Survey: Over 1/3 of Democrats support Second Amendment repeal

[Coyote]

See that is exactly what I mean. A solution that is relatively benign, not even targeting specific guns - and you can't even consider that. Just 3 days.

You are no more rational then those who want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

All I'm saying is I'm sick of Democrats making policy that doesn't produce any results. Look........ if they can guarantee me that a three day waiting period will decrease mass shootings by (I'm being generous here) 50%, then I'm all for it. But I want that guarantee first before they inconvenience me.

There is no guarantee and there are no magical panaceas - but things a 3 day waiting period - might chip away at it and does help with suicides and gun violence brought on by rage.

There is no guarantee that allowing teachers to be armed will make any difference either.

There isn't? So which school shootings had armed teachers?

If you read the stories behind the mass shooters, most of them plan their carnage weeks and even months ahead of time. A three day waiting period won't help. Some say that getting rid of high capacity magazines would help. But the Fla school shooter never used any high cap magazines.

Everybody has a different opinion of what "might" help, but none of them makes any sense. Even if you could repeal the 2nd and ban all guns, the criminals will just get illegal guns.

Again, like I said - there is NO GUARANTEE that having armed teachers will make any difference.

Most do. But not all. So you won't get a solution that will take care of "most" but if it takes care of some - with little real inconvenience to law abiding gun owners - isn't that a good thing?

No I don't. Once you make a law, it's almost impossible to get reversed. So if a law doesn't do any good, we have to wait for an all Republican federal government to get rid of it. The Democrats never would.

We had an assault weapons ban in this country, and it proved to be a complete failure. We didn't get rid of it until it met the expiration date ten years later.

So as a result you opt for no new laws for regulation and restriction - the school of "more guns more guns" thinking?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I think waiting periods are reasonable solutions as well.

A solution means to solve something. What would a waiting period solve?

 

[Marion Morrison]

All I'm saying is I'm sick of Democrats making policy that doesn't produce any results. Look........ if they can guarantee me that a three day waiting period will decrease mass shootings by (I'm being generous here) 50%, then I'm all for it. But I want that guarantee first before they inconvenience me.

There is no guarantee and there are no magical panaceas - but things a 3 day waiting period - might chip away at it and does help with suicides and gun violence brought on by rage.

There is no guarantee that allowing teachers to be armed will make any difference either.

There isn't? So which school shootings had armed teachers?

If you read the stories behind the mass shooters, most of them plan their carnage weeks and even months ahead of time. A three day waiting period won't help. Some say that getting rid of high capacity magazines would help. But the Fla school shooter never used any high cap magazines.

Everybody has a different opinion of what "might" help, but none of them makes any sense. Even if you could repeal the 2nd and ban all guns, the criminals will just get illegal guns.

Again, like I said - there is NO GUARANTEE that having armed teachers will make any difference.

Most do. But not all. So you won't get a solution that will take care of "most" but if it takes care of some - with little real inconvenience to law abiding gun owners - isn't that a good thing?

I think it's a common sense solution. Not only will some teachers be armed, not knowing who's armed and who'
s not will be a deterrent in and of itself.

I am on the fence, and think it's best to leave it up to the individual communities who's children will be affected.

I think waiting periods are reasonable solutions as well.

I disagree with that. Most of these mass shootings have been pre-planned. A few days won't deter anything. Holding the government accountable for doing their job might.

 

[Coyote]

I think waiting periods are reasonable solutions as well.

A solution means to solve something. What would a waiting period solve?

I already pointed that out.

 

[Coyote]

There is no guarantee and there are no magical panaceas - but things a 3 day waiting period - might chip away at it and does help with suicides and gun violence brought on by rage.

There is no guarantee that allowing teachers to be armed will make any difference either.

There isn't? So which school shootings had armed teachers?

If you read the stories behind the mass shooters, most of them plan their carnage weeks and even months ahead of time. A three day waiting period won't help. Some say that getting rid of high capacity magazines would help. But the Fla school shooter never used any high cap magazines.

Everybody has a different opinion of what "might" help, but none of them makes any sense. Even if you could repeal the 2nd and ban all guns, the criminals will just get illegal guns.

Again, like I said - there is NO GUARANTEE that having armed teachers will make any difference.

Most do. But not all. So you won't get a solution that will take care of "most" but if it takes care of some - with little real inconvenience to law abiding gun owners - isn't that a good thing?

