How many democrats own guns?

[Flash]

You didn't address a word I said about the first amendment. Do you have sustain for all the laws that regulate freedoms of speech as well? Do you see usefulness in any of them?

Our constitution gives the government the right and the responsibility to create and evolve our laws to best protect and benefit our citizens. He have courts, appeals, elections and a system of checks and balances that comprises our system of government. We the people are more than just words on a piece of paper.

The thing that you are missing big time and are probably very confused about is the concept that Democracy can be just as oppressive as any other form of government.

That is why we have a Bill of Rights. To protect us from government oppression even when the majority of dickheads in this country vote for it.

Just because the people vote to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms and some stupid Libtard judge upholds the law and some government thugs enforce it doesn't mean it is legal or right.

The Bill of Rights is very specific that because the right to keep and bears arms is necessary for the security of a free state that it shall not be infringed.

You are arguing that the filthy ass government can disregard the Bill of Rights willy nilly depending upon the mood of the day.

It is people like you that will cause the Liberties that our Founding Fathers established to evaporate and that is despicable.

 

[2aguy]

Yet you still can't say what type of background check a thief that STOLE my gun by entering a LOCKED vehicle on PRIVATE PROPERTY where he/she didn't belong will go through for having that gun.

I did answer that... No kind of background check. bg checks have no effect on criminals that illegally buy or steal arms. Do you claim that 100% of criminals steal or illegally obtain guns and 0% are detoured from not being able to easily buy one from a store?

The laws you support won't keep criminals from getting guns because they're criminals. They will find a way to get them. The laws you support will make it harder for those that wouldn't do the things for which you use to put those laws in place.

Making somebody go through a bg check could be an instant thing, it doesn't need to be a process that makes the purchase of a gun any harder. And it definitely could prevent SOME criminals from getting weapons... Not all criminals but some. That's the point

The problem is what's being proposed with background checks will make it harder and only so for those that no one has to worry about when it comes to the reasons such laws are being suggested.

What percentage are you willing to accept when it comes to stopping those that shouldn't get guns related to background checks. If it's 90% successful, is that OK? If the 10%, or whatever you are willing to accept, get them and mass shootings still take place, at what level are you willing to say it was successful?

If it stops one guy from getting a gun and killing somebody then it's a success. The stats you are looking for are not measurable. You can't record murders that didn't happen. I'd think that you would support national and personal security measures. A comprehensive bg check system that flags risky or dangerous individuals and prevents them from purchasing weapons should be something you champion. It shouldn't have any effect on responsible law abiding citizens and would likely cost a fraction of what the NRA and gun lobby has spent on fighting these measures

Yes...they should also be stripped of their voting rights, they should have all electronic means of communicating siezed and should be shipped to Guantanomo....just on suspicion....since 75% of those on that list are mistakes.........

 

[2aguy]

[

That's a fair position to take... It is also fair for your opponents to take the opposite position and want to limit the sale and distribution of weapons to risky individuals. Force the crazy stalker guy with a restraining order to go find a black market gun or try and steal one instead of allowing him to walk into a store and legally buy one.

The problem is that once you open the door for the government to decided who can enjoy the Bill of Rights and who can't then the Bill of Rights really isn't one, is it?

The Bill of Rights establishes boundaries of liberties that the filthy government cannot cross. If we allow the filthy government to arbitrarily decide who can have rights and who can't then we might as well go burn the document or use it for toilet paper because it is worthless.

If Liberals were reasonable then maybe we come to some middle ground but time and time again we have found out that Liberals aren't reasonable.

For instance, the SAFE Act was passed in NY on the false premise that it was "common sense gun control". Two weeks after it was passed a decorated veteran was arrested and charged under the law for having two unloaded 30 rd magazines in the trunk of his car. Earlier this year a man in NY went to see the doctor about insomnia and under the SAFE Act the doctor felt compelled to report him to the government thugs and they came to his house and confiscated his firearms. He was also a veteran.

Recently in NJ a man was arrested for the mere possession of firearms like millions of Americans have. He had no criminal background and was not on any list and there was no reason to believe he was going to use the firearms for crimes. His only "crime" was possession. How reasonable is that?

I could give many more examples of how unreasonable gun control laws are if you would like.

I don't want these stupid Libtards getting a vote in my Constitutional rights, do you?

