The Gun Control Laws The United States Needs

[Rigby5]

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.

And you are just lying.
There have been thousands of studies, polls, interviews, prison surveys, etc.
I am not going to look them all up in order to prove it to you, but clearly these issued have been looked into for centuries, and anyone with any intelligence has agreed that you can't rely on just a small armed elite like police or the military, and must instead rely in each and every household providing their own protection.
Anything else is just a corrupt lie that can only be deliberately intending to destroy the democratic republic.

 

[whitehall]

How could you possibly enforce such an elaborate system? Ironically you would need more (armed) federal agents than there are current gun owners.

 

[Rigby5]

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."

But not relevant, because just as clearly the defense and protection of each home is the obligation and responsibility of each person within that home.

While there were no police or telephones during the days of the founders, still response time is way too long for it to be any other way still. And clearly the police, like the Gestapo, Stazi, Savik, KGB, kapos, etc., can be just as much of a threat as criminals. So in no way is gun control ever remotely compatible with a democratic republic.

 

[Rigby5]

How could you possibly enforce such an elaborate system? Ironically you would need more (armed) federal agents than there are current gun owners.

Clearly what we need is no armed federal agents at all.
Local are always more reflective of local standards, concerns, interests, beliefs, etc.
We do not need federal forces to arrest and abuse local citizens, just because the legislation may be federal.
Only local agents should be armed or conduct any arrests.
That is the only way to reduce massive abuse like Waco or Ruby Ridge.

 

[Rigby5]

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.

That is ridiculous since the Wild West is obviously vastly superior to the strong central government that was corrupt and motivated people to come to the US in the first place.
The Wild West is the solution to the problem.
And the main problem is that strong central government are inherently evil and corrupt.
If you don't get that, then consider how the US has the highest incarceration rate in the world, the illegal War on Drugs, invaded Iraq in deliberate lies, etc.

 

[Taz]

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.

"she's working with Operation Blazing Sword", is that some sort of Jihad thing?

 

[Rigby5]

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" ...

That is just totally and incredibly wrong.
Not only is that totally contrary to the Bill of Rights, but any concept of a democratic republic.
Clearly the weapons laws in Alaska MUST differ from the weapons laws in some place like NYC.
And the last thing we ever need is federal standardization.
Not to mention that federal standardization is simply totally illegal.

 

[JGalt]

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.

"she's working with Operation Blazing Sword", is that some sort of Jihad thing?

Operation Blazing Sword | Offering Gun Education to the LGBTQ Community

 

[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.

That does not even pass basic logic.
If one rational for a restriction on federal jurisdiction is listed, that in no way implies there are no millions more.
All that means is that there is sufficient justification for a block of any federal jurisdiction.
You only need one for sufficient justification.
Additional ones are not needed to be listed.
One is enough.
So any federal weapons law is clearly and completely illegal.

This is also true with drug laws.
There is absolutely no federal jurisdicition over drugs in the constitution, so the 9th and 10th amendments then totally prohibit any federal drug laws.
Which means the federal government is already WAY out of control and excessively abusive.

 

[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.

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.

where do you get your right wing propaganda from?

only the unorganized militia complains about gun control.

 

[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.

That does not even pass basic logic.
If one rational for a restriction on federal jurisdiction is listed, that in no way implies there are no millions more.
All that means is that there is sufficient justification for a block of any federal jurisdiction.
You only need one for sufficient justification.
Additional ones are not needed to be listed.
One is enough.
So any federal weapons law is clearly and completely illegal.

This is also true with drug laws.
There is absolutely no federal jurisdicition over drugs in the constitution, so the 9th and 10th amendments then totally prohibit any federal drug laws.
Which means the federal government is already WAY out of control and excessively abusive.

you have no basic logic. our Second Amendment is express, not implied in any way.

 

[Terri4Trump]

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.

"she's working with Operation Blazing Sword", is that some sort of Jihad thing?

Operation Blazing Sword | Offering Gun Education to the LGBTQ Community

William McLaughlin, the NRA’s social media manager, is gay!!
He sits down with Tomi Lahren to discuss what it’s likely being a gay man working at the gun rights organization

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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.

