Attention, gun control supporters:

[Cammmpbell]

So, you have no rational answer. Not at all surprising.

The manufacture and sale of methamphetimine, cocaine, LSD, and heroin are illegal.

But you can still get them.

The search for rational answers continues...

Are you really looking for rational dave? It seems you are looking for a way to use the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

Rational people in a society try to write laws that limit the damage that can be inflicted on society, without severely limiting the rights and privileges we all covet and enjoy.

The right to bear arms SHOULD be afforded to every law abiding citizen. But we should all be in favor of passing laws to prevent someone who is not a law abiding citizen from gaining access to a firearm.

We have laws that make it illegal for a minor to drive a car. When you are old enough to drive, you have to pass a written test showing you understand the rules of the road. And you have to pass a road test to show you can safely operate a motor vehicle. But even after you meet all those requirements, we still have speed limits. We still have laws that make it a crime to drink and drive.

I anticipate you will argue that driving is a privilege and owning a firearm is a right. But no right is absolute. If the 2nd amendment were absolute, then criminals, and the mentally ill should be eligible...they are NOT, nor should they be eligible.

Like you said, driving is a priviledge NOT a right so your comparrison is worthless and we ALREADY have hundreds of of laws restricing and regulating firearms in this nation we don't need anymore.

We have many laws and regulations about the manufacturing, sales and operation of motor vehicles too. I remember the loud squawking by the Right Wingers when seat belt requirements began. Guess what? Last year motor vehicle deaths in the United States were at record lows dating back to 1949.

The goddamned gun laws and regulation is piss poor and needs something done besides what the gun owners and NRA want. It's major bullshit to continue to allow more people killed on the streets of America than in a war zone....some 30-35 every day.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Read what I posted. Weapons which have no other purpose than to kill human beings. What the fuck has this nation turned into? A bunch of lilly livered cowards who have to display their testosterone by carrying a deadly weapon when they take their family on a picnic, go shopping or to church. The Republican party has turned into a god damned joke and if they don't catch on they're history.

That would be all of the guns EVER produced, less .22's and shotguns.

And they'll do in a pinch.

You really think you can pull that off?

That's right wing NRA bullshit you are spouting. Do away with army assault type weapons and extended capactity magazines. In all the recent mass killings without those dozens if not hundreds of lives would have been saved. If you want to be in a war so goddamned bad join the military or one of the military sub contractors and go to Afghanistan. I feel sure that if you actually are any good with one of those weapons they can find a place for you.

Hey Dumbfuck, in 8 of the last 10 mass shootings nothing other than pistols were used.

Jeezus, you're ignorant!!

 

[GuyPinestra]

Are you really looking for rational dave? It seems you are looking for a way to use the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

Rational people in a society try to write laws that limit the damage that can be inflicted on society, without severely limiting the rights and privileges we all covet and enjoy.

The right to bear arms SHOULD be afforded to every law abiding citizen. But we should all be in favor of passing laws to prevent someone who is not a law abiding citizen from gaining access to a firearm.

We have laws that make it illegal for a minor to drive a car. When you are old enough to drive, you have to pass a written test showing you understand the rules of the road. And you have to pass a road test to show you can safely operate a motor vehicle. But even after you meet all those requirements, we still have speed limits. We still have laws that make it a crime to drink and drive.

I anticipate you will argue that driving is a privilege and owning a firearm is a right. But no right is absolute. If the 2nd amendment were absolute, then criminals, and the mentally ill should be eligible...they are NOT, nor should they be eligible.

Of course I'm looking for rational answers. Perhaps you can explain this dichotomy:

1. We need more laws to keep guns out of the hands on criminals.

2. We know criminals do not obey the law.

As citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some dark alley.

But, that's where the criminal should be forced to buy a gun. In a totally illegal setting, with all the inherant dangers that come with it. BUT, our current laws sanction criminals being able to walk into a gun show, receive expert advice, discounts, what ever weapon(s) they desire without a background check or having to pay black market prices or risk the dangers of buying a weapon from another criminal in a dark alley.

