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

[kaz]

I am in favor of having fewer guns in circulation. The problem is simple, it would be impossible to enforce. Most pro gun control supporters must have no idea of just who many guns exist in the USA and with an equal split between legal and illegal.
I have no problem with hunting; but would like to have a rule, "You must eat what you shoot." The people I worry about most are not the criminals but those who know nothing about guns. I have been asked many times. "Which gun should I buy for self defense?" Anyone asking that question should not be allowed to own one.

Eventually the guns in circulation will either stop working or end up in Mexico, or both.

Read the op and stop dancing. This is the point it addresses.

 

[rdean]

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.

Republican's plan is to make them mandatory for everyone:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...or-felons-rapists-and-murderers-good-job.html

 

[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.

Republican's plan is to make them mandatory for everyone:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...or-felons-rapists-and-murderers-good-job.html

The right to have a gun makes them "mandatory for everyone." Gotcha Skippy. Here's my favorite quote from the article.

"Derbigny ruled that the entire statute -- RS 14:95.1 -- was unconstitutional after voters last year approved by a sweeping majority a constitutional amendment backed by the National Rifle Association. That bill made gun ownership a "fundamental right," on the same level as freedom of speech or religion."

What an insight, three things mentioned in the Bill of Rights are "on the same level." Liberals are all over this, aren't you?

You either didn't read the article you linked or didn't understand it, so I'll give you the 411. The ruling says that Felons who were not convicted of a felony involving gun use cannot be banned from having a gun based on the Amendment. However, felons who were convicted of a felony using a gun can be banned.

So what we have is that Louisiana residents who are not convicted of a Felony involving guns cannot be denied the right to gun ownership. Wow, hard hitting. What is the massive point you believe that makes related to the conversation?

 

[candycorn]

That would be news to nearly everyone on the planet...including the Mayor of Miami...

As I already posted in reply to this:

It's interesting how you pick those cities, which so clearly demonstrate massive differences between the US and the UK. London you can basically only arrive from air. Miami is a melting pot from Latin America, both legal and illegal immigration.

As I've pointed out before, your cliche of gun owners being mainstream white, more rural Americans is largely true. The lie is that isn't where more than a fraction of the gun crimes are occurring. Gun crimes are dominated by inner city, mostly non-white communities with a high rate committed by illegal aliens.

In other words, gun crimes are largely committed where they are already banned. Your solution? Banning them. Why will it work? You don't know. Why doesn't it work for drugs? You don't know. You do know it works in Europe. Why there? You don't know. You just know we have to do what we do for drugs and wait a long, long time, then bam, it'll work.

Boom...there go the goal posts yet again.

Gee, London is more voilent than Detroit. Who Knew? That would be news to everyone on the planet...including the Mayor of Detroit.

It's in the middle of the country pretty much....

Excuse time...ready...set...go!

Gee, London is more voilent than Detroit. Who Knew? That would be news to everyone on the planet...including the Mayor of Detroit.

 

[nhmod]

The comparison between the USA and England I know is incorrect. Is the term "violent crime" the same for all locations. In England, a few years ago, one violent crime was a person throwing a dead cat at another (and missing). What is considered and how it is reported does make a difference.
According to the reference provided England id considerably lower with violent crime than the US. I wonder if the case in Texas where the fellow handed a women a hundred dollars expecting to have sex and shot her as she was leaving. She died from the wound about 2 days later and he was cleared of all charges. I don't believe this made the violent crime list.

 

[kaz]

As I already posted in reply to this:

It's interesting how you pick those cities, which so clearly demonstrate massive differences between the US and the UK. London you can basically only arrive from air. Miami is a melting pot from Latin America, both legal and illegal immigration.

As I've pointed out before, your cliche of gun owners being mainstream white, more rural Americans is largely true. The lie is that isn't where more than a fraction of the gun crimes are occurring. Gun crimes are dominated by inner city, mostly non-white communities with a high rate committed by illegal aliens.

In other words, gun crimes are largely committed where they are already banned. Your solution? Banning them. Why will it work? You don't know. Why doesn't it work for drugs? You don't know. You do know it works in Europe. Why there? You don't know. You just know we have to do what we do for drugs and wait a long, long time, then bam, it'll work.

Boom...there go the goal posts yet again.

Gee, London is more voilent than Detroit. Who Knew? That would be news to everyone on the planet...including the Mayor of Detroit.

It's in the middle of the country pretty much....

Excuse time...ready...set...go!

Gee, London is more voilent than Detroit. Who Knew? That would be news to everyone on the planet...including the Mayor of Detroit.

Going 8 year old now?