First off, all our rights are subject to limitations and regulations and this is reflected in our laws. For example, freedom of speech... We have libel, slander, and rules about noise, vulgarity, disturbing the peace, censorship in advertising and entertainment etc etc etc.

Don't pretend that the 2nd amendment is targeted for regulation more than others.

I can't comment on your examples because I don't know the details. From what you stated, I don't see a problem with doctors flagging mentally unstable individuals if they impose a risk. We do need to be careful with how we do this as it shouldn't deture people from seeking mental healthcare. I assume that with your examples law enforcement had reason to think these individuals posed a risk or dangerous threat or had broken the law.

You cannot be barred from using a computer simply on the off chance you will slander, or libel someone.....you are arrested and punished when you actually commit the act, not before....

Yes...the FBI who gave a pass to the Orlando shooter.....we can always trust the government.....

 

[2aguy]

I support Dems legally owning guns to offset the untra right wingers that are heavily armed and want to get the armed revolution started as soon as possible.

Yeah...so far this year...it is left wing racists who are murdering people...and their muslim supporters.....

 

[2aguy]

i dont find that over blown at all

It's not real. They are instilling fear and playing y'all like puppets.

no there is much talk coming from the left on banning certain firearms

replacing SC judges

plus there has already been confiscations in this country

Yes banning weapons and tools that facilitate mass destruction in small amounts at time is completely different than banning all guns. It why citizens are driving armed tanks to work and protecting their houses with land mines.

Rifles with detachable magazines were used to kill 157 people in mass shootings in 34 years......from 1982-2016.....

knives murdered 1,567 people in 2014, and murder over 1,500 people every single year.....

each year rifles kill fewer people than knives, clubs or bare hands.....

yet you guys focus on the one instrument that isn't killing people in large numbers......

Come on man, use common sense... Make guns super easy to get and put a gun into the hands of the killers who used the knives, clubs, or bare hands... Take away all gun control and give them machine guns... Fatalities go up

Except...that isn't what has actually happened.......you can buy an AR-15 for as little as 500 dollars......and yet they are rarely used for any crime even mass shootings.....

Knives kill more people every single year than all rifles combined.......that is a fact.

The criminals are already getting their guns........they get them in every single country no matter how strict the gun control laws are.....

 

[2aguy]

How hard is it? You get a back ground check and buy a gun. My buddy owns a gun shop in California and can't keep his shelves stocked.

im definitely against registration

as for a universal background check

im not really for that either

however i do believe in responsible gun ownership to include not selling a bad guy a gun

in a sale like that the bad guy trying to buy the gun is already breaking the law

The only reason for a universal background check is to get universal gun registraton......universal background checks cannot be confirmed without registration of guns....that is why the anti gunners are pushing for it so hard.....it does nothing to stop crime or mass shooters...so why are they pushing it? Registration.

You seem like a bright guy, it puzzles me that you can't understand the logic. It's like metal detectors in the airport... A simple preventative measure to limit access the legal sale of weapons to risky individuals. Yes criminals can still get guns in the black market... some will and some won't. Not everybody is connected with illegal arms dealers...

Not everybody is connected with illegal arms dealers..

Excellent point......and those who are, when we find them we can arrest them...we do not need universal background checks to do this...we can already do this and I have linked in other threads about gun runners captured, not with background checks or gun laws...but with snitches....the way all other crimes are stopped.

If you want to stop illegal gun buying...send in undercover police officers....put in sting operations on internet sales....make clear the buyers and sellers cannot pass background checks or are felons....and if the seller or buyer goes forward..arrest them.....

That is how it would be handled if the issue was stopping criminals.....the issue for anti gun activists is getting rid of guns.....that is why they focus on normal gun owners and not criminals.

I actually agree with you on the bg checks, I don't think they serve a significantly impactful purpose and there are better approaches to take. If We are being really honest, registration would be the safest and most effective answer but I know there is no way those fighting the Strawman would ever let that fly

Okay....you just mentioned Registration...please explain how they work, how they will stop criminals and mass shooters ...

And do you realize that actual criminals, are not required to register illegal guns? Because of Haynes v. United States....so the only people who will be forced to register their guns....are people who don't commit crimes with them.....

What is so hard about simply arresting people who break the law with guns.......why is that such a hard concept for you guys.....?

