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

[Bern80]

[

Or we could go with option c. We accept that life has risks and that it not the role of government to legislate all risk out of life. We seem content accepting the risk involved in the existence of other objects, like cars. We have the statistics. We know by their very existence there is a level of danger, injury and loss of life that can and WILL occur. But we also realize that the vast majority of people that operate these devices are not dangerous. That the vast majority of the objects themselves will never be involved in any level of violence or accident and as such it is nonsensical to deprive the vast majority of people of that object for the sake of preventing injury and death from an extremely small minority.

Since there is NO benefit to private citizens having guns and lots of benefits from keeping crazy people from having them, you've kind of "statistically" made the point against gun ownership.

Congratulations!

The above is so stupid it doesn't even make sense. Get it through your skull Joe. Benefit/need is irellevant. It is an invalid argument. We don't go around telling people what they can or can't have based on whether they need it or not. There is no reason to do so where guns are concerned because relatively speaking they pose very little threat to society at large.

 

[Bern80]

WHich is why I say, the fastest way to end gun violence- make the gun manufacturers and sellers legally liable with their deep pockets for those killed by guns.

They'll start screening out the bad apple really fast after that.

You'd drive them out of business because they have no control over where guns go, it's the distribution network that does that. then just like drugs, overseas dealers would take over. You've over and over repeated that your answer to the question of how you're going to make gun laws work when drug laws don't is you want gun laws to work like drug laws.

So, if you want to do that, you have to explain why it will work. Hence, the question in the op.

But that's the point. They'd have EVERY bit of control over where the guns go.

Credit Card companies spend BILLIONS making sure that they are going to get paid back. they create "credit reports" on every last one of us and monitor our spending habits.

You hit a gun manufacturer with an eight figure settlement, guess what, they are going to tighten down REAL fast on how their product is "distributed".

Just like every other manufacturer.

No, not like every other manufacturer. You're not being consistent in your argument. Why are you not insisting we hold the manufacturer of the car the crazy lady in DC used responsible?

 

[kaz]

But according to Joeb someone should lose rights because Joe is afraid of his shadow. Make no mistake about it he advocates NO ONE that is not in the military or law enforcement should have access to firearms.

Yes, he does. And he says he was in the military, and he thinks the primary purpose of guns is for killing people. Only sick people like him should be armed. And bam, we are safe and free!

Well, no guy, when I had a gun in the military, I was RESPONSIBLE for the soldiers in my squad, and in turn, the Officers above me were responsible for my actions.

Which meant if I started exhibiting paranoid or dangerous tendencies, they had a responsibility to reel me in.

Get it?

You said the primary purpose of shooting guns is to kill people, that is sick. And you want only government to have guns. That is really sick if the primary purpose of having guns is to kill people. Think about it, but don't hurt yourself.

 

[kaz]

WHich is why I say, the fastest way to end gun violence- make the gun manufacturers and sellers legally liable with their deep pockets for those killed by guns.

They'll start screening out the bad apple really fast after that.

You'd drive them out of business because they have no control over where guns go, it's the distribution network that does that. then just like drugs, overseas dealers would take over. You've over and over repeated that your answer to the question of how you're going to make gun laws work when drug laws don't is you want gun laws to work like drug laws.

So, if you want to do that, you have to explain why it will work. Hence, the question in the op.

But that's the point. They'd have EVERY bit of control over where the guns go.

Credit Card companies spend BILLIONS making sure that they are going to get paid back. they create "credit reports" on every last one of us and monitor our spending habits.

You hit a gun manufacturer with an eight figure settlement, guess what, they are going to tighten down REAL fast on how their product is "distributed".

Just like every other manufacturer.

Comparing selling guns or any product to people with extending them ongoing credit is just retarded.

And nobody who manufactures products has the unlimited liability of what their customers do with the product that you are proposing.

You're just proposing to shut them down, which leads us directly to the drugs solution, and the question in the op, which you continually have no answer to. You just say do what doesn't work with drugs with guns.

And Candy says how we make gun laws work is to do what we do with drugs, only do more of it and wait a long, long time. She doesn't know why when guns get expensive people won't just start smuggling them in. It will just work. If we wait long enough. And wait, and wait and wait...

 

[kaz]

[

The only thing the meds do is control my desire to kill myself. They have nothing to do with your supposed claim I am a threat to others.

I don't find that terribly reassuring.

But you do feel secure thinking that if your family can sue the gun manufacturer he won't be able to get a gun because he wouldn't be able to get his hands on any of the millions of guns already in the country or the millions more outside the country that could just be put on a plane or a ship already coming in the country loaded with drugs.

Well, it's your funeral...

 

[JoeB131]

[

Comparing selling guns or any product to people with extending them ongoing credit is just retarded.

And nobody who manufactures products has the unlimited liability of what their customers do with the product that you are proposing.

