"common Sense Gun Laws"

[ChrisL]

So that's what people like you want to hang your hat on eh? If we can't stop ALL the illegal activity with laws, then fuck it.
Don't try to stop ANY of the above.

It's just to hard to reduce rapes, murders, child abuse, theft, etc etc. Just to hard, so fuck it, we are RETHUGLIKANS and we ain't trying to do anything to reduce crime.

Other that fantasize about the day you get to shoot some criminal committing a crime against you.

That about your position?

Hey, lets put any person who commits a crime with a gun in prison for life. And tax NOTHING but Republicans to pay for it. Cause you all think it better to waste money jailing them than trying to keep them from getting a gun to commit a gun related crime in the first place.

How much you all wanna pay to keep those people in jail?

You can have all the laws you want as long as you realize they do not prevent crime.

And If we changed our attitudes on non violent victimless crimes we would have more than enough prison space and money to keep violent people in jail for the rest of their lives.

But now you tell me how you are going to prevent rape and murder without assigning every person their own personal cop that is.

I can't figure out what it is that your kind wants.

Are you really dumb enough to think, wish, whatever that ALL crime can be stopped by a law? Really? Come on now. And just because a law won't stop ALL crime, you want what? No laws against criminal behavior?

You just want vigilante justice or what.

How about, seeing as how we lead the world in many categories of crime, we just try hard to REDUCE the amount of crimes being committed against law abiding citizens.

How come that isn't good enough?

Nice dodge on you all wanting to pay for those gun criminals that you want to go to jail for a long time.
You Republicans are the ones that championed putting non violent criminals in jail for many years. Now you all want to rethink that idea eh?

I just said you can have all the laws you want but you have to realize that no law will stop crime.

What is it your kind want?

Do you want pervasive invasive crime prevention tactics like random warrant-less searches and seizures and an overwhelming police and military presence everywhere that is justified in violating any guaranteed right so as to attempt (and fail) to prevent crime?

And I do not see how saying punishment for violent crimes should be draconian and absolute is a call for vigilantism.

That is the same logic that says calling for smaller government is the same as calling for anarchy.

And BTW I am not and have never been a republican. Try and expand your mind beyond your 2 dimensional pigeonhole for once.

Did I say what you wrote? Nah.
What I want is some reasonableness to the conversation about how to reduce crimes committed with a gun and reduce the number of senseless deaths brought about by irresponsible gun ownership.

Surely you can't oppose that goal? Why sure you could. And I expect you will. Cause it's just to hard to figure this out.

You can't legislate responsibility.

All you can do is punish those who commit violent crime and remove them from society.

The punishment is the deterrent for everyone but the worst violent criminal.

And the dumb criminals who think they won't get caught.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You can have all the laws you want as long as you realize they do not prevent crime.

And If we changed our attitudes on non violent victimless crimes we would have more than enough prison space and money to keep violent people in jail for the rest of their lives.

But now you tell me how you are going to prevent rape and murder without assigning every person their own personal cop that is.

I can't figure out what it is that your kind wants.

Are you really dumb enough to think, wish, whatever that ALL crime can be stopped by a law? Really? Come on now. And just because a law won't stop ALL crime, you want what? No laws against criminal behavior?

You just want vigilante justice or what.

How about, seeing as how we lead the world in many categories of crime, we just try hard to REDUCE the amount of crimes being committed against law abiding citizens.

How come that isn't good enough?

Nice dodge on you all wanting to pay for those gun criminals that you want to go to jail for a long time.
You Republicans are the ones that championed putting non violent criminals in jail for many years. Now you all want to rethink that idea eh?

I just said you can have all the laws you want but you have to realize that no law will stop crime.

What is it your kind want?

Do you want pervasive invasive crime prevention tactics like random warrant-less searches and seizures and an overwhelming police and military presence everywhere that is justified in violating any guaranteed right so as to attempt (and fail) to prevent crime?

And I do not see how saying punishment for violent crimes should be draconian and absolute is a call for vigilantism.

That is the same logic that says calling for smaller government is the same as calling for anarchy.

And BTW I am not and have never been a republican. Try and expand your mind beyond your 2 dimensional pigeonhole for once.

Did I say what you wrote? Nah.
What I want is some reasonableness to the conversation about how to reduce crimes committed with a gun and reduce the number of senseless deaths brought about by irresponsible gun ownership.

