A question for those who want more gun control

[2aguy]

Proof of your previous lie.
Well done.

Post the evidence. If you can't, you are the liar!

Says he who, in post # 13 said:"Since I haven't suggested that I want to further limit the right of law abiding citizens..." and then, just 6 posts later, advocates for the universal licensure of gun owners.


Thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks.

More spam ^^^.

I'm sorry you don't like the fact that you get called out on your lies.
if you stopped lying, that wouldn't happen.

And.... I again thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks

No one can 'prove' what hasn't happened yet, which is what you're asking. And you're right, by the way; a lot of people want a lot less guns in the closets of Americans, however it can be managed. Outlaw violent shoot-em-up video games and movies as if they were child pornography. Make it illegal to manufacture or sell certain assault rifles in the United States. Violate everyone's right to privacy and hunt out illegally held guns, or buy them off the streets. Any zany shit you can think of, I'm ready for. There are way too many guns in this country, allowing too many folks to grab a gun and kill anyone they want from a safe distance, like the cowards they are. And there are too many people who think that's ultra cool. It's sick. Guns kill. Period. Get rid of 'em.

Make it illegal to manufacture or sell certain assault rifles in the United States.

Why…….the rifles you mention murder and injure fewer people than knives, blunt objects or bare hands. There are over 3 million of them in private hands and at most 2-3 are used each year for crime……..so what is the problem with them?

You realize there are over 357 million guns in private hands….and that fewer than 8,124 of them are used to murder people…the rest over 356,991,876 million are used for lawful purposes and are never, ever used to commit one crime…right?

And it is a fact that mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing only happen to people who do not have guns to stop it.

Guns save lives. Guns have allowed the weak to free themselves from the strong…..without guns the weak would be the slaves of the strong…just like they were all throughout human history before the first gun was ever invented.

You need to actually think about this topic….it is obvious that you haven't.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Proof of your previous lie.
Well done.

Post the evidence. If you can't, you are the liar!

Says he who, in post # 13 said:"Since I haven't suggested that I want to further limit the right of law abiding citizens..." and then, just 6 posts later, advocates for the universal licensure of gun owners.


Thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks.

More spam ^^^.

I'm sorry you don't like the fact that you get called out on your lies.
if you stopped lying, that wouldn't happen.

And.... I again thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks

No one can 'prove' what hasn't happened yet, which is what you're asking. And you're right, by the way; a lot of people want a lot less guns in the closets of Americans, however it can be managed.

So.... there is -no- reason to believe those who seek restriction on the right of the law abiding will stop with universal background checks.
Thank you.

 

[Steven_R]

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

I'm not required to prove I'm not a criminal to exercise other rights. If I should be required to submit to a background check to buy a gun, then I should be required to submit to a background check to buy a book. Maybe even state level licensing to buy books, may issue licensing at that so my local CLEO can decide if I'm politically juiced in enough to get permission to buy my books, and a registry of who owns which books. Ideas are dangerous after all and we don't want them falling in the hands of the wrong people or kids.

 

[Wry Catcher]

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

I'm not required to prove I'm not a criminal to exercise other rights. If I should be required to submit to a background check to buy a gun, then I should be required to submit to a background check to buy a book. Maybe even state level licensing to buy books, may issue licensing at that so my local CLEO can decide if I'm politically juiced in enough to get permission to buy my books, and a registry of who owns which books. Ideas are dangerous after all and we don't want them falling in the hands of the wrong people or kids.

Apples and alligators.

If the issue of gun control was simple, one wouldn't need to post such far fetched efforts to prove THEIR POV.

 

[Steven_R]

It is simple. People who don't want me to own guns for ideological reasons throw all kinds of hurdles in my way even though I'm not the problem.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Post the evidence. If you can't, you are the liar!

Says he who, in post # 13 said:"Since I haven't suggested that I want to further limit the right of law abiding citizens..." and then, just 6 posts later, advocates for the universal licensure of gun owners.


Thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks.

More spam ^^^.

I'm sorry you don't like the fact that you get called out on your lies.
if you stopped lying, that wouldn't happen.