 

[MonaGonna]

I am in favor of having fewer guns in circulation. The problem is simple, it would be impossible to enforce. Most pro gun control supporters must have no idea of just who many guns exist in the USA and with an equal split between legal and illegal.
I have no problem with hunting; but would like to have a rule, "You must eat what you shoot." The people I worry about most are not the criminals but those who know nothing about guns. I have been asked many times. "Which gun should I buy for self defense?" Anyone asking that question should not be allowed to own one.

Eventually the guns in circulation will either stop working or end up in Mexico, or both.

Read the op and stop dancing. This is the point it addresses.

I can dance if I want to...

You have no plan, so shut up.

 

[candycorn]

Boom...there go the goal posts yet again.

Gee, London is more voilent than Detroit. Who Knew? That would be news to everyone on the planet...including the Mayor of Detroit.

It's in the middle of the country pretty much....

Excuse time...ready...set...go!

Gee, London is more voilent than Detroit. Who Knew? That would be news to everyone on the planet...including the Mayor of Detroit.

Going 8 year old now?

Gee, London is more violent than Philadelphia. Who Knew? That would be news to everyone on the planet...including the Mayor of Philly.

This is the line of BS the gun loons are trying to sell.

 

[rdean]

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.

Republican's plan is to make them mandatory for everyone:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...or-felons-rapists-and-murderers-good-job.html

The right to have a gun makes them "mandatory for everyone." Gotcha Skippy. Here's my favorite quote from the article.

"Derbigny ruled that the entire statute -- RS 14:95.1 -- was unconstitutional after voters last year approved by a sweeping majority a constitutional amendment backed by the National Rifle Association. That bill made gun ownership a "fundamental right," on the same level as freedom of speech or religion."

What an insight, three things mentioned in the Bill of Rights are "on the same level." Liberals are all over this, aren't you?

You either didn't read the article you linked or didn't understand it, so I'll give you the 411. The ruling says that Felons who were not convicted of a felony involving gun use cannot be banned from having a gun based on the Amendment. However, felons who were convicted of a felony using a gun can be banned.

So what we have is that Louisiana residents who are not convicted of a Felony involving guns cannot be denied the right to gun ownership. Wow, hard hitting. What is the massive point you believe that makes related to the conversation?

Not too bright, are you "Skippy". You are like a pair of children s scissors, cute, colorful, not too sharp.

» LA Supreme Court to hear argument on whether law barring felons from guns is constitutional

Almost 75 percent of Louisiana voters who cast ballots in November approved adding to the state constitution, “The right of individuals to acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer, and use arms for defense of life and liberty, and for all other legitimate purposes, is fundamental and shall not be denied or infringed, and any restriction on this right must be subjected to strict scrutiny.”

----------------------------------

See that? Even "felons" are allowed "Fundamental rights". It's why they are called "fundamental rights". When Republicans make gun ownership a "fundamental right", they gave that right to felons and rapists and bank robbers and drug dealers. Sheesh, you guys. What's wrong with you?

Try to figure out what is normally considered a "fundamental right".

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Republican's plan is to make them mandatory for everyone:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...or-felons-rapists-and-murderers-good-job.html

The right to have a gun makes them "mandatory for everyone." Gotcha Skippy. Here's my favorite quote from the article.

"Derbigny ruled that the entire statute -- RS 14:95.1 -- was unconstitutional after voters last year approved by a sweeping majority a constitutional amendment backed by the National Rifle Association. That bill made gun ownership a "fundamental right," on the same level as freedom of speech or religion."

What an insight, three things mentioned in the Bill of Rights are "on the same level." Liberals are all over this, aren't you?

You either didn't read the article you linked or didn't understand it, so I'll give you the 411. The ruling says that Felons who were not convicted of a felony involving gun use cannot be banned from having a gun based on the Amendment. However, felons who were convicted of a felony using a gun can be banned.

So what we have is that Louisiana residents who are not convicted of a Felony involving guns cannot be denied the right to gun ownership. Wow, hard hitting. What is the massive point you believe that makes related to the conversation?

Not too bright, are you "Skippy". You are like a pair of children s scissors, cute, colorful, not too sharp.

» LA Supreme Court to hear argument on whether law barring felons from guns is constitutional

Almost 75 percent of Louisiana voters who cast ballots in November approved adding to the state constitution, “The right of individuals to acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer, and use arms for defense of life and liberty, and for all other legitimate purposes, is fundamental and shall not be denied or infringed, and any restriction on this right must be subjected to strict scrutiny.”

----------------------------------

See that? Even "felons" are allowed "Fundamental rights". It's why they are called "fundamental rights". When Republicans make gun ownership a "fundamental right", they gave that right to felons and rapists and bank robbers and drug dealers. Sheesh, you guys. What's wrong with you?

