CDZ Posting Solutions for Gun Violence

[Skull Pilot]

I don't own an AR because I have a perfectly good rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO rounds and I can drop and swap a magazine with no difficulty.

And like I said the only way to prevent school shootings is to prevent people from just waltzing into a school with firearms of any kind no gun regulation will stop them.

Again, what is the solution. You pegged the problem. Now what is the solution. I have seen the solution work. But I am waiting for you to come up with your own solution. Maybe it would be better, who knows. But you can't keep pointing out the obvious and the problem. Move the needle to the next track and go on to a solution.

I told you.

If you want to stop school shootings you have to prevent people from being able to simply walk into a school with guns.

Again, that's the problem. What is a solution.

Preventing people from entering a school with guns is the solution.

I'm not going to get into the minutiae of it as each school district is more than capable of implementing an agreed upon solution

Obviously, they aren't.

No they aren't. They. like you. are focusing on the wrong things

 

[hunarcy]

Much better background check system that actually includes all felons and dv convictions and any ERPO removal of guns. This needs to be kept accurate and current and it needs to apply to every purchase of a gun and any transfers that are not between immediate family members.

IF a legal gun owner loses or has a gun stolen, the owner MUST report it to police. Otherwise, if the gun is used in a crime, that owner shares legal responsibility for the crime.

Ban AR-15's and similar assault rifles.

1. You are talking about National Background Checks. I agree. And background checks for all sales and transfers of weapons. The common person can still get the firearms easy enough and the criminal just lost one of his most sought after ways of procuring guns. And I would include inter family transfers as well.

2. If a Gun Owner has a gun stolen or lost and doesn't report it then he should be held totally responsible for how the gun is used. Same thing if he loans it out. He should be tried as if he were the one holding it. Firearm Security should not be such a joke.

No Firearms can be banned. You can bump it up to the next level though. Make it so that you have to have a FFL license to own one. Those with Firearms Licenses have NEVER been any problem at all. They abide by the laws, keep their firearms secure and don't go loaning them out to others. You want to steal the guns from a Gun Collector, better bring the tools to take out the entire side of his house so you can run your forklift inside and haul off his walk in gun safe. Meanwhile, all those pesky alarms going off and those ridiculous cops showing up to arrest your butt. The good news is, any one of us that can pass a current background check to obtain a hand gun can also pass a federal FFL License background check. Just pay the 200 bucks every 5 years and meet the security requirements. So don't ban it, regulate it.

Yes...those 3 suggestions show you are not serious about stopping criminals or mass shooters...you simply want to punish people who own guns, and you want to put them in legal peril for the act of buying, owning and carrying a gun......

How about focusing on stopping criminals and mass shooters....which none of what you posted will do one thing to stop.

Those with Firearms Licenses have NEVER been any problem at all

Yes.......there is no need to license law abiding gun owners, they will be law abiding without the piece of paper....the criminals cannot own, buy or carry guns so they can't get a license in the first place....this is where you can't see the truth.....

And of course....you have your Poll Tax.....a tax on the exercise of a Right which is unConstitutional......and the securtiy requirements, will be increased to the point where only the rich can own guns...as they already do in Europe.....

200 bucks every 5 years and meet the security requirements.

Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

Held:
- A municipal ordinance which, as construed and applied, requires religious colporteurs to pay a license tax as a condition to the pursuit of their activities, is invalid under the Federal Constitution as a denial of freedom of speech, press and religion.
- A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution.
- The flat license tax here involved restrains in advance the Constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise

Opinion:

...It is contended, however, that the fact that the license tax can suppress or control this activity is unimportant if it does not do so. But that is to disregard the nature of this tax. It is a license tax -- a flat tax imposed on the exercise of a privilege granted by the Bill of Rights. A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution....

... The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down...

... It is a flat license tax levied and collected as a condition to the pursuit of activities whose enjoyment is guaranteed by the First Amendment. Accordingly, it restrains in advance those constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise...
Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

What the hell does the taxation of Religious written material have to do with firearms. Are you saying that we should all bow and pray to our guns? We should build shrines for them? I don't know of a single person that has ever been killed by being beaten to death by a religious pamphlet. Now, there might be a couple of cases where someone was beaten to death by a leather bound bible but I just haven't hear about it. But never a Pamphlet. Firearms are NOT covered by the 1st amendment like Religion is no matter how hard you pray to your guns.

