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

[Rustic]

Most of these mass shootings are done by leftists...

Sanity And socialism cannot coexist...

 

[Rustic]

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.

 

[OKTexas]

@skullpilot 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 t restrict gun ownership in those cases.

The problem is who gets to decide who gets a gun and who doesn't? How do you plan to keep guns away from criminals? Pass a law? Criminals always obey laws right?

I already said... criminal history... mental illness as a start. isn't that an objective standard?

If they are decided in court, and not just using the word of some anti-gun doctor or an arbitrary decision by some bureaucrat.

do you think judges are more equipped than doctors to make medical judgments? i'd think not. and they'd be just as likely to have their own opinions. and I certainly wouldn't want some NRA shill making those decisions.

so again, what's the appropriate answer? solve the problem since I think we can all agree that people who shouldn't have guns get them.

A doctors or bureaucrats opinion doesn't meet the definition of due process, a judges opinion does. You can't take away constitutional rights without due process.

 

[jillian]

unfettered gun ownership is no one's right.

Wrong. It's all Americans right.

Serious question Jill: Why should Pedophiles NOT own guns? Should they NOT defend themselves?

Prediction: You'll just laugh and not answer.

pedophiles shouldn't own guns because they have committed crimes against another person. fair enough?

i'm not laughing and I did answer. I was sort of expecting someone to ask that.

 

[jillian]

@skullpilot 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 t restrict gun ownership in those cases.

The problem is who gets to decide who gets a gun and who doesn't? How do you plan to keep guns away from criminals? Pass a law? Criminals always obey laws right?

I already said... criminal history... mental illness as a start. isn't that an objective standard?

If they are decided in court, and not just using the word of some anti-gun doctor or an arbitrary decision by some bureaucrat.

do you think judges are more equipped than doctors to make medical judgments? i'd think not. and they'd be just as likely to have their own opinions. and I certainly wouldn't want some NRA shill making those decisions.

so again, what's the appropriate answer? solve the problem since I think we can all agree that people who shouldn't have guns get them.

A doctors or bureaucrats opinion doesn't meet the definition of due process, a judges opinion does. You can't take away constitutional rights without due process.

see, I understand what you're saying in a due process sense. I do. but don't you think that extends the process? and, realistically, if someone suffers from mental illness, they're not going to a doctor because of their political affiliation, so I would expect the doctor to give an accurate assessment. (btw, what I do think is that no doctor is going to want to give a gun to a questionable person, not because of politics, but because of liability issues).

 

[RetiredGySgt]

unfettered gun ownership is no one's right.

Wrong. It's all Americans right.

Serious question Jill: Why should Pedophiles NOT own guns? Should they NOT defend themselves?

Prediction: You'll just laugh and not answer.

pedophiles shouldn't own guns because they have committed crimes against another person. fair enough?

i'm not laughing and I did answer. I was sort of expecting someone to ask that.

Any Felon is denied the right to own firearms. If convicted of pedophile I assume that is a felony. If not then YOU need to change the laws.

 

[jillian]

unfettered gun ownership is no one's right.

Wrong. It's all Americans right.

Serious question Jill: Why should Pedophiles NOT own guns? Should they NOT defend themselves?

Prediction: You'll just laugh and not answer.

pedophiles shouldn't own guns because they have committed crimes against another person. fair enough?

i'm not laughing and I did answer. I was sort of expecting someone to ask that.

Any Felon is denied the right to own firearms. If convicted of pedophile I assume that is a felony. If not then YOU need to change the laws.

not if their neighbor sells them the gun or a straw man buys it for them.

 

[martybegan]

unfettered gun ownership is no one's right.

Wrong. It's all Americans right.

Serious question Jill: Why should Pedophiles NOT own guns? Should they NOT defend themselves?

Prediction: You'll just laugh and not answer.

pedophiles shouldn't own guns because they have committed crimes against another person. fair enough?

i'm not laughing and I did answer. I was sort of expecting someone to ask that.

That would usually make them felons, and thus banned from ownership anyway.

 

[jillian]

unfettered gun ownership is no one's right.

Wrong. It's all Americans right.

Serious question Jill: Why should Pedophiles NOT own guns? Should they NOT defend themselves?

Prediction: You'll just laugh and not answer.

pedophiles shouldn't own guns because they have committed crimes against another person. fair enough?

i'm not laughing and I did answer. I was sort of expecting someone to ask that.

That would usually make them felons, and thus banned from ownership anyway.

and what do you do to the drinking buddy who sells them the gun?

 

[martybegan]

unfettered gun ownership is no one's right.

Wrong. It's all Americans right.

Serious question Jill: Why should Pedophiles NOT own guns? Should they NOT defend themselves?

