Gun death Thread

[PredFan]

Blah, blah, blah...I am right, you are not...because I do not agree with you. Whatever, dude. Your OP is a FAIL. Thanks for playing.

Huge embarassing fail.

 

[Snookie]

Blah, blah, blah...I am right, you are not...because I do not agree with you. Whatever, dude. Your OP is a FAIL. Thanks for playing.

Huge embarassing fail.

It's only your opinion. What me worry?

 

[Snookie]

Frat boys with guns.

Youngstown State University Frat House Shooting: 1 Dead, 11 Injured At Party

 

[Snookie]

crazy cop

Los Angeles Times - California, national and world news - latimes.com

 

[OODA_Loop]

I am for this type of gun control.

Rigell bill: Felony to buy a gun for someone who can't | HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com

Already a felony. Useless.

 

[Missourian]

I am for this type of gun control.

Rigell bill: Felony to buy a gun for someone who can't | HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com

Already a felony. Useless.

Exactly.

Way to push for an existing law...

Federal Law

Federal law prohibits straw purchases by criminalizing the making of false statements to an FFL about a material fact on ATF Form 4473, or presenting false identification in connection with the firearm purchase. Two federal statutes – 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6) and 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A) – are the primary laws under which straw purchases are prosecuted.

First, 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6) prohibits any person:

n connection with the acquisition or attempted acquisition of any firearm or ammunition from a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector, knowingly to make any false or fictitious oral or written statement or to furnish or exhibit any false, fictitious, or misrepresented identification, intended or likely to deceive such importer, manufacturer, dealer, or collector with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale or other disposition of such firearm or ammunition.

Subject to limited exceptions, 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A) imposes criminal penalties, such as fines and imprisonment, upon any person who:

[K]nowingly makes any false statement or representation with respect to the information required by [federal firearms law] to be kept in the records of a person licensed under [federal firearms law] or in applying for any license or exemption or relief from disability under the provisions of [federal firearms law].

These false statements or representations are punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and up to 10 years in prison.14

http://smartgunlaws.org/straw-purchases-policy-summary/

 

[Snookie]

I am for this type of gun control.

Rigell bill: Felony to buy a gun for someone who can't | HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com

Already a felony. Useless.

Federal or state?

 

[Missourian]

I am for this type of gun control.

Rigell bill: Felony to buy a gun for someone who can't | HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com

Already a felony. Useless.

Federal or state?

Shouldn't you already know this?

How can you be so ignorant of the facts of your own crusade?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean-debate-zone/275671-gun-death-thread-6.html#post6786854

 

[Snookie]

Already a felony. Useless.

Federal or state?

Shouldn't you already know this?

How can you be so ignorant of the facts of your own crusade?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean-debate-zone/275671-gun-death-thread-6.html#post6786854

Who do you think I am, Perry Mason?

 

[Missourian]

Federal or state?

Shouldn't you already know this?

How can you be so ignorant of the facts of your own crusade?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean-debate-zone/275671-gun-death-thread-6.html#post6786854

Who do you think I am, Perry Mason?

I think you are someone whose heart is in the right place, but driven by emotion and not fact.

I think you are someone who needs to do more research.

I think after you do that research, you'll find that you and I aren't so far apart...we both want to reduce gun crime, reduce the murder rate further and keep guns out of the hands of criminals, children and the mentally ill.

 

[PaulS1950]

The people speak?

Should the federal government regulate guns of any type?
Yes........................28% (272883)
No.........................71% (681207

Should Congress ban semi-automatic weapons?
Yes........................22% (217420)
No.........................77% (743035)

If Congress does not act should President Obama use an executive order to ban or strictly control the sale of semi-automatic weapons?
Yes.........................20% (197623)
No..........................79% (761568)

Do you agree that the Second Amendment gives citizens the right toown and bear guns without infringement?
Yes..........................81% (779447)
No............................18% (180405)

 

[Snookie]

The people speak?

