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

[Mertex]

Then they say, let's pass a law, that will get rid of guns!

No one is trying to "get rid" of guns.....are all conservatives that dumb that they interpret liberals as wanting to "get rid" of guns when all we want is better gun control to reduce gun violence....."common sense, gun safety laws"?

 

[asaratis]

Then they say, let's pass a law, that will get rid of guns!

No one is trying to "get rid" of guns.....are all conservatives that dumb that they interpret liberals as wanting to "get rid" of guns when all we want is better gun control to reduce gun violence....."common sense, gun safety laws"?

Are all liberals so stupid that they believe that gun control efforts (laws) will affect the use of guns by criminals? The problem that liberals want to abate via gun control WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY GUN CONTROL LAWS!!

What we need is CRIMINAL CONTROL! We need sparse prisons. We need sentences that include outdoor HARD LABOR instead of air conditioned weight rooms. We need prisons where life is worse on the inside than on the outside.

 

[Fishlore]

Stern enforcement of specific laws doesn't make America a police state. Our suppression attempts in regard to illegal drugs doesn't make us a police state. Similar legal effort to make guns illegal and remove them from American society wouldn't make us a police state either. I respect your strong opposition to my proposal but wild exaggeration isn't effective. Japan has some of the most restrictive gun legislation on the planet but nobody is seriously suggesting that Japan is a police state.

Hey fish douche: You cannot simply pass a law such as the simplistic crap YOU proposed since the Constitution says which laws are unauthorized and the Second amendment still exists.

To accomplish your "goal" first you'd have to repeal the Second amendment.

And confiscation of all guns is the very first step IN a police state. Try to learn something of history someday.

Whenever I read one of these insulting, childish posts filled with unsupported generalizations about the Constitution and the history of the world, I know I am dealing with an angry, uneducated gun nut who posts on public forums to express his uncomprehending rage at things he doesn't understand and fears unreasonably. It used to make me sad, now I see it as the intellectual equivalent of gum on the sidewalk. Thanks for showing us your true colors.

I don'

Stern enforcement of specific laws doesn't make America a police state. Our suppression attempts in regard to illegal drugs doesn't make us a police state. Similar legal effort to make guns illegal and remove them from American society wouldn't make us a police state either. I respect your strong opposition to my proposal but wild exaggeration isn't effective. Japan has some of the most restrictive gun legislation on the planet but nobody is seriously suggesting that Japan is a police state.

Hey fish douche: You cannot simply pass a law such as the simplistic crap YOU proposed since the Constitution says which laws are unauthorized and the Second amendment still exists.

To accomplish your "goal" first you'd have to repeal the Second amendment.

And confiscation of all guns is the very first step IN a police state. Try to learn something of history someday.

Whenever I read one of these insulting, childish posts filled with unsupported generalizations about the Constitution and the history of the world, I know I am dealing with an angry, uneducated gun nut who posts on public forums to express his uncomprehending rage at things he doesn't understand and fears unreasonably. It used to make me sad, now I see it as the intellectual equivalent of gum on the sidewalk. Thanks for showing us your true colors.

LOL.

Wrong. I simply point out the obvious, which is that you are none to bright and you are also wrong. UNLESS you repeal the Second Amendment, your idiotic "plan" cannot work.

And confiscation of guns IS a traditional move by tyrants to make sure the populace is unable to effectively defend itself against his aggression and usurpations.

It is not even open to doubt that you are far less educated than you pretend. Further, I am not angry and not a gun nut. BUT, I do support our Constitution and the right of a free people to have a useful mode of self protection against the imbecility you support.

Try again, ya hapless hopeless dipwad.

What you mean to say, or rather what you would say if your brain were not addled by wearing your sister's underpants over your head is "UNLESS the Supreme Court reverses its most recent interpretation of the Second Amendment, your idiotic plan cannot work".

Supreme Court rulings get reversed more often than you think, or possibly in greater numbers than you can count. I cited two famous ones. As for my "plan" being idiotic, well, it was drafted to win the attention of idiots. Based on your garbled fuliminations, I'd say it has exceeded beyond all expectation.

Gun nuts have become a comic trope in American popular culture. Members of the ever-shrinking minority of silly little guys that own guns now owns a dozen guns, drooling over them in the solitary splendor of the bedroom closet. Why does a gun nut need a dozen guns in the closet? For the same reason he needs a dozen girlie magazines under the mattress. One item is never enough for the fetish collector. Stay calm and keep 'em loaded. America needs laughs.

