CDZ Do you Believe Americans Would ever Turn in Our Guns?

It all depends upon you classify as "law abiding."
The meaning of "law abiding" isn't debatable; there are no gradations of it. A law abiding citizen is one who does not willfully violate any law to which they are subject.

Surely, this should apply to any legislator, governor, President, judge, police officer, or any other agent of government, who willfully takes any part in enacting, enforcing, or upholding any law which is blatantly unconstitutional. Every last one of them, after all, is required to take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, as his highest duty. He agrees to this as a condition of being allowed to hold whatever position he holds in government, and the legitimacy of his office and of any action that he takes in connection therewith is contingent on his diligence in holding to that oath.

Surely, no public servant who willfully violates his oath, and willfully violates the Constitution, can honestly be claimed to be “law-abiding”.
Surely, no public servant who willfully violates his oath, and willfully violates the Constitution, can honestly be claimed to be “law-abiding”.
In post 169 -- CDZ - Do you Believe Americans Would ever Turn in Our Guns? -- I expounded upon my assertion that the denotation of "law abiding" isn't debatable. Nothing has changed.

As is so for any individual, upon (1) a jurist's determination that the statute is constitutional and (2) the court's determination, given the evidence presented, that a defendant did indeed perform the actus reus and possess the mens rea needed to be held criminally culpable, yes, so it is that public servants can be called law abiding or law breaking, just as can anyone else.

As goes the matter of a public servant's violating their oath of office, well, the extent to which their doing so constitutes breaking the law depends on whether upholding it is by law required. I think military servants are legally bound to that oaths of office. Other public servants, however, may not be so formally bound, and those who aren't, if they break their oath of office can be said to have derelicted their duty and/or breached a public trust, but not not to have broken the law.

There is in the law a grey area whereby something must by law happen, however, violations of the code section isn't an offense/breaking of the law. Such statutes are readily identified by their lacking penalty provisions. The non-Presidential oath of office is one such law. Individuals taking that oath of office must, to receive the appointment and carry it out, take the oath as noted, but so averring is all they must do to be legally compliant.

AFAIK, the Oath of Office Accountability Act has not been enacted.


Your position was considered and studied. It has found to be false.

The courts had a problem with jury nullification and so they, not the legislatures, declared it to be illegal. So, the courts can be wrong too. Because the United States Supreme Court is not supposed to legislate from the bench, Trump nominated Gorsuch and I hope that he will bring some sanity to that body.
Seriously? You put me through all that only to have no other rebuttal than to introduce the esoterica of jury nullification? Really?

OMG

"Quite simply one does not get to decide unilaterally what law(s) is or isn't constitutional; jurists are the only people authorized to make that determination."

I cannot directly address your insults without having my posts deleted. But, really, something is wrong if jury nullification was all you got out of that post.
 
I doubt there will be any significant national legislation that will require gun owners to turn in their guns.

More likely it will be something like the "Assault weapon" ban Clinton put in place.
300 million guns......that horse has left the barn

Same goes for assault rifles

No need for high capacity magazines or bump stocks
 
The feds already have laws regulating weapons.
Gun laws of the United States are found in a number of federal statutes. These laws regulate the manufacture, trade, possession, transfer, record keeping, transport, and destruction of firearms, ammunition, and firearms accessories. They are enforced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
Gun law in the United States - Wikipedia

Regulation does not necessarily mean denial ... :thup:

Just like it is a common misconception that a private citizen cannot own a machine gun.
That's not true ... It's just extremely difficult and expensive.

.
Exactly. Regulation doesn't mean denial.

No law, nothing, will stop a person who has chosen to go on a rampage (purchased legally or stole the weapon won't matter). The Florida shooter already owned the weapons prior to any calls to the FBI or the school regarding his threats. The whole point is the FBI failed to investigate the issue and prevent it from happening, and the school officer pussed out. More "regulations" will not stop future incidents.
Yes, there need to be "regulations" so the FBI and local law enforcement can act when a person who is regularly violent starts threatening to shoot people. That was prior to his purchasing guns, but the FBI and the current regulations can do nothing until "regulations" are put in place allowing them to.

