Should there be mandatory training before you can purchase a firearm?

[eagle1462010]

Think about it. This is not a gun rights issue. It all about safety. Would you really want your neighbor having a gun and no clue how to use it safely, or even hit what he's aiming at? We require drivers to take a driving test and get a license. Why should guns be any different?

BTW, I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I just want the ones who own those guns to know what they are doing.

There should be mandatory psychological testing: 50% of our current gunnuts would be eliminated.

The Same could be said with your logic.

WTF is that supposed to mean? Your statement is completely illogical: there is no sense in it.

Based on the things I've been reading on these message boards, the posts of pro-gun people, they have obvious psychological problems, and I imagine the reason they don't want to do a psychological test before they are handed a gun is because they fear, and rightly so, they will fail the test. To many itchy fingers, too many having wet dreams hoping someone will break into their house so they can blow them away. Yep. A whole lot of very sick puppies.

Your logic is to impose your set of values on law abiding citizens because of criminal actions of others.............Your logic is flawed and your mindset and opinions are your own..............

Kind of like punishing the cows for the actions of a Coyote raiding the hen house.................Our castrating a neighbor of a rapist for the crimes of a rapist.

You want to ENFORCE YOUR VALUES ON OTHERS.............who don't agree with you.........and we will resist you until hell freezes over.

Your logic doesn't work AT ALL. If you logic worked we would have no laws and no regulations AT ALL. I don't drive drunk or recklessly, but there are laws against doing so. Why am I punished for what others do? I don't steal. Why are there laws against doing so? Why am I punished for what others do?

Your logic is the same as a young child's.

We know your true intentions..............sell it to someone else.............and you know exactly what I mean.

It is the same steps as all other counties have done in a process to grab the guns...............ask Canada how that shit works.

 

[martybegan]

Then why does a background check in NYC take 3-6 months simply to get a handgun permit for home use?

Why does it cost up to $600 for that background check?

I don't have any idea what goes on in New your, and don't really care. I'm talking about federal gun laws goober.

Figures you would dodge the actual facts of the matter.

Again, Its an example of how any government that hates armed citizens will use laws like this to make it as hard as possible for anyone to get a firearm.

except of course people they like, or who are rich, or who are government actors.

Yes, the federal government is out to get you personally, so they made the state government of New York change their gun laws just to inconvenience you. Who wouldn't recognize that? How dastardly of them.

it's government in general, and NYC's laws are what progressives see as the next logical step before they ban private gun ownership entirely.

What i am trying to say, is that any federal law requiring training would be bastardized by any local government that hates private gun ownership to make it as restrictive, expensive and tedious as possible. Not in the interest of safety, but because they don't believe private citizens should have guns.

Did I spell it out enough for you, mouth breather?

You were very clear in articulating your twisted, childish opinion. We're talking federal law goober. If you don't like New York State law, you should move, or elect someone who is a gun nut like you. The citizens of New York don't seem to want gun nuts running their government.

The citizens of Alabama want to ban abortions, should they be able to?

And I have the RKBA as a federal citizen, NYC should not be able to infringe, but its because of lawless cucks like you that we have the situation we have now.

The Fed law would probably make the States do the leg work, and States like NY would let more restrictive places like NYC go even further, while making Upstate gun friendly places follow State laws. (which would be onerous)

Rights are not subject to popular vote.

 

[BULLDOG]

Think about it. This is not a gun rights issue. It all about safety. Would you really want your neighbor having a gun and no clue how to use it safely, or even hit what he's aiming at? We require drivers to take a driving test and get a license. Why should guns be any different?

BTW, I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I just want the ones who own those guns to know what they are doing.

What will happen is places will make the class cost $400 and make you wait 2-3 months to take it after scheduling said class.

You simply can't trust a gun control nut.

Quit whining. We both know that's not how it would be.

Then why does a background check in NYC take 3-6 months simply to get a handgun permit for home use?

