Shooting at Florida high school

Good point. Care to come up with some sort of regulatory proposal that doesn't provoke the "gun-grabber" outcry? I'm willing to listen. As an aside Heller strikes me as a workable (not perfect, but so what?) framework for gun regulation. Somehow, it seems that no one wants to acknowledge it from any side.

Sure...but I can't promise it won't provoke the "slippery slope" outcry. Universal background check, and improving the NICS system would get broad support IMHO...vocal minority not withstanding. I would personally be willing to discuss the magazine capacity issue, but that brings up the "B" word again.

You mean letting the states come up with regulations?

In a revolution I would rather have ten men with guns than one with a vision.

Does that go for GOP types who say that shit while molesting teenage girls and snorting come off some twink's tight ass?

Of course. I have nothing but disdain for them.

Given your propensity for annoying people, D, I wouldn't want any armed men around me at all if I were you.

We appreciate your precision, Captain Pedantic.
Perhaps you should invest in some adult education courses on how to understand the general meaning of simple statements that everyone else gets instictively.

If you see a completely false statement and yet "instinctively" think it is correct, there is something deeply wrong with your instincts. And when the other party insists that they have a truth but it can't be said, and thus all their obviously false and often insane statements should be accepted anyway, you know they have lost the argument.

I don't see any problem with state regulations. Just don't violate the right to have arms. Idaho would no doubt have different ideas about what's appropriate from Illinois , but what's wrong with that? The real problem with a state by state patchwork quilt is that guns would be smuggled from lenient states to more restricted ones. Thus, a federal floor might be the way to go with the individual states able to get more restrictive if they wish, again without violating the 2nd Amendment as interpreted by Heller.

Sure, but that's pretty much the status quo right now.

Yup, that' the way it's always been. The laws are different in every state. That's why that nice lady from PA got arrested at a traffic stop when she accidentally crossed into NJ - she was carrying legally and licensed in PA, but as soon as the NJ cop found out she was armed, he decided to destroy her life.
That's why the recent movement for reciprocity laws.

Funny how "personal responsibility" stops the minute a gun-carrier fucks up as to where they're allowed to bolster their ego with a deadly lump of metal and where they ain't, huh?

Perhaps they should stop focusing so much on the 2nd and more on local ordinance (by which I don't mean the preferred firearm)?

Well, the milsurp market would probably be a lot better off, for one.

1) She was licensed and trained to carry concealed. Personal responsibility.
2) She decided to be armed and trained because she was a single mother of two small children whose home had been robbed twice. Personal and family responsibility.
3) When pulled over, she followed her training by informing the officer she was a licensed concealed carrier, and was wearing her firearm, and presented her PA carry license. Legal responsibility.
4) I kind of doubt ego was a factor - more likely responsibility for her children was the factor.
5) You're an idiot.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/07/ordeal-shaneen-allen-editors/
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/12/pardoned_by_christie_woman_pushed_for_change_to_us.html

Either she wasn't well trained, or she decided to ignore her training, since she broke the law.

How did 'having her life ruined', as you say, improve her family?

Again, the training obviously wasn't sufficient to keep her from breaking the law. And 'legal responsibility' means accepting the consequences when you do break the law.

Again, if she was moved by responsibility for her kids, not breaking the law would have been higher on her list.

Did her training not include a segment on Don't Go To NJ Packing?

What I'm hearing here is that Forbin is pointing out how weed should be legalised across the US because what if a legal user from one state drives into one where it's illegal while carrying.

As I recall the incident, she crossed the line inadvertently.

So you're saying she deserves to have her children ripped away from her and be thrown in jail because, despite doing her best to follow the laws she knew, she slipped up on a point she missed? You're a horrible person.

Fine by me!
Hey, if it's legal to drive in all states with one license, why not guns too?

It's legal to drive in all states with one license because all the states chose to have reciprocity...not because of some Federal mandate. If all the states can agree on concealed carry reciprocity, then they should go for it.

Edited to remove the redundant word.

Nope. I am saying it is a direct and deliberate lie to say that she did her best to follow the law. She acted incredibly irresponsibly. Holding her up as an example is corrupt.

None of that says she deserves what is being done to her. I don't want her family to be torn up. But remember that her kids are still alive. Whatever motivation for legislative change you get from this case, you should be a hundred times more motivated to protect actually responsible, innocent parents from having their kids gunned down at school. If you don't, you expose any appeal to kids and family as mere cynical rhetorics.

I'd actually agree with that myself.

Forbin is absolutely right about NJ's hamfisted, scattershot enforcement on gun laws. Tell them you have a gun, get arrested. Don't tell them, get arrested.

I'm not a gun lover, but when people do exactly what they're supposed to and still get arrested, that pisses me off.

Isn't it funny that a tourist who mistakenly gets out of his car for a routine traffic stop and almost gets shot, gets blamed for "not knowing the customs" of the country their visiting, whilst a woman with a concealed carry is given a pass when she could plausibly say she didn't know the law in New Jersey?

https://reason.com/blog/2018/04/04/why-is-an-assault-weapon-ban-more-real-t

A better analogy would be having a license to drive on the roads of one state and assuming that gives you the right to drive over any bit of land in another.

I don't know where "full faith and credit" begins and ends.

Let's take driving. A license from one state is good in any other, even if you're younger than the second state's driving age. When a state requires cars to be inspected, that only applies to cars registered in that state; cars from other states don't need to pass an emissions test to be allowed to cross over. I'm from a state that doesn't require front license plates, and if I drive into a state that does, I still won't be pulled over for not having one.

On the other hand, every state DOES get to set different speed limits, different policies on cell phone use while driving, different regulations about daytime running lights.

So where's the line?

It's painted on the road

Do they not teach you that in your state?