Australian teen shoots Australian police officer...but they don't have guns, right?

[2aguy]

Wow...didn't hear about this during obama's press conference..of course it happened after he made a fool of himself...but bad timing. did the Iranian teen not realize that obama just told everyone that Australian gun laws kept shootings from happening....I mean..if the teen, suspected of terrorism, can shoot one police officer, then he could have shot more people........right?

But....How did a teenager get a gun in extreme gun controlled Australia?

the kid is 15 years old...how did he get a gun in extreme gun controlled Australia....I thought you anti gun extremists said they solved this...and here we have a 15 year old killing a police officer...

See...I have oointed out in post after post that criminals and mass shooters can get guns easily in any country.

Britain just caught a 19 year old planning on shooting up the university that kicked him out....je got a pistol and over 90 rounds with extended magazines...as well as pipe bombs...and he said geting the weapon and bombs was as easy as buying chocolates....

so how did a 19 year old get a gun in extreme gun controlled Britain?

Europe and Australia are behind the U.S. In mass shootimgs...but as it was pointed out...they have crazy people too....and with the media attention and fame our mass shooters get...that is going to travel over seas...and their crazies are going to start shooting people too....

and like this Iranian kid in Austtalia.....they also have terrorists...

Teen's Slaying Of Australian Police Worker 'Linked To Terror'

Death by firearm per capita is 12 times higher in the U.S.


And in the U.S., its highest in the states with the least gun regulation

sorry, we have been through that before...the anti gunners pushing that meme get their numbers up by adding suicides to the mix...the majority of the gun deaths in their "study" is suicides.......look for the threads where this was discussed.......

Im sorry, I dont see your point. Are you claiming suicide doesn't result in death?

No...I am saying the gun isn't the issue in a suicide.....19,000 people committed suicide in 2013 according to the CDC final statistics table 10...without a gun.....take a gun from the people who used it to commit suicide and they would use what the other 19,000 did.

And Japan, China, South Korea...have absolute gun control and have 2 times or more of the suicide rate that we do...and Hungary, Poland and Russia have stricter gun control laws and higher suicide rates....

guns are not the issue in suicide.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Death by firearm per capita is 12 times higher in the U.S.

Death by firearm per capita is 12 times higher in the Leftist Population Centers, in the US. Remove the Leftist Population Centers from the Equation and the United States is the safest, most peaceful nation on earth.

And in the U.S., its highest in the states with the least gun regulation

So, Chicago has the least gun regulation?​

 

[idb]

Who says that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns?

why is the left so intent on passing MORE laws, then?

Maybe...just maybe they want to have a mechanism to restrict access to guns by the wrong people.
It can't be a perfect law, none ever are, but advocates of unrestricted access to guns are always blaming the mentally ill and criminals for most of the gun violence in the US.
Wouldn't it be great to be able to restrict access to those people while still allowing law-abiding folk to own guns?
Again, I say, it won't be perfect but at least it allows some means of scrutiny of the recipients of weapons.

We already do. We have laws on the books that mandate a background check for all purchases at licensed dealers....and it does nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters.

Criminals use people with clean records to buy their guns, or criminal gun dealers sell them the guns illegally and that makes the mandated federal background checks worthless...and it will make Universal Background checks worthless too...when they are caught they are arrested.

Mass shooters.....they all either undergo all the gun control laws on the books...and then kill...or they buy their guns illegally, thereby avoiding background checks, or they steal their guns......evey single one.

For example...this guy....passed federal mandated background checks....and if you forced all gun owners to get a license...he would have either gotten the license or ignored it....and you could force all guns to be registered..and he would have registered his guns or ignored it and still shot people.

Under current law, anyone who uses a gun to commit a crime can be arrested and jailed. We have that right now without new laws.

Under current law, felons caught in possession of a gun can be arrested and jailed on the spot....we don't need any new laws to do that.

We blame the mentally ill and criminals because they are the actual people doing the killing.....90% of shooters have at least one arrest and almost all of them are career criminals. The nuts....can usually pass background checks because they are never locked up in an institution.

Law abiding, normal people are not going out and shooting people simply because they buy a gun. Almost all shooters have long records of crime and violence...they are not normal people.

That is where the anti gun crowd gets it wrong......they see anyone who wants to own a gun as being the same as actual criminal murderers...but they are not the same, not even close.

Sadly, they target all of their gun control at the normal people who buy guns......and ignore the real problem of criminals.....

Law abiding, normal people are not going out and shooting people simply because they buy a gun. Almost all shooters have long records of crime and violence...they are not normal people.

So, why wouldn't you want to put in place mechanisms to prevent them from obtaining weapons?

having criminal records prevents them from owning guns...so they'll buy them black market or trade drugs for them or steal them...maybe we should make stealing against the law...wait...never mind...that is a law...
maybe the criminals don't know it's against the LAW?...maybe if we just told them to stop they would?...LMAO...

Yeah, you're right, it's really hard so there's no point in trying.

 

[2aguy]

why is the left so intent on passing MORE laws, then?

Maybe...just maybe they want to have a mechanism to restrict access to guns by the wrong people.
It can't be a perfect law, none ever are, but advocates of unrestricted access to guns are always blaming the mentally ill and criminals for most of the gun violence in the US.
Wouldn't it be great to be able to restrict access to those people while still allowing law-abiding folk to own guns?
Again, I say, it won't be perfect but at least it allows some means of scrutiny of the recipients of weapons.

We already do. We have laws on the books that mandate a background check for all purchases at licensed dealers....and it does nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters.

Criminals use people with clean records to buy their guns, or criminal gun dealers sell them the guns illegally and that makes the mandated federal background checks worthless...and it will make Universal Background checks worthless too...when they are caught they are arrested.

Mass shooters.....they all either undergo all the gun control laws on the books...and then kill...or they buy their guns illegally, thereby avoiding background checks, or they steal their guns......evey single one.

For example...this guy....passed federal mandated background checks....and if you forced all gun owners to get a license...he would have either gotten the license or ignored it....and you could force all guns to be registered..and he would have registered his guns or ignored it and still shot people.

Under current law, anyone who uses a gun to commit a crime can be arrested and jailed. We have that right now without new laws.

Under current law, felons caught in possession of a gun can be arrested and jailed on the spot....we don't need any new laws to do that.

We blame the mentally ill and criminals because they are the actual people doing the killing.....90% of shooters have at least one arrest and almost all of them are career criminals. The nuts....can usually pass background checks because they are never locked up in an institution.

Law abiding, normal people are not going out and shooting people simply because they buy a gun. Almost all shooters have long records of crime and violence...they are not normal people.

