Some Facts on Guns

[The Rabbi]

We see the same failed proposals for "gun control" over and over here. "Keep felons from getting guns." "Mental health check mandatory to buy." Etc etc.
Its worthless.
Here are some facts:
There are over 300M guns i nthe United States. They are unregistered, untraceable and unaccounted for. They are small and easily concealed. They have a service life over 100 years. They are relatively simple machines that a high school student with some machine shop experience could duplicate.

There are billions of rounds of ammunition floating around. Many many people have thousands of rounds stored in all kinds of places. All of the centerfire cartridges are capable of being reloaded with new supplies, which also exist in abundance. Reloading requires minimal tools and training.

There are thousands of criminals. Many "criminals" are in fact law abiding citizens who committed some crime decadres ago but has been straight ever since. The others ae career criminals. They are prepared to mug, robm steal, rape, and murder. Carrying a gun isnt much of a big deal for people prepared to do real crimes.

Put these facts together and it is obvious that we cannot restrict the number of guns in circulation. It is obvious we cannot prohibit criminals from gettting guns. It is obvious we cannot restrict access to parts or ammunition.
That ship has already sailed. It isnt go back.
So any proposals that involve restricting people from access will only result in law abiding people being restricted from access.
The solution is more armed citizens, not fewer. The solution is more familiarity with guns, not less.

 

[Pete7469]

Cavemen with simple motors and files can turn steel into machine guns.



This country is full of privately owned CNC machines and 3D printers.

The moonbat messiah can wave his magic dildo so that all the guns disappear, and there will be machinists all over the country making sub machine guns like breakfast tacos.

Bed wetters are complete retards for believing "gun control" is possible.

They need to learn bladder control.

 

[The Rabbi]

If they banned guns what would they do about law enforcement? And it isnt like LE doesnt lose guns out of inventory every day.

 

[Pete7469]

If they banned guns what would they do about law enforcement? And it isnt like LE doesnt lose guns out of inventory every day.

Never mind the fact that it would be open season on LE, since they will all be a source of weapons to people who really want them for committing more crimes.

 

[Redfish]

If they banned guns what would they do about law enforcement? And it isnt like LE doesnt lose guns out of inventory every day.

If guns were banned, only criminals and the government would have guns. Does the third reich come to mind?

 

[CowboyTed]

Actually many countries have imposed bans on guns retrospectively and had great success...

I proposed a simple law making the owner of a gun responsible for that guns use until it gets reported stolen or lost.

Owners could get gun insurance to cover accidents or guns getting in wrong hands before they are reported. This is more akin with personal responsibility. Let market forces of gun insurance drive the safety in much the way insurance drove safety in many other places.

If mandatory it could allow law enforcement to easily see legal and non legal guns quickly. But the main driver will it would take unnecessary guns out of the system, so if you need a gun for self defense you get far lower insurance by acting responsible.

Yes the $229 billion cost a year in gun violence(taxpayer) is in large part not due to legal owned guns but to illegal guns. But the source of illegal guns are coming from legally owned sources.

Actually the NRA sells gun insurance and this further encourages safe gun ownership .

 

[Redfish]

Actually many countries have imposed bans on guns retrospectively and had great success...

I proposed a simple law making the owner of a gun responsible for that guns use until it gets reported stolen or lost.

Owners could get gun insurance to cover accidents or guns getting in wrong hands before they are reported. This is more akin with personal responsibility. Let market forces of gun insurance drive the safety in much the way insurance drove safety in many other places.

If mandatory it could allow law enforcement to easily see legal and non legal guns quickly. But the main driver will it would take unnecessary guns out of the system, so if you need a gun for self defense you get far lower insurance by acting responsible.

Yes the $229 billion cost a year in gun violence(taxpayer) is in large part not due to legal owned guns but to illegal guns. But the source of illegal guns are coming from legally owned sources.

Actually the NRA sells gun insurance and this further encourages safe gun ownership .

what you propose is unnecessary. Each individual is already responsible for his or her acts, whether those acts involve a gun, car, knife, baseball bat, hammer, or nail file.

 

[Steven_R]

Actually many countries have imposed bans on guns retrospectively and had great success...

