Colorado judge strikes down AR-15 ban, and over 10 round magazine ban....good.

[Blues Man]

No it doesn't. A person can voluntarily give up their rights.

And you say you want to keep guns out of the hands of criminal but you refuse to say that we should enforce the federal gun laws we already have on the books.

I'm saying those laws are kind of meaningless if they are selectively enforced.

For instance, prostitution is illegal where I live. Which means, yeah, if you have a girl in the short skirt walking down the street in fishnets, the cops are going to bust her ass.

But they'll ignore the Massage Parlor, the Strip Club and the Escort Service because those places know how to skirt the edges of the law.

And you keep calling for more and more gun laws and you think those will be enforced when the federal gun laws we already have aren't?

Like I said when we enforce federal gun laws they work.

 

[JoeB131]

And you keep calling for more and more gun laws and you think those will be enforced when the federal gun laws we already have aren't?

Like I said when we enforce federal gun laws they work.

You can keep saying that, but our gun laws are so lax that they might as well not have them.

Let's get some meaningful laws and enforce them across the board, then we can talk.

 

[Blues Man]

And you keep calling for more and more gun laws and you think those will be enforced when the federal gun laws we already have aren't?

Like I said when we enforce federal gun laws they work.

You can keep saying that, but our gun laws are so lax that they might as well not have them.

Let's get some meaningful laws and enforce them across the board, then we can talk.

Bullshit.

Tell me exactly which federal laws are you talking about?

The one that prohibits convicted felons and the adjudicated mentally ill or those with an order of protection against them from possessing firearms?


And you don't think the results in Richmond VA were meaningful? The murder rate cut by 33% on one year and another 20% the next and a 30% reduction in armed robberies are just meaningless in your tiny mind?

Like I said you aren't serious about about reducing the crime or murder rates all you want to do is ban guns.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Like I said you aren't serious about about reducing the crime or murder rates all you want to do is ban guns.

He's a leftist. What they do is support stupidity, then when their ideas are a total flop, they just shrug their shoulders and say "well, we tried!"

Removing firearms from law abiding people can only increase violent crime and murders since one side has all the guns and the other side has no way to defend themselves. They don't care about the lives of the American people. Look at who they voted for President. Now this dementia patient is letting all these illegals in with Covid and busing them all across the country. Forget how many Americans will get sick or die because of his actions, they just want more foreigners here for power. Look at how they stick up for Cuomo who killed thousands of senior citizens.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Except that never happens. According to the FBI, there were only 200 cases a year of justifiable homicide with a gun by a civilian compared to 15,000 gun homicides a year which are regular street crime and domestic violence.

It's like saying it's good you have an angry pit bull, when it never actually takes out a burglar, but it has managed to maul several of the neighborhood kids.

Correct, not a lot of shootings. However statistics show that citizens use their firearms in this country between 1 to 4 million times a year to stop crime. Without those firearms, we would have 1 to 4 million more crimes a year. You leftists have zero common sense.

Given the fact most people killed with firearms are criminals themselves, your leftist idea is to try and reduce their deaths and greatly bring up the deaths of innocent Americans. This is why you people should never be in charge of anything. Try to save the lowlifes at the cost of the good people because even your puppet masters know that if you disarm society, the criminals will never give up their guns.

Again, we lock up 2 million people. The police make 10 million arrests a year. Arrests and prisons aren't stopping crime, buddy.

So what are you saying, we shouldn't have prisons?

 

[woodwork201]

Literally, greater than 50% of those charged with rape have at least one prior felony conviction. 8% of them have more than 10 prior rape convictions. This is the Democratic war on women in America. We cannot continue to let these violent animals back into society. To suggest that we can let them into society as long as we don't let them buy a new gun from a gun store is absolutely absurd. Do you really, honestly, believe that your wife is safer because you didn't let a criminal with 10 rape convictions buy a gun at a gun shop? Do you really, honestly, believe that that little piece of shit deterrent is any deterrent at all?

By the way, only 11% of rapes include a weapon other than physical strength. Only 6% of rapists use a gun; 4% of rapists use a knife. If you could actually keep guns out of the hands of violent repeat offenders, it would not reduce rapes a single iota. The rapist would either use a knife or would use his hands. The weapon of rape is a dick, not a gun. If you want to reduce rapes, please see your doctor and turn in your weapon.

They could use anything they want, but an armed victim is what will stop them. Now, if the attacker does use a gun, then it's a matter of who shoots first. If a rapist uses a knife, then the gun beats a knife hands down in any conflict. Not only does the woman win, she has the right to put him in a grave where he belongs.

