This one is for the gun grabbers. Explain this.

[iceberg]

Not at all. Living in a black community I see it firsthand.

One of the associated problems is single-parent households which blacks lead the race on. After the kid gets to a certain age (particularly males) the mother loses control over the kid. After that, he does as he pleases.

In our suburb, they created a three call limit. That means after three police calls to a residence, the property owner is assessed a cost for each additional call. Why this law? Because most of our calls to police are about the kids, and many of those calls come from the black mothers of these kids. We don't have the resources or the time for our police to be surrogate fathers.

I have also seen it right next door which is a story I told repeatedly. If you missed it in the past, I'll be glad to tell it again. I just don't want to bore people with repeated stories.

No need, I understand the point you are trying to make and don’t deny that those are factors that contribute to the problem. But back to my points, it all stems from poverty, lack of education and lack of opportunity. And for many kids, school is the only safe haven and place for opportunity that they have. You trying to dismiss the positive effects that schools can have on at risk youth is extremely short sighted

what gets to be bullshit to me anyway are all the people bitching that we need laws is only followed by no we don't.

we can simply cite too many areas where we have strict gun control laws and they have the worst violence. i don't necessarily think the laws make crime go up, that's just kinda silly. but they are not having an impact to make them go down. so why more? that said, bitching "why more" isn't trying to fix a pretty delicate problem that will require a lot of compromise all around to achieve the key points both sides are really after in the end.

so here's something i would like to see us look into.

first, if you want to play this game it first requires education. there should be a minimum of a week of classes that will include 4 days going over the history of guns, terminology, types and ammo. it would also include a full day on laws already on the books and how effective they have been in various regions. last day would be a full day in the field firing them, breaking them down and cleaning them. you would then need to pass with a minimum of 90% correct a test before you can begin to play this game.

except i'm not talking about buying guns. this would be step one in revamping everything from end to end and making sure the people who make these laws fully understand what is already there, how guns work, and what a dumbass they would look like to misuse clip for mag. you want to be on the committee that handles gun laws, prove your worth and knowledge and do your best to take politics out of this. being political has been getting more than stupid and replicating fears of taking guns away.

next up - background checks need to be revamped and be rerun on a regular basis if you are a gun owner. but you won't need to pass one every time you buy a gun because to own guns you will need a permit more or less showing you have passed a background check and typical training people go through now for a CHL. the background checks should be stricter HOWEVER, they should also include due process. if you are denied your permit you are told why and the gov has a limited time to ensure they tell you why you can't buy the gun. felons and major criminal records, sorry. nothing you can do you ain't getting one. at least not for a long period of time after release and there would be a process to reapply to clear the flag(s) off your background. there would NEVER be something like shady no fly lists and so on. obama earned every criticism by trying to force lists that did NOT have "due process" on them and the NRA will never let that happen. they shouldn't let that happen. due process is core to who we are and even TRYING to go around it is a furious flaming flag of poo.

so you have your license and when you want to buy a gun, hit the range or anything like that, simply show it and done. every other year you will be scanned again to make sure you still have no flags. if you do, you will be contacted about it and have to work through the issues with authorities always ensuring due process is upheld. if it can't be resolved your guns will be turned in until it can be cleared up, or you can sell them and provide a bill of sale and your permit cancelled. reapply at stated time or go through a review process that will be there to address anyone who can't clear the background check.

the background check should be looking into various areas and reviewed on a regular basis to ensure it's still working as intended, tweaked when needed. if a tweak is done and someone fails the check next time it's run, hit review process to determine if it applies and go from there.

there would still be no tracking of guns/gun ownership anymore than we do today. trying to go for that will get any hope of progress shot down. if they can pass the background check, don't really care how many guns they have. that said, if someone buys 10 AR15's at once, flag. unless a dealer but then your permit would indicate how you use guns. sporting, hunting, dealer, reseller, gunsmith and if you quality / prove to be an actual dealer then it won't matter cause those *are* tracked since it's not sold to a private party so those 10 would be on the books to this dealer.

use of guns in any crime would result in loss of permit to start and minimum jail time. judges have discretion to review the situation for other punishments that don't include jail time but minimum you forfeit permit and all weapons with a search and seizure of your property to take all they can find. perfect no, but something more than we do today.

we need to end the bullshit emo-ploys politicians do that which only show they are clueless and say things like mags discarded after use or continued mis-use of "automatic" weapons.

the federal gov should provide a baseline from which the states and increase as they see fit but can't decrease. ie - you would need to use the federal background check system and review process. but if california still feels the need to push it further, up to them. while sales are instant if you have a permit, another state could delay it a day. their call. but at least we all start with the same baseline.

there would be a lot of gnashing of teeth from both sides because no one "wins" this war so to speak as there is compromise to be had. the only thing i would not compromise on would be due process. you take away a right, you say why then and there and provide a quick process to review it, resolve if possible. weeks to months, not years.

to me this would at least ensure those passing laws know history and use today as well. you'll never remove politics from anything the gov is doing, but we can take out as much as possible by ensuring those creating our laws understand the ones we already have.

You really are confused on this topic. Requiring all of this rigamarole you just proposed in a violation of the 2nd Amendment. I think gun permits and/or licensing are unConstitutional.

indeed they are

what other right do we have

that one needs to seek permission(licensing) in order to exercise

Wait! I need to check to see if my free speech license is expired before I comment on that!

can you check out a book w/o a permit?
as a responsible gun owner, would you just tell people to go buy what they want w/o any education or validation?

pretty sure you've got a license for the right to drive that car.

and last i saw, no one has ever killed 60 people and wounded 500 by shouting at them with words.

like i said - offer some solutions or better ways.

 

[danielpalos]

It has to do with the law of large numbers, right wingers; don't be illegal to the law. It sets a Bad example.

 

[DrLove]

Wyoming has more guns per capita than any other state. They have open carry, and you do not need a permit to carry concealed. Yet the crime rate is 40 percent less than the national average, with some cities well below that. Some of them are among the safest places to live in America. So, if guns are the problem, as you believe, why aren't people being gunned down in the streets?

Perhaps that is because there are more Pronghorn Sheep than there are people in Wyoming?

 

[DrLove]

Did I say they were?
How do you know that the guns are responsible for the lower crime rate?

Unless you are stupid then you might want to reconsider a criminal lifestyle where most everyone is armed. Not you though.....

