CDZ Is this image a problem for you? Does it disturb you?

[dblack]

And how did background checks stop the killers shooting up Chicago, Baltimore, D.C., L.A., New York? They already are not allowed to buy a gun because they are criminals...so when the police encounter them while they have the gun, we can already arrest them and lock them up....then, people like you who are judges and prosecutors let them back out, over and over again....that is the problem....not our dumb background check system.

Nobody expects background checks to stop all illegal gun buyers. Your question is childish.

What is childish is punishing people for the illegal actions of a very, very few assholes.

Do you think people should text while driving?

Of course not. But I also don't think people should watch television. In fact, I think the latter is far more dangerous. Should we make that illegal too?

Only if you believe in an authoritarian state which dictates what people should think, believe and do.

Isn't that the purpose of government?

 

[Skull Pilot]

There are gun nuts....and anti-gun nuts. Somewhere in between is the place of reason.

Guns are tools. They are tools that have potentially lethal consequences. They should be treated with the respect and care that they deserve.

A "gun culture" doesn't exactly promote that does it?

My grandfather was in the military, he had guns, he had hunting rifles. He did not go to downtown Saltlake City "packing"...EVER.

My culture treat's guns as a useful tool to be treated with respect, secured when not in use and not used as a statement.

That's probably why I have issues with the photo in the OP. Not that they have guns, but that they feel the need to be armed in the kitchen, talking with the dog, chilling with coffee...as if that is totally ordinary. I understand WHY they want to portray the image...but it's not realistic.

A chain saw is good self defense but I'm not going to haul it around.

Actually a chainsaw is a very poor tool for self defense. The very best tool for self defense is a firearm of some sort.

Use the tool for what it was designed for. You don't use a chain saw for finish trim work. You don't use a nail gun to drive a screw.

A firearm is designed to fire a projectile so as to stop a threat at a distance and as a force multiplier so as to stop more than one threat.

That is all a firearm is.

I prefer a big stick with a nail in it

good for you

I prefer my Glock 19

 

[Skull Pilot]

Really? You need to ask that question? Can you tell these women the exact time of the day or night they may run into a criminal, a rapist, robber or murderer? If we had that ability, then we would only need to carry at that time, but until we achieve that level of psychic perfection, then the only course of action if you want to protect yourself from a random, violent, criminal attack, is to carry your gun like you do your cell phone.

As to an extension of manhood......is that why these women are carrying those guns?

And again with the sexual reference....please get help.

Don't know when a fire might break out either, but I don't see them strapping a fire extinguisher to their legs. Can you say Fashion Statement?

Do you carry a wallet? FASHION STATEMENT
Do you carry a cell phone? Ditto
Do you carry a pen? Ditto also
See where this is going? Just because you may not need a given tool on a given day, does not mean that carrying it daily is a fashion statement. Besides, we know nothing about the situation, you assume they are in their own home, with the doors looked and are relatively safe. How do you know that? They may be in a house that is far out in the country with ample predators around. They just came in from outside to make a meal. Does that mean the guns are a fashion statement, simply because they did not remove them at the door? You make so many assumptions and judge the people and situation based on those assumptions. In reality, you know nothing but there are two women carrying guns in a kitchen. Does this frighten you? Or maybe it simply offends you for some reason. Why is it so terrible for two women to carry guns? Are you sexist? Or maybe you just believe that no one should be "allowed" to carry, unless YOU say so.

What ever the case may be, the problem here is not the women in the picture. The problem is YOU. You know nothing about the situation, and yet you pass judgement on it. Why is that? What is your intent?

Don't be silly. The implication of the picture is exactly what you said it was. They are calmly inside their own home. There is no reason to believe they just came from an intense situation where fire arms were needed. That is not a normal situation. The guns are a fashion statement. That is it.

Why do you continue to make assumptions? You do know the old saying: All assuming does is make an a** out of U and me. You know nothing about the situation, they may well be armed because the is a very real threat, you simply do not know.

