detrimental to society. In the worst cases it incites violence and discord among citizens. Therefore, every citizen must pay an additional $500 to purchase a free speech permit before utilizing these rights.

2nd: Guns are proven to be detrimental to society. In the worst cases, they are used to commit crimes and murders. Therefore, everyone must pay an additional $500 to purchase a gun safe to utilize these rights, even in cases where are gun safe is not needed.

4th: Search and seizures have a proven beneficial effect on society. They allow police to catch criminals and put violators behind bars. Therefore, you must pay and additional $500 to purchase your "unreasonable search and seizure exemption" to exercise your rights against unreasonable search and seizure.

5th: Rights in criminal cases are detrimental to society. They allow known murderers to walk free on technicalities. Therefore, you must pay $500 for a "criminal rights exemption" in order to exercise these rights.

6th: Fair trials are detrimental to society, just as criminal rights are, because they allow known criminals to walk free on technicalities. Therefore, you must purchase these rights for an additional $500 on top of a lawyer. No excuses - if you can afford a lawyer, $500 is not too much to pay.

7th: civil cases are burdensome to the judicial process and can be proven to have a disproportionate case load on judges and lawyers. Therefore, to exercise your rights to bring a civil suit against someone, you must pay and additional $500 above and beyond any filing and lawyers fees. No excuses - if you can afford to bring a civil case, you can afford $500.


Now, which of these are you OK with? Which are you not?

And are you OK with the fact that in every single instance listed, access to your rights is based upon a financial fee and this would disproportionately affect blacks versus whites per capita?

Really, I have no problem if you want to repeal the second amendment. Get your talking points in order, and go for it. That's your right in a democracy.

But until the second amendment is repealed, stop trying to nickel and dime gun owners out of their constitutional rights with excessive fees and requirements like "you have to own a gun safe to own a gun."

Just because YOU don't care about your rights, doesn't mean that others don't.
 
2013-08-20 10:44:40 PM

69gnarkill69: An Australian baseball player out for a jog in an Oklahoma neighborhood was shot and killed by three "bored" teenagers who decided to kill someone for fun, police said.

Silly white kids.


Interestingly, Australia has just about the strictest gun control laws short of a complete ban.
 
2013-08-20 10:44:43 PM

Elegy: TuteTibiImperes: Absolutely I would think you should bear some liability if your gun was used in a crime, even if it was stolen from your home, your vehicle, or taken from you while you were carrying concealed.  If that liability seems like too much for some people, maybe they will reconsider owning guns.  Depending on the circumstances I could see civil vs criminal penalties, but the threat of a weapon being stolen is reason enough to own a gun safe.  If you can't afford a gun safe, you can't afford a gun.

First, you're farking insane. In this hypothetical, you want to arrest me, the victim of a crime, for no other reason than being the victim of a crime.

So if someone stills my car and commits a crime with it, am I liable even though the doors were locked.

Second, do you have any idea how much a gun safe costs? Oh sure, a cheap sears model goes for $200, but you can get through those pretty easily. I have a feeling you want those guns really locked up, so you would need the heavy-walled, armored version, which start around $500.

Congratulations, you just priced poor people out of the market. Since many black people are poor, you also disenfranchised a significant percentage of African-Americans out of their constitutional rights, while allowing white people to purchase access to the same rights.

What's next, a poll-tax, you racist fark?


A car is a practical necessity for most of the country to get to work, buy groceries, and generally deal with the challenges of life.  Cars are also built primarily for transportation.  Guns, on the other hand, are not a necessity for the vast majority of people (only law enforcement, license security, and the military) and are primarily designed to kill.  Cars != guns.

I'd be willing to concede an exception if the weapon is reported stolen, but require that it be reported stolen immediately upon the owner discovering such, so, if you can prove you were on vacation or a business trip it doesn't kick it until you get home, but if you were home that night and didn't call, you're out of luck.

I'd also promote mandatory liability insurance for all gun owners, yearly license/registration fees charged for each weapon owned, and requiring all gun owners to register their weapons and upon doing so agree to surprise inspections of their storage practices from law enforcement (Germany does this, and it seems to work well for them).

If that means some people can't afford to own guns or get so fed up with the hassle and expense that they decide not to own guns, all the better, it means less guns floating around.
 
2013-08-20 10:44:53 PM

scottydoesntknow: OgreMagi: scottydoesntknow: theflatline: JosephFinn: Supplied a minor with an illegal weapon.  Both he and the shop owner should be arrested.

