Gun free zone

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why do you guys keep trying to make Zimmerman into a hero?

Because Zimmerman is representative of the ‘conservative as a victim’ mentality.

Conservatives see Zimmerman as unjustly accused of being a racist solely because Martin was black, racism conservatives perceive as a contrivance of the left.

It plays to the conservative myth of the ‘liberal bias’ media’s portrayal of Zimmerman as a racist in an effort to advance the ‘liberal agenda.’

It plays to the conservative hatred of black pundits such as Al Sharpton making accusations of racism to advance their political agenda.

It plays to the conservative perception of a threat to gun rights and the right to defend oneself, where armed citizens might refrain from using a firearm for fear of being accused of being a racist or arrested after defending oneself.

Consequently to conservatives, Zimmerman is their hero, their Everyman subject to an unfair accusation of racism, racism conservatives simply believe doesn’t exist.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why do you guys keep trying to make Zimmerman into a hero?

Because Zimmerman is representative of the ‘conservative as a victim’ mentality.

Conservatives see Zimmerman as unjustly accused of being a racist solely because Martin was black, racism conservatives perceive as a contrivance of the left.

It plays to the conservative myth of the ‘liberal bias’ media’s portrayal of Zimmerman as a racist in an effort to advance the ‘liberal agenda.’

It plays to the conservative hatred of black pundits such as Al Sharpton making accusations of racism to advance their political agenda.

It plays to the conservative perception of a threat to gun rights and the right to defend oneself, where armed citizens might refrain from using a firearm for fear of being accused of being a racist or arrested after defending oneself.

Consequently to conservatives, Zimmerman is their hero, their Everyman subject to an unfair accusation of racism, racism conservatives simply believe doesn’t exist.

No zimmerman is an American citizen that was being lynched by the anti gun people before any facts were released or a trail was started.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Thank God for obama with out his help Mexico would be way behind us ain't that right Joe?

YOu mean that he actually tried to stop the flow down to Mexico, and was shot down by the gun nutters who insisted that the Mexicans weren't getting guns from here?

Wrong. He was increasing the number of weapons into Mexico.

 

[Katzndogz]

That's what I love about gun control....people think criminals will follow the law....LOLOLOLOLOL

Well, no, the problem with gun control is, we've never really tried it. A few cities have, but kind of meaningless to have gun control in Chicago when you can set up a gun shop in Cicero IL which is right next door.

Other countries have tried meaningful gun control, and it works just fine.

Let's look, shall we? Number of murders with firearms in advanced countries.

Murders with firearms statistics - countries compared - NationMaster Crime

# 4 United States: 9,369
# 11 Germany: 269
# 14 Canada: 144
# 28 Japan: 47
= 39 United Kingdom: 14

Works fine?

"Taxi driver kills 12 in U.K. rampage"

Taxi driver kills 12 in U.K. rampage - The Globe and Mail

Criminals and Sickos will always be able get a gun


.

Why isn't mexico on that list? mexico has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world.

Gun politics in Mexico have resulted in some of the strictest gun laws in the world. It is in many ways similar to the United Kingdom, except with much more severe prison terms for even the smallest gun law violations.

Generally, citizens are restricted by law to:
pistolas (handguns) of .380 Auto or .38 Special revolvers or smaller (.357 Magnum, .357 SIG, and 9x19mm Parabellum or larger are restricted)[4][5]
escopetas (shotguns) of 12 gauge or smaller, with barrels longer than 25 inches, and
rifles (rifles) bolt action and semi-auto.
Handguns in calibers bigger than those mentioned above are forbidden from private ownership without a federal license and restrictions similar to the U.S. National Firearms Act (NFA).
Gun politics in Mexico - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How is that working out?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Thank God for obama with out his help Mexico would be way behind us ain't that right Joe?

YOu mean that he actually tried to stop the flow down to Mexico, and was shot down by the gun nutters who insisted that the Mexicans weren't getting guns from here?

Wrong. He was increasing the number of weapons into Mexico.

Joe has already had a rough tie, be gentle

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Well, no, the problem with gun control is, we've never really tried it. A few cities have, but kind of meaningless to have gun control in Chicago when you can set up a gun shop in Cicero IL which is right next door.

