olyclimber Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 cool we move the discussion onto a dicussion the definition of sanity? and perhaps why batteries are not a 10 Essential? Quote
Figger_Eight Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 That dude in Westlake was stoked he had a gun... Quote
Bug Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 OK. I'm a liberal who is mad at the conservatives for de-funding the mental institutions and landing my ex's ex on the streets where he is free to drive without a license and talk to passers by about how 5 evil demons are going to make him kill his own son (my stepson) thereby making it my responsibility to provide for my ex family's defense against a man who doesn't give a rip about laws or reason. Meanwhile, those same "conservatives" are spending all the money they saved by closing the mental programs on invading Iraq and now occupying it indefinately. Today's conservatives are radicals. Yesterday's leberals are toting guns. I say bring back the dope smoking George Bush. Quote
tanstaafl Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 We'd all be safer if all law-abiding citizens owned a gun. Â I hear about criminals killing people a hell of a lot less often than I hear about a teenager walking into school with an assault rifle and shooting 25 of his classmates, or a father shooting his family and then himself, or a guy showing up to a rave afterparty and slaughtering the partygoers, or a father blowing away his 14-year-old daughter as she crawls in her bedroom window thinking she's an intruder. Â I wonder if the parents of the Amish schoolgirls murdered last month think we'd be safer if only more law-abiding milkmen had easy access to guns? Â All these people, right up to the point they started spraying bullets, were your "law-abiding citizens." Â And no one ever said they were insane either until they killed a bunch of people. Quote
knotzen Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 Why don't you tell us YOUR version of...self defense strategies? Â present a larger target: take an accompanying large friend. Shit! How'm I gonna fit all those hiking requests into my calendar? Â Thanks a lot, DeC. Quote
lancegranite Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 Getting woke up by the police manhunt (helicoptor, squad cars, officers on foot) that seemed to center around my backyard last night at 1:00am really made me think about the finer points of home protection. Quote
Dechristo Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 Why don't you tell us YOUR version of...self defense strategies? Â present a larger target: take an accompanying large friend. Shit! How'm I gonna fit all those hiking requests into my calendar? Â Thanks a lot, DeC. Â Another benefit of the larger friend is in clearing your path by pushing him/her through the brush ahead of yourself. Quote
Billygoat Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 So, did they find human remains today?! Quote
Dechristo Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 just scat and soiled McDonald's napkins. Quote
Fairweather Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 OK. I'm a liberal who is mad at the conservatives for de-funding the mental institutions and landing my ex's ex on the streets where he is free to drive without a license and talk to passers by about how 5 evil demons are going to make him kill his own son (my stepson) thereby making it my responsibility to provide for my ex family's defense against a man who doesn't give a rip about laws or reason. Meanwhile, those same "conservatives" are spending all the money they saved by closing the mental programs on invading Iraq and now occupying it indefinately. Today's conservatives are radicals. Yesterday's leberals are toting guns. I say bring back the dope smoking George Bush. Â Actually, I believe it was liberal judges back in the early 80's that ruled the mentally ill can no longer be involuntarily committed to mental institutions. A violation of their civil rights, ya know. Now we have ten's of thousands of people roaming the streets of this country who, by all rights, should be receiving treatment in an institution. But if its easier for you to blame those evil conservatives, then by all means...... Quote
Fairweather Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 This argument is moot. If fairy-land Seattle types ever succeed in usurping our constitutionally protected right to possess arms, I will become a 'criminal'. Quote
colt45 Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 Actually, I believe it was liberal judges back in the early 80's that ruled the mentally ill can no longer be involuntarily committed to mental institutions.  RCW 71.05.150:  "When a county designated mental health professional receives information alleging that a person, as a result of a mental disorder: (i) Presents a likelihood of serious harm; or (ii) is gravely disabled; the county designated mental health professional may...file a petition for initial detention..." etc.  http://www.psychlaws.org/LegalResources/StateLaws/Washingtonstatute.htm  Quote