And.... I again thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks

No one can 'prove' what hasn't happened yet, which is what you're asking. And you're right, by the way; a lot of people want a lot less guns in the closets of Americans, however it can be managed.

So.... there is -no- reason to believe those who seek restriction on the right of the law abiding will stop with universal background checks.
Thank you.

More spam. I guess you're immune from any consequence for violating board rules. See:

USMB Rules and Guidelines

• No Spamming. Multiple posting of the same thing, advertising and links to other sites.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It is simple. People who don't want me to own guns for ideological reasons throw all kinds of hurdles in my way even though I'm not the problem.

No, what's simple is the fact that no one doesn't you to own guns – that's paranoid, delusional nonsense.

And firearm regulatory measures that comport with Second Amendment jurisprudence don't constitute 'hurdles,' no one want's to 'take your guns.'

 

[Dan Daly]

It is simple. People who don't want me to own guns for ideological reasons throw all kinds of hurdles in my way even though I'm not the problem.

No, what's simple is the fact that no one doesn't you to own guns – that's paranoid, delusional nonsense.

And firearm regulatory measures that comport with Second Amendment jurisprudence don't constitute 'hurdles,' no one want's to 'take your guns.'

That is either an incorrect statement based on simple ignorance or an out-and-out lie. Only you know which.

 

[pwjohn]

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?

You mean just like women's right too choose.

 

[dannyboys]

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?

You mean just like women's right too choose.

When a woman chooses to murder a living being she is committing murder. Period!

 

[pwjohn]

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?

You mean just like women's right too choose.

When a woman chooses to murder a living being she is committing murder. Period!

Dude, you're nasty.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Says he who, in post # 13 said:"Since I haven't suggested that I want to further limit the right of law abiding citizens..." and then, just 6 posts later, advocates for the universal licensure of gun owners.


Thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks.

More spam ^^^.

I'm sorry you don't like the fact that you get called out on your lies.
if you stopped lying, that wouldn't happen.

And.... I again thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks

No one can 'prove' what hasn't happened yet, which is what you're asking. And you're right, by the way; a lot of people want a lot less guns in the closets of Americans, however it can be managed.

So.... there is -no- reason to believe those who seek restriction on the right of the law abiding will stop with universal background checks.
Thank you.

More spam. I guess you're immune from any consequence for violating board rules. See:

I'm sorry you don't like the fact that you get called out on your lies.
if you stopped lying, that wouldn't happen.

And.... I, yet again, again thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks

 

[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....

Where do their efforts cease?

They'll never cease.

They'll never gain traction

Any proposed legislation will not pass through even a Democratic controlled Congress.

They'll never come for our guns

 

[OldLady]

Post the evidence. If you can't, you are the liar!

Says he who, in post # 13 said:"Since I haven't suggested that I want to further limit the right of law abiding citizens..." and then, just 6 posts later, advocates for the universal licensure of gun owners.


Thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks.

More spam ^^^.

I'm sorry you don't like the fact that you get called out on your lies.
if you stopped lying, that wouldn't happen.

And.... I again thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks

No one can 'prove' what hasn't happened yet, which is what you're asking. And you're right, by the way; a lot of people want a lot less guns in the closets of Americans, however it can be managed.

So.... there is -no- reason to believe those who seek restriction on the right of the law abiding will stop with universal background checks.
Thank you.

You are entirely welcome. But I can't speak for anyone else so don't go there; I'm more radical than most, including the Democrats proposing this or that pain in the ass regulation that won't make any difference. I am also fully aware that my hopes will never come to fruition. If I were you, I wouldn't let suspicions about things that haven't been proposed get in the way of cooperating with restrictions that 90% of the population agree with, including gun owners. It's not going to help the 'cause,' it just makes your side look unreasonably stubborn.

 

[OldLady]

Post the evidence. If you can't, you are the liar!

Says he who, in post # 13 said:"Since I haven't suggested that I want to further limit the right of law abiding citizens..." and then, just 6 posts later, advocates for the universal licensure of gun owners.


Thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks.

More spam ^^^.

I'm sorry you don't like the fact that you get called out on your lies.
if you stopped lying, that wouldn't happen.