I think it's a common sense solution. Not only will some teachers be armed, not knowing who's armed and who'
s not will be a deterrent in and of itself.

I am on the fence, and think it's best to leave it up to the individual communities who's children will be affected.

I think waiting periods are reasonable solutions as well.

I disagree with that. Most of these mass shootings have been pre-planned. A few days won't deter anything. Holding the government accountable to do their job might.

Most. But not all.

So it might deter SOME of them. Isn't that a good idea?

 

[whitehall]

Do you realize it lefties? Only about 1/3 of hard core democrats support Dianne Feinstein. About 1/3 of democrats is all that's left in the dwindling hard core base.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

All I'm saying is I'm sick of Democrats making policy that doesn't produce any results. Look........ if they can guarantee me that a three day waiting period will decrease mass shootings by (I'm being generous here) 50%, then I'm all for it. But I want that guarantee first before they inconvenience me.

There is no guarantee and there are no magical panaceas - but things a 3 day waiting period - might chip away at it and does help with suicides and gun violence brought on by rage.

There is no guarantee that allowing teachers to be armed will make any difference either.

There isn't? So which school shootings had armed teachers?

If you read the stories behind the mass shooters, most of them plan their carnage weeks and even months ahead of time. A three day waiting period won't help. Some say that getting rid of high capacity magazines would help. But the Fla school shooter never used any high cap magazines.

Everybody has a different opinion of what "might" help, but none of them makes any sense. Even if you could repeal the 2nd and ban all guns, the criminals will just get illegal guns.

Again, like I said - there is NO GUARANTEE that having armed teachers will make any difference.

Most do. But not all. So you won't get a solution that will take care of "most" but if it takes care of some - with little real inconvenience to law abiding gun owners - isn't that a good thing?

No I don't. Once you make a law, it's almost impossible to get reversed. So if a law doesn't do any good, we have to wait for an all Republican federal government to get rid of it. The Democrats never would.

We had an assault weapons ban in this country, and it proved to be a complete failure. We didn't get rid of it until it met the expiration date ten years later.

So as a result you opt for no new laws for regulation and restriction - the school of "more guns more guns" thinking?

That's exactly what I think. Believe it or not, we have safer schools today than we did in the 90's. Also since the early 90's, our gun murders and violent crime in general have been on the decline. We are obviously doing something right, can't you agree to that?

As the old saying goes, if it's not broke--don't fix it. As long as we are heading in the right direction, we just have to be patient to get desired results.

 

[Marion Morrison]

There isn't? So which school shootings had armed teachers?

If you read the stories behind the mass shooters, most of them plan their carnage weeks and even months ahead of time. A three day waiting period won't help. Some say that getting rid of high capacity magazines would help. But the Fla school shooter never used any high cap magazines.

Everybody has a different opinion of what "might" help, but none of them makes any sense. Even if you could repeal the 2nd and ban all guns, the criminals will just get illegal guns.

Again, like I said - there is NO GUARANTEE that having armed teachers will make any difference.

Most do. But not all. So you won't get a solution that will take care of "most" but if it takes care of some - with little real inconvenience to law abiding gun owners - isn't that a good thing?

I think it's a common sense solution. Not only will some teachers be armed, not knowing who's armed and who'
s not will be a deterrent in and of itself.

I am on the fence, and think it's best to leave it up to the individual communities who's children will be affected.

I think waiting periods are reasonable solutions as well.

I disagree with that. Most of these mass shootings have been pre-planned. A few days won't deter anything. Holding the government accountable to do their job might.

Most. But not all.

So it might deter SOME of them. Isn't that a good idea?

Not for the way it's a hassle for literally millions of law-abiding citizens, no.

That Cruz kid should not have had guns. The people around him contacted the authorities who did not do what they should have across multiple levels of government.

Why is no one pushing for government reform/investigation? Mental health system reform?

The guns don't shoot themselves, it takes a crazy person that should have been dealt with already to do that.

I know why, because while it's the proper way (along with school reform and bringing back discipline) to do what needs to be done, it's a hard job.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Again, like I said - there is NO GUARANTEE that having armed teachers will make any difference.

Most do. But not all. So you won't get a solution that will take care of "most" but if it takes care of some - with little real inconvenience to law abiding gun owners - isn't that a good thing?

I think it's a common sense solution. Not only will some teachers be armed, not knowing who's armed and who'
s not will be a deterrent in and of itself.

I am on the fence, and think it's best to leave it up to the individual communities who's children will be affected.

