If we banned all guns

[Bush92]

The only people that would benefit would be criminals and and the oppression minded liberals in Washington D.C.

 

[RDD_1210]

The only people that would benefit would be criminals and and the oppression minded liberals in Washington D.C.

And the conspiracy theorists who have nothing better to do than create strawman arguments on the internet.

 

[Spoonman]

No intelligent person thinks a total gun ban is feasible or practical.

No intelligent person is against common sense gun laws that prevent people who aren't capable of handling a gun from possessing one.

obviously gun grabbers aren't very intelligent people

And Bigfoot is real. Let me know when you're ready to discuss reality.

i'll give you a dose of reality. today there are well over 100 types of guns that are banned. 40 years ago there were like 2. 100 years ago there were none. a very alarming trend. every year more laws and more restrictive laws are passed. When you want to stop lying about your real intent and discuss reality you might get some cooperation. until that point you can expect to run up against a brick wall. a brick wall that is growing in size and strength year by year too.

 

[jillian]

i'll give you a dose of reality. today there are well over 100 types of guns that are banned. 40 years ago there were like 2. 100 years ago there were none. a very alarming trend. every year more laws and more restrictive laws are passed. When you want to stop lying about your real intent and discuss reality you might get some cooperation. until that point you can expect to run up against a brick wall. a brick wall that is growing in size and strength year by year too.

i'd say guns today are a lot more high-powered than they were 40 years ago.

that said, the AWB was a farce where one grip made an assault rifle but another grip on the same gun didn't.

we need effective background checks to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill and criminal. 90% of this country agrees with that. inaction on that simple front is just absurd. the proposed law allowing the family to intervene when they think their family member is a danger is actually an interesting proposal since who would know better than the family if the person they live with has issues that should keep weapons out of his hands.

 

[The Rabbi]

No intelligent person thinks a total gun ban is feasible or practical.

No intelligent person is against common sense gun laws that prevent people who aren't capable of handling a gun from possessing one.

Missed the first line of the OP, eh?
What are "common sense gun laws"? People crowed the '94 AWB was common sense. It didnt do anythng but enrich some dealers. No one wants to see people who shouldn't own guns owning guns. The problem is how you pass a law outlawing stupidity, ignorance, and apathy.

Common sense laws would involve mandatory hands on training, testing on a regular basis.
Tighter background checks on private sales.
Longer wait times for first time gun buyers.
No tolerance ownership policy for mental illness and convicted felons.

Those sort of laws would make sense in some iteration.

An iteration of Nazi Germany perhaps.
Tennessee requires an 8hr class and written and range test to get a carry permit.
Indiana requires you fill out a form and pay a fee.
The rate of "bad shoots" in both states is about the same.
We dont require people buying chainsaws to undergo training. And chainsaws have probably injured more people than guns. Anyone buying one ought to know they need instruction. And most do. The state shouldn't mandate what people ought to be able to do on their own.

Background checks will do notjhing on gun violence. Most guns used in crimes were stolen and resold out of the trunks of cars. No legislation will prevent that.
How will making people wait help any? What about the woman facing a stalker or violent husband who wants to protect herself? People have literally been killed waiting for their guns. In any case in the CT incident the shooter had applied to buy a gun but didnt want to go through the waiting period. So he killed his mom and stole her guns instead. The waiting period cost his mother her life.

The ATF prosecuted about 48 cases last year of prohibited people attempting to buy a gun. That was out of about 45,000 incidents.

So your proposals are the same crap the Left dishes out that have a proven record of failure.

 

[The Rabbi]

i'll give you a dose of reality. today there are well over 100 types of guns that are banned. 40 years ago there were like 2. 100 years ago there were none. a very alarming trend. every year more laws and more restrictive laws are passed. When you want to stop lying about your real intent and discuss reality you might get some cooperation. until that point you can expect to run up against a brick wall. a brick wall that is growing in size and strength year by year too.

i'd say guns today are a lot more high-powered than they were 40 years ago.

that said, the AWB was a farce where one grip made an assault rifle but another grip on the same gun didn't.

we need effective background checks to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill and criminal. 90% of this country agrees with that. inaction on that simple front is just absurd. the proposed law allowing the family to intervene when they think their family member is a danger is actually an interesting proposal since who would know better than the family if the person they live with has issues that should keep weapons out of his hands.

