Keeping guns from criminals - liberals, what is your plan?

[RKMBrown]

I know of no reason to doubt that will happen. The Constitution isn't even a speed bump restricting the Federal government anymore. In fact, it's a tool to bypass the legislature and just decree new law. Sadly, nothing would surprise me at this point.

Obviously if that technology were to spread for personal weapons in the marketplace, that would be excellent. I would personally be a lot more willing to buy a gun for self defense with that feature. If I trusted it. I'm not there yet with that. I mentioned I'm a collector now, but my guns are locked and I don't keep ammunition with the guns. Then again, I live in really safe areas.

I live in a remote location, I have plenty of hunting weapons. Don't have any young kids any more so my guns are ready to use and not locked up. I'll get a cabinet and lock em up as a part of the child proofing when the grand kids start showing up. I'm not worried about unlocking em for use as I have a pack of dogs that won't let anyone within 500y of the ranch house without an escort

We had a yappy French dog until last year when it passed away. I'll be honest, I hated that dog. It was a dog for women and children. It was a Bichon Frise. Whenever we were on vacation and my wife's friends took care of it when we got back it was the same story. How'd it go? I love your dog! My kids love your dog! I'm sorry, it can't come back, my husband hated it.... But I will give it credit to your point that it was the best damned security system we ever had though. Protection? No. Warning, yeah...

My Australian shepherds and Blue Lacys are all great dogs. When we go out of town we find a high school kid to drop by to check on the feed and water. They pretty much have the free run of about 5 acres of woods that I cross fenced around the ranch house.

 

[kaz]

I live in a remote location, I have plenty of hunting weapons. Don't have any young kids any more so my guns are ready to use and not locked up. I'll get a cabinet and lock em up as a part of the child proofing when the grand kids start showing up. I'm not worried about unlocking em for use as I have a pack of dogs that won't let anyone within 500y of the ranch house without an escort

We had a yappy French dog until last year when it passed away. I'll be honest, I hated that dog. It was a dog for women and children. It was a Bichon Frise. Whenever we were on vacation and my wife's friends took care of it when we got back it was the same story. How'd it go? I love your dog! My kids love your dog! I'm sorry, it can't come back, my husband hated it.... But I will give it credit to your point that it was the best damned security system we ever had though. Protection? No. Warning, yeah...

My Australian shepherds and Blue Lacys are all great dogs. When we go out of town we find a high school kid to drop by to check on the feed and water. They pretty much have the free run of about 5 acres of woods that I cross fenced around the ranch house.

Nice arrangement, it's good you can trust them

 

[RKMBrown]

We had a yappy French dog until last year when it passed away. I'll be honest, I hated that dog. It was a dog for women and children. It was a Bichon Frise. Whenever we were on vacation and my wife's friends took care of it when we got back it was the same story. How'd it go? I love your dog! My kids love your dog! I'm sorry, it can't come back, my husband hated it.... But I will give it credit to your point that it was the best damned security system we ever had though. Protection? No. Warning, yeah...

My Australian shepherds and Blue Lacys are all great dogs. When we go out of town we find a high school kid to drop by to check on the feed and water. They pretty much have the free run of about 5 acres of woods that I cross fenced around the ranch house.

Nice arrangement, it's good you can trust them

Yeah well I know their parents.. Oh you mean the dogs Yeah I trust them to get into all sorts of trouble.

 

[P@triot]

Why?

For serveral reasons....

• As I've already stated (and you've avoided because you know you're wrong), guns are smuggled into this country all the time. What are you going to do, force manufacturers in Russia and China to implement your little scanner?
  
  
• Technology can be bypassed. Has there ever been a safe that wasn't cracked? Nope. Has there ever been an O/S that wasn't hacked? Nope. History has proven unequivocallly that if it was made by man, it can be bypassed by man.
  
  
• Even if your ignorant, naive, utopian dream came to fruition and the U.S. government passed a law requireing all firearms to have a Star Trek biometric scanner on them and they were able to enforce this law over foreign sovereign nations such as Russia and China - what do you do about the existing 6.4 trillion guns in the world that already exist junior?