I think waiting periods are reasonable solutions as well.

I disagree with that. Most of these mass shootings have been pre-planned. A few days won't deter anything. Holding the government accountable to do their job might.

Most. But not all.

So it might deter SOME of them. Isn't that a good idea?

Not for the way it's a hassle for literally millions of law-abiding citizens, no.

That Cruz kid should not have had guns. The people around him contacted the authorities who did not do what they should have across multiple levels of government.

Why is no one pushing for government reform/investigation? Mental health system reform?

The guns don't shoot themselves, it takes a crazy person that should have been dealt with already to do that.

I know why, because while it's the proper way (along with school reform and bringing back discipline) to do what needs to be done, it's a hard job.

And let's not forget the federal government giving money to various local agencies to show a reduction of arrests and jail time for people because of our terribly unfair race statistics of arrests and imprisonments. But no.....that can't be it. It's the NRA's fault.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Making it a hassle for law-abiding citizens to get guns isn't going to keep crazy people out of society. I'm in favor of a physical institution vs. the "chemical restraints" and drug treatment that's been substituted for it. It's not working well at all.
Some people with mental problems don't need to be institutionalized, some do.

 

[2aguy]

All I'm saying is I'm sick of Democrats making policy that doesn't produce any results. Look........ if they can guarantee me that a three day waiting period will decrease mass shootings by (I'm being generous here) 50%, then I'm all for it. But I want that guarantee first before they inconvenience me.

There is no guarantee and there are no magical panaceas - but things a 3 day waiting period - might chip away at it and does help with suicides and gun violence brought on by rage.

There is no guarantee that allowing teachers to be armed will make any difference either.

There isn't? So which school shootings had armed teachers?

If you read the stories behind the mass shooters, most of them plan their carnage weeks and even months ahead of time. A three day waiting period won't help. Some say that getting rid of high capacity magazines would help. But the Fla school shooter never used any high cap magazines.

Everybody has a different opinion of what "might" help, but none of them makes any sense. Even if you could repeal the 2nd and ban all guns, the criminals will just get illegal guns.

Again, like I said - there is NO GUARANTEE that having armed teachers will make any difference.

Most do. But not all. So you won't get a solution that will take care of "most" but if it takes care of some - with little real inconvenience to law abiding gun owners - isn't that a good thing?

No I don't. Once you make a law, it's almost impossible to get reversed. So if a law doesn't do any good, we have to wait for an all Republican federal government to get rid of it. The Democrats never would.

We had an assault weapons ban in this country, and it proved to be a complete failure. We didn't get rid of it until it met the expiration date ten years later.

So as a result you opt for no new laws for regulation and restriction - the school of "more guns more guns" thinking?

No....shit stain......they are trying to fix the background check system....to make sure the government doofuses, actually submit the records so they can keep democrats from committing murder with guns....of course it is the democrats who don't want the background check system fixed.....

What regulations do you want that would stop the mass shooters? You guys are always sketchy on the details......and then, when you propose something that doesn't stop criminals or mass shooters, and we show you, then you bitch like whiny little babies...

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

So as a result you opt for no new laws for regulation and restriction - the school of "more guns more guns" thinking?

I do.

Complete repeal of all gun laws.

Let's go ahead and see what criminals do when we're all fucking armed.

No gun violence should ever go without a return of fire. Ever.

Shoot Back!

 

[iceberg]

According to National Review online, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed that over a third democrats polled favored getting rid if the second amendment. It concludes that most Democrats also favor getting rid of all semi-automatic weapons including handguns.

Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

but

*giggle*

we're not coming for your guns...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

and then, when you propose something that doesn't stop criminals or mass shooters, and we show you, then you bitch like whiny little babies...

They will do more than bitch, they will demand we take even more steps.......more regulations......more inconveniences for the law abiding citizens.

Anybody that knows Democrats understands this is just a stepping stone. Did they stop after we let gays out of the closet? Did they stop when we took lead out of gasoline? Did they stop when they said they only wanted smoking prohibited in movie theaters? Did they stop when they said they only wanted to eliminate prayer in public school?

It never stops with Democrats. Never did and never will.

Again..... show me something that makes sense to stop most mass shootings, and I'm on board. I'm not on board for experimental laws and regulations that are not pragmatic in any way or form.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

I'm left and I don't hate it. Maybe you shouldn't rely on labels.

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Infringe: act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on.

I'm thinking you do.