As usual, you now remain wrong, fishfart:

What I MEANT to say is what I did say. And, your brain is far too minuscule to grasp anything sufficiently to pass judgment on these or any other important matters.

The Second Amendment still exists. The SCOTUS has even (fairly) recently reaffirmed that fact.

That a pinhead fishfucker like you may not like those facts really doesn't manage to change them.

The flatulent burst of childish name calling and personal criticism is unaccompanied by any evidence or analysis about anything. Like so many Internet trolls this poor laddie has nothing to offer but the spectacle of a poor chap consumed by his emotional demons. I feel sorry for him.

His worship of firearms coupled with his uncontrolled rage and inability to connect through verbal or written comminication is more than just pathetic; it is a common trait among our spree shooters, the Second Amendment enthusiasts who shoot up children in elementary schools, strangers is malls and movie theaters and a dozen other venues, including churches, distinctly American bursts of madness which splatter fair Columbia with human gore.

Not every gun nut is a mass murderer but most mass murderers are assuredly gun nuts. Remember that the next time you come across one of these incoherent spouts of hate and rage.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Hey fish douche: You cannot simply pass a law such as the simplistic crap YOU proposed since the Constitution says which laws are unauthorized and the Second amendment still exists.

To accomplish your "goal" first you'd have to repeal the Second amendment.

And confiscation of all guns is the very first step IN a police state. Try to learn something of history someday.

Whenever I read one of these insulting, childish posts filled with unsupported generalizations about the Constitution and the history of the world, I know I am dealing with an angry, uneducated gun nut who posts on public forums to express his uncomprehending rage at things he doesn't understand and fears unreasonably. It used to make me sad, now I see it as the intellectual equivalent of gum on the sidewalk. Thanks for showing us your true colors.

I don'

Hey fish douche: You cannot simply pass a law such as the simplistic crap YOU proposed since the Constitution says which laws are unauthorized and the Second amendment still exists.

To accomplish your "goal" first you'd have to repeal the Second amendment.

And confiscation of all guns is the very first step IN a police state. Try to learn something of history someday.

Whenever I read one of these insulting, childish posts filled with unsupported generalizations about the Constitution and the history of the world, I know I am dealing with an angry, uneducated gun nut who posts on public forums to express his uncomprehending rage at things he doesn't understand and fears unreasonably. It used to make me sad, now I see it as the intellectual equivalent of gum on the sidewalk. Thanks for showing us your true colors.

LOL.

Wrong. I simply point out the obvious, which is that you are none to bright and you are also wrong. UNLESS you repeal the Second Amendment, your idiotic "plan" cannot work.

And confiscation of guns IS a traditional move by tyrants to make sure the populace is unable to effectively defend itself against his aggression and usurpations.

It is not even open to doubt that you are far less educated than you pretend. Further, I am not angry and not a gun nut. BUT, I do support our Constitution and the right of a free people to have a useful mode of self protection against the imbecility you support.

Try again, ya hapless hopeless dipwad.

What you mean to say, or rather what you would say if your brain were not addled by wearing your sister's underpants over your head is "UNLESS the Supreme Court reverses its most recent interpretation of the Second Amendment, your idiotic plan cannot work".

Supreme Court rulings get reversed more often than you think, or possibly in greater numbers than you can count. I cited two famous ones. As for my "plan" being idiotic, well, it was drafted to win the attention of idiots. Based on your garbled fuliminations, I'd say it has exceeded beyond all expectation.

Gun nuts have become a comic trope in American popular culture. Members of the ever-shrinking minority of silly little guys that own guns now owns a dozen guns, drooling over them in the solitary splendor of the bedroom closet. Why does a gun nut need a dozen guns in the closet? For the same reason he needs a dozen girlie magazines under the mattress. One item is never enough for the fetish collector. Stay calm and keep 'em loaded. America needs laughs.

As usual, you now remain wrong, fishfart:

What I MEANT to say is what I did say. And, your brain is far too minuscule to grasp anything sufficiently to pass judgment on these or any other important matters.

The Second Amendment still exists. The SCOTUS has even (fairly) recently reaffirmed that fact.

That a pinhead fishfucker like you may not like those facts really doesn't manage to change them.

