Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Politico)   GA lawmakers introduce bill to protect gun owners who "accidentally" carry a gun into an airport. "A lot of people carry a weapon. It's almost like it's just a second nature to them. And sometimes they forget where they have {it}"   ( politico.com) divider line
    More: Scary, carrying a firearm, Fort Worth International Airport, Chicago O'Hare, x-ray machines, airports  
•       •       •

2622 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Feb 2014 at 12:25 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



401 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-02-18 11:16:57 AM  
"I would tell you that a lot of people carry a weapon," said state Rep. Alan Powell, a Republican who supports the bill. "It's almost like it's just a second nature to them. And sometimes they forget where they have, you know, they basically forget they've got it in a briefcase or a suitcase."

If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.
 
2014-02-18 11:21:11 AM  

Serious Black: If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.


This. Your right to a gun does not absolve you from your responsibility for it.
 
2014-02-18 11:22:40 AM  

Serious Black: If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.


If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.

If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.

If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.
 
2014-02-18 11:23:32 AM  
Sure, they'll just take it from you and donate it to needy children.
 
2014-02-18 11:24:33 AM  
Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.
 
2014-02-18 11:26:42 AM  
Please, like each of you brainiacs knows exactly where all the paperclips you own are located at any given time
 
2014-02-18 11:28:25 AM  

BunkoSquad: Please, like each of you brainiacs knows exactly where all the paperclips you own are located at any given time


Only a handful of us can take over an airplane with a paperclip.
 
2014-02-18 11:29:27 AM  

markie_farkie: If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.


Agreed.

Now this for no reason.

imageshack.com
 
2014-02-18 11:29:51 AM  

Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.



Nothing in this thread could be said better than this.
 
2014-02-18 11:30:43 AM  

Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.


Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE
 
2014-02-18 11:31:07 AM  

Serious Black: "I would tell you that a lot of people carry a weapon," said state Rep. Alan Powell, a Republican who supports the bill. "It's almost like it's just a second nature to them. And sometimes they forget where they have, you know, they basically forget they've got it in a briefcase or a suitcase."

If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.


Thread done.  Turn out the lights please.

/well said
 
2014-02-18 11:33:49 AM  

dittybopper: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.

Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE


"Oops, I broke the law"
 
2014-02-18 11:35:25 AM  

dittybopper: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.

Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE



"I accidentally ran over that baby."
 
2014-02-18 11:36:27 AM  

Blues_X: "I accidentally ran over that baby."


"I forgot armed robbery was illegal."
 
2014-02-18 11:37:23 AM  
"Sorry I drove over your grandma, but my phone buzzed and I had to see who the text was from, could have happened to anybody"
 
2014-02-18 11:38:11 AM  
"Who knew that jizz could shoot over three rows in a movie theater? My bad."
 
2014-02-18 11:39:04 AM  
True CSB time:

The last restaurant I worked at, there was a loaded gun found on the back of the toilet in the men's room.

It was an off duty officer's weapon.

/end CSB
 
2014-02-18 11:40:38 AM  

Trivia Jockey: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.


Nothing in this thread could be said better than this.


How about ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE.

The current policy is largely "zero tolerance", with the rare and sane exception being news:

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2014-01-29/news/os-sanford-airpo rt -holds-passenger-gun-20140129_1_orlando-international-airport-conceale d-weapon-permit-holders-armed-passenger

Why not just make a "gun check" part of the process?  If you have a gun, and are legally permitted to carry it, why not just provide people who inadvertently carry into an airport security zone a way to store their guns on the premises until they return?

That would accomplish the goal of a "gun free zone" in the passenger terminals and by extension on the aircraft, so what harm would be done?

Really, other than making carrying a gun as legally dicey as you possibly can in as many situations as you possibly can in order to make people shy away from it, what possible opposition can you have to something like that?
 
2014-02-18 11:43:31 AM  

dittybopper: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.

Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE


First time offender is unlikely to do prison time. The gubbamint may just take their guns away -which is a suitable punishment for being that irresponsible.
 
2014-02-18 11:44:23 AM  

James!: dittybopper: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.

Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE

"Oops, I broke the law"


"Oops, my inspection sticker expired two weeks ago.  Lifetime revocation of drivers license..."
 
2014-02-18 11:46:05 AM  

dittybopper: Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.


Forgetting you have a loaded pistol in your pocket is a pretty f*cking big unintentional and inadvertent mistake.  Especially when you go to a high-security area like an airport.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm all for laws that disincentivize gun owners from being less than hyper-careful with their guns.
 
2014-02-18 11:47:28 AM  

dittybopper: "Oops, my inspection sticker expired two weeks ago. Lifetime revocation of drivers license..."


If you are seriously equating this with the carrying of a loaded weapon, then your priorities are more skewed than a Fox News poll.
 
2014-02-18 11:48:56 AM  

dittybopper: How about ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE.


Counterpoint:

www.quickmeme.com
 
2014-02-18 11:49:40 AM  

dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.


Nothing in this thread could be said better than this.

How about ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE.

The current policy is largely "zero tolerance", with the rare and sane exception being news:

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2014-01-29/news/os-sanford-airpo rt -holds-passenger-gun-20140129_1_orlando-international-airport-conceale d-weapon-permit-holders-armed-passenger

Why not just make a "gun check" part of the process?  If you have a gun, and are legally permitted to carry it, why not just provide people who inadvertently carry into an airport security zone a way to store their guns on the premises until they return?

That would accomplish the goal of a "gun free zone" in the passenger terminals and by extension on the aircraft, so what harm would be done?

Really, other than making carrying a gun as legally dicey as you possibly can in as many situations as you possibly can in order to make people shy away from it, what possible opposition can you have to something like that?



So now the airport has to build lockers for gun storage and I guess the TSA is responsible for making sure those don't get raided.

How about people just learn what the law is?
 
2014-02-18 11:51:10 AM  

dittybopper: inadvertently carry


Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns, I don't think inadvertent carrying of a gun exists. We are talking about a tool whose sole purpose is to annihilate anything and everything that the business end is pointed towards. I believe a responsible gun owner should know where their potentially deadly firearms are at all times. If that's too much for you to handle, you shouldn't own a gun.
 
2014-02-18 11:52:28 AM  

dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.


Nothing in this thread could be said better than this.

How about ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE.

The current policy is largely "zero tolerance", with the rare and sane exception being news:

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2014-01-29/news/os-sanford-airpo rt -holds-passenger-gun-20140129_1_orlando-international-airport-conceale d-weapon-permit-holders-armed-passenger

Why not just make a "gun check" part of the process?  If you have a gun, and are legally permitted to carry it, why not just provide people who inadvertently carry into an airport security zone a way to store their guns on the premises until they return?

That would accomplish the goal of a "gun free zone" in the passenger terminals and by extension on the aircraft, so what harm would be done?

Really, other than making carrying a gun as legally dicey as you possibly can in as many situations as you possibly can in order to make people shy away from it, what possible opposition can you have to something like that?


Because

a) anyone who forgets they're armed when entering an airport is already being irresponsible
b) you have a place to check it. It's called your car or your house.
c) why just guns? How about my bottle of water, razor blade, and leatherman?
d) and you now want to extend the reach of the TSA by letting them hold on to your 2nd amendment sticks. Brilliant!
 
2014-02-18 11:53:37 AM  

Serious Black: I believe a responsible gun owner should know where their potentially deadly firearms are at all times. If that's too much for you to handle, you shouldn't own a gun.


THIS THIS THIS THIS
 
2014-02-18 11:55:11 AM  
On one hand, a "gun check" service, for a whopping fee (this is an airport after all) seems like a fine business decision.  A significant slice of the population is unable to leave the house without their firearms, and yet do so without killing people at every stop.  The irony is of course that they're uncomfortable in their home town without weapons but will fly to strange cities without them.  Whatever... fine.  Gun check it.

On the other hand: KEEP TRACK OF YOUR F*CKING WEAPONS
 
2014-02-18 11:55:28 AM  

Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.

Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE

First time offender is unlikely to do prison time. The gubbamint may just take their guns away -which is a suitable punishment for being that irresponsible.


Permanently.   It is a felony, right?

It's akin to any number of other things that would be accommodated normally.

For example, I occasionally go to family court, because I'm a foster parent.  On the odd occasions that I forget it's in my pocket (which has happened), the bailiffs at the metal detector will hold on to my pocket knife until I come back out of the court room.

That's how it *SHOULD* be.

I don't think anyone would accuse me of being an "irresponsible knife owner".

If society accepts the fact people can legally carry weapons, and most of the people in the United States live in places where that is the norm:

i62.tinypic.com

Then why should we make it as legally risky as possible for them, if for no other reason than you want to discourage them from carrying as much as you possibly can get away with?
 
2014-02-18 12:00:50 PM  

Trivia Jockey: dittybopper: Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

Forgetting you have a loaded pistol in your pocket is a pretty f*cking big unintentional and inadvertent mistake.  Especially when you go to a high-security area like an airport.


What about in a bag you carry for other purposes (like car trips, etc.)?

Generally, that's what happens, not the one in the pocket, the one in the bag you use for other things besides airline flights.
 
Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm all for laws that disincentivize gun owners from being less than hyper-careful with their guns.

So, you're of the mind that people should be strictly punished when they have no ill intent, merely because they are gun owners.

Are you of the same mind for people who drive cars?  Do you think drivers who exceed the speed limit in school zones should have their driving privileges permanently revoked for the the first offense, and have their car seized, even though it was inadvertent?  After all, it's a farkin' *SCHOOL ZONE*.  They could kill a kid by going 30 MPH instead of 20.

Is that the sort of thing you are generally agreeable with, or is it just because *GUNZ!*?
 
2014-02-18 12:01:23 PM  

dittybopper: Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE


The article mentions how they face possible fines and prison time, but charges are typically dismissed against first time offenders if they take a class. Sounds like the exact opposite of zero tolerance.
 
2014-02-18 12:02:17 PM  

dittybopper: What about in a bag you carry for other purposes (like car trips, etc.)?

Generally, that's what happens, not the one in the pocket, the one in the bag you use for other things besides airline flights.


I make sure there's no "too big bottle of contact lens solution" in that bag before I go to the airport, because I'm aware enough to know THAT I AM GOING TO THE AIRPORT
 
2014-02-18 12:03:17 PM  

exick: The article mentions how they face possible fines and prison time, but charges are typically dismissed against first time offenders if they take a class. Sounds like the exact opposite of zero tolerance.


Quiet now, you're upsetting his paranoia.  He has graphs, sir!
 
2014-02-18 12:05:14 PM  

BunkoSquad: I make sure there's no "too big bottle of contact lens solution" in that bag before I go to the airport, because I'm aware enough to know THAT I AM GOING TO THE AIRPORT


Sorry, but if you think that requiring people to put the same level of thought into CCW and packing toiletries is reasonable restriction, then you are a f*cking commie pinko gun-grabbing, lily-livered, ummm....

Oh!  Hoplophobe!
 
2014-02-18 12:07:05 PM  

dittybopper: What about in a bag you carry for other purposes (like car trips, etc.)?


When you're not on a car trip, is that bag locked up in a safe where only you and other authorized persons can get to it like the NRA suggests? While on car trips, can you correctly tell me the location of your potentially deadly firearm at all times and ensure that nobody unauthorized can get to it like the NRA suggests? If the answer to either question is no, then you're an irresponsible gun owner.
 
2014-02-18 12:07:14 PM  

dittybopper: I don't think anyone would accuse me of being an "irresponsible knife owner".


False analogy. A gun is not a knife.

Unless of course, you think it's smart to bring a knife to a gunfight.
 
2014-02-18 12:09:09 PM  

enry: Because

a) anyone who forgets they're armed when entering an airport is already being irresponsible


Because you've never forgotten you had something in a bag.

b) you have a place to check it. It's called your car or your house.

OK, how about this:  Make money off it by charging like they do for parking.  It could be a revenue stream for the airports.  Say, a $25 initial charge, and a dollar a day after that, with guns not claimed after 6 months being auctioned off.

Alternatively, have a vendor that sells TSA-approved gun cases.  Charge a premium for those, and a surcharge to have them placed in the baggage compartment so you can retrieve it at your destination.

c) why just guns? How about my bottle of water, razor blade, and leatherman?

Well, when you have a leatherman that costs hundreds of dollars like even the most cheap handgun, I'd be fine with that.

d) and you now want to extend the reach of the TSA by letting them hold on to your 2nd amendment sticks. Brilliant!

Are you saying I can't trust the government?
 
2014-02-18 12:09:50 PM  

dittybopper: So, you're of the mind that people should be strictly punished when they have no ill intent, merely because they are gun owners.


Yes.  The more dangerous the subject matter, the move severe the punishment.  Intent just makes things too subjective.

Again, if the goal is to incentivize responsible gun ownership (which the basis for the gun lobby opposing ANY gun restrictions), then you have to make sure the law has the power to so incentivize.  If you can get away with being careless because you had no ill intent, well then the laws are just promoting carelessness.  Or at least permitting it.  I do NOT want that.


Are you of the same mind for people who drive cars?

Depends on what you're talking about.  DUI?  Yes, absolutely.  Now you're talking a danger on par with gun possession.


Do you think drivers who exceed the speed limit in school zones should have their driving privileges permanently revoked for the the first offense, and have their car seized, even though it was inadvertent?  After all, it's a farkin' *SCHOOL ZONE*.  They could kill a kid by going 30 MPH instead of 20.

False equivalence.  The difference in speed from 20 to 30, even in a school zone, is not a clear and present danger.  At least when you consider causality.  Now if you're talking about going 100 in a school zone, yes, you might be in the same territory.
 
2014-02-18 12:10:56 PM  

BunkoSquad: dittybopper: What about in a bag you carry for other purposes (like car trips, etc.)?

Generally, that's what happens, not the one in the pocket, the one in the bag you use for other things besides airline flights.

I make sure there's no "too big bottle of contact lens solution" in that bag before I go to the airport, because I'm aware enough to know THAT I AM GOING TO THE AIRPORT


And you think that's rational?

You think that should be the norm?
 
2014-02-18 12:11:28 PM  
Obviously Airports need to get into the business of gun storage because gun owners can't be bothered to know where their guns are.
 
2014-02-18 12:12:08 PM  

dittybopper: And you think that's rational?

You think that should be the norm?


I think current airport security is completely irrational. That doesn't mean I want to be on the news.
 
2014-02-18 12:12:20 PM  

James!: BunkoSquad: Please, like each of you brainiacs knows exactly where all the paperclips you own are located at any given time

Only a handful of us can take over an airplane with a paperclip.


Welcome to the no-fly list.
 
2014-02-18 12:12:37 PM  

dittybopper: BunkoSquad: dittybopper: What about in a bag you carry for other purposes (like car trips, etc.)?

Generally, that's what happens, not the one in the pocket, the one in the bag you use for other things besides airline flights.

I make sure there's no "too big bottle of contact lens solution" in that bag before I go to the airport, because I'm aware enough to know THAT I AM GOING TO THE AIRPORT

And you think that's rational?

You think that should be the norm?


I think it should be the norm that you know what's in your luggage.
 
2014-02-18 12:13:01 PM  
If you forget that you are carrying a weapon designed to kill people, you're a dipsh*t.

Case closed.

Good day, sir.
 
2014-02-18 12:14:21 PM  
Before I head to the airport, I give myself a thorough pat-down just to be sure that I *don't* inadvertently go in with a weapon.
 
2014-02-18 12:15:20 PM  

James!: I think it should be the norm that you know what's in your luggage.


Yeah but if you own 75 bags and only 61 of them have guns in them, who has time to keep track of that
 
2014-02-18 12:16:29 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: James!: BunkoSquad: Please, like each of you brainiacs knows exactly where all the paperclips you own are located at any given time

Only a handful of us can take over an airplane with a paperclip.

Welcome to the no-fly list.


I don't need to fly, I move about the planet through the power of advanced yoga.
 
2014-02-18 12:17:08 PM  

Serious Black: If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.


Seconded.


BunkoSquad: Please, like each of you brainiacs knows exactly where all the paperclips you own are located at any given time


:-O    You've seen my work desk?
 
2014-02-18 12:18:38 PM  

Witty Comment: True CSB time:

The last restaurant I worked at, there was a loaded gun found on the back of the toilet in the men's room.

It was an off duty officer's weapon.

/end CSB


Take the cannoli.
 
2014-02-18 12:19:06 PM  

BunkoSquad: James!: I think it should be the norm that you know what's in your luggage.

Yeah but if you own 75 bags and only 61 of them have guns in them, who has time to keep track of that


I have several bags prepacked for any potential trip. Some of them may or may not have guns in them.  How am I to be held responsible for checking before I leave my house?
 
2014-02-18 12:19:29 PM  

dittybopper: enry: Because

a) anyone who forgets they're armed when entering an airport is already being irresponsible

Because you've never forgotten you had something in a bag.

b) you have a place to check it. It's called your car or your house.

OK, how about this:  Make money off it by charging like they do for parking.  It could be a revenue stream for the airports.  Say, a $25 initial charge, and a dollar a day after that, with guns not claimed after 6 months being auctioned off.

Alternatively, have a vendor that sells TSA-approved gun cases.  Charge a premium for those, and a surcharge to have them placed in the baggage compartment so you can retrieve it at your destination.

c) why just guns? How about my bottle of water, razor blade, and leatherman?

Well, when you have a leatherman that costs hundreds of dollars like even the most cheap handgun, I'd be fine with that.

d) and you now want to extend the reach of the TSA by letting them hold on to your 2nd amendment sticks. Brilliant!

Are you saying I can't trust the government?


I'm saying you don't trust the government. I don't trust the TSA.

When I leave the house for the airport I double check to make sure I'm bringing only what I can bring on the plane. The only time I got stuck with something was a bottle of hot sauce I should have put in my checked bag. The TSA person let me run back to the counter and have it put back in. If I can do that for the past 12 years with things that are way less dangerous and liable to cause problems than a gun, I think you can be a bottle thoughtful about what you're carrying and where you carry it.

IOW, just take your [ohsnap.jpg] and stuff it.
 
2014-02-18 12:19:58 PM  

the_rev: Before I head to the airport, I give myself a thorough pat-down just to be sure that I *don't* inadvertently go in with a weapon.


Hell I do that for keys and other random sh*t in my pockets in advance of the body scan booth.  But again: we're not talking about pocket change and other dangerous WMDs, we're talking about firearms.  Who has the time and mental capacity to keep track of their handguns?  I mean, it is either in my shoulder harness or in the kid's room... one or the other or maybe in the car.
 
2014-02-18 12:21:46 PM  

Trivia Jockey: Again, if the goal is to incentivize responsible gun ownership (which the basis for the gun lobby opposing ANY gun restrictions), then you have to make sure the law has the power to so incentivize.


So, define "responsible" for me.

I have a feeling that you're going to use it in the same sense that the phrase "common sense" is often used by people who want to pass laws to dis-incentivize gun ownership and lawful carrying to the fullest extent possible.  Those are the people responsible for laws like it being a felony to have an expended cartridge casing or shotgun shell without a permit.

To *ME*, responsible gun ownership is basically following the four rules of safe gun use, and making sure that unauthorized people like criminals don't get access, and that children only have well-supervised age-appropriate access, that sort of thing.  That's responsible gun ownership.

Maybe you're somewhere in the middle.
 
2014-02-18 12:22:44 PM  
Okay, so let's say we permit "Gun Check'n'Go" outside the airport, or in the garage or whatever.  Fine, your CCW guy is covered in case he forgets to put his weapon in the safe while packing.

But now, with that backstop in place, and hey maybe a few signs advertising it at each entrance, do forgetful dipsh*ts still get a pass for bringing their weapon all the way through security?
 
2014-02-18 12:23:30 PM  

dittybopper: To *ME*, responsible gun ownership is basically following the four rules of safe gun use, and making sure that unauthorized people like criminals don't get access, and that children only have well-supervised age-appropriate access, that sort of thing. That's responsible gun ownership.


Is one of those "constantly forget where you've stashed your weapons?"  That seems pretty common-sense to me.
 
2014-02-18 12:23:55 PM  

James!: dittybopper: BunkoSquad: dittybopper: What about in a bag you carry for other purposes (like car trips, etc.)?

Generally, that's what happens, not the one in the pocket, the one in the bag you use for other things besides airline flights.

I make sure there's no "too big bottle of contact lens solution" in that bag before I go to the airport, because I'm aware enough to know THAT I AM GOING TO THE AIRPORT

And you think that's rational?

You think that should be the norm?

I think it should be the norm that you know what's in your luggage.


I'm not disagreeing with that, but what about the inadvertent exceptions?
 
2014-02-18 12:25:03 PM  

factoryconnection: Hell I do that for keys and other random sh*t in my pockets in advance of the body scan booth.


Me too. Before I get in the security line I stop in the restroom and remove my watch, belt, money clip, change, etc and put it in my carry-on bag to go through the xray thing. I hold my ID and boarding pass in my hand.

So, even if I did inadvertently go in with a pistol in my pocket, I'd surely discover it, in time to go back out and leave it in my car.
 
2014-02-18 12:25:11 PM  

dittybopper: So, define "responsible" for me.


I'd have thought "knowing you have a gun on you" would have gone without saying, but here we are.
 
2014-02-18 12:25:53 PM  

factoryconnection: dittybopper: To *ME*, responsible gun ownership is basically following the four rules of safe gun use, and making sure that unauthorized people like criminals don't get access, and that children only have well-supervised age-appropriate access, that sort of thing. That's responsible gun ownership.

Is one of those "constantly forget where you've stashed your weapons?"  That seems pretty common-sense to me.


Constantly, or just that one time because you were in a rush?  Because they'd both be punished exactly the same.
 
2014-02-18 12:25:58 PM  

propasaurus: Witty Comment: True CSB time:

The last restaurant I worked at, there was a loaded gun found on the back of the toilet in the men's room.

It was an off duty officer's weapon.

/end CSB

Take the cannoli.



Lulz.
 
2014-02-18 12:25:59 PM  

dittybopper: So, define "responsible" for me.


Knowing where your guns are at at all times is pretty close to the top of the list of being a responsible gun owner for me.
 
2014-02-18 12:26:24 PM  

dittybopper: So, define "responsible" for me.


It includes: knowing where your gun is at all times, knowing the loaded/unloaded status at all times, and knowing if you're carrying one when you go to a zone where "no guns allowed" is made abundantly clear.

Maybe it's like porn and I'd know if it I saw it, but "forgetting I have a weapon in my jacket pocket" screams "irresponsible" to me.  That sounds like someone has taken for granted the fact he's carrying a deadly weapon, and as a result has gotten careless.  Carelessness isn't "responsible".
 
2014-02-18 12:27:09 PM  

dittybopper: How about ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE.


I'm with this guy.  What's with our zero tolerance policies on rape and murder?  THINK THIS SHIAT THROUGH PEOPLE.
 
2014-02-18 12:27:38 PM  

Serious Black: dittybopper: So, define "responsible" for me.

Knowing where your guns are at at all times is pretty close to the top of the list of being a responsible gun owner for me.


I'm 50 miles away from all my guns right now.