This is another case where you bring this up hoping that the rest of us won't actually read the whole thing. You cherry pick what you think makes you look brilliant and leave out the real meat.

If you REALLY were engaged in honest discussion, you would acknowledge that the relevance of taxation of Religious written material is that it establishes that fees cannot be used to limit the rights of the people. Just as poll taxes were rejected as unconstitutional limitations on voting. Your annoyance is that obviously you can't find a rebuttal to his argument. You would be better served to just admit your proposal is vanquished.

I just know the fundemental difference between Religious Rights (1st amendment) and Firearms Rights (2nd amendment) and know that they don't overlap. I am also very much aware of the supreme court ruling having read the whole thing and there is no way that it can be transferred to a firearm. And I if I go by the other Supreme Court rulings, they don't think so either.

Well, in spite of your protestations, I see NO evidence that you understand the underlying principles of the rulings and merely see your demands to keep them separate as an attempt to insulate your point of view from the reality of the rulings. You're promoting a failed argument based on your desires instead of facts.

 

[Pop23]

You keep talking about banning. I didn't even bring that up. Is that what you want? If you can't get your way, do we just ban it? Or do we do it the way it's been constitutionally done in the past and regulate it. But if you want it banned if you can't get your way then that's okay too.

Correct.

No one is talking about ‘banning’ anything.

Indeed, we can explore ways to both address the issue of gun crime and violence and make gun ownership subject to fewer regulations.

There are 5 categories of gun violence that I posted earlier, a one size fits all solution simply will not accomplish anything. There must be a multi faceted approach starting with gang involvement.

And......tap, tap.....is this mike on?

I’ve answered each. You? Silence
t.

And knock off with the insults. Or at least start your response with the insult so we can start ignoring your response without having to wade through your entire post.

What insults?

Let’s do as you suggested and start with the number one category of death.

Suicide. How will your solution change the overall body count?

My reaction is that it won’t. But I’ll await your response.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Again, what is the solution. You pegged the problem. Now what is the solution. I have seen the solution work. But I am waiting for you to come up with your own solution. Maybe it would be better, who knows. But you can't keep pointing out the obvious and the problem. Move the needle to the next track and go on to a solution.

I told you.

If you want to stop school shootings you have to prevent people from being able to simply walk into a school with guns.

Again, that's the problem. What is a solution.

Preventing people from entering a school with guns is the solution.

I'm not going to get into the minutiae of it as each school district is more than capable of implementing an agreed upon solution

Obviously, they aren't.

No they aren't. They. like you. are focusing on the wrong things

And what would be the solutions? We seen to have a pretty good handle on things around here. We averted one already this year that never made it to the school entrance gate. Now, why are you so certain that I am focused on all the wrong things when what we are doing works?

How about solutions without trying to hijack the discussion.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Correct.

No one is talking about ‘banning’ anything.

Indeed, we can explore ways to both address the issue of gun crime and violence and make gun ownership subject to fewer regulations.

There are 5 categories of gun violence that I posted earlier, a one size fits all solution simply will not accomplish anything. There must be a multi faceted approach starting with gang involvement.

And......tap, tap.....is this mike on?

I’ve answered each. You? Silence
t.

And knock off with the insults. Or at least start your response with the insult so we can start ignoring your response without having to wade through your entire post.

What insults?

Let’s do as you suggested and start with the number one category of death.

Suicide. How will your solution change the overall body count?

My reaction is that it won’t. But I’ll await your response.

Starting Tuesday, we have the Gun Dealers, Politicos, Mental Health Agencies and more working on seeing into that at a local level pertaining to Suicides by firearms. This is a huge step in the right direction and is the first of it's kind. Usually, it's one table shouting at the other table where both sides are completely disconnected from each other. Since this City has been named "Average USA" then there is a good chance what comes out of that will apply to almost everywhere else from a small town to a large city. Many of us just won't accept things as they are. While I don't have the answers, there are those way above my pay grade working on it now and I hope something positive comes out of it.

 

[Pop23]

There are 5 categories of gun violence that I posted earlier, a one size fits all solution simply will not accomplish anything. There must be a multi faceted approach starting with gang involvement.

And......tap, tap.....is this mike on?

I’ve answered each. You? Silence
t.

And knock off with the insults. Or at least start your response with the insult so we can start ignoring your response without having to wade through your entire post.

What insults?

Let’s do as you suggested and start with the number one category of death.

