Over A Third of Democrat Primary Voters Favor Gun Confiscation...Screw your Constitutional Rights!

[ding]

But that is exactly the choice you proposed, right?

And you selected no gun ownership, right?


So what does no gun ownership mean if it doesn’t mean to ban and confiscate all guns?

TBD. Ask me again when I have to make that choice.

You already made that choice.

Are you backing away from your choice?

I believe I said 'if' I had to choose. Something I can't envision having to do.

I guess you are a supporter of reckless, irresponsible gun ownership. How do you justify that?

Your logic is flawed on both points.

You already made your choice, so you don’t need to qualify your choice that you would only make that choice if you are forced to make that choice. Gun violence and gun accidents will continue to occur. So I am struggling to understand what will be different in the future that would compel you to change your choice. The answer is nothing. So your choice won’t change.

I am a huge supporter of responsible gun ownership. But I am not so naive to believe that gun violence and gun accidents will magically stop. We already have laws in place to discourage the unlawful use of firearms. So I see no reason whatsoever to punish peaceable law abiding citizens for the bad acts of others. So how does that make me a supporter of reckless irresponsible gun ownership?

It seems like you've already made your choice, are you backing away from it? Given the choice between reckless, irresponsible gun ownership and no gun ownership you do not appear to support no gun ownership so the only other option is reckless, irresponsible gun ownership.

Dude, that’s a false choice. It seems your standard is zero gun violence and zero gun accidents. Anything less is reckless and irresponsible. That’s a false choice.

We are talking about 3 out of 100,000 people that are reckless and irresponsible.

That means that 99,997 people out of 100,000 are responsible.

So my point is that as a whole we are extremely responsible already.

 

[Penelope]

That is a bogus poll

Provide your proof, Darwin.

the proof is I know a lot of Democrats and the poll is only 443 Democrats, with what almost 5% error, hardly enough to really matter. LOL

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

That is a bogus poll

Provide your proof, Darwin.

the proof is I know a lot of Democrats and the poll is only 443 Democrats, with what almost 5% error, hardly enough to really matter. LOL

Your microcosm is not proof and the poll was scientifically conducted. Even if it's off by five points that's still a significant number of Democrats who continue to insist that "nobody is coming for your guns."

 

[Penelope]

That is a bogus poll

Provide your proof, Darwin.

the proof is I know a lot of Democrats and the poll is only 443 Democrats, with what almost 5% error, hardly enough to really matter. LOL

Your microcosm is not proof and the poll was scientifically conducted. Even if it's off by five points that's still a significant number of Democrats who continue to insist that "nobody is coming for your guns."

And tramp likes their polling:
Trump’s new favorite poll inflates his approval rating by about 10 points
Zogby, which Trump has repeatedly touted this week, was once described as “the worst pollster in the world.”
Trump’s new favorite poll inflates his approval rating by about 10 points

 

[alang1216]

The vast majority of gun sales are at gun shops with a background check. In my state ALL HANDGUN sales must go through a background check no matter what. If you sell a long gun to a prohibited person you are breaking Federal Law and will go to jail when caught. Criminals buy guns on the black market or STEAL THEM. They don't submit to background check anyway.

So requiring all gun sales to include a background check is no big deal then.

Murderers will kill even though murder is illegal. Would you remove those laws too?

 

[TNHarley]

The govt cannot restrict access to firearms. Them doing so, is abuse of power.

They can, they should, and they do. And the vast majority of Americans support it. Trying to hold back such a wave of support is the abuse of power.

So the constitution, the document that protects citizens from abuse, means nothing.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

There is not one, single, solitary, (1) proposal that the gun grabbers want to enact that will change a damn thing, which is the point....When what they want fails, they will point to it as evidence that even more of their failure is called for.

How in the hell does anyone compromise with that lunacy?

Recent polling leaves little doubt that an astonishing 90% of all Americans support, at the very least, mandatory background checks before a gun can be purchased. So why hasn’t more been done to close loopholes in the background check system? LINK

Leads to confiscation.

Ahhh, the slippery slope argument. When has registering guns in this country led to the confiscation of the guns of lawful gun owners?

Ask venezuelans.
Gun Control Preceded the Tyranny in Venezuela | José Niño

I'm asking Americans. When has registering guns in this country led to the confiscation of the guns of lawful gun owners?

It's a precursor to confiscation.
Dems have been calling for a ban of all guns,why do you think they want to do that?

 

[TNHarley]

The govt cannot restrict access to firearms. Them doing so, is abuse of power.

They can, they should, and they do. And the vast majority of Americans support it. Trying to hold back such a wave of support is the abuse of power.