And yet only 2% of criminals get their guns at gunshows.

 

[Cammmpbell]

That would be all of the guns EVER produced, less .22's and shotguns.

And they'll do in a pinch.

You really think you can pull that off?

That's right wing NRA bullshit you are spouting. Do away with army assault type weapons and extended capactity magazines. In all the recent mass killings without those dozens if not hundreds of lives would have been saved. If you want to be in a war so goddamned bad join the military or one of the military sub contractors and go to Afghanistan. I feel sure that if you actually are any good with one of those weapons they can find a place for you.

Hey Dumbfuck, in 8 of the last 10 mass shootings nothing other than pistols were used.

Jeezus, you're ignorant!!

Talk About DumbFuck
Talk About Ignorant



Mass Shootings in America

There have been at least 62 in the last 30 years. It is perhaps too easy to forget how many times this has happened. The horrific mass murder at a movie theater in Colorado on July 20, another at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin on August 5, another at a manufacturer in Minneapolis on September 27—and then the unthinkable nightmare at a Connecticut elementary school on December 14—are the latest in an epidemic of such gun violence over the last three decades. Since 1982, there have been at least 62 mass murders carried out with firearms across the country, with the killings unfolding in 30 states from Massachusetts to Hawaii.

Tragedy in Newtown

Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No. More Guns, More Mass Shootings—Coincidence?

Weapons: Of the 142 guns possessed by the killers, the arsenal included dozens of assault weapons and semiautomatic handguns. Just as Jeffrey Weise used a .40-caliber Glock to slaughter students in Red Lake, Minnesota, in 2005, so too did James Holmes, along with an AR-15 assault rifle, when blasting away at his victims in a darkened movie theater. In Newtown, Connecticut, Adam Lanza wielded two handguns and a .223 Bushmaster semiautomatic assault rifle as he massacred 20 school children and six adults.
The killers: Half of the cases involved school or workplace shootings (12 and 19, respectively); the other 31 cases took place in locations including shopping malls, restaurants, government buildings, and military bases. Forty four of the killers were white males. Only one of them was a woman. (See Goleta, Calif., in 2006.) The average age of the killers was 35, though the youngest among them was a mere 11 years old. (See Jonesboro, Ark., in 1998.) A majority were mentally ill—and many displayed signs of it before setting out to kill.

 

[jtpr312]

Obfuscation. You are avoiding my question and making false accusations.

jtpr312, do YOU support a criminal's right to be able to walk into the safe setting of a gun show, receive expert advice, discounts, and buy what ever weapon(s) they desire without a background check or having to pay black market prices or risk the dangers of buying a weapon from another criminal in a dark alley?

I didn't avoid your question, I ignored it as it is based on nothing I stated or implied and how you inferred that from what I wrote tells me you're either reading comprehension challenged or you have an agenda that you're promoting by asking asinine rhetorical questions that you already know the answer to. Furthermore, please point to any false accusations I made as everything I stated is based on supportable facts and evidence I can easily provide.

Go back and re-read the posts. You said: "we ALREADY have hundreds of of laws restricing and regulating firearms in this nation we don't need anymore"

But there is a loophole in one of those laws that allows a criminal or a mentally ill person to be able to buy weapons at gun shows without a background check. It THAT OK with you? NO you're wrong, it is not a loop hole where people can buy guns at a gun show wihout a background check, I told you, a DEALER MUST, by law, run the same checks at a gun show as if you went to their shop. As far as a private citizen's sale, it is also ALREADY against the law for a private individual to sell a firearm to a KNOWN felon or psycho whether they sell it from their home, in the street, at the mall or at a gun show so we don't need any other new laws that would add nothing to that.

The other crap you said is false. Nothing I wrote is false, EVERYTHING I said I can provide proof as to it's factualness and truthfullness.

