Laws for the Lowest Common Denominator

[Desperado]

People are screaming for more gun control laws. Why?
There are at least 80 million gun owners in America with a estimated total of 258 million guns but there are many people here that would take these legal guns from these people who have committed no crime. Why because a lone mentally deficient person went crazy. Do these people even care why this mental midget went off the deep end?
No, they are more concerned about removing all legal guns from people who have committed no crime. They want to write laws based on the lowest common denominator,
They figure that even if only one mentally deficient person goes berserk that is reason enough to ban all weapons from all people regardless.
Honestly, these people that want to punish the masses are scarier than the mental midget with the gun.

For those of you that are interested there are some great facts here: http://gunowners.org/fs0404.htm

 

[Old Rocks]

20 dead kids today, how many next time? Do we need a society flooded with firearms? Does your right to be armed as if you were going to war supercede the right of my child to live?

Everytime we have an outrage like this, the immediate reaction of the gun nuts is to cry for more guns. Well, we have more and more guns, and more and more outrages like this occuring now.

 

[Desperado]

20 dead kids today, how many next time? Do we need a society flooded with firearms? Does your right to be armed as if you were going to war supercede the right of my child to live?

Everytime we have an outrage like this, the immediate reaction of the gun nuts is to cry for more guns. Well, we have more and more guns, and more and more outrages like this occuring now.

Does your right to be armed as if you were going to war supercede the right of my child to live? Seriously, going just a bit overboard here.
The two are not connected.

Try to inform yourself:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/267721-harvard-gun-study.html

 

[freedombecki]

They forget about having a government like King George III wailing on colonial workers rather than helping them politically. Their desire to be a people valued for their contribution to the realm was just noise to him. They grew tired of the one-way relationship so much so that they rebelled and formed a gov't that would allow them some say-so.

We get in trouble when the pendulum swings too far one way and too far the other between control and autonomy. It seems to be the nature of the republic.

Keeping people able to throw off bad government by having equal fire is generally good, but some turn guns on just the folks, and that is the price society pays for freedom. Someone is always not going to appreciate a free society due to mental defect. It's a pity.

 

[gkjpalmer]

34 people dead in the usa every day from gun related crime.
181 incidents at schools involving multiple casualties and deaths since Columbine.

No one is saying they want to stop proper gun use or ownership, its the gun abuse that needs to stop.

No one can control or regulate a person who decides to shoot someone, however, guns, the types and the munitions capacity can. Regulated does not mean no longer available.

The NRA wants gun owners to think that "regulate" means take away your gun away so you can no longer hunt, target shoot, or keep a gun so you can feel like you are protecting yourself.

The truth is, as long as you believe that regulate means that, gun industry profit which is what the NRA really cares about will continue to pour into their pockets at the cost of say...20 five year old kids and six teachers.

 

[bayoubill]

20 dead kids today, how many next time? Do we need a society flooded with firearms? Does your right to be armed as if you were going to war supercede the right of my child to live?

Everytime we have an outrage like this, the immediate reaction of the gun nuts is to cry for more guns. Well, we have more and more guns, and more and more outrages like this occuring now.

so... if you were an elected lawmaker, what would you propose...?

and, of your proposals, how would they have prevented this and other such tragedies...?


not trying to knock you here... I'm just curious to know exactly how you would change things from the way they are now...

 

[Old Rocks]

20 dead kids today, how many next time? Do we need a society flooded with firearms? Does your right to be armed as if you were going to war supercede the right of my child to live?

Everytime we have an outrage like this, the immediate reaction of the gun nuts is to cry for more guns. Well, we have more and more guns, and more and more outrages like this occuring now.

Does your right to be armed as if you were going to war supercede the right of my child to live? Seriously, going just a bit overboard here.
The two are not connected.

Try to inform yourself:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/267721-harvard-gun-study.html

No, what I said is exactly spot on. I am sure that 20 sets of parents would tell you that. And some parents here in Oregon, also.

And you stupid study did not note that the kill rate in the European nations is less than 1/4 of what it is here.

http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime/Homicide_statistics2012.xls

 

[gkjpalmer]

I would invite any anti gun regulation supporter to provide historical data on the number of times and incidents in 280 years where the government of the United States turned their weapons on their citizenry. There will of course be Ruby Ridge, perhaps Waco and of course Kent State and perhaps a few other law enforcement operations gone wrong.

But the government has no record of shooting up kindagartners.

King George? Man oh man...you really have to stretch that issue to connect with this problem.

 

[Old Rocks]

20 dead kids today, how many next time? Do we need a society flooded with firearms? Does your right to be armed as if you were going to war supercede the right of my child to live?

