Honest and open debate on gun control

[M14 Shooter]

Who are you and why are you talking to me?

Pretty sure he meant that for me.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Answer this Einstein, what must be done to the weapon in order to legally own it?

I'm curious what has to be done to an automatic weapon in order to legally own it.
Please explain.

Indeed -- this should be good.

 

[WinterBorn]

What is it exactly that you wish to do with an automatic weapon? Please explain.

There are any number of traditionally legal uses for a gun; an automatic weapon is suitable for use in any number of them.

You can't go hunting with it....

I hunt with an AR-15 - why can't I hunt with an M16A2?

doesn't make you any safer in defending yourself or your property

I have a semi-auto M1928 Thompson for home defense -- how is the full-auto version any less effective to that end?

The only reason for a person in our current day society would WANT an automatic weapon, is to commit such atrocities like what happened in the movie theater in Denver.

That's the ONLY reason, eh?
Explain how/why none of the legal machine guns in the US have been used for this purpose?

The reason is the folks in power want to make sure they have sufficient superior firepower over the people.

The police can't really protect you, the best they can do is investigate the crime after you've already been made a victim.

You keep asking me to explain things to you. One thing I have learned over the years is I can't fix other people's ignorance.

If you know so much about home defense and the use of weapons, why don't you enlighten the audience here? I know why none of the LEGAL automatic weapons have been used for this purpose, do you? Answer this Einstein, what must be done to the weapon in order to legally own it?

Some of us are waiting for you to tell us what must be done to an automatic weapon in order to legally own it.

 

[ErikViking]

Criminals doesn't show the mental ability to be armed. Hence, license (and plight) removed.

I'm sorry my friend, but that statement seems to indicate that it is you who doesn't show the mental ability to be armed...or engage in logical debate.

Obviously able enough to meet your requirements.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Ban all weapons with semi or fully automatic firing systems. Such weapons belong in the hands of 'well regulated militias', not on the streets. Permit long barrel rifles and shotguns for sporting purposes. Permit revolvers. Ban handguns equipped with magazines holding more than nine rounds.

Violates the constitution. Fail.
Does not prevent criminals from getting guns. Fail.

BZZZT Wrong!

There is no violation of the constitution limiting the kinds of weapons that can be sold. No one has a 2A right to an ICBM. Equally so they don't have a right to fully automatic weapons because they serve no legitimate civilian purpose. Large magazines are the same. No civilian needs more than 9 rounds for "self defense".

And yes, if those are banned then criminals aren't going to be able to buy them either.

No one has a 2A right to an ICBM.

what a foolish response

No surprise that Gun Fetishists lack the cognitive ability to understand that there are legitimate limitations on the 2nd Amendment.

 

[2aguy]

Ban all weapons with semi or fully automatic firing systems. Such weapons belong in the hands of 'well regulated militias', not on the streets. Permit long barrel rifles and shotguns for sporting purposes. Permit revolvers. Ban handguns equipped with magazines holding more than nine rounds.

Violates the constitution. Fail.
Does not prevent criminals from getting guns. Fail.

BZZZT Wrong!

There is no violation of the constitution limiting the kinds of weapons that can be sold. No one has a 2A right to an ICBM. Equally so they don't have a right to fully automatic weapons because they serve no legitimate civilian purpose. Large magazines are the same. No civilian needs more than 9 rounds for "self defense".

And yes, if those are banned then criminals aren't going to be able to buy them either.

No one has a 2A right to an ICBM.

what a foolish response

No surprise that Gun Fetishists lack the cognitive ability to understand that there are legitimate limitations on the 2nd Amendment.

Oh...we do....it is assholes like you who don't....that is why we don't trust you to make those decisions.........

 

[Nosmo King]

Ban all weapons with semi or fully automatic firing systems. Such weapons belong in the hands of 'well regulated militias', not on the streets. Permit long barrel rifles and shotguns for sporting purposes. Permit revolvers. Ban handguns equipped with magazines holding more than nine rounds.

Violates the constitution. Fail.
Does not prevent criminals from getting guns. Fail.

BZZZT Wrong!

