Gun Control - What's the Problem?

[Rustic]

Dude, enough with the photos... Like I tell my toddler... Use your words...
Centinel, Please elaborate... Because Congress can not make it illegal it is a bad idea? That doesn't make sense.

No trust in the federal government... Only a fool would.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So? No gangbangers are buying overpriced firearms at gun shows. In How many of these killing do the firearms come from gun shows??

This is an nonissue...

The only way to avoid a background check is to buy from a private seller. Gunshow or not. The claim of a "gunshow loophole" is a blatant lie told by the anti-liberty left in their pursuit to end civil rights.

 

[Slade3200]

Centinel, Please elaborate... Because Congress can not make it illegal it is a bad idea? That doesn't make sense.

Correct. If congress enacts laws for which it has no constitutional authority, then that's a bad idea.

I agree with that statement Centinel, but it is also a question of interpretation. As the 2nd allows us the right to bare arms it certainly does not say without regulation or restriction. It is a privilege and a huge responsibility to own a gun and it is up to us to decide who and how we allow to have one, especially in a society that has shown continued abuse and recklessness which has resulted in many deaths. Much like driving a car, we must be of age and pass a test verifying that we are responsible enough to handle that privilege. There are many auto deaths a year and we are continuously working to make that system as safe as possible. I'd hope for a similar effort with guns but there is so much resistance.

 

[Slade3200]

So? No gangbangers are buying overpriced firearms at gun shows. In How many of these killing do the firearms come from gun shows??

This is an nonissue...

The only way to avoid a background check is to buy from a private seller. Gunshow or not. The claim of a "gunshow loophole" is a blatant lie told by the anti-liberty left in their pursuit to end civil rights.

You can watch it straight from the horses mouth in the BBC news piece I posted earlier... I know its hard to take a break from Fox but i promise everything will be ok... Hannity will still be on later tonight.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

Only a blithering idiot would think that all military personnel would back a socialist asshole as commander-in-chief and go against the people.
Now go hide

Only a paranoid fanatic is preparing for the next civil war. I hope you got your bunker fully stocked, because as you stock your arsenal preparing for the war that will never come, the majority of us are trying to do things that actually make a difference.

What is with all the references to the war on drugs?? I don't see the relation, that is a completely different subject.

No, not really. Recreational narcotics have been against the law as long as I've been alive. Yet the people that want drugs get them. That's the relationship.

It's the same way with guns. If Democrats had their dream which is to make all guns illegal, then only the criminal and police would have guns because the criminals are not about to give their guns up.

Thanks for posting an intelligent argument and not just calling the Pres an asshat. I see the relationship between drugs and guns that you are talking about but the big difference is drugs are illegal and guns are not. When it comes to prescription meds there are ton of hoops you have jump through to get those, like seeing a doctor and getting a prescription. I just don't agree that Dems only want cops and criminals to have guns and even if that is the desire of some, that is not a realistic possibility and I don't see anybody rational leader proposing that. The measures that have been put on the table all make sense, but yet the pro-gunners fight tooth and nail against an invisible agenda of what they think will come in the future. If it is just about the issues proposed i'd think any responsible person, especially gun owners would support them. If not then please explain how they are harming your rights. I'm talking about closing the gun show loophole, improving background checks and the database etc...

You guys are still missing the whole point... Nobody is arguing that you can't have a gun!!!! You are defending that position but nobody is trying to take that away. Show me the legislation proposing that... There is none.

You say that making improvements to the purchase process won't prevent criminals from getting guns but you still don't explain why you think it is a bad idea???? Why are you fighting against actions that intend on securing that only responsible individuals are able to buy guns????

Probably because most guns used in crimes don't come from gun shows or are legally purchased. They are purchased through straw buyers and stolen guns available on the street. Unless it's a suicide/ murder, who would be stupid enough to buy a gun that could be traced back to them? Nobody.

