It's time!

[Wry Catcher]

We already have sensible gun regulations. What you want is banning and/or confiscation of several classes of common firearms designed for civillian use. What you also crave are useless regulations that will do nothing to deter criminals, and just make it harder for law "abiding citizens to purchase the weapons they want.

At least be honest about it, gun grabber.

At least be honest??? What is this:

No civilian needs a high velocity weapon able to fire 30 or more rounds as quickly as they can pull the trigger"!

You're damn right I want these weapons out of the hands of civilians - how many mass killers were law abiding before they killed others? I really wonder, as fucked up - and I mean that clinically - some of you gun huggers are if you shouldn't be examined to see if you're psychologically fit to own any firearm.

And it sounds like you also need an examination believeing a ban is really going to stop the criminals from getting their hands on these guns. You really want to ban these firearms...make sure you get some good body gear for protection.

The last phrase in your post suggests you already believe that some gun huggers are criminal.

Notice the number of citizens already turning in their guns for a $100.00 gift card?

There is no need to confiscate weapons from law abiding citizens; and the criminals who would not turn in their weapon have no fear of prosecution, simply never use the gun and keep it at home. If your life or that of your family require such a weapon, use it and live with the lesser consequence.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The Second Amendment made sense when ratified in 1791; then no police departments existed, no 911 telephone service existed and most citizens lived in rural communities. A musket firing a ball may have protected a community from an oppressive government, but today small arms cannot stand up to any 21st military and it is beyond foolish to believe they can stand up to ours.

No one needs a high velocity weapon able to fire 30 or more rounds as quickly as they can pull the trigger; such a firearm was inconceivable to those in the 18th century.

It's time to pass sensible gun regulations.

Right. Why not. Lets take it back to the 18th century. Good idea. Well why not...it seems our gov't is doing that to our economy anyways...so why not.

I don't see the connection between the Obama Administration and reactionary policies taking us back to the 18th Century; a more plausible theory is that the Plutocrats in government and generally in the GOP want to take us back to the Gilded Age.

 

[martybegan]

At least be honest??? What is this:

No civilian needs a high velocity weapon able to fire 30 or more rounds as quickly as they can pull the trigger"!

You're damn right I want these weapons out of the hands of civilians - how many mass killers were law abiding before they killed others? I really wonder, as fucked up - and I mean that clinically - some of you gun huggers are if you shouldn't be examined to see if you're psychologically fit to own any firearm.

And it sounds like you also need an examination believeing a ban is really going to stop the criminals from getting their hands on these guns. You really want to ban these firearms...make sure you get some good body gear for protection.

The last phrase in your post suggests you already believe that some gun huggers are criminal.

Notice the number of citizens already turning in their guns for a $100.00 gift card?

There is no need to confiscate weapons from law abiding citizens; and the criminals who would not turn in their weapon have no fear of prosecution, simply never use the gun and keep it at home. If your life or that of your family require such a weapon, use it and live with the lesser consequence.

Im sorry but using a constitutional right to defend myself or posess a weapon protected by then 2nd amendment should not open me up to criminal prosecution.

As for the gun turn in, its more progressive feel good hokum.

It all goes back to fucking over your fellow citizen for people like you.

 

[Goodoledays]

Most Americans would agree - except for the fringe - that some people in society must have the right to keep and bear arms infringed. Felons, those with serious mental illnesses; those who use and abuse drugs and alcohol, domestic violence offenders, etc.

Those who commit atrocious acts of violence, mass murder as we all saw yesterday, do not necessarily show up on LE Radar and thusly are not flagged in background checks.

We need to come up with pragmatic solutions to a recurring problem and cannot do so unless both sides come to the table; a goal of reaching a compromise able to limit the ability of a crazed shooter to inflict the amount of carnage which we saw yesterday would seem palatable to all; all but the aforementioned fringe.

We never hear ideas to prevent such tragic events as happened yesterday from one side of the debate. They generally post over and over about their rights but rarely acknowledge the rights of the victims of gun violence (that includes those who died, their families and friends, first responders, journalists, and the general public who watched yesterday's crime unfold on TV).

Getting back to your stated intent of this thread, what pragmatic solutions have you decided might be workable?

1, Each state would be wise to license every adult who wants to own, possess, or have in their possession and control a firearm. Said license should be suspended or revoked for cause and be valid only for in the state of issue unless other states choose otherwise.

