Is Politicizing Tragedy Wrong?

[BULLDOG]

Yes, but you seem to blame everyone who doesn't follow the gun nut line for trying to steal your guns. Most of us just want to cut down on dead people, and see reasonable controls as the best way to accomplish that. Of course, if you are really a died in the wool gun nut you won't understand, or even believe that.
The 2% of gun owners that do have those problems still stack up a lot of unnecessarily dead bodies. That's enough to be a problem that needs fixing.

What orifice did your 2% number come from? Most shootings are done in urban environments with very tough gun laws. What needs fixing is the brains of liberals, they know so much that isn't true.

If you read the post I as responding to, you would know where the 2% came from

The 2% number he mentioned, however accurate, was accidental shootings. What law do you propose fixes that? The fact is most shootings are not accidental and not legal gun owners but those are the people you lefties love to target. You have NO clue.

That's where you draw the line? Most shootings are not accidental, so we won't do anything about them until they are? What an idiot.

 

[iceberg]

Yes, but you seem to blame everyone who doesn't follow the gun nut line for trying to steal your guns. Most of us just want to cut down on dead people, and see reasonable controls as the best way to accomplish that. Of course, if you are really a died in the wool gun nut you won't understand, or even believe that.

The 2% of gun owners that do have those problems still stack up a lot of unnecessarily dead bodies. That's enough to be a problem that needs fixing.

the problem is finding a common ground on "reasonable".

when you have the left doing things like:

1) banning green tipped .223's as armor piercing to ban them (practice rounds, not armor piercing)
2) when you have a colorado rep saying mags can't be reused so the high capacity ones will not be a problem for long
3) when you have people trying to stop the gun show loophole which granted yes, is a loophole but i can't find a single source who lists this as a way for criminals to get guns as a common practice
4) when you have katie couric...

there's a lot of shady crap the left has done from dumbass reporters right to obama and none of them are common sense nor do they show an understanding of the issue and yes - some are outright lies.

but if you just want less guns and think that will equate to less violence, you're ok with that it would seem.

are you out to stop senseless deaths from:
1) at home accidents
2) mass shootings
3) random acts of violence
4) other (let me know what)

or all of the above? you can't get *all of the above* with a one size fits all law.

even things like the gun show loophole. i happen to feel if you're at a gun show then simply find an FFL dealer or have a few on hand to DO background checks for you. if the state/feds demand it, make it free. problem solved in that regard but at best it's a phyricc victory. not many people are killed from purchases of these guns. feel free to google it.

now people who abuse this loophole? well that's already illegal so prosecute. put 'em in jail and see how many packs of cigs their ass is worth and be done with it.

the only way this is going to slow down is when we all collectively back away from the ledge we're on right now cause the harder people push and the more attacks on people from ISIS to anti-fa to random acts of violence common today - people will naturally want a gun to protect themselves.

to me before buying a gun you should have to take the class for CHL (concealed handgun permit) to ensure you're aware of how to use 'em. then it's no issue when you buy them cause you're already licensed and background checks pre-done.

the entire background check system needs a complete enema. we can't be tagging on this list or that list such as nofly or terrorist watch list because there is no due process to get off those lists. let's add in accountability for due process and when someone is on that list, they are given a specific way to have their case heard in a reasonable timeframe.

people writing guns laws should have to pass a strict test to even show they comprehend the issues around guns and control. if you can't pass it, shut the fuck up about laws so you don't sound like the moron in colorado who didn't know mags were reusable.

common sense can't be drastic because first both sides have to relearn to trust the other. go for banning bullets or do *anything* to fan that flame, game over. by the same token, strict SCREW YOU IT'S MY RIGHT will only foster opposition. we've got that and it's not working.

 

[SeaGal]

Nobody wants dead people.

And just what do you (& those like you) consider reasonable controls??? They've had controls for awhile now and after every shooting, they revise and add to those controls......all without realizing more controls aren't working nor will they ever work.

The more those rights are being chipped away with increasing regulation IS the beginning steps of taking the guns away because those regulations won't fix the problems.

I appreciate your thoughtful and reasoned responses...and agree with the dangers of 'amending (nullifying) the Bill of Rights' through regulation.

The problem lies in that to folks like our friend here...

Yes, but you seem to blame everyone who doesn't follow the gun nut line for trying to steal your guns.