So what your President proposes is a solution looking for a problem and not the other way around. Much of what DumBama suggested is already in play in states like California and New York where it's almost impossible to get a carry license. Guess what? It doesn't work.

 

[Rustic]

Centinel, Please elaborate... Because Congress can not make it illegal it is a bad idea? That doesn't make sense.

Correct. If congress enacts laws for which it has no constitutional authority, then that's a bad idea.

I agree with that statement Centinel, but it is also a question of interpretation. As the 2nd allows us the right to bare arms it certainly does not say without regulation or restriction. It is a privilege and a huge responsibility to own a gun and it is up to us to decide who and how we allow to have one, especially in a society that has shown continued abuse and recklessness which has resulted in many deaths. Much like driving a car, we must be of age and pass a test verifying that we are responsible enough to handle that privilege. There are many auto deaths a year and we are continuously working to make that system as safe as possible. I'd hope for a similar effort with guns but there is so much resistance.

Are you stupid in the head??
No one has an right to a car.
Firearms are an right.

 

[Rustic]

So? No gangbangers are buying overpriced firearms at gun shows. In How many of these killing do the firearms come from gun shows??

This is an nonissue...

The only way to avoid a background check is to buy from a private seller. Gunshow or not. The claim of a "gunshow loophole" is a blatant lie told by the anti-liberty left in their pursuit to end civil rights.

You can watch it straight from the horses mouth in the BBC news piece I posted earlier... I know its hard to take a break from Fox but i promise everything will be ok... Hannity will still be on later tonight.

Again, no gangbangers are buying overpriced firearms at gun shows.
There is no gun show loophole, it's a canard.

 

[Rustic]

 

[hjmick]

You guys are still missing the whole point... Nobody is arguing that you can't have a gun!!!! You are defending that position but nobody is trying to take that away. Show me the legislation proposing that... There is none.

You say that making improvements to the purchase process won't prevent criminals from getting guns but you still don't explain why you think it is a bad idea???? Why are you fighting against actions that intend on securing that only responsible individuals are able to buy guns????

Other than circumvent congress, what did Obama's recent executive actions do that will prevent future shootings like the ones he cited as his call to action? What will they do to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals?

Oh yeah... NOTHING.

So while I have no problem with the effects these executive orders will have, I take issue with his use of the executive orders to circumvent congress on this issue.


If I were a cynic, I'd think this was just a foot in a door President Obama hopes to pry open with more executive orders, more circumventing congress...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

Only a blithering idiot would think that all military personnel would back a socialist asshole as commander-in-chief and go against the people.
Now go hide

Only a paranoid fanatic is preparing for the next civil war. I hope you got your bunker fully stocked, because as you stock your arsenal preparing for the war that will never come, the majority of us are trying to do things that actually make a difference.

What is with all the references to the war on drugs?? I don't see the relation, that is a completely different subject.

No, not really. Recreational narcotics have been against the law as long as I've been alive. Yet the people that want drugs get them. That's the relationship.

It's the same way with guns. If Democrats had their dream which is to make all guns illegal, then only the criminal and police would have guns because the criminals are not about to give their guns up.

Thanks for posting an intelligent argument and not just calling the Pres an asshat. I see the relationship between drugs and guns that you are talking about but the big difference is drugs are illegal and guns are not. When it comes to prescription meds there are ton of hoops you have jump through to get those, like seeing a doctor and getting a prescription. I just don't agree that Dems only want cops and criminals to have guns and even if that is the desire of some, that is not a realistic possibility and I don't see anybody rational leader proposing that. The measures that have been put on the table all make sense, but yet the pro-gunners fight tooth and nail against an invisible agenda of what they think will come in the future. If it is just about the issues proposed i'd think any responsible person, especially gun owners would support them. If not then please explain how they are harming your rights. I'm talking about closing the gun show loophole, improving background checks and the database etc...

Well yes, recreational narcotics are illegal and we have an ever growing problem with narcotics in this country and our laws are not preventing anybody from scoring coke or heroin. That's the point. You think making laws against something is the panacea to this problem.

