Gun Control - What's the Problem?

[blackhawk]

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.

Very simple unless a criminal is highly stupid they are not going to go through the legal process where a background check could prevent them from getting a gun and background checks look for criminal history and a history of mental illness not being irresponsible so they would have no impact on them. Basically what Obama is proposing would not do anymore to prevent gun violence than the background checks and regulations already in place it's just political theatre.

 

[westwall]

Oh? So you admit that you ignore very easily researched history and instead merely parrot what your masters tell you? In other words it is you who are closed minded. Like I stated earlier dude, you talk AT people, you don't discuss anything.

Once more for the slow readers ------- I neither know nor care about that particular info. Get it? My post isn't about that. It's about logic -- which is what about 90% of my posts on this site have always been about.

It's a Slippery Slope Fallacy, that's just a fact and there ain't a damn thing any of you can do about that except to abandon it.

Yes, we KNOW you don't care about facts. Facts DESTROY your slippery slope fallacy argument. Utterly....

Once yet again for the mega-dense: nothing in a fallacy has anything to do with "facts". A fallacy by definition means "facts" are absent.

I didn't post about "facts"; I posted about logic.


Which I just reiterated but you're too dense to read it.

Once again for the propagandist, you are wrong. Historical fact is historical fact. You can't magically disappear it. Thus your argument is specious at best.

And once again MY POINT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY "HISTORICAL FACT". My point had to do with what LOGIC is.

What makes you so dense that you can't figure this out? Is there some magic number of times I have to repeat the same thing until it sinks in?

Your "logic" fails because of FACTUAL EVIDENCE dipshit. That's the WHOLE point. You have NO logic...is the ultimate point.

 

[flacaltenn]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

I'll tell why.. And how there is this much MISTRUST of Prez's motives.

Just prior to this big push for "rational" gun control changes -- the Admin had a FULL SCALE ASSAULT on the gun owners about "Why should TERRORISTS be able to buy guns".. This meme rattled around for TWO WEEKS with every press entity making fun of the fact that we don't use the "No Fly" list or the "Terrorist Watch List" as an additional qualifier on InstaCheck. Well the truth is -- Those lists are pure shit.. Poorly managed, no due process to get ON or OFF. And then we find out that 72 employees of the freaking TSA were found to be on the "No Fly List" by govt auditors. Ain't just gun owners that hates those lists -- the ACLU AGREES they are a large Const. problem.

Then there's this concept that DOCTORS are gonna decide if folks are stable enough to own guns. ALSO FLOATED by the Admin. as a part of HHS guidelines about polling patients about gun ownership in every G.P. office in the country. Bad enough that we don't have access to medical records of Psych cases that ARE under treatment -- now it's open season on "medical opinion" if an Iraq vet is "stable" enough to own a weapon..

All this SOUNDS nice --- but making "lists" is a very dangerous and unpopular way to "allow" folks access to guns. When the psych field can produce a scientific and MEASURABLE test for mental stability --- we can chat about that shit.

I KINDA agree about the gun shows. I think most rational gun owners do. But I had to dispose of 48 match rifles that my dad had in his garage because he used to run the Junior Rifle Club for Civitans. So I loaded them into my rental car with over 6000 rounds of surplus DOD ammunition given to the Rifle Club by a Fed grant. (Yes the Fed Govt GAVE AMMUNITION TO CHILDREN) and drive them to a gun store. Fortunately --- I went to High School with the owner and we resolved it.

I don't want to have to jump thru hoops to inherit GreatGrandaddies goose gun. No reason for it. But YET -- that's how far the leftist gun grabbers WILL take it.

 

[flacaltenn]

I have seen these debates for years.....not one of the pro 2nd Amendment people have attacked background checks on any other grounds than that they are not going to stop criminals and mass shooters from getting guns..which is the whole point to doing them...right? So if you are pushing background checks, and you admit that they don't do what the anti gunners say they will do, pointing that out isn't aggressively attacking or criticizing all effort...they are attacking an effort that is in truth just a way to make gun ownership for people who do not commit crimes with guns...simply because those pushing background checks do not like guns.

You just admitted background checks will do almost nothing to stop criminals from getting guns....Can you explain why you support them then? I will support them only if they are immediate, can use a drivers license to get the check, cost nothing ,and leave no permanent record.......that way they do not target law abiding gun owners.

As a gun owner, I would really not like to have to go through a BG check to sell a gun to a friend, i'm actually going through that now. However, if thats what the powers at be decide to do then I will go through the motions and try to support. I won't stomp my feet like a child... same thing happened when seat belts became a law. I know you disagree but I really think that a registration and tracking system is a much better answer as it will help with criminal investigations and finding stolen guns. I don't by the slippery slope argument.
I also don't think everybody should have a gun and those who do should be accountable. The purpose of having a gun is to be able to defend ones self and individuals with intent to offend and misuse a gun shouldn't have one. I've been to enough sporting events and crowded bars that stir up fights and if everybody was armed a few punches easily turn into a few body bags. Thats not the world I want to live in. I hope our gun culture can calm down and replace some of the testosterone with common sense... because frankly, the gun extremists make it an embarrassing group to be a part of.... Similar to the GOP. So to answer your question, I am not a big supporter of BG checks, im more impartial on the matter. They do enough to keep the bad guys from easily purchasing from the stores which makes it harder, yes harder not impossible, to get a gun... harder is a good thing.

Folks in California felt that way also when they instituted their own "assault weapons" registration in the 90s. They gave in like the wimps they are. WITHIN 3 years --- the owners started to get confiscation messages from the state. I KNOW -- A good friend GAVE me his when I was leaving California to "babysit" for him. Said he'd drop in and reclaim it when he moved back to Kentucky. Still hasn't.. Maybe Slade -- you just haven't followed how these things go when you hear a good story from the leftists.

 

[2aguy]

what did they actually have in common....Spengler had been in prison 17 years...for murder....making you wrong.....ditto the violent history of Johan...and the sandy hook shooter was mentally ill.......