Prediction: You'll just laugh and not answer.

pedophiles shouldn't own guns because they have committed crimes against another person. fair enough?

i'm not laughing and I did answer. I was sort of expecting someone to ask that.

Any Felon is denied the right to own firearms. If convicted of pedophile I assume that is a felony. If not then YOU need to change the laws.

not if their neighbor sells them the gun or a straw man buys it for them.

That's already illegal.

 

[martybegan]

unfettered gun ownership is no one's right.

Wrong. It's all Americans right.

Serious question Jill: Why should Pedophiles NOT own guns? Should they NOT defend themselves?

Prediction: You'll just laugh and not answer.

pedophiles shouldn't own guns because they have committed crimes against another person. fair enough?

i'm not laughing and I did answer. I was sort of expecting someone to ask that.

That would usually make them felons, and thus banned from ownership anyway.

and what do you do to the drinking buddy who sells them the gun?

That's already illegal. Prosecute the bastard, don't make me wait 3-6 months for a gun because of it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The problem is who gets to decide who gets a gun and who doesn't? How do you plan to keep guns away from criminals? Pass a law? Criminals always obey laws right?

I already said... criminal history... mental illness as a start. isn't that an objective standard?

If they are decided in court, and not just using the word of some anti-gun doctor or an arbitrary decision by some bureaucrat.

do you think judges are more equipped than doctors to make medical judgments? i'd think not. and they'd be just as likely to have their own opinions. and I certainly wouldn't want some NRA shill making those decisions.

so again, what's the appropriate answer? solve the problem since I think we can all agree that people who shouldn't have guns get them.

A doctors or bureaucrats opinion doesn't meet the definition of due process, a judges opinion does. You can't take away constitutional rights without due process.

see, I understand what you're saying in a due process sense. I do. but don't you think that extends the process? and, realistically, if someone suffers from mental illness, they're not going to a doctor because of their political affiliation, so I would expect the doctor to give an accurate assessment. (btw, what I do think is that no doctor is going to want to give a gun to a questionable person, not because of politics, but because of liability issues).

So you would allow a NON Judge to determine the ability of someone to have a right protected by the Constitution removed because you are scared? Why not allow cops to determine guilt in crimes, I mean they catch the guys doing it and the Judge is not a cop, they depend on expert testimony for that. Same thing.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

unfettered gun ownership is no one's right.

Wrong. It's all Americans right.

Serious question Jill: Why should Pedophiles NOT own guns? Should they NOT defend themselves?

Prediction: You'll just laugh and not answer.

pedophiles shouldn't own guns because they have committed crimes against another person. fair enough?

i'm not laughing and I did answer. I was sort of expecting someone to ask that.

Any Felon is denied the right to own firearms. If convicted of pedophile I assume that is a felony. If not then YOU need to change the laws.

not if their neighbor sells them the gun or a straw man buys it for them.

That is already ILLEGAL, we keep asking you how you would prevent that and you got no answer.

 

[Auld Phart]

unfettered gun ownership is no one's right.

Wrong. It's all Americans right.

Serious question Jill: Why should Pedophiles NOT own guns? Should they NOT defend themselves?

Prediction: You'll just laugh and not answer.

pedophiles shouldn't own guns because they have committed crimes against another person. fair enough?

i'm not laughing and I did answer. I was sort of expecting someone to ask that.

Any Felon is denied the right to own firearms. If convicted of pedophile I assume that is a felony. If not then YOU need to change the laws.

not if their neighbor sells them the gun or a straw man buys it for them.

not if their neighbor sells them the gun

Illegal for the felon to own a firearm, so the neighbor could be held as an accessory

or a straw man buys it for them.

Illegal, in any state.

 

[jillian]

I already said... criminal history... mental illness as a start. isn't that an objective standard?

If they are decided in court, and not just using the word of some anti-gun doctor or an arbitrary decision by some bureaucrat.

do you think judges are more equipped than doctors to make medical judgments? i'd think not. and they'd be just as likely to have their own opinions. and I certainly wouldn't want some NRA shill making those decisions.

so again, what's the appropriate answer? solve the problem since I think we can all agree that people who shouldn't have guns get them.

A doctors or bureaucrats opinion doesn't meet the definition of due process, a judges opinion does. You can't take away constitutional rights without due process.

see, I understand what you're saying in a due process sense. I do. but don't you think that extends the process? and, realistically, if someone suffers from mental illness, they're not going to a doctor because of their political affiliation, so I would expect the doctor to give an accurate assessment. (btw, what I do think is that no doctor is going to want to give a gun to a questionable person, not because of politics, but because of liability issues).

