Why do gun-enthusiasts OBJECT to registering their weapons?

[nat4900]

Agreed. In fact, all she has to do is file a restraining order and detail why in her filing.

Yeah...this MORON, knows how "successful" restraining orders are with abusive spouses.

Then such a fucking moron should know lawbreakers break the law. You're advocating rendering the victims defenseless against the aggressors.

HIDE.......Run and HIDE......Paranoia is good for you......

 

[Divine Wind]

Agreed. In fact, all she has to do is file a restraining order and detail why in her filing.

Yeah...this MORON, knows how "successful" restraining orders are with abusive spouses.

Then such a fucking moron should know lawbreakers break the law. You're advocating rendering the victims defenseless against the aggressors.

HIDE.......Run and HIDE......Paranoia is good for you......

It's a good tactic, but when all else fails, it's best to have a means of self-defense.

 

[nat4900]

Hey, here's an idea: Let's start with mandatory registration of books! Confiscation will of course happen for those that do not register their books...and if you're on a secret list, you will be banned from buying books.

Let's start there and see how it goes.

Deal?

When was the last time a murderer killed 49 and injured more than 100 more people by throwing books at them???? How fucking simplistic are you morons?

 

[Divine Wind]

Hey, here's an idea: Let's start with mandatory registration of books! Confiscation will of course happen for those that do not register their books...and if you're on a secret list, you will be banned from buying books.

Let's start there and see how it goes.

Deal?

When was the last time a murderer killed 49 and injured more than 100 more people by throwing books at them???? How fucking simplistic are you morons?

Car bombs are better.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Because the government sucks. Durr.

Try not to strain your half brain too much in coming up with such an erudite response. Go take a nap, now.

Stupid OP doesn't deserve a well thought out response.

 

[Divine Wind]

So, you and your fucked up ilk think that we are living in a pre-Nazi environment in the US???
If you think so, grab your trusty rifles and march of Washington D.C. TODAY !!!!! Go on.

Isn't that what the Democrats want? Total Federal control over our lives because they know best? How is this different from National Socialism?

 

[nat4900]

Isn't that what the Democrats want? Total Federal control over our lives because they know best? How is this different from National Socialism?

Not really....That's just both your stupidity and paranoia (and FOX) putting those moronic "conclusions" in your half brain.

 

[WinterBorn]

Agreed. In fact, all she has to do is file a restraining order and detail why in her filing.

Yeah...this MORON, knows how "successful" restraining orders are with abusive spouses.

Ok, so you are saying that a wife beater will ignore restraining orders AND will murder someone. But you think they will obey the laws concerning gun registration?

Now look, I am not going to get into a flame war or trade insults. That is a waste of time. But I will, once again, try to engage you with a simple question. What do you think gun registration will accomplish? The domestic abuse thing is not going to fly.

 

[eflatminor]

So, you want to handle firearm registration like we do vehicles, eh? Okay, let's see what that looks like:

• States may choose to require firearm registration, but the federal government would have no say whatsoever;
• States would not require you to register or obtain a license to use your firearm on your own property, only if you're on public land (you do not need a license to drive on your own land);
• Firearm owners would be free to modify their guns in any way they like, just as we're free to make cars the way we want, including giant monster trucks, as silly as that is; and
• When someone kills one or many people with a firearm, no one will blame the gun, they will blame the murderer, just as we do if someone kills with a car.

Your "contribution" is as simplistic as matching the education level of most of your fellow right wingers on here.

Sure you can drive your car within your own land without a registration.....which is kind of tough for the millions of people who live in a basement or apartment complex.

A few state DO require gun registration and they are among the "safest"...

....and to finally state that its the murderer who gets indicted and not the gun is a childish parallel.

So, you start off with the logical fallacy of ad hominem. Color me shocked.

Moving on, I see you cannot refute what I posted. your comment about renters doesn't change a thing I posted, but thanks for the red herring!

Next, care to post which states require registration and proof they're "safer"? This ought to be good...

Lastly, your last sentence makes zero sense. Are you drunk by chance???

 

[nat4900]

Ok, so you are saying that a wife beater will ignore restraining orders AND will murder someone. But you think they will obey the laws concerning gun registration?

NO......NO....NO.....

I stated from the BEGINNING my scenario.......Again, for the slow witted, a guy purchases a gun LEGALLY prior to getting married....He then becomes a violent abuser.........IF his gun was registered, and police were called in to a domestic violence incident....Should the police know IF a gun was in the house? a simple YES or NO?

 

[nat4900]

Next, care to post which states require registration and proof they're "safer"? This ought to be good...

Moron....No state is safe....even a nitwit like you could relocate to Hawaii for instance. Look it up.

