Gun Control - What's the Problem?

[Crixus]

So it boils down to how unhappy I will be?

How about Trump doing what he said he would do to earn the votes of the gun community and not fucking with our right to keep an bear arms?

That's difficult to do, especially with an election coming up and over 90% negative reporting by the MSM.

I think Trump will back off what he said he's going to do. Remember that anything would have to get past the Senate first.

I don't think bump stocks are a huge loss to the gun community. I never even heard of them until Las Vegas, and from discussions here and elsewhere, most gun people haven't either.

Don't get upset. Sit back and watch. Trump has said things against our beliefs and managed to back down or forget about it. Give the media what they are looking for. When things calm down, then let's see what happens.

Donald Trump has earned my trust.

No matter what trump does, it will be better than what hilary planned to do...

That is true.

However, gun nut people like me are starting to get really pissed at Trump for the anti gun shit he has come up with. We are his core base. It is not politically astute to piss off your core base hoping that they will still vote for you as a lesser of two evils. That is how you lose elections.

Just ask all those RINOs and Democrats that lost their offices in 1994 because they voted for the AWB.

Trump got my vote because he wasn't Hillary. I was becoming okay with trump even with his failure to slow the illegals, but whatever. I was pleased with the mayhem he has caused and the mess he made of the DNC. But after this,





He has proven that he is no different then any other politician in Washington. He is pandering to the democrats. He pretty much lied about his stance on the 2nd. Many have said this is just a ploy to mess with the democrats. I don't think so.

You hit on something there.

Many voters supported Trump because he wasn't Crooked Hillary. It is not that they had a reason to trust Trump but they knew they had a reason not to trust Crooked Hillary.

If Trump goes Libtard bat shit crazy with this gun control shit he will lose the trust of a lot of his core voters. Like I said, political suicide.

Yup. And those core voters will stay home on Election Day. He will probably still be elected if what the DNC has up there now is who he runs against, but I'm thinking the GOP will be dead. I don't know.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That's difficult to do, especially with an election coming up and over 90% negative reporting by the MSM.

I think Trump will back off what he said he's going to do. Remember that anything would have to get past the Senate first.

I don't think bump stocks are a huge loss to the gun community. I never even heard of them until Las Vegas, and from discussions here and elsewhere, most gun people haven't either.

Don't get upset. Sit back and watch. Trump has said things against our beliefs and managed to back down or forget about it. Give the media what they are looking for. When things calm down, then let's see what happens.

Donald Trump has earned my trust.

The problem that Trump will face with his zeal to fuck us on gun control is not that we will vote for Democrats. That is not going to happen. However, what will happen is that we will not have the enthusiasm to vote for him. Several of the states he carried were by pretty narrow margins. That lack of enthusiasm is going to hurt him. We saw that same lack of enthusiasm contribute to McCain and Romney losing, didn't we?

Never trust a New York Liberal with your Constitutional rights. It doesn't make any difference if that Liberal is Trump or Clinton.

Trump may have been a Democrat and has some slight liberal views, but he has presided as a true conservative most of the time.

Show me any President that performed to your total satisfaction, and I'll show you a million dollars buried somewhere. Bush sold us out on the environment. Reagan sold us out on immigration. Old man Bush made the drug problem much worse by having the feds chase down marijuana growers and sellers.

Trump will still carry the enthusiasm and sellout crowds wherever he goes, mainly because of the immigration issues. Yes, gun regulations can be a threat, but I think our country is doomed if we don't stop these people from entering our country.

That is the thing. Everybody sells us out. Every year the government grows bigger and the debt gets greater. The only difference between Republicans and Democrats is the rate of growth.

Our country can't be fixed at the ballot box. Republicans are always better than Democrats but our country won't be fixed and our liberties restore by electing Republicans over Democrats. At the end of the day there isn't that much difference.

I just hope Trump is playing rope a dope with the Democrats on these gun control issues. I also hope that it is not us gun owners he is playing for a dope.

I also suspect that he is taking advice from the NRA leadership. They may be giving Trump permission to go forward with oppressive Red Flag Laws and UBC. I wouldn't put it past those weak minded sonofabitches. They haven't been looking after our interest for some time now. That is why I giving my support to GOA instead of the NRA.

Not one Democrat will vote for Trump if he pushes UBC but hundreds of thousands if not over a million gun owners may not vote for him. They are not going to vote for a Democrat but Trump won't get their vote.

It will be political suicide.

I think you are correct. Trump will introduce legislation that will include things that make the Democrats cringe, and when they vote against his bill that also includes their goodies, Trump can say "Well......I tried!"

He can piss off some Republicans to the point they don't vote. But if he pisses off Democrats, they may come out in droves as they did during the mid-terms. Both parties had outstanding results and way above average turnout, it's just that hate won more people over, and that's how we lost the House.

That can happen in 2020 as well. If Trump is putting on a dog and pony show, then let him say what he wants. It's what he does that counts. No matter what Trump does, it's better than looking forward to reparations, Medicare for all, taxpayer funded colleges, and worst of all, liberal Supreme Court justices, the most important thing about having a Republican President.

I don't know about you Ray but I am getting damn tired of voting for somebody just because he/she is the lesser of two evils.

I need a President that will stand up for my right to keep and bear arms. Not one that will deteriorate it.

It pains me to say it but already Trump has a worst record than Obama.

DumBama was helpless when it came to firearms because he was dealing with a Republican House. Do you really think if he had the legislative backing, we would have the same gun freedoms we have today? Don't you believe it.

Now if you want to see what will happen to your gun rights, allow a Democrat President to get in and possibly turn the SC to the Democrats side. Then you will see the huge loss of gun rights.

I'm sorry, but voting for legislators has always been about the least of two evils. All you can do is support the one that will take the least from you. We are on a roll right now with the SC justices Trump selected although they didn't vote in our favor a couple of times. But it can always be worse.

