If Machine Guns are illegal

Read a Canadian newspaper (http://nationalpost.com/) and figure it out for yourself. (No, they haven't.)

My experience as a teacher is different.

Uh huh. My working in the public schools for three decades led me to support school vouchers. I hope you were more thoughtful than to jump to conclusions when your were a LEO.

 

Does your question mean you don't "do" sarcasm? You made a number of rather uninformed comments about computer technology.

They prolly even taught use how to use a soldering iron after a couple of years.

It ain't rocket science, pal.

 

Hughes amendment is may 16 1986.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/16/canada-passes-law-criminalizing-use-of-wrong-gender-pronouns/

Speaking of the National Post.....

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/bru...aw-to-use-reasonable-pronouns-like-ze-and-zer

So, yes, they have.

I'm often bemused at how disconnected teachers are from the harsh realities of the world.

Well, school vouchers aren't the problem. A governmental campaign to take away people's knowledge of how their nation is supposed to work, and what rights and liberties they have under the Constitution, IS the problem. I didn't just pull that idea out of the air either; I've been a student of history my whole life, and one can track the evolution of how history has been taught and what information they deign to share with students over many years and see exactly what is happening. As a LEO, it was about having as much knowledge as you could possibly get before going into any situation, but you knew that sometimes your ability to react in a split second could be the difference between life and death.

 

Read the legislative summary about Bill C-16, not the hysterical propaganda.

https://lop.parl.ca/About/Parliamen...s=C16&Mode=1&Parl=42&Ses=1&source=library_prb

You're reading an opinion piece. Egads.

I've run a business, worked for large corporations, taught school, and run political campaigns. Teachers are your typical middle class folks. They don't see what poor people see, but they're not much different from anyone else.

A campaign by whom? Teachers? That would be a stupid claim.

History explains, analyzes, but doesn't judge. You judge and call it history rather than correctly identifying it as how you feel.

There are people in the public school system who want to teach their version of history, but they aren't the history teachers. They activist types. History teachers are the bulwark in the system against the manipulation of the curriculum.

Well, knowing your community and what causes people to have the values they do is no doubt important. It is in teaching.

 

Having been married to an elementary school teacher and currently married to the mathematics chair of a Midwestern university you've heard of, I can attest to this - in spades.

 

Sorry, that has NOT been my experience with teachers. I have interacted with teachers extensively, and my wife currently works as one... and she is regularly appalled at the worldview and political viewpoints espoused by her coworkers; viewpoints almost universally driven by a unicorns and rainbow sprinkles.

Check your reading comprehension. I said it was a governmental campaign, and it is. Government inevitably seeks to seize more power for itself, and a careful manipulation of education is just one weapon it can use to undermine political freedom and liberty and make people more willing to accept government micromanagement of their lives.

Dead wrong. History is clear, but when history is rewritten by the powers that be we should be asking ourselves why such should be happening, not just blindly accept it as truth because those who would be our masters claim it to be.

Well, if the "history teachers are the bulwark" then y'all are falling down on the job.

It's also important in law enforcement to know when someone's story doesn't fit the facts.

 

Then let us propose a compromise on the matter.

Anyone, absolutely anyone, who has ever been convicted of a felony offense, will be required to allow the implanting of an RFID chip in the palm of their left hand as a condition of their release from prison back into society, thus meaning it is quite easy to identify a prohibited individual with just a scan of the technology that supposedly exists. These hypothetical chip and biometric readers can be installed at the locations of all currently operating federally licensed firearm dealers, paid for by the federal government, and if a prohibited individual even approaches the location of the dealer, law enforcement is automatically alerted, and the individual is arrested and charged with attempted possession of a firearm, and given another ten years in prison.

Is such considered acceptable? If not, then why not?

 

And nowhere in the history of the united states, has it ever been recognized that states actually have rights.

Which does not change the fact that they are only, at best, presumptively lawful, until held otherwise. They are not actually legal, nor are they constitutional, until such time the united state supreme court concludes such.