That is where the anti gun crowd gets it wrong......they see anyone who wants to own a gun as being the same as actual criminal murderers...but they are not the same, not even close.

Sadly, they target all of their gun control at the normal people who buy guns......and ignore the real problem of criminals.....

Law abiding, normal people are not going out and shooting people simply because they buy a gun. Almost all shooters have long records of crime and violence...they are not normal people.

So, why wouldn't you want to put in place mechanisms to prevent them from obtaining weapons?

having criminal records prevents them from owning guns...so they'll buy them black market or trade drugs for them or steal them...maybe we should make stealing against the law...wait...never mind...that is a law...
maybe the criminals don't know it's against the LAW?...maybe if we just told them to stop they would?...LMAO...

Yeah, you're right, it's really hard so there's no point in trying.

No...we are saying that gun control that targets law abiding people is pointless....target police activity at actual criminals if you want to stop gun crime...I have given you several things you can do......

 

[idb]

Maybe...just maybe they want to have a mechanism to restrict access to guns by the wrong people.
It can't be a perfect law, none ever are, but advocates of unrestricted access to guns are always blaming the mentally ill and criminals for most of the gun violence in the US.
Wouldn't it be great to be able to restrict access to those people while still allowing law-abiding folk to own guns?
Again, I say, it won't be perfect but at least it allows some means of scrutiny of the recipients of weapons.

We already do. We have laws on the books that mandate a background check for all purchases at licensed dealers....and it does nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters.

Criminals use people with clean records to buy their guns, or criminal gun dealers sell them the guns illegally and that makes the mandated federal background checks worthless...and it will make Universal Background checks worthless too...when they are caught they are arrested.

Mass shooters.....they all either undergo all the gun control laws on the books...and then kill...or they buy their guns illegally, thereby avoiding background checks, or they steal their guns......evey single one.

For example...this guy....passed federal mandated background checks....and if you forced all gun owners to get a license...he would have either gotten the license or ignored it....and you could force all guns to be registered..and he would have registered his guns or ignored it and still shot people.

Under current law, anyone who uses a gun to commit a crime can be arrested and jailed. We have that right now without new laws.

Under current law, felons caught in possession of a gun can be arrested and jailed on the spot....we don't need any new laws to do that.

We blame the mentally ill and criminals because they are the actual people doing the killing.....90% of shooters have at least one arrest and almost all of them are career criminals. The nuts....can usually pass background checks because they are never locked up in an institution.

Law abiding, normal people are not going out and shooting people simply because they buy a gun. Almost all shooters have long records of crime and violence...they are not normal people.

That is where the anti gun crowd gets it wrong......they see anyone who wants to own a gun as being the same as actual criminal murderers...but they are not the same, not even close.

Sadly, they target all of their gun control at the normal people who buy guns......and ignore the real problem of criminals.....

Law abiding, normal people are not going out and shooting people simply because they buy a gun. Almost all shooters have long records of crime and violence...they are not normal people.

So, why wouldn't you want to put in place mechanisms to prevent them from obtaining weapons?

having criminal records prevents them from owning guns...so they'll buy them black market or trade drugs for them or steal them...maybe we should make stealing against the law...wait...never mind...that is a law...
maybe the criminals don't know it's against the LAW?...maybe if we just told them to stop they would?...LMAO...

Yeah, you're right, it's really hard so there's no point in trying.

No...we are saying that gun control that targets law abiding people is pointless....target police activity at actual criminals if you want to stop gun crime...I have given you several things you can do......

It's not targeting law abiding people at all.
Nothing will change for them.
It's providing a level of scrutiny at the point of sale for suitability to own a gun.

 

[2aguy]

We already do. We have laws on the books that mandate a background check for all purchases at licensed dealers....and it does nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters.

Criminals use people with clean records to buy their guns, or criminal gun dealers sell them the guns illegally and that makes the mandated federal background checks worthless...and it will make Universal Background checks worthless too...when they are caught they are arrested.

Mass shooters.....they all either undergo all the gun control laws on the books...and then kill...or they buy their guns illegally, thereby avoiding background checks, or they steal their guns......evey single one.

For example...this guy....passed federal mandated background checks....and if you forced all gun owners to get a license...he would have either gotten the license or ignored it....and you could force all guns to be registered..and he would have registered his guns or ignored it and still shot people.

Under current law, anyone who uses a gun to commit a crime can be arrested and jailed. We have that right now without new laws.

Under current law, felons caught in possession of a gun can be arrested and jailed on the spot....we don't need any new laws to do that.

We blame the mentally ill and criminals because they are the actual people doing the killing.....90% of shooters have at least one arrest and almost all of them are career criminals. The nuts....can usually pass background checks because they are never locked up in an institution.

Law abiding, normal people are not going out and shooting people simply because they buy a gun. Almost all shooters have long records of crime and violence...they are not normal people.

That is where the anti gun crowd gets it wrong......they see anyone who wants to own a gun as being the same as actual criminal murderers...but they are not the same, not even close.

Sadly, they target all of their gun control at the normal people who buy guns......and ignore the real problem of criminals.....

Law abiding, normal people are not going out and shooting people simply because they buy a gun. Almost all shooters have long records of crime and violence...they are not normal people.

So, why wouldn't you want to put in place mechanisms to prevent them from obtaining weapons?

having criminal records prevents them from owning guns...so they'll buy them black market or trade drugs for them or steal them...maybe we should make stealing against the law...wait...never mind...that is a law...
maybe the criminals don't know it's against the LAW?...maybe if we just told them to stop they would?...LMAO...

Yeah, you're right, it's really hard so there's no point in trying.

No...we are saying that gun control that targets law abiding people is pointless....target police activity at actual criminals if you want to stop gun crime...I have given you several things you can do......

It's not targeting law abiding people at all.
Nothing will change for them.
It's providing a level of scrutiny at the point of sale for suitability to own a gun.

actually that isn't correct. Remember...criminals will get around your laws by stealing guns or by getting people who have a license and can pass a universal background check get the gun for them.

Mass shooters....will get the license....and then shoot people.

the reason I say it targets the law abiding...is that right now, criminals using guns can already be arrested when they commit a crime with a gun and felons can already be arrested for merely possessing a gun...

Neither one will get a license...

Only non criminals will get the license...what does this mean...one, it costs them money. For the poor it can be a real hurdle when they need guns more than others since they get less police protection. Two, you now have created a situation where a normal, law abiding person, who fails to get a license...can lose their gun rights forever if they fail to get that license...for having committed no crime other than failing to do some paperwork. Also....those states hostile to concealed carry and simply owning a gun....do not always issue the permits or the license even though the are required to by law....D.C. refuses to issue concealed carry permits even though the Supreme Court said they have to......Right?

