Right wingers unrequited "love" of guns...lots of guns...

[80zephyr]

Universal background checks and magazine limits would be reasonable.

However, R-Wers will respond that the bad government will not stop there and the slippery slope begins toward banning all guns, etc.

Interesting that the same rationale is not applied when it comes to those measures of voters' suppression.

Logic dictates that we do. After the 2000 or so gun laws already on the books, the left keeps pushing for more.

Mark

 

[eagle7_31]

Perhaps the most controversial topic on these forums, is this love of guns by right wingers who must be walking around perpetually scared....or just compensating for you know what.

No other nation on earth that is not currently involved in an all-out civil war, experiences the gun violence and carnage as does the U.S.......and ANY attempt to curb the sale of more guns is met by vociferous and incessant whining by the gun slingers.....Never mind that somewhat cooler heads within the RNC have banned guns from their upcoming convention, using the somewhat lame excuse that the secret service (a part of the federal government that they so much hate) does not allow them to come to the convention armed to the teeth.

Follow their "logic" for a moment. Most of them repeatedly state that having MORE guns actually equals LESS killings or gun injuries.......That kind of reasoning is the equivalent to stating that having MORE cars on the highways equals LESS car accidents.......A cognitive failure worthy of a rather "slow" 7 year old.

hey genius, take a look at Chicago or most other blue cities. Right wingers are not the only ones in love with guns.

 

[BULLDOG]

I'm a left winger,and I'm not the least bit concerned about your guns if that is the way you use them. Unfortunately, lots of gun nuts want to prance around in public armed to the teeth 24/7. You can't tell me that somebody with a Rambo attitude, just hoping for a chance to shoot somebody, and carrying their own personal armory isn't endangering the public.

The ones who want that are a small minority of gun owners and open carry is something I don't support I don't speak for all gun owners but I suspect most feel the same about open carry.

I agree. The majority of Americans are in favor of reasonable gun control. Unfortunately, the NRA, who was once focused on gun safety, abandoned their reasonable goals and became nothing more than the sales wing for gun manufacturers. They push fear of a race war, or a civil war, or the fear of gun confiscation, or any number of other things that aren't going to happen as reason to end all restrictions on guns. The NRA bought our politicians.

No one has "bought" anyone. If this election has shown us anything, its that money will not buy you an election. People back idea's and stances for one reason only. They agree with them.

Mark

If this election has shown us anything, it's that republicans have finally got the candidate that right wing radio and fox have been demanding for a long time. I haven't figured out why they might want an idiot who would destroy the country in so many ways, but that's what they got.

Then don't say that right wing pols are "bought" by the NRA. If I were a pol, I would believe in the 2nd regardless of what the NRA stated. Or paid.

Mark

That's a big part of your problem. You think any reasonable regulation will completely negate the 2nd. I know that is the rhetoric coming from the NRA and right wing talking heads, but that's just nuts. Nobody but fringe nuts wants to take all your guns or my guns.

 

[80zephyr]

Again, you want me to trust the same people that think the laws in NYC and other cities like it are just dandy?

Hell No. It would be like trusting PETA to run the USDA.

I understand it would take a reasonable person to see a good law can exist even if something less reasonable exists on the other end of the country. That might be more than you are capable of.

Why would I support infringing more on my fellow citizens when I am already infringed to the point of a de facto ban? Its called principles.

Your side is full of people who want to ban private ownership of firearms. As long as they are the ones pushing more regulations, Not. One. Step. Back.

And your side is full of people who dress up in cammo and prance into coffee shops with locked an loaded ar15s in hopes of a fire fight. A real post-apocalyptic compound mentality. Are you going to side with the crazies to prevent laws that could save lives?

Since relaxation of gun laws have led to LESS crime and murder, please expound on why you believe a reversal would even be more helpful?

Mark

Lots of reasons why crime rate is falling.
What's Behind The Decline In Crime?

And? It's the contention of the left that relaxed gun laws would result in a rise in violence. If that isn't happening, then you have no real basis for an argument against guns.

Mark

 

[whitehall]

Lefties live in a world of hypocrisy. Former senator and radical anti 2nd Amendment activist Edward (Teddy) Kennedy had a privately hired bodyguard who was arrested trying to enter the Senate Office building with several illegal weapons. Teddy quietly got the indictment dismissed. Lefties live in a Orwellian world where only the elites should enjoy the freedom of the Bill of Rights while the rabble has to endure taunts about their manhood.

 

[80zephyr]

Since relaxation of gun laws have led to LESS crime and murder, please expound on why you believe a reversal would even be more helpful?

Tell the above to the Sandy Hook parents and the relatives in San Bernardino about the "successes" of the "relaxation of gun laws that have led to LESS crime....".

Yes, lets talk San Bernadino. California has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, with laws that require 100% background checks. Why didn't those laws work?

Which laws that you favor would have?

Mark

 

[BULLDOG]

I understand it would take a reasonable person to see a good law can exist even if something less reasonable exists on the other end of the country. That might be more than you are capable of.

Why would I support infringing more on my fellow citizens when I am already infringed to the point of a de facto ban? Its called principles.