2. Upon revocation for cause all weapons in the possession of the licensee can be confiscated and criminal penalties for subsequent possession of a firearm shall include a mandatory 10 prison sentence and lifetime supervised release (probation or parole).

3. Anyone convicted of giving, selling, loaning or otherwise providing a firearm to an unlicensed person shall, upon conviction, be sufficient cause for the revocation of their license.

4. All licensed gun owners shall be required to insure each firearm they own for liability, and are civilly liable for any misuse of that gun which harms another. Any firearm not properly secured which results in the death or injury of another shall also be charged with a criminal penalty and upon conviction have their license revoked and be placed on probation to verify all guns are properly disposed of and any restitution to the victim(s) is paid in full.

No one convicted of a crime of violence or driving under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol shall be able to secure a firearm license until they have completed a one year drinking/drug impaired driver program; domestic abusers will have their license revoked. Any current licensed person shall have their license suspended or revoked for such convictions.

No one detained and civilly committed as a danger to themselves or others shall be licensed, and any licensee shall have their license revoked and their guns confiscated.

You know that may be a good start. It even looks like many of the legitimate gun owners would go for it.

Now why don't you try and get the nitwit criminals to go by this. You really think its going to do any good? Just remember they don't go by our laws. They make their own.

 

[Wry Catcher]

And it sounds like you also need an examination believeing a ban is really going to stop the criminals from getting their hands on these guns. You really want to ban these firearms...make sure you get some good body gear for protection.

The last phrase in your post suggests you already believe that some gun huggers are criminal.

Notice the number of citizens already turning in their guns for a $100.00 gift card?

There is no need to confiscate weapons from law abiding citizens; and the criminals who would not turn in their weapon have no fear of prosecution, simply never use the gun and keep it at home. If your life or that of your family require such a weapon, use it and live with the lesser consequence.

Im sorry but using a constitutional right to defend myself or posess a weapon protected by then 2nd amendment should not open me up to criminal prosecution.

As for the gun turn in, its more progressive feel good hokum.

It all goes back to fucking over your fellow citizen for people like you.

You're tone deaf Marty. Who got fucked over more, you are the last terrified six year old to die?

"What is practicable must often control what is pure theory. The habits of the governed often determine in a great degree what is practicable"
Thomas Jefferson, The Art of Power by Jon Meacham.

 

[martybegan]

The last phrase in your post suggests you already believe that some gun huggers are criminal.

Notice the number of citizens already turning in their guns for a $100.00 gift card?

There is no need to confiscate weapons from law abiding citizens; and the criminals who would not turn in their weapon have no fear of prosecution, simply never use the gun and keep it at home. If your life or that of your family require such a weapon, use it and live with the lesser consequence.

Im sorry but using a constitutional right to defend myself or posess a weapon protected by then 2nd amendment should not open me up to criminal prosecution.

As for the gun turn in, its more progressive feel good hokum.

It all goes back to fucking over your fellow citizen for people like you.

You're tone deaf Marty. Who got fucked over more, you are the last terrified six year old to die?

"What is practicable must often control what is pure theory. The habits of the governed often determine in a great degree what is practicable"
Thomas Jefferson, The Art of Power by Jon Meacham.

So fucking me over somehow fixes the kid being dead?

I'm not tone deaf, you are facist asshole. Deal with it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Getting back to your stated intent of this thread, what pragmatic solutions have you decided might be workable?

1, Each state would be wise to license every adult who wants to own, possess, or have in their possession and control a firearm. Said license should be suspended or revoked for cause and be valid only for in the state of issue unless other states choose otherwise.

2. Upon revocation for cause all weapons in the possession of the licensee can be confiscated and criminal penalties for subsequent possession of a firearm shall include a mandatory 10 prison sentence and lifetime supervised release (probation or parole).

3. Anyone convicted of giving, selling, loaning or otherwise providing a firearm to an unlicensed person shall, upon conviction, be sufficient cause for the revocation of their license.

4. All licensed gun owners shall be required to insure each firearm they own for liability, and are civilly liable for any misuse of that gun which harms another. Any firearm not properly secured which results in the death or injury of another shall also be charged with a criminal penalty and upon conviction have their license revoked and be placed on probation to verify all guns are properly disposed of and any restitution to the victim(s) is paid in full.

No one convicted of a crime of violence or driving under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol shall be able to secure a firearm license until they have completed a one year drinking/drug impaired driver program; domestic abusers will have their license revoked. Any current licensed person shall have their license suspended or revoked for such convictions.

