Gun Control - What's the Problem?

[Blues Man]

Because they are utterly unenforceable without a national registry and I will never be in favor of a gun registry.

Not a single criminal who can't legally buy s gun now will be affected by universal background checks

Do you feel the same about our current BG check system? Or is that also useless and should be done away with?

I have no problem with the current system
It's as good as it can be without a gun registry

But I also know that it really does not stop criminals from getting guns

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Then why waste resources doing background checks? Why would you support repealing them all together?

It's the best we can do without a national gun registry. Perfect is the enemy of good in this case

And it does keep criminals in the underground market. Now if we charge every person caught illegally possessing a gun with a federal crime and sentenced them all to 5 years in federal prison we'd actually be focusing on laws that target criminals not law abiding people

So you don't see a problem with changing our once democratic republic into a multi tiered society, where those convicted of illegal federal drug or gun laws, are no longer allowed to vote, defend themselves, etc.?
You don't mind the federal government violating the Bill of Rights and usurping state authority?

Convicted felons, which can include anyone bouncing a check for over $100, have to live in the most dangerous neighborhoods, and actually need a weapon for defense more than anyone else. But even though they are denied representation, we still tax them. Don't you find that taxation without representation, inherently illegal?

The whole Congress deliberately lied to us about Iraq WMD, and murdered over half a million innocent Iraqi civilians, with Shock and Awe. So why is it they are not prosecuted and held to the same standards?

With rights come responsibilities

Shirk those responsibilities and reap the consequences.

It is pretty easy not to be arrested, tried and convicted of a felony.

And I would love to see the assholes in Congress held to the same standards as the rest of us. Got any ideas on how to do that?

 

[Rigby5]

The problem with gun control is that neither side is interested in working toward a compromise. Banning assault weapons can not translate into legislation with those who are 2nd amendment purists. Too many people will continue to dig their heels in and defend their positions.

There is no such thing as a purist.
An assault weapons ban is just an absurd lie, deliberately intended as part of a total confiscation scheme of all weapons.
That is because there is nothing remotely unusual about the AR type of weapons that is about the only firearms made or sold any more. There is absolutely no reason at all to ban them, banning them would put almost all firearms manufacturers out of business, and it would make about 40 million people into criminals.

What you have to understand it that all weapons can be used as or considered assault weapons.
Historically that has included the blunderbuss or the sawed off shotgun of the Revolutionary war, the pair of revolvers of the Civil war cavalry units, the trench shot gun of WWI, the carbine of WWII, etc.
All of these weapons can easily be used to kill hundreds of people, and are technology hundreds of years old, that anyone can easily make themselves even.
The notion of attempting to ban anything dangerous in our modern technology is just insane.
It can not possibly be done.
Those proposing we try it anyway, have to be lying.
No one could be that stupid.
Obviously we instead have to fix what is making people so violent, like over population, future shock, lack of community, media hype, lack of job stability, etc.

Using your thought pattern, I bet you can't wait until Death Race 2020. Start sharpening up those hubcaps today.

Death Race was a movie about needless deaths and violence.
Firearms are used 99% of the time for defense.
Otherwise police would not be armed.
And I trust average people WAY more than I trust police, and in fact, there are few police I trust at all.
The democratic republic is also worth some risk.
We do not want to trade some imagined safety for freedom.
Freedom always comes with some risks and it is a very worth while trade off I think.
Gun control accomplishes nothing except make honest people helpless in the face of crime or government corruption.
That essentially is both foolish and treason, at the same time.

 

[Rigby5]

Do you feel the same about our current BG check system? Or is that also useless and should be done away with?

I have no problem with the current system
It's as good as it can be without a gun registry

But I also know that it really does not stop criminals from getting guns

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Then why waste resources doing background checks? Why would you support repealing them all together?

It's the best we can do without a national gun registry. Perfect is the enemy of good in this case

And it does keep criminals in the underground market. Now if we charge every person caught illegally possessing a gun with a federal crime and sentenced them all to 5 years in federal prison we'd actually be focusing on laws that target criminals not law abiding people

So you don't see a problem with changing our once democratic republic into a multi tiered society, where those convicted of illegal federal drug or gun laws, are no longer allowed to vote, defend themselves, etc.?
You don't mind the federal government violating the Bill of Rights and usurping state authority?

