Gun Control - What's the Problem?

[Wildman]

"Asshat" really?? ... It is completely inappropriate to use about the Commander and Chief.

i knew it from the very beginning!!


LIBERTARD!! ... LIBERTARD!! ... LIBERTARD!!

 

[Wildman]

this ASSHAT is making me want to

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

"Asshat" really?? ... It is completely inappropriate to use about the Commander and Chief.

i knew it from the very beginning!!


LIBERTARD!! ... LIBERTARD!! ... LIBERTARD!!

He says he owns a firearm......I have my doubts.

 

[Wildman]

good night my friends.., i may have to after all!!

 

[2aguy]

No…we don't object to everything proposed……we oppose licensing gun owners, registering guns and universal background checks.

We support prison sentences for criminals who use guns to commit crimes…long ones. And for most felons, they should not be able to own guns..and if they are caught with a gun they should be sent immediately to jail….

Those two points cover just about everything you need to keep gun crime down….we just aren't doing either one...

Stronger law enforcement and harsher punishments are fine if you thats what you want to promote, I could agree with you on that. I personally don't believe you are going to scare people away from committing crimes... Many do it out of desperation, poverty, or because they survive in a gang or criminal type environment, and there are tons of ways we can also work on that. If background checks or stricter regulations reduces gun exposure, reduces gun related accidents, theft, accessibility, suicides, etc. , even if its only by a fraction then I believe that is a good thing. Yes you as a gun owner may need to spend a little more time to get your license or you may have to pay a little more to buy a gun, but in the long run if it reduces death then does even a little bit to help weed out some of the wreckless people who own guns it may be a worthy sacrifice.

If background checks or stricter regulations reduces gun exposure, reduces gun related accidents, theft, accessibility, suicides, etc. , even if its only by a fraction then I believe that is a good thing.

Have you done any actual research on the topic......? As more Americans own and carry guns...our gun accident rate has gone down, our gun murder rate has gone down....our gun suicide rate has gone down..........so you are wrong on all points....

Background checks do nothing to stop gun violence or mass shootings...do you realize that? How do background checks reduce gun accidents? Only safety training does that and anti gun groups oppose teaching gun safety in schools.....

And what if you are poor....and you can't afford the license or a little more to buy a gun...and you live where the police do not go...........so you are excluded from exercising your Right to the 2nd Amendment because you can't afford it..right?

That in and of itself is a violation of the 14th Amendment and the equal protection clause.....that is what shut down democrat Poll Taxes on blacks voting....because they used fees and taxes to keep a Right from being accessed by poor blacks.....

I agree with many of your points and wish more of the discussion on this thread was of this caliber. I'm not a liberal anti-gun person but have been painted into that corner from the engagement of many in this thread. I don't think BG checks are going to do a much to stop bad guys from getting guns. I do think people should have a background check before getting a gun, so lets make that process as good as possible. When somebody tries to do something to work on a problem and a group aggressively attacks and criticizes all efforts we all end up in a polarized deadlock. I also don't like the blind opposition and rederic that surrounds this issue.

I have seen these debates for years.....not one of the pro 2nd Amendment people have attacked background checks on any other grounds than that they are not going to stop criminals and mass shooters from getting guns..which is the whole point to doing them...right? So if you are pushing background checks, and you admit that they don't do what the anti gunners say they will do, pointing that out isn't aggressively attacking or criticizing all effort...they are attacking an effort that is in truth just a way to make gun ownership for people who do not commit crimes with guns...simply because those pushing background checks do not like guns.

You just admitted background checks will do almost nothing to stop criminals from getting guns....Can you explain why you support them then? I will support them only if they are immediate, can use a drivers license to get the check, cost nothing ,and leave no permanent record.......that way they do not target law abiding gun owners.

 

[Londoner]

Obama's only serious act of gun control was to advocate for greater oversight over sales to people on the terrorist watch list.

Republican news sources (talk radio, FOX, etc) reported the mere oversight of gun sales to potential terrorists as the end of the Constitution.

This kind of distortion in reporting means that the OP can't hope to get an intelligent answer to his question. He is merely inviting Republican voters to spew hysterical falsehoods about Obama's desire to confiscate all guns and send all gun owners to FEMA concentration camps.

Any attempt to talk about Obama's actual proposals is impossible.

 

[Rustic]

Obama's only serious act of gun control was to advocate for greater oversight over sales to people on the terrorist watch list.

Republican news sources (talk radio, FOX, etc) reported the mere oversight of gun sales to potential terrorists as the end of the Constitution.

This kind of distortion in reporting means that the OP can't hope to get an intelligent answer to his question. He is merely inviting Republican voters to spew hysterical falsehoods about Obama's desire to confiscate all guns and send all gun owners to FEMA concentration camps.