 

[WinterBorn]

Ok, so you are saying that a wife beater will ignore restraining orders AND will murder someone. But you think they will obey the laws concerning gun registration?

NO......NO....NO.....

I stated from the BEGINNING my scenario.......Again, for the slow witted, a guy purchases a gun LEGALLY prior to getting married....He then becomes a violent abuser.........IF his gun was registered, and police were called in to a domestic violence incident....Should the police know IF a gun was in the house? a simple YES or NO?

I have known quite a few police officers. Every single one assumes there is a gun in the house.

Now, I have asked over and over and over. What do you think will be accomplished by a gun registration? The domestic violence idea sounds nice, but the reality is that, if the man wants to kill her, the man will kill her. Knife, hands, toolbox, or whatever he uses. And the woman, if she is smart will let the cops know there is a gun.

So, since you brought this up in the OP, and keep defending it, list some things you think will be accomplished by a gun registration.

 

[eflatminor]

Hey, here's an idea: Let's start with mandatory registration of books! Confiscation will of course happen for those that do not register their books...and if you're on a secret list, you will be banned from buying books.

Let's start there and see how it goes.

Deal?

When was the last time a murderer killed 49 and injured more than 100 more people by throwing books at them???? How fucking simplistic are you morons?

When was the last time a murderer killed anyone by throwing a firearm at them? Supposed it's possible, but doubtful.

Hey look, another logical fallacy. Just shocking...

 

[eflatminor]

Next, care to post which states require registration and proof they're "safer"? This ought to be good...

Moron....No state is safe....even a nitwit like you could relocate to Hawaii for instance. Look it up.

Are you capable of interacting WITHOUT a logical fallacy? It would appear not...

Anywho, Hawaii ranks 27th among states on the crime index: U.S. Crime Index State Rank

If we look at violent crime rates, it appears there are several states that are less violent, but do not require registration: Violent Crime | State public health statistics | America's Health Rankings

So, I'd agree with you but you're wrong.

Next logical fallacy in 3...2...

 

[nat4900]

I have known quite a few police officers. Every single one assumes there is a gun in the house.

Now, I have asked over and over and over. What do you think will be accomplished by a gun registration? The domestic violence idea sounds nice, but the reality is that, if the man wants to kill her, the man will kill her. Knife, hands, toolbox, or whatever he uses. And the woman, if she is smart will let the cops know there is a gun.

So, since you brought this up in the OP, and keep defending it, list some things you think will be accomplished by a gun registration.

You seem to be "denser" than even some within your ilk....and that isn't too easy......."Congratulations !!!"

Now....I ALREADY posted a link on the benefits of registering your precious weapons....and I'm not going back to do it again so that you nitwits will neglect it.....

Second, in my little scenario.......You say that police "assume" that there'll be a gun in the house of the abuser (wise assumption given that we have MORE weapons than fucking people in this country...thank you NRA and the gun manufacturers).......The crux of it all, is YES the maniac can kill his wife by strangulation, stabbing, kicking, poison, etc.......BUT HOW CAN YOU MORONS COMPARE THOSE METHODS OF KILLING TO AN ASSAULT RIFLE'S POTENTIAL FOR CARNAGE???

 

[nat4900]

Are you capable of interacting WITHOUT a logical fallacy? It would appear not...

Anywho, Hawaii ranks 27th among states on the crime index: U.S. Crime Index State Rank

If we look at violent crime rates, it appears there are several states that are less violent, but do not require registration: Violent Crime | State public health statistics | America's Health Rankings

So, I'd agree with you but you're wrong.

Next logical fallacy in 3...2...

I really do NOT care if you remain the idiot that you're now...Seriously, I really don't give a flying fuck...
Stick to your guns, bibles and latent racism, biases and hatred.....Bottom line, you're a dwindling, anachronistic minority...NOT on this forum for sure...its as full of right wingers as a FOX town hall.....but thank heavens, you are NOT a majority in the general population.

 

[WinterBorn]

I have known quite a few police officers. Every single one assumes there is a gun in the house.

Now, I have asked over and over and over. What do you think will be accomplished by a gun registration? The domestic violence idea sounds nice, but the reality is that, if the man wants to kill her, the man will kill her. Knife, hands, toolbox, or whatever he uses. And the woman, if she is smart will let the cops know there is a gun.

So, since you brought this up in the OP, and keep defending it, list some things you think will be accomplished by a gun registration.

You seem to be "denser" than even some within your ilk....and that isn't too easy......."Congratulations !!!"

Now....I ALREADY posted a link on the benefits of registering your precious weapons....and I'm not going back to do it again so that you nitwits will neglect it.....