Why does it cost up to $600 for that background check?

I don't have any idea what goes on in New your, and don't really care. I'm talking about federal gun laws goober.

There is a proposal on the table (read the OP) and then tell us the tremendous saving of life’s it saves.

I’ve outlined how ineffective it would be.

You?

You outlines the basic NRA mantra "Don't worry about dead people. Sell more guns"

 

[Pop23]

Think about it. This is not a gun rights issue. It all about safety. Would you really want your neighbor having a gun and no clue how to use it safely, or even hit what he's aiming at? We require drivers to take a driving test and get a license. Why should guns be any different?

BTW, I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I just want the ones who own those guns to know what they are doing.

There should be mandatory psychological testing: 50% of our current gunnuts would be eliminated.

The Same could be said with your logic.

WTF is that supposed to mean? Your statement is completely illogical: there is no sense in it.

Based on the things I've been reading on these message boards, the posts of pro-gun people, they have obvious psychological problems, and I imagine the reason they don't want to do a psychological test before they are handed a gun is because they fear, and rightly so, they will fail the test. To many itchy fingers, too many having wet dreams hoping someone will break into their house so they can blow them away. Yep. A whole lot of very sick puppies.

Your logic is to impose your set of values on law abiding citizens because of criminal actions of others.............Your logic is flawed and your mindset and opinions are your own..............

Kind of like punishing the cows for the actions of a Coyote raiding the hen house.................Our castrating a neighbor of a rapist for the crimes of a rapist.

You want to ENFORCE YOUR VALUES ON OTHERS.............who don't agree with you.........and we will resist you until hell freezes over.

Your logic doesn't work AT ALL. If your logic worked, we would have no laws and no regulations AT ALL. I don't drive drunk or recklessly, but there are laws against doing so. Why am I punished for what others do? Why do I need to buy liability insurance? I don't steal. Why are there laws against doing so? Why are there laws against cheating on taxes: I don't cheat on my taxes. Why am I punished for what others do?

Your logic is the same as a young child's.

Can you outline these punishments?

I am curious

 

[Crepitus]

Think about it. This is not a gun rights issue. It all about safety. Would you really want your neighbor having a gun and no clue how to use it safely, or even hit what he's aiming at? We require drivers to take a driving test and get a license. Why should guns be any different?

BTW, I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I just want the ones who own those guns to know what they are doing.

What will happen is places will make the class cost $400 and make you wait 2-3 months to take it after scheduling said class.

You simply can't trust a gun control nut.

You could volunteer to pay for it for people Who can't afford it.

Why?

Why not just not do it?

What about all of that "personal responsibility" crap you guys spew when we talk about important stuff like healthcare?

You are not making sense. Why should I have to pay an additional $400 for a training class to exercise a right?

How about we make people take classes to vote?

No answer huh?

Pretty much what I expected.

 

[martybegan]

What will happen is places will make the class cost $400 and make you wait 2-3 months to take it after scheduling said class.

You simply can't trust a gun control nut.

You could volunteer to pay for it for people Who can't afford it.

Why?

Why not just not do it?

What about all of that "personal responsibility" crap you guys spew when we talk about important stuff like healthcare?

You are not making sense. Why should I have to pay an additional $400 for a training class to exercise a right?

How about we make people take classes to vote?

No answer huh?

Pretty much what I expected.

Why should I have to volunteer to pay for something that shouldn't exist in the first place?

That's the fucking answer, you cuck.

 

[BULLDOG]

Think about it. This is not a gun rights issue. It all about safety. Would you really want your neighbor having a gun and no clue how to use it safely, or even hit what he's aiming at? We require drivers to take a driving test and get a license. Why should guns be any different?

BTW, I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I just want the ones who own those guns to know what they are doing.

There should be mandatory psychological testing: 50% of our current gunnuts would be eliminated.

The Same could be said with your logic.

WTF is that supposed to mean? Your statement is completely illogical: there is no sense in it.

