ENOUGH....Time for Gun Control....NOW

[Little-Acorn]

You are a perfect example of someone that shouldn't be allowed to own a gun, let alone sell them.

You are the shining example of why kids die in school pretty much every day in this country.

So many accusations.

So little fact or backup for any of them.

Let me guess: A liberal, right?

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Common sense and critical thinking aren't supported here.

True. PeeParty lies about his own posts. Other simply repeat that we need to restrict guns from crazy people, like that's possible in any way. They're totally unhinged.

You are a perfect example of someone that shouldn't be allowed to own a gun, let alone sell them.

You are the shining example of why kids die in school pretty much every day in this country.

Notice he doesn't say what I am lying about, he's just taking a bathroom-humor twist on my screen name.

That's how you spot a loser.

 

[RDD_1210]

Correct, no sane people would want that, but many in the Democratic Party definitely do.



It's called the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Privileges.



I can protect myself, thanks. Maybe that's a problem for you, but it's not for me.

Me! Me! Me!

Me the People....

You're a true patriot. Be proud.

A true patriot is focused on fulfilling his own responsibilities, including the one to defend himself and his family. If you spent more time trying to fix your own problems instead of trying to control everyone else's life, you'd be happy.

I am trying to fix my own problems. I consider kids dying in school every week to be my problem. I know you don't give a fuck, but thats because you are a selfish prick.

 

[martybegan]

I am not sure I believe in more gun control, but here is something I came up with:

1a. The English system--with very, very few exceptions, prohibit semi-automatic rifles and pistols.
1b. If mental issues are present, pass a severe psychological evaluation before purchasing a gun.
2. One of the purposes of a government is to protect its people, and while most people are able to safely own a firearm, not all people are. It is fairly simple to obtain a gun if you have no criminal background.
3. A prohibition on semi-automatic rifles and pistols would help prevent these mass killings, since they are the ones that can cause the most damage. All of the killers were mentally unstable, and many of these instabilities were known before the shooting. Obviously this wouldn't prevent them from taking the gun from someone else, but it would help prevent them from obtaining a gun legally, while the prohibition on the semi-automatics would keep them from taking it.
4. The Bill of Rights does not grant citizens a right to EVERYTHING. There are limits to Free Speech--you can't slander, lie, use fighting/offensive words, make threats, etc. In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court ruled that "the right [to bear arms] is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose," only weapons that are 'necessary,' as some people see fit, solely for lawful purposes, such as self-defense. These semi-automatic weapons are not.

The police would have to follow the exact same restrictions, and you know that won't happen.

All you do when you ban semi-autos is make it easier for a criminal to out-gun a law abiding citizen, simple as that.

If they aren't available, how would the criminal be able to out-gun the law-abiding citizen? Obviously there is no immediate fix, since people already have the guns and you can't take them away, but in the long-term I don't see how this would be negative.

If you ban me from owning a firearm some other identical citizen can you are denying me equal protection under the law.

Plus any decent machinist with the proper plans can make a semi-automatic handgun, and soon we will be able to print them out with 3-D printing.

Banning the type of weapon doesn't do squat. Its feel good crap that denies me my rights.

 

[Little-Acorn]

If they aren't available, how would the criminal

Finally we begin to get at the real goal of the gun-haters.

Make guns completely "unavailable".

To anyone.

P.S. Except government, of course. We can trust government.

 

[tanfojam0]

Come on KNB, what book do you want me to read that is going to explain how keeping people from being able to defend themselves is going to make them safer?

Keeping people from defending themselves, and banning semi-automatic rifles and pistols are not the same thing. The U.S. has one of the highest rates of gun murder in the developed world, certainly first among stable nations. The Supreme Court has already stated that citizens do not have the right to own any firearm.

 

[HenryBHough]

What we need is a law mandating jail time for public officials who demand new laws and whilst refusing to enforce existing ones.

