DonDonQuixote said:No TVs there. Not for crimes with guns.
Adding a bunk may result in violation of
federal law.
do you agree that prisions should be a place of comfort?
DonDonQuixote said:No TVs there. Not for crimes with guns.
Adding a bunk may result in violation of
federal law.
DonDonQuixote said:You build prisons. Have you seen one that
is a place of comfort? I haven't.
Depends on the prisonDonQuixote said:Most prisoners I know only get out of the cell for 1 hr/day.
Are you talking about violent or nonviolent criminals?
Interesting perspective. How does that jive with the fact that many jails in the US are essentially becoming the new asylums for the mentally ill. You might remember we discussed this before.papasmerf said:Don
Were it up to me I would bring back prison farms and the 16 hour work day for them. Less violence and fewer repeats
And yes warm, dry, 3 squares, education, medical and sports is pretty comfy.
Work is not required in most jails only free time..
Jus a different corner to hang at.
Asterix said:Interesting perspective. How does that jive with the fact that many jails in the US are essentially becoming the new asylums for the mentally ill. You might remember we discussed this before.
I’ve never really understood how an armed individual today, who is not part of any larger organization constitutes a “A well regulated Militia”.DonQuixote said:Back then, and even more recently, there was a standing militia
ready to be called to arms. Kinda like the ME and the militants
in Iraq today. We now have standing armies. Trained in
individual and unit combat skills.
someone said:I’ve never really understood how an armed individual today, who is not part of any larger organization constitutes a “A well regulated Militia”.
Once they get together with their well armed and regulated buddies, they become the militia.someone said:I’ve never really understood how an armed individual today, who is not part of any larger organization constitutes a “A well regulated Militia”.
Good question. All I know is doing nothing isn't going to help either.papasmerf said:How do you propose to get a count of the guns on the streets and collect them?
I do own one and your response makes no sense whatsoever.papasmerf said:Well then you should not own a gun.
How about not allowing people who own handguns to keep them at home? Target shooting types should be required to store their handguns at a safe storage facility right inside the shooting range. That way they don't have to transport them to and from the shooting range (ie: in the glove box of their car) and they are prevented from storing the weapons in their homes where burglars and their own kids can get them. Gun collectors are the worst because they often have dozens of handguns and may not belong to a shooting range. But they should still be required to keep their collections at approved storage facilities instead of their homes or offices.lookingforitallthetime said:Good question. All I know is doing nothing isn't going to help either.
You may have heard, we had a very successful Run Registry program up here in Canada. Maybe we could tweek it a bit![]()
Makes sense to me but still doesn't answer how to get the existing guns off the streets.slowpoke said:How about not allowing people who own handguns to keep them at home? Target shooting types should be required to store their handguns at a safe storage facility right inside the shooting range. That way they don't have to transport them to and from the shooting range (ie: in the glove box of their car) and they are prevented from storing the weapons in their homes where burglars and their own kids can get them. Gun collectors are the worst because they often have dozens of handguns and may not belong to a shooting range. But they should still be required to keep their collections at approved storage facilities instead of their homes or offices.
Approximately half the handguns on Toronto's streets were stolen from legitimate owners. So if we don't ban these guns outright, we have to get the guns away from houses and offices or do something to eliminate handgun thefts. Approved storage facilities at shooting ranges or wherever else they are allowed would have to be VERY secure, like inside a bank vault with armed guards around the clock. It is fine to say "handguns don't kill people - people do". If we really believed that, we would make gun ownership much easier and put the emphasis on responsible ownership - just like we do with cars. Cars don't kill people either - it is the drivers who cause traffic fatalities and it is the drivers who we punish. So we have to pass laws that recognize that keeping guns in houses where they can be stolen is reckless behaviour that won't be tolerated. Same with leaving the keys in your car so some 14 year old punk can steal it and kill people with it. Punish the thief but also punish the negligent car owner who created such a hazardous situation to begin with.
No it doesn't. It just removes about half of the current supply of guns that have been showing up on the street. We still need more enforcement, undercover police work, youth & school programs etc. - anything to reduce the gun supply and to prevent kids from wanting them in the first place.lookingforitallthetime said:Makes sense to me but still doesn't answer how to get the existing guns off the streets.
Remember, that at the time this was written, the whole concept of a United States was a very abstract one, at best.DonQuixote said:"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security
of a free state, the right of the people to keep and
bear arms, shall not be infringed."
The state has a right to maintain a militia.
How does that give the individual the right
to a private arsenal?
yes they would be labelled unlawful combatants and be locked for years on jerseyfrasier said:Remember, that at the time this was written, the whole concept of a United States was a very abstract one, at best.
The "Army of George Washington" would be more of a militia by todays standards.
If the Brits would have gotten a hold of some they wouldn't have been executed. There leaders of the revolution would have been hanged if caught, the Brits wouldn't even have bothered putting them in prison or trialed them.red said:yes they would be labelled unlawful combatants and be locked for years on jersey
Exactly.frasier said:Remember, that at the time this was written, the whole concept of a United States was a very abstract one, at best.
The "Army of George Washington" would be more of a militia by todays standards.
I was under the impression many of the guns acquired here are coming up from the U.S.. Without an equally aggressive campaign there, we'll see little change in supply here.slowpoke said:No it doesn't. It just removes about half of the current supply of guns that have been showing up on the street. We still need more enforcement, undercover police work, youth & school programs etc. - anything to reduce the gun supply and to prevent kids from wanting them in the first place.
I think here we have to agree to disagree.......I just don't agree with the notion that we have evolved to the point where there is no need for the people of a country to defend themselves.lookingforitallthetime said:Exactly.
This is why the 2nd Amendment is outdated.
The last time I looked this up, about half were smuggled and the other half were stolen from legitimate gun owners. Occasionally, burglars find a whole collection of guns like that guy in Oshawa who had 35 handguns stolen from his apartment or the lawyer who had over a dozen stolen from his office. Having 35 handguns kicking around in your apartment is beyond stupid.lookingforitallthetime said:I was under the impression many of the guns acquired here are coming up from the U.S.. Without an equally aggressive campaign there, we'll see little change in supply here.