I suppose there could be a very real threat, but a random picture with a couple women in the kitchen smiling doesn't give that impression. I guess the entire house could be flying through the air because of tornado, just like the Wizard of OZ too. The picture doesn't give that impression either, but it could be happening.

Well Dr. Petit of CT thought the same thing until a couple pieces of shit invaded his home raped his wife and daughter then burned them alive

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yeah.....the bar one? Virginia and allowed concealed carry in bars...their crime rate in bars went down....

Allowing guns into bars has ‘surprising’ result



When Virginia passed a law allowing concealed carry in bars and alcohol-serving restaurants beginning July 1 of last year, opponents of the change decried the dangers of mixing guns and alcohol, for fear violent crimes would escalate.

But one year later, the Richmond Times-Dispatch did a study to see if the gloomy prognostications came true.

According to state police records, not only did gun violence in bars and restaurants not increase under the new law, it decreased by 5.2 percent.

In fact, of the 145 reported crimes with guns that occurred in Virginia bars and restaurants in fiscal 2010-11 (compared to 153 incidents in the year before the new law took effect), only two of the aggravated assault cases were related to concealed-carry permit holders. In one incident, the crime took place at a restaurant that didn’t serve alcohol – thus unrelated to the new law – and in the other, the weapon was neither discharged nor withdrawn from its holster.

“The numbers basically just confirm what we’ve said would happen if the General Assembly changed the law,” Philip Van Cleave, president of the pro-gun Virginia Citizens Defense League, told the Times-Dispatch. “Keep in mind what the other side was saying – that this was going to be a blood bath, that restaurants will be dangerous and people will stop going. But there was nothing to base the fear-mongering on.”

Virginia isn't the only state that allows carrying a gun....you just can't drink and carry, just like you can't drive and carry...

So......you guys would laugh at people who carry every day....tell us, do you know exactly when you will be violently attacked by a criminal? Because a lot of women who are violently raped, a lot of people who are brutally beaten and robbed, and a lot of people murdered by criminals sure could have used your psychic abilities.....

I think allowing guns in bars is a VERY BAD IDEA frankly. Alcohal fuels violence - there is no doubt about that.

I'm not totally anti-gun, believe it or not. I support the right of citizens to have guns but I also support LIMITS on that right (just like any other right). One of those is mixing guns and booze.

Is there any llimitation you support when it comes to gun rights?

Sure, If you are convicted of a violent crime, no gun, period. Full stop. See the only way to CONSTITUTIONALLY take a right, is through what is called "due process". In other words, conviction of a crime.

So without a background check, what will stop him from being able to buy a gun?

Nothing. JUst don't get caught with it. I would be in favor of VERY severe penalties in that case.

What so many people fail to realize, or maybe they do, and just don't care, is that to have true freedom and liberty there is a certain level of risk. No risk=not free. Period, end of story, full stop. Want to be free, you have to be willing to accept a certain level of risk.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin.

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

Still rings pretty true, even after all this time. Guess those "Crazy White Guys" were pretty darn smart after all...

Yes, some risk is required. Gun nuts roaming the street hoping for a chance to shoot someone is not a reasonable risk.

No one I know with a carry permit "hopes to shoot" anyone

 

[Skull Pilot]

Sure, If you are convicted of a violent crime, no gun, period. Full stop. See the only way to CONSTITUTIONALLY take a right, is through what is called "due process". In other words, conviction of a crime.

So without a background check, what will stop him from being able to buy a gun?

Nothing. JUst don't get caught with it. I would be in favor of VERY severe penalties in that case.

What so many people fail to realize, or maybe they do, and just don't care, is that to have true freedom and liberty there is a certain level of risk. No risk=not free. Period, end of story, full stop. Want to be free, you have to be willing to accept a certain level of risk.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin.

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

Still rings pretty true, even after all this time. Guess those "Crazy White Guys" were pretty darn smart after all...

Yes, some risk is required. Gun nuts roaming the street hoping for a chance to shoot someone is not a reasonable risk.