Surely you can't oppose that goal? Why sure you could. And I expect you will. Cause it's just to hard to figure this out.

You can't legislate responsibility.

All you can do is punish those who commit violent crime and remove them from society.

The punishment is the deterrent for everyone but the worst violent criminal.

And the dumb criminals who think they won't get caught.

They get caught and spend the rest of their lives in a cage where they belong.

 

[jon_berzerk]

I can't figure out what it is that your kind wants.

Are you really dumb enough to think, wish, whatever that ALL crime can be stopped by a law? Really? Come on now. And just because a law won't stop ALL crime, you want what? No laws against criminal behavior?

You just want vigilante justice or what.

How about, seeing as how we lead the world in many categories of crime, we just try hard to REDUCE the amount of crimes being committed against law abiding citizens.

How come that isn't good enough?

Nice dodge on you all wanting to pay for those gun criminals that you want to go to jail for a long time.
You Republicans are the ones that championed putting non violent criminals in jail for many years. Now you all want to rethink that idea eh?

I just said you can have all the laws you want but you have to realize that no law will stop crime.

What is it your kind want?

Do you want pervasive invasive crime prevention tactics like random warrant-less searches and seizures and an overwhelming police and military presence everywhere that is justified in violating any guaranteed right so as to attempt (and fail) to prevent crime?

And I do not see how saying punishment for violent crimes should be draconian and absolute is a call for vigilantism.

That is the same logic that says calling for smaller government is the same as calling for anarchy.

And BTW I am not and have never been a republican. Try and expand your mind beyond your 2 dimensional pigeonhole for once.

Did I say what you wrote? Nah.
What I want is some reasonableness to the conversation about how to reduce crimes committed with a gun and reduce the number of senseless deaths brought about by irresponsible gun ownership.

Surely you can't oppose that goal? Why sure you could. And I expect you will. Cause it's just to hard to figure this out.

You can't legislate responsibility.

All you can do is punish those who commit violent crime and remove them from society.

The punishment is the deterrent for everyone but the worst violent criminal.

And the dumb criminals who think they won't get caught.

They get caught and spend the rest of their lives in a cage where they belong.

i agree

however i do not distinguish between those that violently murder with a firearm

and those that violently murder with any other tool or no tool at all

 

[August West]

If we stopped selling hand guns today what would the country look like 30 years down the road? More shootings or less?

 

[jon_berzerk]

If we stopped selling hand guns today what would the country look like 30 years down the road? More shootings or less?

the real question is

would there be more less or the same amount of violent crime

 

[ChrisL]

I can't figure out what it is that your kind wants.

Are you really dumb enough to think, wish, whatever that ALL crime can be stopped by a law? Really? Come on now. And just because a law won't stop ALL crime, you want what? No laws against criminal behavior?

You just want vigilante justice or what.

How about, seeing as how we lead the world in many categories of crime, we just try hard to REDUCE the amount of crimes being committed against law abiding citizens.

How come that isn't good enough?

Nice dodge on you all wanting to pay for those gun criminals that you want to go to jail for a long time.
You Republicans are the ones that championed putting non violent criminals in jail for many years. Now you all want to rethink that idea eh?

I just said you can have all the laws you want but you have to realize that no law will stop crime.

What is it your kind want?

Do you want pervasive invasive crime prevention tactics like random warrant-less searches and seizures and an overwhelming police and military presence everywhere that is justified in violating any guaranteed right so as to attempt (and fail) to prevent crime?

And I do not see how saying punishment for violent crimes should be draconian and absolute is a call for vigilantism.

That is the same logic that says calling for smaller government is the same as calling for anarchy.

And BTW I am not and have never been a republican. Try and expand your mind beyond your 2 dimensional pigeonhole for once.

Did I say what you wrote? Nah.
What I want is some reasonableness to the conversation about how to reduce crimes committed with a gun and reduce the number of senseless deaths brought about by irresponsible gun ownership.

Surely you can't oppose that goal? Why sure you could. And I expect you will. Cause it's just to hard to figure this out.

You can't legislate responsibility.

All you can do is punish those who commit violent crime and remove them from society.

The punishment is the deterrent for everyone but the worst violent criminal.

And the dumb criminals who think they won't get caught.

They get caught and spend the rest of their lives in a cage where they belong.