I would bet that most small towns have similar stats.

Then by your reasoning, liberals cause crime because all large urban centers are infested with the vermin.

No, large dynamic populations have larger problems including crime.

Blacks are responsible for 95 percent of all violent crime, and half of all murders. You cannot point to a single city with a largy black population that isn't a crime infested hellhole.

Can you kindly link us to a statistic showing that blacks commit 95% of violent crime?

Something besides Stormfront or AmericanRenaissance

 

[DrLove]

I noticed you didn't post the actual list of most dangerous states : from the FBI STATS you love.


10- Arkansas
Florida
Maryland
Delaware
South Carolina
Louisiana
Tennessee
Nevada
New Mexico
1- Alaska .

All gun nut states , except for Maryland .

The Most Dangerous States in America

Hmmm - 8 red states and a couple of purples. Tells me that Goobers perhaps should not own guns.

 

[DrLove]

And yet poor white people are only responsible for 5 percent of crime. Probably less.

You just pulled that stat out of your ass.

 

[Penelope]

Wyoming has more guns per capita than any other state. They have open carry, and you do not need a permit to carry concealed. Yet the crime rate is 40 percent less than the national average, with some cities well below that. Some of them are among the safest places to live in America. So, if guns are the problem, as you believe, why aren't people being gunned down in the streets?

What is their population?

 

[miketx]

Unless you are stupid then you might want to reconsider a criminal lifestyle where most everyone is armed. Not you though.....

I would bet that most small towns have similar stats.

Then by your reasoning, liberals cause crime because all large urban centers are infested with the vermin.

No, large dynamic populations have larger problems including crime.

Blacks are responsible for 95 percent of all violent crime, and half of all murders. You cannot point to a single city with a largy black population that isn't a crime infested hellhole.

Can you kindly link us to a statistic showing that blacks commit 95% of violent crime?

Something besides Stormfront or AmericanRenaissance

I noticed you didn't post the actual list of most dangerous states : from the FBI STATS you love.


10- Arkansas
Florida
Maryland
Delaware
South Carolina
Louisiana
Tennessee
Nevada
New Mexico
1- Alaska .

All gun nut states , except for Maryland .

The Most Dangerous States in America

Hmmm - 8 red states and a couple of purples. Tells me that Goobers perhaps should not own guns.

And yet poor white people are only responsible for 5 percent of crime. Probably less.

You just pulled that stat out of your ass.

The pattern repeats daily.....asking for proof they will never accept.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You aren’t having a very good night ray. Not every kid is fortunate enough to have parents who care. Teachers, coaches, counselors and community program leaders play a tremendous role in the lives of many children. Are you just making this stuff up?

Not at all. Living in a black community I see it firsthand.

One of the associated problems is single-parent households which blacks lead the race on. After the kid gets to a certain age (particularly males) the mother loses control over the kid. After that, he does as he pleases.

In our suburb, they created a three call limit. That means after three police calls to a residence, the property owner is assessed a cost for each additional call. Why this law? Because most of our calls to police are about the kids, and many of those calls come from the black mothers of these kids. We don't have the resources or the time for our police to be surrogate fathers.

I have also seen it right next door which is a story I told repeatedly. If you missed it in the past, I'll be glad to tell it again. I just don't want to bore people with repeated stories.

No need, I understand the point you are trying to make and don’t deny that those are factors that contribute to the problem. But back to my points, it all stems from poverty, lack of education and lack of opportunity. And for many kids, school is the only safe haven and place for opportunity that they have. You trying to dismiss the positive effects that schools can have on at risk youth is extremely short sighted

what gets to be bullshit to me anyway are all the people bitching that we need laws is only followed by no we don't.

we can simply cite too many areas where we have strict gun control laws and they have the worst violence. i don't necessarily think the laws make crime go up, that's just kinda silly. but they are not having an impact to make them go down. so why more? that said, bitching "why more" isn't trying to fix a pretty delicate problem that will require a lot of compromise all around to achieve the key points both sides are really after in the end.

so here's something i would like to see us look into.

first, if you want to play this game it first requires education. there should be a minimum of a week of classes that will include 4 days going over the history of guns, terminology, types and ammo. it would also include a full day on laws already on the books and how effective they have been in various regions. last day would be a full day in the field firing them, breaking them down and cleaning them. you would then need to pass with a minimum of 90% correct a test before you can begin to play this game.

except i'm not talking about buying guns. this would be step one in revamping everything from end to end and making sure the people who make these laws fully understand what is already there, how guns work, and what a dumbass they would look like to misuse clip for mag. you want to be on the committee that handles gun laws, prove your worth and knowledge and do your best to take politics out of this. being political has been getting more than stupid and replicating fears of taking guns away.

next up - background checks need to be revamped and be rerun on a regular basis if you are a gun owner. but you won't need to pass one every time you buy a gun because to own guns you will need a permit more or less showing you have passed a background check and typical training people go through now for a CHL. the background checks should be stricter HOWEVER, they should also include due process. if you are denied your permit you are told why and the gov has a limited time to ensure they tell you why you can't buy the gun. felons and major criminal records, sorry. nothing you can do you ain't getting one. at least not for a long period of time after release and there would be a process to reapply to clear the flag(s) off your background. there would NEVER be something like shady no fly lists and so on. obama earned every criticism by trying to force lists that did NOT have "due process" on them and the NRA will never let that happen. they shouldn't let that happen. due process is core to who we are and even TRYING to go around it is a furious flaming flag of poo.

so you have your license and when you want to buy a gun, hit the range or anything like that, simply show it and done. every other year you will be scanned again to make sure you still have no flags. if you do, you will be contacted about it and have to work through the issues with authorities always ensuring due process is upheld. if it can't be resolved your guns will be turned in until it can be cleared up, or you can sell them and provide a bill of sale and your permit cancelled. reapply at stated time or go through a review process that will be there to address anyone who can't clear the background check.

the background check should be looking into various areas and reviewed on a regular basis to ensure it's still working as intended, tweaked when needed. if a tweak is done and someone fails the check next time it's run, hit review process to determine if it applies and go from there.