So the constitution, the document that protects citizens from abuse, means nothing.

So if the vast majority of people wanted the govt to do away with the freedom of religion, and the govt didnt, you would call that an abuse of power?
Lol wtf

 

[alang1216]

TBD. Ask me again when I have to make that choice.

You already made that choice.

Are you backing away from your choice?

I believe I said 'if' I had to choose. Something I can't envision having to do.

I guess you are a supporter of reckless, irresponsible gun ownership. How do you justify that?

Your logic is flawed on both points.

You already made your choice, so you don’t need to qualify your choice that you would only make that choice if you are forced to make that choice. Gun violence and gun accidents will continue to occur. So I am struggling to understand what will be different in the future that would compel you to change your choice. The answer is nothing. So your choice won’t change.

I am a huge supporter of responsible gun ownership. But I am not so naive to believe that gun violence and gun accidents will magically stop. We already have laws in place to discourage the unlawful use of firearms. So I see no reason whatsoever to punish peaceable law abiding citizens for the bad acts of others. So how does that make me a supporter of reckless irresponsible gun ownership?

It seems like you've already made your choice, are you backing away from it? Given the choice between reckless, irresponsible gun ownership and no gun ownership you do not appear to support no gun ownership so the only other option is reckless, irresponsible gun ownership.

Dude, that’s a false choice. It seems your standard is zero gun violence and zero gun accidents. Anything less is reckless and irresponsible. That’s a false choice.

We are talking about 3 out of 100,000 people that are reckless and irresponsible.

That means that 99,997 people out of 100,000 are responsible.

So my point is that as a whole we are extremely responsible already.

That is the choice you are demanding I make. I never said anything about zero violence or accidents. I actually agree we are extremely responsible already. That is why is seems gun control laws should not affect 99.997% of gun owners.

 

[martybegan]

You already made that choice.

Are you backing away from your choice?

I believe I said 'if' I had to choose. Something I can't envision having to do.

I guess you are a supporter of reckless, irresponsible gun ownership. How do you justify that?

Your logic is flawed on both points.

You already made your choice, so you don’t need to qualify your choice that you would only make that choice if you are forced to make that choice. Gun violence and gun accidents will continue to occur. So I am struggling to understand what will be different in the future that would compel you to change your choice. The answer is nothing. So your choice won’t change.

I am a huge supporter of responsible gun ownership. But I am not so naive to believe that gun violence and gun accidents will magically stop. We already have laws in place to discourage the unlawful use of firearms. So I see no reason whatsoever to punish peaceable law abiding citizens for the bad acts of others. So how does that make me a supporter of reckless irresponsible gun ownership?

It seems like you've already made your choice, are you backing away from it? Given the choice between reckless, irresponsible gun ownership and no gun ownership you do not appear to support no gun ownership so the only other option is reckless, irresponsible gun ownership.

Dude, that’s a false choice. It seems your standard is zero gun violence and zero gun accidents. Anything less is reckless and irresponsible. That’s a false choice.

We are talking about 3 out of 100,000 people that are reckless and irresponsible.

That means that 99,997 people out of 100,000 are responsible.

So my point is that as a whole we are extremely responsible already.

That is the choice you are demanding I make. I never said anything about zero violence or accidents. I actually agree we are extremely responsible already. That is why is seems gun control laws should not affect 99.997% of gun owners.

it's because Gun control nuts get cute and make laws that do nothing but infringe on law abiding people.

To keep a handgun in your own home in NYC takes 3-6 months of paperwork and around $600 in fees. That is what RKBA activists see as the goal of gun control freaks like you. How is that not infringement?

 

[alang1216]

The govt cannot restrict access to firearms. Them doing so, is abuse of power.

They can, they should, and they do. And the vast majority of Americans support it. Trying to hold back such a wave of support is the abuse of power.

So the constitution, the document that protects citizens from abuse, means nothing.

The Constitution was recently re-interpreted to make the 2nd apply as an individual right. I'd say it means different things to different people.

 

[Oddball]

Murderers will kill even though murder is illegal. Would you remove those laws too?

Because murder laws are meant to punish the criminal, not prevent the crime in the first place.....There's a death penalty in many states, and murders still occur.

Are you this obtuse IRL, or just playing like a total idjit for the giggles?

 

[alang1216]

I believe I said 'if' I had to choose. Something I can't envision having to do.

I guess you are a supporter of reckless, irresponsible gun ownership. How do you justify that?

Your logic is flawed on both points.

