So, you want the NRA/pro-gun side to compromise...?

[martybegan]

And that is all together fitting and proper. But the argument was proffered: should citizens ability to have military style weaponry be eliminated, the police should comply as well. I disagree.

I believe that the police force should indeed have the fire power at hand to defeat the criminal element. And, as that criminal element has easy access to potent weaponry, such weapons should be banned. Sale, distribution, importation and manufacture all banned in the interest of public safety. Were the criminals armed to the teeth before such weapons were widely made and sold? The gun manufacturers are to blame for designing and mass marketing weapons that have no virtues in the sporting world.

banning them will not restrict access to criminals, only to normal citizens. You cannot unmake semi auto weapons.

The police are not our overlords, much as you appear to want them to be.

Once they are banned, how will criminals get them? Will such a ban reduce the incidents of random shootings on our city streets? Do you think every gun fired by a criminal is actually fired by a criminal master mind? Can it actually be that most guns used in crimes are bought, or stolen and not obtained by circuitous, elaborate means? I'm betting that most gun shot victims were shot by guns obtained on the open market and not by some criminal syndicate with access to a foreign clandestine source.

Most people shot by guns are shot by handguns. The only reason grabbers concentrate on semi autos is they see it as low hanging fruit. sooner or later they will move on to others.

If criminals really wanted semi-autos, even if you manage to ban and get rid of all civilan ones, machining one isnt that big a deal. Cartels learned chemistry to fuel the drug trade, they will learn machining and bullet making to feed that black market as well.

 

[francoHFW]

Actually, over time bans on semi-autos and their parts and ammo WOULD get them away from everyone, more or less. Background checks, favored by 92%, would also help. NYC has a law that illegal gun carrying has a 5 year mandatory emprisonment, which works great.

As on all other issues, the misinformation and fear mongering propaganda has made the dupes irrational.

 

[francoHFW]

Semi-autos are where you get massacres fcs...duh

 

[tjvh]

And that is all together fitting and proper. But the argument was proffered: should citizens ability to have military style weaponry be eliminated, the police should comply as well. I disagree.

I believe that the police force should indeed have the fire power at hand to defeat the criminal element. And, as that criminal element has easy access to potent weaponry, such weapons should be banned. Sale, distribution, importation and manufacture all banned in the interest of public safety. Were the criminals armed to the teeth before such weapons were widely made and sold? The gun manufacturers are to blame for designing and mass marketing weapons that have no virtues in the sporting world.

banning them will not restrict access to criminals, only to normal citizens. You cannot unmake semi auto weapons.

The police are not our overlords, much as you appear to want them to be.

Once they are banned, how will criminals get them? Will such a ban reduce the incidents of random shootings on our city streets? Do you think every gun fired by a criminal is actually fired by a criminal master mind? Can it actually be that most guns used in crimes are bought, or stolen and not obtained by circuitous, elaborate means? I'm betting that most gun shot victims were shot by guns obtained on the open market and not by some criminal syndicate with access to a foreign clandestine source.

What makes you think criminals don't already have them? And how does punishing people who went through background checks in the first place going to magically lower gun violence? Seems to me it would have the exact opposite effect, because a disarmed populace would be nothing more than a new set of crime victims.

 

[JoeB131]

[

How many times were those guns used against bad guys where they were only wounded instead of killed?

How many times were the bad guys stopped by the simple brandishment of the gun?

Give us the REST of the story, Joe...

Probably very few, but since your side never produces any statistics on it, I won't bother arguing the fallacy.

Yet another of your LIES. FBI and DOJ numbers have been posted, but you, as usual, pretend they do not exist if they do not fit your preconceived notions.

YOU NEED TO STOP LYING.

They don't exist... Sorry.

Now, you guys pretend stuff like "2 million defensive use of guns" and stuff but the fact is.

only 201 bad guys were shot by good guys.

10,000 good guys were shot by bad guys (or other good guys having a bad day) and 16,000 good guys shot themselves after having a bad day.

Private gun ownership is not worth the cost. Period.

But you keep buying the lie the gun industry is selling you.

 

[OODA_Loop]

But you keep buying the lie the gun industry is selling you.

Will do.

 

[JoeB131]

No, that is actually so untrue as to be ridiculous! Cops carried fairly weak firepower until recently.

This is very true. They didn't need to.

Unitl some evil people in the gun industry thought, "Hey, let's sell military grade weapons to crazy people!"

And then they got other stupid people in the NRA to say, "That's what the Founding Fathers wanted us to do. Right after they were done raping their slaves and getting a good bleeding, they polished their guns in case the Brits came back."

Does your tiny little mind ever wonder why the NRA opposes background checks?

Because if the Criminals didn't have awesome firepower, the cops wouldn't want it, and most home owners wouldn't want it.

It's an arms race where they are selling to all sides.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Does your tiny little mind ever wonder why the NRA opposes background checks?

NRA?s Keene Says Group Supports Some Background Checks - Bloomberg

 

[JoeB131]

Does your tiny little mind ever wonder why the NRA opposes background checks?

NRA?s Keene Says Group Supports Some Background Checks - Bloomberg

Some ain't good enough.

We have some now.

We need COMPLETE background checks.

Or at least ones that keep THIS GUY from buying a gun.

Just another satisfied customer...

 

[OODA_Loop]

Does your tiny little mind ever wonder why the NRA opposes background checks?

NRA?s Keene Says Group Supports Some Background Checks - Bloomberg

Some ain't good enough.

We have some now.

We need COMPLETE background checks.