Suicide. How will your solution change the overall body count?

My reaction is that it won’t. But I’ll await your response.

Starting Tuesday, we have the Gun Dealers, Politicos, Mental Health Agencies and more working on seeing into that at a local level pertaining to Suicides by firearms. This is a huge step in the right direction and is the first of it's kind. Usually, it's one table shouting at the other table where both sides are completely disconnected from each other. Since this City has been named "Average USA" then there is a good chance what comes out of that will apply to almost everywhere else from a small town to a large city. Many of us just won't accept things as they are. While I don't have the answers, there are those way above my pay grade working on it now and I hope something positive comes out of it.

Stopping suicide is a side issue. What common sense gun control will lesson the overall body count.

To be clear, I’m not seeing anything on the table that could

 

[Skull Pilot]

I told you.

If you want to stop school shootings you have to prevent people from being able to simply walk into a school with guns.

Again, that's the problem. What is a solution.

Preventing people from entering a school with guns is the solution.

I'm not going to get into the minutiae of it as each school district is more than capable of implementing an agreed upon solution

Obviously, they aren't.

No they aren't. They. like you. are focusing on the wrong things

And what would be the solutions? We seen to have a pretty good handle on things around here. We averted one already this year that never made it to the school entrance gate. Now, why are you so certain that I am focused on all the wrong things when what we are doing works?

How about solutions without trying to hijack the discussion.

The only thing you talk about is the gun.

And I'm not hijacking anything,

How do you stop people from walking into a school with guns?

It seems to me the answer is pretty simple while the execution might be more complicated.

You control access too both the school grounds and the school
You implement bag checks
You implement an ID protocol
You secure the building so no one can get in or out unnoticed

 

[MikeK]

1. Only Some Americans own MOST of the Guns. Most Americans don't own any guns.

[...]

That is the problem.

Attempting to control gun violence by passing endless streams of gun laws is obviously moving in the wrong direction. The harassing effect of so many gun laws has been the disarming of a substantial percentage of the law-abiding population, thereby creating an increasing situation in which only the criminal element is armed.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

And......tap, tap.....is this mike on?

I’ve answered each. You? Silence
t.

And knock off with the insults. Or at least start your response with the insult so we can start ignoring your response without having to wade through your entire post.

What insults?

Let’s do as you suggested and start with the number one category of death.

Suicide. How will your solution change the overall body count?

My reaction is that it won’t. But I’ll await your response.

Starting Tuesday, we have the Gun Dealers, Politicos, Mental Health Agencies and more working on seeing into that at a local level pertaining to Suicides by firearms. This is a huge step in the right direction and is the first of it's kind. Usually, it's one table shouting at the other table where both sides are completely disconnected from each other. Since this City has been named "Average USA" then there is a good chance what comes out of that will apply to almost everywhere else from a small town to a large city. Many of us just won't accept things as they are. While I don't have the answers, there are those way above my pay grade working on it now and I hope something positive comes out of it.

Stopping suicide is a side issue. What common sense gun control will lesson the overall body count.

To be clear, I’m not seeing anything on the table that could

All you see is that they are coming for your toys. It's not all about taking your guns. There are more involved than gun control or regulations. Broaden your scope a bit. Otherwise, you are just spinning your wheels and the rest of the world goes on without you.

The School shooter here wasn't stopped by gun grabbing. It was done by community involvement. There are so many flags that happen before a Mass Shooter ever pulls that first trigger that gives ample warning if the community cares to notice. To be distracted by a bunch of people screaming "You are after my guns" isn't what will cure a thing. There are solutions out there. We just need to get together and find them. The first step is communication from all sides without the BS. And that is exactly what they are trying.

And stopping Suicide isn't just a side issue. It's as big an issue as any other issue with firearms.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

1. Only Some Americans own MOST of the Guns. Most Americans don't own any guns.

[...]

That is the problem.

Attempting to control gun violence by passing endless streams of gun laws is obviously moving in the wrong direction. The harassing effect of so many gun laws has been the disarming of a substantial percentage of the law-abiding population, thereby creating an increasing situation in which only the criminal element is armed.

Same tired old diatribe. This doesn't come up with single solution. It just compounds the problem. Now, address the solutions, we already know the problems.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Again, that's the problem. What is a solution.

Preventing people from entering a school with guns is the solution.

I'm not going to get into the minutiae of it as each school district is more than capable of implementing an agreed upon solution

Obviously, they aren't.

