What should the end goal of our gun policy be?

[2aguy]

BTW, gun control does not mean total confiscation of all guns. That meme is a canard - one echoed by biddable people like you.

The liberal gun-rights-haters have even admitted frankly that the only countries that have managed to reduce these mass shootings, are the ones that enact a virtual 100% ban on guns in civilian hands: England, China, Japan, Australia, etc. The fact that crime continues to increase in most of those countries, is carefully not examined by the liberals.

And yet, with the evidence before them, they continue to push for more gun laws. It's obvious what their real goal is: Knowing the laws they call for won't work, they want the 100% ban in this country, too.

And even that 100% ban will only work if we also enact a massive police state, where squads of armed police first go door to door confiscating every firearm, and then continue to regularly invade and search every house as time goes on, looking for guns.

Keep this in mind the next time some politician calls for "reasonable gun restrictions" or some other tired talking point. He knows it won't work. But it's the next step he wants on the way to his real goal.

What other reason could he have for continuing to push for more gun laws?

Q. What reason do I want to see gun controls?

A. I've seen the results of the insanity, and hope someday a sane gun control policy can be reached by men and women of goodwill.

BTWj, you presented the same logical fallacies I've read dozens of times by those who are opposed to any and all efforts to keep guns out of the hands of those who should not ever own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm.

No one has ever fought the effort to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't own them........that is what you guys say, but it isn't true. You nuts keep proposing things that just won't do that...and all the things you propose really do is target normal gun owners with more paperwork, fines, fees and jail time for mistakes in those things.....

Not one thing you propose keeps guns out of the hands of crimnals or mass shooters....

 

[2aguy]

• BTW, gun control does not mean total confiscation of all guns. That meme is a canard - one echoed by biddable people like you.

  [*]The liberal gun-rights-haters have even admitted frankly that the only countries that have managed to reduce these mass shootings, are the ones that enact a virtual 100% ban on guns in civilian hands: England, China, Japan, Australia, etc. The fact that crime continues to increase in most of those countries, is carefully not examined by the liberals.

And yet, with the evidence before them, they continue to push for more gun laws. It's obvious what their real goal is: Knowing the laws they call for won't work, they want the 100% ban in this country, too.

And even that 100% ban will only work if we also enact a massive police state, where squads of armed police first go door to door confiscating every firearm, and then continue to regularly invade and search every house as time goes on, looking for guns.

Keep this in mind the next time some politician calls for "reasonable gun restrictions" or some other tired talking point. He knows it won't work. But it's the next step he wants on the way to his real goal.

What other reason could he have for continuing to push for more gun laws?

Q. What reason do I want to see gun controls?
A. I've seen the results of the insanity, and hope someday a sane gun control policy can be reached by men and women of goodwill.

"Sane" require that said laws and policies are demonstrably necessary and effective; you know you cannot provide any sound argument to that effect for any of the restrictions you seek.
Thus nothing you seek is "sane".

You are a LIAR. I have presented arguments that may reduce the number of guns in the hands of those who should never be legally capable of owning, possessing or have one or more in their custody or control.

Such arguments include Licensing and Registration and a Flash Notice System. The response is predictable:

• It will not keep guns out of the hands of criminals (only criminals will have guns)
• It violates the 2nd A.
• It is a slippery slope, soon "they" will confiscate all guns in private ownership
• Natural law supersedes gun control laws
• Gun control is a communist goal.

No...the response is the truth about what you propose...

---Licensing only effects law abiding people...criminals, who cannot legally own guns now...are carrying guns now. Criminals who are willing to carry a gun illegally are not going to get a license, and cannot get a license because they have a criminal record.....therefore, your idea only applies to people who do not commit crimes with guns...

Also.....licensing is a fee.....and just as when the democrats used Poll Taxes to deny blacks the right to vote....a licensing fee becomes a barrier to the poor to access this Right.....

So what is the point.

---Registration...

According to the Haynes v. United States Supreme Court decision, convicted criminals do not have to register their illegal guns because to do so violates their right against self incrimination.....therefore...the only people who would be required to register their guns...are law abiding citizens...the ones who do not use them to commit crimes.

The actual purpose of gun registration is confiscation. Registration has been used in every country that banned or confiscated guns, including, but not limited to Britain, Germany, and Australia.......gun registration needs to happen first....otherwise, if you try to do both registration and then confiscation right after each other, people will hide their guns. So first, you tell people they just need to register guns so we know who has them. Of course, this does absolutely nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters....nothing.
Then, years later, once you have the lists ready, and you get the political will....like they did in Germany, Britain and Australia....you can ban or confiscate whatever guns you want and you can assure a high degree of success...because you have that list.

