If you don't want guns don't buy them?

[Wry Catcher]

I will agree with this. Now, I ask how you plan to go about doing that.

As I stated earlier in the thread, there are already laws in place to prevent all those folks from getting guns, how's that working for ya?

people on the right keep saying that. obviously if the loopholes we're talking about don't exist (which they do) and if background checks were universal (which they aren't) then we need to punch up the laws.

btw, two of the weapons used in yesterday's mass shooting (of which we have had more this year than there are days in the year) were purchased legally.

funny I don't even hear the islamophobes demanding background checks for people on the no fly list.

Amazing you're back here for more abuse.
There are no loopholes.
CA already has universal background checks. As you point out, the shooters bought their guns legally, as is the case most times.
What laws would prevent law abiding citizens from buying guns?

Licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds sold. A simple process, any gun in the possession of an unlicensed person become a felony, a felony for the person possessing the weapon, and a felony and loss of the license (which requires all of the sellers other guns to be destroyed).

Thus, without a FFL any sale of a gun becomes a felony, and any sale by a holder of a FFL who sells a gun or ammo to an unlicensed person becomes a felony with a mandatory prison sentence.

How about those apples. This is what the NRA and its supporters will face, for a nation which experiences gun violence on the scale we are having, will eventually awaken and take these or more draconian action.

Some day people of good will will occupy The Congress, and actually put Country First. Some day the Supreme Court will understand the Second Amendment is a problem and needs to be reigned in for the US to become a civilized place to live.

That will do exactly nothing to stop any gun violence.
CA has licensing and registration. We have tried registering ammunition. Didnt work. Thats why we dont do itanymore. A person with a felony is already committing a felony by having a gun. CA already has universal background checks.
The shooters here bought their guns legally because they were law abiding people. At least until they werent.
So your suggestions have been tried and found to be worthless. Their sole aim seems to be sticking it to legal gun owners, not cutting down on crime.

You read and can't comprehend. I'm not sure, but I'm beginning to believe your dense comments are not contrived. Of course you are dishonest, but maybe you even fool yourself.

People obey laws because they support them, or because they fear the consequences if they get caught.

Thus, a gun lover like you, would likely obey gun laws rather than risk the loss of them, the fines associated with not obeying the law and the possible jail or prison sentence.

Thus, licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds of ammo purchased logged onto a national data base, with algorithms seeking anomalies associated with mass murderers and those on no fly lists, tied to FBI, State and Local Arrest records, including civil detentions for being a danger to themselves or others, has a good chance in saving lives and respecting a law abiding citizen's right to own, possess or have in his custody and control firearm.

 

[martybegan]

As I stated earlier in the thread, there are already laws in place to prevent all those folks from getting guns, how's that working for ya?

people on the right keep saying that. obviously if the loopholes we're talking about don't exist (which they do) and if background checks were universal (which they aren't) then we need to punch up the laws.

btw, two of the weapons used in yesterday's mass shooting (of which we have had more this year than there are days in the year) were purchased legally.

funny I don't even hear the islamophobes demanding background checks for people on the no fly list.

Amazing you're back here for more abuse.
There are no loopholes.
CA already has universal background checks. As you point out, the shooters bought their guns legally, as is the case most times.
What laws would prevent law abiding citizens from buying guns?

Licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds sold. A simple process, any gun in the possession of an unlicensed person become a felony, a felony for the person possessing the weapon, and a felony and loss of the license (which requires all of the sellers other guns to be destroyed).

Thus, without a FFL any sale of a gun becomes a felony, and any sale by a holder of a FFL who sells a gun or ammo to an unlicensed person becomes a felony with a mandatory prison sentence.

How about those apples. This is what the NRA and its supporters will face, for a nation which experiences gun violence on the scale we are having, will eventually awaken and take these or more draconian action.

Some day people of good will will occupy The Congress, and actually put Country First. Some day the Supreme Court will understand the Second Amendment is a problem and needs to be reigned in for the US to become a civilized place to live.

That will do exactly nothing to stop any gun violence.
CA has licensing and registration. We have tried registering ammunition. Didnt work. Thats why we dont do itanymore. A person with a felony is already committing a felony by having a gun. CA already has universal background checks.
The shooters here bought their guns legally because they were law abiding people. At least until they werent.
So your suggestions have been tried and found to be worthless. Their sole aim seems to be sticking it to legal gun owners, not cutting down on crime.

You read and can't comprehend. I'm not sure, but I'm beginning to believe your dense comments are not contrived. Of course you are dishonest, but maybe you even fool yourself.

People obey laws because they support them, or because they fear the consequences if they get caught.

Thus, a gun lover like you, would likely obey gun laws rather than risk the loss of them, the fines associated with not obeying the law and the possible jail or prison sentence.

Thus, licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds of ammo purchased logged onto a national data base, with algorithms seeking anomalies associated with mass murderers and those on no fly lists, tied to FBI, State and Local Arrest records, including civil detentions for being a danger to themselves or others, has a good chance in saving lives and respecting a law abiding citizen's right to own, possess or have in his custody and control firearm.

And all we have to do to accomplish this is turn the US into a police state.

No thank you.

 

[jillian]

Skull Pilot said "If you don't want a gun don't buy one" yet that is so beside the point

first, who says there aren't guns in my home?

second, that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep guns away from people who shouldn't have them... the nutters, the criminals, the spouse abusers, pedophiles...


most normal people understand the need to restrict gun ownership in those cases.

Where have I ever said convicted felons should have guns?