...this..."A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."...is the 'gun nut line'.

 

[Iceweasel]

Yes, but you seem to blame everyone who doesn't follow the gun nut line for trying to steal your guns. Most of us just want to cut down on dead people, and see reasonable controls as the best way to accomplish that. Of course, if you are really a died in the wool gun nut you won't understand, or even believe that.
The 2% of gun owners that do have those problems still stack up a lot of unnecessarily dead bodies. That's enough to be a problem that needs fixing.

What orifice did your 2% number come from? Most shootings are done in urban environments with very tough gun laws. What needs fixing is the brains of liberals, they know so much that isn't true.

If you read the post I as responding to, you would know where the 2% came from

The 2% number he mentioned, however accurate, was accidental shootings. What law do you propose fixes that? The fact is most shootings are not accidental and not legal gun owners but those are the people you lefties love to target. You have NO clue.

That's where you draw the line? Most shootings are not accidental, so we won't do anything about them until they are? What an idiot.

Huh? You are on LSD. That isn't close to what I said.

 

[BULLDOG]

Yes, but you seem to blame everyone who doesn't follow the gun nut line for trying to steal your guns. Most of us just want to cut down on dead people, and see reasonable controls as the best way to accomplish that. Of course, if you are really a died in the wool gun nut you won't understand, or even believe that.

The 2% of gun owners that do have those problems still stack up a lot of unnecessarily dead bodies. That's enough to be a problem that needs fixing.

the problem is finding a common ground on "reasonable".

when you have the left doing things like:

1) banning green tipped .223's as armor piercing to ban them (practice rounds, not armor piercing)
2) when you have a colorado rep saying mags can't be reused so the high capacity ones will not be a problem for long
3) when you have people trying to stop the gun show loophole which granted yes, is a loophole but i can't find a single source who lists this as a way for criminals to get guns as a common practice
4) when you have katie couric...

there's a lot of shady crap the left has done from dumbass reporters right to obama and none of them are common sense nor do they show an understanding of the issue and yes - some are outright lies.

but if you just want less guns and think that will equate to less violence, you're ok with that it would seem.

are you out to stop senseless deaths from:
1) at home accidents
2) mass shootings
3) random acts of violence
4) other (let me know what)

or all of the above? you can't get *all of the above* with a one size fits all law.

even things like the gun show loophole. i happen to feel if you're at a gun show then simply find an FFL dealer or have a few on hand to DO background checks for you. if the state/feds demand it, make it free. problem solved in that regard but at best it's a phyricc victory. not many people are killed from purchases of these guns. feel free to google it.

now people who abuse this loophole? well that's already illegal so prosecute. put 'em in jail and see how many packs of cigs their ass is worth and be done with it.

the only way this is going to slow down is when we all collectively back away from the ledge we're on right now cause the harder people push and the more attacks on people from ISIS to anti-fa to random acts of violence common today - people will naturally want a gun to protect themselves.

to me before buying a gun you should have to take the class for CHL (concealed handgun permit) to ensure you're aware of how to use 'em. then it's no issue when you buy them cause you're already licensed and background checks pre-done.

the entire background check system needs a complete enema. we can't be tagging on this list or that list such as nofly or terrorist watch list because there is no due process to get off those lists. let's add in accountability for due process and when someone is on that list, they are given a specific way to have their case heard in a reasonable timeframe.

people writing guns laws should have to pass a strict test to even show they comprehend the issues around guns and control. if you can't pass it, shut the fuck up about laws so you don't sound like the moron in colorado who didn't know mags were reusable.

common sense can't be drastic because first both sides have to relearn to trust the other. go for banning bullets or do *anything* to fan that flame, game over. by the same token, strict SCREW YOU IT'S MY RIGHT will only foster opposition. we've got that and it's not working.

Come on. You admit there is a gun show loophole, but try to say people not capable of buying a gun otherwise don't take advantage of it? You have done nothing more than repeat all the goofy NRA talking points. We both know those are mostly crap

 

[BULLDOG]

Nobody wants dead people.

And just what do you (& those like you) consider reasonable controls??? They've had controls for awhile now and after every shooting, they revise and add to those controls......all without realizing more controls aren't working nor will they ever work.

