A gun control proposal

[AVG-JOE]

Geez , u guys would rather have guns coming out of vending machines .

Sure. Why not?

All it would take is computers in the machines and state issued weapons permits with chips.

If anyone can solve the challenge of keeping movie-goers and school-kids safe while preserving a level of weapons availability that can only be described as 'Industrial', it's America, God damn it!

 

[Ernie S.]

Of course it's a loophole! Criminal can't buy a gun from a dealer but he can from a private sale . How is that not a loophole in a law designed to keep guns from criminals .?

Selling a gun to a felon is already against the law.Why would you imagine another law would keep a criminal from breaking the law?

Can the seller be held criminally liable for the injuries caused by a weapon sold without a background check?

If everyone insists that we continue hell-bent on never putting any restrictions on the availability of weapons at the wholesale level, the retail and private sale levels of that market need to step up and take responsibility for safe distribution to the public at large.

The point is to keep guns out of the hands of the whack-jobs.

Nationally standardized background checks and criminal liability after the sale is the only answer that addresses the problem and preserves the current overall availability and choices in weapons.

Why should he be? If he sold a gun to a felon, he can get up to 10 years. Now you want someone to be civilly liable for the actions of another? How's that work? Are used car sellers liable to the victims of a DUI accident?

 

[Rustic]

Still no law has been brought up that would work in stopping these shootings, let's hear it in detail.???

Progressives have no ideas

 

[AVG-JOE]

Of course it's a loophole! Criminal can't buy a gun from a dealer but he can from a private sale . How is that not a loophole in a law designed to keep guns from criminals .?

Selling a gun to a felon is already against the law.Why would you imagine another law would keep a criminal from breaking the law?

Can the seller be held criminally liable for the injuries caused by a weapon sold without a background check?

If everyone insists that we continue hell-bent on never putting any restrictions on the availability of weapons at the wholesale level, the retail and private sale levels of that market need to step up and take responsibility for safe distribution to the public at large.

The point is to keep guns out of the hands of the whack-jobs.

Nationally standardized background checks and criminal liability after the sale is the only answer that addresses the problem and preserves the current overall availability and choices in weapons.

Why should he be? If he sold a gun to a felon, he can get up to 10 years. Now you want someone to be civilly liable for the actions of another? How's that work? Are used car sellers liable to the victims of a DUI accident?

I said 'criminally liable'.

Sounds like some of the legal infrastructure exists. Cool! Firming that up nationally and building what we need for nationally standardized background checks is all We lack.

 

[The Rabbi]

Just proving that the whole "gun control doesn't work" line is false .

Only one with selective numbers is you pro gun freaks . Cherry pick a red state outlier like Utah and compare it to a densely populated state like Jersey .

What difference does densely populated make? Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, etc are all densely populated and high in gun violence.
So obviously laws dont make a difference, population density does. Right?

 

[AVG-JOE]

Of course it's a loophole! Criminal can't buy a gun from a dealer but he can from a private sale . How is that not a loophole in a law designed to keep guns from criminals .?

Selling a gun to a felon is already against the law.Why would you imagine another law would keep a criminal from breaking the law?

Can the seller be held criminally liable for the injuries caused by a weapon sold without a background check?

If everyone insists that we continue hell-bent on never putting any restrictions on the availability of weapons at the wholesale level, the retail and private sale levels of that market need to step up and take responsibility for safe distribution to the public at large.

The point is to keep guns out of the hands of the whack-jobs.

Nationally standardized background checks and criminal liability after the sale is the only answer that addresses the problem and preserves the current overall availability and choices in weapons.

Why should he be? If he sold a gun to a felon, he can get up to 10 years. Now you want someone to be civilly liable for the actions of another? How's that work? Are used car sellers liable to the victims of a DUI accident?

I'm willing to bet that if an unlicensed drunk drives off a lot and smacks a school bus the used car dealer would have some explaining to do.

It's all about the licensing and permitting.

 

[The Rabbi]

States with the most gun violence .

States With the Most Gun Violence

LA
MISS
ALASKA
WYO
Ok
MT
ARK
Bama
New Mexico
so Carolina

You are delusional Moon Bat.. None of those states had 50 shooting two weekends in a row and then 18 on the third weekend like in Chicago as we saw recently, which has the toughest gun control laws in the country.

Chicago is a city . Tough gun laws get sabotaged by the loose gun laws around it .