Poor low information moron.
Most crimes are committed with guns stolen. Why don't you pass a law making stealing guns illegal?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

No intelligent person thinks a total gun ban is feasible or practical.

No intelligent person is against common sense gun laws that prevent people who aren't capable of handling a gun from possessing one.

Missed the first line of the OP, eh?
What are "common sense gun laws"? People crowed the '94 AWB was common sense. It didnt do anythng but enrich some dealers. No one wants to see people who shouldn't own guns owning guns. The problem is how you pass a law outlawing stupidity, ignorance, and apathy.

Common sense laws would involve mandatory hands on training, testing on a regular basis.
Tighter background checks on private sales.
Longer wait times for first time gun buyers.
No tolerance ownership policy for mental illness and convicted felons.

Those sort of laws would make sense in some iteration.

So, in essence, training by a broke despondent govt that engages in endless spying, endless wars, never ending social engineering and other sordid goods. No thanks.

 

[Spoonman]

OK. let's say the Diane Feinsteins of the world got their wish and the US imposed a total ban on guns, no private citizen was allowed to own one. I realize the Supreme Court made that impossible, but let's say it's wet dream week at the DNC.
Then what?
The civil disobesdiance would make Prohibition look like child's play. If the gov't tried to enforce the edict going to house to house they would have a rebellion of major proportions in many places. Sure, not in Commieformia, where men are limp dicks. But in more rural areas, forget it. There isn't an army big enough to enforce that.

OK, so let's say we simply enacted "common sense" gun control like they want. Basically a re-enactment of the Assault Weapons Ban and other provisions like registration of guns, no private sales, etc.
We know what the old AWB did. Nothing. OK, not nothing It drove up the price of hi cap mags and pre ban weapons. It sure didnt stop a single shooting or crime. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over hoping for a different result.
There are over 300M guns in this country. The genie is not going back in the bottle.

You start with a stupid and false assumption and then build an argument to destroy it. How about this assumption: What if conservatives cared about America and wanted to move it into the 21st century rather than backward into the 18th century. Or what about this one: What if conservatives believed it was wrong to cheat in elections. Or maybe, what if conservatives cared about others instead of just themselves.

what exactly is moving into the 21st century? keeping people enslaved through entitlement programs?

 

[Little-Acorn]

i'd say guns today are a lot more high-powered than they were 40 years ago.

You'd be wrong, as usual.

And yet you have a vote.

(sigh)

 

[RDD_1210]

Missed the first line of the OP, eh?
What are "common sense gun laws"? People crowed the '94 AWB was common sense. It didnt do anythng but enrich some dealers. No one wants to see people who shouldn't own guns owning guns. The problem is how you pass a law outlawing stupidity, ignorance, and apathy.

Common sense laws would involve mandatory hands on training, testing on a regular basis.
Tighter background checks on private sales.
Longer wait times for first time gun buyers.
No tolerance ownership policy for mental illness and convicted felons.

Those sort of laws would make sense in some iteration.

An iteration of Nazi Germany perhaps.
Tennessee requires an 8hr class and written and range test to get a carry permit.
Indiana requires you fill out a form and pay a fee.
The rate of "bad shoots" in both states is about the same.
We dont require people buying chainsaws to undergo training. And chainsaws have probably injured more people than guns. Anyone buying one ought to know they need instruction. And most do. The state shouldn't mandate what people ought to be able to do on their own.

Background checks will do notjhing on gun violence. Most guns used in crimes were stolen and resold out of the trunks of cars. No legislation will prevent that.
How will making people wait help any? What about the woman facing a stalker or violent husband who wants to protect herself? People have literally been killed waiting for their guns. In any case in the CT incident the shooter had applied to buy a gun but didnt want to go through the waiting period. So he killed his mom and stole her guns instead. The waiting period cost his mother her life.