Neither Adam Lanza nor Michael Dunn had any such violent history, so no -- they did not have that in common. You're wrong. What they DID have in common was guns. Guns and being a male member of American Gun Culture. All four of them. See, that's what "they all had in common" MEANS.

But I already said this. And no, it's not going away.

not one of them was a normal gun owner...they were nowhere near normal gun culture...and as the research I have posted showed...they all had violent histories or mental illness....not one of them was John Q. citizen who all of a sudden murdered someone because they owned a gun...they killed because they were by nature violent killers.....

They're Americans. Therefore they're part of the American culture --- which is, among many other things, a gun worship culture. QEfuckingD.

2012 Webster, New York shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Police identified the gunman as 62-year-old local resident William H. Spengler, Jr.[7] Spengler previously spent 17 years in prison for murdering his 92-year-old grandmother with a hammer in 1980.[6][8][11] He had not attracted the attention of police since then. William Spengler "could not stand" his sister Cheryl, according to a friend, Roger Vercruysse. Spengler's mother Arline, to whom he was said to have been close, died two months earlier.[6]

Yeah ummmm.... I don't need a Wiki on William Spengler. I'm the one who brought him in here.

the only one we know little about is Dunn and there are no background stories on him....the Sandy Hook shooter had known mental issues and you obviously didn't think about the fire fighter shooter because using a guy who murdered his grandmother with a hammer as an example of normal American gun owners is just stupid.......

and the Football player....a long history of having his violent behavior protected by everyone around him....not to mention the belief that he may have sustained brain damage from playing football....of course you didn't mention that when you used him to smear normal gun owners.....

You anti gun loons always lie to push your agenda.....

Not one of your examples is a normal person who just suddenly lost it because they had a gun....they were all abnormal people with long histories of violence or mental illness....but telling that truth, those facts and that reality destroys your lies.......

 

[2aguy]

what did they actually have in common....Spengler had been in prison 17 years...for murder....making you wrong.....ditto the violent history of Johan...and the sandy hook shooter was mentally ill.......

Neither Adam Lanza nor Michael Dunn had any such violent history, so no -- they did not have that in common. You're wrong. What they DID have in common was guns. Guns and being a male member of American Gun Culture. All four of them. See, that's what "they all had in common" MEANS.

But I already said this. And no, it's not going away.

not one of them was a normal gun owner...they were nowhere near normal gun culture...and as the research I have posted showed...they all had violent histories or mental illness....not one of them was John Q. citizen who all of a sudden murdered someone because they owned a gun...they killed because they were by nature violent killers.....

They're Americans. Therefore they're part of the American culture --- which is, among many other things, a gun worship culture. QEfuckingD.

2012 Webster, New York shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Police identified the gunman as 62-year-old local resident William H. Spengler, Jr.[7] Spengler previously spent 17 years in prison for murdering his 92-year-old grandmother with a hammer in 1980.[6][8][11] He had not attracted the attention of police since then. William Spengler "could not stand" his sister Cheryl, according to a friend, Roger Vercruysse. Spengler's mother Arline, to whom he was said to have been close, died two months earlier.[6]

Yeah ummmm.... I don't need a Wiki on William Spengler. I'm the one who brought him in here.

and here we go. Michael Dunn..the loud music shooter had a history of violence.....

Shooting of Jordan Davis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Edit
Michael Dunn's former neighbor, Charles Hendrix, said he was not surprised by Dunn's behavior.[30][31] Hendrix commented on Dunn, whom he described as arrogant and controlling, adding that Dunn's ex-wives told him that Dunn was violent and abusive toward them, although he never personally witnessed this.[31] Hendrix spoke of a previous discussion where Dunn asked him if he knew anyone who would "take care of" someone who infuriated him in an unrelated incident, and Hendrix interpreted further discussion as Dunn wanting to send a hit on this person.[30]

so now tall of the people you used for your examples fit everything I have posted about actual shooters....they are not normal people, they are not normal gun owners....but nice try....

 

[Pogo]

Once more for the slow readers ------- I neither know nor care about that particular info. Get it? My post isn't about that. It's about logic -- which is what about 90% of my posts on this site have always been about.

It's a Slippery Slope Fallacy, that's just a fact and there ain't a damn thing any of you can do about that except to abandon it.

Yes, we KNOW you don't care about facts. Facts DESTROY your slippery slope fallacy argument. Utterly....

Once yet again for the mega-dense: nothing in a fallacy has anything to do with "facts". A fallacy by definition means "facts" are absent.

I didn't post about "facts"; I posted about logic.


Which I just reiterated but you're too dense to read it.

Once again for the propagandist, you are wrong. Historical fact is historical fact. You can't magically disappear it. Thus your argument is specious at best.

And once again MY POINT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY "HISTORICAL FACT". My point had to do with what LOGIC is.

What makes you so dense that you can't figure this out? Is there some magic number of times I have to repeat the same thing until it sinks in?

Your "logic" fails because of FACTUAL EVIDENCE dipshit. That's the WHOLE point. You have NO logic...is the ultimate point.

And Ad Hominem is in fact yet another fallacy. Collect the whole set. I see you've displayed in right next to Red Herring.
That's nice.

 

[westwall]

Yes, we KNOW you don't care about facts. Facts DESTROY your slippery slope fallacy argument. Utterly....

Once yet again for the mega-dense: nothing in a fallacy has anything to do with "facts". A fallacy by definition means "facts" are absent.

I didn't post about "facts"; I posted about logic.


Which I just reiterated but you're too dense to read it.

Once again for the propagandist, you are wrong. Historical fact is historical fact. You can't magically disappear it. Thus your argument is specious at best.

And once again MY POINT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY "HISTORICAL FACT". My point had to do with what LOGIC is.

What makes you so dense that you can't figure this out? Is there some magic number of times I have to repeat the same thing until it sinks in?

Your "logic" fails because of FACTUAL EVIDENCE dipshit. That's the WHOLE point. You have NO logic...is the ultimate point.

And Ad Hominem is in fact yet another fallacy. Collect the whole set. I see you've displayed in right next to Red Herring.
That's nice.

I see you are still using terms that you have no understanding of. Great job!

