A Call to Reason: Why Background Checks Don’t Work

[Pete7469]

You keep making these assertions based on nothing. The truth is that on the national level gun control is a failure. After Sandy Hook the federal govt failed to get ANY new regulations passed. There is no reason to think somehow its going to be different later.

I only caution you on one point. If we don't run the ball all the way into the end zone, we can expect the bed wetters to come back in the quiet of night and pass some bullshit laws while we aren't looking.

Never under estimate how low a fascist will go.

 

[The Rabbi]

You keep making these assertions based on nothing. The truth is that on the national level gun control is a failure. After Sandy Hook the federal govt failed to get ANY new regulations passed. There is no reason to think somehow its going to be different later.

I only caution you on one point. If we don't run the ball all the way into the end zone, we can expect the bed wetters to come back in the quiet of night and pass some bullshit laws while we aren't looking.

Never under estimate how low a fascist will go.

We need to keep an eye on it, for sure. But it is such a loser that Kondor's predictions are about like a rerun of North Korea's invasion of the US.

 

[FA_Q2]

Oh, c'mon, one can wipe one's backside with 'public opinion surveys', for all the good it will do you, in the face of accelerating gun-related violence and domestic terrorism, and you know it as well as I do.

But, you're bound and determined to continue deluding yourself(ves) over future prospects, so, what the hell...

You've been warned.

I've addressed this already.

You don't get criminally insane authoritarian sociopaths to back off by ceding some freedom to them. They ALWAYS come back for the rest.

We win this fight by pushing for the repeal of existing laws, and replacing them with an education focused on preventing problems. If we have to carve out a 28th Amendment forever forbidding a local, state or federal agency, office or legislature from passing policy or laws that in any way hinders a citizen of the US from acquiring, possessing, carrying or trading a firearm or ammunition, then that's what I'm all in for.

You want "compromise"? OK fine.

Limit the caliber allowed for civilian ownership not exceed the 40mm limit that the government law enforcement agencies can use against us.

That's as far as I'm wiling to go.

Your problem is that you perceive everyone who is in favor of better gun controls, to be a 'criminally insane authoritarian sociopath'.

On the contrary, most are normal people... average citizens... parents and grandparents... who want our high gun-related crime rate put back under control... and who will eventually buy into Gun Grabber's own worst arguments and solutions, if you don't get out in front of this damned thing.

When you regain a perspective that most folks merely want an end to the gun violence rather than your enemies and enemies of the US Constitution, you will be better positioned to participate in any future nationwide reform process.

I suggest you work on it... you don't have as much time as you think.. regardless of which party is in power at any given point in time.

People who believe "common sense gun laws" would prevent crime are misguided misinformed low information people.

You are entitled to your opinion.

It has the virtue of never having been tried before on a nationwide level in this country in the modern information age.

One way or another, we are likely to find out whether it works, sometime in the not-too-distant future.

It then becomes a question of how draconian the new 'trial environment' becomes.

People who take-up seats at the discussion table have a better chance of steering than those remaining outside the collaborative loop.

But, if folks insist upon having that concept reinforced for them in a practical sense, once it becomes too late to exert substantive influence, well...

Nice how you narrow that it has not been tried here recently. You are purposefully ignoring the fact that it has been tried several times on nation wide levels and it fails every time. Grater gun control that we already have is nothing more than a feel good measure that accomplished nothing. Nothing other than removing a constitutional right without purpose.

There is also the very real falsehood that you keep demanding that it is coming when gun laws are moving the other direction in many ways. Grater control is certainly NOT coming. The gun control advocates have tried to use every tragedy that they can and so far it has failed miserably.

 

[FA_Q2]

Should the government infringe on rights granted in the constitution, for "public safety".

No.

Should the government establish and enforce standards for the licensing of gun-owners and the registration of firearms?

Yes.

Cognitive dissonance right there.

 

[Kondor3]

looks like I and others know how your ilk works Kondor , good to have it out in the open , to be able to read your words and thinking .
Thank you , both you Bulldog and a few others !!

You make a perfect target for the Gun-Grabbers... obtuse, intransigent, and manifesting sociopathic and paranoid perceptions and behaviors. Although I'm sure that the NRA will welcome your continued donations, their PR Folks are probably saying: "Fer Crissakes, puh-leeeze stay off our side, eh?" as they read your feedback.

