A gun control proposal

[RDD_1210]

And Australia pretty much eliminated mass shootings with gun control.

And everyone didn't have a hi cap semi auto decades ago.

And there was just a mass shooting a few days ago in Australia doofus. You lose.

IF A LAW DOESN'T WORK 100% OF THE TIME IT IS A FAILURE.

Right?

Gun laws fail 100% of the time. That's the point.

Weird how you manage to connect to the internet from that rock you're living under.

Weird how you manage to connect to the internet from that rock you're living under.

No weirder than the view of the world you're getting from that cloud you live on

Hey, at least I'm willing to look at what is happening in the rest of the world. By the looks of this thread, most of you people barely get out of your trailers.

 

[Auld Phart]

And there was just a mass shooting a few days ago in Australia doofus. You lose.

IF A LAW DOESN'T WORK 100% OF THE TIME IT IS A FAILURE.

Right?

Gun laws fail 100% of the time. That's the point.

Weird how you manage to connect to the internet from that rock you're living under.

Weird how you manage to connect to the internet from that rock you're living under.

No weirder than the view of the world you're getting from that cloud you live on

Hey, at least I'm willing to look at what is happening in the rest of the world. By the looks of this thread, most of you people barely get out of your trailers.

and blind to the US.

You're trying to put a round peg in a square hole, and it wont' fit.

One of the reasons America was settled was because of Englands gun laws, and that's at least one of the reasons the right to keep and bear arms was the second added to the constitution.

you keep pointing out how gun control has worked in other countries, what were the gun laws like BEFORE gun control was passed?

YOU point out the lack of guns in other countries.

how many did the population have prior to gun control?

500,000?

a million?

10 million?

Try putting controls on 300,000,000+ firearms, owned by 100,000,000+ civilians.

Keep whining about the number of deaths caused by guns...

approximately .001% per year.

You want to cut down on deaths by firearms?

attack the root of the problem

poverty, drugs, mental illness.

You can't control the guns, when there are approximately 200-300,000 guns stolen a year.

You're fighting a losing cause, and making a fool of yourself.

 

[PredFan]

Before the first gun control laws were passed decades ago, we had zero mass shootings. Now we have gun control and a bunch of mass shootings. It isn't a coincidence.

And Australia pretty much eliminated mass shootings with gun control.

And everyone didn't have a hi cap semi auto decades ago.

And there was just a mass shooting a few days ago in Australia doofus. You lose.

IF A LAW DOESN'T WORK 100% OF THE TIME IT IS A FAILURE.

Right?

Gun laws fail 100% of the time. That's the point.

Weird how you manage to connect to the internet from that rock you're living under.

Yeah, you have nothing. Dismissed.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

so what do u want ? Guns out of vending machines?

I want you to go away until you learn to write at least as well as a third-grader.

Someone who is too damn stupid even to spell a simple, common word like “you” isn't smart enough to have anything to say on a forum such as this that is worth anyone else's time to try to read or respond to.

 

[Little-Acorn]

How about a real conversation about the gun issue .

Here's what I think .

Background Checks, no private sale or gun show loopholes . Gun registration so we can follow the gun and prevent straw purchases. Local gun licenses thru the police Those things would help keep guns away from criminals and kooks . That's the majority of the gun problem.

In return . The law abiding can buy all the guns they want . U can only shoot 2 at a time at best . U want a 20 round clip, go ahead and have a party . License to carry, ok with me .


What's the down side ?

Yet another wishful thinker who believes it's OK for government to have veto power over every citizen's right to own and carry a gun. (sigh)

 

[candycorn]

How about criminal liability for deaths resulting from the sale of a weapon where the seller failed to run a standardized background check?

What if you illegally sold it to Gun Nutjob Sr. but Gun Nutjob Jr. uses the weapon?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

How about a real conversation about the gun issue .

Here's what I think .

Background Checks, no private sale or gun show loopholes . Gun registration so we can follow the gun and prevent straw purchases. Local gun licenses thru the police Those things would help keep guns away from criminals and kooks . That's the majority of the gun problem.

In return . The law abiding can buy all the guns they want . U can only shoot 2 at a time at best . U want a 20 round clip, go ahead and have a party . License to carry, ok with me .


What's the down side ?

Although Constitutional gun licenses and registration nonetheless manifest as an undue burden to the Second Amendment right, and gun licensing and registration laws should be struck down by the Supreme Court accordingly, save that for concealed carry.