No one who commits a crime that would qualify as being punishable by execution, or violent repeat offenders are released from prison. Liberals have no 'mindset' to release violent repeat offenders into society. You're either ignorant, a liar or you live with your head in the sand or up your ass, because we release violent murderers, rapists, car jackerers, armed robbers, child molestors, etc, EVERY FREAKING DAY in this nation


Liberal New York State has a involuntary commitment law. But, there are a number of liberty issues with involuntary commitment, but you right wing 'individual liberty' types are totally obtuse to the dangers they create for innocent people. And you left wingnuts are totally unconcerned about letting violent sociopaths live among us and even in sates that have involuntary committment laws you make the process of committing these scumbags almost impossibile to carry out.

.

 

[jtpr312]

Are you really looking for rational dave? It seems you are looking for a way to use the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

Rational people in a society try to write laws that limit the damage that can be inflicted on society, without severely limiting the rights and privileges we all covet and enjoy.

The right to bear arms SHOULD be afforded to every law abiding citizen. But we should all be in favor of passing laws to prevent someone who is not a law abiding citizen from gaining access to a firearm.

We have laws that make it illegal for a minor to drive a car. When you are old enough to drive, you have to pass a written test showing you understand the rules of the road. And you have to pass a road test to show you can safely operate a motor vehicle. But even after you meet all those requirements, we still have speed limits. We still have laws that make it a crime to drink and drive.

I anticipate you will argue that driving is a privilege and owning a firearm is a right. But no right is absolute. If the 2nd amendment were absolute, then criminals, and the mentally ill should be eligible...they are NOT, nor should they be eligible.

Like you said, driving is a priviledge NOT a right so your comparrison is worthless and we ALREADY have hundreds of of laws restricing and regulating firearms in this nation we don't need anymore.

We have many laws and regulations about the manufacturing, sales and operation of motor vehicles too. I remember the loud squawking by the Right Wingers when seat belt requirements began. Guess what? Last year motor vehicle deaths in the United States were at record lows dating back to 1949.

The goddamned gun laws and regulation is piss poor and needs something done besides what the gun owners and NRA want. It's major bullshit to continue to allow more people killed on the streets of America than in a war zone....some 30-35 every day.

I would venture to bet that you don't even know the gun laws in your own state, let alone the over 300 at the federal level so please refrain from speaking on a topic you're unqualified to offer an intelligent opinion on. As for seat belt laws being the reason their are less fatalities, you may want to double check things like Drunk Driving enforcement, air bags, and other saftey regulations put on new cars and their influence on the number of fatal accidents and get back to me. Now to your bs about allowing more people to get killed in America than in a war zone, you may want to check the statistics on who exaclty is committing all these murders and then whine to your left wing liberal scumbag law makers who allow these violent predators to be repeatedly released upon our streets after committing sometimes dozens of violent felonies starting when they were in their teens. We have a hispanic gang banger/dope dealer and a negro male problem in this nation, not a gun problem. Get rid of the criminally minded negro males with a violent criminal record, and EVERY gang affiliated hispanic that has a violent criminal record in this nation and the murder rates would drop by at least 75%. I know you liberal a-holes hate to hear that truth and blame the murder rates on the guns, but the REALITY is that the vast, vast, vast majority of murders in this nation are committed by those two groups of people. Run along now Nancy, I'm sure some scumbag Stalinist liberal democrat is voicing their opinion on how safe the rest of us would be if law abiding citizens lost their right to own certain firearms, most likely while being guarded by their own body guards armed with the same weapons they want to restrict us from owning.

 

[rightwinger]

Like you said, driving is a priviledge NOT a right so your comparrison is worthless and we ALREADY have hundreds of of laws restricing and regulating firearms in this nation we don't need anymore.

We have many laws and regulations about the manufacturing, sales and operation of motor vehicles too. I remember the loud squawking by the Right Wingers when seat belt requirements began. Guess what? Last year motor vehicle deaths in the United States were at record lows dating back to 1949.

The goddamned gun laws and regulation is piss poor and needs something done besides what the gun owners and NRA want. It's major bullshit to continue to allow more people killed on the streets of America than in a war zone....some 30-35 every day.