 

[Pogo]

what did they actually have in common....Spengler had been in prison 17 years...for murder....making you wrong.....ditto the violent history of Johan...and the sandy hook shooter was mentally ill.......

Neither Adam Lanza nor Michael Dunn had any such violent history, so no -- they did not have that in common. You're wrong. What they DID have in common was guns. Guns and being a male member of American Gun Culture. All four of them. See, that's what "they all had in common" MEANS.

But I already said this. And no, it's not going away.

not one of them was a normal gun owner...they were nowhere near normal gun culture...and as the research I have posted showed...they all had violent histories or mental illness....not one of them was John Q. citizen who all of a sudden murdered someone because they owned a gun...they killed because they were by nature violent killers.....

They're Americans. Therefore they're part of the American culture --- which is, among many other things, a gun worship culture. QEfuckingD.

2012 Webster, New York shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Police identified the gunman as 62-year-old local resident William H. Spengler, Jr.[7] Spengler previously spent 17 years in prison for murdering his 92-year-old grandmother with a hammer in 1980.[6][8][11] He had not attracted the attention of police since then. William Spengler "could not stand" his sister Cheryl, according to a friend, Roger Vercruysse. Spengler's mother Arline, to whom he was said to have been close, died two months earlier.[6]

Yeah ummmm.... I don't need a Wiki on William Spengler. I'm the one who brought him in here.

and here we go. Michael Dunn..the loud music shooter had a history of violence.....

Shooting of Jordan Davis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Edit
Michael Dunn's former neighbor, Charles Hendrix, said he was not surprised by Dunn's behavior.[30][31] Hendrix commented on Dunn, whom he described as arrogant and controlling, adding that Dunn's ex-wives told him that Dunn was violent and abusive toward them, although he never personally witnessed this.[31] Hendrix spoke of a previous discussion where Dunn asked him if he knew anyone who would "take care of" someone who infuriated him in an unrelated incident, and Hendrix interpreted further discussion as Dunn wanting to send a hit on this person.[30]

so now tall of the people you used for your examples fit everything I have posted about actual shooters....they are not normal people, they are not normal gun owners....but nice try....

Funny that, if my post was a "load of crap" as alleged --- it was nevertheless worth ten --- count 'em ten reply posts. So far. And all of them desperate to change the subject from what it was to prior histories and mental states, avoiding the central point at all costs.

Some "load of crap". I should post more "loads of crap". This one's been generating desperation deflections for days.

 

[RandallFlagg]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

Well, for one - there are ALREADY background checks. Anytime I purchase a weapon, I undergo a background check conducted by the FBI and the State Police. Next - can you, honestly say, without reservation that Obama would NOT confiscate every legally owned gun if he were able? Seriously? Next - do you ever wonder why it is that these "men" who fail to follow the Constitution are protected by armed men? Why is it that it's perfectly OK for these people, who would deny you your Constitutional rights have no problem whatsoever, being defended by "rough men with rifles"?

Remember, Hitler confiscated guns. Mussolini confiscated guns. Mao confiscated guns. The ONLY reason this country has remained free - is the populace's ability to keep and maintain their arms. And it bugs the living daylights out of the left - who would readily give up "freedom for a little security".

Think about it.

 

[2aguy]

what did they actually have in common....Spengler had been in prison 17 years...for murder....making you wrong.....ditto the violent history of Johan...and the sandy hook shooter was mentally ill.......

Neither Adam Lanza nor Michael Dunn had any such violent history, so no -- they did not have that in common. You're wrong. What they DID have in common was guns. Guns and being a male member of American Gun Culture. All four of them. See, that's what "they all had in common" MEANS.

But I already said this. And no, it's not going away.

not one of them was a normal gun owner...they were nowhere near normal gun culture...and as the research I have posted showed...they all had violent histories or mental illness....not one of them was John Q. citizen who all of a sudden murdered someone because they owned a gun...they killed because they were by nature violent killers.....

They're Americans. Therefore they're part of the American culture --- which is, among many other things, a gun worship culture. QEfuckingD.

2012 Webster, New York shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Police identified the gunman as 62-year-old local resident William H. Spengler, Jr.[7] Spengler previously spent 17 years in prison for murdering his 92-year-old grandmother with a hammer in 1980.[6][8][11] He had not attracted the attention of police since then. William Spengler "could not stand" his sister Cheryl, according to a friend, Roger Vercruysse. Spengler's mother Arline, to whom he was said to have been close, died two months earlier.[6]

Yeah ummmm.... I don't need a Wiki on William Spengler. I'm the one who brought him in here.

and here we go. Michael Dunn..the loud music shooter had a history of violence.....

Shooting of Jordan Davis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Edit
Michael Dunn's former neighbor, Charles Hendrix, said he was not surprised by Dunn's behavior.[30][31] Hendrix commented on Dunn, whom he described as arrogant and controlling, adding that Dunn's ex-wives told him that Dunn was violent and abusive toward them, although he never personally witnessed this.[31] Hendrix spoke of a previous discussion where Dunn asked him if he knew anyone who would "take care of" someone who infuriated him in an unrelated incident, and Hendrix interpreted further discussion as Dunn wanting to send a hit on this person.[30]

so now tall of the people you used for your examples fit everything I have posted about actual shooters....they are not normal people, they are not normal gun owners....but nice try....

Funny that, if my post was a "load of crap" as alleged --- it was nevertheless worth ten --- count 'em ten reply posts. So far. And all of them desperate to change the subject from what it was to prior histories and mental states, avoiding the central point at all costs.

Some "load of crap". I should post more "loads of crap". This one's been generating desperation deflections for days.

Lies can be posted quickly.....trying to tell the truth takes actual work and research...as you can see...you lied by hiding the abnormal backgrounds of all of your shooters...so I have to go and dig up the actual histories of you lies....like the guy who murdered his grandmother with a hammer....that was a nice omission.......but it had to be found.....

 

[Pogo]

what did they actually have in common....Spengler had been in prison 17 years...for murder....making you wrong.....ditto the violent history of Johan...and the sandy hook shooter was mentally ill.......

