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

[2aguy]

Still waiting wry catcher.....

Felons....no guns....non violent felons could possibly apply for gun rights after 10 years with no crimes....

Mentally Ill...needs work...if we are not careful, anti gunners will use talking to a grief counselor as a reason to deny a normal person their gun rights....

Current gun laws need to be enforced...

No magazine limits....

no assault weapon ban

no gun registration

no licensing for gun owners....

I would allow the background checks we have now.....they don't work but you anti gun nuts want them for some reason and I will allow you that sop to your craziness....

that's about it....

 

[2aguy]

Abortion....only for the life of the mother, and it would be her decision, especially if she wants to risk her life to deliver her child.....otherwise it is just outright murder of a human being....but let's try to do that in another thread.....

 

[The Rabbi]

Eventually a million moms and dads will rise up and say "Enough"! Maybe not today, but eventually sanity will replace insanity, and gun control in some unknown and currently unknowable iteration will prevail.

What is your plan for keeping guns out of the hands of people who don't obey laws?

How will it work?

His ideas won't work....he is another gun grabbing moron.......

Your angry, emotional and childish reactions are clearly proof of my observation that you're not very bright. Anyone who can read in context understands my point made over and over, that is, some form of gun control is necessary, for what we have today is insane.

That is an opinion, moron, not a plan of action. Unless and until men and women of good will come to their senses, we will continue to see the types of events which have become all too common in our country. That type of event is of course a situation where one man (no woman, yet) takes a rapid fire weapon with a large magazine and slaughters innocent men, women and children.

Simpletons suggest everyone of us be armed, and that the mentally ill be denied their freedoms, but their right to guns all of types shall never be infringed, no matter who is harmed. Thus you and the others, the NRA and members of Congress who fail to take action, and allowed the Brady Bill to sunset, are not men or women of good will. The are the loud and callous among us.

OK, let's play.
What form of "gun control" do you believe would keep guns from the hands of criminals?

OK, let's do that. Any person over the age of 12 who commits any felony, misdemeanor or has been civilly committed to a mental hospital as a danger to themselves or others shall have both of their hands removed.

Any more stupid questions Rabbit? How about we excuse those who violate the law of gravity, we don't want to be too harsh.

All right. Then you actually dont have any concrete proposals that would effectively reduce the rate of crime involving guns.
Next.

 

[The Rabbi]

Still waiting wry catcher.....

Felons....no guns....non violent felons could possibly apply for gun rights after 10 years with no crimes....

Mentally Ill...needs work...if we are not careful, anti gunners will use talking to a grief counselor as a reason to deny a normal person their gun rights....

Current gun laws need to be enforced...

No magazine limits....

no assault weapon ban

no gun registration

no licensing for gun owners....

I would allow the background checks we have now.....they don't work but you anti gun nuts want them for some reason and I will allow you that sop to your craziness....

that's about it....

He has no answer. His idea is merely to "stick it" to lawful gun owners because he resents them for whatever reason. He isnt interested in a solution to a problem, only a victory over people he considers enemies.

 

[2aguy]

Would it count if he just repeats favorite word groupings of anti gunners....."licensing" "background checks"....and so on......would he have to actually show how they would stop gun crime or can he just keep repeating those words?

 

[The Rabbi]

Would it count if he just repeats favorite word groupings of anti gunners....."licensing" "background checks"....and so on......would he have to actually show how they would stop gun crime or can he just keep repeating those words?

Well thats where he's headed. Its the old "we have to do something. Here's something. Let's do it"approach that's failed for 40 years.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Still waiting wry catcher.....

Felons....no guns....non violent felons could possibly apply for gun rights after 10 years with no crimes....

Mentally Ill...needs work...if we are not careful, anti gunners will use talking to a grief counselor as a reason to deny a normal person their gun rights....

Current gun laws need to be enforced...

No magazine limits....

no assault weapon ban

no gun registration

no licensing for gun owners....

I would allow the background checks we have now.....they don't work but you anti gun nuts want them for some reason and I will allow you that sop to your craziness....

that's about it....

I have.

Current gun laws are enforced. What evidence do you have that they are not?

Why does any citizen need a large capacity magazine and speed loader?

Why does any citizen need an assault weapon (that is a weapon designed to kill many humans as rapidly as possible?

