A question for those who want more gun control

[M14 Shooter]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

There no reason to believe that, because they won't be happy until gun ownership is banned.

 

[2aguy]

Because we know history we know that the only thing that will stop their demand for more laws is when all guns are banned and confiscated......until then they will baby step gun laws till they get to the end game.

 

[M14 Shooter]

No response from he target audience.
Gee - I'm shocked.

 

[toxicmedia]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

They'll not cease their efforts, but Congress won't pass any gun legislation.

Nothing to worry about here.

They're not coming for our guns

 

[ClosedCaption]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

So you dont have a problem with Background checks except to say that something else will happen someday?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

They'll not cease their efforts....

Where do their efforts cease?

 

[2aguy]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

They'll not cease their efforts, but Congress won't pass any gun legislation.

Nothing to worry about here.

They're not coming for our guns

They are going to bypass congress. They will pass the gun laws they want in blue states where they can actually become law. They will then use obama appointed federal judges to uphold them as legal…..and then hope a democrat wins 2016 and will replace one or more of the Justices who understand the Constitution with left wingers…then those state laws will become Constitutional…..

 

[2aguy]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

So you dont have a problem with Background checks except to say that something else will happen someday?

Background checks do not stop criminals or mass shooters from getting guns. As long as they only apply to licensed gun dealers I have no problem with the current system as long as it is completely revamped so that the checks are instantaneous, leave no record, and don't cost anything…since gun ownership is a Right.

 

[OldLady]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

I sure as hell won't. You got that right.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

So you dont have a problem with Background checks except to say that something else will happen someday?

Background checks do not stop criminals or mass shooters from getting guns. As long as they only apply to licensed gun dealers I have no problem with the current system as long as it is completely revamped so that the checks are instantaneous, leave no record, and don't cost anything…since gun ownership is a Right.

No law stops anything and thats why you wackos keep making different rules for guns like no one will notice and you're being reasonable. I guess this means since no law stops all of anything then you oppose all laws. Is that right?

Laws are deterrents! There isnt one law that exists that stops all of anything.

 

[2aguy]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

So you dont have a problem with Background checks except to say that something else will happen someday?

Background checks do not stop criminals or mass shooters from getting guns. As long as they only apply to licensed gun dealers I have no problem with the current system as long as it is completely revamped so that the checks are instantaneous, leave no record, and don't cost anything…since gun ownership is a Right.

No law stops anything and thats why you wackos keep making different rules for guns like no one will notice and you're being reasonable. I guess this means since no law stops all of anything then you oppose all laws. Is that right?

Laws are deterrents! There isnt one law that exists that stops all of anything.

I guess this means since no law stops all of anything then you oppose all laws

I have shown how that point of attack is really stupid…..I'll do it again.

Laws do not stop criminal acts, they say what a criminal act is and what the punishment is if you break the law. We already have those for guns….20,000 of them. If you use a gun to commit a crime you go to jail. If you are a felon, and are simply caught in possession of a gun, you go to jail….of course democrats keep letting them out with short sentences, but that is for another time.

So again…we have posted this over and over again that if you use a gun to commit a crime you are arrested and sent to jail, and that if you are a felon caught with a gun you get arrested and sent to jail……

So please….which one of those follows your stupid point that we don't want any laws at all….could you explain that?

The problem you nuts have is that you want the law to prevent crime….to keep those who commit crime form committing the crime…..Laws can serve only a limited function like that because only people who want to obey the laws obey the laws……and if they choose not to obey the laws..again, we can arrest them and send them to jail.

You think that by making background check laws you are preventing people who break the laws from breaking the law. That is why you are nuts. Your background check only effects those who obey the law, who will undergo the background check because they respect the law no matter how stupid it is.

Criminals ignore your background check law…and will ignore your universal background check law too…….and when they are caught having committed a crime with a gun they got without a background check, they can be arrested and sent to jail….

