Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
By the way, Ray, your avatar tells me all I need to know about you and your character. You are definately part of the problem.
Yep, people that cherish the ability to protect themselves are a huge problem in this country.
So felons and the insane deserve an equal right to 'protect' themselves, with guns?
What does that have to do with anything I said?
By the way, Ray, your avatar tells me all I need to know about you and your character. You are definately part of the problem.
Yep, people that cherish the ability to protect themselves are a huge problem in this country.
So felons and the insane deserve an equal right to 'protect' themselves, with guns?
What does that have to do with anything I said?
It has to do with your opinion on gun rights. Answer the question.
By the way, Ray, your avatar tells me all I need to know about you and your character. You are definately part of the problem.
Yep, people that cherish the ability to protect themselves are a huge problem in this country.
So felons and the insane deserve an equal right to 'protect' themselves, with guns?
What does that have to do with anything I said?
It has to do with your opinion on gun rights. Answer the question.
I don't think that felons or mentally challenged people should have access to guns and neither did the Supreme Court. They ruled that yes, there can be restrictions in certain cases.
Our argument is not that these people should have firearms, our argument is that there is nothing you can really do to prevent it. Making it harder on law abiding citizens to obtain or keep firearms is not a solution. Plus the fact it's all political and not for the benefit of all.
Democrats want to put up as many hurdles as possible for all gun owners. If you don't believe me, look at what it takes to own or carry a firearm in a non-gun friendly state compared to a friendly gun state.
Yep, people that cherish the ability to protect themselves are a huge problem in this country.
So felons and the insane deserve an equal right to 'protect' themselves, with guns?
What does that have to do with anything I said?
It has to do with your opinion on gun rights. Answer the question.
I don't think that felons or mentally challenged people should have access to guns and neither did the Supreme Court. They ruled that yes, there can be restrictions in certain cases.
Our argument is not that these people should have firearms, our argument is that there is nothing you can really do to prevent it. Making it harder on law abiding citizens to obtain or keep firearms is not a solution. Plus the fact it's all political and not for the benefit of all.
Democrats want to put up as many hurdles as possible for all gun owners. If you don't believe me, look at what it takes to own or carry a firearm in a non-gun friendly state compared to a friendly gun state.
Why allow individuals to legally sell guns to felons and crazy people then?
I have put guns in gun shops with licensed gun dealers and sold guns on consignment. That insures all my guns are sold with background checks. Cost me a few dollars for the dealers commission, but I find it worth the expense. Maybe having all people selling their guns could be asked to do this.So felons and the insane deserve an equal right to 'protect' themselves, with guns?
What does that have to do with anything I said?
It has to do with your opinion on gun rights. Answer the question.
I don't think that felons or mentally challenged people should have access to guns and neither did the Supreme Court. They ruled that yes, there can be restrictions in certain cases.
Our argument is not that these people should have firearms, our argument is that there is nothing you can really do to prevent it. Making it harder on law abiding citizens to obtain or keep firearms is not a solution. Plus the fact it's all political and not for the benefit of all.
Democrats want to put up as many hurdles as possible for all gun owners. If you don't believe me, look at what it takes to own or carry a firearm in a non-gun friendly state compared to a friendly gun state.
Why allow individuals to legally sell guns to felons and crazy people then?
How is one to determine who is crazy or not? Why should it be up to a private seller to restrict who they sell a gun to unless they are a licensed dealer? The restrictions are already on the buyer. If the buyer doesn't adhere to those restrictions, they are breaking the law.
So felons and the insane deserve an equal right to 'protect' themselves, with guns?
What does that have to do with anything I said?
It has to do with your opinion on gun rights. Answer the question.
I don't think that felons or mentally challenged people should have access to guns and neither did the Supreme Court. They ruled that yes, there can be restrictions in certain cases.
Our argument is not that these people should have firearms, our argument is that there is nothing you can really do to prevent it. Making it harder on law abiding citizens to obtain or keep firearms is not a solution. Plus the fact it's all political and not for the benefit of all.
Democrats want to put up as many hurdles as possible for all gun owners. If you don't believe me, look at what it takes to own or carry a firearm in a non-gun friendly state compared to a friendly gun state.
Why allow individuals to legally sell guns to felons and crazy people then?
How is one to determine who is crazy or not? Why should it be up to a private seller to restrict who they sell a gun to unless they are a licensed dealer? The restrictions are already on the buyer. If the buyer doesn't adhere to those restrictions, they are breaking the law.
What does that have to do with anything I said?
It has to do with your opinion on gun rights. Answer the question.