The ATF prosecuted about 48 cases last year of prohibited people attempting to buy a gun. That was out of about 45,000 incidents.

So your proposals are the same crap the Left dishes out that have a proven record of failure.

Like I said earlier.

No one with any ounce of intelligence would be against common sense laws that would ensure capable, mature people are able to own the firearms of their choice and restrict those who have shown they are not capable of that sort of responsibility from being able to gain access to firearms.

You are not an intelligent person so I not only would not expect you to even attempt to agree to and discuss anything rationally, I'll also so you have clearly demonstrated that you are not mature enough to own a gun yourself. You should not be permitted to own any sort of firearm.

 

[The Rabbi]

i'd say guns today are a lot more high-powered than they were 40 years ago.

You'd be wrong, as usual.

And yet you have a vote.

(sigh)

I dont think she's wrong on that count necessarily. The hi cap pistol, the very large caliber (500 magnum, 480 Ruger, 10mm) didnt exist. Yes, they had the .44mag in handguns.
The question is whether that really makes a difference. Most shootings are done with cheap semi autos, mostly smaller calibers.

 

[The Rabbi]

Common sense laws would involve mandatory hands on training, testing on a regular basis.
Tighter background checks on private sales.
Longer wait times for first time gun buyers.
No tolerance ownership policy for mental illness and convicted felons.

Those sort of laws would make sense in some iteration.

An iteration of Nazi Germany perhaps.
Tennessee requires an 8hr class and written and range test to get a carry permit.
Indiana requires you fill out a form and pay a fee.
The rate of "bad shoots" in both states is about the same.
We dont require people buying chainsaws to undergo training. And chainsaws have probably injured more people than guns. Anyone buying one ought to know they need instruction. And most do. The state shouldn't mandate what people ought to be able to do on their own.

Background checks will do notjhing on gun violence. Most guns used in crimes were stolen and resold out of the trunks of cars. No legislation will prevent that.
How will making people wait help any? What about the woman facing a stalker or violent husband who wants to protect herself? People have literally been killed waiting for their guns. In any case in the CT incident the shooter had applied to buy a gun but didnt want to go through the waiting period. So he killed his mom and stole her guns instead. The waiting period cost his mother her life.

The ATF prosecuted about 48 cases last year of prohibited people attempting to buy a gun. That was out of about 45,000 incidents.

So your proposals are the same crap the Left dishes out that have a proven record of failure.

Like I said earlier.

No one with any ounce of intelligence would be against common sense laws that would ensure capable, mature people are able to own the firearms of their choice and restrict those who have shown they are not capable of that sort of responsibility from being able to gain access to firearms.

You are not an intelligent person so I not only would not expect you to even attempt to agree to and discuss anything rationally, I'll also so you have clearly demonstrated that you are not mature enough to own a gun yourself. You should not be permitted to own any sort of firearm.

Idiot. I am a firearms dealer.

 

[Nosmo King]

Missed the first line of the OP, eh?
What are "common sense gun laws"? People crowed the '94 AWB was common sense. It didnt do anythng but enrich some dealers. No one wants to see people who shouldn't own guns owning guns. The problem is how you pass a law outlawing stupidity, ignorance, and apathy.

Common sense laws would involve mandatory hands on training, testing on a regular basis.
Tighter background checks on private sales.
Longer wait times for first time gun buyers.
No tolerance ownership policy for mental illness and convicted felons.

Those sort of laws would make sense in some iteration.

So, in essence, training by a broke despondent govt that engages in endless spying, endless wars, never ending social engineering and other sordid goods. No thanks.

Would you be proud if your son enlisted in the Marines?

Yet another part of "a broke despondent govt that engages in endless spying, endless wars, never ending social engineering and other sordid goods".

No solution will ever be offered up by gun nuts. They are either too unimaginative, or paranoid, or intellectually lazy. What a miserable way to go through life.

 

[The Rabbi]

Common sense laws would involve mandatory hands on training, testing on a regular basis.
Tighter background checks on private sales.
Longer wait times for first time gun buyers.
No tolerance ownership policy for mental illness and convicted felons.