If the FBI and local LEOs WILL do anything. The Parkland shooter had numerous complaints against him, and someone called the FBI tip line and warned them that the guy was armed and ready to explode. The tipster even said he was going to end up shooting a school up. The FBI's actions? Nada, zip, zero, nothing at all.
 
The feds already have laws regulating weapons.
Gun laws of the United States are found in a number of federal statutes. These laws regulate the manufacture, trade, possession, transfer, record keeping, transport, and destruction of firearms, ammunition, and firearms accessories. They are enforced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
Gun law in the United States - Wikipedia

Regulation does not necessarily mean denial ... :thup:

Just like it is a common misconception that a private citizen cannot own a machine gun.
That's not true ... It's just extremely difficult and expensive.

.
Exactly. Regulation doesn't mean denial.

No law, nothing, will stop a person who has chosen to go on a rampage (purchased legally or stole the weapon won't matter). The Florida shooter already owned the weapons prior to any calls to the FBI or the school regarding his threats. The whole point is the FBI failed to investigate the issue and prevent it from happening, and the school officer pussed out. More "regulations" will not stop future incidents.
Yes, there need to be "regulations" so the FBI and local law enforcement can act when a person who is regularly violent starts threatening to shoot people. That was prior to his purchasing guns, but the FBI and the current regulations can do nothing until "regulations" are put in place allowing them to.

The FBI could have investigated and IF they had, there was plenty to sustain an arrest for terroristic threats.

Furthermore, if people were working with me (I'm doing more than keyboard pecking), ALL of Cruz's misdeeds could have been put into a single database. There a county official could have sent DFACS in to inspect the home he lived in, alert his parents to Cruz's activities and try to determine if an intervention was necessary.

Cruz could have undergone an IQ test, been assessed by two different mental health officials and they could have determined that he needed help.

In any event, NOBODY seems to want to hold the system accountable for its failures and incompetency.

That is what pisses me off. There were all the signs, warnings and even a tip called in to the FBI. But until there was a body count, law enforcement did absolutely nothing. And people wonder why people want guns for self-defense?
 
I doubt there will be any significant national legislation that will require gun owners to turn in their guns.

More likely it will be something like the "Assault weapon" ban Clinton put in place.
300 million guns......that horse has left the barn

Same goes for assault rifles

No need for high capacity magazines or bump stocks

I don't think magazine capacity is much of an issue. As for the bump stocks, I am a huge fan of accuracy. Don't care if they ban those ridiculous items or not. Among many shooters and gunsmiths, the term "bump stock" is an insult. As in, "did you see that bumpstock trying to adjust his scope? What an idiot.".
 
I doubt there will be any significant national legislation that will require gun owners to turn in their guns.

More likely it will be something like the "Assault weapon" ban Clinton put in place.
300 million guns......that horse has left the barn

Same goes for assault rifles

No need for high capacity magazines or bump stocks

I don't think magazine capacity is much of an issue. As for the bump stocks, I am a huge fan of accuracy. Don't care if they ban those ridiculous items or not. Among many shooters and gunsmiths, the term "bump stock" is an insult. As in, "did you see that bumpstock trying to adjust his scope? What an idiot.".

While I agree with you that outlawing bump stocks won't affect those who know how to shoot, it is the principle of the thing. They banned fully autos; we did nothing. They banned semi-auto import bans... still nothing. They banned parts (esp. barrels.) We did nothing. They banned the so - called "Streetsweeper" shotgun. You cannot even get an eight shot .45 cal auto into the U.S. and those haven't been used in a crime (outside of maybe a domestic dispute) since Al Capone was around.

The anti-gunners keep telling us what they aren't going to do while they are doing it incrementally. Banning bump stocks is a no go. I won't support any politician that votes for banning them.
 
The feds already have laws regulating weapons. Gun law in the United States - Wikipedia

Regulation does not necessarily mean denial ... :thup:

Just like it is a common misconception that a private citizen cannot own a machine gun.
That's not true ... It's just extremely difficult and expensive.

.
Exactly. Regulation doesn't mean denial.