Not all felons are violent, some crimes of violence are misdemeanors (assault, battery, domestic violence, even ADW is a wobbler).

Background checks aren't extensive, if a license is required, I would have the offender printed and the prints be placed separately from criminal records, and recorded solely to notify the licensing agency if and when the licensee come to the attention of law enforcement. At that time the license could be suspended pending further information. If the information reveals the offender committed a serious violent felony, and act of domestic violence, etc.

 

[2aguy]

Current gun laws are enforced. What evidence do you have that they are not?

Why does any citizen need a large capacity magazine and speed loader?

Why does any citizen need an assault weapon (that is a weapon designed to kill many humans as rapidly as possible?

Not all felons are violent, some crimes of violence are misdemeanors (assault, battery, domestic violence, even ADW is a wobbler).

Background checks aren't extensive, if a license is required, I would have the offender printed and the prints be placed separately from criminal records, and recorded solely to notify the licensing agency if and when the licensee come to the attention of law enforcement. At that time the license could be suspended pending further information. If the information reveals the offender committed a serious violent felony, and act of domestic violence, etc.

Gun laws....in Chicago....they don't prosecute gun crimes.....the guys who shot up a park last year had gun crimes in their backgrounds but were given boot camps instead of long prison sentences due to weapons charges....

Magazines, speed loaders and assault weapons....first, they haven't broken the law, 2nd, the citizens need to have access to the basic weapon of the U.S. infantry....to keep the government from turning on the people...

The background check for the Santa Barbara killer....he had one done for each of the 3 weapons he bought.....the 8-9,000 gun murders a year.....current background checks didn't stop them....and stolen guns or guns bought for gang members by girlfriends and family members won't be stopped by background checks either....

Criminals do not get permits, licenses....only law abiding citizens do.....again.....how does that stop any crime.....

When someone breaks the law with a gun...arrest them and prosecute them for the gun crime...put them away for a long, long time......that is effective gun control.....

And more on Magazine limits.....the killer at Santa Barbara....used legally mandated 10 round magazines...the limits didn't stop him....

The Sandy Hook shooter...changed magazines frequently, using combat reloading techniques so magazine limits wouldn't have mattered or stopped him.....

Also...he had pistols with him....so taking away an the AR-15 wouldn't have saved any lives.....

magazine limits, gun bans....pointless and only punish the very people who don't abuse them....

 

[2aguy]

One thing I would do as well....end gun free zones......they simply allow killers to kill unmolested until the police can arrive...allow legally armed private citizens to defend themselves...it will stop mass killers when a lawfully armed citizen is at the scene....

 

[2aguy]

And more on magazine bans.....didn't stop Columbine or Virginia tech....

Gun Control Facts Why a High Capacity Magazine Ban Would Not Prevent Mass Shootings - Mic

Would so-called “high capacity” magazine bans prevent mass shootings?

It doesn't seem likely such a ban would prevent mass shootings. Consider that one of the Columbineshooters used a Hi-Point 995 carbine rifle, which uses 10 round magazines. He just carried 13 of them. Similarly, the Virginia Tech shooter used handguns and 17 magazines – mostly of 10-round (but also some 15-round). Two of the highest profile mass shootings in recent history and shooters used 10-round magazines; they just brought a lot of them. These magazines would not have been affected at all by the proposed ban.

How long does it take to change a magazine?

Magazine changes can be very, very rapid, taking just seconds. The Columbine shooters had all the time in the world to reload and reload. They shot in the cafeteria, they entered the library, the went back to the cafeteria, then they went back to the library, and finally the science area. The shooting started at 11:19am and they continued their carnage until they committed suicide at approximately 12:08pm - or nearly an hour.

 

[2aguy]

Also...on standard magazines....when you are attacked...you do not have any idea how many rounds you will have to fire to save yourself or your family.....if you are a law abiding citizen, there is no sane reason to limit how many bullets you can carry to defend yourself....

If you have more than you need.....who cares...you did not use them to break the law....and if you need them...you had them....

 

[Wry Catcher]

So far, in 329 pages, the argument by those who oppose gun control / gun regulations can be summarized thusly:

• It's my Second Amendment Right!
• Those who would like to see gun controls really want to ban guns entirely;
• Any gun control will lead first to registration, then to confiscation;
• Honest citizens will become criminals;
• Gun control will put honest citizens' lives at risk

 

[2aguy]

Why does any citizen need an assault weapon (that is a weapon designed to kill many humans as rapidly as possible?