Father bought it in his name, took it home.   Gun shop owner has nothing to do with this.

Do you think if a father bought his son a Ford pickup and the kid used it to run over people, that the dealership needs to be sued?  Or if my father buys a knife from Macys, and I stab someone with it, Macy's is responsible?

Wait....Macy's sells knives?

Which department? I'm always stuck sitting in a chair when my girlfriend shops.

Kitchen department.  D'uh.

Damn...and I was thinking hunting knives. Thought they were expanding their merchandise.


At Macy's the most you can hope for is a Victorinox.  And I'm not even sure they even sell those.
 
2013-08-20 10:45:25 PM

freetomato: Smart.

It took me 2 times to qualify on the M16. First time I had ever handled a firearm. The next time, I fired expert on the M60. That was about the same time a distant cousin of mine blew his own brains out accidentally in front of his new bride doing God knows what.....

Training, training, training. Or is that for elitists?


Elitists and freetomatoes.
Did you get any time in with those .38s? I farking hated the Smith & Wessons - gritty triggers on 'em.

/Oh, and old soldiers.
//It's how we get to be old soldiers.
///My personal challah recipe is still yours for the asking.
 
2013-08-20 10:45:43 PM

LordJiro: TuteTibiImperes:I'd go as far as to say that gun owners should be held liable for any crimes committed with their weapons.  If you're going to own a gun, you have the responsibility to protect it and keep it locked up so that miscreants can't access it.

This, even if your weapon is stolen. Unless a LOT of effort was made by the thief (like, stealing the whole gun safe), a stolen gun means you neglected your responsibilities as a gun owner.


Thankfully, you are wrong. Certain SCOTUS rulings (too lazy to look them up now) have ruled that to be an unreasonable burden on gun owners, and rightly so. Gun owners have a right to keep their firearms in a readily available location. After all, what good is a gun for self defense, ostensibly the main reason for having one, if it's in a location that's time consuming to reach? I would agree more with your sentiment when it came to securing a large collection, but expecting every last gun to be kept in a safe bolted to the floor is ridiculous and eliminates much of the practical reason for having a gun.

How would you like to be held accountable for a car thief killing someone after stealing your car? Well, guess you should have parked in a better neighborhood then. Or had one of those Lo-Jack things. You could have done more! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!>!!
 
2013-08-20 10:46:04 PM

Dextro: This is a semi-auto gun that fires a .45 ACP (a pistol round) and people in this thread have called it an assault rifle? Dear God.



www.bigheadsays.com

Diane would call it an "assault rifle".

And don't you DARE question Diane.
 
2013-08-20 10:46:41 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Cars != guns.


That is correct.  One is a Constitutionally protected Right.  The other isn't.
 
2013-08-20 10:46:47 PM

OgreMagi: demaL-demaL-yeH: OgreMagi: theflatline: Ironically of our dead-eye family, mom is rated as an Expert. But that is due to her father giving her a bow as a six year old and her uncanny eye site.

Sounds like a couple I knew.  With a rifle, the husband was the best, no argument.  He was a sniper in the army.  With a pistol, the wife  She pretty much out shot everyone at the range.  And she did it wearing a miniskirt and spiked heels.

...  and she wore sleeveless shirts and showed a lot of cleavage.
And seemed to really enjoy getting fresh burns from the hot brass.

/Spice it up a little more, bro.

Naw, she learned her lesson about cleavage at the range early on.  A woman only makes that mistake once.  She did have incredible boobies, though.  Double Ds (after having them reduced).


This is Fark.  You know the drill...
 
2013-08-20 10:48:43 PM

OgreMagi: theflatline: Ironically of our dead-eye family, mom is rated as an Expert. But that is due to her father giving her a bow as a six year old and her uncanny eye site.

Sounds like a couple I knew.  With a rifle, the husband was the best, no argument.  He was a sniper in the army.  With a pistol, the wife  She pretty much out shot everyone at the range.  And she did it wearing a miniskirt and spiked heels.


I worked for the Federal Air Marshal Service for 6 years, practically from 9/12 (not a FAM, support personnel). They have about the highest shooting requirements of any other fed agency. The BEST shot in our field office was a quiet, plump brunette who had been with the BOP and grew up on a farm, shooting squirrels when she was 7. I called her Annie Oakley. If you saw her on a plane, you would think she was a librarian on her way to a conference.

http://www.thegunzone.com/fam-lawman/ fam-qual.html
 
2013-08-20 10:49:00 PM

OgreMagi: Naw, she learned her lesson at the range early on.