I have already shown that criminals don't get licenses...none of the gang members who shot 50 people in Chicago this weekend went to a gun class and spent 16 hours of training to get a concealed carry permit.

However..if a normal, honest, law abiding person puts his gun in his car....he can be a felon.....having committed no crime other than putting the gun in his car or failing to get a license..........

Why would you want to target law abiding people with that? That is what all three of your proposals would do...Licensing gun owners, registering their guns and mandating that they get a background check if they sell their gun to their brother.

And other facets of the universal background check....a guy has a gun, and his wife has a concealed carry permit..."here honey...take my M&P shield with you tonight when you are showing that house...." He gives her the gun....they are now both felons....she has a concealed carry permit, and can actually carry a gun....but he did not get a federal, universal background check on her to see if she could have that gun.....

The creation of licensing and registering and universal background checks will only catch law abiding non criminals....and it will ruin their lives.

for example...the Nurse from Pennsylvania...had a legal concealed carry permit...went into New Jersey with her legal gun and her legal carry permit...and became a felon...because New Jersey doesn't allow concealed carry in their state...When the police officer walked up to her car...she did the legal thing in Pennsylvania...she dutifully informed him she was carrying a gun and had a gun permit for it......and then he arrested her and she was facing a felony...it took Chris Christie to overturn it.

That is the problem with your gun control laws...they make criminals out of normal people simply because of clerical errorr, and they can destroy their lives....

And all for the fact that we can arrest criminals and felons with guns with existing laws, and do not need licensing, registration or universal background checks to do it.

 

[idb]

So, why wouldn't you want to put in place mechanisms to prevent them from obtaining weapons?

having criminal records prevents them from owning guns...so they'll buy them black market or trade drugs for them or steal them...maybe we should make stealing against the law...wait...never mind...that is a law...
maybe the criminals don't know it's against the LAW?...maybe if we just told them to stop they would?...LMAO...

Yeah, you're right, it's really hard so there's no point in trying.

No...we are saying that gun control that targets law abiding people is pointless....target police activity at actual criminals if you want to stop gun crime...I have given you several things you can do......

It's not targeting law abiding people at all.
Nothing will change for them.
It's providing a level of scrutiny at the point of sale for suitability to own a gun.

actually that isn't correct. Remember...criminals will get around your laws by stealing guns or by getting people who have a license and can pass a universal background check get the gun for them.

Mass shooters....will get the license....and then shoot people.

the reason I say it targets the law abiding...is that right now, criminals using guns can already be arrested when they commit a crime with a gun and felons can already be arrested for merely possessing a gun...

Neither one will get a license...

Only non criminals will get the license...what does this mean...one, it costs them money. For the poor it can be a real hurdle when they need guns more than others since they get less police protection. Two, you now have created a situation where a normal, law abiding person, who fails to get a license...can lose their gun rights forever if they fail to get that license...for having committed no crime other than failing to do some paperwork. Also....those states hostile to concealed carry and simply owning a gun....do not always issue the permits or the license even though the are required to by law....D.C. refuses to issue concealed carry permits even though the Supreme Court said they have to......Right?

I have already shown that criminals don't get licenses...none of the gang members who shot 50 people in Chicago this weekend went to a gun class and spent 16 hours of training to get a concealed carry permit.

However..if a normal, honest, law abiding person puts his gun in his car....he can be a felon.....having committed no crime other than putting the gun in his car or failing to get a license..........

Why would you want to target law abiding people with that? That is what all three of your proposals would do...Licensing gun owners, registering their guns and mandating that they get a background check if they sell their gun to their brother.

And other facets of the universal background check....a guy has a gun, and his wife has a concealed carry permit..."here honey...take my M&P shield with you tonight when you are showing that house...." He gives her the gun....they are now both felons....she has a concealed carry permit, and can actually carry a gun....but he did not get a federal, universal background check on her to see if she could have that gun.....

The creation of licensing and registering and universal background checks will only catch law abiding non criminals....and it will ruin their lives.

for example...the Nurse from Pennsylvania...had a legal concealed carry permit...went into New Jersey with her legal gun and her legal carry permit...and became a felon...because New Jersey doesn't allow concealed carry in their state...When the police officer walked up to her car...she did the legal thing in Pennsylvania...she dutifully informed him she was carrying a gun and had a gun permit for it......and then he arrested her and she was facing a felony...it took Chris Christie to overturn it.

That is the problem with your gun control laws...they make criminals out of normal people simply because of clerical errorr, and they can destroy their lives....

And all for the fact that we can arrest criminals and felons with guns with existing laws, and do not need licensing, registration or universal background checks to do it.

If they're law abiding then they'll have a license...won't they?
How do you tell if someone is a potential criminal?

No law is perfect...neither is the option of letting anyone have a gun that wants one.

 

[candycorn]

Nope….Chicago has there own laws about guns…..as does D.C. and Baltimore……and any number of big cities.

Oh, okay. So state laws do not apply to the cities. Fascinating view of society you have there.

Yeah….sometimes they don't apply…for years Chicago was the only part of the State that didn't allow people to own pistols….it didn't stop the gang members but law abiding citizens were limited to shotguns and they even had restrictions on that….also…chicago still won't let gun stores open in the city…they are currently in court over that…

D.C……..lost a court case and have been ordered to allow people to own guns and to carry guns….they have fought both and are still refusing to allow concealed carry permits…..

So yes…there is a lot of differences in a state where you have a red state with blue cities.

No; the difference is simple geography. When you have a state that won't ban weapons and a city that will, criminals simply acquire the guns in the State and bring them into the city. Thanks to Walker, they can probably buy them in Wisconsin. Thanks to Daniels, they can probably get them in Indiana too.

When you have entire nations that regulate weapons, you end up like Europe where you have very few massacres (if any) and not these monthly bloodbaths.

Its really that simple.

Sorry...doesn't work that way....you guys tell us that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns....Chicago has strict gun control laws in the city....that means...according to you guys, that criminals can't get guns in chicago. Notice as well....that there are cities in states with less gun control that have lower gun murder rates than chicago...and those states have gun stores all over their states...while chicago still won't let gun stores open up inside city limits......so in states where people can carry guns, and buy guns in the state, and they don't even have to leave the state to buy guns........they have lower gun murder rates than chicago with strict gun control laws....that blows your point all to shit.....

Who says that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns?

He is, apparently, unaware of something called automobiles that many use to drive from one place to another.