I proposed a simple law making the owner of a gun responsible for that guns use until it gets reported stolen or lost.

Owners could get gun insurance to cover accidents or guns getting in wrong hands before they are reported. This is more akin with personal responsibility. Let market forces of gun insurance drive the safety in much the way insurance drove safety in many other places.

If mandatory it could allow law enforcement to easily see legal and non legal guns quickly. But the main driver will it would take unnecessary guns out of the system, so if you need a gun for self defense you get far lower insurance by acting responsible.

Yes the $229 billion cost a year in gun violence(taxpayer) is in large part not due to legal owned guns but to illegal guns. But the source of illegal guns are coming from legally owned sources.

Actually the NRA sells gun insurance and this further encourages safe gun ownership .

Which would do nothing since criminals don't care about laws. All it does is impose yet another burden on the law abiding.

 

[CowboyTed]

Actually many countries have imposed bans on guns retrospectively and had great success...

I proposed a simple law making the owner of a gun responsible for that guns use until it gets reported stolen or lost.

Owners could get gun insurance to cover accidents or guns getting in wrong hands before they are reported. This is more akin with personal responsibility. Let market forces of gun insurance drive the safety in much the way insurance drove safety in many other places.

If mandatory it could allow law enforcement to easily see legal and non legal guns quickly. But the main driver will it would take unnecessary guns out of the system, so if you need a gun for self defense you get far lower insurance by acting responsible.

Yes the $229 billion cost a year in gun violence(taxpayer) is in large part not due to legal owned guns but to illegal guns. But the source of illegal guns are coming from legally owned sources.

Actually the NRA sells gun insurance and this further encourages safe gun ownership .

what you propose is unnecessary. Each individual is already responsible for his or her acts, whether those acts involve a gun, car, knife, baseball bat, hammer, or nail file.

Guns are a far more lethal than the other devices and have an intention to kill... But look at your examples, Car, you need to have car insurance for unintended consequences... Car insurance is a matter of personal responsibility... Unless you have the money available to pay for unintended consequences of your actions the personal responsibility would dictate you have insurance....

Knives are used on a daily basis by far more people and relative accidents are very rarely fatal.



Why are you against personal reponsibility?

 

[Steven_R]

So you want to put another burden on the poor. Self-defense becomes a privilege of the rich. Can't afford the insurance, then good luck.

Wonderful proposal.

 

[CowboyTed]

Actually many countries have imposed bans on guns retrospectively and had great success...

I proposed a simple law making the owner of a gun responsible for that guns use until it gets reported stolen or lost.

Owners could get gun insurance to cover accidents or guns getting in wrong hands before they are reported. This is more akin with personal responsibility. Let market forces of gun insurance drive the safety in much the way insurance drove safety in many other places.

If mandatory it could allow law enforcement to easily see legal and non legal guns quickly. But the main driver will it would take unnecessary guns out of the system, so if you need a gun for self defense you get far lower insurance by acting responsible.

Yes the $229 billion cost a year in gun violence(taxpayer) is in large part not due to legal owned guns but to illegal guns. But the source of illegal guns are coming from legally owned sources.

Actually the NRA sells gun insurance and this further encourages safe gun ownership .

Which would do nothing since criminals don't care about laws. All it does is impose yet another burden on the law abiding.

Actually by reducing the amount of unsecured guns in society and you are directly affecting the main supply of guns going into illegal hands.

Nearly all guns start their life being legal, I am just wanting to keep them legal and in the hands of some one who will treat them with respect. Getting insurance would advocate that.

This is not an over night solver but it would mean more responsible gun ownership and less guns in the black market.

 

[Redfish]

Actually many countries have imposed bans on guns retrospectively and had great success...

I proposed a simple law making the owner of a gun responsible for that guns use until it gets reported stolen or lost.

Owners could get gun insurance to cover accidents or guns getting in wrong hands before they are reported. This is more akin with personal responsibility. Let market forces of gun insurance drive the safety in much the way insurance drove safety in many other places.

If mandatory it could allow law enforcement to easily see legal and non legal guns quickly. But the main driver will it would take unnecessary guns out of the system, so if you need a gun for self defense you get far lower insurance by acting responsible.