While I'm reasonably certain I know where they are, I can't 100% guarantee it, because they aren't with me.

Is that irresponsible?
 
2014-02-18 12:27:39 PM  

dittybopper: I'm not disagreeing with that, but what about the inadvertent exceptions?


They take your gun away and toss it in the "shiat you will never see again" bin like everything else you're not supposed to bring to the airport.  They might also fine you.
 
2014-02-18 12:27:41 PM  
In this thread, we learn that respobsible gun owners SOMETIMES DON'T EVEN KNOW THEY HAVE THEIR WEAPON!

Wow. Such responsibility. Much careful. wow.

dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: Again, if the goal is to incentivize responsible gun ownership (which the basis for the gun lobby opposing ANY gun restrictions), then you have to make sure the law has the power to so incentivize.

So, define "responsible" for me.

I have a feeling that you're going to use it in the same sense that the phrase "common sense" is often used by people who want to pass laws to dis-incentivize gun ownership and lawful carrying to the fullest extent possible.  Those are the people responsible for laws like it being a felony to have an expended cartridge casing or shotgun shell without a permit.

To *ME*, responsible gun ownership is basically following the four rules of safe gun use, and making sure that unauthorized people like criminals don't get access, and that children only have well-supervised age-appropriate access, that sort of thing.  That's responsible gun ownership.

Maybe you're somewhere in the middle.


If you don't remember you have your gun with you, how can you exactly be sure to keep unauthorized people from getting access to it? YOU FORGOT YOU HAD IT.
 
2014-02-18 12:28:13 PM  

dittybopper: but what about the inadvertent exceptions?


There are certain things so inherently dangerous that we've placed strict liability on them.  That's so we don't have to try and determine someone's subjective intent.  Guns are one of those things.  There should not be any exceptions for inadvertence.
 
2014-02-18 12:28:45 PM  

Trivia Jockey: It includes: knowing where your gun is at all times,


I'm 50 miles away from my guns, and have been for several hours.  I can't guarantee with 100% certainty where they are.  Am I irresponsible?
 
2014-02-18 12:29:02 PM  
GET PROPER TRAINING AND THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.


sphotos-a-ord.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2014-02-18 12:29:30 PM  

dittybopper: Constantly, or just that one time because you were in a rush? Because they'd both be punished exactly the same.


They should be.  My god, allowing someone to be irresponsible with a gun because they're in a hurry is the f*cking definition of stuff I don't want.
 
2014-02-18 12:30:06 PM  
People really shouldn't be allowed to own guns.
 
2014-02-18 12:31:07 PM  

dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: It includes: knowing where your gun is at all times,

I'm 50 miles away from my guns, and have been for several hours.  I can't guarantee with 100% certainty where they are.  Am I irresponsible?


Hell, you could a gun on your right now.  How are you to know!?
 
2014-02-18 12:31:21 PM  

dittybopper: Serious Black: dittybopper: So, define "responsible" for me.

Knowing where your guns are at at all times is pretty close to the top of the list of being a responsible gun owner for me.

I'm 50 miles away from all my guns right now.

While I'm reasonably certain I know where they are, I can't 100% guarantee it, because they aren't with me.

Is that irresponsible?


Are they stored in such a manner that they are "not accessible to unauthorized persons" like the NRA says you should do to be safe with your guns?
 
2014-02-18 12:31:41 PM  
Done in one. You should not be allowed to own a gun if you are not capable of being responsible about it.
 
2014-02-18 12:31:43 PM  

vartian: Serious Black: If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.

This. Your right to a gun does not absolve you from your responsibility for it.


That should be said about having children as well, but thats for another thread.

/pro gun
//anti- your children
 
2014-02-18 12:32:07 PM  

dittybopper: I'm 50 miles away from my guns, and have been for several hours. I can't guarantee with 100% certainty where they are. Am I irresponsible?


Did you leave the house with them locked in your safe?  Then no.  Are your guns are just as likely to be in your safe as they are to be lying on your kitchen table?  Then yes.

But your argument is irrelevant anyway, because we're talking about people who forget they have guns on their person.  When they go into a public place.
 
2014-02-18 12:32:23 PM  

dittybopper: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.

Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE


So much this. I hate laws that don't take into account intent.
 
2014-02-18 12:32:35 PM  

Serious Black: dittybopper: inadvertently carry

Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns, I don't think inadvertent carrying of a gun exists. We are talking about a tool whose sole purpose is to annihilate anything and everything that the business end is pointed towards. I believe a responsible gun owner should know where their potentially deadly firearms are at all times. If that's too much for you to handle, you shouldn't own a gun.


I have 70+ guns.  I think most of them are locked up in the basement.
 
2014-02-18 12:32:38 PM  

dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: It includes: knowing where your gun is at all times,

I'm 50 miles away from my guns, and have been for several hours.  I can't guarantee with 100% certainty where they are.  Am I irresponsible?


Are they in a locked safe where only you know the combination? Then yes, that's responsible because they're still under your control.
 
2014-02-18 12:33:49 PM  
This bill is a stupid attempt to curry favor from the state's lowest common denominators.  Before I had to move to Canada, I never once "forgot" I was carrying concealed.  Something like that is no accident, just stupidity.
 
2014-02-18 12:34:16 PM  
Next, they'll try to pass a law that allows you to take your gun on a plane if you pinky-swear that you won't do anything bad.
 
2014-02-18 12:34:26 PM  

Russ1642: I hate laws that don't take into account intent.


But intent is subjective.  It's why so many people hate "stand your ground".  If I'm intending on committing a crime and I'm caught with a gun where I shouldn't have one, can't I just say it was an accident?  How do we decide?

Intent has it's place in criminal law, but it's not here.
 
2014-02-18 12:34:41 PM  

Trivia Jockey: dittybopper: but what about the inadvertent exceptions?

There are certain things so inherently dangerous that we've placed strict liability on them.  That's so we don't have to try and determine someone's subjective intent.  Guns are one of those things.  There should not be any exceptions for inadvertence.


So you are saying that yes, you want to make gun ownership as legally risky for the gun owner as you possibly can, given the constraints of the Heller and McDonald decisions which take out-right bans off the table.

How do you feel about people being charged with a felony for having an expended round of ammunition without a permit? That's basically the same thing:  Strict liability.
 
2014-02-18 12:34:57 PM  

dittybopper: Constantly, or just that one time because you were in a rush? Because they'd both be punished exactly the same.


Except, as others have pointed out, they aren't in court.  Which is where punishment occurs.

You have your sh*t together on gun rights, Ditty, but you don't need to take the idiot gun-owner's side just because both of you happen to own guns.  I don't take idiot car-owners' sides in things, nor idiot parents' sides, nor idiot liberals.  Is the group that lives by the philosophy "I'm too preoccupied to have a clue where my gun is" really the team that deserves your support?

Or is it that you're in that group?  If so, then by all means fire away.
 
2014-02-18 12:36:35 PM  

ChipNASA: GET PROPER TRAINING AND THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.


hnn.us
 
2014-02-18 12:36:42 PM  
I accidentally went over the speed limit, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 12:37:18 PM  
I accidentally left my baby in the car while I went shopping, officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 12:38:14 PM  

Serious Black: "I would tell you that a lot of people carry a weapon," said state Rep. Alan Powell, a Republican who supports the bill. "It's almost like it's just a second nature to them. And sometimes they forget where they have, you know, they basically forget they've got it in a briefcase or a suitcase."

If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.



They didn't forget where their gun was, they forgot they couldn't carry it into an airport. (Or whatever restricted venue)
 
2014-02-18 12:38:48 PM  
People who accid... oooooooh.  You mean dumbasses.
 
2014-02-18 12:38:52 PM  

Nick Nostril: People really shouldn't be allowed to own guns.



I live with my mom
 
2014-02-18 12:38:54 PM  

dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: It includes: knowing where your gun is at all times,

I'm 50 miles away from my guns, and have been for several hours.  I can't guarantee with 100% certainty where they are.  Am I irresponsible?


So you're saying that you should only beheld responsible for knowing where your guns are with 100% certainty if you are physically in possession of them at that moment?
 
GBB
2014-02-18 12:38:57 PM  
So, I'm thinking about hijacking a plane.  My plan is, I'm going to sneak a gun on-board and storm the cockpit.  The gun will come in handy to either force the pilot/co-pilot to open the door, or shoot the lock on the door.

Of course, the easiest way to sneak the gun on-board is to slide it through security and if they catch it, I'll just claim I forgot about it.

mikeandvalblogging.files.wordpress.com
Criminals thrive on the indulgence of society's understanding.   Criminals mock society's laws
 
2014-02-18 12:38:58 PM  
COOL STORY TIEM!!

So for my 10th birthday my mom let my friends and I make a campfire in our sandpit.

This is about 6 acres of sand, nothing flammable, my mom was the secretary to the Fire Chief. The only reason this was allowed was to celebrate that fact that all four of us had recently received our "fire safety" Girl Scout badges. We had a bucket of water, a fire circle and adult supervision.

My neighbors called the police anyway, and the big dumb cop showed up all blustering and angry- because of the serious threat the four little girls were to his manhood or something- and took his gun out and put it on the hood of his car.

After my mom showed him her permit he drove off. With his gun and badge still on the top of his car.
When we found it, we were smart enough to leave it where it was and get my mom, because even though we were 10 year old children, we were smart enough to understand that fire arms are dangerous.

My mom tore an absolute strip off that cop.
 
2014-02-18 12:38:58 PM  
I accidentally left my cigarette burning while falling asleep and now my two cats and 3 kids are dead, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 12:39:16 PM  

factoryconnection: but you don't need to take the idiot gun-owner's side just because both of you happen to own guns


I don't think you understand how absolutist positions work.  He argues stupid shiat because his position is fundamentally grounded on stupid shiat.
 
2014-02-18 12:39:45 PM  

dittybopper: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.

Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE


Ignorantia Juris Nemi Nem Excusat

"With Great power comes Great Responsibility"
 
2014-02-18 12:40:01 PM  

KidneyStone: I carry and more than once I've gone somewhere I shouldn't have gone while carrying.  Nobody got shot.  Shocking!


And you should have been arrested, (ir)responsible gun owner.
 
2014-02-18 12:40:22 PM  

dittybopper: So you are saying that yes, you want to make gun ownership as legally risky for the gun owner as you possibly can


No, I want to make irresponsible gun ownership as legally risky as possible.
 
2014-02-18 12:40:30 PM  

Blues_X: Who knew that jizz could shoot over three rows in a movie theater?


I think everyone on Fark knows that...
 
2014-02-18 12:40:41 PM  

dittybopper: Why not just make a "gun check" part of the process? If you have a gun, and are legally permitted to carry it, why not just provide people who inadvertently carry into an airport security zone a way to store their guns on the premises until they return?



I'm okay with that.

There would be a financial cost involved in putting the infrastructure in place -- lockers, locks, keys, training, extra personnel and another line for them so I'm not stuck waiting behind the forgetful putz, etc. -- so I'd want the gun owners to pay the entire cost of all that through service fees.
 
2014-02-18 12:41:21 PM  

vartian: Serious Black: If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.

This. Your right to a gun does not absolve you from your responsibility for it.


Thisthisthis.

/pro-gun
//anti-idiot
 
2014-02-18 12:42:26 PM  
I accidentally drank too much alcohol and got behind a wheel and now Mary Jane Rottencrotch is dead, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 12:42:32 PM  

Trivia Jockey: dittybopper: Constantly, or just that one time because you were in a rush? Because they'd both be punished exactly the same.

They should be.  My god, allowing someone to be irresponsible with a gun because they're in a hurry is the f*cking definition of stuff I don't want.


Remember we aren't talking about shooting things recklessly, just forgetting that you left your legal handgun in a bag.

And BTW, that's what most of the cases are:  It's not someone actually carrying in a holster on their person, it's a gun left in a bag:

Most of the weapons confiscated in 2013 had gun permits and were found in the carry-on luggage of passengers.

But let's think some more about this:  If you declare your weapon and put it in your checked baggage, you're 100% OK legally.  So why not just give people the option (for a substantial fee!) to have that done, or, alternatively, to just have them stored (again for a substantial fee!) until they return from their trip.

I can't think of any rational security purpose for not doing that.  Hell, *ADVERTISE* that you're doing it:  People who carry concealed would probably be more likely to use an airport where they can check their guns right before going into the secure area than they would one where they would have to leave their guns at home.  Make money off of their fear.  It's Win-Win!
 
2014-02-18 12:42:39 PM  
Is this were all the gun nuts say "Well this guy was a irresponsible gun owner! Don't lump him with other gun owners" but then when someone suggests then that people should have training or the most basics of background checks the same people go "No no no! you can't do that!! They should be able to have guns and make mistakes!"

If you have no problem allowing irresponsible gun owners to have access to guns without even trying to weed them out to some degree you can't also pretend that they shouldn't count as normal gun owners. Because in your world you have no problem with them having easy access to guns.

Either you have to accept them as normal gun owners, or you can support laws for more responsible gun ownership - Saying they shouldn't be considered normal gun owners while be against anything to do make it harder for them to be gun owners is just not honest.

And shut up with the "Well if you pass these laws irresponsible people will still access guns" that's a BS argument only used for guns. Could you imagine someone saying "We should get rid of rape and murder laws because people can still rape and murder even after theses laws are in place!" The reason for laws is not to stop 100% of the activity it's too reduce it.
 
2014-02-18 12:42:41 PM  

Onkel Buck: vartian: Serious Black: If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.

This. Your right to a gun does not absolve you from your responsibility for it.

That should be said about having children as well, but thats for another thread.

/pro gun
//anti- your children


I'm kinda both anti your gun and kids :)
 
2014-02-18 12:42:49 PM  
You would think this would be one of those no brainier things where everyone would be on the side of "WTF tard, how about keeping track of your deadly weapon and use some personal responsibility". But it looks like there's a few farkers who don't believe being responsible with your gun is necessary, your extremist views are noted so I can dismiss what you have to say on this subject in the future.
 
2014-02-18 12:42:49 PM  
CSB:

My gym bag has multiple uses....the gym (duh), and I occasionally use it to transport handguns to my local range, and use it as my carry-on bag when flying.

I never leave firearms in it once I'm home, but when I'm about to fly somewhere, I double-check it to make sure there isn't any loose ammo inside.
 
2014-02-18 12:43:03 PM  
I accidentally addressed the reimbursement check to me when another volunteer spent the funds and now I have $500 more than I should, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 12:43:39 PM  
I accidentally dropped a canister of cyanide outside the lab and now I am going to the funeral of a colleague, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 12:43:44 PM  
Stupid arguments are stupid.

People (in general) aren't "forgetting they have a gun."  They simply don't connect "carrying a gun" with "is illegal in the airport."

How many people do you think walk into a courthouse with their cellphone, or a small pocketknife?  Did they "forget they had a cellphone?"  No, they just neglected to make the mental connection between "jury duty" and "no cellphones."
 
2014-02-18 12:44:12 PM  

The_Sponge: CSB:

My gym bag has multiple uses....the gym (duh), and I occasionally use it to transport handguns to my local range, and use it as my carry-on bag when flying.

I never leave firearms in it once I'm home, but when I'm about to fly somewhere, I double-check it to make sure there isn't any loose ammo inside.


When you check your bag to ensure that their aren't any guns or ammo in it do you feel Obama's boot on your neck?
 
2014-02-18 12:44:35 PM  
I accidentally violated the age of consent because I didn't check the 17 year old girl's age before porking her, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 12:45:08 PM  

coeyagi: I accidentally left my cigarette burning while falling asleep and now my two cats and 3 kids are dead, officer. Mulligan?


A blonde is walking down the street.

A guy says, "Hey lady....there's a tampon in your mouth."

She says, "F*ck!  What did I do with my cigarette?"
 
2014-02-18 12:45:15 PM  

dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: It includes: knowing where your gun is at all times,

I'm 50 miles away from my guns, and have been for several hours.  I can't guarantee with 100% certainty where they are.  Am I irresponsible?


encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com
 
2014-02-18 12:46:05 PM  
I accidentally ran over a girl crossing the street because I was texting, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 12:46:25 PM  
Considering that a gun would probably be discovered in an area under federal jurisdiction, this law would mean precisely squat.
 
2014-02-18 12:47:01 PM  

The_Sponge: coeyagi: I accidentally left my cigarette burning while falling asleep and now my two cats and 3 kids are dead, officer. Mulligan?

A blonde is walking down the street.

A guy says, "Hey lady....there's a tampon in your mouth."

She says, "F*ck!  What did I do with my cigarette?"


I accidentally laughed at The_Sponge who doesn't want to be responsible for his own actions, officer.  Potato?
 
2014-02-18 12:47:09 PM  

James!: The_Sponge: CSB:

My gym bag has multiple uses....the gym (duh), and I occasionally use it to transport handguns to my local range, and use it as my carry-on bag when flying.

I never leave firearms in it once I'm home, but when I'm about to fly somewhere, I double-check it to make sure there isn't any loose ammo inside.

When you check your bag to ensure that their aren't any guns or ammo in it do you feel Obama's boot on your neck?



Nope....I feel him patting me on the butt and saying "good job".
 
2014-02-18 12:47:56 PM  

coeyagi: The_Sponge: coeyagi: I accidentally left my cigarette burning while falling asleep and now my two cats and 3 kids are dead, officer. Mulligan?

A blonde is walking down the street.

A guy says, "Hey lady....there's a tampon in your mouth."

She says, "F*ck!  What did I do with my cigarette?"

I accidentally laughed at The_Sponge who doesn't want to be responsible for his own actions, officer.  Potato?



Heh.
 
2014-02-18 12:48:13 PM  

dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: It includes: knowing where your gun is at all times,

I'm 50 miles away from my guns, and have been for several hours.  I can't guarantee with 100% certainty where they are.  Am I irresponsible?


Then how do you know your 50 miles away from them?
 
2014-02-18 12:48:18 PM  

Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: I don't think anyone would accuse me of being an "irresponsible knife owner".

False analogy. A gun is not a knife.


In Georgia, the "illegal to carry in this location" state law (16-11-129) prohibits the carry of weapons.  Knives and firearms are both included under the definition of weapon for this law.

So the analogy is good: in the eyes of this law, a knife and gun are the same.  Yet if you have a knife, you can take it back out to your car, have someone come pick it up from you, let it be confiscated, etc, etc.  You are not automatically cuffed and taken to spend the night in the Clayton County Jail.
 
2014-02-18 12:48:28 PM  
I accidentally fell asleep at the commands of the roller coaster ride and now 7 people are dead, officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 12:48:49 PM  

Serious Black: "I would tell you that a lot of people carry a weapon," said state Rep. Alan Powell, a Republican who supports the bill. "It's almost like it's just a second nature to them. And sometimes they forget where they have, you know, they basically forget they've got it in a briefcase or a suitcase."

If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.


Now, be fair. A gun is a tool, as the gun fondlers so often tell us. I forget where my tools are all the time. And a tool that I would most likely NEVER EVER use, in my entire lifetime of owning it, would be really easy to lose track of.

/Concealed carry is probably the least useful form of personal protection known to man. It's better than wearing a lightning-rod hat, but not much.
 
2014-02-18 12:49:09 PM  
The problem with gun shills is that they just don't understand that this is the crap that will ultimately give gun grabbers what they want and yet, you defend the irresponsible idiots.
 
2014-02-18 12:49:43 PM  

Trivia Jockey: dittybopper: but what about the inadvertent exceptions?

There are certain things so inherently dangerous that we've placed strict liability on them.  That's so we don't have to try and determine someone's subjective intent.  Guns are one of those things.  There should not be any exceptions for inadvertence.


Exactly.

Also, you can put me in the "there's no way someone inadvertently brings a gun to a farking airport" camp.

What this law does is give people an incentive to try and sneak firearms on airplanes. If they get caught they can say, "oops! my bad" and that's basically that. I can't see how anyone would think this is responsible legislation.
 
2014-02-18 12:50:06 PM  
I accidentally brought a gun to a high school to pick up my kid, officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 12:50:24 PM  

coeyagi: I accidentally fell asleep at the commands of the roller coaster ride and now 7 people are dead, officer.  Mulligan?


Hey not all of these comparisons are fair.  That carnie was actually required to get training before operating that deadly equipment.
 
2014-02-18 12:50:26 PM  

factoryconnection: You have your sh*t together on gun rights, Ditty, but you don't need to take the idiot gun-owner's side just because both of you happen to own guns.  I don't take idiot car-owners' sides in things, nor idiot parents' sides, nor idiot liberals.  Is the group that lives by the philosophy "I'm too preoccupied to have a clue where my gun is" really the team that deserves your support?


Everyone of us is an idiot sometimes.

*EVERY*farkING*ONE*OF*US*.

Even you.

I don't care if you think you are Mr. McCool, never, ever, makes a mistake or forgets something.  You do.  More often than you think.  But that doesn't necessarily make you irresponsible, it makes you *HUMAN*, not a robot.

Approximately 1.8 *MILLION* people fly commercial flights every day in the US.  The TSA seized about 5 guns per day in US airports in 2013.  This in a country where 65% of the people live in areas where it's legal to carry a firearm.

So why are we so set on punishing the 0.0003% of people who make an honest mistake with no ill intent?

Why *NOT* make it so that they can legally check their guns if they inadvertently forgot them in a bag?  Why the urge to punish something like that?
 
2014-02-18 12:50:53 PM  

dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.


Nothing in this thread could be said better than this.

How about ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE.

The current policy is largely "zero tolerance", with the rare and sane exception being news:

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2014-01-29/news/os-sanford-airpo rt -holds-passenger-gun-20140129_1_orlando-international-airport-conceale d-weapon-permit-holders-armed-passenger

Why not just make a "gun check" part of the process?  If you have a gun, and are legally permitted to carry it, why not just provide people who inadvertently carry into an airport security zone a way to store their guns on the premises until they return?

That would accomplish the goal of a "gun free zone" in the passenger terminals and by extension on the aircraft, so what harm would be done?

Really, other than making carrying a gun as legally dicey as you possibly can in as many situations as you possibly can in order to make people shy away from it, what possible opposition can you have to something like that?


Short answer? because that gives all would be highjackers and criminals an "out" if they are caught in the boarding process "oops, meant to check that BRB"  leading to a much higher probability of gun violence in or around airplanes.   Better public policy it to put the onus on people who choose to carry deadly weapons to maintain situational awareness at all times.


I say this as someone who DID forget a deadly weapon in my carry on luggage once and was caught by security.  Now in my case it was a custom forged 9-in wrought iron dagger a blacksmith friend had given me as a present, and I was able to convince the guard it was a "letter opener" (whereupon she re-packed my luggage and sent me on my way-pre 9/11 of course), but had I gotten in trouble i would have been nobody's fault but my own.   I think the penalties for such thing should be pretty mild if was truly an accident and no nefarious intent can be proven (Forfeiture of the weapon and a small fine for a first offense), but there should be a strong societal disincentive for carry weapons in that environment
 
2014-02-18 12:52:12 PM  

ikanreed: coeyagi: I accidentally fell asleep at the commands of the roller coaster ride and now 7 people are dead, officer.  Mulligan?