I would venture to bet that you don't even know the gun laws in your own state, let along the over 300 at the federal level so please refrain from speaking on a topic you're unqualified to offer an intelligent opinion on. As for seat belt laws being the reason their are less fatalities, you may want to double check things like Drunk Driving enforcement, air bags, and other saftey regulations put on new cars and their influence on the number of fatal accidents and get back to me.

You are correct

We looked at the number of traffic fatalities and incorporated hundreds of fixes to make driving safer and bring down the mortality rate

Every time we try the same with guns, we face the wrath of the NRA

 

[The Rabbi]

We have many laws and regulations about the manufacturing, sales and operation of motor vehicles too. I remember the loud squawking by the Right Wingers when seat belt requirements began. Guess what? Last year motor vehicle deaths in the United States were at record lows dating back to 1949.

The goddamned gun laws and regulation is piss poor and needs something done besides what the gun owners and NRA want. It's major bullshit to continue to allow more people killed on the streets of America than in a war zone....some 30-35 every day.

I would venture to bet that you don't even know the gun laws in your own state, let along the over 300 at the federal level so please refrain from speaking on a topic you're unqualified to offer an intelligent opinion on. As for seat belt laws being the reason their are less fatalities, you may want to double check things like Drunk Driving enforcement, air bags, and other saftey regulations put on new cars and their influence on the number of fatal accidents and get back to me.

You are correct

We looked at the number of traffic fatalities and incorporated hundreds of fixes to make driving safer and bring down the mortality rate

Every time we try the same with guns, we face the wrath of the NRA

You could really make things safer by lowering the speed limit to 25mph. No one needs to go faster than that. And that's faster than the Founders were able to go.
There have been hundreds of fixes to make guns safer. And guns are pretty safe. Much more so than cars.

 

[GuyPinestra]

That's right wing NRA bullshit you are spouting. Do away with army assault type weapons and extended capactity magazines. In all the recent mass killings without those dozens if not hundreds of lives would have been saved. If you want to be in a war so goddamned bad join the military or one of the military sub contractors and go to Afghanistan. I feel sure that if you actually are any good with one of those weapons they can find a place for you.

Hey Dumbfuck, in 8 of the last 10 mass shootings nothing other than pistols were used.

Jeezus, you're ignorant!!

Talk About DumbFuck
Talk About Ignorant



Mass Shootings in America

There have been at least 62 in the last 30 years. It is perhaps too easy to forget how many times this has happened. The horrific mass murder at a movie theater in Colorado on July 20, another at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin on August 5, another at a manufacturer in Minneapolis on September 27—and then the unthinkable nightmare at a Connecticut elementary school on December 14—are the latest in an epidemic of such gun violence over the last three decades. Since 1982, there have been at least 62 mass murders carried out with firearms across the country, with the killings unfolding in 30 states from Massachusetts to Hawaii.

Tragedy in Newtown

Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No. More Guns, More Mass Shootings—Coincidence?

Weapons: Of the 142 guns possessed by the killers, the arsenal included dozens of assault weapons and semiautomatic handguns. Just as Jeffrey Weise used a .40-caliber Glock to slaughter students in Red Lake, Minnesota, in 2005, so too did James Holmes, along with an AR-15 assault rifle, when blasting away at his victims in a darkened movie theater. In Newtown, Connecticut, Adam Lanza wielded two handguns and a .223 Bushmaster semiautomatic assault rifle as he massacred 20 school children and six adults.
The killers: Half of the cases involved school or workplace shootings (12 and 19, respectively); the other 31 cases took place in locations including shopping malls, restaurants, government buildings, and military bases. Forty four of the killers were white males. Only one of them was a woman. (See Goleta, Calif., in 2006.) The average age of the killers was 35, though the youngest among them was a mere 11 years old. (See Jonesboro, Ark., in 1998.) A majority were mentally ill—and many displayed signs of it before setting out to kill.

