Muscatine

Proof?

I have been posting here nearly 120 months. My total replies on record are 4,168. That is 34.7 replies per month average.

Hiroad, for example, has been here 45 months. His total replies on record are 2,139. That is 47.5 replies per month average.

NEDL, for example, has been here 78 months. His total replies on record are 3,133. That is 40.2 replies per month average.

And yet...mallcontent has only been here 36 months tomorrow. Its total replies are 2,258. That is 62.7 replies per month average.

That's about 30% more than hiroad's, 50% or so more than NEDL's, and nearly double what I post as replies. And all that in the shortest overall amount of time.

But BS, you've chosen only three from the right.   There are many more.   To make it fair and balanced, I should respond to all of them equally.

BS

Stench

The fox

Darylmaxen

gta1

hechta

hiroad

logic

mobaydave

nedl

nigel

opinionated

BDEye

They add up to over 14,000 posts.   Over six times what I've done.   I'm falling behind.   Must devote more time to this.

Mal when I first read your reply I sat and laughed and then felt bad for you since you are someone so misinformed and unreasonable.

"You boys can defend this guy's right to bear arms if you like, but I take the position it should have been denied."

My first question Mal would be on what do you base the denial of his right to bear arms?

We deny the right to bear arms to many people now.   Children, felons, mental cases, and others.   Surely we can deny this guy a gun.   Mental condition might apply.

Unless you can prove there was any legal reasoning he was given the same consideration as anyone else.  The law does not generally apply to "might" or else the prisons would be full of people simply because they "might" commit a crime.

Who, in your opinion, has the right to bear arms?

Most sane people with the exceptions noted above and there are others.   But they shouldn't have the right to carry them  loaded wherever they go.   And shoot anybody they think is theatening.

Others? kindly elaborate.  The law is already on the books to deny the right to purchase and bear arms to people that are not sane, if it is provable.  They do not have the right to carry them wherever they go, any privately owned business or place has the right to deny access to anyone they want.  Noone has the right to shoot anybody simply because they THINK they are threatening.

If you regulate everyone's right to bear arms how do you remedy the fact that there are millions of guns out there now in private possession?

Confiscate them.

All I can say here is, oh my God where has your mind gone?

If there were at least one person in that theater with a concealed weapon could the outcome have been different?

Who knows.   The guy had some pretty good body armor.   If more people started shooting there could have been more  deaths.   If there were several people who started shooting, they might shoot each other.   How would they know who's side they were on?   If I were in that theater while shooting was going on and a guy a few rows away pulled out a gun,  I just might shoot him.

I've seen no reports that he had "some pretty good body armor", I have seen reports that he was wearing body armor.  Generally when people talk about body armor that consists of a vest alone, ( although there are pants and head protection also )anyone properly trained knows that the main body cavity is not the only target.  If after proper training you still would say something as stupid as "If I were in that theater while shooting was going on and a guy a few rows away pulled out a gun,  I just might shoot him." then you should not consider carrying a weapon, you're not one of those we want with a gun.

Why do you Democrats always jump on the bandwagon after the fact?

We've been on the bandwagon long before the fact as you call it.

But you only release your venim after one of these isolated incidents.  You seem to think that this type of isolated incident should make it proper to get carried away.  Perhaps anyone and everyone should not have a car, they have killed far more. 

I believe this is a horrible tragedy and am at a loss for words for the people and their families.  This is a terrible thing and I wish we had a magic wand that allowed us to know how and when this type of thing is going to happen.  So far by all indications there was nothing that alerted law enforcement to the fact this person was going to do such a thing.

Please join the rest of us in feeling for the people and their families and quit making stupid gallant statements like this.  But if you do have that magic wand that says for some real reason other than your stand against guns that he should not have the right to bear arms I will withdraw that last sentence.

No magic wand available.  But better background checks would help.

The backround checks can only reveal what is to be found.  If the person has not had any involvement with law enforcement or the mental health professionals then there is nothing to reveal there is any legal reason to deny them.  The same can be found for many of the incidents that have happened, there was no prior reason to suspect the person.