You already made your choice, so you don’t need to qualify your choice that you would only make that choice if you are forced to make that choice. Gun violence and gun accidents will continue to occur. So I am struggling to understand what will be different in the future that would compel you to change your choice. The answer is nothing. So your choice won’t change.

I am a huge supporter of responsible gun ownership. But I am not so naive to believe that gun violence and gun accidents will magically stop. We already have laws in place to discourage the unlawful use of firearms. So I see no reason whatsoever to punish peaceable law abiding citizens for the bad acts of others. So how does that make me a supporter of reckless irresponsible gun ownership?

It seems like you've already made your choice, are you backing away from it? Given the choice between reckless, irresponsible gun ownership and no gun ownership you do not appear to support no gun ownership so the only other option is reckless, irresponsible gun ownership.

Dude, that’s a false choice. It seems your standard is zero gun violence and zero gun accidents. Anything less is reckless and irresponsible. That’s a false choice.

We are talking about 3 out of 100,000 people that are reckless and irresponsible.

That means that 99,997 people out of 100,000 are responsible.

So my point is that as a whole we are extremely responsible already.

That is the choice you are demanding I make. I never said anything about zero violence or accidents. I actually agree we are extremely responsible already. That is why is seems gun control laws should not affect 99.997% of gun owners.

it's because Gun control nuts get cute and make laws that do nothing but infringe on law abiding people.

To keep a handgun in your own home in NYC takes 3-6 months of paperwork and around $600 in fees. That is what RKBA activists see as the goal of gun control freaks like you. How is that not infringement?

I have no idea about NYC's laws and I don't care to research them. I wonder how much of the delay and cost comes from the absurd system of gun laws that we have. Maybe we need a national registration database to speed things up?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Your logic is flawed on both points.

You already made your choice, so you don’t need to qualify your choice that you would only make that choice if you are forced to make that choice. Gun violence and gun accidents will continue to occur. So I am struggling to understand what will be different in the future that would compel you to change your choice. The answer is nothing. So your choice won’t change.

I am a huge supporter of responsible gun ownership. But I am not so naive to believe that gun violence and gun accidents will magically stop. We already have laws in place to discourage the unlawful use of firearms. So I see no reason whatsoever to punish peaceable law abiding citizens for the bad acts of others. So how does that make me a supporter of reckless irresponsible gun ownership?

It seems like you've already made your choice, are you backing away from it? Given the choice between reckless, irresponsible gun ownership and no gun ownership you do not appear to support no gun ownership so the only other option is reckless, irresponsible gun ownership.

Dude, that’s a false choice. It seems your standard is zero gun violence and zero gun accidents. Anything less is reckless and irresponsible. That’s a false choice.

We are talking about 3 out of 100,000 people that are reckless and irresponsible.

That means that 99,997 people out of 100,000 are responsible.

So my point is that as a whole we are extremely responsible already.

That is the choice you are demanding I make. I never said anything about zero violence or accidents. I actually agree we are extremely responsible already. That is why is seems gun control laws should not affect 99.997% of gun owners.

it's because Gun control nuts get cute and make laws that do nothing but infringe on law abiding people.

To keep a handgun in your own home in NYC takes 3-6 months of paperwork and around $600 in fees. That is what RKBA activists see as the goal of gun control freaks like you. How is that not infringement?

I have no idea about NYC's laws and I don't care to research them. I wonder how much of the delay and cost comes from the absurd system of gun laws that we have. Maybe we need a national registration database to speed things up?

NO!
God am I glad I live in Texas!!!
I can get on Armslist and buy damn near any gun I want as long as it's in Texas.
Thats the way it should be!!

 

[alang1216]

Recent polling leaves little doubt that an astonishing 90% of all Americans support, at the very least, mandatory background checks before a gun can be purchased. So why hasn’t more been done to close loopholes in the background check system? LINK

Leads to confiscation.

Ahhh, the slippery slope argument. When has registering guns in this country led to the confiscation of the guns of lawful gun owners?

Ask venezuelans.
Gun Control Preceded the Tyranny in Venezuela | José Niño

I'm asking Americans. When has registering guns in this country led to the confiscation of the guns of lawful gun owners?

It's a precursor to confiscation.
Dems have been calling for a ban of all guns,why do you think they want to do that?

I'm a Dem but I don't speak for the Dems, I speak only for myself but if I had to guess I'd say there are many voices in the party, not just one. Bernie is very popular with the Dems and he is not calling for a ban.

 

[Oddball]

But that is exactly the choice you proposed, right?

And you selected no gun ownership, right?


So what does no gun ownership mean if it doesn’t mean to ban and confiscate all guns?