No law, nothing, will stop a person who has chosen to go on a rampage (purchased legally or stole the weapon won't matter). The Florida shooter already owned the weapons prior to any calls to the FBI or the school regarding his threats. The whole point is the FBI failed to investigate the issue and prevent it from happening, and the school officer pussed out. More "regulations" will not stop future incidents.
Yes, there need to be "regulations" so the FBI and local law enforcement can act when a person who is regularly violent starts threatening to shoot people. That was prior to his purchasing guns, but the FBI and the current regulations can do nothing until "regulations" are put in place allowing them to.

The FBI could have investigated and IF they had, there was plenty to sustain an arrest for terroristic threats.

Furthermore, if people were working with me (I'm doing more than keyboard pecking), ALL of Cruz's misdeeds could have been put into a single database. There a county official could have sent DFACS in to inspect the home he lived in, alert his parents to Cruz's activities and try to determine if an intervention was necessary.

Cruz could have undergone an IQ test, been assessed by two different mental health officials and they could have determined that he needed help.

In any event, NOBODY seems to want to hold the system accountable for its failures and incompetency.

That is what pisses me off. There were all the signs, warnings and even a tip called in to the FBI. But until there was a body count, law enforcement did absolutely nothing. And people wonder why people want guns for self-defense?


I'll go you one better - with laws in place and people reporting the crimes, the government dropped the ball. DFACS, the school, the county police, the FBI... all of them proving to be incompetent boobs. And while we're paying them good salaries they let us down and the left does what? They blame the freaking NRA. Could people be any more stupid?
 
Considering the horrible event in Florida this week, we've again heard all about the idea of banning some or all type of firearms from private ownership by private citizens. We've heard anecdotes about Scotland, England and Australia doing such things.

It's been talked about on tv, radio, and from the mouths of parents who have lost children, among many others. My wuedtion is this...

Do you really believe that the vast majority of American gun owners would turn in their guns if rewuired to?


I dont believe thst the majority of American gun owners would. Here's why...

Three different rdgistratoon/ban attempts gave been made here in the US in the last five years or so. All have fsiled miserably in their attempts.

1. The NY SAFE Act passed in 2013 required gun owners to register "assault weapons" already in their possession by January 1, 2014 or face confiscation.
RESILT: Only a few thousand "assault weapons" registrations were ever filed. Even as of 2018, the number I've heard is less thsn 50,000 guns (A minimal number considering the NYS definition of an assault weapon)

2. At the same time the Stste of Connecticut demanded the registration of all "assault weapons" AND all high capacity magazines by January 1, 2014.
RESULTS: Less thsn 5,000 rifles and less than 3,000 high capacity magazine.registrstion forms filed.

3. After the Las Vegas shooting in the fall of 2017, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts banned bump stocks and trigger cranks, effective February 1, 2018. Owners of such devises were not allowed to sell or transfer them, but expected to turn them in to the Police (without compensation).
RESULT: As of the last report I heard on the radio only one bump stock and three trigger cranks had been turned in.

So, whst does this mean?... If the gun owners in some of the most Liberal areas of the country will not comply with these orders, why would anyone expect other gun owners to do so? Especially when the Governors of all three states hsve failed to impose any form of punishment for the defiance?
Prohibition didn't work even when Americans were mostly law abiding and respected "the law". Flash forward , we have states that ignore federal laws like on Cannabis or illegal aliens. It's amazing we agree on anything anymore, but I digress. So, banning guns won't work because like it or not, America is a nation of lawbreaking scoundrels. It's in our bloody DNA, we are idiots.We are amazing. We are....

From the very founding of this country, Americans have had an unalienable Right to Life. This includes, but is not limited to owning a firearm to not only insure the security of a free State, but to protect Life and Limb.

Now, as long as I'm alive, people will have guns because I will not turn mine in; I would never register them; if I dispose of them, it will not be with the government's approval or disapproval.

I am the most law abiding person on this thread and can show you security clearances from my past to back that up. America does have a problem with people being killed. Mass shootings were in the news and LONG BEFORE you or any other swinging Richard on ANY of these boards was concerned about the issueand I was already lobbying the pro-gun lobby AND the left (started in 1989) to put in sensible measures that would significantly reduce, if not eliminate mass shootings. It was met with apathy, silence, and complaints of TLDR as if you can solve the issue with bumper sticker slogans.

