| Author | Post |
|---|
CJ
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Oct 20th, 2007 |
| Location: | VT, AK |
| Posts: | 60 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 19th, 2009 01:52 am |
|
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20090918/NEWS02/909180310/1007/Essex-parents-push-for-stricter-gun-laws
The parents' website contains links to such groups as the Brady Campaign. The comments on the article were largely against the idea. The parents are quite misinformed since state law already prohibits giving a handgun to a minor under age 16 without parental consent, posession by a minor without parental consent, and of course there's federal law on the matter. I hope our legislature ignores them.
|
Task Force 16
Campaign Veteran
|
Posted: Sat Sep 19th, 2009 06:08 am |
|
In reading the bio on this kid, it appears that he was an outstanding achiever. That sometimes makes for an unhappy person.
I have to wonder, if the parents have aksed themselves, "What could they have done to prevent this? What did they miss that would have given them warning that something wasn't right with their son?"
Were they such high achievers themselves that they didn't take time to really "know" their son, so they might have noticed a change?
This may not have been a suicide either. Since there were no witnesses, it could have been a muder by one of his "buddies" and they made it look like a suicide.
If this kid wanted to off himself, he didn't need a gun to do it.
I'm not attempting to judge the parents since I know nothing about them. Just posing some questions.
I think the anti-gun groups may have found themselves a pair of greiving "useful idiots" to help push more anti-gun laws.
|
modificationvt
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jul 13th, 2008 |
| Location: | Burlington |
| Posts: | 39 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 20th, 2009 03:01 pm |
|
the first kid broke the law by taking the gun, he also broke the law by bringing it to a school, the second kid broke the law by handling the gun. so clearly what we need is more laws.
Suicide is equally as tragic no matter what the means of death are, but why is it that when some one hangs themselves we don't scream "we need stricter rope laws"
also, would these people be wanting stricter car laws if their kid had died in a car accident? we have more high school kids die each year from car "accidents" then we do from suicide.
My other feeling is, if this kid really wanted to kill himself it would have happened with or without the gun.
I hope that Vermonts pre emptive gun laws put these people to a stop.
|
aadvark
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Aug 25th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 103 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 21st, 2009 09:39 pm |
|
NO, VERMONT LAWS ARE FINE AS THEY ARE.
VERMONT AND ALASKA DO NOT NEED ANY MORE FIREARMS LEGISLATION THAN WHAT THEY HAVE NOW, WHICH FOR THE MOST PART HAS BEEN SHOVED DOWN THEIR THROATS FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, GONE AWRY, THAT COMPLETELY IGNORES STATES RIGHTS TO START WITH.
IT IS NOONES FAULT IF 'XU' KILLED HIMSELF, IF 'XU' WAS GOING TO KILL HIMSELF HE WOULD HAVE DONE SO ANYWAY.
I DO NOT CARE HOW SAD THE STORY IS ABOUT 'XU', PEOPLE DIE ALL THE TIME. MOST PEOPLE WHO DIE USUALLY HAVE NO SAY IN THE MATTER AS IT IS SUDDEN OR INADVERTANT. 'XU' KILLED HIMSELF ON PURPOSE, SOMETHING THAT IS NOONES FAULT OR RESPONSIBILITY OTHER THAN HIS. HE MADE THAT CHOICE, NOONE FORCED HIM TO DO SO.
IT DOES NOT MATTER IF 'XU' WAS 5 YEARS OLD, 15 YEARS OLD, OR... 75 YEARS OLD, HE MADE THAT DECISION FOR HIMSELF.
NOONE IN VERMONT NEEDS TO SUFFER ANY KIND OF CIVIL OR CRIMINAL PENALTY OR BE FACED WITH ADDITIONAL FIREARMS LEGISLATION BECAUSE OF 'XU'S' ACTIONS.
BESIDES... IF THE PARENTS ARE ANGRY OR FRUSTRATED ABOUT THIS, THEN, SOMEBODY SHOULD CONFRONT THEN TO MAKE GOOD AN ACCOUNT OF PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY. PERHAPS, MAYBE, 'XU' WOULD NEVER HAVE KILLED HIMSELF IF THE PARENTS WERE MORE INVOLVED IN THIS MATTER. MADE WHAT VERMONT NEEDS IS MORE PARENTING LAWS INSTEAD, HUH, AS OPPOSED TO MORE FIREARMS LAWS!
THEN AGAIN, THOUGH, TRY EXPLANING THAT TO THE BRADY CAMPAIGN AND ALL OF THEIR NARROW MINDED SHEEPISH FOLLOWERS!
|
cbackous
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Sep 23rd, 2009 01:13 pm |
|
aadvark wrote: NO, VERMONT LAWS ARE FINE AS THEY ARE.
VERMONT AND ALASKA DO NOT NEED ANY MORE FIREARMS LEGISLATION THAN WHAT THEY HAVE NOW, WHICH FOR THE MOST PART HAS BEEN SHOVED DOWN THEIR THROATS FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, GONE AWRY, THAT COMPLETELY IGNORES STATES RIGHTS TO START WITH.