Convicted felons, which can include anyone bouncing a check for over $100, have to live in the most dangerous neighborhoods, and actually need a weapon for defense more than anyone else. But even though they are denied representation, we still tax them. Don't you find that taxation without representation, inherently illegal?

The whole Congress deliberately lied to us about Iraq WMD, and murdered over half a million innocent Iraqi civilians, with Shock and Awe. So why is it they are not prosecuted and held to the same standards?

With rights come responsibilities

Shirk those responsibilities and reap the consequences.

It is pretty easy not to be arrested, tried and convicted of a felony.

And I would love to see the assholes in Congress held to the same standards as the rest of us. Got any ideas on how to do that?

According to the founders, the only way to deal with the inevitable creeping government corruption, is with periodic revolutions. The historic norm is about every 400 years or so. So while no one wants that, and we can always delay out of optimism, we must never allow someone make revolution impossible. It should always be an expected fact of life.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The problem with gun control is that neither side is interested in working toward a compromise. Banning assault weapons can not translate into legislation with those who are 2nd amendment purists. Too many people will continue to dig their heels in and defend their positions.

There is no such thing as a purist.
An assault weapons ban is just an absurd lie, deliberately intended as part of a total confiscation scheme of all weapons.
That is because there is nothing remotely unusual about the AR type of weapons that is about the only firearms made or sold any more. There is absolutely no reason at all to ban them, banning them would put almost all firearms manufacturers out of business, and it would make about 40 million people into criminals.

What you have to understand it that all weapons can be used as or considered assault weapons.
Historically that has included the blunderbuss or the sawed off shotgun of the Revolutionary war, the pair of revolvers of the Civil war cavalry units, the trench shot gun of WWI, the carbine of WWII, etc.
All of these weapons can easily be used to kill hundreds of people, and are technology hundreds of years old, that anyone can easily make themselves even.
The notion of attempting to ban anything dangerous in our modern technology is just insane.
It can not possibly be done.
Those proposing we try it anyway, have to be lying.
No one could be that stupid.
Obviously we instead have to fix what is making people so violent, like over population, future shock, lack of community, media hype, lack of job stability, etc.

Using your thought pattern, I bet you can't wait until Death Race 2020. Start sharpening up those hubcaps today.

Death Race was a movie about needless deaths and violence.
Firearms are used 99% of the time for defense.
Otherwise police would not be armed.
And I trust average people WAY more than I trust police, and in fact, there are few police I trust at all.
The democratic republic is also worth some risk.
We do not want to trade some imagined safety for freedom.
Freedom always comes with some risks and it is a very worth while trade off I think.
Gun control accomplishes nothing except make honest people helpless in the face of crime or government corruption.
That essentially is both foolish and treason, at the same time.

Just keep sharpening those hubcaps. You may get your chance someday, Road Warrior.

 

[Rigby5]

The problem with gun control is that neither side is interested in working toward a compromise. Banning assault weapons can not translate into legislation with those who are 2nd amendment purists. Too many people will continue to dig their heels in and defend their positions.

There is no such thing as a purist.
An assault weapons ban is just an absurd lie, deliberately intended as part of a total confiscation scheme of all weapons.
That is because there is nothing remotely unusual about the AR type of weapons that is about the only firearms made or sold any more. There is absolutely no reason at all to ban them, banning them would put almost all firearms manufacturers out of business, and it would make about 40 million people into criminals.

What you have to understand it that all weapons can be used as or considered assault weapons.
Historically that has included the blunderbuss or the sawed off shotgun of the Revolutionary war, the pair of revolvers of the Civil war cavalry units, the trench shot gun of WWI, the carbine of WWII, etc.
All of these weapons can easily be used to kill hundreds of people, and are technology hundreds of years old, that anyone can easily make themselves even.
The notion of attempting to ban anything dangerous in our modern technology is just insane.
It can not possibly be done.
Those proposing we try it anyway, have to be lying.
No one could be that stupid.
Obviously we instead have to fix what is making people so violent, like over population, future shock, lack of community, media hype, lack of job stability, etc.

Using your thought pattern, I bet you can't wait until Death Race 2020. Start sharpening up those hubcaps today.