Hey not all of these comparisons are fair.  That carnie was actually required to get training before operating that deadly equipment.


I "accidentally" didn't get a background check at a gun show because I know I am insane and was looking for a way to murder lots of people quickly, and then murdered lots of people quickly, officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 12:53:17 PM  
I accidentally rolled a huge snowball down the mountain that hit a car, flipped it over and killed its inhabitants, officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 12:53:18 PM  

Jocktopus: Stupid arguments are stupid.

People (in general) aren't "forgetting they have a gun."  They simply don't connect "carrying a gun" with "is illegal in the airport."

How many people do you think walk into a courthouse with their cellphone, or a small pocketknife?  Did they "forget they had a cellphone?"  No, they just neglected to make the mental connection between "jury duty" and "no cellphones."


Not only that, the majority of the airport guns seized were in their carry-on luggage, not in a holster on their person.

It's hard to imagine a scenario where you forget you are *WEARING* a gun, but much easier to imagine one where it's in a bag that you use for other purposes, and you forgot or missed it when packing for your trip.
 
2014-02-18 01:03:43 PM  

dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: dittybopper: Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

Forgetting you have a loaded pistol in your pocket is a pretty f*cking big unintentional and inadvertent mistake.  Especially when you go to a high-security area like an airport.

What about in a bag you carry for other purposes (like car trips, etc.)?

Generally, that's what happens, not the one in the pocket, the one in the bag you use for other things besides airline flights.
 
Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm all for laws that disincentivize gun owners from being less than hyper-careful with their guns.

So, you're of the mind that people should be strictly punished when they have no ill intent, merely because they are gun owners.

Are you of the same mind for people who drive cars?  Do you think drivers who exceed the speed limit in school zones should have their driving privileges permanently revoked for the the first offense, and have their car seized, even though it was inadvertent?  After all, it's a farkin' *SCHOOL ZONE*.  They could kill a kid by going 30 MPH instead of 20.

Is that the sort of thing you are generally agreeable with, or is it just because *GUNZ!*?


It's sort of like the people who want to perform Transvaginal ultrasounds and make women look at the monitor before consenting to an abortion
 
2014-02-18 01:03:54 PM  
Well, it looks like I'm gonna need a new pair of snowshoes what with all this threadshiat. Ew.
 
2014-02-18 01:03:56 PM  

Serious Black: dittybopper: inadvertently carry

Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns, I don't think inadvertent carrying of a gun exists. We are talking about a tool whose sole purpose is to annihilate anything and everything that the business end is pointed towards. I believe a responsible gun owner should know where their potentially deadly firearms are at all times. If that's too much for you to handle, you shouldn't own a gun.


I can see you've never carried a gun. I had to wear an M9 around for a year when I was in Iraq (a more useless paperweight was never inflicted on anyone; I worked in an office in the Green Zone, so if the hajjis got inside the wire to the point where I had to shoot at them, I was dead, pistol or no). Within a month, you forget you have the thing on. I left mine lying around (unloaded, because the military isn't as stupid as most Armed Citizens) more than once when I took it off to work out.

People need to realize on both sides of this argument that concealed carry pistols are almost NEVER used. It's a piece of really heavy, really stupid jewelry; an anti-gorilla amulet designed to protect against a largely nonexistent threat. Your odds of using it in a situation where no gun would make for a worse outcome are lotteryesque. Heck, most police detectives never pull out their pistols, let alone Armed Citizens. So if you're silly enough to be in the habit of constantly going armed, you're going to quit thinking about it after a few months or years of it never being necessary.

Also, loaded guns are in no way a hazard to other fliers, so freaking out over the "danger" of inadvertently leaving a loaded handgun in your luggage is just that, a freakout. People who want to hijack airplanes or commit other crimes are a problem; idiot wannabes with guns in their carryons have yet to hurt anyone in an airport or on a plane.
 
2014-02-18 01:05:29 PM  
I accidentally stabbed someone with a ski pole while going down a black diamond in Vail, officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:05:30 PM  
Taking guns to airports when taking shampoo on board is banned. And people are okay with this?img.fark.net
 
2014-02-18 01:06:05 PM  
I accidentally defrauded the IRS by claiming losses, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:06:13 PM  

coeyagi: I accidentally drank too much alcohol and got behind a wheel and now Mary Jane Rottencrotch is dead, officer. Mulligan?


coeyagi: I accidentally addressed the reimbursement check to me when another volunteer spent the funds and now I have $500 more than I should, officer. Mulligan?


coeyagi: I accidentally ran over a girl crossing the street because I was texting, officer. Mulligan?


coeyagi: I accidentally violated the age of consent because I didn't check the 17 year old girl's age before porking her, officer. Mulligan?


coeyagi: I accidentally dropped a canister of cyanide outside the lab and now I am going to the funeral of a colleague, officer. Mulligan?


Am I the only one that really wants to meet this Officer Mulligan fellow?
 
2014-02-18 01:06:16 PM  

Serious Black: dittybopper: inadvertently carry

Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns, I don't think inadvertent carrying of a gun exists. We are talking about a tool whose sole purpose is to annihilate anything and everything that the business end is pointed towards. I believe a responsible gun owner should know where their potentially deadly firearms are at all times. If that's too much for you to handle, you shouldn't own a gun.


I had an 'accidental discharge' once.

/OK, more than once
//That was the end of those dates
 
2014-02-18 01:06:31 PM  
I guess i can sort of see his point, after a while it just becomes routine, leaving the house; keys, wallet, phone, gun. I have a small leatherman on my keychain all the time that i never really give any thought to...

EXCEPT WHEN IM GOING TO THE farkING AIRPORT.


I dont know about anyone else, but i generally try to avoid doing things that have the potential to get me anally fisted by a high school drop out.
 
2014-02-18 01:06:42 PM  
I accidentally shot jizz out the car window while getting head from my girlfriend, it hit a motorcycler in the eye and now he's blind, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:06:45 PM  

dittybopper: To *ME*, responsible gun ownership is basically following the four rules of safe gun use, and making sure that unauthorized people like criminals don't get access, and that children only have well-supervised age-appropriate access, that sort of thing.  That's responsible gun ownership.


And a fifth rule of "Never take your weapon somewhere it is unlawful to possess it" is somehow unreasonable?


I've carried a leatherman in my pocket as a matter of course from freshman year in high school to present with the sole exception of basic training and the first four weeks of AIT.  It comes with me to work, on dates with my wife, babysitting for friends, to the movie theatre, to everywhere I go.

EXCEPT when I am getting on an airplane or entering another area where it is expressly forbidden.  The night before it goes into my checked luggage if I am taking a bag.  If I am not checking luggage it goes on my nightstand.  On arrival as soon as I get my checked bag if I'm exiting the airport it goes directly into my pocket again.  I have never had it confiscated at an airport, and I fly fairly frequently (On average around once a month between business and pleasure over the last few years, less often before that).

I recognize as a responsible knife owner that it is not allowed past that point, and that it should not be on my person as I pass that point.  I recognize as a responsible knife owner that I am carrying something that can be used as a weapon even though it is pretty expressly a tool.  I recognize that as such there are some places where it won't be allowed in and that I may be barred from entry or have it confiscated if I try to carry it in.


I have zero sympathy for the idea of forgetting that you are carrying a weapon.

I have zero sympathy for the idea of entering a airport security checkpoint without complete knowledge of everything on your person and in your carry on luggage.

If you can't tell me whether or not you are currently in possession of a deadly weapon, you shouldn't be carrying them.  Especially in areas where it is so expressly well known that it is unlawful to do so.


If I can remember to put my knife in checked luggage or leave it at home without the motivation of being charged with a crime for failing to do so, you can leave your weapon at home or check it properly.  Zero sympathy.


/also keeps a checklist of times the leatherman would have been useful but wasn't present due to lack of checked luggage
//current record is 4 hours from time of landing to realizing having it would have been useful
 
2014-02-18 01:07:15 PM  

Serious Black: "I would tell you that a lot of people carry a weapon," said state Rep. Alan Powell, a Republican who supports the bill. "It's almost like it's just a second nature to them. And sometimes they forget where they have, you know, they basically forget they've got it in a briefcase or a suitcase."

If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.


Yup. Just wanted to make sure someone had said this. And seconded it. And continued to second it. And said "this" a few times.

Regardless of what laws anyone wants to pass, it's pretty stupid to say that the basis is that it's normal to forget you're carrying a weapon around with you.
 
2014-02-18 01:07:18 PM  
I accidentally outted a CIA operative via Robert Novak, officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:07:28 PM  

mbillips: People who want to hijack airplanes or commit other crimes are a problem; idiot wannabes with guns in their carryons have yet to hurt anyone in an airport or on a plane.


How do you distinguish the two?
 
2014-02-18 01:08:02 PM  
I accidentally solicited for sex in a men's bathroom in the Minneapolis airport, officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:08:13 PM  

BunkoSquad: dittybopper: What about in a bag you carry for other purposes (like car trips, etc.)?

Generally, that's what happens, not the one in the pocket, the one in the bag you use for other things besides airline flights.

I make sure there's no "too big bottle of contact lens solution" in that bag before I go to the airport, because I'm aware enough to know THAT I AM GOING TO THE AIRPORT


FWIW, in the US you can just take contact solution (or pretty much any liquid) out of your bag declare it "medicinal".  While normally a threat to national security, speaking the magical "medicinal" word to the TSA renders liquids in excess of 3.4 oz safe.

/thread-jack
 
2014-02-18 01:08:24 PM  

Jocktopus: Stupid arguments are stupid.

People (in general) aren't "forgetting they have a gun."   They simply don't connect "carrying a gun" with "is illegal in the airport."

How many people do you think walk into a courthouse with their cellphone, or a small pocketknife?  Did they "forget they had a cellphone?"  No, they just neglected to make the mental connection between "jury duty" and "no cellphones."



LOLWUT?

When was the last time carrying a gun onto a plane was legal?  1971?
 
2014-02-18 01:08:39 PM  
I accidentally solicited for prostitutes before getting a round of applause for my return on the floor of Congress, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:09:39 PM  
I accidentally dropped sodium hydroxide in a pot of Egg Drop Soup, officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:09:50 PM  

Serious Black: dittybopper: inadvertently carry

Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns,...


upload.wikimedia.org would like a word
 
2014-02-18 01:09:53 PM  

mbillips: Serious Black: dittybopper: inadvertently carry

Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns, I don't think inadvertent carrying of a gun exists. We are talking about a tool whose sole purpose is to annihilate anything and everything that the business end is pointed towards. I believe a responsible gun owner should know where their potentially deadly firearms are at all times. If that's too much for you to handle, you shouldn't own a gun.

I can see you've never carried a gun. I had to wear an M9 around for a year when I was in Iraq (a more useless paperweight was never inflicted on anyone; I worked in an office in the Green Zone, so if the hajjis got inside the wire to the point where I had to shoot at them, I was dead, pistol or no). Within a month, you forget you have the thing on. I left mine lying around (unloaded, because the military isn't as stupid as most Armed Citizens) more than once when I took it off to work out.


That's funny, because the only dudes who ever lost track of their weapons in my unit were the biggest fark-ups and retards.
 
2014-02-18 01:09:59 PM  
So all the thugs and terrorists can use this excuse now?
 
2014-02-18 01:10:41 PM  
I accidentally found Jesus.... dead in my garden, because I worked him to death, officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:11:35 PM  

Sgt Otter: That's funny, because the only dudes who ever lost track of their weapons in my unit were the biggest fark-ups and retards.


So you're saying that you don't want fark-ups and retards carrying loaded guns in the airport?

Why do you hate our freedoms?
 
2014-02-18 01:11:39 PM  
I accidentally stabbed my girlfriend in the chest when we were reenacting a scene from "The Following", officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:12:34 PM  

Cyno01: I generally try to avoid doing things that have the potential to get me anally fisted by a high school drop out.


Well that's where you and I differ, then...
 
2014-02-18 01:12:46 PM  
I accidentally built a contraption that I saw on A-Team and now an entire carload of Shriners have been chopped into small pieces, officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:13:46 PM  

The_Sponge: CSB:

My gym bag has multiple uses....the gym (duh), and I occasionally use it to transport handguns to my local range, and use it as my carry-on bag when flying.

I never leave firearms in it once I'm home, but when I'm about to fly somewhere, I double-check it to make sure there isn't any loose ammo inside.


I call bullshiat.

Your lying about going to the gym.
 
2014-02-18 01:13:53 PM  
How about this  - Make it a $2000 fine + confiscate gun, but it's a misdemeanor(no Jail).
That way, gun owner who is being irresponsible is now not a gun owner.
 
2014-02-18 01:14:46 PM  
I accidentally kicked a blue USPS mailbox with a drunk midget sleeping in it and then he died from an acute blow to the head when the mailbox hit the pavement, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:14:48 PM  

RickN99: Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: I don't think anyone would accuse me of being an "irresponsible knife owner".

False analogy. A gun is not a knife.


In Georgia, the "illegal to carry in this location" state law (16-11-129) prohibits the carry of weapons.  Knives and firearms are both included under the definition of weapon for this law.

So the analogy is good: in the eyes of this law, a knife and gun are the same.  Yet if you have a knife, you can take it back out to your car, have someone come pick it up from you, let it be confiscated, etc, etc.  You are not automatically cuffed and taken to spend the night in the Clayton County Jail.



Here is the law that you are citing:

http://www.georgiapacking.org/GaCode/?title=16&chapter=11&section=12 9

Note that this is about a "weapons carry license" that is guns and knives with blades over 5" in length. The original story is that some Hillbilly forgot about his pocket knife while going into court. This is not the same as forgetting about the Samurai sword that you have tucked under your jacket.


http://www.georgiapacking.org/GaCode/?title=16&chapter=11&section=12 5. 1

"  (2) "Knife" means a cutting instrument designed for the purpose of offense and defense consisting of a blade that is greater than five inches in length which is fastened to a handle. "

So, um, you are wrong.
 
2014-02-18 01:15:10 PM  

Trivia Jockey: dittybopper: Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

Forgetting you have a loaded pistol in your pocket is a pretty f*cking big unintentional and inadvertent mistake.  Especially when you go to a high-security area like an airport.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm all for laws that disincentivize gun owners from being less than hyper-careful with their guns.


If only there were some way to train gun owners into double checking just exactly where their gun is when they know they're heading to a place where they aren't allowed.

/but that's just crazy talk
 
2014-02-18 01:15:35 PM  
I'm thinking dittybopper realized how completely indefensible his position was and fled to Mexico.

Hopefully he remembered to check his gun first.
 
2014-02-18 01:15:40 PM  
I accidentally farted in the face of a woman with emphysema and she choked to death, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:16:10 PM  
We can't really expect responsible gun owners to be responsible. That would be a violation of their rights.
 
2014-02-18 01:16:36 PM  
I accidentally injected people with a used syringe that was previously used on an AIDS patient and now 47 patients have HIV, officer.  Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 01:16:54 PM  

dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: dittybopper: Constantly, or just that one time because you were in a rush? Because they'd both be punished exactly the same.

They should be.  My god, allowing someone to be irresponsible with a gun because they're in a hurry is the f*cking definition of stuff I don't want.

Remember we aren't talking about shooting things recklessly, just forgetting that you left your legal handgun in a bag.

And BTW, that's what most of the cases are:  It's not someone actually carrying in a holster on their person, it's a gun left in a bag:

Most of the weapons confiscated in 2013 had gun permits and were found in the carry-on luggage of passengers.

But let's think some more about this:  If you declare your weapon and put it in your checked baggage, you're 100% OK legally.  So why not just give people the option (for a substantial fee!) to have that done, or, alternatively, to just have them stored (again for a substantial fee!) until they return from their trip.

I can't think of any rational security purpose for not doing that.  Hell, *ADVERTISE* that you're doing it:  People who carry concealed would probably be more likely to use an airport where they can check their guns right before going into the secure area than they would one where they would have to leave their guns at home.  Make money off of their fear.  It's Win-Win!



While they're at it they're going to have to change another law - at least here at Ft Lauderdale Airport. You are not allowed to bring a firearm into the airport terminal - so how the hell are you supposed to check it in your luggage? You are required to report it to the person at the ticket counter inside, and even demonstrate that it is secured in your luggage if asked ... but you're not supposed to bring a firearm into the terminal. The biggest problem with laws like this are the idiots that write them without thinking them through.
 
2014-02-18 01:16:55 PM  

coeyagi: I accidentally kicked a blue USPS mailbox with a drunk midget sleeping in it and then he died from an acute blow to the head when the mailbox hit the pavement, officer. Mulligan?



Did you hear about the midget who died playing ping-pong?

He got too excited and ran off the table.
 
2014-02-18 01:18:01 PM  

gilgigamesh: I'm thinking dittybopper realized how completely indefensible his position was and fled to Mexico.

Hopefully he remembered to check his gun first.


That'd require some self-awareness.
 
2014-02-18 01:18:51 PM  

RexTalionis: mbillips: People who want to hijack airplanes or commit other crimes are a problem; idiot wannabes with guns in their carryons have yet to hurt anyone in an airport or on a plane.

How do you distinguish the two?


If they show up at the airport with a gun in their luggage/pocket, you put them in a small room and have large men talk to them. Hijackers and crooks are VERY QUICKLY distinguishable from innocent dumbasses. You give the innocent dumbass a ticket, and you deal with the other type appropriately. But that's not my point. What I'm saying is, the PUT THEM UNDER THE JAIL, OMG THEY'RE PUTTING ME IN PERIL attitude toward actual innocent dumbasses who bring guns to the airport (whom this Georgia law is intended to protect) is just hysterical. If those inadvertently packed guns wound up on the plane, nobody would ever know the difference.

Sgt Otter: mbillips: Serious Black: dittybopper: inadvertently carry

Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns, I don't think inadvertent carrying of a gun exists. We are talking about a tool whose sole purpose is to annihilate anything and everything that the business end is pointed towards. I believe a responsible gun owner should know where their potentially deadly firearms are at all times. If that's too much for you to handle, you shouldn't own a gun.

I can see you've never carried a gun. I had to wear an M9 around for a year when I was in Iraq (a more useless paperweight was never inflicted on anyone; I worked in an office in the Green Zone, so if the hajjis got inside the wire to the point where I had to shoot at them, I was dead, pistol or no). Within a month, you forget you have the thing on. I left mine lying around (unloaded, because the military isn't as stupid as most Armed Citizens) more than once when I took it off to work out.

That's funny, because the only dudes who ever lost track of their weapons in my unit were the biggest fark-ups and retards.


Yeah, but they were probably grunts. I'm a Navy public affairs officer, and old, and thus absent-minded. I bet your squared-away hard chargers can't write an English sentence to save their lives, though, let alone turn Iraqi-translated Arabic news reports into clear, correct English with an executive summary that allows general officers to make smart decisions. Military specialization ftw.
 
2014-02-18 01:19:31 PM  

The_Sponge: coeyagi: I accidentally kicked a blue USPS mailbox with a drunk midget sleeping in it and then he died from an acute blow to the head when the mailbox hit the pavement, officer. Mulligan?


Did you hear about the midget who died playing ping-pong?

He got too excited and ran off the table.


I accidentally brought a gun to an airport, officer. Mulligan?

(full circle, done)

//Keep it responsible, Responsible Tuberous-Americans™!
 
2014-02-18 01:20:30 PM  

Publikwerks: How about this  - Make it a $2000 fine + confiscate gun, but it's a misdemeanor(no Jail).
That way, gun owner who is being irresponsible is now not a gun owner.


But but but that gun owner forgot where is bootstraps were that day too! MULLIGAN!
 
2014-02-18 01:21:02 PM  

mbillips: I can see you've never carried a gun. I had to wear an M9 around for a year when I was in Iraq (a more useless paperweight was never inflicted on anyone; I worked in an office in the Green Zone, so if the hajjis got inside the wire to the point where I had to shoot at them, I was dead, pistol or no). Within a month, you forget you have the thing on. I left mine lying around (unloaded, because the military isn't as stupid as most Armed Citizens) more than once when I took it off to work out.


...I can see you were in need of corrective training.  Your failure to properly follow lawful orders is hardly a good argument against requiring citizens to properly follow the law.
 
2014-02-18 01:21:48 PM  

Corvus: Is this were all the gun nuts say "Well this guy was a irresponsible gun owner! Don't lump him with other gun owners" but then when someone suggests then that people should have training or the most basics of background checks the same people go "No no no! you can't do that!! They should be able to have guns and make mistakes!"


Nope. The gun nuts in this thread are arguing that you can be a responsible gun owner while having no idea where your gun is, and that trying to board a flight with a gun should be treated as a minor infraction like breaking the speed limit.

Seriously; what the fark, dittybopper? Did you forget to take your meds today?
 
2014-02-18 01:23:38 PM  

Because People in power are Stupid: RickN99: Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: I don't think anyone would accuse me of being an "irresponsible knife owner".

False analogy. A gun is not a knife.


In Georgia, the "illegal to carry in this location" state law (16-11-129) prohibits the carry of weapons.  Knives and firearms are both included under the definition of weapon for this law.

So the analogy is good: in the eyes of this law, a knife and gun are the same.  Yet if you have a knife, you can take it back out to your car, have someone come pick it up from you, let it be confiscated, etc, etc.  You are not automatically cuffed and taken to spend the night in the Clayton County Jail.


Here is the law that you are citing:

http://www.georgiapacking.org/GaCode/?title=16&chapter=11§ion=12 9

Note that this is about a "weapons carry license" that is guns and knives with blades over 5" in length. The original story is that some Hillbilly forgot about his pocket knife while going into court. This is not the same as forgetting about the Samurai sword that you have tucked under your jacket.


http://www.georgiapacking.org/GaCode/?title=16&chapter=11§ion=12 5. 1

"  (2) "Knife" means a cutting instrument designed for the purpose of offense and defense consisting of a blade that is greater than five inches in length which is fastened to a handle. "

So, um, you are wrong.


Holy crap, when did they change that? The law used to be 3 inches; five inches is a freakin' dagger. ALEC strikes again. I guess this means I can carry my switchblade now as long as I don't cross state lines.
 
2014-02-18 01:23:44 PM  

Gunther: Corvus: Is this were all the gun nuts say "Well this guy was a irresponsible gun owner! Don't lump him with other gun owners" but then when someone suggests then that people should have training or the most basics of background checks the same people go "No no no! you can't do that!! They should be able to have guns and make mistakes!"

Nope. The gun nuts in this thread are arguing that you can be a responsible gun owner while having no idea where your gun is, and that trying to board a flight with a gun should be treated as a minor infraction like breaking the speed limit.

Seriously; what the fark, dittybopper? Did you forget to take your meds today?


Worse than this thread, some MOTHERF*CKER in Georgia thinks that irresponsible gun owners should be treated as a responsible gun owner!

//just making sure we still have our eyes on the bigger asshole, here
 
2014-02-18 01:24:09 PM  
I am a pretty strong supporter of gun rights, both of ownership and carrying. I will never understand the logic of people who think gun ownership creates some kind of magical, protected category of rights that ensures you special legal and practical immunity from the consequences of your actions; simply because a gun is involved.