IT IS NOONES FAULT IF 'XU' KILLED HIMSELF, IF 'XU' WAS GOING TO KILL HIMSELF HE WOULD HAVE DONE SO ANYWAY.
I DO NOT CARE HOW SAD THE STORY IS ABOUT 'XU', PEOPLE DIE ALL THE TIME. MOST PEOPLE WHO DIE USUALLY HAVE NO SAY IN THE MATTER AS IT IS SUDDEN OR INADVERTANT. 'XU' KILLED HIMSELF ON PURPOSE, SOMETHING THAT IS NOONES FAULT OR RESPONSIBILITY OTHER THAN HIS. HE MADE THAT CHOICE, NOONE FORCED HIM TO DO SO.
IT DOES NOT MATTER IF 'XU' WAS 5 YEARS OLD, 15 YEARS OLD, OR... 75 YEARS OLD, HE MADE THAT DECISION FOR HIMSELF.
NOONE IN VERMONT NEEDS TO SUFFER ANY KIND OF CIVIL OR CRIMINAL PENALTY OR BE FACED WITH ADDITIONAL FIREARMS LEGISLATION BECAUSE OF 'XU'S' ACTIONS.
BESIDES... IF THE PARENTS ARE ANGRY OR FRUSTRATED ABOUT THIS, THEN, SOMEBODY SHOULD CONFRONT THEN TO MAKE GOOD AN ACCOUNT OF PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY. PERHAPS, MAYBE, 'XU' WOULD NEVER HAVE KILLED HIMSELF IF THE PARENTS WERE MORE INVOLVED IN THIS MATTER. MADE WHAT VERMONT NEEDS IS MORE PARENTING LAWS INSTEAD, HUH, AS OPPOSED TO MORE FIREARMS LAWS!
THEN AGAIN, THOUGH, TRY EXPLANING THAT TO THE BRADY CAMPAIGN AND ALL OF THEIR NARROW MINDED SHEEPISH FOLLOWERS!
I TALK IN ALL CAPS BECAUSE IT MAKES ME FEEL IMPORTANT!
|
aadvark
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Aug 25th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 103 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 23rd, 2009 08:37 pm |
|
No, actually I had just discussed this issue in several other forums.
It has recently been brought to my attention that all capital letters is against the rules of this forum, and it is considered shouting.
I am not too Internet savvy, and I did not realize this when I first started posting my blogs in several forums.
I wil adjust my writing style to consist of standard capitalization only. Make no mistake, I do not consider myself any more important than anyone else. Also, I do not consider my thoughts or ideas any more important than anyone elses either.
Forgive me for writing in all capital letters, and know that I will change my writing style effective immediately.
|
PavePusher
Regular Member
| Joined: | Thu Apr 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Tucson, Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 663 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 24th, 2009 05:59 am |
|
aadvark, it's not against the rules, but, as you said, it is the internet equivalent of "shouting" and is generally reserved for brief points of emphasis.
Ettiquite aside, you said some very valid things and, as a legal Vermont resident (haven't lived there for 19 years, thanks USAF...) I don't wish to see our laws changed for the worse either. Although I think we should set up an optional permit system, like Alaska's, to give us some reciprocity with other states until the Thune bill goes through. Getting legal to carry outside of the state can be a REAL PAIN IN THE KEISTER!!!
(Note the proper use of all caps...  )
Carry safely, friend!
|
modificationvt
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jul 13th, 2008 |
| Location: | Burlington |
| Posts: | 39 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 24th, 2009 03:35 pm |
|
there are classes you can take in Vermont to get Florida and Utah carry permits. Hell a copy of your police record and a $20 check will get you a NH permit.
Having a Vermont specific voluntary permit is just one step closer to mandatory permitting. Just like the gun storage laws that are being proposed by Xu s family is just one step towards gun registration. (after all how do you enforce gun storage laws without knowing who has the guns)
|
aadvark
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Aug 25th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 103 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 24th, 2009 06:18 pm |
|
I think that The United States Congress should make good a Law that says if you have a permit in any State, it is good in every State. However, I am fully aware this bill failed in Congress by... I am not sure, but I think it was two votes!
Aside from that, each State should adapt Vermont/Alaska style carry Laws. All Adult Law-abiding Citizens should be allowed to carry anything, anywhere, at anytime, without any further restrictions... Laws, etc..
The United States Federal Government should cut... no questions asked... complete and total exemptions for anyone with a Permit to carry on Federal Lands, Federal Property, Federal Parks, Federal Buildings, Federal Military Bases, etc.. The ONLY off limits place in this Country should be, errr... Area 51..., at least this is what I hear.
Maybe the USAF fellow could shed some top secret light on that....
|
HankT
State Researcher
|
Posted: Thu Sep 24th, 2009 07:52 pm |
|
aadvark wrote: No, actually I had just discussed this issue in several other forums.
It has recently been brought to my attention that all capital letters is against the rules of this forum, and it is considered shouting.
I am not too Internet savvy, and I did not realize this when I first started posting my blogs in several forums.