Based on the things I've been reading on these message boards, the posts of pro-gun people, they have obvious psychological problems, and I imagine the reason they don't want to do a psychological test before they are handed a gun is because they fear, and rightly so, they will fail the test. To many itchy fingers, too many having wet dreams hoping someone will break into their house so they can blow them away. Yep. A whole lot of very sick puppies.

Your logic is to impose your set of values on law abiding citizens because of criminal actions of others.............Your logic is flawed and your mindset and opinions are your own..............

Kind of like punishing the cows for the actions of a Coyote raiding the hen house.................Our castrating a neighbor of a rapist for the crimes of a rapist.

You want to ENFORCE YOUR VALUES ON OTHERS.............who don't agree with you.........and we will resist you until hell freezes over.

Your logic doesn't work AT ALL. If your logic worked, we would have no laws and no regulations AT ALL. I don't drive drunk or recklessly, but there are laws against doing so. Why am I punished for what others do? Why do I need to buy liability insurance? I don't steal. Why are there laws against doing so? Why are there laws against cheating on taxes: I don't cheat on my taxes. Why am I punished for what others do?

Your logic is the same as a young child's.

Even most children can see the ignorance in his logic. Perhaps a desperate young child trying to talk his way out of the results of his misdeeds would be a better example.

 

[eagle1462010]

There should be mandatory psychological testing: 50% of our current gunnuts would be eliminated.

The Same could be said with your logic.

WTF is that supposed to mean? Your statement is completely illogical: there is no sense in it.

Based on the things I've been reading on these message boards, the posts of pro-gun people, they have obvious psychological problems, and I imagine the reason they don't want to do a psychological test before they are handed a gun is because they fear, and rightly so, they will fail the test. To many itchy fingers, too many having wet dreams hoping someone will break into their house so they can blow them away. Yep. A whole lot of very sick puppies.

Your logic is to impose your set of values on law abiding citizens because of criminal actions of others.............Your logic is flawed and your mindset and opinions are your own..............

Kind of like punishing the cows for the actions of a Coyote raiding the hen house.................Our castrating a neighbor of a rapist for the crimes of a rapist.

You want to ENFORCE YOUR VALUES ON OTHERS.............who don't agree with you.........and we will resist you until hell freezes over.

Your logic doesn't work AT ALL. If your logic worked, we would have no laws and no regulations AT ALL. I don't drive drunk or recklessly, but there are laws against doing so. Why am I punished for what others do? Why do I need to buy liability insurance? I don't steal. Why are there laws against doing so? Why are there laws against cheating on taxes: I don't cheat on my taxes. Why am I punished for what others do?

Your logic is the same as a young child's.

Even most children can see the ignorance in his logic. Perhaps a desperate young child trying to talk his way out of the results of his misdeeds would be a better example.

The Psych method of pushing your Mantra...........how sweet and expected.

 

[BULLDOG]

I don't have any idea what goes on in New your, and don't really care. I'm talking about federal gun laws goober.

Figures you would dodge the actual facts of the matter.

Again, Its an example of how any government that hates armed citizens will use laws like this to make it as hard as possible for anyone to get a firearm.

except of course people they like, or who are rich, or who are government actors.

Yes, the federal government is out to get you personally, so they made the state government of New York change their gun laws just to inconvenience you. Who wouldn't recognize that? How dastardly of them.

it's government in general, and NYC's laws are what progressives see as the next logical step before they ban private gun ownership entirely.

What i am trying to say, is that any federal law requiring training would be bastardized by any local government that hates private gun ownership to make it as restrictive, expensive and tedious as possible. Not in the interest of safety, but because they don't believe private citizens should have guns.

Did I spell it out enough for you, mouth breather?

You were very clear in articulating your twisted, childish opinion. We're talking federal law goober. If you don't like New York State law, you should move, or elect someone who is a gun nut like you. The citizens of New York don't seem to want gun nuts running their government.