Death Race was a movie about needless deaths and violence.
Firearms are used 99% of the time for defense.
Otherwise police would not be armed.
And I trust average people WAY more than I trust police, and in fact, there are few police I trust at all.
The democratic republic is also worth some risk.
We do not want to trade some imagined safety for freedom.
Freedom always comes with some risks and it is a very worth while trade off I think.
Gun control accomplishes nothing except make honest people helpless in the face of crime or government corruption.
That essentially is both foolish and treason, at the same time.

Just keep sharpening those hubcaps. You may get your chance someday, Road Warrior.

What is the alternative, other than establishing the equivalent of the KGB, Savik, Stazi, Gestapo, kapos, etc., here in the US?
We can NEVER rely on police for safety.
They will always have too long of a response time, and they themselves are too corrupt and trigger happy.
I much prefer everyone defend themselves.
I trust my neighbors.
I do not trust the police or the thieves in Congress.
If the police or Congress were trustworthy, there would be no War on Drugs.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The problem with gun control is that neither side is interested in working toward a compromise. Banning assault weapons can not translate into legislation with those who are 2nd amendment purists. Too many people will continue to dig their heels in and defend their positions.

There is no such thing as a purist.
An assault weapons ban is just an absurd lie, deliberately intended as part of a total confiscation scheme of all weapons.
That is because there is nothing remotely unusual about the AR type of weapons that is about the only firearms made or sold any more. There is absolutely no reason at all to ban them, banning them would put almost all firearms manufacturers out of business, and it would make about 40 million people into criminals.

What you have to understand it that all weapons can be used as or considered assault weapons.
Historically that has included the blunderbuss or the sawed off shotgun of the Revolutionary war, the pair of revolvers of the Civil war cavalry units, the trench shot gun of WWI, the carbine of WWII, etc.
All of these weapons can easily be used to kill hundreds of people, and are technology hundreds of years old, that anyone can easily make themselves even.
The notion of attempting to ban anything dangerous in our modern technology is just insane.
It can not possibly be done.
Those proposing we try it anyway, have to be lying.
No one could be that stupid.
Obviously we instead have to fix what is making people so violent, like over population, future shock, lack of community, media hype, lack of job stability, etc.

Using your thought pattern, I bet you can't wait until Death Race 2020. Start sharpening up those hubcaps today.

Death Race was a movie about needless deaths and violence.
Firearms are used 99% of the time for defense.
Otherwise police would not be armed.
And I trust average people WAY more than I trust police, and in fact, there are few police I trust at all.
The democratic republic is also worth some risk.
We do not want to trade some imagined safety for freedom.
Freedom always comes with some risks and it is a very worth while trade off I think.
Gun control accomplishes nothing except make honest people helpless in the face of crime or government corruption.
That essentially is both foolish and treason, at the same time.

Just keep sharpening those hubcaps. You may get your chance someday, Road Warrior.

What is the alternative, other than establishing the equivalent of the KGB, Savik, Stazi, Gestapo, kapos, etc., here in the US?
We can NEVER rely on police for safety.
They will always have too long of a response time, and they themselves are too corrupt and trigger happy.
I much prefer everyone defend themselves.
I trust my neighbors.
I do not trust the police or the thieves in Congress.
If the police or Congress were trustworthy, there would be no War on Drugs.

Let's admit to some things first.

You are NEVER going to stop violent killings.
You are never going to stop mass shootings

Now that we have agreed to those two, let's go one step further. Violent killings will happen with or without guns. No change to that.

But there is something we can do for mass shootings (4 or more dead). We can limit the tools required to go for the record. They busted another one that was going for the record yesterday. He had the AR, the high capacity mags and the plan. He also had a big mouth. His Girl Friend turned him in. Now, what can we do to take away the tools from this type of situation. And please, more guns are not the answer. A bunch of people firing guns in a crowd only means a lot of collateral damage and confusion when the cops get there. One Good Guy with a Gun was already shot by a cop when he tried to stop a shooting.

So if we can't stop the mass shootings, we minimize the body count. That means change the tools available to the shooter. make it harder to get that AR. Make it nearly impossible to get that 30, 50 and 100 round mag. That's a good start. The Heller unwritten rule seems to be 15 but there isn't a whole lot of difference between 15 and 20 rounds. But there is between 15 and 50. Get the AR off the open streets. If someone is walking down the street with an AR or an AK a ton of bells should be going off and cops should be responding in Swat gear. There is no reason to be carrying an AR to go Grocery Shopping unless you are trying to get the best deal on your Cantaloupe. And do the universal background checks as well as the Red Flags. Doing these in one area and not the other areas means a person just jumps the state line, buys whatever the hell they want and then jumps back across the line again. AT least make getting the stuff more a sport than so easy.