So you would allow a NON Judge to determine the ability of someone to have a right protected by the Constitution removed because you are scared? Why not allow cops to determine guilt in crimes, I mean they catch the guys doing it and the Judge is not a cop, they depend on expert testimony for that. Same thing.

funny... you would have a judge determine if a woman is fit to make decisions about her own body and follow a doctors advice.

i would think a judge should only be involved if someone IS denied a gun. then maybe they should have the right to challenge the medical determination or the determination of whatever authority might have denied them a gun.

but in the first instance? again, most people with mental illness don't ever get that illness adjudicated, as you know.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

If they are decided in court, and not just using the word of some anti-gun doctor or an arbitrary decision by some bureaucrat.

do you think judges are more equipped than doctors to make medical judgments? i'd think not. and they'd be just as likely to have their own opinions. and I certainly wouldn't want some NRA shill making those decisions.

so again, what's the appropriate answer? solve the problem since I think we can all agree that people who shouldn't have guns get them.

A doctors or bureaucrats opinion doesn't meet the definition of due process, a judges opinion does. You can't take away constitutional rights without due process.

see, I understand what you're saying in a due process sense. I do. but don't you think that extends the process? and, realistically, if someone suffers from mental illness, they're not going to a doctor because of their political affiliation, so I would expect the doctor to give an accurate assessment. (btw, what I do think is that no doctor is going to want to give a gun to a questionable person, not because of politics, but because of liability issues).

So you would allow a NON Judge to determine the ability of someone to have a right protected by the Constitution removed because you are scared? Why not allow cops to determine guilt in crimes, I mean they catch the guys doing it and the Judge is not a cop, they depend on expert testimony for that. Same thing.

funny... you would have a judge determine if a woman is fit to make decisions about her own body and follow a doctors advice.

i would think a judge should only be involved if someone IS denied a gun. then maybe they should have the right to challenge the medical determination or the determination of whatever authority might have denied them a gun.

but in the first instance? again, most people with mental illness don't ever get that illness adjudicated, as you know.

You are a lawyer you know it doesn't work that way yet you want it to anyway. So explain to me why I should be denied my RIGHT to own a firearm with no Court time BUT to deny a woman an abortion is different again?

 

[Contumacious]

The problem is who gets to decide who gets a gun and who doesn't? How do you plan to keep guns away from criminals? Pass a law? Criminals always obey laws right?

I already said... criminal history... mental illness as a start. isn't that an objective standard?

If they are decided in court, and not just using the word of some anti-gun doctor or an arbitrary decision by some bureaucrat.

do you think judges are more equipped than doctors to make medical judgments? i'd think not. and they'd be just as likely to have their own opinions. and I certainly wouldn't want some NRA shill making those decisions.

so again, what's the appropriate answer? solve the problem since I think we can all agree that people who shouldn't have guns get them.

A doctors or bureaucrats opinion doesn't meet the definition of due process, a judges opinion does. You can't take away constitutional rights without due process.

see, I understand what you're saying in a due process sense. I do. but don't you think that extends the process? and, realistically, if someone suffers from mental illness, they're not going to a doctor because of their political affiliation, so I would expect the doctor to give an accurate assessment. (btw, what I do think is that no doctor is going to want to give a gun to a questionable person, not because of politics, but because of liability issues).

Are you aware that nazi Germany, the former USSR, Cuba, Israhell consider dissenters as being "mentally ill"?


.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

@skullpilot 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 t restrict gun ownership in those cases.

The problem is who gets to decide who gets a gun and who doesn't? How do you plan to keep guns away from criminals? Pass a law? Criminals always obey laws right?

I already said... criminal history... mental illness as a start. isn't that an objective standard?

They'll just buy them off the street, like most of them do now. Some law saying they can't go into Academy and buy a brand new Glock won't accomplish squat.

 

[jillian]

Most of these mass shootings are done by leftists...

Sanity And socialism cannot coexist...

that's delusional, nutter.

but thanks for playing.

the Nazi sym[pathizer Dylan klepbold and the white supremacist dylann roof were not democrats.

damn, do you lie just for fun?

 

[Contumacious]

inconvenience is not an issue. no one has a right against inconvenience in purchasing a weapon when there is a societal interest.

Is that true?

Tell me "Counselor"... what legal principle legitimately infringes upon the convenience of the citizen to purchase a firearm, to which they are otherwise Constitutionally entitled?

I'm intrigued...

(Reader, you'll want to pay attention here... shit's about to get real)

Mr fucktard, sir:

We have EQUAL RIGHTS?


Which right authorizes you to investigate to see if I am qualified to bear arms?

We hold these truths to be self-evident,

that all men are created equal,

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,"


.