And.... I again thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks

No one can 'prove' what hasn't happened yet, which is what you're asking. And you're right, by the way; a lot of people want a lot less guns in the closets of Americans, however it can be managed. Outlaw violent shoot-em-up video games and movies as if they were child pornography. Make it illegal to manufacture or sell certain assault rifles in the United States. Violate everyone's right to privacy and hunt out illegally held guns, or buy them off the streets. Any zany shit you can think of, I'm ready for. There are way too many guns in this country, allowing too many folks to grab a gun and kill anyone they want from a safe distance, like the cowards they are. And there are too many people who think that's ultra cool. It's sick. Guns kill. Period. Get rid of 'em.

Make it illegal to manufacture or sell certain assault rifles in the United States.

Why…….the rifles you mention murder and injure fewer people than knives, blunt objects or bare hands. There are over 3 million of them in private hands and at most 2-3 are used each year for crime……..so what is the problem with them?

You realize there are over 357 million guns in private hands….and that fewer than 8,124 of them are used to murder people…the rest over 356,991,876 million are used for lawful purposes and are never, ever used to commit one crime…right?

And it is a fact that mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing only happen to people who do not have guns to stop it.

Guns save lives. Guns have allowed the weak to free themselves from the strong…..without guns the weak would be the slaves of the strong…just like they were all throughout human history before the first gun was ever invented.

You need to actually think about this topic….it is obvious that you haven't.

I've thought about it a lot. You and I have had this discussion and others before and I have actually given it a great deal of thought, done some research, etc. I acknowledge your points, and I guess I can't disagree with statistics. But darn it, putting more and more guns in the hands of Americans is NOT the answer to out of control gun violence and death in this country. I'm pretty sure we'll never know if I'm right, because I'm on the losing side of this and I know it. I was just honestly answering the OP's question.

 

[2aguy]

Says he who, in post # 13 said:"Since I haven't suggested that I want to further limit the right of law abiding citizens..." and then, just 6 posts later, advocates for the universal licensure of gun owners.


Thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks.

More spam ^^^.

I'm sorry you don't like the fact that you get called out on your lies.
if you stopped lying, that wouldn't happen.

And.... I again thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks

No one can 'prove' what hasn't happened yet, which is what you're asking. And you're right, by the way; a lot of people want a lot less guns in the closets of Americans, however it can be managed.

So.... there is -no- reason to believe those who seek restriction on the right of the law abiding will stop with universal background checks.
Thank you.

You are entirely welcome. But I can't speak for anyone else so don't go there; I'm more radical than most, including the Democrats proposing this or that pain in the ass regulation that won't make any difference. I am also fully aware that my hopes will never come to fruition. If I were you, I wouldn't let suspicions about things that haven't been proposed get in the way of cooperating with restrictions that 90% of the population agree with, including gun owners. It's not going to help the 'cause,' it just makes your side look unreasonably stubborn.

wouldn't let suspicions about things that haven't been proposed get in the way of cooperating with restrictions that 90% of the population agree with, including gun owners. It's not going to help the 'cause,' it just makes your side look unreasonably stubborn

Do you realize that the 90% are agreeing with restrictions they don't understand because the regulations proposed are not what the 90% think they are. When the 90%, and it isn't really 90%, here "universal background checks" they think if someone sells a gun as an individual, to a stranger, they should get a background check.

That is what they hear when they hear Universal Background check. They do not understand that with universal background checks they will need to register all guns in order to enforce universal background checks. Do you think the 90% realize that or what it has meant historically?

Do you think the 90% realizes that under universal background checks, as created by Everytown for Gun Safety….that they cannot sell a gun to their dad, their mom or their brothers, even if they live in the same home…without getting a universal background check? That under the provisions desired by Everytown that they cannot loan a gun to their family members or friends, even at the range, if they do not first get a Universal background check.

Do they know that asking a friend to store your guns while you are on vacation…you know…to be a responsible gun owner….will now require that both of you go down to the gun store first to get background checks on the person watching the gun….and that when you pick up the gun you then have to get a new background check on the original owner…to hand them back…..


There are so many hidden attacks on gun owners in the concept of Universal BAckground Checks that it makes the 90% number foolish…since they don't have a clue what they are saying yes to…..