Any attempt to talk about Obama's actual proposals is impossible.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Obama's only serious act of gun control was to advocate for greater oversight over sales to people on the terrorist watch list.

Republican news sources (talk radio, FOX, etc) reported the mere oversight of gun sales to potential terrorists as the end of the Constitution.

This kind of distortion in reporting means that the OP can't hope to get an intelligent answer to his question. He is merely inviting Republican voters to spew hysterical falsehoods about Obama's desire to confiscate all guns and send all gun owners to FEMA concentration camps.

Any attempt to talk about Obama's actual proposals is impossible.

Especially when liberals lie like you just did in your post.

He did not advocate the repeal of sales to terrorists, he advocated repealing the sales of guns to those on the No Fly list.

So you tell me: when was the last time somebody on the No Fly list legally purchased a firearm and committed a crime with it?

And this is what I meant when I said earlier that DumBama is proposing a solution to a problem that isn't there. Nobody on the No Fly list are murdering people or committing acts of mass shootings in the United States.

 

[Pogo]

Not sure if you're aware of this but ---- restating a Slippery Slope fallacy over and over and over and over and over and over and over ---- doesn't make it any le&ss a Slippery Slope fallacy.

Please show us ONE country that adopted registration of weapons and then didn't follow up with confiscation. Just one. I can go all the way back to the Byzantine Empire and their registration of swords followed up by the confiscation and murder of 32,000 sword owners for my timeline.

You?

I've never looked into that and frankly, don't give a shit.

The point stands: Slippery Slope fallacy is Slippery Slope fallacy is Slippery Slope fallacy. Doesn't matter one iota how many times you repeat the same thing in hope that somebody will believe it.

Oh? So you admit that you ignore very easily researched history and instead merely parrot what your masters tell you? In other words it is you who are closed minded. Like I stated earlier dude, you talk AT people, you don't discuss anything.

Once more for the slow readers ------- I neither know nor care about that particular info. Get it? My post isn't about that. It's about logic -- which is what about 90% of my posts on this site have always been about.

It's a Slippery Slope Fallacy, that's just a fact and there ain't a damn thing any of you can do about that except to abandon it.

Yes, we KNOW you don't care about facts. Facts DESTROY your slippery slope fallacy argument. Utterly....

Once yet again for the mega-dense: nothing in a fallacy has anything to do with "facts". A fallacy by definition means "facts" are absent.

I didn't post about "facts"; I posted about logic.


Which I just reiterated but you're too dense to read it.

 

[Slade3200]

The current background check system needs to be made immediate and no record keeping, no fee.....a pass/fail...you give them your drivers license or any other state issued I.D., they run it for felonies and you get a pass or fail and get the gun right then and there if you pass.

That is a common point we can all agree to....knowing that criminals do not undergo background checks...they will get someone who can pass the check to buy the guns for them.......but background checks seem to make you guys happy....as long as individual "transfers" are left alone...which means I can sell a gun to a family member without a background check, or lend a gun to a friend for a hunting trip or to try it out at the range to see if they want to buy one........


Mass shooters will also not be affected...they can pass the background check...or they steal their guns or buy them illegally......


but, if you meet the above requiements for background checks I could meet you there........since it doesn't cost anything and does not create a permanent record.


Any problem with that?

No problems with that, I wish more would respond with the same tact... Like I said, BG checks are not my idea of a game changer or problem fixer. It is something that is in place that the exec wants to improve, there is def room for improvement so I have no objections major objections. Now if it is going to cost us an arm and I leg I would probably suggest a better allocation of those funds. What I have more of a problem with is the uproar and backlash that is caused over something that is a relative non-issue.

 

[Slade3200]

36???? you are too damn young to grasp the situation.

I am the one raising the next generation, developing the next wave of business and technology, It is my generation that is moving into the drivers seat and will have to deal with the messes and successes that your generation is leaving me. I tackle ideas with an open mind and although there are many close minded, old school, traditionalist out there, i am able to see through the crap and learn what I can. Hot air comes from both sides but we are lost when we either stop thinking for ourselves or we close our eyes and ears to new ideas.

 

[Slade3200]

He says he owns a firearm......I have my doubts.

I own 8

 

[Slade3200]

I have seen these debates for years.....not one of the pro 2nd Amendment people have attacked background checks on any other grounds than that they are not going to stop criminals and mass shooters from getting guns..which is the whole point to doing them...right? So if you are pushing background checks, and you admit that they don't do what the anti gunners say they will do, pointing that out isn't aggressively attacking or criticizing all effort...they are attacking an effort that is in truth just a way to make gun ownership for people who do not commit crimes with guns...simply because those pushing background checks do not like guns.