Or at least ones that keep THIS GUY from buying a gun.

Just another satisfied customer...

How would a background check stop Loughner ?

Adjudicate him mentally incompetent ?

 

[JoeB131]

1) that's a picture of Joker HOlmes, not Loughner. The fact you can't keep the "Crazy people who were able to get a gun" straight is probably a good example of how easy it was to get a gun.

2) Everyone in Holmes (and Loughner. And Lanza. And Cho's) life knew they were crazy. And they were still able to get guns.

 

[OODA_Loop]

1) that's a picture of Joker HOlmes, not Loughner. The fact you can't keep the "Crazy people who were able to get a gun" straight is probably a good example of how easy it was to get a gun.

2) Everyone in Holmes (and Loughner. And Lanza. And Cho's) life knew they were crazy. And they were still able to get guns.

So you don't have an answer ?

 

[JoeB131]

1) that's a picture of Joker HOlmes, not Loughner. The fact you can't keep the "Crazy people who were able to get a gun" straight is probably a good example of how easy it was to get a gun.

2) Everyone in Holmes (and Loughner. And Lanza. And Cho's) life knew they were crazy. And they were still able to get guns.

So you don't have an answer ?

Yes, I did.... I'm sorry you didn't understand it.

Had they done a REAL background check, like job or a credit card company would do, they'd have found out that Holmes or Loughner were on suspension from their schools because their erratic behavior. That would have been a big red flag tonot sell them a gun.

 

[OODA_Loop]

1) that's a picture of Joker HOlmes, not Loughner. The fact you can't keep the "Crazy people who were able to get a gun" straight is probably a good example of how easy it was to get a gun.

2) Everyone in Holmes (and Loughner. And Lanza. And Cho's) life knew they were crazy. And they were still able to get guns.

So you don't have an answer ?

Yes, I did.... I'm sorry you didn't understand it.

Had they done a REAL background check, like job or a credit card company would do, they'd have found out that Holmes or Loughner were on suspension from their schools because their erratic behavior. That would have been a big red flag tonot sell them a gun.

So you want a background check that includes your school records on which a suspension is a prohibiting act ?

 

[GuyPinestra]

1) that's a picture of Joker HOlmes, not Loughner. The fact you can't keep the "Crazy people who were able to get a gun" straight is probably a good example of how easy it was to get a gun.

2) Everyone in Holmes (and Loughner. And Lanza. And Cho's) life knew they were crazy. And they were still able to get guns.

So you don't have an answer ?

Yes, I did.... I'm sorry you didn't understand it.

Had they done a REAL background check, like job or a credit card company would do, they'd have found out that Holmes or Loughner were on suspension from their schools because their erratic behavior. That would have been a big red flag tonot sell them a gun.

Does the phrase 'adjudicated mentally incompetent' have ANY meaning to you whatsoever?

 

[JoeB131]

So you don't have an answer ?

Yes, I did.... I'm sorry you didn't understand it.

Had they done a REAL background check, like job or a credit card company would do, they'd have found out that Holmes or Loughner were on suspension from their schools because their erratic behavior. That would have been a big red flag tonot sell them a gun.

So you want a background check that includes your school records on which a suspension is a prohibiting act ?

Personally, I want all private guns confiscated because private citizens don't need them.

But if you are going to absolutely insist on letting people have them, yes, I want to make DAMNED SURE they aren't crazy.

If you got suspended from school because you were acting so crazy they had to ban you from campus (again- Cho, Loughner and Holmes all fell into this category), that should have at least held up gun owership.

 

[OODA_Loop]

If you got suspended from school because you were acting so crazy they had to ban you from campus (again- Cho, Loughner and Holmes all fell into this category), that should have at least held up gun owership.

Someone who is so crazy they are barred from school and no ajudication...suspension?

Therein lies the problem.

If you're that crazy.....adjudicate them as such and no NICS....no gun.

 

[JoeB131]

So you don't have an answer ?

Yes, I did.... I'm sorry you didn't understand it.

Had they done a REAL background check, like job or a credit card company would do, they'd have found out that Holmes or Loughner were on suspension from their schools because their erratic behavior. That would have been a big red flag tonot sell them a gun.

Does the phrase 'adjudicated mentally incompetent' have ANY meaning to you whatsoever?

Why wait for "adjudication"?

Frankly, I think that a mere call to his school should be enough to put the kibosh on that shit. And it would have, had we had solid checks in place.

Or we could just ban all private gun ownership, because there's no good reason for you to have a gun at all as a private citizen. But I'm trying to "meet you halfway".

 

[JoeB131]

If you got suspended from school because you were acting so crazy they had to ban you from campus (again- Cho, Loughner and Holmes all fell into this category), that should have at least held up gun owership.

Someone who is so crazy they are barred from school and no ajudication...suspension?

Therein lies the problem.

If you're that crazy.....adjudicate them as such and no NICS....no gun.

Or we just don't sell them a gun until they prove they AREN'T crazy.

 

[OODA_Loop]

If you got suspended from school because you were acting so crazy they had to ban you from campus (again- Cho, Loughner and Holmes all fell into this category), that should have at least held up gun owership.

Someone who is so crazy they are barred from school and no ajudication...suspension?

Therein lies the problem.

If you're that crazy.....adjudicate them as such and no NICS....no gun.

Or we just don't sell them a gun until they prove they AREN'T crazy.

Ajudication is the means to not sell them a gun.

We have a mental ajudication problem.

I have no quams limiting the freedoms of a proven whack job.