If he rapes a woman using a gun, then that's additional prison time: one for rape and the other for using a firearm he wasn't allowed to have, because losing that right not only stops somebody from buying a new firearm, they are not allowed to be in possession of one either.

Extra prison time for the gun only serves to vilify the gun. It is admitting that the gun is evil and if you use an evil tool in your crime we will punish you more. That the law makes it illegal to be in possession of a gun doesn't matter: they're criminals. By definition they ignore the law. And if rape won't keep them in prison then that's the problem. A woman raped at knife point is no less raped than the woman raped at gun point.

Why do you want to lessen the punishment of rapists who use a knife or use their own hands and brute strength to force the woman into compliance?

 

[JoeB131]

Bullshit.

Tell me exactly which federal laws are you talking about?

The one that prohibits convicted felons and the adjudicated mentally ill or those with an order of protection against them from possessing firearms?

Which people can get around in private sales or sales at gun shows... that's the whole point.

 

[JoeB131]

Correct, not a lot of shootings. However statistics show that citizens use their firearms in this country between 1 to 4 million times a year to stop crime. Without those firearms, we would have 1 to 4 million more crimes a year. You leftists have zero common sense.

Yeah, those claims have no credibility.... They would have you believe that 99.999% of the time where you have a confrontation between a gun nut and a criminal, that the gun nut would refrain from firing, and that the criminal would be deterred by the mere site of a gun. It just doesn't pass the laugh test.

Given the fact most people killed with firearms are criminals themselves, your leftist idea is to try and reduce their deaths and greatly bring up the deaths of innocent Americans. This is why you people should never be in charge of anything. Try to save the lowlifes at the cost of the good people because even your puppet masters know that if you disarm society, the criminals will never give up their guns.

Most Americans killed by guns are killed in suicides and domestic violence. the fact that one third of our country has a "police record" doesn't make them criminals.

So what are you saying, we shouldn't have prisons?

I'm saying prison should be restricted to just murderers and rapists... not property and drug criminals. This is what the Europeans and Japanese do, and they lock up less than 100,000 people and have nowhere near our crime levels.

Take the "War on Drugs". we've quadrupled the prison population trying to "just say no", and frankly, we've made ourselves less safe.

 

[Blues Man]

Bullshit.

Tell me exactly which federal laws are you talking about?

The one that prohibits convicted felons and the adjudicated mentally ill or those with an order of protection against them from possessing firearms?

Which people can get around in private sales or sales at gun shows... that's the whole point.

So that's the only law you want passed?

Since when?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yeah, those claims have no credibility.... They would have you believe that 99.999% of the time where you have a confrontation between a gun nut and a criminal, that the gun nut would refrain from firing, and that the criminal would be deterred by the mere site of a gun. It just doesn't pass the laugh test.

In most cases a criminal only uses a gun to force compliance. They never had any intention on actually firing the weapon. Even our very own FBI statistics show Americans use their guns over a million times a year for self-defense or to stop a crime. I know you think you know more than the FBI and all these other research groups, but trust me, you're not that slick.

Two guys follow a woman out of the store to her car. When she approaches her car, they attempt to steal her purse. They are not armed. I see what's going on and pull out my gun ordering them to stop. They run away as fast as they can. See, this is an instance where I used my gun to stop a crime. The police come out to try and find the robbers, take our statements, and that's the end of it; probably won't even be reported on our local news.

Just because you are unaware of things going on doesn't mean they don't happen.

Most Americans killed by guns are killed in suicides and domestic violence. the fact that one third of our country has a "police record" doesn't make them criminals.

The fact is that people who wish to commit suicide will do so with or without a gun. The other fact is that if some guy wants to kill his wife, he will do so with or without a gun. People don't kill other people because they have a gun, they kill other people or themselves because they want to kill. The gun is just a tool.

I'm saying prison should be restricted to just murderers and rapists... not property and drug criminals. This is what the Europeans and Japanese do, and they lock up less than 100,000 people and have nowhere near our crime levels.

Take the "War on Drugs". we've quadrupled the prison population trying to "just say no", and frankly, we've made ourselves less safe.

Great. If you ever come home and find somebody broke into your house and stole 10K of valuables, don't call the police because you think that person should not be in prison. After all, I'm sure when somebody breaks into a home in Japan or Europe, the police don't do anything about it.

You said earlier that prison doesn't stop people from committing any crime, so why should rapists and murderers be any different?

