Walmart and Dick's Raise Minimum Age for Gun Buyers to 21 - page 5

Read Article in its entirety... Read More

  1. by   toomuchbaloney
    Trump just showed that he listens to the 30 million voices that the NRA put into Trump's campaign coffers. Of course, we weren't supposed to find out that all those millions of dollars originated in Russia.
  2. by   herring_RN
  3. by   elkpark
    Quote from Lil Nel
    Just another day in Trumplandia.
    Yes, and that's what makes it so sad ...
  4. by   Lil Nel
    More proof that the idea of arming teachers in the classroom is nothing more than insane.


    Gun-trained teacher accidentally discharges firearm in Calif. classroom, injuring student - The Washington Post
  5. by   toomuchbaloney
    It seems to me that a gun safety class should be taught at a shooting range.
  6. by   azhiker96
    Background checks are not as valuable when 500,000 fugitives are deleted from the system because they may have not crossed state lines.

    FEINSTEIN GETS SHOCKING ANSWER: Obama DOJ Forced FBI to Drop 5��K Fugitives from NICS Background Check Database [Video] - American Journal Review
  7. by   azhiker96
    Quote from Lil Nel
    More proof that the idea of arming teachers in the classroom is nothing more than insane.


    Gun-trained teacher accidentally discharges firearm in Calif. classroom, injuring student - The Washington Post
    Yes, that reserve police officer certainly did a bonehead move. Does that mean all reserve police officers should be unarmed? Maybe the take away is police training is inadequate. This wasn't a teacher who received training for gun handling in that job and setting.
  8. by   MunoRN
    Quote from azhiker96
    Background checks are not as valuable when 500,000 fugitives are deleted from the system because they may have not crossed state lines.

    FEINSTEIN GETS SHOCKING ANSWER: Obama DOJ Forced FBI to Drop 5��K Fugitives from NICS Background Check Database [Video] - American Journal Review
    Which is why background check laws need to be changed if we believe these 500,000 people should be in the system.

    What the laws is that "fugitives" should be part of the NICS database. There were 500,000 people with outstanding felony warrants that were added to the database, the problem is that having an outstanding warrant doesn't make someone a fugitive. A fugitive is someone who physically leaves the jurisdiction they are wanted in to avoid prosecution, so if they don't leave then the are not a fugitive, they have a warrant but are still located in the jurisdiction they have a warrant in.

    The DOJ can't make up imaginary laws to enforce, so if we disagree that these people should have been removed then the law needs to be changed to support doing that, yet the argument often is that we don't need new laws we just need to enforce the laws that exist, while simultaneously blaming inadequate laws as being the problem.
  9. by   chare
    Quote from MunoRN
    [...]
    The DOJ can't make up imaginary laws to enforce, so if we disagree that these people should have been removed then the law needs to be changed to support doing that, yet the argument often is that we don't need new laws we just need to enforce the laws that exist, while simultaneously blaming inadequate laws as being the problem.
    What law are you referring to? This was an administrative decision by the Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel to standardize the definition of fugitive that was used within the DOJ. This need came about as a result of differing opinions of fugitive used by the FBI and ATF. From the Washington Post article cited below:
    The FBI, which runs the criminal background check database, had a broad definition and said that anyone with an outstanding arrest warrant was prohibited from buying a gun. But ATF argued that, under the law, a person is considered a fugitive from justice only if they have an outstanding warrant and have also traveled to another state.
    This decision was initially made during Mr. Obama's administration. The definition was further narrowed by the DOJ after Mr. Trump's inauguration. As this was an administrative decision, the DOJ could easily reverse this decision and adopt the prior definition used by the FBI.

    Tens of thousands with outstanding warrants purged from background check database for gun purchases
  10. by   MunoRN
    Quote from chare
    What law are you referring to? This was an administrative decision by the Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel to standardize the definition of fugitive that was used within the DOJ. This need came about as a result of differing opinions of fugitive used by the FBI and ATF. From the Washington Post article cited below:

    This decision was initially made during Mr. Obama's administration. The definition was further narrowed by the DOJ after Mr. Trump's inauguration. As this was an administrative decision, the DOJ could easily reverse this decision and adopt the prior definition used by the FBI.

    Tens of thousands with outstanding warrants purged from background check database for gun purchases
    The DOJ can't actually just decide to violate a law. The law states that "fugitives" can be added to the NCIS system, and previously this had been interpreted to mean anyone with an outstanding warrant, it was then correctly noted that the accepted definition of "fugitive" involves someone who has fled a jurisdiction, so they can't continue to use the interpretation that "fugitive" could apply to someone who has not fled the jurisdiction they are wanted in, to do so would be to knowingly violate the law.
  11. by   Lil Nel
    Quote from azhiker96
    Yes, that reserve police officer certainly did a bonehead move. Does that mean all reserve police officers should be unarmed? Maybe the take away is police training is inadequate. This wasn't a teacher who received training for gun handling in that job and setting.
    I don't understand your comment. This is a teacher, who happens to also be a reserve police officer. He teaches math and another subject.

    Supposedly, he would have received more training in gun handling, etc., as a reserve police officer than a teacher armed with a gun.

    If gun training for reserve police officers is inadequate, what on earth makes you think teachers would receive superior training?

    They won't. Remember, nobody wants to pay teachers.
  12. by   azhiker96
    I doubt that teacher/reserve police officer was taught to point a gun up and pull the trigger to see if it is loaded. That was a very poor choice. Standard protocol is to never place your finger on the trigger unless you intend to fire or to check function after assembling an unloaded weapon.

    However, I wouldn't condemn the idea of teachers carrying concealed based on this one incident. If we applied that same standard to nursing we would soon have little to do at work.

    I think we should value our children enough to provide them with at least the level of security we use at sporting events, concerts, federal buildings, and many inner city schools. Our government needs to provide funding for metal detectors and armed security at every public school.

    I'm not a fan of making armed teachers a first line or only line of defense. They already have enough to do with lesson plans, classroom instruction, assessing kids for learning issues, watching for behavioral problems, and dealing with student on student violence or student on teacher violence.
  13. by   itsybitsy
    Quote from MunoRN
    The DOJ can't actually just decide to violate a law. The law states that "fugitives" can be added to the NCIS system, and previously this had been interpreted to mean anyone with an outstanding warrant, it was then correctly noted that the accepted definition of "fugitive" involves someone who has fled a jurisdiction, so they can't continue to use the interpretation that "fugitive" could apply to someone who has not fled the jurisdiction they are wanted in, to do so would be to knowingly violate the law.
    It was a change in terms, for both organizations to use. The law stated "fugitive from justice", which I guess was up to interpretation. Now it is not. Neither one was breaking the law, and if left, would have been within the law.

    Where did you get felony warrants in your first post? Past and pending felony charges with warrants would prohibit a person from obtaining a firearm anyways.

    But yes, I want the current laws to be followed. I don't want new gun laws. People need to follow the current laws. Criminals don't follow the laws.

    https://www.justice.gov/sites/defaul...03/guncard.pdf
    Last edit by itsybitsy on Mar 18

close