Gun control vs. Terrorism (Dem hypocrisy)

[Rustic]

I think there are a few more factors involved. I don't think citizens should be able to walk into walmart and buy a fully automatic uzi, so I think limitations on available firepower make sense. I think every honest citizen should be able to get a pistol or riffle to defend themselves, but all this high power stuff, I'm fine with regulating. I'm fine with harsh punishments for gun violence offenders but it is very situational and I don't think a teenager who got caught up with the wrong crowd should go to jail till they are 50 for making a stupid mistake... Again, it all depends on the case.

In other words, you like the way the gun laws are now. There is no place in the US where you can LEGALLY walk in and buy a full auto UZI. If you want to own one legally, prepare for a long process.

Yes, I think it makes sense to regulate the firepower that citizens own. Everybody deserves basic protection but it shouldn’t be quick and easy for somebody to get a weapon capable of killing dozens of people in the matter of just a few seconds. Those “tools” as they’ve been called pose a great danger to society and deserve to be regulated.

The other side of the conversation that seems to get lost is the motivation, indicators, mental process, and conditions etc that drive people to kill in the way that they do because ultimately there is a person behind every trigger pull.

The point is, the militia is best for the common defense.

especially in cities like chicago. let's get these gang bangers and their illegal guns off the street.

We need to improve the ratio of well regulated militia to unorganized militia.

You got to read those words in context of that era, it doesn’t mean the same now as it did then.
Enforce the current laws, and don’t allow any new frivolous laws

 

[Rustic]

/----/ And once those new procedures are in place at the truck rental, you'll enjoy watching Muslims sue for discrimination and being profiled.

I always enjoy watching a big corporation get screwed over. Especially Home Depot, those people are bastards. (I worked as a subcontractor at one for two years)

But that's not the point. The point is, the Gun industry is intentionally irresponsible. If you guys weren't terrified a scary Muslim or black man was going to pop out and get you, you wouldn't want enough guns to fight off the Zombie Armageddon.

Their whole business model is built on fear, and having to not sell to the scary people hurts their business plan.

Now, we could have gun ownership like Germany, where they have 17 million gun owners, but they are background checked, thoroughly. But they have gun laws with teeth. And they have very few mass shooting incidents.

We don’t want to live like Germany, living in a cesspool of Germany would suck

 

[Brain357]

No, you don’t seem to understand the point. Are you trying to understand or are you just reacting?

So it seems you don't give a shit about any murders unless they happen during a mass shooting.

I'm sure the families of the other 99% of murder victims appreciate that

Of course I do, why would you say that? You are bringing up a completely different issue. Such a lazy way of debating

Then why poo poo the fact that 5 times a many people are killed annually with knives than with rifles?

Clearly knives are the bigger threat to society than rifles

again, that isn't the argument... It is about the destructive power that we legally allow people to hold... Somebody storming a night club or concert with a knife may still kill a couple people but it wouldn't be anywhere near the damage they would do with a gun, or with an auto, or with a bomb... I think you understand

I am looking at annual totals.

Personally I don't think a murder that occurs in a mass shooting is any different from a murder that occurs any other time with any other weapon.

So a mass murderer isn't worse than just a single murder? Right...

 

[Brain357]

Do you realize that less than 1% of all murders occur in mass shooting events or that less than 2% of all murders are committed with rifles of any kind?

More than 5 times as many people are killed with knives annually than rifles so if rifles are a "threat to society" then knives must be a 5 times larger threat no?

No, you don’t seem to understand the point. Are you trying to understand or are you just reacting?

So it seems you don't give a shit about any murders unless they happen during a mass shooting.

I'm sure the families of the other 99% of murder victims appreciate that

Of course I do, why would you say that? You are bringing up a completely different issue. Such a lazy way of debating

Then why poo poo the fact that 5 times a many people are killed annually with knives than with rifles?

