CDZ We only need one gun law

Life in prison.

Here's the rundown of what we should do.

Commit any crime while in possession of a firearm even if that firearm is not drawn get an automatic 10 years no parole. Thus would make the act of illegally carrying a weapon one that gets you put away for 10 years.

Discharge a firearm while committing any crime even if no one is injured 20 years no parole.

Discharge a firearm during the commission of a crime and either injure or kill anyone life no parole.

Again, we already lock up 2 million people and have another 7 million on parole or probation, rendering them effectively unemployable and increasing the probability they will return to crime.

We don't have room for the real criminals we have now. If locking people up was the answer, we'd have the lowest crime rates in the industrialized world, not the highest.
Again we lock up more people for nonviolent crimes an drug offenses than anyone.
I don't know how many times I have to tell you that it would be a simple thing to have nonviolent offenders serve alternate sentences so that prison space can be reserved to violent pieces of shit
 
We already have thousands of gun laws, at the Federal, State, and local level. Murder, armed robbery, etc, are already illegal. We only need one more gun law...

Anyone found guilty of any violent crime with a gun...Gets hanged by the neck until dead.

The punishment doesn't fit the crime. Lynching is ok for someone convicted of murder, though.
So if someone shoots you in the head and you survive, what do you think should be their punishment?

Tough question. Chop off their gun hand, maybe. Punishment is supposed to be a deterrent from committing further offenses.

That would probably do it.

Lobotomy is the better way.
 
Anyone found guilty of any violent crime with a gun...Gets hanged by the neck until dead.
used to have said law.

seems leftist don't like to punish criminals

Indeed. Look what JoeB131 posted just before your post…

Again, we already lock up 2 million people and have another 7 million on parole or probation, rendering them effectively unemployable and increasing the probability they will return to crime.

We don't have room for the real criminals we have now. If locking people up was the answer, we'd have the lowest crime rates in the industrialized world, not the highest.

It's rather obvious. He wants to deny law-abiding citizens one of our most essential Constitutional rights, and he does not want genuine, violent criminals to be punished. I've been saying, for quite some time, that whether through ignorance or willful intent, those who support restrictions on the people's right to keep and bear arms are on the side of violent criminals, against against that of law-abiding citizens. They are not often as obvious about it as JoeB131 is being here.
 
We already have thousands of gun laws, at the Federal, State, and local level. Murder, armed robbery, etc, are already illegal. We only need one more gun law...

Anyone found guilty of any violent crime with a gun...Gets hanged by the neck until dead.

The punishment doesn't fit the crime. Lynching is ok for someone convicted of murder, though.
So if someone shoots you in the head and you survive, what do you think should be their punishment?

Tough question. Chop off their gun hand, maybe. Punishment is supposed to be a deterrent from committing further offenses.

That would probably do it.

Lobotomy is the better way.
I was thinking something of the same.

If he were permanently disabled, and couldn't even chop off their hand himself b/c he didn't know who he was or where he were at anymore, it would seem the person that shot him got the better end of the deal.

In that instance, the punishment still doesn't fit the crime.

But. . . he did admit, tough question. It pretty much depends on what happens to the victim. Does their ear get shot off, or do they get permanently disabled that affects them forever. Plus, was it an accident, or did the perp. intend to kill?
 
sheep minded people think everyone is a sheep.

those people had no idea what was really going on, they didn't have history teaching them.

we do.

I've got a degree in history, thanks.

My point still stands. Most people will side with even the worst governments when the other side is a "nut with a gun".

Case in point, did you praise Black Lives Matters when they started taking potshots at cops?
 
Again we lock up more people for nonviolent crimes an drug offenses than anyone.
I don't know how many times I have to tell you that it would be a simple thing to have nonviolent offenders serve alternate sentences so that prison space can be reserved to violent pieces of shit

Wrong again.

Releasing Drug Offenders Won’t End Mass Incarceration

According to the Bureau of Prisons, there are 207,847 people incarcerated in federal prisons. Roughly half (48.6 percent) are in for drug offenses. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, there are 1,358,875 people in state prisons. Of them, 16 percent have a drug crime as their most serious offense. There were also 744,600 inmates in county and city jails. (The BOP data is current as of July 16. From BJS, the latest jail statistics are from midyear 2014, and the latest prison statistics from year-end 2013.) That’s an incarceration rate of about 725 people per 100,000 population.

Suppose every federal drug offender were released today. That would cut the incarceration rate to about 693 inmates per 100,000 population. Suppose further that every drug offender in a state prison were also released. That would get the rate down to 625. It’s a significant drop, no question — these hypothetical measures would shrink the overall prison population by about 14 percent.
 