You'd think responsible gun owners would take the opposite position: that gun ownership implies a heightened level of responsibility. But here we are.
 
2014-02-18 01:25:12 PM  

gilgigamesh: I am a pretty strong supporter of gun rights, both of ownership and carrying. I will never understand the logic of people who think gun ownership creates some kind of magical, protected category of rights that ensures you special legal and practical immunity from the consequences of your actions; simply because a gun is involved.

You'd think responsible gun owners would take the opposite position: that gun ownership implies a heightened level of responsibility. But here we are.


Nope.  The majority of them don't.  More rights, less regulation.  Because Jesus, Founding Fathers and Apple Motherf*ckin' Pie!
 
2014-02-18 01:26:14 PM  
We need this flexibility in the law so we can continue to send terrorists (non-white), while not wrongfully incarcerating good, god-fearing Americans (white).
 
2014-02-18 01:27:45 PM  
mbillips:
Holy crap, when did they change that? The law used to be 3 inches; five inches is a freakin' dagger. ALEC strikes again. I guess this means I can carry my switchblade now as long as I don't cross state lines.

Jesus Christ.  My ex-girlfriend gave me a Benchmade Nimravus for my birthday, and it has a 4.5" blade.  I used to get made fun of for carrying it on my vest, because the damn thing is so big.

www.jtice.com
 
2014-02-18 01:28:51 PM  

NkThrasher: mbillips: I can see you've never carried a gun. I had to wear an M9 around for a year when I was in Iraq (a more useless paperweight was never inflicted on anyone; I worked in an office in the Green Zone, so if the hajjis got inside the wire to the point where I had to shoot at them, I was dead, pistol or no). Within a month, you forget you have the thing on. I left mine lying around (unloaded, because the military isn't as stupid as most Armed Citizens) more than once when I took it off to work out.

...I can see you were in need of corrective training.  Your failure to properly follow lawful orders is hardly a good argument against requiring citizens to properly follow the law.


I'm OK with requiring them to follow the law. I'm just saying they shouldn't be criminally prosecuted for disobeying this particular law without criminal intent (which is a requirement for conviction of any criminal offense, btw). Taking a gun to the airport, unless a reasonable person would conclude you had criminal intent in doing so, should be a civil offense punishable with a fine. My personal experience is that the sort of people who think they need to carry a handgun around all the time reasonably could wind up at the airport with a gun without meaning to break any laws. You can give them a ticket for that, but you shouldn't arrest them and charge them with a crime.
 
2014-02-18 01:29:11 PM  

coeyagi: I accidentally built a contraption that I saw on A-Team and now an entire carload of Shriners have been chopped into small pieces, officer.  Mulligan?


i.dailymail.co.uk
 
2014-02-18 01:31:04 PM  

mbillips: If those inadvertently packed guns wound up on the plane, nobody would ever know the difference.


I know this is going to come as a very profound shock to a lot of gun owners, but you don't get to be above the law just because the law in question wasn't written specifically about you. That's how laws work. You don't get to just declare yourself exempt from them because you pinky-swear you're not going to do whatever bad thing the law is aimed at preventing.
 
2014-02-18 01:31:29 PM  

coeyagi: The_Sponge: coeyagi: I accidentally kicked a blue USPS mailbox with a drunk midget sleeping in it and then he died from an acute blow to the head when the mailbox hit the pavement, officer. Mulligan?


Did you hear about the midget who died playing ping-pong?

He got too excited and ran off the table.

I accidentally brought a gun to an airport, officer. Mulligan?

(full circle, done)

//Keep it responsible, Responsible Tuberous-Americans™!


Didja notice how all those other things hurt people? But carrying a gun to the airport didn't hurt anyone? Look up intentional tort sometime.
 
2014-02-18 01:32:34 PM  

RexTalionis: mbillips: People who want to hijack airplanes or commit other crimes are a problem; idiot wannabes with guns in their carryons have yet to hurt anyone in an airport or on a plane.

How do you distinguish the two?


SImple, you let them all bring their guns on and if they were hijackers, they will hijack the plane.  Duh.
 
2014-02-18 01:33:02 PM  
I don't think this measure is at all necessary, wise, or even ok.

How on earth can you honestly forget you're carrying a weapon into security screening at an airport? I check twice to make sure I haven't absentmindedly brought open containers of mouthwash or too much toothpaste.

The people who want a pass on this sort of thing...it isn't really about firearms, I don't think, it's more akin to the mentality of the people (yes, plural) who I've seen walk to the front of a line we've been waiting in for an hour and say, "is there a line for people who got here late so they don't miss their flight?" No, ma'am, there's not, that's why we're all got here earlier to wait in line. Ffs.
 
2014-02-18 01:34:52 PM  
So imagine if you will, an innocent man traveling to a business meeting in Cleveland. It's been a busy day, and he's rushed and rather stressed. He gets to the airport, takes off his shoes, puts his toiletries in a bucket and then realizes he's left a loaded gun in his carry on.

Now should this man, this a law abiding, upstanding citizen, this responsible gun owner be charged for this crime? OF COURSE NOT? It's a silly mistake. One anyone could make.

Now.

Imagine he's black.
 
2014-02-18 01:35:10 PM  
mbillips:Didja notice how all those other things hurt people? But carrying a gun to the airport didn't hurt anyone? Look up intentional tort sometime.

Wow, I'll admit, I'm surprised by that fact.  Today I learned no one has ever been hurt by a gun at an airport.  Fark.com is such a wealth of truthiness!
 
2014-02-18 01:35:32 PM  

dittybopper: James!: dittybopper: BunkoSquad: dittybopper: What about in a bag you carry for other purposes (like car trips, etc.)?

Generally, that's what happens, not the one in the pocket, the one in the bag you use for other things besides airline flights.

I make sure there's no "too big bottle of contact lens solution" in that bag before I go to the airport, because I'm aware enough to know THAT I AM GOING TO THE AIRPORT

And you think that's rational?

You think that should be the norm?

I think it should be the norm that you know what's in your luggage.

I'm not disagreeing with that, but what about the inadvertent exceptions?


You may want to back off of this one, it's really making you stretch and sound silly.  You are typically a very reasonable and thoughtful person even when I disagree with you, this just comes off as a knee-jerk defense of an utterly insane law.  It's already been said, and in the "initial text offering" of the thread:   If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.
 
2014-02-18 01:36:25 PM  

mbillips: Serious Black: dittybopper: inadvertently carry

Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns, I don't think inadvertent carrying of a gun exists. We are talking about a tool whose sole purpose is to annihilate anything and everything that the business end is pointed towards. I believe a responsible gun owner should know where their potentially deadly firearms are at all times. If that's too much for you to handle, you shouldn't own a gun.

I can see you've never carried a gun. I had to wear an M9 around for a year when I was in Iraq (a more useless paperweight was never inflicted on anyone; I worked in an office in the Green Zone, so if the hajjis got inside the wire to the point where I had to shoot at them, I was dead, pistol or no). Within a month, you forget you have the thing on. I left mine lying around (unloaded, because the military isn't as stupid as most Armed Citizens) more than once when I took it off to work out.

People need to realize on both sides of this argument that concealed carry pistols are almost NEVER used. It's a piece of really heavy, really stupid jewelry; an anti-gorilla amulet designed to protect against a largely nonexistent threat. Your odds of using it in a situation where no gun would make for a worse outcome are lotteryesque. Heck, most police detectives never pull out their pistols, let alone Armed Citizens. So if you're silly enough to be in the habit of constantly going armed, you're going to quit thinking about it after a few months or years of it never being necessary.

Also, loaded guns are in no way a hazard to other fliers, so freaking out over the "danger" of inadvertently leaving a loaded handgun in your luggage is just that, a freakout. People who want to hijack airplanes or commit other crimes are a problem; idiot wannabes with guns in their carryons have yet to hurt anyone in an airport or on a plane.


I worked at ISAF Headquarters in Kabul for six months. I did not personally carry as I was a civilian and was allowed to not carry, but every uniformed officer was required to carry. Even General friggin Allen had to carry at all times. I can't verify he did so, but every time I saw him in public, I can verify he had his M9 on him.

Our base never once left readiness state Lima for guns, meaning all guns were required to be loaded but without a round in the chamber. That could be because the Kabul Green Zone was not a paradise of safety like the Baghdad Green Zone.

Everyone who carried had to keep their guns on their person at all times; the one exception was if you took both a pistol and a rifle that you only had to carry one, but the other had to be locked up in a carrier in your room when it was not on their person. Everybody carried their guns with them to the DFAC, to the bathroom, and in the gym when they were working out. And people didn't just forget where they were and leave them lying around. At the most, I only recall one incident where somebody left their gun laying somewhere, and that sparked an immediate contact via e-mail to the entire damn base asking whose gun it was.

About a month before my redeployment, I asked the coworker that I sat next to about his gun. He complained about it and commented that it was impossible to forget he had it with how it shifted his weight distribution while walking. Every other military officer in my group of about 15 said similar things regardless of how they carried it (leg and shoulder holster were the two most popular options).

In short, I don't buy anything you're saying.
 
2014-02-18 01:36:36 PM  
Where did I put my carton of Acme brand dynamite? Was it next to the wood stove? I can't remember?
 
2014-02-18 01:37:31 PM  
I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.
 
2014-02-18 01:37:32 PM  

vartian: Serious Black: If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.

This. Your right to a gun does not absolve you from your responsibility for it.


MUCH, MUCH more than this- If you forget you have a gun on you, or where it is on you, doesn't that completely invalidate the logic behind stand your ground laws? If you believe you don't have a gun, while actually carrying one, then that gun will not protect you or your family no matter how powerful and accurate it is.
 
2014-02-18 01:38:19 PM  
I leave the house with a pocket full of change every day. I've been carrying it so long that I never even give it a second though... except when I'm going to the FARKING AIRPORT.

Anyone who's so clueless and unaware of their surroundings shouldn't be carrying anything more dangerous than a spork.
 
2014-02-18 01:38:27 PM  

skozlaw: mbillips: If those inadvertently packed guns wound up on the plane, nobody would ever know the difference.

I know this is going to come as a very profound shock to a lot of gun owners, but you don't get to be above the law just because the law in question wasn't written specifically about you. That's how laws work. You don't get to just declare yourself exempt from them because you pinky-swear you're not going to do whatever bad thing the law is aimed at preventing.


You're confusing two different areas of law. Civil laws regulating behavior (speeding) are different from criminal laws banning intentional bad behavior (vehicular homicide). Of course, people should be barred from carrying loaded guns on planes. But if they had no criminal intent, that's a civil violation of a regulation, NOT A CRIME, and is punished with a civil fine or forfeiture, not jail time. Airport security isn't there to keep guns or knives or bottles of water off planes; it's there to keep would-be hijackers unarmed. Idiots who inadvertently leave guns in their luggage are hurting airport security no more than people who don't have guns in their luggage.
 
2014-02-18 01:39:02 PM  
I'm with the majority here: if you can't remember to leave your gun home before you fly out, then you don't deserve to carry a gun.

On a different, but gun related note, I keep hearing "an armed society is a polite society", but evidence is disproving that. It seems that carrying a gun has empowered countless azzholes to truly be themselves in all sorts of situations.

Three quarters of etiquette is about defusing situations or avoiding giving offense. To many gun owners seem to think that carrying a gun exempts them from those rules of polite society. They feel entirely free to give as much offense as they want to, and they don't feel obligated to back down, apologize or swallow their pride. Ever.

Instead of becoming more polite, the arming of society had made it belligerent and confrontational.

/real life trolls and itgs rejoice! With a gun, you're a God of annoyance made corporeal!
 
2014-02-18 01:39:08 PM  

Doom MD: dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: dittybopper: Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

Forgetting you have a loaded pistol in your pocket is a pretty f*cking big unintentional and inadvertent mistake.  Especially when you go to a high-security area like an airport.

What about in a bag you carry for other purposes (like car trips, etc.)?

Generally, that's what happens, not the one in the pocket, the one in the bag you use for other things besides airline flights.
 
Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm all for laws that disincentivize gun owners from being less than hyper-careful with their guns.

So, you're of the mind that people should be strictly punished when they have no ill intent, merely because they are gun owners.

Are you of the same mind for people who drive cars?  Do you think drivers who exceed the speed limit in school zones should have their driving privileges permanently revoked for the the first offense, and have their car seized, even though it was inadvertent?  After all, it's a farkin' *SCHOOL ZONE*.  They could kill a kid by going 30 MPH instead of 20.

Is that the sort of thing you are generally agreeable with, or is it just because *GUNZ!*?

It's sort of like the people who want to perform Transvaginal ultrasounds and make women look at the monitor before consenting to an abortion


Yes, it is.  It's trying to take something that is a right and make it as difficult to exercise as possible.  Not *IMPOSSIBLE*, of course, because that would be unconstitutional, just as difficult as they think they can get away with.
 
2014-02-18 01:39:16 PM  
Lawmakers supportive of the plan in Georgia say some wiggle room should be allowed. They want to allow people licensed to carry a gun to avoid being arrested if they are caught at a security checkpoint carrying a firearm and obey instructions to leave. Offenders without a license to carry a gun could still be arrested.

Typical unconstitutional restrictions from the hoplophobe civil disarmament proponents.
 
2014-02-18 01:40:35 PM  

what_now: So imagine if you will, an innocent man traveling to a business meeting in Cleveland. It's been a busy day, and he's rushed and rather stressed. He gets to the airport, takes off his shoes, puts his toiletries in a bucket and then realizes he's left a loaded gun in his carry on.

Now should this man, this a law abiding, upstanding citizen, this responsible gun owner be charged for this crime? OF COURSE NOT? It's a silly mistake. One anyone could make.

Now.

Imagine he's black.


cbschicago.files.wordpress.com

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/04/24/state-sen-donne-trotter-plead s- guilty-to-bringing-gun-to-ohare/
 
2014-02-18 01:40:50 PM  

mbillips: NkThrasher: mbillips: I can see you've never carried a gun. I had to wear an M9 around for a year when I was in Iraq (a more useless paperweight was never inflicted on anyone; I worked in an office in the Green Zone, so if the hajjis got inside the wire to the point where I had to shoot at them, I was dead, pistol or no). Within a month, you forget you have the thing on. I left mine lying around (unloaded, because the military isn't as stupid as most Armed Citizens) more than once when I took it off to work out.

...I can see you were in need of corrective training.  Your failure to properly follow lawful orders is hardly a good argument against requiring citizens to properly follow the law.

I'm OK with requiring them to follow the law. I'm just saying they shouldn't be criminally prosecuted for disobeying this particular law without criminal intent (which is a requirement for conviction of any criminal offense, btw). Taking a gun to the airport, unless a reasonable person would conclude you had criminal intent in doing so, should be a civil offense punishable with a fine. My personal experience is that the sort of people who think they need to carry a handgun around all the time reasonably could wind up at the airport with a gun without meaning to break any laws. You can give them a ticket for that, but you shouldn't arrest them and charge them with a crime.


Certainly they don't *mean* to break the law, however that is very different than the reality that they *are* breaking the law, and a law that is not unreasonable.  Attempting to carry a firearm past a security checkpoint, with plenty of signs saying "Hey dumbass, don't bring weapons in here", and forty someodd years of it being the case that firearms are unlawful to take past the checkpoint, whether it is intentional or unintentional, is ridiculous.  It flies in the face of any claims about "Responsible" ownership, a "Responsible" owner would not do that, it makes you expressly "Irresponsible" to attempt it, even if it is unintentional.

As has been cited repeatedly in thread, and from TFA:

Those convicted of a misdemeanor for carrying a gun into the secured areas of Georgia's airports could face a $1,000 fine or up to a year of probation or prison time. However, charges are dismissed against most first-time offenders if they attend gun safety classes, surrender the firearm they illegally brought to the checkpoint and stay out of further trouble. They do not lose their license to carry a weapon in Georgia. TSA officials can separately fine them up to $11,000.

The system already accepts that a person can make a mistake and not need excessive punishment for it.  It identifies that a person screwed up, may need retraining, and provides a punishment of confiscation of the firearm.
 
2014-02-18 01:41:05 PM  

what_now: So imagine if you will, an innocent man traveling to a business meeting in Cleveland. It's been a busy day, and he's rushed and rather stressed. He gets to the airport, takes off his shoes, puts his toiletries in a bucket and then realizes he's left a loaded gun in his carry on.

Now should this man, this a law abiding, upstanding citizen, this responsible gun owner be charged for this crime? OF COURSE NOT? It's a silly mistake. One anyone could make.

Now.

Imagine he's black.

Muslim!11!
 
2014-02-18 01:41:56 PM  

lennavan: mbillips:Didja notice how all those other things hurt people? But carrying a gun to the airport didn't hurt anyone? Look up intentional tort sometime.

Wow, I'll admit, I'm surprised by that fact.  Today I learned no one has ever been hurt by a gun at an airport.  Fark.com is such a wealth of truthiness!


No one was ever hurt by someone merely carrying a gun to an airport. They were hurt by someone taking a gun out and shooting it. The Georgia law is meant to address ONLY the former. Georgia law already allows you to carry a gun in the airport up to the security gates, anyway. There are probably dozens of goofballs at Hartsfield right now with concealed handguns, picking up or dropping off someone.
 
2014-02-18 01:44:15 PM  

Private_Citizen: I'm with the majority here: if you can't remember to leave your gun home before you fly out, then you don't deserve to carry a gun.

On a different, but gun related note, I keep hearing "an armed society is a polite society", but evidence is disproving that. It seems that carrying a gun has empowered countless azzholes to truly be themselves in all sorts of situations.

Three quarters of etiquette is about defusing situations or avoiding giving offense. To many gun owners seem to think that carrying a gun exempts them from those rules of polite society. They feel entirely free to give as much offense as they want to, and they don't feel obligated to back down, apologize or swallow their pride. Ever.

Instead of becoming more polite, the arming of society had made it belligerent and confrontational.

/real life trolls and itgs rejoice! With a gun, you're a God of annoyance made corporeal!


Yeah, those elaborate rituals of courtesy that were practiced when men carried swords and were expected to be touchy about their honor were pretty much useless in controlling bullies who were good at sword fighting. An armed society is a generally polite (except for bullies) society, but also usually a VIOLENT society.
 
2014-02-18 01:44:47 PM  

mbillips: Airport security isn't there to keep guns or knives or bottles of water off planes



mbillips: Airport security isn't there to keep guns or knives or bottles of water off planes


mbillips: Airport security isn't there to keep guns or knives or bottles of water off planes



mbillips: Airport security isn't there to keep guns or knives or bottles of water off planes
 
2014-02-18 01:47:42 PM  

The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.


Don't ever change sponge. Mr. 'The 2nd amendment is a very important right but I can't explain why.'

You still don't understand that in the hypothetical scenario where registration is law, that if you chose not to, how that would make you irresponsible, by definition? Can't help you then. Maybe look up the definition of words?
 
2014-02-18 01:50:11 PM  

mbillips: lennavan: mbillips:Didja notice how all those other things hurt people? But carrying a gun to the airport didn't hurt anyone? Look up intentional tort sometime.

Wow, I'll admit, I'm surprised by that fact.  Today I learned no one has ever been hurt by a gun at an airport.  Fark.com is such a wealth of truthiness!

No one was ever hurt by someone merely carrying a gun to an airport. They were hurt by someone taking a gun out and shooting it. The Georgia law is meant to address ONLY the former. Georgia law already allows you to carry a gun in the airport up to the security gates, anyway. There are probably dozens of goofballs at Hartsfield right now with concealed handguns, picking up or dropping off someone.


We might as well make it the same for bombs. Afterall, no one was ever hurt by a bomb that wasn't detonated. Pretty strange logic these people employ here. It's ALMOST as if they have one set of standards for things they like, selfishly, and another for everything else. ALMOST.
 
2014-02-18 01:53:09 PM  

mbillips: No one was ever hurt by someone merely carrying a gun to an airport. They were hurt by someone taking a gun out and shooting it.


So in your world view, someone taking a gun out and hijacking an airplane by merely threatening to shoot the gun isn't possible?  Well, that's certainly one point of view.
 
2014-02-18 01:53:35 PM  

The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.


Nothing says Responsible Gun Owner like flaunting the law.
 
2014-02-18 01:53:52 PM  

what_now: So imagine if you will, an innocent man traveling to a business meeting in Cleveland. It's been a busy day, and he's rushed and rather stressed. He gets to the airport, takes off his shoes, puts his toiletries in a bucket and then realizes he's left a loaded gun in his carry on.

Now should this man, this a law abiding, upstanding citizen, this responsible gun owner be charged for this crime? OF COURSE NOT? It's a silly mistake. One anyone could make.

Now.

Imagine he's black.


Or Arabic.
 
2014-02-18 01:54:27 PM  

dittybopper: Jocktopus: Stupid arguments are stupid.

People (in general) aren't "forgetting they have a gun."  They simply don't connect "carrying a gun" with "is illegal in the airport."

How many people do you think walk into a courthouse with their cellphone, or a small pocketknife?  Did they "forget they had a cellphone?"  No, they just neglected to make the mental connection between "jury duty" and "no cellphones."

Not only that, the majority of the airport guns seized were in their carry-on luggage, not in a holster on their person.

It's hard to imagine a scenario where you forget you are *WEARING* a gun, but much easier to imagine one where it's in a bag that you use for other purposes, and you forgot or missed it when packing for your trip.


Alright lets work that scenario for a second:

You are packing in a hurry, and forget your Colt defender is sitting in the bottom of your laptop bag as you hurried pack other shiat around it to make your flight.   Airport security misses it for whatever reason and you sucessfully  board your flight , while you are crusing at 30,000 fet you reach into your bag for your lap top and somehow accidentally snag the trigger pull on your Colt (which being the sort of irresponsible person who can;t keep track of their guns in the first place, you also carry with one in the chamber) *Bang* the airplane now has a hole in the fuselage and the cabin is experiencing rapid decompression as the pilot fights to keep the plane up

That's a hell of a lot of consequences for an "innocent mistake"    seems safer to make people make DAMN sure they aren;t carrying BEFORE tey get on the plane, neh?
 
2014-02-18 01:55:24 PM  

justtray: We might as well make it the same for bombs. Afterall, no one was ever hurt by a bomb that wasn't detonated. Pretty strange logic these people employ here. It's ALMOST as if they have one set of standards for things they like, selfishly, and another for everything else. ALMOST.


Because an indiscriminate bomb capable of perhaps destroying an aircraft, and which in any case is not an effective individual defensive weapon because of it's indiscriminate nature, is exactly the same thing as a firearm.

Do you really even *THINK* about what you post before you hit "Enter"?
 
2014-02-18 01:55:45 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: So all the thugs and terrorists can use this excuse now?


Works for him
encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2014-02-18 01:56:05 PM  

NkThrasher: mbillips: NkThrasher: mbillips: I can see you've never carried a gun. I had to wear an M9 around for a year when I was in Iraq (a more useless paperweight was never inflicted on anyone; I worked in an office in the Green Zone, so if the hajjis got inside the wire to the point where I had to shoot at them, I was dead, pistol or no). Within a month, you forget you have the thing on. I left mine lying around (unloaded, because the military isn't as stupid as most Armed Citizens) more than once when I took it off to work out.

