CDZ Is this the way it is or the way that it should be ?

[2aguy]

Yes there are......because they make law abiding people criminals simply for a failure to get a piece of paper...they will have committed no actual crime...but you create a crime for them to commit simply to get them in trouble...when it serves no real deterrent against actual criminals

You guys are so gung ho to screw over law abiding gun owners, yet could not care less about the actual criminals murdering people in democrat cities.....you have warped thinking processes.....

All they have to do is get the permit. "Failure to get a piece of paper"? Uh, okay, then I guess you oppose those stupid Voter ID laws in Texas and elsewhere?

Didn't think so.

You're an amazing hypocrite.

Nope.....the voter i.d. just verifies who you say you are......I am more than happy to show a gun store my drivers license too......

Then you should be MORE than happy to show your permit to a police officer when you're openly carrying in a non-open-carry state. Unless you're an amazing hypocrite.

You have to show your i.d. when you get a traffic stop........and I would be more than happy to do that if a cop asked me......Blue Lives Matter......Black lies Murder.....

But not if you have a gun, right?

LMAO @ your insane logic.

Whenever you get stopped......I have no problem with that......I don't mind at all...and I don't need an extra piece of paper...he can already look for felonies and warrants with just that card....no need for your paper....

 

[Moonglow]

. What's impossible ? That if I want to attend a rally that is divisive but peaceful, and if I feel the need to carry my weapon for protection while there, then your saying that there is no permit process for me to do so or that it is impossible to have me fill out a form to grant me the authority to carry openly my weapon at the rally in which I am seeking to attend for my personal protection ? A permit in which puts my name on a granted permit list of possible carry holders in which may be attending the rally and attending it while armed ?

No.
I'm saying that it's impossible to know who is carrying a weapon and who is not. I'm saying that a permit does nothing. I'm saying whether there are laws, restrictions, or check points, or not, people that want to bring weapons to marches and rallies will do so. How is anyone going to control such? So, why even get a permit? What real purpose does a permit serve? Those that have no intention to harm anyone, shouldn't be worried about anyway. And the bad guys that do have intentions to harm someone, aren't going to apply for permit.

It's basically the same as stupid gun control and attempting to get weapons off our streets. It's impossible.

Then obviously there's no reason to oppose such laws and regulations.

Except for the waste of time and taxpayers' money discussing and voting on such legislation. We have bigger fish to fry in this country.

Sure, you mean by voting to repeal Obamacare for the 47th time or holding the 30th Benghazi hearing? LMAO @ you

We have 12,000 gun homicides per year. If we can reduce that by even 10%, it's surely worth the time to save 1,200 people.

Guns are used 1,500,00 times a year on average to stop violent crime....that far outweighs gun crime of any kind.....and the number from the FBI homicie table is 8,124 for 2014.....and it was going down...before obama started releasing criminals and attacking the police........

More Americans bought guns..and the gun murder rate went down....you whole argument is based on lies....

yes, those nasty pot dealers are a murderous bunch..

 

[2aguy]

Very silly........... really cute ......

We have laws to punish crime, not to prevent crime. Our laws are NOT prevention, rather they exist to punish crime.
The bad guys do not care about laws. And, for the most part, the good guys don't need laws to prevent them from doing wrong and committing crimes. How many rapists care that it's against the law to rape? How many thieves care about laws against stealing? How many murderers care that it's against the law to murder?

This argument is soooooo tired and thoroughly debunked.

Well, I challenge you, or anyone else, to debunk it. The argument is true and valid.

I'll wait here for you to debunk it and prove it false. Good luck.

We have all kinds of laws to prevent crime. Murder laws prevent crime, in many cases. Not all of them, sure, but that's not a valid argument for ridding our society of murder laws.

You're an idiot.

We have gun laws that act the same as murder laws...commit a crime with a gun and you go to jail....commit murder you go to jail.....

you want Pre-CRime.....where you arrest people before they use their guns to commit a crime......

It's not pre-crime if they've made the decision to carry their gun without a permit any more than it's "pre crime" if they drive without a license.

What's wrong with you?

Nope....as long as they are law abiding there is no law being broken for carrying a gun...unless guys like you make one in order to punish law abiding gun owners....

Felons can already be run for warrants and felony status and if they are found with a gun...they can already be arrested....because it is already illegal for them to have a gun...

Thus...there is no reason for your piece of paper...it adds nothing to the process...as I keep showing you....and simply adds time, money and a new punishable offense where there wasn't one before....