Try to figure out what is normally considered a "fundamental right".

All one need do is show a reasonable reason for a restriction. It does not invalidate laws that restrict violent felons from firearms. Even your own quoted portion proves that you retard.

 

[Steven_R]

See that? Even "felons" are allowed "Fundamental rights". It's why they are called "fundamental rights". When Republicans make gun ownership a "fundamental right", they gave that right to felons and rapists and bank robbers and drug dealers. Sheesh, you guys. What's wrong with you?

Try to figure out what is normally considered a "fundamental right".

Some of us believe that once a man's debt to society has been paid, then he should be able to rejoin society with all the rights and responsibilities that entails. Otherwise, all sentences really are life sentences, including those that are truly victimless crimes.

The question isn't why are we okay with people never getting civil rights back, but rather if a man can never again be trusted, why is he allowed to roam free if he is still a threat?

 

[candycorn]

The article continues:

The pattern is staggering. A number of U.S. cities have gun homicide rates in line with the most deadly nations in the world.

If it were a country, New Orleans (with a rate 62.1 gun murders per 100,000 people) would rank second in the world.

Detroit's gun homicide rate (35.9) is just a bit less than El Salvador (39.9).

Baltimore's rate (29.7) is not too far off that of Guatemala (34.8).

Gun murder in Newark (25.4) and Miami (23.7) is comparable to Colombia (27.1).

Washington D.C. (19) has a higher rate of gun homicide than Brazil (18.1).

Atlanta's rate (17.2) is about the same as South Africa (17).

Cleveland (17.4) has a higher rate than the Dominican Republic (16.3).

Gun murder in Buffalo (16.5) is similar to Panama (16.2).

Houston's rate (12.9) is slightly higher than Ecuador's (12.7).

Gun homicide in Chicago (11.6) is similar to Guyana (11.5).

Phoenix's rate (10.6) is slightly higher than Mexico (10).

Los Angeles (9.2) is comparable to the Philippines (8.9).

Boston rate (6.2) is higher than Nicaragua (5.9).

New York, where gun murders have declined to just four per 100,000, is still higher than Argentina (3).

Even the cities with the lowest homicide rates by American standards, like San Jose and Austin, compare to Albania and Cambodia respectively.

Austin...the capitol of the reddest state in the union...

 

[Geaux4it]

Nobody cares except about 5 lefties on this board

((((YAWN)))))

-Geaux

 

[rdean]

The right to have a gun makes them "mandatory for everyone." Gotcha Skippy. Here's my favorite quote from the article.

"Derbigny ruled that the entire statute -- RS 14:95.1 -- was unconstitutional after voters last year approved by a sweeping majority a constitutional amendment backed by the National Rifle Association. That bill made gun ownership a "fundamental right," on the same level as freedom of speech or religion."

What an insight, three things mentioned in the Bill of Rights are "on the same level." Liberals are all over this, aren't you?

You either didn't read the article you linked or didn't understand it, so I'll give you the 411. The ruling says that Felons who were not convicted of a felony involving gun use cannot be banned from having a gun based on the Amendment. However, felons who were convicted of a felony using a gun can be banned.

So what we have is that Louisiana residents who are not convicted of a Felony involving guns cannot be denied the right to gun ownership. Wow, hard hitting. What is the massive point you believe that makes related to the conversation?

Not too bright, are you "Skippy". You are like a pair of children s scissors, cute, colorful, not too sharp.

» LA Supreme Court to hear argument on whether law barring felons from guns is constitutional

Almost 75 percent of Louisiana voters who cast ballots in November approved adding to the state constitution, “The right of individuals to acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer, and use arms for defense of life and liberty, and for all other legitimate purposes, is fundamental and shall not be denied or infringed, and any restriction on this right must be subjected to strict scrutiny.”

----------------------------------

See that? Even "felons" are allowed "Fundamental rights". It's why they are called "fundamental rights". When Republicans make gun ownership a "fundamental right", they gave that right to felons and rapists and bank robbers and drug dealers. Sheesh, you guys. What's wrong with you?

Try to figure out what is normally considered a "fundamental right".

All one need do is show a reasonable reason for a restriction. It does not invalidate laws that restrict violent felons from firearms. Even your own quoted portion proves that you retard.

Not for a "fundamental right" dumbass. Why do you think it's going to court? Because liberals want felons to have guns?

 

[Geaux4it]

Not too bright, are you "Skippy". You are like a pair of children s scissors, cute, colorful, not too sharp.