TBD. Ask me again when I have to make that choice.

You already made that choice.

Are you backing away from your choice?

I believe I said 'if' I had to choose. Something I can't envision having to do.

I guess you are a supporter of reckless, irresponsible gun ownership. How do you justify that?

Your logic is flawed on both points.

You already made your choice, so you don’t need to qualify your choice that you would only make that choice if you are forced to make that choice. Gun violence and gun accidents will continue to occur. So I am struggling to understand what will be different in the future that would compel you to change your choice. The answer is nothing. So your choice won’t change.

I am a huge supporter of responsible gun ownership. But I am not so naive to believe that gun violence and gun accidents will magically stop. We already have laws in place to discourage the unlawful use of firearms. So I see no reason whatsoever to punish peaceable law abiding citizens for the bad acts of others. So how does that make me a supporter of reckless irresponsible gun ownership?

It seems like you've already made your choice, are you backing away from it? Given the choice between reckless, irresponsible gun ownership and no gun ownership you do not appear to support no gun ownership so the only other option is reckless, irresponsible gun ownership.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Please, you don't think DEMONRATS are tyrannical after viewing what they have done to Trump with their STAR CHAMBER Impeachment, and Schitt denying Republican witnesses....you are blind!

So you think you're justified in armed rebellion since the Dems are exercising their rights under the Constitution and you don't like it? It is democracy you don't like, not tyranny. You are a poster child for gun control.

LOL Rights my ass... They are abusing the powers given them by the people and its time to remove them by vote or force.. whichever becomes necessary to protect the Constitution they are shredding.

 

[alang1216]

I have no idea about NYC's laws and I don't care to research them. I wonder how much of the delay and cost comes from the absurd system of gun laws that we have. Maybe we need a national registration database to speed things up?

NO!
God am I glad I live in Texas!!!
I can get on Armslist and buy damn near any gun I want as long as it's in Texas.
Thats the way it should be!!

I'm glad you live in Texas too. Will you be packing at church next Sunday?

 

[ding]

You already made that choice.

Are you backing away from your choice?

I believe I said 'if' I had to choose. Something I can't envision having to do.

I guess you are a supporter of reckless, irresponsible gun ownership. How do you justify that?

Your logic is flawed on both points.

You already made your choice, so you don’t need to qualify your choice that you would only make that choice if you are forced to make that choice. Gun violence and gun accidents will continue to occur. So I am struggling to understand what will be different in the future that would compel you to change your choice. The answer is nothing. So your choice won’t change.

I am a huge supporter of responsible gun ownership. But I am not so naive to believe that gun violence and gun accidents will magically stop. We already have laws in place to discourage the unlawful use of firearms. So I see no reason whatsoever to punish peaceable law abiding citizens for the bad acts of others. So how does that make me a supporter of reckless irresponsible gun ownership?

It seems like you've already made your choice, are you backing away from it? Given the choice between reckless, irresponsible gun ownership and no gun ownership you do not appear to support no gun ownership so the only other option is reckless, irresponsible gun ownership.

Dude, that’s a false choice. It seems your standard is zero gun violence and zero gun accidents. Anything less is reckless and irresponsible. That’s a false choice.

We are talking about 3 out of 100,000 people that are reckless and irresponsible.

That means that 99,997 people out of 100,000 are responsible.

So my point is that as a whole we are extremely responsible already.

That is the choice you are demanding I make. I never said anything about zero violence or accidents. I actually agree we are extremely responsible already. That is why is seems gun control laws should not affect 99.997% of gun owners.

No. That’s the choice you already made. You can write all the laws you want but there will still be gun violence and gun accidents. After each occurrence you will want more laws written but gun violence and gun accidents will still occur. You will never be satisfied.

How do I know? Because you aren’t satisfied with 99,997 people out of 100,000 people who are responsible gun owners.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Leads to confiscation.

Ahhh, the slippery slope argument. When has registering guns in this country led to the confiscation of the guns of lawful gun owners?

Ask venezuelans.
Gun Control Preceded the Tyranny in Venezuela | José Niño

I'm asking Americans. When has registering guns in this country led to the confiscation of the guns of lawful gun owners?

It's a precursor to confiscation.
Dems have been calling for a ban of all guns,why do you think they want to do that?

I'm a Dem but I don't speak for the Dems, I speak only for myself but if I had to guess I'd say there are many voices in the party, not just one. Bernie is very popular with the Dems and he is not calling for a ban.

He's no fan of the 2nd amendment.
Bernie Sanders has a confounding record on gun control. But he was mostly right on debate night.