The reason Democrats never proposed making all guns illegal is because it would be struck down by the supreme court. That's for now. But if America keeps electing Democrat Presidents, an overturn of gun ownership might not be that far down the road once they get enough liberal judges to make that law of the land.

What you have to understand is that each party wants to expand their voting base. One of the largest voting bases for the Democrat party are victims. Democrats love victims and victims love Democrats.

By being able to disarm the public (or as much as they can) that gives the criminals the advantage. So when crime increases once again because people can no longer use firearms for protection, they become victims. Then we have BIG CRIME to deal with. And how do Democrats deal with big crime? The same way they deal with all big things like big corporations, big pharma, big banks, big tobacco: you need big government.

The bigger the government, the happier the Democrat. And this is why we need to stop this before it takes off like a race car.

 

[Rustic]

You guys are still missing the whole point... Nobody is arguing that you can't have a gun!!!! You are defending that position but nobody is trying to take that away. Show me the legislation proposing that... There is none.

You say that making improvements to the purchase process won't prevent criminals from getting guns but you still don't explain why you think it is a bad idea???? Why are you fighting against actions that intend on securing that only responsible individuals are able to buy guns????

Other than circumvent congress, what did Obama's recent executive actions do that will prevent future shootings like the ones he cited as his call to action? What will they do to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals?

Oh yeah... NOTHING.

So while I have no problem with the effects these executive orders will have, I take issue with his use of the executive orders to circumvent congress on this issue.


If I were a cynic, I'd think this was just a foot in a door President Obama hopes to pry open with more executive orders, more circumventing congress...

...and Barry can never be trusted, ever.

 

[Slade3200]

Centinel, Please elaborate... Because Congress can not make it illegal it is a bad idea? That doesn't make sense.

Correct. If congress enacts laws for which it has no constitutional authority, then that's a bad idea.

I agree with that statement Centinel, but it is also a question of interpretation. As the 2nd allows us the right to bare arms it certainly does not say without regulation or restriction. It is a privilege and a huge responsibility to own a gun and it is up to us to decide who and how we allow to have one, especially in a society that has shown continued abuse and recklessness which has resulted in many deaths. Much like driving a car, we must be of age and pass a test verifying that we are responsible enough to handle that privilege. There are many auto deaths a year and we are continuously working to make that system as safe as possible. I'd hope for a similar effort with guns but there is so much resistance.

Are you stupid in the head??
No one has an right to a car.
Firearms are an right.

Firearms are an right? Ok genius... So you do think a 5 year old has the right to take a gun to school? Do you think an ex-con fresh out of jail should be able to stroll into a gun store and buy a gun? How about the mentally disturbed? If you have any brain you'd say no to these loaded examples, but it validates the point that there are limits and restrictions that should be put in place. Now if you said yes to any of those examples i'd love to hear your rationale

 

[Rustic]

Centinel, Please elaborate... Because Congress can not make it illegal it is a bad idea? That doesn't make sense.

Correct. If congress enacts laws for which it has no constitutional authority, then that's a bad idea.

I agree with that statement Centinel, but it is also a question of interpretation. As the 2nd allows us the right to bare arms it certainly does not say without regulation or restriction. It is a privilege and a huge responsibility to own a gun and it is up to us to decide who and how we allow to have one, especially in a society that has shown continued abuse and recklessness which has resulted in many deaths. Much like driving a car, we must be of age and pass a test verifying that we are responsible enough to handle that privilege. There are many auto deaths a year and we are continuously working to make that system as safe as possible. I'd hope for a similar effort with guns but there is so much resistance.

Are you stupid in the head??
No one has an right to a car.
Firearms are an right.

Firearms are an right? Ok genius... So you do think a 5 year old has the right to take a gun to school? Do you think an ex-con fresh out of jail should be able to stroll into a gun store and buy a gun? How about the mentally disturbed? If you have any brain you'd say no to these loaded examples, but it validates the point that there are limits and restrictions that should be put in place. Now if you said yes to any of those examples i'd love to hear your rationale

Deflection noted...