When you have universal bans as they do in European Countries, you don't have these monthly bloodbaths.

It's that simple.

 

[2aguy]

having criminal records prevents them from owning guns...so they'll buy them black market or trade drugs for them or steal them...maybe we should make stealing against the law...wait...never mind...that is a law...
maybe the criminals don't know it's against the LAW?...maybe if we just told them to stop they would?...LMAO...

Yeah, you're right, it's really hard so there's no point in trying.

No...we are saying that gun control that targets law abiding people is pointless....target police activity at actual criminals if you want to stop gun crime...I have given you several things you can do......

It's not targeting law abiding people at all.
Nothing will change for them.
It's providing a level of scrutiny at the point of sale for suitability to own a gun.

actually that isn't correct. Remember...criminals will get around your laws by stealing guns or by getting people who have a license and can pass a universal background check get the gun for them.

Mass shooters....will get the license....and then shoot people.

the reason I say it targets the law abiding...is that right now, criminals using guns can already be arrested when they commit a crime with a gun and felons can already be arrested for merely possessing a gun...

Neither one will get a license...

Only non criminals will get the license...what does this mean...one, it costs them money. For the poor it can be a real hurdle when they need guns more than others since they get less police protection. Two, you now have created a situation where a normal, law abiding person, who fails to get a license...can lose their gun rights forever if they fail to get that license...for having committed no crime other than failing to do some paperwork. Also....those states hostile to concealed carry and simply owning a gun....do not always issue the permits or the license even though the are required to by law....D.C. refuses to issue concealed carry permits even though the Supreme Court said they have to......Right?

I have already shown that criminals don't get licenses...none of the gang members who shot 50 people in Chicago this weekend went to a gun class and spent 16 hours of training to get a concealed carry permit.

However..if a normal, honest, law abiding person puts his gun in his car....he can be a felon.....having committed no crime other than putting the gun in his car or failing to get a license..........

Why would you want to target law abiding people with that? That is what all three of your proposals would do...Licensing gun owners, registering their guns and mandating that they get a background check if they sell their gun to their brother.

And other facets of the universal background check....a guy has a gun, and his wife has a concealed carry permit..."here honey...take my M&P shield with you tonight when you are showing that house...." He gives her the gun....they are now both felons....she has a concealed carry permit, and can actually carry a gun....but he did not get a federal, universal background check on her to see if she could have that gun.....

The creation of licensing and registering and universal background checks will only catch law abiding non criminals....and it will ruin their lives.

for example...the Nurse from Pennsylvania...had a legal concealed carry permit...went into New Jersey with her legal gun and her legal carry permit...and became a felon...because New Jersey doesn't allow concealed carry in their state...When the police officer walked up to her car...she did the legal thing in Pennsylvania...she dutifully informed him she was carrying a gun and had a gun permit for it......and then he arrested her and she was facing a felony...it took Chris Christie to overturn it.

That is the problem with your gun control laws...they make criminals out of normal people simply because of clerical errorr, and they can destroy their lives....

And all for the fact that we can arrest criminals and felons with guns with existing laws, and do not need licensing, registration or universal background checks to do it.

If they're law abiding then they'll have a license...won't they?
How do you tell if someone is a potential criminal?

No law is perfect...neither is the option of letting anyone have a gun that wants one.

If they are law abiding what does making them get a license do. If they are stopped for a crime they can be arrested. If they are stopped by a police officer and they are not convicted criminals and they have the gun they can be arrested….if they are not convicted criminals having them have a license is just extra paperwork that does nothing to change their status….since they can already be arrested if they commit a crime with a gun or if they are a convicted criminal, they can already be arrested without the license. Right? Is anything I have said untrue?

How do you tell if someone is a potential criminal?….our laws are not based on that. Our laws are based on people who break them…then they have a record and can be dealt with as actual criminals.

We don't let anyone who wants a gun have one, convicted criminals cannot have guns.

 

[Rotagilla]

why is the left so intent on passing MORE laws, then?

Maybe...just maybe they want to have a mechanism to restrict access to guns by the wrong people.
It can't be a perfect law, none ever are, but advocates of unrestricted access to guns are always blaming the mentally ill and criminals for most of the gun violence in the US.
Wouldn't it be great to be able to restrict access to those people while still allowing law-abiding folk to own guns?
Again, I say, it won't be perfect but at least it allows some means of scrutiny of the recipients of weapons.

We already do. We have laws on the books that mandate a background check for all purchases at licensed dealers....and it does nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters.

Criminals use people with clean records to buy their guns, or criminal gun dealers sell them the guns illegally and that makes the mandated federal background checks worthless...and it will make Universal Background checks worthless too...when they are caught they are arrested.

Mass shooters.....they all either undergo all the gun control laws on the books...and then kill...or they buy their guns illegally, thereby avoiding background checks, or they steal their guns......evey single one.

For example...this guy....passed federal mandated background checks....and if you forced all gun owners to get a license...he would have either gotten the license or ignored it....and you could force all guns to be registered..and he would have registered his guns or ignored it and still shot people.

Under current law, anyone who uses a gun to commit a crime can be arrested and jailed. We have that right now without new laws.

Under current law, felons caught in possession of a gun can be arrested and jailed on the spot....we don't need any new laws to do that.

We blame the mentally ill and criminals because they are the actual people doing the killing.....90% of shooters have at least one arrest and almost all of them are career criminals. The nuts....can usually pass background checks because they are never locked up in an institution.

Law abiding, normal people are not going out and shooting people simply because they buy a gun. Almost all shooters have long records of crime and violence...they are not normal people.

That is where the anti gun crowd gets it wrong......they see anyone who wants to own a gun as being the same as actual criminal murderers...but they are not the same, not even close.

Sadly, they target all of their gun control at the normal people who buy guns......and ignore the real problem of criminals.....

Law abiding, normal people are not going out and shooting people simply because they buy a gun. Almost all shooters have long records of crime and violence...they are not normal people.

So, why wouldn't you want to put in place mechanisms to prevent them from obtaining weapons?

having criminal records prevents them from owning guns...so they'll buy them black market or trade drugs for them or steal them...maybe we should make stealing against the law...wait...never mind...that is a law...
maybe the criminals don't know it's against the LAW?...maybe if we just told them to stop they would?...LMAO...

Yeah, you're right, it's really hard so there's no point in trying.

you said that..not me..

pretty weak, too...

 

[2aguy]

Oh, okay. So state laws do not apply to the cities. Fascinating view of society you have there.