Try a sleeve full of hot links from an M-60. Scratch-burns are no fun.
/Always button up tight and check the folds.
 
2013-08-20 10:49:34 PM
Lothar learned of one of Konrad's shootings and took the firearm away from him," the affidavit stated. "However, Konrad was able to access it again and continue to commit shootings with it.
Arrest away.
 
2013-08-20 10:49:45 PM
So the 15 year old is being tried as an adult while the father is being charged with allowing a minor to access his firearms?  Sounds very consistent.
 
2013-08-20 10:49:59 PM

OgreMagi: theflatline: JosephFinn: Supplied a minor with an illegal weapon.  Both he and the shop owner should be arrested.

Father bought it in his name, took it home.   Gun shop owner has nothing to do with this.

Do you think if a father bought his son a Ford pickup and the kid used it to run over people, that the dealership needs to be sued?  Or if my father buys a knife from Macys, and I stab someone with it, Macy's is responsible?

If the kid had already purposely ran over someone with that Ford pickup and the father didn't take away the damn keys, then yeah.

The gun dealer, however, can't be held at fault so long as it was sold legally.



Wait, is there reason to believe that the father KNEW that his son had shot the pedestrian, yet continued to allow access?

Link?

Thanks.
 
2013-08-20 10:51:18 PM
Thanks, Obama!
 
2013-08-20 10:54:12 PM

Amos Quito: OgreMagi: theflatline: JosephFinn: Supplied a minor with an illegal weapon.  Both he and the shop owner should be arrested.

Father bought it in his name, took it home.   Gun shop owner has nothing to do with this.

Do you think if a father bought his son a Ford pickup and the kid used it to run over people, that the dealership needs to be sued?  Or if my father buys a knife from Macys, and I stab someone with it, Macy's is responsible?

If the kid had already purposely ran over someone with that Ford pickup and the father didn't take away the damn keys, then yeah.

The gun dealer, however, can't be held at fault so long as it was sold legally.


Wait, is there reason to believe that the father KNEW that his son had shot the pedestrian, yet continued to allow access?

Link?

Thanks.


...it's in the article.

"Lothar learned of one of Konrad's shootings and took the firearm away from him," the affidavit stated. "However, Konrad was able to access it again and continue to commit shootings with it. ...
 
2013-08-20 10:54:39 PM

Amos Quito: Every American has a 1 in 500 chance of being shot in a given year. Not shot and killed, mind you. Just shot.
Linky linky???
Pretty please?


Why should I? You're a petulant little fark who couldn't stand losing an argument so you resorted to calling me obscenities a dozen times. I don't place anyone on ignore, but there are some people I'm simply not interested in replying to anymore. You are very close to being one.

/here's your farking link. Do the math: 467,300 / 320 million = .0015 = 0.2% (rounded) = 1 in 500.
//there. Now grow the fark up. Science is the best system we have and you are a god damn retard.
 
2013-08-20 10:55:31 PM

scottydoesntknow: Amos Quito: OgreMagi: theflatline: JosephFinn: Supplied a minor with an illegal weapon.  Both he and the shop owner should be arrested.

Father bought it in his name, took it home.   Gun shop owner has nothing to do with this.

Do you think if a father bought his son a Ford pickup and the kid used it to run over people, that the dealership needs to be sued?  Or if my father buys a knife from Macys, and I stab someone with it, Macy's is responsible?

If the kid had already purposely ran over someone with that Ford pickup and the father didn't take away the damn keys, then yeah.

The gun dealer, however, can't be held at fault so long as it was sold legally.


Wait, is there reason to believe that the father KNEW that his son had shot the pedestrian, yet continued to allow access?

Link?

Thanks.

...it's in the article.

"Lothar learned of one of Konrad's shootings and took the firearm away from him," the affidavit stated. "However, Konrad was able to access it again and continue to commit shootings with it. ...


Sounds like misprison of a felony.
 
2013-08-20 10:55:38 PM

Elegy: MFAWG: Elegy: TuteTibiImperes: Absolutely I would think you should bear some liability if your gun was used in a crime, even if it was stolen from your home, your vehicle, or taken from you while you were carrying concealed.  If that liability seems like too much for some people, maybe they will reconsider owning guns.  Depending on the circumstances I could see civil vs criminal penalties, but the threat of a weapon being stolen is reason enough to own a gun safe.  If you can't afford a gun safe, you can't afford a gun.