On that, we can agree. How do we discern between the "gun nuts", as you call them, and those who carry for other reasons though?

Cops, military personnel, properly certified and trained security guards have a valid reason to be armed in public.Others are either making a fashion statement, or they are so afraid of facing the natural uncertainty of reality till they don't have the ability to safely carry a gun.

How is a concealed weapon that no one knows you have a fashion statement?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yeah.....the bar one? Virginia and allowed concealed carry in bars...their crime rate in bars went down....

Allowing guns into bars has ‘surprising’ result



When Virginia passed a law allowing concealed carry in bars and alcohol-serving restaurants beginning July 1 of last year, opponents of the change decried the dangers of mixing guns and alcohol, for fear violent crimes would escalate.

But one year later, the Richmond Times-Dispatch did a study to see if the gloomy prognostications came true.

According to state police records, not only did gun violence in bars and restaurants not increase under the new law, it decreased by 5.2 percent.

In fact, of the 145 reported crimes with guns that occurred in Virginia bars and restaurants in fiscal 2010-11 (compared to 153 incidents in the year before the new law took effect), only two of the aggravated assault cases were related to concealed-carry permit holders. In one incident, the crime took place at a restaurant that didn’t serve alcohol – thus unrelated to the new law – and in the other, the weapon was neither discharged nor withdrawn from its holster.

“The numbers basically just confirm what we’ve said would happen if the General Assembly changed the law,” Philip Van Cleave, president of the pro-gun Virginia Citizens Defense League, told the Times-Dispatch. “Keep in mind what the other side was saying – that this was going to be a blood bath, that restaurants will be dangerous and people will stop going. But there was nothing to base the fear-mongering on.”

Virginia isn't the only state that allows carrying a gun....you just can't drink and carry, just like you can't drive and carry...

So......you guys would laugh at people who carry every day....tell us, do you know exactly when you will be violently attacked by a criminal? Because a lot of women who are violently raped, a lot of people who are brutally beaten and robbed, and a lot of people murdered by criminals sure could have used your psychic abilities.....

I think allowing guns in bars is a VERY BAD IDEA frankly. Alcohal fuels violence - there is no doubt about that.

I'm not totally anti-gun, believe it or not. I support the right of citizens to have guns but I also support LIMITS on that right (just like any other right). One of those is mixing guns and booze.

Is there any llimitation you support when it comes to gun rights?

Sure, If you are convicted of a violent crime, no gun, period. Full stop. See the only way to CONSTITUTIONALLY take a right, is through what is called "due process". In other words, conviction of a crime.

So without a background check, what will stop him from being able to buy a gun?

And how did background checks stop the killers shooting up Chicago, Baltimore, D.C., L.A., New York? They already are not allowed to buy a gun because they are criminals...so when the police encounter them while they have the gun, we can already arrest them and lock them up....then, people like you who are judges and prosecutors let them back out, over and over again....that is the problem....not our dumb background check system.

Nobody expects background checks to stop all illegal gun buyers. Your question is childish.

so what exactly do you plan to do about the actual criminals who buy guns illegally?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Nobody expects background checks to stop all illegal gun buyers. Your question is childish.

What is childish is punishing people for the illegal actions of a very, very few assholes.

Do you think people should text while driving?

Of course not. But I also don't think people should watch television. In fact, I think the latter is far more dangerous. Should we make that illegal too?

Only if you believe in an authoritarian state which dictates what people should think, believe and do.

Isn't that the purpose of government?

um no

 

[dblack]

so what exactly do you plan to do about the actual criminals who buy guns illegally?

Easy. Make it illegal to be a criminal.

 

[Divine Wind]

Nobody expects background checks to stop all illegal gun buyers. Your question is childish.

What is childish is punishing people for the illegal actions of a very, very few assholes.

Do you think people should text while driving?

Of course not. But I also don't think people should watch television. In fact, I think the latter is far more dangerous. Should we make that illegal too?

Only if you believe in an authoritarian state which dictates what people should think, believe and do.

Isn't that the purpose of government?