It's not that I don't understand your frustration, I do. I'm a landlord, and I can't tell you the financial losses I took during the housing bubble which Bush didn't do enough to stop. With 0% down, lowlifes from the inner-city moved into my suburb and destroyed it, thus cutting my property value in half. Sure I'm pissed, but what would have happened if Gore or Kerry were in the White House instead of Bush? It would have been much, much worse.

 

[Slade3200]

See you use another faux argument. I never said it would stop ALL mass gun murders. You are clearly not interested in having an honest debate as you make up shit to debate that I neither said nor implied. I’m not going to waste anymore time correcting your dishonesty. Perhaps we can pick up the debate some other time once you’ve grown up a bit.

That’s not what you’re pissed about. You’re pissed because I pointed out the many flaws in your proposal.

If your suggestion isn’t going to stop mass shootings, then why bother to inconvenience all other gun owners in the country if it isn’t going to solve anything?

See, the Democrat party also know their proposals won’t stop anything either. And when it doesn’t, on to the next set of laws that will have the same results. In the end, we will be stuck with a bunch of laws that don’t accomplish anything that we will never be able to get rid of. What it will do is make purchasing and keeping a firearm such a hassle, such a problem, and likely such an expense that most law abiding people will just not deal with it and remain unarmed.

It’s all part of the big plan.

How do you know that gun laws haven’t prevented death? It’s common sense to me. What you call an inconvenience also serves as a deterrent. It prevents people from making emotional decisions, it makes high risk people go through other means to get guns and lessens their killing power. The kid who shot up a group with a hand gun would have done much more damage if he could have stopped by the local Big 5 and bought an uzi on his way to school.

Get it?

We are to the point where there have been so many mass shootings that it's hard to remember. But I don't recall a mass murder where the weapons involved were obtained through "other means" that could have been prevented.

In Sandy Hook, the kid did attempt to buy firearms and was denied with our current system. So he killed his mother and used her weapons instead. In Columbine, the shooters were under age which prevented them from legally buying guns in their names. They used straw purchasers who claim they didn't know the intent of the shooters. While they were strange kids and did have juvenile criminal records, nobody suspected they were capable of anything like what they did.

In these last two shootings, I believe the suspects were allowed to buy guns, just like the kook in the Las Vegas shooting. I also believe most of the shooters in mass murderers didn't have a record either.

The point is there is no way to determine who might do what in most cases. So to say that these initiatives will not stop mass murders, but will make them a little better is hardly worth the inconvenience of the rest of the country.

Well there you go, you are proving my point. Sandy hook guy tried to buy but couldn’t so he had to use what his mom had. What if all the GC deniers had their way and there were no regulations? What if sandy hook guy could have just bought an uzi? How many more kids would be dead?

Probably the same amount. He didn't kill more because of the weapons he didn't have, he heard sirens and killed himself.

When shooting into a group of people, a semi-automatic handgun will do the same damage as a semi-automatic rifle. The only difference is you have better aim with a rifle which isn't needed when you're killing people sitting in a church or in a school at short range.

Fully automatic weapons in this country are only legal by licensed and very investigated individuals.

Statistically, our gun and violent crime has been on the decline since the early 90's with what we are doing. That was interrupted with the Ferguson Effect, but is back on the decline once again. Liz Warren is trying to rehash that event, but I don't think it will catch on.

Do you agree that the restrictions on full autos is a good thing and saves lives?

 

[Slade3200]

How do you know that gun laws haven’t prevented death? It’s common sense to me. What you call an inconvenience also serves as a deterrent. It prevents people from making emotional decisions, it makes high risk people go through other means to get guns and lessens their killing power. The kid who shot up a group with a hand gun would have done much more damage if he could have stopped by the local Big 5 and bought an uzi on his way to school.

Get it?

What I get is that the kid who mows down people in a mass shooting could be identified and stopped - even helped and their life put back on the right track IF we concentrated on the ROOT OF THE PROBLEM. Watch your local news after a mass shooting. The people that know the shooter will say we knew that was going to happen, it didn't come as a surprise, etc.

We know long before these young people kill someone, but don't do a damn thing to prevent it. Then you don't help them and their first encounter with police as an adult is after they've killed someone.

I don't think people like YOU get it.

I completely agree with you. I think mental health care in schools should be a primary focus. Why don’t you think I get it?

The solution to the problem is NOT background checks. If anyone is asking, then I don't think they get it. the guys buying guns and killing people would pass the background check. Their warning signs are ignored and they have no "history" (having been minors) to check.

People are pissing in the wind on this one. If you're calling the cops on a kid continually; if they're being reported to police; being kicked out of school, then someone needs to get involved ASAP.

Go the child's home; interview the parents; interview the child; give the child an IQ test and a drug test. Determine where the problem is. Use the schools in the evening hours as places to teach parenting skills and one on one / group therapy for parents and children. SOLVE the problem while the kid is young.

BTW: The current method is to give a kid six minutes with a doctor and let them prescribe Ritalin or Adderall and then let the kid begin thinking the police and pills are their parents.

I didn't say background checks were the solution to the problem. I dont think there is A solution that will solve the problem... but there are several things that can be done to help reduce the damage. Background check are one of those things.

We already have background checks for weapons purchased from a dealer at a shop or gun show. We have had killers who did pass the background check and still used those weapons for mass murders.

Your right it’s not a full proof system, some get through. Would you do away with the background check system we have or do you think it is doing some good?

 

[Slade3200]

How do you know that gun laws haven’t prevented death? It’s common sense to me. What you call an inconvenience also serves as a deterrent. It prevents people from making emotional decisions, it makes high risk people go through other means to get guns and lessens their killing power. The kid who shot up a group with a hand gun would have done much more damage if he could have stopped by the local Big 5 and bought an uzi on his way to school.

Get it?