No one detained and civilly committed as a danger to themselves or others shall be licensed, and any licensee shall have their license revoked and their guns confiscated.

You know that may be a good start. It even looks like many of the legitimate gun owners would go for it.

Now why don't you try and get the nitwit criminals to go by this. You really think its going to do any good? Just remember they don't go by our laws. They make their own.

Yes they do. So we should focus our attention very early in the game. Provide intensive services to those very young children who manifest behaviors similar to those of mass murders, violent criminals and such at a young age. Remember, the Child is the Father of the Man.

 

[Goodoledays]

At least be honest??? What is this:

No civilian needs a high velocity weapon able to fire 30 or more rounds as quickly as they can pull the trigger"!

You're damn right I want these weapons out of the hands of civilians - how many mass killers were law abiding before they killed others? I really wonder, as fucked up - and I mean that clinically - some of you gun huggers are if you shouldn't be examined to see if you're psychologically fit to own any firearm.

And it sounds like you also need an examination believeing a ban is really going to stop the criminals from getting their hands on these guns. You really want to ban these firearms...make sure you get some good body gear for protection.

The last phrase in your post suggests you already believe that some gun huggers are criminal.

Notice the number of citizens already turning in their guns for a $100.00 gift card?

There is no need to confiscate weapons from law abiding citizens; and the criminals who would not turn in their weapon have no fear of prosecution, simply never use the gun and keep it at home. If your life or that of your family require such a weapon, use it and live with the lesser consequence.

My last phrase is indicating you take the guns away from legitimate gun owners...you better watch out for the nuthead criminals out there that are still going to get their hands on them. Its not that hard for them. Just like drugs...they want them bad enough they will get them. So watch out.

 

[Goodoledays]

The Second Amendment made sense when ratified in 1791; then no police departments existed, no 911 telephone service existed and most citizens lived in rural communities. A musket firing a ball may have protected a community from an oppressive government, but today small arms cannot stand up to any 21st military and it is beyond foolish to believe they can stand up to ours.

No one needs a high velocity weapon able to fire 30 or more rounds as quickly as they can pull the trigger; such a firearm was inconceivable to those in the 18th century.

It's time to pass sensible gun regulations.

Right. Why not. Lets take it back to the 18th century. Good idea. Well why not...it seems our gov't is doing that to our economy anyways...so why not.

I don't see the connection between the Obama Administration and reactionary policies taking us back to the 18th Century; a more plausible theory is that the Plutocrats in government and generally in the GOP want to take us back to the Gilded Age.

Well its a shame. You lefties don't see hardly any connections when it comes to gov't. Your leader has you so blindsighted you just believe anything he says is the right way. You can't even see for yourself anymore. Its called being brainwashed.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The last phrase in your post suggests you already believe that some gun huggers are criminal.

Notice the number of citizens already turning in their guns for a $100.00 gift card?

There is no need to confiscate weapons from law abiding citizens; and the criminals who would not turn in their weapon have no fear of prosecution, simply never use the gun and keep it at home. If your life or that of your family require such a weapon, use it and live with the lesser consequence.

Im sorry but using a constitutional right to defend myself or posess a weapon protected by then 2nd amendment should not open me up to criminal prosecution.

As for the gun turn in, its more progressive feel good hokum.

It all goes back to fucking over your fellow citizen for people like you.

You're tone deaf Marty. Who got fucked over more, you are the last terrified six year old to die?

Nothing you have suggsted would have stopped that last killing, so what the fuck does one have to do with the other?

Jeebus, you are exploiting a tragedy to advance a cause that is effectively unrelated to stopping the tragedy in question.

Have you no shame at all?

 

[skookerasbil]

JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday, rejecting claims by America's top gun lobby that Israel serves as proof for its philosophy that the U.S. needs more weapons, not fewer.

"Far from the image of a heavily armed population where ordinary people have their own arsenals to repel attackers, Israel allows its people to acquire firearms only if they can prove their professions or places of residence put them in danger. The country relies on its security services, not armed citizens, to prevent terror attacks."

Israel rejects NRA's guns-in-schools claim - CBS News

I am constantly perplexed by Libtard Propaganda: Do they knowingly promote false or misleading information, or are they simply surrounded with "like-minded" individuals who never question the party line? This thread is just another example evading the relevant issue of armed guards at schools and focusing on irrelevant word-mincing about whether the primary purpose of Israeli security is to stop terrorists as opposed to crazed gunmen, and deceptively suggests that the NRA simply believes "the U.S. needs more weapons."