And you tell me how to stop wackos from getting guns

In fact I'm the only one here who has actually proposed a workable plan

Automatic life in prison without parole for any crime committed while possessing a firearm

That's how you stop gun crimes

i think keeping criminals and wackos from getting guns is a function of compiling readily accessible information. you might not like that, but fact is, it's pretty much the only way.... then making that information mandatory for sellers of guns to check in a national database. a waiting period after buying guns, if necessary, to get a full picture might also be appropriate.

the point is, that instead of people fighting against controls, perhaps it would be better if we dumped the NRA BS and work together to protect our society from the kinds of mass shooting we've been experiencing.

for the record, i think the participation of people who respect and understand guns is very important in achieving effective gun laws. I know how stupid some of the provisions of the AWB were and what the criteria were for defining automatic weapons making that law not only ineffective but absurd.

we can do better. we are the only civilized society that faces these problems with such regularity.

 

[martybegan]

Skull Pilot said "If you don't want a gun don't buy one" yet that is so beside the point

first, who says there aren't guns in my home?

second, that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep guns away from people who shouldn't have them... the nutters, the criminals, the spouse abusers, pedophiles...


most normal people understand the need to restrict gun ownership in those cases.

Where have I ever said convicted felons should have guns?

And you tell me how to stop wackos from getting guns

In fact I'm the only one here who has actually proposed a workable plan

Automatic life in prison without parole for any crime committed while possessing a firearm

That's how you stop gun crimes

i think keeping criminals and wackos from getting guns is a function of compiling readily accessible information. you might not like that, but fact is, it's pretty much the only way.... then making that information mandatory for sellers of guns to check in a national database. a waiting period after buying guns, if necessary, to get a full picture might also be appropriate.

the point is, that instead of people fighting against controls, perhaps it would be better if we dumped the NRA BS and work together to protect our society from the kinds of mass shooting we've been experiencing.

for the record, i think the participation of people who respect and understand guns is very important in achieving effective gun laws. I know how stupid some of the provisions of the AWB were and what the criteria were for defining automatic weapons making that law not only ineffective but absurd.

we can do better. we are the only civilized society that faces these problems with such regularity.

The problem is your side takes a small waiting period and turns it into 3-6 months of bullshit, as in NYC. Sorry, if you are given an inch, you take a mile. Until I can get a pistol permit, or a CCW without having to explain "why" to some government fucktard, no new laws, not an inch back.

Our side has compromised enough, your fucking turn.

 

[jillian]

Skull Pilot said "If you don't want a gun don't buy one" yet that is so beside the point

first, who says there aren't guns in my home?

second, that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep guns away from people who shouldn't have them... the nutters, the criminals, the spouse abusers, pedophiles...


most normal people understand the need to restrict gun ownership in those cases.

Where have I ever said convicted felons should have guns?

And you tell me how to stop wackos from getting guns

In fact I'm the only one here who has actually proposed a workable plan

Automatic life in prison without parole for any crime committed while possessing a firearm

That's how you stop gun crimes

i think keeping criminals and wackos from getting guns is a function of compiling readily accessible information. you might not like that, but fact is, it's pretty much the only way.... then making that information mandatory for sellers of guns to check in a national database. a waiting period after buying guns, if necessary, to get a full picture might also be appropriate.

the point is, that instead of people fighting against controls, perhaps it would be better if we dumped the NRA BS and work together to protect our society from the kinds of mass shooting we've been experiencing.

for the record, i think the participation of people who respect and understand guns is very important in achieving effective gun laws. I know how stupid some of the provisions of the AWB were and what the criteria were for defining automatic weapons making that law not only ineffective but absurd.

we can do better. we are the only civilized society that faces these problems with such regularity.

The problem is your side takes a small waiting period and turns it into 3-6 months of bullshit, as in NYC. Sorry, if you are given an inch, you take a mile. Until I can get a pistol permit, or a CCW without having to explain "why" to some government fucktard, no new laws, not an inch back.

Our side has compromised enough, your fucking turn.

first of all "my side" is finding a rational response to mass shootings. that should be all of our side.

what you *think* the waiting period will be is irrelevant. what is relevant is what the law says the waiting perior is.

 

[martybegan]

Skull Pilot said "If you don't want a gun don't buy one" yet that is so beside the point

first, who says there aren't guns in my home?

second, that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep guns away from people who shouldn't have them... the nutters, the criminals, the spouse abusers, pedophiles...


most normal people understand the need to restrict gun ownership in those cases.

Where have I ever said convicted felons should have guns?

And you tell me how to stop wackos from getting guns

In fact I'm the only one here who has actually proposed a workable plan

Automatic life in prison without parole for any crime committed while possessing a firearm

That's how you stop gun crimes

i think keeping criminals and wackos from getting guns is a function of compiling readily accessible information. you might not like that, but fact is, it's pretty much the only way.... then making that information mandatory for sellers of guns to check in a national database. a waiting period after buying guns, if necessary, to get a full picture might also be appropriate.

the point is, that instead of people fighting against controls, perhaps it would be better if we dumped the NRA BS and work together to protect our society from the kinds of mass shooting we've been experiencing.

for the record, i think the participation of people who respect and understand guns is very important in achieving effective gun laws. I know how stupid some of the provisions of the AWB were and what the criteria were for defining automatic weapons making that law not only ineffective but absurd.

we can do better. we are the only civilized society that faces these problems with such regularity.

The problem is your side takes a small waiting period and turns it into 3-6 months of bullshit, as in NYC. Sorry, if you are given an inch, you take a mile. Until I can get a pistol permit, or a CCW without having to explain "why" to some government fucktard, no new laws, not an inch back.