What I get is that the kid who mows down people in a mass shooting could be identified and stopped - even helped and their life put back on the right track IF we concentrated on the ROOT OF THE PROBLEM. Watch your local news after a mass shooting. The people that know the shooter will say we knew that was going to happen, it didn't come as a surprise, etc.

We know long before these young people kill someone, but don't do a damn thing to prevent it. Then you don't help them and their first encounter with police as an adult is after they've killed someone.

I don't think people like YOU get it.

I completely agree with you. I think mental health care in schools should be a primary focus. Why don’t you think I get it?

The solution to the problem is NOT background checks. If anyone is asking, then I don't think they get it. the guys buying guns and killing people would pass the background check. Their warning signs are ignored and they have no "history" (having been minors) to check.

People are pissing in the wind on this one. If you're calling the cops on a kid continually; if they're being reported to police; being kicked out of school, then someone needs to get involved ASAP.

Go the child's home; interview the parents; interview the child; give the child an IQ test and a drug test. Determine where the problem is. Use the schools in the evening hours as places to teach parenting skills and one on one / group therapy for parents and children. SOLVE the problem while the kid is young.

BTW: The current method is to give a kid six minutes with a doctor and let them prescribe Ritalin or Adderall and then let the kid begin thinking the police and pills are their parents.

I didn't say background checks were the solution to the problem. I dont think there is A solution that will solve the problem... but there are several things that can be done to help reduce the damage. Background check are one of those things.

No, they aren't. The current checks don't stop criminals who simply steal their guns or use straw buyers who can pass any background check. Mass shooters can pass any background check or they too steal their guns....

Background checks are security theater......and the next step to gun registration, which you need to confiscate guns.

You’re right BG checks don’t stop those people. If you think they are useless would you call for eliminating BG checks all together? Let anybody buy any gun from anywhere that wants to sell them?

 

[Slade3200]

you forget what happened to all of our cars when we were forced to get licenses!


every car was confiscated!


and then when they forced us to get wedding licenses our brides were all rounded up and taken away!


same thing will happen with guns!

Then tell me what is the purpose of registering a car.

If you don't know I'll tell you

You have to register a car primarily so the state can tax you.

Since there is no legal way to put an excise tax on guns what is the purpose of registering them?

Let’s keep going... Why are licenses given for cars?

Owning a car is not a Right. Democrats used Poll Taxes to charge a fee against Blacks for the Right to vote, and it was struck down under the 14th Amendment.

Murdock v Pennsylvania states that you can't be charged a fee to exercise a Right...

That is why licensing gun owners is unConstitutional.

Im so tired of the knee jerk reaction “driving isn’t a right” retort. that has nothing to do with his point which was regarding the effects of licensing and registration

It has everything to do with the point...... and if licensing was such a fix for cars, why do they kill 38,000 people?

Registration does nothing for guns...other than allow politicians to confiscate them...which we have seen all over the world.

Cars kill 38,000 people because they are dangerous. Wanna make an educated guess which way that number would go if there were no regulations? No seat belt laws, no licensing requirements, no speed limits

 

[Slade3200]

How much more honest can you be you ask? Much more... you can start by not saying I said things like “spy” when I never said anything I’d the sort. That would be a good start.

Spying on Americans is not the only way, there are many ways to flag somebody at risk. It can be done by doctors, family, friends employers. And there would be a process to evaluate.

What would you propose Ray? Do nothing to prevent mental people from getting guns except for Arm those around them so they can defend themselves? What are your bright ideas?

Let's be honest...... 12 mass public shootings in 2018. total killed, 93. That is slightly more than are killed by lawn mowers each year. As people keep stating, we already have laws that can be used, the problem is that government keeps failing to use them....Parkland for example....over 30 visits by police....red flag after red flag....what kept them from preventing the attack (possibly)....the Obama "Promise Program" that encouraged the police and the school from pressing felony charges against the shooter....so they could keep their student arrest rate low.......

The Texas Church shooter...... the Air Force failed to put his records into NICS.......

A new red flag law wouldn't have prevented either one of those...because the government agencies meant to monitor these situations failed to do it.

Well I agree, we need to do better with the laws we have in the books because that would help. laws can help. Agreed?

I explain how you stop gun crime over in the CDZ...you might want to join.......

Laws that make the sentence for violent gun crime.....rape, robbery and murder, a life sentence without parole, and a 30 year sentence for illegal gun possession by a felon.....that is the only law we need to stop 95% of the gun crime in this country.... all the rest, universal background checks, gun registration, fees, taxes, are all useless, and only serve to slowly squeeze law abiding gun owners with so much red tape, fees and taxes that they give up on owning guns.....

My way works, and makes the other crap pointless.

I’m not opposed to harsh punishment for gun related violent crime. I think that could have some positive effects. I also think regulations have positive effects as well

We have all the regulations we need right now.... the ones you guys want don't do anything to help....at all.

Do we need these regulations? Do they help or should we get rid of them?

 

[Crixus]

The problem that Trump will face with his zeal to fuck us on gun control is not that we will vote for Democrats. That is not going to happen. However, what will happen is that we will not have the enthusiasm to vote for him. Several of the states he carried were by pretty narrow margins. That lack of enthusiasm is going to hurt him. We saw that same lack of enthusiasm contribute to McCain and Romney losing, didn't we?

Never trust a New York Liberal with your Constitutional rights. It doesn't make any difference if that Liberal is Trump or Clinton.

Trump may have been a Democrat and has some slight liberal views, but he has presided as a true conservative most of the time.

Show me any President that performed to your total satisfaction, and I'll show you a million dollars buried somewhere. Bush sold us out on the environment. Reagan sold us out on immigration. Old man Bush made the drug problem much worse by having the feds chase down marijuana growers and sellers.

Trump will still carry the enthusiasm and sellout crowds wherever he goes, mainly because of the immigration issues. Yes, gun regulations can be a threat, but I think our country is doomed if we don't stop these people from entering our country.