Yeah….sometimes they don't apply…for years Chicago was the only part of the State that didn't allow people to own pistols….it didn't stop the gang members but law abiding citizens were limited to shotguns and they even had restrictions on that….also…chicago still won't let gun stores open in the city…they are currently in court over that…

D.C……..lost a court case and have been ordered to allow people to own guns and to carry guns….they have fought both and are still refusing to allow concealed carry permits…..

So yes…there is a lot of differences in a state where you have a red state with blue cities.

No; the difference is simple geography. When you have a state that won't ban weapons and a city that will, criminals simply acquire the guns in the State and bring them into the city. Thanks to Walker, they can probably buy them in Wisconsin. Thanks to Daniels, they can probably get them in Indiana too.

When you have entire nations that regulate weapons, you end up like Europe where you have very few massacres (if any) and not these monthly bloodbaths.

Its really that simple.

Sorry...doesn't work that way....you guys tell us that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns....Chicago has strict gun control laws in the city....that means...according to you guys, that criminals can't get guns in chicago. Notice as well....that there are cities in states with less gun control that have lower gun murder rates than chicago...and those states have gun stores all over their states...while chicago still won't let gun stores open up inside city limits......so in states where people can carry guns, and buy guns in the state, and they don't even have to leave the state to buy guns........they have lower gun murder rates than chicago with strict gun control laws....that blows your point all to shit.....

Who says that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns?

He is, apparently, unaware of something called automobiles that many use to drive from one place to another.

When you have universal bans as they do in European Countries, you don't have these monthly bloodbaths.

It's that simple.

How did the 19 year old arrested last week in Britain get his pistol, 90 rounds and pipe bombs with universal bans? How did the terrorists in France, 2 of them on government terrorist watch lists and 1 a convicted criminal get fully automatic rifles, 30 round magazines, pistols, grenades, and a rocket propelled grenade in a country with a universal ban?

How did the gangs in Marseilles….who shot up a neighbor hood the same week as the Charlie Hebdo shooting, get their fully automatic rifles in a country with universal bans.

How did the shooter on the train, who was stopped by Americans, get his fully automatic rifle in a country with universal bans.

How do the gangs in Sweden get fully automatic rifles and grenades in a country with universal bans.

How did the terrorist who held hostages in Australia in the coffee shop get his gun in a country with a universal ban.

How did the 15 year old teenager immigrant in Australia get the pistol he used to murder 2 police officers.

The terrorists in Denmark…where did they get their guns.

The terrorists in Belgium…where did they get their guns.

The criminals and terrorists in Europe and Australia can easily get whatever guns they want, and they do…when they want them. They get them as easily as our criminals do…and if they don't use them as much that has more to do with european criminal culture than American culture...

 

[2aguy]

Oh, okay. So state laws do not apply to the cities. Fascinating view of society you have there.

Yeah….sometimes they don't apply…for years Chicago was the only part of the State that didn't allow people to own pistols….it didn't stop the gang members but law abiding citizens were limited to shotguns and they even had restrictions on that….also…chicago still won't let gun stores open in the city…they are currently in court over that…

D.C……..lost a court case and have been ordered to allow people to own guns and to carry guns….they have fought both and are still refusing to allow concealed carry permits…..

So yes…there is a lot of differences in a state where you have a red state with blue cities.

No; the difference is simple geography. When you have a state that won't ban weapons and a city that will, criminals simply acquire the guns in the State and bring them into the city. Thanks to Walker, they can probably buy them in Wisconsin. Thanks to Daniels, they can probably get them in Indiana too.

When you have entire nations that regulate weapons, you end up like Europe where you have very few massacres (if any) and not these monthly bloodbaths.

Its really that simple.

Sorry...doesn't work that way....you guys tell us that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns....Chicago has strict gun control laws in the city....that means...according to you guys, that criminals can't get guns in chicago. Notice as well....that there are cities in states with less gun control that have lower gun murder rates than chicago...and those states have gun stores all over their states...while chicago still won't let gun stores open up inside city limits......so in states where people can carry guns, and buy guns in the state, and they don't even have to leave the state to buy guns........they have lower gun murder rates than chicago with strict gun control laws....that blows your point all to shit.....

Who says that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns?

He is, apparently, unaware of something called automobiles that many use to drive from one place to another.

When you have universal bans as they do in European Countries, you don't have these monthly bloodbaths.

It's that simple.

He is, apparently, unaware of something called automobiles that many use to drive from one place to another.

I am fully aware of cars….you failed to read and respond to my post on Puerto Rico and Australia…..Puerto Rico, according to VICE t.v. has the strictest gun control laws in the United States and it's protectorates…..it is an island nation……you can't drive cars to another state…can you? And they have the highest gun murder rate in the world.

Australia….another island nation….where you can't just drive across a border with a car…right? Confiscated their guns and you can't legally own a gun..right? How do their immigrants get their guns to kill police officers and college professors?

How do Australian "Bikie" gangs get their guns for their drive buys and murders?

 

[candycorn]

Yeah….sometimes they don't apply…for years Chicago was the only part of the State that didn't allow people to own pistols….it didn't stop the gang members but law abiding citizens were limited to shotguns and they even had restrictions on that….also…chicago still won't let gun stores open in the city…they are currently in court over that…

D.C……..lost a court case and have been ordered to allow people to own guns and to carry guns….they have fought both and are still refusing to allow concealed carry permits…..

So yes…there is a lot of differences in a state where you have a red state with blue cities.

No; the difference is simple geography. When you have a state that won't ban weapons and a city that will, criminals simply acquire the guns in the State and bring them into the city. Thanks to Walker, they can probably buy them in Wisconsin. Thanks to Daniels, they can probably get them in Indiana too.

When you have entire nations that regulate weapons, you end up like Europe where you have very few massacres (if any) and not these monthly bloodbaths.

Its really that simple.

Sorry...doesn't work that way....you guys tell us that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns....Chicago has strict gun control laws in the city....that means...according to you guys, that criminals can't get guns in chicago. Notice as well....that there are cities in states with less gun control that have lower gun murder rates than chicago...and those states have gun stores all over their states...while chicago still won't let gun stores open up inside city limits......so in states where people can carry guns, and buy guns in the state, and they don't even have to leave the state to buy guns........they have lower gun murder rates than chicago with strict gun control laws....that blows your point all to shit.....

Who says that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns?

He is, apparently, unaware of something called automobiles that many use to drive from one place to another.

When you have universal bans as they do in European Countries, you don't have these monthly bloodbaths.

It's that simple.

He is, apparently, unaware of something called automobiles that many use to drive from one place to another.