Our side has compromised enough, your fucking turn.

first of all "my side" is finding a rational response to mass shootings. that should be all of our side.

what you *think* the waiting period will be is irrelevant. what is relevant is what the law says the waiting perior is.

Your response isn't rational. Your side is given an inch, and takes a mile. Again, give me my rights back, then we can talk. Until then, Fuck. Off.

 

[The Rabbi]

As I stated earlier in the thread, there are already laws in place to prevent all those folks from getting guns, how's that working for ya?

people on the right keep saying that. obviously if the loopholes we're talking about don't exist (which they do) and if background checks were universal (which they aren't) then we need to punch up the laws.

btw, two of the weapons used in yesterday's mass shooting (of which we have had more this year than there are days in the year) were purchased legally.

funny I don't even hear the islamophobes demanding background checks for people on the no fly list.

Amazing you're back here for more abuse.
There are no loopholes.
CA already has universal background checks. As you point out, the shooters bought their guns legally, as is the case most times.
What laws would prevent law abiding citizens from buying guns?

Licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds sold. A simple process, any gun in the possession of an unlicensed person become a felony, a felony for the person possessing the weapon, and a felony and loss of the license (which requires all of the sellers other guns to be destroyed).

Thus, without a FFL any sale of a gun becomes a felony, and any sale by a holder of a FFL who sells a gun or ammo to an unlicensed person becomes a felony with a mandatory prison sentence.

How about those apples. This is what the NRA and its supporters will face, for a nation which experiences gun violence on the scale we are having, will eventually awaken and take these or more draconian action.

Some day people of good will will occupy The Congress, and actually put Country First. Some day the Supreme Court will understand the Second Amendment is a problem and needs to be reigned in for the US to become a civilized place to live.

That will do exactly nothing to stop any gun violence.
CA has licensing and registration. We have tried registering ammunition. Didnt work. Thats why we dont do itanymore. A person with a felony is already committing a felony by having a gun. CA already has universal background checks.
The shooters here bought their guns legally because they were law abiding people. At least until they werent.
So your suggestions have been tried and found to be worthless. Their sole aim seems to be sticking it to legal gun owners, not cutting down on crime.

You read and can't comprehend. I'm not sure, but I'm beginning to believe your dense comments are not contrived. Of course you are dishonest, but maybe you even fool yourself.

People obey laws because they support them, or because they fear the consequences if they get caught.

Thus, a gun lover like you, would likely obey gun laws rather than risk the loss of them, the fines associated with not obeying the law and the possible jail or prison sentence.

Thus, licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds of ammo purchased logged onto a national data base, with algorithms seeking anomalies associated with mass murderers and those on no fly lists, tied to FBI, State and Local Arrest records, including civil detentions for being a danger to themselves or others, has a good chance in saving lives and respecting a law abiding citizen's right to own, possess or have in his custody and control firearm.

We dont deny people basic rights because "there might be a good chance." I realize that goes against the fascist in you but surely somewhere between sucking prisoner cock you got some instruction on the Bill of Rights.
I'm not the gun owner you have to worry about. The gun owner you have to worry about already couldn't pass a background check.

 

[The Rabbi]

Skull Pilot said "If you don't want a gun don't buy one" yet that is so beside the point

first, who says there aren't guns in my home?

second, that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep guns away from people who shouldn't have them... the nutters, the criminals, the spouse abusers, pedophiles...


most normal people understand the need to restrict gun ownership in those cases.

Where have I ever said convicted felons should have guns?

And you tell me how to stop wackos from getting guns

In fact I'm the only one here who has actually proposed a workable plan

Automatic life in prison without parole for any crime committed while possessing a firearm

That's how you stop gun crimes

i think keeping criminals and wackos from getting guns is a function of compiling readily accessible information. you might not like that, but fact is, it's pretty much the only way.... then making that information mandatory for sellers of guns to check in a national database. a waiting period after buying guns, if necessary, to get a full picture might also be appropriate.

the point is, that instead of people fighting against controls, perhaps it would be better if we dumped the NRA BS and work together to protect our society from the kinds of mass shooting we've been experiencing.

for the record, i think the participation of people who respect and understand guns is very important in achieving effective gun laws. I know how stupid some of the provisions of the AWB were and what the criteria were for defining automatic weapons making that law not only ineffective but absurd.

we can do better. we are the only civilized society that faces these problems with such regularity.

The shooters in California legally bought their guns So did a bunch of others. There isnt a background check in the world that would have stopped them.
How'd that work out?
Background checks only stop law abiding citizens from buying guns.

 

[The Rabbi]

Skull Pilot said "If you don't want a gun don't buy one" yet that is so beside the point

first, who says there aren't guns in my home?

second, that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep guns away from people who shouldn't have them... the nutters, the criminals, the spouse abusers, pedophiles...


most normal people understand the need to restrict gun ownership in those cases.

Where have I ever said convicted felons should have guns?

And you tell me how to stop wackos from getting guns

In fact I'm the only one here who has actually proposed a workable plan

Automatic life in prison without parole for any crime committed while possessing a firearm

That's how you stop gun crimes

i think keeping criminals and wackos from getting guns is a function of compiling readily accessible information. you might not like that, but fact is, it's pretty much the only way.... then making that information mandatory for sellers of guns to check in a national database. a waiting period after buying guns, if necessary, to get a full picture might also be appropriate.

the point is, that instead of people fighting against controls, perhaps it would be better if we dumped the NRA BS and work together to protect our society from the kinds of mass shooting we've been experiencing.

for the record, i think the participation of people who respect and understand guns is very important in achieving effective gun laws. I know how stupid some of the provisions of the AWB were and what the criteria were for defining automatic weapons making that law not only ineffective but absurd.

we can do better. we are the only civilized society that faces these problems with such regularity.