there would still be no tracking of guns/gun ownership anymore than we do today. trying to go for that will get any hope of progress shot down. if they can pass the background check, don't really care how many guns they have. that said, if someone buys 10 AR15's at once, flag. unless a dealer but then your permit would indicate how you use guns. sporting, hunting, dealer, reseller, gunsmith and if you quality / prove to be an actual dealer then it won't matter cause those *are* tracked since it's not sold to a private party so those 10 would be on the books to this dealer.

use of guns in any crime would result in loss of permit to start and minimum jail time. judges have discretion to review the situation for other punishments that don't include jail time but minimum you forfeit permit and all weapons with a search and seizure of your property to take all they can find. perfect no, but something more than we do today.

we need to end the bullshit emo-ploys politicians do that which only show they are clueless and say things like mags discarded after use or continued mis-use of "automatic" weapons.

the federal gov should provide a baseline from which the states and increase as they see fit but can't decrease. ie - you would need to use the federal background check system and review process. but if california still feels the need to push it further, up to them. while sales are instant if you have a permit, another state could delay it a day. their call. but at least we all start with the same baseline.

there would be a lot of gnashing of teeth from both sides because no one "wins" this war so to speak as there is compromise to be had. the only thing i would not compromise on would be due process. you take away a right, you say why then and there and provide a quick process to review it, resolve if possible. weeks to months, not years.

to me this would at least ensure those passing laws know history and use today as well. you'll never remove politics from anything the gov is doing, but we can take out as much as possible by ensuring those creating our laws understand the ones we already have.

You really are confused on this topic. Requiring all of this rigamarole you just proposed in a violation of the 2nd Amendment. I think gun permits and/or licensing are unConstitutional.

like i said - top down changes of things. and how is getting a CHL type permit taking away your right? you can get as many guns as you want, this is just a way to do background checks and if you don't pass, make sure you know why and can work through it.

we can't keep things the way they are and standard MY RIGHT isn't going to keep flying very well in the face of such abuse by people who shouldn't be having guns in the first place. you can either create a better system that still provides said rights and also ensures those utilizing those rights are not a danger to others, as best we can.

like i said - a lot of people bitch, but so few even TRY to offer solutions or a better way. you gonna just bitch at this, or help think of a better way than we have today?

or - are you ok with how things are today?

You know what? The way things are is just fine as far as I am concerned.

Unlike you I realize and have accepted the fact that people are violent and unpredictable. These 2 facts are as irrefutable as gravity.

Knowing that and knowing that absolutely nothing we do vis a vis laws, behavior modification, bans of items and substances etc ad nauseum will change the fact that people kill each other and always will, then I have to accept all the ramifications that come with allowing people the ability to protect themselves from the violence will inevitably be wrought.

 

[Skull Pilot]

No need, I understand the point you are trying to make and don’t deny that those are factors that contribute to the problem. But back to my points, it all stems from poverty, lack of education and lack of opportunity. And for many kids, school is the only safe haven and place for opportunity that they have. You trying to dismiss the positive effects that schools can have on at risk youth is extremely short sighted

what gets to be bullshit to me anyway are all the people bitching that we need laws is only followed by no we don't.

we can simply cite too many areas where we have strict gun control laws and they have the worst violence. i don't necessarily think the laws make crime go up, that's just kinda silly. but they are not having an impact to make them go down. so why more? that said, bitching "why more" isn't trying to fix a pretty delicate problem that will require a lot of compromise all around to achieve the key points both sides are really after in the end.

so here's something i would like to see us look into.

first, if you want to play this game it first requires education. there should be a minimum of a week of classes that will include 4 days going over the history of guns, terminology, types and ammo. it would also include a full day on laws already on the books and how effective they have been in various regions. last day would be a full day in the field firing them, breaking them down and cleaning them. you would then need to pass with a minimum of 90% correct a test before you can begin to play this game.

except i'm not talking about buying guns. this would be step one in revamping everything from end to end and making sure the people who make these laws fully understand what is already there, how guns work, and what a dumbass they would look like to misuse clip for mag. you want to be on the committee that handles gun laws, prove your worth and knowledge and do your best to take politics out of this. being political has been getting more than stupid and replicating fears of taking guns away.

next up - background checks need to be revamped and be rerun on a regular basis if you are a gun owner. but you won't need to pass one every time you buy a gun because to own guns you will need a permit more or less showing you have passed a background check and typical training people go through now for a CHL. the background checks should be stricter HOWEVER, they should also include due process. if you are denied your permit you are told why and the gov has a limited time to ensure they tell you why you can't buy the gun. felons and major criminal records, sorry. nothing you can do you ain't getting one. at least not for a long period of time after release and there would be a process to reapply to clear the flag(s) off your background. there would NEVER be something like shady no fly lists and so on. obama earned every criticism by trying to force lists that did NOT have "due process" on them and the NRA will never let that happen. they shouldn't let that happen. due process is core to who we are and even TRYING to go around it is a furious flaming flag of poo.

so you have your license and when you want to buy a gun, hit the range or anything like that, simply show it and done. every other year you will be scanned again to make sure you still have no flags. if you do, you will be contacted about it and have to work through the issues with authorities always ensuring due process is upheld. if it can't be resolved your guns will be turned in until it can be cleared up, or you can sell them and provide a bill of sale and your permit cancelled. reapply at stated time or go through a review process that will be there to address anyone who can't clear the background check.

the background check should be looking into various areas and reviewed on a regular basis to ensure it's still working as intended, tweaked when needed. if a tweak is done and someone fails the check next time it's run, hit review process to determine if it applies and go from there.

there would still be no tracking of guns/gun ownership anymore than we do today. trying to go for that will get any hope of progress shot down. if they can pass the background check, don't really care how many guns they have. that said, if someone buys 10 AR15's at once, flag. unless a dealer but then your permit would indicate how you use guns. sporting, hunting, dealer, reseller, gunsmith and if you quality / prove to be an actual dealer then it won't matter cause those *are* tracked since it's not sold to a private party so those 10 would be on the books to this dealer.

use of guns in any crime would result in loss of permit to start and minimum jail time. judges have discretion to review the situation for other punishments that don't include jail time but minimum you forfeit permit and all weapons with a search and seizure of your property to take all they can find. perfect no, but something more than we do today.

we need to end the bullshit emo-ploys politicians do that which only show they are clueless and say things like mags discarded after use or continued mis-use of "automatic" weapons.

the federal gov should provide a baseline from which the states and increase as they see fit but can't decrease. ie - you would need to use the federal background check system and review process. but if california still feels the need to push it further, up to them. while sales are instant if you have a permit, another state could delay it a day. their call. but at least we all start with the same baseline.

there would be a lot of gnashing of teeth from both sides because no one "wins" this war so to speak as there is compromise to be had. the only thing i would not compromise on would be due process. you take away a right, you say why then and there and provide a quick process to review it, resolve if possible. weeks to months, not years.

to me this would at least ensure those passing laws know history and use today as well. you'll never remove politics from anything the gov is doing, but we can take out as much as possible by ensuring those creating our laws understand the ones we already have.