First, you're farking insane. In this hypothetical, you want to arrest me, the victim of a crime, for no other reason than being the victim of a crime.

So if someone stills my car and commits a crime with it, am I liable even though the doors were locked.

Second, do you have any idea how much a gun safe costs? Oh sure, a cheap sears model goes for $200, but you can get through those pretty easily. I have a feeling you want those guns really locked up, so you would need the heavy-walled, armored version, which start around $500.

Congratulations, you just priced poor people out of the market. Since many black people are poor, you also disenfranchised a significant percentage of African-Americans out of their constitutional rights, while allowing white people to purchase access to the same rights.

What's next, a poll-tax, you racist fark?

Holy crap, really?

Lets look at some of the more pertinent amendments from bill of rights.

1st: Freedom of Speech. Hate speech is proven to be detrimental to society. In the worst cases it incites violence and discord among citizens. Therefore, every citizen must pay an additional $500 to purchase a free speech permit before utilizing these rights.

2nd: Guns are proven to be detrimental to society. In the worst cases, they are used to commit crimes and murders. Therefore, everyone must pay an additional $500 to purchase a gun safe to utilize these rights, even in cases where are gun safe is not needed.

4th: ...


The 2nd amendment was designed to allow civilian ownership of weapons for the purposes of forming a well regulated militia.  The words militia and regulated are right in the text.  Overly broad readings by the Supreme Court have allowed it to expand such that everyone thinks they have the constitutional right to own a damned armory in their rec-room.

That was never the intent, and I have no problem restricting the 2nd above any and all other amendments.
 
2013-08-20 10:56:33 PM

theflatline: JosephFinn: Supplied a minor with an illegal weapon.  Both he and the shop owner should be arrested.

Father bought it in his name, took it home.   Gun shop owner has nothing to do with this.


Is he a member of a well-regulated militia; as in, police?  National Guard?  Army?  Anything?  If not, then it's an illegal weapon.
 
2013-08-20 10:57:13 PM

TuteTibiImperes: The 2nd amendment was designed to allow civilian ownership of weapons for the purposes of forming a well regulated militia. The words militia and regulated are right in the text. Overly broad readings by the Supreme Court have allowed it to expand such that everyone thinks they have the constitutional right to own a damned armory in their rec-room.


Kinda hard to have a militia when the government can disarm it..  Also, can you explain how the right of the people is limited just to militia weapons?
 
2013-08-20 10:58:09 PM

JosephFinn: theflatline: JosephFinn: Supplied a minor with an illegal weapon.  Both he and the shop owner should be arrested.

Father bought it in his name, took it home.   Gun shop owner has nothing to do with this.

Is he a member of a well-regulated militia; as in, police?  National Guard?  Army?  Anything?  If not, then it's an illegal weapon.


Is he a person?  Then he has the right to keep and bear that arm.  Militia membership is irrelevant, and the police are not a well regulated militia.
 
2013-08-20 10:58:13 PM

OgreMagi: TuteTibiImperes: Cars != guns.

That is correct.  One is a Constitutionally protected Right.  The other isn't.


Which is more important to Americans' economy and livelihood?
 
2013-08-20 10:58:41 PM

Ishkur: Amos Quito: Every American has a 1 in 500 chance of being shot in a given year. Not shot and killed, mind you. Just shot.
Linky linky???
Pretty please?

Why should I? You're a petulant little fark who couldn't stand losing an argument so you resorted to calling me obscenities a dozen times. I don't place anyone on ignore, but there are some people I'm simply not interested in replying to anymore. You are very close to being one.

/here's your farking link. Do the math: 467,300 / 320 million = .0015 = 0.2% (rounded) = 1 in 500.
//there. Now grow the fark up. Science is the best system we have and you are a god damn retard.


Dude, that includes muggings, brandishings, and all other firearm crimes that do not necessarily involve anybody being shot.
 
2013-08-20 10:58:49 PM
Wow -- white, black, male, female, hair that is short, medium, long, and in dreadlocks ...

Say what you want, these are equal-opportunity murderous thugs.
 
2013-08-20 10:59:22 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: freetomato: Smart.

It took me 2 times to qualify on the M16. First time I had ever handled a firearm. The next time, I fired expert on the M60. That was about the same time a distant cousin of mine blew his own brains out accidentally in front of his new bride doing God knows what.....