That is the thing. Everybody sells us out. Every year the government grows bigger and the debt gets greater. The only difference between Republicans and Democrats is the rate of growth.

Our country can't be fixed at the ballot box. Republicans are always better than Democrats but our country won't be fixed and our liberties restore by electing Republicans over Democrats. At the end of the day there isn't that much difference.

I just hope Trump is playing rope a dope with the Democrats on these gun control issues. I also hope that it is not us gun owners he is playing for a dope.

I also suspect that he is taking advice from the NRA leadership. They may be giving Trump permission to go forward with oppressive Red Flag Laws and UBC. I wouldn't put it past those weak minded sonofabitches. They haven't been looking after our interest for some time now. That is why I giving my support to GOA instead of the NRA.

Not one Democrat will vote for Trump if he pushes UBC but hundreds of thousands if not over a million gun owners may not vote for him. They are not going to vote for a Democrat but Trump won't get their vote.

It will be political suicide.

I think you are correct. Trump will introduce legislation that will include things that make the Democrats cringe, and when they vote against his bill that also includes their goodies, Trump can say "Well......I tried!"

He can piss off some Republicans to the point they don't vote. But if he pisses off Democrats, they may come out in droves as they did during the mid-terms. Both parties had outstanding results and way above average turnout, it's just that hate won more people over, and that's how we lost the House.

That can happen in 2020 as well. If Trump is putting on a dog and pony show, then let him say what he wants. It's what he does that counts. No matter what Trump does, it's better than looking forward to reparations, Medicare for all, taxpayer funded colleges, and worst of all, liberal Supreme Court justices, the most important thing about having a Republican President.

I don't know about you Ray but I am getting damn tired of voting for somebody just because he/she is the lesser of two evils.

I need a President that will stand up for my right to keep and bear arms. Not one that will deteriorate it.

It pains me to say it but already Trump has a worst record than Obama.

DumBama was helpless when it came to firearms because he was dealing with a Republican House. Do you really think if he had the legislative backing, we would have the same gun freedoms we have today? Don't you believe it.

Now if you want to see what will happen to your gun rights, allow a Democrat President to get in and possibly turn the SC to the Democrats side. Then you will see the huge loss of gun rights.

I'm sorry, but voting for legislators has always been about the least of two evils. All you can do is support the one that will take the least from you. We are on a roll right now with the SC justices Trump selected although they didn't vote in our favor a couple of times. But it can always be worse.

It's not that I don't understand your frustration, I do. I'm a landlord, and I can't tell you the financial losses I took during the housing bubble which Bush didn't do enough to stop. With 0% down, lowlifes from the inner-city moved into my suburb and destroyed it, thus cutting my property value in half. Sure I'm pissed, but what would have happened if Gore or Kerry were in the White House instead of Bush? It would have been much, much worse.

I get the "lesser of two evils", but can you watch the video and not wonder if the lesser of the two evils was chosen? I said in another thread that I can recall a democrat president just outright saying stuff like that. If it comes to it, I hope congress stops any such bill cold, but I won't hold my breath.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

See you use another faux argument. I never said it would stop ALL mass gun murders. You are clearly not interested in having an honest debate as you make up shit to debate that I neither said nor implied. I’m not going to waste anymore time correcting your dishonesty. Perhaps we can pick up the debate some other time once you’ve grown up a bit.

That’s not what you’re pissed about. You’re pissed because I pointed out the many flaws in your proposal.

If your suggestion isn’t going to stop mass shootings, then why bother to inconvenience all other gun owners in the country if it isn’t going to solve anything?

See, the Democrat party also know their proposals won’t stop anything either. And when it doesn’t, on to the next set of laws that will have the same results. In the end, we will be stuck with a bunch of laws that don’t accomplish anything that we will never be able to get rid of. What it will do is make purchasing and keeping a firearm such a hassle, such a problem, and likely such an expense that most law abiding people will just not deal with it and remain unarmed.

It’s all part of the big plan.

How do you know that gun laws haven’t prevented death? It’s common sense to me. What you call an inconvenience also serves as a deterrent. It prevents people from making emotional decisions, it makes high risk people go through other means to get guns and lessens their killing power. The kid who shot up a group with a hand gun would have done much more damage if he could have stopped by the local Big 5 and bought an uzi on his way to school.

Get it?

We are to the point where there have been so many mass shootings that it's hard to remember. But I don't recall a mass murder where the weapons involved were obtained through "other means" that could have been prevented.

In Sandy Hook, the kid did attempt to buy firearms and was denied with our current system. So he killed his mother and used her weapons instead. In Columbine, the shooters were under age which prevented them from legally buying guns in their names. They used straw purchasers who claim they didn't know the intent of the shooters. While they were strange kids and did have juvenile criminal records, nobody suspected they were capable of anything like what they did.

In these last two shootings, I believe the suspects were allowed to buy guns, just like the kook in the Las Vegas shooting. I also believe most of the shooters in mass murderers didn't have a record either.

The point is there is no way to determine who might do what in most cases. So to say that these initiatives will not stop mass murders, but will make them a little better is hardly worth the inconvenience of the rest of the country.

But we DO know who is most likely to become a mass murderer.

I think there are things that can be done. But infringing on the rights of all Americans isn't the solution.

It may take more manpower, but if there is a clear cut case of a kook, he should be watched carefully even if it means followed by a federal agent.

Now that we have a more right-leaning court, perhaps we can re-instiute being committed again. It was removed from our society during the 70s as it was considered crime-less prisons.

I'm telling you up front. You don't need that. I can solve the problem without any new taxes, no new bureaucracies, NO GUN CONTROL and it would leave NO PRETEXTS FOR BACKGROUND CHECKS

 

[Porter Rockwell]

You know what's NOT fake news?