I don't think that felons or mentally challenged people should have access to guns and neither did the Supreme Court. They ruled that yes, there can be restrictions in certain cases.
Our argument is not that these people should have firearms, our argument is that there is nothing you can really do to prevent it. Making it harder on law abiding citizens to obtain or keep firearms is not a solution. Plus the fact it's all political and not for the benefit of all.
Democrats want to put up as many hurdles as possible for all gun owners. If you don't believe me, look at what it takes to own or carry a firearm in a non-gun friendly state compared to a friendly gun state.
Why allow individuals to legally sell guns to felons and crazy people then?
How is one to determine who is crazy or not? Why should it be up to a private seller to restrict who they sell a gun to unless they are a licensed dealer? The restrictions are already on the buyer. If the buyer doesn't adhere to those restrictions, they are breaking the law.
lol, first you concede you believe that the mentally challenged should not have guns, now you're claiming we can't determine who those people are.
Why should it be up to a private seller to restrict who they sell a gun to unless they are a licensed dealer?
Because we've determined that certain categories of people should not be able to buy guns.
Hey let's all get our guns and go meet Obama. That will show him!!You have a right to defend yourself. You've only had a right to be armed with a gun for hat purpose since 2008......according to a 5-4 Supreme Court decision. If you honestly admit that.....and stop with the lie about what he founders wanted.....we can begin to have a discussion about what steps to take moving forward.
Hey let's all get our guns and go meet Obama. That will show him!!You have a right to defend yourself. You've only had a right to be armed with a gun for hat purpose since 2008......according to a 5-4 Supreme Court decision. If you honestly admit that.....and stop with the lie about what he founders wanted.....we can begin to have a discussion about what steps to take moving forward.
Who is your gun protecting you from on an internet web forum, wingnut?By the way, Ray, your avatar tells me all I need to know about you and your character. You are definately part of the problem.
Yep, people that cherish the ability to protect themselves are a huge problem in this country.
Why do you believe that they will follow the law?It has to do with your opinion on gun rights. Answer the question.
I don't think that felons or mentally challenged people should have access to guns and neither did the Supreme Court. They ruled that yes, there can be restrictions in certain cases.
Our argument is not that these people should have firearms, our argument is that there is nothing you can really do to prevent it. Making it harder on law abiding citizens to obtain or keep firearms is not a solution. Plus the fact it's all political and not for the benefit of all.
Democrats want to put up as many hurdles as possible for all gun owners. If you don't believe me, look at what it takes to own or carry a firearm in a non-gun friendly state compared to a friendly gun state.
Why allow individuals to legally sell guns to felons and crazy people then?
How is one to determine who is crazy or not? Why should it be up to a private seller to restrict who they sell a gun to unless they are a licensed dealer? The restrictions are already on the buyer. If the buyer doesn't adhere to those restrictions, they are breaking the law.
lol, first you concede you believe that the mentally challenged should not have guns, now you're claiming we can't determine who those people are.
Why should it be up to a private seller to restrict who they sell a gun to unless they are a licensed dealer?
Because we've determined that certain categories of people should not be able to buy guns.
Correct which is why we have laws against them buying guns.
Now you're being willfully stupid. It has been explained sev3eral times that it is a felony to sell guns to a felon or an insane person.Yep, people that cherish the ability to protect themselves are a huge problem in this country.
So felons and the insane deserve an equal right to 'protect' themselves, with guns?
What does that have to do with anything I said?
It has to do with your opinion on gun rights. Answer the question.
I don't think that felons or mentally challenged people should have access to guns and neither did the Supreme Court. They ruled that yes, there can be restrictions in certain cases.
Our argument is not that these people should have firearms, our argument is that there is nothing you can really do to prevent it. Making it harder on law abiding citizens to obtain or keep firearms is not a solution. Plus the fact it's all political and not for the benefit of all.
Democrats want to put up as many hurdles as possible for all gun owners. If you don't believe me, look at what it takes to own or carry a firearm in a non-gun friendly state compared to a friendly gun state.
Why allow individuals to legally sell guns to felons and crazy people then?
Why do you believe that they will follow the law?I don't think that felons or mentally challenged people should have access to guns and neither did the Supreme Court. They ruled that yes, there can be restrictions in certain cases.
Our argument is not that these people should have firearms, our argument is that there is nothing you can really do to prevent it. Making it harder on law abiding citizens to obtain or keep firearms is not a solution. Plus the fact it's all political and not for the benefit of all.
Democrats want to put up as many hurdles as possible for all gun owners. If you don't believe me, look at what it takes to own or carry a firearm in a non-gun friendly state compared to a friendly gun state.
Why allow individuals to legally sell guns to felons and crazy people then?