Neither Adam Lanza nor Michael Dunn had any such violent history, so no -- they did not have that in common. You're wrong. What they DID have in common was guns. Guns and being a male member of American Gun Culture. All four of them. See, that's what "they all had in common" MEANS.

But I already said this. And no, it's not going away.

not one of them was a normal gun owner...they were nowhere near normal gun culture...and as the research I have posted showed...they all had violent histories or mental illness....not one of them was John Q. citizen who all of a sudden murdered someone because they owned a gun...they killed because they were by nature violent killers.....

They're Americans. Therefore they're part of the American culture --- which is, among many other things, a gun worship culture. QEfuckingD.

2012 Webster, New York shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Police identified the gunman as 62-year-old local resident William H. Spengler, Jr.[7] Spengler previously spent 17 years in prison for murdering his 92-year-old grandmother with a hammer in 1980.[6][8][11] He had not attracted the attention of police since then. William Spengler "could not stand" his sister Cheryl, according to a friend, Roger Vercruysse. Spengler's mother Arline, to whom he was said to have been close, died two months earlier.[6]

Yeah ummmm.... I don't need a Wiki on William Spengler. I'm the one who brought him in here.

and here we go. Michael Dunn..the loud music shooter had a history of violence.....

Shooting of Jordan Davis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Edit
Michael Dunn's former neighbor, Charles Hendrix, said he was not surprised by Dunn's behavior.[30][31] Hendrix commented on Dunn, whom he described as arrogant and controlling, adding that Dunn's ex-wives told him that Dunn was violent and abusive toward them, although he never personally witnessed this.[31] Hendrix spoke of a previous discussion where Dunn asked him if he knew anyone who would "take care of" someone who infuriated him in an unrelated incident, and Hendrix interpreted further discussion as Dunn wanting to send a hit on this person.[30]

so now tall of the people you used for your examples fit everything I have posted about actual shooters....they are not normal people, they are not normal gun owners....but nice try....

Funny that, if my post was a "load of crap" as alleged --- it was nevertheless worth ten --- count 'em ten reply posts. So far. And all of them desperate to change the subject from what it was to prior histories and mental states, avoiding the central point at all costs.

Some "load of crap". I should post more "loads of crap". This one's been generating desperation deflections for days.

Lies can be posted quickly.....trying to tell the truth takes actual work and research...as you can see...you lied by hiding the abnormal backgrounds of all of your shooters...so I have to go and dig up the actual histories of you lies....like the guy who murdered his grandmother with a hammer....that was a nice omission.......but it had to be found.....

"Backgrounds" are irrelevant. I understand that's what you wish the point was, but it ain't. Never was. The point was, is now, and shall ever remain, world without end amen, that we live in a Gun Culture, meaning our values are steeped in the idea of shooting and killing things as a solution to any problem. It starts in childhood, marketing toy guns and GI Joes. It's fed and fostered every hour of every day and night in what we have that passes for "storytelling" -- which means television, movies, music, comic book, video games, literature and even linguistic metaphor. The message is pounded into the collective head relentlessly and continuously from every possible angle. And gullible saps like you soak it up like candy.

THAT is what all those guys had in common. Your desperate attempts to reframe the point into your own personal after-the-fact Wikipedia background check is as bullshitious as it is transparent. You can dig up dirt on anybody you want; doesn't give you a causation.

Let's haul out this chestnut that I've posted here before: A Tale of Two Cities (apologies to Dickens), repost from a couple o years ago:


I give you two cities, split by a river, kinda like Minneapolis and St. Paul are but this is a different pair of cities.

Obviously being next to each other, these cities have much in common regionally, climatically, industrially and so on. They are less than a mile apart, connected by a bridge and a tunnel. But the two cities show a stark difference in one area.

The city to the west recorded 377 total homicides in 2011 and 327 in 2010, according to police statistics(1), carrying a homicide rate of around 50 per 100,000 people.

Across the bridge in the same time period, there was a total of one. For both years put together. A rate of 0.30. From September 27, 2009 to November 22, 2011 in that city, there were no murders at all. Zero.

What's going on here?

----- One of them is in Canada. The cities are Detroit and Windsor.

I haven't determined how many of those homicides were committed by firearm, but for a guide, out of 386 Detroit homicides in 2012, 333 were by firearm. Over 86%. (1)

And the one murder that finally broke the 2011 streak in Windsor? It was a stabbing.

People in his city of about 215,000 have a saying, Blaine said Friday afternoon: "In Windsor, when a 7-Eleven is held up, it usually is a knife. In Detroit, it is an Uzi."

It's not that there's no crime in Windsor, an industrial city that has seen its own economic challenges. "We're no different than any other major metropolitan area," Corey said. (here)

704 to 1 in homicide; several hundred to zero in gun deaths.
Detroit: at or near the highest murder rate in its country; Windsor: lowest in its country.
Less than a mile apart.

What's driving the difference? Gun control? Or gun culture?

Resources/further reading:
(1) 2012 Crime/Homicide Stats

(2) Freep.com 1/3/13

A Tale of Two Cities

Murder-Free Two Years

The fault lies not in our guns but in ourselves. To our values we are underlings.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

what did they actually have in common....Spengler had been in prison 17 years...for murder....making you wrong.....ditto the violent history of Johan...and the sandy hook shooter was mentally ill.......

Neither Adam Lanza nor Michael Dunn had any such violent history, so no -- they did not have that in common. You're wrong. What they DID have in common was guns. Guns and being a male member of American Gun Culture. All four of them. See, that's what "they all had in common" MEANS.

But I already said this. And no, it's not going away.

not one of them was a normal gun owner...they were nowhere near normal gun culture...and as the research I have posted showed...they all had violent histories or mental illness....not one of them was John Q. citizen who all of a sudden murdered someone because they owned a gun...they killed because they were by nature violent killers.....

They're Americans. Therefore they're part of the American culture --- which is, among many other things, a gun worship culture. QEfuckingD.