You really are confused on this topic. Requiring all of this rigamarole you just proposed in a violation of the 2nd Amendment. I think gun permits and/or licensing are unConstitutional.

indeed they are

what other right do we have

that one needs to seek permission(licensing) in order to exercise

Wait! I need to check to see if my free speech license is expired before I comment on that!

can you check out a book w/o a permit?
as a responsible gun owner, would you just tell people to go buy what they want w/o any education or validation?

pretty sure you've got a license for the right to drive that car.

and last i saw, no one has ever killed 60 people and wounded 500 by shouting at them with words.

like i said - offer some solutions or better ways.

FYI you have no right to drive a car.

 

[iceberg]

Not at all. Living in a black community I see it firsthand.

One of the associated problems is single-parent households which blacks lead the race on. After the kid gets to a certain age (particularly males) the mother loses control over the kid. After that, he does as he pleases.

In our suburb, they created a three call limit. That means after three police calls to a residence, the property owner is assessed a cost for each additional call. Why this law? Because most of our calls to police are about the kids, and many of those calls come from the black mothers of these kids. We don't have the resources or the time for our police to be surrogate fathers.

I have also seen it right next door which is a story I told repeatedly. If you missed it in the past, I'll be glad to tell it again. I just don't want to bore people with repeated stories.

No need, I understand the point you are trying to make and don’t deny that those are factors that contribute to the problem. But back to my points, it all stems from poverty, lack of education and lack of opportunity. And for many kids, school is the only safe haven and place for opportunity that they have. You trying to dismiss the positive effects that schools can have on at risk youth is extremely short sighted

what gets to be bullshit to me anyway are all the people bitching that we need laws is only followed by no we don't.

we can simply cite too many areas where we have strict gun control laws and they have the worst violence. i don't necessarily think the laws make crime go up, that's just kinda silly. but they are not having an impact to make them go down. so why more? that said, bitching "why more" isn't trying to fix a pretty delicate problem that will require a lot of compromise all around to achieve the key points both sides are really after in the end.

so here's something i would like to see us look into.

first, if you want to play this game it first requires education. there should be a minimum of a week of classes that will include 4 days going over the history of guns, terminology, types and ammo. it would also include a full day on laws already on the books and how effective they have been in various regions. last day would be a full day in the field firing them, breaking them down and cleaning them. you would then need to pass with a minimum of 90% correct a test before you can begin to play this game.

except i'm not talking about buying guns. this would be step one in revamping everything from end to end and making sure the people who make these laws fully understand what is already there, how guns work, and what a dumbass they would look like to misuse clip for mag. you want to be on the committee that handles gun laws, prove your worth and knowledge and do your best to take politics out of this. being political has been getting more than stupid and replicating fears of taking guns away.

next up - background checks need to be revamped and be rerun on a regular basis if you are a gun owner. but you won't need to pass one every time you buy a gun because to own guns you will need a permit more or less showing you have passed a background check and typical training people go through now for a CHL. the background checks should be stricter HOWEVER, they should also include due process. if you are denied your permit you are told why and the gov has a limited time to ensure they tell you why you can't buy the gun. felons and major criminal records, sorry. nothing you can do you ain't getting one. at least not for a long period of time after release and there would be a process to reapply to clear the flag(s) off your background. there would NEVER be something like shady no fly lists and so on. obama earned every criticism by trying to force lists that did NOT have "due process" on them and the NRA will never let that happen. they shouldn't let that happen. due process is core to who we are and even TRYING to go around it is a furious flaming flag of poo.

so you have your license and when you want to buy a gun, hit the range or anything like that, simply show it and done. every other year you will be scanned again to make sure you still have no flags. if you do, you will be contacted about it and have to work through the issues with authorities always ensuring due process is upheld. if it can't be resolved your guns will be turned in until it can be cleared up, or you can sell them and provide a bill of sale and your permit cancelled. reapply at stated time or go through a review process that will be there to address anyone who can't clear the background check.

the background check should be looking into various areas and reviewed on a regular basis to ensure it's still working as intended, tweaked when needed. if a tweak is done and someone fails the check next time it's run, hit review process to determine if it applies and go from there.

there would still be no tracking of guns/gun ownership anymore than we do today. trying to go for that will get any hope of progress shot down. if they can pass the background check, don't really care how many guns they have. that said, if someone buys 10 AR15's at once, flag. unless a dealer but then your permit would indicate how you use guns. sporting, hunting, dealer, reseller, gunsmith and if you quality / prove to be an actual dealer then it won't matter cause those *are* tracked since it's not sold to a private party so those 10 would be on the books to this dealer.

use of guns in any crime would result in loss of permit to start and minimum jail time. judges have discretion to review the situation for other punishments that don't include jail time but minimum you forfeit permit and all weapons with a search and seizure of your property to take all they can find. perfect no, but something more than we do today.

we need to end the bullshit emo-ploys politicians do that which only show they are clueless and say things like mags discarded after use or continued mis-use of "automatic" weapons.

the federal gov should provide a baseline from which the states and increase as they see fit but can't decrease. ie - you would need to use the federal background check system and review process. but if california still feels the need to push it further, up to them. while sales are instant if you have a permit, another state could delay it a day. their call. but at least we all start with the same baseline.

there would be a lot of gnashing of teeth from both sides because no one "wins" this war so to speak as there is compromise to be had. the only thing i would not compromise on would be due process. you take away a right, you say why then and there and provide a quick process to review it, resolve if possible. weeks to months, not years.

to me this would at least ensure those passing laws know history and use today as well. you'll never remove politics from anything the gov is doing, but we can take out as much as possible by ensuring those creating our laws understand the ones we already have.