If that were the case cities in states with loose gun laws would show higher rates of shootings than cities in states with strict gun laws.
That isnt the case. Thus you are wrong.

 

[The Rabbi]

Of course it's a loophole! Criminal can't buy a gun from a dealer but he can from a private sale . How is that not a loophole in a law designed to keep guns from criminals .?

Selling a gun to a felon is already against the law.Why would you imagine another law would keep a criminal from breaking the law?

Can the seller be held criminally liable for the injuries caused by a weapon sold without a background check?

If everyone insists that we continue hell-bent on never putting any restrictions on the availability of weapons at the wholesale level, the retail and private sale levels of that market need to step up and take responsibility for safe distribution to the public at large.

The point is to keep guns out of the hands of the whack-jobs.

Nationally standardized background checks and criminal liability after the sale is the only answer that addresses the problem and preserves the current overall availability and choices in weapons.

Not anymore than we hold the seller of a car criminally liable if the buyer drives drunk and kills someone.

 

[The Rabbi]

Of course it's a loophole! Criminal can't buy a gun from a dealer but he can from a private sale . How is that not a loophole in a law designed to keep guns from criminals .?

Selling a gun to a felon is already against the law.Why would you imagine another law would keep a criminal from breaking the law?

Selling a gun to a felon is a crime.
A felon possessing a gun is a crime
Taking a gun into a gun free zone is a crime.
Pointing hte gun at people is a crime
Shooting people is a crime
Killing people is a crime.

Now, how many more laws do we need to prevent criminals from killing people?

Criminals don't shoot up schools and theaters. Whack-jobs do.

Obviously, the cops have their hands full with the "criminals". It's literally two different issues. Let's use the technology that we already have to keep guns out of the hands of the whack-jobs.

Whack jobs shooting up schools are also criminals.
You're welcome. But I agree it is two issues not one.

 

[The Rabbi]

Of course it's a loophole! Criminal can't buy a gun from a dealer but he can from a private sale . How is that not a loophole in a law designed to keep guns from criminals .?

Selling a gun to a felon is already against the law.Why would you imagine another law would keep a criminal from breaking the law?

Can the seller be held criminally liable for the injuries caused by a weapon sold without a background check?

If everyone insists that we continue hell-bent on never putting any restrictions on the availability of weapons at the wholesale level, the retail and private sale levels of that market need to step up and take responsibility for safe distribution to the public at large.

The point is to keep guns out of the hands of the whack-jobs.

Nationally standardized background checks and criminal liability after the sale is the only answer that addresses the problem and preserves the current overall availability and choices in weapons.

Why should he be? If he sold a gun to a felon, he can get up to 10 years. Now you want someone to be civilly liable for the actions of another? How's that work? Are used car sellers liable to the victims of a DUI accident?

I said 'criminally liable'.

Sounds like some of the legal infrastructure exists. Cool! Firming that up nationally and building what we need for nationally standardized background checks is all We lack.

You have no idea what you're talking about.
And fwiw Oregon already has universal background checks. We see how that worked.

 

[The Rabbi]

Of course it's a loophole! Criminal can't buy a gun from a dealer but he can from a private sale . How is that not a loophole in a law designed to keep guns from criminals .?

Selling a gun to a felon is already against the law.Why would you imagine another law would keep a criminal from breaking the law?

Can the seller be held criminally liable for the injuries caused by a weapon sold without a background check?

If everyone insists that we continue hell-bent on never putting any restrictions on the availability of weapons at the wholesale level, the retail and private sale levels of that market need to step up and take responsibility for safe distribution to the public at large.

The point is to keep guns out of the hands of the whack-jobs.

Nationally standardized background checks and criminal liability after the sale is the only answer that addresses the problem and preserves the current overall availability and choices in weapons.

Why should he be? If he sold a gun to a felon, he can get up to 10 years. Now you want someone to be civilly liable for the actions of another? How's that work? Are used car sellers liable to the victims of a DUI accident?

I'm willing to bet that if an unlicensed drunk drives off a lot and smacks a school bus the used car dealer would have some explaining to do.

It's all about the licensing and permitting.

Nope, you are wrong and you lose your bet.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Of course it's a loophole! Criminal can't buy a gun from a dealer but he can from a private sale . How is that not a loophole in a law designed to keep guns from criminals .?

Selling a gun to a felon is already against the law.Why would you imagine another law would keep a criminal from breaking the law?

Can the seller be held criminally liable for the injuries caused by a weapon sold without a background check?