...I can see you were in need of corrective training.  Your failure to properly follow lawful orders is hardly a good argument against requiring citizens to properly follow the law.

I'm OK with requiring them to follow the law. I'm just saying they shouldn't be criminally prosecuted for disobeying this particular law without criminal intent (which is a requirement for conviction of any criminal offense, btw). Taking a gun to the airport, unless a reasonable person would conclude you had criminal intent in doing so, should be a civil offense punishable with a fine. My personal experience is that the sort of people who think they need to carry a handgun around all the time reasonably could wind up at the airport with a gun without meaning to break any laws. You can give them a ticket for that, but you shouldn't arrest them and charge them with a crime.

Certainly they don't *mean* to break the law, however that is very different than the reality that they *are* breaking the law, and a law that is not unreasonable.  Attempting to carry a firearm past a security checkpoint, with plenty of signs saying "Hey dumbass, don't bring weapons in here", and forty someodd years of it being the case that firearms are unlawful to take past the checkpoint, whether it is intentional or unintentional, is ridiculous.  It flies in the face of any claims about "Responsible" ownership, a "Responsible" owner would not do that, it makes you expressly "Irresponsible" to a ...


Being irresponsible is not a crime. If you DELIBERATELY flout the signs that say, "Hey, don't do this," then, yeah, you should be charged with a misdemeanor (or felony, depending on the actual danger you're posing to other people). But if you accidentally do something dumb, and no one is harmed by your action, why should you spend the night in jail? It's not like the proposed bill gives carte blanche to try to carry weapons through security, it just makes it a non-arresting offense if you can reasonably claim lack of intent. I'd be fine with pulling people's carry licenses and confiscating their guns (which the current law doesn't do EVEN IF YOU'RE CONVICTED MULTIPLE TIMES), but I'm not OK with jailing people who didn't intend to commit a crime, and did not hurt anyone.
 
2014-02-18 01:56:06 PM  

Latinwolf: what_now: So imagine if you will, an innocent man traveling to a business meeting in Cleveland. It's been a busy day, and he's rushed and rather stressed. He gets to the airport, takes off his shoes, puts his toiletries in a bucket and then realizes he's left a loaded gun in his carry on.

Now should this man, this a law abiding, upstanding citizen, this responsible gun owner be charged for this crime? OF COURSE NOT? It's a silly mistake. One anyone could make.

Now.

Imagine he's black.

Or Arabic.


Or Arablack.
 
2014-02-18 01:58:38 PM  

mbillips: Private_Citizen: I'm with the majority here: if you can't remember to leave your gun home before you fly out, then you don't deserve to carry a gun.

On a different, but gun related note, I keep hearing "an armed society is a polite society", but evidence is disproving that. It seems that carrying a gun has empowered countless azzholes to truly be themselves in all sorts of situations.

Three quarters of etiquette is about defusing situations or avoiding giving offense. To many gun owners seem to think that carrying a gun exempts them from those rules of polite society. They feel entirely free to give as much offense as they want to, and they don't feel obligated to back down, apologize or swallow their pride. Ever.

Instead of becoming more polite, the arming of society had made it belligerent and confrontational.

/real life trolls and itgs rejoice! With a gun, you're a God of annoyance made corporeal!

Yeah, those elaborate rituals of courtesy that were practiced when men carried swords and were expected to be touchy about their honor were pretty much useless in controlling bullies who were good at sword fighting. An armed society is a generally polite (except for bullies) society, but also usually a VIOLENT society.


The code of chivalry was supposed to control the little lordlings running around with too much testosterone and an overgrown sense of entitlement. As you pointed out, the code was not that successful, and eventually carrying swords was banned.

Most rules of etiquette/polite society are more concerned with making people feel comfortable, and not offending others than preventing stabbings.

But there is no new code of chivalry. Even the rules carry keep getting relaxed. And the rules of polite society? As I pointed out, to many people think caring a gun means they take no one's crap and they hand out as much as they want.

And that's why I believe arming society has made it far less polite.
 
2014-02-18 02:00:37 PM  

justtray: mbillips: lennavan: mbillips:Didja notice how all those other things hurt people? But carrying a gun to the airport didn't hurt anyone? Look up intentional tort sometime.

Wow, I'll admit, I'm surprised by that fact.  Today I learned no one has ever been hurt by a gun at an airport.  Fark.com is such a wealth of truthiness!

No one was ever hurt by someone merely carrying a gun to an airport. They were hurt by someone taking a gun out and shooting it. The Georgia law is meant to address ONLY the former. Georgia law already allows you to carry a gun in the airport up to the security gates, anyway. There are probably dozens of goofballs at Hartsfield right now with concealed handguns, picking up or dropping off someone.

We might as well make it the same for bombs. Afterall, no one was ever hurt by a bomb that wasn't detonated. Pretty strange logic these people employ here. It's ALMOST as if they have one set of standards for things they like, selfishly, and another for everything else. ALMOST.


The difference is, bombs are illegal to possess in most cases, and they have no legal purpose. Guns are completely legal to possess in Georgia and many people routinely carry them around. I DON'T CARRY A GUN, OR LIKE PEOPLE WHO DO. I also don't like living in a police state where people are arrested for looking at a cop wrong, or violating the rules of airport security theater.
 
2014-02-18 02:03:18 PM  

mbillips: lennavan: mbillips:Didja notice how all those other things hurt people? But carrying a gun to the airport didn't hurt anyone? Look up intentional tort sometime.

Wow, I'll admit, I'm surprised by that fact.  Today I learned no one has ever been hurt by a gun at an airport.  Fark.com is such a wealth of truthiness!

No one was ever hurt by someone merely carrying a gun to an airport. They were hurt by someone taking a gun out and shooting it. The Georgia law is meant to address ONLY the former. Georgia law already allows you to carry a gun in the airport up to the security gates, anyway. There are probably dozens of goofballs at Hartsfield right now with concealed handguns, picking up or dropping off someone.


guns do go off accidentially. a gun doing that ON anirplane from the bottom of a carryon could  kill a plane full of people.  it would be unlikley, but a bullet blowing out a window could be a very bad thing and cause complete cabin depressurization
 
2014-02-18 02:04:18 PM  

mbillips: Being irresponsible is not a crime. If you DELIBERATELY flout the signs that say, "Hey, don't do this," then, yeah, you should be charged with a misdemeanor (or felony, depending on the actual danger you're posing to other people). But if you accidentally do something dumb, and no one is harmed by your action, why should you spend the night in jail? It's not like the proposed bill gives carte blanche to try to carry weapons through security, it just makes it a non-arresting offense if you can reasonably claim lack of intent. I'd be fine with pulling people's carry licenses and confiscating their guns (which the current law doesn't do EVEN IF YOU'RE CONVICTED MULTIPLE TIMES), but I'm not OK with jailing people who didn't intend to commit a crime, and did not hurt anyone.


You are deliberately flouting the signs by doing it, even accidentally.  You should be asking yourself "Hey, I'm in a security line at an airport, I frequently carry a gun, am I carrying right now?  Where is my weapon?  Let me pat my jacket pocket where it frequently is in my normal life."  by not doing that you are deliberately failing to follow the law.

I get that you're arguing about proportional response/punishment based on intent.  But we have that already, the first time offender who intended to carry it past isn't going to get a slap on the wrist, safety class, and confiscation of the firearm.  The first time offender who did intend to carry it past is going to get the slap on the wrist.  The first night in jail is part of establishing which class of idiot you are, the intentionally idiotic, or the unintentionally.  In either case, you're an idiot that broke the law.
 
2014-02-18 02:05:23 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.

Nothing says Responsible Gun Owner like flaunting the law.



Yeah!  That Rosa Parks should have known her place and moved to the back of the bus.
 
2014-02-18 02:07:24 PM  
lennavan

Guns have no legal purpose at airports.

It's entirely legal to carry a firearm in the airport in the vast majority of American states. You just can't take it through security checkpoints and beyond.
 
2014-02-18 02:09:29 PM  

BunkoSquad: dittybopper: What about in a bag you carry for other purposes (like car trips, etc.)?

Generally, that's what happens, not the one in the pocket, the one in the bag you use for other things besides airline flights.

I make sure there's no "too big bottle of contact lens solution" in that bag before I go to the airport, because I'm aware enough to know THAT I AM GOING TO THE AIRPORT


Well actually you can take the big bottle now, they eased up the rules for "medical supplies".  You just have to tell them it's there and they use this cool little chemical sniffer deal to make sure you're not carrying lava in there or something.
 
2014-02-18 02:10:32 PM  

dittybopper: justtray: We might as well make it the same for bombs. Afterall, no one was ever hurt by a bomb that wasn't detonated. Pretty strange logic these people employ here. It's ALMOST as if they have one set of standards for things they like, selfishly, and another for everything else. ALMOST.

Because an indiscriminate bomb capable of perhaps destroying an aircraft, and which in any case is not an effective individual defensive weapon because of it's indiscriminate nature, is exactly the same thing as a firearm.

Do you really even *THINK* about what you post before you hit "Enter"?


What would happen to a passenger aircraft, flying at a high altitude if someone accidentally shot a hole through the fuselage?

I say "accidentally" because we are also talking about the yokels that couldn't remember that they were carrying a firearm onto a plane.

But then the point is moot, because in both cases where an "accidental" bomb is brought through TSA and also the case where an accidental firearm is brought through-laws exist as a deterrent to promote responsible ownership of said bombs or guns.
 
2014-02-18 02:11:19 PM  

mbillips: The difference is, bombs are illegal to possess in most cases, and they have no legal purpose


Bombs have no legal purpose? Really?

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com

worldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com
 
2014-02-18 02:11:40 PM  

mbillips: justtray: mbillips: lennavan: mbillips:Didja notice how all those other things hurt people? But carrying a gun to the airport didn't hurt anyone? Look up intentional tort sometime.

Wow, I'll admit, I'm surprised by that fact.  Today I learned no one has ever been hurt by a gun at an airport.  Fark.com is such a wealth of truthiness!

No one was ever hurt by someone merely carrying a gun to an airport. They were hurt by someone taking a gun out and shooting it. The Georgia law is meant to address ONLY the former. Georgia law already allows you to carry a gun in the airport up to the security gates, anyway. There are probably dozens of goofballs at Hartsfield right now with concealed handguns, picking up or dropping off someone.

We might as well make it the same for bombs. Afterall, no one was ever hurt by a bomb that wasn't detonated. Pretty strange logic these people employ here. It's ALMOST as if they have one set of standards for things they like, selfishly, and another for everything else. ALMOST.

The difference is, bombs are illegal to possess in most cases, and they have no legal purpose. Guns are completely legal to possess in Georgia and many people routinely carry them around. I DON'T CARRY A GUN, OR LIKE PEOPLE WHO DO. I also don't like living in a police state where people are arrested for looking at a cop wrong, or violating the rules of airport security theater.


Ultimately you're just proving my point. The law as it stands makes it illegal to bring the gun through security. The law also makes it illegal to carry bombs around. You argued intent. As did I. You cannot logically be for not being responsible for breaking the law in one case, and not the other with your rationale, which is why it's faulty. Hopefully now you understand why we don't attempt to legislate based on intent. We legislate based on risk. Yes, it's sometimes inconvenient.
 
2014-02-18 02:11:43 PM  

Magorn: mbillips: lennavan: mbillips:Didja notice how all those other things hurt people? But carrying a gun to the airport didn't hurt anyone? Look up intentional tort sometime.

Wow, I'll admit, I'm surprised by that fact.  Today I learned no one has ever been hurt by a gun at an airport.  Fark.com is such a wealth of truthiness!

No one was ever hurt by someone merely carrying a gun to an airport. They were hurt by someone taking a gun out and shooting it. The Georgia law is meant to address ONLY the former. Georgia law already allows you to carry a gun in the airport up to the security gates, anyway. There are probably dozens of goofballs at Hartsfield right now with concealed handguns, picking up or dropping off someone.

guns do go off accidentially. a gun doing that ON anirplane from the bottom of a carryon could  kill a plane full of people.  it would be unlikley, but a bullet blowing out a window could be a very bad thing and cause complete cabin depressurization


Guns sitting in a suitcase don't go off accidentally unless they're SERIOUSLY defective. If you were opening the case, sure, you could accidentally discharge it. Oh, and that's a myth about a handgun bullet causing rapid cabin depressurization. Mythbusters disproved it (it makes no sense from a physics standpoint; plane fuselages aren't latex balloons). Even the windows won't blow out from a bullet hole; they'll just leak through the hole. That would be a bad thing, but in terms of risk, it's probably less likely than the chihuahua under somebody's seat getting loose and severing someone's carotid artery. And WAY less than the risk of dying from a disease you picked up on the plane.
 
2014-02-18 02:12:18 PM  
....and I always make sure my Swiss Army knife is in my check-in bag and not my carry-on bag.

/Then again, I don't really travel with it any more.
//Don't want to lose it to a TSA goon with "sticky fingers".
 
2014-02-18 02:15:08 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: mbillips: The difference is, bombs are illegal to possess in most cases, and they have no legal purpose

Bombs have no legal purpose? Really?

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 299x168]

[worldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com image 640x511]


Those aren't bombs. Those are industrial demolition charges. Bombs are portable anti-personnel devices. Now, if you wanted to argue that people who inadvertently carried a block of C4 on a plane were endangering us all, you'd have a worse argument than the one about guns in luggage, because that stuff is inert if you don't have a detonator attached. You can throw it in a fireplace and it'll just burn.
 
2014-02-18 02:15:36 PM  

Trivia Jockey: Russ1642: I hate laws that don't take into account intent.

But intent is subjective.  It's why so many people hate "stand your ground".  If I'm intending on committing a crime and I'm caught with a gun where I shouldn't have one, can't I just say it was an accident?  How do we decide?

Intent has it's place in criminal law, but it's not here.


This.
 
2014-02-18 02:16:47 PM  
Hey you know, I like this gun storage locker at the airport.  In addition, I think we should have robots that cruise parking lots checking for infants for people who accidentally forget their babies in the car then they can put the babies in baby storage.
 
2014-02-18 02:17:04 PM  

The_Sponge: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.

Nothing says Responsible Gun Owner like flaunting the law.


Yeah!  That Rosa Parks should have known her place and moved to the back of the bus.


It's funny that you see yourself as such a victim, to portray yourself as equal to someone fighting for racial equality against a hypothetical scenario that doesn't exist, based on a single interpretation of the 2nd amendment that is roughly 6 years old, that goes against ~70 years of precedence, that would STILL constitutionally consider registration legal.

Do you have no shame, sir?
 
2014-02-18 02:18:05 PM  

lennavan: mbillips:Didja notice how all those other things hurt people? But carrying a gun to the airport didn't hurt anyone? Look up intentional tort sometime.

Wow, I'll admit, I'm surprised by that fact.  Today I learned no one has ever been hurt by a gun at an airport.  Fark.com is such a wealth of truthiness!


He also neglected one of my Boobiess: over the speed limit. How about drugs? How about gay sex? It's almost like the gun derpers forget there are other victimless crimes. But this victimless crime COULD be with intent to have many victims.
 
2014-02-18 02:20:13 PM  

mbillips: Guns sitting in a suitcase don't go off accidentally unless they're SERIOUSLY defective.


My friend had an SKS that he bought from a gun show. When there was one in the chamber, it would misfire if you set it down. When I told this story previously on Fark, some doofuses (sp-doofii?) pretending that they were gun experts said that the gun wasn't clean and that anyone who owned it -therefor wasn't a responsible gun owner... but we determined that the previous owner had converted it to full auto at some point and then half-assed converting it back.

But guns DO misfire, especially if there is one in the chamber you know -like the way that irresponsible gun owners like to keep their weapons
 
2014-02-18 02:20:23 PM  

The_Sponge: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.

Nothing says Responsible Gun Owner like flaunting the law.


Yeah!  That Rosa Parks should have known her place and moved to the back of the bus.


Haha civil rights. Yeah, you farking crusader, you.
 
2014-02-18 02:21:31 PM  

mbillips: Sin_City_Superhero: mbillips: The difference is, bombs are illegal to possess in most cases, and they have no legal purpose

Bombs have no legal purpose? Really?

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 299x168]

[worldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com image 640x511]

Those aren't bombs. Those are industrial demolition charges. Bombs are portable anti-personnel devices. Now, if you wanted to argue that people who inadvertently carried a block of C4 on a plane were endangering us all, you'd have a worse argument than the one about guns in luggage, because that stuff is inert if you don't have a detonator attached. You can throw it in a fireplace and it'll just burn.


bomb

/bäm/

noun

noun: bomb; plural noun: bombs; noun: volcanic bomb; plural noun: volcanic bombs; noun: a bomb

1. a container filled with explosive, incendiary material, smoke, gas, or other destructive substance, designed to explode on impact or when detonated by a time mechanism, remote-control device, or lit fuse.


Dynamite is a bomb.
 
2014-02-18 02:22:20 PM  
I don't know how others do it, but when I go to the airport, I know each and every item I have in my baggage hold bag, every item in my carry-on, and every item in my briefcase. Because I check through each and every bag and packed each and every one of them.
 
2014-02-18 02:23:17 PM  

mbillips: Sin_City_Superhero: mbillips: The difference is, bombs are illegal to possess in most cases, and they have no legal purpose

Bombs have no legal purpose? Really?

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 299x168]

[worldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com image 640x511]

Those aren't bombs. Those are industrial demolition charges. Bombs are portable anti-personnel devices. Now, if you wanted to argue that people who inadvertently carried a block of C4 on a plane were endangering us all, you'd have a worse argument than the one about guns in luggage, because that stuff is inert if you don't have a detonator attached. You can throw it in a fireplace and it'll just burn.


Face it, your argument is flawed on the surface. I don't know your intent, but you are trying to give guns a separate category than many other similar and dissimilar items that use the same logic you have attempted.

They all fail for the same reason; intent is not obvious and subject to interpretation.
 
2014-02-18 02:24:23 PM  

justtray: Ultimately you're just proving my point. The law as it stands makes it illegal to bring the gun through security. The law also makes it illegal to carry bombs around. You argued intent. As did I. You cannot logically be for not being responsible for breaking the law in one case, and not the other with your rationale, which is why it's faulty. Hopefully now you understand why we don't attempt to legislate based on intent. We legislate based on risk. Yes, it's sometimes inconvenient.


No, we mostly legislate based on baseless fear and panic. That's why you can't carry a bottle of water on a plane. Because of a never-realized plan to conceal explosive chemicals in bottles that looked like water. We extrapolate real threats (the wave of armed hijackers in the early 1970s, 9/11) into imaginary ones (ordinary citizens carrying guns). Concealed carry by ordinary citizens is silly, it's unnecessary, but it's about as likely to hurt you as a stray dog in your neighborhood.

How do I know this? Because people don't shoot up Greyhound buses or Amtrak trains, neither of which check your carry-on luggage. You could let every person on the TSA pre-clear list carry a pistol, and nobody would ever notice the difference.
 
2014-02-18 02:24:23 PM  

dericwater: I don't know how others do it, but when I go to the airport, I know each and every item I have in my baggage hold bag, every item in my carry-on, and every item in my briefcase. Because I check through each and every bag and packed each and every one of them.


Here too.  I know the f*cking thread count of the sheets in my luggage.  I know the guy damn RPMs my electric shaver has.  I know I have $2.38 in change in my carry-on.

So, not only are they irresponsible, THEY'RE SH*TTY AIRPORT PATRONS too!

//holdin-up-the-TSA-line motherf*ckers!
 
2014-02-18 02:24:26 PM  
Again, in this very thread, we were told that there were only a few tenants of responsible gun ownership, and one of those was "Making sure that unauthorized people do not get access to your gun."

I am still sort of waiting for an explanation for how one does this when *they are ignorant that they have the gun with them*

Perhaps they used some sort of 2nd amendment warding spell, or something.

Then again, RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS (or at least one) think folks shouldn't be charged when a loaded gun is left out, and a 5 year old kills a 2 year old with it, so whatever.
 
2014-02-18 02:24:44 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: bomb

/bäm/

noun

noun: bomb; plural noun: bombs; noun: volcanic bomb; plural noun: volcanic bombs; noun: a bomb

1. a container filled with explosive, incendiary material, smoke, gas, or other destructive substance, designed to explode on impact or when detonated by a time mechanism, remote-control device, or lit fuse.


Dynamite is a bomb.


I think he's trying to say that it's legal to bring "demolition charges" onto an airplane.
 
2014-02-18 02:24:50 PM  

justtray: mbillips: Sin_City_Superhero: mbillips: The difference is, bombs are illegal to possess in most cases, and they have no legal purpose

Bombs have no legal purpose? Really?

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 299x168]

[worldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com image 640x511]

Those aren't bombs. Those are industrial demolition charges. Bombs are portable anti-personnel devices. Now, if you wanted to argue that people who inadvertently carried a block of C4 on a plane were endangering us all, you'd have a worse argument than the one about guns in luggage, because that stuff is inert if you don't have a detonator attached. You can throw it in a fireplace and it'll just burn.

Face it, your argument is flawed on the surface. I don't know your intent, but you are trying to give guns a separate category than many other similar and dissimilar items that use the same logic you have attempted.

They all fail for the same reason; intent is not obvious and subject to interpretation.


I'm not making ANY argument, either way. I was simply pointing out that there are legal uses for bombs. That's all.
 
2014-02-18 02:26:24 PM  
If you own a gun, and you forget where it is, you should be forced to give that gun away to somebody who will responsibly care for it like an adult.
 
2014-02-18 02:27:54 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: I'm not making ANY argument, either way. I was simply pointing out that there are legal uses for bombs. That's all.


I was not replying to you good sir. Your argument was valid, and it was the same as I was bringing up.
 
2014-02-18 02:28:24 PM  

AgentPothead: If you own a gun, and you forget where it is, you should be forced to give that gun away to somebody who will responsibly care for it like an adult use it on yourself.


It's the only way to be sure.  -Hicks
 
2014-02-18 02:28:47 PM  

mbillips: people don't shoot up Greyhound buses or Amtrak trains


You'll never guess what 5 seconds of google will pull up on this "fact."
 
2014-02-18 02:29:30 PM  
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun (he misplaced and that may have ended up in the hands of the bad guy in the first place)." -Wayne Lapierre
 
2014-02-18 02:30:13 PM  

dittybopper: justtray: We might as well make it the same for bombs. Afterall, no one was ever hurt by a bomb that wasn't detonated. Pretty strange logic these people employ here. It's ALMOST as if they have one set of standards for things they like, selfishly, and another for everything else. ALMOST.

Because an indiscriminate bomb capable of perhaps destroying an aircraft, and which in any case is not an effective individual defensive weapon because of it's indiscriminate nature, is exactly the same thing as a firearm.

Do you really even *THINK* about what you post before you hit "Enter"?


Just as a firearm is not the same thing as a knife, right? Oh, wait...
 
2014-02-18 02:31:16 PM  
You know what would be nice?

If TFA actually gave detail as to the bill's number or name so we could look it up and read the proposed law for ourselves.