You really are confused on this topic. Requiring all of this rigamarole you just proposed in a violation of the 2nd Amendment. I think gun permits and/or licensing are unConstitutional.

like i said - top down changes of things. and how is getting a CHL type permit taking away your right? you can get as many guns as you want, this is just a way to do background checks and if you don't pass, make sure you know why and can work through it.

we can't keep things the way they are and standard MY RIGHT isn't going to keep flying very well in the face of such abuse by people who shouldn't be having guns in the first place. you can either create a better system that still provides said rights and also ensures those utilizing those rights are not a danger to others, as best we can.

like i said - a lot of people bitch, but so few even TRY to offer solutions or a better way. you gonna just bitch at this, or help think of a better way than we have today?

or - are you ok with how things are today?

You know what? The way things are is just fine as far as I am concerned.

Unlike you I realize and have accepted the fact that people are violent and unpredictable. These 2 facts are as irrefutable as gravity.

Knowing that and knowing that absolutely nothing we do vis a vis laws, behavior modification, bans of items and substances etc ad nauseum will change the fact that people kill each other and always will, then I have to accept all the ramifications that come with allowing people the ability to protect themselves from the violence will inevitably be wrought.

great.

how does any of what i suggest stop them from doing that?

i do think the background check system needs an enema and nothing should be done w/o due process as well.
i also believe that the ones passing these laws should be qualified to do so.

the rest is flexible to me but suggestions i think would benefit both sides. but the reason nothing ever changes is exactly what you are saying right now.

people don't want it to change. why? fear usually. and i would strongly agree it's not unfounded.

 

[iceberg]

what gets to be bullshit to me anyway are all the people bitching that we need laws is only followed by no we don't.

we can simply cite too many areas where we have strict gun control laws and they have the worst violence. i don't necessarily think the laws make crime go up, that's just kinda silly. but they are not having an impact to make them go down. so why more? that said, bitching "why more" isn't trying to fix a pretty delicate problem that will require a lot of compromise all around to achieve the key points both sides are really after in the end.

so here's something i would like to see us look into.

first, if you want to play this game it first requires education. there should be a minimum of a week of classes that will include 4 days going over the history of guns, terminology, types and ammo. it would also include a full day on laws already on the books and how effective they have been in various regions. last day would be a full day in the field firing them, breaking them down and cleaning them. you would then need to pass with a minimum of 90% correct a test before you can begin to play this game.

except i'm not talking about buying guns. this would be step one in revamping everything from end to end and making sure the people who make these laws fully understand what is already there, how guns work, and what a dumbass they would look like to misuse clip for mag. you want to be on the committee that handles gun laws, prove your worth and knowledge and do your best to take politics out of this. being political has been getting more than stupid and replicating fears of taking guns away.

next up - background checks need to be revamped and be rerun on a regular basis if you are a gun owner. but you won't need to pass one every time you buy a gun because to own guns you will need a permit more or less showing you have passed a background check and typical training people go through now for a CHL. the background checks should be stricter HOWEVER, they should also include due process. if you are denied your permit you are told why and the gov has a limited time to ensure they tell you why you can't buy the gun. felons and major criminal records, sorry. nothing you can do you ain't getting one. at least not for a long period of time after release and there would be a process to reapply to clear the flag(s) off your background. there would NEVER be something like shady no fly lists and so on. obama earned every criticism by trying to force lists that did NOT have "due process" on them and the NRA will never let that happen. they shouldn't let that happen. due process is core to who we are and even TRYING to go around it is a furious flaming flag of poo.

so you have your license and when you want to buy a gun, hit the range or anything like that, simply show it and done. every other year you will be scanned again to make sure you still have no flags. if you do, you will be contacted about it and have to work through the issues with authorities always ensuring due process is upheld. if it can't be resolved your guns will be turned in until it can be cleared up, or you can sell them and provide a bill of sale and your permit cancelled. reapply at stated time or go through a review process that will be there to address anyone who can't clear the background check.

the background check should be looking into various areas and reviewed on a regular basis to ensure it's still working as intended, tweaked when needed. if a tweak is done and someone fails the check next time it's run, hit review process to determine if it applies and go from there.

there would still be no tracking of guns/gun ownership anymore than we do today. trying to go for that will get any hope of progress shot down. if they can pass the background check, don't really care how many guns they have. that said, if someone buys 10 AR15's at once, flag. unless a dealer but then your permit would indicate how you use guns. sporting, hunting, dealer, reseller, gunsmith and if you quality / prove to be an actual dealer then it won't matter cause those *are* tracked since it's not sold to a private party so those 10 would be on the books to this dealer.

use of guns in any crime would result in loss of permit to start and minimum jail time. judges have discretion to review the situation for other punishments that don't include jail time but minimum you forfeit permit and all weapons with a search and seizure of your property to take all they can find. perfect no, but something more than we do today.

we need to end the bullshit emo-ploys politicians do that which only show they are clueless and say things like mags discarded after use or continued mis-use of "automatic" weapons.

the federal gov should provide a baseline from which the states and increase as they see fit but can't decrease. ie - you would need to use the federal background check system and review process. but if california still feels the need to push it further, up to them. while sales are instant if you have a permit, another state could delay it a day. their call. but at least we all start with the same baseline.

there would be a lot of gnashing of teeth from both sides because no one "wins" this war so to speak as there is compromise to be had. the only thing i would not compromise on would be due process. you take away a right, you say why then and there and provide a quick process to review it, resolve if possible. weeks to months, not years.

to me this would at least ensure those passing laws know history and use today as well. you'll never remove politics from anything the gov is doing, but we can take out as much as possible by ensuring those creating our laws understand the ones we already have.

You really are confused on this topic. Requiring all of this rigamarole you just proposed in a violation of the 2nd Amendment. I think gun permits and/or licensing are unConstitutional.

indeed they are

what other right do we have

that one needs to seek permission(licensing) in order to exercise

Wait! I need to check to see if my free speech license is expired before I comment on that!

can you check out a book w/o a permit?
as a responsible gun owner, would you just tell people to go buy what they want w/o any education or validation?

pretty sure you've got a license for the right to drive that car.

and last i saw, no one has ever killed 60 people and wounded 500 by shouting at them with words.

like i said - offer some solutions or better ways.

FYI you have no right to drive a car.

gosh. never heard that rebuttal before.

you have no specified right to a lot of things in life but still benefit from them.