 

[RDD_1210]

True. PeeParty lies about his own posts. Other simply repeat that we need to restrict guns from crazy people, like that's possible in any way. They're totally unhinged.

You are a perfect example of someone that shouldn't be allowed to own a gun, let alone sell them.

You are the shining example of why kids die in school pretty much every day in this country.

More die from food allergies than guns. BAN FOOD!

Is that the best you can do?

(I already know it is, so don't bother responding)

 

[KNB]

Come on KNB, what book do you want me to read that is going to explain how keeping people from being able to defend themselves is going to make them safer?

What are you defending yourselves from? People with guns? Good idea. Sell guns all over the world and then sell more guns so people can defend themselves from all the crazies out there with guns. Because, you know, the world is a dangerous place after selling so many hundreds of millions of guns.

 

[RDD_1210]

You are a perfect example of someone that shouldn't be allowed to own a gun, let alone sell them.

You are the shining example of why kids die in school pretty much every day in this country.

So many accusations.

So little fact or backup for any of them.

Let me guess: A liberal, right?

So much ego.

So little education.

Let me guess, a "patriot" right?

 

[martybegan]

You are a perfect example of someone that shouldn't be allowed to own a gun, let alone sell them.

You are the shining example of why kids die in school pretty much every day in this country.

More die from food allergies than guns. BAN FOOD!

Is that the best you can do?

(I already know it is, so don't bother responding)

You are the one that made an idiotic statement that kids are dying in schools (implying firearms) every day, when that is clearly not the case. Is there a case EVERY day of a kid dying in school due to being shot?

No?

Then fuck off.

 

[tanfojam0]

If they aren't available, how would the criminal

Finally we begin to get at the real goal of the gun-haters.

Make guns completely "unavailable".

To anyone.

How about some critical reading skills?

I said: Ban or severely prohibit semi-automatics like they do in many others countries with very low gun death rates, such as England.

Opposing point: Criminals will still get their hands on these guns and now be able to out-gun law-abiding citizens.

I said: If those semi-autos aren't available, how will the criminals get their hands on them to out-gun us?

 

[M14 Shooter]

True. PeeParty lies about his own posts. Other simply repeat that we need to restrict guns from crazy people, like that's possible in any way. They're totally unhinged.

You are a perfect example of someone that shouldn't be allowed to own a gun, let alone sell them.

You are the shining example of why kids die in school pretty much every day in this country.

Notice he doesn't say what I am lying about, he's just taking a bathroom-humor twist on my screen name.

That's how you spot a loser.

Post 118 awaits your response.

 

[tanfojam0]

The police would have to follow the exact same restrictions, and you know that won't happen.

All you do when you ban semi-autos is make it easier for a criminal to out-gun a law abiding citizen, simple as that.

If they aren't available, how would the criminal be able to out-gun the law-abiding citizen? Obviously there is no immediate fix, since people already have the guns and you can't take them away, but in the long-term I don't see how this would be negative.

If you ban me from owning a firearm some other identical citizen can you are denying me equal protection under the law.

Plus any decent machinist with the proper plans can make a semi-automatic handgun, and soon we will be able to print them out with 3-D printing.

Banning the type of weapon doesn't do squat. Its feel good crap that denies me my rights.

Police Officers in those nations don't have these weapons. That's the point. They aren't available.

So then why not make nuclear bombs legal too? Obviously they're more difficult to make, but it can still be done.

Laws don't totally prevent. Everybody knows that. People still do plenty of things that are illegal. But the laws will not, I believe, have exactly zero benefit like gun-rights activists claim.

 

[RDD_1210]

More die from food allergies than guns. BAN FOOD!

Is that the best you can do?

(I already know it is, so don't bother responding)

You are the one that made an idiotic statement that kids are dying in schools (implying firearms) every day, when that is clearly not the case. Is there a case EVERY day of a kid dying in school due to being shot?

No?

Then fuck off.

Oh we're going to play semantics games now. Weeeee!

