Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: SHOOTINGS

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Ray,
With all due respect, I think this is a false argument that is over-tried on
the American people with the sole intent into scaring them into allowing
expanded misuse of the terms of the intent of the original 2nd Amendment to
the Bill of Rights. We are not Australia and in our history since the
signing of the Constitution there has not been one amendment removed from
the original Bill of Rights. Constitutional Lawyers and Judges hold these
basic rules as the foundation for all future clarification of their
ambiguity in relationship to the state of evolution in history. Nobody will
take away your handguns or weapons under the protection of the original Bill
of Rights, but they can if you misuse your weapons. 
Your argument is based on labeling those who disagree as anti-gun and in all
of my arguments, I pointed out that I am pro-gun but believe that at the
current state of affairs we may be better off without them if we can not
control the misuse. 
How many legal hand gun owners in our society use their weapons to deter
crime or prevent an unjust government from taking control? Compared to those
who have been harmed by legal or illegal weapons, the answer is probably
not. If you have not killed, then to confront someone who is about to attack
your family may be more likely to get you and your family killed once you
hesitate in the face of padimonium and fear.
I've said the rest of what I might add in my other post today.
Dennis
 
 
 
 
 
Dennis S. Wish, PE
California Professional Engineer
Structural Engineering Consultant
C-41250 (Exp. 3/31/07)
dennis.wish(--nospam--at)verizon.net
http://structuralist.spaces.live.com
 
 
This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent
responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and return
the original message to us at the above e-mail. Thank you.
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Raymond Shreenan [mailto:rshreenan(--nospam--at)adelphia.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 12:24 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: SHOOTINGS

Dennis and Gary:

I totally agree on back ground checks for mentally unstable people in 
addition to those with criminal records and there should be a well 
established data base for ease of checking an individual prior to a gun 
sale.  I also believe in limiting sales to weapons that are not assault 
types.
I have a problem with registration because if and when the anti gun people 
successfully get legislation approved to mandate that all gun owners must 
register their weapons, only law abiding citizens will do it and if they 
don't they will become criminals.  Furthermore when and if the state or 
federal government decides to confiscate all hand guns and other weapons as 
they did in Australia, they will know who has them from registration records

and again, only law abiding citizens will give up their weapons leaving the 
playing field in favor of criminals that will still have their weapons. 
Most criminals that use guns obtain them illegally, have by passed back 
ground check and their weapons are not registered. They are not caught until

they are arrested for carrying or for use of a firearm while committing a 
criminal act.  Registration in that case has no effect.  Washington DC has 
outlawed hand gun possession and they have one of the highest crime rates if

not the highest involving weapons.

Regards,
Ray Shreenan
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gary L. Hodgson and Assoc." <ghodgson(--nospam--at)bellnet.ca>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 4:40 AM
Subject: Re: SHOOTINGS


> Dennis & Ray,
> Ray's statement about guns not being registered by criminals is correct. 
> It also doesn't matter.  If all weapons were registered, then a trail is 
> provided to find out where the criminals acquired their weapons.  In 
> countries with strict gun controls, there are not only fewer deaths, but 
> more of the bums resting in jail for gun possession, taken out of action 
> and identified.  That's why the cops are in favour of gun control.  As for

> the mentally unstable, you will never be able to eliminate them from doing

> something such as VT, or in our case, Dawson College just a few months 
> before VT; just hopefully make it harder to get guns.
> Gary
>
> Dennis Wish wrote:
>> Monday, April 23, 2007 Ray,
>> I don't particularly see a need to apologize for speaking out on issues 
>> that
>> affect us all. As I stated before, we should not be politicizing this act
>> but rather able to discuss it as protection of humanitarian. There are
>> several things that can be done legally to protect the rights of gun 
>> owners,
>> and to help mitigate the illegal use of weapons. I agree that while
>> "criminals" are not likely to register weapons, there is a need in every
>> state to insure that a weapon has a unique signature (other than barrel
>> matching to the rounds) that leads to a document identifying the 
>> responsible
>> owner of the weapon (whether he or she is involved in the illegal use or
>> not). So the issue becomes a legal rather than political matter to create
>> tremendously greater penalties for those who commit a crime with an
>> unregistered weapon as well as the casual owner of a weapon who either 
>> loses
>> the weapon or does not secure it against theft or use by another family
>> member that leads to a crime. There should be no second chance for the 
>> use
>> of a weapon (any weapon including knives) in a criminal act. If the 
>> killer
>> took his life, then his family should be tried to acertain their
>> responsibilty in the act of his or her growth that led to the illegal use

>> of
>> the weapon. For example, the student at VT had a history since childhood 
>> of
>> some psychological behaviour that was recent enough to have prevented his
>> ownership and registration of a hand gun. In this case, he legally
>> registered the weapons and his state of mind was never considered to be
>> released to any agency that might have prevented him from obtaining the
>> weapons. This could simply be a federal registry or database - after all,
>> there is one already on each of use that approprate agencies can access 
>> to
>> verify existing conditions for evaluation of health insurance. In fact, 
>> most
>> of our personal records that companies use for billing charges are 
>> already
>> in the hands of outsourced labor in India and China. While we claim to
>> respect the privacy of medical records, there is no actual protection in
>> countries such as India or China to respect our laws. This was proven 
>> true
>> by the letters many of us received from investment houses, credit 
>> companies
>> and even medical billing that found violations of privacy in the 
>> outsourcing
>> of labor to other countries. We also know that it is difficult to protect
>> Copyrights of software products in these countries when knock-offs or
>> pirated media is made available at a fraction of the price.
>> Read Thomas Friedman's book "The Earth is Flat" to understand how 
>> negatively
>> (in the readers eyes) Globalization is affecting us. Friedman takes the
>> other side of the argument, disregarding the effect on US Labor and 
>> Services
>> but praises the world growth in underdeveloped countries by the 
>> outsourcing
>> of labor that benefits American's who have the assets to invest by
>> continuint to draw higher profit margins each year.
>> These same methods that we protect, can be accessed by Homeland Security 
>> to
>> insure the safety of Americans by reducing the illegal use of weapons and