 

[2aguy]

No.
I'm saying that it's impossible to know who is carrying a weapon and who is not. I'm saying that a permit does nothing. I'm saying whether there are laws, restrictions, or check points, or not, people that want to bring weapons to marches and rallies will do so. How is anyone going to control such? So, why even get a permit? What real purpose does a permit serve? Those that have no intention to harm anyone, shouldn't be worried about anyway. And the bad guys that do have intentions to harm someone, aren't going to apply for permit.

It's basically the same as stupid gun control and attempting to get weapons off our streets. It's impossible.

Then obviously there's no reason to oppose such laws and regulations.

And when the democrats instituted Poll Taxes and Literacy tests to keep blacks from voting...there was really no reason to oppose those laws either..right?

There was no rational basis for those rules. There is a rational basis to require people handling a lethal weapon to do so after proving that they're not dangerous and after proving they're competent to do so.

Nice attempt at an equivalency, though.

Nope........the only laws we need to handle that we already have...felons cannot buy, own or carry guns...when they are found with a gun they can already be arrested....

if someone with a gun commits a crime with the gun, they too can already be arrested.....

that is all we need.....the piece of paper adds nothing to that equation..except costing more money, and setting up law abiding gun owners for a crime for a failure to get that piece of paper.......

Felons absolutely can buy, own and carry guns. They do it all the time by buying from unscrupulous sellers. This is a law that helps address that in certain states.

Why are you all of a sudden against states' rights?

If they are caught they go to jail.....it doesn't address anything ...and just saying it does, doesn't make it address it.........

If a cop finds a felon with a gun, no matter how he got it...he can be arrested right now....he cannot get your paper anyway, and is legally barred from having the gun in the first place....

your paper is not necessary in any way, shape or form....

 

[2aguy]

No.
I'm saying that it's impossible to know who is carrying a weapon and who is not. I'm saying that a permit does nothing. I'm saying whether there are laws, restrictions, or check points, or not, people that want to bring weapons to marches and rallies will do so. How is anyone going to control such? So, why even get a permit? What real purpose does a permit serve? Those that have no intention to harm anyone, shouldn't be worried about anyway. And the bad guys that do have intentions to harm someone, aren't going to apply for permit.

It's basically the same as stupid gun control and attempting to get weapons off our streets. It's impossible.

. I guess I'm mainly talking about open carry like the situation was in Dallas... Yes concealed carry is just that, but if prohibited at a rally or event, then I wouldn't want the law to find me packing at a rally or event if it is not lawful to do so at the specific event. Right Sonny ? An event could OK open or concealed carry, but shouldn't the event organizers accompanied by law enforcement set the guidelines and rules for such ? Otherwise there could be a permit process that would grant permission or not to those who would want to carry openly or concealed at the event. This way law enforcement along with the event organizers might at least know who is packing, and why they are packing at the event right ?

Only the honest people would come forth and apply for such a permit. Those intent on doing harm would never do such a thing. How would law enforcement personnel know who has what unless they set up security check points like airports have? And, who's to say that someone intent on doing harm, wouldn't do as the sniper did from outside the secure zone? A sniper can pick people off from a 1,000 yards away, or farther.

And, unless every single person is scanned and searched, and there is a secure area that no one can enter without passing through a security check point, how will anyone be sure that only those with a permit have arms? In other words, at protests, rallies, riots, and sudden gatherings into the streets, how would it work?

This is a strawman argument that alleges gun laws can only be acceptable if they stop ALL gun crime from happening.

We create laws to mitigate crime and make an orderly society to the best of our ability. We don't demand perfection and then throw away all laws when we can't achieve it.

The entire premise of all your points in this thread is completely worthless.

No......we have gun laws...they handle every gun crime there is......if you use a gun to commit a crime you are arrested.......just like murder, or speeding violations....you guys want law abiding gun owners to meet a special standard...while ignoring actual criminals who use guns....

We also have "no running by the pool" signs in lieu of "don't fall and break your neck and drown" signs.

Welcome to organized society, you fucking idiot.

We are in the CDZ.......no swearing...

 

[2aguy]

Very silly........... really cute ......

We have laws to punish crime, not to prevent crime. Our laws are NOT prevention, rather they exist to punish crime.
The bad guys do not care about laws. And, for the most part, the good guys don't need laws to prevent them from doing wrong and committing crimes. How many rapists care that it's against the law to rape? How many thieves care about laws against stealing? How many murderers care that it's against the law to murder?

This argument is soooooo tired and thoroughly debunked.

Well, I challenge you, or anyone else, to debunk it. The argument is true and valid.

I'll wait here for you to debunk it and prove it false. Good luck.