Should the federal government regulate guns of any type?
Yes........................28% (272883)
No.........................71% (681207

Should Congress ban semi-automatic weapons?
Yes........................22% (217420)
No.........................77% (743035)

If Congress does not act should President Obama use an executive order to ban or strictly control the sale of semi-automatic weapons?
Yes.........................20% (197623)
No..........................79% (761568)

Do you agree that the Second Amendment gives citizens the right toown and bear guns without infringement?
Yes..........................81% (779447)
No............................18% (180405)

Means nothing without citing a source.

 

[PaulS1950]

The people speak?

Should the federal government regulate guns of any type?
Yes........................28% (272883)
No.........................71% (681207

Should Congress ban semi-automatic weapons?
Yes........................22% (217420)
No.........................77% (743035)

If Congress does not act should President Obama use an executive order to ban or strictly control the sale of semi-automatic weapons?
Yes.........................20% (197623)
No..........................79% (761568)

Do you agree that the Second Amendment gives citizens the right toown and bear guns without infringement?
Yes..........................81% (779447)
No............................18% (180405)

Means nothing without citing a source.

The source is American News (an independent poll)
Does that add value to it? - not to you because you don't want to believe it.

 

[sitarro]

Now this is a gentleman that I am proud to call an American!

Sipsey Street Irregulars: Henson Ong at Gun Violence Prevention Public Hearing - Hartford, CT

 

[Snookie]

The people speak?

Should the federal government regulate guns of any type?
Yes........................28% (272883)
No.........................71% (681207

Should Congress ban semi-automatic weapons?
Yes........................22% (217420)
No.........................77% (743035)

If Congress does not act should President Obama use an executive order to ban or strictly control the sale of semi-automatic weapons?
Yes.........................20% (197623)
No..........................79% (761568)

Do you agree that the Second Amendment gives citizens the right toown and bear guns without infringement?
Yes..........................81% (779447)
No............................18% (180405)

Means nothing without citing a source.

The source is American News (an independent poll)
Does that add value to it? - not to you because you don't want to believe it.

From fox news, lol.

 

[PaulS1950]

Means nothing without citing a source.

The source is American News (an independent poll)
Does that add value to it? - not to you because you don't want to believe it.

From fox news, lol.

No, It is not related to Fox news....

 

[asaratis]

Prove it. Please, no nra statistics.

Oh, the denial.

Interesting that you want to "debate" the issue but have already started eliminating possible sources that negate the possibility of refuting your possible premise.

Which is my right to do so.

Is it because you prefer one-sided "debate" or that you just can't stand being exposed to the truth.

Say! Let's have a debate on Christianity...but you can't use anything written in the Bible! That makes as much sense as your stupid thread restriction.

 

[UKRider]

Interesting that you want to "debate" the issue but have already started eliminating possible sources that negate the possibility of refuting your possible premise.

Which is my right to do so.

Is it because you prefer one-sided "debate" or that you just can't stand being exposed to the truth.

Say! Let's have a debate on Christianity...but you can't use anything written in the Bible! That makes as much sense as your stupid thread restriction.

I agree. Such a restriction is counter productive to the discussion imo.

 

[freetek]

@Snookie

The following paragraph is from a report done at Harvard University (if you've heard of it).

You can view the entire report here:

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

CONCLUSION
This Article has reviewed a significant amount of evidence
from a wide variety of international sources. Each individual
portion of evidence is subject to cavil—at the very least the
general objection that the persuasiveness of social scientific
evidence cannot remotely approach the persuasiveness of
conclusions in the physical sciences. Nevertheless, the bur‐
den of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal
more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, espe‐
cially since they argue public policy ought to be based on
that mantra.149
To bear that burden would at the very least
require showing that a large number of nations with more
guns have more death and that nations that have imposed
stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions
in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are
not observed when a large number of nations are compared
across the world.
-----------
I think I will probably not post and unsubscribe to this thread since links I have provided for 'Snookie' seem to be ignored by her; is it possible she is the real one?
It tires me to read her tripe.

 

[Cowman]

My Uncle was a trained police officer(though not his profession anymore), and committed suicide with a firearm recently.

It really really sucks.

He was apparently on medication that was really messing with his mind. I'd like to think that maybe... maybe if he didn't have a gun close by(he was a gun person), he wouldn't have been able to so immediately kill himself on a mental low.