The Gun Control Laws The United States Needs

[Flash]

When we Conservatives say that the Moon Bats are bat shit crazy and can never be trusted with their definition of "reasonable gun control laws" this is the kind of oppressive shit we are talking about.

The sad thing is that just about all the other Moon Bat clowns running for President propose similar polices.

Elizabeth Warren outlines sweeping new gun control plans

Elizabeth Warren outlines sweeping new gun control plans

The new plan is among Warren’s broadest to date, calling for universal background checks, the passage of a federal ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and the closure of loopholes often targeted by gun control activists.

But Warren also ties it to her signature anti-corruption bill, arguing that the prospects for legislative action rest on wholesale reform to lobbying laws. Additionally, the Massachusetts senator would move to hold gun manufacturers “strictly liable for the harm they cause through a federal private right of action” — opening the industry up to lawsuits from victims of gun violence.

As part of that push, Warren points to previously introduced legislation — typically associated with bankers — designed to hold corporate executives more directly accountable for the actions of their companies. The result, she writes, could mean “holding gun industry CEOs personally accountable” over potential wrongdoing or negligence.

 

[Rigby5]

Oh, getting pissed at fuckers who try to deny rights can't righteous anger, right?

Fuck you. You are the enemy.

.

I'm the enemy because I expressed my opinion for tighter gun control laws in attempt to bring down the huge numbers of deaths and injuries caused by firearms in the United States every year?

I don't think you understand what democracy, liberty and freedom are about if you attack another citizen for simply expressing their opinion on an issue.

No you're the enemy because your ideology is ignorant we already have gun control laws we also have motor vehicle laws that make it illegal to drive under the influence how does that work out?
Also we have laws making it illegal to sell drugs on the street.

Unfortunately, the current gun control laws are not saving enough lives. What I propose will save thousands of lives a year eventually. Tighter Gun control laws have saved many lives in Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. The United States needs to reduce its death rate from firearms down to levels similar to Western Europe, Canada, and Japan. The United States is the wealthiest country in the world and its intolerable to have the firearm death rate we have, when so many other 1st world developed country's have a much lower rate.

I'm more interested in saving lives than protecting the so called "rights" of the minority gun owning nerds.

No, they haven't. The peaceful culture of European countries before World War 2 kept criminals from murdering people...that has changed.....so will their violent crime rate, just ask the Swedes...

We have the gun murder rate because democrats keep letting repeat gun offenders out of jail, over and over.

You don't want to save lives.....you want more victims of crime....Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to save lives, stopping rapes, robberies and murders...that is according to research by the Centers for Disease Control....

If someone wants to kill you, the fact that you have a gun is unlikely to save you. That's because the attacker gets to pick things like TIME, PLACE, the position you'll be in, the position the attacker will be in, before taking the first shot.

There for, the best way to save you from being murdered by a firearm is to make them unavailable to the attacker.

That is incredibly foolish because it obviously is impossible to eliminate all possible weapons.
Millions of weapons not only already exist in the hands of criminals, but they can easily make then from scratch if they wanted to.
Clearly the ONLY thing that actually prevents any crimes is the threat of instant retaliation.
And only an armed population can do that.
Reducing arms not only ensures a vast increase in crime, but also ensures the ordinary decay of government, through corruption, is greatly accelerated.
It totally violates the general principle of a democratic republic, to attempt to disarm the population while the government elite remain armed.
That is totally backwards.
It is the people who are supposed to be armed, while the hired public servants are supposed to remain unarmed unless needed.

 

[Rigby5]

The Gun Control Laws The United States Needs

In order to purchase a firearm, an individual must do the following:

01. Attend three month class on firearms

02. Pass a written test when the class has been completed

03. Achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test

04. Pass a Mental Health evaluation at a hospital

05. Pass a background check in which the government digs into their criminal record

06. Pass a background check involving interviews with friends and family

07. Only shotguns and Air Rifles may be purchased, no handguns

08. New magazines can only be purchased by trading in empty ones

09. When a gun owner dies, their relatives must surrender the deceased members firearms

10. Every three years, the individual must pass the above tests and investigations

Sorry, but the Constitution says otherwise.