You keep wanting to be Tom Cruise in Minority Report and swing down on a Zip line and arrest people before they commit crime...it didn't work in the movie, it won't work in reality.

 

[Slade3200]

You didn't address a word I said about the first amendment. Do you have sustain for all the laws that regulate freedoms of speech as well? Do you see usefulness in any of them?

Our constitution gives the government the right and the responsibility to create and evolve our laws to best protect and benefit our citizens. He have courts, appeals, elections and a system of checks and balances that comprises our system of government. We the people are more than just words on a piece of paper.

The thing that you are missing big time and are probably very confused about is the concept that Democracy can be just as oppressive as any other form of government.

That is why we have a Bill of Rights. To protect us from government oppression even when the majority of dickheads in this country vote for it.

Just because the people vote to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms and some stupid Libtard judge upholds the law and some government thugs enforce it doesn't mean it is legal or right.

The Bill of Rights is very specific that because the right to keep and bears arms is necessary for the security of a free state that it shall not be infringed.

You are arguing that the filthy ass government can disregard the Bill of Rights willy nilly depending upon the mood of the day.

It is people like you that will cause the Liberties that our Founding Fathers established to evaporate and that is despicable.

Again you dodge my comments/questions about first amendment... Want to try again?

 

[2aguy]

You didn't address a word I said about the first amendment. Do you have sustain for all the laws that regulate freedoms of speech as well? Do you see usefulness in any of them?

Our constitution gives the government the right and the responsibility to create and evolve our laws to best protect and benefit our citizens. He have courts, appeals, elections and a system of checks and balances that comprises our system of government. We the people are more than just words on a piece of paper.

The thing that you are missing big time and are probably very confused about is the concept that Democracy can be just as oppressive as any other form of government.

That is why we have a Bill of Rights. To protect us from government oppression even when the majority of dickheads in this country vote for it.

Just because the people vote to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms and some stupid Libtard judge upholds the law and some government thugs enforce it doesn't mean it is legal or right.

The Bill of Rights is very specific that because the right to keep and bears arms is necessary for the security of a free state that it shall not be infringed.

You are arguing that the filthy ass government can disregard the Bill of Rights willy nilly depending upon the mood of the day.

It is people like you that will cause the Liberties that our Founding Fathers established to evaporate and that is despicable.

Again you dodge my comments/questions about first amendment... Want to try again?

Slander and Libel laws are not proactive.....you break the law, you get punished...you want proactive laws against gun crimes.......and all that does is effect people who do not use guns for crimes......

We can already arrest people who use guns to commit crimes, just like we can arrest people who yell fire in a theater or slander or libel someone.........

 

[Slade3200]

It's not real. They are instilling fear and playing y'all like puppets.

no there is much talk coming from the left on banning certain firearms

replacing SC judges

plus there has already been confiscations in this country

Yes banning weapons and tools that facilitate mass destruction in small amounts at time is completely different than banning all guns. It why citizens are driving armed tanks to work and protecting their houses with land mines.

Rifles with detachable magazines were used to kill 157 people in mass shootings in 34 years......from 1982-2016.....

knives murdered 1,567 people in 2014, and murder over 1,500 people every single year.....

each year rifles kill fewer people than knives, clubs or bare hands.....

yet you guys focus on the one instrument that isn't killing people in large numbers......

Come on man, use common sense... Make guns super easy to get and put a gun into the hands of the killers who used the knives, clubs, or bare hands... Take away all gun control and give them machine guns... Fatalities go up

Except...that isn't what has actually happened.......you can buy an AR-15 for as little as 500 dollars......and yet they are rarely used for any crime even mass shootings.....

Knives kill more people every single year than all rifles combined.......that is a fact.

The criminals are already getting their guns........they get them in every single country no matter how strict the gun control laws are.....

SOME criminals are getting and using guns... Others who can't easily get one do other things... Like use knives, a far less lethal tool. An angry killer with a knife is likely going to cause less damage than an angry criminal with a gun, would you agree with that?

 

[2aguy]

no there is much talk coming from the left on banning certain firearms

replacing SC judges

plus there has already been confiscations in this country

Yes banning weapons and tools that facilitate mass destruction in small amounts at time is completely different than banning all guns. It why citizens are driving armed tanks to work and protecting their houses with land mines.