2012 Webster, New York shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Police identified the gunman as 62-year-old local resident William H. Spengler, Jr.[7] Spengler previously spent 17 years in prison for murdering his 92-year-old grandmother with a hammer in 1980.[6][8][11] He had not attracted the attention of police since then. William Spengler "could not stand" his sister Cheryl, according to a friend, Roger Vercruysse. Spengler's mother Arline, to whom he was said to have been close, died two months earlier.[6]

Yeah ummmm.... I don't need a Wiki on William Spengler. I'm the one who brought him in here.

and here we go. Michael Dunn..the loud music shooter had a history of violence.....

Shooting of Jordan Davis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Edit
Michael Dunn's former neighbor, Charles Hendrix, said he was not surprised by Dunn's behavior.[30][31] Hendrix commented on Dunn, whom he described as arrogant and controlling, adding that Dunn's ex-wives told him that Dunn was violent and abusive toward them, although he never personally witnessed this.[31] Hendrix spoke of a previous discussion where Dunn asked him if he knew anyone who would "take care of" someone who infuriated him in an unrelated incident, and Hendrix interpreted further discussion as Dunn wanting to send a hit on this person.[30]

so now tall of the people you used for your examples fit everything I have posted about actual shooters....they are not normal people, they are not normal gun owners....but nice try....

Funny that, if my post was a "load of crap" as alleged --- it was nevertheless worth ten --- count 'em ten reply posts. So far. And all of them desperate to change the subject from what it was to prior histories and mental states, avoiding the central point at all costs.

Some "load of crap". I should post more "loads of crap". This one's been generating desperation deflections for days.

Lies can be posted quickly.....trying to tell the truth takes actual work and research...as you can see...you lied by hiding the abnormal backgrounds of all of your shooters...so I have to go and dig up the actual histories of you lies....like the guy who murdered his grandmother with a hammer....that was a nice omission.......but it had to be found.....

"Backgrounds" are irrelevant. I understand that's what you wish the point was, but it ain't. Never was. The point was, is now, and shall ever remain, world without end amen, that we live in a Gun Culture, meaning our values are steeped in the idea of shooting and killing things as a solution to any problem. It starts in childhood, marketing toy guns and GI Joes. It's fed and fostered every hour of every day and night in what we have that passes for "storytelling" -- which means television, movies, music, comic book, video games, literature and even linguistic metaphor. The message is pounded into the collective head relentlessly and continuously from every possible angle. And gullible saps like you soak it up like candy.

THAT is what all those guys had in common. Your desperate attempts to reframe the point into your own personal after-the-fact Wikipedia background check is as bullshitious as it is transparent. You can dig up dirt on anybody you want; doesn't give you a causation.

Let's haul out this chestnut that I've posted here before: A Tale of Two Cities (apologies to Dickens), repost from a couple o years ago:


I give you two cities, split by a river, kinda like Minneapolis and St. Paul are but this is a different pair of cities.

Obviously being next to each other, these cities have much in common regionally, climatically, industrially and so on. They are less than a mile apart, connected by a bridge and a tunnel. But the two cities show a stark difference in one area.

The city to the west recorded 377 total homicides in 2011 and 327 in 2010, according to police statistics(1), carrying a homicide rate of around 50 per 100,000 people.

Across the bridge in the same time period, there was a total of one. For both years put together. A rate of 0.30. From September 27, 2009 to November 22, 2011 in that city, there were no murders at all. Zero.

What's going on here?

----- One of them is in Canada. The cities are Detroit and Windsor.

I haven't determined how many of those homicides were committed by firearm, but for a guide, out of 386 Detroit homicides in 2012, 333 were by firearm. Over 86%. (1)

And the one murder that finally broke the 2011 streak in Windsor? It was a stabbing.

People in his city of about 215,000 have a saying, Blaine said Friday afternoon: "In Windsor, when a 7-Eleven is held up, it usually is a knife. In Detroit, it is an Uzi."

It's not that there's no crime in Windsor, an industrial city that has seen its own economic challenges. "We're no different than any other major metropolitan area," Corey said. (here)

704 to 1 in homicide; several hundred to zero in gun deaths.
Detroit: at or near the highest murder rate in its country; Windsor: lowest in its country.
Less than a mile apart.

What's driving the difference? Gun control? Or gun culture?

Resources/further reading:
(1) 2012 Crime/Homicide Stats

(2) Freep.com 1/3/13

A Tale of Two Cities

Murder-Free Two Years

The fault lies not in our guns but in ourselves. To our values we are underlings.

So there are no places in the US like Windsor? Of course there is, in the very same "gun culture" as you call it.

It's not the guns, it's the type of people. You move all those people from Detroit to Windsor, I guarantee you that you will see the same (or close) amount of murders.

 

[Pogo]

Neither Adam Lanza nor Michael Dunn had any such violent history, so no -- they did not have that in common. You're wrong. What they DID have in common was guns. Guns and being a male member of American Gun Culture. All four of them. See, that's what "they all had in common" MEANS.

But I already said this. And no, it's not going away.


They're Americans. Therefore they're part of the American culture --- which is, among many other things, a gun worship culture. QEfuckingD.

Yeah ummmm.... I don't need a Wiki on William Spengler. I'm the one who brought him in here.

and here we go. Michael Dunn..the loud music shooter had a history of violence.....

Shooting of Jordan Davis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Edit
Michael Dunn's former neighbor, Charles Hendrix, said he was not surprised by Dunn's behavior.[30][31] Hendrix commented on Dunn, whom he described as arrogant and controlling, adding that Dunn's ex-wives told him that Dunn was violent and abusive toward them, although he never personally witnessed this.[31] Hendrix spoke of a previous discussion where Dunn asked him if he knew anyone who would "take care of" someone who infuriated him in an unrelated incident, and Hendrix interpreted further discussion as Dunn wanting to send a hit on this person.[30]

so now tall of the people you used for your examples fit everything I have posted about actual shooters....they are not normal people, they are not normal gun owners....but nice try....

Funny that, if my post was a "load of crap" as alleged --- it was nevertheless worth ten --- count 'em ten reply posts. So far. And all of them desperate to change the subject from what it was to prior histories and mental states, avoiding the central point at all costs.