The problem is your side takes a small waiting period and turns it into 3-6 months of bullshit, as in NYC. Sorry, if you are given an inch, you take a mile. Until I can get a pistol permit, or a CCW without having to explain "why" to some government fucktard, no new laws, not an inch back.

Our side has compromised enough, your fucking turn.

first of all "my side" is finding a rational response to mass shootings. that should be all of our side.

what you *think* the waiting period will be is irrelevant. what is relevant is what the law says the waiting perior is.

LOL!
What kind of rational response is "We need to do more of what has already failed"?

 

[Wry Catcher]

people on the right keep saying that. obviously if the loopholes we're talking about don't exist (which they do) and if background checks were universal (which they aren't) then we need to punch up the laws.

btw, two of the weapons used in yesterday's mass shooting (of which we have had more this year than there are days in the year) were purchased legally.

funny I don't even hear the islamophobes demanding background checks for people on the no fly list.

Amazing you're back here for more abuse.
There are no loopholes.
CA already has universal background checks. As you point out, the shooters bought their guns legally, as is the case most times.
What laws would prevent law abiding citizens from buying guns?

Licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds sold. A simple process, any gun in the possession of an unlicensed person become a felony, a felony for the person possessing the weapon, and a felony and loss of the license (which requires all of the sellers other guns to be destroyed).

Thus, without a FFL any sale of a gun becomes a felony, and any sale by a holder of a FFL who sells a gun or ammo to an unlicensed person becomes a felony with a mandatory prison sentence.

How about those apples. This is what the NRA and its supporters will face, for a nation which experiences gun violence on the scale we are having, will eventually awaken and take these or more draconian action.

Some day people of good will will occupy The Congress, and actually put Country First. Some day the Supreme Court will understand the Second Amendment is a problem and needs to be reigned in for the US to become a civilized place to live.

That will do exactly nothing to stop any gun violence.
CA has licensing and registration. We have tried registering ammunition. Didnt work. Thats why we dont do itanymore. A person with a felony is already committing a felony by having a gun. CA already has universal background checks.
The shooters here bought their guns legally because they were law abiding people. At least until they werent.
So your suggestions have been tried and found to be worthless. Their sole aim seems to be sticking it to legal gun owners, not cutting down on crime.

You read and can't comprehend. I'm not sure, but I'm beginning to believe your dense comments are not contrived. Of course you are dishonest, but maybe you even fool yourself.

People obey laws because they support them, or because they fear the consequences if they get caught.

Thus, a gun lover like you, would likely obey gun laws rather than risk the loss of them, the fines associated with not obeying the law and the possible jail or prison sentence.

Thus, licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds of ammo purchased logged onto a national data base, with algorithms seeking anomalies associated with mass murderers and those on no fly lists, tied to FBI, State and Local Arrest records, including civil detentions for being a danger to themselves or others, has a good chance in saving lives and respecting a law abiding citizen's right to own, possess or have in his custody and control firearm.

And all we have to do to accomplish this is turn the US into a police state.

No thank you.

Where we stand on the dichotomy of Security and Freedom is determined by independent variables, the elephant in the room being radical Islam, but historically there are others as violent and radical: The SLA, McVeigh & unregulated militias, Street Gangs, the Unabomber and the Olympic bomber, to name but a few.

Note, murder is investigated by Motive, Opportunity and Means. Efforts to control Means and Opportunity can be effective, Motive is not easy to confirm before or after an event.

We can put our heads in the sand, and pretend the Second Amendment is the most important part of the COTUS, one that protects our nation from tyranny, but that opinion was codified for the first time by Scalia, and the blood of the innocents murdered yesterday, and everyday this year by a gun, are on his hands..

 

[The Rabbi]

Amazing you're back here for more abuse.
There are no loopholes.
CA already has universal background checks. As you point out, the shooters bought their guns legally, as is the case most times.
What laws would prevent law abiding citizens from buying guns?

Licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds sold. A simple process, any gun in the possession of an unlicensed person become a felony, a felony for the person possessing the weapon, and a felony and loss of the license (which requires all of the sellers other guns to be destroyed).

Thus, without a FFL any sale of a gun becomes a felony, and any sale by a holder of a FFL who sells a gun or ammo to an unlicensed person becomes a felony with a mandatory prison sentence.

How about those apples. This is what the NRA and its supporters will face, for a nation which experiences gun violence on the scale we are having, will eventually awaken and take these or more draconian action.

Some day people of good will will occupy The Congress, and actually put Country First. Some day the Supreme Court will understand the Second Amendment is a problem and needs to be reigned in for the US to become a civilized place to live.

That will do exactly nothing to stop any gun violence.
CA has licensing and registration. We have tried registering ammunition. Didnt work. Thats why we dont do itanymore. A person with a felony is already committing a felony by having a gun. CA already has universal background checks.
The shooters here bought their guns legally because they were law abiding people. At least until they werent.
So your suggestions have been tried and found to be worthless. Their sole aim seems to be sticking it to legal gun owners, not cutting down on crime.

You read and can't comprehend. I'm not sure, but I'm beginning to believe your dense comments are not contrived. Of course you are dishonest, but maybe you even fool yourself.

People obey laws because they support them, or because they fear the consequences if they get caught.