Rifles with detachable magazines were used to kill 157 people in mass shootings in 34 years......from 1982-2016.....

knives murdered 1,567 people in 2014, and murder over 1,500 people every single year.....

each year rifles kill fewer people than knives, clubs or bare hands.....

yet you guys focus on the one instrument that isn't killing people in large numbers......

Come on man, use common sense... Make guns super easy to get and put a gun into the hands of the killers who used the knives, clubs, or bare hands... Take away all gun control and give them machine guns... Fatalities go up

Except...that isn't what has actually happened.......you can buy an AR-15 for as little as 500 dollars......and yet they are rarely used for any crime even mass shootings.....

Knives kill more people every single year than all rifles combined.......that is a fact.

The criminals are already getting their guns........they get them in every single country no matter how strict the gun control laws are.....

SOME criminals are getting and using guns... Others who can't easily get one do other things... Like use knives, a far less lethal tool. An angry killer with a knife is likely going to cause less damage than an angry criminal with a gun, would you agree with that?

and none of the gun laws you support is stopping them.

all the criminals who want guns are getting guns....even in France, Britain and Australia, as well as Japan........

except when the knife guy selects children or old people.........right? Ask China and the Japanese about that.....or the French about their Trucks...and even that guy had a fully automatic weapon, which is illegal in France......

 

[Conservative65]

The problem is what's being proposed with background checks will make it harder and only so for those that no one has to worry about when it comes to the reasons such laws are being suggested.

Two problem with universal background checks:
- The law will not affect criminals
- Enforcement is only possible with universal registration.

Universal registration is the goal; no one wonders why.

what a bunch of BS.

You gun hater

Yet you still can't say what type of background check a thief that STOLE my gun by entering a LOCKED vehicle on PRIVATE PROPERTY where he/she didn't belong will go through for having that gun.

I did answer that... No kind of background check. bg checks have no effect on criminals that illegally buy or steal arms. Do you claim that 100% of criminals steal or illegally obtain guns and 0% are detoured from not being able to easily buy one from a store?

The laws you support won't keep criminals from getting guns because they're criminals. They will find a way to get them. The laws you support will make it harder for those that wouldn't do the things for which you use to put those laws in place.

Making somebody go through a bg check could be an instant thing, it doesn't need to be a process that makes the purchase of a gun any harder. And it definitely could prevent SOME criminals from getting weapons... Not all criminals but some. That's the point

The problem is what's being proposed with background checks will make it harder and only so for those that no one has to worry about when it comes to the reasons such laws are being suggested.

What percentage are you willing to accept when it comes to stopping those that shouldn't get guns related to background checks. If it's 90% successful, is that OK? If the 10%, or whatever you are willing to accept, get them and mass shootings still take place, at what level are you willing to say it was successful?

If it stops one guy from getting a gun and killing somebody then it's a success. The stats you are looking for are not measurable. You can't record murders that didn't happen. I'd think that you would support national and personal security measures. A comprehensive bg check system that flags risky or dangerous individuals and prevents them from purchasing weapons should be something you champion. It shouldn't have any effect on responsible law abiding citizens and would likely cost a fraction of what the NRA and gun lobby has spent on fighting these measures

What about the others it didn't stop and the ones they killed? You OK with that?

I support common sense measures and what you propose isn't since you can't tell me what kind of background check a person stealing a gun will go through. When you can do that, you'll have a valid argument. Are you claiming that if someone that is flagged they won't go about trying to find ways to get one illegally? For what you say to make sense, you'd have to make that argument.

It shouldn't? Anything the left proposes always has unintended consequences.

 

[2aguy]

no there is much talk coming from the left on banning certain firearms

replacing SC judges

plus there has already been confiscations in this country

Yes banning weapons and tools that facilitate mass destruction in small amounts at time is completely different than banning all guns. It why citizens are driving armed tanks to work and protecting their houses with land mines.

Rifles with detachable magazines were used to kill 157 people in mass shootings in 34 years......from 1982-2016.....

knives murdered 1,567 people in 2014, and murder over 1,500 people every single year.....

each year rifles kill fewer people than knives, clubs or bare hands.....

yet you guys focus on the one instrument that isn't killing people in large numbers......

Come on man, use common sense... Make guns super easy to get and put a gun into the hands of the killers who used the knives, clubs, or bare hands... Take away all gun control and give them machine guns... Fatalities go up

Except...that isn't what has actually happened.......you can buy an AR-15 for as little as 500 dollars......and yet they are rarely used for any crime even mass shootings.....