There is no violation of the constitution limiting the kinds of weapons that can be sold. No one has a 2A right to an ICBM. Equally so they don't have a right to fully automatic weapons because they serve no legitimate civilian purpose. Large magazines are the same. No civilian needs more than 9 rounds for "self defense".

And yes, if those are banned then criminals aren't going to be able to buy them either.

No one has a 2A right to an ICBM.

what a foolish response

No surprise that Gun Fetishists lack the cognitive ability to understand that there are legitimate limitations on the 2nd Amendment.

There are libel and slander laws restricting the 1st amendment. There continues to be illegal searches and seizures, illegal access to letters and communication. And these infractions and regulations are regarded as de riguer among the gun lovers.

And yet, something as logical as back ground checks and registration amounts to a constitutional crisis and an affront to liberty by those same gun lovers.

The constitution is not a suicide pact. It was written in an age when the weapons held by civilians did not significantly differ from the weapons used by national armies (with the exception of artillery and warships).

Today's national arsenals include nuclear weaponry, surface to air missiles, satellite guided weapons and, regrettably chemical and biological weapons. Civilians have been completely out gunned and the notion of a bunch of self appointed 'militia' men holding off the Army and Navy and Air Forces of the United States of America over some idea of political pique have receded into history.

 

[M14 Shooter]

228 posts, no sound responses.
Impressive.

 

[2aguy]

Ban all weapons with semi or fully automatic firing systems. Such weapons belong in the hands of 'well regulated militias', not on the streets. Permit long barrel rifles and shotguns for sporting purposes. Permit revolvers. Ban handguns equipped with magazines holding more than nine rounds.

Violates the constitution. Fail.
Does not prevent criminals from getting guns. Fail.

BZZZT Wrong!

There is no violation of the constitution limiting the kinds of weapons that can be sold. No one has a 2A right to an ICBM. Equally so they don't have a right to fully automatic weapons because they serve no legitimate civilian purpose. Large magazines are the same. No civilian needs more than 9 rounds for "self defense".

And yes, if those are banned then criminals aren't going to be able to buy them either.

No one has a 2A right to an ICBM.

what a foolish response

No surprise that Gun Fetishists lack the cognitive ability to understand that there are legitimate limitations on the 2nd Amendment.

There are libel and slander laws restricting the 1st amendment. There continues to be illegal searches and seizures, illegal access to letters and communication. And these infractions and regulations are regarded as de riguer among the gun lovers.

And yet, something as logical as back ground checks and registration amounts to a constitutional crisis and an affront to liberty by those same gun lovers.

The constitution is not a suicide pact. It was written in an age when the weapons held by civilians did not significantly differ from the weapons used by national armies (with the exception of artillery and warships).

Today's national arsenals include nuclear weaponry, surface to air missiles, satellite guided weapons and, regrettably chemical and biological weapons. Civilians have been completely out gunned and the notion of a bunch of self appointed 'militia' men holding off the Army and Navy and Air Forces of the United States of America over some idea of political pique have receded into history.

There are libel and slander laws restricting the 1st amendment. There continues to be illegal searches and seizures, illegal access to letters and communication. And these infractions and regulations are regarded as de riguer among the gun lovers.

yes.....when you break them....you are not required to have slander insurance, or be licensed before you can buy a computer on the off chance you might slander someone, dittos illegal searches....they are dealt with after the illegal search, not before.....and there is no way you can stop an illegal search if they intend to do it regardless of the law.....you arrest them and take them to court afterward.....

What is it that you guys don't get when it comes to laws and how they actually work.......

So what you want for the first amendment is essentially this...

To own a computer, tablet, or laptop you must register with the government in case you want to use them for cyber crime? Right?

You must register each tablet, laptop or computer with the police so if you use it for cyber crime they can find you? Right?

You must carry insurance and show you have that insurance for slander and libel before you post on the internet, buy a computer, write a book or an article for a magazine on the chance you might break the slander or libel law....if you don't have insurance you cannot publish or post anything and you can't own any electronic devises.....right?

You guys are so stupid.......

 

[Nosmo King]

228 posts, no sound responses.
Impressive.

Face it. You don't want "an open and honest debate". Each and every suggestion made has been rejected out of hand by you as either 'argument based in emotion' or totally unworkable. You have utterly failed to proffer any solution to the gun violence problem we are saddled with in this nation. Rather, you simply reinforce your love and devotion to the culture of the gun.

What you fail to realize is, while your personal experiences with guns might be, how should I describe this...'pleasurable', too many American families and communities have suffered under the terror wrought by guns and are fed to the gills with frustration over the intractable positions taken by the gun lobby and their devoted minions.

So I challenge you. Give us what you think are answers to your own OP. Otherwise, we have all been educated in your circular logic and inflexible mindset.

 

[2aguy]

228 posts, no sound responses.
Impressive.

Face it. You don't want "an open and honest debate". Each and every suggestion made has been rejected out of hand by you as either 'argument based in emotion' or totally unworkable. You have utterly failed to proffer any solution to the gun violence problem we are saddled with in this nation. Rather, you simply reinforce your love and devotion to the culture of the gun.

What you fail to realize is, while your personal experiences with guns might be, how should I describe this...'pleasurable', too many American families and communities have suffered under the terror wrought by guns and are fed to the gills with frustration over the intractable positions taken by the gun lobby and their devoted minions.

So I challenge you. Give us what you think are answers to your own OP. Otherwise, we have all been educated in your circular logic and inflexible mindset.

No each suggestion has been analyzed and found to be useless in doing what you guys claim you want....keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and mass shooters.

My solution....when you catch a criminal using a gun to commit a crime, you arrest them and lock them up for a long time...unlike now where you see violent repeat offenders with weapon charges getting out of jail and murdering people.

You don't need to register anyone, license anyone or anything and it stops gun crime.

If you catch a convicted felon in possession of a gun, you arrest them and lock them up for a long time...again....no extra paperwork, which is useless anyway, is needed.

The law abiding own and carry guns without interference, and the criminals are arrested and locked up.

That is my solution....that is how every other criminal activity is handled and you are simply treating guns crime like any other crime....guilty in the commission of the crime, not before.

 

[2aguy]

228 posts, no sound responses.
Impressive.

Face it. You don't want "an open and honest debate". Each and every suggestion made has been rejected out of hand by you as either 'argument based in emotion' or totally unworkable. You have utterly failed to proffer any solution to the gun violence problem we are saddled with in this nation. Rather, you simply reinforce your love and devotion to the culture of the gun.

What you fail to realize is, while your personal experiences with guns might be, how should I describe this...'pleasurable', too many American families and communities have suffered under the terror wrought by guns and are fed to the gills with frustration over the intractable positions taken by the gun lobby and their devoted minions.

So I challenge you. Give us what you think are answers to your own OP. Otherwise, we have all been educated in your circular logic and inflexible mindset.

Nosmo...I have asked and asked and asked people like you to explain the mechanics of your gun laws...how they will work to stop criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.....and not...if we do this they can't get guns...answers...I mean real mechanics.....I have given you mine.......

 

[M14 Shooter]

There are libel and slander laws restricting the 1st amendment. There continues to be illegal searches and seizures, illegal access to letters and communication. And these infractions and regulations are regarded as de riguer among the gun lovers.

yes.....when you break them....you are not required to have slander insurance, or be licensed before you can buy a computer on the off chance you might slander someone, dittos illegal searches....they are dealt with after the illegal search, not before.....and there is no way you can stop an illegal search if they intend to do it regardless of the law.....you arrest them and take them to court afterward...

Never mind that libel and slander do not fall under the protection of the 1st amendment because they cause harm to others; using these limitations on the 1st as a parallel to justify restrictions on the 2nd only apply if the exercise of the right under the 2nd also cause harm.

Does the purchase of a firearm harm anyone? No.
Does the simple ownership of a firearm harm anyone? No.
Does the simple possession of a firearm harm anyone? No.

/game

 

[Lonestar_logic]

228 posts, no sound responses.
Impressive.

Face it. You don't want "an open and honest debate". Each and every suggestion made has been rejected out of hand by you as either 'argument based in emotion' or totally unworkable. You have utterly failed to proffer any solution to the gun violence problem we are saddled with in this nation. Rather, you simply reinforce your love and devotion to the culture of the gun.

What you fail to realize is, while your personal experiences with guns might be, how should I describe this...'pleasurable', too many American families and communities have suffered under the terror wrought by guns and are fed to the gills with frustration over the intractable positions taken by the gun lobby and their devoted minions.

So I challenge you. Give us what you think are answers to your own OP. Otherwise, we have all been educated in your circular logic and inflexible mindset.

No each suggestion has been analyzed and found to be useless in doing what you guys claim you want....keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and mass shooters.

My solution....when you catch a criminal using a gun to commit a crime, you arrest them and lock them up for a long time...unlike now where you see violent repeat offenders with weapon charges getting out of jail and murdering people.

You don't need to register anyone, license anyone or anything and it stops gun crime.

If you catch a convicted felon in possession of a gun, you arrest them and lock them up for a long time...again....no extra paperwork, which is useless anyway, is needed.

The law abiding own and carry guns without interference, and the criminals are arrested and locked up.

That is my solution....that is how every other criminal activity is handled and you are simply treating guns crime like any other crime....guilty in the commission of the crime, not before.

That does nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. For your plan to work, criminals have to have guns. If you think the threat of jail is going to deter them, well, just look at how well that works with every other law that these criminals ignore.

 

[M14 Shooter]

No each suggestion has been analyzed and found to be useless in doing what you guys claim you want....keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and mass shooters.

Indeed. I do not bother with certain people because they know they cannot address the issue with anything other than emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Ban all weapons with semi or fully automatic firing systems. Such weapons belong in the hands of 'well regulated militias', not on the streets. Permit long barrel rifles and shotguns for sporting purposes. Permit revolvers. Ban handguns equipped with magazines holding more than nine rounds.

Violates the constitution. Fail.
Does not prevent criminals from getting guns. Fail.

BZZZT Wrong!

There is no violation of the constitution limiting the kinds of weapons that can be sold. No one has a 2A right to an ICBM. Equally so they don't have a right to fully automatic weapons because they serve no legitimate civilian purpose. Large magazines are the same. No civilian needs more than 9 rounds for "self defense".

And yes, if those are banned then criminals aren't going to be able to buy them either.

No one has a 2A right to an ICBM.

what a foolish response

No surprise that Gun Fetishists lack the cognitive ability to understand that there are legitimate limitations on the 2nd Amendment.

There are libel and slander laws restricting the 1st amendment. There continues to be illegal searches and seizures, illegal access to letters and communication. And these infractions and regulations are regarded as de riguer among the gun lovers.

And yet, something as logical as back ground checks and registration amounts to a constitutional crisis and an affront to liberty by those same gun lovers.

The constitution is not a suicide pact. It was written in an age when the weapons held by civilians did not significantly differ from the weapons used by national armies (with the exception of artillery and warships).

Today's national arsenals include nuclear weaponry, surface to air missiles, satellite guided weapons and, regrettably chemical and biological weapons. Civilians have been completely out gunned and the notion of a bunch of self appointed 'militia' men holding off the Army and Navy and Air Forces of the United States of America over some idea of political pique have receded into history.

Agreed!

The 2nd Amendment does not require that everyone must be armed to the teeth 24*7.

But that would be Nirvana to the Gun Fetishists who don't have a clue that by obstructing all reasonable and normal regulations they are effectively depriving others of their freedom to live without being in fear that if they aren't carrying a gun at all times they will be a "victim".

The NRA and the Gun Fetishists wants to turn this nation into a "Free Gun Zone".

That is nonsensical and absurd because it introduces unnecessary risk to the lives of ordinary people.

Even during the heyday of the "Wild West" guns were banned at city limits because the local government knew that they would cause more harm than good.

People do have a right to live in a well regulated society where guns are not required to be carried at all times.

 

[Liminal]

Ban all weapons with semi or fully automatic firing systems. Such weapons belong in the hands of 'well regulated militias', not on the streets. Permit long barrel rifles and shotguns for sporting purposes. Permit revolvers. Ban handguns equipped with magazines holding more than nine rounds.

Violates the constitution. Fail.
Does not prevent criminals from getting guns. Fail.

BZZZT Wrong!

