Looking at the US gun law debate another way...

[NeverEndingMe]

oh boy, the retard has gone off the derp end...

I agree with you on this. And I think it's approaching the issue at the wrong point, but with Republican intransigence in Congress, you have to try to pick some point that might be supported. If they go with the list, they jolly well should clean up the list. Pointing out at the list as a bad list, though, just becomes another attempt by gun nuts to not do anything to cut down on their choices of mass killing devices. Just as mealy mouthed an argument that box cutters, pen names, and IUDs kill too.

The issue should be approached at the manufacturing and distribution points. There's no legitimate reason for anyone out of the military (even not in the police) for someone to need a class of weapons that is capable of high kills rapidly (here is where you gun nuts get mealy mouthed about what that is. It's something, so common sense and caring folks will pick a point and start from there). We don't permit private citizens to walk around with nuclear weapons, so just ratchet back from there to a point where quick, high kill rates aren't possible. There's no reason why a private citizen should have such a weapon. Their right to own one and play with one does not supersede the rights of others to live.

So, screw Congress--the public should go after gun manufactures and should harass gunshop owners selling such weapons within their community. Name them, photograph them, publicize them and their activities. Point to them in church and at the bowling alley and call out what they are doing. It doesn't matter if it's currently legal. It's wrong and it's contributing to and enabling mass casualties among the innocent who are just trying to exercise their right to go to school, the market, the movies, church, and clubs without being mowed down by some nut whose has far more options available to him to kill people because of the stupidity of gun nuts.

 

[BotanyBoy]

We put people in office to solve problems, not to just look at them and do nothing about them.

LMFAO!!! And how's that working out??

 

[Ldy_Sea]

I with Republican intransigence in Congress,

AKA defending constitutional rights.

BTW The NRA and Republicans have been trying since the 1980's to add mental health to the NCIC database to prevent the mentally ill from buying a gun. This legislation was blocked by the AMA and Democrats because it would stigmatize mental illness. Let thementally ill have guns or they might feel bad. That's logical.

you have to try to pick some point that might be supported. If they go with the list, they jolly well should clean up the list.

Something conservatives have been demanding since the lists started. Yet Democrats have stopped every attempt at making the process more transparent.

Pointing out at the list as a bad list, though, just becomes another attempt by gun nuts to not do anything to cut down on their choices of mass killing devices.

Because the ACLU are so in favor of guns. When anti gun groups agree with the NRA about gun legislation. It's probably a bad idea.

Or do you believe putting someones name on a piece of paper is a good way to take away constitutional rights. What's next a no writing list to stop freedom of speech. Once one right is curtiled how long before others are?

Just as mealy mouthed an argument that box cutters, pen knives, and IUDs kill too.

IUD"s kill? Well so do toilets. 12 people a year in the US die from injuries related to using the toilet.

There is no constitutional right to carry a knife, or box cutter. Unles syou think the bill of rights is "mealy mouthed" reason to allow freedom of speech, freedom of assembly etc... What applies to one right applies to all.

That's a stupid argument against cutting the choices down at the end of big kill rate options.

That's like saying the 4th amendment prevents justice.

The issue should be approached at the manufacturing and distribution points. There's no legitimate reason for anyone out of the military (even not in the police) for someone to need a class of weapons that is capable of high kills rapidly

So only criminals should have guns. I can kill people rapidly with a knife or hammer, or golf club. Look at the chart I posted. The US crime rate is lower than Canada with it's gun control laws.

Chicago is the most violent city in the US and has strict gun control laws. Are people in Chicago more violent than people in Houston or Atlanta?

(here is where you gun nuts get mealy mouthed about what that is. It's something, so common sense and caring folks will pick a point and start from there). We don't permit private citizens to walk around with nuclear weapons,

Really! Wow! Nor can a citizen own any explosives with out the proper permits. Yet in Boston and Oklahoma and San Bernidino and many other places CRIMINALS DIDN"T OBEY THE LAW and got their hands on explosives. Guess that whole ban thing didn't work out.

It's illegal for a person to build a nuclear rector in their backyard, that didn't stop this fourteen year old from doing so. He even got radioactive material by writing letters. Hows that ban working out?

Laws didn't stop criminals. If making something illegal stopped criminals than wouldn't making murder and rape stop those crimes. Meth and Coke are illegal, how hard are they to get?

so just ratchet back from there to a point where quick, high kill rates aren't possible. There's no reason why a private citizen should have such a weapon. Their right to own one and play with one does not supersede the rights of others to live.