Do you think a person should spend the rest of his or her life in prison for an armed robbery where nobody was harmed? I'm sorry, but I don't agree with giving a life sentence for crimes less than murder/attempted murder.

 

[ChrisL]

If we stopped selling hand guns today what would the country look like 30 years down the road? More shootings or less?

How would anyone know that unless they have a crystal ball? It certainly doesn't work with handguns. Not to mention, it is a RIGHT.

Edit: Oops! Lol! I meant to say it certainly hasn't worked with drugs!!! It's still early!

 

[jon_berzerk]

I just said you can have all the laws you want but you have to realize that no law will stop crime.

What is it your kind want?

Do you want pervasive invasive crime prevention tactics like random warrant-less searches and seizures and an overwhelming police and military presence everywhere that is justified in violating any guaranteed right so as to attempt (and fail) to prevent crime?

And I do not see how saying punishment for violent crimes should be draconian and absolute is a call for vigilantism.

That is the same logic that says calling for smaller government is the same as calling for anarchy.

And BTW I am not and have never been a republican. Try and expand your mind beyond your 2 dimensional pigeonhole for once.

Did I say what you wrote? Nah.
What I want is some reasonableness to the conversation about how to reduce crimes committed with a gun and reduce the number of senseless deaths brought about by irresponsible gun ownership.

Surely you can't oppose that goal? Why sure you could. And I expect you will. Cause it's just to hard to figure this out.

You can't legislate responsibility.

All you can do is punish those who commit violent crime and remove them from society.

The punishment is the deterrent for everyone but the worst violent criminal.

And the dumb criminals who think they won't get caught.

They get caught and spend the rest of their lives in a cage where they belong.

Do you think a person should spend the rest of his or her life in prison for an armed robbery where nobody was harmed? I'm sorry, but I don't agree with giving a life sentence for crimes less than murder/attempted murder.

I just said you can have all the laws you want but you have to realize that no law will stop crime.

What is it your kind want?

Do you want pervasive invasive crime prevention tactics like random warrant-less searches and seizures and an overwhelming police and military presence everywhere that is justified in violating any guaranteed right so as to attempt (and fail) to prevent crime?

And I do not see how saying punishment for violent crimes should be draconian and absolute is a call for vigilantism.

That is the same logic that says calling for smaller government is the same as calling for anarchy.

And BTW I am not and have never been a republican. Try and expand your mind beyond your 2 dimensional pigeonhole for once.

Did I say what you wrote? Nah.
What I want is some reasonableness to the conversation about how to reduce crimes committed with a gun and reduce the number of senseless deaths brought about by irresponsible gun ownership.

Surely you can't oppose that goal? Why sure you could. And I expect you will. Cause it's just to hard to figure this out.

You can't legislate responsibility.

All you can do is punish those who commit violent crime and remove them from society.

The punishment is the deterrent for everyone but the worst violent criminal.

And the dumb criminals who think they won't get caught.

They get caught and spend the rest of their lives in a cage where they belong.

Do you think a person should spend the rest of his or her life in prison for an armed robbery where nobody was harmed? I'm sorry, but I don't agree with giving a life sentence for crimes less than murder/attempted murder.

there are some crimes that should land one in prison for the rest of their lives

whether armed or not

molesting children would be one of them in my book

 

[RKMBrown]

Do any of you people really think that laws prevent crime?

Have drug laws prevented drug use?
Have drunk driving laws stopped people from driving drunk?
Do laws against assault prevent assault?
Theft?
Rape?
Child abuse?
Murder?

Etc ad nauseum?

Laws do not prevent crime from happening all they do is define the punishment after the fact.

If my assertion is true (and it is) then punishment for crimes is the best way to deal with crime.

The only common sense thing to do is to make punishments for gun and any violent crimes absolute and draconian.

Laws do prevent crime, but they only prevent it in those with the 1) moral compass not to break laws 2) those who realize said crime is not worth the punishment. It does nothing to prevent those too willing, to stupid, or too evil from committing the crime.

When the law is evil breaking the law is heroic.

 

[ChrisL]

Did I say what you wrote? Nah.
What I want is some reasonableness to the conversation about how to reduce crimes committed with a gun and reduce the number of senseless deaths brought about by irresponsible gun ownership.

Surely you can't oppose that goal? Why sure you could. And I expect you will. Cause it's just to hard to figure this out.