Thus, a gun lover like you, would likely obey gun laws rather than risk the loss of them, the fines associated with not obeying the law and the possible jail or prison sentence.

Thus, licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds of ammo purchased logged onto a national data base, with algorithms seeking anomalies associated with mass murderers and those on no fly lists, tied to FBI, State and Local Arrest records, including civil detentions for being a danger to themselves or others, has a good chance in saving lives and respecting a law abiding citizen's right to own, possess or have in his custody and control firearm.

And all we have to do to accomplish this is turn the US into a police state.

No thank you.

Where we stand on the dichotomy of Security and Freedom is determined by independent variables, the elephant in the room being radical Islam, but historically there are others as violent and radical: The SLA, McVeigh & unregulated militias, Street Gangs, the Unabomber and the Olympic bomber, to name but a few.

Note, murder is investigated by Motive, Opportunity and Means. Efforts to control Means and Opportunity can be effective, Motive is not easy to confirm before or after an event.

We can put our heads in the sand, and pretend the Second Amendment is the most important part of the COTUS, one that protects our nation from tyranny, but that opinion was codified for the first time by Scalia, and the blood of the innocents murdered yesterday, and everyday this year by a gun, are on his hands..

Drama queen.

We did not suspend the Constitution or any part of it in response to McVeigh or any other incident. We shouldnt start now.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

California has registration of firearms right? Which means the shooter that LEGALLY bought his firearms had them registered. Remind me how that stopped the shootings?

You people amaze me. You won't agree to put mentally ill people in hospitals nor require doctors to put them in facilities to protect them and us but then whine about crazies on the street. You won't admit gun registration does not work and demand more of it. You won't admit we already have background checks and they did not stop any of the recent shootings but demand more.

You won't authorize the cops or the Military to handle the gang problems in our inner cities that lead to almost ALL the shootings and whine about it daily.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Skull Pilot said "If you don't want a gun don't buy one" yet that is so beside the point

first, who says there aren't guns in my home?

second, that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep guns away from people who shouldn't have them... the nutters, the criminals, the spouse abusers, pedophiles...


most normal people understand the need to restrict gun ownership in those cases.

Where have I ever said convicted felons should have guns?

And you tell me how to stop wackos from getting guns

In fact I'm the only one here who has actually proposed a workable plan

Automatic life in prison without parole for any crime committed while possessing a firearm

That's how you stop gun crimes

i think keeping criminals and wackos from getting guns is a function of compiling readily accessible information. you might not like that, but fact is, it's pretty much the only way.... then making that information mandatory for sellers of guns to check in a national database. a waiting period after buying guns, if necessary, to get a full picture might also be appropriate.

the point is, that instead of people fighting against controls, perhaps it would be better if we dumped the NRA BS and work together to protect our society from the kinds of mass shooting we've been experiencing.

for the record, i think the participation of people who respect and understand guns is very important in achieving effective gun laws. I know how stupid some of the provisions of the AWB were and what the criteria were for defining automatic weapons making that law not only ineffective but absurd.

we can do better. we are the only civilized society that faces these problems with such regularity.

So how do you know if a person is mentally ill if there is no record of it?

And what do you propose that medical records be made public?

DId you ever think that maybe it's us and not the guns?

Americans are a violent breed

 

[martybegan]

Amazing you're back here for more abuse.
There are no loopholes.
CA already has universal background checks. As you point out, the shooters bought their guns legally, as is the case most times.
What laws would prevent law abiding citizens from buying guns?

Licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds sold. A simple process, any gun in the possession of an unlicensed person become a felony, a felony for the person possessing the weapon, and a felony and loss of the license (which requires all of the sellers other guns to be destroyed).

Thus, without a FFL any sale of a gun becomes a felony, and any sale by a holder of a FFL who sells a gun or ammo to an unlicensed person becomes a felony with a mandatory prison sentence.

How about those apples. This is what the NRA and its supporters will face, for a nation which experiences gun violence on the scale we are having, will eventually awaken and take these or more draconian action.

Some day people of good will will occupy The Congress, and actually put Country First. Some day the Supreme Court will understand the Second Amendment is a problem and needs to be reigned in for the US to become a civilized place to live.

That will do exactly nothing to stop any gun violence.
CA has licensing and registration. We have tried registering ammunition. Didnt work. Thats why we dont do itanymore. A person with a felony is already committing a felony by having a gun. CA already has universal background checks.
The shooters here bought their guns legally because they were law abiding people. At least until they werent.
So your suggestions have been tried and found to be worthless. Their sole aim seems to be sticking it to legal gun owners, not cutting down on crime.

You read and can't comprehend. I'm not sure, but I'm beginning to believe your dense comments are not contrived. Of course you are dishonest, but maybe you even fool yourself.

People obey laws because they support them, or because they fear the consequences if they get caught.

Thus, a gun lover like you, would likely obey gun laws rather than risk the loss of them, the fines associated with not obeying the law and the possible jail or prison sentence.

Thus, licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds of ammo purchased logged onto a national data base, with algorithms seeking anomalies associated with mass murderers and those on no fly lists, tied to FBI, State and Local Arrest records, including civil detentions for being a danger to themselves or others, has a good chance in saving lives and respecting a law abiding citizen's right to own, possess or have in his custody and control firearm.

And all we have to do to accomplish this is turn the US into a police state.

No thank you.

Where we stand on the dichotomy of Security and Freedom is determined by independent variables, the elephant in the room being radical Islam, but historically there are others as violent and radical: The SLA, McVeigh & unregulated militias, Street Gangs, the Unabomber and the Olympic bomber, to name but a few.