Isn't it amazing how Dumbocrats never have a plan? Never. Not once. Everything they do is a stumbling, mumbling, bumbling, fumbling act of buffoonery. Their fiscal plans collapse cities (Detroit), states (California), and nations (U.S., Cuba, Greece, U.S.S.R., Cambodia, etc.). Their healthcare policies cause the cost to skyrocket and the availability to plummet (how is Obamacare working out libs?). Their foreign policies cause us to be mocked by our enemies, isolated by our allies, and attacked over and over and over and over (Benghazi, Boston Marathon, WTC I, U.S.S. Cole in Yemen, Embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya, etc.).

But, that's what happens when you form your "ideas" based on ignorant, immature, utopian idealism.

How many guns from 100 years ago are used today in crimes? Meaning that over time, guns get replaced... Got to start somewhere. Unlike you, who doesn't want anything done, ever. My plan takes a step in the right direction. As for foreign guns, it would be fairly simple to convince others of a measure that actually would work. Cars all over the world now have seatbelts...

Well that's true, 100 years from now many of today's existing guns will be broken, corroded, destroyed, etc. So what do we do in the meantime - experience 100 years of Newtown slaughters because of irrational liberals?

In addition, you still haven't addressed the black market from foreign manufacturers and you haven't addressed the technology being bypassed anyway.

Do you have a real, practical, plan for these issues?

 

[P@triot]

Isn't it amazing that the best idea a fucking stupid gun nutter can come up with to prevent needless, senseless death is.........to do absolutely fucking nothing. To act like there is no problem to solve.

Of course, the limited intellect displayed on here by the likes of a rotty or a warrior or a go for it, spider, or any of the other gun nutter idiots, well what can you expect.

Low intelligence gives poor results. No matter what the problem is.

Actually [MENTION=35352]zeke[/MENTION] - conservatives have had the solution for over 100 years now. Unfortunately, irrational and ignorant liberals don't want implement it.

However, Newtown proved that your "solutions" end in slaughter and Arapahoe proved that our solution ends with security and safety.

Liberalism = Sandy Hook in Newtown = 27 victims dead in a slaughter

Conservatism = Arapohoe = only 1 dead (the killer) the day of the shooting (and only 1 victim who later succumbed to her wounds)

Gee....if only liberals were capable of basic math

 

[P@triot]

33 gun deaths every day
35 thousand since Sandy Hook
2nd leading cause of death, ages 15-19
95% of Americans are in favor laws to get guns away from criminals, terrorists, drug dealers, mentally ill

But we still cater to a small minority of nutters who want everyone armed and shooting at each other.

More people die every year from automobile accidents than they do from guns. More children die every year from automobile accidents than they do from guns.

And yet all you want to do is focus on the object which causes less deaths. Where is your call to ban automobiles? Why - because you like them? Because you have an irrational fear of guns since you've never shot one? Because you were brainwashed by the media and mommy & daddy to fear them and you're weak minded?

Only a Dumbocrat is so fuck'n stupid as to lose their fuck'n mind over something that causes less death and embrace and celebrate something which causes more death...

Another epic fail. Cars are being updated all the time with new safety measures like air bags, seat belts... Guns, not so much.

So then you're admitting [MENTION=44706]Bumberclyde[/MENTION] that you don't give a damn about human life? For you, it's all about control and the ability to dictate to companies what they must do?

Why does it matter to you that "cars are being updated all the time with new safety measures...."? I thought you were so distraught over the loss of human life? And if that's the case, wouldn't any normal, rational adult focus their efforts on stopping what causes more death rather than what causes less death?

Where is the demand to outlaw automobiles? Help me to understand...

 

[P@triot]

33 gun deaths every day
35 thousand since Sandy Hook
2nd leading cause of death, ages 15-19
95% of Americans are in favor laws to get guns away from criminals, terrorists, drug dealers, mentally ill

But we still cater to a small minority of nutters who want everyone armed and shooting at each other.