Also...registration will need a fee....and just like when the democrats used Poll Taxes to deny blacks the right to vote.....a fee to register would bar the poor from accessing this Right.

A flash notice system would work......but it has already been suggested by our side....you go in, you submit your drivers license to buy the gun, they run your name and you should get a pass/fail on the purchase...with no record keeping...

The pu

 

[2aguy]

• [*]The liberal gun-rights-haters have even admitted frankly that the only countries that have managed to reduce these mass shootings, are the ones that enact a virtual 100% ban on guns in civilian hands: England, China, Japan, Australia, etc. The fact that crime continues to increase in most of those countries, is carefully not examined by the liberals.

And yet, with the evidence before them, they continue to push for more gun laws. It's obvious what their real goal is: Knowing the laws they call for won't work, they want the 100% ban in this country, too.

And even that 100% ban will only work if we also enact a massive police state, where squads of armed police first go door to door confiscating every firearm, and then continue to regularly invade and search every house as time goes on, looking for guns.

Keep this in mind the next time some politician calls for "reasonable gun restrictions" or some other tired talking point. He knows it won't work. But it's the next step he wants on the way to his real goal.

What other reason could he have for continuing to push for more gun laws?

Q. What reason do I want to see gun controls?
A. I've seen the results of the insanity, and hope someday a sane gun control policy can be reached by men and women of goodwill.

"Sane" require that said laws and policies are demonstrably necessary and effective; you know you cannot provide any sound argument to that effect for any of the restrictions you seek.
Thus nothing you seek is "sane".

You are a LIAR. I have presented arguments that may reduce the number of guns in the hands of those who should never be legally capable of owning, possessing or have one or more in their custody or control.

Such arguments include Licensing and Registration and a Flash Notice System. The response is predictable:

• It will not keep guns out of the hands of criminals (only criminals will have guns)
• It violates the 2nd A.
• It is a slippery slope, soon "they" will confiscate all guns in private ownership
• Natural law supersedes gun control laws
• Gun control is a communist goal.

Registration is a no go , PERIOD.

Why?

We register cars
We register boats
We register Air craft

Why not guns?

This is why...

--Licensing only effects law abiding people...criminals, who cannot legally own guns now...are carrying guns now. Criminals who are willing to carry a gun illegally are not going to get a license, and cannot get a license because they have a criminal record.....therefore, your idea only applies to people who do not commit crimes with guns...

Also.....licensing is a fee.....and just as when the democrats used Poll Taxes to deny blacks the right to vote....a licensing fee becomes a barrier to the poor to access this Right.....

So what is the point.

---Registration...

According to the Haynes v. United States Supreme Court decision, convicted criminals do not have to register their illegal guns because to do so violates their right against self incrimination.....therefore...the only people who would be required to register their guns...are law abiding citizens...the ones who do not use them to commit crimes.

The actual purpose of gun registration is confiscation. Registration has been used in every country that banned or confiscated guns, including, but not limited to Britain, Germany, and Australia.......gun registration needs to happen first....otherwise, if you try to do both registration and then confiscation right after each other, people will hide their guns. So first, you tell people they just need to register guns so we know who has them. Of course, this does absolutely nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters....nothing.
Then, years later, once you have the lists ready, and you get the political will....like they did in Germany, Britain and Australia....you can ban or confiscate whatever guns you want and you can assure a high degree of success...because you have that list.

Also...registration will need a fee....and just like when the democrats used Poll Taxes to deny blacks the right to vote.....a fee to register would bar the poor from accessing this Right.

You guys bitch about free voter I.D. cards...yet you expect us to essentially pay a Poll Tax for the Right to own a gun....

 

[Contumacious]

"Sane" require that said laws and policies are demonstrably necessary and effective; you know you cannot provide any sound argument to that effect for any of the restrictions you seek.
Thus nothing you seek is "sane".

You are a LIAR. I have presented arguments that may reduce the number of guns in the hands of those who should never be legally capable of owning, possessing or have one or more in their custody or control.

Such arguments include Licensing and Registration and a Flash Notice System. The response is predictable:

• It will not keep guns out of the hands of criminals (only criminals will have guns)
• It violates the 2nd A.
• It is a slippery slope, soon "they" will confiscate all guns in private ownership
• Natural law supersedes gun control laws
• Gun control is a communist goal.