You mean like the 200+ Native Americans killed at Wounded Knee when federal troops came to take their guns? Tell me again that the government is here to protect us and not take our guns.

Read my quotes from the founding fathers with sources above. Every one refers to arms and the Citizens having the ability to fight against a tyrannical government using the same arms that a standing army has. Just like citizens stood against tyranny in 1949 at the Battle of Athens.

So, screw Congress--the public should go after gun manufactures and should harass gunshop owners selling such weapons within their community. Name them, photograph them, publicize them and their activities. Point to them in church and at the bowling alley and call out what they are doing. It doesn't matter if it's currently legal.

So waste tax dollars illegally harassing businesses that sell a legal product. That makes sense. No one being harassed like that would sue and win.

We are a society of laws. No one should be above the law. If something is legal that's all that matters. Not anyones opinion on that law. Otherwise we would be in anarchy, and I could kill anyone I wanted.

When Rosa Parks sat in the front of the bus that was illegal. She was arrested. The law was unjust. The law was changed.

It's wrong

In your opinion.

Despite the fact that over the last 30 years gun ownership has increased and gun crimes have declined according to FBI statistics.

Despite the fact the CDC did a study in 08 or 09, ordered by Obama, that showed firearms prevent more crimes than they are used in, and that more lives are saved by firearms in a day than are lost in a year, most of the time without a shot being fired.

Despite that fact even the Anti-Gun New York Times states that banning the AR-15 and like weapons for 10 years (1994-2004) had no effect on the crime rate. Link to the the article is in a previous post.

and it's contributing to and enabling mass casualties among the innocent who are just trying to exercise their right to go to school, the market, the movies, church, and clubs without being mowed down by some nut whose has far more options available to him to kill people because of the stupidity of gun nuts.

Why is it every mass shooter is a Democrat and not one of them was a member of the NRA yet the GOP and NRA are blamed for their actions?

If "gun nuts" as you like to say are so dangerous why is there never a shooting at a gun show or an NRA convention? Why are all shootings in places where the law or property manager disallows guns.

Could it be that people who want to shoot up a location go places where LAW ABIDING citizens are unarmed?

If banning guns will work, explain the San Bernidino shooting (Strict Gun control laws)

Explain the Paris shootings (All guns banned)

Explain why Honduras has the highest rate of gun deaths in the world when all guns are banned.

Explain why Switzerland which has the highest rate of firearm ownership in the world has one of the lowest murder rates.

Could it be that it's not guns, it's people? Or is that too logical and filled with too much common sense?

I await your reply. Try to use facts not opinions. Since I have already proven your opinions wrong several times, and I'm tired of repeating myself.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

sr71plt is one of the mentally defective.

AKA defending constitutional rights.

BTW The NRA and Republicans have been trying since the 1980's to add mental health to the NCIC database to prevent the mentally ill from buying a gun. This legislation was blocked by the AMA and Democrats because it would stigmatize mental illness. Let thementally ill have guns or they might feel bad. That's logical.


Something conservatives have been demanding since the lists started. Yet Democrats have stopped every attempt at making the process more transparent.



Because the ACLU are so in favor of guns. When anti gun groups agree with the NRA about gun legislation. It's probably a bad idea.

Or do you believe putting someones name on a piece of paper is a good way to take away constitutional rights. What's next a no writing list to stop freedom of speech. Once one right is curtiled how long before others are?



IUD"s kill? Well so do toilets. 12 people a year in the US die from injuries related to using the toilet.

There is no constitutional right to carry a knife, or box cutter. Unles syou think the bill of rights is "mealy mouthed" reason to allow freedom of speech, freedom of assembly etc... What applies to one right applies to all.



That's like saying the 4th amendment prevents justice.



So only criminals should have guns. I can kill people rapidly with a knife or hammer, or golf club. Look at the chart I posted. The US crime rate is lower than Canada with it's gun control laws.

Chicago is the most violent city in the US and has strict gun control laws. Are people in Chicago more violent than people in Houston or Atlanta?



Really! Wow! Nor can a citizen own any explosives with out the proper permits. Yet in Boston and Oklahoma and San Bernidino and many other places CRIMINALS DIDN"T OBEY THE LAW and got their hands on explosives. Guess that whole ban thing didn't work out.