 

[Skull Pilot]

No need, I understand the point you are trying to make and don’t deny that those are factors that contribute to the problem. But back to my points, it all stems from poverty, lack of education and lack of opportunity. And for many kids, school is the only safe haven and place for opportunity that they have. You trying to dismiss the positive effects that schools can have on at risk youth is extremely short sighted

what gets to be bullshit to me anyway are all the people bitching that we need laws is only followed by no we don't.

we can simply cite too many areas where we have strict gun control laws and they have the worst violence. i don't necessarily think the laws make crime go up, that's just kinda silly. but they are not having an impact to make them go down. so why more? that said, bitching "why more" isn't trying to fix a pretty delicate problem that will require a lot of compromise all around to achieve the key points both sides are really after in the end.

so here's something i would like to see us look into.

first, if you want to play this game it first requires education. there should be a minimum of a week of classes that will include 4 days going over the history of guns, terminology, types and ammo. it would also include a full day on laws already on the books and how effective they have been in various regions. last day would be a full day in the field firing them, breaking them down and cleaning them. you would then need to pass with a minimum of 90% correct a test before you can begin to play this game.

except i'm not talking about buying guns. this would be step one in revamping everything from end to end and making sure the people who make these laws fully understand what is already there, how guns work, and what a dumbass they would look like to misuse clip for mag. you want to be on the committee that handles gun laws, prove your worth and knowledge and do your best to take politics out of this. being political has been getting more than stupid and replicating fears of taking guns away.

next up - background checks need to be revamped and be rerun on a regular basis if you are a gun owner. but you won't need to pass one every time you buy a gun because to own guns you will need a permit more or less showing you have passed a background check and typical training people go through now for a CHL. the background checks should be stricter HOWEVER, they should also include due process. if you are denied your permit you are told why and the gov has a limited time to ensure they tell you why you can't buy the gun. felons and major criminal records, sorry. nothing you can do you ain't getting one. at least not for a long period of time after release and there would be a process to reapply to clear the flag(s) off your background. there would NEVER be something like shady no fly lists and so on. obama earned every criticism by trying to force lists that did NOT have "due process" on them and the NRA will never let that happen. they shouldn't let that happen. due process is core to who we are and even TRYING to go around it is a furious flaming flag of poo.

so you have your license and when you want to buy a gun, hit the range or anything like that, simply show it and done. every other year you will be scanned again to make sure you still have no flags. if you do, you will be contacted about it and have to work through the issues with authorities always ensuring due process is upheld. if it can't be resolved your guns will be turned in until it can be cleared up, or you can sell them and provide a bill of sale and your permit cancelled. reapply at stated time or go through a review process that will be there to address anyone who can't clear the background check.

the background check should be looking into various areas and reviewed on a regular basis to ensure it's still working as intended, tweaked when needed. if a tweak is done and someone fails the check next time it's run, hit review process to determine if it applies and go from there.

there would still be no tracking of guns/gun ownership anymore than we do today. trying to go for that will get any hope of progress shot down. if they can pass the background check, don't really care how many guns they have. that said, if someone buys 10 AR15's at once, flag. unless a dealer but then your permit would indicate how you use guns. sporting, hunting, dealer, reseller, gunsmith and if you quality / prove to be an actual dealer then it won't matter cause those *are* tracked since it's not sold to a private party so those 10 would be on the books to this dealer.

use of guns in any crime would result in loss of permit to start and minimum jail time. judges have discretion to review the situation for other punishments that don't include jail time but minimum you forfeit permit and all weapons with a search and seizure of your property to take all they can find. perfect no, but something more than we do today.

we need to end the bullshit emo-ploys politicians do that which only show they are clueless and say things like mags discarded after use or continued mis-use of "automatic" weapons.

the federal gov should provide a baseline from which the states and increase as they see fit but can't decrease. ie - you would need to use the federal background check system and review process. but if california still feels the need to push it further, up to them. while sales are instant if you have a permit, another state could delay it a day. their call. but at least we all start with the same baseline.

there would be a lot of gnashing of teeth from both sides because no one "wins" this war so to speak as there is compromise to be had. the only thing i would not compromise on would be due process. you take away a right, you say why then and there and provide a quick process to review it, resolve if possible. weeks to months, not years.

to me this would at least ensure those passing laws know history and use today as well. you'll never remove politics from anything the gov is doing, but we can take out as much as possible by ensuring those creating our laws understand the ones we already have.

You really are confused on this topic. Requiring all of this rigamarole you just proposed in a violation of the 2nd Amendment. I think gun permits and/or licensing are unConstitutional.

like i said - top down changes of things. and how is getting a CHL type permit taking away your right? you can get as many guns as you want, this is just a way to do background checks and if you don't pass, make sure you know why and can work through it.

we can't keep things the way they are and standard MY RIGHT isn't going to keep flying very well in the face of such abuse by people who shouldn't be having guns in the first place. you can either create a better system that still provides said rights and also ensures those utilizing those rights are not a danger to others, as best we can.

like i said - a lot of people bitch, but so few even TRY to offer solutions or a better way. you gonna just bitch at this, or help think of a better way than we have today?

or - are you ok with how things are today?

You know what? The way things are is just fine as far as I am concerned.

Unlike you I realize and have accepted the fact that people are violent and unpredictable. These 2 facts are as irrefutable as gravity.

Knowing that and knowing that absolutely nothing we do vis a vis laws, behavior modification, bans of items and substances etc ad nauseum will change the fact that people kill each other and always will, then I have to accept all the ramifications that come with allowing people the ability to protect themselves from the violence will inevitably be wrought.

great.

how does any of what i suggest stop them from doing that?

i do think the background check system needs an enema and nothing should be done w/o due process as well.
i also believe that the ones passing these laws should be qualified to do so.

the rest is flexible to me but suggestions i think would benefit both sides. but the reason nothing ever changes is exactly what you are saying right now.

people don't want it to change. why? fear usually. and i would strongly agree it's not unfounded.

There is no reason to make it harder to buy a firearm.