It is, however, the obligation of the one putting forth the argument against a constitutional right, to defend their presented position. The burden of proof is always on the one making the proposal, not those that the proposal is being presented to.

 

What may or may not be wanted by yourself is of no relevance. Wants are immaterial.

​

The site has been read, but there is nothing indicating that the proposed test would only cost twenty dollars per individual. Until such proof is presented, it is nothing more than supposition on the part of yourself.

What may or may not be wanted by myself is of no relevance to the discussion. What is being addressed is the actual fact that any individual has the potential to be quite dangerous to the public. But such is not a legal basis for depriving them of their constitutional rights, on the assumption that they may one day do something to harm others.

Just as the position of yourself is being established to the contrary? There is information to show that gang members exist who do not already have established criminal records and felony convictions?

The obvious question of "so what?" must be asked with regard to the above. What ultimate, meaningful difference does such make if law enforcement encounters individuals who are legally carrying firearms? Legal activity is not a legitimate basis for believing that a crime is either being committed, or is about to be committed. The burden of proof is not on the people of the united states to demonstrate that they are committing no crime, nor should such be the case.

And those who are sensitive and incapable of operating in the real world where their feelings are not regarded as the most important thing, will always feel that they are victims no matter what is done.

Again. Think. Meaning that such is not actually known to be fact, it is simply presumed to be the case. Conjecture and nothing beyond conjecture is all that is possessed by yourself on this particular matter.

Technology is indeed understood. That is why it is not believed that the proposal on the part of yourself holds any merit or legitimacy.

Let us cut through the rhetoric and addressing individual points, and get right to the heart of the overall matter. The proposed solution on the part of yourself is nothing more than an over-reliance on technology of questionable validity and accuracy, and the drastic expansion of a government that is already far too big and cumbersome to be effective at doing what it is supposed to do, all based on the desperate hope that doing such will lead to some perceived, measurable increase to public safety, all because of the hysterical screaming of those who cannot function in the real world where their feelings and perceptions are not the most important thing in the world. That is ultimately what is being proposed by yourself boils down to.

Keep in mind this is the same government that concluded Omar Mateen and Nikolas Cruz, two mass shooters who were known for boasting about their desire to murder others, presented no credible threat to the public, and did not intervene when doing such would have saved lives.

 

Canadians are not going to jail for not using genderless pronouns.

Teachers tend to be middle-class liberals. They're not radicals.

This is pretty wooly stuff.

I have a book for you ... E.H. Carr, "What is History?"

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias=aps&field-keywords=what+is+history+carr&rh=i:aps,k:what+is+history+carr

I don't think you understand what's being taught in public school history courses.

 

It's not the best technology because RF chips can be shielded and faked.

 

Back with the same nitpicking?

 

I see. You're going to play word games, again, and then presume to lecture. You make asinine comments about senility and act like senile people with firearms in of little or no concern.

Supposition you requested. I offered my view because I have expertise in this area. I've written a lot of computer software (I taught computer science for years), designed tests, and have a good idea of how much a test to screen for dementia would cost to administer. You were only interested in nitpicking and playing cross-examiner.

We already remove the license to drive of people with dementia, and it's a good basis for taking firearms out of their hands. Screw their "constitutional right" to have a deadly weapon.

Yeah, and I'm prepared to get it if you're prepared to put up $1,000 against my $50,000 where you get the $50,000 if I can't find a gang member without a felony conviction and I get your $1,000 if I can find one. You won't put up the money because you know there is someone.

And because some of them won't ever be entirely happy, it's a great reason to dig in your heels to the point they comprise a majority and restrict open carry. Brilliant.

You...

The technology is used in the Nexus Pass.

Propaganda BS.

Outrageous mischaracterization, hyperbole.

Non Sequitur.

Not one even half-intelligent solution from you. Nada. Zip. Zilch.

 

You are a narcissistic person and not worth the effort.

