Five-year-old boy accidentally shoots, kills sister

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

You don't, because you're an imbecile.

im·be·cile
ˈimbəsəl,-ˌsil/
nouninformal

noun: imbecile; plural noun: imbeciles

1. 1.
   a stupid person.
   
   
   
   
   

adjective
adjective: imbecile

1. 1.
   stupid; idiotic.
   
   "try not to make imbecile remarks"
   
   
   
   

Again,you don't let facts stand in your way .

[firstdown]

You guys need to agree to disagree and stop the name calling.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by firstdown

You guys need to agree to disagree and stop the name calling.

Your comment has fallen on deaf ears.

At this point, the thread should probably closed. RR and I have made our case, and giantone's helped make it too.

Originally Posted by Giantone

Nope .

Urban Dictionary: gun nut

(snip)- usually used playingly by oneself or by other firearms enthusiasts in this sense. Often associates with people with similar interests.

(snip) - usually used derogatively by non-gun people, particularly those who are scared of firearms.
Me: I keep my AR-15 mags loaded with hollow points for reduced penetration and higher stopping power for riot protection.
Everyone else: You're just another dangerous Second Amendment freak, a raving gun nut.

Gee, and which usage was yours, giantone? Thanks for proving where the name calling started.

Originally Posted by Giantone

gun nut
Web definitions

1. The gun culture is a culture shared by people in the gun politics debate, generally those who advocate preserving gun rights and who are generally against more gun control. ...
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Nut

From your own link, the part you dishonestly left out: (giantone lying again, what a surprise) Bold mine.

"To some gun owners, it is embraced affectionately, such as in the popular outdoors magazine Field and Stream which has a column called "The Gun Nut".[10] However to others it is regarded as a pejorative stereotype cast upon gun owners by anti-gun advocates as a means of implying that they are fanatical, exhibit abnormal behavior, or are a threat to the safety of others.[11][12][13][14][15] The term has additionally been used at times by some law enforcement agencies to describe a profile to categorize criminal suspects.[16][17]"

So yeah, at the point where folks have pretty much stated their case, and giantone's left defending name calling and looking rather foolish doing so as RR points out, I think we're done here.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Your comment has fallen on deaf ears.

At this point, the thread should probably closed. RR and I have made our case, and giantone's helped make it too.


Gee, and which usage was yours, giantone? Thanks for proving where the name calling started.

From your own link, the part you dishonestly left out: (giantone lying again, what a surprise) Bold mine.

"To some gun owners, it is embraced affectionately, such as in the popular outdoors magazine Field and Stream which has a column called "The Gun Nut".[10] However to others it is regarded as a pejorative stereotype cast upon gun owners by anti-gun advocates as a means of implying that they are fanatical, exhibit abnormal behavior, or are a threat to the safety of others.[11][12][13][14][15] The term has additionally been used at times by some law enforcement agencies to describe a profile to categorize criminal suspects.[16][17]"

.

So you agree with me , it's not derogatory ,Thank You .

[HailGreen28]

Comedy too cheesy for sitcom TV.

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Do you not consider "gun nut" derogatory:

Originally Posted by Giantone

Nope .

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

(snip)"a pejorative stereotype cast upon gun owners by anti-gun advocates as a means of implying that they are fanatical, exhibit abnormal behavior, or are a threat to the safety of others.[11][12][13][14][15] The term has additionally been used at times by some law enforcement agencies to describe a profile to categorize criminal suspects.[16][17][/B]"

Originally Posted by Giantone

So you agree with me , it's not derogatory ,Thank You .

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

At this point, the thread should probably closed. RR and I have made our case, and giantone's helped make it too.

Originally Posted by Giantone

Actually you have made my case but again if it helps you sleep at night .

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Your comment has fallen on deaf ears.

At this point, the thread should probably closed. RR and I have made our case, and giantone's helped make it too.

.

Actually you have made my case but again if it helps you sleep at night .

[firstdown]

Giantone you must be sleeping on the job. He was probably a member of the NRA and a gun nut.

Why did he do it? Unanswered questions about the Washington Navy Yard rampage - U.S. News

And you questioned why blind people should have a carry permit.

Hero who led blind coworker from Navy Yard shooting: 'He was all by himself' - TODAY.com

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Giantone you must be sleeping on the job. He was probably a member of the NRA and a gun nut.

Why did he do it? Unanswered questions about the Washington Navy Yard rampage - U.S. News

And you questioned why blind people should have a carry permit.

Hero who led blind coworker from Navy Yard shooting: 'He was all by himself' - TODAY.com

I see you agree with me also .

[Chico23231]

Investigators seek Aaron Alexis' motive after D.C. Navy Yard shooting - CNN.com

SO police had recent reports this guy was hearing voices and having some sort of mental breakdown. And he had reached out to Vetern Affairs for help with psychological issues. Please tell me what sense is there in arming someone like this? 12 dead bodies. We need to seperate the mentally unstable people from weapons. It doesnt make sense

[RedskinRat]

Already illegal.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Already illegal.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”

Hey what about better background checks maybe that would help ,ya know like at gun shows or with independent dealers ,anything would be better than innocent people dead, would you agree ?

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Hey what about better background checks maybe that would help ,ya know like at gun shows or with independent dealers ,anything would be better than innocent people dead, would you agree ?

Define 'better'. We already have shit in place, it's not enforced, more regulations will make no positive difference.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Define 'better'. We already have shit in place, it's not enforced, more regulations will make no positive difference.

Bet you're already aware, giantone can't do definitions well. Especially in this case where :

Navy officials said Mr. Alexis was given a general discharge in 2011 after exhibiting a “pattern of misbehavior,” which officials declined to detail. The year before, Mr. Alexis was arrested in Fort Worth for discharging a firearm after an upstairs neighbor said he had confronted her in the parking lot about making too much noise, according to a Fort Worth police report.

The police in Seattle, where Mr. Alexis once lived, said Monday that they had arrested him in 2004 for shooting the tires of another man’s vehicle in what Mr. Alexis later described to detectives as an anger-fueled “blackout.”

In this case, the closest definition to what "better" should be is "enforced". One would think there would already be plenty of background checks for a civilian contractor for the Navy anyways, but obviously there was a breakdown there...... But I'm sure giantone meant "more restrictions on everybody else even though it wouldn't have prevented this shooting (never fail to exploit a tragedy)".

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

One would think there would already be plenty of background checks for a civilian contractor for the Navy anyways, but obviously there was a breakdown there.

I didn't realize that when they do that kind of "background check"(employment) they see if you own a gun or guns ,wow, you are smart .

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Giantone

I didn't realize that when they do that kind of "background check"(employment) they see if you own a gun or guns ,wow, you are smart .

Another logical fail on your part, giantone. Seeing how he passed the background checks to work there, what makes you think the gun background check similarly enforced would have stopped him?

Why don't we work on not clearing / disarming people proven to be demonstrably crazy, before trying to disarm everybody else?