The flatulent burst of childish name calling and personal criticism is unaccompanied by any evidence or analysis about anything. Like so many Internet trolls this poor laddie has nothing to offer but the spectacle of a poor chap consumed by his emotional demons. I feel sorry for him.

His worship of firearms coupled with his uncontrolled rage and inability to connect through verbal or written comminication is more than just pathetic; it is a common trait among our spree shooters, the Second Amendment enthusiasts who shoot up children in elementary schools, strangers is malls and movie theaters and a dozen other venues, including churches, distinctly American bursts of madness which splatter fair Columbia with human gore.

Not every gun nut is a mass murderer but most mass murderers are assuredly gun nuts. Remember that the next time you come across one of these incoherent spouts of hate and rage.

Hey fishfart:

While you are busy doing the very thing you pretend to be above (which makes you an imbecile hypocrite which everyone sees quite clearly, you scum-sucking twat), let's get down to it, shall we, fuckhead?

YOU are the moron who suggested confiscation of guns. I pointed out to you, you mental pygmy, that that isn't possible as long as we have a Second Amendment.

Since then, you have offered not one fucking thing to support your idiotic notion.

Now, it is true that I have engaged in name calling. Not my fault you are a fish fuckface. Deal with it, bitch.

But what is not true is that you have the foggiest notion of the implications of the stupidity you are "suggesting."

 

[Arizona Willie]

Then they say, let's pass a law, that will get rid of guns!

No one is trying to "get rid" of guns.....are all conservatives that dumb that they interpret liberals as wanting to "get rid" of guns when all we want is better gun control to reduce gun violence....."common sense, gun safety laws"?

Are all liberals so stupid that they believe that gun control efforts (laws) will affect the use of guns by criminals? The problem that liberals want to abate via gun control WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY GUN CONTROL LAWS!!

What we need is CRIMINAL CONTROL! We need sparse prisons. We need sentences that include outdoor HARD LABOR instead of air conditioned weight rooms. We need prisons where life is worse on the inside than on the outside.

========
Conservatives keep screaming that Obama is " going to take our guns away ".

How many guns have been taken away from you?

Hmmm, all I hear is crickets.

 

[Fishlore]

Whenever I read one of these insulting, childish posts filled with unsupported generalizations about the Constitution and the history of the world, I know I am dealing with an angry, uneducated gun nut who posts on public forums to express his uncomprehending rage at things he doesn't understand and fears unreasonably. It used to make me sad, now I see it as the intellectual equivalent of gum on the sidewalk. Thanks for showing us your true colors.

I don'

Whenever I read one of these insulting, childish posts filled with unsupported generalizations about the Constitution and the history of the world, I know I am dealing with an angry, uneducated gun nut who posts on public forums to express his uncomprehending rage at things he doesn't understand and fears unreasonably. It used to make me sad, now I see it as the intellectual equivalent of gum on the sidewalk. Thanks for showing us your true colors.

LOL.

Wrong. I simply point out the obvious, which is that you are none to bright and you are also wrong. UNLESS you repeal the Second Amendment, your idiotic "plan" cannot work.

And confiscation of guns IS a traditional move by tyrants to make sure the populace is unable to effectively defend itself against his aggression and usurpations.

It is not even open to doubt that you are far less educated than you pretend. Further, I am not angry and not a gun nut. BUT, I do support our Constitution and the right of a free people to have a useful mode of self protection against the imbecility you support.

Try again, ya hapless hopeless dipwad.

What you mean to say, or rather what you would say if your brain were not addled by wearing your sister's underpants over your head is "UNLESS the Supreme Court reverses its most recent interpretation of the Second Amendment, your idiotic plan cannot work".

Supreme Court rulings get reversed more often than you think, or possibly in greater numbers than you can count. I cited two famous ones. As for my "plan" being idiotic, well, it was drafted to win the attention of idiots. Based on your garbled fuliminations, I'd say it has exceeded beyond all expectation.

Gun nuts have become a comic trope in American popular culture. Members of the ever-shrinking minority of silly little guys that own guns now owns a dozen guns, drooling over them in the solitary splendor of the bedroom closet. Why does a gun nut need a dozen guns in the closet? For the same reason he needs a dozen girlie magazines under the mattress. One item is never enough for the fetish collector. Stay calm and keep 'em loaded. America needs laughs.

As usual, you now remain wrong, fishfart:

What I MEANT to say is what I did say. And, your brain is far too minuscule to grasp anything sufficiently to pass judgment on these or any other important matters.

