England vs. U.S. murder rate

[Marion Morrison]

If you drive a car only on your property and park it there, you don't have to do anything. No licensing, registering, inspecting, etc. Let's do the same thing for guns. As long as you leave it in your house and use it on your property, you don't need to register it, license it or insure it. You would only need to do that if you carried it off your property. Treating guns like cars might get more support than you'd think.

Ok. The avalanche option.

How does it get from the store to your home?

Bingo. You have to have insurance, registration of some sort, license tags....

1. Delivery.
2. You leave the firearm in its original packaging until you get it home.
3. Temporary dealer registration.

I mean, come on. So many ways to make it work.

As long as you carry liability for when/if your kid takes the gun and smokes 26 kids.... I’m with you.

And when you no longer have children in the house, you don't need insurance.

Sure you do. If/when you go all Zimmerman/Loughner/Oswald/Root/Whitman/Kelley/Mandalay Bay Guy. Most folks don’t wreck their cars...but we force them to carry insurance. We should do the same with guns.

GFY with that. That is an infringement.

 

[Rustic]

No amount of frivolous gun control laws will save a single soul… Fact

 

[candycorn]

If you drive a car only on your property and park it there, you don't have to do anything. No licensing, registering, inspecting, etc. Let's do the same thing for guns. As long as you leave it in your house and use it on your property, you don't need to register it, license it or insure it. You would only need to do that if you carried it off your property. Treating guns like cars might get more support than you'd think.

Ok. The avalanche option.

How does it get from the store to your home?

Bingo. You have to have insurance, registration of some sort, license tags....

1. Delivery.
2. You leave the firearm in its original packaging until you get it home.
3. Temporary dealer registration.

I mean, come on. So many ways to make it work.

As long as you carry liability for when/if your kid takes the gun and smokes 26 kids.... I’m with you.

And when you no longer have children in the house, you don't need insurance.

But we don't force them to carry insurance unless they take their cars out on the roads. Basically, again, you're treating every citizen as a potential criminal before they do anything wrong. Using that logic, you should have your children registered with the state and every house be subject to regular inspections, because you are likely to go all child abuser. Every house should also be inspected regularly because if/when you go drug dealer, we need to be able to spot the pot plants you're growing. Binoculars should be registered and licensed and equipped with a GPS tracker because if/when you go peeping tom, we can nail you. You know you will, it's just a matter of time.

Yup..the predicted avalanche has commenced.

 

[candycorn]

Ok. The avalanche option.

How does it get from the store to your home?

Bingo. You have to have insurance, registration of some sort, license tags....

1. Delivery.
2. You leave the firearm in its original packaging until you get it home.
3. Temporary dealer registration.

I mean, come on. So many ways to make it work.

As long as you carry liability for when/if your kid takes the gun and smokes 26 kids.... I’m with you.

And when you no longer have children in the house, you don't need insurance.

Sure you do. If/when you go all Zimmerman/Loughner/Oswald/Root/Whitman/Kelley/Mandalay Bay Guy. Most folks don’t wreck their cars...but we force them to carry insurance. We should do the same with guns.

Firearm ownership is not a right... dumbass

Hmmm

 

[candycorn]

Ok. The avalanche option.

How does it get from the store to your home?

Bingo. You have to have insurance, registration of some sort, license tags....

1. Delivery.
2. You leave the firearm in its original packaging until you get it home.
3. Temporary dealer registration.

I mean, come on. So many ways to make it work.

As long as you carry liability for when/if your kid takes the gun and smokes 26 kids.... I’m with you.

And when you no longer have children in the house, you don't need insurance.

Sure you do. If/when you go all Zimmerman/Loughner/Oswald/Root/Whitman/Kelley/Mandalay Bay Guy. Most folks don’t wreck their cars...but we force them to carry insurance. We should do the same with guns.

GFY with that. That is an infringement.

It wax his idea to treat guns like cars so GFY

 

[candycorn]

No amount of frivolous gun control laws will save a single soul… Fact

Actual gun laws do work pretty well everywhere they are tried in the macro.

 

[Rustic]

No amount of frivolous gun control laws will save a single soul… Fact

Actual gun laws do work pretty well everywhere they are tried in the macro.

The vast majority of violent crime in this country is in progressive controlled urban areas with extremely strict gun control laws, by repeat offenders.
We have no criminal control in this country obviously… Frivolous gun control laws obviously do not work

 

[hadit]

Ok. The avalanche option.

How does it get from the store to your home?

Bingo. You have to have insurance, registration of some sort, license tags....

