Skip to comments.
Treating gun owners like sex offenders in the name of "sunshine"
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/007050.htm ^
| 3/13/2007
| agitate
Posted on 03/13/2007 1:50:26 PM PDT by Agitate
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-86 next last
To: AppyPappy
Good morning.
"My threat level is almost nil."
In this age of meth and illegal immigration, I don't believe any place is truly safe.
It sounds like you don't need a gun at all. Fortunately, for the moment, it is a matter of choice, eh.
Michael Frazier
61
posted on
03/14/2007 8:12:30 AM PDT
by
brazzaville
(no surrender no retreat, well, maybe retreat's ok)
To: antiRepublicrat
They must tell you it is voluntary. This was just decided in United States District Court for Eastern District of Pennsylvania Stollenwerk vs. Jeffrey Miller, et. al. and the Pennsylvania State Police can no longer require a person give their SSN. Also, local sheriffs must issue and new permit that does not include the SSN if requested.
It all began when Mike Stollenwerk purchased a gun in PA and refused to give his SSN. He was denied and the some law enforcement people showed up at his home to check on him. He filed suit, lost in state court, but won the appeal in federal court. Contact me privately and I will email you the court documents.
62
posted on
03/14/2007 8:17:28 AM PDT
by
mombrown1
(The Second Amendment is the reset button for the First.)
To: mombrown1
Contact me privately and I will email you the court documents. Thanks for the tip. I just got it for myself, good read.
Here's a tip when googling decisions or getting them on FindLaw, they never use "vs." only "v."
To: Yo-Yo
roanoke.com: The Daily Pulse
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Shedding some light on concealed handguns
Total number of votes: |
3273 |
Agree: |
2%
|
|
Disagree: |
98%
|
|
|
The Daily Pulse is an online survey of those who choose to participate and therefore is not a scientific sample. |
|
Virginians should know who has concealed handgun permits.
|
Thank you for voting!
|
64
posted on
03/14/2007 8:40:41 AM PDT
by
300magnum
(We know that if evil is not confronted, it gains in strength and audacity, and returns to strike us)
To: Egon
There are plenty of reasons people choose to carry weapons: fear of a violent ex-lover, concern about criminals or worry that the king of England might try to get into your house.
I guess he's saying that CCW holders might be nutters. But the author isn't taking sides? Right.
65
posted on
03/14/2007 9:01:53 AM PDT
by
wysiwyg
(What parts of "right of the people" and "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?)
To: Teacher317
Let's see, it takes a few seconds on Google to find:
Full address, including ZIP, and yes you can get it on one of the mapping services, with directions.
Multiple phone numbers and email addresses.
Where he graduated from and when, and what degree (MA, philosophy).
Then he worked for the Bend Bulletin from 2001 until 7/05, then was unemployed until he started working for his current paper in 11/05.
For a few dollars at any one of many agencies I could have SSN, bank account numbers, etc.
To: Smokin' Joe
And the "papers" can't understand why their circulation is going down the tubes.
67
posted on
03/14/2007 5:14:47 PM PDT
by
oyez
(In politics perception is reality.)
To: Egon
We're going to find out who in the New River Valley has a concealed handgun permit."Being necessary for the free state, the right to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed..." Looks like everybody has one to me.
68
posted on
03/14/2007 5:24:38 PM PDT
by
meyer
(Bring back the Contract with America and you'll bring back the Republican majority.)
To: samm1148
"That's because gun control isn't about public safety: It's advocating for criminals pure and simple. Not one of those anti-freedom groups pushes for harder sentences and reduced appeals on criminals, not one."
I think that you are only seeing parts of the picture. Both gun control and refusing to hold criminals responsible are part of the larger mindset of not holding anyone responsible, because all "evil" is caused by the "capitalist" system. Anything that helps to "bring down" the "system" is an advance to liberal idiots. They worship at the alter of Castro, Mao, and Stalin.The only people to be held "responsible" are those who support capitalism, and being "held responsible" means punishing them in any way possible. It doesn't matter if it is illegal, immoral or destructive; all that matters is that those who oppose their coming to power are hurt or hindered.