Are you so old that you can't read the shit YOU post?

142 guns total, but no exact number on semi-auto rifles and pistols, just 'dozens'. Fail.

8 of the last 10 shootings were carried out with pistols ONLY, not a semi-auto rifle to be found. (Or what YOU would call an 'assault weapon' in your ignorance.)

If you want to call me a dumbfuck, dispute what I posted and PROVE it, asswipe!

 

[JoeB131]

Here's the problem with your "thinking":

The law abiding citizen will not have them, but the criminals will. Now why would you want to give an edge to criminals?



Not for the bad guys. For them, it's a tactical advantage.

Every other country that banned or limited private gun ownership had their level of violent crime drop.

In Japan, they had 11 Gun Homicides last year. Compared to our 9148.

It's already against the law to shoot people, Joe. Is another law going to finally get the attention of criminals?

"criminals" aren't the problem. Most gun murders are usually domestic arguments that wouldn't have lead to a murder if a gun hadn't been in the house. The same can be said about the 16K gun sucides we have every year.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Every other country that banned or limited private gun ownership had their level of violent crime drop.

In Japan, they had 11 Gun Homicides last year. Compared to our 9148.

It's already against the law to shoot people, Joe. Is another law going to finally get the attention of criminals?

"criminals" aren't the problem. Most gun murders are usually domestic arguments that wouldn't have lead to a murder if a gun hadn't been in the house. The same can be said about the 16K gun sucides we have every year.

Got a link, schmuck?

 

[JoeB131]

Don't do links... Look it up yourself.

Google "most murder victims" and it will auto fill with "know their killer".

 

[eflatminor]

Every other country that banned or limited private gun ownership had their level of violent crime drop.

In Japan, they had 11 Gun Homicides last year. Compared to our 9148.

It's already against the law to shoot people, Joe. Is another law going to finally get the attention of criminals?

"criminals" aren't the problem. Most gun murders are usually domestic arguments that wouldn't have lead to a murder if a gun hadn't been in the house. The same can be said about the 16K gun sucides we have every year.

The Japanese, whom you guys love to point out as having a wondrous gun-free culture, manage to commit over 30,000 suicides every year.

Now what were you saying about banning guns and preventing suicides?

 

[The Rabbi]

It's already against the law to shoot people, Joe. Is another law going to finally get the attention of criminals?

"criminals" aren't the problem. Most gun murders are usually domestic arguments that wouldn't have lead to a murder if a gun hadn't been in the house. The same can be said about the 16K gun sucides we have every year.

The Japanese, whom you guys love to point out as having a wondrous gun-free culture, manage to commit over 30,000 suicides every year.

Now what were you saying about banning guns and preventing suicides?

Guns cause suicide. They sit and whisper to their owners "do it. do it." Didn't you ever hear that?
And Joe is full of shit. It isn't that he doesn't know anything. It's that whatever he knows is wrong.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Don't do links... Look it up yourself.

Google "most murder victims" and it will auto fill with "know their killer".

"Know their killer" =/= "Domestic arguments"

But then again you already know that, you're just trying to obfuscate.

 

[9thIDdoc]

The goddamned gun laws and regulation is piss poor and needs something done besides what the gun owners and NRA want. It's major bullshit to continue to allow more people killed on the streets of America than in a war zone....some 30-35 every day.

So you want to turn America into a war zone with hundreds killed every day. That may make sense in your feavered brain but nowhere else.

 

[eflatminor]

The goddamned gun laws and regulation is piss poor and needs something done besides what the gun owners and NRA want.

And your solution?

Does it involve keeping certain firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens, thereby giving a tactical edge to crazies and criminals? Naw, nobody could be that stupid.

Does in involve restricting the inalienable right to protect oneself? No...who would do such a dumb thing?

Does it involve disarming the people? Well, only someone ignorant to history would suggest that!

Does it involve un-inventing firearms? Now that's just silly.