The citizens of Alabama want to ban abortions, should they be able to?

And I have the RKBA as a federal citizen, NYC should not be able to infringe, but its because of lawless cucks like you that we have the situation we have now.

The Fed law would probably make the States do the leg work, and States like NY would let more restrictive places like NYC go even further, while making Upstate gun friendly places follow State laws. (which would be onerous)

Rights are not subject to popular vote.

Cry me a river. You lost all credibility when you decided to become a gun nut.

 

[Pop23]

What will happen is places will make the class cost $400 and make you wait 2-3 months to take it after scheduling said class.

You simply can't trust a gun control nut.

Quit whining. We both know that's not how it would be.

Then why does a background check in NYC take 3-6 months simply to get a handgun permit for home use?

Why does it cost up to $600 for that background check?

I don't have any idea what goes on in New your, and don't really care. I'm talking about federal gun laws goober.

There is a proposal on the table (read the OP) and then tell us the tremendous saving of life’s it saves.

I’ve outlined how ineffective it would be.

You?

You outlines the basic NRA mantra "Don't worry about dead people. Sell more guns"

I see you have no answers. Let’s try.

Will the OP’s suggestion make criminals less likely to kill? If so, how is training a killer to more effectively kill going to reduce his killing rate?

Will the OPs suggestion stop someone wanting to kill himself less effective in his/her attempt because he is better trained in killing himself?

I’ve just given you two examples, that are 99% of all gun deaths.

Please explain how better training ends the percentage of death caused by guns.

Give it a shot. You might not look as stupid as you appear.

 

[eagle1462010]

Figures you would dodge the actual facts of the matter.

Again, Its an example of how any government that hates armed citizens will use laws like this to make it as hard as possible for anyone to get a firearm.

except of course people they like, or who are rich, or who are government actors.

Yes, the federal government is out to get you personally, so they made the state government of New York change their gun laws just to inconvenience you. Who wouldn't recognize that? How dastardly of them.

it's government in general, and NYC's laws are what progressives see as the next logical step before they ban private gun ownership entirely.

What i am trying to say, is that any federal law requiring training would be bastardized by any local government that hates private gun ownership to make it as restrictive, expensive and tedious as possible. Not in the interest of safety, but because they don't believe private citizens should have guns.

Did I spell it out enough for you, mouth breather?

You were very clear in articulating your twisted, childish opinion. We're talking federal law goober. If you don't like New York State law, you should move, or elect someone who is a gun nut like you. The citizens of New York don't seem to want gun nuts running their government.

The citizens of Alabama want to ban abortions, should they be able to?

And I have the RKBA as a federal citizen, NYC should not be able to infringe, but its because of lawless cucks like you that we have the situation we have now.

The Fed law would probably make the States do the leg work, and States like NY would let more restrictive places like NYC go even further, while making Upstate gun friendly places follow State laws. (which would be onerous)

Rights are not subject to popular vote.

Cry me a river. You lost all credibility when you decided to become a gun nut.

Gun Nut in the eyes of a Gun Grabber mentality...................Why we believe you are a Gun Grabber Nut.

 

[martybegan]

Figures you would dodge the actual facts of the matter.

Again, Its an example of how any government that hates armed citizens will use laws like this to make it as hard as possible for anyone to get a firearm.

except of course people they like, or who are rich, or who are government actors.

Yes, the federal government is out to get you personally, so they made the state government of New York change their gun laws just to inconvenience you. Who wouldn't recognize that? How dastardly of them.

it's government in general, and NYC's laws are what progressives see as the next logical step before they ban private gun ownership entirely.

What i am trying to say, is that any federal law requiring training would be bastardized by any local government that hates private gun ownership to make it as restrictive, expensive and tedious as possible. Not in the interest of safety, but because they don't believe private citizens should have guns.

Did I spell it out enough for you, mouth breather?

