Three gun control proposals that will actually work

[The Rabbi]

Go is 1.940" No-Go is 1.946"

What are you doing here? Know anyone in the market for a Smith 15? Got two for sale.

 

[DarkFury]

You will never ever change the "minds" of these gun control retards. All we can do is point and laugh at their stupidity and give money to the NRA. You can't fix stupid, all we can do is take steps to make sure they don't win.

Kind of admitting here that you lie, cheat or steal to have your way.
Wars start that way idiot. And you damn sure want a gun for that.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

1) Repeal the 1968 Gun Control act. This Act has totally failed at its purpose of keeping guns from the hands of criminals. The only thing criminal here is the criminalizing of otherwise legal behavior. We have had nearly 50 years of experience with this law. It doesnt work. It needs to go, period.
2) Treat mass shooting perpetrators like rape victims. Ever see a rape victim's name in the paper? No, of course not. Mass shooters should get the same anonymous treatment. Since man of them are motivated by getting their 15 minutes, the knowledge they will get nothing but an obscure grave or jail cell will discourage this kind of celebrity seeking
3) Outlaw public gun free zones, and make private ones liable for shootings on their property. Virtually every mass shooting in this country in the last 20 years has happened in a gun free zone. They dont work. Period. No public property should be off limits to law abiding citizens with guns. Private property should be able to post No Guns, but if a criminal shoots someone who could have had a gun and doesnt the property owner should get sued.

I would qualify the last as private property with public access.

 

[Coyote]

1) Repeal the 1968 Gun Control act. This Act has totally failed at its purpose of keeping guns from the hands of criminals. The only thing criminal here is the criminalizing of otherwise legal behavior. We have had nearly 50 years of experience with this law. It doesnt work. It needs to go, period.
2) Treat mass shooting perpetrators like rape victims. Ever see a rape victim's name in the paper? No, of course not. Mass shooters should get the same anonymous treatment. Since man of them are motivated by getting their 15 minutes, the knowledge they will get nothing but an obscure grave or jail cell will discourage this kind of celebrity seeking
3) Outlaw public gun free zones, and make private ones liable for shootings on their property. Virtually every mass shooting in this country in the last 20 years has happened in a gun free zone. They dont work. Period. No public property should be off limits to law abiding citizens with guns. Private property should be able to post No Guns, but if a criminal shoots someone who could have had a gun and doesnt the property owner should get sued.

Private property owners have the right to decide what is allowed on their property without being sued. Maybe we should sue gun manufacturers if their product is used in a crime. Same logic. Except for #2, these are retarded ideas. You do realize that in the "no gun control" era of the "wild wild west" - there were a lot of shootings and it wasn't just the "bad guys" that got it.

 

[Coyote]

You will never ever change the "minds" of these gun control retards. All we can do is point and laugh at their stupidity and give money to the NRA. You can't fix stupid, all we can do is take steps to make sure they don't win.

No right is unlimited, including gun rights. Fixing stupid is recognizing that a certain amount of gun control is rational.

 

[The Rabbi]

1) Repeal the 1968 Gun Control act. This Act has totally failed at its purpose of keeping guns from the hands of criminals. The only thing criminal here is the criminalizing of otherwise legal behavior. We have had nearly 50 years of experience with this law. It doesnt work. It needs to go, period.
2) Treat mass shooting perpetrators like rape victims. Ever see a rape victim's name in the paper? No, of course not. Mass shooters should get the same anonymous treatment. Since man of them are motivated by getting their 15 minutes, the knowledge they will get nothing but an obscure grave or jail cell will discourage this kind of celebrity seeking
3) Outlaw public gun free zones, and make private ones liable for shootings on their property. Virtually every mass shooting in this country in the last 20 years has happened in a gun free zone. They dont work. Period. No public property should be off limits to law abiding citizens with guns. Private property should be able to post No Guns, but if a criminal shoots someone who could have had a gun and doesnt the property owner should get sued.

Private property owners have the right to decide what is allowed on their property without being sued. Maybe we should sue gun manufacturers if their product is used in a crime. Same logic. Except for #2, these are retarded ideas. You do realize that in the "no gun control" era of the "wild wild west" - there were a lot of shootings and it wasn't just the "bad guys" that got it.

If you want to insist that everyone on your property is disarmed then you assume the burden of assuring their safety. If a criminal comes on the property and shoots others, you are responsible for that.
It is hardly the same logic as gun manufacturers. Why not sue shoe manufacturers when someone runs away from a crime scene?