Trump said "Take guns first, due process second" as in supports Red Flag
Trump got bumpstocks banned and made 500,000+ plus Americans felons over a hunk of plastic
Trump called and CONGRATULATED Rick Scott for SIGNING gun control in FL
Trump expresses support for stronger background checks

Trump sucks on the 2A, just like any Democrat would.and the Moon Bats should love him for it.

So you would be happier with Hillary in there instead with a Democrat Congress?

So it boils down to how unhappy I will be?

How about Trump doing what he said he would do to earn the votes of the gun community and not fucking with our right to keep an bear arms?

That's difficult to do, especially with an election coming up and over 90% negative reporting by the MSM.

I think Trump will back off what he said he's going to do. Remember that anything would have to get past the Senate first.

I don't think bump stocks are a huge loss to the gun community. I never even heard of them until Las Vegas, and from discussions here and elsewhere, most gun people haven't either.

Don't get upset. Sit back and watch. Trump has said things against our beliefs and managed to back down or forget about it. Give the media what they are looking for. When things calm down, then let's see what happens.

Donald Trump has earned my trust.

You live in a world of delusional fantasy if you'r trusting Trump on this one. Pay attention to who is going to be enforcing his agenda:

Did Trump just nominate a gun-grabber for Attorney General? | Gun Owners of America

Trump’s Pick to lead ATF has Supported Gun Control | Gun Owners of America

His past doth testify against him. He is the most anti-gun president in the history of the United States.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

So it boils down to how unhappy I will be?

How about Trump doing what he said he would do to earn the votes of the gun community and not fucking with our right to keep an bear arms?

That's difficult to do, especially with an election coming up and over 90% negative reporting by the MSM.

I think Trump will back off what he said he's going to do. Remember that anything would have to get past the Senate first.

I don't think bump stocks are a huge loss to the gun community. I never even heard of them until Las Vegas, and from discussions here and elsewhere, most gun people haven't either.

Don't get upset. Sit back and watch. Trump has said things against our beliefs and managed to back down or forget about it. Give the media what they are looking for. When things calm down, then let's see what happens.

Donald Trump has earned my trust.

No matter what trump does, it will be better than what hilary planned to do...

That is true.

However, gun nut people like me are starting to get really pissed at Trump for the anti gun shit he has come up with. We are his core base. It is not politically astute to piss off your core base hoping that they will still vote for you as a lesser of two evils. That is how you lose elections.

Just ask all those RINOs and Democrats that lost their offices in 1994 because they voted for the AWB.

Trump got my vote because he wasn't Hillary. I was becoming okay with trump even with his failure to slow the illegals, but whatever. I was pleased with the mayhem he has caused and the mess he made of the DNC. But after this,





He has proven that he is no different then any other politician in Washington. He is pandering to the democrats. He pretty much lied about his stance on the 2nd. Many have said this is just a ploy to mess with the democrats. I don't think so.

You hit on something there.

Many voters supported Trump because he wasn't Crooked Hillary. It is not that they had a reason to trust Trump but they knew they had a reason not to trust Crooked Hillary.

If Trump goes Libtard bat shit crazy with this gun control shit he will lose the trust of a lot of his core voters. Like I said, political suicide.

This is the Duopoly paradox these fucking assholes create. They don't have to be good. Just better than the other guy who is the only shitty alternative.

We continue to find ourselves voting for the least destructive, rather than the best.

I FUCKING HATE IT.

We have no alternatives.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Let's be honest...... 12 mass public shootings in 2018. total killed, 93. That is slightly more than are killed by lawn mowers each year. As people keep stating, we already have laws that can be used, the problem is that government keeps failing to use them....Parkland for example....over 30 visits by police....red flag after red flag....what kept them from preventing the attack (possibly)....the Obama "Promise Program" that encouraged the police and the school from pressing felony charges against the shooter....so they could keep their student arrest rate low.......

The Texas Church shooter...... the Air Force failed to put his records into NICS.......

A new red flag law wouldn't have prevented either one of those...because the government agencies meant to monitor these situations failed to do it.

Well I agree, we need to do better with the laws we have in the books because that would help. laws can help. Agreed?

I explain how you stop gun crime over in the CDZ...you might want to join.......

Laws that make the sentence for violent gun crime.....rape, robbery and murder, a life sentence without parole, and a 30 year sentence for illegal gun possession by a felon.....that is the only law we need to stop 95% of the gun crime in this country.... all the rest, universal background checks, gun registration, fees, taxes, are all useless, and only serve to slowly squeeze law abiding gun owners with so much red tape, fees and taxes that they give up on owning guns.....

My way works, and makes the other crap pointless.

I’m not opposed to harsh punishment for gun related violent crime. I think that could have some positive effects. I also think regulations have positive effects as well

We have all the regulations we need right now.... the ones you guys want don't do anything to help....at all.

Do we need these regulations? Do they help or should we get rid of them?

With the lack of trustworthiness from the gun-grabbers and their attempt to have the right to keep and bear found by the SCOTUS to NOT be an individual right, has me completely unconcerned about their bullshit claims to want safety.

THE ATTEMPT TO DESTROY THE RIGHT VIA JUDICIAL LEGISLATION WAS UNFORGIVABLE!!!!

IT JUSTIFIES THE BURTAL EXECUTION OF EVERY FUCKING ONE OF THEM!!!


I am fucking pissed off enough to push hardcore for a repeal of all regulations, just so I can dance in their cocksucking faces.

But, more importantly, we MUST push back with equally-determined force or we will lose it all.

NOT ONE MORE INCH!!!

.

 

[Rigby5]

t

I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea

Who are the wrong hands?

Who gets to decide that?

Whatcha gonna do when big government decides YOU are the wrong hands?

If anyone actually had an accurate predictive way to know in advance whose hands would be truly wrong, we'd already be preventing 90% of all gun murders and would be able to re-institute automatic weapons while removing 90% of the gun laws off the books.