To: patton
"It appears that the list included things like the home address of the Chief Justice of the VA State Supreme Court.
I imagine that is a legal issue for the paper."
That made them a lot of friends in high places.
To: marktwain
I suspect it didn't, actually.
71
posted on
03/14/2007 6:01:07 PM PDT
by
patton
(In spit of it all...)
To: mombrown1
"Also, I do not believe that the state police have the right to maintain a database. They also do not have the right to require Social Security Nos. The SSN must be given voluntarily per federal law"
I agree, but let me tell you the way that the law is administered. You do not have to give your SSN, but if you do not, you will not receive a CCW. That is how they interpret "voluntary". The same system is in effect in Arizona. I complained about it 12 years ago, when we started. The response was, "It is for law enforcement use. If you don't give us your SSN, we will not give you the permit."
Who has the money for a test case?
To: patton
"I suspect it didn't, actually."
Sorry, I should have put the "sarcasm" notification on.
To: marktwain
74
posted on
03/14/2007 6:26:35 PM PDT
by
patton
(In spit of it all...)
To: marktwain
I've been in the NRA almost two decades now. Too often I see pro-gun groups being bogged down by clip sizes, caliber of weapons, and do they look like a military weapon.
The whole issue comes down to behavior. I think the liberals engage in these arguments for the same reason a magician forces you to pay attention to his one hand--don't look at what he is holding in the other hand.
We need to ask the anti-freedom groups why they don't support tougher laws for criminal behavior. Do many guns have an effect on crime? The liberal argument would be: But even a legal gun owner might be robbed; his guns taken for use by a criminal. But missing is the fact that the criminal made a deliberate decision to break into a house and steal guns.
Is my reasoning simplistic? Yes it is. But often the simplest reason is the correct one. Occam's Razor says: All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one.
Maybe the simplest solution for criminal behavior is to more effectively punish and control those who engage in it.
75
posted on
03/14/2007 6:30:45 PM PDT
by
samm1148
(Pennsylvania-They haven't taxed air--yet)
To: 3AngelaD
"I thought editorial writers were supposed to have been around long enough to have gained some perspective and experience of the real world. Apparently not."
FRiend, I'd say this chump just got a whole, great, BIG, bunch of experience of the real world, don't you think?
I should think 135,000 people would make an adequately large group for a class-action suit, too.
76
posted on
03/14/2007 7:48:36 PM PDT
by
Old Student
(We have a name for the people who think indiscriminate killing is fine. They're called "The Bad Guys)
To: oyez
It seems people will always need something to line the birdcage, put under the garbage can, crunch up for packing material, or put under their cat's litterbox.
Without a newspaper, I don't think I could train a puppy.
And what of all those naked fish leaving the market...
No, I suppose there will always be a place for the 'dead tree media', not that I regret that.
I just wish the writing/reporting was good enough that I regretted using the newspaper for those other jobs instead of reading it.
77
posted on
03/14/2007 8:49:34 PM PDT
by
Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
To: Smokin' Joe
I imagine that is a legal issue for the paper I imagine their 'legal issues' are just beginning.
One of those who wrote in their comments section thanked the columnist (sarcastically, I presume) for exposing them to Islamic Jihad and Hamas, who now have their home address if they used the database.
One of those whose names and addresses the paper published was one of the justices of the VA. State Supreme Court.
Like you said, their 'legal issues' are very likely just beginning....
78
posted on
03/15/2007 6:15:35 AM PDT
by
archy
(Et Thybrim multo spumantem sanguine cerno. [from Virgil's *Aeneid*.])
To: Freedom_Is_Not_Free
I don't need a permit to speak. Not yet.
79
posted on
03/15/2007 6:24:36 AM PDT
by
unixfox
(The 13th Amendment Abolished Slavery, The 16th Amendment Reinstated It !)
To: Publius6961
Publius, I did a search on my last name and city before the web page was pulled. It provided my full name and street address.
80
posted on
03/15/2007 6:41:57 AM PDT
by
Jonah Hex
("How'd you get that scar, mister?" "Nicked myself shaving.")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-86 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson