Honest and open debate on gun control

[jon_berzerk]

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.

bigot

 

[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.

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.

what is wrong with you people

yet another foolish response

is that all you have going for you

communication of a false statements is not protected by the 1st amendment

go back and try again

 

[jon_berzerk]

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!

bigot

 

[Liminal]

228 posts, no sound responses.
Impressive.

That's because gun control advocates can't address the real problem. Other nations have gun ownership, some a lot more than others. But they don't have a problem with mass shootings. Why is that? It's apparent to me that the problem isn't guns, the problem is: we are an uncivilized society.

 

[jon_berzerk]

228 posts, no sound responses.
Impressive.

That's because gun control advocates can't address the real problem. Other nations have gun ownership, some a lot more than others. But they don't have a problem with mass shootings. Why is that? It's apparent to me that the problem isn't guns, the problem is: we are an uncivilized society.

true

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Fact is you're not going to keep criminals or the mentally insane from getting their hands on guns no matter how many gun bans or gun laws you have. The only viable option is to arm yourself and be prepared to take action when threatened by one of these individuals.

 

[Liminal]

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.

The reaction to the recent mass murder in South Carolina morphed into a debate about the Confederate flag because Democrats lack the intestinal fortitude to directly address gun control. Democrat politicians seem to have learned that Second Amendment issues cut across party lines.

 

[RKMBrown]

Let's just face facts... libs really are retarded.

 

[Liminal]

Let's just face facts... libs really are retarded.

I've been a Democrat for many years, and let me tell you, it ain't easy these days. Difficult for me to justify my continued association with that party. When a viable alternative, middle of the road, third party emerges, I'll be happy to vote for them. As it is I won't be able to bring myself to vote for Hilary, she's why I voted for Obama in the first place. That's how terrible I think she is. If Jim Web is the Democrat candidate I'll vote for him. If Hilary is the candidate, then I'll vote for Jeb Bush. If Ted Cruz is the Republican candidate, then I don't know what I'll do.

 

[2aguy]

Let's just face facts... libs really are retarded.

I've been a Democrat for many years, and let me tell you, it ain't easy these days. Difficult for me to justify my continued association with that party. When a viable alternative, middle of the road, third party emerges, I'll be happy to vote for them. As it is I won't be able to bring myself to vote for Hilary, she's why I voted for Obama in the first place. That's how terrible I think she is. If Jim Web is the Democrat candidate I'll vote for him. If Hilary is the candidate, then I'll vote for Jeb Bush. If Ted Cruz is the Republican candidate, then I don't know what I'll do.

any vote for a democrat is a vote for extreme gun control....the next democrat will appoint Supreme Court justices and they will be vetted for anti gun activism......

 

[Liminal]

Let's just face facts... libs really are retarded.

I've been a Democrat for many years, and let me tell you, it ain't easy these days. Difficult for me to justify my continued association with that party. When a viable alternative, middle of the road, third party emerges, I'll be happy to vote for them. As it is I won't be able to bring myself to vote for Hilary, she's why I voted for Obama in the first place. That's how terrible I think she is. If Jim Web is the Democrat candidate I'll vote for him. If Hilary is the candidate, then I'll vote for Jeb Bush. If Ted Cruz is the Republican candidate, then I don't know what I'll do.

any vote for a democrat is a vote for extreme gun control....the next democrat will appoint Supreme Court justices and they will be vetted for anti gun activism......

I think you're probably right about that. The Democrats act as though they don't have a long term agenda, but these things have a way of developing after a little while. I have hard time believing that when the San Francisco city council banned handgun ownership, that it wasn't designed to be a national test case. Fortunately the Supreme Court ruled against the city council, but that's no guarantee for the future.

 

[westwall]

I do. I bo

Perhaps you can elaborate on how banning semi auto weapons will make them unavailable.

Especially if the scores of millions of existing weapons are not confiscated.
Never mind the question as to how such a thing does not violate the constitution.

I have guns that are over a hundred years old in perfect working condition. Those guns will be shooting a hundred years from now.

I have semi-automatic guns that are over 100 years old

Really! Don't tell me you have a Mondragon.

I do. I bought mine 30 years ago.

 

[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.

The reaction to the recent mass murder in South Carolina morphed into a debate about the Confederate flag because Democrats lack the intestinal fortitude to directly address gun control. Democrat politicians seem to have learned that Second Amendment issues cut across party lines.

And yet when a mad man with ready access to a gun designed for warfare not sport walked int a Connecticut elementary school, the debate was all about back ground checks.

Until the NRA and their hordes of loyal minions stopped that common sense measure.

Thanks, Republicans for the ostrich reaction. Stick your head in a hole and the problem goes away.

 

[Liminal]

I do. I bo

Perhaps you can elaborate on how banning semi auto weapons will make them unavailable.

Especially if the scores of millions of existing weapons are not confiscated.
Never mind the question as to how such a thing does not violate the constitution.

I have guns that are over a hundred years old in perfect working condition. Those guns will be shooting a hundred years from now.

I have semi-automatic guns that are over 100 years old

Really! Don't tell me you have a Mondragon.

I do. I bought mine 30 years ago.

Really? That is impressive. You must be a serious collector, if it's in good condition it must be worth at least $10,000. I saw a Mondragon once at the big Reno gun show about ten years ago.
Correction, it has to be worth at least $25,000 and possibly as much as 40,000.

 

[Liminal]

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.

The reaction to the recent mass murder in South Carolina morphed into a debate about the Confederate flag because Democrats lack the intestinal fortitude to directly address gun control. Democrat politicians seem to have learned that Second Amendment issues cut across party lines.

And yet when a mad man with ready access to a gun designed for warfare not sport walked int a Connecticut elementary school, the debate was all about back ground checks.

Until the NRA and their hordes of loyal minions stopped that common sense measure.

Thanks, Republicans for the ostrich reaction. Stick your head in a hole and the problem goes away.

Some problems defy reasonable solution, or any solution at all. Sure, you can ban guns....but then what? Have you considered the reaction, the likely backlash? Is it worth the price of the possibility of secession and civil war? I don't think it is.

 

[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.

The reaction to the recent mass murder in South Carolina morphed into a debate about the Confederate flag because Democrats lack the intestinal fortitude to directly address gun control. Democrat politicians seem to have learned that Second Amendment issues cut across party lines.

And yet when a mad man with ready access to a gun designed for warfare not sport walked int a Connecticut elementary school, the debate was all about back ground checks.

Until the NRA and their hordes of loyal minions stopped that common sense measure.

Thanks, Republicans for the ostrich reaction. Stick your head in a hole and the problem goes away.

Some problems defy reasonable solution, or any solution at all. Sure, you can ban guns....but then what? Have you considered the reaction, the likely backlash? Is it worth the price of the possibility of secession and civil war? I don't think it is.

I'll risk hyperbole in exchange for fewer mass shootings.

 

[bodecea]

If there was an armed Church member in the Church, the demon with the gun would have been
terminated. Guns don't kill people kill.
End of story, over and out.
Thank you. And God bless you all.

Just think...if there had been an armed person somewhere near President Reagan in 1981, he and others would not have been shot.

 

[RKMBrown]

Let's just face facts... libs really are retarded.

I've been a Democrat for many years, and let me tell you, it ain't easy these days. Difficult for me to justify my continued association with that party. When a viable alternative, middle of the road, third party emerges, I'll be happy to vote for them. As it is I won't be able to bring myself to vote for Hilary, she's why I voted for Obama in the first place. That's how terrible I think she is. If Jim Web is the Democrat candidate I'll vote for him. If Hilary is the candidate, then I'll vote for Jeb Bush. If Ted Cruz is the Republican candidate, then I don't know what I'll do.

I gave up on the pubs for the same reason. I'm libertarian now and I don't care if my votes are a waste.

 

[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.

The reaction to the recent mass murder in South Carolina morphed into a debate about the Confederate flag because Democrats lack the intestinal fortitude to directly address gun control. Democrat politicians seem to have learned that Second Amendment issues cut across party lines.

And yet when a mad man with ready access to a gun designed for warfare not sport walked int a Connecticut elementary school, the debate was all about back ground checks.

Until the NRA and their hordes of loyal minions stopped that common sense measure.

Thanks, Republicans for the ostrich reaction. Stick your head in a hole and the problem goes away.

Okay genius.....he murdered to get the gun.....and how would the background check, which he didn't go through stop him....and the shooter in Santa barbara, got three guns with 3 different background checks, no AR-15, and used 10 round magazines........

I notice you didn't explain the mechanics of any of your gun control laws that you support.....

Also...in Europe they have extreme gun control......all guns are inaccessible to law abiding citizens.....and 3 terrorists, 2 on government terrorist watch lists, 1 a convicted felon, easily got fully automatic rifles, with 30 round magazines, the same for the gang members in Marseille, France who used fully automatic rifles to shoot up a neighborhood just before the French Prime minister was supposed to speak about crime there....dittos, Denmark, Sweden and Belgium....all fully automatic rifles in Countries with gun control laws far more extreme than ours....

And they got fully automatic rifles easily....

So how do you propose that our gun laws would be any better? Please explain?

 

[2aguy]

If there was an armed Church member in the Church, the demon with the gun would have been
terminated. Guns don't kill people kill.
End of story, over and out.
Thank you. And God bless you all.

Just think...if there had been an armed person somewhere near President Reagan in 1981, he and others would not have been shot.

Notice......moron......that they didn't stop him before he shot Reagan did they.....and the Secret Service actively look for threats every day, and actually investigate possible threats, they don't just wait for shooters.....and what did they do....they caught him when he used the gun and arrested him.........

That is the only way to stop criminals with guns....you stop them like every other crime, when they actually break the law....you guys want to stop them before they break the law....and unless you are a mind reader it isn't going to happen......even with the Secret Service on the job....