YOU won't get involved because it isn't about gun control. The right won't get involved because they ignorantly think they are safe from bans / confiscations. NOBODY really cares about addressing the root cause of the problem. Both sides just need a pretext to keep the gun control fight going. People like you are going to destroy the Republic and the right, will do as Nero did - they will fiddle while Rome burns.

Nice post. What can I say? I realize no matter what anyone says, guns are still going to play a large part in American culture. Some folks are so enamored with them, they would rather have children slaughtered by maniacs (as if it's a secret dirty price we pay for "freedom"). I myself, value lives of innocent people more than the antiquated dusty old and obsolete second amendment. In my opinion, we would be better off with out fire arms.
We would better of as Americans repealing the 2nd amendment. But, that is just my conscience talking. It isn't' going to happen as long as a few rich out off touch PACs represent a minority of impassioned pseudo "patriots" gun hugger, deluded out of touch, pro gun control freaks dominate our political landscape. And they are. That, ladies and gentlemen, is why we will never have rational and reason debate on this issue and why we are willing to accept mass murder in our streets and schools.
 
Last edited:

I saw the Penn and Teller thing. They are accepted as independent thinkers.I like these guys. They are totally irreverent all the way, and they use intellect and humor to cast light on various issues, brilliant. But as far as the gun issue, they lost me with this shallow side stepping. Ok, they made a point, but also lost a MAJOR point at the same time. They don't face the issue of hyper advances in firearms since in the Second amendment was created, They don't delve into the various nuances like, say, the invention of the assault rifle up to mass shootings and NEVER address the issues that are occurring now, with mass school shootings by well armed madmen. Unlike the framers of the constitution, Pen and Teller WELL night KNEW what the problem is with guns.And they cowardly shrank away from facing the REAL facts.
 
Considering the horrible event in Florida this week, we've again heard all about the idea of banning some or all type of firearms from private ownership by private citizens. We've heard anecdotes about Scotland, England and Australia doing such things.

It's been talked about on tv, radio, and from the mouths of parents who have lost children, among many others. My wuedtion is this...

Do you really believe that the vast majority of American gun owners would turn in their guns if rewuired to?


I dont believe thst the majority of American gun owners would. Here's why...

Three different rdgistratoon/ban attempts gave been made here in the US in the last five years or so. All have fsiled miserably in their attempts.

1. The NY SAFE Act passed in 2013 required gun owners to register "assault weapons" already in their possession by January 1, 2014 or face confiscation.
RESILT: Only a few thousand "assault weapons" registrations were ever filed. Even as of 2018, the number I've heard is less thsn 50,000 guns (A minimal number considering the NYS definition of an assault weapon)

2. At the same time the Stste of Connecticut demanded the registration of all "assault weapons" AND all high capacity magazines by January 1, 2014.
RESULTS: Less thsn 5,000 rifles and less than 3,000 high capacity magazine.registrstion forms filed.

3. After the Las Vegas shooting in the fall of 2017, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts banned bump stocks and trigger cranks, effective February 1, 2018. Owners of such devises were not allowed to sell or transfer them, but expected to turn them in to the Police (without compensation).
RESULT: As of the last report I heard on the radio only one bump stock and three trigger cranks had been turned in.

So, whst does this mean?... If the gun owners in some of the most Liberal areas of the country will not comply with these orders, why would anyone expect other gun owners to do so? Especially when the Governors of all three states hsve failed to impose any form of punishment for the defiance?
Prohibition didn't work even when Americans were mostly law abiding and respected "the law". Flash forward , we have states that ignore federal laws like on Cannabis or illegal aliens. It's amazing we agree on anything anymore, but I digress. So, banning guns won't work because like it or not, America is a nation of lawbreaking scoundrels. It's in our bloody DNA, we are idiots.We are amazing. We are....

From the very founding of this country, Americans have had an unalienable Right to Life. This includes, but is not limited to owning a firearm to not only insure the security of a free State, but to protect Life and Limb.

Now, as long as I'm alive, people will have guns because I will not turn mine in; I would never register them; if I dispose of them, it will not be with the government's approval or disapproval.