Then, maybe, people could discuss it with some level of logic an knowledge.
 
2014-02-18 02:32:43 PM  

RickN99: Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: I don't think anyone would accuse me of being an "irresponsible knife owner".

False analogy. A gun is not a knife.

In Georgia, the "illegal to carry in this location" state law (16-11-129) prohibits the carry of weapons.  Knives and firearms are both included under the definition of weapon for this law.

So the analogy is good: in the eyes of this law, a knife and gun are the same.  Yet if you have a knife, you can take it back out to your car, have someone come pick it up from you, let it be confiscated, etc, etc.  You are not automatically cuffed and taken to spend the night in the Clayton County Jail.


And your knife can be used to kill a dozen people in another terminal across the building long before a response can be made? Your analogy remains false...
 
2014-02-18 02:32:52 PM  

The_Sponge: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.

Nothing says Responsible Gun Owner like flaunting the law.


Yeah!  That Rosa Parks should have known her place and moved to the back of the bus.


You can't be farking serious with this...
 
2014-02-18 02:33:09 PM  

coeyagi: The_Sponge: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.

Nothing says Responsible Gun Owner like flaunting the law.


Yeah!  That Rosa Parks should have known her place and moved to the back of the bus.

Haha civil rights. Yeah, you farking crusader, you.



I'm not a crusader....I'm making a point about people standing up to unjust laws.

And firearm ownership is an important civil right, whether you like it or not.
 
2014-02-18 02:34:54 PM  

mbillips: You're confusing two different areas of law. Civil laws regulating behavior (speeding) are different from criminal laws banning intentional bad behavior (vehicular homicide). Of course, people should be barred from carrying loaded guns on planes. But if they had no criminal intent, that's a civil violation of a regulation, NOT A CRIME, and is punished with a civil fine or forfeiture, not jail time. Airport security isn't there to keep guns or knives or bottles of water off planes; it's there to keep would-be hijackers unarmed. Idiots who inadvertently leave guns in their luggage are hurting airport security no more than people who don't have guns in their luggage.


What on Earth do you imagine any of that meant in relation to what I said?
 
2014-02-18 02:35:05 PM  

dittybopper: justtray: We might as well make it the same for bombs. Afterall, no one was ever hurt by a bomb that wasn't detonated. Pretty strange logic these people employ here. It's ALMOST as if they have one set of standards for things they like, selfishly, and another for everything else. ALMOST.

Because an indiscriminate bomb capable of perhaps destroying an aircraft, and which in any case is not an effective individual defensive weapon because of it's indiscriminate nature, is exactly the same thing as a firearm.


Yeah I can't really imagine a way a gun might be used to bring down a plane. They're purely for defense.
 
2014-02-18 02:35:49 PM  

The_Sponge: coeyagi: The_Sponge: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.

Nothing says Responsible Gun Owner like flaunting the law.


Yeah!  That Rosa Parks should have known her place and moved to the back of the bus.

Haha civil rights. Yeah, you farking crusader, you.


I'm not a crusader....I'm making a point about people standing up to unjust laws.

And firearm ownership is an important civil right, whether you like it or not.


Sure it is, and no one is preventing you from owning one, Captain False Equivalency.

Rights can be regulated.  You can't yell "Fire" in a theater.  Deal with it like you are an adult in an advanced society and move on.
 
2014-02-18 02:36:14 PM  

The_Sponge: coeyagi: The_Sponge: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.

Nothing says Responsible Gun Owner like flaunting the law.


Yeah!  That Rosa Parks should have known her place and moved to the back of the bus.

Haha civil rights. Yeah, you farking crusader, you.


I'm not a crusader....I'm making a point about people standing up to unjust laws.

And firearm ownership is an important civil right, whether you like it or not.


You were crying about registration, not ownership.
 
2014-02-18 02:36:37 PM  

Mentalpatient87: The_Sponge: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.

Nothing says Responsible Gun Owner like flaunting the law.


Yeah!  That Rosa Parks should have known her place and moved to the back of the bus.

You can't be farking serious with this...



Standing up to unjust laws?  I am serious.

Granted, I do not live in a state where registration is required.  But if that day comes, I won't do it.
 
2014-02-18 02:36:44 PM  

Felgraf: Then again, RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS (or at least one) think folks shouldn't be charged when a loaded gun is left out, and a 5 year old kills a 2 year old with it, so whatever.


Citation needed, please.
 
2014-02-18 02:37:08 PM  
I accidentally drank too much alcohol and got behind a wheel and now Mary Jane Rottencrotch is dead, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally addressed the reimbursement check to me when another volunteer spent the funds and now I have $500 more than I should, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally dropped a cannister of cyanide outside the lab and now I am going to the funeral of a colleague, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally violated the age of consent because I didn't check the 17 year old girl's age before porking her, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally ran over a girl crossing the street because I was texting, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally fell asleep at the commands of the roller coaster ride and now 7 people are dead, officer.  Mulligan?
I accidentally stabbed someone with a ski pole while going down a black diamond in Vail, officer.  Mulligan?
I accidentally defrauded the IRS by claiming losses, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally shot jizz out the car window while getting head from my girlfriend, it hit a motorcycler in the eye and now he's blind, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally outted a CIA operative via Robert Novak, officer.  Mulligan?
I accidentally solicited for sex in a men's bathroom in the Minneapolis airport, officer.  Mulligan?
I accidentally solicited prostitutes before getting a round of applause for my return on the floor of Congress, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 02:37:17 PM  

vharshyde: RickN99: Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: I don't think anyone would accuse me of being an "irresponsible knife owner".

False analogy. A gun is not a knife.

In Georgia, the "illegal to carry in this location" state law (16-11-129) prohibits the carry of weapons.  Knives and firearms are both included under the definition of weapon for this law.

So the analogy is good: in the eyes of this law, a knife and gun are the same.  Yet if you have a knife, you can take it back out to your car, have someone come pick it up from you, let it be confiscated, etc, etc.  You are not automatically cuffed and taken to spend the night in the Clayton County Jail.

And your knife can be used to kill a dozen people in another terminal across the building long before a response can be made? Your analogy remains false...


Never bring a knife to a gunfight.

That is a gun has far more killing potential than a knife... or does the military now issue pen knives in lieu of firearms?
 
2014-02-18 02:39:30 PM  

coeyagi: Rights can be regulated.  You can't yell "Fire" in a theater.


Yes, you can - especially if there *is* a fire in that theatre.

Please cite a law that makes this illegal.

Inciting a riot is illegal, but if you yell "fire" in a theatre and no one panics, will you be arrested?
 
2014-02-18 02:40:27 PM  

Felgraf: Again, in this very thread, we were told that there were only a few tenants of responsible gun ownership, and one of those was "Making sure that unauthorized people do not get access to your gun."

I am still sort of waiting for an explanation for how one does this when *they are ignorant that they have the gun with them*

Perhaps they used some sort of 2nd amendment warding spell, or something.

Then again, RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS (or at least one) think folks shouldn't be charged when a loaded gun is left out, and a 5 year old kills a 2 year old with it, so whatever.


OK, I don't want to defend those people; they're stupid. But there's a big difference between, "Oh, hey, look, a gun where it shouldn't be" and "Dead 2-year-old." You need to assess the actual risk. The TSA is opposed to getting rid of the must-arrest provision because somebody shot up a TSA security station. But that gunman wasn't trying to sneak a gun through security; he had it out and blasting before going through the metal detector. You pretty much have to assume anyone caught with a gun at security had no bad purpose, because anyone with a bad purpose would try to avoid getting caught with a gun. That's pretty hard to do when you put it through an X-ray machine. The law isn't intended to discourage concealed weapons carry and enforce responsibility (the way, say, a triggerlock provision is). It's intended to stop people from hurting other people on an airplane, by limiting the sort of weapons they might have.
 
2014-02-18 02:41:10 PM  

dittybopper: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.

Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE


THAT. I wish they'd free the poor bastards that made the mistake of going to NYC with weapons, too. If they make the effort to comply once they realize the mistake, there's no reason to charge them with a felony and permanently take their weapons.
 
2014-02-18 02:41:44 PM  
The_Sponge:

I'm not a crusader....I'm making a point about people standing up to unjust laws.


You're not so much making a point as facefarking it kiddo.
 
2014-02-18 02:42:40 PM  
For those who do care about facts, here is a snipped from the bill:

2013-2014 Regular Session - HB 875Safe Carry Protection Act; enact
http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20132014/139285.pdf

(b) A person who is not a license holder and who violates this Code section shall be guilty
647 of a misdemeanor. A license holder who violates this Code section shall be guilty of a
648 misdemeanor; provided, however, that a license holder who immediately leaves the
649 restricted access area upon notification that he or she is in possession of a weapon or long
650 gun shall not be guilty of violating this Code section.
 
2014-02-18 02:43:31 PM  

The_Sponge: Mentalpatient87: The_Sponge: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.

Nothing says Responsible Gun Owner like flaunting the law.


Yeah!  That Rosa Parks should have known her place and moved to the back of the bus.

You can't be farking serious with this...


Standing up to unjust laws?  I am serious.

Granted, I do not live in a state where registration is required.  But if that day comes, I won't do it.


No, not that. That's not it. I meant the part where you're equating yourself to Rosa Parks. Like you are similar in any way at all. That's just farking stupid. But please, continue flailing.
 
2014-02-18 02:43:45 PM  
The_Sponge

I do not live in a state where registration is required. But if that day comes, I won't do it.

A pretty common sentiment. We just had a story last week about how 50-85% of owners in Connecticut were refusing to register their weapons, IIRC.
 
2014-02-18 02:45:06 PM  

sugar_fetus: For those who do care about facts, here is a snipped from the bill:

2013-2014 Regular Session - HB 875Safe Carry Protection Act; enact
http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20132014/139285.pdf

(b) A person who is not a license holder and who violates this Code section shall be guilty
647 of a misdemeanor. A license holder who violates this Code section shall be guilty of a
648 misdemeanor; provided, however, that a license holder who immediately leaves the
649 restricted access area upon notification that he or she is in possession of a weapon or long
650 gun shall not be guilty of violating this Code section.


You can keep your gun but you'll miss your flight.

I'm okay with this.
 
2014-02-18 02:45:15 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: The_Sponge

I do not live in a state where registration is required. But if that day comes, I won't do it.

A pretty common sentiment. We just had a story last week about how 50-85% of owners in Connecticut were refusing to register their weapons, IIRC.


Because soshulizm? Kenya Fart Bongoing?  Awww.  Those poor patriots.
 
2014-02-18 02:45:59 PM  

lennavan: mbillips: people don't shoot up Greyhound buses or Amtrak trains

You'll never guess what 5 seconds of google will pull up on this "fact."


A bunch of stories about shootings at Greyhound stations? The only Amtrak shooting I can find was by an undercover cop doing a drug bust on the train (thanks, officers, for finding such a safe place to do that).
 
2014-02-18 02:48:12 PM  
"A lot of people carry a weapon. It's almost like it's just a second nature to them. And sometimes they forget where they have {it}"

Speaking as someone who gets paid to carry a weapon, and has had to carry it everyday, for over a year straight on deployments, that sentence doesn't ring true for me.  Carrying your weapon that often, it becomes sort of a part of you.  You get used to the discomfort, the extra weight, or the straps of the holster or sling.  Checking your weapon, verifying it, it becomes as instinctive as rubbing the sleet out of your eyes in the morning.  It becomes an extension of your body.

On the days you're NOT carrying a weapon?  It feels weird, like something vital is missing.  It's a feeling like walking around while wearing only one shoe.
 
2014-02-18 02:48:15 PM  

Serious Black: "I would tell you that a lot of people carry a weapon," said state Rep. Alan Powell, a Republican who supports the bill. "It's almost like it's just a second nature to them. And sometimes they forget where they have, you know, they basically forget they've got it in a briefcase or a suitcase."

If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.


I don't know why we needed >250 more comments after this one. There is a responsibility that comes with a CCW - I love guns, I have a CCW and even I can get 100% behind this statement.
 
2014-02-18 02:48:43 PM  

coeyagi: I accidentally drank too much alcohol and got behind a wheel and now Mary Jane Rottencrotch is dead, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally addressed the reimbursement check to me when another volunteer spent the funds and now I have $500 more than I should, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally dropped a cannister of cyanide outside the lab and now I am going to the funeral of a colleague, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally violated the age of consent because I didn't check the 17 year old girl's age before porking her, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally ran over a girl crossing the street because I was texting, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally fell asleep at the commands of the roller coaster ride and now 7 people are dead, officer.  Mulligan?
I accidentally stabbed someone with a ski pole while going down a black diamond in Vail, officer.  Mulligan?
I accidentally defrauded the IRS by claiming losses, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally shot jizz out the car window while getting head from my girlfriend, it hit a motorcycler in the eye and now he's blind, officer. Mulligan?
I accidentally outted a CIA operative via Robert Novak, officer.  Mulligan?
I accidentally solicited for sex in a men's bathroom in the Minneapolis airport, officer.  Mulligan?
I accidentally solicited prostitutes before getting a round of applause for my return on the floor of Congress, officer. Mulligan?


I accidentally turned right on red where it wasn't allowed, and hurt no one, officer. Mulligan?
 
2014-02-18 02:48:52 PM  

The_Sponge: coeyagi: The_Sponge: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.

Nothing says Responsible Gun Owner like flaunting the law.


Yeah!  That Rosa Parks should have known her place and moved to the back of the bus.

Haha civil rights. Yeah, you farking crusader, you.


I'm not a crusader....I'm making a point about people standing up to unjust laws.

And firearm ownership is an important civil right, whether you like it or not.


I'm just curious, where in the fark did you read someone wants to prevent firearm ownership?  Can you quote it for me?  Because I'm not seeing that.  Thanks.
 
2014-02-18 02:49:47 PM  

sugar_fetus: if you yell "fire" in a theatre and no one panics, will you be arrested?


I don't know about yelling, but if you pull out a cell phone, and text "FIRE" in a theater, you will rightfully get your ass kicked.
 
2014-02-18 02:50:08 PM  
It is responsible to have a loaded gun on your person and not know it, or have one in your bag or in your car or you could leave it in the movie theater when it drops out of your pocket or better yet take it with you to the playground and drop it next to the jungle gym.  This is what we've learned on fark today.
 
2014-02-18 02:51:27 PM  

Serious Black: Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns, I don't think inadvertent carrying of a gun exists.


You seem to have a serious reading comprehension problem with the English language then.  Both of those phrases exist, have verifiable definitions, and are understood by the general populous.
 
2014-02-18 02:51:49 PM  

lennavan: I'm just curious, where in the fark did you read someone wants to prevent firearm ownership?  Can you quote it for me?  Because I'm not seeing that.  Thanks.


This is common knowledge among the tea party crowd:

imageshack.com
 
2014-02-18 02:53:25 PM  

dittybopper: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.

Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE


Except that it's a policy for real firearms, and  not drawings or poptarts or fingers. (Yeah, I know: Brits are stupid.)

dittybopper: Why not just make a "gun check" part of the process?  If you have a gun, and are legally permitted to carry it, why not just provide people who inadvertently carry into an airport security zone a way to store their guns on the premises until they return?
That would accomplish the goal of a "gun free zone" in the passenger terminals and by extension on the aircraft, so what harm would be done?
Really, other than making carrying a gun as legally dicey as you possibly can in as many situations as you possibly can in order to make people shy away from it, what possible opposition can you have to something like that?


The "no carrying firearms on airplanes" rule has been been in effect since 1968. You really can't claim ignorance.

The "gun check" idea? Are the concessionaires trustworthy? Is the arsenal sufficiently secure? How do you insure it? What do you do if somebody doesn't return for a weapon? How do you keep it from becoming a dumping ground/storage room for crime weapons? Ammunition storage?
 
2014-02-18 02:53:42 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: sugar_fetus: if you yell "fire" in a theatre and no one panics, will you be arrested?

I don't know about yelling, but if you pull out a cell phone, and text "FIRE" in a theater, you will rightfully get your ass kicked.


Or shot.

www.trbimg.com
 
2014-02-18 02:55:16 PM  

lennavan: I'm just curious, where in the fark did you read someone wants to prevent firearm ownership? Can you quote it for me? Because I'm not seeing that. Thanks.



"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it.  - Senator Feinstein
 
2014-02-18 02:56:02 PM  

Mentalpatient87: The_Sponge: Mentalpatient87: The_Sponge: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The_Sponge: I forgot the name of the yahoo who said I was an irresponsible gun owner because I refuse to register mine.

Nothing says Responsible Gun Owner like flaunting the law.


Yeah!  That Rosa Parks should have known her place and moved to the back of the bus.

You can't be farking serious with this...


Standing up to unjust laws?  I am serious.

Granted, I do not live in a state where registration is required.  But if that day comes, I won't do it.

No, not that. That's not it. I meant the part where you're equating yourself to Rosa Parks. Like you are similar in any way at all. That's just farking stupid. But please, continue flailing.


The fact that they see that as a rational equivalency, that alone is enough to make me question their standing as someone who is a safe, responsible gun owner. If they're capable of this level of irrational thought in a mere Fark thread, I can't really trust them with a lethal weapon.
 
2014-02-18 02:58:15 PM  
To be clear,

Most of these people did not forget where they had their gun.  What they forgot was that they aren't allowed on their person or in carry-on bags through the security checkpoint.  To them, its no different than having a pocket knife or a pair a clippers.  It's pretty easy to get into a routine where you know every place you go it's okay, but forget when going somewhere new.  I forgot I had a pocket knife when I walked into a Federal Building once.  Didn't even occur to me that it wasn't allowed until the security guard saw it in the objects dish as going through the screening.

Irresponsible yes, but I think the punishments are overly harsh for something that should simply be "I'm sorry sir/madam, but you need to store that firearm in your vehicle or other secure location.  We can't let you through with it."
 
2014-02-18 02:58:16 PM  

Mentalpatient87: No, not that. That's not it. I meant the part where you're equating yourself to Rosa Parks. Like you are similar in any way at all. That's just farking stupid. But please, continue flailing.



I used an example of somebody standing up to an unjust law.

Fine....you guys want to rip on me for wanting to disobey an unjust law?  Fine.  Then I hope you guys "keep it real" by not smoking weed if it is illegal in your state.
 
2014-02-18 02:58:26 PM  
coeyagi

Because soshulizm? Kenya Fart Bongoing?

Perhaps understandably, the article had no quotation from anyone refusing to register their firearms, so I couldn't say.
 
2014-02-18 02:59:22 PM  

sugar_fetus: Inciting a riot is illegal, but if you yell "fire" in a theatre and no one panics, will you be arrested?


The word incitement does not imply success. It does not matter if anybody panics, only that you attempted to cause panic.

And whether you are arrested or not is immaterial to whether or not what you did is a crime. People are not arrested every day for crimes they commit even when an officer is aware of the crime. That does not mean what they did wasn't criminal.
 
2014-02-18 03:00:36 PM  

dittybopper: Trivia Jockey: It includes: knowing where your gun is at all times,

I'm 50 miles away from my guns, and have been for several hours.  I can't guarantee with 100% certainty where they are.  Am I irresponsible?


Yes. If you were responsible, they'd be in their locked, secure enclosure where you knew for a fact they were when you'd left them.
 
2014-02-18 03:00:41 PM  

The_Sponge: Mentalpatient87: No, not that. That's not it. I meant the part where you're equating yourself to Rosa Parks. Like you are similar in any way at all. That's just farking stupid. But please, continue flailing.


I used an example of somebody standing up to an unjust law.

Fine....you guys want to rip on me for wanting to disobey an unjust law?  Fine.  Then I hope you guys "keep it real" by not smoking weed if it is illegal in your state.


Yeah you guys are obviously all hippies hepped up on the reefers for disagreeing with the notion that this patriot is in any way different that Rosa Parks.
 
2014-02-18 03:02:38 PM  

The_Sponge: lennavan: I'm just curious, where in the fark did you read someone wants to prevent firearm ownership? Can you quote it for me? Because I'm not seeing that. Thanks.


"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it.  - Senator Feinstein


Ah okay.  So Fark.com linked an article discussing the legality of guns going through airport checkpoints and the thread is entirely filled with discussion about guns at airports.  No one in the entire thread or the article even used the word "Feinstein" let alone discussed Diane Feinstein or her policy positions.  Diane Feinstein works for the federal government and this article is about a state law.  So naturally it makes sense you were arguing about what Diane Feinstein said in 1995 and we should all attempt to defend it.

Seems legit.
 
2014-02-18 03:03:04 PM  

trappedspirit: Serious Black: Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns, I don't think inadvertent carrying of a gun exists.

You seem to have a serious reading comprehension problem with the English language then.  Both of those phrases exist, have verifiable definitions, and are understood by the general populous.


It's kind of a mantra among gun safety instructors.  It's kind of like how Driver's Ed teachers say "there's no such thing as an 'accident.'  It's a collision."

Barring some sort of catastrophic mechanical malfunction, 99.9999% of accidental discharges are due to the owner negligently handling or operating the weapon.  It's supposed to enforce the idea that the gun owner is 100% responsible for his/her weapon at all times, and no, it did not "accidentally" go off by itself.
 
2014-02-18 03:06:08 PM  

dittybopper: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.

Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE


Remember a few days ago when you said you weren't one of the crazy gun nuts? Yeah. shiat like this is why you're a crazy gun nut. If you can't keep track of your guns, you shouldn't get to own them.
 
2014-02-18 03:06:21 PM  

mbillips: Felgraf: Again, in this very thread, we were told that there were only a few tenants of responsible gun ownership, and one of those was "Making sure that unauthorized people do not get access to your gun."

I am still sort of waiting for an explanation for how one does this when *they are ignorant that they have the gun with them*

Perhaps they used some sort of 2nd amendment warding spell, or something.

Then again, RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS (or at least one) think folks shouldn't be charged when a loaded gun is left out, and a 5 year old kills a 2 year old with it, so whatever.

OK, I don't want to defend those people; they're stupid. But there's a big difference between, "Oh, hey, look, a gun where it shouldn't be" and "Dead 2-year-old." You need to assess the actual risk. The TSA is opposed to getting rid of the must-arrest provision because somebody shot up a TSA security station. But that gunman wasn't trying to sneak a gun through security; he had it out and blasting before going through the metal detector. You pretty much have to assume anyone caught with a gun at security had no bad purpose, because anyone with a bad purpose would try to avoid getting caught with a gun. That's pretty hard to do when you put it through an X-ray machine. The law isn't intended to discourage concealed weapons carry and enforce responsibility (the way, say, a triggerlock provision is). It's intended to stop people from hurting other people on an airplane, by limiting the sort of weapons they might have.


If you really believe that, and you are a gun owner, I fear for the safety of those around you.

"You pretty much have to assume anyone caught with a gun at security had no bad purpose"

So we should have no law enforcement? No penalties for breaking the law?

Anyone with criminal intent knows they will be caught, so they don't break the law. Any one who breaks the law must be innocent since they clearly had no criminal intent.

Do you really not see the logical contradictions in that way of thinking?