Other countries have tried meaningful gun control, and it works just fine.

Let's look, shall we? Number of murders with firearms in advanced countries.

Murders with firearms statistics - countries compared - NationMaster Crime

# 4 United States: 9,369
# 11 Germany: 269
# 14 Canada: 144
# 28 Japan: 47
= 39 United Kingdom: 14

Works fine?

"Taxi driver kills 12 in U.K. rampage"

Taxi driver kills 12 in U.K. rampage - The Globe and Mail

Criminals and Sickos will always be able get a gun


.

Why isn't mexico on that list? mexico has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world.

Gun politics in Mexico have resulted in some of the strictest gun laws in the world. It is in many ways similar to the United Kingdom, except with much more severe prison terms for even the smallest gun law violations.

Generally, citizens are restricted by law to:
pistolas (handguns) of .380 Auto or .38 Special revolvers or smaller (.357 Magnum, .357 SIG, and 9x19mm Parabellum or larger are restricted)[4][5]
escopetas (shotguns) of 12 gauge or smaller, with barrels longer than 25 inches, and
rifles (rifles) bolt action and semi-auto.
Handguns in calibers bigger than those mentioned above are forbidden from private ownership without a federal license and restrictions similar to the U.S. National Firearms Act (NFA).
Gun politics in Mexico - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How is that working out?

Mexico is on the list.

Gun Violence homicides statistics - countries compared - Nation Master

 

[JoeB131]

Dumbass do you know you can't get an automatic weapon at walmart?
Step 1-You must find a dealer with a Class III FFL as they're the only ones who may deal in NFA weapons (machine guns, silencers, etc.) and select a weapon that was registered in the NFA registry before 1986 (this only applies for full-auto, silencers and AOW can be brand new)

Step 2-You must make your application to both the federal gov't and your local chief law enforcement officer, both must approve.

Step 3-Pay the $200 tax stamp

Again, the guy was able to buy an AR-15 retail, which can be very easily converted. I think they made the ones manufactured after 1986 a little harder to convert, but it can still be done.

This is against the law, of course, and you shouldn't do it. So is spraying down an audience of moviegoers...

You said he bought an automatic weapon now you say he converted an AR15 will you make up your mind what he did?

I don't make the big distinction that you do. Even a semi-Automatic lets you fire a lot of lead downrange pretty quickly...

He was able to kill 12 and wound 59, that's a lot of ordenance fired in a short amount of time, and he never should have had access to it.

 

[Katzndogz]

Works fine?

"Taxi driver kills 12 in U.K. rampage"

Taxi driver kills 12 in U.K. rampage - The Globe and Mail

Criminals and Sickos will always be able get a gun


.

Why isn't mexico on that list? mexico has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world.

Gun politics in Mexico have resulted in some of the strictest gun laws in the world. It is in many ways similar to the United Kingdom, except with much more severe prison terms for even the smallest gun law violations.

Generally, citizens are restricted by law to:
pistolas (handguns) of .380 Auto or .38 Special revolvers or smaller (.357 Magnum, .357 SIG, and 9x19mm Parabellum or larger are restricted)[4][5]
escopetas (shotguns) of 12 gauge or smaller, with barrels longer than 25 inches, and
rifles (rifles) bolt action and semi-auto.
Handguns in calibers bigger than those mentioned above are forbidden from private ownership without a federal license and restrictions similar to the U.S. National Firearms Act (NFA).
Gun politics in Mexico - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How is that working out?

Mexico is on the list.

Gun Violence homicides statistics - countries compared - Nation Master

mexico was not on the list shown here for the purpose of showing us how restrictive gun laws result in less gun violence.

 

[JoeB131]

Thank God for obama with out his help Mexico would be way behind us ain't that right Joe?

YOu mean that he actually tried to stop the flow down to Mexico, and was shot down by the gun nutters who insisted that the Mexicans weren't getting guns from here?

Wrong. He was increasing the number of weapons into Mexico.

2000 Guns flow into Mexico from the US every year. That's over 700,000 a year.

Fast and Furious tried to track about 700 of them.