People who are deemed violent and or mentally unstable

That is not at all legal.
That is what you expect in Russia, where anyone who is critical of the government is deemed violent or mentally unstable.
That not how law is supposed to work.
Anyone who is actually violent or mentally unstable should be involuntarily committed.
Preventing them from legally being able to buy a gun does nothing except corrupt the system.
A violent or mentally unstable person can still easily get a gun illegally, or flammables, poisons, explosives, large vehicles, etc.
What you suggest makes no sense, and it totally contrary to a democratic republic.

Who said anything about being critical of government as a disqualifying factor?! You’re injecting that into the conversation.

And what I say makes sense to millions who support gun control measures. Yes, some people will have contacts to get guns on the black market but others won’t and we need to have some safeguards in place so they can’t just walk into any old store and walk out with the power to kill dozens of people in a matter of seconds. Call me crazy if you must

That is silly.
Interjecting suppression of anything or anyone critical of government is EXACTLY what governments ALWAYS do!
Federal gun control is always a guaranteed means of suppressing any dissent, and being able to completely dominate and intimidate the entire population.
That is always the only point of any gun control, and always has been.

What you say your intent is makes no sense to anyone because they never actually thought about it.
They go by hysterical emotions that make no sense at all.
You are suggesting we try to disarm 100% of the non-government population, so that the criminal 0.1% can not just buy a gun from a gun store. And that clearly is ridiculous because the 0.1% who are criminals, already have their guns, and get all then need from drug traffickers from South America, Southeast Asia, the Balkans, etc.
All gun control laws do is disarm the honest people who we need and want to be armed, and all federal gun laws to is create a corrupt federal government that is not even supposed to be passing ANY weapons law at all.

You are crazy.
Obviously anyone too dangerous to allow to walk into a gun store to buy a gun, also can not be allowed in a fertilizer store to buy explosives, to buy gasoline, to buy poisons, etc.
Guns are likely the LEAST dangerous thing people could buy.
With something like ricin, which is easily obtained, one could not only kill thousands, but not even get caught.
It is clear you have NO understanding of technology, society, or common sense.
So it bares repeating, you are crazy is you support federal gun control in any way, shape, or form.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

That's difficult to do, especially with an election coming up and over 90% negative reporting by the MSM.

I think Trump will back off what he said he's going to do. Remember that anything would have to get past the Senate first.

I don't think bump stocks are a huge loss to the gun community. I never even heard of them until Las Vegas, and from discussions here and elsewhere, most gun people haven't either.

Don't get upset. Sit back and watch. Trump has said things against our beliefs and managed to back down or forget about it. Give the media what they are looking for. When things calm down, then let's see what happens.

Donald Trump has earned my trust.

No matter what trump does, it will be better than what hilary planned to do...

That is true.

However, gun nut people like me are starting to get really pissed at Trump for the anti gun shit he has come up with. We are his core base. It is not politically astute to piss off your core base hoping that they will still vote for you as a lesser of two evils. That is how you lose elections.

Just ask all those RINOs and Democrats that lost their offices in 1994 because they voted for the AWB.

Trump got my vote because he wasn't Hillary. I was becoming okay with trump even with his failure to slow the illegals, but whatever. I was pleased with the mayhem he has caused and the mess he made of the DNC. But after this,





He has proven that he is no different then any other politician in Washington. He is pandering to the democrats. He pretty much lied about his stance on the 2nd. Many have said this is just a ploy to mess with the democrats. I don't think so.

You hit on something there.

Many voters supported Trump because he wasn't Crooked Hillary. It is not that they had a reason to trust Trump but they knew they had a reason not to trust Crooked Hillary.

If Trump goes Libtard bat shit crazy with this gun control shit he will lose the trust of a lot of his core voters. Like I said, political suicide.

This is the Duopoly paradox these fucking assholes create. They don't have to be good. Just better than the other guy who is the only shitty alternative.

We continue to find ourselves voting for the least destructive, rather than the best.

I FUCKING HATE IT.

We have no alternatives.

.

Yes, you have alternatives. Back in the good old days, you started at the grass roots level and grew.

 

[Rigby5]

Who are the wrong hands?

Who gets to decide that?

Whatcha gonna do when big government decides YOU are the wrong hands?

If anyone actually had an accurate predictive way to know in advance whose hands would be truly wrong, we'd already be preventing 90% of all gun murders and would be able to re-institute automatic weapons while removing 90% of the gun laws off the books.

People who are deemed violent and or mentally unstable

Again, who decides the threshold for "violent" and "mentally unstable?" We already deny people with known violent past, crimes, threats to others the right to hold a gun. And we already do the same for the mentally institutionalized deemed not in good control of themself. What has it accomplished?

So now we are back in that gray area where someone must guess who might BECOME violent or has the CAPACITY to be so, and who is just a little goofy and who is dangerously so?

And that leads us right back to lopping off a whole bunch of totally innocent, harmless people who have not done a thing to deserve it in the hopes that we catch enough of the truly crazy, dangerous people in the process!

So that leads us full circle right back to the original questions:

• Who gets to decide all that?
• What if they rule against you for reasons other than actual things you've done?
• Where is the governing watch dogs which keeps such power from being abused?
• And why are we still blaming the guns and not going after the cause which drives these people in the first place?

We the people decide through the representatives that we elect. Hopefully there are town halls and public forums to gather input from the people but that’s how it works in a republic.

That is not how a democratic republic works.
Individual rights, like self defense, are not up for anyone's vote.
That is as silly as claiming that slavery would be legal if the majority voted for it against a minority.

Slavery would be legal if it was voted into law. That’s not silly at all that actually how our government works.