Registration is a no go , PERIOD.

Why?

We register cars
We register boats
We register Air craft

Why not guns?

Gun Control in Nazi Germany


Gun Control in the Third Reich: Disarming the Jews and “Enemies of the State” by Stephen P. Halbrook, Independent Institute, 2014, 364 pp.

There is no shortage of theories or writings related to the rise of the Third Reich and the subsequent Holocaust. Stephen Halbrook’s 2013 book, Gun Control in the Third Reich offers a compelling and important account of the role of gun prohibition in aiding Hitler’s goals of exterminating the Jews and other “enemies of the state.” While much of the early gun prohibition was created with supposedly good intent, Halbrook carefully and meticulously details how a change in political regime facilitated manipulating some well-intentioned gun registration laws and other gun prohibition to be used in inconceivable way

YOU LOSE - anytime on the internet one needs to default to Hitler or Germany's Policies in the 30's & 40's the post fails.

YOU LOSE:

"Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it."

George Santayana,

 

[2aguy]

You are a LIAR. I have presented arguments that may reduce the number of guns in the hands of those who should never be legally capable of owning, possessing or have one or more in their custody or control.

Such arguments include Licensing and Registration and a Flash Notice System. The response is predictable:

• It will not keep guns out of the hands of criminals (only criminals will have guns)
• It violates the 2nd A.
• It is a slippery slope, soon "they" will confiscate all guns in private ownership
• Natural law supersedes gun control laws
• Gun control is a communist goal.

Registration is a no go , PERIOD.

Why?

We register cars
We register boats
We register Air craft

Why not guns?

Gun Control in Nazi Germany


Gun Control in the Third Reich: Disarming the Jews and “Enemies of the State” by Stephen P. Halbrook, Independent Institute, 2014, 364 pp.

There is no shortage of theories or writings related to the rise of the Third Reich and the subsequent Holocaust. Stephen Halbrook’s 2013 book, Gun Control in the Third Reich offers a compelling and important account of the role of gun prohibition in aiding Hitler’s goals of exterminating the Jews and other “enemies of the state.” While much of the early gun prohibition was created with supposedly good intent, Halbrook carefully and meticulously details how a change in political regime facilitated manipulating some well-intentioned gun registration laws and other gun prohibition to be used in inconceivable way

YOU LOSE - anytime on the internet one needs to default to Hitler or Germany's Policies in the 30's & 40's the post fails.

YOU LOSE:

"Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it."

George Santayana,

That is the thing.......they don't even know history exists....for a left wing, anti gun nutter.....history only exists from the time they wake up in the morning...everything else is just a hollywood movie....

They know genocides happen...they know that the people were not able to stop it...they have been told that had people been armed the mass murder quite possibly could have been stopped.......and they don't care.....

 

[Wry Catcher]

BTW, gun control does not mean total confiscation of all guns. That meme is a canard - one echoed by biddable people like you.

The liberal gun-rights-haters have even admitted frankly that the only countries that have managed to reduce these mass shootings, are the ones that enact a virtual 100% ban on guns in civilian hands: England, China, Japan, Australia, etc. The fact that crime continues to increase in most of those countries, is carefully not examined by the liberals.

And yet, with the evidence before them, they continue to push for more gun laws. It's obvious what their real goal is: Knowing the laws they call for won't work, they want the 100% ban in this country, too.

And even that 100% ban will only work if we also enact a massive police state, where squads of armed police first go door to door confiscating every firearm, and then continue to regularly invade and search every house as time goes on, looking for guns.

Keep this in mind the next time some politician calls for "reasonable gun restrictions" or some other tired talking point. He knows it won't work. But it's the next step he wants on the way to his real goal.

What other reason could he have for continuing to push for more gun laws?

Q. What reason do I want to see gun controls?

A. I've seen the results of the insanity, and hope someday a sane gun control policy can be reached by men and women of goodwill.

BTWj, you presented the same logical fallacies I've read dozens of times by those who are opposed to any and all efforts to keep guns out of the hands of those who should not ever own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm.

No one has ever fought the effort to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't own them........that is what you guys say, but it isn't true. You nuts keep proposing things that just won't do that...and all the things you propose really do is target normal gun owners with more paperwork, fines, fees and jail time for mistakes in those things.....

Not one thing you propose keeps guns out of the hands of crimnals or mass shooters....

Written by ^^^ a dyed in the wool Philistine.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Five-dollar words^^^ from a five-cent mind.