fe7cff15   
   XPost: alt.society.liberalism, talk.politics.guns   
   From: kurtnicklas@gmail.com   
      
   On Feb 20, 9:42 pm, Matt  wrote:   
   > Kurt Nicklas  wrote innews:6696a5b7-399   
   -4164-8b00-fa79c48bd375@k8g2000yqb.googlegroups.com:   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > > On Feb 20, 6:17 pm, Matt  wrote:   
   > >> RD Sandman  wrote   
   > >> innews:XnsA16D736B64DBho   
   > > pew...@216.196.121.131:   
   >   
   > >> > Matt  wrote in   
   > >> >news:kg377t$8kt$1@dont-email.me:   
   >   
   > >> >> RD Sandman  wrote in   
   > >> >>news:XnsA16D4819EC12Ehopewell@216.196.121.131:   
   >   
   > >> >>> Matt  wrote in   
   > >> >>>news:XnsA16CBFCC1AAE4matttellessprynetcom@78.46.70.116:   
   >   
   > >> >>>> RD Sandman  wrote in   
   > >> >>>>news:XnsA16CAC542BDE7hopewell@216.196.121.131:   
   >   
   > >> >>>>> "Oglethorpe"  wrote in   
   > >> >>>>>news:r_mdncktGtcnirnMnZ2dnUVZ_gCdnZ2d@mchsi.com:   
   >   
   > >> >>>>>> "Matt"  wrote in message   
   > >> >>>>>>news:XnsA16BB13437A9Amatttellessprynetcom@78.46.70.116...   
   >   
   > >> >>>>>> If someone goes to a surrounding state to avoid the laws in   
   > >> >>>>>> their   
   > >> >>>>>>> state of residence, they cannot LEGALLY purchase a firearm   
   > >> >>>>>>> Th   
   > > e   
   > >> >>>>>>> reason a dealer asks for a driver's license photo ID is to   
   > >> >>>>>>> check   
   > >> >> if   
   > >> >>>>>>> the purchaser is a resident of the state. If not, then an F   
   > > FL   
   > >> >> (by   
   > >> >>>>>>> federal law) must be involved from the purchaser's home   
   > >> >>>>>>> state.   
   > >> >> That   
   > >> >>>>>>> FFL will run a background check on the purchaser and ensure   
   > >> >>>>>>> that   
   > >> >> the   
   > >> >>>>>>> transaction meets all applicable laws in the state of   
   > >> >>>>>>> residence.   
   >   
   > >> >>>>>> Right. Like Laughner, right?   
   >   
   > >> >>>>>> ==   
   >   
   > >> >>>>>> You can't even spell his name right. So why should we care   
   > >> >>>>>> what you "think"? Loughner is a left fringer nutcase who   
   > >> >>>>>> passed the NICS. He shot Giffords because she is a blue dogh   
   > >> >>>>>> Democrat and isn't left fringer enough to suit him.   
   >   
   > >> >>>>> Loughner was apolitical. He was not a member of the left or of   
   > >> >>>>> the right. Don't be like our local sheriff Dupnik who tried to   
   > >> >>>>> paint   
   > >> >> him   
   > >> >>>>> as a Tea Partier.   
   >   
   > >> >>>>> He also passed NICS because he had not been examined by mental   
   > >> >> health   
   > >> >>>>> professionals although he had been expelled from the Pima   
   > >> >>>>> College campus for scaring his classmates and other infractions   
   > >> >>>>> (none involving a gun). His parents did nothing about the   
   > >> >>>>> letter they received from the college and neither did the PCSO   
   > >> >>>>> or TPD although both departments were aware of him from some of   
   > >> >>>>> his activities.   
   >   
   > >> >>>> Which brings up an interesting point, RD. Would you back a law   
   > >> >>>> which required you to have a mental health examination by an   
   > >> >>>> independent   
   > >> >>> group   
   > >> >>>> before a gun could be sold to you? And to have that exam   
   > >> >>>> repeated on some reasonable basis?   
   >   
   > >> >>> Nope. I already back laws that allow you to be involuntarily   
   > >> >> committed   
   > >> >>> for observation *IF* you display outward signs of mental   
   > >> >>> impairment. Loughner, Holmes, Cho and Lanza all did.   
   >   
   > >> >> And yet, one of the biggest problems is that most do NOT display   
   > >> >> any sort of outward sign. Or, if you prefer, you cannot always   
   > >> >> judge a book by its cover.   
   >   
   > >> >> Loughner, et al, already committed their crimes. How many more   
   > >> >> folk out there are going to?   
   >   
   > >> > Loughner displayed many signs of mental imbalance BEFORE he went   
   > >> > off. As did Cho and Lanza. I assume Holmes did also since he was   
   > >> > being seen by a shrink.   
   >   
   > >> Loughner did. But, really, RD, how many times do you read "He was   
   > >> such a nice young man, never did anyone any harm?" just before they   
   > >> go off?   
   >   
   > >> I don't think a mental exam is in any way infringement, and will   
   > >> likely catch a lot of these nutcases that slip through "loopholes".   
   >   
   > > It didn't catch leftwing Usenet crusader Steve Kangas before he set   
   > > off with a pistol to   
   > > murder Richard Scaife.   
   >   
   > And the blathering Snickers continues to make a fool of himself.   
      
   Check out today's post about the hypocrite Useneter Kangas, Bubkis.   
      
   After all the blathering from the Left about the 'violent right' turns   
   out the only Usenet creature to take up a gun to enforce his beliefs   
   was a "progressive".   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)