An AR-15, in 5.56, the boogyman of the anti gunners....is a good home defense weapon....it is essentially a weapon platform...you can put a light and a laser on it and you have 3 points of contact with the weapon making it more accurate to shoot than a pistol....also, the light round breaks up in dry wall...unlike most pistol ammo, which means you won't kill a neighbor if you shoot it in your home....

Also...if you go hiking in remote areas, you have a good, multipurpose weapon.....it may save your life against any kind of monster you might encounter...especially on the border where cartel members actually have military grade rifles....

 

[2aguy]

So far, in 329 pages, the argument by those who oppose gun control / gun regulations can be summarized thusly:

• It's my Second Amendment Right!
• Those who would like to see gun controls really want to ban guns entirely;
• Any gun control will lead first to registration, then to confiscation;
• Honest citizens will become criminals;
• Gun control will put honest citizens' lives at risk

Um.....dishonest much.....I believe enforcing existing laws is more than enough gun control...it is a right, even if you hate that fact, and those who push these laws intentionally know they lead to bans, and the ones, like you don't know any better, and registration is necessary for "Universal Background Checks" it is the only way to track guns not in the system....right?...and if you don't register your guns....you are a felon....right?....and there are currently more false positives in the NICS background check system than actual criminals stopped.....

3 day waiting periods, gun permit processes, and carry permit processes deny guns to women who may need guns to defend against ex husbands and boyfriends intent on killing them...

and not one of those measures stops actual criminals......why don't you see that?

 

[2aguy]

Any gun control will lead first to registration, then to confiscation;

You know....there is history on this....it isn't just pretend.....right?

 

[2aguy]

NewYork SAFE act makes criminals out of law abiding citizens...

As Many As One Million Armed New Yorkers Are About To Break The Law - Forbes

This year April 15 is more than the tax deadline for an estimated one million New York State residents. It’s also the deadline to register “assault weapons” and “high-capacity” magazines. If they don’t, they’ll begin living outside the law. A lot of them have decided to do just that. They’ve decided to practice civil disobedience even though failure to register an “assault weapon” by the deadline is punishable as a “class A misdemeanor,” which means a maximum sentence of one year in prison.

I put “assault weapon” and “high-capacity” in quotes because their definitions vary by state—they’re political terms. In New York State, the SAFE Act passed by the legislature and signed by Governor Andrew Cuomo in January 2013, uses an expansive and elaborate definition of “assault weapon” that includes a lot more than AR-15s. Now even a semiautomatic Remington Model 1100 shotgun—a popular shotgun first made in 1963 that is used by millions of hunters and skeet shooters—is an “assault weapon” in New York State if the shotgun has a pistol grip. Many other commonly owned pistols, shotguns and rifles are also now labeled “assault weapons” in New York State.

When I asked the New York State Police how many New York gun owners had registered the guns they own that now fit somewhere into the state’s expansive “assault weapons” category the state responded: “New York State Police cannot release information related to the registration of assault weapons including the number of assault weapons registered. Those records you seek are derived from information collected for the State Police database and are, therefore, exempt from disclosure.”

This is the same dilemma Connecticut gun owners found themselves in at the end of 2013. As of December 31, 2013, according to Lt. J. Paul Vance of the Connecticut State Police (CSP CSPI -0.77%), the state had received 41,347 applications to register “assault weapons” and 36,932 applications to register “high-capacity” magazines. That means that more than 300,000 Connecticut residents decided not to register their “assault weapons,” moved them out of state, or sold them.

300,000 new Connecticut criminals.......

There is a history to these things....of course...liberals believe history starts when they wake up in the morning.....

 

[Little-Acorn]

So far, in 329 pages, the argument by those who oppose gun control / gun regulations can be summarized thusly:

• It's my Second Amendment Right!
• Those who would like to see gun controls really want to ban guns entirely;
• Any gun control will lead first to registration, then to confiscation;
• Honest citizens will become criminals;
• Gun control will put honest citizens' lives at risk

Very good.

And your point is....??

 

[Wry Catcher]

Current gun laws are enforced. What evidence do you have that they are not?

Why does any citizen need a large capacity magazine and speed loader?

Why does any citizen need an assault weapon (that is a weapon designed to kill many humans as rapidly as possible?