Everytime we have an outrage like this, the immediate reaction of the gun nuts is to cry for more guns. Well, we have more and more guns, and more and more outrages like this occuring now.

so... if you were an elected lawmaker, what would you propose...?

and, of your proposals, how would they have prevented this and other such tragedies...?


not trying to knock you here... I'm just curious to know exactly how you would change things from the way they are now...

OK.

First, in depth background checks for anyone buying a gun of any type.

Second, same rules for assault weopons as are presently in place for fully automatic weopons.

Third. Clip and magazine capacity in rifles and handguns limited to six.

Fourth. Nationwide laws concerning accountability for your guns. You store your guns irresponsibly, and someone commits a crime with that gun, you own the crime.

Fifth. Get the current assault rifles off the street. You own one of these, and wish to legally keep it, you pass the tests for owning such a weopon. If you fail to, and are found to be in possession of one of these weopons outside of your home, the weopon is confiscated and destroyed, and you spend six months as the guest of the the government.

The NRA created this current situation, it is time for sane Citizens to fix the situation.

 

[bayoubill]

34 people dead in the usa every day from gun related crime.
181 incidents at schools involving multiple casualties and deaths since Columbine.

No one is saying they want to stop proper gun use or ownership, its the gun abuse that needs to stop.

No one can control or regulate a person who decides to shoot someone, however, guns, the types and the munitions capacity can. Regulated does not mean no longer available.

The NRA wants gun owners to think that "regulate" means take away your gun away so you can no longer hunt, target shoot, or keep a gun so you can feel like you are protecting yourself.

The truth is, as long as you believe that regulate means that, gun industry profit which is what the NRA really cares about will continue to pour into their pockets at the cost of say...20 five year old kids and six teachers.

You obviously don't know jack shit about the NRA and the gun industry...

relative to other manufacturing sectors, the gun industry is tiny... and their profit margin is no more than the average for businesses in America...

and, while gun-manufacturing companies may contribute a small portion of their profits to the NRA, the NRA is not fueled by such contributions, but rather by membership dues and contributions from their 4 million members...

 

[Desperado]

No, what I said is exactly spot on. I am sure that 20 sets of parents would tell you that. And some parents here in Oregon, also.

Im sure in your mind it does sound spot on. The reality of it though is that you want to punish 80 million gun owners in the US for the acts of a mental midget.
That makes you sound more paranoid than anything else.

Remember:

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid

 

[Old Rocks]

They forget about having a government like King George III wailing on colonial workers rather than helping them politically. Their desire to be a people valued for their contribution to the realm was just noise to him. They grew tired of the one-way relationship so much so that they rebelled and formed a gov't that would allow them some say-so.

We get in trouble when the pendulum swings too far one way and too far the other between control and autonomy. It seems to be the nature of the republic.

Keeping people able to throw off bad government by having equal fire is generally good, but some turn guns on just the folks, and that is the price society pays for freedom. Someone is always not going to appreciate a free society due to mental defect. It's a pity.

Equal fire power? Are you truly that stupid? You are going to take on an Apache with an AR 15?

No, what we have seen in the past few years is not an acceptable price for the insanity that the NRA and people like you push. We are going to take away the ability for the crazies to have easy access to huge firepower.

 

[Old Rocks]

No, what I said is exactly spot on. I am sure that 20 sets of parents would tell you that. And some parents here in Oregon, also.

Im sure in your mind it does sound spot on. The reality of it though is that you want to punish 80 million gun owners in the US for the acts of a mental midget.
That makes you sound more paranoid than anything else.

Remember:

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid

Dumb fuck. I have hunting guns. I have owned guns since I was 12, and that is for more than 50 years. I do not own war weopons, and will never do so. I can and have defended myself adaquetly with regular hunting guns.

It is you crazies that insist on having vast arsenals of war weopons, who either go over the edge yourselves, or give access to your guns to someone who does so, that live in fear. It is time to hold those who have flooded this nation with firearms accountable for the results of that.

 

[Old Rocks]

34 people dead in the usa every day from gun related crime.
181 incidents at schools involving multiple casualties and deaths since Columbine.

No one is saying they want to stop proper gun use or ownership, its the gun abuse that needs to stop.

No one can control or regulate a person who decides to shoot someone, however, guns, the types and the munitions capacity can. Regulated does not mean no longer available.

The NRA wants gun owners to think that "regulate" means take away your gun away so you can no longer hunt, target shoot, or keep a gun so you can feel like you are protecting yourself.

The truth is, as long as you believe that regulate means that, gun industry profit which is what the NRA really cares about will continue to pour into their pockets at the cost of say...20 five year old kids and six teachers.