>> by
>> making the capture of anyone without a licensed weapon a federal or local
>> offence with a mandatory minimum of say 10-years in jail and life on a
>> second office - worse if used in the act of a crime. Strong mandatory
>> sentencing is one way to protect the legal ownership of handguns and
>> protects the constitutional rights, but it helps to slowly mitigate the
>> illegal use by taking the offenders off the street. Where we put them for

>> 10 or more years is another problem that needs to be
>> addressed and how we use them to pay for their own incarceration is 
>> another
>> issue.
>>  Dennis S. Wish, PE
>> California Professional Engineer
>> Structural Engineering Consultant
>> C-41250 (Exp. 3/31/07)
>> dennis.wish(--nospam--at)verizon.net
>> http://structuralist.spaces.live.com
>>  This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to
>> which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
>> confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the 
>> reader
>> of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent
>> responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are
>> hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
>> communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
>> communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and 
>> return
>> the original message to us at the above e-mail. Thank you.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Raymond Shreenan [mailto:rshreenan(--nospam--at)adelphia.net] Sent: Friday, 
>> April 20, 2007 1:42 PM
>> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
>> Subject: Re: SHOOTINGS
>>
>> Gary:
>>
>> I respect your opinion, but what is misleading is the notion that 
>> criminals will register their fire arms.
>> I also want to apologize for using this great forum for debating gun 
>> control
>>
>> and I will not pursue this any further.  My heartfelt prayers went out to

>> the students and faculty and their families the day I first heard the 
>> tragic
>>
>> news.
>>
>> Ray Shreenan
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Gary L. Hodgson and Assoc." <ghodgson(--nospam--at)bellnet.ca>
>> To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
>> Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 4:51 AM
>> Subject: Re: SHOOTINGS
>>
>>
>>
>>> That statement is totally mis-leading.  The same can be said for cars 
>>> and trucks and yet we require every one to undergo testing of some sort 
>>> and place restrictions on those who have some sort of problem, e.g. 
>>> handi-capped, colour-blindness, etc.  I see nothing wrong with requiring

>>> a
>>>
>>
>>
>>> strict licensing regime for fire-arms.
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> Raymond Shreenan wrote:
>>>
>>>> Guns don't kill people, people kill people
>>>>
>>>> R.S.
>>>>     ----- Original Message -----
>>>>     *From:* ASC <mailto:ggg(--nospam--at)bigpond.net.au>
>>>>     *To:* Struct EngAssoc <mailto:seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
>>>>     *Sent:* Tuesday, April 17, 2007 1:43 AM
>>>>     *Subject:* SHOOTINGS
>>>>
>>>>     The rest of civilized world never ceases to be amazed
>>>>     with America's love affair with guns.
>>>>      And with America's unwillingness to do anything about it.
>>>>      36,000 people are dying each year this way, most by accidents.
>>>>      That deranged individual was not a criminal by design, was he?
>>>>      Did the accessibility of guns made the world safer for him or
>>>>     anyone else?
>>>>      Tell me more about the blessing of firearms...
>>>>      About the freedom it brings...
>>>>      About safety and security...
>>>>      And how it limits the powers of the government...
>>>>      And how it protects from communists...
>>>>      Do you really believe in this?
>>>>      As a young engineer in So Cal I once met an older engineer, who 
>>>> did.
>>>>      Sincerely, Gregory from Oz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
>>> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
>>> * *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers * 
>>> Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To *   subscribe (no

>>> fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
>>> *
>>> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
>>> *
>>> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you *   send 
>>> to
>>>
>>
>>
>>> the list is public domain and may be re-posted *   without your 
>>> permission. Make sure you visit our web *   site at: 
>>> http://www.seaint.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>>
>>
>>
>> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
>> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
>> * *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers *   Association

>> of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To *   subscribe (no fee) or 
>> UnSubscribe, please go to:
>> *
>> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
>> *
>> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you *   send 
>> to the list is public domain and may be re-posted *   without your 
>> permission. Make sure you visit our web *   site at: 
>> http://www.seaint.org ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** 
>> ********
>>
>> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
>> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
>> * *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers *   Association

>> of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To *   subscribe (no fee) or 
>> UnSubscribe, please go to:
>> *
>> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
>> *
>> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you *   send 
>> to the list is public domain and may be re-posted *   without your 
>> permission. Make sure you visit our web *   site at: 
>> http://www.seaint.org ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** 
>> ********
>>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> * *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers *   Association 
> of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To *   subscribe (no fee) or 
> UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you *   send to

> the list is public domain and may be re-posted *   without your 
> permission. Make sure you visit our web *   site at: http://www.seaint.org

> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********