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

Well that's already the case where possible. People have liability policies for accidentally shooting someone. But you cannot insure for an intentional act. SO your proposal is typically based on ignorance and hatred.

"Form of"... It could be in any number of fully enforceable agreements. Wise up.

There can be no form of liability insurance that covers intentional acts. You don't understand how insurance works, do you?

See bolded text above and do smarten up.
 
The kid stole the gun from what I've read. So the OP and other gun grabbers now want gun control for everyone in the country because a kid stole a gun to commit the crime of murder. And odds are he committed that murder in a gun free zone.

So how many laws did this kid break? But the OP and others want to punish all of those that follow the law.

Assholes. I wish they'd shut their smarmy mealy mouths up.

The gunman who killed a Reynolds High School student in Portland, Oregon and wounded a popular teacher in a shooting spree yesterday has been named as 15-year-old Jared Michael Padgett. Troutdale Police Chief Scott Anderson revealed that Padgett was armed with an AR-15 rifle, legally owned, which he stole and used to open fire and kill Emilio Hoffman, 14 and wound Teacher Todd Rispler.

Home | Mail Online
 
The kid stole the gun from what I've read. So the OP and other gun grabbers now want gun control for everyone in the country because a kid stole a gun to commit the crime of murder. And odds are he committed that murder in a gun free zone.

So how many laws did this kid break? But the OP and others want to punish all of those that follow the law.

Assholes. I wish they'd shut their smarmy mealy mouths up.

The gunman who killed a Reynolds High School student in Portland, Oregon and wounded a popular teacher in a shooting spree yesterday has been named as 15-year-old Jared Michael Padgett. Troutdale Police Chief Scott Anderson revealed that Padgett was armed with an AR-15 rifle, legally owned, which he stole and used to open fire and kill Emilio Hoffman, 14 and wound Teacher Todd Rispler.

Home | Mail Online
I'd ask the anti-gun loons what law would prevent someone from stealing a gun and then using it to murder people, but, as judged by their certain responses, they won't understand the question.
 
"Form of"... It could be in any number of fully enforceable agreements. Wise up.

There can be no form of liability insurance that covers intentional acts. You don't understand how insurance works, do you?

See bolded text above and do smarten up.

Double down on stupid. What kind of "fully enforceable agreement" do you want? How do you make an agreement with someone who is intent on killing himself and a bunch of others?
You aren't very smart, are you?
 
Still no explanation of how the additional laws demanded by the OP, would affect people who don't obey laws, such as these shooters and mass murderers.
 
Well, if Double Secret Probation doesn't work, we could always put them on Triple Secret Probation.
 
Still no explanation of how the additional laws demanded by the OP, would affect people who don't obey laws, such as these shooters and mass murderers.



Libs have convinced their ignorant minions that gun control will stop criminals. The fact that some actually buy it shows a gross lack of critical thinking. Since we know that Hillary and other liberals who never leave home without armed body guards aren't stupid enough to believe their own shit, it's obviously not about the safety of people. They are lying and probably laughing at the way they've convinced so many to drink the koolaid. It's about the safety of the liberal agenda. Criminals, hostile countries, and tyrannical governments want nothing more than unarmed and helpless people. Hillary wants to ban guns and she's said as much. To destroy this country and introduce the kind of controlling government the left desires, guns have to go. Liberty is the enemy of leftwing policies.

Imagine you are home alone and you hear your door being kicked in late at night. If you have a gun, you have the ability to stop the person instantly. They may also have a gun, but at least you are equal.

Imagine the same scenario if there were no guns. Someone kicks your door in and your only hope is to hide, while at the same time calling 911. The person finds you and it's a physical fight. You lose. Add a knife to equation and you suffer even more. And you'll likely be raped and beaten before you die.

The truth is that if the left has their way, the above scenarios would be reality for innocent victims. The truth is that the criminal will still have a gun. Even if they could get guns out of the hands of criminals, it comes down to the victim trying to fight off an attacker. When the attacker is a man and the victim is a woman or small guy, the victim loses in every possible scenario. Sure, the left suggests that you try to run. Not an option if you're in an apartment or house and you're on the second floor or higher. You're trapped. The left says hide or go in the bathroom and lock the door. I guess they don't understand that interior doors are even easier to kick in than entrance doors. And where do you hide? Closets or under the bed. First place they'd look.

Your only hope would be police arriving immediately and the odds of that are pretty slim.