I am the most law abiding person on this thread and can show you security clearances from my past to back that up. America does have a problem with people being killed. Mass shootings were in the news and LONG BEFORE you or any other swinging Richard on ANY of these boards was concerned about the issueand I was already lobbying the pro-gun lobby AND the left (started in 1989) to put in sensible measures that would significantly reduce, if not eliminate mass shootings. It was met with apathy, silence, and complaints of TLDR as if you can solve the issue with bumper sticker slogans.

YOU won't get involved because it isn't about gun control. The right won't get involved because they ignorantly think they are safe from bans / confiscations. NOBODY really cares about addressing the root cause of the problem. Both sides just need a pretext to keep the gun control fight going. People like you are going to destroy the Republic and the right, will do as Nero did - they will fiddle while Rome burns.

Nice post. What can I say? I realize no matter what anyone says, guns are still going to play a large part in American culture. Some folks are so enamored with them, they would rather have children slaughtered by maniacs (as if it's a secret dirty price we pay for "freedom"). I myself, value lives of innocent people more than the antiquated dusty old and obsolete second amendment. In my opinion, we would be better off with out fire arms.
We would better of as Americans repealing the 2nd amendment. But, that is just my conscience talking. It isn't' going to happen as long as a few rich out off touch PACs represent a minority of impassioned pseudo "patriots" gun hugger, deluded out of touch, pro gun control freaks dominate our political landscape. And they are. That, ladies and gentlemen, is why we will never have rational and reason debate on this issue and why we are willing to accept mass murder in our streets and schools.

Liberals are always slinging that skeet about having a rational and reasonable debate about gun control, but they only see the issue their way.

I take everything you say about gun control in and weigh my conclusions accordingly. And, when a liberal tries to tell me they care more about children than I do, they are full of manure. That's not opinion; that is a fact.

I have taken children into my home as a DFACS asset. I've been a foster parent and have adopted children. I advocate regularly in favor of them and their Rights. Maybe you would like to prove your commitment by joining in with me and doing more than pecking your keyboard? Pm me and let's see about that commitment.

Guns play a part of American culture because we had to use force to break away from tyranny and oppression. From the days of Jesus ordering his apostles to hock their robes if they had to in order to buy a sword to the founders of our nation, we've understood the value of Liberty.

All your double talking about guns while refusing to do something to keep the mentally ill off the streets says more about your character than a fifty paragraph rant from me.

 

I saw the Penn and Teller thing. They are accepted as independent thinkers.I like these guys. They are totally irreverent all the way, and they use intellect and humor to cast light on various issues, brilliant. But as far as the gun issue, they lost me with this shallow side stepping. Ok, they made a point, but also lost a MAJOR point at the same time. They don't face the issue of hyper advances in firearms since in the Second amendment was created, They don't delve into the various nuances like, say, the invention of the assault rifle up to mass shootings and NEVER address the issues that are occurring now, with mass school shootings by well armed madmen. Unlike the framers of the constitution, Pen and Teller WELL night KNEW what the problem is with guns.And they cowardly shrank away from facing the REAL facts.


I have been talking about mass murderers and how to get rid of them LONG before Adam Lanza and Nickolas Cruz. I was even posting here about solutions without gun control when there were not news stories going on about it then.

How did you miss that? If you're so into the issue, how could you miss the times I've addressed the root cause behind people like Nickolas Cruz?
 
Considering the horrible event in Florida this week, we've again heard all about the idea of banning some or all type of firearms from private ownership by private citizens. We've heard anecdotes about Scotland, England and Australia doing such things.

It's been talked about on tv, radio, and from the mouths of parents who have lost children, among many others. My wuedtion is this...

Do you really believe that the vast majority of American gun owners would turn in their guns if rewuired to?


I dont believe thst the majority of American gun owners would. Here's why...

Three different rdgistratoon/ban attempts gave been made here in the US in the last five years or so. All have fsiled miserably in their attempts.

1. The NY SAFE Act passed in 2013 required gun owners to register "assault weapons" already in their possession by January 1, 2014 or face confiscation.
RESILT: Only a few thousand "assault weapons" registrations were ever filed. Even as of 2018, the number I've heard is less thsn 50,000 guns (A minimal number considering the NYS definition of an assault weapon)

2. At the same time the Stste of Connecticut demanded the registration of all "assault weapons" AND all high capacity magazines by January 1, 2014.
RESULTS: Less thsn 5,000 rifles and less than 3,000 high capacity magazine.registrstion forms filed.

