A gun control proposal

[jon_berzerk]

You are not going to get any kind of compromise from our gun nuts. And I would add the penalties for breaking these laws. If you sell a gun to someone without the background check and approval, you are arrested for a felony, and can never own any kind of firearm again. The same for the person trying to buy a gun without a check. Guns cannot be transferred in any manner, even within families without said background check. To do so incurs a felony conviction. Those with felony convictions cannot own guns. Period. Those judged to have sanity problems with hostility cannot own guns, period.

If you sell a gun to someone without the background check and approval, you are arrested for a felony, and can never own any kind of firearm again.

do you think that really matters to a criminal seriously

 

[jon_berzerk]

How about a real conversation about the gun issue .

Here's what I think .

Background Checks, no private sale or gun show loopholes . Gun registration so we can follow the gun and prevent straw purchases. Local gun licenses thru the police Those things would help keep guns away from criminals and kooks . That's the majority of the gun problem.

In return . The law abiding can buy all the guns they want . U can only shoot 2 at a time at best . U want a 20 round clip, go ahead and have a party . License to carry, ok with me .


What's the down side ?

no

 

[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?

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'.

I've owned guns for more than 50 years, so far they have hurt no one. Never had any type of permit, I do however have a license to carry in public. Is that responsible enough for ya? BTW that would apply to the vast majority of legal gun owners.

 

[Rustic]

You are not going to get any kind of compromise from our gun nuts. And I would add the penalties for breaking these laws. If you sell a gun to someone without the background check and approval, you are arrested for a felony, and can never own any kind of firearm again. The same for the person trying to buy a gun without a check. Guns cannot be transferred in any manner, even within families without said background check. To do so incurs a felony conviction. Those with felony convictions cannot own guns. Period. Those judged to have sanity problems with hostility cannot own guns, period.

If you sell a gun to someone without the background check and approval, you are arrested for a felony, and can never own any kind of firearm again.

do you think that really matters to a criminal seriously

Dumb a$$ progressives think so...

 

[Avatar4321]

So we should give a list of targets to the government so they know who will likely fight back when they take away our rights.

Was no one paying attention in red dawn?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

No one is trying to take your guns . Truth is we have a serious gun issue in this country . And they all ain't stolen .

There was a big fbi report that found the big problem is the straw purchases . Guns are not born illegal . People aren't making them in their basements . They are getting ahold of legal guns .

Let's make it tougher for the gangbangers girlfriend to buy a Gun and hand it over to her criminal boyfriend .

The Home Gunsmith

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Gun registration - hell no. Because the Bill of Rights guarantees me the right to keep and bear arms it is none of the government's business what firearms I own.

See also: The Fourth Amendment

Government has no right to know, and no need to know, what you own. This is especially true if that knowledge is likely to be used to violate your right under the Second Amendment to own arms, but even where there isn't any such motive at work, it's still none of government's damn business.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Why would u compare Cali wh Vermont ? A rural state wh like 5 people compared to the most populated state wh probably 30 cities larger than Burlington Vt . ?

You are being intellectually dishonest . How about using similar states ? Texas vs New York ? Arizona vs Mass?

U pick the statistic even. Gun deaths, gun homicides . U choose and I'll go look.

There is no such who as “U”.

Nor is there any such word as “wh”.

Even if you wrote like a grown-up, you'd still be an idiot, but writing like an illiterate retard only makes you appear more so.

 

[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'.

I've owned guns for more than 50 years, so far they have hurt no one. Never had any type of permit, I do however have a license to carry in public. Is that responsible enough for ya? BTW that would apply to the vast majority of legal gun owners.

So what the fuck are you afraid of?

 

[AVG-JOE]

So we should give a list of targets to the government so they know who will likely fight back when they take away our rights.

Was no one paying attention in red dawn?

Anyone who fears their government so needs to think about changing governments.

Look folks... either your vote and your trust in your fellow Americans deserve your faith or we're wasting our Time.

 

[The Rabbi]

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!

You have no idea what you're talking about.
Oregon requires no permit to purchase firearms. The guy in fact had purchased all his guns from a dealer legally and passed the background check. IN fact there is no background check that would have disqualified him.
So what is your solution here?

 

[Ernie S.]

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!

You have no idea what you're talking about.
Oregon requires no permit to purchase firearms. The guy in fact had purchased all his guns from a dealer legally and passed the background check. IN fact there is no background check that would have disqualified him.
So what is your solution here?