That is not just silly, but insane.
That is NOT at all how law works.
This is a democratic republic, so then the ONLY source of any legal authority is the inherent rights of individuals.
So then when we create government, all government is then authorized to do, is defend those inherent rights.
And slavery would not be defending the rights of anyone.
So it could never be legal, even if 100% of the population voted for it.
The first thing a democratic republic has to do is write up the basic goals and limitations or government, including the basic Bill of Rights which government is NEVER supposed to be able to violate, under any circumstances.
You really do not seem to understand anything about law, democratic republics, rights, or delegated authority.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

What I get is that the kid who mows down people in a mass shooting could be identified and stopped - even helped and their life put back on the right track IF we concentrated on the ROOT OF THE PROBLEM. Watch your local news after a mass shooting. The people that know the shooter will say we knew that was going to happen, it didn't come as a surprise, etc.

We know long before these young people kill someone, but don't do a damn thing to prevent it. Then you don't help them and their first encounter with police as an adult is after they've killed someone.

I don't think people like YOU get it.

I completely agree with you. I think mental health care in schools should be a primary focus. Why don’t you think I get it?

The solution to the problem is NOT background checks. If anyone is asking, then I don't think they get it. the guys buying guns and killing people would pass the background check. Their warning signs are ignored and they have no "history" (having been minors) to check.

People are pissing in the wind on this one. If you're calling the cops on a kid continually; if they're being reported to police; being kicked out of school, then someone needs to get involved ASAP.

Go the child's home; interview the parents; interview the child; give the child an IQ test and a drug test. Determine where the problem is. Use the schools in the evening hours as places to teach parenting skills and one on one / group therapy for parents and children. SOLVE the problem while the kid is young.

BTW: The current method is to give a kid six minutes with a doctor and let them prescribe Ritalin or Adderall and then let the kid begin thinking the police and pills are their parents.

I didn't say background checks were the solution to the problem. I dont think there is A solution that will solve the problem... but there are several things that can be done to help reduce the damage. Background check are one of those things.

No, they aren't. The current checks don't stop criminals who simply steal their guns or use straw buyers who can pass any background check. Mass shooters can pass any background check or they too steal their guns....

Background checks are security theater......and the next step to gun registration, which you need to confiscate guns.

You’re right BG checks don’t stop those people. If you think they are useless would you call for eliminating BG checks all together? Let anybody buy any gun from anywhere that wants to sell them?

I definitely would allow people to buy firearms without all the B.S. and background checks.

When you have unstable people, it's usually when they are young. You can identify them, rehabilitate them and there would be no pretext for gun control.

Everybody seems to know how many people are killed by guns in every little shithole from Angola to Zimbabwe, but I'll bet that NONE of them know how other countries deal with unruly kids.

Here, we blame the kid, feed them pills, let the police parent them, and then bitch about it when the kid grows up to be a killer.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No matter what trump does, it will be better than what hilary planned to do...

That is true.

However, gun nut people like me are starting to get really pissed at Trump for the anti gun shit he has come up with. We are his core base. It is not politically astute to piss off your core base hoping that they will still vote for you as a lesser of two evils. That is how you lose elections.

Just ask all those RINOs and Democrats that lost their offices in 1994 because they voted for the AWB.

Trump got my vote because he wasn't Hillary. I was becoming okay with trump even with his failure to slow the illegals, but whatever. I was pleased with the mayhem he has caused and the mess he made of the DNC. But after this,





He has proven that he is no different then any other politician in Washington. He is pandering to the democrats. He pretty much lied about his stance on the 2nd. Many have said this is just a ploy to mess with the democrats. I don't think so.

You hit on something there.

Many voters supported Trump because he wasn't Crooked Hillary. It is not that they had a reason to trust Trump but they knew they had a reason not to trust Crooked Hillary.

If Trump goes Libtard bat shit crazy with this gun control shit he will lose the trust of a lot of his core voters. Like I said, political suicide.

This is the Duopoly paradox these fucking assholes create. They don't have to be good. Just better than the other guy who is the only shitty alternative.

We continue to find ourselves voting for the least destructive, rather than the best.

I FUCKING HATE IT.

We have no alternatives.

.

Yes, you have alternatives. Back in the good old days, you started at the grass roots level and grew.

That usually goes nowhere and ends up getting the commie elected because all fucking commies are all in lockstep with their goose-stepping commie overlords.

.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What I get is that the kid who mows down people in a mass shooting could be identified and stopped - even helped and their life put back on the right track IF we concentrated on the ROOT OF THE PROBLEM. Watch your local news after a mass shooting. The people that know the shooter will say we knew that was going to happen, it didn't come as a surprise, etc.

We know long before these young people kill someone, but don't do a damn thing to prevent it. Then you don't help them and their first encounter with police as an adult is after they've killed someone.

I don't think people like YOU get it.

I completely agree with you. I think mental health care in schools should be a primary focus. Why don’t you think I get it?

The solution to the problem is NOT background checks. If anyone is asking, then I don't think they get it. the guys buying guns and killing people would pass the background check. Their warning signs are ignored and they have no "history" (having been minors) to check.

People are pissing in the wind on this one. If you're calling the cops on a kid continually; if they're being reported to police; being kicked out of school, then someone needs to get involved ASAP.

Go the child's home; interview the parents; interview the child; give the child an IQ test and a drug test. Determine where the problem is. Use the schools in the evening hours as places to teach parenting skills and one on one / group therapy for parents and children. SOLVE the problem while the kid is young.

BTW: The current method is to give a kid six minutes with a doctor and let them prescribe Ritalin or Adderall and then let the kid begin thinking the police and pills are their parents.

I didn't say background checks were the solution to the problem. I dont think there is A solution that will solve the problem... but there are several things that can be done to help reduce the damage. Background check are one of those things.

We already have background checks for weapons purchased from a dealer at a shop or gun show. We have had killers who did pass the background check and still used those weapons for mass murders.

Your right it’s not a full proof system, some get through. Would you do away with the background check system we have or do you think it is doing some good?

Half and half on that.