1. Delivery.
2. You leave the firearm in its original packaging until you get it home.
3. Temporary dealer registration.

I mean, come on. So many ways to make it work.

As long as you carry liability for when/if your kid takes the gun and smokes 26 kids.... I’m with you.

And when you no longer have children in the house, you don't need insurance.

But we don't force them to carry insurance unless they take their cars out on the roads. Basically, again, you're treating every citizen as a potential criminal before they do anything wrong. Using that logic, you should have your children registered with the state and every house be subject to regular inspections, because you are likely to go all child abuser. Every house should also be inspected regularly because if/when you go drug dealer, we need to be able to spot the pot plants you're growing. Binoculars should be registered and licensed and equipped with a GPS tracker because if/when you go peeping tom, we can nail you. You know you will, it's just a matter of time.

Yup..the predicted avalanche has commenced.

And why not? That's what you're advocating, treating every person as a potential criminal. Your language, "if/when", remember? You're taking the approach that every gun owner just needs a small provocation to become a mass murderer. That's ridiculous, and I'm illustrating how ridiculous it is.

Here's the bottom line. I don't think you're serious about any of this. I think that if we enacted every measure you've mentioned in this thread, you would not be satisfied, but would insist on ever more restrictive measures until it is practically impossible to own a gun. That is why gun owners resist these measures, because they don't trust your intentions and are rightly concerned that they are merely steps toward total confiscation and banning.

 

[hadit]

1. Delivery.
2. You leave the firearm in its original packaging until you get it home.
3. Temporary dealer registration.

I mean, come on. So many ways to make it work.

As long as you carry liability for when/if your kid takes the gun and smokes 26 kids.... I’m with you.

And when you no longer have children in the house, you don't need insurance.

Sure you do. If/when you go all Zimmerman/Loughner/Oswald/Root/Whitman/Kelley/Mandalay Bay Guy. Most folks don’t wreck their cars...but we force them to carry insurance. We should do the same with guns.

GFY with that. That is an infringement.

It wax his idea to treat guns like cars so GFY

Actually, no. I said that society accepts deaths as an acceptable cost to get something desirable, and as an illustration pointed out that we accept tens of thousands of deaths every year just so we can drive fast. You then said that we take all sorts of measures to make cars safe, intimating that you think we should do the same thing with guns, and the race was on.

 

[candycorn]

1. Delivery.
2. You leave the firearm in its original packaging until you get it home.
3. Temporary dealer registration.

I mean, come on. So many ways to make it work.

As long as you carry liability for when/if your kid takes the gun and smokes 26 kids.... I’m with you.

And when you no longer have children in the house, you don't need insurance.

But we don't force them to carry insurance unless they take their cars out on the roads. Basically, again, you're treating every citizen as a potential criminal before they do anything wrong. Using that logic, you should have your children registered with the state and every house be subject to regular inspections, because you are likely to go all child abuser. Every house should also be inspected regularly because if/when you go drug dealer, we need to be able to spot the pot plants you're growing. Binoculars should be registered and licensed and equipped with a GPS tracker because if/when you go peeping tom, we can nail you. You know you will, it's just a matter of time.

Yup..the predicted avalanche has commenced.

And why not? That's what you're advocating, treating every person as a potential criminal. Your language, "if/when", remember? You're taking the approach that every gun owner just needs a small provocation to become a mass murderer. That's ridiculous, and I'm illustrating how ridiculous it is.

Here's the bottom line. I don't think you're serious about any of this. I think that if we enacted every measure you've mentioned in this thread, you would not be satisfied, but would insist on ever more restrictive measures until it is practically impossible to own a gun. That is why gun owners resist these measures, because they don't trust your intentions and are rightly concerned that they are merely steps toward total confiscation and banning.

Liability insurance is treating someone like a criminal?

 

[candycorn]

As long as you carry liability for when/if your kid takes the gun and smokes 26 kids.... I’m with you.

And when you no longer have children in the house, you don't need insurance.

Sure you do. If/when you go all Zimmerman/Loughner/Oswald/Root/Whitman/Kelley/Mandalay Bay Guy. Most folks don’t wreck their cars...but we force them to carry insurance. We should do the same with guns.

GFY with that. That is an infringement.

It wax his idea to treat guns like cars so GFY

Actually, no. I said that society accepts deaths as an acceptable cost to get something desirable, and as an illustration pointed out that we accept tens of thousands of deaths every year just so we can drive fast. You then said that we take all sorts of measures to make cars safe, intimating that you think we should do the same thing with guns, and the race was on.

And you didn’t disagree.