A super dooper background check with government mandated foresight. We need to ban those that will commit crimes in the future from obtaining guns in the past.

 

[AVG-JOE]

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!

You have no idea what you're talking about.
Oregon requires no permit to purchase firearms. The guy in fact had purchased all his guns from a dealer legally and passed the background check. IN fact there is no background check that would have disqualified him.
So what is your solution here?

Then the fault lay in the process of checking backgrounds!

This is NOT rocket science, Bro'.

​

 

[The Rabbi]

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!

You have no idea what you're talking about.
Oregon requires no permit to purchase firearms. The guy in fact had purchased all his guns from a dealer legally and passed the background check. IN fact there is no background check that would have disqualified him.
So what is your solution here?

Then the fault lay in the process of checking backgrounds!

This is NOT rocket science, Bro'.

​

You have no idea what you are talking about.
What change in the process would have prevented his buying guns?

 

[AVG-JOE]

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!

You have no idea what you're talking about.
Oregon requires no permit to purchase firearms. The guy in fact had purchased all his guns from a dealer legally and passed the background check. IN fact there is no background check that would have disqualified him.
So what is your solution here?

Then the fault lay in the process of checking backgrounds!

This is NOT rocket science, Bro'.

​

You have no idea what you are talking about.
What change in the process would have prevented his buying guns?

If the background check in use is failing to catch the whack-os, a few more questions are in order, and the sane will simply have to deal.

America is dying proof that something needs to be done to try and keep guns out of the hands of the broken Monkeys. We have two and only two choices: Ban a LOT of guns from ever hitting the market at the wholesale level, or criminally put the onus on sellers at the retail level. Properly regulating the flow at the retail level preserves the variety of and the availability of weapons that we currently enjoy.

There is nothing wrong with the rest of us asking potential gun owners to prove that they're responsible enough to own one, and holding sellers criminally liable for sales outside the checks.


The proudest day for most of the gun owners I know was the day they got their concealed carry permit from the state, so what is the big fucking deal?

`​

 

[The Rabbi]

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!

You have no idea what you're talking about.
Oregon requires no permit to purchase firearms. The guy in fact had purchased all his guns from a dealer legally and passed the background check. IN fact there is no background check that would have disqualified him.
So what is your solution here?

Then the fault lay in the process of checking backgrounds!

This is NOT rocket science, Bro'.

​

You have no idea what you are talking about.
What change in the process would have prevented his buying guns?

If the background check in use is failing to catch the whack-os, a few more questions are in order, and the sane will simply have to deal.

America is dying proof that something needs to be done to try and keep guns out of the hands of the broken Monkeys. We have two and only two choices: Ban a LOT of guns from ever hitting the market at the wholesale level or criminally put the onus on sellers at the retail level. Properly regulating the flow at the retail level preserves the variety of and the availability of weapons that we currently enjoy.

There is nothing wrong with the rest of us asking potential gun owners to prove that they're responsible enough to own one, and holding sellers criminally liable for sales outside the checks.


The proudest day for most of the gun owners I know was the day they got their concealed carry permit from the state, so what is the big fucking deal?

`​

Again, what question would have turned up something to deny him on? "Are you a psycho?"
Again and again you throw out platitudes because you have no knowledge of the system and how it works. It is difficult debating someone with so little understanding of the issues.

 

[xdangerousxdavex]

Unfortunately people still have not learned to be responsible for their guns...

 

[The Rabbi]

Unfortunately people still have not learned to be responsible for their guns...

Who are these "people"? The vast majority of gun owners are very responsible people. Permit holders in every state consistently have lower levels of crimes committed than law enforcement officers.

 

[Iceweasel]

Anyone who fears their government so needs to think about changing governments.

Look folks... either your vote and your trust in your fellow Americans deserve your faith or we're wasting our Time.

What? Have you never read from the founders and why they included the 2nd Amendment? Tyranny was one of the main reasons. I believe you confuse opposition to fear. Opposing something doesn't mean you fear it.

Trust our fellow citizens? Hell no, I've been around too long for that. Quite a few are going through life fat, dumb and happy, perfectly content living off of the low hanging fruit provided by others, at gunpoint.

 

[Iceweasel]

Unfortunately people still have not learned to be responsible for their guns...

Why are vegans so obnoxious and stupid?