Some "load of crap". I should post more "loads of crap". This one's been generating desperation deflections for days.

Lies can be posted quickly.....trying to tell the truth takes actual work and research...as you can see...you lied by hiding the abnormal backgrounds of all of your shooters...so I have to go and dig up the actual histories of you lies....like the guy who murdered his grandmother with a hammer....that was a nice omission.......but it had to be found.....

"Backgrounds" are irrelevant. I understand that's what you wish the point was, but it ain't. Never was. The point was, is now, and shall ever remain, world without end amen, that we live in a Gun Culture, meaning our values are steeped in the idea of shooting and killing things as a solution to any problem. It starts in childhood, marketing toy guns and GI Joes. It's fed and fostered every hour of every day and night in what we have that passes for "storytelling" -- which means television, movies, music, comic book, video games, literature and even linguistic metaphor. The message is pounded into the collective head relentlessly and continuously from every possible angle. And gullible saps like you soak it up like candy.

THAT is what all those guys had in common. Your desperate attempts to reframe the point into your own personal after-the-fact Wikipedia background check is as bullshitious as it is transparent. You can dig up dirt on anybody you want; doesn't give you a causation.

Let's haul out this chestnut that I've posted here before: A Tale of Two Cities (apologies to Dickens), repost from a couple o years ago:


I give you two cities, split by a river, kinda like Minneapolis and St. Paul are but this is a different pair of cities.

Obviously being next to each other, these cities have much in common regionally, climatically, industrially and so on. They are less than a mile apart, connected by a bridge and a tunnel. But the two cities show a stark difference in one area.

The city to the west recorded 377 total homicides in 2011 and 327 in 2010, according to police statistics(1), carrying a homicide rate of around 50 per 100,000 people.

Across the bridge in the same time period, there was a total of one. For both years put together. A rate of 0.30. From September 27, 2009 to November 22, 2011 in that city, there were no murders at all. Zero.

What's going on here?

----- One of them is in Canada. The cities are Detroit and Windsor.

I haven't determined how many of those homicides were committed by firearm, but for a guide, out of 386 Detroit homicides in 2012, 333 were by firearm. Over 86%. (1)

And the one murder that finally broke the 2011 streak in Windsor? It was a stabbing.

People in his city of about 215,000 have a saying, Blaine said Friday afternoon: "In Windsor, when a 7-Eleven is held up, it usually is a knife. In Detroit, it is an Uzi."

It's not that there's no crime in Windsor, an industrial city that has seen its own economic challenges. "We're no different than any other major metropolitan area," Corey said. (here)

704 to 1 in homicide; several hundred to zero in gun deaths.
Detroit: at or near the highest murder rate in its country; Windsor: lowest in its country.
Less than a mile apart.

What's driving the difference? Gun control? Or gun culture?

Resources/further reading:
(1) 2012 Crime/Homicide Stats

(2) Freep.com 1/3/13

A Tale of Two Cities

Murder-Free Two Years

The fault lies not in our guns but in ourselves. To our values we are underlings.

So there are no places in the US like Windsor? Of course there is, in the very same "gun culture" as you call it.

It's not the guns, it's the type of people. You move all those people from Detroit to Windsor, I guarantee you that you will see the same (or close) amount of murders.

Yeah I know. That's the whole point. Windsor's in Canada --- and Canada simply doesn't have a history of gun worship.

 

[2aguy]

what did they actually have in common....Spengler had been in prison 17 years...for murder....making you wrong.....ditto the violent history of Johan...and the sandy hook shooter was mentally ill.......

Neither Adam Lanza nor Michael Dunn had any such violent history, so no -- they did not have that in common. You're wrong. What they DID have in common was guns. Guns and being a male member of American Gun Culture. All four of them. See, that's what "they all had in common" MEANS.

But I already said this. And no, it's not going away.

not one of them was a normal gun owner...they were nowhere near normal gun culture...and as the research I have posted showed...they all had violent histories or mental illness....not one of them was John Q. citizen who all of a sudden murdered someone because they owned a gun...they killed because they were by nature violent killers.....

They're Americans. Therefore they're part of the American culture --- which is, among many other things, a gun worship culture. QEfuckingD.

2012 Webster, New York shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Police identified the gunman as 62-year-old local resident William H. Spengler, Jr.[7] Spengler previously spent 17 years in prison for murdering his 92-year-old grandmother with a hammer in 1980.[6][8][11] He had not attracted the attention of police since then. William Spengler "could not stand" his sister Cheryl, according to a friend, Roger Vercruysse. Spengler's mother Arline, to whom he was said to have been close, died two months earlier.[6]

Yeah ummmm.... I don't need a Wiki on William Spengler. I'm the one who brought him in here.

and here we go. Michael Dunn..the loud music shooter had a history of violence.....

Shooting of Jordan Davis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Edit
Michael Dunn's former neighbor, Charles Hendrix, said he was not surprised by Dunn's behavior.[30][31] Hendrix commented on Dunn, whom he described as arrogant and controlling, adding that Dunn's ex-wives told him that Dunn was violent and abusive toward them, although he never personally witnessed this.[31] Hendrix spoke of a previous discussion where Dunn asked him if he knew anyone who would "take care of" someone who infuriated him in an unrelated incident, and Hendrix interpreted further discussion as Dunn wanting to send a hit on this person.[30]

so now tall of the people you used for your examples fit everything I have posted about actual shooters....they are not normal people, they are not normal gun owners....but nice try....

Funny that, if my post was a "load of crap" as alleged --- it was nevertheless worth ten --- count 'em ten reply posts. So far. And all of them desperate to change the subject from what it was to prior histories and mental states, avoiding the central point at all costs.

Some "load of crap". I should post more "loads of crap". This one's been generating desperation deflections for days.

Lies can be posted quickly.....trying to tell the truth takes actual work and research...as you can see...you lied by hiding the abnormal backgrounds of all of your shooters...so I have to go and dig up the actual histories of you lies....like the guy who murdered his grandmother with a hammer....that was a nice omission.......but it had to be found.....