The more those rights are being chipped away with increasing regulation IS the beginning steps of taking the guns away because those regulations won't fix the problems.

I appreciate your thoughtful and reasoned responses...and agree with the dangers of 'amending (nullifying) the Bill of Rights' through regulation.

The problem lies in that to folks like our friend here...

Yes, but you seem to blame everyone who doesn't follow the gun nut line for trying to steal your guns.

...this..."A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."...is the 'gun nut line'.

So when do you think I first started trying to take your guns? You must think I'm a lot more powerful than I am, and you have no idea of what I think about your guns.

 

[Iceweasel]

Yes, but you seem to blame everyone who doesn't follow the gun nut line for trying to steal your guns. Most of us just want to cut down on dead people, and see reasonable controls as the best way to accomplish that. Of course, if you are really a died in the wool gun nut you won't understand, or even believe that.

The 2% of gun owners that do have those problems still stack up a lot of unnecessarily dead bodies. That's enough to be a problem that needs fixing.

the problem is finding a common ground on "reasonable".

when you have the left doing things like:

1) banning green tipped .223's as armor piercing to ban them (practice rounds, not armor piercing)
2) when you have a colorado rep saying mags can't be reused so the high capacity ones will not be a problem for long
3) when you have people trying to stop the gun show loophole which granted yes, is a loophole but i can't find a single source who lists this as a way for criminals to get guns as a common practice
4) when you have katie couric...

there's a lot of shady crap the left has done from dumbass reporters right to obama and none of them are common sense nor do they show an understanding of the issue and yes - some are outright lies.

but if you just want less guns and think that will equate to less violence, you're ok with that it would seem.

are you out to stop senseless deaths from:
1) at home accidents
2) mass shootings
3) random acts of violence
4) other (let me know what)

or all of the above? you can't get *all of the above* with a one size fits all law.

even things like the gun show loophole. i happen to feel if you're at a gun show then simply find an FFL dealer or have a few on hand to DO background checks for you. if the state/feds demand it, make it free. problem solved in that regard but at best it's a phyricc victory. not many people are killed from purchases of these guns. feel free to google it.

now people who abuse this loophole? well that's already illegal so prosecute. put 'em in jail and see how many packs of cigs their ass is worth and be done with it.

the only way this is going to slow down is when we all collectively back away from the ledge we're on right now cause the harder people push and the more attacks on people from ISIS to anti-fa to random acts of violence common today - people will naturally want a gun to protect themselves.

to me before buying a gun you should have to take the class for CHL (concealed handgun permit) to ensure you're aware of how to use 'em. then it's no issue when you buy them cause you're already licensed and background checks pre-done.

the entire background check system needs a complete enema. we can't be tagging on this list or that list such as nofly or terrorist watch list because there is no due process to get off those lists. let's add in accountability for due process and when someone is on that list, they are given a specific way to have their case heard in a reasonable timeframe.

people writing guns laws should have to pass a strict test to even show they comprehend the issues around guns and control. if you can't pass it, shut the fuck up about laws so you don't sound like the moron in colorado who didn't know mags were reusable.

common sense can't be drastic because first both sides have to relearn to trust the other. go for banning bullets or do *anything* to fan that flame, game over. by the same token, strict SCREW YOU IT'S MY RIGHT will only foster opposition. we've got that and it's not working.

Come on. You admit there is a gun show loophole, but try to say people not capable of buying a gun otherwise don't take advantage of it? You have done nothing more than repeat all the goofy NRA talking points. We both know those are mostly crap

How many murders are committed by private firearm sales? I'm sure you have those numbers at your fingertips just waiting for someone to ask.

 

[iceberg]

Come on. You admit there is a gun show loophole, but try to say people not capable of buying a gun otherwise don't take advantage of it? You have done nothing more than repeat all the goofy NRA talking points. We both know those are mostly crap

by definition you *can't* take advantage of it. the loophole is meant for the one-time sale of a gun. not to sell a lot of guns and not to go into business and avoid the law. you try to do that, you are breaking the law. arrest them.

and if you think i'm parakeeting then you are not listening.

we can do away with the gun show loophole by giving free background checks at the gun show. should be easy enough. miss that part of my statement, didja?

i said not many are used in crimes and invited you to google it up and *not* parakeet the anti-gun crowd 40% bullshit figure.

i also said we need to revamp the entire background check system and allow for other "lists" and ensure due process is included. you hear the NRA say that one much, doya's?

next time read what i say before responding. it makes this much smoother.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

View attachment 131050

‘A humiliating coup de grace’: Right-wing WSJ editorial roasts Trump’s fight with London mayor
The Wall Street Journal’s right-wing editorial page has written another blistering editorial slamming President Donald Trump’s erratic and self-destructive behavior.