You're just proposing to shut them down, which leads us directly to the drugs solution, and the question in the op, which you continually have no answer to. You just say do what doesn't work with drugs with guns.

And Candy says how we make gun laws work is to do what we do with drugs, only do more of it and wait a long, long time. She doesn't know why when guns get expensive people won't just start smuggling them in. It will just work. If we wait long enough. And wait, and wait and wait...

It's easier to manufacture guns than it is drugs.

I think you also forget WHY drugs were outlawed to start with. Because before they were made illegal, everyone was doing them. Doctors routinely recommended cocaine for children, there were a million opium addicts in a population of less than 100 Million.

 

[kaz]

[

Comparing selling guns or any product to people with extending them ongoing credit is just retarded.

And nobody who manufactures products has the unlimited liability of what their customers do with the product that you are proposing.

You're just proposing to shut them down, which leads us directly to the drugs solution, and the question in the op, which you continually have no answer to. You just say do what doesn't work with drugs with guns.

And Candy says how we make gun laws work is to do what we do with drugs, only do more of it and wait a long, long time. She doesn't know why when guns get expensive people won't just start smuggling them in. It will just work. If we wait long enough. And wait, and wait and wait...

It's easier to manufacture guns than it is drugs.

Which totally supports my point

I think you also forget WHY drugs were outlawed to start with. Because before they were made illegal, everyone was doing them. Doctors routinely recommended cocaine for children, there were a million opium addicts in a population of less than 100 Million.

Yes, all hail government, they will save us. That sucks. But compare it to present day where fighting the drugs gets us:

1) Funding serious bad guys from the Taliban in Afghanistan to drug cartels in Columbia causing destabilization of those governments and their neighbors and leaving their people living in fear.

2) Funding organized crime in the United States.

3) Causing shootouts in the streets and terrorizing inner city neighborhoods into silence.

4) Allowing massive intrusions into our privacy by the government in the name of finding drug money.

5) Spending billions and billions we don't have year after year, as opposed to taxing drugs like any other product and bringing in revenue.

Thanks government for helping! No problem is so big or so complicated that government can't make it worse. And you want to double down and do the same for guns! Good thinking.

This is the core of libertarianism, that is inherently so. Sure, if government could do my charity for me and make good decisions that expanded my liberty and made my life easier, I'd love it too. The only difference between liberals and me is that I recognize that never happens. The Obamacare disaster where Obamacare ended up helping no one but government is what happens. A libertarian is just a liberal or a conservative with their eyes open.

 

[Steven_R]

Government makes no mistakes. When a government program fails to meet expectations, that is just proof not enough government was applied to the problem. More government is obviously needed. Repeat ad nausium.

 

[Spoonman]

 

[JoeB131]

[

I think you also forget WHY drugs were outlawed to start with. Because before they were made illegal, everyone was doing them. Doctors routinely recommended cocaine for children, there were a million opium addicts in a population of less than 100 Million.

Yes, all hail government, they will save us. That sucks. But compare it to present day where fighting the drugs gets us:

1) Funding serious bad guys from the Taliban in Afghanistan to drug cartels in Columbia causing destabilization of those governments and their neighbors and leaving their people living in fear.

2) Funding organized crime in the United States.

3) Causing shootouts in the streets and terrorizing inner city neighborhoods into silence.

4) Allowing massive intrusions into our privacy by the government in the name of finding drug money.

5) Spending billions and billions we don't have year after year, as opposed to taxing drugs like any other product and bringing in revenue.

Thanks government for helping! No problem is so big or so complicated that government can't make it worse. And you want to double down and do the same for guns! Good thinking.

This is the core of libertarianism, that is inherently so. Sure, if government could do my charity for me and make good decisions that expanded my liberty and made my life easier, I'd love it too. The only difference between liberals and me is that I recognize that never happens. The Obamacare disaster where Obamacare ended up helping no one but government is what happens. A libertarian is just a liberal or a conservative with their eyes open.

I think the problem is, if Libertarianism is such a nifty idea, why hasn't any country ever tried it, not even once?

I mean, even the really bad ideas like Theocracy, Fascism and Communism had a few countries willing to give it a go.

Is the War on Drugs executed badly? Absolutely. They are treating a medical problem like a criminal one.

Is legallizing drugs the answer? Not unless you want your kid doing them the minute he's 18.

 

[Geaux4it]

The answer is we need to sell and buy more guns.

An armed society is a peaceful society

Not to mention, the police have no obligation whatsoever to come to your aid. You are on your own

-Geaux

 

[jon_berzerk]

The answer is we need to sell and buy more guns.

An armed society is a peaceful society

Not to mention, the police have no obligation whatsoever to come to your aid. You are on your own

-Geaux

Governor Jerry Brown Refuses To Sign Bill Banning Semi-Automatic Rifles

California Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a bill Friday that would have banned future sales of most semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines, part of a firearms package approved by state lawmakers in response to mass shootings in other states.