You were very clear in articulating your twisted, childish opinion. We're talking federal law goober. If you don't like New York State law, you should move, or elect someone who is a gun nut like you. The citizens of New York don't seem to want gun nuts running their government.

The citizens of Alabama want to ban abortions, should they be able to?

And I have the RKBA as a federal citizen, NYC should not be able to infringe, but its because of lawless cucks like you that we have the situation we have now.

The Fed law would probably make the States do the leg work, and States like NY would let more restrictive places like NYC go even further, while making Upstate gun friendly places follow State laws. (which would be onerous)

Rights are not subject to popular vote.

Cry me a river. You lost all credibility when you decided to become a gun nut.

Not a gun nut. a Strict Constructional Federalist, with libertarian leanings.

And that you couldn't reply to my statements shows how useless you are.

 

[martybegan]

Yes, the federal government is out to get you personally, so they made the state government of New York change their gun laws just to inconvenience you. Who wouldn't recognize that? How dastardly of them.

it's government in general, and NYC's laws are what progressives see as the next logical step before they ban private gun ownership entirely.

What i am trying to say, is that any federal law requiring training would be bastardized by any local government that hates private gun ownership to make it as restrictive, expensive and tedious as possible. Not in the interest of safety, but because they don't believe private citizens should have guns.

Did I spell it out enough for you, mouth breather?

You were very clear in articulating your twisted, childish opinion. We're talking federal law goober. If you don't like New York State law, you should move, or elect someone who is a gun nut like you. The citizens of New York don't seem to want gun nuts running their government.

The citizens of Alabama want to ban abortions, should they be able to?

And I have the RKBA as a federal citizen, NYC should not be able to infringe, but its because of lawless cucks like you that we have the situation we have now.

The Fed law would probably make the States do the leg work, and States like NY would let more restrictive places like NYC go even further, while making Upstate gun friendly places follow State laws. (which would be onerous)

Rights are not subject to popular vote.

Cry me a river. You lost all credibility when you decided to become a gun nut.

Gun Nut in the eyes of a Gun Grabber mentality...................Why we believe you are a Gun Grabber Nut.

The funny thing is I don't even own a gun. However I refuse to give up my right to one, just like I have never been arrested or had my apartment searched, (or ever plan to be in a position for that to happen) and yet I refuse to give up my 4th 5th and 6th amendment rights.

Though the way things are going, I think its time for a rifle and shotgun to be bought by me.

 

[BULLDOG]

The Same could be said with your logic.

WTF is that supposed to mean? Your statement is completely illogical: there is no sense in it.

Based on the things I've been reading on these message boards, the posts of pro-gun people, they have obvious psychological problems, and I imagine the reason they don't want to do a psychological test before they are handed a gun is because they fear, and rightly so, they will fail the test. To many itchy fingers, too many having wet dreams hoping someone will break into their house so they can blow them away. Yep. A whole lot of very sick puppies.

Your logic is to impose your set of values on law abiding citizens because of criminal actions of others.............Your logic is flawed and your mindset and opinions are your own..............

Kind of like punishing the cows for the actions of a Coyote raiding the hen house.................Our castrating a neighbor of a rapist for the crimes of a rapist.

You want to ENFORCE YOUR VALUES ON OTHERS.............who don't agree with you.........and we will resist you until hell freezes over.

Your logic doesn't work AT ALL. If your logic worked, we would have no laws and no regulations AT ALL. I don't drive drunk or recklessly, but there are laws against doing so. Why am I punished for what others do? Why do I need to buy liability insurance? I don't steal. Why are there laws against doing so? Why are there laws against cheating on taxes: I don't cheat on my taxes. Why am I punished for what others do?

Your logic is the same as a young child's.

Even most children can see the ignorance in his logic. Perhaps a desperate young child trying to talk his way out of the results of his misdeeds would be a better example.

The Psych method of pushing your Mantra...........how sweet and expected.

Spoken like a student who has completed the first two weeks of Psych 101 and is desperately trying to analyze everyone he sees to exhibit how little he really knows.