Those sort of laws would make sense in some iteration.

So, in essence, training by a broke despondent govt that engages in endless spying, endless wars, never ending social engineering and other sordid goods. No thanks.

Would you be proud if your son enlisted in the Marines?

Yet another part of "a broke despondent govt that engages in endless spying, endless wars, never ending social engineering and other sordid goods".

No solution will ever be offered up by gun nuts. They are either too unimaginative, or paranoid, or intellectually lazy. What a miserable way to go through life.

I offered a solution. You didnt like it. So dont lie and say "gun nuts" sont offer solutions.
Your solutions suck. They are based on total ignorance of guns, how they work, how they are made, and how they have been regulated.

 

[Nosmo King]

First, I propose a TOTAL ban on the manufacture, sale, possession, import, export, trade, swap or bequest of all weapons with semi-automatic firing systems and magazines capable of holding greater than ten rounds. If strawmen can cross state lines and buy mass quantities of such weapons because single states already ban them, make the program national.

A ban on all weapons with barrel lengths shorter than six inches. Ownership of bolt action rifles, pump action shot guns and revolvers should not be interfered with.

....because students, roommates, and bystanders shot with a revolver or two (with speedloaders and/or quick-change cylinders) aren't nearly as "bad" as students, roommates, and bystanders shot by a semi-automatic pistol.

How stupid can these blinders-on gun-ban fanatics be?

It's as if we believed that speed limits would eradicate highway deaths. We know that's not the case, but it's both a start and a reduction in the problem.

If gun nuts ran highway safety, they would throw their hands in the air and declare that only those who do not obey the law are culpable for highway deaths and we have a right to speed.

No single solution proposed will TOTALLY ELIMINATE gun violence, but we should make a start to reduce it.

But that concept is foreign to the gun nut. He has his marching orders. He will toe the line. We will neither conceive nor support any notions to reduce gun violence because he feels that guns are not culpable in gun violence. And that's the twisted logic of the gun nut.

 

[Nosmo King]

So, in essence, training by a broke despondent govt that engages in endless spying, endless wars, never ending social engineering and other sordid goods. No thanks.

Would you be proud if your son enlisted in the Marines?

Yet another part of "a broke despondent govt that engages in endless spying, endless wars, never ending social engineering and other sordid goods".

No solution will ever be offered up by gun nuts. They are either too unimaginative, or paranoid, or intellectually lazy. What a miserable way to go through life.

I offered a solution. You didnt like it. So dont lie and say "gun nuts" sont offer solutions.
Your solutions suck. They are based on total ignorance of guns, how they work, how they are made, and how they have been regulated.

Your 'solution' is tantamount to fighting a house fire with cans of gasoline. Removing all restrictions on guns will only serve to add more guns to a street already flooded with guns and blood. And you say my solutions suck. you, gun makers, ammunition makers and funeral directors are the only folks hoping there are more guns out there to create gun violence.

 

[The Rabbi]

First, I propose a TOTAL ban on the manufacture, sale, possession, import, export, trade, swap or bequest of all weapons with semi-automatic firing systems and magazines capable of holding greater than ten rounds. If strawmen can cross state lines and buy mass quantities of such weapons because single states already ban them, make the program national.

A ban on all weapons with barrel lengths shorter than six inches. Ownership of bolt action rifles, pump action shot guns and revolvers should not be interfered with.

....because students, roommates, and bystanders shot with a revolver or two (with speedloaders and/or quick-change cylinders) aren't nearly as "bad" as students, roommates, and bystanders shot by a semi-automatic pistol.

How stupid can these blinders-on gun-ban fanatics be?

It's as if we believed that speed limits would eradicate highway deaths. We know that's not the case, but it's both a start and a reduction in the problem.

If gun nuts ran highway safety, they would throw their hands in the air and declare that only those who do not obey the law are culpable for highway deaths and we have a right to speed.

No single solution proposed will TOTALLY ELIMINATE gun violence, but we should make a start to reduce it.

