Armed pro-Trump protesters gather outside Michigan elections chief's home

[Zacc]

Murders involving firearms in crimes of passion are also a small fraction of murders involving a firearm.

For the victim it is NOT a small fraction. It is everything. It is a fact that the easy availability of a weapon greatly increases the usage of it.

The danger of Firearms, like automobiles, is directly related to the user.

And that is exactly why the registration and periodic review of the operators is such a good idea. That is why the cars must be registered, and their selling also needs to be tracked.

I find your condescending misrepresentation of people who live in the south, of which I’m one, disgusting.

I also live in the South, and what I said was an exaggeration - for sarcastic purposes. Talking generally about Southerners… they are wonderful, polite, kind, helpful people. But there are exceptions, too.

It is a right antecedent to government and is not dependent on what you or anyone else thinks is an obsession.

There are no “rights” outside the legal system. And the obsession is plainly visible.

 

[ProVobis]

But the young guy in Kenosha has discovered that one may have to defend oneself in court.

I believe that young guy crossed state lines to participate. Complicates things a little bit.

 

[vz71]

If a Psych Eval gives that indication, then yes.

I would like to see your data that says we can predict accurately who will break the law.

Then we need to know if this data is strong enough to suspend legal rights.

I doubt it. But…let’s see it.

That only applies to the Courts.

You wish to assume everyone a criminal?

You go into any place that forbids firearms and there are metal and explosive detectors. You have to prove you are innocent before you can proceed. The Assumption in these cases, you are guilty until cleared (declared innocent) by the detection devices.

No, the devices detect the presence of metal objects, and you are then searched further if one is indicated.
No crime is being investigated.
Innocent or guilt is irrelevant.

Police pulls you over. He orders you to perform a sobriety test and or Breath Analyzer. He presumes you are guilty before either test proves you are innocent.

He has a right to. You have already (in his view) committed a crime. He has every right to investigate further.

 

[MikeInVA]

Police pulls you over. He orders you to perform a sobriety test and or Breath Analyzer. He presumes you are guilty before either test proves you are innocent.

You kind of missed the concept of probable cause. The police generally only pull a person over if they are behaving erratically.

 

[RootKitWarrior]

You go into any place that forbids firearms and there are metal and explosive detectors. You have to prove you are innocent before you can proceed. The Assumption in these cases, you are guilty until cleared (declared innocent) by the detection devices.

No, the devices detect the presence of metal objects, and you are then searched further if one is indicated.

1. At the point you step before the metal detector you are guilty.
2. You pass thru it.
   .
3. if it goes off, you are still guilty.
4. then you are searched
5. if something is found that is illegal, you are never left the guilty state
6. if nothing is found that is illegal, then you are now innocent.

.
7) if it does not go off, then you are now innocent.
.
8) They may still retain the right to search you, then they have reasserted the position that you are guilty.
9) if something is found that is illegal, you never left the guilty state
10) if nothing is found that is illegal, then you are now innocent.

No crime is being investigated.

And no crime is being investigated by a Psych Eval.

He has a right to. You have already (in his view) committed a crime. He has every right to investigate further.

And his view is that you are guilty until proven innocent without any further investigation.
In the end, he will have to justify his view.
If you refuse to take the sobriety tests, he still assumes ( in his view ) that you are guilty. His view is that you have something to hide by refusal.

 

[JonNC]

It depends on the availability of the means to become a criminal.

No, it doesn’t. Tools do not cause someone to commit a crime. Again, roughly 100 million Americans legally own over 300 million civilian firearms. If the means caused the crime, we’d know it.

How much preparation is needed to become one, and how much damage they can do if they turn to become a criminal.

It has everything to do with individual choices. Blunt objects snd personal weapons (hands, feet, etc) kill more people than civilian rifles, including the AR-15.
Further, up until this year, crime has been dropping consistently since 1990. Meanwhile, firearms ownership has dramatically increased.
In short, an increase in civilian firearms has coincided with a decrease in crime.