The Second Amendment still exists. The SCOTUS has even (fairly) recently reaffirmed that fact.

That a pinhead fishfucker like you may not like those facts really doesn't manage to change them.

The flatulent burst of childish name calling and personal criticism is unaccompanied by any evidence or analysis about anything. Like so many Internet trolls this poor laddie has nothing to offer but the spectacle of a poor chap consumed by his emotional demons. I feel sorry for him.

His worship of firearms coupled with his uncontrolled rage and inability to connect through verbal or written comminication is more than just pathetic; it is a common trait among our spree shooters, the Second Amendment enthusiasts who shoot up children in elementary schools, strangers is malls and movie theaters and a dozen other venues, including churches, distinctly American bursts of madness which splatter fair Columbia with human gore.

Not every gun nut is a mass murderer but most mass murderers are assuredly gun nuts. Remember that the next time you come across one of these incoherent spouts of hate and rage.

Hey fishfart:

While you are busy doing the very thing you pretend to be above (which makes you an imbecile hypocrite which everyone sees quite clearly, you scum-sucking twat), let's get down to it, shall we, fuckhead?

YOU are the moron who suggested confiscation of guns. I pointed out to you, you mental pygmy, that that isn't possible as long as we have a Second Amendment.

Since then, you have offered not one fucking thing to support your idiotic notion.

Now, it is true that I have engaged in name calling. Not my fault you are a fish fuckface. Deal with it, bitch.

But what is not true is that you have the foggiest notion of the implications of the stupidity you are "suggesting."

This is a sick little puppy. The idea of his gun collection would be alarming if he didn't live in some god forsaken shit hole thousands of miles from my well-guarded estate. There are hundred of these guys running around loose in God's Country. Cause for alarm.

 

[kaz]

The OP asked "Liberals, what's your plan?" I posted my plan. Did I expect conservatives to like it? Did the conservatives expect that they would like it? Of course not on both counts. Does this mean that the thread is a mistake? No, it is interesting and helpful to see the opposing point of view. One might even engage in debate about some of evidence or argument presented by Liberals presenting their plans as requested. It's a debate forum, isn't it?

But what about the hostility, the sarcasm, the name calling? Is getting the opportunity to indulge in these attacks the real reason for asking for Liberal plans? Seriously, Dude, is that where you are coming from?

The problem with your plan is that it would do more harm than good in this country. The question isn't how we'd do it in a made up world, it's what do you propose that would work in this one.

My plan is to maximize keeping criminals in jail to reduce repeat crimes and let people defend themselves. You'd start a rebellion trying to confiscate 310 million guns

The rebellion fantasy is a big part of the gun lover's world. Rebellion against an oppressive government, rebellion against foreign invaders, now rebellion against a gun confiscation law. They are all dreams.

For one thing, gun owners are not connected and are united only by their guns. They don't know each other, they have no communication or logistics and most of them are middle-aged country boys driving pickup trucks. Not much of a challenge for the state police.

The fantasy is one of jack-booted thugs standing on the front lawn exchanging fire with our gun-toting hero. That isn't the way things work. Court orders, civil fines, etc. the slow squeeze that collapsed the rebellious bluster of the gun nuts holed up in that wildlife sanctuary. Having a gun doesn't make you a soldier.

One good thing about that notional "rebellion" it would solidify majority support for gun confiscation. The American pea pull are sick and tired of these gun nuts with their crazy ideas.

You sure like to tell people who you don't know, like or understand what they think. As for me, I'm not a rebellion buff, I think it's pretty unlikely. So on that point I agree. But If you think trying to disarm the country won't cause one, you just go ahead and try it, that would do it. It would be a civil war. And the military would be split at best.

No politician would be stupid to try it. The question isn't to come up with a theoretical plan that would work in an alternate reality, it's to propose an actual plan that would work in this one. You didn't accomplish that.

 

[Fishlore]

The OP asked "Liberals, what's your plan?" I posted my plan. Did I expect conservatives to like it? Did the conservatives expect that they would like it? Of course not on both counts. Does this mean that the thread is a mistake? No, it is interesting and helpful to see the opposing point of view. One might even engage in debate about some of evidence or argument presented by Liberals presenting their plans as requested. It's a debate forum, isn't it?

But what about the hostility, the sarcasm, the name calling? Is getting the opportunity to indulge in these attacks the real reason for asking for Liberal plans? Seriously, Dude, is that where you are coming from?