No they aren't. They. like you. are focusing on the wrong things

And what would be the solutions? We seen to have a pretty good handle on things around here. We averted one already this year that never made it to the school entrance gate. Now, why are you so certain that I am focused on all the wrong things when what we are doing works?

How about solutions without trying to hijack the discussion.

The only thing you talk about is the gun.

And I'm not hijacking anything,

How do you stop people from walking into a school with guns?

It seems to me the answer is pretty simple while the execution might be more complicated.

You control access too both the school grounds and the school
You implement bag checks
You implement an ID protocol
You secure the building so no one can get in or out unnoticed

You are talking about ID Checks and Entrance X-Ray machines. That can be done. What won't be tolerated is the going through each and every student bag or having pat downs, etc.. It has to be very low on the intrusive side.

 

[MikeK]

1. Only Some Americans own MOST of the Guns. Most Americans don't own any guns.

[...]

That is the problem.

Attempting to control gun violence by passing endless streams of gun laws is obviously moving in the wrong direction. The harassing effect of so many gun laws has been the disarming of a substantial percentage of the law-abiding population, thereby creating an increasing situation in which only the criminal element is armed.

Same tired old diatribe. This doesn't come up with single solution. It just compounds the problem. Now, address the solutions, we already know the problems.

That is the solution. And it's not a diatribe. It's a simple, common sense fact.

But the prohibitive laws have produced such a dam of repression that lifting the critical bans will enable a flood of gun violence for at least a year or two until the situation stabilizes. That is until the good guys with guns eliminate all or most of the bad guys with guns, which is the inevitable result -- and its what would have happened long ago if the avalanche of redundant gun laws had never started.

The situation is not complicated. You just think it is.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

1. Only Some Americans own MOST of the Guns. Most Americans don't own any guns.

[...]

That is the problem.

Attempting to control gun violence by passing endless streams of gun laws is obviously moving in the wrong direction. The harassing effect of so many gun laws has been the disarming of a substantial percentage of the law-abiding population, thereby creating an increasing situation in which only the criminal element is armed.

Same tired old diatribe. This doesn't come up with single solution. It just compounds the problem. Now, address the solutions, we already know the problems.

That is the solution. And it's not a diatribe. It's a simple, common sense fact.

But the prohibitive laws have produced such a dam of repression that lifting the critical bans will enable a flood of gun violence for at least a year or two until the situation stabilizes. That is until the good guys with guns eliminate all or most of the bad guys with guns, which is the inevitable result -- and its what would have happened long ago if the avalanche of redundant gun laws had never started.

The situation is not complicated. You just think it is.

This is another case of an attempt to hijack the discussion once again and I just won't play. The rest of us go back to trying to find solutions. You have your own areas to bitch about "They are trying to take all my guns" routine.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

1. Only Some Americans own MOST of the Guns. Most Americans don't own any guns.

[...]

That is the problem.

Attempting to control gun violence by passing endless streams of gun laws is obviously moving in the wrong direction. The harassing effect of so many gun laws has been the disarming of a substantial percentage of the law-abiding population, thereby creating an increasing situation in which only the criminal element is armed.

Same tired old diatribe. This doesn't come up with single solution. It just compounds the problem. Now, address the solutions, we already know the problems.

That is the solution. And it's not a diatribe. It's a simple, common sense fact.

But the prohibitive laws have produced such a dam of repression that lifting the critical bans will enable a flood of gun violence for at least a year or two until the situation stabilizes. That is until the good guys with guns eliminate all or most of the bad guys with guns, which is the inevitable result -- and its what would have happened long ago if the avalanche of redundant gun laws had never started.

The situation is not complicated. You just think it is.

This is as ridiculous as it is wrong.

 

[Pop23]

I’ve answered each. You? Silence
t.

And knock off with the insults. Or at least start your response with the insult so we can start ignoring your response without having to wade through your entire post.

What insults?

Let’s do as you suggested and start with the number one category of death.

Suicide. How will your solution change the overall body count?

My reaction is that it won’t. But I’ll await your response.

Starting Tuesday, we have the Gun Dealers, Politicos, Mental Health Agencies and more working on seeing into that at a local level pertaining to Suicides by firearms. This is a huge step in the right direction and is the first of it's kind. Usually, it's one table shouting at the other table where both sides are completely disconnected from each other. Since this City has been named "Average USA" then there is a good chance what comes out of that will apply to almost everywhere else from a small town to a large city. Many of us just won't accept things as they are. While I don't have the answers, there are those way above my pay grade working on it now and I hope something positive comes out of it.