Clearly knives are the bigger threat to society than rifles

again, that isn't the argument... It is about the destructive power that we legally allow people to hold... Somebody storming a night club or concert with a knife may still kill a couple people but it wouldn't be anywhere near the damage they would do with a gun, or with an auto, or with a bomb... I think you understand

The firepower is too much when you can storm a night club with an off duty officer working security and still kill over 50.

 

[GHook93]

It made me think about how the "Left" typically reacts to gun violence, something we heard a lot of after Vegas, and I noticed that the messaging is quite different. After a shooting event the Left seems quick and adamant to try and change our laws to make communities safer. I've heard it communicated as a negligence of duty to not talk about gun control after a shooting. In the same spirit, why isn't there a reaction to legislate a way to keep us safer from terrorism after a terror attack by the Left? Its a rhetorical question, i know why, hence the hypocrisy. But if anybody would like to try to rationalize it then please go ahead!

Simple.

Home Depot Trucks aren't designed to kill people.

Guns are.

But I will bet you'll find out that this guy had a harder time renting a truck from the Home Depot than that other nut had building up a small arsenal.

Harder time renting then voting!


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[2aguy]

Hey...if you want to show a state i.d. to buy a gun....no big deal.....but you need a background check to buy a gun, and you can't buy a gun if you are a felon...that includes private sales......a felon can get insurance, a license and rent a killing truck...

Your right. to get a gun, all he has to do is go to a private seller or go to gun show, no problem.

Nope.....if he uses the gun for a crime, he can be arrested. If he is a felon, he can't legally buy that gun, and if he is caught we can already arrest him. We have the laws in place to deal with these criminals.....the problem is that democrats like you keep letting violent people back on the street..over and over and over again...

 

[2aguy]

Yeah, but they do it so efficiently, and after the massive terrorist attacks in France and elsewhere using trucks, I feel that all people who wish to buy or rent trucks should have to undergo a background check, and any company that rents a truck that is then used in a crime should be shut down immediately and the owners and workers thrown in prison.

That will show those terrorists who's boss!

Except Truck attacks are still pretty rare. One or two globally a year..not a big thing.

We have a bunch of mass shootings a year. The rest of the world doesn't, they have the good sense to not let people buy guns.

We had 6 in 2016.....several by muslim terrorists......killed a total of 71 people....the muslim in France, with one rental truck murdered 89 people and injured over 450......he killed more people with a rental truck than mass shooters did in a year....generally every single year.....if they are paying attention, they will use more trucks.

 

[Brain357]

Hey...if you want to show a state i.d. to buy a gun....no big deal.....but you need a background check to buy a gun, and you can't buy a gun if you are a felon...that includes private sales......a felon can get insurance, a license and rent a killing truck...

Your right. to get a gun, all he has to do is go to a private seller or go to gun show, no problem.

Nope.....if he uses the gun for a crime, he can be arrested. If he is a felon, he can't legally buy that gun, and if he is caught we can already arrest him. We have the laws in place to deal with these criminals.....the problem is that democrats like you keep letting violent people back on the street..over and over and over again...

Back up your claim. We have the fullest jails in the world

 

[2aguy]

Yeah, but they do it so efficiently, and after the massive terrorist attacks in France and elsewhere using trucks, I feel that all people who wish to buy or rent trucks should have to undergo a background check, and any company that rents a truck that is then used in a crime should be shut down immediately and the owners and workers thrown in prison.

That will show those terrorists who's boss!

Except Truck attacks are still pretty rare. One or two globally a year..not a big thing.

We have a bunch of mass shootings a year. The rest of the world doesn't, they have the good sense to not let people buy guns.

Except their criminals get guns easily, it is the people who won't use guns for crime that can't get the guns.....criminals in Europe and around the world...no problem.

 

[2aguy]

The purpose of any tool is determined by the intent of the wielder of that tool.