Training, training, training. Or is that for elitists?

Elitists and freetomatoes.
Did you get any time in with those .38s? I farking hated the Smith & Wessons - gritty triggers on 'em.

/Oh, and old soldiers.
//It's how we get to be old soldiers.
///My personal challah recipe is still yours for the asking.


I got a lot of time with the .38s, snubbed nose, they are people stoppers and are great for center masses at short distances.

Oddly enough our trainer, an ex NOPD cop, had an office in the bottom of the Superdome in New Orleans, and it had a range. He had a projector that shined on a wall and he had films that we had to shoot no shoot decide, with paper bullets.

I also have 2 .22 north americans, five shot .22.long, that I never carry, dad used to carry them in the 80s when New Orleans was pretty rough.  When you fire them look out for bruised fingers.

I am a little guy, so my weapon of choice is a  six inch .357 that I have under my mattress.
 
2013-08-20 10:59:47 PM

poot_rootbeer: OgreMagi: TuteTibiImperes: Cars != guns.

That is correct.  One is a Constitutionally protected Right.  The other isn't.

Which is more important to Americans' economy and livelihood?


The Constitution.
 
2013-08-20 11:00:03 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Elegy: TuteTibiImperes: Absolutely I would think you should bear some liability if your gun was used in a crime, even if it was stolen from your home, your vehicle, or taken from you while you were carrying concealed.  If that liability seems like too much for some people, maybe they will reconsider owning guns.  Depending on the circumstances I could see civil vs criminal penalties, but the threat of a weapon being stolen is reason enough to own a gun safe.  If you can't afford a gun safe, you can't afford a gun.

First, you're farking insane. In this hypothetical, you want to arrest me, the victim of a crime, for no other reason than being the victim of a crime.

So if someone stills my car and commits a crime with it, am I liable even though the doors were locked.

Second, do you have any idea how much a gun safe costs? Oh sure, a cheap sears model goes for $200, but you can get through those pretty easily. I have a feeling you want those guns really locked up, so you would need the heavy-walled, armored version, which start around $500.

Congratulations, you just priced poor people out of the market. Since many black people are poor, you also disenfranchised a significant percentage of African-Americans out of their constitutional rights, while allowing white people to purchase access to the same rights.

What's next, a poll-tax, you racist fark?

A car is a practical necessity for most of the country to get to work, buy groceries, and generally deal with the challenges of life.  Cars are also built primarily for transportation.  Guns, on the other hand, are not a necessity for the vast majority of people (only law enforcement, license security, and the military) and are primarily designed to kill.  Cars != guns.

I'd be willing to concede an exception if the weapon is reported stolen, but require that it be reported stolen immediately upon the owner discovering such, so, if you can prove you were on vacation or a business trip it doesn't kick it until you get home, but if you were home that night and didn't call, you're out of luck.

I'd also promote mandatory liability insurance for all gun owners, yearly license/registration fees charged for each weapon owned, and requiring all gun owners to register their weapons and upon doing so agree to surprise inspections of their storage practices from law enforcement (Germany does this, and it seems to work well for them).

If that means some people can't afford to own guns or get so fed up with the hassle and expense that they decide not to own guns, all the better, it means less guns floating around.


"Cars != guns"
So what if someone stole a knife from my house and committed a crime with it? A baseball bat? A crossbow?

What if my front door was locked and dead bolted and someone stole my gun? Surely that's safe enough, right? I mean, it's pretty clear that a locked and dead bolted door says "do not enter my property."

How is it the fault of the legal owner of a thing that someone else stole his property and commits a crime?

"Germany, surprise home inspections"

Germany != the US. Last I checked, Germany didn't have a right to bear arms in its constitution.

Again, if you want to repeal the second amendment, get your talking points in order and go for it. That's your right in a democracy and I have no problem with it.

Instead, you admittedly want to nickel and dime gun owners out of their constitutional rights. That, I have a problem with.

You also want to set up a situation which will disproportionately disenfranchise poor people over rich people.

That, I have a BIG problem with. Are you racist, or do you just think poor people are too prone to crime to lawfully exercise their constitutional rights?
 
2013-08-20 11:00:34 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: freetomato: Smart.

It took me 2 times to qualify on the M16. First time I had ever handled a firearm. The next time, I fired expert on the M60. That was about the same time a distant cousin of mine blew his own brains out accidentally in front of his new bride doing God knows what.....