There is no evidence that gun registration has any effect preventing gun violence, it presumes that gun owners 'might' commit a crime absent any evidence in support, where civil rights cannot be limited based on what government believes 'might' happen.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

no thanks Timmy , I want to roll back all gun laws .

so what do u want ? Guns out of vending machines?

The application of firearms regulatory measures consistent with that of the regulation of other rights: that firearms regulatory measures be rationally based, pursue a compelling governmental interest, are supported by objective, documented facts and evidence, and pursue a proper legislative end.

In essence what needs to happen is laws that seek to limit or restrict the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment should be subject to strict scrutiny of judicial review, which is currently not the case.

If firearms regulatory measures were subject to strict scrutiny, policies such as waiting periods, magazine capacity restrictions and bans, licensing requirements (save that of concealed carry), permit requirements, registration requirements, and bans on particular types of weapons clearly in common use would be invalidated by the courts.

 

[kaz]

How about a real conversation about the gun issue .

Here's what I think .

Background Checks, no private sale or gun show loopholes . Gun registration so we can follow the gun and prevent straw purchases. Local gun licenses thru the police Those things would help keep guns away from criminals and kooks . That's the majority of the gun problem.

In return . The law abiding can buy all the guns they want . U can only shoot 2 at a time at best . U want a 20 round clip, go ahead and have a party . License to carry, ok with me .


What's the down side ?

It doesn't accomplish anything. All you're doing is regulating legal gun owners. Criminals buy illegal ones

 

[kaz]

[The application of firearms regulatory measures consistent with that of the regulation of other rights.

You mean like voting? If all you have to do is show an ID, you on board?

What about paying a fee for free speech, is that allowed?

What about having to apply for protection from illegal search and siezure?

This is consistent? What other Constitutional rights require an application, government approval, showing ID and fees again?

 

[kaz]

You are not going to get any kind of compromise from our gun nuts. And I would add the penalties for breaking these laws. If you sell a gun to someone without the background check and approval, you are arrested for a felony, and can never own any kind of firearm again. The same for the person trying to buy a gun without a check. Guns cannot be transferred in any manner, even within families without said background check. To do so incurs a felony conviction. Those with felony convictions cannot own guns. Period. Those judged to have sanity problems with hostility cannot own guns, period.

We won't compromise? You mean like showing an ID to vote? No wait, that's you...

 

[AVG-JOE]

How about criminal liability for deaths resulting from the sale of a weapon where the seller failed to run a standardized background check?

how about liability for jack daniels, or coors.

Like strict drunk driving laws with teeth? MADD would agree.

 

[FA_Q2]

That about sums up your capacity to differentiate very different issues.
Proving you have the intellect of a small radish.

Conservatives: Abortions must be banned, because every life matters
Conservatives: Gun can't be restricted in any way, even if people are being shot and killed daily

At least you're consistent.........consistently selfish.

The people doing the shooting and killing arent deterred from the laws on the books. Hasnt this point been made often enough that you get it yet? Or are you one of those stupid ones?

So why are the laws in every other 1st world country working?

Let me guess, America is the only country with criminals?

But they aren't working idiot. That is just a lie that your media and politicians tell you.

Of course they are. Where do you get your info? A simple google search will show you that they are in fact working, much more so than anything we have going here.

England:

Oh wait - that didn't work at all...

The think is you want to compare rates between the US and other nations but that is asinine - we are not the same as any other given nation. The same thing applies when you reject rates in nations with much higher gun ownership rates and less crime.

The only viable way to gauge the effectiveness of gun control is to compare a nations crime (specifically homicide as that is the chief point: saving lives). Universally, you see utter failure.

Gun control does not accomplish anything.

 

[kaz]

How about criminal liability for deaths resulting from the sale of a weapon where the seller failed to run a standardized background check?

how about liability for jack daniels, or coors.

Like strict drunk driving laws with teeth? MADD would agree.

Warning: This post contains extreme sarcasm

Our drug laws obviously are very effective, it would be easy to apply the same real solutions to guns

We now return to our regularly scheduled posting

 

[The Rabbi]

Countries Compared by Crime > Total crimes per 1000. International Statistics at NationMaster.com

Sorry to disappoint but this is too easy.

Did you even read your own link? The very first thing it says about the data for crime stats is - " Note: Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence"

Seriously? That's the data you're hanging your hat on. Holy fuck you idiots make this too easy.

