Banning ammo that can defeat body armor...?

How do you know the buyer is a felon if you don't do a background check?

DUH.

Billc - you do this in so many of your posts. You need to think things through before you post.

:cuckoo:

Private sales are generally to friends and family members. You know if they are a felon.


Ridiculous.

That's another way of saying you want people to be able to get guns for criminals.
 
so now no criminals want rifles eh?

What are the statistics regarding crimes committed with rifles?

79.9% of gun crime is with handguns.
11.1% with rifles.

MOST gun crime is the theft of the gun.

So, violent crime is the real question.

96.3% of violent acts involving a firearm occur with a handgun.

More violent acts are committed with shotguns than with rifles.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/GUIC.PDF

I'm kinda surprised you're a gun grabber.
Almost all cops and ex-cops are gun grabbers, almost all former high ranking officers are too.
no one, least of all I,cares what you think Road Runner. You're just a crusty old man who has nothing left in his life except the internet and his guns.

Not even smart enough to figure out that if you fight every little sensible gun regulation people will just feel less inclined to deal with you.

There is absolutely no reason to ban these rounds.


There is no sensible reason to resist background checks between on a private gun sell either, yet...............


There are several reasons....

1) background checks do not stop the 8-9,000 gun murders by criminals each year, nor the mass shootings that ocurr each year......

2) the time, money and manpower to regulate private sales would be too much for law enforcement resources

3) ******it is against the law....already, for a felon to buy a gun even from a private seller

4)******it is against the law to sell a gun to a felon even if you are a private seller

5) you would have to register all guns to have the database to know who is selling what guns to who as private sellers....which would be insane and a step towards a future ban...


So....on top of background checks of any kind already being useless at stopping violent crime....it also leads to abuses against law abiding gun owners....


How do you know the buyer is a felon if you don't do a background check?

DUH.

Billc - you do this in so many of your posts. You need to think things through before you post.

so now no criminals want rifles eh?

What are the statistics regarding crimes committed with rifles?

79.9% of gun crime is with handguns.
11.1% with rifles.

MOST gun crime is the theft of the gun.

So, violent crime is the real question.

96.3% of violent acts involving a firearm occur with a handgun.

More violent acts are committed with shotguns than with rifles.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/GUIC.PDF

I'm kinda surprised you're a gun grabber.
Almost all cops and ex-cops are gun grabbers, almost all former high ranking officers are too.

Completely false. Most cops are pro 2nd amendment. Of all people...they know more than anyone how important a gun is for self defense. They admit they'll have trouble getting to someone before a bad guy can.

Find 100 cops. Ask them how many have bought a gun for their wife and trained her to use it. Ask them if they believe a person should have a gun at home for defense. I bet 90-95 answet yes, yes and yes.

:cuckoo:


Police unions are anti-gun.

I don't trust cops to tell the truth on the issue.

Rank and file may feel one way, top brass are anti-gun in general.


Another opinion that you confuse with fact.
 
Doodette, why do the rabid RWs want criminals, illegals, terrorists, metal cases to have the same easy access to guns that the rest of us have? Why do you want those groups to outgun law enforcement?

Pillowbite - if not banning target ammo would put guns into the hands of Al Qaeda terrorists - you and the other democrat traitors would be all for it. Be real.
 
At no point did I say I objected to the public having them. I sad I don't have a problem with the ban, an entirely different statement.
So, you don't mind if the 2nd Amendment stands, but you're good with it being infringed as well? :dunno:
Does a person have the right to walk into a airport and yell " i have a bomb"
This places people in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger; as such, it is not protected by the 1st.
Can you describe a 2nd amendment-related analogue to this?
 
At no point did I say I objected to the public having them. I sad I don't have a problem with the ban, an entirely different statement.
So, you don't mind if the 2nd Amendment stands, but you're good with it being infringed as well? :dunno:
Does a person have the right to walk into a airport and yell " i have a bomb"
This places people in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger; as such, it is not protected by the 1st.
Can you describe a 2nd amendment-related analogue to this?


Oh yeah? Where in the first Amendment does it say the government can regulate speech if it presents any danger? Answer me that
 
At no point did I say I objected to the public having them. I sad I don't have a problem with the ban, an entirely different statement.
So, you don't mind if the 2nd Amendment stands, but you're good with it being infringed as well? :dunno:
Does a person have the right to walk into a airport and yell " i have a bomb"
This places people in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger; as such, it is not protected by the 1st.
Can you describe a 2nd amendment-related analogue to this?
Oh yeah?
Yes.
Now, can you describe a 2nd amendment-related analogue to yelling "I have a bomb!" in an airport?
 
At no point did I say I objected to the public having them. I sad I don't have a problem with the ban, an entirely different statement.
So, you don't mind if the 2nd Amendment stands, but you're good with it being infringed as well? :dunno:
Does a person have the right to walk into a airport and yell " i have a bomb"
This places people in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger; as such, it is not protected by the 1st.
Can you describe a 2nd amendment-related analogue to this?
Oh yeah?
Yes.
Now, can you describe a 2nd amendment-related analogue to yelling "I have a bomb!" in an airport?


why did you cut my quote? Where in the first amendment does it say that the government can quell free speech if it poses a danger?
 
I sell firearms on a private site all the time.....it's a national board with local listings. Somebody inquires, I meet them in a public place, and show them an unloaded weapon. If they like it they sign a receipt that lists their Arizona DL number and address, signature, and check a box that says they're legally able to own a firearm. I can't sell a pistol to an out-of-state resident. Then I lock that receipt up because without it if that weapon appears at a crime scene, I'm the one in the soup if I don't have a solid alibi.
 
Oh yeah? Where in the first Amendment does it say the government can regulate speech if it presents any danger? Answer me that

It's doesn't - nor does government regulate speech. You are perfectly within your rights to yell fire in a crowded theater. You simply will be held civilly and criminally responsible for the results. Airports post, by law that you agree to be searched and willfully surrender certain rights by entering.

Try again.
 

Forum List

Back
Top