Knives kill more people every single year than all rifles combined.......that is a fact.

The criminals are already getting their guns........they get them in every single country no matter how strict the gun control laws are.....

SOME criminals are getting and using guns... Others who can't easily get one do other things... Like use knives, a far less lethal tool. An angry killer with a knife is likely going to cause less damage than an angry criminal with a gun, would you agree with that?

How does registration of guns stop criminals or mass shooters?

 

[Conservative65]

no there is much talk coming from the left on banning certain firearms

replacing SC judges

plus there has already been confiscations in this country

Yes banning weapons and tools that facilitate mass destruction in small amounts at time is completely different than banning all guns. It why citizens are driving armed tanks to work and protecting their houses with land mines.

Rifles with detachable magazines were used to kill 157 people in mass shootings in 34 years......from 1982-2016.....

knives murdered 1,567 people in 2014, and murder over 1,500 people every single year.....

each year rifles kill fewer people than knives, clubs or bare hands.....

yet you guys focus on the one instrument that isn't killing people in large numbers......

Come on man, use common sense... Make guns super easy to get and put a gun into the hands of the killers who used the knives, clubs, or bare hands... Take away all gun control and give them machine guns... Fatalities go up

Except...that isn't what has actually happened.......you can buy an AR-15 for as little as 500 dollars......and yet they are rarely used for any crime even mass shootings.....

Knives kill more people every single year than all rifles combined.......that is a fact.

The criminals are already getting their guns........they get them in every single country no matter how strict the gun control laws are.....

SOME criminals are getting and using guns... Others who can't easily get one do other things... Like use knives, a far less lethal tool. An angry killer with a knife is likely going to cause less damage than an angry criminal with a gun, would you agree with that?

To say a knife is a less lethal tool would mean you can explain how someone killed by a nut with a knife is less dead than someone killed by a nut with a gun.

If you say some criminals will continue to get guns, are you willing to accept as OK the deaths of those killed by that some?

 

[Slade3200]

im definitely against registration

as for a universal background check

im not really for that either

however i do believe in responsible gun ownership to include not selling a bad guy a gun

in a sale like that the bad guy trying to buy the gun is already breaking the law

The only reason for a universal background check is to get universal gun registraton......universal background checks cannot be confirmed without registration of guns....that is why the anti gunners are pushing for it so hard.....it does nothing to stop crime or mass shooters...so why are they pushing it? Registration.

You seem like a bright guy, it puzzles me that you can't understand the logic. It's like metal detectors in the airport... A simple preventative measure to limit access the legal sale of weapons to risky individuals. Yes criminals can still get guns in the black market... some will and some won't. Not everybody is connected with illegal arms dealers...

Not everybody is connected with illegal arms dealers..

Excellent point......and those who are, when we find them we can arrest them...we do not need universal background checks to do this...we can already do this and I have linked in other threads about gun runners captured, not with background checks or gun laws...but with snitches....the way all other crimes are stopped.

If you want to stop illegal gun buying...send in undercover police officers....put in sting operations on internet sales....make clear the buyers and sellers cannot pass background checks or are felons....and if the seller or buyer goes forward..arrest them.....

That is how it would be handled if the issue was stopping criminals.....the issue for anti gun activists is getting rid of guns.....that is why they focus on normal gun owners and not criminals.

I actually agree with you on the bg checks, I don't think they serve a significantly impactful purpose and there are better approaches to take. If We are being really honest, registration would be the safest and most effective answer but I know there is no way those fighting the Strawman would ever let that fly

Okay....you just mentioned Registration...please explain how they work, how they will stop criminals and mass shooters ...

And do you realize that actual criminals, are not required to register illegal guns? Because of Haynes v. United States....so the only people who will be forced to register their guns....are people who don't commit crimes with them.....

What is so hard about simply arresting people who break the law with guns.......why is that such a hard concept for you guys.....?

You keep wanting to be Tom Cruise in Minority Report and swing down on a Zip line and arrest people before they commit crime...it didn't work in the movie, it won't work in reality.

There is no objection to arresting people who break gun laws and people who shoot and kill people. There are many people who want to do more and work towards prevention.