There is no violation of the constitution limiting the kinds of weapons that can be sold. No one has a 2A right to an ICBM. Equally so they don't have a right to fully automatic weapons because they serve no legitimate civilian purpose. Large magazines are the same. No civilian needs more than 9 rounds for "self defense".

And yes, if those are banned then criminals aren't going to be able to buy them either.

No one has a 2A right to an ICBM.

what a foolish response

No surprise that Gun Fetishists lack the cognitive ability to understand that there are legitimate limitations on the 2nd Amendment.

There are libel and slander laws restricting the 1st amendment. There continues to be illegal searches and seizures, illegal access to letters and communication. And these infractions and regulations are regarded as de riguer among the gun lovers.

And yet, something as logical as back ground checks and registration amounts to a constitutional crisis and an affront to liberty by those same gun lovers.

The constitution is not a suicide pact. It was written in an age when the weapons held by civilians did not significantly differ from the weapons used by national armies (with the exception of artillery and warships).

Today's national arsenals include nuclear weaponry, surface to air missiles, satellite guided weapons and, regrettably chemical and biological weapons. Civilians have been completely out gunned and the notion of a bunch of self appointed 'militia' men holding off the Army and Navy and Air Forces of the United States of America over some idea of political pique have receded into history.

Just when our leaders and representatives have made so much progress on dismantling the Fourth Amendment, it looks like a good time to start working on the Second Amendment as well. Because we know how much we can trust those guys.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Ban all weapons with semi or fully automatic firing systems. Such weapons belong in the hands of 'well regulated militias', not on the streets. Permit long barrel rifles and shotguns for sporting purposes. Permit revolvers. Ban handguns equipped with magazines holding more than nine rounds.

Violates the constitution. Fail.
Does not prevent criminals from getting guns. Fail.

BZZZT Wrong!

There is no violation of the constitution limiting the kinds of weapons that can be sold. No one has a 2A right to an ICBM. Equally so they don't have a right to fully automatic weapons because they serve no legitimate civilian purpose. Large magazines are the same. No civilian needs more than 9 rounds for "self defense".

And yes, if those are banned then criminals aren't going to be able to buy them either.

No one has a 2A right to an ICBM.

what a foolish response

No surprise that Gun Fetishists lack the cognitive ability to understand that there are legitimate limitations on the 2nd Amendment.

once again you have it ass backwards leftard

 

[Derideo_Te]

Ban all weapons with semi or fully automatic firing systems. Such weapons belong in the hands of 'well regulated militias', not on the streets. Permit long barrel rifles and shotguns for sporting purposes. Permit revolvers. Ban handguns equipped with magazines holding more than nine rounds.

Violates the constitution. Fail.
Does not prevent criminals from getting guns. Fail.

BZZZT Wrong!

There is no violation of the constitution limiting the kinds of weapons that can be sold. No one has a 2A right to an ICBM. Equally so they don't have a right to fully automatic weapons because they serve no legitimate civilian purpose. Large magazines are the same. No civilian needs more than 9 rounds for "self defense".

And yes, if those are banned then criminals aren't going to be able to buy them either.

No one has a 2A right to an ICBM.

what a foolish response

No surprise that Gun Fetishists lack the cognitive ability to understand that there are legitimate limitations on the 2nd Amendment.

once again you have it ass backwards leftard

Ironic coming from a Gun Fetishist.

Still waiting on the OP to produce a single coherent honest post on gun control!

 

[jon_berzerk]

228 posts, no sound responses.
Impressive.

Face it. You don't want "an open and honest debate". Each and every suggestion made has been rejected out of hand by you as either 'argument based in emotion' or totally unworkable. You have utterly failed to proffer any solution to the gun violence problem we are saddled with in this nation. Rather, you simply reinforce your love and devotion to the culture of the gun.

What you fail to realize is, while your personal experiences with guns might be, how should I describe this...'pleasurable', too many American families and communities have suffered under the terror wrought by guns and are fed to the gills with frustration over the intractable positions taken by the gun lobby and their devoted minions.

So I challenge you. Give us what you think are answers to your own OP. Otherwise, we have all been educated in your circular logic and inflexible mindset.

Each and every suggestion made has been rejected

which ones

the only one i have seen is from that army guy some posts back