Keeping guns from criminals - liberals, what is your plan?

[candycorn]

Every time there's a shooting, liberals run around saying this proves we need more gun laws. I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals every time you say you want more gun laws.

In particular, address given that drugs are illegal, and yet any parent knows any kid can get as much pot as they want. There are millions of guns in the US, millions more in the world. So don't just say more laws, explain how more laws are going to actually work.

So, there have been 7 shootings killing at least 10 people in the last decade. The only thing you've achieved so far is that no one was shooting back.

It's a misnomer to believe that if gun laws had been non-existent that there would have been shooting back. Likely not in Columbine, Sandyhook, VA Tech, etc...

As for the question

It's a very long term proposition but the only way to effectively attack the problem is to begin to attack the supply and you do that by decreasing the demand.


Tax the holy crap out of firearms and ammunition. Pass laws making it a requirement that gun owners carry liabiltiy insurance per weapon--very expensive.

Also, make all gun crimes federal crimes and steep minimum sentences for armed robbery. You use a gun, you're going away for 20 years; no parole, no time off for good behavior, soyanara.

Basically make firearms the equivalent of cigarettes.

As stated it's a long-term proposition but the sooner we get started...

 

[Bern80]

I know, you just decline to say what you want. Gun control laws work. When that's said repubs will bring up murders in Australia as PROOF gun laws don't work. Like gun control will prevent it All.

So, explain how gun control laws don't work.

Same strawman, I've never argued eliminating gun laws would prevent all murders, you pulled that out of your ass.

This is the incredibly low bar liberals paint for yourselves. For your own proposals, that you want them to work is sufficient to justify them. For me, you assign that if I'm not going to give you your way, my proposal has to be perfection. It has to work 100% of the time. You've proven nothing but what a vacant intellect you are.

You know its bad when they avoid Even an open ended question: Show me how gun control laws don't work.

They cant, but they are Anti so they have to be Anti- gun control even when they cant explain it

Okay, I'll take a crack at it. First I'm gonna need a little help. What do you define as 'working' gun laws?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Same strawman, I've never argued eliminating gun laws would prevent all murders, you pulled that out of your ass.

This is the incredibly low bar liberals paint for yourselves. For your own proposals, that you want them to work is sufficient to justify them. For me, you assign that if I'm not going to give you your way, my proposal has to be perfection. It has to work 100% of the time. You've proven nothing but what a vacant intellect you are.

You know its bad when they avoid Even an open ended question: Show me how gun control laws don't work.

They cant, but they are Anti so they have to be Anti- gun control even when they cant explain it

Okay, I'll take a crack at it. First I'm gonna need a little help. What do you define as 'working' gun laws?

Making a difference to curb gun violence

 

[Steven_R]

You can't have guns in DC or Chicago (without being juiced in, natch), but gun deaths are regular there.

Now, if the solution to gun violence is to say someone can't have guns, how can there possibly be gun violence in those cities?

 

[Missourian]

We keep getting the same canned answers spoon fed to the posters by their anti-gun masters.

These guys went through background checks.

Cho, Joker, Loughner, Alexis.

Every one of them PASS a NICS federal background check.

Registration??? WTF?

We KNOW who bought the guns. We know because they were background checked.

We have Closed Caption running around waving her hands above her head yelling "I don't know what to do, BUT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING!!!"

That's the absolutely WORST solution.

I'm no liberal, but I'll tell you my plan.

Background check for private sales of handguns and semi-automatic centerfire long guns.

(I realize you gun grabbers likely have no idea what this means...look it up and educate yourselves.)

But NOT the same background check protocol as new purchases.

I should be able to call in myself give a persons name and get a background check and a confirmation number...I'll be responsible for the information gathering and the record keeping.

I'll get a signed bill of sale that I sold John Q. Smith of 1234 Frame St. my Ruger SR9C serial number 1234567890 on such and such date and here is the confirmation number of the background check.

If I choose, I can turn that information over to my local Sheriffs department and be absolved of the burden of record keeping or I can keep in in a file locked up with my firearms.

If the gun is used in a crime and the police come looking for it, there is a paper trail.

But you aren't required to give the serial number of the firearm as part of the background check.


Everyone's main concerns are addressed.

Handguns, the major contributor to gun crime and gun violence are being background checked, and legal gun owners can still trade hunting rifles and shotguns without government looking over their shoulders.

 

[Bern80]

Every time there's a shooting, liberals run around saying this proves we need more gun laws. I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals every time you say you want more gun laws.

In particular, address given that drugs are illegal, and yet any parent knows any kid can get as much pot as they want. There are millions of guns in the US, millions more in the world. So don't just say more laws, explain how more laws are going to actually work.

So, there have been 7 shootings killing at least 10 people in the last decade. The only thing you've achieved so far is that no one was shooting back.

It's a misnomer to believe that if gun laws had been non-existent that there would have been shooting back. Likely not in Columbine, Sandyhook, VA Tech, etc...

As for the question

It's a very long term proposition but the only way to effectively attack the problem is to begin to attack the supply and you do that by decreasing the demand.