Yes the $229 billion cost a year in gun violence(taxpayer) is in large part not due to legal owned guns but to illegal guns. But the source of illegal guns are coming from legally owned sources.

Actually the NRA sells gun insurance and this further encourages safe gun ownership .

what you propose is unnecessary. Each individual is already responsible for his or her acts, whether those acts involve a gun, car, knife, baseball bat, hammer, or nail file.

Guns are a far more lethal than the other devices and have an intention to kill... But look at your examples, Car, you need to have car insurance for unintended consequences... Car insurance is a matter of personal responsibility... Unless you have the money available to pay for unintended consequences of your actions the personal responsibility would dictate you have insurance....

Knives are used on a daily basis by far more people and relative accidents are very rarely fatal.



Why are you against personal reponsibility?

I am 100% in favor of personal responsibility. How does buying mandatory insurance increase your personal responsibility? Actually your proposal decreases personal responsibility because people would rely on the insurance to bail them out.

 

[Rotagilla]

Ulster County Sheriff: All Licensed Handgun Owners Should Carry Them


Ulster County Sheriff: All Licensed Handgun Owners Should Carry Them

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) – All licensed handgun owners in Ulster County should carry their pistols.

That’s the message Thursday from the Ulster County Sheriff.

Ulster County is located about two hours north of New York City.

“In light of recent events that have occurred in the United States and around the world I want to encourage citizens of Ulster County who are licensed to carry a firearm to please do so,” wrote Sheriff Paul J. Van Blarcum in a Facebook post. “I urge you to responsibly take advantage of your legal right to carry a firearm. To ensure the safety of yourself and others, make sure you are comfortable and proficient with your weapon, and knowledgeable of the laws in New York State with regards to carrying a weapon and when it is legal to use it.”

 

[Redfish]

Actually many countries have imposed bans on guns retrospectively and had great success...

I proposed a simple law making the owner of a gun responsible for that guns use until it gets reported stolen or lost.

Owners could get gun insurance to cover accidents or guns getting in wrong hands before they are reported. This is more akin with personal responsibility. Let market forces of gun insurance drive the safety in much the way insurance drove safety in many other places.

If mandatory it could allow law enforcement to easily see legal and non legal guns quickly. But the main driver will it would take unnecessary guns out of the system, so if you need a gun for self defense you get far lower insurance by acting responsible.

Yes the $229 billion cost a year in gun violence(taxpayer) is in large part not due to legal owned guns but to illegal guns. But the source of illegal guns are coming from legally owned sources.

Actually the NRA sells gun insurance and this further encourages safe gun ownership .

Which would do nothing since criminals don't care about laws. All it does is impose yet another burden on the law abiding.

Actually by reducing the amount of unsecured guns in society and you are directly affecting the main supply of guns going into illegal hands.

Nearly all guns start their life being legal, I am just wanting to keep them legal and in the hands of some one who will treat them with respect. Getting insurance would advocate that.

This is not an over night solver but it would mean more responsible gun ownership and less guns in the black market.

very naive

 

[CowboyTed]

So you want to put another burden on the poor. Self-defense becomes a privilege of the rich. Can't afford the insurance, then good luck.

Wonderful proposal.

So your reason for not doing it is because it would affect the poor. If they go to gun training and secure their weapon the insurance cost would be quite low. This can be said the same about car insurance.
Again this is from the right, it is about personal responsibility. Why should the tax payer pay for individuals who are involved in high risk behaviour like not securing there guns and being untrained?

 

[Redfish]

So you want to put another burden on the poor. Self-defense becomes a privilege of the rich. Can't afford the insurance, then good luck.

Wonderful proposal.

So your reason for not doing it is because it would affect the poor. If they go to gun training and secure their weapon the insurance cost would be quite low. This can be said the same about car insurance.
Again this is from the right, it is about personal responsibility. Why should the tax payer pay for individuals who are involved in high risk behaviour like not securing there guns and being untrained?

Uhhh, how many gang bangers are going to take gun safety classes and buy insurance?

 

[The Rabbi]

Actually many countries have imposed bans on guns retrospectively and had great success...