We have a system of checks in place and for the most part it works well enough.
I don't mind a background check before issuing a CCW permit but once that permit is in hand then I should be able not only to carry a weapon in all 50 states but also to purchase one in all 50 states.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You really are confused on this topic. Requiring all of this rigamarole you just proposed in a violation of the 2nd Amendment. I think gun permits and/or licensing are unConstitutional.

indeed they are

what other right do we have

that one needs to seek permission(licensing) in order to exercise

Wait! I need to check to see if my free speech license is expired before I comment on that!

can you check out a book w/o a permit?
as a responsible gun owner, would you just tell people to go buy what they want w/o any education or validation?

pretty sure you've got a license for the right to drive that car.

and last i saw, no one has ever killed 60 people and wounded 500 by shouting at them with words.

like i said - offer some solutions or better ways.

FYI you have no right to drive a car.

gosh. never heard that rebuttal before.

you have no specified right to a lot of things in life but still benefit from them.

And yet you still incorrectly think you have a right to drive a car on publicly owned roads.

 

[iceberg]

what gets to be bullshit to me anyway are all the people bitching that we need laws is only followed by no we don't.

we can simply cite too many areas where we have strict gun control laws and they have the worst violence. i don't necessarily think the laws make crime go up, that's just kinda silly. but they are not having an impact to make them go down. so why more? that said, bitching "why more" isn't trying to fix a pretty delicate problem that will require a lot of compromise all around to achieve the key points both sides are really after in the end.

so here's something i would like to see us look into.

first, if you want to play this game it first requires education. there should be a minimum of a week of classes that will include 4 days going over the history of guns, terminology, types and ammo. it would also include a full day on laws already on the books and how effective they have been in various regions. last day would be a full day in the field firing them, breaking them down and cleaning them. you would then need to pass with a minimum of 90% correct a test before you can begin to play this game.

except i'm not talking about buying guns. this would be step one in revamping everything from end to end and making sure the people who make these laws fully understand what is already there, how guns work, and what a dumbass they would look like to misuse clip for mag. you want to be on the committee that handles gun laws, prove your worth and knowledge and do your best to take politics out of this. being political has been getting more than stupid and replicating fears of taking guns away.

next up - background checks need to be revamped and be rerun on a regular basis if you are a gun owner. but you won't need to pass one every time you buy a gun because to own guns you will need a permit more or less showing you have passed a background check and typical training people go through now for a CHL. the background checks should be stricter HOWEVER, they should also include due process. if you are denied your permit you are told why and the gov has a limited time to ensure they tell you why you can't buy the gun. felons and major criminal records, sorry. nothing you can do you ain't getting one. at least not for a long period of time after release and there would be a process to reapply to clear the flag(s) off your background. there would NEVER be something like shady no fly lists and so on. obama earned every criticism by trying to force lists that did NOT have "due process" on them and the NRA will never let that happen. they shouldn't let that happen. due process is core to who we are and even TRYING to go around it is a furious flaming flag of poo.

so you have your license and when you want to buy a gun, hit the range or anything like that, simply show it and done. every other year you will be scanned again to make sure you still have no flags. if you do, you will be contacted about it and have to work through the issues with authorities always ensuring due process is upheld. if it can't be resolved your guns will be turned in until it can be cleared up, or you can sell them and provide a bill of sale and your permit cancelled. reapply at stated time or go through a review process that will be there to address anyone who can't clear the background check.

the background check should be looking into various areas and reviewed on a regular basis to ensure it's still working as intended, tweaked when needed. if a tweak is done and someone fails the check next time it's run, hit review process to determine if it applies and go from there.

there would still be no tracking of guns/gun ownership anymore than we do today. trying to go for that will get any hope of progress shot down. if they can pass the background check, don't really care how many guns they have. that said, if someone buys 10 AR15's at once, flag. unless a dealer but then your permit would indicate how you use guns. sporting, hunting, dealer, reseller, gunsmith and if you quality / prove to be an actual dealer then it won't matter cause those *are* tracked since it's not sold to a private party so those 10 would be on the books to this dealer.

use of guns in any crime would result in loss of permit to start and minimum jail time. judges have discretion to review the situation for other punishments that don't include jail time but minimum you forfeit permit and all weapons with a search and seizure of your property to take all they can find. perfect no, but something more than we do today.

we need to end the bullshit emo-ploys politicians do that which only show they are clueless and say things like mags discarded after use or continued mis-use of "automatic" weapons.

the federal gov should provide a baseline from which the states and increase as they see fit but can't decrease. ie - you would need to use the federal background check system and review process. but if california still feels the need to push it further, up to them. while sales are instant if you have a permit, another state could delay it a day. their call. but at least we all start with the same baseline.

there would be a lot of gnashing of teeth from both sides because no one "wins" this war so to speak as there is compromise to be had. the only thing i would not compromise on would be due process. you take away a right, you say why then and there and provide a quick process to review it, resolve if possible. weeks to months, not years.

to me this would at least ensure those passing laws know history and use today as well. you'll never remove politics from anything the gov is doing, but we can take out as much as possible by ensuring those creating our laws understand the ones we already have.

You really are confused on this topic. Requiring all of this rigamarole you just proposed in a violation of the 2nd Amendment. I think gun permits and/or licensing are unConstitutional.

like i said - top down changes of things. and how is getting a CHL type permit taking away your right? you can get as many guns as you want, this is just a way to do background checks and if you don't pass, make sure you know why and can work through it.

we can't keep things the way they are and standard MY RIGHT isn't going to keep flying very well in the face of such abuse by people who shouldn't be having guns in the first place. you can either create a better system that still provides said rights and also ensures those utilizing those rights are not a danger to others, as best we can.

like i said - a lot of people bitch, but so few even TRY to offer solutions or a better way. you gonna just bitch at this, or help think of a better way than we have today?

or - are you ok with how things are today?

You know what? The way things are is just fine as far as I am concerned.

Unlike you I realize and have accepted the fact that people are violent and unpredictable. These 2 facts are as irrefutable as gravity.

Knowing that and knowing that absolutely nothing we do vis a vis laws, behavior modification, bans of items and substances etc ad nauseum will change the fact that people kill each other and always will, then I have to accept all the ramifications that come with allowing people the ability to protect themselves from the violence will inevitably be wrought.

great.

how does any of what i suggest stop them from doing that?

i do think the background check system needs an enema and nothing should be done w/o due process as well.
i also believe that the ones passing these laws should be qualified to do so.

the rest is flexible to me but suggestions i think would benefit both sides. but the reason nothing ever changes is exactly what you are saying right now.

people don't want it to change. why? fear usually. and i would strongly agree it's not unfounded.