How is one to determine who is crazy or not? Why should it be up to a private seller to restrict who they sell a gun to unless they are a licensed dealer? The restrictions are already on the buyer. If the buyer doesn't adhere to those restrictions, they are breaking the law.
lol, first you concede you believe that the mentally challenged should not have guns, now you're claiming we can't determine who those people are.
Why should it be up to a private seller to restrict who they sell a gun to unless they are a licensed dealer?
Because we've determined that certain categories of people should not be able to buy guns.
Correct which is why we have laws against them buying guns.
I thought the only people who obey gun laws are lawful people?
You tell me? I assume you want "to close the gun show loophole" like other idiotic Liberals. #1. There is no loophole and #2, requiring background checks for all private sales would be ineffective at anything but infringing the rights of law abiding citizens.What proposals did I make?It would be possible that someone with my sense of responsibility may have sold a weapon to someone like Adam Lanza's mother, but I believe she acquired her weapons by retail sales with background checks, records; the whole 9 yards.Good character can be a subjective thing. Whenever guns change hands with no paper trail or documentation there is always the chance for ulterior things to occur. Your modus operandiCorrect! No background check, but it is STILL a felony Why does it need to be a felony to sell a gun to a felon TWICE? Is a criminal then twice as likely to break or follow the law?Wiat. Stop! Pull yourself together... If a stranger answers a newspaper add and buys a gun from the owner, there is NO background check...capice? SAME FOR A GUN SHOW... GUNS ARE SOLD TO STRANGERS WITH NO QUESTIONS ASKED.... re you always this stupid or are you having a senior moment?
I doubt you have ever touched a gun, let alone sold one so I'll educate you. LEGAL gun owners take their responsibilities rather seriously. We tend to value our freedom and rights to the point where we make it our duty to know who we hand a gun to.
No one I have ever sold to was a criminal. Every one was known to me to be of good character.
Street thugs who sell guns out of the trunk of their cars are already criminals and prohibited from possessing weapons, much less selling them. They don't take anything seriously, especially their duty to their fellow man. They don't care who they sell to as long as the person ahas enough money so that they can get their next bag of heroin. Making private sales of guns by criminals to criminals is redundant and stupid, stupid.
is admirable but why should the society at large trust you or anyone else to do the right thing just because YOU decide who is or is not a person of good character? I know, it doesn't really matter since guns are all over the place and even thugs have plenty of them.
But thugs do not generally go to churches or schools to commit mass murder. Further, the loser nerds who perpetrate those kind of killings are too afraid to go in to thug territory to buy their guns. Those type of killers usually go the legal route. typically they have no criminal record and appear to be just ordinary joes protected by the 2nd Amendment. Even YOu might have sold a gun to any of them.
Her son murdered her. Circumstances of that are unknown. Could it be that he killed his mother because she was trying to prevent the rampage her son was about to go on? Interesting twist, but it can never be more than a supposition.....
Other school shooters stole weapons from parents as well and yes, some purchased their weapons legally.
Those that purchased their weapons were subject to background checks. NONE, to my knowledge bought weapons from a private seller at a gun show. None acquired weapons that they wouldn't have obtained if all private sales were subject to background checks. Your proposals would have accomplished NOTHING but inconveniencing tens of thousands of sane, law abiding persons as they tried to purchase a legal product in a legal transaction between them and another person who had every right to legally sell a firearm.
SUGGEST SOMETHING THAT MIGHT ACTUALLY WORK.
Propose something that would work.
I agree with most of what you say but I don't buy the "democrats putting ideas in people's head" canard. The American people, regardless of party affiliation, are smarter than that. They can see through the bullshit of either party. That is how Obama became president despite the republican blitz by Limnbugh radio and Fox news.I would guess..... none. Perhaps you have some data to prove me wrong?How do you know how many killings have been prevented by background checks already?It would be possible that someone with my sense of responsibility may have sold a weapon to someone like Adam Lanza's mother, but I believe she acquired her weapons by retail sales with background checks, records; the whole 9 yards.
Her son murdered her. Circumstances of that are unknown. Could it be that he killed his mother because she was trying to prevent the rampage her son was about to go on? Interesting twist, but it can never be more than a supposition.....
Other school shooters stole weapons from parents as well and yes, some purchased their weapons legally.
Those that purchased their weapons were subject to background checks. NONE, to my knowledge bought weapons from a private seller at a gun show. None acquired weapons that they wouldn't have obtained if all private sales were subject to background checks. Your proposals would have accomplished NOTHING but inconveniencing tens of thousands of sane, law abiding persons as they tried to purchase a legal product in a legal transaction between them and another person who had every right to legally sell a firearm.
