How to reduce gun deaths in US

[Mac-7]

Wow. Mac-7 the gun controller. Of course Bruen is wrong because it is still too restrictive on the protections of the 2nd Amendment but even going with those restrictive tests, can you show a single law from 1791 that forbade felons from owning guns? Or, in your mind it is that Bruen is far too liberal and we need a lot more gun control than what Bruen would allow?

When you commit a felony you deserve punishment

Not being allowed to own a gun is part of your punishment

 

[Mac-7]

Why can't people not in prison carry guns? Is that constitutional in your mind? Or is that an infringement on their right to keep and bear arms?

Its a good and sensible law

If that bothers someone tell them not to commit a felony

 

[woodwork201]

Nahhhhh.... just start executing people convicted of killing someone while committing a crime.

Six months from arrest to execution... no twenty or thirty years' worth of bulll$hit... if they're proven guilty... that's the end of it.

6 weeks to execution. They used to do it in days when any communication to the Courts was by horseback or foot. Now we have computers, instant delivery of messages, instant search of case history and precedent. An attorney should be able to present at least a petition demonstrating probable cause for a postponement by 3 weeks and get a decision back in another 3.

 

[woodwork201]

When you commit a felony you deserve punishment

Not being allowed to own a gun is part of your punishment

You might be right - but you're not - except for that whole "shall not be infringed" thing. In the Founding era, guns were protected even from liens, tax collections, or anything else. They could never be taken.

I understand that you're more of a gun controller than is the State of New York. They except the ruling in Bruen and you do not. Otherwise, show me the historical tradition and the historical analogues for preventing felons from keeping or bearing arms.

You are a great example of why we're losing the fight for our right to keep and bear arms. You're a gun controller just like the Giffords, the Brfadys, and just like Stephen Dettelbach, Merrick Garland, and Joe Biden. You agree with them 1000% that the right to keep and bear arms can be infringed and should be infringed. If you disagree with them at all, it is only in the when to infringe, against whom to infringe, and how to infringe.

The problem is, of course, now that you've agreed with them absolutely that they can and should infringe, it is they, not you, who get to answer the when, against whom, and how questions.

 

[Stann]

6 weeks to execution. They used to do it in days when any communication to the Courts was by horseback or foot. Now we have computers, instant delivery of messages, instant search of case history and precedent. An attorney should be able to present at least a petition demonstrating probable cause for a postponement by 3 weeks and get a decision back in another 3.

Laws and the justice system are good but are not perfect , some innocent's will die but that's an acceptable loss if it helps deter the rampant crime rates. The only thing I would also like to see changed is that fraud is a felony , not a misdemeanor. Rich people pushed that law into place to make it harder for them to be convicted. White Collar crime does more harm than all other crime combined. In China they execute bad businessmen who willfully commit fraud.

 

[woodwork201]

Its a good and sensible law

If that bothers someone tell them not to commit a felony

Fortunately, the Constitution doesn't say that laws only need be good and sensible to Mac-7. The Constitution requires that all laws be in conformance with the Constitution.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Apparently the Founders didn't get your ancestors' memo about the "good and sensible" clause.

 

[woodwork201]

Why bother with a trial at all, just do away with due process altogether and execute them the same day.

Well, that's not what he said, is it?

 

[woodwork201]

Laws and the justice system are good but are not perfect , some innocent's will die but that's an acceptable loss if it helps deter the rampant crime rates. The only thing I would also like to see changed is that fraud is a felony , not a misdemeanor. Rich people pushed that law into place to make it harder for them to be convicted. White Collar crime does more harm than all other crime combined. In China they execute bad businessmen who willfully commit fraud.

Wow! I promise you, I have never heard someone say something so antithetical to our way of life in the United States, in my life.

What Americans used to say is, "Better for a hundred guilty men to go free than for a single innocent man to be in jail." That said more about our way of life in America than virtually every other thing we stand for. And now you've reversed it, and now it is OK for some innocents to go to die as long as we get some guilty with them.

It is astonishing how far our younger generations have fallen from the idea that is America and the liberty that our forefathers have fought two wars, with several hundred thousands of them killed, on our land to defend.

 

[Stann]

Nahhhhh.... just start executing people convicted of killing someone while committing a crime.

Six months from arrest to execution... no twenty or thirty years' worth of bulll$hit... if they're proven guilty... that's the end of it.

Let's make it quicker , no appeals on capital punishment , like it was before the lawyers changed the laws to.make more money.