And yet there are 400 million firearms in private hands and only about 10000 murders a year with them.

We banned millions off lawn darts only over a few deaths.

How can you be so sure about that? Would banning guns make crazy people sane, criminals into law abiding citizens?

No, but their ability to cause mayhem would be lessened.
:lame2:
We still have a set, apparently there was no confiscation.

Lame comparison anyway.
Lawn darts are not covered by the Constitution. You really are a broken record pushing what will NEVER happen.
 
It's rather obvious. He wants to deny law-abiding citizens one of our most essential Constitutional rights, and he does not want genuine, violent criminals to be punished. I've been saying, for quite some time, that whether through ignorance or willful intent, those who support restrictions on the people's right to keep and bear arms are on the side of violent criminals, against against that of law-abiding citizens. They are not often as obvious about it as JoeB131 is being here.

A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy.

If guns and prisons made us safer.... we'd have the lowest crime rates in the industrialized world, not the highest. So we've tried it your way, it's failed MISERABLY by any metric you want to throw out there.

Maybe, just maybe if we addressed the underlying issues- the availability of guns, poverty, racism - we'd solve the problem of crime. Because locking them up and cowering in our houses behind guns ain't working, bud.
 
And yet there are 400 million firearms in private hands and only about 10000 murders a year with them.

We banned millions off lawn darts only over a few deaths.

How can you be so sure about that? Would banning guns make crazy people sane, criminals into law abiding citizens?

No, but their ability to cause mayhem would be lessened.
:lame2:
We still have a set, apparently there was no confiscation.

Lame comparison anyway.
Lawn darts are not covered by the Constitution. You really are a broken record pushing what will NEVER happen.
However, carry on...you continue to make a complete ass out of yourself.
 
sheep minded people think everyone is a sheep.

those people had no idea what was really going on, they didn't have history teaching them.

we do.

I've got a degree in history, thanks.

My point still stands. Most people will side with even the worst governments when the other side is a "nut with a gun".

Case in point, did you praise Black Lives Matters when they started taking potshots at cops?
since blm is based on lies, no, of course not.
 
We still have a set, apparently there was no confiscation.

Lame comparison anyway.
Lawn darts are not covered by the Constitution. You really are a broken record pushing what will NEVER happen.
However, carry on...you continue to make a complete ass out of yourself.

"Guns" aren't mentioned in the constitution, either.
 
since blm is based on lies, no, of course not.

Really? So LaQuan McDonald isn't dead? Is he just faking, that little scamp?

Or Mike brown. Eric Garner? Tamir Rice?

You see, you are kind of making my point here. The government is killing people in the street now, and no one is rising up with their guns.
do the math, make comparisons, the numbers aren't there to back up their lies.

only leftist tools believe their lies, hell, even your media masters know it's lies.
 
do the math, make comparisons, the numbers aren't there to back up their lies.

only leftist tools believe their lies, hell, even your media masters know it's lies.

i've done the math. LaQuan McDonald was shot 16 times. 9 of those shots were in the back when he was lying on the ground. The man who was caught red handed shooting him on tape, lying about it to investigators STILL hasn't gone to trial yet four years later. They MIGHT start a trial some time this year.

Yet nobody is rioting. Nobody is leading an armed insurrection against the government.

So the idea that guns save us from oppressive government is just... silly.
 
do the math, make comparisons, the numbers aren't there to back up their lies.

only leftist tools believe their lies, hell, even your media masters know it's lies.

i've done the math. LaQuan McDonald was shot 16 times. 9 of those shots were in the back when he was lying on the ground. The man who was caught red handed shooting him on tape, lying about it to investigators STILL hasn't gone to trial yet four years later. They MIGHT start a trial some time this year.

Yet nobody is rioting. Nobody is leading an armed insurrection against the government.

So the idea that guns save us from oppressive government is just... silly.
thanks for proving your a liar, not needed, since it's a well known fact.
 
We still have a set, apparently there was no confiscation.

Lame comparison anyway.
Lawn darts are not covered by the Constitution. You really are a broken record pushing what will NEVER happen.
However, carry on...you continue to make a complete ass out of yourself.

"Guns" aren't mentioned in the constitution, either.
That deserves a personal...:21:
 
We already have thousands of gun laws, at the Federal, State, and local level. Murder, armed robbery, etc, are already illegal. We only need one more gun law...

Anyone found guilty of any violent crime with a gun...Gets hanged by the neck until dead.

The punishment doesn't fit the crime. Lynching is ok for someone convicted of murder, though.

Murder and violent rape should be capitol hanging offenses. Complete with a speedy public hanging after the trial.
 

Forum List

Back
Top