I am fully aware of cars….you failed to read and respond to my post on Puerto Rico and Australia…..Puerto Rico, according to VICE t.v. has the strictest gun control laws in the United States and it's protectorates…..it is an island nation……you can't drive cars to another state…can you? And they have the highest gun murder rate in the world.

Australia….another island nation….where you can't just drive across a border with a car…right? Confiscated their guns and you can't legally own a gun..right? How do their immigrants get their guns to kill police officers and college professors?

How do Australian "Bikie" gangs get their guns for their drive buys and murders?

Probably from the black market. Their murder rate would have to increase 2100% to equal ours. Because they don't sell guns at department stores.

 

[candycorn]

Yeah….sometimes they don't apply…for years Chicago was the only part of the State that didn't allow people to own pistols….it didn't stop the gang members but law abiding citizens were limited to shotguns and they even had restrictions on that….also…chicago still won't let gun stores open in the city…they are currently in court over that…

D.C……..lost a court case and have been ordered to allow people to own guns and to carry guns….they have fought both and are still refusing to allow concealed carry permits…..

So yes…there is a lot of differences in a state where you have a red state with blue cities.

No; the difference is simple geography. When you have a state that won't ban weapons and a city that will, criminals simply acquire the guns in the State and bring them into the city. Thanks to Walker, they can probably buy them in Wisconsin. Thanks to Daniels, they can probably get them in Indiana too.

When you have entire nations that regulate weapons, you end up like Europe where you have very few massacres (if any) and not these monthly bloodbaths.

Its really that simple.

Sorry...doesn't work that way....you guys tell us that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns....Chicago has strict gun control laws in the city....that means...according to you guys, that criminals can't get guns in chicago. Notice as well....that there are cities in states with less gun control that have lower gun murder rates than chicago...and those states have gun stores all over their states...while chicago still won't let gun stores open up inside city limits......so in states where people can carry guns, and buy guns in the state, and they don't even have to leave the state to buy guns........they have lower gun murder rates than chicago with strict gun control laws....that blows your point all to shit.....

Who says that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns?

He is, apparently, unaware of something called automobiles that many use to drive from one place to another.

When you have universal bans as they do in European Countries, you don't have these monthly bloodbaths.

It's that simple.

How did the 19 year old arrested last week in Britain get his pistol, 90 rounds and pipe bombs with universal bans? How did the terrorists in France, 2 of them on government terrorist watch lists and 1 a convicted criminal get fully automatic rifles, 30 round magazines, pistols, grenades, and a rocket propelled grenade in a country with a universal ban?

How did the gangs in Marseilles….who shot up a neighbor hood the same week as the Charlie Hebdo shooting, get their fully automatic rifles in a country with universal bans.

How did the shooter on the train, who was stopped by Americans, get his fully automatic rifle in a country with universal bans.

How do the gangs in Sweden get fully automatic rifles and grenades in a country with universal bans.

How did the terrorist who held hostages in Australia in the coffee shop get his gun in a country with a universal ban.

How did the 15 year old teenager immigrant in Australia get the pistol he used to murder 2 police officers.

The terrorists in Denmark…where did they get their guns.

The terrorists in Belgium…where did they get their guns.

The criminals and terrorists in Europe and Australia can easily get whatever guns they want, and they do…when they want them. They get them as easily as our criminals do…and if they don't use them as much that has more to do with european criminal culture than American culture...

Can you walk into a store and walk out with a Bushmaster AR-15 in London today?

Yes or no.

 

[2aguy]

No; the difference is simple geography. When you have a state that won't ban weapons and a city that will, criminals simply acquire the guns in the State and bring them into the city. Thanks to Walker, they can probably buy them in Wisconsin. Thanks to Daniels, they can probably get them in Indiana too.

When you have entire nations that regulate weapons, you end up like Europe where you have very few massacres (if any) and not these monthly bloodbaths.

Its really that simple.

Sorry...doesn't work that way....you guys tell us that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns....Chicago has strict gun control laws in the city....that means...according to you guys, that criminals can't get guns in chicago. Notice as well....that there are cities in states with less gun control that have lower gun murder rates than chicago...and those states have gun stores all over their states...while chicago still won't let gun stores open up inside city limits......so in states where people can carry guns, and buy guns in the state, and they don't even have to leave the state to buy guns........they have lower gun murder rates than chicago with strict gun control laws....that blows your point all to shit.....

Who says that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns?

He is, apparently, unaware of something called automobiles that many use to drive from one place to another.

When you have universal bans as they do in European Countries, you don't have these monthly bloodbaths.

It's that simple.

How did the 19 year old arrested last week in Britain get his pistol, 90 rounds and pipe bombs with universal bans? How did the terrorists in France, 2 of them on government terrorist watch lists and 1 a convicted criminal get fully automatic rifles, 30 round magazines, pistols, grenades, and a rocket propelled grenade in a country with a universal ban?

How did the gangs in Marseilles….who shot up a neighbor hood the same week as the Charlie Hebdo shooting, get their fully automatic rifles in a country with universal bans.

How did the shooter on the train, who was stopped by Americans, get his fully automatic rifle in a country with universal bans.

How do the gangs in Sweden get fully automatic rifles and grenades in a country with universal bans.

How did the terrorist who held hostages in Australia in the coffee shop get his gun in a country with a universal ban.

How did the 15 year old teenager immigrant in Australia get the pistol he used to murder 2 police officers.

The terrorists in Denmark…where did they get their guns.

The terrorists in Belgium…where did they get their guns.

The criminals and terrorists in Europe and Australia can easily get whatever guns they want, and they do…when they want them. They get them as easily as our criminals do…and if they don't use them as much that has more to do with european criminal culture than American culture...

Can you walk into a store and walk out with a Bushmaster AR-15 in London today?

Yes or no.

No….but that didn't stop the 19 year old kid who got a pistol on the dark web…you think it would be hard to get an ar-15 if they wanted it…..the three terrorists in France got fully automatic rifles, the shooters is Belgium, Denmark, Sweden and Norway…dittos……..

And of course, Ar-15s kill fewer people than knives, clubs and hands and feet in the UNited STates…so guns are not the issue…funny you decided on the AR-15 considering how rarely they are used for mass shootings….

And with the title of this thread….how hard was it for the 15 year old immigrant kid….to get a gun to kill the police officer…or the bike gangs to get their guns in Australia…….

 

[idb]

Sorry...doesn't work that way....you guys tell us that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns....Chicago has strict gun control laws in the city....that means...according to you guys, that criminals can't get guns in chicago. Notice as well....that there are cities in states with less gun control that have lower gun murder rates than chicago...and those states have gun stores all over their states...while chicago still won't let gun stores open up inside city limits......so in states where people can carry guns, and buy guns in the state, and they don't even have to leave the state to buy guns........they have lower gun murder rates than chicago with strict gun control laws....that blows your point all to shit.....