3. After the Las Vegas shooting in the fall of 2017, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts banned bump stocks and trigger cranks, effective February 1, 2018. Owners of such devises were not allowed to sell or transfer them, but expected to turn them in to the Police (without compensation).
RESULT: As of the last report I heard on the radio only one bump stock and three trigger cranks had been turned in.

So, whst does this mean?... If the gun owners in some of the most Liberal areas of the country will not comply with these orders, why would anyone expect other gun owners to do so? Especially when the Governors of all three states hsve failed to impose any form of punishment for the defiance?
Prohibition didn't work even when Americans were mostly law abiding and respected "the law". Flash forward , we have states that ignore federal laws like on Cannabis or illegal aliens. It's amazing we agree on anything anymore, but I digress. So, banning guns won't work because like it or not, America is a nation of lawbreaking scoundrels. It's in our bloody DNA, we are idiots.We are amazing. We are....

From the very founding of this country, Americans have had an unalienable Right to Life. This includes, but is not limited to owning a firearm to not only insure the security of a free State, but to protect Life and Limb.

Now, as long as I'm alive, people will have guns because I will not turn mine in; I would never register them; if I dispose of them, it will not be with the government's approval or disapproval.

I am the most law abiding person on this thread and can show you security clearances from my past to back that up. America does have a problem with people being killed. Mass shootings were in the news and LONG BEFORE you or any other swinging Richard on ANY of these boards was concerned about the issueand I was already lobbying the pro-gun lobby AND the left (started in 1989) to put in sensible measures that would significantly reduce, if not eliminate mass shootings. It was met with apathy, silence, and complaints of TLDR as if you can solve the issue with bumper sticker slogans.

YOU won't get involved because it isn't about gun control. The right won't get involved because they ignorantly think they are safe from bans / confiscations. NOBODY really cares about addressing the root cause of the problem. Both sides just need a pretext to keep the gun control fight going. People like you are going to destroy the Republic and the right, will do as Nero did - they will fiddle while Rome burns.

Nice post. What can I say? I realize no matter what anyone says, guns are still going to play a large part in American culture. Some folks are so enamored with them, they would rather have children slaughtered by maniacs (as if it's a secret dirty price we pay for "freedom"). I myself, value lives of innocent people more than the antiquated dusty old and obsolete second amendment. In my opinion, we would be better off with out fire arms.
We would better of as Americans repealing the 2nd amendment. But, that is just my conscience talking. It isn't' going to happen as long as a few rich out off touch PACs represent a minority of impassioned pseudo "patriots" gun hugger, deluded out of touch, pro gun control freaks dominate our political landscape. And they are. That, ladies and gentlemen, is why we will never have rational and reason debate on this issue and why we are willing to accept mass murder in our streets and schools.

Liberals are always slinging that skeet about having a rational and reasonable debate about gun control, but they only see the issue their way.

I take everything you say about gun control in and weigh my conclusions accordingly. And, when a liberal tries to tell me they care more about children than I do, they are full of manure. That's not opinion; that is a fact.

I have taken children into my home as a DFACS asset. I've been a foster parent and have adopted children. I advocate regularly in favor of them and their Rights. Maybe you would like to prove your commitment by joining in with me and doing more than pecking your keyboard? Pm me and let's see about that commitment.

Guns play a part of American culture because we had to use force to break away from tyranny and oppression. From the days of Jesus ordering his apostles to hock their robes if they had to in order to buy a sword to the founders of our nation, we've understood the value of Liberty.

All your double talking about guns while refusing to do something to keep the mentally ill off the streets says more about your character than a fifty paragraph rant from me.


I already replied to that, dear boy. You and Penn & Teller know that flintlocks aren't comparable to Machine guns the same way the French & British generals thought they were before the first battle of the Somme . We get kids gunned down needlessly, let's shed more blood of the innocent before we realize times change.
 