Tax the holy crap out of firearms and ammunition. Pass laws making it a requirement that gun owners carry liabiltiy insurance per weapon--very expensive.

Also, make all gun crimes federal crimes and steep minimum sentences for armed robbery. You use a gun, you're going away for 20 years; no parole, no time off for good behavior, soyanara.

Basically make firearms the equivalent of cigarettes.

As stated it's a long-term proposition but the sooner we get started...

This is absolutely idiotic. With no other object would you propsose such moronic measures. Do you realize the violence that does occur with firearms occurs with a mere fraction of the number of firearms that are out there. I don't know if it's perception or what, but you seem to believe that most guns and gun owners are violent people when that simply isn't the case. The vast majority of guns are never used against another human being and the vast majority of gun owners aren't criminals. You have not right to treat them as such.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Every time there's a shooting, liberals run around saying this proves we need more gun laws. I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals every time you say you want more gun laws.

In particular, address given that drugs are illegal, and yet any parent knows any kid can get as much pot as they want. There are millions of guns in the US, millions more in the world. So don't just say more laws, explain how more laws are going to actually work.

So, there have been 7 shootings killing at least 10 people in the last decade. The only thing you've achieved so far is that no one was shooting back.

It's a misnomer to believe that if gun laws had been non-existent that there would have been shooting back. Likely not in Columbine, Sandyhook, VA Tech, etc...

As for the question

It's a very long term proposition but the only way to effectively attack the problem is to begin to attack the supply and you do that by decreasing the demand.


Tax the holy crap out of firearms and ammunition. Pass laws making it a requirement that gun owners carry liabiltiy insurance per weapon--very expensive.

Also, make all gun crimes federal crimes and steep minimum sentences for armed robbery. You use a gun, you're going away for 20 years; no parole, no time off for good behavior, soyanara.

Basically make firearms the equivalent of cigarettes.

As stated it's a long-term proposition but the sooner we get started...

That's just incredibly stupid.

Deal with the fucking criminals not everyone else.

Mandatory minimum 15 years in prison for ANY crime (felony) committed while in posession of a firearm. Life if the weapon is stolen.

 

[Bern80]

You know its bad when they avoid Even an open ended question: Show me how gun control laws don't work.

They cant, but they are Anti so they have to be Anti- gun control even when they cant explain it

Okay, I'll take a crack at it. First I'm gonna need a little help. What do you define as 'working' gun laws?

Making a difference to curb gun violence

That's not very specific. Does a person defending themselves constitute violence? How are you going to tie decreased violence to a law as opposed to other factors?

 

[Missourian]

Every time there's a shooting, liberals run around saying this proves we need more gun laws. I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals every time you say you want more gun laws.

In particular, address given that drugs are illegal, and yet any parent knows any kid can get as much pot as they want. There are millions of guns in the US, millions more in the world. So don't just say more laws, explain how more laws are going to actually work.

So, there have been 7 shootings killing at least 10 people in the last decade. The only thing you've achieved so far is that no one was shooting back.

It's a misnomer to believe that if gun laws had been non-existent that there would have been shooting back. Likely not in Columbine, Sandyhook, VA Tech, etc...

As for the question

It's a very long term proposition but the only way to effectively attack the problem is to begin to attack the supply and you do that by decreasing the demand.


Tax the holy crap out of firearms and ammunition. Pass laws making it a requirement that gun owners carry liabiltiy insurance per weapon--very expensive.

Also, make all gun crimes federal crimes and steep minimum sentences for armed robbery. You use a gun, you're going away for 20 years; no parole, no time off for good behavior, soyanara.

Basically make firearms the equivalent of cigarettes.

As stated it's a long-term proposition but the sooner we get started...

So poor people can't defend themselves but rich people can.

Great plan.

Ever hear of a poll tax?

It was a tax that disenfranchised poor voter by making damn sure they couldn't afford to exercise their constitutional right.

This would be the Second Amendment equivalent.

It wouldn't stand up to constitutional scrutiny for 30 seconds.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Okay, I'll take a crack at it. First I'm gonna need a little help. What do you define as 'working' gun laws?

Making a difference to curb gun violence

That's not very specific. Does a person defending themselves constitute violence? How are you going to tie decreased violence to a law as opposed to other factors?

It doesn't have to be specific. Less bullets going into peoples bodies

 

[Steven_R]

Making a difference to curb gun violence

That's not very specific. Does a person defending themselves constitute violence? How are you going to tie decreased violence to a law as opposed to other factors?

It doesn't have to be specific. Less bullets going into peoples bodies

It's already illegal to put bullets into bodies outside of very limited and specific circumstances.

 

[ClosedCaption]

That's not very specific. Does a person defending themselves constitute violence? How are you going to tie decreased violence to a law as opposed to other factors?

It doesn't have to be specific. Less bullets going into peoples bodies

It's already illegal to put bullets into bodies outside of very limited and specific circumstances.

I know, thanks.