The left also suggests that you pee your pants to stop a rapist. Seriously? You don't need a gun, just drink lots of water.

Meanwhile, every single liberal politician and wealthy liberal has the best security that money can buy, including armed body guards. And they have a problem with you wanting to protect yourself.

Hillary is already saying that she doesn't believe the 2nd amendment gives people the right to defend themselves with guns. I guess people have no right to go hunting either. Nope, you should not be allowed to shoot a rapist or murderer if they enter your home and threaten you and your children. Libs say 'tough shit'. If you want that kind of security, you better be wealthy or a politician. Otherwise, you are nothing but fair game for anyone who wants to harm you.
 
"Form of"... It could be in any number of fully enforceable agreements. Wise up.

There can be no form of liability insurance that covers intentional acts. You don't understand how insurance works, do you?
See bolded text above and do smarten up.
Why don't we just require licenses -- like we do for cars?
It would reduce gun sales and we can't have that. We only have about 300 million of them.
 
"Form of"... It could be in any number of fully enforceable agreements. Wise up.

There can be no form of liability insurance that covers intentional acts. You don't understand how insurance works, do you?
See bolded text above and do smarten up.
Why don't we just require licenses -- like we do for cars?
It would reduce gun sales and we can't have that. We only have about 300 million of them.
We should get 600 million of them!
 
Active Shooter at Oregon High School

BREAKING: Reports of active shooter at high school near Portland | Q13 FOX News

PORTLAND — There were multiple reports of an active shooter around 8:30 a.m. at a high school in Troutdale, Oregon.

According to the Columbian Newspaper, area police requested assistance from Clark County Washington sheriff’s deputies at Reynolds High School in Troutdale, Ore. to respond to calls of a possible shooting.

Read more: BREAKING: Reports of active shooter at high school near Portland | Q13 FOX News



Sorry, children. It's time to make it harder to get your shiny, dangerous toys. Too many loonies out there. Every week now.

The "GOOD GUY WITH A GUN" at Walmart ended up in the hospital in Las Vegas. SO there goes that Wayne LaPierre bullshit myth.
Come take them, coward
 
There is a shooter, so let's make sure everyone is completely unarmed and at the mercy of the next shooter that comes along.

Seriously, why on earth do you think that makes any sense whatsoever?

Perhaps because in countries with proper gun control there are less killings.

You might think what you're saying is logical, but it's not really.

The last school shooting in the UK was in 1996. With a population 1/5 the size of the US, you'd expect there to be one every few years under your logic.
 
There is a shooter, so let's make sure everyone is completely unarmed and at the mercy of the next shooter that comes along.

Seriously, why on earth do you think that makes any sense whatsoever?

Perhaps because in countries with proper gun control there are less killings.

You might think what you're saying is logical, but it's not really.

The last school shooting in the UK was in 1996. With a population 1/5 the size of the US, you'd expect there to be one every few years under your logic.
Doesnt matter; if you are not willing to come get the guns, then fuck you and just shut the fuck up.

Dont put Law Enforcement people up to doing your dirty work, you fucking coward.
 
An approx average of 10 people are shot / murdered in Chicago every weekend, NTPP. No one ever says, 'Its time for gun control'. In fact Obama completely ignores the dozens and dozens of shooting victims who do nothing to help further his political agenda.

I've never seen YOU on a Monday morning, after another record-setting Chicago shooting weekend, calling for more gun control.

People get shot all the time because there are bad people in the world. And the answer is NOT to void the Constitution and strip law-abiding citizens of their right to bear arms, to protect themselves....

...especially when the same government that wants to take those guns from law-abiding citizens is arming Mexican Drug Cartels, is arming terrorists, is bringing violent illegals into the country, is protecting violent illegal criminals, is ensuring they have safe havens in which to live, and is bringing terrorists into the country that end up killing American citizens, like the 12 in California.

If anything, it is NOT time to take guns from law-abiding citizens - it is time to ban this administration from handling and having access to weapons AND time to hold this President accountable for aiding and abetting criminals, illegals, and terrorists WHILE refusing to enforce existing laws and breaking the law.
 
Why don't we just require licenses -- like we do for cars?
It would reduce gun sales and we can't have that. We only have about 300 million of them.
How would requiring licenses, like we do for cars, reduce gun sales?
The real problem is not increased or decreased sales when it comes to licensing.

The real problem is that it would require other states to recognize and accept the licenses issued by other states as is stated in the Constitution.
 

Forum List

Back
Top