The Mexicans have been on our case for years about this, but the NRA and it's cohorts just won't hear of it.

 

[Katzndogz]

Again, the guy was able to buy an AR-15 retail, which can be very easily converted. I think they made the ones manufactured after 1986 a little harder to convert, but it can still be done.

This is against the law, of course, and you shouldn't do it. So is spraying down an audience of moviegoers...

You said he bought an automatic weapon now you say he converted an AR15 will you make up your mind what he did?

I don't make the big distinction that you do. Even a semi-Automatic lets you fire a lot of lead downrange pretty quickly...

He was able to kill 12 and wound 59, that's a lot of ordenance fired in a short amount of time, and he never should have had access to it.

Then he would have used something else, maybe a bomb, and killed even more people.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Comparing the UK with the U.S. you will find somethings shocking that the UK leads Ameica in

NationMaster - Crime stats: United Kingdom vs United States

 

[JoeB131]

If ONE U.S. Marine had been sitting in that theater with a weapon things probably would have turned out differently!

Um, yeah, probably you'd have had more fatalities, but Holmes probably wouldn't have been one of them.

The guy had body armor on. He spent a long time thinking about what he planned to do.

Now, give the marines credit, they are very good at what they do, but the fact is, even in war zones they make mistakes. A crowded room with lots of smoke and panicking people and bullets flying everywhere...

This shows how much the NRA has really poisoned this discussion when you see a case where someone having a gun was a bad thing, absolutely, and the answer is, "Well, we just need more guns in that situation."

Crazy.

The guy was thinking about what would happen after he was done killing everyone. He was worried about the cops.....not innocent bystanders. I think he wanted to spend the rest of his life in prison rather than being shot to death.

Or he wanted to live long enough to kill more people.

Or maybe he really thinks he is The Joker.

Point is, more guns would not have made that situation better..

 

[JoeB131]

Comparing the UK with the U.S. you will find somethings shocking that the UK leads Ameica in

NationMaster - Crime stats: United Kingdom vs United States

Yawn, you've spammed this thread with enough lame attempts to make a point, haven't you?

Fact is, the UK doesn't have these kinds of problems, we have them all the time. And when someone suggests, "Hey, maybe we should pass a law to make it harder for crazy people to buy guns", you guys man the ramparts.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Again, the guy was able to buy an AR-15 retail, which can be very easily converted. I think they made the ones manufactured after 1986 a little harder to convert, but it can still be done.

This is against the law, of course, and you shouldn't do it. So is spraying down an audience of moviegoers...

You said he bought an automatic weapon now you say he converted an AR15 will you make up your mind what he did?

I don't make the big distinction that you do. Even a semi-Automatic lets you fire a lot of lead downrange pretty quickly...

He was able to kill 12 and wound 59, that's a lot of ordenance fired in a short amount of time, and he never should have had access to it.

You specified automatic weapons. Did he have one yes or no?

Hey Joe, who's going to PAY for all those interviews with employers, schools and family? There must be a couple thousand dollars worth of interviewing there.

How about we give everyone a thorough mental evaluation? We could send them to the local mental health clinic, have them interviewed to determine just how crazy they are. I mean, we KNOW they're crazy, they want to buy a gun!

Yeah, that'll work!

I have no problem adding that to the license application fee. Make the gun nuts pay to prove they aren't nuts. Works for me.

Before I got hired, my company gave me a drug test, they called my former employer, they called my three references, the made me provide two forms of ID, and they did a criminal background and credit check on me to make sure I was who I said I was.

When I worked for the Census Bureau part time in 2010, they did all the above less the drug test, but they took my fingerprints and asked for a copy of my DD214.

Strikes me we should do at least as much to make sure we aren't giving automatic weapons to crazy people.

 

[mudwhistle]

Um, yeah, probably you'd have had more fatalities, but Holmes probably wouldn't have been one of them.

The guy had body armor on. He spent a long time thinking about what he planned to do.

Now, give the marines credit, they are very good at what they do, but the fact is, even in war zones they make mistakes. A crowded room with lots of smoke and panicking people and bullets flying everywhere...