You can't legislate responsibility.

All you can do is punish those who commit violent crime and remove them from society.

The punishment is the deterrent for everyone but the worst violent criminal.

And the dumb criminals who think they won't get caught.

They get caught and spend the rest of their lives in a cage where they belong.

Do you think a person should spend the rest of his or her life in prison for an armed robbery where nobody was harmed? I'm sorry, but I don't agree with giving a life sentence for crimes less than murder/attempted murder.

Did I say what you wrote? Nah.
What I want is some reasonableness to the conversation about how to reduce crimes committed with a gun and reduce the number of senseless deaths brought about by irresponsible gun ownership.

Surely you can't oppose that goal? Why sure you could. And I expect you will. Cause it's just to hard to figure this out.

You can't legislate responsibility.

All you can do is punish those who commit violent crime and remove them from society.

The punishment is the deterrent for everyone but the worst violent criminal.

And the dumb criminals who think they won't get caught.

They get caught and spend the rest of their lives in a cage where they belong.

Do you think a person should spend the rest of his or her life in prison for an armed robbery where nobody was harmed? I'm sorry, but I don't agree with giving a life sentence for crimes less than murder/attempted murder.

there are some crimes that should land one in prison for the rest of their lives

whether armed or not

molesting children would be one of them in my book

Crimes against the defenseless (children, the elderly or otherwise infirmed too) should be punished more harshly, I agree. I remember a few years ago, there was a guy in my local area who was going around punching elderly women in the face to steal their purses! He should be locked away from society forever, preying on the old and weak like that. Unbelievable what some people are capable of doing.

 

[August West]

If we stopped selling hand guns today what would the country look like 30 years down the road? More shootings or less?

How would anyone know that unless they have a crystal ball? It certainly doesn't work with handguns. Not to mention, it is a RIGHT.

Edit: Oops! Lol! I meant to say it certainly hasn't worked with drugs!!! It's still early!

The 2nd amendment specifically mentions hand guns? I think not.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I just said you can have all the laws you want but you have to realize that no law will stop crime.

What is it your kind want?

Do you want pervasive invasive crime prevention tactics like random warrant-less searches and seizures and an overwhelming police and military presence everywhere that is justified in violating any guaranteed right so as to attempt (and fail) to prevent crime?

And I do not see how saying punishment for violent crimes should be draconian and absolute is a call for vigilantism.

That is the same logic that says calling for smaller government is the same as calling for anarchy.

And BTW I am not and have never been a republican. Try and expand your mind beyond your 2 dimensional pigeonhole for once.

Did I say what you wrote? Nah.
What I want is some reasonableness to the conversation about how to reduce crimes committed with a gun and reduce the number of senseless deaths brought about by irresponsible gun ownership.

Surely you can't oppose that goal? Why sure you could. And I expect you will. Cause it's just to hard to figure this out.

You can't legislate responsibility.

All you can do is punish those who commit violent crime and remove them from society.

The punishment is the deterrent for everyone but the worst violent criminal.

And the dumb criminals who think they won't get caught.

They get caught and spend the rest of their lives in a cage where they belong.

Do you think a person should spend the rest of his or her life in prison for an armed robbery where nobody was harmed? I'm sorry, but I don't agree with giving a life sentence for crimes less than murder/attempted murder.

I don't have a problem with it.

If one is willing to pull a gun on a person other than in self defense then that person does not belong in society.

As i said punishment must be draconian and absolute.

 

[ChrisL]

If we stopped selling hand guns today what would the country look like 30 years down the road? More shootings or less?

How would anyone know that unless they have a crystal ball? It certainly doesn't work with handguns. Not to mention, it is a RIGHT.

Edit: Oops! Lol! I meant to say it certainly hasn't worked with drugs!!! It's still early!

The 2nd amendment specifically mentions hand guns? I think not.

Does it say NOT handguns. I think not.

 

[ChrisL]

If we stopped selling hand guns today what would the country look like 30 years down the road? More shootings or less?

How would anyone know that unless they have a crystal ball? It certainly doesn't work with handguns. Not to mention, it is a RIGHT.

Edit: Oops! Lol! I meant to say it certainly hasn't worked with drugs!!! It's still early!

The 2nd amendment specifically mentions hand guns? I think not.

THIS was already taken care of with the Heller case. YES, we can have handguns.