More people die every year from automobile accidents than they do from guns. More children die every year from automobile accidents than they do from guns.

And yet all you want to do is focus on the object which causes less deaths. Where is your call to ban automobiles? Why - because you like them? Because you have an irrational fear of guns since you've never shot one? Because you were brainwashed by the media and mommy & daddy to fear them and you're weak minded?

Only a Dumbocrat is so fuck'n stupid as to lose their fuck'n mind over something that causes less death and embrace and celebrate something which causes more death...

Cars have a purpose other than death. They are called accidents for a reason. Guns killing is no accident, that is their only purpose. Your really in no position to call anyone else stupid.

A guns only purpose is to kill? Really? Then how do you explain that the Secret Service surrounds the president with a wicked arsenal of fully automatic weapons?!? If a gun's only purpose is to kill, isn't your president in mortal danger right now? And why aren't you demanding that the Secret Service disarm [MENTION=43262]Brain357[/MENTION]?

Furthermore, I thought you "cared" about human life? If that's true, then you wouldn't care about the "intent" of the cause of the death - you'd only care about stopping it. If it's not true, and you don't care about human life, then you are despicable piece of shit for pretending to care in order to further an irrational agenda.

So which is it junior?

 

[Brain357]

More people die every year from automobile accidents than they do from guns. More children die every year from automobile accidents than they do from guns.

And yet all you want to do is focus on the object which causes less deaths. Where is your call to ban automobiles? Why - because you like them? Because you have an irrational fear of guns since you've never shot one? Because you were brainwashed by the media and mommy & daddy to fear them and you're weak minded?

Only a Dumbocrat is so fuck'n stupid as to lose their fuck'n mind over something that causes less death and embrace and celebrate something which causes more death...

Cars have a purpose other than death. They are called accidents for a reason. Guns killing is no accident, that is their only purpose. Your really in no position to call anyone else stupid.

A guns only purpose is to kill? Really? Then how do you explain that the Secret Service surrounds the president with a wicked arsenal of fully automatic weapons?!? If a gun's only purpose is to kill, isn't your president in mortal danger right now? And why aren't you demanding that the Secret Service disarm [MENTION=43262]Brain357[/MENTION]?

Furthermore, I thought you "cared" about human life? If that's true, then you wouldn't care about the "intent" of the cause of the death - you'd only care about stopping it. If it's not true, and you don't care about human life, then you are despicable piece of shit for pretending to care in order to further an irrational agenda.

So which is it junior?

You sure have a skill at wording things stupidly. What do you think would happen if the secret service fired those guns? Death of course. I'll just repeat myself since nothing you said changes it:
Cars have a purpose other than death. They are called accidents for a reason. Guns killing is no accident, that is their only purpose. Your really in no position to call anyone else stupid.

 

[Bumberclyde]

More people die every year from automobile accidents than they do from guns. More children die every year from automobile accidents than they do from guns.

And yet all you want to do is focus on the object which causes less deaths. Where is your call to ban automobiles? Why - because you like them? Because you have an irrational fear of guns since you've never shot one? Because you were brainwashed by the media and mommy & daddy to fear them and you're weak minded?

Only a Dumbocrat is so fuck'n stupid as to lose their fuck'n mind over something that causes less death and embrace and celebrate something which causes more death...

Another epic fail. Cars are being updated all the time with new safety measures like air bags, seat belts... Guns, not so much.

So then you're admitting [MENTION=44706]Bumberclyde[/MENTION] that you don't give a damn about human life? For you, it's all about control and the ability to dictate to companies what they must do?

Why does it matter to you that "cars are being updated all the time with new safety measures...."? I thought you were so distraught over the loss of human life? And if that's the case, wouldn't any normal, rational adult focus their efforts on stopping what causes more death rather than what causes less death?

Where is the demand to outlaw automobiles? Help me to understand...