Registration would make law enforcement easier and allows them to track where guns are acquired and confiscate guns that are not legally obtained. It also would facilitate prosecution of illegal arms dealers and reduce black market operations.

And guess what... There are less car accidents because we don't let 5 year olds or blind people drive on the freeway. Same concept with gun control

 

[2aguy]

The problem is what's being proposed with background checks will make it harder and only so for those that no one has to worry about when it comes to the reasons such laws are being suggested.

Two problem with universal background checks:
- The law will not affect criminals
- Enforcement is only possible with universal registration.

Universal registration is the goal; no one wonders why.

what a bunch of BS.

You gun hater

I did answer that... No kind of background check. bg checks have no effect on criminals that illegally buy or steal arms. Do you claim that 100% of criminals steal or illegally obtain guns and 0% are detoured from not being able to easily buy one from a store?

The laws you support won't keep criminals from getting guns because they're criminals. They will find a way to get them. The laws you support will make it harder for those that wouldn't do the things for which you use to put those laws in place.

Making somebody go through a bg check could be an instant thing, it doesn't need to be a process that makes the purchase of a gun any harder. And it definitely could prevent SOME criminals from getting weapons... Not all criminals but some. That's the point

The problem is what's being proposed with background checks will make it harder and only so for those that no one has to worry about when it comes to the reasons such laws are being suggested.

What percentage are you willing to accept when it comes to stopping those that shouldn't get guns related to background checks. If it's 90% successful, is that OK? If the 10%, or whatever you are willing to accept, get them and mass shootings still take place, at what level are you willing to say it was successful?

If it stops one guy from getting a gun and killing somebody then it's a success. The stats you are looking for are not measurable. You can't record murders that didn't happen. I'd think that you would support national and personal security measures. A comprehensive bg check system that flags risky or dangerous individuals and prevents them from purchasing weapons should be something you champion. It shouldn't have any effect on responsible law abiding citizens and would likely cost a fraction of what the NRA and gun lobby has spent on fighting these measures

What about the others it didn't stop and the ones they killed? You OK with that?

I support common sense measures and what you propose isn't since you can't tell me what kind of background check a person stealing a gun will go through. When you can do that, you'll have a valid argument. Are you claiming that if someone that is flagged they won't go about trying to find ways to get one illegally? For what you say to make sense, you'd have to make that argument.

It shouldn't? Anything the left proposes always has unintended consequences.

Anything the left proposes always has unintended consequences

Sorry...you are wrong on this.....the left never has unintended consequences.......look deep enough at the leaders pushing these things...and the unintended consequences are exactly what they wanted...they just couldn't push those because of the resistance....

 

[M14 Shooter]

SOME criminals are getting and using guns... Others who can't easily get one do other things... Like use knives, a far less lethal tool. An angry killer with a knife is likely going to cause less damage than an angry criminal with a gun, would you agree with that?

How does registration of guns stop criminals or mass shooters?

How is the registration of a gun not a restriction in excess of those placed on the right to free speech?

 

[2aguy]

The only reason for a universal background check is to get universal gun registraton......universal background checks cannot be confirmed without registration of guns....that is why the anti gunners are pushing for it so hard.....it does nothing to stop crime or mass shooters...so why are they pushing it? Registration.

You seem like a bright guy, it puzzles me that you can't understand the logic. It's like metal detectors in the airport... A simple preventative measure to limit access the legal sale of weapons to risky individuals. Yes criminals can still get guns in the black market... some will and some won't. Not everybody is connected with illegal arms dealers...

Not everybody is connected with illegal arms dealers..

Excellent point......and those who are, when we find them we can arrest them...we do not need universal background checks to do this...we can already do this and I have linked in other threads about gun runners captured, not with background checks or gun laws...but with snitches....the way all other crimes are stopped.

If you want to stop illegal gun buying...send in undercover police officers....put in sting operations on internet sales....make clear the buyers and sellers cannot pass background checks or are felons....and if the seller or buyer goes forward..arrest them.....

That is how it would be handled if the issue was stopping criminals.....the issue for anti gun activists is getting rid of guns.....that is why they focus on normal gun owners and not criminals.

I actually agree with you on the bg checks, I don't think they serve a significantly impactful purpose and there are better approaches to take. If We are being really honest, registration would be the safest and most effective answer but I know there is no way those fighting the Strawman would ever let that fly

Okay....you just mentioned Registration...please explain how they work, how they will stop criminals and mass shooters ...