 

[Flopper]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

It's gun control and and it comes from Obama. That's all conservatives need to know. The actual plan is irrelevant.

 

[80zephyr]

You guys are still missing the whole point... Nobody is arguing that you can't have a gun!!!! You are defending that position but nobody is trying to take that away. Show me the legislation proposing that... There is none.

You say that making improvements to the purchase process won't prevent criminals from getting guns but you still don't explain why you think it is a bad idea???? Why are you fighting against actions that intend on securing that only responsible individuals are able to buy guns????

Nope. You are missing the point. We have already seen hundreds of gun laws enacted, and every time they bleat that the next law will solve the problem.

Now, we both know this is bullshit so why are you defending the indefensible?

Mark

 

[Centinel]

I agree with that statement Centinel, but it is also a question of interpretation. As the 2nd allows us the right to bare arms it certainly does not say without regulation or restriction.

Regardless of what the 2nd says, congress has only a limited set of powers. These are listed in Article I, section 8. If you were to peruse these powers, you would not find any power that would enable congress to pass a law regulating or restricting firearms possession.

It would be a bad idea for congress to enact a law for which it has no constitutional authority.

 

[Rustic]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.



It's gun control and and it comes from Obama. That's all conservatives need to know. The actual plan is irrelevant.

 

[Rustic]

 

[80zephyr]

Centinel, Please elaborate... Because Congress can not make it illegal it is a bad idea? That doesn't make sense.

Correct. If congress enacts laws for which it has no constitutional authority, then that's a bad idea.

I agree with that statement Centinel, but it is also a question of interpretation. As the 2nd allows us the right to bare arms it certainly does not say without regulation or restriction. It is a privilege and a huge responsibility to own a gun and it is up to us to decide who and how we allow to have one, especially in a society that has shown continued abuse and recklessness which has resulted in many deaths. Much like driving a car, we must be of age and pass a test verifying that we are responsible enough to handle that privilege. There are many auto deaths a year and we are continuously working to make that system as safe as possible. I'd hope for a similar effort with guns but there is so much resistance.

Does "shall not be infringed" ring a bell?

Mark

 

[Slade3200]

Well yes, recreational narcotics are illegal and we have an ever growing problem with narcotics in this country and our laws are not preventing anybody from scoring coke or heroin. That's the point. You think making laws against something is the panacea to this problem.

The reason Democrats never proposed making all guns illegal is because it would be struck down by the supreme court. That's for now. But if America keeps electing Democrat Presidents, an overturn of gun ownership might not be that far down the road once they get enough liberal judges to make that law of the land.

What you have to understand is that each party wants to expand their voting base. One of the largest voting bases for the Democrat party are victims. Democrats love victims and victims love Democrats.

By being able to disarm the public (or as much as they can) that gives the criminals the advantage. So when crime increases once again because people can no longer use firearms for protection, they become victims. Then we have BIG CRIME to deal with. And how do Democrats deal with big crime? The same way they deal with all big things like big corporations, big pharma, big banks, big tobacco: you need big government.

The bigger the government, the happier the Democrat. And this is why we need to stop this before it takes off like a race car.

I am in no way in favor of Big Government, I think the smaller the better. I am in favor of a safer community and I think there are ways we can do that. The presidents proposals might make a small impact and if that is so then i'm all for supporting any kind of change that could save a life. I live in California and had no problem getting my gun license. I have no problem with anybody else going through the background check process like I did... In fact I would hope everybody does. If you could by a gun as easy as it is to buy a pack of gum, I think we'd be in a world of trouble. And although I'm fine with ones right to defend yourself against crime, I also think it is a bogus argument. The number of citizens who prevent a crime because they are armed pales in comparison to the accidents, or escalations that lead to death because there was a gun in the picture.