 

[hadit]

As long as you carry liability for when/if your kid takes the gun and smokes 26 kids.... I’m with you.

And when you no longer have children in the house, you don't need insurance.

But we don't force them to carry insurance unless they take their cars out on the roads. Basically, again, you're treating every citizen as a potential criminal before they do anything wrong. Using that logic, you should have your children registered with the state and every house be subject to regular inspections, because you are likely to go all child abuser. Every house should also be inspected regularly because if/when you go drug dealer, we need to be able to spot the pot plants you're growing. Binoculars should be registered and licensed and equipped with a GPS tracker because if/when you go peeping tom, we can nail you. You know you will, it's just a matter of time.

Yup..the predicted avalanche has commenced.

And why not? That's what you're advocating, treating every person as a potential criminal. Your language, "if/when", remember? You're taking the approach that every gun owner just needs a small provocation to become a mass murderer. That's ridiculous, and I'm illustrating how ridiculous it is.

Here's the bottom line. I don't think you're serious about any of this. I think that if we enacted every measure you've mentioned in this thread, you would not be satisfied, but would insist on ever more restrictive measures until it is practically impossible to own a gun. That is why gun owners resist these measures, because they don't trust your intentions and are rightly concerned that they are merely steps toward total confiscation and banning.

Liability insurance is treating someone like a criminal?

Declaring that it is necessary for "if/when" someone uses your weapon to kill innocent people is. Context, remember?

 

[hadit]

And when you no longer have children in the house, you don't need insurance.

Sure you do. If/when you go all Zimmerman/Loughner/Oswald/Root/Whitman/Kelley/Mandalay Bay Guy. Most folks don’t wreck their cars...but we force them to carry insurance. We should do the same with guns.

GFY with that. That is an infringement.

It wax his idea to treat guns like cars so GFY

Actually, no. I said that society accepts deaths as an acceptable cost to get something desirable, and as an illustration pointed out that we accept tens of thousands of deaths every year just so we can drive fast. You then said that we take all sorts of measures to make cars safe, intimating that you think we should do the same thing with guns, and the race was on.

And you didn’t disagree.

We were having a discussion, exploring the idea. It's pretty much an intellectual exercise only, because the 2nd Amendment is there.

 

[candycorn]

And when you no longer have children in the house, you don't need insurance.

But we don't force them to carry insurance unless they take their cars out on the roads. Basically, again, you're treating every citizen as a potential criminal before they do anything wrong. Using that logic, you should have your children registered with the state and every house be subject to regular inspections, because you are likely to go all child abuser. Every house should also be inspected regularly because if/when you go drug dealer, we need to be able to spot the pot plants you're growing. Binoculars should be registered and licensed and equipped with a GPS tracker because if/when you go peeping tom, we can nail you. You know you will, it's just a matter of time.

Yup..the predicted avalanche has commenced.

And why not? That's what you're advocating, treating every person as a potential criminal. Your language, "if/when", remember? You're taking the approach that every gun owner just needs a small provocation to become a mass murderer. That's ridiculous, and I'm illustrating how ridiculous it is.

Here's the bottom line. I don't think you're serious about any of this. I think that if we enacted every measure you've mentioned in this thread, you would not be satisfied, but would insist on ever more restrictive measures until it is practically impossible to own a gun. That is why gun owners resist these measures, because they don't trust your intentions and are rightly concerned that they are merely steps toward total confiscation and banning.

Liability insurance is treating someone like a criminal?

Declaring that it is necessary for "if/when" someone uses your weapon to kill innocent people is. Context, remember?

Uhh..that’s the nature of liability insurance. All insurance in fact.

 

[candycorn]

Sure you do. If/when you go all Zimmerman/Loughner/Oswald/Root/Whitman/Kelley/Mandalay Bay Guy. Most folks don’t wreck their cars...but we force them to carry insurance. We should do the same with guns.

GFY with that. That is an infringement.

It wax his idea to treat guns like cars so GFY

Actually, no. I said that society accepts deaths as an acceptable cost to get something desirable, and as an illustration pointed out that we accept tens of thousands of deaths every year just so we can drive fast. You then said that we take all sorts of measures to make cars safe, intimating that you think we should do the same thing with guns, and the race was on.

And you didn’t disagree.

We were having a discussion, exploring the idea. It's pretty much an intellectual exercise only, because the 2nd Amendment is there.