 

[Kondor3]

Should the government infringe on rights granted in the constitution, for "public safety".

No.

Should the government establish and enforce standards for the licensing of gun-owners and the registration of firearms?

Yes.

Cognitive dissonance right there.

Not when one unburdens one's self of the dea that Registration and Licensing are infringements upon one's Constitutional Rights.

 

[Kondor3]

Oh, c'mon, one can wipe one's backside with 'public opinion surveys', for all the good it will do you, in the face of accelerating gun-related violence and domestic terrorism, and you know it as well as I do.

But, you're bound and determined to continue deluding yourself(ves) over future prospects, so, what the hell...

You've been warned.

I've addressed this already.

You don't get criminally insane authoritarian sociopaths to back off by ceding some freedom to them. They ALWAYS come back for the rest.

We win this fight by pushing for the repeal of existing laws, and replacing them with an education focused on preventing problems. If we have to carve out a 28th Amendment forever forbidding a local, state or federal agency, office or legislature from passing policy or laws that in any way hinders a citizen of the US from acquiring, possessing, carrying or trading a firearm or ammunition, then that's what I'm all in for.

You want "compromise"? OK fine.

Limit the caliber allowed for civilian ownership not exceed the 40mm limit that the government law enforcement agencies can use against us.

That's as far as I'm wiling to go.

Your problem is that you perceive everyone who is in favor of better gun controls, to be a 'criminally insane authoritarian sociopath'.

On the contrary, most are normal people... average citizens... parents and grandparents... who want our high gun-related crime rate put back under control... and who will eventually buy into Gun Grabber's own worst arguments and solutions, if you don't get out in front of this damned thing.

When you regain a perspective that most folks merely want an end to the gun violence rather than your enemies and enemies of the US Constitution, you will be better positioned to participate in any future nationwide reform process.

I suggest you work on it... you don't have as much time as you think.. regardless of which party is in power at any given point in time.

People who believe "common sense gun laws" would prevent crime are misguided misinformed low information people.

You are entitled to your opinion.

It has the virtue of never having been tried before on a nationwide level in this country in the modern information age.

One way or another, we are likely to find out whether it works, sometime in the not-too-distant future.

It then becomes a question of how draconian the new 'trial environment' becomes.

People who take-up seats at the discussion table have a better chance of steering than those remaining outside the collaborative loop.

But, if folks insist upon having that concept reinforced for them in a practical sense, once it becomes too late to exert substantive influence, well...

You keep making these assertions based on nothing. The truth is that on the national level gun control is a failure. After Sandy Hook the federal govt failed to get ANY new regulations passed. There is no reason to think somehow its going to be different later.

I show you the future - spanning decades and even generations, perhaps. It's your choice to reject the vision. Unfortunate. For Gun Owners.

 

[FA_Q2]

Should the government infringe on rights granted in the constitution, for "public safety".

No.

Should the government establish and enforce standards for the licensing of gun-owners and the registration of firearms?

Yes.

Cognitive dissonance right there.

Not when one unburdens one's self of the dea that Registration and Licensing are infringements upon one's Constitutional Rights.

You mean when one lies to oneself.

That is as straight forward as it gets – it is a FACT That requiring registration or licensing is an infringement by its very definition. The argument is not weather rights can be infringed upon – we do that all over the place in law with every single protected right. The question has always been how far that infringement can go.

 

[pismoe]

decades ehh Kondor ?? And all the time growing a new breed of gun owning enthusiast like women , minorities , new imported people . And heck , with events like a burned down Baltimore as a current example and the long hot summer that's just getting started guns will certainly have an appeal to practical storeowners , home owners and just practical people defending their lives and property Kondor .

 

[The Rabbi]

Should the government infringe on rights granted in the constitution, for "public safety".

No.

Should the government establish and enforce standards for the licensing of gun-owners and the registration of firearms?

Yes.

Cognitive dissonance right there.

Not when one unburdens one's self of the dea that Registration and Licensing are infringements upon one's Constitutional Rights.

You mean swings into fantasy? Yeah those are infringements. Nor will they solve anything.

 

[Kondor3]

Should the government infringe on rights granted in the constitution, for "public safety".