I proposed a simple law making the owner of a gun responsible for that guns use until it gets reported stolen or lost.

Owners could get gun insurance to cover accidents or guns getting in wrong hands before they are reported. This is more akin with personal responsibility. Let market forces of gun insurance drive the safety in much the way insurance drove safety in many other places.

If mandatory it could allow law enforcement to easily see legal and non legal guns quickly. But the main driver will it would take unnecessary guns out of the system, so if you need a gun for self defense you get far lower insurance by acting responsible.

Yes the $229 billion cost a year in gun violence(taxpayer) is in large part not due to legal owned guns but to illegal guns. But the source of illegal guns are coming from legally owned sources.

Actually the NRA sells gun insurance and this further encourages safe gun ownership .

what you propose is unnecessary. Each individual is already responsible for his or her acts, whether those acts involve a gun, car, knife, baseball bat, hammer, or nail file.

Guns are a far more lethal than the other devices and have an intention to kill... But look at your examples, Car, you need to have car insurance for unintended consequences... Car insurance is a matter of personal responsibility... Unless you have the money available to pay for unintended consequences of your actions the personal responsibility would dictate you have insurance....

Knives are used on a daily basis by far more people and relative accidents are very rarely fatal.



Why are you against personal reponsibility?

GUns have no intentions. Guns are inanimate objects. People have intentions.
Requiring insurance merely discriminates against poor people, who probably need guns more than anyone else. And if someone cant afford insurance or cant get it do you think that means he wont get a gun anyway?
Again, it turns law abiding people into criminals.

 

[The Rabbi]

Actually many countries have imposed bans on guns retrospectively and had great success...

I proposed a simple law making the owner of a gun responsible for that guns use until it gets reported stolen or lost.

Owners could get gun insurance to cover accidents or guns getting in wrong hands before they are reported. This is more akin with personal responsibility. Let market forces of gun insurance drive the safety in much the way insurance drove safety in many other places.

If mandatory it could allow law enforcement to easily see legal and non legal guns quickly. But the main driver will it would take unnecessary guns out of the system, so if you need a gun for self defense you get far lower insurance by acting responsible.

Yes the $229 billion cost a year in gun violence(taxpayer) is in large part not due to legal owned guns but to illegal guns. But the source of illegal guns are coming from legally owned sources.

Actually the NRA sells gun insurance and this further encourages safe gun ownership .

Which would do nothing since criminals don't care about laws. All it does is impose yet another burden on the law abiding.

Actually by reducing the amount of unsecured guns in society and you are directly affecting the main supply of guns going into illegal hands.

Nearly all guns start their life being legal, I am just wanting to keep them legal and in the hands of some one who will treat them with respect. Getting insurance would advocate that.

This is not an over night solver but it would mean more responsible gun ownership and less guns in the black market.

There is no such thing as a "legal" or "illegal" gun.
You engage in the old arms control fallacy. If we reduce nuclear weapons by X amount then we reduce the danger by X amount. It isnt true. It isnt true about guns as well.
If you control guns you control only those in the hands of law abiding citizens, which is where you want them. You cannot by definition control guns in the hands of criminals.

 

[The Rabbi]

So you want to put another burden on the poor. Self-defense becomes a privilege of the rich. Can't afford the insurance, then good luck.

Wonderful proposal.

So your reason for not doing it is because it would affect the poor. If they go to gun training and secure their weapon the insurance cost would be quite low. This can be said the same about car insurance.
Again this is from the right, it is about personal responsibility. Why should the tax payer pay for individuals who are involved in high risk behaviour like not securing there guns and being untrained?

Lots of poor people dont have car insurance either.
Again, criminals and irresponsible people will not do those things.

 

[Siete]

Most homeowner's insurance companies view guns no differently than other personal property. They're covered in the event of theft or damage and, assuming no criminal negligence is found, most homeowners also are covered for liability claims related to gun accidents.Aug 9, 2012
Homeowner's insurance covers gun owners for theft, liability
www.insurancequotes.com/home/home-insurance-guns


as a collector all of my guns are covered. My gun safe reduces my cost. I have two life insurance policies that cover everything else. One is underwritten by Smith Wesson.