Second, in my little scenario.......You say that police "assume" that there'll be a gun in the house of the abuser (wise assumption given that we have MORE weapons than fucking people in this country...thank you NRA and the gun manufacturers).......The crux of it all, is YES the maniac can kill his wife by strangulation, stabbing, kicking, poison, etc.......BUT HOW CAN YOU MORONS COMPARE THOSE METHODS OF KILLING TO AN ASSAULT RIFLE'S POTENTIAL FOR CARNAGE???

Why? Because the scenario that YOU brought up does not involve carnage on any large scale the overwhelming majority of the time.

Yeah, I didn't see the link. I just thought you might have your own reasons, or be able to express some. My mistake for expecting you to state much. You seem far more interesting in childish insults and nonsense.

 

[eflatminor]

Are you capable of interacting WITHOUT a logical fallacy? It would appear not...

Anywho, Hawaii ranks 27th among states on the crime index: U.S. Crime Index State Rank

If we look at violent crime rates, it appears there are several states that are less violent, but do not require registration: Violent Crime | State public health statistics | America's Health Rankings

So, I'd agree with you but you're wrong.

Next logical fallacy in 3...2...

I really do NOT care if you remain the idiot that you're now...Seriously, I really don't give a flying fuck...
Stick to your guns, bibles and latent racism, biases and hatred.....Bottom line, you're a dwindling, anachronistic minority...NOT on this forum for sure...its as full of right wingers as a FOX town hall.....but thank heavens, you are NOT a majority in the general population.

Pathologically incapable of communication without logical fallacies. You really ought to get that looked at.

Such an angry little man you are.

Lastly, I see you completely avoided the fact I proved your assertion wrong. Typical. You're free to try again.

 

[nat4900]

Tom Lehmann
December 26, 2015 ·
s every 3 seconds (400 bullets per minute with a large enough clip) to kill as many of the enemy as possible in a shortest period of time. Let’s be real, this type of destruction has no place in our peacetime civilized society. Please be honest, ask yourself if you have the right to carry rocket propelled grenades (rpg) or a m60 machine gun? Of course not. Someone please tell me why you should be allowed to own an assault rifle. Please don’t embarrass yourself by saying that it’s your right to bear arms or you need it for hunting. Listen, I’m not professing to take our guns away, I am just saying that we need to have some sanity to the argument. In today’s world we will always be confronted with emotionally disturbed people, terrorist, and criminals. Let’s just agree that we need to make it difficult to arm them with weapons designed to achieve mass slaughter of large number of human beings.
The bottom line is that there is no reason why weapons of mass destruction of any sort - chemical weapons, biological weapons, RPG's, improvised explosive devices (IED's), missiles, dirty bombs, nuclear devices, or assault weapons -- should be easily accessible. For 10 years there was a ban on the production, ownership and use of assault weapons in the United States until Congress and the Bush Administration allowed it to lapse when it sunset and came up for reauthorization in 2004.
Can our elected officials be counted on to reinstate the assault weapons ban? Or does the blood stain of man’s inhumanity to man live within all of us?

 

[WinterBorn]

Tom Lehmann
December 26, 2015 ·
s every 3 seconds (400 bullets per minute with a large enough clip) to kill as many of the enemy as possible in a shortest period of time. Let’s be real, this type of destruction has no place in our peacetime civilized society. Please be honest, ask yourself if you have the right to carry rocket propelled grenades (rpg) or a m60 machine gun? Of course not. Someone please tell me why you should be allowed to own an assault rifle. Please don’t embarrass yourself by saying that it’s your right to bear arms or you need it for hunting. Listen, I’m not professing to take our guns away, I am just saying that we need to have some sanity to the argument. In today’s world we will always be confronted with emotionally disturbed people, terrorist, and criminals. Let’s just agree that we need to make it difficult to arm them with weapons designed to achieve mass slaughter of large number of human beings.
The bottom line is that there is no reason why weapons of mass destruction of any sort - chemical weapons, biological weapons, RPG's, improvised explosive devices (IED's), missiles, dirty bombs, nuclear devices, or assault weapons -- should be easily accessible. For 10 years there was a ban on the production, ownership and use of assault weapons in the United States until Congress and the Bush Administration allowed it to lapse when it sunset and came up for reauthorization in 2004.
Can our elected officials be counted on to reinstate the assault weapons ban? Or does the blood stain of man’s inhumanity to man live within all of us?

You missed some of what Tom Lehmann said. If you are going to cut & paste, at least be honest enough to use it all.

The actual quote begins with: "Forty five years ago I was asked by United States of America to fight for freedom in Viet Nam. I was given an assault rifle that was designed to fire 20 bullets every 3 seconds (400 bullets per minute with a large enough clip) to kill as many of the enemy as possible in a shortest period of time."

If you do not know the difference between the rifle that was issued during Vietnam and the rifle sold to civilians, you should go and do a little research.