It’s okay. Mary backed off when she saw it was your idea

 

[hadit]

But we don't force them to carry insurance unless they take their cars out on the roads. Basically, again, you're treating every citizen as a potential criminal before they do anything wrong. Using that logic, you should have your children registered with the state and every house be subject to regular inspections, because you are likely to go all child abuser. Every house should also be inspected regularly because if/when you go drug dealer, we need to be able to spot the pot plants you're growing. Binoculars should be registered and licensed and equipped with a GPS tracker because if/when you go peeping tom, we can nail you. You know you will, it's just a matter of time.

Yup..the predicted avalanche has commenced.

And why not? That's what you're advocating, treating every person as a potential criminal. Your language, "if/when", remember? You're taking the approach that every gun owner just needs a small provocation to become a mass murderer. That's ridiculous, and I'm illustrating how ridiculous it is.

Here's the bottom line. I don't think you're serious about any of this. I think that if we enacted every measure you've mentioned in this thread, you would not be satisfied, but would insist on ever more restrictive measures until it is practically impossible to own a gun. That is why gun owners resist these measures, because they don't trust your intentions and are rightly concerned that they are merely steps toward total confiscation and banning.

Liability insurance is treating someone like a criminal?

Declaring that it is necessary for "if/when" someone uses your weapon to kill innocent people is. Context, remember?

Uhh..that’s the nature of liability insurance. All insurance in fact.

I notice that you did not deny that your ultimate goal is to totally disarm the populace.

 

[hadit]

GFY with that. That is an infringement.

It wax his idea to treat guns like cars so GFY

Actually, no. I said that society accepts deaths as an acceptable cost to get something desirable, and as an illustration pointed out that we accept tens of thousands of deaths every year just so we can drive fast. You then said that we take all sorts of measures to make cars safe, intimating that you think we should do the same thing with guns, and the race was on.

And you didn’t disagree.

We were having a discussion, exploring the idea. It's pretty much an intellectual exercise only, because the 2nd Amendment is there.

It’s okay. Mary backed off when she saw it was your idea

And you want to treat guns like cars. That's not my idea.

 

[candycorn]

Yup..the predicted avalanche has commenced.

And why not? That's what you're advocating, treating every person as a potential criminal. Your language, "if/when", remember? You're taking the approach that every gun owner just needs a small provocation to become a mass murderer. That's ridiculous, and I'm illustrating how ridiculous it is.

Here's the bottom line. I don't think you're serious about any of this. I think that if we enacted every measure you've mentioned in this thread, you would not be satisfied, but would insist on ever more restrictive measures until it is practically impossible to own a gun. That is why gun owners resist these measures, because they don't trust your intentions and are rightly concerned that they are merely steps toward total confiscation and banning.

Liability insurance is treating someone like a criminal?

Declaring that it is necessary for "if/when" someone uses your weapon to kill innocent people is. Context, remember?

Uhh..that’s the nature of liability insurance. All insurance in fact.

I notice that you did not deny that your ultimate goal is to totally disarm the populace.

I do deny that.
I’m not remotely in favor of that.

I just think the following.

If you’re a mother in Santa Fe, Texas and you get a call that your kid has been murdered by a gun, the purchaser of that gun must have some means to compensate you. Funerals are $20K and that is for starters.

The same goes for all victims of gun violence.

If you get the same call from the police and your kid was killed in a car wreck, there is a compensation mechanism in place at least. This, AFTER we have regulated loads of safety standards into the cars and to the roads they drive on as well.

 

[Cellblock2429]

A guy gets pissed in Paris Texas, he goes out and buys a gun at any of the dozens of stores that sell them within a mile of his house and kills whoever pissed him off.

A guy gets pissed in Paris France, he can't buy a gun because nobody sells them. He gets over it and everybody wakes up alive tomorrow.

The same scenario plays out 10,000 times a year (in different localities of course). Except while our guy in Paris Texas is killing someone, thousands of pissed off dudes across the face of the globe remain just that; pissed off. They don't become murderers.

/——/ You’re just pulling crapola out of your ass and posting it as fact. Post the London assaults with knives-

 

[candycorn]

It wax his idea to treat guns like cars so GFY

Actually, no. I said that society accepts deaths as an acceptable cost to get something desirable, and as an illustration pointed out that we accept tens of thousands of deaths every year just so we can drive fast. You then said that we take all sorts of measures to make cars safe, intimating that you think we should do the same thing with guns, and the race was on.

And you didn’t disagree.

We were having a discussion, exploring the idea. It's pretty much an intellectual exercise only, because the 2nd Amendment is there.

It’s okay. Mary backed off when she saw it was your idea

And you want to treat guns like cars. That's not my idea.

It was your idea to compare the two. Not mine. I,however, agree.