General Discussion

farminator3000

(2,117 posts)

38. don't you have to kill multiple people to get life?

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 02:49 PM

Dec 2012

so..

show us a list of what you can get a mandatory life sentence for, if you are the expert

and

explain how you arrived at the conclusion that it is the one and only way.

also

here is another way so solve 'the problem'

a violent person (i don't care if be beat her with a hammer or a fucking zucchini and gave her bruises. but i DO care if he ever so much as punched his girlfriend, if he ever had one)

SHOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO OWN A GUN EVER. THE PUBLIC SHOULD KNOW THE PERSON IS DANGEROUS AND STAY AWAY FROM HIM.

here's a few more questions-
why is it 99% men that do these things?
do you own a prison?
life sentences are a good thing?
how many thousands of killers get released from prison a year and don't do on killing sprees?
so are saying releasing people from jail turns people into lunatics, really. ever heard of a parole board?

have fun with the ???

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

160 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So the firefighter shooter was using a Bushmaster .223 [View all] RomneyLies Dec 2012 OP

Yup nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #1

And buy all the ammo you want over the internet! nt Walk away Dec 2012 #3

Yes - Do We See A Pattern Now - Just Waiting For All The NRA Apologist Excuses cantbeserious Dec 2012 #2

They'll say he still obtained them illegally RomneyLies Dec 2012 #4

A law without a means of enforcement is nothing more than a suggestion. politicat Dec 2012 #30

How about Paroles have to be regulated? Yavapai Dec 2012 #37

If you require all private transactions to have a background check and go through an FFL dealer RomneyLies Dec 2012 #41

have you ever heard of pissing in a cup? farminator3000 Dec 2012 #45

This message was self-deleted by its author zzyzxter Dec 2012 #96

You joined today to post that? RomneyLies Dec 2012 #97

What was it? Thanks. uppityperson Dec 2012 #106

...and you are believable? Yavapai Dec 2012 #112

And you are sticking up for a one post wonder RomneyLies Dec 2012 #115

Reading what the hidden posts were, I'd say yes. Insulting perhaps, but believable? yes. uppityperson Dec 2012 #122

I have little tolerance for CT RomneyLies Dec 2012 #124

now you're talking about raising the tax revenues SemperEadem Dec 2012 #52

no, he isn't. neither one of you make sense farminator3000 Dec 2012 #70

republicans SemperEadem Jan 2013 #160

he wasn't supposed to have weapons but just waiting to hear how he got them. Taking bets here... wordpix Dec 2012 #79

And all three are easier than stealing them n/t RomneyLies Dec 2012 #99

We're on the same side on this -- politicat Dec 2012 #110

but isn' that the point? booley Dec 2012 #158

Now is not the time for a gun control debate!!! Dirty Socialist Dec 2012 #13

We must first rehash, distract and bemoan the definition of assault. morningfog Dec 2012 #22

All private gun transactions should require a background check. Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #5

The only answer is to require ALL transactions to go through an FFL dealer. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #6

Why would that be the "only" answer? Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #8

Anything can be claimed if a private citizen uses the internet to run the check. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #10

Perhaps if the transfer query were tied to a registration. Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #34

Conducted by who? The seller? You trust sellers?? Logical Dec 2012 #87

If the seller's not trustworthy... Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #94

If they do and it is discovered down the road RomneyLies Dec 2012 #101

I concur. Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #149

Well the seller has no incentive to do a background check. The FFL dealer does. Logical Dec 2012 #103

They do if you institute significant criminal penalties for not doing so... Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #148

Agreed. LP2K12 Dec 2012 #154

I wish I could recommend more than once nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #7

They always have an "arsenal." Chorophyll Dec 2012 #9

For the record, gungeon folks have been calling for an open to public NICS aikoaiko Dec 2012 #11

That's a non-solution soluiton RomneyLies Dec 2012 #14

The federal government cannot mandate that hack89 Dec 2012 #17

Oh yes they can! RomneyLies Dec 2012 #21

So why didn't they? hack89 Dec 2012 #23

Three letters explains why they didn't RomneyLies Dec 2012 #33

How does that stop someone from introducing legistlation? hack89 Dec 2012 #46

HAH! RomneyLies Dec 2012 #49

But that does not regulate private sales beyond gun shows hack89 Dec 2012 #51

They don't make it out of committee pipoman Dec 2012 #67

hack89 is correct former-republican Dec 2012 #27

There has been calls for a federally mandated closure of the gun sho loophole for the past decade RomneyLies Dec 2012 #43