I wil adjust my writing style to consist of standard capitalization only. Make no mistake, I do not consider myself any more important than anyone else. Also, I do not consider my thoughts or ideas any more important than anyone elses either.
Forgive me for writing in all capital letters, and know that I will change my writing style effective immediately.
Typing in all caps is of extremely minor importance, aardvark. The important thing is your participation the discussion and the quality of your arguments.
Most of the "NO ALL CAPS!" guys forget or don't know that...
This is a discussion forum about guns and gun rights. An informal forum. This ain't no academic conference or United Nations assembly...
Posts in all caps don't bother me. I read 'em anyway. I look for ideas, information and wisdom...
|
PavePusher
Regular Member
| Joined: | Thu Apr 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Tucson, Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 663 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 24th, 2009 10:22 pm |
|
aadvark wrote: I think that The United States Congress should make good a Law that says if you have a permit in any State, it is good in every State. However, I am fully aware this bill failed in Congress by... I am not sure, but I think it was two votes!
Aside from that, each State should adapt Vermont/Alaska style carry Laws. All Adult Law-abiding Citizens should be allowed to carry anything, anywhere, at anytime, without any further restrictions... Laws, etc..
The United States Federal Government should cut... no questions asked... complete and total exemptions for anyone with a Permit to carry on Federal Lands, Federal Property, Federal Parks, Federal Buildings, Federal Military Bases, etc.. The ONLY off limits place in this Country should be, errr... Area 51..., at least this is what I hear.
Maybe the USAF fellow could shed some top secret light on that....
It's all weather balloons. Really.
Just don't stare at the blinky lights for too long... 
|
aadvark
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Aug 25th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 103 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 25th, 2009 06:35 pm |
|
What goes blink in the night?...
|
junglebob
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Nov 1st, 2009 11:57 pm |
|
modificationvt wrote: there are classes you can take in Vermont to get Florida and Utah carry permits. Hell a copy of your police record and a $20 check will get you a NH permit.
Having a Vermont specific voluntary permit is just one step closer to mandatory permitting. Just like the gun storage laws that are being proposed by Xu s family is just one step towards gun registration. (after all how do you enforce gun storage laws without knowing who has the guns)
Cost of NH is now $100. Any gun course by an NRA certified instructor is good for a Florida LTC, cost isn't much more than NH, its good for 7 years. Also proof of military training works for Florida, forget the form #. Florida is also good in about 28 states.
|
eddyys
Regular Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 8th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 56 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 9th, 2009 04:12 pm |
|
cbackous wrote: aadvark wrote: NO, VERMONT LAWS ARE FINE AS THEY ARE.
VERMONT AND ALASKA DO NOT NEED ANY MORE FIREARMS LEGISLATION THAN WHAT THEY HAVE NOW, WHICH FOR THE MOST PART HAS BEEN SHOVED DOWN THEIR THROATS FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, GONE AWRY, THAT COMPLETELY IGNORES STATES RIGHTS TO START WITH.
IT IS NOONES FAULT IF 'XU' KILLED HIMSELF, IF 'XU' WAS GOING TO KILL HIMSELF HE WOULD HAVE DONE SO ANYWAY.
I DO NOT CARE HOW SAD THE STORY IS ABOUT 'XU', PEOPLE DIE ALL THE TIME. MOST PEOPLE WHO DIE USUALLY HAVE NO SAY IN THE MATTER AS IT IS SUDDEN OR INADVERTANT. 'XU' KILLED HIMSELF ON PURPOSE, SOMETHING THAT IS NOONES FAULT OR RESPONSIBILITY OTHER THAN HIS. HE MADE THAT CHOICE, NOONE FORCED HIM TO DO SO.
IT DOES NOT MATTER IF 'XU' WAS 5 YEARS OLD, 15 YEARS OLD, OR... 75 YEARS OLD, HE MADE THAT DECISION FOR HIMSELF.
NOONE IN VERMONT NEEDS TO SUFFER ANY KIND OF CIVIL OR CRIMINAL PENALTY OR BE FACED WITH ADDITIONAL FIREARMS LEGISLATION BECAUSE OF 'XU'S' ACTIONS.
BESIDES... IF THE PARENTS ARE ANGRY OR FRUSTRATED ABOUT THIS, THEN, SOMEBODY SHOULD CONFRONT THEN TO MAKE GOOD AN ACCOUNT OF PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY. PERHAPS, MAYBE, 'XU' WOULD NEVER HAVE KILLED HIMSELF IF THE PARENTS WERE MORE INVOLVED IN THIS MATTER. MADE WHAT VERMONT NEEDS IS MORE PARENTING LAWS INSTEAD, HUH, AS OPPOSED TO MORE FIREARMS LAWS!
THEN AGAIN, THOUGH, TRY EXPLANING THAT TO THE BRADY CAMPAIGN AND ALL OF THEIR NARROW MINDED SHEEPISH FOLLOWERS!
I TALK IN ALL CAPS BECAUSE IT MAKES ME FEEL IMPORTANT!
CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOOOOL
|
Current time is 11:05 pm | |
|
|
|