It's illegal for a person to build a nuclear rector in their backyard, that didn't stop this fourteen year old from doing so. He even got radioactive material by writing letters. Hows that ban working out?

Laws didn't stop criminals. If making something illegal stopped criminals than wouldn't making murder and rape stop those crimes. Meth and Coke are illegal, how hard are they to get?



You mean like the 200+ Native Americans killed at Wounded Knee when federal troops came to take their guns? Tell me again that the government is here to protect us and not take our guns.

Read my quotes from the founding fathers with sources above. Every one refers to arms and the Citizens having the ability to fight against a tyrannical government using the same arms that a standing army has. Just like citizens stood against tyranny in 1949 at the Battle of Athens.



So waste tax dollars illegally harassing businesses that sell a legal product. That makes sense. No one being harassed like that would sue and win.

We are a society of laws. No one should be above the law. If something is legal that's all that matters. Not anyones opinion on that law. Otherwise we would be in anarchy, and I could kill anyone I wanted.

When Rosa Parks sat in the front of the bus that was illegal. She was arrested. The law was unjust. The law was changed.



In your opinion.

Despite the fact that over the last 30 years gun ownership has increased and gun crimes have declined according to FBI statistics.

Despite the fact the CDC did a study in 08 or 09, ordered by Obama, that showed firearms prevent more crimes than they are used in, and that more lives are saved by firearms in a day than are lost in a year, most of the time without a shot being fired.

Despite that fact even the Anti-Gun New York Times states that banning the AR-15 and like weapons for 10 years (1994-2004) had no effect on the crime rate. Link to the the article is in a previous post.



Why is it every mass shooter is a Democrat and not one of them was a member of the NRA yet the GOP and NRA are blamed for their actions?

If "gun nuts" as you like to say are so dangerous why is there never a shooting at a gun show or an NRA convention? Why are all shootings in places where the law or property manager disallows guns.

Could it be that people who want to shoot up a location go places where LAW ABIDING citizens are unarmed?

If banning guns will work, explain the San Bernidino shooting (Strict Gun control laws)

Explain the Paris shootings (All guns banned)

Explain why Honduras has the highest rate of gun deaths in the world when all guns are banned.

Explain why Switzerland which has the highest rate of firearm ownership in the world has one of the lowest murder rates.

Could it be that it's not guns, it's people? Or is that too logical and filled with too much common sense?

I await your reply. Try to use facts not opinions. Since I have already proven your opinions wrong several times, and I'm tired of repeating myself.

 

[Obuzeti]

Worth noting: the Demos are currently sitting in on the House to demand a vote on gun control. Still only a vote, but it's more momentum than I've seen in awhile.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/house-democrats-gun-control-sit-in/488264/

 

[Ldy_Sea]

Worth noting: the Demos are currently sitting in on the House to demand a vote on gun control. Still only a vote, but it's more momentum than I've seen in awhile.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/house-democrats-gun-control-sit-in/488264/

I heard. My son did that when he was four years old \. It lasted for about six months. When he didn't get his way he would sit on the floor and pout. Demanding we give him what ever he wanted. We never did.

One would hope Senators and Representatives are more mature than four year olds, but from what I've seern from the Democrats they're not.

 

[sr71plt]

I await your reply. Try to use facts not opinions. Since I have already proven your opinions wrong several times, and I'm tired of repeating myself.

What I believe is that you like to throw a lot of flak in the air in an attempt not to be a responsible citizen.

 

[phrodeau]

and just what has that obama done? he whines more than any previous POTUS which makes obama a little cry baby bitch

With the incessant whining coming from your direction, he must be doing quite a bit.

 

[Obuzeti]

I heard. My son did that when he was four years old \. It lasted for about six months. When he didn't get his way he would sit on the floor and pout. Demanding we give him what ever he wanted. We never did.

One would hope Senators and Representatives are more mature than four year olds, but from what I've seern from the Democrats they're not.

Mind you, it worked for Martin Luther, so while I see the comparison you're trying to make, this has political resonance.

 

[phrodeau]

At least the Dems are only shutting down the Chamber, and not the whole Federal government, like their colleagues did.

 

[Ldy_Sea]

What I believe is that you like to throw a lot of flak in the air in an attempt not to be a responsible citizen.

And there it is. When you can't debate facts, use personal attacks. You know nothing about me, and based on your ongoing feud with LC, who I added to ignore a long time ago, this just proves you are way too immature to have an adult conversation.