Last edited:

I saw the Penn and Teller thing. They are accepted as independent thinkers.I like these guys. They are totally irreverent all the way, and they use intellect and humor to cast light on various issues, brilliant. But as far as the gun issue, they lost me with this shallow side stepping. Ok, they made a point, but also lost a MAJOR point at the same time. They don't face the issue of hyper advances in firearms since in the Second amendment was created, They don't delve into the various nuances like, say, the invention of the assault rifle up to mass shootings and NEVER address the issues that are occurring now, with mass school shootings by well armed madmen. Unlike the framers of the constitution, Pen and Teller WELL night KNEW what the problem is with guns.And they cowardly shrank away from facing the REAL facts.


I have been talking about mass murderers and how to get rid of them LONG before Adam Lanza and Nickolas Cruz. I was even posting here about solutions without gun control when there were not news stories going on about it then.

How did you miss that? If you're so into the issue, how could you miss the times I've addressed the root cause behind people like Nickolas Cruz?



You mean false flag shootings where the people are never told the whole truth? Warning signs that someone might have had a few screws loose that were on the law enforcement radar and yet they did nothing? THEN they stood down while someone like Cruz along with someone else commits this crime then it is politicized in an attempt to implement more draconian legislation? 99 percent of these mass shootings are nothing but Operation Gladio syle psy-ops using the cause, effect and solution of the Hegelian dialectic. These types of psy-ops will continue to happen because most of the sheeple only have double digit I.Qs.
 
Considering the horrible event in Florida this week, we've again heard all about the idea of banning some or all type of firearms from private ownership by private citizens. We've heard anecdotes about Scotland, England and Australia doing such things.

It's been talked about on tv, radio, and from the mouths of parents who have lost children, among many others. My wuedtion is this...

Do you really believe that the vast majority of American gun owners would turn in their guns if rewuired to?


I dont believe thst the majority of American gun owners would. Here's why...

Three different rdgistratoon/ban attempts gave been made here in the US in the last five years or so. All have fsiled miserably in their attempts.

1. The NY SAFE Act passed in 2013 required gun owners to register "assault weapons" already in their possession by January 1, 2014 or face confiscation.
RESILT: Only a few thousand "assault weapons" registrations were ever filed. Even as of 2018, the number I've heard is less thsn 50,000 guns (A minimal number considering the NYS definition of an assault weapon)

2. At the same time the Stste of Connecticut demanded the registration of all "assault weapons" AND all high capacity magazines by January 1, 2014.
RESULTS: Less thsn 5,000 rifles and less than 3,000 high capacity magazine.registrstion forms filed.

3. After the Las Vegas shooting in the fall of 2017, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts banned bump stocks and trigger cranks, effective February 1, 2018. Owners of such devises were not allowed to sell or transfer them, but expected to turn them in to the Police (without compensation).
RESULT: As of the last report I heard on the radio only one bump stock and three trigger cranks had been turned in.

So, whst does this mean?... If the gun owners in some of the most Liberal areas of the country will not comply with these orders, why would anyone expect other gun owners to do so? Especially when the Governors of all three states hsve failed to impose any form of punishment for the defiance?
Prohibition didn't work even when Americans were mostly law abiding and respected "the law". Flash forward , we have states that ignore federal laws like on Cannabis or illegal aliens. It's amazing we agree on anything anymore, but I digress. So, banning guns won't work because like it or not, America is a nation of lawbreaking scoundrels. It's in our bloody DNA, we are idiots.We are amazing. We are....

From the very founding of this country, Americans have had an unalienable Right to Life. This includes, but is not limited to owning a firearm to not only insure the security of a free State, but to protect Life and Limb.

Now, as long as I'm alive, people will have guns because I will not turn mine in; I would never register them; if I dispose of them, it will not be with the government's approval or disapproval.

I am the most law abiding person on this thread and can show you security clearances from my past to back that up. America does have a problem with people being killed. Mass shootings were in the news and LONG BEFORE you or any other swinging Richard on ANY of these boards was concerned about the issueand I was already lobbying the pro-gun lobby AND the left (started in 1989) to put in sensible measures that would significantly reduce, if not eliminate mass shootings. It was met with apathy, silence, and complaints of TLDR as if you can solve the issue with bumper sticker slogans.

YOU won't get involved because it isn't about gun control. The right won't get involved because they ignorantly think they are safe from bans / confiscations. NOBODY really cares about addressing the root cause of the problem. Both sides just need a pretext to keep the gun control fight going. People like you are going to destroy the Republic and the right, will do as Nero did - they will fiddle while Rome burns.