It's not the NRA former-republican Dec 2012 #48

It is the NRA. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #50

Any one in congress can introduce any bill they want. former-republican Dec 2012 #53

And that reason is spelled N-R-A n/t RomneyLies Dec 2012 #54

no, they can't farminator3000 Dec 2012 #73

They can introduce a bill that says "you have to annoy people on the internet everyday for no kwassa Dec 2012 #114

you are the NRA farminator3000 Dec 2012 #71

So what kind of rights are in the Bill of Rights? nt hack89 Dec 2012 #95

How many other rights in the BOR contain a constraint? RomneyLies Dec 2012 #102

Meaning well equipped and trained. hack89 Dec 2012 #131

Then use the original arms. Muskets are fine. Anything else is not. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #139

didn't see anything about a right to be intentionally obtuse. go away. farminator3000 Dec 2012 #111

Every right in the BOR is a civil right. hack89 Dec 2012 #132

Only ONE right in the BOR has a restrictive clause RomneyLies Dec 2012 #134

Which does not mean what you want it to mean. hack89 Dec 2012 #135

It means what the SCOTUS says it means RomneyLies Dec 2012 #138

You keep believing that hack89 Dec 2012 #140

Nobody wants to take away your weapons RomneyLies Dec 2012 #141

Do I really have to point out all the posts calling for a ban and confiscation? hack89 Dec 2012 #142

Combined with a proper database it sure as hell would have RomneyLies Dec 2012 #143

So you advocate the government tracking all mentally ill people in America? hack89 Dec 2012 #144

Yes RomneyLies Dec 2012 #145

are anti-depressants on your list as well? n/t Matt_R Dec 2012 #151

Can't they hold back federal funds for states that do not comply? Like they do for drinking age, etc Logical Dec 2012 #89

Why do you think Congressmen would ever consider such a thing? hack89 Dec 2012 #93

To fix the background check issue. This should not even make the NRA mad really. Logical Dec 2012 #104

Congressmen will not punish their own states. hack89 Dec 2012 #133

They do for other issues. Like alcohol. Logical Dec 2012 #136

Time will tell, I guess. nt hack89 Dec 2012 #137

I'm not sure why. The penalties could be the same. aikoaiko Dec 2012 #64

Interesting atreides1 Dec 2012 #12

jump to this- and what difference does it make where he bought anythin? that isn't THE SUBJECT HERE farminator3000 Dec 2012 #58

Inb4 'he was taking antidepressants too'...nt SidDithers Dec 2012 #15

The firefighter shooter should never have been released from prison slackmaster Dec 2012 #16

He was convicted of first degree manslaughter RomneyLies Dec 2012 #18

Yeah, he didn't really mean to kill his grandma when he beat her repeatedly with a hammer. slackmaster Dec 2012 #19

More likely the prosecuting attorney was crap. n/t RomneyLies Dec 2012 #20

or related to him farminator3000 Dec 2012 #28

don't you mean sarcasm master, slack? farminator3000 Dec 2012 #26

He was just trying to hang a picture of the grandkids, and missed. Atman Dec 2012 #44

Wow! lexw Dec 2012 #56

ha farminator3000 Dec 2012 #59

So rather than regulate semi auto weapons, just have mandatory life sentences for all crimes? Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #24

No, only for heinous crimes like beating one's grandmother to death with a hammer slackmaster Dec 2012 #39

please explain farminator3000 Dec 2012 #61

Shoulda... coulda... woulda... 99Forever Dec 2012 #36

don't you have to kill multiple people to get life? farminator3000 Dec 2012 #38

I believe that in New York premeditated murder with a weapon enhancement can result in a life... slackmaster Dec 2012 #40

for pete's sake. WTF????? farminator3000 Dec 2012 #25

"...served 17 years in prison for the 1980 hammer slaying of his grandmother." Atman Dec 2012 #29

If he had shot his grandmother rather than beating her to death, he might still be in prison slackmaster Dec 2012 #31