No.

Should the government establish and enforce standards for the licensing of gun-owners and the registration of firearms?

Yes.

Cognitive dissonance right there.

Not when one unburdens one's self of the dea that Registration and Licensing are infringements upon one's Constitutional Rights.

You mean when one lies to oneself.

That is as straight forward as it gets – it is a FACT That requiring registration or licensing is an infringement by its very definition. The argument is not weather rights can be infringed upon – we do that all over the place in law with every single protected right. The question has always been how far that infringement can go.

As you like.

Being a lifelong Gun Rights advocate, I merely show you the writing on the wall, even if a handful of notable decisions have led you into the error of complacency and untouchability.

 

[The Rabbi]

I've addressed this already.

You don't get criminally insane authoritarian sociopaths to back off by ceding some freedom to them. They ALWAYS come back for the rest.

We win this fight by pushing for the repeal of existing laws, and replacing them with an education focused on preventing problems. If we have to carve out a 28th Amendment forever forbidding a local, state or federal agency, office or legislature from passing policy or laws that in any way hinders a citizen of the US from acquiring, possessing, carrying or trading a firearm or ammunition, then that's what I'm all in for.

You want "compromise"? OK fine.

Limit the caliber allowed for civilian ownership not exceed the 40mm limit that the government law enforcement agencies can use against us.

That's as far as I'm wiling to go.

Your problem is that you perceive everyone who is in favor of better gun controls, to be a 'criminally insane authoritarian sociopath'.

On the contrary, most are normal people... average citizens... parents and grandparents... who want our high gun-related crime rate put back under control... and who will eventually buy into Gun Grabber's own worst arguments and solutions, if you don't get out in front of this damned thing.

When you regain a perspective that most folks merely want an end to the gun violence rather than your enemies and enemies of the US Constitution, you will be better positioned to participate in any future nationwide reform process.

I suggest you work on it... you don't have as much time as you think.. regardless of which party is in power at any given point in time.

People who believe "common sense gun laws" would prevent crime are misguided misinformed low information people.

You are entitled to your opinion.

It has the virtue of never having been tried before on a nationwide level in this country in the modern information age.

One way or another, we are likely to find out whether it works, sometime in the not-too-distant future.

It then becomes a question of how draconian the new 'trial environment' becomes.

People who take-up seats at the discussion table have a better chance of steering than those remaining outside the collaborative loop.

But, if folks insist upon having that concept reinforced for them in a practical sense, once it becomes too late to exert substantive influence, well...

You keep making these assertions based on nothing. The truth is that on the national level gun control is a failure. After Sandy Hook the federal govt failed to get ANY new regulations passed. There is no reason to think somehow its going to be different later.

I show you the future - spanning decades and even generations, perhaps. It's your choice to reject the vision. Unfortunate. For Gun Owners.

LOL! Yeah, that's the future.
Here's the real future: No gun owners is giving up anything. And no politician concerned about getting elected will push gun control.

 

[The Rabbi]

Should the government infringe on rights granted in the constitution, for "public safety".

No.

Should the government establish and enforce standards for the licensing of gun-owners and the registration of firearms?

Yes.

Cognitive dissonance right there.

Not when one unburdens one's self of the dea that Registration and Licensing are infringements upon one's Constitutional Rights.

You mean when one lies to oneself.

That is as straight forward as it gets – it is a FACT That requiring registration or licensing is an infringement by its very definition. The argument is not weather rights can be infringed upon – we do that all over the place in law with every single protected right. The question has always been how far that infringement can go.

As you like.

Being a lifelong Gun Rights advocate, I merely show you the writing on the wall, even if a handful of notable decisions have led you into the error of complacency and untouchability.

Yeah you're a gun rights advocate. You advocate giving them up.

 

[FA_Q2]

Should the government infringe on rights granted in the constitution, for "public safety".

No.

Should the government establish and enforce standards for the licensing of gun-owners and the registration of firearms?

Yes.

Cognitive dissonance right there.

Not when one unburdens one's self of the dea that Registration and Licensing are infringements upon one's Constitutional Rights.

You mean when one lies to oneself.