Stopping suicide is a side issue. What common sense gun control will lesson the overall body count.

To be clear, I’m not seeing anything on the table that could

All you see is that they are coming for your toys. It's not all about taking your guns. There are more involved than gun control or regulations. Broaden your scope a bit. Otherwise, you are just spinning your wheels and the rest of the world goes on without you.

The School shooter here wasn't stopped by gun grabbing. It was done by community involvement. There are so many flags that happen before a Mass Shooter ever pulls that first trigger that gives ample warning if the community cares to notice. To be distracted by a bunch of people screaming "You are after my guns" isn't what will cure a thing. There are solutions out there. We just need to get together and find them. The first step is communication from all sides without the BS. And that is exactly what they are trying.

And stopping Suicide isn't just a side issue. It's as big an issue as any other issue with firearms.

Then what will your solution do to decrease the number of suicides?

I don’t see an argument. Let’s hear one

 

[MikeK]

This is as ridiculous as it is wrong.

Why?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

1. Only Some Americans own MOST of the Guns. Most Americans don't own any guns.

[...]

That is the problem.

Attempting to control gun violence by passing endless streams of gun laws is obviously moving in the wrong direction. The harassing effect of so many gun laws has been the disarming of a substantial percentage of the law-abiding population, thereby creating an increasing situation in which only the criminal element is armed.

Same tired old diatribe. This doesn't come up with single solution. It just compounds the problem. Now, address the solutions, we already know the problems.

That is the solution. And it's not a diatribe. It's a simple, common sense fact.

But the prohibitive laws have produced such a dam of repression that lifting the critical bans will enable a flood of gun violence for at least a year or two until the situation stabilizes. That is until the good guys with guns eliminate all or most of the bad guys with guns, which is the inevitable result -- and its what would have happened long ago if the avalanche of redundant gun laws had never started.

The situation is not complicated. You just think it is.

This is as ridiculous as it is wrong.

That was already tried. And it failed miserably. Yah, we are going to have a bunch of drunks with guns running around. How'd that work out before? Or we are going to have angry people with guns running around. How'd that work out before? A lot of innocents died is how that worked. The "Good Guys" with Guns will also start to eliminate themselves and others around them. History tell us it's not a real good idea.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

And knock off with the insults. Or at least start your response with the insult so we can start ignoring your response without having to wade through your entire post.

What insults?

Let’s do as you suggested and start with the number one category of death.

Suicide. How will your solution change the overall body count?

My reaction is that it won’t. But I’ll await your response.

Starting Tuesday, we have the Gun Dealers, Politicos, Mental Health Agencies and more working on seeing into that at a local level pertaining to Suicides by firearms. This is a huge step in the right direction and is the first of it's kind. Usually, it's one table shouting at the other table where both sides are completely disconnected from each other. Since this City has been named "Average USA" then there is a good chance what comes out of that will apply to almost everywhere else from a small town to a large city. Many of us just won't accept things as they are. While I don't have the answers, there are those way above my pay grade working on it now and I hope something positive comes out of it.

Stopping suicide is a side issue. What common sense gun control will lesson the overall body count.

To be clear, I’m not seeing anything on the table that could

All you see is that they are coming for your toys. It's not all about taking your guns. There are more involved than gun control or regulations. Broaden your scope a bit. Otherwise, you are just spinning your wheels and the rest of the world goes on without you.

The School shooter here wasn't stopped by gun grabbing. It was done by community involvement. There are so many flags that happen before a Mass Shooter ever pulls that first trigger that gives ample warning if the community cares to notice. To be distracted by a bunch of people screaming "You are after my guns" isn't what will cure a thing. There are solutions out there. We just need to get together and find them. The first step is communication from all sides without the BS. And that is exactly what they are trying.

And stopping Suicide isn't just a side issue. It's as big an issue as any other issue with firearms.

Then what will your solution do to decrease the number of suicides?

I don’t see an argument. Let’s hear one

I have already said that a panel has been put together made up Gun Dealers, Health Medicos and more that start meeting tuesday that are going to look at the suicide rate of firearms. Am I as smart as those folks? Nope. But for the first time, all the sides are sitting down at the same table and actually going to discuss it. What we usually have is a bunch of different tables just yelling insults at the other tables. Just like any "Discussion" you are involved in.