If everyone insists that we continue hell-bent on never putting any restrictions on the availability of weapons at the wholesale level, the retail and private sale levels of that market need to step up and take responsibility for safe distribution to the public at large.

The point is to keep guns out of the hands of the whack-jobs.

Nationally standardized background checks and criminal liability after the sale is the only answer that addresses the problem and preserves the current overall availability and choices in weapons.

Why should he be? If he sold a gun to a felon, he can get up to 10 years. Now you want someone to be civilly liable for the actions of another? How's that work? Are used car sellers liable to the victims of a DUI accident?

I said 'criminally liable'.

Sounds like some of the legal infrastructure exists. Cool! Firming that up nationally and building what we need for nationally standardized background checks is all We lack.

You have no idea what you're talking about.
And fwiw Oregon already has universal background checks. We see how that worked.

So what the fuck happened? Did that particular whack-job graduating to criminal have a permit?

If he did, SHAME on the issuing authority!

If he didn't, THAT'S what needs to be fixed!

 

[dblack]

Selling a gun to a felon is already against the law.Why would you imagine another law would keep a criminal from breaking the law?

Can the seller be held criminally liable for the injuries caused by a weapon sold without a background check?

If everyone insists that we continue hell-bent on never putting any restrictions on the availability of weapons at the wholesale level, the retail and private sale levels of that market need to step up and take responsibility for safe distribution to the public at large.

The point is to keep guns out of the hands of the whack-jobs.

Nationally standardized background checks and criminal liability after the sale is the only answer that addresses the problem and preserves the current overall availability and choices in weapons.

Why should he be? If he sold a gun to a felon, he can get up to 10 years. Now you want someone to be civilly liable for the actions of another? How's that work? Are used car sellers liable to the victims of a DUI accident?

I said 'criminally liable'.

Sounds like some of the legal infrastructure exists. Cool! Firming that up nationally and building what we need for nationally standardized background checks is all We lack.

You have no idea what you're talking about.
And fwiw Oregon already has universal background checks. We see how that worked.

So what the fuck happened? Did that particular whack-job graduating to criminal have a permit?

If he did, SHAME on the issuing authority!

If he didn't, THAT'S what needs to be fixed!

So, we should make a law requiring criminals to have permits?

We should just cut to the heart of the problem and make it illegal to kill people with guns.

Er.... nevermind.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Permit for the weapons.

My bad. Lazy sentence. Sorry.

I can see how that post might entice the blond to surface in folks.

 

[dblack]

Permit for the weapons.

My bad. Lazy sentence. Sorry.

I can see how that post might entice the blond to surface in folks.

I took it as you meant it. Six, one half dozen, etc....

We're suffering from the national delusion that every social ill can be solved by passing a law. We need to come to terms with the fact that it isn't so, and pretending otherwise only makes matters worse.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Law? Anarchy?

We are a nation of laws.

Less government is no more the always elusive answer than is more government.

The answer is appropriate government.

It's a tool, Monkeys... one of many that we're driving back to the stars that spawned us, naming everything we find along the way with words.

 

[OKTexas]

Permit for the weapons.

My bad. Lazy sentence. Sorry.

I can see how that post might entice the blond to surface in folks.

Why should you need a permit to exercise a constitutional right?

 

[dblack]

Law? Anarchy?

We are a nation of laws.

Less government is no more the always elusive answer than is more government.

The answer is appropriate government.

Ayup. That is the question.

For what problems is government an appropriate solution?

1. My neighbor is a bully.

2. I'm hungry.

3. My mother doesn't love me.

4. No one likes me.

5. I can't find a job.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Permit for the weapons.

My bad. Lazy sentence. Sorry.

I can see how that post might entice the blond to surface in folks.

Why should you need a permit to exercise a constitutional right?

Because Monkeys prove each and every day that We, The Rest of The Monkeys, can't trust them with the responsibility of gun ownership.

With great power comes great responsibility, Bro'.

`​

 

[AVG-JOE]

Law? Anarchy?

We are a nation of laws.

Less government is no more the always elusive answer than is more government.

The answer is appropriate government.

Ayup. That is the question.

For what problems is government an appropriate solution?

1. My neighbor is a bully.

2. I'm hungry.

3. My mother doesn't love me.

4. No one likes me.

5. I can't find a job.

Exactly!


And may the constructive debate over resource allocations drive the conversation for the rest of the century.