No, but that's what many Left Wingers believe it is. The old fight between Federalists and Classical Liberalism.

Classical Liberalism believes that government are created by individuals to protect themselves from each other and that the purpose of government should be to minimize conflict between individuals that would otherwise arise in a state of nature.

 

[Divine Wind]

Sure, If you are convicted of a violent crime, no gun, period. Full stop. See the only way to CONSTITUTIONALLY take a right, is through what is called "due process". In other words, conviction of a crime.

So without a background check, what will stop him from being able to buy a gun?

And how did background checks stop the killers shooting up Chicago, Baltimore, D.C., L.A., New York? They already are not allowed to buy a gun because they are criminals...so when the police encounter them while they have the gun, we can already arrest them and lock them up....then, people like you who are judges and prosecutors let them back out, over and over again....that is the problem....not our dumb background check system.

Nobody expects background checks to stop all illegal gun buyers. Your question is childish.

so what exactly do you plan to do about the actual criminals who buy guns illegally?

Sure, If you are convicted of a violent crime, no gun, period. Full stop. See the only way to CONSTITUTIONALLY take a right, is through what is called "due process". In other words, conviction of a crime.

So without a background check, what will stop him from being able to buy a gun?

And how did background checks stop the killers shooting up Chicago, Baltimore, D.C., L.A., New York? They already are not allowed to buy a gun because they are criminals...so when the police encounter them while they have the gun, we can already arrest them and lock them up....then, people like you who are judges and prosecutors let them back out, over and over again....that is the problem....not our dumb background check system.

Nobody expects background checks to stop all illegal gun buyers. Your question is childish.

so what exactly do you plan to do about the actual criminals who buy guns illegally?

Easy. Make it illegal to be a criminal.

LOL. Yes, that's what modern liberals believe. They'd rather pass new laws restricting rights than enforcing the laws already on the books.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

So without a background check, what will stop him from being able to buy a gun?

And how did background checks stop the killers shooting up Chicago, Baltimore, D.C., L.A., New York? They already are not allowed to buy a gun because they are criminals...so when the police encounter them while they have the gun, we can already arrest them and lock them up....then, people like you who are judges and prosecutors let them back out, over and over again....that is the problem....not our dumb background check system.

Nobody expects background checks to stop all illegal gun buyers. Your question is childish.

so what exactly do you plan to do about the actual criminals who buy guns illegally?

So without a background check, what will stop him from being able to buy a gun?

And how did background checks stop the killers shooting up Chicago, Baltimore, D.C., L.A., New York? They already are not allowed to buy a gun because they are criminals...so when the police encounter them while they have the gun, we can already arrest them and lock them up....then, people like you who are judges and prosecutors let them back out, over and over again....that is the problem....not our dumb background check system.

Nobody expects background checks to stop all illegal gun buyers. Your question is childish.

so what exactly do you plan to do about the actual criminals who buy guns illegally?

Easy. Make it illegal to be a criminal.

LOL. Yes, that's what modern liberals believe. They'd rather pass new laws restricting rights than enforcing the laws already on the books.

Actually, that's what the nutters say - Just throw up our hands and give up.

Anyone old enough to remember when car makers said the same thing? They said seat belts and safety measures will not save lives. That was code for 'it will cost us money'.

NRA is now saying very close to the same thing, except they wave the flag and the constitution at the easily owned tee potty types. Yes 2aguy I'm looking at you.

It was effective for a while for car makers and it will ring the bell for the nutters until they're sick of stepping over hundreds of dead kids bodies to sell more guns to those who don't need them. Like cleverly disguised cupcake 2aguy


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Picaro]

The pic is very artificially staged and affected. My wife nor my friends' wives wear their holsters in the house, for one.

I'm trying to figure out what some mean by a 'gun culture', as if gun owners just sit around all day obsessing over firearms; we don't.