As for being a responsible citizen what is that? My definition is
Obey all Laws- Check
Peacefully protest injustice- Check
Volunteer to help the less fortunate- Check
Discuss the issues of the day with those who disagree, without resorting to personal attacks- Check
Support my family without government handouts- Check
Be aware of issues affecting people and research them using various sources to learn both sides of an issue- Check
Vote in every election- Check
Run for public office- Check
Serve the constituents to the best of your ability- Check
Serve your country in some capacity- Check
Be kind to everyone even if you disagree- Check
Speak the truth even when others don't want to hear it- Check

So what is a responsible citizen? Lieing? storing classified emails on a private server? Letting soliders die then blaming a video? Banning over size sodas? Suspending kids because their pop tart looks like a gun? Sitting on a floor because you didn't get your way in a vote? Calling a mass shooting workplace violence when the shooter was using arabic phrases? Redacting references to Islam in a 911 call when everyone knows it happened?

And people wonder why the right thinks the left is a joke.

 

[Ldy_Sea]

Mind you, it worked for Martin Luther, so while I see the comparison you're trying to make, this has political resonance.

It did? Martin Luther wrote the 95 thesis, he traveled throughout Europe making speeches and converting Christians from Catholicism, to Lutheranism. He was excommunicated from the Catholic Church, branded an outlaw and at one point kidnapped by the civil authorities.

If on the off chance you meant Martin Luther King Junior,

In addition to leading protest marches, across the US, he gave speeches, he wrote letters, organized groups to protest injustice PEACEFULLY. He was also a republican and supporter of gun rights, just like his niece Corretta Scott King.

Just sitting on the floor is a publicity stunt. No more, no less. Getting their names in the paper for doing nothing.

 

[sr71plt]

No, you're too far off my beam for me to want to waste my time with you further. (For one thing, it's been a slog to try to teach you that radical Islam didn't come in on God's third day.) I've told you what I think you're doing. That's all you get from me. You're a lost cause in my perspective and unpleasant to converse with. I think you're totally self-centered, uncaring, crazy, and pretty much standing right next to the crazy nuts who are popping people all at a high rate of kill power.

 

[Ldy_Sea]

At least the Dems are only shutting down the Chamber, and not the whole Federal government, like their colleagues did.

Blame the GOP whenit is the Presidents job to gt a budget to pass. That's in teh constitution, the president submits a budget to congress for approval.

Even with a Democrat majority in both houses diring his first term no budget was approved. Budgets need a simple majority not 2/3rds.

So who's fault is it the government shut down. The branch that passes laws or the EXECUTUTIVE branch.

What happened to when democrats took responsibility? The left went from "The Buck Stops here" to it's all Bushes (or the NRA's or GOP's or ...) fault.

Can we go back to when we had Democrats who cared and liked the US like Kennedy did. Instead of people who blame others and destroy things in teh name of peace and tolerance.

 

[Ldy_Sea]

No, you're too far off my beam for me to want to waste my time with you further.

I care why?

(For one thing, it's been a slog to try to teach you that radical Islam didn't come in on God's third day.)

When you can show me you're PhD in Islamic studies and have over 60 years as a member of that religion, then I'll take you as an authority. Until then nope.

I've told you what I think you're doing.

Accusations and personal insults yep you've done that. Juding me when you don't know anything about me. You've done that.

What am I doing, proving you wrong using facts and logic which no one has proven wrong yet. Ohhh scary.

That's all you get from me.

Actions speak louder than words.

You're a lost cause in my perspective and unpleasant to converse with.

Not once have I used any insulting language toward you. So it must be facts that you find unpleasant. Good to know.

How many times have you insulted me? But i'm the unpleasant one. Seems Legit.

Yet not once have I I think you're totally self-centered, uncaring, crazy, and pretty much standing right next to the crazy nuts who are popping people all at a high rate of kill power.

Wow how many insults can you get in one sentence. Still not a single fact.

What exactly is a high rate of "Kill Power" never heard that term before.

Just so you know I can fire 6 rounds from a colt .45 peacemaker faster than I can fire 6 rounds from an AR-15 semi automatic rifle.

If i was standing next to

crazy nuts who are popping people all at a high rate of kill power

I asssume that kill power means shooting a big scary black gun that makes me poop my pants

The person shooting at innocent people would end up with multiple rounds of .45 caliber hyda shocks in their chest, thereby saving lives.