Yet another epic fail! Who said anything about banning guns? Anyone? Certainly not I. Making things safer as technology improves, yes, for ANY product.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

iPhone fingerprint scanner works pretty good. They get better as they go along. Manual key override requires the key, the user is assumed to have a means to secure the key away from the weapon. Depends on your personal situation. Do you lock your car door? How about the door to your place of business? I don't have a problem with easily removed locks, people use em or don't, free country. That said if a kid drowns in you pool and you did not have a kid proof fence... expect to be sued and loose. As these gun locks become more pervasive expect to be sued if a kid shoots someone or himself with your unlocked gun.

Door locks and not impenetrable.

I addressed your key override key remark already. If I person can steal your gun, he can also steal the override key.

Are you sure you want to compare children drowning in pools to those dying by guns?

1. Fact: Twice as many children are killed playing football in school than are murdered by guns. That's right. Despite what media coverage might seem to indicate, there are more deaths related to high school football than guns. In a recent three year period, twice as many football players died from hits to the head, heat stroke, etc. (45), as compared with students who were murdered by firearms (22) during that same time period.[1]

2. Fact: More children will die in a car, drown in a pool, or choke on food than they will by firearms. As seen by the chart on the previous page, children are at a 2,000 percent greater risk from the car in their driveway, than they are by the gun in their parents' closet. Children are almost 7 times more likely to drown than to be shot, and they are 130 percent more likely to die from choking on their dinner.[2]

3. Fact: Accidental gun deaths among children have declined by over 50 % in 25 years, even though the population (and the gun stock) has continued to increase. [3]

4. Fact: Despite the low number of gun accidents among children, most of these fatalities are not truly "accidents." According to Dr. Gary Kleck, many such accidents are misnamed -- those "accidents" actually resulting from either suicides or extreme cases of child abuse.[4] Dr. Kleck also notes that, "Accidental shooters were significantly more likely to have been arrested, arrested for a violent act, arrested in connection with alcohol, involved in highway crashes, given traffic citations, and to have had their driver's license suspended or revoked."[5]

Myth #2: Children Gun Deaths Are At Epidemic Proportions

LS you are arguing with someone who agrees with the point that these gun laws suck. My point was not to say we need these things. My point was to make predictions about what is going to happen, like it or not. We do these things because we can and because people demand solutions. Whether or not said solutions are effective is completely mute to the progressive liberal mind.

As for the children thing.. I don't mind retroactive negligence laws. If a child drowns in your pool and you don't have a fence, negligence. If a child picks up your unlocked gun and kills himself, negligence. If a child dies of heat exhaustion in a car, negligence. I don't see what the big deal is.

Go ahead with your predictions there Nostradomus.

The big deal dumbass is education and freedom.

I have to put a fence around my pool because some idiots can't control their child?

I've had guns my entire life and raised five kids and never locked a single weapon up. I taught my children about guns how they were not toys and what the consequences were if they misused them and taught them all how to shoot before they were nine years old.

No matter how many laws you morons pass, you can't fix stupid.

 

[Theowl32]

Everything is a political opportunity for democraps. Their stupid minions just get lead along by their nose. Since the stupid ones (the 47%) always think they are the smartest ones in the room, they never consider how they are used as political pawns.

The smarter ones know precisely what they are doing (Obama Pelosi Schumer Reid). They know they want to expand their power, and they will always go to their same old script.

"They care about the poor and down trodden. They are the robinhoods. They have their best interests at heart. All of their intentions are pure and good. Conservatives hate minorities, women, gays etc and their greed is the reason for the plight of the poor. Those horrible one percenters that never include tinsel town celebs for some odd reason."

Lets take a look at some those lefties that have been on record bashing the "1%" shall we?

Barbara Streisand home, one of them....

George Clooney

Matt Damon

The left of course do not care. They are morons. Hypocritical pawns. All of them.

 

[kaz]

Cars have a purpose other than death. They are called accidents for a reason. Guns killing is no accident, that is their only purpose. Your really in no position to call anyone else stupid.