Maybe New Yorkers and West Coast Burb Brats should get out more, instead of remaining clueless urban hicks who think everything beyond their neighborhoods is a Siberian wilderness full of marauding Mongols and monsters or something; fly-over country is nothing at all like Queens or East Palo Alto or Compton ,much less south Chicago, the part of the 'community' that was 'organized' by Obama and his mentors.

 

[dblack]

Actually, that's what the nutters say -

Well what do you say? What is the purpose of government?

 

[Divine Wind]

And how did background checks stop the killers shooting up Chicago, Baltimore, D.C., L.A., New York? They already are not allowed to buy a gun because they are criminals...so when the police encounter them while they have the gun, we can already arrest them and lock them up....then, people like you who are judges and prosecutors let them back out, over and over again....that is the problem....not our dumb background check system.

Nobody expects background checks to stop all illegal gun buyers. Your question is childish.

so what exactly do you plan to do about the actual criminals who buy guns illegally?

And how did background checks stop the killers shooting up Chicago, Baltimore, D.C., L.A., New York? They already are not allowed to buy a gun because they are criminals...so when the police encounter them while they have the gun, we can already arrest them and lock them up....then, people like you who are judges and prosecutors let them back out, over and over again....that is the problem....not our dumb background check system.

Nobody expects background checks to stop all illegal gun buyers. Your question is childish.

so what exactly do you plan to do about the actual criminals who buy guns illegally?

Easy. Make it illegal to be a criminal.

LOL. Yes, that's what modern liberals believe. They'd rather pass new laws restricting rights than enforcing the laws already on the books.

Actually, that's what the nutters say - Just throw up our hands and give up.

Anyone old enough to remember when car makers said the same thing? They said seat belts and safety measures will not save lives. That was code for 'it will cost us money'.

NRA is now saying very close to the same thing, except they wave the flag and the constitution at the easily owned tee potty types. Yes 2aguy I'm looking at you.

It was effective for a while for car makers and it will ring the bell for the nutters until they're sick of stepping over hundreds of dead kids bodies to sell more guns to those who don't need them. Like cleverly disguised cupcake 2aguy


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Nice rant. Really good at twisting words too.

Okay. So do you just want to ban guns or do you want to pass "common sense" guns laws? If the latter, please delineate exactly what sort of laws you intend to pass over all of us.

 

[blackhawk]

Here we have an image....if you see what I am alluding to...please comment.....View attachment 140169

If you have a problem with these women, please explain why.........

Other than it looks like the dog is hungry and no one is feeding him or her no.

 

[Coyote]

When guns are a symbol of indadequacy:

Penny's is a violent place apparently...

Bars are a great place for firearms...

Target...another violent place...don't go shopping without dangling an assault style weapon...

Just eating out with my weaponry .... doesn't everyone?

Contrast that with those for whom gun's are just a tool:

So is the gun a statement or a useful tool? My grandfather (and husband) had/have guns. During hunting season, rifles are in use, when not in use, they're safely stored. My grandfather would have laughted at people who feel the need to carry assault type rifles and "massive stopping power" into Penny's.

Yeah.....the bar one? Virginia and allowed concealed carry in bars...their crime rate in bars went down....

Allowing guns into bars has ‘surprising’ result



When Virginia passed a law allowing concealed carry in bars and alcohol-serving restaurants beginning July 1 of last year, opponents of the change decried the dangers of mixing guns and alcohol, for fear violent crimes would escalate.

But one year later, the Richmond Times-Dispatch did a study to see if the gloomy prognostications came true.

According to state police records, not only did gun violence in bars and restaurants not increase under the new law, it decreased by 5.2 percent.

In fact, of the 145 reported crimes with guns that occurred in Virginia bars and restaurants in fiscal 2010-11 (compared to 153 incidents in the year before the new law took effect), only two of the aggravated assault cases were related to concealed-carry permit holders. In one incident, the crime took place at a restaurant that didn’t serve alcohol – thus unrelated to the new law – and in the other, the weapon was neither discharged nor withdrawn from its holster.