 

[iceberg]

Yes, but you seem to blame everyone who doesn't follow the gun nut line for trying to steal your guns. Most of us just want to cut down on dead people, and see reasonable controls as the best way to accomplish that. Of course, if you are really a died in the wool gun nut you won't understand, or even believe that.

The 2% of gun owners that do have those problems still stack up a lot of unnecessarily dead bodies. That's enough to be a problem that needs fixing.

the problem is finding a common ground on "reasonable".

when you have the left doing things like:

1) banning green tipped .223's as armor piercing to ban them (practice rounds, not armor piercing)
2) when you have a colorado rep saying mags can't be reused so the high capacity ones will not be a problem for long
3) when you have people trying to stop the gun show loophole which granted yes, is a loophole but i can't find a single source who lists this as a way for criminals to get guns as a common practice
4) when you have katie couric...

there's a lot of shady crap the left has done from dumbass reporters right to obama and none of them are common sense nor do they show an understanding of the issue and yes - some are outright lies.

but if you just want less guns and think that will equate to less violence, you're ok with that it would seem.

are you out to stop senseless deaths from:
1) at home accidents
2) mass shootings
3) random acts of violence
4) other (let me know what)

or all of the above? you can't get *all of the above* with a one size fits all law.

even things like the gun show loophole. i happen to feel if you're at a gun show then simply find an FFL dealer or have a few on hand to DO background checks for you. if the state/feds demand it, make it free. problem solved in that regard but at best it's a phyricc victory. not many people are killed from purchases of these guns. feel free to google it.

now people who abuse this loophole? well that's already illegal so prosecute. put 'em in jail and see how many packs of cigs their ass is worth and be done with it.

the only way this is going to slow down is when we all collectively back away from the ledge we're on right now cause the harder people push and the more attacks on people from ISIS to anti-fa to random acts of violence common today - people will naturally want a gun to protect themselves.

to me before buying a gun you should have to take the class for CHL (concealed handgun permit) to ensure you're aware of how to use 'em. then it's no issue when you buy them cause you're already licensed and background checks pre-done.

the entire background check system needs a complete enema. we can't be tagging on this list or that list such as nofly or terrorist watch list because there is no due process to get off those lists. let's add in accountability for due process and when someone is on that list, they are given a specific way to have their case heard in a reasonable timeframe.

people writing guns laws should have to pass a strict test to even show they comprehend the issues around guns and control. if you can't pass it, shut the fuck up about laws so you don't sound like the moron in colorado who didn't know mags were reusable.

common sense can't be drastic because first both sides have to relearn to trust the other. go for banning bullets or do *anything* to fan that flame, game over. by the same token, strict SCREW YOU IT'S MY RIGHT will only foster opposition. we've got that and it's not working.

Come on. You admit there is a gun show loophole, but try to say people not capable of buying a gun otherwise don't take advantage of it? You have done nothing more than repeat all the goofy NRA talking points. We both know those are mostly crap

How many murders are committed by private firearm sales? I'm sure you have those numbers at your fingertips just waiting for someone to ask.

i can tell you but i invited him to go look it up. anything i tell him would be a bwak bwak parakeet apparently - even though he's not reading what i said.

 

[iceberg]

View attachment 131050

‘A humiliating coup de grace’: Right-wing WSJ editorial roasts Trump’s fight with London mayor
The Wall Street Journal’s right-wing editorial page has written another blistering editorial slamming President Donald Trump’s erratic and self-destructive behavior.

an article slamming trump.

gosh. how...new.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

View attachment 131050

‘A humiliating coup de grace’: Right-wing WSJ editorial roasts Trump’s fight with London mayor
The Wall Street Journal’s right-wing editorial page has written another blistering editorial slamming President Donald Trump’s erratic and self-destructive behavior.

an article slamming trump.

gosh. how...new.

