"common Sense Gun Laws"

[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.

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.

So since you can't remove the rights, you want to remove the sale of what we have a right to have?

 

[WinterBorn]

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

I think she was an excellent shot and liked shooting guns.

 

[ChrisL]

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.

I agree, but does that warrant taking away an individual's freedom for his/her entire life? What if he/she was just young and stupid at the time? I don't feel comfortable with that idea at all. That gives the government leeway to take away our freedoms for . . . whatever they deem to be appropriate. I think it's most appropriate that the crime fit the punishment. Besides, when you go and try to determine whether a person MIGHT have pulled the trigger, then it's like you're trying to read their thoughts. What if they would NOT have pulled the trigger? Nope, I can't get behind that idea at all.

 

[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.

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.

No, it specifically mentions HANDGUNS. Now, do you think that is going to stop the black market from getting handguns? Do you know how many handguns there are in circulation worldwide right now?

What Heller Says
The Heller case involved a challenge to the District of Columbia's ban on handguns. For the first time in nearly 70 years, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the meaning of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as it relates to gun control laws.

 

[jon_berzerk]

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.

I agree, but does that warrant taking away an individual's freedom for his/her entire life? What if he/she was just young and stupid at the time? I don't feel comfortable with that idea at all. That gives the government leeway to take away our freedoms for . . . whatever they deem to be appropriate. I think it's most appropriate that the crime fit the punishment. Besides, when you go and try to determine whether a person MIGHT have pulled the trigger, then it's like you're trying to read their thoughts. What if they would NOT have pulled the trigger? Nope, I can't get behind that idea at all.

the thing i dont like about connecting the use a firearm in the commission of a crime

as a heightened punishment is that it sends the message that there is something wrong

with firearm ownership

i see crime as crime murder for example should run the same length of time regardless

of tool used

the person is just as dead whether shot to death or beaten to death with a bat

 

[Skull Pilot]

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.

Anyone who pulls a gun in the commission of a crime IS a dangerous person.

 

[jon_berzerk]

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.

Anyone who pulls a gun in the commission of a crime IS a dangerous person.

true but so is the guy that pulls a bat out in the commission of a crime

 

[Skull Pilot]

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.

I agree, but does that warrant taking away an individual's freedom for his/her entire life? What if he/she was just young and stupid at the time? I don't feel comfortable with that idea at all. That gives the government leeway to take away our freedoms for . . . whatever they deem to be appropriate. I think it's most appropriate that the crime fit the punishment. Besides, when you go and try to determine whether a person MIGHT have pulled the trigger, then it's like you're trying to read their thoughts. What if they would NOT have pulled the trigger? Nope, I can't get behind that idea at all.

the thing i dont like about connecting the use a firearm in the commission of a crime

as a heightened punishment is that it sends the message that there is something wrong

with firearm ownership

i see crime as crime murder for example should run the same length of time regardless

of tool used

the person is just as dead whether shot to death or beaten to death with a bat

There is nothing wrong with gun ownership there is plenty wrong with using a gun in a crime or any other illegal way.

 

[Skull Pilot]

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.

Anyone who pulls a gun in the commission of a crime IS a dangerous person.

true but so is the guy that pulls a bat out in the commission of a crime

I said the punishment for any violent crime should be draconian and absolute.

Gun or no gun violent crime cannot be tolerated.

 

[jon_berzerk]

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.

I agree, but does that warrant taking away an individual's freedom for his/her entire life? What if he/she was just young and stupid at the time? I don't feel comfortable with that idea at all. That gives the government leeway to take away our freedoms for . . . whatever they deem to be appropriate. I think it's most appropriate that the crime fit the punishment. Besides, when you go and try to determine whether a person MIGHT have pulled the trigger, then it's like you're trying to read their thoughts. What if they would NOT have pulled the trigger? Nope, I can't get behind that idea at all.

the thing i dont like about connecting the use a firearm in the commission of a crime

as a heightened punishment is that it sends the message that there is something wrong

with firearm ownership

i see crime as crime murder for example should run the same length of time regardless

of tool used

the person is just as dead whether shot to death or beaten to death with a bat

There is nothing wrong with gun ownership there is plenty wrong with using a gun in a crime or any other illegal way.

certainly

but so is using a bat knife or hands for that matter

 

[WinterBorn]

I agree that any seriously violent crime should be punished in the same way. But using a gun makes it a life threatening criminal act. The fact that they did not pull the trigger THIS time should not matter.