“The numbers basically just confirm what we’ve said would happen if the General Assembly changed the law,” Philip Van Cleave, president of the pro-gun Virginia Citizens Defense League, told the Times-Dispatch. “Keep in mind what the other side was saying – that this was going to be a blood bath, that restaurants will be dangerous and people will stop going. But there was nothing to base the fear-mongering on.”

Virginia isn't the only state that allows carrying a gun....you just can't drink and carry, just like you can't drive and carry...

So......you guys would laugh at people who carry every day....tell us, do you know exactly when you will be violently attacked by a criminal? Because a lot of women who are violently raped, a lot of people who are brutally beaten and robbed, and a lot of people murdered by criminals sure could have used your psychic abilities.....

I think allowing guns in bars is a VERY BAD IDEA frankly. Alcohal fuels violence - there is no doubt about that.

I'm not totally anti-gun, believe it or not. I support the right of citizens to have guns but I also support LIMITS on that right (just like any other right). One of those is mixing guns and booze.

Is there any llimitation you support when it comes to gun rights?

Sure, If you are convicted of a violent crime, no gun, period. Full stop. See the only way to CONSTITUTIONALLY take a right, is through what is called "due process". In other words, conviction of a crime.

So without a background check, what will stop him from being able to buy a gun?

And how did background checks stop the killers shooting up Chicago, Baltimore, D.C., L.A., New York? They already are not allowed to buy a gun because they are criminals...so when the police encounter them while they have the gun, we can already arrest them and lock them up....then, people like you who are judges and prosecutors let them back out, over and over again....that is the problem....not our dumb background check system.

Are you making the argument that because background checks aren't 100% perfect they should be abandoned?

 

[dblack]

Yeah.....the bar one? Virginia and allowed concealed carry in bars...their crime rate in bars went down....

Allowing guns into bars has ‘surprising’ result



When Virginia passed a law allowing concealed carry in bars and alcohol-serving restaurants beginning July 1 of last year, opponents of the change decried the dangers of mixing guns and alcohol, for fear violent crimes would escalate.

But one year later, the Richmond Times-Dispatch did a study to see if the gloomy prognostications came true.

According to state police records, not only did gun violence in bars and restaurants not increase under the new law, it decreased by 5.2 percent.

In fact, of the 145 reported crimes with guns that occurred in Virginia bars and restaurants in fiscal 2010-11 (compared to 153 incidents in the year before the new law took effect), only two of the aggravated assault cases were related to concealed-carry permit holders. In one incident, the crime took place at a restaurant that didn’t serve alcohol – thus unrelated to the new law – and in the other, the weapon was neither discharged nor withdrawn from its holster.

“The numbers basically just confirm what we’ve said would happen if the General Assembly changed the law,” Philip Van Cleave, president of the pro-gun Virginia Citizens Defense League, told the Times-Dispatch. “Keep in mind what the other side was saying – that this was going to be a blood bath, that restaurants will be dangerous and people will stop going. But there was nothing to base the fear-mongering on.”

Virginia isn't the only state that allows carrying a gun....you just can't drink and carry, just like you can't drive and carry...

So......you guys would laugh at people who carry every day....tell us, do you know exactly when you will be violently attacked by a criminal? Because a lot of women who are violently raped, a lot of people who are brutally beaten and robbed, and a lot of people murdered by criminals sure could have used your psychic abilities.....

I think allowing guns in bars is a VERY BAD IDEA frankly. Alcohal fuels violence - there is no doubt about that.

I'm not totally anti-gun, believe it or not. I support the right of citizens to have guns but I also support LIMITS on that right (just like any other right). One of those is mixing guns and booze.

Is there any llimitation you support when it comes to gun rights?

Sure, If you are convicted of a violent crime, no gun, period. Full stop. See the only way to CONSTITUTIONALLY take a right, is through what is called "due process". In other words, conviction of a crime.

So without a background check, what will stop him from being able to buy a gun?

And how did background checks stop the killers shooting up Chicago, Baltimore, D.C., L.A., New York? They already are not allowed to buy a gun because they are criminals...so when the police encounter them while they have the gun, we can already arrest them and lock them up....then, people like you who are judges and prosecutors let them back out, over and over again....that is the problem....not our dumb background check system.