I'd dig up the story but I know you won't read anything that goes against your false beliefs. But CVS drug stores are closing up many of their outlets in San Francisco. Why San Francisco? Because their commie leadership made shoplifting a minor offense. In fact if you call police about a shoplifter, they won't even come out unless the merchandise stolen exceeds $1,000. So people are looting these stores on a daily basis and they can't stay open. The ones that stay open have such high prices people can't afford to shop there.

This is the world leftists want to create for us. It's why we either keep Democrats out of power, or divide the country into two countries instead.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Extra prison time for the gun only serves to vilify the gun. It is admitting that the gun is evil and if you use an evil tool in your crime we will punish you more. That the law makes it illegal to be in possession of a gun doesn't matter: they're criminals. By definition they ignore the law. And if rape won't keep them in prison then that's the problem. A woman raped at knife point is no less raped than the woman raped at gun point.

Why do you want to lessen the punishment of rapists who use a knife or use their own hands and brute strength to force the woman into compliance?

Vilify the gun? What are you getting at, do you think guns will develop an inferiority complex or something?

If a woman fights back and gets lucky, she may be able to escape a person with a knife. But if he has a gun, she's not going to escape him then. If she pokes him in the eyes she only has seconds to get away. If she's in a bit of a distance when he regains his sight back, he can still shoot her.

Guns are not the only weapon, but the ultimate weapon which is why criminals shouldn't have them. A guy attacking a woman is brought to a halt if he has a knife but she has a gun. If they both have guns, that could get ugly, especially for the victim.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Extra prison time for the gun only serves to vilify the gun. It is admitting that the gun is evil and if you use an evil tool in your crime we will punish you more. That the law makes it illegal to be in possession of a gun doesn't matter: they're criminals. By definition they ignore the law. And if rape won't keep them in prison then that's the problem. A woman raped at knife point is no less raped than the woman raped at gun point.

Why do you want to lessen the punishment of rapists who use a knife or use their own hands and brute strength to force the woman into compliance?

Vilify the gun? What are you getting at, do you think guns will develop an inferiority complex or something?

If a woman fights back and gets lucky, she may be able to escape a person with a knife. But if he has a gun, she's not going to escape him then. If she pokes him in the eyes she only has seconds to get away. If she's in a bit of a distance when he regains his sight back, he can still shoot her.

Guns are not the only weapon, but the ultimate weapon which is why criminals shouldn't have them. A guy attacking a woman is brought to a halt if he has a knife but she has a gun. If they both have guns, that could get ugly, especially for the victim.

Hey, nothing's ever 100% perfect. But if we both have guns, at least we're on something approaching a level playing field. If I don't have a gun, I'm at a huge disadvantage whether he has a gun or not.

 

[woodwork201]

Extra prison time for the gun only serves to vilify the gun. It is admitting that the gun is evil and if you use an evil tool in your crime we will punish you more. That the law makes it illegal to be in possession of a gun doesn't matter: they're criminals. By definition they ignore the law. And if rape won't keep them in prison then that's the problem. A woman raped at knife point is no less raped than the woman raped at gun point.

Why do you want to lessen the punishment of rapists who use a knife or use their own hands and brute strength to force the woman into compliance?

Vilify the gun? What are you getting at, do you think guns will develop an inferiority complex or something?

If a woman fights back and gets lucky, she may be able to escape a person with a knife. But if he has a gun, she's not going to escape him then. If she pokes him in the eyes she only has seconds to get away. If she's in a bit of a distance when he regains his sight back, he can still shoot her.

Guns are not the only weapon, but the ultimate weapon which is why criminals shouldn't have them. A guy attacking a woman is brought to a halt if he has a knife but she has a gun. If they both have guns, that could get ugly, especially for the victim.

6% or rapes involve a gun. Of those 6%, how many do you think would have occurred if the rapist could not get a gun - if the gun wasn't simply the convenient weapon? I'll tell you how many: 100% of the 6% would still have occurred.

You're wrong when you suggest that laws against convicted criminals from having guns will have the effect of keeping convicted felons from having guns. We, gun rights advocating community, have long argued that gun laws don't work because criminals, by definition, don't follow the law. Laws against felons having guns only prevent the felons who have taken a law-abiding path after prison from having guns.

If you think that laws forbidding felons from having guns actually prevent crimes then you admit that you believe gun control works. And if you support unconstitutional gun laws then you also admit that you believe that the Constitution is a guideline and not an actual restriction on government; you admit that you believe the government can do anything they wish, Constitution be damned.