We have all kinds of laws to prevent crime. Murder laws prevent crime, in many cases. Not all of them, sure, but that's not a valid argument for ridding our society of murder laws.

You're an idiot.

We have gun laws that act the same as murder laws...commit a crime with a gun and you go to jail....commit murder you go to jail.....

you want Pre-CRime.....where you arrest people before they use their guns to commit a crime......

It's not pre-crime if they've made the decision to carry their gun without a permit any more than it's "pre crime" if they drive without a license.

What's wrong with you?

I had a whole thread set up for the gun license debate......you should have gone there...but I will show you are just as wrong in this thread too.....

 

[2aguy]

View attachment 81555

. What's impossible ? That if I want to attend a rally that is divisive but peaceful, and if I feel the need to carry my weapon for protection while there, then your saying that there is no permit process for me to do so or that it is impossible to have me fill out a form to grant me the authority to carry openly my weapon at the rally in which I am seeking to attend for my personal protection ? A permit in which puts my name on a granted permit list of possible carry holders in which may be attending the rally and attending it while armed ?

No.
I'm saying that it's impossible to know who is carrying a weapon and who is not. I'm saying that a permit does nothing. I'm saying whether there are laws, restrictions, or check points, or not, people that want to bring weapons to marches and rallies will do so. How is anyone going to control such? So, why even get a permit? What real purpose does a permit serve? Those that have no intention to harm anyone, shouldn't be worried about anyway. And the bad guys that do have intentions to harm someone, aren't going to apply for permit.

It's basically the same as stupid gun control and attempting to get weapons off our streets. It's impossible.

. I guess I'm mainly talking about open carry like the situation was in Dallas... Yes concealed carry is just that, but if prohibited at a rally or event, then I wouldn't want the law to find me packing at a rally or event if it is not lawful to do so at the specific event. Right Sonny ? An event could OK open or concealed carry, but shouldn't the event organizers accompanied by law enforcement set the guidelines and rules for such ? Otherwise there could be a permit process that would grant permission or not to those who would want to carry openly or concealed at the event. This way law enforcement along with the event organizers might at least know who is packing, and why they are packing at the event right ?

Only the honest people would come forth and apply for such a permit. Those intent on doing harm would never do such a thing. How would law enforcement personnel know who has what unless they set up security check points like airports have? And, who's to say that someone intent on doing harm, wouldn't do as the sniper did from outside the secure zone? A sniper can pick people off from a 1,000 yards away, or farther.

And, unless every single person is scanned and searched, and there is a secure area that no one can enter without passing through a security check point, how will anyone be sure that only those with a permit have arms? In other words, at protests, rallies, riots, and sudden gatherings into the streets, how would it work?

. All areas of concern & question can be addressed if wanted to in this nation. Rallies, Marches & gatherings should have designated areas in which the permits are written for. Any activities committed by those protestors that are rallying outside of the areas granted by the permit for the rallies, marches & gatherings, will be in violation of the overall permit that covers the event. People that are supposed to be attending the event, but are seen carrying outside the event or area in which the permit doesn't cover, then they are subject to questioning, possible arrest or their weapons confiscated. Permits can be written for specific areas anywhere that there is a safe and proper facility, park, mall or tract of land in which the two parties might agree upon as a great place for an event, rallies, march or etc. After that is agreed upon, then the boundaries can be set for the permit, and the rules written for it.
This whole Texas event makes one think about how to have these events safely for all, and especially for the police after Dallas.

they already had everything you want.....and then a criminal came in and ignored all of your rules...and murdered police officers.........your permit process would not have stopped that guy one bit....you could have barred all normal, law abiding gun owners from having guns at that march.....and he still would have shown up and murdered police officers....

why is this such a hard concept for you guys to understand?

 

[2aguy]

Why the open carry at this protest, and what was their reasoning behind the open carry or having weapons at this protest ? Who was the open carriers afraid of or who were they sending a message to @ the event or were they carrying in case they needed to defend themselves, but from who ?

They wanted to show that they were law abiding people and they were not a threat even if they were exercising their Right to bear arms....and they showed that............they shot no one, they harmed no one........

 

[2aguy]

Very silly........... really cute ......

We have laws to punish crime, not to prevent crime. Our laws are NOT prevention, rather they exist to punish crime.
The bad guys do not care about laws. And, for the most part, the good guys don't need laws to prevent them from doing wrong and committing crimes. How many rapists care that it's against the law to rape? How many thieves care about laws against stealing? How many murderers care that it's against the law to murder?

This argument is soooooo tired and thoroughly debunked.