See…..you are putting an extra bureaucratic step in the process….but it is only for normal, law abiding people. A felon cannot legally buy, own or carry a gun…..and if they are caught they go to jail…..and sending them to jail happens without a background check because they can't pass a background check anyway, so they don't get a background check.



See…..what the background check really is…..is a step toward Universal Background checks…..which is the step that leads to registration and then to confiscation…..that is all background checks are. They are baby steps to confiscation because each step does not keep criminals or mass shooters from getting guns….so that leads you nuts to push for the next step…pretending that if you just had that next step the problem would be solved…until it isn't…then you say….Yeah, we knew it wouldn't stop all gun crime…that is why we need the next step…and finally….none of that other stuff worked..so now we just have to confiscate guns.

The confiscation part could be 20-30-50 years out. But the important first step is registering the guns…and to get registration, you need universal background checks.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

Since I haven't suggested that I want to further limit the right of law abiding citizens, I cannot respond to this question.

I can and will ask a question of the OP (who will respond with one of the logical fallacies he is known for, and lie about my arguments for Licensing and Registration of Firearms by individual states which choose to pass enabling legislation to do so.

What part of the Constitution provides you with privacy, or prohibits a State from require a Doctor to be licensed, a driver to be licensed, a teacher to have a certificate and a contractor to be licensed? How is that different than requiring an individual who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a license.

How is registration of a gun any different than the control of certain poisons and explosives, which require both a license and a record of purchase?

 

[ClosedCaption]

You can talk in all the circles you want but if you oppose gun laws because it doesnt stop all shootings then you have to be against all other laws or at least explain why gun laws should be treated different than all others

 

[2aguy]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

Since I haven't suggested that I want to further limit the right of law abiding citizens, I cannot respond to this question.

I can and will ask a question of the OP (who will respond with one of the logical fallacies he is known for, and lie about my arguments for Licensing and Registration of Firearms by individual states which choose to pass enabling legislation to do so.

What part of the Constitution provides you with privacy, or prohibits a State from require a Doctor to be licensed, a driver to be licensed, a teacher to have a certificate and a contractor to be licensed? How is that different than requiring an individual who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a license.

How is registration of a gun any different than the control of poisons and explosives, which require both a license and a record of purchase?

The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed….there is no such point about poisons and explosives…….

And again, you will not answer what purpose licensing gun owners serves, how it will do anything you claim it will do, and dittos for registration.

 

[ClosedCaption]

If gun laws were bad and do nothing would these people work so hard everyday to get rid of the laws that do nothing?

 

[2aguy]

If gun laws were bad and do nothing would these people work so hard everyday to get rid of the laws that do nothing?

They do do something…they make it harder and more expensive for people who actually obey them to buy, own and carry a gun. And again, do nothing to stop criminals from getting a gun, or mass shooters.

 

[ClosedCaption]

If gun laws were bad and do nothing would these people work so hard everyday to get rid of the laws that do nothing?

They do do something…they make it harder and more expensive for people who actually obey them to buy, own and carry a gun. And again, do nothing to stop criminals from getting a gun, or mass shooters.

Because thats not what laws do.

 

[2aguy]

If gun laws were bad and do nothing would these people work so hard everyday to get rid of the laws that do nothing?

They do do something…they make it harder and more expensive for people who actually obey them to buy, own and carry a gun. And again, do nothing to stop criminals from getting a gun, or mass shooters.

Because thats not what laws do.

Yes…the gun laws on background checks do that. They make it harder for people who obey the law to get a gun, while doing nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters from getting a gun. I have to wait for a background check and if universal checks go through people will have to pay more just to buy a gun…which is unConstitutional.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Given history, why should anyone believe that those who want to further limit the right to arms for the law abiding will cease their efforts to do so with universal background checks?

They'll not cease their efforts, but Congress won't pass any gun legislation.

Nothing to worry about here.

They're not coming for our guns

True.

But it's a lie many try to propagate nonetheless.