 

[2aguy]

Says he who, in post # 13 said:"Since I haven't suggested that I want to further limit the right of law abiding citizens..." and then, just 6 posts later, advocates for the universal licensure of gun owners.


Thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks.

More spam ^^^.

I'm sorry you don't like the fact that you get called out on your lies.
if you stopped lying, that wouldn't happen.

And.... I again thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks

No one can 'prove' what hasn't happened yet, which is what you're asking. And you're right, by the way; a lot of people want a lot less guns in the closets of Americans, however it can be managed. Outlaw violent shoot-em-up video games and movies as if they were child pornography. Make it illegal to manufacture or sell certain assault rifles in the United States. Violate everyone's right to privacy and hunt out illegally held guns, or buy them off the streets. Any zany shit you can think of, I'm ready for. There are way too many guns in this country, allowing too many folks to grab a gun and kill anyone they want from a safe distance, like the cowards they are. And there are too many people who think that's ultra cool. It's sick. Guns kill. Period. Get rid of 'em.

Make it illegal to manufacture or sell certain assault rifles in the United States.

Why…….the rifles you mention murder and injure fewer people than knives, blunt objects or bare hands. There are over 3 million of them in private hands and at most 2-3 are used each year for crime……..so what is the problem with them?

You realize there are over 357 million guns in private hands….and that fewer than 8,124 of them are used to murder people…the rest over 356,991,876 million are used for lawful purposes and are never, ever used to commit one crime…right?

And it is a fact that mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing only happen to people who do not have guns to stop it.

Guns save lives. Guns have allowed the weak to free themselves from the strong…..without guns the weak would be the slaves of the strong…just like they were all throughout human history before the first gun was ever invented.

You need to actually think about this topic….it is obvious that you haven't.

I've thought about it a lot. You and I have had this discussion and others before and I have actually given it a great deal of thought, done some research, etc. I acknowledge your points, and I guess I can't disagree with statistics. But darn it, putting more and more guns in the hands of Americans is NOT the answer to out of control gun violence and death in this country. I'm pretty sure we'll never know if I'm right, because I'm on the losing side of this and I know it. I was just honestly answering the OP's question.

But darn it, putting more and more guns in the hands of Americans is NOT the answer to out of control gun violence and death in this country.

Then how do you explain the fact that as more Americans now own and actually carry guns…the gun murder rate has continuously gone down, and not up. That there are 357 million guns in private hands and that the majority of actual gun murder is committed by people who cannot legally own guns…..so of the 8,124 gun murders, the majority are committed by violent criminals who cannot own or carry a gun murdering other violent criminals who cannot own or carry a gun.

So normal, law abiding gun owners can own and carry guns all day long and they will not shoot people or commit crimes with those guns. So do you see how your sentence makes little sense….when the reality shows that the act of owning guns is not the problem……violent criminals are the problem, and that none of the proposed gun restrictions actually address criminals. That all the proposed gun control laws target people who are not the problem…who will not use guns to commit crime?

So the answer to out of control gun violence is not arming everyone, it is just that arming normal gun owners isn't a part of the problem or the equation.

The answer is to target criminals…with long sentences and prosecutions for gun crime….which we do not have.

 

[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....

Where do their efforts cease?

They'll never cease.

They'll never gain traction

Any proposed legislation will not pass through even a Democratic controlled Congress.

They'll never come for our guns

I think you are wrong. They know the court system is the way to get the guns. They are passing anti gun legislation in blue states. The federal judges obama has appointed are upholding these laws, and if hilary replaces one of the 3 conservatives on the court those laws will become Constitutional, and the anti gunners will go nuts to pass them all over the country.

 

[OldLady]

More spam ^^^.

I'm sorry you don't like the fact that you get called out on your lies.
if you stopped lying, that wouldn't happen.

And.... I again thank you for your continued demonstration that you cannot give anyone a reason to believe those who seek to further limit the rights of the law abiding will stop at universal background checks

No one can 'prove' what hasn't happened yet, which is what you're asking. And you're right, by the way; a lot of people want a lot less guns in the closets of Americans, however it can be managed. Outlaw violent shoot-em-up video games and movies as if they were child pornography. Make it illegal to manufacture or sell certain assault rifles in the United States. Violate everyone's right to privacy and hunt out illegally held guns, or buy them off the streets. Any zany shit you can think of, I'm ready for. There are way too many guns in this country, allowing too many folks to grab a gun and kill anyone they want from a safe distance, like the cowards they are. And there are too many people who think that's ultra cool. It's sick. Guns kill. Period. Get rid of 'em.