 

[MikeInVA]

Cain didn’t slay Able with an AR-15.

 

[pnewton]

Further, up until this year, crime has been dropping consistently since 1990. Meanwhile, firearms ownership has dramatically increased.
In short, an increase in civilian firearms has coincided with a decrease in crime.

As has the decline in executions. Though I note that the murder rate is holding steady for the last decade or two.

 

[vz71]

At the point you step before the metal detector you are guilty.

No, you’re not. The machine is not detecting guilt or innocence of wrongdoing.
It is simply there to detect whatever the property owner wants screened out.

• You pass thru it.
  .
• if it goes off, you are still guilty.

No.
If it goes off, it means you may need further checking.

• then you are searched
• if something is found that is illegal, you are never left the guilty state

Your premise is incorrect.
If the detector goes off, it does not mean you are guilty or innocent.
It means further checking is required.
If you are found with whatever, you are still not guilty or innocent. You simply are found to have whatever they want screened.
You can give it up, or leave.

And no crime is being investigated by a Psych Eval

You have not shown that a psych evaluation will predict with accuracy who will or will not commit a crime.

And his view is that you are guilty until proven innocent without any further investigation.

No, it is his witness of a criminal violation that provides the probable cause to investigate further.

 

[JonNC]

I believe that young guy crossed state lines to participate. Complicates things a little bit.

If it is found that he acted in self defense, the crossing of state lines isn’t meaningful.

 

[JonNC]

Cain didn’t slay Able with an AR-15.

Yeah, but I’ll bet he was a Trump supporter.

 

[JonNC]

As has the decline in executions. Though I note that the murder rate is holding steady for the last decade or two.

Even holding steady while gun sales grow is indicative of no causation between gun sales and gun crime, since most gun crimes are not done with legally purchased arms.

 

[Petra202]

Did you watch any news this summer ?

 

[pnewton]

Did you watch any news this summer ?

Uh, yes. Do you want to know if I ever take a bath while asking silly question?

 

[JonNC]

Do you want to know if I ever take a bath while asking silly question?

No! WTMI

 

[RootKitWarrior]

You have not shown that a psych evaluation will predict with accuracy who will or will not commit a crime.

If a psych eval can determine whether one can gain access to a Nuclear Power Plant, it can ascertain ones fitness to continue to own a firearm.

If a psych eval can determine a police officers fitness for duty, than it can absolutely determine one’s fitness to continue to won a firearm.

 

[vz71]

If a psych eval can determine whether one can gain access to a Nuclear Power Plant, it can ascertain ones fitness to continue to own a firearm.

No, access to a nuclear power plant is not a constitutional right.
Ownership of a firearm is.
One needs specific reasons to deny it.
A psych evaluation does not do this.

If a psych eval can determine a police officers fitness for duty, than it can absolutely determine one’s fitness to continue to won a firearm.

Again, you are trying to compare a constitutional right with something that is not a constitutional right.
You need a fairly large amount of certitude before a constitutional right can be suspended.

You have not shown a psych evaluation provides this.

 

[MikeInVA]

It is simply ridiculous to see that gun ownership is considered less important than any other dangerous endeavors. The solution would be simple: use the same mechanism for gun ownership as it is used for owning and operating automobiles. Both are lethal weapons. Of course cars are useful on their own, while guns have no other uses besides killing.

Owning and operating a car is not a right. Gun ownership is.

 

[Zacc]

Owning and operating a car is not a right. Gun ownership is.

That is the problem! Cars have good reasons to have and operate them. Gun’s don’t. I can just imagine Jesus endorsing lethal weapons, and consider them more important than peaceful transportation. Something is very wrong with this picture.

 

[sallybutler]

Actually, if not having a car prevented you from unhindered travel, wouldn’t that be a violation? And why should the government be allowed to determine whether or not you can drive? Did they do the same with horses in the Old West? Wasn’t a car called a Horseless Carriage?