You don't have to confiscate guns to minimize chances and body counts. Just make some simple changes and wait it out. The change won't happen over night but it will happen. Criminals hate it when they have to pay extra to get what they used to get so cheap.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Let's admit to some things first.

You are NEVER going to stop violent killings.
You are never going to stop mass shootings

So, is it acceptable to FURTHER infringe on the rights of MILLIONS of people lawfully exercising that right for something that happens so very little comparatively?

But there is something we can do for mass shootings (4 or more dead). We can limit the tools required to go for the record. They busted another one that was going for the record yesterday. He had the AR, the high capacity mags and the plan. He also had a big mouth. His Girl Friend turned him in. Now, what can we do to take away the tools from this type of situation. And please, more guns are not the answer. A bunch of people firing guns in a crowd only means a lot of collateral damage and confusion when the cops get there. One Good Guy with a Gun was already shot by a cop when he tried to stop a shooting.

So if we can't stop the mass shootings, we minimize the body count. That means change the tools available to the shooter. make it harder to get that AR. Make it nearly impossible to get that 30, 50 and 100 round mag. That's a good start. The Heller unwritten rule seems to be 15 but there isn't a whole lot of difference between 15 and 20 rounds. But there is between 15 and 50. Get the AR off the open streets. If someone is walking down the street with an AR or an AK a ton of bells should be going off and cops should be responding in Swat gear. There is no reason to be carrying an AR to go Grocery Shopping unless you are trying to get the best deal on your Cantaloupe. And do the universal background checks as well as the Red Flags. Doing these in one area and not the other areas means a person just jumps the state line, buys whatever the hell they want and then jumps back across the line again. AT least make getting the stuff more a sport than so easy.

It has happened not more than a few times, where a woman is trapped in her house, at night, being attacked by multiple armed invaders. Are you going to tell her that she can only have 15 rounds of ammunition before she is required to fumble around in the dark to find another magazine, or try to reload the one she just emptied?

C'mon. That is unreasonable.

Not to mention the FACT that the 2nd Amendment was intended to cover "weapons of war" which would include any capacity magazine.

What is with your obsession with the AR platform? It is no more dangerous than any other gun platform.

And, don't give me this AR cult mumbo jumbo. That is straight bullshit right out of some Democrat's smelly ass. It's bullshit.

The only "cult" is that the platform has become popular because of its flexibility. Why is that a bad thing?

.

 

[Slade3200]

Why exactly do you oppose universal background checks? You support state BG checks right?

Because they are utterly unenforceable without a national registry and I will never be in favor of a gun registry.

Not a single criminal who can't legally buy s gun now will be affected by universal background checks

Do you feel the same about our current BG check system? Or is that also useless and should be done away with?

I have no problem with the current system
It's as good as it can be without a gun registry

But I also know that it really does not stop criminals from getting guns

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Then why waste resources doing background checks? Why would you support repealing them all together?

It's the best we can do without a national gun registry. Perfect is the enemy of good in this case

And it does keep criminals in the underground market. Now if we charge every person caught illegally possessing a gun with a federal crime and sentenced them all to 5 years in federal prison we'd actually be focusing on laws that target criminals not law abiding people

See, the tough part of your argument is you rightfully admit that background checks are useful but then oppose measures that would make them better and more effective because you are worried about giving an inch for the slippery slope. I understand your fears and mistrust in government. It that also shouldn’t completely close you off to doing things that you know will help.

 

[Slade3200]

Thanks for explaining that. Would I be correct to assume it’s your last two points that bring the real concern?

I’d think that if you support background checks, which it sounds like you do because they indeed are effective... you’d want the most comprehensive database and widespread access to info.

I’d also think that your security concerns could be addressed through encryption. Tech can do great things now a days. One thing the gov needs to catch up on

to put it bluntly, I don't trust the federal government they have been given to much power already and giving them the amount of information required to operate universal background checks it will be used and abused other than just preventing criminals from buying guns

I appreciate your honesty. You should stick to that argument. I think that most people have the same fears but then they get lost trying to argue that laws and regulations don’t work.