The governor announced signing other gun-related legislation but rejected the centerpiece bill, which would have imposed the nation’s toughest restrictions on gun ownership.

Brown’s veto message said it was too far-reaching. The bill by Democratic Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg would have outlawed future sales of an entire class of weapons that includes most assault rifles.

It was lawmakers’ latest attempt to close loopholes that have allowed manufacturers to work around previous assault weapon bans. Gun rights groups had threatened to sue if the semi-automatic weapons ban became law.

“I don’t believe that this bill’s blanket ban on semi-automatic rifles would reduce criminal activity or enhance public safety enough to warrant this infringement on gun owners’ rights,” the Democratic governor wrote in his veto message.

Brown Vetoes Bill Banning Semi-Automatic Rifles - ABC News

 

[jon_berzerk]

The answer is we need to sell and buy more guns.

An armed society is a peaceful society

Not to mention, the police have no obligation whatsoever to come to your aid. You are on your own

-Geaux

The answer is we need to sell and buy more guns.

these scopes are soon market ready but very spendy

12 Year Old Girl Hits 1000 Yards with TrackingPoint Smart Rifle

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfpZjTOyiFA]12 Year Old Girl Hits 1000 Yards with TrackingPoint Smart Rifle - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Geaux4it]

The answer is we need to sell and buy more guns.

An armed society is a peaceful society

Not to mention, the police have no obligation whatsoever to come to your aid. You are on your own

-Geaux

The answer is we need to sell and buy more guns.

these scopes are soon market ready but very spendy

12 Year Old Girl Hits 1000 Yards with TrackingPoint Smart Rifle

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfpZjTOyiFA]12 Year Old Girl Hits 1000 Yards with TrackingPoint Smart Rifle - YouTube[/ame]

Ok- She can be on my team

-Geaux

 

[Valox]

How come gun nuts believe in arming teachers, but not ghetto people.

Should your logic work both way? More guns that ghetto people have, the less crime?

When was the last time the NRA conducted a bake sale in gun violent neighborhoods? But is it is cool that the NRA wants to arm 3rd grade math teachers.

 

[Geaux4it]

How come gun nuts believe in arming teachers, but not ghetto people.

Should your logic work both way? More guns that ghetto people have, the less crime?

When was the last time the NRA conducted a bake sale in gun violent neighborhoods? But is it is cool that the NRA wants to arm 3rd grade math teachers.

I'm all for the hood keeping their weapons to continue the cleansing of their own. Saves taxpayer dollars in keeping them out of prison.

A funeral is far cheaper than incarceration

-Geaux

 

[Valox]

How come gun nuts believe in arming teachers, but not ghetto people.

Should your logic work both way? More guns that ghetto people have, the less crime?

When was the last time the NRA conducted a bake sale in gun violent neighborhoods? But is it is cool that the NRA wants to arm 3rd grade math teachers.

I'm all for the hood keeping their weapons to continue the cleansing of their own. Saves taxpayer dollars in keeping them out of prison.

A funeral is far cheaper than incarceration

-Geaux

When was the last time you walked through one of those neighborhoods, handing out guns?

 

[Geaux4it]

How come gun nuts believe in arming teachers, but not ghetto people.

Should your logic work both way? More guns that ghetto people have, the less crime?

When was the last time the NRA conducted a bake sale in gun violent neighborhoods? But is it is cool that the NRA wants to arm 3rd grade math teachers.

I'm all for the hood keeping their weapons to continue the cleansing of their own. Saves taxpayer dollars in keeping them out of prison.

A funeral is far cheaper than incarceration

-Geaux

When was the last time you walked through one of those neighborhoods, handing out guns?

There is no shortage in the neighborhood of guns. If someone there wants one, they can find it.

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

How come gun nuts believe in arming teachers, but not ghetto people.

Should your logic work both way? More guns that ghetto people have, the less crime?

When was the last time the NRA conducted a bake sale in gun violent neighborhoods? But is it is cool that the NRA wants to arm 3rd grade math teachers.

I'm all for the hood keeping their weapons to continue the cleansing of their own. Saves taxpayer dollars in keeping them out of prison.

A funeral is far cheaper than incarceration

-Geaux

When was the last time you walked through one of those neighborhoods, handing out guns?

Maybe he could fly his Confederate Flag while he's at it.

 

[KissMy]

How come gun nuts believe in arming teachers, but not ghetto people.

Should your logic work both way? More guns that ghetto people have, the less crime?

When was the last time the NRA conducted a bake sale in gun violent neighborhoods? But is it is cool that the NRA wants to arm 3rd grade math teachers.

Guns are banned in violent ghetto neighborhoods. Then the police use stop & frisk to charge all good people carrying a gun as a criminal. Thus creating more criminals. Without good people with guns to stop the criminals, they begin to rule the streets causing social problems. Social problems breed crime.