 

[Iron Head]

The first 2 proposals are almost tolerable. The third of quite offensive. That is, to apply strict liability to property owners.

You want REAL change? Give everyone 1 free kill per year. Allow civil liability for the purpose of covering costs, but no criminal liability. That is, if you want to whack someone then you can do it without fear of jail, just civil liability for wrongful death. Think that you will get away with murder? Think again. The survivors can exercise their one freebie on you in retribution.

Chances are people will start being a lot more civil toward one another if they know there will be real and immediate consequences for their actions.

 

[The Rabbi]

You will never ever change the "minds" of these gun control retards. All we can do is point and laugh at their stupidity and give money to the NRA. You can't fix stupid, all we can do is take steps to make sure they don't win.

No right is unlimited, including gun rights. Fixing stupid is recognizing that a certain amount of gun control is rational.

Which part is rational? The part that has delivered consistent failure for 40 years?

 

[Coyote]

1) Repeal the 1968 Gun Control act. This Act has totally failed at its purpose of keeping guns from the hands of criminals. The only thing criminal here is the criminalizing of otherwise legal behavior. We have had nearly 50 years of experience with this law. It doesnt work. It needs to go, period.
2) Treat mass shooting perpetrators like rape victims. Ever see a rape victim's name in the paper? No, of course not. Mass shooters should get the same anonymous treatment. Since man of them are motivated by getting their 15 minutes, the knowledge they will get nothing but an obscure grave or jail cell will discourage this kind of celebrity seeking
3) Outlaw public gun free zones, and make private ones liable for shootings on their property. Virtually every mass shooting in this country in the last 20 years has happened in a gun free zone. They dont work. Period. No public property should be off limits to law abiding citizens with guns. Private property should be able to post No Guns, but if a criminal shoots someone who could have had a gun and doesnt the property owner should get sued.

Private property owners have the right to decide what is allowed on their property without being sued. Maybe we should sue gun manufacturers if their product is used in a crime. Same logic. Except for #2, these are retarded ideas. You do realize that in the "no gun control" era of the "wild wild west" - there were a lot of shootings and it wasn't just the "bad guys" that got it.

If you want to insist that everyone on your property is disarmed then you assume the burden of assuring their safety. If a criminal comes on the property and shoots others, you are responsible for that.
It is hardly the same logic as gun manufacturers. Why not sue shoe manufacturers when someone runs away from a crime scene?

Sure it's the same logic. If a person can be sued for a criminal act committed on his property than a person can be sued for a criminal act committed by something he provided.

Who gets sued when a gun happy Rambo shoots the wrong person on your property?

 

[Coyote]

You will never ever change the "minds" of these gun control retards. All we can do is point and laugh at their stupidity and give money to the NRA. You can't fix stupid, all we can do is take steps to make sure they don't win.

No right is unlimited, including gun rights. Fixing stupid is recognizing that a certain amount of gun control is rational.

Which part is rational? The part that has delivered consistent failure for 40 years?

Has it failed? Do you have stats to show that?

And what makes gun rights so special that they should have NO restriction?

 

[The Rabbi]

You will never ever change the "minds" of these gun control retards. All we can do is point and laugh at their stupidity and give money to the NRA. You can't fix stupid, all we can do is take steps to make sure they don't win.

No right is unlimited, including gun rights. Fixing stupid is recognizing that a certain amount of gun control is rational.

Which part is rational? The part that has delivered consistent failure for 40 years?

Has it failed? Do you have stats to show that?

The 1968 gun control act was passed to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Do you know of any criminals who cannot get access to a gun?

 

[The Rabbi]

1) Repeal the 1968 Gun Control act. This Act has totally failed at its purpose of keeping guns from the hands of criminals. The only thing criminal here is the criminalizing of otherwise legal behavior. We have had nearly 50 years of experience with this law. It doesnt work. It needs to go, period.
2) Treat mass shooting perpetrators like rape victims. Ever see a rape victim's name in the paper? No, of course not. Mass shooters should get the same anonymous treatment. Since man of them are motivated by getting their 15 minutes, the knowledge they will get nothing but an obscure grave or jail cell will discourage this kind of celebrity seeking
3) Outlaw public gun free zones, and make private ones liable for shootings on their property. Virtually every mass shooting in this country in the last 20 years has happened in a gun free zone. They dont work. Period. No public property should be off limits to law abiding citizens with guns. Private property should be able to post No Guns, but if a criminal shoots someone who could have had a gun and doesnt the property owner should get sued.