The the design is the purpose. The purpose of a firearm is to project a bullet to kill another person. That's what it's design to do. When you Gun Nut wankers get on here and talk about guns, it's about how you want to off you some darkie, not about how you want to teach them paper targets a lesson.

There are 1,500,000 defensive gun uses every year........of those only about 230 are pushed by the criminal to the point the victim has to shoot them....so guns do not have to be fired to stop almost all of the crimes they stop....so no, good guys don't have to shoot guns to save lives......

 

[2aguy]

Most of the sellers at gun shows are licensed and run background checks.

"Most'? "most" implies that are some who don't run background checks.

And the crooks know who those guys are, which TOTALLY DEFEATS THE PURPOSE OF A BACKGROUND CHECK!

No.....sorry.....that stupid argument is over.....criminals are not getting their guns from gun shows..we know this from research, they are gettting them from people who can already pass background checks...which means they would pass a background check for a private sale........or they steal the guns....you have no point...background checks are already defeated by criminals, and any check on a private sale will also be defeated by criminals.....

Mass shooters...simply pass any and all background checks....making your point even more stupid...

 

[Brain357]

The purpose of any tool is determined by the intent of the wielder of that tool.

The the design is the purpose. The purpose of a firearm is to project a bullet to kill another person. That's what it's design to do. When you Gun Nut wankers get on here and talk about guns, it's about how you want to off you some darkie, not about how you want to teach them paper targets a lesson.

There are 1,500,000 defensive gun uses every year........of those only about 230 are pushed by the criminal to the point the victim has to shoot them....so guns do not have to be fired to stop almost all of the crimes they stop....so no, good guys don't have to shoot guns to save lives......

How many arrests?

 

[2aguy]

No, you don’t seem to understand the point. Are you trying to understand or are you just reacting?

So it seems you don't give a shit about any murders unless they happen during a mass shooting.

I'm sure the families of the other 99% of murder victims appreciate that

Of course I do, why would you say that? You are bringing up a completely different issue. Such a lazy way of debating

Then why poo poo the fact that 5 times a many people are killed annually with knives than with rifles?

Clearly knives are the bigger threat to society than rifles

again, that isn't the argument... It is about the destructive power that we legally allow people to hold... Somebody storming a night club or concert with a knife may still kill a couple people but it wouldn't be anywhere near the damage they would do with a gun, or with an auto, or with a bomb... I think you understand

The firepower is too much when you can storm a night club with an off duty officer working security and still kill over 50.

They killed 89 people with a rental truck...and injured over 450.....

The only reason so many were killed in that nightclub is because people like you made it a gun free zone for good guys.....had they been able to carry guns in their, since it is in Florida and they have concealed carry, the guy wouldn't have killed so many unarmed people......that's on you guys.

 

[2aguy]

Hey...if you want to show a state i.d. to buy a gun....no big deal.....but you need a background check to buy a gun, and you can't buy a gun if you are a felon...that includes private sales......a felon can get insurance, a license and rent a killing truck...

Your right. to get a gun, all he has to do is go to a private seller or go to gun show, no problem.

Nope.....if he uses the gun for a crime, he can be arrested. If he is a felon, he can't legally buy that gun, and if he is caught we can already arrest him. We have the laws in place to deal with these criminals.....the problem is that democrats like you keep letting violent people back on the street..over and over and over again...

Back up your claim. We have the fullest jails in the world

California Democrats hate the gun, not the gunman – Orange County Register

Now that Democrats have supermajorities in the California state Legislature, they’ve rolled into Sacramento with a zest for lowering the state’s prison population and have interpreted St. Augustine’s words of wisdom to mean, “Hate the gun, not the gunman.”

I say this because, once they finally took a break from preaching about the benefits of stricter gun control, the state Senate voted to loosen sentencing guidelines for criminals convicted of gun crimes.

Currently, California law requires anyone who uses a gun while committing a felony to have their sentence increased by 10 years or more in prison — on top of the normal criminal penalty. If enacted, Senate Bill 620 would eliminate that mandate.