Fairweather Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 Um, yea - You better read the entire statute. Also, note in your snippet, "initial detention". Quote
Bug Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 OK. I'm a liberal who is mad at the conservatives for de-funding the mental institutions and landing my ex's ex on the streets where he is free to drive without a license and talk to passers by about how 5 evil demons are going to make him kill his own son (my stepson) thereby making it my responsibility to provide for my ex family's defense against a man who doesn't give a rip about laws or reason. Meanwhile, those same "conservatives" are spending all the money they saved by closing the mental programs on invading Iraq and now occupying it indefinately. Today's conservatives are radicals. Yesterday's leberals are toting guns. I say bring back the dope smoking George Bush. Â Actually, I believe it was liberal judges back in the early 80's that ruled the mentally ill can no longer be involuntarily committed to mental institutions. A violation of their civil rights, ya know. Now we have ten's of thousands of people roaming the streets of this country who, by all rights, should be receiving treatment in an institution. But if its easier for you to blame those evil conservatives, then by all means...... Guess again. Fed funding of state institutions was cut under Reagan during his first and second term and then again completely eliminated under Bush. Right now you can have a direct relative committed if you can prove they are a danger to themselves or someone else. My ex's ex could be committed today if his family would take responsibility and PAY for his entire bill. Quote
catbirdseat Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 Sorry to put the thread back on topic, but this morning's paper had a little article which said that Snohomish Sherrif's Dept. found the bones in a ravine distant from the Mt. Pilchuck trailhead and confirmed that they were human bones. Â Okay, you may return to your regularly scheduled gun rant. Quote
colt45 Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 Um, yea - You better read the entire statute. Also, note in your snippet, "initial detention". I did read the entire statute. Did you?  At the risk of wasting valuable cc.com board space, here is the section which lays out the criteria for extended involuntary commitment:  ----------------- RCW 71.05.280 Additional confinement -- Grounds.  At the expiration of the fourteen-day period of intensive treatment, a person may be confined for further treatment pursuant to RCW 71.05.320 if:  (1) Such person after having been taken into custody for evaluation and treatment has threatened, attempted, or inflicted:  (a) Physical harm upon the person of another or himself or herself, or substantial damage upon the property of another, and  (b) as a result of mental disorder presents a likelihood of serious harm; or  (2) Such person was taken into custody as a result of conduct in which he or she attempted or inflicted physical harm upon the person of another or himself or herself, or substantial damage upon the property of others, and continues to present, as a result of mental disorder, a likelihood of serious harm; or  (3) Such person has been determined to be incompetent and criminal charges have been dismissed pursuant to RCW 10.77.090 (4), and has committed acts constituting a felony, and as a result of a mental disorder, presents a substantial likelihood of repeating similar acts. In any proceeding pursuant to this subsection it shall not be necessary to show intent, willfulness, or state of mind as an element of the crime; or  (4) Such person is gravely disabled.  ----------  Please let me know what I'm missing here Quote
counterfeitfake Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 You know how sometimes, maybe when you're at the beach, you see two seagulls just flapping and squawking away at each other endlessly for no apparent reason? That's how you gun debate doofuses sound. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 You know how sometimes, maybe when you're at the beach, you see two seagulls just flapping and squawking away at each other endlessly for no apparent reason? That's how you gun debate doofuses sound. Â Quote
hawkeye69 Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 wow, almost had another 10 essentials rant from the Fundamentalist Mounties Sect. preaching from the FoH, their koran. sounds like a mounties jihad. Â if i choose to carry a gun, thats my deal. you guys that have a problem with that can go f*** yourselves. Quote
Winter Posted October 19, 2006 Posted October 19, 2006 Don't waste FW's time with facts, laws, and other trivial meaningless details. He knows everything about everything - learn to place blind faith in his wisdom and judgment. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.