Where has gun control worked, dunce?
You have utterly failed in your posts. You are the most failed poster here since Billy Triple Fail.

In every 1st world country you listed for me earlier.

That's a fail. You havent shown they've worked at all. You might as well attribute it to higher consumption of cheese or fish.

 

[The Rabbi]

Conservatives: Abortions must be banned, because every life matters
Conservatives: Gun can't be restricted in any way, even if people are being shot and killed daily

At least you're consistent.........consistently selfish.

The people doing the shooting and killing arent deterred from the laws on the books. Hasnt this point been made often enough that you get it yet? Or are you one of those stupid ones?

So why are the laws in every other 1st world country working?

Let me guess, America is the only country with criminals?

But they aren't working idiot. That is just a lie that your media and politicians tell you.

Of course they are. Where do you get your info? A simple google search will show you that they are in fact working, much more so than anything we have going here.

England:

Oh wait - that didn't work at all...

The think is you want to compare rates between the US and other nations but that is asinine - we are not the same as any other given nation. The same thing applies when you reject rates in nations with much higher gun ownership rates and less crime.

The only viable way to gauge the effectiveness of gun control is to compare a nations crime (specifically homicide as that is the chief point: saving lives). Universally, you see utter failure.

Gun control does not accomplish anything.

The same countries in Europe always had lower rates of crime and violence, even when guns were relatively easy to get.
RDD is a moron who cannot back up his claims and runs away when called on them.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

no thanks Timmy , I want to roll back all gun laws .

so what do u want ? Guns out of vending machines?

The application of firearms regulatory measures consistent with that of the regulation of other rights: that firearms regulatory measures be rationally based, pursue a compelling governmental interest, are supported by objective, documented facts and evidence, and pursue a proper legislative end.

In essence what needs to happen is laws that seek to limit or restrict the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment should be subject to strict scrutiny of judicial review, which is currently not the case.

If firearms regulatory measures were subject to strict scrutiny, policies such as waiting periods, magazine capacity restrictions and bans, licensing requirements (save that of concealed carry), permit requirements, registration requirements, and bans on particular types of weapons clearly in common use would be invalidated by the courts.

 

[hortysir]

How about criminal liability for deaths resulting from the sale of a weapon where the seller failed to run a standardized background check?

Make the standardized backgrounds free to the sellers and real easy to do. As a tax payer, I'd be willing to pay for that.

So many complain about the extra burden on the poor to be able to pay for an ID card but we're okay with making the poor pay to run a background check on someone?
C'mon man.

And registration, while you say we can have as many as we want?
That won't wash, either. It's nobody's business how many guns I have.

Sorry but these proposals won't keep guns away from criminals.
Criminals break the law. That's what they do.

All you're accomplishing is putting more obstacles and fees in my path while the neighborhood thugs still get to do as they please

 

[dblack]

How about a real conversation about the gun issue .

Here's what I think .

Background Checks, no private sale or gun show loopholes . Gun registration so we can follow the gun and prevent straw purchases. Local gun licenses thru the police Those things would help keep guns away from criminals and kooks . That's the majority of the gun problem.

In return . The law abiding can buy all the guns they want . U can only shoot 2 at a time at best . U want a 20 round clip, go ahead and have a party . License to carry, ok with me .


What's the down side ?

Let's treat guns like cars. Register, insurance, and don't let them become an eyesore for your neighbors.

Yes. Let's outsource our rights to insurance companies. Great idea!

 

[FA_Q2]

no thanks Timmy , I want to roll back all gun laws .

so what do u want ? Guns out of vending machines?

The application of firearms regulatory measures consistent with that of the regulation of other rights: that firearms regulatory measures be rationally based, pursue a compelling governmental interest, are supported by objective, documented facts and evidence, and pursue a proper legislative end.

In essence what needs to happen is laws that seek to limit or restrict the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment should be subject to strict scrutiny of judicial review, which is currently not the case.

If firearms regulatory measures were subject to strict scrutiny, policies such as waiting periods, magazine capacity restrictions and bans, licensing requirements (save that of concealed carry), permit requirements, registration requirements, and bans on particular types of weapons clearly in common use would be invalidated by the courts.

The real question I have here is why?

With the recent SCOTUS rulings, I think there are several laws on the books that are not simply unconstitutional but blatantly so yet they have not fallen. It is not as though these rulings are brand new - how have some of these laws stuck around?