 

[BULLDOG]

Quit whining. We both know that's not how it would be.

Then why does a background check in NYC take 3-6 months simply to get a handgun permit for home use?

Why does it cost up to $600 for that background check?

I don't have any idea what goes on in New your, and don't really care. I'm talking about federal gun laws goober.

There is a proposal on the table (read the OP) and then tell us the tremendous saving of life’s it saves.

I’ve outlined how ineffective it would be.

You?

You outlines the basic NRA mantra "Don't worry about dead people. Sell more guns"

I see you have no answers. Let’s try.

Will the OP’s suggestion make criminals less likely to kill? If so, how is training a killer to more effectively kill going to reduce his killing rate?

Will the OPs suggestion stop someone wanting to kill himself less effective in his/her attempt because he is better trained in killing himself?

I’ve just given you two examples, that are 99% of all gun deaths.

Please explain how better training ends the percentage of death caused by guns.

Give it a shot. You might not look as stupid as you appear.

Typical gun nut /NRA logic "It won't solve every aspect of every problem, so we shouldn't try to make any part of it better"

 

[Esmeralda]

There should be mandatory psychological testing: 50% of our current gunnuts would be eliminated.

The Same could be said with your logic.

WTF is that supposed to mean? Your statement is completely illogical: there is no sense in it.

Based on the things I've been reading on these message boards, the posts of pro-gun people, they have obvious psychological problems, and I imagine the reason they don't want to do a psychological test before they are handed a gun is because they fear, and rightly so, they will fail the test. To many itchy fingers, too many having wet dreams hoping someone will break into their house so they can blow them away. Yep. A whole lot of very sick puppies.

Your logic is to impose your set of values on law abiding citizens because of criminal actions of others.............Your logic is flawed and your mindset and opinions are your own..............

Kind of like punishing the cows for the actions of a Coyote raiding the hen house.................Our castrating a neighbor of a rapist for the crimes of a rapist.

You want to ENFORCE YOUR VALUES ON OTHERS.............who don't agree with you.........and we will resist you until hell freezes over.

Your logic doesn't work AT ALL. If your logic worked, we would have no laws and no regulations AT ALL. I don't drive drunk or recklessly, but there are laws against doing so. Why am I punished for what others do? Why do I need to buy liability insurance? I don't steal. Why are there laws against doing so? Why are there laws against cheating on taxes: I don't cheat on my taxes. Why am I punished for what others do?

Your logic is the same as a young child's.

Can you outline these punishments?

I am curious

Seriously?

Punishment isn't the correct word. Punishment is the word the poster used to whom I was replying. It's a childish term and a childish way to represent having regulations and laws in respect to civilized behavior.

You apparently seem unable to see the correlation between requirements and regulations in just about every 'right' we have as 'free' citizens and the right to have guns.

Really your question is just too stupid a question for me to bother with. Figure it out yourself, unless you are too retarded. You are obviously too retarded to pick up on irony.

 

[BULLDOG]

Yes, the federal government is out to get you personally, so they made the state government of New York change their gun laws just to inconvenience you. Who wouldn't recognize that? How dastardly of them.

it's government in general, and NYC's laws are what progressives see as the next logical step before they ban private gun ownership entirely.

What i am trying to say, is that any federal law requiring training would be bastardized by any local government that hates private gun ownership to make it as restrictive, expensive and tedious as possible. Not in the interest of safety, but because they don't believe private citizens should have guns.

Did I spell it out enough for you, mouth breather?

You were very clear in articulating your twisted, childish opinion. We're talking federal law goober. If you don't like New York State law, you should move, or elect someone who is a gun nut like you. The citizens of New York don't seem to want gun nuts running their government.

The citizens of Alabama want to ban abortions, should they be able to?

And I have the RKBA as a federal citizen, NYC should not be able to infringe, but its because of lawless cucks like you that we have the situation we have now.