Sure laws can work, such as a law against murder can work to intimidate murderers.
But that is NOT what you are describing.
You are falsely claiming that a minor charge for illegal possession of a firearm will prevent people from committing mass murder and suicide. And clearly that is not just false, but irrational, and a deliberate lie.

I’m not claiming that. I’m saying a law preventing a pissed off high schooler from buying a machine gun is a good thing. A law not letting high risk people like felons and the mentally disturbed carry guns around is a good thing because if they get caught they get arrested. We also don’t facilitate access to the most dangerous weapons in the world through our legal commerce system, so we do checks to make sure responsible people are purchasing. That should be common sense.

High schoolers have not been able to buy a machine gun since the 1930s, and even back in the 1930s when it was easy for kids to buy a machine gun, mail order, for $27, there was absolutely no case of it every happening.
Accessibility of weapons has NEVER been a factor in determining if someone is going to commit mass murder or not.
The fact mass murders are happening now, shows that something ELSE is seriously wrong now, and needs to be fixed, desperately. What ever is wrong, like over population, future shock, lack of opportunity, disorientation from lack of communities, media over load, etc. MUST be fixed, and trying to instead cover up the symptoms, will only prevent it from being fixed.
What should be common sense is that when you have have massive systemic problems, that you fix the source of the problem. You do not instead decide to turn our once democratic republic into a concentration camp where the government dictates everything. Because when you defy the intent of the founders, and rely in mercenary police and military instead of a militia and citizen soldiers, the only possible result always has to be a draconian dictatorship.

It is a lie to claim that felons are a risk. About 40% of the Black population now is illegally denied the right to vote over drug related felony convictions. The federal government has no authority over things like drugs at all, and they should not be dictating rights like whether after their sentence is over, if they can vote, defend themselves, etc.

And high risk people obviously can not be allowed out on the street. The idea of instead trying to make the entire world nerf safe so that you can let just anyone run around and do what ever they want, is insane. The high risk people do NOT at all need firearms to murder millions of people. If for example at a school shooting, like Harris and Klebold, they have instead just gone into the basement and opened a gas pipe, they could have left a timer and departed. They would not even have been there when hundreds would have died. So they could have gone on doing it over and over. The fact they instead use firearm is because the media has show that firearms get the best coverage. And it is a good thing, because firearms are so loud that they sound the alarm, and prevent REALLY LARGE mass murders, like arson, explosives, poisons, etc., could easily do. For example, ricin is easily available, and all someone would have to do in order to kill millions, is to back flush ricin into the water inlet in any home, with a higher pressure pump. To think firearms are the main danger, or that one could make the whole world into a prison camp to prevent access to dangerous technology, is just insane. It is so irrational that I can only see it as a deliberate lie, intended on finding feeble justifications for deliberately changing this country from a democratic republic, into a prison camp.

I have lots more to say, but likely even this won't be read anyway.

High schoolers haven’t been able to buy machine guns because of laws restricting them to do so. Good and effective laws in my opinion. I bring up that scenario to again make my point that regulations help and are sensible. I keep hearing these arguments that guns shouldn’t be regulated or BG checks are useless, or criminals can get guns underground so no need to regulate commerce. That’s just BS. We’ve have very common sense laws in place they are effective and it is a very fair debate to evaluate if we should continue with regulations or deregulations.

 

[Slade3200]

Because they are utterly unenforceable without a national registry and I will never be in favor of a gun registry.

Not a single criminal who can't legally buy s gun now will be affected by universal background checks

Do you feel the same about our current BG check system? Or is that also useless and should be done away with?

I have no problem with the current system
It's as good as it can be without a gun registry

But I also know that it really does not stop criminals from getting guns

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Then why waste resources doing background checks? Why would you support repealing them all together?

It's the best we can do without a national gun registry. Perfect is the enemy of good in this case

And it does keep criminals in the underground market. Now if we charge every person caught illegally possessing a gun with a federal crime and sentenced them all to 5 years in federal prison we'd actually be focusing on laws that target criminals not law abiding people

So you don't see a problem with changing our once democratic republic into a multi tiered society, where those convicted of illegal federal drug or gun laws, are no longer allowed to vote, defend themselves, etc.?
You don't mind the federal government violating the Bill of Rights and usurping state authority?

Convicted felons, which can include anyone bouncing a check for over $100, have to live in the most dangerous neighborhoods, and actually need a weapon for defense more than anyone else. But even though they are denied representation, we still tax them. Don't you find that taxation without representation, inherently illegal?