 

[CitizenSeven]

Any law one wishes to pass limiting the exercise of the second amendment should be viewed in light of what if we applied this to the first? How many would advocate for post registration to reduce the incident of libel and seditious speech? Only if you can in good conscience advocate for such measures restricting the first can you genuinely advocate for the second.

 

[ChrisL]

Did I say what you wrote? Nah.
What I want is some reasonableness to the conversation about how to reduce crimes committed with a gun and reduce the number of senseless deaths brought about by irresponsible gun ownership.

Surely you can't oppose that goal? Why sure you could. And I expect you will. Cause it's just to hard to figure this out.

You can't legislate responsibility.

All you can do is punish those who commit violent crime and remove them from society.

The punishment is the deterrent for everyone but the worst violent criminal.

And the dumb criminals who think they won't get caught.

They get caught and spend the rest of their lives in a cage where they belong.

Do you think a person should spend the rest of his or her life in prison for an armed robbery where nobody was harmed? I'm sorry, but I don't agree with giving a life sentence for crimes less than murder/attempted murder.

I don't have a problem with it.

If one is willing to pull a gun on a person other than in self defense then that person does not belong in society.

As i said punishment must be draconian and absolute.

Mmm. I don't think I can agree with that. The punishment should fit the crime, and although gun crimes ARE serious, we can't take away a person's freedom for life unless it's warranted and necessary to protect society because the person has been deemed to be a dangerous person.

 

[WinterBorn]

If we stopped selling hand guns today what would the country look like 30 years down the road? More shootings or less?

How would anyone know that unless they have a crystal ball? It certainly doesn't work with handguns. Not to mention, it is a RIGHT.

Edit: Oops! Lol! I meant to say it certainly hasn't worked with drugs!!! It's still early!

The 2nd amendment specifically mentions hand guns? I think not.

The 1st amendment specifically mentions political speech? I think not.
The 1st amendment specifically mentions Christianity? I think not.

 

[WinterBorn]

You can't legislate responsibility.

All you can do is punish those who commit violent crime and remove them from society.

The punishment is the deterrent for everyone but the worst violent criminal.

And the dumb criminals who think they won't get caught.

They get caught and spend the rest of their lives in a cage where they belong.

Do you think a person should spend the rest of his or her life in prison for an armed robbery where nobody was harmed? I'm sorry, but I don't agree with giving a life sentence for crimes less than murder/attempted murder.

I don't have a problem with it.

If one is willing to pull a gun on a person other than in self defense then that person does not belong in society.

As i said punishment must be draconian and absolute.

Mmm. I don't think I can agree with that. The punishment should fit the crime, and although gun crimes ARE serious, we can't take away a person's freedom for life unless it's warranted and necessary to protect society because the person has been deemed to be a dangerous person.

The armed robber committed a crime with a firearm. There is no way to know whether they were WILLING to pull the trigger, just that they did or did not. That they committed a crime with a firearm is what we know for sure.

 

[August West]

If we stopped selling hand guns today what would the country look like 30 years down the road? More shootings or less?

How would anyone know that unless they have a crystal ball? It certainly doesn't work with handguns. Not to mention, it is a RIGHT.

Edit: Oops! Lol! I meant to say it certainly hasn't worked with drugs!!! It's still early!

The 2nd amendment specifically mentions hand guns? I think not.

THIS was already taken care of with the Heller case. YES, we can have handguns.

Yes you can but only if they`re being sold. The court ruled that we have a right to defend ourselves in our homes with a firearm. That`s it.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I have a shotgun. It works fine just as it is. But for inside the home I prefer the precision of a single projectile.

The only problem with that is if your wife who hates guns has to use it. With a shotgun it basically aim at the feet of the intruder and you cant miss hitting him.

I have been married twice. Both of them enjoy shooting. In fact, my first wife is one of the best pistol shots I know.

My current girlfriend has 2 revolvers, both in .357. I have found that women can be good shooters, just as well as men. And no one should have a defensive firearm that they have not fired. If the wife who dislikes guns shoots a sawed off shotgun in a practice setting, she will likely flinch like hell or be unwilling to shoot it again. They kick much worse and teh sound is louder.

yea tell that to Annie Oakley...

Do you think Annie Oakley would be "wife who hates guns"?

since she made her living shooting.....what do you think?.....


Oakley in 1922