"The law isn't intended to discourage concealed weapons carry and enforce responsibility"

So you agree this isn't a 2nd amendment issue. Then what is it? Because to me it sounds like people who just don't like to play by the rules. Any rules.

I am a firearms owner. I have a concealed carry permit. Short of memento-like brain damage, I cannot imagine getting in to the security line to board a plane and not knowing, or just realizing at that moment, I had a firearm in my possession.

To the folks arguing against punishing people for bringing guns to airport security, not one of the statements made in this thread has had any persuasive power.

Either you are wrong, or you are just doing a really piss poor job of making your argument.
 
2014-02-18 03:08:41 PM  

lennavan: The_Sponge: lennavan: I'm just curious, where in the fark did you read someone wants to prevent firearm ownership? Can you quote it for me? Because I'm not seeing that. Thanks.


"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it.  - Senator Feinstein

Ah okay.  So Fark.com linked an article discussing the legality of guns going through airport checkpoints and the thread is entirely filled with discussion about guns at airports.  No one in the entire thread or the article even used the word "Feinstein" let alone discussed Diane Feinstein or her policy positions.  Diane Feinstein works for the federal government and this article is about a state law.  So naturally it makes sense you were arguing about what Diane Feinstein said in 1995 and we should all attempt to defend it.

Seems legit.


How dare you speak to Rosa Packs that way!
 
2014-02-18 03:10:51 PM  

Molavian: Serious Black: dittybopper: inadvertently carry

Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns, I don't think inadvertent carrying of a gun exists. We are talking about a tool whose sole purpose is to annihilate anything and everything that the business end is pointed towards. I believe a responsible gun owner should know where their potentially deadly firearms are at all times. If that's too much for you to handle, you shouldn't own a gun.

I have 70+ guns.  I think most of them are locked up in the basement.


You actually have 53 guns now; it's been awhile since you checked


/better go make sure
//70+ guns? I have 2. One for each of ya...
 
2014-02-18 03:11:36 PM  
You know, a national law to protect me from the millions of local laws designed by assholes to f*ck me over would be nice.
 
2014-02-18 03:13:49 PM  

Brainsick: /better go make sure


Ha, the joke's on you.  I lost all my guns in a tragic canoeing accident in the middle of Lake Michigan!
 
2014-02-18 03:15:05 PM  

mbillips: You pretty much have to assume anyone caught with a gun at security had no bad purpose, because anyone with a bad purpose would try to avoid getting caught with a gun.


All of those people with bad purposes will most certainly try to avoid getting caught.  So you're suggesting if we do catch them in the act of trying to sneak a gun on board, we should just assume since they got caught, they clearly had no bad intent and send them on their way?  That makes sense to you?

If you get caught with a gun at an airport security check, there are only two possible explanations:

1) You knew the gun was in there and you intentionally violated the law. 
2) You had no idea where your gun was.

Either way you should spend some time in jail to sit there and feel bad about yourself.
 
2014-02-18 03:15:23 PM  

Molavian: You know, a national law to protect me from the millions of local laws designed by assholes to f*ck me over would be nice.


Millions? Boy. I thought it was bad that there was ONE law that mentioned me by name after the pickle incident.
 
2014-02-18 03:16:26 PM  
Correct me if i am wrong but i thought the law making it illegal to have a gun on a  commercial jetliner ( unless checked in the hold) was Federal and not state.
 
2014-02-18 03:16:49 PM  

lennavan: Either way you should spend some time in jail to sit there and feel bad about yourself.


You know, a quick Google suggests to me that most people that get caught don't even spend any time in jail. In fact, most of them seem to just get fines.
 
2014-02-18 03:17:39 PM  

trappedspirit: Serious Black: Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns, I don't think inadvertent carrying of a gun exists.

You seem to have a serious reading comprehension problem with the English language then.  Both of those phrases exist, have verifiable definitions, and are understood by the general populous.


Sure, it is technically possible for a gun to have a manufacturing defect that allows a round to be discharged from the gun without a person pulling the trigger. That is a true accidental discharge. Those are rather unlikely though. Most handguns manufactured today have a drop safety that prevent the hammer from striking the firing pin when the gun is dropped. Shy of that drop safety malfunctioning and somebody dropping such a gun in a way that the hammer hits the firing pin in the process, the only way for a gun to discharge is for the person holding the gun to pull the trigger. And if you pull the trigger when you don't mean to do so, you err by using the word accident to describe the incident. The correct word for these kinds of situations is negligence. Most militaries around the globe automatically presume that a gun firing when the holder didn't mean for it to happen is negligence because they believe the holder is in control of the gun at all times. I don't think that's a ridiculous standard to apply to anyone who wants to concealed carry (or really own a gun in the first place). You're wielding a tool whose sole use is to destroy anything that is directly lined up with the muzzle.

As for inadvertently carrying, I'd love to hear your argument for how it is responsible for a gun owner to forget that they have a loaded gun on their person.
 
2014-02-18 03:20:11 PM  

BubbaWilkins: To be clear,

Most of these people did not forget where they had their gun
.  What they forgot was that they aren't allowed on their person or in carry-on bags through the security checkpoint.  To them, its no different than having a pocket knife or a pair a clippers.  It's pretty easy to get into a routine where you know every place you go it's okay, but forget when going somewhere new.  I forgot I had a pocket knife when I walked into a Federal Building once.  Didn't even occur to me that it wasn't allowed until the security guard saw it in the objects dish as going through the screening.

Irresponsible yes, but I think the punishments are overly harsh for something that should simply be "I'm sorry sir/madam, but you need to store that firearm in your vehicle or other secure location.  We can't let you through with it."


You know what would be really farking awkward?  If there was an AP story with a quote that actually directly contradicted your "fact."

TSA doesn't believe these gun-toting passengers are terrorists, but the agency can't explain why so many passengers try to board planes with guns, either, Castelveter said. The most common excuse offered by passengers is "I forgot it was there."

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/guns-airlines-93695.html#ixzz2 th t5XqkU

Oh man this is awkward.
 
2014-02-18 03:26:54 PM  

lennavan: The_Sponge: lennavan: I'm just curious, where in the fark did you read someone wants to prevent firearm ownership? Can you quote it for me? Because I'm not seeing that. Thanks.


"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it.  - Senator Feinstein

Ah okay.  So Fark.com linked an article discussing the legality of guns going through airport checkpoints and the thread is entirely filled with discussion about guns at airports.  No one in the entire thread or the article even used the word "Feinstein" let alone discussed Diane Feinstein or her policy positions.  Diane Feinstein works for the federal government and this article is about a state law.  So naturally it makes sense you were arguing about what Diane Feinstein said in 1995 and we should all attempt to defend it.

Seems legit.



I read your post too quickly and thus overlooked you were referencing only the linked article.

And I'm disagreeing that it's stupid to forget that you have a firearm in your carry-on bag or luggage.
 
2014-02-18 03:28:11 PM  
CSB:
Took a short trip and the bag I used for my luggage was previously used at the range. I get settled on the plane and go into my bag to get a book, when I noticed I still had several empty shell casings in there. (2 .45s, a 9mm, and five .22s if I remember). Security didn't say anything about it on the way through, but I didn't want to chance it on the way back, so I tucked them all into the seat pocket in front of me.

I figure at some point, it made someone's day more interesting.


Also there was one time I brought my rifle on board a flight. It was an military style assault weapon. I handed to the security guy, walked through the metal detector, and he gave me back my rifle. Of course I was on a deployement to Iraq, though. They did, however, confiscate my toenail clippers because of the 1 inch toejam pick. They said it was a dangerous item and not allowed.
 
2014-02-18 03:29:25 PM  

skozlaw: lennavan: Either way you should spend some time in jail to sit there and feel bad about yourself.

You know, a quick Google suggests to me that most people that get caught don't even spend any time in jail. In fact, most of them seem to just get fines.


Oh I know, I actually think the laws need to go further.  If someone hits the point where they're not sure if they're currently carrying a gun or not, they should spend a few nights in jail to think about just how stupid they are.  Also from the article I posted just above:

If the state or jurisdiction where the airport is located has tolerant gun laws, TSA screeners will frequently hand the gun back to the passenger and recommend locking it in a car or finding some other safe place for it.
 
2014-02-18 03:29:59 PM  

MythDragon: Also there was one time I brought my rifle on board a flight. It was an military style assault weapon. I handed to the security guy, walked through the metal detector, and he gave me back my rifle. Of course I was on a deployement to Iraq, though. They did, however, confiscate my toenail clippers because of the 1 inch toejam pick. They said it was a dangerous item and not allowed.


Reminds me of the story where they took a pilot's nail clippers away.

*FACE PALM*
 
2014-02-18 03:32:30 PM  

James!: Only a handful of us can take over an airplane with a paperclip.


modestmovie.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-02-18 03:35:57 PM  

The_Sponge: lennavan: The_Sponge: lennavan: I'm just curious, where in the fark did you read someone wants to prevent firearm ownership? Can you quote it for me? Because I'm not seeing that. Thanks.


"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it.  - Senator Feinstein

Ah okay.  So Fark.com linked an article discussing the legality of guns going through airport checkpoints and the thread is entirely filled with discussion about guns at airports.  No one in the entire thread or the article even used the word "Feinstein" let alone discussed Diane Feinstein or her policy positions.  Diane Feinstein works for the federal government and this article is about a state law.  So naturally it makes sense you were arguing about what Diane Feinstein said in 1995 and we should all attempt to defend it.

Seems legit.


I read your post too quickly and thus overlooked you were referencing only the linked article.

And I'm disagreeing that it's stupid to forget that you have a firearm in your carry-on bag or luggage.


This tells me that your cut-off for what is and isn't stupid is not an acceptable one.
 
2014-02-18 03:36:39 PM  

The_Sponge: I read your post too quickly and thus overlooked you were referencing only the linked article.


No, my post referenced your post.

The_Sponge: And firearm ownership is an important civil right, whether you like it or not.

Why the fark, in a thread about carrying guns past airport checkpoints, where the linked article is about carrying guns past airport checkpoints, and all of the posts are about carrying guns past airport checkpoints, would you bring up something about firearm ownership?
 
2014-02-18 03:36:39 PM  
I've accidentally carried a knife through multiple airports in my carry on bag.

It was a solid confirmation of how useful the TSA is.
 
2014-02-18 03:38:00 PM  

Molavian: Serious Black: dittybopper: inadvertently carry

Much like the "accidental discharge" that I am positive only exists in the realm of unicorns and leprechauns, I don't think inadvertent carrying of a gun exists. We are talking about a tool whose sole purpose is to annihilate anything and everything that the business end is pointed towards. I believe a responsible gun owner should know where their potentially deadly firearms are at all times. If that's too much for you to handle, you shouldn't own a gun.

I have 70+ guns.  I think most of them are locked up in the basement.


"If you know how many guns you own, you don't have enough"
I've only got 36. I thought I was doing my part to make up for the people who didn't own any, but now I see I haven't been trying hard enough :(
 
2014-02-18 03:41:02 PM  

DrBenway: le.

And I'm NOT disagreeing that it's stupid to forget that you have a firearm in your carry-on bag or luggage.

This tells me that your cut-off for what is and isn't stupid is not an acceptable one.


FARK!

/FTFM.
//And if you don't believe me, see my earlier posts in this thread.
 
2014-02-18 03:41:06 PM  

The_Sponge: And firearm ownership is an important civil right, whether you like it or not.


That's so wrong it would need three lefts to be right again.  Firearm ownership isn't a "civil right".  It's a constitutional right*.  If black people couldn't own guns, then you'd have a civil rights issue.  This is an important distinction because a civil right is a matter of societal ethics and morality, whereas gun ownership isn't.  We only talk about it as a right because we have a specific founding document that says it is.  There's no philosophical basis to say that all decent civilizations must give their citizens the right to bear arms.

* For the purpose of the argument above I assumed there was an unfettered constitutional right to own firearms of most types, though in reality I firmly believe the modern interpretation of the second amendment is about as wrong as the statement of yours I responded to.
 
2014-02-18 03:41:51 PM  

sugar_fetus: Felgraf: Then again, RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS (or at least one) think folks shouldn't be charged when a loaded gun is left out, and a 5 year old kills a 2 year old with it, so whatever.

Citation needed, please.


This thread : http://www.fark.com/comments/7728443/Giving-five-year-old-My-First-Ri f le-yields-predictable-results

Specifically,
http://www.fark.com/comments/7728443/83947482#c83947482 
I suppose I wasn't *quite* remembering correctly. They didn't explicitly say the person shouldn't be charged, they just said it was a "Crazy accident".
 
2014-02-18 03:43:22 PM  
I do t really get what the big deal is in the first place. Anyone intent on killing people can walk into an airport with a gun. For snyone else, just provide a way to check it into cargo and go.

I can easily see how someone who carries daily could forget to leave it at home. I've lost a couple of keychain pocket knives at airports, I carry one all the time so I forgot to take it out and leave it at home.
 
2014-02-18 03:43:55 PM  

Blues_X: If you forget that you are carrying a weapon designed to kill people, you're a dipsh*t.

Case closed.

Good day, sir.


This was good, I am surprised you didn't get more bites.
 
2014-02-18 03:44:27 PM  

The_Sponge: Mentalpatient87: No, not that. That's not it. I meant the part where you're equating yourself to Rosa Parks. Like you are similar in any way at all. That's just farking stupid. But please, continue flailing.


I used an example of somebody standing up to an unjust law.

Fine....you guys want to rip on me for wanting to disobey an unjust law?  Fine.  Then I hope you guys "keep it real" by not smoking weed if it is illegal in your state.


You're not being ripped on because of standing up to an unjust law, you're being ripped on for the stratospherically idiotic notion of comparing yourself to Rosa Parks.
 
2014-02-18 03:45:26 PM  

The_Sponge: I'm disagreeing that it's stupid to forget that you have a firearm in your carry-on bag or luggage.


Fair enough, what other places do you feel it's not stupid to forget you have a firearm?  Is it stupid to forget you have a loaded gun in your closet?  Is it stupid to forget you have a loaded gun on you while you take a nap?  Is it stupid to forget you left a loaded gun out on your coffee table while you're at work and your kids are home?

I always thought responsible gun owners should know where their guns are at all times.  But here I am now learning there are gun rights advocates who think it's not stupid to forget where you left your gun.  And I really want some specific quotes out of you for the next time an article like a 4 year old girl shot herself because her father forgot he left his loaded gun laying out within her reach.  I will want to suggest that was stupid of him but it seems you will argue that's not stupid at all.
  http://www.kctv5.com/story/20555073/child-playing-with-gun-acciden tall y-shoots-self
 
2014-02-18 03:46:08 PM  

Blues_X: dittybopper: Rev.K: Nothing to see here folks, just more Responsible Gun OwnershipTM

Because nothing says Responsible Gun OwnershipTM  quite like passing laws to protect negligent gun-owners.

Because nothing says "Common Sense Gun LawsTM" than sending people to prison for unintentional and inadvertent mistakes.

ZERO TOLERANCE = ZERO INTELLIGENCE


"I accidentally ran over that baby."


People accidentally run over kids all the time and aren't charged with murder. Sometimes it's involuntary manslaughter, sometimes it's negligence, other times it's just a tragic accident. I'm not one to punish someone for making a mistake.
 
2014-02-18 03:46:24 PM  

James10952001: I can easily see how someone who carries daily could forget to leave it at home


Right, but that's precisely the kind of behavior we're trying to stop.
 
2014-02-18 03:46:45 PM  

Tigger: You're not being ripped on because of standing up to an unjust law, you're being ripped on for the stratospherically idiotic notion of comparing yourself to Rosa Parks.



I wasn't comparing myself to her, I was using a famous example of somebody not obeying an unjust law.
 
2014-02-18 03:47:22 PM  

Tigger: You're not being ripped on because of standing up to an unjust law


Actually I'm ripping on him for that, but your point is taken.
 
2014-02-18 03:47:50 PM  

lennavan: The_Sponge: I'm disagreeing that it's stupid to forget that you have a firearm in your carry-on bag or luggage.

Fair enough, what other places do you feel it's not stupid to forget you have a firearm?  Is it stupid to forget you have a loaded gun in your closet?  Is it stupid to forget you have a loaded gun on you while you take a nap?  Is it stupid to forget you left a loaded gun out on your coffee table while you're at work and your kids are home?

I always thought responsible gun owners should know where their guns are at all times.  But here I am now learning there are gun rights advocates who think it's not stupid to forget where you left your gun.  And I really want some specific quotes out of you for the next time an article like a 4 year old girl shot herself because her father forgot he left his loaded gun laying out within her reach.  I will want to suggest that was stupid of him but it seems you will argue that's not stupid at all.
  http://www.kctv5.com/story/20555073/child-playing-with-gun-acciden tall y-shoots-self



That was a typo.....meant to say "not disagreeing".

And if you think I'm lying, check out my earlier posts.
 
2014-02-18 03:48:05 PM  

lennavan: BubbaWilkins: To be clear,

Most of these people did not forget where they had their gun.  What they forgot was that they aren't allowed on their person or in carry-on bags through the security checkpoint.  To them, its no different than having a pocket knife or a pair a clippers.  It's pretty easy to get into a routine where you know every place you go it's okay, but forget when going somewhere new.  I forgot I had a pocket knife when I walked into a Federal Building once.  Didn't even occur to me that it wasn't allowed until the security guard saw it in the objects dish as going through the screening.

Irresponsible yes, but I think the punishments are overly harsh for something that should simply be "I'm sorry sir/madam, but you need to store that firearm in your vehicle or other secure location.  We can't let you through with it."

You know what would be really farking awkward?  If there was an AP story with a quote that actually directly contradicted your "fact."

TSA doesn't believe these gun-toting passengers are terrorists, but the agency can't explain why so many passengers try to board planes with guns, either, Castelveter said. The most common excuse offered by passengers is "I forgot it was there."

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/guns-airlines-93695.html#ixzz2 th t5XqkU

Oh man this is awkward.


Nothing awkward, it's the simplest answer to give authorities which requires no additional explanation.
 
2014-02-18 03:49:02 PM  

James10952001: People accidentally run over kids all the time and aren't charged with murder. Sometimes it's involuntary manslaughter, sometimes it's negligence, other times it's just a tragic accident. I'm not one to punish someone for making a mistake.


If you want to make your analogy more apt, it would be people who accidentally run over kids because they forgot to check their brake fluid for five years and their brakes went out while driving past a grade school.
 
2014-02-18 03:49:40 PM  

The_Sponge: DrBenway: le.

And I'm NOT disagreeing that it's stupid to forget that you have a firearm in your carry-on bag or luggage.

This tells me that your cut-off for what is and isn't stupid is not an acceptable one.

FARK!

/FTFM.
//And if you don't believe me, see my earlier posts in this thread.


Ah, well then you can disregard my post above.  I'm not suggesting lengthy prison sentences.  Doing stupid shiat with guns has major consequences.  Forgetting where your gun is leads to these stories about kids shooting and killing themselves accidentally because daddy forgot he left his gun out.  So yeah, if somehow, such as during airport screenings, the authorities find out you had no idea where your gun is, that should be punishable by spending a few days in jail.  It's not so outrageous to suggest you should always know where your gun is at.
 
2014-02-18 03:50:26 PM  

The_Sponge: I wasn't comparing myself to her, I was using a famous example of somebody not obeying an unjust law.


And the comparison between people of a certain race not being allowed to choose their own seat on a bus and you registering a handgun is patently absurd.  That's why you're being called out on it.
 
2014-02-18 03:52:34 PM  

Trivia Jockey: The_Sponge: I wasn't comparing myself to her, I was using a famous example of somebody not obeying an unjust law.

And the comparison between people of a certain race not being allowed to choose their own seat on a bus and you registering a handgun is patently absurd.  That's why you're being called out on it.



It's examples of people disobeying unjust laws.....now to what degree are they important is a different matter.
 
2014-02-18 03:54:03 PM  

Felgraf: sugar_fetus: Felgraf: Then again, RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS (or at least one) think folks shouldn't be charged when a loaded gun is left out, and a 5 year old kills a 2 year old with it, so whatever.

Citation needed, please.

This thread : http://www.fark.com/comments/7728443/Giving-five-year-old-My-First-Ri f le-yields-predictable-results

Specifically,
http://www.fark.com/comments/7728443/83947482#c83947482 
I suppose I wasn't *quite* remembering correctly. They didn't explicitly say the person shouldn't be charged, they just said it was a "Crazy accident".


As that citation does not say someone should not be charged,  your statement is wrong, yes?

Finally, some honesty in a Fark gun thread. :-)
 
2014-02-18 03:54:07 PM  

lennavan: Ah, well then you can disregard my post above. I'm not suggesting lengthy prison sentences. Doing stupid shiat with guns has major consequences. Forgetting where your gun is leads to these stories about kids shooting and killing themselves accidentally because daddy forgot he left his gun out. So yeah, if somehow, such as during airport screenings, the authorities find out you had no idea where your gun is, that should be punishable by spending a few days in jail. It's not so outrageous to suggest you should always know where your gun is at.



I'm on the fence with a few days in jail, but HEFTY fines are definitely a must.
 
2014-02-18 03:55:21 PM  

Molavian: Brainsick: /better go make sure

Ha, the joke's on you.  I lost all my guns in a tragic canoeing accident in the middle of Lake Michigan!


You've used that line online at least twice. Goes to criminal intent.
And nobody sane takes a farking canoe across the middle of Lake Michigan.
 
2014-02-18 03:56:59 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Molavian: Brainsick: /better go make sure

Ha, the joke's on you.  I lost all my guns in a tragic canoeing accident in the middle of Lake Michigan!

You've used that line online at least twice. Goes to criminal intent.
And nobody sane takes a farking canoe across the middle of Lake Michigan.



Mine were lost when I became a pacifist and threw them into Lake Chelan....the third deepest lake in the U.S.
 
2014-02-18 03:57:32 PM  
The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun*

*Unless the good guy doesn't even know he's carrying a gun
 
2014-02-18 03:58:19 PM  

coeyagi: I accidentally violated the age of consent because I didn't check the 17 year old girl's age before porking her, officer. Mulligan?


...Okay. But if it happens 3 more times, I am issuing you a citation.
 
2014-02-18 03:58:25 PM  

The_Sponge: Tigger: You're not being ripped on because of standing up to an unjust law, you're being ripped on for the stratospherically idiotic notion of comparing yourself to Rosa Parks.


I wasn't comparing myself to her, I was using a famous example of somebody not obeying an unjust law.


Brilliant.
 
2014-02-18 03:59:59 PM  

The_Sponge: Trivia Jockey: The_Sponge: I wasn't comparing myself to her, I was using a famous example of somebody not obeying an unjust law.

And the comparison between people of a certain race not being allowed to choose their own seat on a bus and you registering a handgun is patently absurd.  That's why you're being called out on it.


It's examples of people disobeying unjust laws.....now to what degree are they important is a different matter.


It's implicit in bringing it up that you are drawing a parallel. That you're evading that point makes you disingenuous at best. Either that, or we're back to the question of your ability to discern what is and isn't too stupid.
 
