Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    Saratoga, CA
  1. I was an active poster about 10 years ago, when I was taking an EMT B class. I got an email about DustDevil dying a couple years ago. Sorry to hear him go. I came back to see how things are going here and it looks like a ghost town. Did something happen? Did the board just slowly drop in popularity over time? Looks like my history from 10 years ago is wiped? New management?
  2. Ok, so earlier today I went to the university gym to see what the Judo program's all about, and I ended up needed EMS. Yeah. [s:c744136a0c]They have a tournament this weekend, I ate a lot just beforehand, and they worked us really hard, and[/s:c744136a0c] ok I'll just admit it, I'm really physically unfit. But I had a strange case of something, and I was wondering if you guys have an opinion. So because I had a late class I ate dinner basically 30 minutes before the Judo session. (bad idea). The "Sensei" guy told us to drink lots of water, but I just ate and biked really far and so my
  3. But to sue someone for selling a gun, there would first have to be gun control laws in place, wouldn't there? The seller of guns are just selling the guns, not pulling the triggers. Of course without gun control laws there could be a case for pain and suffering or something, but I'm not a lawyer. Can anybody with a legal background comment on this?
  4. This may be where the snafu happened, since "mentally defective" does not fit perfectly into either category, although this is the only article that mentions it so I can't vouch for its accuracy.
  5. We must be some kind of long-lost opposite twins, because nothing I've read said he was involuntarily committed. In fact, I've read many times that he was NOT involuntarily committed. He was not declared outright mentally defective, but as I've said, he was declared "an immediate danger to himself", which falls into the range of “adjudicated as a mental defective.” Credit companies are more thorough with history because there is a greater incentive. One, they want to be absolutely certain that they get their money and two they want to find more ways to charge you money. Giving you a cre
  6. hmmm.... half right. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/20/us/20cnd...nyt&emc=rss He was not involunatrily commited, but declared "an immediate danger to himself", which falls into the range of “adjudicated as a mental defective,” which means he shouln't have been able to buy a gun. The background check should have caught it, but apparently there's a problem with the reporting methods and the court ruling didn't show up. Thanks for bringing that up. I had no idea. The point still is, you cannot and do not call him a "resident alien" and try to pretend that this is some kind of pr
  7. I haven't read this thread at all, so apologize if this has already been brought up, but I find how poorly the poll was made humorously entertaining.
  8. He was a permanent legal resident, don't pass him off as a foreign problem. In virginia, there IS no difference between legal permanent resident and citizen in terms of buying a gun.
  9. I guess the original statement was to contrast the idea that you should definitely buy a gun because you'll be automatically safer. When I was in drivers ed class, and in the California Drivers Handbook it is made explicitly clear to us that driving is a privilege. Well, in the CDH it's not explicitly stated, but if you read it, the phrase "driving privilege" is commonplace, while the phrase "driving right" is non-existant. This is probably because some people told them to write it that way. The best official explaination I can find on why it has been decided this way is here: I
  10. Well, I guess I over-zealously assumed that you were in a juristiction that didn't ban guns. However it appears that the original purpose was lost over the various responses. I am not for gun prohibition, but for strict gun control. As I said before, the necessity of a gun is situational (largely by region), so, (I guess I should add "If guns are legal in your area" at this point), then figure out if your situation warrants a gun. Yes, the default position is that everyone gets to drive just as the default position in many places is everyone gets to own a gun. But in both scenarios
  11. Right. And by saying that to you I was assuming you personally had that choice. I was using the word "reasonable" to mean people that are able to accurately assess risk and make an educated decision on whether or not it is a good idea to own a gun. The point was that, you can't just have "decide for yourself" as a rule (or, law,) for who should and shouldn't have a gun, because not everybody is reasonable enough to make a correct decision. This is why we have gun control. Just like the statement "assess your risk and decide for yourself whether it is a good idea to be driving at th
  12. The problem is, that sentence only works as an advisory statement and will never be workable as legal code, because 1. It assumes that all people are reasonable. (Whereas I used it in addressing Michael and I'm relatively certain that he's a reasonable person.) 2. It does not address when and where you are allowed to use your gun, which is the subject on which this thread was started and on which legislation was recently passed.
  13. Well Michael, I've got a question for you. Can you imagine a situation in which you wish you carried an AED around? or an epi-pen? or a pocket mask? Now, how many people do you know that DO carry around medical equipment? As I said before, in my opinion, the necessity of a gun is very situational. Me, I should never carry a gun because I'm extremely implusive, have no self control, and live in an area where the likelyhood of needing a gun is something like 1/n as n approaches infinity. (Both when I'm at my college dorm and when I drive back home.) I would feel safer without a weapon
  14. To say that a higher or lower crime rate between locations is only because guns weren't banned or guns were banned is a bad way to interpret statistics, since there are an INCREDIBLY large number of confounding variables. But if you really want to, http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/ Index is supposedly the sum of violent crime, property crime, murders, forcible rapes, robberies, aggrevated assaults, burglaries, larcenies, and vehicle thefts. Since the Index doesn't really add up, I added my own category (Sum), which is the sum of all columns besides year, Population, and Index. Co
  • Create New...