Note, murder is investigated by Motive, Opportunity and Means. Efforts to control Means and Opportunity can be effective, Motive is not easy to confirm before or after an event.

We can put our heads in the sand, and pretend the Second Amendment is the most important part of the COTUS, one that protects our nation from tyranny, but that opinion was codified for the first time by Scalia, and the blood of the innocents murdered yesterday, and everyday this year by a gun, are on his hands..

Again, how is restricting my 2nd amendment rights going to prevent someone else from shooting up someplace?

You always run to Scalia to place blame, but the fact is the RKBA has always been around, the curtailing of it started in the 20's and 30's due to prohibition. All he did was put to paper the concept this country was founded on, that each individual has the right to be armed to protect themselves and their way of life. Government does not have the sole right to use force, it resides with the people.

You want to try to change that, while providing no promise that the methods you use would lead to us being any safer than we are now.

And yet you argue vehemently about rights that ARE NOT EVEN IN THE DOCUMENT, and for some reason have more sway than something explicitly listed, as MY RIGHT as a member of "the people".

 

[OKTexas]

Buy more guns and ammo...

Why does the USA have more mass shootings than any other country per capita by a huge amount.

Because of absolutely disgusting human beings like Rustic. It is gun mentality shown by Rustic not just the easy access to guns.
It is a mentality that guns can solve all problems. It is a sick mind set. He/she may not be a mass killer but he/she provides an atmosphere that the mass killers thrive.

You sir are totally full of shit. We have an open society, people will do bad things because evil does exist and no one is enabling it, it thrives because of our lax standards of behavior. If anyone is enabling it, that would be the left and their relative moralism, they are the ones making excuses for terrorist and thugs.

You are correct that people will do bad things no matter what. BUT the bad things they do are influenced by the society around them. Why does the USA have more mass killings and gun deaths per capita than any other western country?
I tell you why, because of idiots like you are in denial about our society's view about the use of guns. There are many actions we can all take to protect gun possession for the right people and the right purpose. Idiots like you are saying gun possession for all for what ever reason you need it for. And there are idiots doing exactly what you profess. Too many idiots.

Hey dummy, it not responsible gun owners who are pushing or glorifying the use of guns to solve problems. You would need to take a close look at the entertainment industry to nail that culprit. At this point in time, Gansta Rap, Hip Hop, movies and TV have been pushing the hell out of "violence is the solution" for a few decades now. Add to that the lefts moral relativist attitudes, making excuses for bad people doing bad things and you get what you've got. What the regressives answer, put the mentally ill on the streets, release more felons from jail early and legalize the drug culture, it's only going to get worse.

This thing that just happened in CA was a well planned, well executed terrorist attack. There were months of planning, creating the IED's they found at the location and the couples home and a married couple doesn't orphan their 6 month old child to settle a work dispute.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds sold. A simple process, any gun in the possession of an unlicensed person become a felony, a felony for the person possessing the weapon, and a felony and loss of the license (which requires all of the sellers other guns to be destroyed).

Thus, without a FFL any sale of a gun becomes a felony, and any sale by a holder of a FFL who sells a gun or ammo to an unlicensed person becomes a felony with a mandatory prison sentence.

How about those apples. This is what the NRA and its supporters will face, for a nation which experiences gun violence on the scale we are having, will eventually awaken and take these or more draconian action.

Some day people of good will will occupy The Congress, and actually put Country First. Some day the Supreme Court will understand the Second Amendment is a problem and needs to be reigned in for the US to become a civilized place to live.

That will do exactly nothing to stop any gun violence.
CA has licensing and registration. We have tried registering ammunition. Didnt work. Thats why we dont do itanymore. A person with a felony is already committing a felony by having a gun. CA already has universal background checks.
The shooters here bought their guns legally because they were law abiding people. At least until they werent.
So your suggestions have been tried and found to be worthless. Their sole aim seems to be sticking it to legal gun owners, not cutting down on crime.

You read and can't comprehend. I'm not sure, but I'm beginning to believe your dense comments are not contrived. Of course you are dishonest, but maybe you even fool yourself.

People obey laws because they support them, or because they fear the consequences if they get caught.

Thus, a gun lover like you, would likely obey gun laws rather than risk the loss of them, the fines associated with not obeying the law and the possible jail or prison sentence.

Thus, licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds of ammo purchased logged onto a national data base, with algorithms seeking anomalies associated with mass murderers and those on no fly lists, tied to FBI, State and Local Arrest records, including civil detentions for being a danger to themselves or others, has a good chance in saving lives and respecting a law abiding citizen's right to own, possess or have in his custody and control firearm.

And all we have to do to accomplish this is turn the US into a police state.

No thank you.

Where we stand on the dichotomy of Security and Freedom is determined by independent variables, the elephant in the room being radical Islam, but historically there are others as violent and radical: The SLA, McVeigh & unregulated militias, Street Gangs, the Unabomber and the Olympic bomber, to name but a few.

Note, murder is investigated by Motive, Opportunity and Means. Efforts to control Means and Opportunity can be effective, Motive is not easy to confirm before or after an event.

We can put our heads in the sand, and pretend the Second Amendment is the most important part of the COTUS, one that protects our nation from tyranny, but that opinion was codified for the first time by Scalia, and the blood of the innocents murdered yesterday, and everyday this year by a gun, are on his hands..

Drama queen.

We did not suspend the Constitution or any part of it in response to McVeigh or any other incident. We shouldnt start now.