Marty, you're a world class tool. This is why you're a failure in life. I know deep down you've always wondered why your life has turned in to the steaming pile of shit it is now.

So I'll do you a favor now and I'll tell you why.

It's because you're just not smart and you're an asshole. That's a dangerous combination that unfortunately has resulted in your life turning in to the laughing stock that it is.

No need to thank me.

 

[Little-Acorn]

So then why not make nuclear bombs legal too?

I was wondering when the gun-haters would get their fannies spanked enough to switch over to the silly "nuclear weapon" dodge instead.

 

[Flopper]

So still no clear explanation how passing laws keeping guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens helps stop violent people from massacring others.

In mass shooting, it's usually a case of law abiding citizens who go off the deep end and massacre others. For gun control to work you must either identify the potential killers and deny them guns or deny guns to all. To do either would take very strong support from the public which is not there, at least not yet.

And it would take a massive federal and state level assault on the citizens do not want to be disarmed.

I think it highly unlikely that any gun control laws passed would result in an attempt to disarm citizens. Far more likely are laws aimed at restricting sales, because 40% of American households own guns and the country is pretty evenly divided on the issue.

 

[martybegan]

Is that the best you can do?

(I already know it is, so don't bother responding)

You are the one that made an idiotic statement that kids are dying in schools (implying firearms) every day, when that is clearly not the case. Is there a case EVERY day of a kid dying in school due to being shot?

No?

Then fuck off.

Oh we're going to play semantics games now. Weeeee!

Marty, you're a world class tool. This is why you're a failure in life. I know deep down you've always wondered why your life has turned in to the steaming pile of shit it is now.

So I'll do you a favor now and I'll tell you why.

It's because you're just not smart and you're an asshole. That's a dangerous combination that unfortunately has resulted in your life turning in to the laughing stock that it is.

No need to thank me.

Can't prove shit, so therefore you kick in the ad-hominems, making it nice and long to hide your inability to prove a single point you attempt to make.

I will put my intellect up against yours, put my success in life up against yours, and put my general happiness up against yours any day of the fucking week.

 

[martybegan]

In mass shooting, it's usually a case of law abiding citizens who go off the deep end and massacre others. For gun control to work you must either identify the potential killers and deny them guns or deny guns to all. To do either would take very strong support from the public which is not there, at least not yet.

And it would take a massive federal and state level assault on the citizens do not want to be disarmed.

I think it highly unlikely that any gun control laws passed would result in an attempt to disarm citizens. Far more likely are laws aimed at restricting sales, because 40% of American households own guns and the country is pretty evenly divided on the issue.

Allowing citizens to keep firearms that I would no longer be able to purchase violates equal protection. Just because someone has it already is not a viable reason to let the keep it and deny me access to it as long as we have equally clean backgrounds.

Also allowing the police to keep them would be a violation as well. Police are citizens, with only the additional ability to arrest people with immunity to claims against them as long as the arrest is handled per procedures.

they are not a class of knights, upon whom we bestow a right of arms we deny everyone else.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If they aren't available, how would the criminal be able to out-gun the law-abiding citizen? Obviously there is no immediate fix, since people already have the guns and you can't take them away, but in the long-term I don't see how this would be negative.

If you ban me from owning a firearm some other identical citizen can you are denying me equal protection under the law.

Plus any decent machinist with the proper plans can make a semi-automatic handgun, and soon we will be able to print them out with 3-D printing.

Banning the type of weapon doesn't do squat. Its feel good crap that denies me my rights.

Police Officers in those nations don't have these weapons. That's the point. They aren't available.

So then why not make nuclear bombs legal too? Obviously they're more difficult to make, but it can still be done.

Laws don't totally prevent. Everybody knows that. People still do plenty of things that are illegal. But the laws will not, I believe, have exactly zero benefit like gun-rights activists claim.

Laws cannot prevent people from breaking the law.
Laws CAN be used to punish people after they break the law - which is, of course, why we have them.