The Fed law would probably make the States do the leg work, and States like NY would let more restrictive places like NYC go even further, while making Upstate gun friendly places follow State laws. (which would be onerous)

Rights are not subject to popular vote.

Cry me a river. You lost all credibility when you decided to become a gun nut.

Gun Nut in the eyes of a Gun Grabber mentality...................Why we believe you are a Gun Grabber Nut.

Odd that you think your extremist views will go unchecked forever.

 

[martybegan]

it's government in general, and NYC's laws are what progressives see as the next logical step before they ban private gun ownership entirely.

What i am trying to say, is that any federal law requiring training would be bastardized by any local government that hates private gun ownership to make it as restrictive, expensive and tedious as possible. Not in the interest of safety, but because they don't believe private citizens should have guns.

Did I spell it out enough for you, mouth breather?

You were very clear in articulating your twisted, childish opinion. We're talking federal law goober. If you don't like New York State law, you should move, or elect someone who is a gun nut like you. The citizens of New York don't seem to want gun nuts running their government.

The citizens of Alabama want to ban abortions, should they be able to?

And I have the RKBA as a federal citizen, NYC should not be able to infringe, but its because of lawless cucks like you that we have the situation we have now.

The Fed law would probably make the States do the leg work, and States like NY would let more restrictive places like NYC go even further, while making Upstate gun friendly places follow State laws. (which would be onerous)

Rights are not subject to popular vote.

Cry me a river. You lost all credibility when you decided to become a gun nut.

Gun Nut in the eyes of a Gun Grabber mentality...................Why we believe you are a Gun Grabber Nut.

Odd that you think your extremist views will go unchecked forever.

Oh and a big internet tough guy like you will do the checking?

nah, you will let government do it for you, and then wonder why you are being led away in chains when they come for you for doing something or thinking something against them.

 

[BULLDOG]

Yes, the federal government is out to get you personally, so they made the state government of New York change their gun laws just to inconvenience you. Who wouldn't recognize that? How dastardly of them.

it's government in general, and NYC's laws are what progressives see as the next logical step before they ban private gun ownership entirely.

What i am trying to say, is that any federal law requiring training would be bastardized by any local government that hates private gun ownership to make it as restrictive, expensive and tedious as possible. Not in the interest of safety, but because they don't believe private citizens should have guns.

Did I spell it out enough for you, mouth breather?

You were very clear in articulating your twisted, childish opinion. We're talking federal law goober. If you don't like New York State law, you should move, or elect someone who is a gun nut like you. The citizens of New York don't seem to want gun nuts running their government.

The citizens of Alabama want to ban abortions, should they be able to?

And I have the RKBA as a federal citizen, NYC should not be able to infringe, but its because of lawless cucks like you that we have the situation we have now.

The Fed law would probably make the States do the leg work, and States like NY would let more restrictive places like NYC go even further, while making Upstate gun friendly places follow State laws. (which would be onerous)

Rights are not subject to popular vote.

Cry me a river. You lost all credibility when you decided to become a gun nut.

Not a gun nut. a Strict Constructional Federalist, with libertarian leanings.

And that you couldn't reply to my statements shows how useless you are.

You're a RWNJ republican gun nut who has a litany of thinks he likes to call himself, because he's too embarrassed to admit he is a republican RWNJ gun nut.

 

[Crepitus]

You could volunteer to pay for it for people Who can't afford it.

Why?

Why not just not do it?

What about all of that "personal responsibility" crap you guys spew when we talk about important stuff like healthcare?

You are not making sense. Why should I have to pay an additional $400 for a training class to exercise a right?

How about we make people take classes to vote?

No answer huh?

Pretty much what I expected.

Why should I have to volunteer to pay for something that shouldn't exist in the first place?

That's the fucking answer, you cuck.

You still aren't answering the question, you are dodging it.

Childish insults are the last refuge of the mentally incompetent. And you aren't even very good at it.