"Backgrounds" are irrelevant. I understand that's what you wish the point was, but it ain't. Never was. The point was, is now, and shall ever remain, world without end amen, that we live in a Gun Culture, meaning our values are steeped in the idea of shooting and killing things as a solution to any problem. It starts in childhood, marketing toy guns and GI Joes. It's fed and fostered every hour of every day and night in what we have that passes for "storytelling" -- which means television, movies, music, comic book, video games, literature and even linguistic metaphor. The message is pounded into the collective head relentlessly and continuously from every possible angle. And gullible saps like you soak it up like candy.

THAT is what all those guys had in common. Your desperate attempts to reframe the point into your own personal after-the-fact Wikipedia background check is as bullshitious as it is transparent. You can dig up dirt on anybody you want; doesn't give you a causation.

Let's haul out this chestnut that I've posted here before: A Tale of Two Cities (apologies to Dickens), repost from a couple o years ago:


I give you two cities, split by a river, kinda like Minneapolis and St. Paul are but this is a different pair of cities.

Obviously being next to each other, these cities have much in common regionally, climatically, industrially and so on. They are less than a mile apart, connected by a bridge and a tunnel. But the two cities show a stark difference in one area.

The city to the west recorded 377 total homicides in 2011 and 327 in 2010, according to police statistics(1), carrying a homicide rate of around 50 per 100,000 people.

Across the bridge in the same time period, there was a total of one. For both years put together. A rate of 0.30. From September 27, 2009 to November 22, 2011 in that city, there were no murders at all. Zero.

What's going on here?

----- One of them is in Canada. The cities are Detroit and Windsor.

I haven't determined how many of those homicides were committed by firearm, but for a guide, out of 386 Detroit homicides in 2012, 333 were by firearm. Over 86%. (1)

And the one murder that finally broke the 2011 streak in Windsor? It was a stabbing.

People in his city of about 215,000 have a saying, Blaine said Friday afternoon: "In Windsor, when a 7-Eleven is held up, it usually is a knife. In Detroit, it is an Uzi."

It's not that there's no crime in Windsor, an industrial city that has seen its own economic challenges. "We're no different than any other major metropolitan area," Corey said. (here)

704 to 1 in homicide; several hundred to zero in gun deaths.
Detroit: at or near the highest murder rate in its country; Windsor: lowest in its country.
Less than a mile apart.

What's driving the difference? Gun control? Or gun culture?

Resources/further reading:
(1) 2012 Crime/Homicide Stats

(2) Freep.com 1/3/13

A Tale of Two Cities

Murder-Free Two Years

The fault lies not in our guns but in ourselves. To our values we are underlings.

And the two cities show it isn't access to guns that is the problem but our criminal culture.....our criminals murder more often and it has nothing to do with access to guns...it is their mindset.........

And since the normal gun culture in this country is not a problem...you nuts need to focus on criminals...

there are over 357 million guns in private hands......and a tiny, tiny minority are used in crime.......so our gun culture is not a problem....our criminals...created by democrats social policy is the problem.


356,991,876 guns in private hands, the gun culture of the United States.......and then the tiny minority of criminals who use guns illegally. Yeah.....not a problem of American gun culture.

 

[2aguy]

what did they actually have in common....Spengler had been in prison 17 years...for murder....making you wrong.....ditto the violent history of Johan...and the sandy hook shooter was mentally ill.......

Neither Adam Lanza nor Michael Dunn had any such violent history, so no -- they did not have that in common. You're wrong. What they DID have in common was guns. Guns and being a male member of American Gun Culture. All four of them. See, that's what "they all had in common" MEANS.

But I already said this. And no, it's not going away.

not one of them was a normal gun owner...they were nowhere near normal gun culture...and as the research I have posted showed...they all had violent histories or mental illness....not one of them was John Q. citizen who all of a sudden murdered someone because they owned a gun...they killed because they were by nature violent killers.....

They're Americans. Therefore they're part of the American culture --- which is, among many other things, a gun worship culture. QEfuckingD.

2012 Webster, New York shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Police identified the gunman as 62-year-old local resident William H. Spengler, Jr.[7] Spengler previously spent 17 years in prison for murdering his 92-year-old grandmother with a hammer in 1980.[6][8][11] He had not attracted the attention of police since then. William Spengler "could not stand" his sister Cheryl, according to a friend, Roger Vercruysse. Spengler's mother Arline, to whom he was said to have been close, died two months earlier.[6]

Yeah ummmm.... I don't need a Wiki on William Spengler. I'm the one who brought him in here.

and here we go. Michael Dunn..the loud music shooter had a history of violence.....

Shooting of Jordan Davis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Edit
Michael Dunn's former neighbor, Charles Hendrix, said he was not surprised by Dunn's behavior.[30][31] Hendrix commented on Dunn, whom he described as arrogant and controlling, adding that Dunn's ex-wives told him that Dunn was violent and abusive toward them, although he never personally witnessed this.[31] Hendrix spoke of a previous discussion where Dunn asked him if he knew anyone who would "take care of" someone who infuriated him in an unrelated incident, and Hendrix interpreted further discussion as Dunn wanting to send a hit on this person.[30]

so now tall of the people you used for your examples fit everything I have posted about actual shooters....they are not normal people, they are not normal gun owners....but nice try....

Funny that, if my post was a "load of crap" as alleged --- it was nevertheless worth ten --- count 'em ten reply posts. So far. And all of them desperate to change the subject from what it was to prior histories and mental states, avoiding the central point at all costs.

Some "load of crap". I should post more "loads of crap". This one's been generating desperation deflections for days.

Lies can be posted quickly.....trying to tell the truth takes actual work and research...as you can see...you lied by hiding the abnormal backgrounds of all of your shooters...so I have to go and dig up the actual histories of you lies....like the guy who murdered his grandmother with a hammer....that was a nice omission.......but it had to be found.....

"Backgrounds" are irrelevant. I understand that's what you wish the point was, but it ain't. Never was. The point was, is now, and shall ever remain, world without end amen, that we live in a Gun Culture, meaning our values are steeped in the idea of shooting and killing things as a solution to any problem. It starts in childhood, marketing toy guns and GI Joes. It's fed and fostered every hour of every day and night in what we have that passes for "storytelling" -- which means television, movies, music, comic book, video games, literature and even linguistic metaphor. The message is pounded into the collective head relentlessly and continuously from every possible angle. And gullible saps like you soak it up like candy.