Nonsense. In addition to self defense, they are used for, food, sport and collecting. This has been well covered.

It's also irrelevant. You have no plan for criminals to not actually get guns, which means honest citizens being armed in self defense is warranted regardless of what "other" purpose guns have.

 

[kaz]

Another epic fail. Cars are being updated all the time with new safety measures like air bags, seat belts... Guns, not so much.

So then you're admitting [MENTION=44706]Bumberclyde[/MENTION] that you don't give a damn about human life? For you, it's all about control and the ability to dictate to companies what they must do?

Why does it matter to you that "cars are being updated all the time with new safety measures...."? I thought you were so distraught over the loss of human life? And if that's the case, wouldn't any normal, rational adult focus their efforts on stopping what causes more death rather than what causes less death?

Where is the demand to outlaw automobiles? Help me to understand...

Yet another epic fail! Who said anything about banning guns? Anyone? Certainly not I. Making things safer as technology improves, yes, for ANY product.

A distinction without a difference. The Washington Navy Yard is the perfect example. People who had guns and knew how to use them were slaughtered. What difference did their guns make when rules prevented them from having them or using them when they were being shot and killed?

And as I keep asking you, why do these shootings keep happening at the places like schools, malls and theaters that everyone knows is the least likely place for other people to have guns? Why do you suppose murderers pick THOSE spots exactly?

 

[kaz]

My Australian shepherds and Blue Lacys are all great dogs. When we go out of town we find a high school kid to drop by to check on the feed and water. They pretty much have the free run of about 5 acres of woods that I cross fenced around the ranch house.

Nice arrangement, it's good you can trust them

Yeah well I know their parents.. Oh you mean the dogs Yeah I trust them to get into all sorts of trouble.

I'm sure, but you know what I mean, they stay on your property. It's great for your both since you can give them more freedom that way.

 

[kaz]

No matter how long this thread stays alive, no liberals have an actual plan.

You have ones like CandyCorn (taxes) and BumperClyde (technology costs) who say if we ban guns in a different way then it will work. We had a few who wanted to live in a police state and go all Singapore. And we had a bunch who asked what our plan is to get guns from criminals when our argument is based on that we can't. Not one libbie has a plan that we continue to live in the country we are in, and guns go poof on criminals. Just demonstrating the OP was right, you can't....

 

[Brain357]

Cars have a purpose other than death. They are called accidents for a reason. Guns killing is no accident, that is their only purpose. Your really in no position to call anyone else stupid.

Nonsense. In addition to self defense, they are used for, food, sport and collecting. This has been well covered.

It's also irrelevant. You have no plan for criminals to not actually get guns, which means honest citizens being armed in self defense is warranted regardless of what "other" purpose guns have.

Yes the comparison is complete nonsense. Cars are necessary for transportation and there is no alternative. Guns are not necessary and you could use pepper spray as an alternative. The fact is if we woke up tomorrow with no cars or trucks our country would collapse. If we woke up with no guns then 99.9% of citizens would be unaffected. The only people affected would be the paranoid gun nuts scared to come out because Bigfoot will get them. But they need a good doctor, not a gun.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Cars have a purpose other than death. They are called accidents for a reason. Guns killing is no accident, that is their only purpose. Your really in no position to call anyone else stupid.

Nonsense. In addition to self defense, they are used for, food, sport and collecting. This has been well covered.

It's also irrelevant. You have no plan for criminals to not actually get guns, which means honest citizens being armed in self defense is warranted regardless of what "other" purpose guns have.

Yes the comparison is complete nonsense. Cars are necessary for transportation and there is no alternative. Guns are not necessary and you could use pepper spray as an alternative. The fact is if we woke up tomorrow with no cars or trucks our country would collapse. If we woke up with no guns then 99.9% of citizens would be unaffected. The only people affected would be the paranoid gun nuts scared to come out because Bigfoot will get them. But they need a good doctor, not a gun.