So, you are not bearing arms if you have a shotgun?

In WWI, the assault weapon of choice was the trench shotgun.

 

[danielpalos]

Well, with that logic, we should not have any laws because supposedly the rich and famous can just circumvent them and that is not fair to the poor. Sorry, the country, society, needs laws regardless of what you think the rich are capable of.

We have laws you dickless turd: The Bill of Rights, and I have the right to bear arms without your punk ass infringing on it with your faggot bitch ass rules.

Only well regulated militia have literal recourse to our Second Amendment.

 

[Kondor3]

The States have had their turn firearms at control and, in the main, have not performed adequately.
The time has come to establish uniform firearms control throughout the entire Union at the Federal level, instead.
Every owner, every firearm, every transaction to be treated uniformly, from Honolulu to Bangor, from Minnesota Falls to El Paso.
-----------
* comprehensive Federal database listing every user, weapon, dealer, transaction, etc., deemed relevant to such controls
* every owner and/or user must be licensed; licenses issued on the Federal level and good in all 50 States
* every weapon must be registered; registrations issued on the Federal level and good in all 50 States
* every transaction ( sale, gift, inheritance, loan, etc.) for transfer of weapon possession is approved and recorded on the Federal level
* different classes of weapons ( handguns, shotguns and rifles, assault weapons, etc. )
* different owner-user licenses for different classes of weapons, including different licensing prerequisites (vetting, approvals, training, etc.)
* mandatory periodic training (3 years? 5 years? 10 years?) for each type of license held (each class of weapons owned)
* mandatory standards and regulations for storage of firearms ( at home or other fixed locations, while in-transit, when carrying, etc. )
* mandatory reporting of relevant mental health issues on the part of qualified healthcare providers
* mandatory reporting of relevant criminal convictions or substantiated allegations of relevant violent behaviors
* voluntary reporting of relevant mental health issues on the part of other interested or affected or witnessing persons
* fast-track judicial review of "red flag" reports coming in from healthcare providers, law enforcement and voluntary informants
* immediate seizure of all weapons in the possession of "red flagged" owner-users and secure storage of same pending judicial hearing
* restoration of weapons and licensing for those cleared during a judicial hearing; permanent forfeiture for those not cleared by same
* heavy fines - and jail time for repeat offenders - for those violating licensing, registration, transaction or possession regulations
* relaxation of "castle laws" to allow more latitude for licensed owner-users who kill or injure others in defense of their persons and property
* death penalty or life imprisonment for those convicted of killing or injuring others with such weapons in commission of a crime
* States enforce Federal gun control laws at the local level, supported by Federal funding and resources when deemed appropriate or necessary
----------
And if all that doesn't work, we start lo-jacking the goddamned guns.
----------
It is time to ensure that the "militia" (at-large) is "well-regulated" ...

 

[dblack]

The States have had their turn firearms at control and, in the main, have not performed adequately.
The time has come to establish uniform firearms control throughout the entire Union at the Federal level, instead.

The time has come to admit that we can't solve every problem with government.

 

[Kondor3]

The States have had their turn firearms at control and, in the main, have not performed adequately.
The time has come to establish uniform firearms control throughout the entire Union at the Federal level, instead.

The time has come to admit that we can't solve every problem with government.

This one we can, if we ever decide to try in earnest --- hell, government is the only solution to this Wild West situation.

 

[danielpalos]

This is the common law for the common defense:

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

Our State legislators should not "slack on this issue."

 

[Flash]

 

[danielpalos]

I will not be lectured to about natural rights, by the party that only alleges to care about it, in abortion threads.

 

[Kondor3]

Just so...

Instead, you can be lectured about "gun control" by those who (a) believe it necessary and (b) also abhor abortion.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

 

[dblack]

The States have had their turn firearms at control and, in the main, have not performed adequately.
The time has come to establish uniform firearms control throughout the entire Union at the Federal level, instead.