Are you making the argument that because background checks aren't 100% perfect they should be abandoned?

Sounds like it. Which is about as silly as saying that wearing guns in holsters around the house is as normal carrying a cell phone.

 

[hadit]

I think allowing guns in bars is a VERY BAD IDEA frankly. Alcohal fuels violence - there is no doubt about that.

I'm not totally anti-gun, believe it or not. I support the right of citizens to have guns but I also support LIMITS on that right (just like any other right). One of those is mixing guns and booze.

Is there any llimitation you support when it comes to gun rights?

Sure, If you are convicted of a violent crime, no gun, period. Full stop. See the only way to CONSTITUTIONALLY take a right, is through what is called "due process". In other words, conviction of a crime.

So without a background check, what will stop him from being able to buy a gun?

Nothing. JUst don't get caught with it. I would be in favor of VERY severe penalties in that case.

What so many people fail to realize, or maybe they do, and just don't care, is that to have true freedom and liberty there is a certain level of risk. No risk=not free. Period, end of story, full stop. Want to be free, you have to be willing to accept a certain level of risk.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin.

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

Still rings pretty true, even after all this time. Guess those "Crazy White Guys" were pretty darn smart after all...

Yes, some risk is required. Gun nuts roaming the street hoping for a chance to shoot someone is not a reasonable risk.

No one I know with a carry permit "hopes to shoot" anyone

Actually, permit holders are among the safest out there. I have yet to see evidence that more "gun nuts" kill people than "bad guys" do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[9thIDdoc]

For those of us not born and raised in the gun culture, this image seems to be rather ham handed stab at normalizing something I find disturbing.

As I,said, I,was not raised in a household with guns. I was not raised in a home that felt constantly threatened and in desperate need of protection by force of arms. I was not raised in a household where guns were romanticized.

I find that gun culture to be a hinderence to fully understanding the scourge of guns and senseless gunplay. A couple of housewives packing heat seems to me, at least, more than a little sad.

Happily I was raised to believe that a lack of knowledge does not aid understanding. What I find sad is your pride in your lack of knowledge and baseless fears.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And how did background checks stop the killers shooting up Chicago, Baltimore, D.C., L.A., New York? They already are not allowed to buy a gun because they are criminals...so when the police encounter them while they have the gun, we can already arrest them and lock them up....then, people like you who are judges and prosecutors let them back out, over and over again....that is the problem....not our dumb background check system.

Nobody expects background checks to stop all illegal gun buyers. Your question is childish.

so what exactly do you plan to do about the actual criminals who buy guns illegally?

And how did background checks stop the killers shooting up Chicago, Baltimore, D.C., L.A., New York? They already are not allowed to buy a gun because they are criminals...so when the police encounter them while they have the gun, we can already arrest them and lock them up....then, people like you who are judges and prosecutors let them back out, over and over again....that is the problem....not our dumb background check system.

Nobody expects background checks to stop all illegal gun buyers. Your question is childish.

so what exactly do you plan to do about the actual criminals who buy guns illegally?

Easy. Make it illegal to be a criminal.

LOL. Yes, that's what modern liberals believe. They'd rather pass new laws restricting rights than enforcing the laws already on the books.

Actually, that's what the nutters say - Just throw up our hands and give up.

Anyone old enough to remember when car makers said the same thing? They said seat belts and safety measures will not save lives. That was code for 'it will cost us money'.

NRA is now saying very close to the same thing, except they wave the flag and the constitution at the easily owned tee potty types. Yes 2aguy I'm looking at you.

It was effective for a while for car makers and it will ring the bell for the nutters until they're sick of stepping over hundreds of dead kids bodies to sell more guns to those who don't need them. Like cleverly disguised cupcake 2aguy


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

So then maybe you can tell me how restricting my right to own firearms will stop some piece of shit criminal from using an illegally obtained gun in the commission of a crime.