 

[Stann]

First they flood our country with thugs from 3rd W countries.....then they attempt to disarm us so we can't be safe in our homes anymore.

They, you have a problem.

 

[Stann]

Wow! I promise you, I have never heard someone say something so antithetical to our way of life in the United States, in my life.

What Americans used to say is, "Better for a hundred guilty men to go free than for a single innocent man to be in jail." That said more about our way of life in America than virtually every other thing we stand for. And now you've reversed it, and now it is OK for some innocents to go to die as long as we get some guilty with them.

It is astonishing how far our younger generations have fallen from the idea that is America and the liberty that our forefathers have fought two wars, with several hundred thousands of them killed, on our land to defend.

Don't tell me you're a businessman who.commits a lot of fraud and you want to continue your predatory lifestyle without any consequences.

 

[woodwork201]

Alcohol kills twice that, first ban alcohol then get back to us on guns. And Biden/Dem's border polices have killed over 200,000 Americans.

Not to mention hundreds of thousands of those coming to America that were raped and put into sexual slavery including children. The left doesn't care about rape or child molestation and pornography. They care about socialism alone. And all of those deaths, those rapes, those children raped, molested, and photographed in pornography are simply, as Stann said in How to reduce gun deaths in US, an acceptable loss in their plans to establish communism as the only political power in The United States.

 

[Stann]

Not to mention hundreds of thousands of those coming to America that were raped and put into sexual slavery including children. The left doesn't care about rape or child molestation and pornography. They care about socialism alone. And all of those deaths, those rapes, those children raped, molested, and photographed in pornography are simply, as Stann said in How to reduce gun deaths in US, an acceptable loss in their plans to establish communism as the only political power in The United States.

Too much off subject.You are anything to correlate unrelated facts. All that does is confuse the issue you're attempting to make.

 

[woodwork201]

There is a loophole surrounding private gun sales

But your side is so radical and untrustworthy that no reasonable compromise is possible

Private sales are a loophole to what? WHen we talk about things like tax loopholes, we talk about things that let someone not pay a tax mandated for the rest of us, so what is the law that this loophole you mention defeats? Is it the 2nd Amendment? Because that certainly protects selling guns between private individuals because that is how it was done in 1791. And if you can't prove a historical tradition in 1791, the law you're thinking private sales have looped around, would be presumably unconstitutional according to the Supreme Court (and the Constitution).

But your allegiance to gun control is really something.

 

[woodwork201]

so few firearms are sold that way at gun shows as to make it meaningless. The seller has to PAY a fee and rent the space and the law prevents a private citizen from selling a large number of private firearms. They would need a license for that.

By the new rules posted by the ATF this week, simply offering for sale a single gun at a dollar higher than what you paid for it will get your head blown off as happened to the Director of the Little Rock Airport.

 

[woodwork201]

Wow, a gun nut finally admitted it.

Kudos.

Your side is mowing down people left and right for being brown (El Paso) or black (Buffalo).

Fuck you.

Both of those shooters were Biden voters.

 

[woodwork201]

What compromise are you offering?

What compromise would you accept?

 

[woodwork201]

Banning assault weapons and universal background checks is not an unreasonable “ask”.

We HAD a ten year ban on them and the world didn’t collapse.

There was never an assault weapons ban in the United States - not on the possession nor on the sale of them. More AR-15 style rifles were sold in the years 1994 to 2004 than in the 10 years from 1994 back to 1984.

 

[Stann]

so few firearms are sold that way at gun shows as to make it meaningless. The seller has to PAY a fee and rent the space and the law prevents a private citizen from selling a large number of private firearms. They would need a license for that.

That is indirectly false. Gun shows are often a front to make straw purchases . In essence many of these guns end up in the hands of criminals and organized crime.

 

[woodwork201]

So like I said

There is no compromise with Republican gun nuts (or anti-abortion freaks)

The Constitution starts us with "shall not be infringed". So what do you have to offer in compromise? You have nothing. Unfortunately, you've seen several self-proclaimed gun rights supporters here who are far too happy to compromise with you and that's how this mess of gun control got started in the first place but how that was supposed to go is:

Gun owners: "Shall not be infringed."
Gun controllers: "but we offer to only infringe a little bit more each year."
Gun controllers - get up and walk out with the best package in the history of the world, still holding on to, "Shall not be infringed."

When we have it all, 100%, and you have absolutely nothing, zero per cent, you have nothing to offer in compromise. That is what the gun owners forgot and forgetting that has led to an ever increasing list of "compromised" away rights.

No; there's been too much compromising already.