Some Rube submissive like you defending every thing the Orange goon does LOL

 

[Iceweasel]

Yes, but you seem to blame everyone who doesn't follow the gun nut line for trying to steal your guns. Most of us just want to cut down on dead people, and see reasonable controls as the best way to accomplish that. Of course, if you are really a died in the wool gun nut you won't understand, or even believe that.

The 2% of gun owners that do have those problems still stack up a lot of unnecessarily dead bodies. That's enough to be a problem that needs fixing.

the problem is finding a common ground on "reasonable".

when you have the left doing things like:

1) banning green tipped .223's as armor piercing to ban them (practice rounds, not armor piercing)
2) when you have a colorado rep saying mags can't be reused so the high capacity ones will not be a problem for long
3) when you have people trying to stop the gun show loophole which granted yes, is a loophole but i can't find a single source who lists this as a way for criminals to get guns as a common practice
4) when you have katie couric...

there's a lot of shady crap the left has done from dumbass reporters right to obama and none of them are common sense nor do they show an understanding of the issue and yes - some are outright lies.

but if you just want less guns and think that will equate to less violence, you're ok with that it would seem.

are you out to stop senseless deaths from:
1) at home accidents
2) mass shootings
3) random acts of violence
4) other (let me know what)

or all of the above? you can't get *all of the above* with a one size fits all law.

even things like the gun show loophole. i happen to feel if you're at a gun show then simply find an FFL dealer or have a few on hand to DO background checks for you. if the state/feds demand it, make it free. problem solved in that regard but at best it's a phyricc victory. not many people are killed from purchases of these guns. feel free to google it.

now people who abuse this loophole? well that's already illegal so prosecute. put 'em in jail and see how many packs of cigs their ass is worth and be done with it.

the only way this is going to slow down is when we all collectively back away from the ledge we're on right now cause the harder people push and the more attacks on people from ISIS to anti-fa to random acts of violence common today - people will naturally want a gun to protect themselves.

to me before buying a gun you should have to take the class for CHL (concealed handgun permit) to ensure you're aware of how to use 'em. then it's no issue when you buy them cause you're already licensed and background checks pre-done.

the entire background check system needs a complete enema. we can't be tagging on this list or that list such as nofly or terrorist watch list because there is no due process to get off those lists. let's add in accountability for due process and when someone is on that list, they are given a specific way to have their case heard in a reasonable timeframe.

people writing guns laws should have to pass a strict test to even show they comprehend the issues around guns and control. if you can't pass it, shut the fuck up about laws so you don't sound like the moron in colorado who didn't know mags were reusable.

common sense can't be drastic because first both sides have to relearn to trust the other. go for banning bullets or do *anything* to fan that flame, game over. by the same token, strict SCREW YOU IT'S MY RIGHT will only foster opposition. we've got that and it's not working.

Come on. You admit there is a gun show loophole, but try to say people not capable of buying a gun otherwise don't take advantage of it? You have done nothing more than repeat all the goofy NRA talking points. We both know those are mostly crap

How many murders are committed by private firearm sales? I'm sure you have those numbers at your fingertips just waiting for someone to ask.

i can tell you but i invited him to go look it up. anything i tell him would be a bwak bwak parakeet apparently - even though he's not reading what i said.

Fact is they don't care. If a number isn't useful it's discarded.

 

[iceberg]

View attachment 131050

‘A humiliating coup de grace’: Right-wing WSJ editorial roasts Trump’s fight with London mayor
The Wall Street Journal’s right-wing editorial page has written another blistering editorial slamming President Donald Trump’s erratic and self-destructive behavior.

an article slamming trump.

gosh. how...new.

Some Rube submissive like you defending every thing the Orange goon does LOL

then you're just a assfart cause i don't defend all he does.

you just see it that way cause you're a blinded idiot who feels anyone who doesn't agree with you MUST COMPLETELY DISAGREE and take the extreme other side of the discussion.

all i'm saying is you can't swing a dead cat w/o seeing someone knock trump. it's far from news, all the trendy people are doing it, and have at it.

but it's still butt-nugget stupid and removes your own cred when all you can do is bitch and offer up nothing else.