Not all felons are violent, some crimes of violence are misdemeanors (assault, battery, domestic violence, even ADW is a wobbler).

Background checks aren't extensive, if a license is required, I would have the offender printed and the prints be placed separately from criminal records, and recorded solely to notify the licensing agency if and when the licensee come to the attention of law enforcement. At that time the license could be suspended pending further information. If the information reveals the offender committed a serious violent felony, and act of domestic violence, etc.

Gun laws....in Chicago....they don't prosecute gun crimes.....the guys who shot up a park last year had gun crimes in their backgrounds but were given boot camps instead of long prison sentences due to weapons charges....

Magazines, speed loaders and assault weapons....first, they haven't broken the law, 2nd, the citizens need to have access to the basic weapon of the U.S. infantry....to keep the government from turning on the people...

Now this is funny ^^^. You really don't think through anything, do you?

The background check for the Santa Barbara killer....he had one done for each of the 3 weapons he bought.....the 8-9,000 gun murders a year.....current background checks didn't stop them....and stolen guns or guns bought for gang members by girlfriends and family members won't be stopped by background checks either....

You see the world as black and white, thus you cannot understand that background checks do not equate to a vetting such as done with police candidates. That thefts could be reduced if the gun owner did not safely store his or her guns, making the gun owner culpable both civilly and criminally for harm done with a weapon poorly stored and easily stolen might be effective.

Criminals do not get permits, licenses....only law abiding citizens do.....again.....how does that stop any crime.....

A criminal would be someone who didn't get a license, or one previously convicted of certain crimes. Any person who provided a gun to an unlicensed individual in any manner would lose their license and suffer criminal penalties as well as be civilly liable for any harm done to any person or their property.

We don't live in a movie where we can predict what each person will do before they do it.

When someone breaks the law with a gun...arrest them and prosecute them for the gun crime...put them away for a long, long time......that is effective gun control.....

"Use a gun, go to prison", and use of a gun enhancements are in effect in CA. and have been for years.

And more on Magazine limits.....the killer at Santa Barbara....used legally mandated 10 round magazines...the limits didn't stop him....

So, other killers/mass murderers have used larger capacity mags and speed loaders to do their thing. Why does an average citizen need to rapidly fire a dozen or more rounds?

The Sandy Hook shooter...changed magazines frequently, using combat reloading techniques so magazine limits wouldn't have mattered or stopped him.....

Once situation proves nothing, a shooter will need to pause, maybe take his eyes off of the targets and thus give some people a chance to run away or time to charge the Sob

Also...he had pistols with him....so taking away an the AR-15 wouldn't have saved any lives.....

You don't know that

magazine limits, gun bans....pointless and only punish the very people who don't abuse them....

Punished, lol, that amounts to a spanking - what greater punishment is there than to take your 6 yo to school and have him or her slaughtered.

 

[2aguy]

The background check for the Santa Barbara killer....he had one done for each of the 3 weapons he bought.....the 8-9,000 gun murders a year.....current background checks didn't stop them....and stolen guns or guns bought for gang members by girlfriends and family members won't be stopped by background checks either....

You see the world as black and white, thus you cannot understand that background checks do not equate to a vetting such as done with police candidates. That thefts could be reduced if the gun owner did not safely store his or her guns, making the gun owner culpable both civilly and criminally for harm done with a weapon poorly stored and easily stolen might be effective.

Then what are they for...? They are pointless....they don't stop criminals from getting guns, they don't stop mass shooters from getting guns....they are an added step....for the sake of adding a step....to law abiding people getting guns.....no other reason.

If someone has a house or apartment and keeps their gun in their home....it is safely stored......if he leaves it lying around on his front lawn locked and loaded....you might have a case....otherwise...they are the victim of a crime, not a perpetrator....why would you punish them if their property is stolen....that makes no sense.....

 

[2aguy]

When someone breaks the law with a gun...arrest them and prosecute them for the gun crime...put them away for a long, long time......that is effective gun control.....

"Use a gun, go to prison", and use of a gun enhancements are in effect in CA. and have been for years.

And you show how effective these laws are...the Santa barbara killer didn't seem deterred....but locking up violaters is the only sane way to enact "gun control" anything else, background checks, registration, and licensing...do absolutely nothing for what you claim you want to achieve....yet you still want to do them...that is crazy....