This shows how much the NRA has really poisoned this discussion when you see a case where someone having a gun was a bad thing, absolutely, and the answer is, "Well, we just need more guns in that situation."

Crazy.

The guy was thinking about what would happen after he was done killing everyone. He was worried about the cops.....not innocent bystanders. I think he wanted to spend the rest of his life in prison rather than being shot to death.

Or he wanted to live long enough to kill more people.

Or maybe he really thinks he is The Joker.

Point is, more guns would not have made that situation better..

Maybe not. Then he most likely would have picked a softer target.

They always do.

They don't like it when people shoot back.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Comparing the UK with the U.S. you will find somethings shocking that the UK leads Ameica in

NationMaster - Crime stats: United Kingdom vs United States

Yawn, you've spammed this thread with enough lame attempts to make a point, haven't you?

Fact is, the UK doesn't have these kinds of problems, we have them all the time. And when someone suggests, "Hey, maybe we should pass a law to make it harder for crazy people to buy guns", you guys man the ramparts.

You posted the link I'm just using it.

 

[GuyPinestra]

YOu mean that he actually tried to stop the flow down to Mexico, and was shot down by the gun nutters who insisted that the Mexicans weren't getting guns from here?

Wrong. He was increasing the number of weapons into Mexico.

2000 Guns flow into Mexico from the US every year. That's over 700,000 a year.

Fast and Furious tried to track about 700 of them.

The Mexicans have been on our case for years about this, but the NRA and it's cohorts just won't hear of it.

Your ignorance is ASTOUNDING!

Fast and Furious allowed well over 2,000 guns to be walked into Mexico. Guns that the gun shops TRIED to stop, but ATF told them to allow the purchases.

Now please show us a source for your claim of 700,000 guns a year...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Hey Joe do you realize a revolver functions the same way as a semi automatic does minus the magazine?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The fundamental problem with ‘gun control’ is its reliance of a presumption of guilt, that if one wishes to own a firearm, he’s some sort of a potential danger or threat.

Consequently, we’ll subject a potential gun owner to background checks, waiting periods, and perhaps compel him to obtain some sort of ‘license’ and be subject to training before allowing him to take possession of his firearm.

Granted, the individual right to own a handgun is not a fundamental right such as speech, but this sort of a preemption of a right is Constitutionally troubling nonetheless, as it can be argued a right delayed is a right denied.

Indeed, a person planning on giving a speech isn’t subject to a background check to make sure he isn’t going to yell ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater; he isn’t required to wait a given period of time before giving his speech; and he isn’t required to get a license to give a speech, or take speech lessons as a condition of giving his speech.

Ultimately ‘gun control’ laws are followed only by those who are going to obey the law in any event, and in order to be Constitutionally valid, must not manifest an undue burden on the exercising one’s Second Amendment rights.

As is the case with many troubling issues which face our Nation, there is no ‘quick fix’ to the problem of gun violence, and greater restrictions on the acquisition of firearms is clearly no solution.

 

[GuyPinestra]

The fundamental problem with ‘gun control’ is its reliance of a presumption of guilt, that if one wishes to own a firearm, he’s some sort of a potential danger or threat.

Consequently, we’ll subject a potential gun owner to background checks, waiting periods, and perhaps compel him to obtain some sort of ‘license’ and be subject to training before allowing him to take possession of his firearm.

Granted, the individual right to own a handgun is not a fundamental right such as speech, but this sort of a preemption of a right is Constitutionally troubling nonetheless, as it can be argued a right delayed is a right denied.

Indeed, a person planning on giving a speech isn’t subject to a background check to make sure he isn’t going to yell ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater; he isn’t required to wait a given period of time before giving his speech; and he isn’t required to get a license to give a speech, or take speech lessons as a condition of giving his speech.

Ultimately ‘gun control’ laws are followed only by those who are going to obey the law in any event, and in order to be Constitutionally valid, must not manifest an undue burden on the exercising one’s Second Amendment rights.

As is the case with many troubling issues which face our Nation, there is no ‘quick fix’ to the problem of gun violence, and greater restrictions on the acquisition of firearms is clearly no solution.

We seldom agree Clayton, but in this instance...