Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How would you determine who should be denied guns and votes?Felons? The mentally frazzled? Would you deny them both guns and votes?Would you deny a gun to the same people you would deny the vote?
We do.
Permanent residents can own firearms, but they can't vote.
Not permanently.
And let me just add, I don't think a person who we don't want owning a gun or voting should be walking the streets freely.
yep.why should gun shops have to go thru back ground checks for buyers and those selling at gun shows not have to do the same, with whom they are selling to?
It makes the Gun Shops background requirements useless, unless background checks are universal, imo.
How many times do you have to be told.....all gun sellers at gun shows have to do background checks.
Private property owners can sell their private property without a background check, they can do that in the parking lot, across the street or at a local Denny's.....
You don't know what you are talking about.....
Do you understand that criminals do not buy their guns at gun shows or from private sellers?
Why do you think that will accomplish anything?Why not ban the semi automatic, as they were under Clinton??
How would you determine who should be denied guns and votes?Felons? The mentally frazzled? Would you deny them both guns and votes?We do.
Permanent residents can own firearms, but they can't vote.
Not permanently.
And let me just add, I don't think a person who we don't want owning a gun or voting should be walking the streets freely.
When a person has a restraining order (real or imagined for violence) they are often times temporarily removed from possessing firearms. The Restraining order always has a time period where it runs out. I doubt if we need to be locking those people up. Just keep them away from firearms for a short time until the cool off period ends.
yep.why should gun shops have to go thru back ground checks for buyers and those selling at gun shows not have to do the same, with whom they are selling to?
It makes the Gun Shops background requirements useless, unless background checks are universal, imo.
How many times do you have to be told.....all gun sellers at gun shows have to do background checks.
Private property owners can sell their private property without a background check, they can do that in the parking lot, across the street or at a local Denny's.....
You don't know what you are talking about.....
Do you understand that criminals do not buy their guns at gun shows or from private sellers?
Gun show loophole is a political term in the United States referring to the sale of firearms by private sellers, including those done at gun shows, that do not meet federal background check requirements. This is dubbed the private sale exemption or "secondary market".
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not ban the semi automatic, as they were under Clinton??
Aurora: AR-15
Orlando: AR-15
Parkland: AR-15
Las Vegas: AR-15
Sandy Hook: AR-15
Texas Church: AR-15
San Bernardino: AR-15
Waffle House: AR-15
Santa Fe High School: AR-15
El Passo: AR-15
Dayton: AR-15
Odessa: AR-15
How would you determine who should be denied guns and votes?Felons? The mentally frazzled? Would you deny them both guns and votes?
Not permanently.
And let me just add, I don't think a person who we don't want owning a gun or voting should be walking the streets freely.
When a person has a restraining order (real or imagined for violence) they are often times temporarily removed from possessing firearms. The Restraining order always has a time period where it runs out. I doubt if we need to be locking those people up. Just keep them away from firearms for a short time until the cool off period ends.
Many are imagined and bullshit.
.Violence or fear of violence is like racism now. It can mean anything and judges tend to err on the side of so called safety when signing those orders.
I mean all your girlfriend or wife has to say is you raised your voice, looked cross-eyed at her, or you tapped her on the butt because she didn't iron your shirt correctly....
As well as the police interview partRigby seems to be forgetting the "show good reason to own a firearm" part.This from Newsweek:That is the opposite of what I've read from almost every other source. Where are you getting this information? I'd be real interested in a link.Every developed nation has people withmental health problems, violent video games and movies, depressed kids.
Only the US has the 2nd Amendment and a PAC dedicated to eliminating any restrictions on buying firearms.
So we have weekly mass shootings
That actually is totally untrue.
It is actually much easier to buy firearms in all other countries compared to the US, except maybe Japan.
The US has over 10,000 firearms laws, and most are complex federal laws, like it being illegal to even drive by a school with a firearm in the trunk of your car.
In other countries you may have to register or license, but that is much less complex than the finger printing and background check you have to do in the US.
All you have to do in the UK, France, Germany, etc., is to join a club and you then are guaranteed approval.
In places like Switzerland and Israel, the government is giving out guns for free, and almost mandating people be armed.
View attachment 277209
Why do you believe someone should be forced to demonstrate to the state a "good reason" for the exercise of his right?As well as the police interview partRigby seems to be forgetting the "show good reason to own a firearm" part.
yep.why should gun shops have to go thru back ground checks for buyers and those selling at gun shows not have to do the same, with whom they are selling to?
It makes the Gun Shops background requirements useless, unless background checks are universal, imo.
How many times do you have to be told.....all gun sellers at gun shows have to do background checks.
Private property owners can sell their private property without a background check, they can do that in the parking lot, across the street or at a local Denny's.....
You don't know what you are talking about.....