SUGGEST SOMETHING THAT MIGHT ACTUALLY WORK.
You're saying that they don't work...how do you know?
The one recent mass shooter that could not have passed a background check acquired guns without one, didn't he?
My GOD man! A box of rocks has 70 IQ points on you.
This guy in Oregon got his guns from a family member. So did the Charleston shooter. So did the Sandy Hook shooter. Ft Hood? He was legal to purchase and own a gun. The Colorado movie shooter purchased all his guns legally.
For the life of me, I can't see where this registration thing would prevent any past or future mass shootings. These Democrat politicians put these ideas in the heads of their constituents and like robots, they ask no questions. Just follow orders and repeat what you've been told.
Unbelievable.
OMG, it's like somebody wrote this for a show.
First you say that Democrat politicians are not brainwashing their followers with what to say and what to think, and then you finish with the typical Fox News and Limbaugh line.
You can't make this stuff up!
If you don't know what I meant you need to look it up... I won't waste my time on you!It wasn't liberalism that put the skids on Stop and Frisk, it was the US Constitution!Sounds like another anecdote with no real substance. Besides rednecks SELLING guns could be part of the problem.You gotta admit. It's funny. Chicago has stringent gun laws. But Chicago is completely surrounded by Rednecks selling guns like popcorn.
So you got all these rednecks selling guns to thugs and then complaining that so many thugs illegally own guns so that proves the laws don't work? It's like them saying government doesn't work and the entire time making sure it doesn't work. What are Rednecks good for? What do the bring to the country?
I know, I know, I can't think of anything either.
The problem in liberal Chicago is not rednecks buying guns. The problem is that there is so much crime that judges are forced to slap people on the hands when they are caught illegally possessing a firearm. They simply go back out into the street, get another gun and they're ready for warfare.
Rednecks are not out in the streets of Chicago selling guns to brothers. Read up on Chicago sometime. There are plenty of stories out there about the overcrowded prisons that make it near impossible to lock up everybody with a gun.
If you're trying to solve a problem or come close to it, you have to look at what worked in the past. Stop and Frisk produced some amazing results in NYC. Now that it's gone, the tide is swinging the other way. So what's the problem? Liberals and liberalism.
So the US Constitution jumped out and made DeBlaahzio put a stop to it?
So felons and the insane deserve an equal right to 'protect' themselves, with guns?
What does that have to do with anything I said?
It has to do with your opinion on gun rights. Answer the question.
I don't think that felons or mentally challenged people should have access to guns and neither did the Supreme Court. They ruled that yes, there can be restrictions in certain cases.
Our argument is not that these people should have firearms, our argument is that there is nothing you can really do to prevent it. Making it harder on law abiding citizens to obtain or keep firearms is not a solution. Plus the fact it's all political and not for the benefit of all.
Democrats want to put up as many hurdles as possible for all gun owners. If you don't believe me, look at what it takes to own or carry a firearm in a non-gun friendly state compared to a friendly gun state.
Why allow individuals to legally sell guns to felons and crazy people then?
How is one to determine who is crazy or not? Why should it be up to a private seller to restrict who they sell a gun to unless they are a licensed dealer? The restrictions are already on the buyer. If the buyer doesn't adhere to those restrictions, they are breaking the law.
What does that have to do with anything I said?
It has to do with your opinion on gun rights. Answer the question.
I don't think that felons or mentally challenged people should have access to guns and neither did the Supreme Court. They ruled that yes, there can be restrictions in certain cases.
Our argument is not that these people should have firearms, our argument is that there is nothing you can really do to prevent it. Making it harder on law abiding citizens to obtain or keep firearms is not a solution. Plus the fact it's all political and not for the benefit of all.
Democrats want to put up as many hurdles as possible for all gun owners. If you don't believe me, look at what it takes to own or carry a firearm in a non-gun friendly state compared to a friendly gun state.
Why allow individuals to legally sell guns to felons and crazy people then?
How is one to determine who is crazy or not? Why should it be up to a private seller to restrict who they sell a gun to unless they are a licensed dealer? The restrictions are already on the buyer. If the buyer doesn't adhere to those restrictions, they are breaking the law.
That is the crux of the entire issue. Not even background checks can uncover a person's undiagnosed mental condition nor can it predict subsequent future mental impairment . Should we forbid casual drinkers who sometimes get inebriated to own guns? There wont be a record of temporary mental impairment anywhere. It only take one time to get drunk and get your gun to settle a score or perceived disrespect. Frankly, guns just can't be controlled in this country. If you can't control 'em you had better be ready to confront them. See post #1235!