Keep violent felons locked up.

 

[zeke]

Interesting. Not one of you has offered an idea as to how you are gonna pay for all these life time prisoners.
Anyone have an idea how to pay for them? I mean we already jail more of our people than any other civilized country. At a tremendous cost. And have made keeping prisoners a for profit venture. How you gonna pay for this?

How about people that leave guns where the kids can find them and shoot themselves. Does the parent go to jail for life? Or was that just an "accident" waiting to happen?

 

[jon_berzerk]

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.

Anyone who pulls a gun in the commission of a crime IS a dangerous person.

true but so is the guy that pulls a bat out in the commission of a crime

I said the punishment for any violent crime should be draconian and absolute.

Gun or no gun violent crime cannot be tolerated.

agreed

 

[ChrisL]

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.

Anyone who pulls a gun in the commission of a crime IS a dangerous person.

What about a person who pulls a knife or uses any other weapon?

 

[Skull Pilot]

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.

I agree, but does that warrant taking away an individual's freedom for his/her entire life? What if he/she was just young and stupid at the time? I don't feel comfortable with that idea at all. That gives the government leeway to take away our freedoms for . . . whatever they deem to be appropriate. I think it's most appropriate that the crime fit the punishment. Besides, when you go and try to determine whether a person MIGHT have pulled the trigger, then it's like you're trying to read their thoughts. What if they would NOT have pulled the trigger? Nope, I can't get behind that idea at all.

the thing i dont like about connecting the use a firearm in the commission of a crime

as a heightened punishment is that it sends the message that there is something wrong

with firearm ownership

i see crime as crime murder for example should run the same length of time regardless

of tool used

the person is just as dead whether shot to death or beaten to death with a bat

There is nothing wrong with gun ownership there is plenty wrong with using a gun in a crime or any other illegal way.

certainly

but so is using a bat knife or hands for that matter

the punishment for any and all violent crime must be draconian and absolute.

 

[WinterBorn]

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.

Anyone who pulls a gun in the commission of a crime IS a dangerous person.

What about a person who pulls a knife or uses any other weapon?

They should face the same punishments.

 

[Skull Pilot]

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.

Anyone who pulls a gun in the commission of a crime IS a dangerous person.

What about a person who pulls a knife or uses any other weapon?

I already answered that question

 

[Wildman]

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 like that "cage" idea, a cage like the Viet Cong used for our captured pilots and ground troops when/if captured. i believe it was called a "Tiger Cage"

 

[ChrisL]

Interesting. Not one of you has offered an idea as to how you are gonna pay for all these life time prisoners.
Anyone have an idea how to pay for them? I mean we already jail more of our people than any other civilized country. At a tremendous cost. And have made keeping prisoners a for profit venture. How you gonna pay for this?

How about people that leave guns where the kids can find them and shoot themselves. Does the parent go to jail for life? Or was that just an "accident" waiting to happen?

Why would we want to lock someone up for life for an accident? Are you going to do that to parents whose kids drown in the family pool too?

 

[WinterBorn]

Interesting. Not one of you has offered an idea as to how you are gonna pay for all these life time prisoners.
Anyone have an idea how to pay for them? I mean we already jail more of our people than any other civilized country. At a tremendous cost. And have made keeping prisoners a for profit venture. How you gonna pay for this?

How about people that leave guns where the kids can find them and shoot themselves. Does the parent go to jail for life? Or was that just an "accident" waiting to happen?

I have said, in numerous posts, that we should release the nonviolent drug offenders. That would remove a huge portion of our prison population.

Require proper storage of firearms. I believe I stated that in the OP. I am not sure how we enforce that, since I do not agree that the police should be able to enter a home simply because they have a firearm. But yes, you could indeed prosecute the parents (or whomever did not store the gun) for it.