The whole Congress deliberately lied to us about Iraq WMD, and murdered over half a million innocent Iraqi civilians, with Shock and Awe. So why is it they are not prosecuted and held to the same standards?

When people commit crimes they forfeit their rights. When they are released they are still a risk to society and need to earn back the public trust which is why it makes sense to have probationary periods. Do you not believe in that?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

to put it bluntly, I don't trust the federal government they have been given to much power already and giving them the amount of information required to operate universal background checks it will be used and abused other than just preventing criminals from buying guns

I appreciate your honesty. You should stick to that argument. I think that most people have the same fears but then they get lost trying to argue that laws and regulations don’t work.

Sure laws can work, such as a law against murder can work to intimidate murderers.
But that is NOT what you are describing.
You are falsely claiming that a minor charge for illegal possession of a firearm will prevent people from committing mass murder and suicide. And clearly that is not just false, but irrational, and a deliberate lie.

I’m not claiming that. I’m saying a law preventing a pissed off high schooler from buying a machine gun is a good thing. A law not letting high risk people like felons and the mentally disturbed carry guns around is a good thing because if they get caught they get arrested. We also don’t facilitate access to the most dangerous weapons in the world through our legal commerce system, so we do checks to make sure responsible people are purchasing. That should be common sense.

High schoolers have not been able to buy a machine gun since the 1930s, and even back in the 1930s when it was easy for kids to buy a machine gun, mail order, for $27, there was absolutely no case of it every happening.
Accessibility of weapons has NEVER been a factor in determining if someone is going to commit mass murder or not.
The fact mass murders are happening now, shows that something ELSE is seriously wrong now, and needs to be fixed, desperately. What ever is wrong, like over population, future shock, lack of opportunity, disorientation from lack of communities, media over load, etc. MUST be fixed, and trying to instead cover up the symptoms, will only prevent it from being fixed.
What should be common sense is that when you have have massive systemic problems, that you fix the source of the problem. You do not instead decide to turn our once democratic republic into a concentration camp where the government dictates everything. Because when you defy the intent of the founders, and rely in mercenary police and military instead of a militia and citizen soldiers, the only possible result always has to be a draconian dictatorship.

It is a lie to claim that felons are a risk. About 40% of the Black population now is illegally denied the right to vote over drug related felony convictions. The federal government has no authority over things like drugs at all, and they should not be dictating rights like whether after their sentence is over, if they can vote, defend themselves, etc.

And high risk people obviously can not be allowed out on the street. The idea of instead trying to make the entire world nerf safe so that you can let just anyone run around and do what ever they want, is insane. The high risk people do NOT at all need firearms to murder millions of people. If for example at a school shooting, like Harris and Klebold, they have instead just gone into the basement and opened a gas pipe, they could have left a timer and departed. They would not even have been there when hundreds would have died. So they could have gone on doing it over and over. The fact they instead use firearm is because the media has show that firearms get the best coverage. And it is a good thing, because firearms are so loud that they sound the alarm, and prevent REALLY LARGE mass murders, like arson, explosives, poisons, etc., could easily do. For example, ricin is easily available, and all someone would have to do in order to kill millions, is to back flush ricin into the water inlet in any home, with a higher pressure pump. To think firearms are the main danger, or that one could make the whole world into a prison camp to prevent access to dangerous technology, is just insane. It is so irrational that I can only see it as a deliberate lie, intended on finding feeble justifications for deliberately changing this country from a democratic republic, into a prison camp.

I have lots more to say, but likely even this won't be read anyway.

High schoolers haven’t been able to buy machine guns because of laws restricting them to do so. Good and effective laws in my opinion. I bring up that scenario to again make my point that regulations help and are sensible. I keep hearing these arguments that guns shouldn’t be regulated or BG checks are useless, or criminals can get guns underground so no need to regulate commerce. That’s just BS. We’ve have very common sense laws in place they are effective and it is a very fair debate to evaluate if we should continue with regulations or deregulations.

You want regulation.

Propose something that pro-gun-rights people will accept.

Regulations that amount to a ban of certain weapons will never be acceptable.

Give back all gun rights if you want to regulate all guns. People should be able to get any weapon a soldier would use. With all the regulations and check proposed, those prior restrictions should be lifted.

You're asking for a lot. You have got to be willing to give a lot in return.