There is no reason to make it harder to buy a firearm.

We have a system of checks in place and for the most part it works well enough.
I don't mind a background check before issuing a CCW permit but once that permit is in hand then I should be able not only to carry a weapon in all 50 states but also to purchase one in all 50 states.

great.

and if what i'm talking about were in place you could.

 

[iceberg]

indeed they are

what other right do we have

that one needs to seek permission(licensing) in order to exercise

Wait! I need to check to see if my free speech license is expired before I comment on that!

can you check out a book w/o a permit?
as a responsible gun owner, would you just tell people to go buy what they want w/o any education or validation?

pretty sure you've got a license for the right to drive that car.

and last i saw, no one has ever killed 60 people and wounded 500 by shouting at them with words.

like i said - offer some solutions or better ways.

FYI you have no right to drive a car.

gosh. never heard that rebuttal before.

you have no specified right to a lot of things in life but still benefit from them.

And yet you still incorrectly think you have a right to drive a car on publicly owned roads.

where did i say this?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Wait! I need to check to see if my free speech license is expired before I comment on that!

can you check out a book w/o a permit?
as a responsible gun owner, would you just tell people to go buy what they want w/o any education or validation?

pretty sure you've got a license for the right to drive that car.

and last i saw, no one has ever killed 60 people and wounded 500 by shouting at them with words.

like i said - offer some solutions or better ways.

FYI you have no right to drive a car.

gosh. never heard that rebuttal before.

you have no specified right to a lot of things in life but still benefit from them.

And yet you still incorrectly think you have a right to drive a car on publicly owned roads.

where did i say this?

Cut the shit.

You just wrote this

you've got a license for the right to drive that car.

 

[iceberg]

can you check out a book w/o a permit?
as a responsible gun owner, would you just tell people to go buy what they want w/o any education or validation?

pretty sure you've got a license for the right to drive that car.

and last i saw, no one has ever killed 60 people and wounded 500 by shouting at them with words.

like i said - offer some solutions or better ways.

FYI you have no right to drive a car.

gosh. never heard that rebuttal before.

you have no specified right to a lot of things in life but still benefit from them.

And yet you still incorrectly think you have a right to drive a car on publicly owned roads.

where did i say this?

Cut the shit.

You just wrote this

you've got a license for the right to drive that car.

did i say where? but then again if on private land no i don't need a license so that wouldn't work either.

before we start wordsmtihing around, no. the "right" to drive a car, fly in a plane, and may other things also *NOT* specified in the constitution are still rights we share by paying taxes on these services.

if you are *only* going to say the rights spelled out in the constitution are all we have great. we can get literal there as well and pretend that we still live in 1776 and only go by what was said at the time.

wanna go there next?

 

[Skull Pilot]

FYI you have no right to drive a car.

gosh. never heard that rebuttal before.

you have no specified right to a lot of things in life but still benefit from them.

And yet you still incorrectly think you have a right to drive a car on publicly owned roads.

where did i say this?

Cut the shit.

You just wrote this

you've got a license for the right to drive that car.

did i say where? but then again if on private land no i don't need a license so that wouldn't work either.

before we start wordsmtihing around, no. the "right" to drive a car, fly in a plane, and may other things also *NOT* specified in the constitution are still rights we share by paying taxes on these services.

if you are *only* going to say the rights spelled out in the constitution are all we have great. we can get literal there as well and pretend that we still live in 1776 and only go by what was said at the time.

wanna go there next?

Words mean things.

Most people know this already.

So no you do not have a right to drive. You do not have the right to do many things you are simply permitted to do them if you meet certain requirements and your ability to to any of those things can be taken away from you at any time for any reason.

 

[Vandalshandle]

You aren’t having a very good night ray. Not every kid is fortunate enough to have parents who care. Teachers, coaches, counselors and community program leaders play a tremendous role in the lives of many children. Are you just making this stuff up?

Not at all. Living in a black community I see it firsthand.

One of the associated problems is single-parent households which blacks lead the race on. After the kid gets to a certain age (particularly males) the mother loses control over the kid. After that, he does as he pleases.

In our suburb, they created a three call limit. That means after three police calls to a residence, the property owner is assessed a cost for each additional call. Why this law? Because most of our calls to police are about the kids, and many of those calls come from the black mothers of these kids. We don't have the resources or the time for our police to be surrogate fathers.

I have also seen it right next door which is a story I told repeatedly. If you missed it in the past, I'll be glad to tell it again. I just don't want to bore people with repeated stories.

No need, I understand the point you are trying to make and don’t deny that those are factors that contribute to the problem. But back to my points, it all stems from poverty, lack of education and lack of opportunity. And for many kids, school is the only safe haven and place for opportunity that they have. You trying to dismiss the positive effects that schools can have on at risk youth is extremely short sighted

No, my only point is that the United States spends more per capita on primary education than any other industrialized country in the world, yet we are only mediocre in results to show for it.

So tell me, where is this lack of education you speak of? Because if you took an entire school of low income kids, sent them to a suburban school, and did the reverse with the suburban school kids, you wouldn't see much of a change.

It's less the education than it is the people there for the education. When our suburb was white, we had the highest performance results in the county, now that it's black, we have one of the lowest.

So what changed? What changed is the family structure. The school buildings are not the same, in fact, we built all new schools several years ago. Our teachers are still paid well. Every levy passes. It's not the educational system.

Like I said, families play a part, but you can’t legislate the ways families act. We can improve our education and community programs, those also play a role.

And what do you mean by "improve" our education? Such as what????

If you mean keep throwing more money at the problem, that's been a proven failure.

We've seen this huge public push (mostly by the Democrats) to stop bullying, to accept gays, to stop smoking, stop taking drugs, to eat more healthy, yet we've never seen any push by the Democrats that promote the family unit; to stress the importance of a two-parent family.

Correct, we cannot force personal decisions on people, but we can constantly remind people of the failures single-parent families experience all the time. Because if we can make improvements there, it will do ten times more good than improving community programs or throwing more money into schools.

The government should provide free reruns of "Ozzie and Harriet" and "Leave it to Beaver" to every school in the nation, and require testing of students as to whether or not Harriet should serve chocolate, or vanilla ice cream after dinner, and whether or not June should vacuum in high heels or flats.