2014-02-18 04:00:02 PM  

BubbaWilkins: lennavan: BubbaWilkins: To be clear,

Most of these people did not forget where they had their gun.  What they forgot was that they aren't allowed on their person or in carry-on bags through the security checkpoint.  To them, its no different than having a pocket knife or a pair a clippers.  It's pretty easy to get into a routine where you know every place you go it's okay, but forget when going somewhere new.  I forgot I had a pocket knife when I walked into a Federal Building once.  Didn't even occur to me that it wasn't allowed until the security guard saw it in the objects dish as going through the screening.

Irresponsible yes, but I think the punishments are overly harsh for something that should simply be "I'm sorry sir/madam, but you need to store that firearm in your vehicle or other secure location.  We can't let you through with it."

You know what would be really farking awkward?  If there was an AP story with a quote that actually directly contradicted your "fact."

TSA doesn't believe these gun-toting passengers are terrorists, but the agency can't explain why so many passengers try to board planes with guns, either, Castelveter said. The most common excuse offered by passengers is "I forgot it was there."

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/guns-airlines-93695.html#ixzz2 th t5XqkU

Oh man this is awkward.

Nothing awkward, it's the simplest answer to give authorities which requires no additional explanation.


Right.  So when someone walks up to a security checkpoint and goes through the scanner looking for weapons and has their bags X-rayed looking for weapons, and there are signs and notices all over the damn place saying all the things you can't bring on the airplanes, including guns, it makes sense people forgot you're not allowed to bring guns on airplanes.

And sure that AP story quoting the TSA spokesperson directly stating forgetting they had the guns on them was the most common reason but your gut feeling knows better!

I love that you doubled down rather than admit you made a silly mistake in assuming what was true.
 
2014-02-18 04:02:12 PM  

The_Sponge: Fine....you guys want to rip on me for wanting to disobey an unjust law? Fine. Then I hope you guys "keep it real" by not smoking weed if it is illegal in your state.


I smoke weed sometimes. I'm like Ghandi, Thoreau, Dalai Lama, John Lennon, and Lech Wałęsa combined.
 
2014-02-18 04:03:11 PM  

The_Sponge: It's examples of people disobeying unjust laws.....now to what degree are they important is a different matter.


But the degree is what makes a comparison reasonable or not.
 
2014-02-18 04:04:27 PM  

DrBenway: It's implicit in bringing it up that you are drawing a parallel. That you're evading that point makes you disingenuous at best. Either that, or we're back to the question of your ability to discern what is and isn't too stupid.



It was brought up because somebody essentially made the point that you should always obey the law.
 
2014-02-18 04:06:38 PM  

lennavan: BubbaWilkins: lennavan: BubbaWilkins: To be clear,

Most of these people did not forget where they had their gun.  What they forgot was that they aren't allowed on their person or in carry-on bags through the security checkpoint.  To them, its no different than having a pocket knife or a pair a clippers.  It's pretty easy to get into a routine where you know every place you go it's okay, but forget when going somewhere new.  I forgot I had a pocket knife when I walked into a Federal Building once.  Didn't even occur to me that it wasn't allowed until the security guard saw it in the objects dish as going through the screening.

Irresponsible yes, but I think the punishments are overly harsh for something that should simply be "I'm sorry sir/madam, but you need to store that firearm in your vehicle or other secure location.  We can't let you through with it."

You know what would be really farking awkward?  If there was an AP story with a quote that actually directly contradicted your "fact."

TSA doesn't believe these gun-toting passengers are terrorists, but the agency can't explain why so many passengers try to board planes with guns, either, Castelveter said. The most common excuse offered by passengers is "I forgot it was there."

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/guns-airlines-93695.html#ixzz2 th t5XqkU

Oh man this is awkward.

Nothing awkward, it's the simplest answer to give authorities which requires no additional explanation.

Right.  So when someone walks up to a security checkpoint and goes through the scanner looking for weapons and has their bags X-rayed looking for weapons, and there are signs and notices all over the damn place saying all the things you can't bring on the airplanes, including guns, it makes sense people forgot you're not allowed to bring guns on airplanes.

And sure that AP story quoting the TSA spokesperson directly stating forgetting they had the guns on them was the most common reason but your gut feeling knows better!

I love ...


I aim to please....and also to keep the groupings tight.
 
2014-02-18 04:11:28 PM  

The_Sponge: DrBenway: It's implicit in bringing it up that you are drawing a parallel. That you're evading that point makes you disingenuous at best. Either that, or we're back to the question of your ability to discern what is and isn't too stupid.


It was brought up because somebody essentially made the point that you should always obey the law.


So it was a comparison between Rosa Parks breaking the law and a gun owner breaking the law?

Noted.
 
2014-02-18 04:11:48 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Molavian: Brainsick: /better go make sure

Ha, the joke's on you.  I lost all my guns in a tragic canoeing accident in the middle of Lake Michigan!

You've used that line online at least twice. Goes to criminal intent.
And nobody sane takes a farking canoe across the middle of Lake Michigan.


See?  I have supporting evidence that my accident was not only possible, but probable!
 
2014-02-18 04:25:29 PM  

James10952001: Sometimes it's involuntary manslaughter, sometimes it's negligence, other times it's just a tragic accident


For one thing, it's never an accident when some random citizen brings a gun in an airport. It's always negligence. Kids can run out in front of drivers who are doing everything right. Nobody's gun ever got up and jumped in their briefcase.

For another, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. There are degrees of charges for running over children and their are degrees of charges for gun-in-airport incidents. If you run over a kid by mistake because you were going too fast, you get involuntary manslaughter. If you're a numbnut who doesn't take care with where his firearm is, you also get a lesser charge.

Now, if you aim your car at a group of schoolchildren and run them down, you're probably going to get a little bit stiffer sentence. Likewise, if you take your gun out in the damn terminal and start shooting people, you probably aren't just getting a fine.

Guns don't make you immune from the law or common sense. The same principals at play in virtually every other aspect of the law apply here. Crimes of "honest" negligence carry lighter penalties and crimes of malice carry stiffer penalties. This is true whether those crimes involve some nitwit with a gun or not. Why should negligent gun owners get mulligans? Generally speaking, negligent drivers don't. People who start a fire that gets out of control generally don't get an "oops my bad". Just because it's a gun owner doing something irresopnsible suddenly we're supposed to start making eceptions though?

How about no. A thousand dollar fine seems like a perfectly fine way to reinforce the notion that if you're going to carry a dangerous weapon around in public that maybe you should pay a little bit more attention to where it is. Some time in prison sounds like a perfectly fine way to reinforce that idea on repeat offenders. If you're that stupid you shouldn't be running around in public with a gun anyway.
 
2014-02-18 04:44:31 PM  
Well I know this might seem like a shock to some of you, but you are allowed to carry firearms into the airport to be stowed underneath the plane, so that you can have them wherever you are going.

Hunting trips for instance, target shooting matches, whatever. We have a 2nd Amendment.

However Airport rules are very strict and can border on confusing as each state, city and municipality has its own laws.

So I believe they are trying to protect the guy who walks in and has his firearm in a soft case unlocked and forgot to notify the airport he was bringing it ahead of time, that sort of thing.
 
2014-02-18 04:47:08 PM  
Outsider-looking-in here (though I've spent enough time in the USA to understand the local attitude to gun ownership and the 2nd amendment).

A loaded hand-gun is a weapon. It is designed to kill from a distance, which means that unlike a knife, it can be used without endangering the bearer. It is small enough to be concealed, unlike a rifle or cross-bow. It is therefore unique, and has to be singled out for particular scrutiny.

The whole debate around guns in the USA is also unique. While I've had Americans criticise Australia for our strict gun laws, I also acknowledge there is a massive difference between suppressing the rise of a gun culture in a country that doesn't have one, and attempting to remove guns from a country that was built on them.

But that doesn't change that with additional rights comes additional responsibility.

Being able to walk into an airport (or anywhere else) carrying a loaded weapon and not being aware of it is not being responsible. Any more than accidentally driving off with your child on top of the car is being responsible.

The severity of a risk has two components - the likelihood of occurring and the impact if it does.  Accidentally drinking out-of-date milk might be fine, but in the worst case it could cause you to feel sick to the stomach. Similarly, chances are an armed individual inside an airport is harmless, but if not, the consequences can be devastating. Same as having guns inside schools, or inside courts. There is a good reason why there are areas where these are restricted.

Should "intent" be an excuse for every transgression? Hell no. There was a little kid killed outside a school here late last year ago when another mother accidentally put the car in "drive" rather than "reverse" and plowed into a six-year old. Was it an accident? Yes. Did she intend to kill the child? No. But that level of carelessness merits punishment. The right to drive a vehicle comes with the responsibility to not drive it over children. She was charged with "gross negligence occassioning death". It would have been much better for everybody if the whole situation had never occurred, and a lot of laws where the potential impact is high exist to avoid them from occuring in the first place. Part of that deterence is punishment to the transgressor that enters the public awareness.

While you may have the right to own and carry one, you have a responsibility to follow the rules. This isn't a new rule that was imposed upon you. It was a rule that's existed a long time. If you don't follow the rules, you get punished. Your punishment deters others from doing the same thing. Society, as a whole, comes out ahead.

And I reject the "gun lockers at airports" idea. That's outsourcing your responsibility. "Well, if they didn't want us to carry guns on planes, they'd look after them for us". The world doesn't work that way, unless you want to live in some sort of socialist utopia... in which case they should clean your car, mind and feed your children and drop over to water your plants and feed your pets. If somebody wants to start a business nearby an airport offering gun-lockers, good on them. Entrepreneurship in its purest form.

"No one in this world, so far as I know - and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me - has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people." -- Mencken.

Post 9/11, nobody can argue that they don't know that the TSA are going through everybody with a fine tooth comb... and/or a rubber glove. The full body scanner debate was all over the press for ages.

So to me, the answer is simple. If you are allowed to carry guns in public, but you walk into an airport, then they need to be treated the same way as nail files, bottled water, scissors and all the other crap that gets confiscated at a TSA point. You bring it in, you lose it. So it's a $5000 rare classic? Tough. You knew the rules.

As an aside, I can't reconcile how a culture that regards "socialism" and "liberal" as dirty words - that rejects social concepts such as universal health care on the ideological grounds that government should not be interfering in people's lives - can then turn around and expect that same government. to then step in and save them from their own stupidity. You can have it one way or the other. There seems to be an ingrained expectation that the entire structure of society - the government, the public service... and even The Church -- exists only to fulfill your particular individual needs. There is no empathy that the individual standing next to you also has needs... and at some point, all those individual needs seem to over lap.

I live in Australia, and we are also rapidly following the USA's lead into a culture of diminished personal responsibility. We don't have a Bill of Rights, but that hasn't stopped us being home to the second most litigious state in the world, behind only California. We have massive public spats between private cars, public transport users, pedestrians and cyclists... all believing they have the moral high ground. Personally, I see a great benefit to giving everybody a gun... fear of being held accountable might stop some of the aggression.
 
2014-02-18 04:51:01 PM  
If you forget you're carrying it, how the hell are you going to remember to use it if you need it?
 
2014-02-18 04:52:49 PM  

James!: I don't need to fly, I move about the planet through the power of advanced yoga.


Novice.  I move the planet around myself.
 
2014-02-18 04:53:20 PM  

mcmnky: If you really believe that, and you are a gun owner, I fear for the safety of those around you.

"You pretty much have to assume anyone caught with a gun at security had no bad purpose"

So we should have no law enforcement? No penalties for breaking the law?


Those two statements are unrelated. In THIS PARTICULAR RARE INSTANCE, it's reasonable to assume the people who show up with weapons in their luggage have no ill intent. Because they actually question those people, and take them to court, and guess what? None of them are crooks or terrorists. 

Anyone with criminal intent knows they will be caught, so they don't break the law. Any one who breaks the law must be innocent since they clearly had no criminal intent. Do you really not see the logical contradictions in that way of thinking?

AGAIN, I'm talking about airport security ONLY. People obey the law in proportion to their sense of whether they can get away with it. No one with the slightest brain thinks they can get away with smuggling guns onto an airplane, so QED, the people who DO wind up with guns at the security checkpoint must either be the world's dumbest criminals, or people who brought them there unintentionally. Show me ONE instance of the TSA ever apprehending a would-be terrorist at a security checkpoint because of an attempt to smuggle aboard a weapon. It never happens. All they do is stop STUFF from coming aboard, none of which was intended to do any harm. You'll note that none of those people arrested at Hartsfield for trying to bring a gun through security were ever charged with any other offense.

"The law isn't intended to discourage concealed weapons carry and enforce responsibility" So you agree this isn't a 2nd amendment issue. Then what is it? Because to me it sounds like people who just don't like to play by the rules. Any rules.

The rules are in place to stop hijackings. That's why we started making people go through metal detectors 40 years ago. The point is not to stop nail clippers and water bottles from coming aboard, it's to keep the airplane safe. Sending stupid and/or irresponsible people to jail for making an innocent mistake in no way furthers that goal.

I am a firearms owner. I have a concealed carry permit. Short of memento-like brain damage, I cannot imagine getting in to the security line to board a plane and not knowing, or just realizing at that moment, I had a firearm in my possession.

Yes, you are a tightly wrapped, hyper-responsible paranoic who lives every second aware of your physical surroundings. Lots of us creative types with ADHD are not like that at all. We daydream and lose track of stuff, time, place. We are a growing segment of the population. We probably are less likely to carry a gun, but somebody like Terry Coleman, a professional politician who brought a gun through security in his briefcase, is likely to be a bit more loosey goosey about his surroundings and stuff. I personally was walking toward airport security once with a bag in my hand (pre-9/11; we were driving across country and going through security to meet a pilot friend who had just landed) when at the last minute I remembered I had a pistol in the bag. I checked it into a rental locker (remember those?) and we went on our way.

To the folks arguing against punishing people for bringing guns to airport security, not one of the statements made in this thread has had any persuasive power. Either you are wrong, or you are just doing a really piss poor job of making your argument.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be PUNISHED, just that the punishment should fit the offense. Careless, but harmless violation of a security regulation should be punished by a fine. People shouldn't be arrested and taken to jail if they haven't deliberately committed a crime, and law enforcement should use reasonable common sense when it comes to assessing intent. At AIRPORT SECURITY (don't extrapolate beyond that), the most reasonable assumption is that people bringing guns through security don't have criminal intent.
 
2014-02-18 04:55:09 PM  

sheumack: Outsider-looking-in here (though I've spent enough time in the USA to understand the local attitude to gun ownership and the 2nd amendment).

A loaded hand-gun is a weapon. It is designed to kill from a distance, which means that unlike a knife, it can be used without endangering the bearer. It is small enough to be concealed, unlike a rifle or cross-bow. It is therefore unique, and has to be singled out for particular scrutiny.

The whole debate around guns in the USA is also unique. While I've had Americans criticise Australia for our strict gun laws, I also acknowledge there is a massive difference between suppressing the rise of a gun culture in a country that doesn't have one, and attempting to remove guns from a country that was built on them.

But that doesn't change that with additional rights comes additional responsibility.

Being able to walk into an airport (or anywhere else) carrying a loaded weapon and not being aware of it is not being responsible. Any more than accidentally driving off with your child on top of the car is being responsible.

The severity of a risk has two components - the likelihood of occurring and the impact if it does.  Accidentally drinking out-of-date milk might be fine, but in the worst case it could cause you to feel sick to the stomach. Similarly, chances are an armed individual inside an airport is harmless, but if not, the consequences can be devastating. Same as having guns inside schools, or inside courts. There is a good reason why there are areas where these are restricted.

Should "intent" be an excuse for every transgression? Hell no. There was a little kid killed outside a school here late last year ago when another mother accidentally put the car in "drive" rather than "reverse" and plowed into a six-year old. Was it an accident? Yes. Did she intend to kill the child? No. But that level of carelessness merits punishment. The right to drive a vehicle comes with the responsibility to not drive it over children. She wa ...


well.. I get your point about personal responsibility with a firearm, but I also went through 4 years of Marine Corps Infantry where firearms awareness, safety and ballistics were jammed into my head on a daily basis. Most people don't have that level of awareness and discipline, but our 2nd Amendment still remains a right and freedom that is afforded to all.

I can see how someone might make an honest mistake in this hectic and crazy world we live in.. am I advocating for the guy who walks in with a pistol in his trench coat pocket? No, but I am advocating for the guy who forgot to notify the Airport ahead of time, or the guy who has it in the wrong type of case ( it has to be in a hard case, locked, and ammunition is not allowed in the Airport at all )

As far as your spiel about the American way of life... we were founded after a Revolution and everything was put in place to preserve individual freedom and to prevent a singular ruling entity from forming again. Sadly that is eroding because we have an open door immigration policy and let anyone get elected. How can you preserve a countries original intentions if you are letting people from other countries come in and get elected, allowing them to write their own laws??
 
2014-02-18 04:57:58 PM  

treesloth: James!: I don't need to fly, I move about the planet through the power of advanced yoga.

Novice.  I move the planet around myself.


That's terrible for the environment.  Earth killer.
 
2014-02-18 05:00:01 PM  

MagicMissile: Well I know this might seem like a shock to some of you, but you are allowed to carry firearms into the airport to be stowed underneath the plane, so that you can have them wherever you are going.

Hunting trips for instance, target shooting matches, whatever. We have a 2nd Amendment.

However Airport rules are very strict and can border on confusing as each state, city and municipality has its own laws.

So I believe they are trying to protect the guy who walks in and has his firearm in a soft case unlocked and forgot to notify the airport he was bringing it ahead of time, that sort of thing.


No. This is a Georgia bill. Georgia already allows carrying guns into the airport outside the TSA security gates. Heck, under Georgia law you can openly carry a loaded rifle or shotgun into the airport. Concealed carry permit holders can carry concealed pistols and knives/swords in the airport as long as they're in the public areas outside security. The bill is trying to protect the dumbasses who show up with a pistol in their carry on that they forgot about. Happens about 100 times a year, and currently they spend the night in jail.
 
2014-02-18 05:07:42 PM  
Crimes of "honest" negligence carry lighter penalties and crimes of malice carry stiffer penalties. This is true whether those crimes involve some nitwit with a gun or not. Why should negligent gun owners get mulligans? Generally speaking, negligent drivers don't. People who start a fire that gets out of control generally don't get an "oops my bad". Just because it's a gun owner doing something irresopnsible suddenly we're supposed to start making eceptions though?

Why can't you tell the difference between an improper action that results in harm and one that results in no harm? Nobody is injured in any way when somebody's gun is found in their carryon luggage. This is in no way a parallel with any of the other instances of negligence you cited. If you run a red light when there are no cars around and get pulled over, should you go directly to jail? I mean, you were either negligent or deliberately breaking the law, and if a car had been crossing your path, somebody might have been killed. That's an EXACT parallel to negligently bringing a gun through airport security, so why should that mean an arrest and not the traffic violation?
 
2014-02-18 05:10:11 PM  

sheumack: Outsider-looking-in here


I actually read all of that.  Because it was very well said.  Thank you, sir.  I wish more Americans would see how allied foreigners see us, because then maybe some of them would understand how dumb we look to outsiders.
 
2014-02-18 05:14:09 PM  

sugar_fetus: Felgraf: sugar_fetus: Felgraf: Then again, RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS (or at least one) think folks shouldn't be charged when a loaded gun is left out, and a 5 year old kills a 2 year old with it, so whatever.

Citation needed, please.

This thread : http://www.fark.com/comments/7728443/Giving-five-year-old-My-First-Ri f le-yields-predictable-results

Specifically,
http://www.fark.com/comments/7728443/83947482#c83947482 
I suppose I wasn't *quite* remembering correctly. They didn't explicitly say the person shouldn't be charged, they just said it was a "Crazy accident".

As that citation does not say someone should not be charged,  your statement is wrong, yes?

Finally, some honesty in a Fark gun thread. :-)


As I said, I misremembered. Still, I would argue 'crazy accident' implies that there shouldn't be blame, sine it's 'an accident', and not, you know. Gross negligence.
 
2014-02-18 05:14:36 PM  
ctrl+F <<complaints about TFA being the mobile version>>

Hrm. Maybe I'm just the only one that tried to view from a desktop, or cared!
 
2014-02-18 05:22:34 PM  

Serious Black: "I would tell you that a lot of people carry a weapon," said state Rep. Alan Powell, a Republican who supports the bill. "It's almost like it's just a second nature to them. And sometimes they forget where they have, you know, they basically forget they've got it in a briefcase or a suitcase."

If you forget where your gun is, you are an irresponsible gun owner. Period.


Done in one. I'm fine with responsible gun ownership. I wish that the gun nuts were, too.
 
2014-02-18 05:34:43 PM  

Trivia Jockey: sheumack: Outsider-looking-in here

I actually read all of that.  Because it was very well said.  Thank you, sir.  I wish more Americans would see how allied foreigners see us, because then maybe some of them would understand how dumb we look to outsiders.


I don't mind being thought dumb by nations that have half the civil rights we do.
 
2014-02-18 05:48:02 PM  

MagicMissile: Trivia Jockey: sheumack: Outsider-looking-in here

I actually read all of that.  Because it was very well said.  Thank you, sir.  I wish more Americans would see how allied foreigners see us, because then maybe some of them would understand how dumb we look to outsiders.

I don't mind being thought dumb by nations that have half the civil rights we do.


When you say stuff like this:

As far as your spiel about the American way of life... we were founded after a Revolution and everything was put in place to preserve individual freedom and to prevent a singular ruling entity from forming again. Sadly that is eroding because we have an open door immigration policy and let anyone get elected. How can you preserve a countries original intentions if you are letting people from other countries come in and get elected, allowing them to write their own laws??

...rest assured that it's not merely other nations that think you're dumb. Too dumb (not to mention too paranoid) to be trusted with firearms. But "rules is rules," so carry on. By the way, that's "carry on" as in "carry on with your bad self," not "carry on your gun when you get on a plane." If you didn't seem to be so dumb, I wouldn't feel obliged to explain that.
 
2014-02-18 05:48:16 PM  

sheumack: A loaded hand-gun is a weapon. It is designed to kill from a distance, which means that unlike a knife, it can be used without endangering the bearer. It is small enough to be concealed, unlike a rifle or cross-bow. It is therefore unique, and has to be singled out for particular scrutiny.


Quick what is the deadly threat distance of a knife? 21 feet.
 
2014-02-18 05:51:21 PM  
I think it won't be too long before every state REQUIRES people to carry a gun everywhere they go,
and if that happens....hoo-boy, we're all toast.
 
2014-02-18 05:57:58 PM  

mbillips: Why can't you tell the difference between an improper action that results in harm and one that results in no harm? Nobody is injured in any way when somebody's gun is found in their carryon luggage. This is in no way a parallel with any of the other instances of negligence you cited. If you run a red light when there are no cars around and get pulled over, should you go directly to jail? I mean, you were either negligent or deliberately breaking the law, and if a car had been crossing your path, somebody might have been killed. That's an EXACT parallel to negligently bringing a gun through airport security, so why should that mean an arrest and not the traffic violation?


FYI - if you drive drunk, you're going to get arrested and go to jail.  Even if you don't hit anyone.  This is only an outrage to you.
 
2014-02-18 06:23:16 PM