And do you realize that actual criminals, are not required to register illegal guns? Because of Haynes v. United States....so the only people who will be forced to register their guns....are people who don't commit crimes with them.....

What is so hard about simply arresting people who break the law with guns.......why is that such a hard concept for you guys.....?

You keep wanting to be Tom Cruise in Minority Report and swing down on a Zip line and arrest people before they commit crime...it didn't work in the movie, it won't work in reality.

There is no objection to arresting people who break gun laws and people who shoot and kill people. There are many people who want to do more and work towards prevention.

Registration would make law enforcement easier and allows them to track where guns are acquired and confiscate guns that are not legally obtained. It also would facilitate prosecution of illegal arms dealers and reduce black market operations.

And guess what... There are less car accidents because we don't let 5 year olds or blind people drive on the freeway. Same concept with gun control

Registration would make law enforcement easier and allows them to track where guns are acquired and confiscate guns that are not legally obtained. It also would facilitate prosecution of illegal arms dealers and reduce black market operations.

Every one of those things can already be done...and in fact is already being done....they arrest the criminal using the gun, they get him to roll over on the supplier, and then if the guy is an actual criminal, they arrest them too....

Keep in mind.....they have registration in all of the countries I have mentioned...and it doesn't stop their criminals....

Do you acknowledge that actual criminals will not have to register their illegal guns? So if you catch a criminal with an unregistered gun, you can't punish him for that crime..right? You can only punish law abiding gun owners who don't register their gun....

And gun registration in Canada.....had been stopped, why....it cost too much money, time and manpower and did nothing to solve crimes.....

More kids are killed in car accidents than are killed with guns.........we don't let 5 year olds buy, own or carry guns......how does that have anything to do with registering a gun....?

 

[Slade3200]

You didn't address a word I said about the first amendment. Do you have sustain for all the laws that regulate freedoms of speech as well? Do you see usefulness in any of them?

Our constitution gives the government the right and the responsibility to create and evolve our laws to best protect and benefit our citizens. He have courts, appeals, elections and a system of checks and balances that comprises our system of government. We the people are more than just words on a piece of paper.

The thing that you are missing big time and are probably very confused about is the concept that Democracy can be just as oppressive as any other form of government.

That is why we have a Bill of Rights. To protect us from government oppression even when the majority of dickheads in this country vote for it.

Just because the people vote to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms and some stupid Libtard judge upholds the law and some government thugs enforce it doesn't mean it is legal or right.

The Bill of Rights is very specific that because the right to keep and bears arms is necessary for the security of a free state that it shall not be infringed.

You are arguing that the filthy ass government can disregard the Bill of Rights willy nilly depending upon the mood of the day.

It is people like you that will cause the Liberties that our Founding Fathers established to evaporate and that is despicable.

Again you dodge my comments/questions about first amendment... Want to try again?

Slander and Libel laws are not proactive.....you break the law, you get punished...you want proactive laws against gun crimes.......and all that does is effect people who do not use guns for crimes......

We can already arrest people who use guns to commit crimes, just like we can arrest people who yell fire in a theater or slander or libel someone.........

You really don't get the difference or are you messing with me? A gun is a much more lethal and destructive tool than words... Do you also oppose airport security? There is a public safety concern that is being addressed.

 

[Slade3200]

Yes banning weapons and tools that facilitate mass destruction in small amounts at time is completely different than banning all guns. It why citizens are driving armed tanks to work and protecting their houses with land mines.

Rifles with detachable magazines were used to kill 157 people in mass shootings in 34 years......from 1982-2016.....

knives murdered 1,567 people in 2014, and murder over 1,500 people every single year.....

each year rifles kill fewer people than knives, clubs or bare hands.....

yet you guys focus on the one instrument that isn't killing people in large numbers......

Come on man, use common sense... Make guns super easy to get and put a gun into the hands of the killers who used the knives, clubs, or bare hands... Take away all gun control and give them machine guns... Fatalities go up

Except...that isn't what has actually happened.......you can buy an AR-15 for as little as 500 dollars......and yet they are rarely used for any crime even mass shootings.....

Knives kill more people every single year than all rifles combined.......that is a fact.

The criminals are already getting their guns........they get them in every single country no matter how strict the gun control laws are.....