That is as straight forward as it gets – it is a FACT That requiring registration or licensing is an infringement by its very definition. The argument is not weather rights can be infringed upon – we do that all over the place in law with every single protected right. The question has always been how far that infringement can go.

As you like.

Being a lifelong Gun Rights advocate, I merely show you the writing on the wall, even if a handful of notable decisions have led you into the error of complacency and untouchability.

Not really. You have not ‘shown’ anything beyond one liner statements and demands that it is happening (when there is no indication of such).

 

[Kondor3]

Should the government infringe on rights granted in the constitution, for "public safety".

No.

Should the government establish and enforce standards for the licensing of gun-owners and the registration of firearms?

Yes.

Cognitive dissonance right there.

Not when one unburdens one's self of the dea that Registration and Licensing are infringements upon one's Constitutional Rights.

You mean swings into fantasy? Yeah those are infringements. Nor will they solve anything.

Automatic gain say is getting us nowhere.

Your inability to consider long-range trends and long-range public reaction and long-range lawmaking and long-range judicial activism in this context is most unfortunate.

But, I won't belabor the point any longer.

I'll let the future and The People handle that.

 

[Pete7469]

You make a perfect target for the Gun-Grabbers... obtuse, intransigent, and manifesting sociopathic and paranoid perceptions and behaviors. Although I'm sure that the NRA will welcome your continued donations, their PR Folks are probably saying: "Fer Crissakes, puh-leeeze stay off our side, eh?" as they read your feedback.

You probably say the same thing about Ted Nugent.

Problem is he is more popular with his "extremism" than ever.

You should probably look up the word "sociopath" again before you try and use it. People who are concerned about their rights and the rights of others cannot be "sociopathic" by any definition.

 

[The Rabbi]

Should the government infringe on rights granted in the constitution, for "public safety".

No.

Should the government establish and enforce standards for the licensing of gun-owners and the registration of firearms?

Yes.

Cognitive dissonance right there.

Not when one unburdens one's self of the dea that Registration and Licensing are infringements upon one's Constitutional Rights.

You mean swings into fantasy? Yeah those are infringements. Nor will they solve anything.

Automatic gain say is getting us nowhere.

Your inability to consider long-range trends and long-range public reaction and long-range lawmaking and long-range judicial activism in this context is most unfortunate.

But, I won't belabor the point any longer.

I'll let the future and The People handle that.

LOL! The long range trend has been towards less gun control. That has been the case for the last 20 years. Can you show any indication that gun control is gaining popularity? Any evidence?

 

[Kondor3]

Should the government infringe on rights granted in the constitution, for "public safety".

No.

Should the government establish and enforce standards for the licensing of gun-owners and the registration of firearms?

Yes.

Cognitive dissonance right there.

Not when one unburdens one's self of the dea that Registration and Licensing are infringements upon one's Constitutional Rights.

You mean when one lies to oneself.

That is as straight forward as it gets – it is a FACT That requiring registration or licensing is an infringement by its very definition. The argument is not weather rights can be infringed upon – we do that all over the place in law with every single protected right. The question has always been how far that infringement can go.

As you like.

Being a lifelong Gun Rights advocate, I merely show you the writing on the wall, even if a handful of notable decisions have led you into the error of complacency and untouchability.

Not really. You have not ‘shown’ anything beyond one liner statements and demands that it is happening (when there is no indication of such).

As you like. I'm not the one who is going to have his knickers in a twist when you lose your place at the table and can no longer influence the outcome.

 

[Kondor3]

You make a perfect target for the Gun-Grabbers... obtuse, intransigent, and manifesting sociopathic and paranoid perceptions and behaviors. Although I'm sure that the NRA will welcome your continued donations, their PR Folks are probably saying: "Fer Crissakes, puh-leeeze stay off our side, eh?" as they read your feedback.

You probably say the same thing about Ted Nugent.

Problem is he is more popular with his "extremism" than ever.

You should probably look up the word "sociopath" again before you try and use it. People who are concerned about their rights and the rights of others cannot be "sociopathic" by any definition.

If you go far enough back on the thread you find the bread crumbs.

 

[Pete7469]

Not when one unburdens one's self of the dea that Registration and Licensing are infringements upon one's Constitutional Rights.

What do you call it? An enhancement? You seem to have trouble with your english comprehension skills.