The only difference between you and Handgun Control, Inc. is just how much gun control you want.

It is very sad now many who claim to be gun rights advocates are actually just lesser gun controllers. The worst part, is that all of those agree the government can do things not granted in the Constitution. These are authoritarians not constitutionalists. They (you?) believe the government can exceed its constitutional authority as long as they are enforcing ideas you like.

It's not the left that will destroy our country; it's the fake-right that will hand it over to the left because the fake-right doesn't have the backbone to stand up for the Constitution.

Honestly, we're doomed. The constitutional era is over. The authoritarian era is ahead.

 

[woodwork201]

Yeah, those claims have no credibility.... They would have you believe that 99.999% of the time where you have a confrontation between a gun nut and a criminal, that the gun nut would refrain from firing, and that the criminal would be deterred by the mere site of a gun. It just doesn't pass the laugh test.

In most cases a criminal only uses a gun to force compliance. They never had any intention on actually firing the weapon. Even our very own FBI statistics show Americans use their guns over a million times a year for self-defense or to stop a crime. I know you think you know more than the FBI and all these other research groups, but trust me, you're not that slick.

Two guys follow a woman out of the store to her car. When she approaches her car, they attempt to steal her purse. They are not armed. I see what's going on and pull out my gun ordering them to stop. They run away as fast as they can. See, this is an instance where I used my gun to stop a crime. The police come out to try and find the robbers, take our statements, and that's the end of it; probably won't even be reported on our local news.

Just because you are unaware of things going on doesn't mean they don't happen.

Most Americans killed by guns are killed in suicides and domestic violence. the fact that one third of our country has a "police record" doesn't make them criminals.

The fact is that people who wish to commit suicide will do so with or without a gun. The other fact is that if some guy wants to kill his wife, he will do so with or without a gun. People don't kill other people because they have a gun, they kill other people or themselves because they want to kill. The gun is just a tool.

I'm saying prison should be restricted to just murderers and rapists... not property and drug criminals. This is what the Europeans and Japanese do, and they lock up less than 100,000 people and have nowhere near our crime levels.

Take the "War on Drugs". we've quadrupled the prison population trying to "just say no", and frankly, we've made ourselves less safe.

Great. If you ever come home and find somebody broke into your house and stole 10K of valuables, don't call the police because you think that person should not be in prison. After all, I'm sure when somebody breaks into a home in Japan or Europe, the police don't do anything about it.

You said earlier that prison doesn't stop people from committing any crime, so why should rapists and murderers be any different?

I'd dig up the story but I know you won't read anything that goes against your false beliefs. But CVS drug stores are closing up many of their outlets in San Francisco. Why San Francisco? Because their commie leadership made shoplifting a minor offense. In fact if you call police about a shoplifter, they won't even come out unless the merchandise stolen exceeds $1,000. So people are looting these stores on a daily basis and they can't stay open. The ones that stay open have such high prices people can't afford to shop there.

This is the world leftists want to create for us. It's why we either keep Democrats out of power, or divide the country into two countries instead.

So the person will commit suicide with or without the gun. The wife killer will kill with or without the gun. And after you make those arguments you argue that the rapist won't rape without the gun? Really?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So the person will commit suicide with or without the gun. The wife killer will kill with or without the gun. And after you make those arguments you argue that the rapist won't rape without the gun? Really?

Where did I ever say that?

 

[woodwork201]

Vilify the gun? What are you getting at, do you think guns will develop an inferiority complex or something?

I was clear; you make the gun evil in the eyes of those who don't know better. If the gun yields longer sentences then the gun must be more evil than the knife.

The whole idea of a gun crime is flawed. Oh, sure, brandishing is a crime that is a gun crime - the gun is the crime. But murder with a gun is murder. The dead is no more dead than the knife crime or the anti-freeze crime. How silly would that be if the FBI published specs on anti-freeze crime? Murder is murder. It's the person who commits the murder, not the weapon. Rape is rape. The weapon used to force compliance makes no difference.

Additionally, the gun is not necessarily more dangerous in a close-quarter struggle than the knife. I don't ever want to be in the position of struggling for a knife or a gun but I can possibly deflect a gun. In fact, in many circumstances, you'd be surprised just how easy it is to take your handgun away from you. Grabbing your edged weapon by the blade is a whole different story.

Unless a gun is more evil than a knife then there's no justification for an extra penalty for the gun.