 

[BULLDOG]

Come on. You admit there is a gun show loophole, but try to say people not capable of buying a gun otherwise don't take advantage of it? You have done nothing more than repeat all the goofy NRA talking points. We both know those are mostly crap

by definition you *can't* take advantage of it. the loophole is meant for the one-time sale of a gun. not to sell a lot of guns and not to go into business and avoid the law. you try to do that, you are breaking the law. arrest them.

and if you think i'm parakeeting then you are not listening.

we can do away with the gun show loophole by giving free background checks at the gun show. should be easy enough. miss that part of my statement, didja?

i said not many are used in crimes and invited you to google it up and *not* parakeet the anti-gun crowd 40% bullshit figure.

i also said we need to revamp the entire background check system and allow for other "lists" and ensure due process is included. you hear the NRA say that one much, doya's?

next time read what i say before responding. it makes this much smoother.

You're intentionally ignoring so much. If there was just one seller, your silly remarks about taking advantage might make sense. There are as many sellers as there are buyers. No way to keep track on how many each of them sell, especially since there is no paperwork or requirement for any record keeping.

Free background checks would be great, but unless they are required, who would bother, and why should they bother?

I tried googling it, but since the NRA owned congressmen made it illegal for records to be kept on that type thing, there are no credible reports that are much less than 20 years old.

Yes you are parroting their crap.

 

[SeaGal]

So when do you think I first started trying to take your guns? You must think I'm a lot more powerful than I am, and you have no idea of what I think about your guns.

Actually I don't think much about you at all...your words are revealing enough. But for the record - what is your take on this - ..."A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."...?

 

[BULLDOG]

So when do you think I first started trying to take your guns? You must think I'm a lot more powerful than I am, and you have no idea of what I think about your guns.

Actually I don't think much about you at all...your words are revealing enough. But for the record - what is your take on this - ..."A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."...?

Come on. Don't stop there. Go ahead and finish it. You know what right wing radio already told you that I think about it.

 

[iceberg]

Come on. You admit there is a gun show loophole, but try to say people not capable of buying a gun otherwise don't take advantage of it? You have done nothing more than repeat all the goofy NRA talking points. We both know those are mostly crap

by definition you *can't* take advantage of it. the loophole is meant for the one-time sale of a gun. not to sell a lot of guns and not to go into business and avoid the law. you try to do that, you are breaking the law. arrest them.

and if you think i'm parakeeting then you are not listening.

we can do away with the gun show loophole by giving free background checks at the gun show. should be easy enough. miss that part of my statement, didja?

i said not many are used in crimes and invited you to google it up and *not* parakeet the anti-gun crowd 40% bullshit figure.

i also said we need to revamp the entire background check system and allow for other "lists" and ensure due process is included. you hear the NRA say that one much, doya's?

next time read what i say before responding. it makes this much smoother.

You're intentionally ignoring so much. If there was just one seller, your silly remarks about taking advantage might make sense. There are as many sellers as there are buyers. No way to keep track on how many each of them sell, especially since there is no paperwork or requirement for any record keeping.

Free background checks would be great, but unless they are required, who would bother, and why should they bother?

I tried googling it, but since the NRA owned congressmen made it illegal for records to be kept on that type thing, there are no credible reports that are much less than 20 years old.

Yes you are parroting their crap.

again - you're not listening to me. you're hearing what you want out of what i am saying then instead of trying to understand, *i'm* the one ignoring a bunch.

how many people sell guns via the gun show loophole? you need to tell me this at this point cause to date, you have not that i have seen. please do not run to the 40% bullshit either. that would be you parroting their crap. also - if no way to keep track where did their 40% come from?

and i said free background checks SO THEY DO GET DONE - not as an option. i am saying just do away with the damn gun show loophole because if you're at a gun show, someone can do it for you. if $25 is an issue, have a voucher program to let them get it done for free.

THIRD FUCKING TIME I SAID THIS - you going to mis-read me again?

i also said people who are writing the laws need to be tested and certified to do so to AVOID it becoming a political issue. together the NRA and the gov needs to come up with a new system that will satisfy as many as possible but no - not all will be happy. never gonna happen but we do need to do more than we are doing today.

but the background checks we have are pointless as it stands. those need to have some meat into them AND they need to follow due process. period.

now if someone is selling guns FOR A LIVING via this loophole - that is already illegal - prosecute. i've said this before as well but you fly by it to keep saying i'm not listening *to you*. what good do more laws do if you're not utilizing the ones in place for this already?

i've pointed out various ideas i've had about getting a licenses/class first that would piss off many gun owners - but hey - i'm a party-liner dude!
i've pointed out you can easily do away with the gun show loophole cause you're at a gun show - hit any dealer there and they can and will do one for you for $25.
i've pointed out an educational system for both law makers and the average user that needs to be in place

but you've bypassed all of that and said google stumped you.

great. when you want to listen let me know cause i've FAR FROM parkeeted jack nor shit about the NRA party lines.