Your side is full of people who want to ban private ownership of firearms. As long as they are the ones pushing more regulations, Not. One. Step. Back.

And your side is full of people who dress up in cammo and prance into coffee shops with locked an loaded ar15s in hopes of a fire fight. A real post-apocalyptic compound mentality. Are you going to side with the crazies to prevent laws that could save lives?

Since relaxation of gun laws have led to LESS crime and murder, please expound on why you believe a reversal would even be more helpful?

Mark

Lots of reasons why crime rate is falling.
What's Behind The Decline In Crime?

And? It's the contention of the left that relaxed gun laws would result in a rise in violence. If that isn't happening, then you have no real basis for an argument against guns.

Mark

That would be right if the only thing effecting crime rate was guns. It's not, and trying to pretend it is is dumb.

 

[80zephyr]

Then don't say that right wing pols are "bought" by the NRA. If I were a pol, I would believe in the 2nd regardless of what the NRA stated. Or paid.

The NRA would love you.......You're a hell of a lot cheaper.

Do you really think that pro gun pols keep getting elected because the NRA buys their votes?

Mark

 

[BULLDOG]

Then don't say that right wing pols are "bought" by the NRA. If I were a pol, I would believe in the 2nd regardless of what the NRA stated. Or paid.

The NRA would love you.......You're a hell of a lot cheaper.

Do you really think that pro gun pols keep getting elected because the NRA buys their votes?

Mark

No. I believe they keep getting elected for the same reason Trump is the republican nominee. Right wingers are stupid.

 

[80zephyr]

The ones who want that are a small minority of gun owners and open carry is something I don't support I don't speak for all gun owners but I suspect most feel the same about open carry.

I agree. The majority of Americans are in favor of reasonable gun control. Unfortunately, the NRA, who was once focused on gun safety, abandoned their reasonable goals and became nothing more than the sales wing for gun manufacturers. They push fear of a race war, or a civil war, or the fear of gun confiscation, or any number of other things that aren't going to happen as reason to end all restrictions on guns. The NRA bought our politicians.

No one has "bought" anyone. If this election has shown us anything, its that money will not buy you an election. People back idea's and stances for one reason only. They agree with them.

Mark

If this election has shown us anything, it's that republicans have finally got the candidate that right wing radio and fox have been demanding for a long time. I haven't figured out why they might want an idiot who would destroy the country in so many ways, but that's what they got.

Then don't say that right wing pols are "bought" by the NRA. If I were a pol, I would believe in the 2nd regardless of what the NRA stated. Or paid.

Mark

That's a big part of your problem. You think any reasonable regulation will completely negate the 2nd. I know that is the rhetoric coming from the NRA and right wing talking heads, but that's just nuts. Nobody but fringe nuts wants to take all your guns or my guns.

What "reasonable regulation" would stop someone from killing another? You do realize that with the 1000's of gun laws already past, that this same claim was made over and over again?

Why will the next laws work when the previous ones didn't?

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

Why would I support infringing more on my fellow citizens when I am already infringed to the point of a de facto ban? Its called principles.

Your side is full of people who want to ban private ownership of firearms. As long as they are the ones pushing more regulations, Not. One. Step. Back.

And your side is full of people who dress up in cammo and prance into coffee shops with locked an loaded ar15s in hopes of a fire fight. A real post-apocalyptic compound mentality. Are you going to side with the crazies to prevent laws that could save lives?

Since relaxation of gun laws have led to LESS crime and murder, please expound on why you believe a reversal would even be more helpful?

Mark

Lots of reasons why crime rate is falling.
What's Behind The Decline In Crime?

And? It's the contention of the left that relaxed gun laws would result in a rise in violence. If that isn't happening, then you have no real basis for an argument against guns.

Mark

That would be right if the only thing effecting crime rate was guns. It's not, and trying to pretend it is is dumb.

I'm not the one making the claim. If the left makes such a claim, it is incumbent on them to PROVE what they assert.

Mark

 

[Grizz]

I understand it would take a reasonable person to see a good law can exist even if something less reasonable exists on the other end of the country. That might be more than you are capable of.

Why would I support infringing more on my fellow citizens when I am already infringed to the point of a de facto ban? Its called principles.

Your side is full of people who want to ban private ownership of firearms. As long as they are the ones pushing more regulations, Not. One. Step. Back.

And your side is full of people who dress up in cammo and prance into coffee shops with locked an loaded ar15s in hopes of a fire fight. A real post-apocalyptic compound mentality. Are you going to side with the crazies to prevent laws that could save lives?

Since relaxation of gun laws have led to LESS crime and murder, please expound on why you believe a reversal would even be more helpful?

Mark

Lots of reasons why crime rate is falling.
What's Behind The Decline In Crime?

And? It's the contention of the left that relaxed gun laws would result in a rise in violence. If that isn't happening, then you have no real basis for an argument against guns.

Mark

Passing new laws makes them "feel" better. Never mind that they don't do shit.

 

[80zephyr]

Define a "reasonable" restriction.

Why? We've had this conversation before, and you made it clear that you consider no restriction reasonable.