The bill, which passed on a 22-14 party-line vote, with support only from Democrats, now heads to the state Assembly for consideration.

Republicans and the National Rifle Association have vowed to campaign against it.

Why have Democrats suddenly developed a soft spot for criminals convicted of gun crimes? The bill’s author, state Sen. Steve Bradford, D-Gardena, says that he was motivated to write the bill after a 17-year-old riding in a car involved in a drive-by shooting was sentenced to 25 years in prison, even though he claims that he wasn’t the one who pulled the trigger.

and for all those anti-gunners who want to know where criminals get guns....well...this law lowers the prison time for those who give guns to criminals.....

Why is that?

Prop. 57, for example, very deceptively and fundamentally changed the definition of what constitutes a “non-violent” offense.


supplying a firearm to a gang member,

l
felon obtaining a firearm,

discharging a firearm on school grounds

 

[2aguy]

Firearm ownership is none of your business, and certainly none of the federal government business.

Again, until the majority who don't own guns or even sensible gun owners who don't want crazy people to have them decided "enough is enough".

We have said enough, that is why we decided that good people carrying guns would reduce the crime rate...and we were right...

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 16.3 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...
-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

 

[2aguy]

Just one month ago, a mental case who was not a Muslim killed 60 people and wounded 550 in Los Vegas. It was deemed an issue of (domestic) Constitutional rights, and we immediately decided that ABSOLUTELY NOTHING should be done to prevent such tragedies from happening again. (Even after BOTH PARTIES agreed that, at the very least, devices like bump fire stocks, which convert semi-automatic rifles into full fledged machine guns should be illegal....nothing has been, or will be done. That was the lowest of the low hanging fruit, and it's apparently off limits.)

Jeff Flake ✔ @JeffFlake
Actually, the Gang of 8, including @SenSchumer, did away with the Diversity Visa Program as part of broader reforms. I know, I was there https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/925684982307348480 …

8:36 AM - Nov 1, 2017

No....we simply showed you that nothing you guys proposed would stop the next one or address the problem......what can actually be done.....people who know them coming forward and warning people...that is how you stop it....

Keeping radical muslims out of the country would help....they won't provide aid and support to actual terrorists or become terrorists themselves.....and this guy actually put out warning signs that were ignored...again....

 

[Brain357]

So it seems you don't give a shit about any murders unless they happen during a mass shooting.

I'm sure the families of the other 99% of murder victims appreciate that

Of course I do, why would you say that? You are bringing up a completely different issue. Such a lazy way of debating

Then why poo poo the fact that 5 times a many people are killed annually with knives than with rifles?

Clearly knives are the bigger threat to society than rifles

again, that isn't the argument... It is about the destructive power that we legally allow people to hold... Somebody storming a night club or concert with a knife may still kill a couple people but it wouldn't be anywhere near the damage they would do with a gun, or with an auto, or with a bomb... I think you understand

The firepower is too much when you can storm a night club with an off duty officer working security and still kill over 50.

They killed 89 people with a rental truck...and injured over 450.....

The only reason so many were killed in that nightclub is because people like you made it a gun free zone for good guys.....had they been able to carry guns in their, since it is in Florida and they have concealed carry, the guy wouldn't have killed so many unarmed people......that's on you guys.

There was an armed off duty officer working security. He killed that many in the presence of police. Way too much firepower obviously.

 

[2aguy]

/----/ HD will get sued because blood sucking lawyers always go after the deep pockets even though HD was a passive victim. HD will most likely settle to avoid the expense of jury trials and the possibility the plaintiffs will win.

Yes, they will. and they will also probably institute new procedures to keep this sort of thing from happening again, which is THE WHOLE PURPOSE of civil litigation.