The problem with your plan is that it would do more harm than good in this country. The question isn't how we'd do it in a made up world, it's what do you propose that would work in this one.

My plan is to maximize keeping criminals in jail to reduce repeat crimes and let people defend themselves. You'd start a rebellion trying to confiscate 310 million guns

The rebellion fantasy is a big part of the gun lover's world. Rebellion against an oppressive government, rebellion against foreign invaders, now rebellion against a gun confiscation law. They are all dreams.

For one thing, gun owners are not connected and are united only by their guns. They don't know each other, they have no communication or logistics and most of them are middle-aged country boys driving pickup trucks. Not much of a challenge for the state police.

The fantasy is one of jack-booted thugs standing on the front lawn exchanging fire with our gun-toting hero. That isn't the way things work. Court orders, civil fines, etc. the slow squeeze that collapsed the rebellious bluster of the gun nuts holed up in that wildlife sanctuary. Having a gun doesn't make you a soldier.

One good thing about that notional "rebellion" it would solidify majority support for gun confiscation. The American pea pull are sick and tired of these gun nuts with their crazy ideas.

You sure like to tell people who you don't know, like or understand what they think. As for me, I'm not a rebellion buff, I think it's pretty unlikely. So on that point I agree. But If you think trying to disarm the country won't cause one, you just go ahead and try it, that would do it. It would be a civil war. And the military would be split at best.

No politician would be stupid to try it. The question isn't to come up with a theoretical plan that would work in an alternate reality, it's to propose an actual plan that would work in this one. You didn't accomplish that.

No, I don't like squelching trolls but like rats in the barn, you can't just let 'em run wild. As for the tough talk about rebellion and Second Amendment heroes rising up to defend us all aginst tyranny etc. etc. I note that there is never a gun nut around when you need one. For every situation in which a gun-toting civilian stops or prevents a crime there are a thousand cases of tragic family suicide and accidental manslaughter by gun. Guns don't prevent crimes, they cause them. No other advanced democracy has our gun ownership numbers or our gun homicide numbers.

As for an actual plan that would work in the present circumstances, there isn't one but the flaw isn't in the process it's in the politics. This will change. The percentage of families owning a gun has been dropping for 40 years. All that is holding up the present situation is the antique and utterly corrupt political system. The gun nuts are getting older and fewer every year. It's the gun industry that is propping up the carnage.

 

[kaz]

Every time there's a shooting, liberals run around saying this proves we need more gun laws. I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals every time you say you want more gun laws.

In particular, address given that drugs are illegal, and yet any parent knows any kid can get as much pot as they want. There are millions of guns in the US, millions more in the world. So don't just say more laws, explain how more laws are going to actually work.

So, there have been 7 shootings killing at least 10 people in the last decade. The only thing you've achieved so far is that no one was shooting back.

Many shooters are not criminals until they get ahold of a gun......what needs to be done is "keeping guns out of irresponsible people" - like in this case. But most gun nuts think everyone is entitled to a gun, and an AR15 if they so desire. Hope these irresponsible people only kill those in their own families....that seems fair.

Child in back seat gets ‘ahold of gun,’ shoots and kills woman driving car

Your link obviously points to an irresponsible gun owner. Those of us that are responsible would like to see those who's carelessness results in harm to others dealt with harshly.
What you fail to grasp is that I didn't leave a loaded gun on the back seat of that lady's car and infringing my right to own and carry a firearm will not prevent another kid from shooting his mom. However it may prevent me from defending myself or others in my home or business.
You bring up AR 15 as if you know something about guns.... Suppose you tell us what you know about the AR 15

Exactly. No one says, OMG, do you see what that idiot did in that car, what is wrong with cars!

Like cars were created for the sole purpose of killing people?

Sorry man, who do you want to murder?

 

[Rustic]

Buy more guns and ammo...

 

[kaz]

Then they say, let's pass a law, that will get rid of guns!

No one is trying to "get rid" of guns.....are all conservatives that dumb that they interpret liberals as wanting to "get rid" of guns when all we want is better gun control to reduce gun violence....."common sense, gun safety laws"?

you want to make sure we don't have buns when we need them

 

[Mertex]

Then they say, let's pass a law, that will get rid of guns!

No one is trying to "get rid" of guns.....are all conservatives that dumb that they interpret liberals as wanting to "get rid" of guns when all we want is better gun control to reduce gun violence....."common sense, gun safety laws"?