1. Felons can't have guns. Reasonable
2. Instant background check at point of sale. Reasonable
3. No automatic weapons without a special permit, Reasonable.

Everything else is just fluff.

Good. That means you are for universal background checks.

From my understanding, requiring universal checks would entail some form of registry, of which I am dead set against.

Mark

I know that is the right wing rhetoric, but we have background checks now for all licensed dealers without your feared registry. What makes you think we would have to have one to check individual sales?

How can you regulate who sells without knowing who the owner is?

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

Do you have a fire extinguisher? If so why are you living in such fear?

If you wish to strap a fire extinguisher to your leg and prance through Walmart, I wouldn't have a problem with that.

Wrong answer. Since fire suppression tools are usually found in stores, would you also support hanging a firearm on the wall in a store for emergency use?

Mark

Many businesses have armed security. I don't see someone who is trained in the use of firearms in a confrontational situation as a problem. The little class required for CC is nowhere near making a person competent or safe in that kind of situation.

I'm not a trained firefighter either. Do you think its safe for me to use such equipment in an emergency?

Mark

According to OSHA, all refineries and construction companies are required to hire people that do nothing but stand by with a fire extinguisher when someone is welding or using a torch, or anything that could cause a spark. Those fire-watches are told to use the extinguisher if a person's pants leg catches on fire or perhaps if a rag or piece of paper which shouldn't be there to start with catches on fire. Only things that an untrained person is capable of. Under no circumstances are they to try fighting a real fire. They are not trained for that, and would cause a danger to themselves and others. They should only notify the real fire fighters who are trained to do that.

So, they should try to put out a fire before the experts arrive? If not why have extinguishers on site?

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

So all gun owners are just seconds away from cutting loose and opening up on everyone around them?

Never implied the above.....But when there is an objection to even "regulate" the sale of an assault weapon whose only purpose is to kill both fast and as many individual as possible, THEN sanity should intervene.

And when you get rid of those, what happens when a guy with a shotgun kills 10 people in a single incident. Will you want to restrict those shotguns as well?

Mark

Chances are that that guy would have never been able to pass a background check to start with.

If what you say is true, then where are these shooters coming from?

Mark

There are always crazies. Keeping guns away from them is a good thing.

How do you do that?

Mark

 

[nat4900]

Yes, lets talk San Bernadino. California has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, with laws that require 100% background checks. Why didn't those laws work?

Because when you have California versus the NRA....California loses.

The suspects in the San Bernardino shootings used semiautomatic rifles that were legally obtained despite gun laws in California that were intended to ban assault weapons and are widely regarded as among the strictest in the country.

The rifles were variants of the popular AR-15, the semiautomatic civilian version of a military M-16. They are surprisingly easy to acquire in California

 

[nat4900]

Yes, lets talk San Bernadino. California has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, with laws that require 100% background checks. Why didn't those laws work?

Because when you have California versus the NRA....California loses.

The suspects in the San Bernardino shootings used semiautomatic rifles that were legally obtained despite gun laws in California that were intended to ban assault weapons and are widely regarded as among the strictest in the country.

The rifles were variants of the popular AR-15, the semiautomatic civilian version of a military M-16. They are surprisingly easy to acquire in California

 

[BULLDOG]

Never implied the above.....But when there is an objection to even "regulate" the sale of an assault weapon whose only purpose is to kill both fast and as many individual as possible, THEN sanity should intervene.

And when you get rid of those, what happens when a guy with a shotgun kills 10 people in a single incident. Will you want to restrict those shotguns as well?

Mark

Chances are that that guy would have never been able to pass a background check to start with.

If what you say is true, then where are these shooters coming from?

Mark

There are always crazies. Keeping guns away from them is a good thing.

How do you do that?

Mark

Universal background checks would stop a lot of them.

 

[Iceweasel]

Is it your educated opinion that by passing more gun laws crime will drop?

NO, crime will NOT drop.....but mass carnages would be lessened if we stop indiscriminate sales of weapons manufactured SOLELY for the purpose of mass shootings and killings.

You can buy anything you want if you want it bad enough. A dedicated killer will always get/have what they need/want.Making large magazines or semi-automatic weapons illegal will stop nothing.

Most gun nuts aren't dedicated killers. They are just pathetic fools with a Rambo fetish, but they are too scared to actually join the military. That attitude endangers all of us.

You're a danger to yourself. You have nothing but stupidity and hate to fuel your little pea brain.

 

[Iceweasel]

If you think you need to be armed all the time, then obviously your controlling emotion is fear. Sorry, but I don't think living with that much fear is healthy.

Do you have a fire extinguisher? If so why are you living in such fear?

If you wish to strap a fire extinguisher to your leg and prance through Walmart, I wouldn't have a problem with that.

Wrong answer. Since fire suppression tools are usually found in stores, would you also support hanging a firearm on the wall in a store for emergency use?

Mark

Many businesses have armed security. I don't see someone who is trained in the use of firearms in a confrontational situation as a problem. The little class required for CC is nowhere near making a person competent or safe in that kind of situation.

This is a shall issue state. No training required.

Fail.