You just admitted background checks will do almost nothing to stop criminals from getting guns....Can you explain why you support them then? I will support them only if they are immediate, can use a drivers license to get the check, cost nothing ,and leave no permanent record.......that way they do not target law abiding gun owners.

As a gun owner, I would really not like to have to go through a BG check to sell a gun to a friend, i'm actually going through that now. However, if thats what the powers at be decide to do then I will go through the motions and try to support. I won't stomp my feet like a child... same thing happened when seat belts became a law. I know you disagree but I really think that a registration and tracking system is a much better answer as it will help with criminal investigations and finding stolen guns. I don't by the slippery slope argument.
I also don't think everybody should have a gun and those who do should be accountable. The purpose of having a gun is to be able to defend ones self and individuals with intent to offend and misuse a gun shouldn't have one. I've been to enough sporting events and crowded bars that stir up fights and if everybody was armed a few punches easily turn into a few body bags. Thats not the world I want to live in. I hope our gun culture can calm down and replace some of the testosterone with common sense... because frankly, the gun extremists make it an embarrassing group to be a part of.... Similar to the GOP. So to answer your question, I am not a big supporter of BG checks, im more impartial on the matter. They do enough to keep the bad guys from easily purchasing from the stores which makes it harder, yes harder not impossible, to get a gun... harder is a good thing.

 

[westwall]

Please show us ONE country that adopted registration of weapons and then didn't follow up with confiscation. Just one. I can go all the way back to the Byzantine Empire and their registration of swords followed up by the confiscation and murder of 32,000 sword owners for my timeline.

You?

I've never looked into that and frankly, don't give a shit.

The point stands: Slippery Slope fallacy is Slippery Slope fallacy is Slippery Slope fallacy. Doesn't matter one iota how many times you repeat the same thing in hope that somebody will believe it.

Oh? So you admit that you ignore very easily researched history and instead merely parrot what your masters tell you? In other words it is you who are closed minded. Like I stated earlier dude, you talk AT people, you don't discuss anything.

Once more for the slow readers ------- I neither know nor care about that particular info. Get it? My post isn't about that. It's about logic -- which is what about 90% of my posts on this site have always been about.

It's a Slippery Slope Fallacy, that's just a fact and there ain't a damn thing any of you can do about that except to abandon it.

Yes, we KNOW you don't care about facts. Facts DESTROY your slippery slope fallacy argument. Utterly....

Once yet again for the mega-dense: nothing in a fallacy has anything to do with "facts". A fallacy by definition means "facts" are absent.

I didn't post about "facts"; I posted about logic.


Which I just reiterated but you're too dense to read it.

Once again for the propagandist, you are wrong. Historical fact is historical fact. You can't magically disappear it. Thus your argument is specious at best.

 

[Rustic]

I have seen these debates for years.....not one of the pro 2nd Amendment people have attacked background checks on any other grounds than that they are not going to stop criminals and mass shooters from getting guns..which is the whole point to doing them...right? So if you are pushing background checks, and you admit that they don't do what the anti gunners say they will do, pointing that out isn't aggressively attacking or criticizing all effort...they are attacking an effort that is in truth just a way to make gun ownership for people who do not commit crimes with guns...simply because those pushing background checks do not like guns.

You just admitted background checks will do almost nothing to stop criminals from getting guns....Can you explain why you support them then? I will support them only if they are immediate, can use a drivers license to get the check, cost nothing ,and leave no permanent record.......that way they do not target law abiding gun owners.

As a gun owner, I would really not like to have to go through a BG check to sell a gun to a friend, i'm actually going through that now. However, if thats what the powers at be decide to do then I will go through the motions and try to support. I won't stomp my feet like a child... same thing happened when seat belts became a law. I know you disagree but I really think that a registration and tracking system is a much better answer as it will help with criminal investigations and finding stolen guns. I don't by the slippery slope argument.
I also don't think everybody should have a gun and those who do should be accountable. The purpose of having a gun is to be able to defend ones self and individuals with intent to offend and misuse a gun shouldn't have one. I've been to enough sporting events and crowded bars that stir up fights and if everybody was armed a few punches easily turn into a few body bags. Thats not the world I want to live in. I hope our gun culture can calm down and replace some of the testosterone with common sense... because frankly, the gun extremists make it an embarrassing group to be a part of.... Similar to the GOP. So to answer your question, I am not a big supporter of BG checks, im more impartial on the matter. They do enough to keep the bad guys from easily purchasing from the stores which makes it harder, yes harder not impossible, to get a gun... harder is a good thing.

Federal government has no credibility on such things, commander asshat proves my point.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

He says he owns a firearm......I have my doubts.

I own 8

Are they all registered?

 

[Redfish]

He says he owns a firearm......I have my doubts.

I own 8

Are they all registered?

no ones guns are registered. going through a background check does not register your guns. Once the background check is completed the files are deleted. There is no gun registry in the USA------------------------yet.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

He says he owns a firearm......I have my doubts.