The time has come to admit that we can't solve every problem with government.

This one we can, if we ever decide to try in earnest --- hell, government is the only solution to this Wild West situation.

Not really. Mass shootings are already illegal. This notion that we can, and should, use laws to prevent people from doing bad things, rather than simply punishing them after the fact, is antithetical to free society. It ends up with each of us sitting in a cell, with virtually all public interaction banned, because everything we do might cause harm to someone else.

More to the point, we've already made killing people illegal. But some would-be perpetrators don't care because they're crazy, or just plain evil. So now we're trying to make whatever facilitates their acts illegal (guns, in this case). That's a bad premise for laws, and leads to overbearing tyrannical government.

If I recall correctly, overbearing tyrannical government is your preference, so you might not have a problem with this approach, but I do.

Our problems are social, and political, but they're not legal problems. No amount of legislation (short of locking everyone in a cell) will prevent crazy/evil people from inflicting harm on others. We need to look hard at what is causing more and more crazy/evil people to kill. It's not guns. It's not a lack of legislation.

 

[Flash]

Just so...

Instead, you can be lectured about "gun control" by those who (a) believe it necessary and (b) also abhor abortion.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Most anti gun nuts are also bat shit crazy Libtards that strongly support abortion.

 

[Jarlaxle]

When all the old hillbillies like Mari die off, the US will be in a good position to revoke the 2nd. Younger people don't want all the gun violence like hillbillies do.

Only because the school systems and other social organizations aren’t properly educating these young people.

I constantly remind my friends and associates to take their kids, grandkids, nieces/nephews, etc... out to shoot. I’m taking three next weekend for their first time shooting. They range from 9-11 years old.

Too little, too late. Immigrants especially, are trying to get away from gun violence, they don't want to come here and have to arm themselves, that's what they are fleeing from. So it's only a matter of time. Less hillbillies equals less gun owners. It's simply numbers. Sane and educated people want change.

This might be the dumbest thing ever posted on the internet.

My wife is teaching a safety class today...she's working with Operation Blazing Sword.

 

[Jarlaxle]

1. Fuck you.

2. Fuck you.

3. Fuck you some more.

4. Fuck off.

5. Fuck you.

6. Fuck off and die.

7. Fuck you.

8 Fuck you some more.

9. Fuck you.

10. I've been fully trained. Licensed and have served my Country.

11. Fuck off and die.

Ahhh, anger and hostility, characteristics often found in those that commit crime.

Oh, getting pissed at fuckers who try to deny rights can't righteous anger, right?

Fuck you. You are the enemy.

.

I'm the enemy because I expressed my opinion for tighter gun control laws in attempt to bring down the huge numbers of deaths and injuries caused by firearms in the United States every year?

I don't think you understand what democracy, liberty and freedom are about if you attack another citizen for simply expressing their opinion on an issue.

No you're the enemy because your ideology is ignorant we already have gun control laws we also have motor vehicle laws that make it illegal to drive under the influence how does that work out?
Also we have laws making it illegal to sell drugs on the street.

Unfortunately, the current gun control laws are not saving enough lives. What I propose will save thousands of lives a year eventually. Tighter Gun control laws have saved many lives in Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. The United States needs to reduce its death rate from firearms down to levels similar to Western Europe, Canada, and Japan. The United States is the wealthiest country in the world and its intolerable to have the firearm death rate we have, when so many other 1st world developed country's have a much lower rate.

I'm more interested in saving lives than protecting the so called "rights" of the minority gun owning nerds.

Have any proof of this steaming pile of horse shit?

 

[hunarcy]

...Let's restrict free speech like that...

Free speech does not kill... guns do.

Free speech does kill by spreading hate and violent ideas that theses violent, sick people believe before they take up their weapons.

 

[danielpalos]

Just so...