 

[Steven_R]

It's already illegal to shoot people. Is one more law going to magically fix this? We'll make it extra-illegal? Maybe we can put people who use guns on Double Secret Probation just to be sure.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It's already illegal to shoot people. Is one more law going to magically fix this? We'll make it extra-illegal? Maybe we can put people who use guns on Double Secret Probation just to be sure.

I offered a solution on the previous page but everyone is ignoring it.

 

[ClosedCaption]

It's already illegal to shoot people. Is one more law going to magically fix this? We'll make it extra-illegal? Maybe we can put people who use guns on Double Secret Probation just to be sure.

See Kaz...Let me just requite what you said

Same strawman, I've never argued eliminating gun laws would prevent all murders, you pulled that out of your ass.
This is the incredibly low bar liberals paint for yourselves. For your own proposals, that you want them to work is sufficient to justify them. For me, you assign that if I'm not going to give you your way, my proposal has to be perfection. It has to work 100% of the time. You've proven nothing but what a vacant intellect you are.

Here's Steven making the same argument. I promise you that I am not Steven and didn't make him say this. Soooo, uhhhh

 

[Missourian]

Every time there's a shooting, liberals run around saying this proves we need more gun laws. I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals every time you say you want more gun laws.

In particular, address given that drugs are illegal, and yet any parent knows any kid can get as much pot as they want. There are millions of guns in the US, millions more in the world. So don't just say more laws, explain how more laws are going to actually work.

So, there have been 7 shootings killing at least 10 people in the last decade. The only thing you've achieved so far is that no one was shooting back.

It's a misnomer to believe that if gun laws had been non-existent that there would have been shooting back. Likely not in Columbine, Sandyhook, VA Tech, etc...

As for the question

It's a very long term proposition but the only way to effectively attack the problem is to begin to attack the supply and you do that by decreasing the demand.


Tax the holy crap out of firearms and ammunition. Pass laws making it a requirement that gun owners carry liabiltiy insurance per weapon--very expensive.

Also, make all gun crimes federal crimes and steep minimum sentences for armed robbery. You use a gun, you're going away for 20 years; no parole, no time off for good behavior, soyanara.

Basically make firearms the equivalent of cigarettes.

As stated it's a long-term proposition but the sooner we get started...

That's just incredibly stupid.

Deal with the fucking criminals not everyone else.

Mandatory minimum 15 years in prison for ANY crime (felony) committed while in posession of a firearm. Life if the weapon is stolen.

The gun grabbers don't actually care about criminals using guns.

If they did, this would be the route they would choose.

But instead they would say "Look at all these black people in prison, this isn't fair."

Pretty much the same thing they say today.

The gun grabbers don't trust LEGAL gun owners with guns.

They don't want to own a gun, and they don't want anyone else to own one either.

That's the bottom line.

 

[ClosedCaption]

It's already illegal to shoot people. Is one more law going to magically fix this? We'll make it extra-illegal? Maybe we can put people who use guns on Double Secret Probation just to be sure.

I offered a solution on the previous page but everyone is ignoring it.

Your "solution" is only a solution to how to lock more americans up

 

[Steven_R]

It's already illegal to shoot people. Is one more law going to magically fix this? We'll make it extra-illegal? Maybe we can put people who use guns on Double Secret Probation just to be sure.

I offered a solution on the previous page but everyone is ignoring it.

Your "solution" is only a solution to how to lock more americans up

I'm perfectly okay with locking up violent criminals.

 

[ClosedCaption]

It's a misnomer to believe that if gun laws had been non-existent that there would have been shooting back. Likely not in Columbine, Sandyhook, VA Tech, etc...

As for the question

It's a very long term proposition but the only way to effectively attack the problem is to begin to attack the supply and you do that by decreasing the demand.


Tax the holy crap out of firearms and ammunition. Pass laws making it a requirement that gun owners carry liabiltiy insurance per weapon--very expensive.

Also, make all gun crimes federal crimes and steep minimum sentences for armed robbery. You use a gun, you're going away for 20 years; no parole, no time off for good behavior, soyanara.

Basically make firearms the equivalent of cigarettes.

As stated it's a long-term proposition but the sooner we get started...

That's just incredibly stupid.

Deal with the fucking criminals not everyone else.

Mandatory minimum 15 years in prison for ANY crime (felony) committed while in posession of a firearm. Life if the weapon is stolen.

The gun grabbers don't actually care about criminals using guns.

If they did, this would be the route they would choose.

But instead they would say "Look at all these black people in prison, this isn't fair."

Pretty much the same thing they say today.

The gun grabbers don't trust LEGAL gun owners with guns.

They don't want to own a gun, and they don't want anyone else to own one either.

That's the bottom line.

You're right. There is only one way to skin a cat. Yep

 

[Missourian]

It's already illegal to shoot people. Is one more law going to magically fix this? We'll make it extra-illegal? Maybe we can put people who use guns on Double Secret Probation just to be sure.

I offered a solution on the previous page but everyone is ignoring it.

Your "solution" is only a solution to how to lock more americans up

^See, called that one...less than two minutes.