The gun industry, however, has a special carve out after the DC Sniper case, where the victims won money after the gun industry sold guns to a convicted felon and a minor. Then they went on to market deadlier guns and nastier guns and things like Bump Stocks.

If Home Depot acted like the Gun Industry, they'd be renting trucks that look like this, and then mocking your manliness for not owning one.

Yeah....genius...tell us exactly how Home Depot is going to stop the next one.....moron........considering the guy didn't have a criminal record, he had a drivers license and he had cash.....

Do you dumb fucks want home depot to start racially profiling people who rent their trucks....?

 

[Brain357]

Firearm ownership is none of your business, and certainly none of the federal government business.

Again, until the majority who don't own guns or even sensible gun owners who don't want crazy people to have them decided "enough is enough".

We have said enough, that is why we decided that good people carrying guns would reduce the crime rate...and we were right...

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 16.3 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...
-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

Thank the bill Clinton crime bill and gun control.

What's happening now?

FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

 

[2aguy]

I like to call out hypocrisy on both sides of the aisle when I see it, usually on the Right but today I see it on the Left. I just watched the press conference for the recent tragedy in Manhattan. My heart goes out to the victims. During this press conference I heard De Blasio and Como speak about the resolve of New Yorkers and Americans. They emphasized the point that terrorists are trying to break our spirit and if we change our lives in any way then we are letting them win. A respectable point.

It made me think about how the "Left" typically reacts to gun violence, something we heard a lot of after Vegas, and I noticed that the messaging is quite different. After a shooting event the Left seems quick and adamant to try and change our laws to make communities safer. I've heard it communicated as a negligence of duty to not talk about gun control after a shooting. In the same spirit, why isn't there a reaction to legislate a way to keep us safer from terrorism after a terror attack by the Left? Its a rhetorical question, i know why, hence the hypocrisy. But if anybody would like to try to rationalize it then please go ahead!

Note that i'm pretty liberal and support both of these reactions. I'm fine with common sense gun control measures and I am pro immigration and religious freedom. But I have to call it like I see it when hypocrisy hits.

We are very similar...I support common sense gun control, I am pro legal immigration and I support religious freedom.

What gun control do you think works? For me.....my common sense gun control is essentially these two items...

1) if you commit a crime with a gun, you go to jail for 30 years.

2) if you are a convicted, violent felon, caught in possession of a gun, you go away for 30 years.

That pretty much covers everything we need to stop criminals and illegal guns......

I think there are a few more factors involved. I don't think citizens should be able to walk into walmart and buy a fully automatic uzi, so I think limitations on available firepower make sense. I think every honest citizen should be able to get a pistol or riffle to defend themselves, but all this high power stuff, I'm fine with regulating. I'm fine with harsh punishments for gun violence offenders but it is very situational and I don't think a teenager who got caught up with the wrong crowd should go to jail till they are 50 for making a stupid mistake... Again, it all depends on the case.

In other words, you like the way the gun laws are now. There is no place in the US where you can LEGALLY walk in and buy a full auto UZI. If you want to own one legally, prepare for a long process.

Yes, I think it makes sense to regulate the firepower that citizens own. Everybody deserves basic protection but it shouldn’t be quick and easy for somebody to get a weapon capable of killing dozens of people in the matter of just a few seconds. Those “tools” as they’ve been called pose a great danger to society and deserve to be regulated.

The other side of the conversation that seems to get lost is the motivation, indicators, mental process, and conditions etc that drive people to kill in the way that they do because ultimately there is a person behind every trigger pull.

The government doesn't get to regulate bearable arms of citizens.....they are protected by our Right to Self defense......that is the starting point...


Kill a dozen people in matter of a few seconds....like a couple of revolves? A lever action rifle, or a pump action shotgun....you see how what you say will eventually lead to those things being banned as well? A rental truck murdered more people in one go than all of the mass shooters this country has ever had.......killing more people in one drive through a crowd than entire years of mass shooting events........

Do we ban trucks?