THAT is what all those guys had in common. Your desperate attempts to reframe the point into your own personal after-the-fact Wikipedia background check is as bullshitious as it is transparent. You can dig up dirt on anybody you want; doesn't give you a causation.

Let's haul out this chestnut that I've posted here before: A Tale of Two Cities (apologies to Dickens), repost from a couple o years ago:


I give you two cities, split by a river, kinda like Minneapolis and St. Paul are but this is a different pair of cities.

Obviously being next to each other, these cities have much in common regionally, climatically, industrially and so on. They are less than a mile apart, connected by a bridge and a tunnel. But the two cities show a stark difference in one area.

The city to the west recorded 377 total homicides in 2011 and 327 in 2010, according to police statistics(1), carrying a homicide rate of around 50 per 100,000 people.

Across the bridge in the same time period, there was a total of one. For both years put together. A rate of 0.30. From September 27, 2009 to November 22, 2011 in that city, there were no murders at all. Zero.

What's going on here?

----- One of them is in Canada. The cities are Detroit and Windsor.

I haven't determined how many of those homicides were committed by firearm, but for a guide, out of 386 Detroit homicides in 2012, 333 were by firearm. Over 86%. (1)

And the one murder that finally broke the 2011 streak in Windsor? It was a stabbing.

People in his city of about 215,000 have a saying, Blaine said Friday afternoon: "In Windsor, when a 7-Eleven is held up, it usually is a knife. In Detroit, it is an Uzi."

It's not that there's no crime in Windsor, an industrial city that has seen its own economic challenges. "We're no different than any other major metropolitan area," Corey said. (here)

704 to 1 in homicide; several hundred to zero in gun deaths.
Detroit: at or near the highest murder rate in its country; Windsor: lowest in its country.
Less than a mile apart.

What's driving the difference? Gun control? Or gun culture?

Resources/further reading:
(1) 2012 Crime/Homicide Stats

(2) Freep.com 1/3/13

A Tale of Two Cities

Murder-Free Two Years

The fault lies not in our guns but in ourselves. To our values we are underlings.

The fault lies not in our guns but in ourselves. To our values we are underlings

Not our values.....the values created by democrats who have helped create a criminal underclass that murders people easily and often......the rest of us....good people...

 

[Rustic]

 

[Pogo]

nd the two cities show it isn't access to guns that is the problem but our criminal culture.....our criminals murder more often and it has nothing to do with access to guns...it is their mindset.........

Almost actually correct.

It isn't gun laws; if one wants a gun one can get one, whether legally or not, just as one can get a hit of crack, a prostitute, an underage drink, etc. That's a given. Always has been.

The key word is "wants". That's what "Gun Culture" means. And once again you try to shift my point because you can't handle it as is.

There is no "criminal culture". Canada has its criminals, just as we do, just as everyone does. It may be called a subculture to some extent but it's not the dominant culture, not there, not here. The difference is that (in this example) Canada does not have a gun-worshiping culture as an accepted everyday value ......... while we do.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

nd the two cities show it isn't access to guns that is the problem but our criminal culture.....our criminals murder more often and it has nothing to do with access to guns...it is their mindset.........

Almost actually correct.

It isn't gun laws; if one wants a gun one can get one, whether legally or not, just as one can get a hit of crack, a prostitute, an underage drink, etc. That's a given. Always has been.

The key word is "wants". That's what "Gun Culture" means. And once again you try to shift my point because you can't handle it as is.

There is no "criminal culture". Canada has its criminals, just as we do, just as everyone does. It may be called a subculture to some extent but it's not the dominant culture, not there, not here. The difference is that (in this example) Canada does not have a gun-worshiping culture as an accepted everyday value ......... while we do.

Okay, so you honestly admit that people that want guns will get them. In the same post, you say we have a gun culture.

So if the criminals have guns, and our penal system isn't a deterrent to crime, then how are we to protect ourselves if we are not a gun culture?

 

[2aguy]

nd the two cities show it isn't access to guns that is the problem but our criminal culture.....our criminals murder more often and it has nothing to do with access to guns...it is their mindset.........

Almost actually correct.

It isn't gun laws; if one wants a gun one can get one, whether legally or not, just as one can get a hit of crack, a prostitute, an underage drink, etc. That's a given. Always has been.

The key word is "wants". That's what "Gun Culture" means. And once again you try to shift my point because you can't handle it as is.

There is no "criminal culture". Canada has its criminals, just as we do, just as everyone does. It may be called a subculture to some extent but it's not the dominant culture, not there, not here. The difference is that (in this example) Canada does not have a gun-worshiping culture as an accepted everyday value ......... while we do.

Wrong.....there is a criminal culture....the "Travellor" type of criminal has not been a violent criminal, the Mexican Cartels...incredibly violent.....more violent than inner city American gang culture....vs. Japanese Yakuza culture where money is the absolute most important thing to them....

So yes....different criminals behave differently in different countries..... The "sub" culture of criminals is the problem.....not American gun culture. America values firearms for many reasons......and since it is the majority culture and it is not violent in any way they are not the problem

As the anti gun loons ceaslessly point out...in a country with 1.5 million defensive gun uses each year, according to bill clinton, there are only 238 criminals shot and killed. Normal gun owning Americans....close to 356,991,876 gun in private hands and over 13 million normal Americans carrying gun for self defense ....do not kill unless they absolutely have to.

Normal people...use guns to stop crime 1.5 million times....and only kill 238 criminals a year...according to the anti gun nuts.

The criminal sub-culture.....murdered 8,124 people in 2014..........

So no....our gun culture is fine...and responsible and a bulwark against the government.....

Our sub-criminal sub-culture.....fueled by single teenage mothers and no fathers in the home.....they are where we need to focus our efforts....not locking up normal gun owners and destroying their lives over arbitrary clerical errors......just because you guys hate gun owners.