» LA Supreme Court to hear argument on whether law barring felons from guns is constitutional

Almost 75 percent of Louisiana voters who cast ballots in November approved adding to the state constitution, “The right of individuals to acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer, and use arms for defense of life and liberty, and for all other legitimate purposes, is fundamental and shall not be denied or infringed, and any restriction on this right must be subjected to strict scrutiny.”

----------------------------------

See that? Even "felons" are allowed "Fundamental rights". It's why they are called "fundamental rights". When Republicans make gun ownership a "fundamental right", they gave that right to felons and rapists and bank robbers and drug dealers. Sheesh, you guys. What's wrong with you?

Try to figure out what is normally considered a "fundamental right".

All one need do is show a reasonable reason for a restriction. It does not invalidate laws that restrict violent felons from firearms. Even your own quoted portion proves that you retard.

Not for a "fundamental right" dumbass. Why do you think it's going to court? Because liberals want felons to have guns?

Why don't all you fags get a conga line going and start a confiscating?

Get with it son

-Geaux

 

[rdean]

The article continues:

The pattern is staggering. A number of U.S. cities have gun homicide rates in line with the most deadly nations in the world.

If it were a country, New Orleans (with a rate 62.1 gun murders per 100,000 people) would rank second in the world.

Detroit's gun homicide rate (35.9) is just a bit less than El Salvador (39.9).

Baltimore's rate (29.7) is not too far off that of Guatemala (34.8).

Gun murder in Newark (25.4) and Miami (23.7) is comparable to Colombia (27.1).

Washington D.C. (19) has a higher rate of gun homicide than Brazil (18.1).

Atlanta's rate (17.2) is about the same as South Africa (17).

Cleveland (17.4) has a higher rate than the Dominican Republic (16.3).

Gun murder in Buffalo (16.5) is similar to Panama (16.2).

Houston's rate (12.9) is slightly higher than Ecuador's (12.7).

Gun homicide in Chicago (11.6) is similar to Guyana (11.5).

Phoenix's rate (10.6) is slightly higher than Mexico (10).

Los Angeles (9.2) is comparable to the Philippines (8.9).

Boston rate (6.2) is higher than Nicaragua (5.9).

New York, where gun murders have declined to just four per 100,000, is still higher than Argentina (3).

Even the cities with the lowest homicide rates by American standards, like San Jose and Austin, compare to Albania and Cambodia respectively.

Austin...the capitol of the reddest state in the union...

70% of gun deaths are suicide.

FIREARM INJURY IN THE U.S.

Most of those are white guys in Red States. Listen to these right wingers and you would swear 99% of all gun deaths in the world would be black guys in Chicago.

 

[Geaux4it]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/10/colorado-recall-results_n_3903209.html

Colorado Recall Results: Democratic State Senators Defeated In Major Victory For NRA

WASHINGTON -- The first recall election in Colorado's history on Tuesday marked a stunning victory for the National Rifle Association and gun rights activists, with the ouster of two Democrats -- Senate President John Morse (Colorado Springs) and state Sen. Angela Giron (Pueblo). The two lawmakers were the target of separate recall fights over their support for stricter gun laws earlier this year.

"The highest rank in a democracy is citizen, not senate president," Morse said in his concession speech, as his supporters solemnly watched, some shedding tears.

What originally began as local political fallout over the Democratic-controlled legislature's comprehensive gun control package quickly escalated into a national referendum on gun policy. Morse and Giron both voted in favor of the legislation, signed into law by Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) in March, which requires background checks for all firearm purchases and bans ammunition magazines over 15 rounds.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

100 pages and not one lefty has answered the question posed by the op.

 

[candycorn]

100 pages and not one lefty has answered the question posed by the op.

The answer was given...your "punitive tax" nonsense wasn't an answer; it's an excuse...

You've gotten to the hilarious point of trying to argue that London is more violent than Detroit Anyone with eyeballs knows it isn't the truth.

Simply make the guns expensive and the supply dries up. And when the supply goes away it goes away across the board; including criminals.

At the same time; if you use a gun to commit a crime, you need to go away for 10-30 years. No parole. First time offender or lifelong criminal...see ya.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

100 pages and not one lefty has answered the question posed by the op.

The answer was given...your "punitive tax" nonsense wasn't an answer; it's an excuse...

You've gotten to the hilarious point of trying to argue that London is more violent than Detroit Anyone with eyeballs knows it isn't the truth.

Simply make the guns expensive and the supply dries up. And when the supply goes away it goes away across the board; including criminals.

At the same time; if you use a gun to commit a crime, you need to go away for 10-30 years. No parole. First time offender or lifelong criminal...see ya.

Once again for the slow and ohh so stupid... If a tax on voting is unconstitutional because it INFRINGES the right, then a punitive tax on firearms is also unconstitutional.