No, the thread was none of those things nor was it an effort to evade the issue of armed guards at schools.
1. Arming guards at every school in America is 1) very expensive; 2) loaded with risk and unless private schools are subsidized, puts them at risk.
2. A lone gunman is impossible to stop unless the armed guard is at the right spot at the right time, is equally armed and protected and most importantly cares not if s/he lives or dies.
3. Arming guards in the numbers needed is a great opportunity for gun makers, ammo suppliers, range masters and such to profit - those are whom the NRA wants to protect.
4. The GOP wants to privatize health care. First by gutting/repealing Obamacare and then by gutting Medicare, Medicaid and SSI. Yet, the NRA expects more treatment for mental health.
5. Bullets kill people, some are the targets and some are not - does anyone want a gun fight on a school campus pitting high velocity high capacity guns vis a vis other high velocity high capacity guns?

LMAO......."very expensive"......coming from a guy who is 100% behind tax money going to scam operations like Solyndra............1/2 a billion dollars worth by the way!!


Putting armed guards/cops in schools is a no-brainer..........except for the social engineering, intellectual, theres a solution to every societal problem, assholes on the left. ALL of them see confiscation of guns as a zero sum game. Very, very dangerous.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I am constantly perplexed by Libtard Propaganda: Do they knowingly promote false or misleading information, or are they simply surrounded with "like-minded" individuals who never question the party line? This thread is just another example evading the relevant issue of armed guards at schools and focusing on irrelevant word-mincing about whether the primary purpose of Israeli security is to stop terrorists as opposed to crazed gunmen, and deceptively suggests that the NRA simply believes "the U.S. needs more weapons."

No, the thread was none of those things nor was it an effort to evade the issue of armed guards at schools.
1. Arming guards at every school in America is 1) very expensive; 2) loaded with risk and unless private schools are subsidized, puts them at risk.
2. A lone gunman is impossible to stop unless the armed guard is at the right spot at the right time, is equally armed and protected and most importantly cares not if s/he lives or dies.
3. Arming guards in the numbers needed is a great opportunity for gun makers, ammo suppliers, range masters and such to profit - those are whom the NRA wants to protect.
4. The GOP wants to privatize health care. First by gutting/repealing Obamacare and then by gutting Medicare, Medicaid and SSI. Yet, the NRA expects more treatment for mental health.
5. Bullets kill people, some are the targets and some are not - does anyone want a gun fight on a school campus pitting high velocity high capacity guns vis a vis other high velocity high capacity guns?

LMAO......."very expensive"......coming from a guy who is 100% behind tax money going to scam operations like Solyndra............1/2 a billion dollars worth by the way!!


Putting armed guards/cops in schools is a no-brainer..........except for the social engineering, intellectual, theres a solution to every societal problem, assholes on the left. ALL of them see confiscation of guns as a zero sum game. Very, very dangerous.

I have no problem putting a police officer or deputy sheriff on a high school or middle school campus, but I have no illusions that would solve the issue at hand; if someone wants to go out with a bang and take a number of kids/faculty with him and be shot by a LEO and not with his own hand. The problem is a shooter with a 30-round magazine, a backup or two with a quick release button will outgun the the LEO; and, a non suicidal LEO will call for backup and be prudent until they arrive.

Why are all posts which mention banning all guns and confiscations posted by RW fear mongers. Oh yeah.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Most Americans would agree - except for the fringe - that some people in society must have the right to keep and bear arms infringed. Felons, those with serious mental illnesses; those who use and abuse drugs and alcohol, domestic violence offenders, etc.

Those who commit atrocious acts of violence, mass murder as we all saw yesterday, do not necessarily show up on LE Radar and thusly are not flagged in background checks.

We need to come up with pragmatic solutions to a recurring problem and cannot do so unless both sides come to the table; a goal of reaching a compromise able to limit the ability of a crazed shooter to inflict the amount of carnage which we saw yesterday would seem palatable to all; all but the aforementioned fringe.

We never hear ideas to prevent such tragic events as happened yesterday from one side of the debate. They generally post over and over about their rights but rarely acknowledge the rights of the victims of gun violence (that includes those who died, their families and friends, first responders, journalists, and the general public who watched yesterday's crime unfold on TV).

Looking back, and how many innocents people are slaughtered by guns in the hands of those who are mentally ill, suicidal or disaffected.