Reckless Enda

[Whoops2u]

It seems most don't want to start up, so I won't.

Usually the debate devolves to the fact some place no positive value on firearms so any deviance from what they would do is a need to ban them.

I await the day we yank driver's licenses for any at-fault accident. Or, depending on the facts in this case, any accident--fault or no.

 

[Zigner]

Usually the debate devolves to the fact some place no positive value on firearms so any deviance from what they would do is a need to ban them.

You really haven't been around this forum long enough to assume that.

In THIS thread, in THIS situation, the OP has no business being allowed to own a gun. That's all I'm saying.

 

[quincy]

It seems most don't want to start up, so I won't.

Usually the debate devolves to the fact some place no positive value on firearms so any deviance from what they would do is a need to ban them.

I await the day we yank driver's licenses for any at-fault accident. Or, depending on the facts in this case, any accident--fault or no.

This thread is not the place for the discussion you seem to want. Sorry.

 

[quincy]

I have had no firearm debate in this forum so was not expressing an opinion on how it would be handled here. However, I've had the discussion many times that gets to that core difference. We can play if you like to find out if the result would be similar here.

Please, this thread is not a platform for a gun discussion except as it applies to Bart's legal issue.

 

[quincy]

Bart's attorney will help him with his defense and possible plea agreement. Any agreement may include Bart's ability to have guns.

This is not a gun rights issue but rather what possibly can be negotiated to keep Bart from jail on a reckless endangerment charge and conviction.