I own 8

Are they all registered?

no ones guns are registered. going through a background check does not register your guns. Once the background check is completed the files are deleted. There is no gun registry in the USA------------------------yet.

Dammit you just screwed my set up!!!

 

[2aguy]

The current background check system needs to be made immediate and no record keeping, no fee.....a pass/fail...you give them your drivers license or any other state issued I.D., they run it for felonies and you get a pass or fail and get the gun right then and there if you pass.

That is a common point we can all agree to....knowing that criminals do not undergo background checks...they will get someone who can pass the check to buy the guns for them.......but background checks seem to make you guys happy....as long as individual "transfers" are left alone...which means I can sell a gun to a family member without a background check, or lend a gun to a friend for a hunting trip or to try it out at the range to see if they want to buy one........


Mass shooters will also not be affected...they can pass the background check...or they steal their guns or buy them illegally......


but, if you meet the above requiements for background checks I could meet you there........since it doesn't cost anything and does not create a permanent record.


Any problem with that?

No problems with that, I wish more would respond with the same tact... Like I said, BG checks are not my idea of a game changer or problem fixer. It is something that is in place that the exec wants to improve, there is def room for improvement so I have no objections major objections. Now if it is going to cost us an arm and I leg I would probably suggest a better allocation of those funds. What I have more of a problem with is the uproar and backlash that is caused over something that is a relative non-issue.

It is not a non issue. Everytown for gun Safety and mayor bloomberg their boss, want to use background checks as a way to get registration, and as a way to keep people from bothering with owning a gun….did you see the links I gave to what their definition of "transfer" means to gun safety education, gun storage and lending or selling guns to relatives…?

There is no need for universal background checks…everything the anti gunners say they want them for is already addressed by current laws. What they want is a gateway to gun registration……that gives them confiscation several years down the road……

If you try to register guns in order to confiscate them at the same time…it won't get done. That is why they break them up…register first, then later, confiscate...

 

[2aguy]

I have seen these debates for years.....not one of the pro 2nd Amendment people have attacked background checks on any other grounds than that they are not going to stop criminals and mass shooters from getting guns..which is the whole point to doing them...right? So if you are pushing background checks, and you admit that they don't do what the anti gunners say they will do, pointing that out isn't aggressively attacking or criticizing all effort...they are attacking an effort that is in truth just a way to make gun ownership for people who do not commit crimes with guns...simply because those pushing background checks do not like guns.

You just admitted background checks will do almost nothing to stop criminals from getting guns....Can you explain why you support them then? I will support them only if they are immediate, can use a drivers license to get the check, cost nothing ,and leave no permanent record.......that way they do not target law abiding gun owners.

As a gun owner, I would really not like to have to go through a BG check to sell a gun to a friend, i'm actually going through that now. However, if thats what the powers at be decide to do then I will go through the motions and try to support. I won't stomp my feet like a child... same thing happened when seat belts became a law. I know you disagree but I really think that a registration and tracking system is a much better answer as it will help with criminal investigations and finding stolen guns. I don't by the slippery slope argument.
I also don't think everybody should have a gun and those who do should be accountable. The purpose of having a gun is to be able to defend ones self and individuals with intent to offend and misuse a gun shouldn't have one. I've been to enough sporting events and crowded bars that stir up fights and if everybody was armed a few punches easily turn into a few body bags. Thats not the world I want to live in. I hope our gun culture can calm down and replace some of the testosterone with common sense... because frankly, the gun extremists make it an embarrassing group to be a part of.... Similar to the GOP. So to answer your question, I am not a big supporter of BG checks, im more impartial on the matter. They do enough to keep the bad guys from easily purchasing from the stores which makes it harder, yes harder not impossible, to get a gun... harder is a good thing.

I know you disagree but I really think that a registration and tracking system is a much better answer as it will help with criminal investigations and finding stolen guns.

Actually, registration doesn't help with criminal investigations………a gun in the hands of a criminal did not get their by being registered to the criminal……so if you find a gun at a murder scene, it just leads back to the original owner who didn't commit the murder. And if you look into the topic…that gun has changed hands at least a dozen times by the time it is found at a crime scene.

And in every place where guns were registered…to help in crime investigations and to keep people safe……it always ended up being used to confiscate guns……..history shows this over and over again. we are not making this up.

I've been to enough sporting events and crowded bars that stir up fights and if everybody was armed a few punches easily turn into a few body bags.

Virginia legalized concealed carry in bars…do you know what happened…..? The anti gunners said it would lead to shoot outs over drunks arguing…..do you know what actually happened? The level of violence in bars went down…not up. We already can deal with people carrying guns while drunk….you arrest them and take their gun…….we don't need new laws to do that.