 

[BULLDOG]

Come on. You admit there is a gun show loophole, but try to say people not capable of buying a gun otherwise don't take advantage of it? You have done nothing more than repeat all the goofy NRA talking points. We both know those are mostly crap

by definition you *can't* take advantage of it. the loophole is meant for the one-time sale of a gun. not to sell a lot of guns and not to go into business and avoid the law. you try to do that, you are breaking the law. arrest them.

and if you think i'm parakeeting then you are not listening.

we can do away with the gun show loophole by giving free background checks at the gun show. should be easy enough. miss that part of my statement, didja?

i said not many are used in crimes and invited you to google it up and *not* parakeet the anti-gun crowd 40% bullshit figure.

i also said we need to revamp the entire background check system and allow for other "lists" and ensure due process is included. you hear the NRA say that one much, doya's?

next time read what i say before responding. it makes this much smoother.

You're intentionally ignoring so much. If there was just one seller, your silly remarks about taking advantage might make sense. There are as many sellers as there are buyers. No way to keep track on how many each of them sell, especially since there is no paperwork or requirement for any record keeping.

Free background checks would be great, but unless they are required, who would bother, and why should they bother?

I tried googling it, but since the NRA owned congressmen made it illegal for records to be kept on that type thing, there are no credible reports that are much less than 20 years old.

Yes you are parroting their crap.

again - you're not listening to me. you're hearing what you want out of what i am saying then instead of trying to understand, *i'm* the one ignoring a bunch.

how many people sell guns via the gun show loophole? you need to tell me this at this point cause to date, you have not that i have seen. please do not run to the 40% bullshit either. that would be you parroting their crap. also - if no way to keep track where did their 40% come from?

and i said free background checks SO THEY DO GET DONE - not as an option. i am saying just do away with the damn gun show loophole because if you're at a gun show, someone can do it for you. if $25 is an issue, have a voucher program to let them get it done for free.

THIRD FUCKING TIME I SAID THIS - you going to mis-read me again?

i also said people who are writing the laws need to be tested and certified to do so to AVOID it becoming a political issue. together the NRA and the gov needs to come up with a new system that will satisfy as many as possible but no - not all will be happy. never gonna happen but we do need to do more than we are doing today.

but the background checks we have are pointless as it stands. those need to have some meat into them AND they need to follow due process. period.

now if someone is selling guns FOR A LIVING via this loophole - that is already illegal - prosecute. i've said this before as well but you fly by it to keep saying i'm not listening *to you*. what good do more laws do if you're not utilizing the ones in place for this already?

i've pointed out various ideas i've had about getting a licenses/class first that would piss off many gun owners - but hey - i'm a party-liner dude!
i've pointed out you can easily do away with the gun show loophole cause you're at a gun show - hit any dealer there and they can and will do one for you for $25.
i've pointed out an educational system for both law makers and the average user that needs to be in place

but you've bypassed all of that and said google stumped you.

great. when you want to listen let me know cause i've FAR FROM parkeeted jack nor shit about the NRA party lines.

The 40% you keep mentioning certainly didn't come from me, and I've never used it in this subject. You are right about there being no way to know unless background checks are universally required. The way it is now, a person could make a very good living selling used guns because there is no record to tell how many guns he already sold. Of course, the cops could keep him under surveillance, and eventually build a case against him, but that won't happen with every individual seller, now will it? It's not unreasonable to expect background checks for EVERY gun that is sold by ANYONE.

 

[SeaGal]

Come on. Don't stop there. Go ahead and finish it. You know what right wing radio already told you that I think about it.

You mean this?...A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.".

Here's your chance to speak up, if you dare...no need to be skeered. No NRA owned right wing politician boogymen hiding under the keyboard gonna jump out and grab you by the 1A.