You obviously don't know jack shit about the NRA and the gun industry...

relative to other manufacturing sectors, the gun industry is tiny... and their profit margin is no more than the average for businesses in America...

and, while gun-manufacturing companies may contribute a small portion of their profits to the NRA, the NRA is not fueled by such contributions, but rather by membership dues and contributions from their 4 million members...

Perhaps we should institute a special tax on those members to cover the costs of the funerals of victims of gun violence in the US.

 

[thanatos144]

20 dead kids today, how many next time? Do we need a society flooded with firearms? Does your right to be armed as if you were going to war supercede the right of my child to live?

Everytime we have an outrage like this, the immediate reaction of the gun nuts is to cry for more guns. Well, we have more and more guns, and more and more outrages like this occuring now.

How many abortions happen a year?

 

[bayoubill]

34 people dead in the usa every day from gun related crime.
181 incidents at schools involving multiple casualties and deaths since Columbine.

No one is saying they want to stop proper gun use or ownership, its the gun abuse that needs to stop.

No one can control or regulate a person who decides to shoot someone, however, guns, the types and the munitions capacity can. Regulated does not mean no longer available.

The NRA wants gun owners to think that "regulate" means take away your gun away so you can no longer hunt, target shoot, or keep a gun so you can feel like you are protecting yourself.

The truth is, as long as you believe that regulate means that, gun industry profit which is what the NRA really cares about will continue to pour into their pockets at the cost of say...20 five year old kids and six teachers.

You obviously don't know jack shit about the NRA and the gun industry...

relative to other manufacturing sectors, the gun industry is tiny... and their profit margin is no more than the average for businesses in America...

and, while gun-manufacturing companies may contribute a small portion of their profits to the NRA, the NRA is not fueled by such contributions, but rather by membership dues and contributions from their 4 million members...

Perhaps we should institute a special tax on those members to cover the costs of the funerals of victims of gun violence in the US.

and after the guns are taken away from law-abiding citizens, perhaps we should institute a special tax on those folks who pushed for the disarmament... to cover the costs of the funerals of law-abiding citizens who were no longer able to adequately protect themselves from non-law-abiding persons...

 

[Merchant_of_Meh]

I personally don't believe guns are the problem. The people that use them are the problem.

We have exams for people who want to drive cars and fly planes, which are equally as dangerous as guns....and yet guys like this are afforded easy access to everything they need to do what they did. Why is that?

Why is America able to track anyone on the face of the earth who we view as a threat to our security as a nation, and yet we can't even develop a system to prevent or if that fails, track mentally unstable people.

Taking away guns is not the answer. Taking away the ease by which guys like Lanza obtain these guns is what needs to happen.

 

[bayoubill]

I personally don't believe guns are the problem. The people that use them are the problem.

We have exams for people who want to drive cars and fly planes, which are equally as dangerous as guns....and yet guys like this are afforded easy access to everything they need to do what they did. Why is that?

Why is America able to track anyone on the face of the earth who we view as a threat to our security as a nation, and yet we can't even develop a system to prevent or if that fails, track mentally unstable people.

Taking away guns is not the answer. Taking away the ease by which guys like Lanza obtain these guns is what needs to happen.

As I understand it, Lanza stole the guns from his mother... so what you're proposing wouldn't have prevented him from shooting up the school...

 

[gkjpalmer]

Yep....members of the NRA pay dues...what a great deal for the gun Industry....their lobbyists are paid for by some one else. But wait, the majority of NRA MEMBERS see a cause for some gun regulation.

Who does the NRA represent?

Understand one thing....if assault weapons and mega clips are legal to distribute and sell to anyone here in the USA, there is justification for their manufacture here. But there is a much bigger global market as well, where profit taking is very lucrative and less viewable.

I am an AARP member and pay dues, and there are a lot more of us than recorded NRA members...but how does the NRA manage to be so much more powerful legislativly? Cash, lots of it.

 

[Desperado]

Dumb fuck. I have hunting guns. I have owned guns since I was 12, and that is for more than 50 years. I do not own war weopons, and will never do so. I can and have defended myself adaquetly with regular hunting guns.

It is you crazies that insist on having vast arsenals of war weopons, who either go over the edge yourselves, or give access to your guns to someone who does so, that live in fear. It is time to hold those who have flooded this nation with firearms accountable for the results of that.

How do you describe "war weopons"? Is that your code for Semi-Automatic?
So are you proposing that civilians can only own revolvers and bolt action rifles?

"War Weapons" to me are fully automatic. Since Automatic weapons are very regulated and very restricted in the US, I don't think our definitions are the same.