Someone proposed a gun-purchase "license" that would allow qualified individuals to purchase any gun, without restriction, and without limitation. That would ease the concerns about registration and would still do the checks needed to make sure criminals and loonies are not allowed to purchase.


I still think that is unconstitutional, but start proposing compromise or it goes nowhere.

The gun-grabbing side needs to show a large measure of good faith to expect any new regulations. They need to heavily compromise or get nothing.

.

 

[Slade3200]

I appreciate your honesty. You should stick to that argument. I think that most people have the same fears but then they get lost trying to argue that laws and regulations don’t work.

Sure laws can work, such as a law against murder can work to intimidate murderers.
But that is NOT what you are describing.
You are falsely claiming that a minor charge for illegal possession of a firearm will prevent people from committing mass murder and suicide. And clearly that is not just false, but irrational, and a deliberate lie.

I’m not claiming that. I’m saying a law preventing a pissed off high schooler from buying a machine gun is a good thing. A law not letting high risk people like felons and the mentally disturbed carry guns around is a good thing because if they get caught they get arrested. We also don’t facilitate access to the most dangerous weapons in the world through our legal commerce system, so we do checks to make sure responsible people are purchasing. That should be common sense.

High schoolers have not been able to buy a machine gun since the 1930s, and even back in the 1930s when it was easy for kids to buy a machine gun, mail order, for $27, there was absolutely no case of it every happening.
Accessibility of weapons has NEVER been a factor in determining if someone is going to commit mass murder or not.
The fact mass murders are happening now, shows that something ELSE is seriously wrong now, and needs to be fixed, desperately. What ever is wrong, like over population, future shock, lack of opportunity, disorientation from lack of communities, media over load, etc. MUST be fixed, and trying to instead cover up the symptoms, will only prevent it from being fixed.
What should be common sense is that when you have have massive systemic problems, that you fix the source of the problem. You do not instead decide to turn our once democratic republic into a concentration camp where the government dictates everything. Because when you defy the intent of the founders, and rely in mercenary police and military instead of a militia and citizen soldiers, the only possible result always has to be a draconian dictatorship.

It is a lie to claim that felons are a risk. About 40% of the Black population now is illegally denied the right to vote over drug related felony convictions. The federal government has no authority over things like drugs at all, and they should not be dictating rights like whether after their sentence is over, if they can vote, defend themselves, etc.

And high risk people obviously can not be allowed out on the street. The idea of instead trying to make the entire world nerf safe so that you can let just anyone run around and do what ever they want, is insane. The high risk people do NOT at all need firearms to murder millions of people. If for example at a school shooting, like Harris and Klebold, they have instead just gone into the basement and opened a gas pipe, they could have left a timer and departed. They would not even have been there when hundreds would have died. So they could have gone on doing it over and over. The fact they instead use firearm is because the media has show that firearms get the best coverage. And it is a good thing, because firearms are so loud that they sound the alarm, and prevent REALLY LARGE mass murders, like arson, explosives, poisons, etc., could easily do. For example, ricin is easily available, and all someone would have to do in order to kill millions, is to back flush ricin into the water inlet in any home, with a higher pressure pump. To think firearms are the main danger, or that one could make the whole world into a prison camp to prevent access to dangerous technology, is just insane. It is so irrational that I can only see it as a deliberate lie, intended on finding feeble justifications for deliberately changing this country from a democratic republic, into a prison camp.

I have lots more to say, but likely even this won't be read anyway.

High schoolers haven’t been able to buy machine guns because of laws restricting them to do so. Good and effective laws in my opinion. I bring up that scenario to again make my point that regulations help and are sensible. I keep hearing these arguments that guns shouldn’t be regulated or BG checks are useless, or criminals can get guns underground so no need to regulate commerce. That’s just BS. We’ve have very common sense laws in place they are effective and it is a very fair debate to evaluate if we should continue with regulations or deregulations.

You want regulation.

Propose something that pro-gun-rights people will accept.

Regulations that amount to a ban of certain weapons will never be acceptable.

Give back all gun rights if you want to regulate all guns. People should be able to get any weapon a soldier would use. With all the regulations and check proposed, those prior restrictions should be lifted.

You're asking for a lot. You have got to be willing to give a lot in return.