Private property owners have the right to decide what is allowed on their property without being sued. Maybe we should sue gun manufacturers if their product is used in a crime. Same logic. Except for #2, these are retarded ideas. You do realize that in the "no gun control" era of the "wild wild west" - there were a lot of shootings and it wasn't just the "bad guys" that got it.

If you want to insist that everyone on your property is disarmed then you assume the burden of assuring their safety. If a criminal comes on the property and shoots others, you are responsible for that.
It is hardly the same logic as gun manufacturers. Why not sue shoe manufacturers when someone runs away from a crime scene?

Sure it's the same logic. If a person can be sued for a criminal act committed on his property than a person can be sued for a criminal act committed by something he provided.

Who gets sued when a gun happy Rambo shoots the wrong person on your property?

Your "logic" is absurd.
Show me where "gun happy rambos" have ever shot people on someone's property.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You do realize that in the "no gun control" era of the "wild wild west" - there were a lot of shootings and it wasn't just the "bad guys" that got it.

Only on TV.

 

[Shrimpbox]

Did gun control work in Australia?

John Howard, who served as prime minister of Australia from 1996 to 2007, is no one's idea of a lefty. He was one of George W. Bush's closest allies, enthusiastically backing the Iraq intervention, and took a hard line domestically against increased immigration and union organizing (pdf).

But one of Howard's other lasting legacies is Australia's gun control regime, first passed in 1996 in response to a massacre in Tasmania that left 35 dead. The law banned semiautomatic and automatic rifles and shotguns. It also instituted a mandatory buy-back program for newly banned weapons.

On Wednesday, Howard took to the Melbourne daily the Age to call on the United States, in light of the Aurora, Colo., massacre, to follow in Australia's footsteps. "There are many American traits which we Australians could well emulate to our great benefit," he concluded. "But when it comes to guns, we have been right to take a radically different path."

So what have the Australian laws actually done for homicide and suicide rates? Howard cites a study (pdf) by Andrew Leigh of Australian National University and Christine Neill of Wilfrid Laurier University finding that the firearm homicide rate fell by 59 percent, and the firearm suicide rate fell by 65 percent, in the decade after the law was introduced, without a parallel increase in non-firearm homicides and suicides. That provides strong circumstantial evidence for the law's effectiveness.

This is what you want? Well, that is what you people are going to get with your continued idiocy concerning the proliferation of firearms in this nation. And when it happens, it will happen exactly as in Australia. A final straw that offends everyone so badly that they simply override the stupidity of the NRA and GOP.

I have rebutted your exact same claim in another thread. You liberals just won't quit. If it fails in one thread just introduce it in another. This is why debating with libs is a fools errand, they will never, never, never, ever admit they were wrong.

 

[Coyote]

You do realize that in the "no gun control" era of the "wild wild west" - there were a lot of shootings and it wasn't just the "bad guys" that got it.

Only on TV.

Interesting...you might be right, there's apparently a lot of myth on the violence there - I looked it up and found this tidbit:

Did the Wild West Have More Gun Control Than We Do Today?

Yet this is all based on a widely shared misunderstanding of the Wild West. Frontier towns -- places like Tombstone, Deadwood, and Dodge -- actually had the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation.

In fact, many of those same cities have far less burdensome gun control today then they did back in the 1800s.

Guns were obviously widespread on the frontier. Out in the untamed wilderness, you needed a gun to be safe from bandits, natives, and wildlife. In the cities and towns of the West, however, the law often prohibited people from toting their guns around. A visitor arriving in Wichita, Kansas in 1873, the heart of the Wild West era, would have seen signs declaring, "Leave Your Revolvers At Police Headquarters, and Get a Check."