Cars are necessary for transportation and there is no alternative.

what we hear everyday how cars are bad

and public trans is the way to go

--LOL

 

[kaz]

Cars have a purpose other than death. They are called accidents for a reason. Guns killing is no accident, that is their only purpose. Your really in no position to call anyone else stupid.

Nonsense. In addition to self defense, they are used for, food, sport and collecting. This has been well covered.

It's also irrelevant. You have no plan for criminals to not actually get guns, which means honest citizens being armed in self defense is warranted regardless of what "other" purpose guns have.

Yes the comparison is complete nonsense. Cars are necessary for transportation and there is no alternative. Guns are not necessary and you could use pepper spray as an alternative. The fact is if we woke up tomorrow with no cars or trucks our country would collapse. If we woke up with no guns then 99.9% of citizens would be unaffected. The only people affected would be the paranoid gun nuts scared to come out because Bigfoot will get them. But they need a good doctor, not a gun.

First of all, you're full of shit. Sporting, hunting, shooting, collecting are fun and have nothing to do with shooting people. That you don't like guns doesn't make them worthless to anyone but you.

Second of all, you are posting the red in a thread that asks your plan, and apparently you don't have one either. So what difference does that statement make? And your stat is also crap, a lot of people would be affected.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Cars have a purpose other than death. They are called accidents for a reason. Guns killing is no accident, that is their only purpose. Your really in no position to call anyone else stupid.

Nonsense. In addition to self defense, they are used for, food, sport and collecting. This has been well covered.

It's also irrelevant. You have no plan for criminals to not actually get guns, which means honest citizens being armed in self defense is warranted regardless of what "other" purpose guns have.

Yes the comparison is complete nonsense. Cars are necessary for transportation and there is no alternative. Guns are not necessary and you could use pepper spray as an alternative. The fact is if we woke up tomorrow with no cars or trucks our country would collapse. If we woke up with no guns then 99.9% of citizens would be unaffected. The only people affected would be the paranoid gun nuts scared to come out because Bigfoot will get them. But they need a good doctor, not a gun.

Defending oneself is not necessary?

Are you really that stupid?

What would you do if thugs invaded your home while your children were there? Ask them to line up so you could pepper spray them before they rape your wife?

I'm guessing you would lay down like a little bitch and beg them to spare your life instead of being a man and killing the rat bastards where they stood.

 

[RKMBrown]

Nonsense. In addition to self defense, they are used for, food, sport and collecting. This has been well covered.

It's also irrelevant. You have no plan for criminals to not actually get guns, which means honest citizens being armed in self defense is warranted regardless of what "other" purpose guns have.

Yes the comparison is complete nonsense. Cars are necessary for transportation and there is no alternative. Guns are not necessary and you could use pepper spray as an alternative. The fact is if we woke up tomorrow with no cars or trucks our country would collapse. If we woke up with no guns then 99.9% of citizens would be unaffected. The only people affected would be the paranoid gun nuts scared to come out because Bigfoot will get them. But they need a good doctor, not a gun.

First of all, you're full of shit. Sporting, hunting, shooting, collecting are fun and have nothing to do with shooting people. That you don't like guns doesn't make them worthless to anyone but you.

Second of all, you are posting the red in a thread that asks your plan, and apparently you don't have one either. So what difference does that statement make? And your stat is also crap, a lot of people would be affected.

Daniel: Hey - you ever get into fights when you were a kid?
Miyagi: Huh - plenty.
Daniel: Yeah, but it wasn't like the problem I have, right?
Miyagi: Why? Fighting fighting. Same same.
Daniel: Yeah, but you knew karate.
Miyagi: Someone always know more.
Daniel: You mean there were times when you were scared to fight?
Miyagi: Always scare. Miyagi hate fighting.
Daniel: Yeah, but you like karate.
Miyagi: So?
Daniel: So, karate's fighting. You train to fight.
Miyagi: That what you think?
Daniel: [pondering] No.
Miyagi: Then why train?
Daniel: [thinks] So I won't have to fight.
Miyagi: [laughs] Miyagi have hope for you.