Are they stopping people not legally allowed to buy a gun to buy one at a dealer? Yes they are. Are they stopping people who are not legally allowed to buy a gun to buy one elsewhere? No it doesn't.

Go to your pharmacist and ask for a bottle of Oxycontin, and he refuses to sell it to you without a prescription. Go to the street and it's ready available.

The question is, did you solve anything by forcing the addict to buy from the street instead of the drug store? No you didn't. Did you stop all law abiding citizens? Yes you did.

So let's say a evil or twisted person wants to commit a mass murder. Do you really think that the inability to buy a firearm at a dealer will make him say "Oh well, I guess I can't do it now!"

London is trying to institute a law that stops people from carrying knives outside of their home. Why? Because knife killings surpassed murders in New York City even with the available guns.

It's the old cliche. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. If you take a nice middle-class suburb, and create a law that all households must have at least one firearm, you won't change the crime statics one bit. Create a law in lower income neighborhoods that nobody is allowed to own a firearm, the same thing. You won't change the crime statistics one bit.

 

[Rigby5]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.

First, because it doesn't work. My brother-in-law bought a gun on the side of the highway. Got in touch with a guy, met him at a highway rest stop, gave him the cash, he gave him the gun. They drove off.

Now please explain to me how your background checks or whatever law, is going to stop that? It isn't. It simply will not prevent a single gun from getting in the hands of a single criminal. It never works.

And here's the other side.

You say you don't feel threatened. Yeah of course not. No politician is going to say openly "This is the first step to taking away all your guns!".

But in the end, what the hell do you think government is going to do with that information?



After Katrina hit, armed national guard went house to house, confiscating guns from people registered to owning weapons. They went to middle class and upper class areas, taking guns from home owners trying to defend their property.

You know where they didn't go? To the poor crime infested areas, because no one there registered their illegal guns.

Here are the two reasons conservatives are against endless new laws:

1. New laws do not stop criminals, they only stop good law abiding citizens. There is zero evidence, as in none, that laws have stopped a criminal from getting a gun, anymore than prohibition stopped people from getting a drink, and drug laws stop teenagers from overdosing on Heroin.

2. New laws are a way of moving toward totalitarianism, and government abuse of the public. The Jews in Europe went willingly towards their own death, because the government promised them all those laws were for their protection. It's one half step towards government control each time, until you end in a dictatorship. There is no surprise that every dictator in history, has first started with gun control.

Background checks and gun control laws wouldn’t stop people like your brother from getting a gun. But it will stop the people who don’t have the phone number of the guy that will sell them a gun at a rest stop.

Except that all drug dealers already have to have guns to protect their illegal profits, so they won't mind at all selling some guns as well and increase their profits a little bit more.
Everyone knows where they can buy an illegal gun.
Several of them have even offered to sell me a machine gun.

No, everyone does not know where to get an illegal gun. Some do and others can find out if they try hard enough. But there are also others who don’t and who are prevented from getting dangerous weapons because we have it regulated

That is impossible stupid.
Clearly over 60% of the US population has experience with illegal drugs according to polls, so they then all know where to get drugs and guns. There is not one drug dealer who is not also armed, because they work in cash, so need defense. So all more gun laws will do is create another revenue source for drug deals. You can never reduce firearm access because no one will agree to that. The general population will do like they do with drugs or with Prohibition, and just deliberately disobey the corrupt government that has lost its credibility.
Any they do not have to get firearms to be dangerous.
A can of gasoline has killed hundreds of people already, is put in the right place.
What you suggest is naively foolish, diabolically deceptive.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That’s not what you’re pissed about. You’re pissed because I pointed out the many flaws in your proposal.

If your suggestion isn’t going to stop mass shootings, then why bother to inconvenience all other gun owners in the country if it isn’t going to solve anything?

See, the Democrat party also know their proposals won’t stop anything either. And when it doesn’t, on to the next set of laws that will have the same results. In the end, we will be stuck with a bunch of laws that don’t accomplish anything that we will never be able to get rid of. What it will do is make purchasing and keeping a firearm such a hassle, such a problem, and likely such an expense that most law abiding people will just not deal with it and remain unarmed.

It’s all part of the big plan.

How do you know that gun laws haven’t prevented death? It’s common sense to me. What you call an inconvenience also serves as a deterrent. It prevents people from making emotional decisions, it makes high risk people go through other means to get guns and lessens their killing power. The kid who shot up a group with a hand gun would have done much more damage if he could have stopped by the local Big 5 and bought an uzi on his way to school.

Get it?

We are to the point where there have been so many mass shootings that it's hard to remember. But I don't recall a mass murder where the weapons involved were obtained through "other means" that could have been prevented.

In Sandy Hook, the kid did attempt to buy firearms and was denied with our current system. So he killed his mother and used her weapons instead. In Columbine, the shooters were under age which prevented them from legally buying guns in their names. They used straw purchasers who claim they didn't know the intent of the shooters. While they were strange kids and did have juvenile criminal records, nobody suspected they were capable of anything like what they did.

In these last two shootings, I believe the suspects were allowed to buy guns, just like the kook in the Las Vegas shooting. I also believe most of the shooters in mass murderers didn't have a record either.

The point is there is no way to determine who might do what in most cases. So to say that these initiatives will not stop mass murders, but will make them a little better is hardly worth the inconvenience of the rest of the country.

But we DO know who is most likely to become a mass murderer.

I think there are things that can be done. But infringing on the rights of all Americans isn't the solution.

It may take more manpower, but if there is a clear cut case of a kook, he should be watched carefully even if it means followed by a federal agent.

Now that we have a more right-leaning court, perhaps we can re-instiute being committed again. It was removed from our society during the 70s as it was considered crime-less prisons.

I'm telling you up front. You don't need that. I can solve the problem without any new taxes, no new bureaucracies, NO GUN CONTROL and it would leave NO PRETEXTS FOR BACKGROUND CHECKS

Do elaborate.