 

[woodwork201]

So the person will commit suicide with or without the gun. The wife killer will kill with or without the gun. And after you make those arguments you argue that the rapist won't rape without the gun? Really?

Where did I ever say that?

If you didn't say it, you certainly implied it. Why else would you expect rapes to go down if criminals can't get guns. Where's the benefit of criminals not legally having guns if it doesn't lead to less crime?

 

[freyasman]

Yeah, those claims have no credibility.... They would have you believe that 99.999% of the time where you have a confrontation between a gun nut and a criminal, that the gun nut would refrain from firing, and that the criminal would be deterred by the mere site of a gun. It just doesn't pass the laugh test.

In most cases a criminal only uses a gun to force compliance. They never had any intention on actually firing the weapon. Even our very own FBI statistics show Americans use their guns over a million times a year for self-defense or to stop a crime. I know you think you know more than the FBI and all these other research groups, but trust me, you're not that slick.

Two guys follow a woman out of the store to her car. When she approaches her car, they attempt to steal her purse. They are not armed. I see what's going on and pull out my gun ordering them to stop. They run away as fast as they can. See, this is an instance where I used my gun to stop a crime. The police come out to try and find the robbers, take our statements, and that's the end of it; probably won't even be reported on our local news.

Just because you are unaware of things going on doesn't mean they don't happen.

Most Americans killed by guns are killed in suicides and domestic violence. the fact that one third of our country has a "police record" doesn't make them criminals.

The fact is that people who wish to commit suicide will do so with or without a gun. The other fact is that if some guy wants to kill his wife, he will do so with or without a gun. People don't kill other people because they have a gun, they kill other people or themselves because they want to kill. The gun is just a tool.

I'm saying prison should be restricted to just murderers and rapists... not property and drug criminals. This is what the Europeans and Japanese do, and they lock up less than 100,000 people and have nowhere near our crime levels.

Take the "War on Drugs". we've quadrupled the prison population trying to "just say no", and frankly, we've made ourselves less safe.

Great. If you ever come home and find somebody broke into your house and stole 10K of valuables, don't call the police because you think that person should not be in prison. After all, I'm sure when somebody breaks into a home in Japan or Europe, the police don't do anything about it.

You said earlier that prison doesn't stop people from committing any crime, so why should rapists and murderers be any different?

I'd dig up the story but I know you won't read anything that goes against your false beliefs. But CVS drug stores are closing up many of their outlets in San Francisco. Why San Francisco? Because their commie leadership made shoplifting a minor offense. In fact if you call police about a shoplifter, they won't even come out unless the merchandise stolen exceeds $1,000. So people are looting these stores on a daily basis and they can't stay open. The ones that stay open have such high prices people can't afford to shop there.

This is the world leftists want to create for us. It's why we either keep Democrats out of power, or divide the country into two countries instead.

You realize you are arguing and attempting to use reason and facts with a poster that is a deliberate liar, right?
Nothing you tell him is going to matter, because he is a hack, and only here to spread lies and bullshit.

You get that, right?

 

[freyasman]

Vilify the gun? What are you getting at, do you think guns will develop an inferiority complex or something?

I was clear; you make the gun evil in the eyes of those who don't know better. If the gun yields longer sentences then the gun must be more evil than the knife.

The whole idea of a gun crime is flawed. Oh, sure, brandishing is a crime that is a gun crime - the gun is the crime. But murder with a gun is murder. The dead is no more dead than the knife crime or the anti-freeze crime. How silly would that be if the FBI published specs on anti-freeze crime? Murder is murder. It's the person who commits the murder, not the weapon. Rape is rape. The weapon used to force compliance makes no difference.

Additionally, the gun is not necessarily more dangerous in a close-quarter struggle than the knife. I don't ever want to be in the position of struggling for a knife or a gun but I can possibly deflect a gun. In fact, in many circumstances, you'd be surprised just how easy it is to take your handgun away from you. Grabbing your edged weapon by the blade is a whole different story.

Unless a gun is more evil than a knife then there's no justification for an extra penalty for the gun.

Here's an expert on that subject;

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If you didn't say it, you certainly implied it. Why else would you expect rapes to go down if criminals can't get guns. Where's the benefit of criminals not legally having guns if it doesn't lead to less crime?

The benefit of it is if they do commit a crime with a gun, it's added years to their sentence and we can put them away for much longer. Even for minor offenses like stealing. If a cop chases a guy down who stole something and he has a gun on him as well, he'll get much more time in prison than he would have gotten for whatever he stole even though he didn't use the gun for the theft.