Nice post. What can I say? I realize no matter what anyone says, guns are still going to play a large part in American culture. Some folks are so enamored with them, they would rather have children slaughtered by maniacs (as if it's a secret dirty price we pay for "freedom"). I myself, value lives of innocent people more than the antiquated dusty old and obsolete second amendment. In my opinion, we would be better off with out fire arms.
We would better of as Americans repealing the 2nd amendment. But, that is just my conscience talking. It isn't' going to happen as long as a few rich out off touch PACs represent a minority of impassioned pseudo "patriots" gun hugger, deluded out of touch, pro gun control freaks dominate our political landscape. And they are. That, ladies and gentlemen, is why we will never have rational and reason debate on this issue and why we are willing to accept mass murder in our streets and schools.

Liberals are always slinging that skeet about having a rational and reasonable debate about gun control, but they only see the issue their way.

I take everything you say about gun control in and weigh my conclusions accordingly. And, when a liberal tries to tell me they care more about children than I do, they are full of manure. That's not opinion; that is a fact.

I have taken children into my home as a DFACS asset. I've been a foster parent and have adopted children. I advocate regularly in favor of them and their Rights. Maybe you would like to prove your commitment by joining in with me and doing more than pecking your keyboard? Pm me and let's see about that commitment.

Guns play a part of American culture because we had to use force to break away from tyranny and oppression. From the days of Jesus ordering his apostles to hock their robes if they had to in order to buy a sword to the founders of our nation, we've understood the value of Liberty.

All your double talking about guns while refusing to do something to keep the mentally ill off the streets says more about your character than a fifty paragraph rant from me.


I already replied to that, dear boy. You and Penn and Teller know that flintlocks aren't comparable to Machine guns the same way the French & British generals thought they were before the first battle of the Somme . We get kids gunned down needlessly, let's shed more blood of the innocent before we realize times change.


Your point is lost in your own ignorance. When Jesus told his apostles that they would have to carry a sword, don't you think he knew how much more dangerous muskets would be when we had to fight the War of Independence? Do you think Jesus was stupid and could not see the future?

"When the strong man fully armed guardeth his own court, his goods are in peace" Luke 11; 21

You are trying claim moral high ground and dismissing the very people who insured your Freedom and Liberty from the life of Jesus to the present.
 

I saw the Penn and Teller thing. They are accepted as independent thinkers.I like these guys. They are totally irreverent all the way, and they use intellect and humor to cast light on various issues, brilliant. But as far as the gun issue, they lost me with this shallow side stepping. Ok, they made a point, but also lost a MAJOR point at the same time. They don't face the issue of hyper advances in firearms since in the Second amendment was created, They don't delve into the various nuances like, say, the invention of the assault rifle up to mass shootings and NEVER address the issues that are occurring now, with mass school shootings by well armed madmen. Unlike the framers of the constitution, Pen and Teller WELL night KNEW what the problem is with guns.And they cowardly shrank away from facing the REAL facts.


I have been talking about mass murderers and how to get rid of them LONG before Adam Lanza and Nickolas Cruz. I was even posting here about solutions without gun control when there were not news stories going on about it then.

How did you miss that? If you're so into the issue, how could you miss the times I've addressed the root cause behind people like Nickolas Cruz?



You mean false flag shootings where the people are never told the whole truth? Warning signs that someone might have had a few screws loose that were on the law enforcement radar and yet they did nothing? THEN they stood down while someone like Cruz along with someone else commits this crime then it is politicized in an attempt to implement more draconian legislation? 99 percent of these mass shootings are nothing but Operation Gladio syle psy-ops using the cause, effect and solution of the Hegelian dialectic. These types of psy-ops will continue to happen because most of the sheeple only have double digit I.Qs.


What pisses me off about Cruz is that the entire government FAILED to do their job and the media along with uneducated robots that were not trained in school blame the NRA because bureaucrats didn't do their job.
 
Please. Imagine for instance, sheeple accepting generals word accepting a hun with a machine gun mowing down people in 1918 instead of say a weirdo American nihilist kid that had his 2 amendment right to bare arms and mow down little kids in 2018 is any better.
 

Forum List

Back
Top