Make it illegal to manufacture or sell certain assault rifles in the United States.

Why…….the rifles you mention murder and injure fewer people than knives, blunt objects or bare hands. There are over 3 million of them in private hands and at most 2-3 are used each year for crime……..so what is the problem with them?

You realize there are over 357 million guns in private hands….and that fewer than 8,124 of them are used to murder people…the rest over 356,991,876 million are used for lawful purposes and are never, ever used to commit one crime…right?

And it is a fact that mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing only happen to people who do not have guns to stop it.

Guns save lives. Guns have allowed the weak to free themselves from the strong…..without guns the weak would be the slaves of the strong…just like they were all throughout human history before the first gun was ever invented.

You need to actually think about this topic….it is obvious that you haven't.

I've thought about it a lot. You and I have had this discussion and others before and I have actually given it a great deal of thought, done some research, etc. I acknowledge your points, and I guess I can't disagree with statistics. But darn it, putting more and more guns in the hands of Americans is NOT the answer to out of control gun violence and death in this country. I'm pretty sure we'll never know if I'm right, because I'm on the losing side of this and I know it. I was just honestly answering the OP's question.

But darn it, putting more and more guns in the hands of Americans is NOT the answer to out of control gun violence and death in this country.

Then how do you explain the fact that as more Americans now own and actually carry guns…the gun murder rate has continuously gone down, and not up. That there are 357 million guns in private hands and that the majority of actual gun murder is committed by people who cannot legally own guns…..so of the 8,124 gun murders, the majority are committed by violent criminals who cannot own or carry a gun murdering other violent criminals who cannot own or carry a gun.

So normal, law abiding gun owners can own and carry guns all day long and they will not shoot people or commit crimes with those guns. So do you see how your sentence makes little sense….when the reality shows that the act of owning guns is not the problem……violent criminals are the problem, and that none of the proposed gun restrictions actually address criminals. That all the proposed gun control laws target people who are not the problem…who will not use guns to commit crime?

So the answer to out of control gun violence is not arming everyone, it is just that arming normal gun owners isn't a part of the problem or the equation.

The answer is to target criminals…with long sentences and prosecutions for gun crime….which we do not have.

In my dream world, going down hard on the criminals and on the suppliers who sell them the guns, is part of the plan; the first step before making it harder for Average Joe to purchase a hunting rifle. I'd be all for it.
I agree it would be insane to take guns from law abiding citizens before making serious progress in taking guns from criminals. But then assault type weapons and large capacity magazines would go bye-bye. No need for them in the law abiding world you present.

You see, a lot of the crimes commited with guns aren't done by gang members or mafia types. They're done by nut jobs who were quietly crazy and flew beneath the radar and have guns in the house legally. Or by abusers who flip when girlfriend tries to break up. Or by kids in the 'hood carrying for self protection that get into a situation where they act like, well, kids. The less guns in circulation, the less risk of one being used. Does that make sense to you at all?
The problem with your argument is that if a good percentage of violent criminals haven't got a gun in the house to begin with, during that moment of crisis when they want to kill someone, a lot of shootings won't occur. Kids in gangs carry guns for self protection from other kids carrying guns. If guns hadn't been in the house, Newtown wouldn't have occurred. If the Aurora shooter hadn't been able to legally purchase all his guns and ammunition, there would be more innocent theater goers alive today.
The problem with your argument is that if a good percentage of violent criminals haven't got a gun in the house to begin with, during that moment of crisis when they want to kill someone, a lot of shootings won't occur. Kids in gangs carry guns for self protection from other kids carrying guns. If guns hadn't been in the house, Newtown wouldn't have occurred. If the Aurora shooter hadn't been able to legally purchase all his guns and ammunition, there would be more innocent theater goers alive today.

 

[OldLady]

Oops. technical difficulties with that last post.