Why shouldn't we discuss the viability of some parts of the COTUS, written in the 18th Century, as sufficient and necessary for a diverse nation in the 21st Century?

Should a State population be reduced by the number of ancestors of former slaves and native Americans (Art. I, Sec. I, Clause 3) and thus reduce the number of seats the state has in the H. of Reps.?

Why shouldn't POTUS have the line-item veto, we can then see the person or the persons who voted to keep or not pork in the national budget?

Let's modify the Second Amendment, to create a clear statement:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of each state to regulate, train and arm its corp shall not be infringed; nor shall any state infringe the right of its citizens to vote in any general election."​

 

[The Rabbi]

That will do exactly nothing to stop any gun violence.
CA has licensing and registration. We have tried registering ammunition. Didnt work. Thats why we dont do itanymore. A person with a felony is already committing a felony by having a gun. CA already has universal background checks.
The shooters here bought their guns legally because they were law abiding people. At least until they werent.
So your suggestions have been tried and found to be worthless. Their sole aim seems to be sticking it to legal gun owners, not cutting down on crime.

You read and can't comprehend. I'm not sure, but I'm beginning to believe your dense comments are not contrived. Of course you are dishonest, but maybe you even fool yourself.

People obey laws because they support them, or because they fear the consequences if they get caught.

Thus, a gun lover like you, would likely obey gun laws rather than risk the loss of them, the fines associated with not obeying the law and the possible jail or prison sentence.

Thus, licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds of ammo purchased logged onto a national data base, with algorithms seeking anomalies associated with mass murderers and those on no fly lists, tied to FBI, State and Local Arrest records, including civil detentions for being a danger to themselves or others, has a good chance in saving lives and respecting a law abiding citizen's right to own, possess or have in his custody and control firearm.

And all we have to do to accomplish this is turn the US into a police state.

No thank you.

Where we stand on the dichotomy of Security and Freedom is determined by independent variables, the elephant in the room being radical Islam, but historically there are others as violent and radical: The SLA, McVeigh & unregulated militias, Street Gangs, the Unabomber and the Olympic bomber, to name but a few.

Note, murder is investigated by Motive, Opportunity and Means. Efforts to control Means and Opportunity can be effective, Motive is not easy to confirm before or after an event.

We can put our heads in the sand, and pretend the Second Amendment is the most important part of the COTUS, one that protects our nation from tyranny, but that opinion was codified for the first time by Scalia, and the blood of the innocents murdered yesterday, and everyday this year by a gun, are on his hands..

Drama queen.

We did not suspend the Constitution or any part of it in response to McVeigh or any other incident. We shouldnt start now.

Why shouldn't we discuss the viability of some parts of the COTUS, written in the 18th Century, as sufficient and necessary for a diverse nation in the 21st Century?

Should a State population be reduced by the number of ancestors of former slaves and native Americans (Art. I, Sec. I, Clause 3) and thus reduce the number of seats the state has in the H. of Reps.?

Why shouldn't POTUS have the line-item veto, we can then see the person or the persons who voted to keep or not pork in the national budget?

Let's modify the Second Amendment, to create a clear statement:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of each state to regulate, train and arm its corp shall not be infringed; nor shall any state infringe the right of its citizens to vote in any general election."​

We can add the COnstitution to things you know nothing about.
The census directed counting of some Indians and slaves by 3/5ths. It says nothing about people's ancestors.
The POTUS has the line item veto, if I recall correctly. It isnt a constitutional issue but a statutory one.
You are welcome to try amending the 2nd. Good luck.

 

[martybegan]

That will do exactly nothing to stop any gun violence.
CA has licensing and registration. We have tried registering ammunition. Didnt work. Thats why we dont do itanymore. A person with a felony is already committing a felony by having a gun. CA already has universal background checks.
The shooters here bought their guns legally because they were law abiding people. At least until they werent.
So your suggestions have been tried and found to be worthless. Their sole aim seems to be sticking it to legal gun owners, not cutting down on crime.

You read and can't comprehend. I'm not sure, but I'm beginning to believe your dense comments are not contrived. Of course you are dishonest, but maybe you even fool yourself.

People obey laws because they support them, or because they fear the consequences if they get caught.

Thus, a gun lover like you, would likely obey gun laws rather than risk the loss of them, the fines associated with not obeying the law and the possible jail or prison sentence.

Thus, licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds of ammo purchased logged onto a national data base, with algorithms seeking anomalies associated with mass murderers and those on no fly lists, tied to FBI, State and Local Arrest records, including civil detentions for being a danger to themselves or others, has a good chance in saving lives and respecting a law abiding citizen's right to own, possess or have in his custody and control firearm.

And all we have to do to accomplish this is turn the US into a police state.

No thank you.

Where we stand on the dichotomy of Security and Freedom is determined by independent variables, the elephant in the room being radical Islam, but historically there are others as violent and radical: The SLA, McVeigh & unregulated militias, Street Gangs, the Unabomber and the Olympic bomber, to name but a few.

Note, murder is investigated by Motive, Opportunity and Means. Efforts to control Means and Opportunity can be effective, Motive is not easy to confirm before or after an event.

We can put our heads in the sand, and pretend the Second Amendment is the most important part of the COTUS, one that protects our nation from tyranny, but that opinion was codified for the first time by Scalia, and the blood of the innocents murdered yesterday, and everyday this year by a gun, are on his hands..

Drama queen.

We did not suspend the Constitution or any part of it in response to McVeigh or any other incident. We shouldnt start now.

Why shouldn't we discuss the viability of some parts of the COTUS, written in the 18th Century, as sufficient and necessary for a diverse nation in the 21st Century?