Who says that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns?

He is, apparently, unaware of something called automobiles that many use to drive from one place to another.

When you have universal bans as they do in European Countries, you don't have these monthly bloodbaths.

It's that simple.

How did the 19 year old arrested last week in Britain get his pistol, 90 rounds and pipe bombs with universal bans? How did the terrorists in France, 2 of them on government terrorist watch lists and 1 a convicted criminal get fully automatic rifles, 30 round magazines, pistols, grenades, and a rocket propelled grenade in a country with a universal ban?

How did the gangs in Marseilles….who shot up a neighbor hood the same week as the Charlie Hebdo shooting, get their fully automatic rifles in a country with universal bans.

How did the shooter on the train, who was stopped by Americans, get his fully automatic rifle in a country with universal bans.

How do the gangs in Sweden get fully automatic rifles and grenades in a country with universal bans.

How did the terrorist who held hostages in Australia in the coffee shop get his gun in a country with a universal ban.

How did the 15 year old teenager immigrant in Australia get the pistol he used to murder 2 police officers.

The terrorists in Denmark…where did they get their guns.

The terrorists in Belgium…where did they get their guns.

The criminals and terrorists in Europe and Australia can easily get whatever guns they want, and they do…when they want them. They get them as easily as our criminals do…and if they don't use them as much that has more to do with european criminal culture than American culture...

Can you walk into a store and walk out with a Bushmaster AR-15 in London today?

Yes or no.

No….but that didn't stop the 19 year old kid who got a pistol on the dark web…you think it would be hard to get an ar-15 if they wanted it…..the three terrorists in France got fully automatic rifles, the shooters is Belgium, Denmark, Sweden and Norway…dittos……..

And of course, Ar-15s kill fewer people than knives, clubs and hands and feet in the UNited STates…so guns are not the issue…funny you decided on the AR-15 considering how rarely they are used for mass shootings….

And with the title of this thread….how hard was it for the 15 year old immigrant kid….to get a gun to kill the police officer…or the bike gangs to get their guns in Australia…….

Yeah, you're right.
No law can stop every criminal so there's no point in having laws...and anyway...it's too hard so why bother trying.

 

[2aguy]

Who says that gun control laws stop criminals from getting guns?

He is, apparently, unaware of something called automobiles that many use to drive from one place to another.

When you have universal bans as they do in European Countries, you don't have these monthly bloodbaths.

It's that simple.

How did the 19 year old arrested last week in Britain get his pistol, 90 rounds and pipe bombs with universal bans? How did the terrorists in France, 2 of them on government terrorist watch lists and 1 a convicted criminal get fully automatic rifles, 30 round magazines, pistols, grenades, and a rocket propelled grenade in a country with a universal ban?

How did the gangs in Marseilles….who shot up a neighbor hood the same week as the Charlie Hebdo shooting, get their fully automatic rifles in a country with universal bans.

How did the shooter on the train, who was stopped by Americans, get his fully automatic rifle in a country with universal bans.

How do the gangs in Sweden get fully automatic rifles and grenades in a country with universal bans.

How did the terrorist who held hostages in Australia in the coffee shop get his gun in a country with a universal ban.

How did the 15 year old teenager immigrant in Australia get the pistol he used to murder 2 police officers.

The terrorists in Denmark…where did they get their guns.

The terrorists in Belgium…where did they get their guns.

The criminals and terrorists in Europe and Australia can easily get whatever guns they want, and they do…when they want them. They get them as easily as our criminals do…and if they don't use them as much that has more to do with european criminal culture than American culture...

Can you walk into a store and walk out with a Bushmaster AR-15 in London today?

Yes or no.

No….but that didn't stop the 19 year old kid who got a pistol on the dark web…you think it would be hard to get an ar-15 if they wanted it…..the three terrorists in France got fully automatic rifles, the shooters is Belgium, Denmark, Sweden and Norway…dittos……..

And of course, Ar-15s kill fewer people than knives, clubs and hands and feet in the UNited STates…so guns are not the issue…funny you decided on the AR-15 considering how rarely they are used for mass shootings….

And with the title of this thread….how hard was it for the 15 year old immigrant kid….to get a gun to kill the police officer…or the bike gangs to get their guns in Australia…….

Yeah, you're right.
No law can stop every criminal so there's no point in having laws...and anyway...it's too hard so why bother trying.

Do you want to be childish or have a real conversation? We already have laws on the book about using a gun to commit crime…if you break that law you get arrested…..if you are a felon and just now the the gun you can be arrested. How is that not having a law. Just because the new laws on licensing, registration and universal background checks have ben shown to be dumb…..try to at least be an adult.

 

[idb]

He is, apparently, unaware of something called automobiles that many use to drive from one place to another.

When you have universal bans as they do in European Countries, you don't have these monthly bloodbaths.

It's that simple.

How did the 19 year old arrested last week in Britain get his pistol, 90 rounds and pipe bombs with universal bans? How did the terrorists in France, 2 of them on government terrorist watch lists and 1 a convicted criminal get fully automatic rifles, 30 round magazines, pistols, grenades, and a rocket propelled grenade in a country with a universal ban?

How did the gangs in Marseilles….who shot up a neighbor hood the same week as the Charlie Hebdo shooting, get their fully automatic rifles in a country with universal bans.

How did the shooter on the train, who was stopped by Americans, get his fully automatic rifle in a country with universal bans.

How do the gangs in Sweden get fully automatic rifles and grenades in a country with universal bans.

How did the terrorist who held hostages in Australia in the coffee shop get his gun in a country with a universal ban.

How did the 15 year old teenager immigrant in Australia get the pistol he used to murder 2 police officers.

The terrorists in Denmark…where did they get their guns.

The terrorists in Belgium…where did they get their guns.

The criminals and terrorists in Europe and Australia can easily get whatever guns they want, and they do…when they want them. They get them as easily as our criminals do…and if they don't use them as much that has more to do with european criminal culture than American culture...

Can you walk into a store and walk out with a Bushmaster AR-15 in London today?

Yes or no.

No….but that didn't stop the 19 year old kid who got a pistol on the dark web…you think it would be hard to get an ar-15 if they wanted it…..the three terrorists in France got fully automatic rifles, the shooters is Belgium, Denmark, Sweden and Norway…dittos……..