Anyway, your solution?

p.s. If it involves tougher sentences for those that utilize a firearm in the commission of their crime, I'm on board.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Sorry, EFM, I can't rep you again....

 

[Bfgrn]

I didn't avoid your question, I ignored it as it is based on nothing I stated or implied and how you inferred that from what I wrote tells me you're either reading comprehension challenged or you have an agenda that you're promoting by asking asinine rhetorical questions that you already know the answer to. Furthermore, please point to any false accusations I made as everything I stated is based on supportable facts and evidence I can easily provide.

Go back and re-read the posts. You said: "we ALREADY have hundreds of of laws restricing and regulating firearms in this nation we don't need anymore"

But there is a loophole in one of those laws that allows a criminal or a mentally ill person to be able to buy weapons at gun shows without a background check. It THAT OK with you? NO you're wrong, it is not a loop hole where people can buy guns at a gun show wihout a background check, I told you, a DEALER MUST, by law, run the same checks at a gun show as if you went to their shop. As far as a private citizen's sale, it is also ALREADY against the law for a private individual to sell a firearm to a KNOWN felon or psycho whether they sell it from their home, in the street, at the mall or at a gun show so we don't need any other new laws that would add nothing to that.

The other crap you said is false. Nothing I wrote is false, EVERYTHING I said I can provide proof as to it's factualness and truthfullness.

No one who commits a crime that would qualify as being punishable by execution, or violent repeat offenders are released from prison. Liberals have no 'mindset' to release violent repeat offenders into society. You're either ignorant, a liar or you live with your head in the sand or up your ass, because we release violent murderers, rapists, car jackerers, armed robbers, child molestors, etc, EVERY FREAKING DAY in this nation


Liberal New York State has a involuntary commitment law. But, there are a number of liberty issues with involuntary commitment, but you right wing 'individual liberty' types are totally obtuse to the dangers they create for innocent people. And you left wingnuts are totally unconcerned about letting violent sociopaths live among us and even in sates that have involuntary committment laws you make the process of committing these scumbags almost impossibile to carry out.

.

1) I already provide proof with hidden camera video that anyone can buy weapons at a gun show without a background check. Investigators with hidden cameras traveled to seven gun shows across Ohio, Tennessee and Nevada, and found out just how easy it is for criminals and the mentally ill to walk in and buy guns -- no questions asked.

The investigators told the private sellers that they "probably couldn't pass a background check" -- and at that point, the seller should have sent them away. Because even private sellers are prohibited by federal law from selling to those who they have reason to suspect could not pass a background check.

Instead, 19 out of 30 private sellers made the sale.

2) They are NOT releasing violent murderers, rapists, car skyjackers, armed robbers, child molesters, etc, EVERY FREAKING DAY in this nation. If anything, our nation has more people incarcerated who should have never been imprisoned in the first place. Especially marijuana users.

3) You like to throw around insults like Stalinist and statist. But you are the REAL Stalinist and the REAL statist. Since when does having a mental problem automatically make you guilty of being a 'violent sociopath' and a 'scumbag'? Don't you have to actually COMMIT and act of violence first? If you want citizens removed from society because they MIGHT commit a crime, then you have even Stalin beat. And WHO decides if you should be removed from society...the STATE.

4) You obviously have a serious mental problem. It is clearly apparent from what you say. You should be committed immediately. I will make the phone call right now...

 

[9thIDdoc]

The goddamned gun laws and regulation is piss poor and needs something done besides what the gun owners and NRA want.

And your solution?

Does it involve keeping certain firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens, thereby giving a tactical edge to crazies and criminals? Naw, nobody could be that stupid.

Does in involve restricting the inalienable right to protect oneself? No...who would do such a dumb thing?

Does it involve disarming the people? Well, only someone ignorant to history would suggest that!

Does it involve un-inventing firearms? Now that's just silly.

Anyway, your solution?

p.s. If it involves tougher sentences for those that utilize a firearm in the commission of their crime, I'm on board.

My bad I suppose. I would never say anything that idiotic. I was quoting Cammmpbell.