Would you cowering in a corner do anything to save people?

 

[sr71plt]

Sorry, I'm not interested in conversing with rabid (and rather dumb) fanatics who have no problem enabling the slaughter of innocents. You join quite a few others on ignore, so you can save your rants. I haven't read the last two. I'm fine with you believing anything you want to. There isn't a chance in hell you'll win me over to your side of enabling the slaughter of innocents so that crazy nuts can have super guns to play with.

 

[Ldy_Sea]

Sorry, I'm not interested in conversing with rabid (and rather dumb)

Insults...again

fanatics who have no problem enabling the slaughter of innocents.

Despite FBI statistics that Violent crime is decreasing and gun ownership is increasing.

Despite Chicago being the most violent city in America and having strict gun laws.

Despite the fact not a single mass shooter was tied to the GOP or NRA, it's all their fault.

Despite the fact that no one has ever been shot at a gun show or NRA convention.

Despite the fact every mass shooting happens where guns are not allowed.

Despite the fact that when police stop a mass shooting the average body count is 14.7, but when an armed citizen stops a mass shooitng teh average body count is 2.3

But it's Law Abiding citizens who are responsible for what criminals do.

You join quite a few others on ignore, so you can save your rants.

Since you're using facts, I'm taking my ball and going home. That's what this sentence should say. About as mature as ignoring someone you disagree with.

Not to mention using facts in a discussion is now "Posting Rants"

Is insulting people high minded discourse?

I haven't read the last two. I'm fine with you believing anything you want to. There isn't a chance in hell you'll win me over to your side of enabling the slaughter of innocents so that crazy nuts can have super guns to play with.

And there's that tolerance we all hear about from the left. When they can't dispute facts, they use insults When insults fail they pretend you're the problem and try to get you to go away.

At least Pilot admits he is close minded and will never change his mind even when he is proven wrong over and over and over again.

Good to know willfull ignorance is alive and well.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

At least the Dems are only shutting down the Chamber, and not the whole Federal government, like their colleagues did.

clearly, they are mentally unfit. if this is the best that they have, the Dems are clearly retards.

 

[about_average]

There is no Constitutional right to own semi-automatic weapons.

I never claimed there was, but at least some of the bills would ban them from owning any guns which would take away a right without due process as things currently stand.

 

[phrodeau]

I never claimed there was, but at least some of the bills would ban them from owning any guns which would take away a right without due process as things currently stand.

"Them" being people on the terrorist watch list? Simple. Make sure that everyone on the watch list has already been given due process.

 

[Ldy_Sea]

Yet more proof gun bans don't work.

Germany has strict anti gun laws, an armed gunman took hostages in a theater 20 people were hurt.

How many times must a criminal attack a people in a gun free zone before people will wake up and realize the only people that obey the law are the ones who don't want to hurt others.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

"Them" being people on the terrorist watch list? Simple. Make sure that everyone on the watch list has already been given due process.

are are those gun laws working in Chicago?

drink more of the juice

 

[NeverEndingMe]

hey retards!

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

56 million defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control:

You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!

The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.

With guns, we are "citizens". Without them, we are "subjects".

During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

If you value your freedom, please spread this antigun-control message to all of your friends.

SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN!
SWITZERLAND'S GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT THEY ISSUE A RIFLE.
SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!
IT'S A NO BRAINER!
DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.

Spread the word everywhere you can that you are a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!

It's time to speak loud before they try to silence and disarm us.

You're not imagining it, history shows that governments always manipulate tragedies to attempt to disarm the people.

 

[CharlieB4]

A little more gun history.

In 1996, a nutter named Martin Bryant killed 35 people with a semi automatic, a cheap AK 47 knock off, in Port Arthur Australia. In 1997 the federal government with the support of the states introduced gun control laws. Access to semi automatics was severely restricted. All firearms had to be registered. Licensing was standardized across the country.

There hasn't been another mass shooting.

Yes criminals still have guns, yes illegal guns are still sold on the black market. But at the very least if the police see someone with a gun they can detain them and ask for their license. Any criminal caught with a gun can be arrested just for that.

 

[about_average]

"Them" being people on the terrorist watch list? Simple. Make sure that everyone on the watch list has already been given due process.

And the no-fly list. And yes, simple. Which was my point, the democrats wouldn't agree to making the the changes to the laws to make sure there was due process. They just wanted people on the lists prohibited from buying a gun.