This is as ridiculous as it is ignorant and wrong.

All governments have the authority to place limits and restrictions on guns consistent with the Second Amendment, including the Federal government.

 

[Terri4Trump]

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.

Thats a winner. Thank you.

 

[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.

where do you get your right wing propaganda from?

only the unorganized militia complains about gun control.

The idea of removing power from the general democracy and enforcing a monopoly on power to a central government is just insane fascist propaganda.
Only sane individuals complain about federal gun control.
There is absolutely no legal basis for it at all, it is totally corrupt, nothing good can possibly come from it, and clearly the founders wanted a decentralized armed population of citizen soldiers.

The history of gun control came from the KKK type organizations of the wealthy elite who wanted to be able to more easily murder rebellious Blacks, immigrants, and labor organizers.
Anyone supporting any sort of federal gun control is just a traitor to the democratic republic.

 

[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.

This is as ridiculous as it is ignorant and wrong.

All governments have the authority to place limits and restrictions on guns consistent with the Second Amendment, including the Federal government.

It is impossible for any federal weapons restriction to ever at all be consistent with the 2nd Amendment, when clearly the 2nd amendment says that there is to be ZERO federal jurisdiction on any weapons.

The 2nd amendment does not at all try to list ALL of the reasons why any and all federal weapons legislation is to be banned.
It only has to list ONE, and that is sufficient to totally ban any and all federal weapons legislation.
So anyone attempting to promote any federal weapons legislation is not only a traitor, but an obvious liar and fool on top of that.
It should be clear to absolutely anyone that any democratic republic always depends entirely on the general population retaining armed against inevitable government corruption. Never has any government been able to prevent eventual corruption requiring it to be fought and destroyed.
Anyone who would try to prevent that is a traitor to absolutely every positive principle in human society.

 

[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.

That does not even pass basic logic.
If one rational for a restriction on federal jurisdiction is listed, that in no way implies there are no millions more.
All that means is that there is sufficient justification for a block of any federal jurisdiction.
You only need one for sufficient justification.
Additional ones are not needed to be listed.
One is enough.
So any federal weapons law is clearly and completely illegal.

This is also true with drug laws.
There is absolutely no federal jurisdicition over drugs in the constitution, so the 9th and 10th amendments then totally prohibit any federal drug laws.
Which means the federal government is already WAY out of control and excessively abusive.

you have no basic logic. our Second Amendment is express, not implied in any way.

You have it backwards.
Yes the 2nd amendment is express and not implied in anyway, but like ALL of the amendments in the Bill of Rights, the 2nd amendment is strictly an absolute prohibition on any federal jurisdiction.
The whole point of any and all amendment of the Bill of Rights is to prevent any future federal power creep.
And the founders clearly were well aware of how governments constantly become corrupt, because the federal government has become totally and unacceptably corrupt.
Clearly any and all federal weapons laws are totally illegal.

 

[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.

This is as ridiculous as it is ignorant and wrong.

All governments have the authority to place limits and restrictions on guns consistent with the Second Amendment, including the Federal government.

There is absolutely no way to read the bill of rights without it being blatantly the founders wanted absolutely ZERO federal jurisdiction over weapons.
If you were correct that all government had authority to make laws like weapons restriction, then the whole Bill of Rights would be utterly pointless.
If you understood the 9th and 10th amendments at all, you would know that the federal government was ONLY to have any jurisdiction when explicitly granted such jurisdiction in the body of the Constitution. Do you see ANY article anywhere granting such federal jurisdiction over weapons? There is NONE! So there can not ever be ANY legal federal weapons law without an additional amendment or constitutional convention.

 

[M14 Shooter]

States with stricter gun control regulations have fewer mass shootings

Since there's no clear correlation whatsoever between gun ownership rate and gun homicide rate.... so?

 

[M14 Shooter]

In 1977, 50% of U.S. households had a gun in the house. In 2014, only 31% of U.S. households had a gun in the house. That's why gun murders have gone down.

How do you lie to yourself like this?