Shame On You. (nt) Paladin Dec 2012 #35

the article I read this am speculated he stole them Patiod Dec 2012 #146

Any word on the sister he was living with? Lady Freedom Returns Dec 2012 #32

No, they haven't found her yet. I don't have much hope she is alive. LisaL Dec 2012 #42

I'm ignorant of the "gun show loophole"... We have gun shows here often... MrMickeysMom Dec 2012 #47

In most gun shows, there is no requirement for a background check prior to selling a gun. n/t RomneyLies Dec 2012 #55

not entirely accurate melm00se Dec 2012 #63

Which is why tons of "private owners" put their arsenals on display at gun shows RomneyLies Dec 2012 #66

How do they do this? MrMickeysMom Dec 2012 #88

PA is better regulated. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #92

"gun show loophole" is a misnomer. OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #57

so we are just supposed to believe what you type? weird, i found those words on the internets farminator3000 Dec 2012 #76

What I wrote were the federal requirements. OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #113

That's why the FOPA needs to be repealed, including the Hughes Amendment RomneyLies Dec 2012 #116

I don't mind the FOPA. I think a 100% background check would be good though. OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #121

Only way to let go of the Hughes amendment is to require federal registration. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #123

Your post contradicts your own OP. former9thward Dec 2012 #125

Your erroneous assumption is, he bought the guns in NY RomneyLies Dec 2012 #127

An out of state resident can't buy at gunshows. former9thward Dec 2012 #129

Depends on the state. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #130

Uh, thats federal law. N/T beevul Dec 2012 #147

Thanks... MrMickeysMom Dec 2012 #90

where are you? are you in america, or.. farminator3000 Dec 2012 #74

I reside in PA MrMickeysMom Dec 2012 #91

Correct, you live in one of the better states. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #117

Ok, let's say you pass a law that requires such checks The Straight Story Dec 2012 #60

you're suggesting people be allowed to sell guns at garage sales, FFS? bettyellen Dec 2012 #65

Not suggesting anything, but see here: (you can sell them at garage sales) The Straight Story Dec 2012 #68

You appeared to be supporting it, and that shit needs to stop. bettyellen Dec 2012 #69

So my question stands then: The Straight Story Dec 2012 #72

registration regulations, and enforcement. bettyellen Dec 2012 #75

Now we are getting somewhere.... The Straight Story Dec 2012 #77

Just firearms. n/t RomneyLies Dec 2012 #81

wow, paranoia and willful ignorance of what gun control advocates are asking for.... bettyellen Dec 2012 #83

Ignorant of what they are asking for? Yes...WHAT are they asking for? The Straight Story Dec 2012 #119

Liability theKed Dec 2012 #126

Both criminal and civil liability. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #128

What if the seller removes any identifying marks? Matt_R Dec 2012 #152

Cannot be done RomneyLies Dec 2012 #156

jinx, buy me a coke! farminator3000 Dec 2012 #82

You would be committing a crime RomneyLies Dec 2012 #78

answer your own questions farminator3000 Dec 2012 #80

Your "buddy" robs a liquor store, gets caught, gives you up, you go to jail. Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #105

Better yet, his buddy does not even HAVE to give him up. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #108

I guess his Man Card was re-issued. catbyte Dec 2012 #62

I believe the focus should be why Jenoch Dec 2012 #84

ANYTHING to take the focus away from the guns. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #85

Its still a vailid point Travis_0004 Dec 2012 #153

All would be moot if his access to guns was made 123 time harder uponit7771 Dec 2012 #107

This is a gun eilen Dec 2012 #86

There is no "gunshow loophole"- it is a private sales loophole. We need to fix it. Cronkite Dec 2012 #98

That's the colloquial name given to the private transfer loophole. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #100

It is called a gun show loophole because all disqualified individuals know Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #109

And he left a note saying that he wanted to kill everyone in the neighborhood malaise Dec 2012 #118

What video games was he playing? geomon666 Dec 2012 #120

Seriously..... Cronkite Dec 2012 #159

i'm just gonna throw this out there farminator3000 Dec 2012 #150

These suggestions LP2K12 Dec 2012 #155

there has to be a very distinct line drawn between state and federal farminator3000 Dec 2012 #157