Do you understand that criminals do not buy their guns at gun shows or from private sellers?
Gun show loophole is a political term in the United States referring to the sale of firearms by private sellers, including those done at gun shows, that do not meet federal background check requirements. This is dubbed the private sale exemption or "secondary market".
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not ban the semi automatic, as they were under Clinton??
Aurora: AR-15
Orlando: AR-15
Parkland: AR-15
Las Vegas: AR-15
Sandy Hook: AR-15
Texas Church: AR-15
San Bernardino: AR-15
Waffle House: AR-15
Santa Fe High School: AR-15
El Passo: AR-15
Dayton: AR-15
Odessa: AR-15
Lanza murdered his mother and stole her rifleAll of Lanza’s weapons were legally bought? Right?
How do you think this supports your position?
What did he murder her with?Lanza murdered his mother and stole her rifleAll of Lanza’s weapons were legally bought? Right?
How do you think this supports your position?
Why do you believe someone should be forced to demonstrate to the state a "good reason" for the exercise of his right?As well as the police interview partRigby seems to be forgetting the "show good reason to own a firearm" part.
Ah - the 50-state legal AR. Nice.Here is a picture of the last 2 AR-15s I purchased.
What do you find wrong with them?
What did he murder her with?Lanza murdered his mother and stole her rifleAll of Lanza’s weapons were legally bought? Right?
How do you think this supports your position?
Another one of her guns
You can't answer the question because you don't have an answer, or because you don't understand the question?Ask RigbyWhy do you believe someone should be forced to demonstrate to the state a "good reason" for the exercise of his right?As well as the police interview partRigby seems to be forgetting the "show good reason to own a firearm" part.
Let us know when you change the law that allows the state to seize your guns because someone else has a "mental disorder".Correct. The guns shouldn’t have been in the house with someone diagnosed with mental disorders.What did he murder her with?Lanza murdered his mother and stole her rifleAll of Lanza’s weapons were legally bought? Right?
How do you think this supports your position?
Another one of her guns
You can't answer the question because you don't have an answer, or because you don't understand the question?Ask RigbyWhy do you believe someone should be forced to demonstrate to the state a "good reason" for the exercise of his right?As well as the police interview partRigby seems to be forgetting the "show good reason to own a firearm" part.
So, you cannot tell us -why- you believe what you believe, just that you believe what you believe.I would say the former.You can't answer the question because you don't have an answer, or because you don't understand the question?Ask RigbyWhy do you believe someone should be forced to demonstrate to the state a "good reason" for the exercise of his right?As well as the police interview partRigby seems to be forgetting the "show good reason to own a firearm" part.
Is that what you tell the parents of kindergarteners when they opt for the Kevlar backpack? You speak of basic freedoms as if your freedom to carry a gun without credentials trumps the massive public concern with gun violence.Every gun owner is a law abiding citizen right up to the point they pull the trigger.No law, no single provision of a regulation will ever, and has never stopped criminal actions. Speed limits have not eradicated high speed highway accidents. No building codes have ever ended building fires.No, you're right. Background checks won't do the trick. Ban and confiscate assault rifles and mags over 10 rounds. Insist on safety courses and licensing, including a clean mental health evaluation, every five years, for any gun. Clean up the NICS data base so it actually contains the information needed to make an informed decision on a potential buyer's appropriateness for a gun.
Americans are stupid mental cases.
But who would argue that speed limits have substantially reduced high speed airomobile accidents? Who would argue that building codes have been totally ineffective in making construction standards higher and therefore safer?
The Gun Culture is retrenching so deeply in the canard that massively popular, common sense gun safety regulations inevitably result in gun confiscation. The 'slippery slope' doctrine.
Those who successfully introduced Prohibition used the same intractable political tact. The most obstinate politics in 20th century American politics. But when faced with overwhelming popular opposition, they held fast until they were utterly smashed. A few compromises would most certainly saved the Prohibition movement.
You can't name any common sense gun regulations....all you put out are gun laws meant to restrict gun access for law abiding gun owners.
A background check does not infringe the right to bear arms.
Jayzus! Ya want an ID to cast a vote, but not to get a gun!
Yes...a background check does......
The I.D. to vote is to make sure no one is stealing your name and your vote, dumb ass.
And no, normal people do not use their guns for gun crime or gun murder.......