Training, training, training. Or is that for elitists?

Elitists and freetomatoes.
Did you get any time in with those .38s? I farking hated the Smith & Wessons - gritty triggers on 'em.

/Oh, and old soldiers.
//It's how we get to be old soldiers.
///My personal challah recipe is still yours for the asking.


Yes, send that recipe my way, please! I have started baking and canning recently, with amateur results on the baking side. Bestow your secrets to me! Me at ultra fark.

(General statement, not directed at you). Righties have this misconception that lefties are soft, helpless hippies. Oh no, my friends. Many of us are just fine, marksmanship-wise, and have many other survival skills. I don't want the civil war some seem to want, but if it comes to that, this family will be A OK.
 
2013-08-20 11:01:49 PM

Snarfangel: Wow -- white, black, male, female, hair that is short, medium, long, and in dreadlocks ...

Say what you want, these are equal-opportunity murderous thugs.



she was totally cock teasing the shooter, while banging the black dude.
 
2013-08-20 11:02:15 PM

Ishkur: /here's your farking link. Do the math: 467,300 / 320 million = .0015 = 0.02% (rounded) = 1 in 5000.


Correcting my own math. It's 1 in 5000.
 
2013-08-20 11:03:13 PM

poot_rootbeer: OgreMagi: TuteTibiImperes: Cars != guns.

That is correct.  One is a Constitutionally protected Right.  The other isn't.

Which is more important to Americans' economy and livelihood?


That would depend on the American in question. There are certainly people who depend more on firearms more than they do automobiles.
 
2013-08-20 11:04:03 PM
TuteTibiImperes [TotalFark]
2013-08-20 07:28:15 PM


The father should absolutely be charged. I'd go as far as to say that gun owners should be held liable for any crimes committed with their weapons. If you're going to own a gun, you have the responsibility to protect it and keep it locked up so that miscreants can't access it.

And anyone whose car is stolen should be responsible for anything the thief does with it.
 
2013-08-20 11:04:18 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Elegy: MFAWG: Elegy: TuteTibiImperes: Absolutely I would think you should bear some liability if your gun was used in a crime, even if it was stolen from your home, your vehicle, or taken from you while you were carrying concealed.  If that liability seems like too much for some people, maybe they will reconsider owning guns.  Depending on the circumstances I could see civil vs criminal penalties, but the threat of a weapon being stolen is reason enough to own a gun safe.  If you can't afford a gun safe, you can't afford a gun.

First, you're farking insane. In this hypothetical, you want to arrest me, the victim of a crime, for no other reason than being the victim of a crime.

So if someone stills my car and commits a crime with it, am I liable even though the doors were locked.

Second, do you have any idea how much a gun safe costs? Oh sure, a cheap sears model goes for $200, but you can get through those pretty easily. I have a feeling you want those guns really locked up, so you would need the heavy-walled, armored version, which start around $500.

Congratulations, you just priced poor people out of the market. Since many black people are poor, you also disenfranchised a significant percentage of African-Americans out of their constitutional rights, while allowing white people to purchase access to the same rights.

What's next, a poll-tax, you racist fark?

Holy crap, really?

Lets look at some of the more pertinent amendments from bill of rights.

1st: Freedom of Speech. Hate speech is proven to be detrimental to society. In the worst cases it incites violence and discord among citizens. Therefore, every citizen must pay an additional $500 to purchase a free speech permit before utilizing these rights.

2nd: Guns are proven to be detrimental to society. In the worst cases, they are used to commit crimes and murders. Therefore, everyone must pay an additional $500 to purchase a gun safe to utilize these rights, even in cases where are gun safe is not needed.

4th: ...

The 2nd amendment was designed to allow civilian ownership of weapons for the purposes of forming a well regulated militia.  The words militia and regulated are right in the text.  Overly broad readings by the Supreme Court have allowed it to expand such that everyone thinks they have the constitutional right to own a damned armory in their rec-room.

That was never the intent, and I have no problem restricting the 2nd above any and all other amendments.


Free speech was never intended to include hate speech. I have no problem with regulating free speech over and above the other amendments.

The right to a fair trail was never intended to allow murderers and child molestors to walk free. I have no problem with regulating the 4th amendment over and above the others.

Etc...

Again, you want to repeal the 2nd? Go for it.

But you don't, because that is too hard. Instead, you take the cowards way and want to legislate it out of existence.
 
Displayed 50 of 318 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report