SOME criminals are getting and using guns... Others who can't easily get one do other things... Like use knives, a far less lethal tool. An angry killer with a knife is likely going to cause less damage than an angry criminal with a gun, would you agree with that?

and none of the gun laws you support is stopping them.

all the criminals who want guns are getting guns....even in France, Britain and Australia, as well as Japan........

except when the knife guy selects children or old people.........right? Ask China and the Japanese about that.....or the French about their Trucks...and even that guy had a fully automatic weapon, which is illegal in France......

ALL criminals are? You sure about that? What happened to the kid in Vegas at the trump rally.? Noticed you skipped over that post

 

[2aguy]

The only reason for a universal background check is to get universal gun registraton......universal background checks cannot be confirmed without registration of guns....that is why the anti gunners are pushing for it so hard.....it does nothing to stop crime or mass shooters...so why are they pushing it? Registration.

You seem like a bright guy, it puzzles me that you can't understand the logic. It's like metal detectors in the airport... A simple preventative measure to limit access the legal sale of weapons to risky individuals. Yes criminals can still get guns in the black market... some will and some won't. Not everybody is connected with illegal arms dealers...

Not everybody is connected with illegal arms dealers..

Excellent point......and those who are, when we find them we can arrest them...we do not need universal background checks to do this...we can already do this and I have linked in other threads about gun runners captured, not with background checks or gun laws...but with snitches....the way all other crimes are stopped.

If you want to stop illegal gun buying...send in undercover police officers....put in sting operations on internet sales....make clear the buyers and sellers cannot pass background checks or are felons....and if the seller or buyer goes forward..arrest them.....

That is how it would be handled if the issue was stopping criminals.....the issue for anti gun activists is getting rid of guns.....that is why they focus on normal gun owners and not criminals.

I actually agree with you on the bg checks, I don't think they serve a significantly impactful purpose and there are better approaches to take. If We are being really honest, registration would be the safest and most effective answer but I know there is no way those fighting the Strawman would ever let that fly

Okay....you just mentioned Registration...please explain how they work, how they will stop criminals and mass shooters ...

And do you realize that actual criminals, are not required to register illegal guns? Because of Haynes v. United States....so the only people who will be forced to register their guns....are people who don't commit crimes with them.....

What is so hard about simply arresting people who break the law with guns.......why is that such a hard concept for you guys.....?

You keep wanting to be Tom Cruise in Minority Report and swing down on a Zip line and arrest people before they commit crime...it didn't work in the movie, it won't work in reality.

There is no objection to arresting people who break gun laws and people who shoot and kill people. There are many people who want to do more and work towards prevention.

Registration would make law enforcement easier and allows them to track where guns are acquired and confiscate guns that are not legally obtained. It also would facilitate prosecution of illegal arms dealers and reduce black market operations.

And guess what... There are less car accidents because we don't let 5 year olds or blind people drive on the freeway. Same concept with gun control

This is what happened when Canada just tried to register long guns....

What's wrong with a registry?

But gun registries have a number of problems. For one, they don’t solve crimes.

Canada’s experience with a long-gun registry illustrates this. After having spent some two billion dollars, the program was found to be ineffective at solving crimes or keeping people safe.

The State of Maryland has had a similar experience with its ballistic fingerprint records, finding that in fifteen years, only twenty-six cases were aided by the registry, and in those cases, law enforcement already knew which guns were involved.

All of this, of course, is in addition to the major question of how we would register American guns in the first place, considering the hundreds of millions here presently and our porous borders.

What registries do allow is confiscation. The experience in Britain of gun control worsening over time illustrates this. The same is true for Australia. And we’ve seen attempts to do the same thing in New York and California.

And then there’s the more basic question of privacy.

This is a concern that goes broader and deeper than just gun rights. Whether we’re talking about the NSA’s spying on our e-mail and telephone calls or the FBI’s desire to have a door opened for them into iPhones, it is abundantly clear that government wants easy access to our personal lives, in spite of and in contradiction to the protection of the Fourth Amendment.

A gun registry would simply be yet another example of this.

I’m sure that all of these points are a case of preaching to the choir, but as I was told once, even the choir needs to hear a good sermon now and then. In the battles over gun control, we risk letting some things slip through when confronted with a flurry of demands, and it’s up to us to make sure bad ideas are not converted into laws.