Should a State population be reduced by the number of ancestors of former slaves and native Americans (Art. I, Sec. I, Clause 3) and thus reduce the number of seats the state has in the H. of Reps.?

Why shouldn't POTUS have the line-item veto, we can then see the person or the persons who voted to keep or not pork in the national budget?

Let's modify the Second Amendment, to create a clear statement:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of each state to regulate, train and arm its corp shall not be infringed; nor shall any state infringe the right of its citizens to vote in any general election."​

Not gonna fly. so basically the State government can decide I don't "deserve" to protect myself with a fire arm,.

The whole idea is the PEOPLE keep the right to arms, not the States, not the Feds, not some piss ant city government.

If you want that, then disarm the police as well. If they get guns, I get guns.

 

[The Rabbi]

You read and can't comprehend. I'm not sure, but I'm beginning to believe your dense comments are not contrived. Of course you are dishonest, but maybe you even fool yourself.

People obey laws because they support them, or because they fear the consequences if they get caught.

Thus, a gun lover like you, would likely obey gun laws rather than risk the loss of them, the fines associated with not obeying the law and the possible jail or prison sentence.

Thus, licensing, registration and an accounting of the number of rounds of ammo purchased logged onto a national data base, with algorithms seeking anomalies associated with mass murderers and those on no fly lists, tied to FBI, State and Local Arrest records, including civil detentions for being a danger to themselves or others, has a good chance in saving lives and respecting a law abiding citizen's right to own, possess or have in his custody and control firearm.

And all we have to do to accomplish this is turn the US into a police state.

No thank you.

Where we stand on the dichotomy of Security and Freedom is determined by independent variables, the elephant in the room being radical Islam, but historically there are others as violent and radical: The SLA, McVeigh & unregulated militias, Street Gangs, the Unabomber and the Olympic bomber, to name but a few.

Note, murder is investigated by Motive, Opportunity and Means. Efforts to control Means and Opportunity can be effective, Motive is not easy to confirm before or after an event.

We can put our heads in the sand, and pretend the Second Amendment is the most important part of the COTUS, one that protects our nation from tyranny, but that opinion was codified for the first time by Scalia, and the blood of the innocents murdered yesterday, and everyday this year by a gun, are on his hands..

Drama queen.

We did not suspend the Constitution or any part of it in response to McVeigh or any other incident. We shouldnt start now.

Why shouldn't we discuss the viability of some parts of the COTUS, written in the 18th Century, as sufficient and necessary for a diverse nation in the 21st Century?

Should a State population be reduced by the number of ancestors of former slaves and native Americans (Art. I, Sec. I, Clause 3) and thus reduce the number of seats the state has in the H. of Reps.?

Why shouldn't POTUS have the line-item veto, we can then see the person or the persons who voted to keep or not pork in the national budget?

Let's modify the Second Amendment, to create a clear statement:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of each state to regulate, train and arm its corp shall not be infringed; nor shall any state infringe the right of its citizens to vote in any general election."​

Not gonna fly. so basically the State government can decide I don't "deserve" to protect myself with a fire arm,.

The whole idea is the PEOPLE keep the right to arms, not the States, not the Feds, not some piss ant city government.

If you want that, then disarm the police as well. If they get guns, I get guns.

Thats essentially the law in NYC and some other places. You have to apply for a permit and show some "good reason" why you need one. That it's your constitutional right somehow doesnt enter into it.

 

[martybegan]

And all we have to do to accomplish this is turn the US into a police state.

No thank you.

Where we stand on the dichotomy of Security and Freedom is determined by independent variables, the elephant in the room being radical Islam, but historically there are others as violent and radical: The SLA, McVeigh & unregulated militias, Street Gangs, the Unabomber and the Olympic bomber, to name but a few.

Note, murder is investigated by Motive, Opportunity and Means. Efforts to control Means and Opportunity can be effective, Motive is not easy to confirm before or after an event.

We can put our heads in the sand, and pretend the Second Amendment is the most important part of the COTUS, one that protects our nation from tyranny, but that opinion was codified for the first time by Scalia, and the blood of the innocents murdered yesterday, and everyday this year by a gun, are on his hands..

Drama queen.

We did not suspend the Constitution or any part of it in response to McVeigh or any other incident. We shouldnt start now.

Why shouldn't we discuss the viability of some parts of the COTUS, written in the 18th Century, as sufficient and necessary for a diverse nation in the 21st Century?

Should a State population be reduced by the number of ancestors of former slaves and native Americans (Art. I, Sec. I, Clause 3) and thus reduce the number of seats the state has in the H. of Reps.?

Why shouldn't POTUS have the line-item veto, we can then see the person or the persons who voted to keep or not pork in the national budget?

Let's modify the Second Amendment, to create a clear statement:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of each state to regulate, train and arm its corp shall not be infringed; nor shall any state infringe the right of its citizens to vote in any general election."​

Not gonna fly. so basically the State government can decide I don't "deserve" to protect myself with a fire arm,.

The whole idea is the PEOPLE keep the right to arms, not the States, not the Feds, not some piss ant city government.

If you want that, then disarm the police as well. If they get guns, I get guns.

Thats essentially the law in NYC and some other places. You have to apply for a permit and show some "good reason" why you need one. That it's your constitutional right somehow doesnt enter into it.

I've been bitching about that over about 5 different theads. The whole purpose of NYC's laws is to make it so difficult to get a gun that you give up.

You only need their permission for CCW's, but even a home permit for a handgun takes 3-6 months and costs $1000 dollars.