Instead, you can be lectured about "gun control" by those who (a) believe it necessary and (b) also abhor abortion.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Most anti gun nuts are also bat shit crazy Libtards that strongly support abortion.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

 

[rjs330]

Well, with that logic, we should not have any laws because supposedly the rich and famous can just circumvent them and that is not fair to the poor. Sorry, the country, society, needs laws regardless of what you think the rich are capable of.

We have laws you dickless turd: The Bill of Rights, and I have the right to bear arms without your punk ass infringing on it with your faggot bitch ass rules.

Those laws also allow us to change them when society feels they need to be changed. The founding fathers gave us the mechanism to change anything in the constitution provided you have enough votes.

You're right, so get the Constitution changed then. Until then stop trying to infringe on the rights that are there.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I see you are back to using the Klek lie as a quote once more. Do you really want to go through this again? Do the friggin math. 1.1 million times each year. Break it down to each month, then to each day. Then to each hour and finally, to each minute. The streets would be more like a bloody video game each and every time you left your fortress. Turn off the Video Game, shut off the TV, and get outside more often. Enjoy real life.

Moron....it was the CDC that said 1.1 million, Kleck's research put it at close to 2.5 million.....you are an idiot.....

No, it was Kleck that said 2.3 million but his partner in crime said later one after the BS was called on Kleck that it was really 1.1 mil. Either one, the math doesn't add up. I went to the store and bought a steak and did an outdoor BBQ. I did it without taking a weapon of any kind. Not one single sidearm or long gun. In all that time not one defensive shooting, no robberies, no rapes, nothing but stupid drivers. Using the Kleck and his runni9ng mate, I would have had at least a shooting in the Safeway parking lot. Or two or three. I would have had to duck and dodge all the way in and all the way out. And maybe had to duck behind a counter or two inside the store. I already posted the number per minute using the 1.1 mil. And the CDC showed the total homicides and it was a fraction of the 1.1 million. They had no way of knowing the DGU rate. It's a made up figure in your case

I let you out of the box. But it looks like you are still a foul mouthed little kid so back in the box you go.

Again not all gun defensive actions are reported to the police it's not reported if you don't discharge a cartridge. Just showing it will stop a crime from happening.

This is baseless speculation; absent objective, documented evidence it's nothing more than subjective opinion, completely devoid of merit.

Wrong.

The reason why there likely are more than 3 million defensive uses of firearms ever year is that surveys of convicted criminal have indicated that to be true.
And it also is fairly obvious, since over 1.1 million serious, violent, successful, crimes are reported every single year.
Clearly far more serious violent crimes are attempted than succeed.
It is actually far more than that most likely, because even most successful crimes are not reported.
For example, they say only 1 in 6 successful rapes are reported.

From anecdotal experience, I know that criminals have attempted more than 1 serious crime a years against me, and although I have never actually drawn the weapon I have a concealed carry permit for, I would not have felt safe stopping all those crimes if I had not been armed.

Absolutely EVERYONE doing any research at all has pretty much agreed with Kleck.
It is impossible to come up with any better statistic than he did.
He has been verified by Lott, Mustard, and the DOJ's own studies.

And you're just as wrong.

This is also baseless speculation; absent objective, documented evidence it's nothing more than subjective opinion, completely devoid of merit.

 

[Rigby5]

Well, with that logic, we should not have any laws because supposedly the rich and famous can just circumvent them and that is not fair to the poor. Sorry, the country, society, needs laws regardless of what you think the rich are capable of.

We have laws you dickless turd: The Bill of Rights, and I have the right to bear arms without your punk ass infringing on it with your faggot bitch ass rules.

Only well regulated militia have literal recourse to our Second Amendment.

The founders were extremely clear that they considered everyone part of the well regulated militia.
Remember there were NO police back then at all, and the military was supposed to be citizens soldiers, which included some women even.

But it is impossible to read the Bill of Rights at all and get anything except that it was entirely and completely a ban on any and all federal jurisdiction.
Whether or not weapons are an individual right is far more clear from the 4th and 5th amendments.
But the 2nd amendment absolutely forbids any federal weapons laws at all, in any way, shape, or form.