Are all liberals so stupid that they believe that gun control efforts (laws) will affect the use of guns by criminals? The problem that liberals want to abate via gun control WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY GUN CONTROL LAWS!!

Are all conservatives that stupid that they think that more people owning more guns will reduce crime, or not affect the number of crimes? Apparently so, because they even believe in buying guns for their children. How stupid is that? As long as conservatives keep fighting for even mentals to be allowed to buy guns, and gun shows to sell guns without registering buyers....the the more senseless crimes we will have.


The fact is that if NRA claims about the efficacy of guns in reducing crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialized nations instead of the highest homicide rate (by a wide margin).

The U.S. is by far the world leader in the number of guns in civilian hands. The stricter gun laws of other “advanced countries” have restrained homicidal violence, suicides and gun accidents—even when, in some cases, laws were introduced over massive protests from their armed citizens.

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-what-we-can-learn-other-advanced-countries-379105

What we need is CRIMINAL CONTROL! We need sparse prisons. We need sentences that include outdoor HARD LABOR instead of air conditioned weight rooms. We need prisons where life is worse on the inside than on the outside.[/QUOTE]

Apparently you've never visited a prison. If you believe that life is worse on the outside than it is in prison, you're either very ignorant or totally naive.

Harsher punishments isn't the answer. Sending people to prison doesn't stop criminals.....allowing idiots to own guns is the problem. Encouraging people to buy and carry guns makes it easier for the "not right in the head - quick to anger people" to end up killing for stupid reasons.

Road Rage Causes Drivers to Shoot and Kill Each Other

 

[Mertex]

Then they say, let's pass a law, that will get rid of guns!

No one is trying to "get rid" of guns.....are all conservatives that dumb that they interpret liberals as wanting to "get rid" of guns when all we want is better gun control to reduce gun violence....."common sense, gun safety laws"?

you want to make sure we don't have buns when we need them

You can have all the "buns" you want.....but some people clearly shouldn't have GUNS.

 

[Rustic]

Then they say, let's pass a law, that will get rid of guns!

No one is trying to "get rid" of guns.....are all conservatives that dumb that they interpret liberals as wanting to "get rid" of guns when all we want is better gun control to reduce gun violence....."common sense, gun safety laws"?

Are all liberals so stupid that they believe that gun control efforts (laws) will affect the use of guns by criminals? The problem that liberals want to abate via gun control WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY GUN CONTROL LAWS!!

Are all conservatives that stupid that they think that more people owning more guns will reduce crime, or not affect the number of crimes? Apparently so, because they even believe in buying guns for their children. How stupid is that? As long as conservatives keep fighting for even mentals to be allowed to buy guns, and gun shows to sell guns without registering buyers....the the more senseless crimes we will have.


The fact is that if NRA claims about the efficacy of guns in reducing crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialized nations instead of the highest homicide rate (by a wide margin).

The U.S. is by far the world leader in the number of guns in civilian hands. The stricter gun laws of other “advanced countries” have restrained homicidal violence, suicides and gun accidents—even when, in some cases, laws were introduced over massive protests from their armed citizens.

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-what-we-can-learn-other-advanced-countries-379105

What we need is CRIMINAL CONTROL! We need sparse prisons. We need sentences that include outdoor HARD LABOR instead of air conditioned weight rooms. We need prisons where life is worse on the inside than on the outside.

Apparently you've never visited a prison. If you believe that life is worse on the outside than it is in prison, you're either very ignorant or totally naive.

Harsher punishments isn't the answer. Sending people to prison doesn't stop criminals.....allowing idiots to own guns is the problem. Encouraging people to buy and carry guns makes it easier for the "not right in the head - quick to anger people" to end up killing for stupid reasons.

Road Rage Causes Drivers to Shoot and Kill Each Other[/QUOTE]
More guns = less crime... Fact

 

[Mertex]

Every time there's a shooting, liberals run around saying this proves we need more gun laws. I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals every time you say you want more gun laws.

In particular, address given that drugs are illegal, and yet any parent knows any kid can get as much pot as they want. There are millions of guns in the US, millions more in the world. So don't just say more laws, explain how more laws are going to actually work.

So, there have been 7 shootings killing at least 10 people in the last decade. The only thing you've achieved so far is that no one was shooting back.