And of course, Ar-15s kill fewer people than knives, clubs and hands and feet in the UNited STates…so guns are not the issue…funny you decided on the AR-15 considering how rarely they are used for mass shootings….

And with the title of this thread….how hard was it for the 15 year old immigrant kid….to get a gun to kill the police officer…or the bike gangs to get their guns in Australia…….

Yeah, you're right.
No law can stop every criminal so there's no point in having laws...and anyway...it's too hard so why bother trying.

Do you want to be childish or have a real conversation? We already have laws on the book about using a gun to commit crime…if you break that law you get arrested…..if you are a felon and just now the the gun you can be arrested. How is that not having a law. Just because the new laws on licensing, registration and universal background checks have ben shown to be dumb…..try to at least be an adult.

I was simply paraphrasing your own arguments.

They seem to be, in essence; no law will stop criminals getting guns so unless it stops every gun crime there's no point in having any laws, and anyway there are already lots of guns so it would be really hard to put in any sort of gun control, and anyway it doesn't work overseas because criminals can still use knives and hammers and cars...something, something, something...
Or something.

 

[candycorn]

How did the 19 year old arrested last week in Britain get his pistol, 90 rounds and pipe bombs with universal bans? How did the terrorists in France, 2 of them on government terrorist watch lists and 1 a convicted criminal get fully automatic rifles, 30 round magazines, pistols, grenades, and a rocket propelled grenade in a country with a universal ban?

How did the gangs in Marseilles….who shot up a neighbor hood the same week as the Charlie Hebdo shooting, get their fully automatic rifles in a country with universal bans.

How did the shooter on the train, who was stopped by Americans, get his fully automatic rifle in a country with universal bans.

How do the gangs in Sweden get fully automatic rifles and grenades in a country with universal bans.

How did the terrorist who held hostages in Australia in the coffee shop get his gun in a country with a universal ban.

How did the 15 year old teenager immigrant in Australia get the pistol he used to murder 2 police officers.

The terrorists in Denmark…where did they get their guns.

The terrorists in Belgium…where did they get their guns.

The criminals and terrorists in Europe and Australia can easily get whatever guns they want, and they do…when they want them. They get them as easily as our criminals do…and if they don't use them as much that has more to do with european criminal culture than American culture...

Can you walk into a store and walk out with a Bushmaster AR-15 in London today?

Yes or no.

No….but that didn't stop the 19 year old kid who got a pistol on the dark web…you think it would be hard to get an ar-15 if they wanted it…..the three terrorists in France got fully automatic rifles, the shooters is Belgium, Denmark, Sweden and Norway…dittos……..

And of course, Ar-15s kill fewer people than knives, clubs and hands and feet in the UNited STates…so guns are not the issue…funny you decided on the AR-15 considering how rarely they are used for mass shootings….

And with the title of this thread….how hard was it for the 15 year old immigrant kid….to get a gun to kill the police officer…or the bike gangs to get their guns in Australia…….

Yeah, you're right.
No law can stop every criminal so there's no point in having laws...and anyway...it's too hard so why bother trying.

Do you want to be childish or have a real conversation? We already have laws on the book about using a gun to commit crime…if you break that law you get arrested…..if you are a felon and just now the the gun you can be arrested. How is that not having a law. Just because the new laws on licensing, registration and universal background checks have ben shown to be dumb…..try to at least be an adult.

I was simply paraphrasing your own arguments.

They seem to be, in essence; no law will stop criminals getting guns so unless it stops every gun crime there's no point in having any laws, and anyway there are already lots of guns so it would be really hard to put in any sort of gun control, and anyway it doesn't work overseas because criminals can still use knives and hammers and cars...something, something, something...
Or something.

You summarize the position of gun crazies like M14 Shooter perfectly.

It's an all or nothing world these people live in and you'll notice the anger, frustration, and overall loonieness gets progressively worse as the world passes them by.

 

[2aguy]

How did the 19 year old arrested last week in Britain get his pistol, 90 rounds and pipe bombs with universal bans? How did the terrorists in France, 2 of them on government terrorist watch lists and 1 a convicted criminal get fully automatic rifles, 30 round magazines, pistols, grenades, and a rocket propelled grenade in a country with a universal ban?

How did the gangs in Marseilles….who shot up a neighbor hood the same week as the Charlie Hebdo shooting, get their fully automatic rifles in a country with universal bans.

How did the shooter on the train, who was stopped by Americans, get his fully automatic rifle in a country with universal bans.

How do the gangs in Sweden get fully automatic rifles and grenades in a country with universal bans.

How did the terrorist who held hostages in Australia in the coffee shop get his gun in a country with a universal ban.

How did the 15 year old teenager immigrant in Australia get the pistol he used to murder 2 police officers.

The terrorists in Denmark…where did they get their guns.

The terrorists in Belgium…where did they get their guns.

The criminals and terrorists in Europe and Australia can easily get whatever guns they want, and they do…when they want them. They get them as easily as our criminals do…and if they don't use them as much that has more to do with european criminal culture than American culture...

Can you walk into a store and walk out with a Bushmaster AR-15 in London today?

Yes or no.

No….but that didn't stop the 19 year old kid who got a pistol on the dark web…you think it would be hard to get an ar-15 if they wanted it…..the three terrorists in France got fully automatic rifles, the shooters is Belgium, Denmark, Sweden and Norway…dittos……..

And of course, Ar-15s kill fewer people than knives, clubs and hands and feet in the UNited STates…so guns are not the issue…funny you decided on the AR-15 considering how rarely they are used for mass shootings….

And with the title of this thread….how hard was it for the 15 year old immigrant kid….to get a gun to kill the police officer…or the bike gangs to get their guns in Australia…….

Yeah, you're right.
No law can stop every criminal so there's no point in having laws...and anyway...it's too hard so why bother trying.

Do you want to be childish or have a real conversation? We already have laws on the book about using a gun to commit crime…if you break that law you get arrested…..if you are a felon and just now the the gun you can be arrested. How is that not having a law. Just because the new laws on licensing, registration and universal background checks have ben shown to be dumb…..try to at least be an adult.

I was simply paraphrasing your own arguments.

They seem to be, in essence; no law will stop criminals getting guns so unless it stops every gun crime there's no point in having any laws, and anyway there are already lots of guns so it would be really hard to put in any sort of gun control, and anyway it doesn't work overseas because criminals can still use knives and hammers and cars...something, something, something...
Or something.

it doesn't work over seas because they still get guns....anytime they want them...and they prefer fully automatic rifles....and grenades........Norway, France, Sweden
, Denmark, Belgium.....all had shootindpga and all are experiencing uncreasing gun crime.