Someone proposed a gun-purchase "license" that would allow qualified individuals to purchase any gun, without restriction, and without limitation. That would ease the concerns about registration and would still do the checks needed to make sure criminals and loonies are not allowed to purchase.


I still think that is unconstitutional, but start proposing compromise or it goes nowhere.

The gun-grabbing side needs to show a large measure of good faith to expect any new regulations. They need to heavily compromise or get nothing.

.

Soldiers are accepted, trained and supervised in the US military when they are given access to the weapons they use. You just want to hand the same things out to any citizen who wants one?! Yeah right.

 

[Lesh]

You want regulation.

Propose something that pro-gun-rights people will accept.

There's nothing they would accept.

ZERO


NADA

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You want regulation.

Propose something that pro-gun-rights people will accept.

There's nothing they would accept.

ZERO


NADA

And whose fault is that?

Who were the cocksucking motherfuckers refusing to even admit that gun ownership is an individual right?

Who made us fight that issue all the way to the Supreme Court?

You will get NOTHING because you deserve NOTHING. You motherfuckers have acted in bad faith. Now, anything you do looks suspicious. It looks like a dirty trick, because you tried to eliminate the individual right. You played dirty. Expect nothing.

And it's your own damn fault. So, go fuck yourself.

.

 

[The Original Tree]

Gun Control:

Just Liberals Removing the ability of their enemies to protect themselves one Litigation, and One Erosion of our Rights at a time.

Once you are powerless, they will seize power.

Leftists are The Ultimate Cowards.

 

[TRFjr]

You want regulation.

Propose something that pro-gun-rights people will accept.

There's nothing they would accept.

ZERO


NADA

when you start giving in on abortion then we will talk

 

[Lesh]

You want regulation.

Propose something that pro-gun-rights people will accept.

There's nothing they would accept.

ZERO


NADA

And whose fault is that?

Who were the cocksucking motherfuckers refusing to even admit that gun ownership is an individual right?

Who made us fight that issue all the way to the Supreme Court?

You will get NOTHING because you deserve NOTHING. You motherfuckers have acted in bad faith. Now, anything you do looks suspicious. It looks like a dirty trick, because you tried to eliminate the individual right. You played dirty. Expect nothing.

And it's your own damn fault. So, go fuck yourself.

.

Don't get mad at me when you make yourself out to be a dishonest fool

 

[Blues Man]

Because they are utterly unenforceable without a national registry and I will never be in favor of a gun registry.

Not a single criminal who can't legally buy s gun now will be affected by universal background checks

Do you feel the same about our current BG check system? Or is that also useless and should be done away with?

I have no problem with the current system
It's as good as it can be without a gun registry

But I also know that it really does not stop criminals from getting guns

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Then why waste resources doing background checks? Why would you support repealing them all together?

It's the best we can do without a national gun registry. Perfect is the enemy of good in this case

And it does keep criminals in the underground market. Now if we charge every person caught illegally possessing a gun with a federal crime and sentenced them all to 5 years in federal prison we'd actually be focusing on laws that target criminals not law abiding people

See, the tough part of your argument is you rightfully admit that background checks are useful but then oppose measures that would make them better and more effective because you are worried about giving an inch for the slippery slope. I understand your fears and mistrust in government. It that also shouldn’t completely close you off to doing things that you know will help.

I don't know it will help and you don't either

Expanded background checks will have no effect on the illegal gun trade unless there is a national gun registry and I will never support that

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You want regulation.

Propose something that pro-gun-rights people will accept.

There's nothing they would accept.

ZERO


NADA

And whose fault is that?

Who were the cocksucking motherfuckers refusing to even admit that gun ownership is an individual right?

Who made us fight that issue all the way to the Supreme Court?

You will get NOTHING because you deserve NOTHING. You motherfuckers have acted in bad faith. Now, anything you do looks suspicious. It looks like a dirty trick, because you tried to eliminate the individual right. You played dirty. Expect nothing.

And it's your own damn fault. So, go fuck yourself.

.

Don't get mad at me when you make yourself out to be a dishonest fool

Explain your bullshit.

.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You want regulation.

Propose something that pro-gun-rights people will accept.

Better still, propose one that will solve or greatly reduce any of the problems we have with firearms today.

Democrats are not stupid, they just act like it. They know their suggestions and proposals won't do one thing to stop a mass murder or reduce gun related murders. That's when they'll introduce step 2, and when that's proven to be a failure, step 3, then 4..........