Regardless of your inane trolling, I have an Associates degree in electronics, as well as countless hours and certifications.

I made no opinions on computer technology.
Check my posts.

 

It is merely being recognized and pointed out that they are not the only group that should be concerned about, if the basis being used is the potential to be dangerous.

It does not matter how good the screening process is if it cannot be afforded. Cost of the screening was asked for, which could not be supplied by yourself. Being able to write in code does not amount to anything related to knowing about medicine, or the related cost of such. For the proposal to have actual merit, then it must be easily affordable, otherwise it is discrimination on the basis of income.

Operation of a motor vehicle on a public road is not a constitutional right, it is a privilege granted by government, and subject to numerous restrictions that have little relevancy to safety.

Off topic and irrelevant nonsense.

A more accurate comparison is telling them to cease their sniveling, cease their whining, cease their crying, and actually grow up and become adults, as the real world will not cater to their weaknesses.

Except for the fact that it is true.

Except for the fact that it was proven to actually be fact, during the administration of the previous president of the united states.

And yet it is confirmed fact. Omar Mateen admitted to the FBI that he wanted to murder people, that they did nothing about it.

Such is because it has been recognized on the part of myself that no solutions exist, nor can be made to exist, when the topic of discussion is focused exclusively on firearms, rather than on the individuals that choose to misuse them for their own gains. It is an issue that pertains exclusively to the individual, not the tool they choose to utilize. And until such time that the united states chooses to get serious about such topics, and stop being a nation of excuses for bad behavior, nothing can be done on the matter. The real world does not care about those who commit crime because they claim to have had a bad childhood, or believe they are victims of an unjust system that supposedly forced them to engage in illegal activity at a young age.

 

Time will tell.

Sorry, but you're dead wrong on that too. My wife is a teacher, and she's surrounded by the most mindlessly left-wing sheep you could ever imagine. Hell, they had a security training seminar to start this most recent school year, and her colleagues were whining about suing the school because having to think about a possible crisis event at the school made them feel "triggered". They wanted to argue with the police officers teaching the course, saying they thought they needed to step out in front of the shooter waving their hands so the shooter would know they wanted to talk to him and he would stop shooting so they could try to dialogue with him.

No, it's perfectly valid stuff; easily documented by analyzing the evolution of history texts and what our children are being taught today versus what they were taught just a few decades ago.

Well, seeing as how my wife works in the public schools and I've actually seen the textbook of what's being taught in public school history courses today you'll forgive me if I don't think you know what you're talking about; despite your claims to the contrary.

 

There are no tests in Medicine that are billed to Patients for $ 20 since the Patient is simultaneously billed for many related costs.
Hence why an M.R.I. cost is over 5 thousand dollars.

 

I have an 85 year old neighbor that makes many claims, perhaps true many years ago, however, today at his age, obviously not so much, as he claimed he could remove a car engine in 15 minutes.

 

Next thing you're going to tell us you know what a superheterodyne receiver is.

 

All that was covered in basic radio classes, and My Amateur radio license test, amplitude modulation super het receivers,
, B.F.O.s, I.F. amplifier circuits, what is or was your point ?

 

Sarcasm.

 

You're a disciple?

 

Yeah, sure--you tell 'em. You're a genius, soon to be police chief.

How many use terms like "triggered?" Damn few.

I doubt very many challenged the police officer.

You're telling a history teacher about history textbooks? I wonder if they had a patrol hat large enough for you.

 

No one would ever hire me to be chief. I'm no politician, and the most viable tactical skill guys like that have is knowing what to kiss, whose to kiss, and where to kiss it.

With the notable exception of my wife, the entire teaching staff was a bunch of mewing, whining, self-absorbed leftists without a molecule of real world common sense between them.

And you'd be wrong about that too.

Frankly, I have little reason to believe you are what you claim to be, and care less and less as time goes on. Yeah, I'm telling you about history textbooks, since you clearly know nothing about them.