A check? That's right. When you entered a frontier town, you were legally required to leave your guns at the stables on the outskirts of town or drop them off with the sheriff, who would give you a token in exchange. You checked your guns then like you'd check your overcoat today at a Boston restaurant in winter. Visitors were welcome, but their guns were not. ​

 

[Coyote]

1) Repeal the 1968 Gun Control act. This Act has totally failed at its purpose of keeping guns from the hands of criminals. The only thing criminal here is the criminalizing of otherwise legal behavior. We have had nearly 50 years of experience with this law. It doesnt work. It needs to go, period.
2) Treat mass shooting perpetrators like rape victims. Ever see a rape victim's name in the paper? No, of course not. Mass shooters should get the same anonymous treatment. Since man of them are motivated by getting their 15 minutes, the knowledge they will get nothing but an obscure grave or jail cell will discourage this kind of celebrity seeking
3) Outlaw public gun free zones, and make private ones liable for shootings on their property. Virtually every mass shooting in this country in the last 20 years has happened in a gun free zone. They dont work. Period. No public property should be off limits to law abiding citizens with guns. Private property should be able to post No Guns, but if a criminal shoots someone who could have had a gun and doesnt the property owner should get sued.

Private property owners have the right to decide what is allowed on their property without being sued. Maybe we should sue gun manufacturers if their product is used in a crime. Same logic. Except for #2, these are retarded ideas. You do realize that in the "no gun control" era of the "wild wild west" - there were a lot of shootings and it wasn't just the "bad guys" that got it.

If you want to insist that everyone on your property is disarmed then you assume the burden of assuring their safety. If a criminal comes on the property and shoots others, you are responsible for that.
It is hardly the same logic as gun manufacturers. Why not sue shoe manufacturers when someone runs away from a crime scene?

Sure it's the same logic. If a person can be sued for a criminal act committed on his property than a person can be sued for a criminal act committed by something he provided.

Who gets sued when a gun happy Rambo shoots the wrong person on your property?

Your "logic" is absurd.
Show me where "gun happy rambos" have ever shot people on someone's property.

Show me why a property owner should be held liable for shootiings on their property because they forbid guns and the person could have had a gun. Hell...I should be able to bring my dog on their property then because my dog might protect me. Maybe the property owner should be held liable for attacks that occur when a person could have had their dog with them.

 

[PredFan]

You will never ever change the "minds" of these gun control retards. All we can do is point and laugh at their stupidity and give money to the NRA. You can't fix stupid, all we can do is take steps to make sure they don't win.

No right is unlimited, including gun rights. Fixing stupid is recognizing that a certain amount of gun control is rational.

It isn't rational when it's been shown that gun control does not work, and never has worked. Doing the same thing over and over expecting different results is the opposite of rational.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You do realize that in the "no gun control" era of the "wild wild west" - there were a lot of shootings and it wasn't just the "bad guys" that got it.

Only on TV.

Interesting...you might be right, there's apparently a lot of myth on the violence there - I looked it up and found this tidbit:

Did the Wild West Have More Gun Control Than We Do Today?

Yet this is all based on a widely shared misunderstanding of the Wild West. Frontier towns -- places like Tombstone, Deadwood, and Dodge -- actually had the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation.

In fact, many of those same cities have far less burdensome gun control today then they did back in the 1800s.

Guns were obviously widespread on the frontier. Out in the untamed wilderness, you needed a gun to be safe from bandits, natives, and wildlife. In the cities and towns of the West, however, the law often prohibited people from toting their guns around. A visitor arriving in Wichita, Kansas in 1873, the heart of the Wild West era, would have seen signs declaring, "Leave Your Revolvers At Police Headquarters, and Get a Check."

A check? That's right. When you entered a frontier town, you were legally required to leave your guns at the stables on the outskirts of town or drop them off with the sheriff, who would give you a token in exchange. You checked your guns then like you'd check your overcoat today at a Boston restaurant in winter. Visitors were welcome, but their guns were not. ​

Indeed, the same as private property owners can restrict firearms on their property today.

 

[PredFan]

You will never ever change the "minds" of these gun control retards. All we can do is point and laugh at their stupidity and give money to the NRA. You can't fix stupid, all we can do is take steps to make sure they don't win.

No right is unlimited, including gun rights. Fixing stupid is recognizing that a certain amount of gun control is rational.

Which part is rational? The part that has delivered consistent failure for 40 years?

Has it failed? Do you have stats to show that?

And what makes gun rights so special that they should have NO restriction?

No one says there should be no restrictions. That is something you are making up to save your argument.

And yes the stats have been shown hundreds of times here on this message board alone.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Show me why a property owner should be held liable for shootiings on their property because they forbid guns and the person could have had a gun.

If the property is public access the owners are required to provide a safe and secure environment. If someone is injured by another who ignored the rules because the injured party was prohibited from having the means to protect himself, the liability falls upon the property owner for failing to provide a safe and secure environment.

It's just like little kids and swimming pools. No fence, and you're negligent and liable.