But that concept is foreign to the gun nut. He has his marching orders. He will toe the line. We will neither conceive nor support any notions to reduce gun violence because he feels that guns are not culpable in gun violence. And that's the twisted logic of the gun nut.

We could all but eliminate highway deaths by making the speed limit 15MPH. That wont happen either. I gues liberals dont care about saving lives after all.

One impetus for the 55MPH national speed limit was to save lives. But states rebelled and in many places it's back up to 70. Because there are many considerations and saving lives is only one. We accept a certain level of risk in return for a level of freedom. Guns are no different.

 

[RDD_1210]

An iteration of Nazi Germany perhaps.
Tennessee requires an 8hr class and written and range test to get a carry permit.
Indiana requires you fill out a form and pay a fee.
The rate of "bad shoots" in both states is about the same.
We dont require people buying chainsaws to undergo training. And chainsaws have probably injured more people than guns. Anyone buying one ought to know they need instruction. And most do. The state shouldn't mandate what people ought to be able to do on their own.

Background checks will do notjhing on gun violence. Most guns used in crimes were stolen and resold out of the trunks of cars. No legislation will prevent that.
How will making people wait help any? What about the woman facing a stalker or violent husband who wants to protect herself? People have literally been killed waiting for their guns. In any case in the CT incident the shooter had applied to buy a gun but didnt want to go through the waiting period. So he killed his mom and stole her guns instead. The waiting period cost his mother her life.

The ATF prosecuted about 48 cases last year of prohibited people attempting to buy a gun. That was out of about 45,000 incidents.

So your proposals are the same crap the Left dishes out that have a proven record of failure.

Like I said earlier.

No one with any ounce of intelligence would be against common sense laws that would ensure capable, mature people are able to own the firearms of their choice and restrict those who have shown they are not capable of that sort of responsibility from being able to gain access to firearms.

You are not an intelligent person so I not only would not expect you to even attempt to agree to and discuss anything rationally, I'll also so you have clearly demonstrated that you are not mature enough to own a gun yourself. You should not be permitted to own any sort of firearm.

Idiot. I am a firearms dealer.

You were a firearms dealer. Your business closed down, remember.

And because you were doesn't mean you should be. Clearly laws need to be revamped to prevent people such as yourself from owning weapons purely designed to kill.

 

[The Rabbi]

Would you be proud if your son enlisted in the Marines?

Yet another part of "a broke despondent govt that engages in endless spying, endless wars, never ending social engineering and other sordid goods".

No solution will ever be offered up by gun nuts. They are either too unimaginative, or paranoid, or intellectually lazy. What a miserable way to go through life.

I offered a solution. You didnt like it. So dont lie and say "gun nuts" sont offer solutions.
Your solutions suck. They are based on total ignorance of guns, how they work, how they are made, and how they have been regulated.

Your 'solution' is tantamount to fighting a house fire with cans of gasoline. Removing all restrictions on guns will only serve to add more guns to a street already flooded with guns and blood. And you say my solutions suck. you, gun makers, ammunition makers and funeral directors are the only folks hoping there are more guns out there to create gun violence.

Guns dont create gun violence. People create gun violence.
My solution is tantamount to admitting the obvious: restricting guns when the problem is people is counterproductive and foolish.

 

[The Rabbi]

Like I said earlier.

No one with any ounce of intelligence would be against common sense laws that would ensure capable, mature people are able to own the firearms of their choice and restrict those who have shown they are not capable of that sort of responsibility from being able to gain access to firearms.

You are not an intelligent person so I not only would not expect you to even attempt to agree to and discuss anything rationally, I'll also so you have clearly demonstrated that you are not mature enough to own a gun yourself. You should not be permitted to own any sort of firearm.

Idiot. I am a firearms dealer.

You were a firearms dealer. Your business closed down, remember.

And because you were doesn't mean you should be. Clearly laws need to be revamped to prevent people such as yourself from owning weapons purely designed to kill.

I am a firearms dealer, asshole. I passed all the BG checks etc necessary to do that.
Clearly you would like laws revamped to punish people you dont like. Which is why you're a lib.