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
Though only 15% of Americans over the age of 15 have arrest records,63 approximately 90 percent of “adult mur‐ derers have adult records, with an average adult criminal career [involving crimes committed as an adult rather than a child] of six or more years, including four major adult felony arrests.”64
I. VIOLENCE: THE DECISIVENESS OF SOCIAL FACTORS
One reason the extent of gun ownership in a society does not spur the murder rate is that murderers are not spread evenly throughout the population. Analysis of perpetrator studies shows that violent criminals—especially murderers—“almost uniformly have a long history of involvement in criminal behav‐ ior.”37 So it would not appreciably raise violence if all law‐ abiding, responsible people had firearms because they are not the ones who rape, rob, or murder.38 By the same token, violent crime would not fall if guns were totally banned to civilians. As the respective examples of Luxembourg and Russia suggest,39 individuals who commit violent crimes will either find guns despite severe controls or will find other weapons to use. 40
--------------------------
III. DO ORDINARY PEOPLE MURDER?
The “more guns equal more death” mantra seems plausible only when viewed through the rubric that murders mostly in‐ volve ordinary people who kill because they have access to a firearm when they get angry. If this were true, murder might well increase where people have ready access to firearms, but the available data provides no such correlation. Nations and
areas with more guns per capita do not have higher murder rates than those with fewer guns per capita.53
Nevertheless, critics of gun ownership often argue that a “gun in the closet to protect against burglars will most likely be used to shoot a spouse in a moment of rage . . . . The problem is you and me—law‐abiding folks;”54 that banning handgun posses‐ sion only for those with criminal records will “fail to protect us from the most likely source of handgun murder: ordinary citi‐ zens;”55 that “most gun‐related homicides . . . are the result of impulsive actions taken by individuals who have little or no criminal background or who are known to the victims;”56 that “the majority of firearm homicide[s occur] . . . not as the result of criminal activity, but because of arguments between people who know each other;”57 that each year there are thousands of gun murders “by law‐abiding citizens who might have stayed law‐abiding if they had not possessed firearms.”58
These comments appear to rest on no evidence and actually con‐ tradict facts that have so uniformly been established by homicide studies dating back to the 1890s that they have become “crimino‐ logical axioms.”59 Insofar as studies focus on perpetrators, they show that neither a majority, nor many, nor virtually any murder‐ ers are ordinary “law‐abiding citizens.”60
Rather, almost all mur‐ derers are extremely aberrant individuals with life histories of violence, psychopathology, substance abuse, and other dangerous behaviors. “The vast majority of persons involved in life‐ threatening violence have a long criminal record with many prior contacts with the justice system.”61 “Thus homicide—[whether] of a
stranger or [of] someone known to the offender—‘is usually part of a pattern of violence, engaged in by people who are known . . . as violence prone.’”62
Though only 15% of Americans over the age of 15 have arrest records,63 approximately 90 percent of “adult mur‐ derers have adult records, with an average adult criminal career [involving crimes committed as an adult rather than a child] of six or more years, including four major adult felony arrests.”64
These national statistics dovetail with data from local nineteenth and twentieth century studies. For example: victims as well as offenders [in 1950s and 1960s Philadelphia murders] . . . tended to be people with prior police records, usually for violent crimes such as as‐ sault.”65
“The great majority of both perpetrators and victims of [1970s Harlem] assaults and murders had previous [adult] arrests, probably over 80% or more.”66 Boston police and probation officers in the 1990s agreed that of those juvenile‐perpetrated murders where all the facts were known, virtually all were committed by gang members, though the killing was not necessarily gang‐ directed. 67 One example would be a gang member who stabs his girlfriend to death in a fit of anger.68 Regardless of their arrests for other crimes, 80% of 1997 Atlanta murder arrestees had at least one earlier drug offense with 70% having 3 or more prior drug of‐ fenses.69
A New York Times study of the 1,662 murders committed in that city in the years 2003–2005 found that “[m]ore than 90 percent of the killers had criminal records.”70 Baltimore police figures show that “92 percent of murder suspects had [prior] criminal records in 2006.”71 Several of the more recent homicide studies just reviewed
********
The time you could rationalize gun murder and suicide by way of actuality tables is over. Not one sane human is in favor of mass shootings as just the inevitable cost of having the gun culture regulate itself. Gun makers, importers and exporters have paid to develop a political interest in making and selling more guns. Mazel tov! A blessing on their house. American capitalism with the receipts to prove it.
But the abuse of their products has resulted in a very popular and bi-partisan plea to reign this in. Hunters, sportsmen and those who opt for a gun as self defense will not be hindered in their choice of weaponry for those purposes.
The canard that a vote for Democrats means confiscation tomorrow is exposed for the intellectually insulting scread it is. I've heard those ads since 1976. Democrats have been elected. But no confiscations.
Your hand is played out. The American people are saying 'Do something'.
Maybe then, you all should not glorify guns, the AR--15 in particular or those guns that look like it, or act like it, and these loony tune murderers wouldn't be so enamored with how fast and well it kills human beings? All over the net, are legal gun owners constantly showing off their stash, their collections in pictures.... or boasting on internet boards about their guns.... as if it makes their cocks big and fat....Why do you think that will accomplish anything?Why not ban the semi automatic, as they were under Clinton??
View attachment 277297
View attachment 277299