 

[MikeK]

That was already tried. And it failed miserably. Yah, we are going to have a bunch of drunks with guns running around. How'd that work out before? Or we are going to have angry people with guns running around. How'd that work out before? A lot of innocents died is how that worked. The "Good Guys" with Guns will also start to eliminate themselves and others around them. History tell us it's not a real good idea.

What was already tried? And when was it tried? I'm 82 years old and I don't remember any sensible reduction of gun restrictions. What I do remember is an endless sequence of increasingly repressive gun laws each of which was followed by an increase in gun crime, accidents, and misuse.

We never had serious gun problems back in the '50s, when there were far fewer gun laws and restrictions. Why is that?

I remember back then walking into Goodwear Sporting Goods on Flatbush Avenue, Brooklyn, asking to see the surplus M-1 carbine on the shelf, buying it along with two bandoliers of surplus ammo. The fellow wrapped it up in brown paper, I paid cash and walked out the door with it. The only paperwork was the little receipt I got with "Cash" written on the "Name" line.

Down in Skowhegan, Maine, in 1958, a little general store had a bunch of handguns on the shelves of the same case that held candy. I bought an old Walther P-38 (automatic) for $50 cash. The only formality was he asked for some ID. I gave him my driver license and military ID card. He wrote some info down -- and he gave me half a box of 9mm ammo.

Can you do that today -- when the gun crime rate is rising daily? To buy the same gun would be harder than getting married -- yet the gun incident rate is rising.

Today I can't even buy a BB-gun in New Jersey without a permit that takes weeks to get. And there are more gun crimes, accidents and misuse today than ever before.

So what in the world are you talking about that was tried before and failed? Do you dream this stuff up?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

That was already tried. And it failed miserably. Yah, we are going to have a bunch of drunks with guns running around. How'd that work out before? Or we are going to have angry people with guns running around. How'd that work out before? A lot of innocents died is how that worked. The "Good Guys" with Guns will also start to eliminate themselves and others around them. History tell us it's not a real good idea.

What was already tried? And when was it tried? I'm 82 years old and I don't remember any sensible reduction of gun restrictions. What I do remember is an endless sequence of increasingly repressive gun laws each of which was followed by an increase in gun crime, accidents, and misuse.

We never had serious gun problems back in the '50s, when there were far fewer gun laws and restrictions. Why is that?

I remember back then walking into Goodwear Sporting Goods on Flatbush Avenue, Brooklyn, asking to see the surplus M-1 carbine on the shelf, buying it along with two bandoliers of surplus ammo. The fellow wrapped it up in brown paper, I paid cash and walked out the door with it. The only paperwork was the little receipt I got with "Cash" written on the "Name" line.

Down in Skowhegan, Maine, in 1958, a little general store had a bunch of handguns on the shelves of the same case that held candy. I bought an old Walther P-38 (automatic) for $50 cash. The only formality was he asked for some ID. I gave him my driver license and military ID card. He wrote some info down -- and he gave me half a box of 9mm ammo.

Can you do that today -- when the gun crime rate is rising daily? To buy the same gun would be harder than getting married -- yet the gun incident rate is rising.

Today I can't even buy a BB-gun in New Jersey without a permit that takes weeks to get. And there are more gun crimes, accidents and misuse today than ever before.

So what in the world are you talking about that was tried before and failed? Do you dream this stuff up?

From about 1850 to 1871, the Towns and Cities in the West had NO gun regulations. What they had was everyone wearing guns out in the open. What they also had was a huge murder rate, people being killed by stray projectiles, petty arguments being settle by gun battles. It was to the point where they had to do something. Most Western Towns and Cities adopted no weapons on the streets to be carried. It created a new law enforcement called "Town Tamer" who would go in and clean up a town and get the weapons off the streets by whatever means they had to use. This held for over 100 years until about 20 years ago. Many towns and Cities still have that rule today. Some towns and cities have gone to a CCW though. A few allow open carry inside the city limits of non licensed people. Like I said, when it becomes common place, we don't need drunks with guns running around. It's not real common place right now but if everyone were to be armed we would be right back the way it was in the middle 1800s. And we are no more civilized now than we were then by as long shot.

This is the last time I am going to address this in this message chain as it has nothing to do with finding Solutions. It just is a way to hijack the discussion.