Many shooters are not criminals until they get ahold of a gun......what needs to be done is "keeping guns out of irresponsible people" - like in this case. But most gun nuts think everyone is entitled to a gun, and an AR15 if they so desire. Hope these irresponsible people only kill those in their own families....that seems fair.

Child in back seat gets ‘ahold of gun,’ shoots and kills woman driving car

Your link obviously points to an irresponsible gun owner. Those of us that are responsible would like to see those who's carelessness results in harm to others dealt with harshly.
What you fail to grasp is that I didn't leave a loaded gun on the back seat of that lady's car and infringing my right to own and carry a firearm will not prevent another kid from shooting his mom. However it may prevent me from defending myself or others in my home or business.
You bring up AR 15 as if you know something about guns.... Suppose you tell us what you know about the AR 15

Exactly. No one says, OMG, do you see what that idiot did in that car, what is wrong with cars!

Like cars were created for the sole purpose of killing people?

Sorry man, who do you want to murder?

I don't want to murder anyone........but you're comparing cars to guns....cars weren't manufactured for the sole purpose of killing people....guns are.

 

[Mertex]

More guns = less crime... Fact

Your opinion isn't fact.[/QUOTE]

 

[Rustic]

Then they say, let's pass a law, that will get rid of guns!

No one is trying to "get rid" of guns.....are all conservatives that dumb that they interpret liberals as wanting to "get rid" of guns when all we want is better gun control to reduce gun violence....."common sense, gun safety laws"?

Are all liberals so stupid that they believe that gun control efforts (laws) will affect the use of guns by criminals? The problem that liberals want to abate via gun control WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY GUN CONTROL LAWS!!

Are all conservatives that stupid that they think that more people owning more guns will reduce crime, or not affect the number of crimes? Apparently so, because they even believe in buying guns for their children. How stupid is that? As long as conservatives keep fighting for even mentals to be allowed to buy guns, and gun shows to sell guns without registering buyers....the the more senseless crimes we will have.


The fact is that if NRA claims about the efficacy of guns in reducing crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialized nations instead of the highest homicide rate (by a wide margin).

The U.S. is by far the world leader in the number of guns in civilian hands. The stricter gun laws of other “advanced countries” have restrained homicidal violence, suicides and gun accidents—even when, in some cases, laws were introduced over massive protests from their armed citizens.

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-what-we-can-learn-other-advanced-countries-379105

What we need is CRIMINAL CONTROL! We need sparse prisons. We need sentences that include outdoor HARD LABOR instead of air conditioned weight rooms. We need prisons where life is worse on the inside than on the outside.

Apparently you've never visited a prison. If you believe that life is worse on the outside than it is in prison, you're either very ignorant or totally naive.

Harsher punishments isn't the answer. Sending people to prison doesn't stop criminals.....allowing idiots to own guns is the problem. Encouraging people to buy and carry guns makes it easier for the "not right in the head - quick to anger people" to end up killing for stupid reasons.

Road Rage Causes Drivers to Shoot and Kill Each Other

More guns = less crime... Fact

Your opinion isn't fact.[/QUOTE]

 

[Mertex]

You're deflecting.....you're opinion isn't fact.

 

[Rustic]

You're deflecting.....you're opinion isn't fact.

 

[Rustic]

Many shooters are not criminals until they get ahold of a gun......what needs to be done is "keeping guns out of irresponsible people" - like in this case. But most gun nuts think everyone is entitled to a gun, and an AR15 if they so desire. Hope these irresponsible people only kill those in their own families....that seems fair.

Child in back seat gets ‘ahold of gun,’ shoots and kills woman driving car

Your link obviously points to an irresponsible gun owner. Those of us that are responsible would like to see those who's carelessness results in harm to others dealt with harshly.
What you fail to grasp is that I didn't leave a loaded gun on the back seat of that lady's car and infringing my right to own and carry a firearm will not prevent another kid from shooting his mom. However it may prevent me from defending myself or others in my home or business.
You bring up AR 15 as if you know something about guns.... Suppose you tell us what you know about the AR 15

Exactly. No one says, OMG, do you see what that idiot did in that car, what is wrong with cars!

Like cars were created for the sole purpose of killing people?

Sorry man, who do you want to murder?

I don't want to murder anyone........but you're comparing cars to guns....cars weren't manufactured for the sole purpose of killing people....guns are.

No one has a "right" to a car... Firearm ownership is right. Fuck nut. Lol