Well, I challenge you, or anyone else, to debunk it. The argument is true and valid.

I'll wait here for you to debunk it and prove it false. Good luck.

We have all kinds of laws to prevent crime. Murder laws prevent crime, in many cases. Not all of them, sure, but that's not a valid argument for ridding our society of murder laws.

You're an idiot.

Anyone who thinks "murder laws" prevent crime is living under a rock.

. Ok, if a man stole a horse back in the old days, then his punishment would be death by hanging. The reason they made and enacted such a stern law, is because it was to hopefully work as a deterrent and a punishment all in the same thinking. The reason many bad things are happening these days, is because liberals lessened the laws of the land against the criminals, and since then they have been constantly decriminalising things on a daily basis now.

We have laws that allow us to arrest you if you commit a crime with a gun...where it falls down is the length of sentence prosecutors and judges give to gun criminals....

If you guys would stop wasting your time with law abiding gun owners......the ones not shooting people...and instead focused on the guys actually shooting people.......then our gun murder rate would go down even more.....

 

[2aguy]

Getting back to the premise of the thread... How can we prevent a situation like Dallas again, where as you had open carry at a protest, and then the cops didn't know who the shooter was or actually whether or not he had come from amongst the open carry crowd who was at this event ? Was the shooter hidden among the open carry crowd until he slinked off into the shadows to do his evilness?

Again.....you could have banned open rifle carry at that event....the shooter would still show up and shoot cops because he doesn't care that it is against the law......

Do you guys have problems with your brains where that concept just doesn't sink in?

The actual event showed that normal people carrying rifles...were not a problem...the actual event...not the mythical one you make up in your mind.......

That and the Gifford's shooting....two mass public shootings, out doors in a large public space and nothing you guys said would happen happened.........

Try thinking for once...

 

[2aguy]

No.
I'm saying that it's impossible to know who is carrying a weapon and who is not. I'm saying that a permit does nothing. I'm saying whether there are laws, restrictions, or check points, or not, people that want to bring weapons to marches and rallies will do so. How is anyone going to control such? So, why even get a permit? What real purpose does a permit serve? Those that have no intention to harm anyone, shouldn't be worried about anyway. And the bad guys that do have intentions to harm someone, aren't going to apply for permit.

It's basically the same as stupid gun control and attempting to get weapons off our streets. It's impossible.

. I guess I'm mainly talking about open carry like the situation was in Dallas... Yes concealed carry is just that, but if prohibited at a rally or event, then I wouldn't want the law to find me packing at a rally or event if it is not lawful to do so at the specific event. Right Sonny ? An event could OK open or concealed carry, but shouldn't the event organizers accompanied by law enforcement set the guidelines and rules for such ? Otherwise there could be a permit process that would grant permission or not to those who would want to carry openly or concealed at the event. This way law enforcement along with the event organizers might at least know who is packing, and why they are packing at the event right ?

Only the honest people would come forth and apply for such a permit. Those intent on doing harm would never do such a thing. How would law enforcement personnel know who has what unless they set up security check points like airports have? And, who's to say that someone intent on doing harm, wouldn't do as the sniper did from outside the secure zone? A sniper can pick people off from a 1,000 yards away, or farther.

And, unless every single person is scanned and searched, and there is a secure area that no one can enter without passing through a security check point, how will anyone be sure that only those with a permit have arms? In other words, at protests, rallies, riots, and sudden gatherings into the streets, how would it work?

This is a strawman argument that alleges gun laws can only be acceptable if they stop ALL gun crime from happening.

We create laws to mitigate crime and make an orderly society to the best of our ability. We don't demand perfection and then throw away all laws when we can't achieve it.

The entire premise of all your points in this thread is completely worthless.

Well, you sure haven't proved me wrong. You've made no effort to dispute any point that I've made.
Again, I will ask:

(1) How will gun control laws stop gun related crimes?
(2) How will gun control laws get guns off our streets?
(3) How will gun control laws adversely affect criminals?
(4) How will gun control laws stop people from selling guns among themselves?
(5) How will gun control laws stop the illegal sale of guns?

Please answer all questions in order to prove me wrong.
Thanks.

. Are there no laws that already address what you have stated above (old laws on the books maybe ?), or is there no laws that address your frustrations above ? If laws are on the books, then is it a matter of enforcement ?

laws are on the books, then is it a matter of enforcement

Yes......it is only a matter of enforcement.........judges and prosecutors are not putting actual gun criminals in jail...they are giving them short sentences, then they get out and commit gun murder.........the cops know who the shooters are, they also know who the victims will be.......90% of the shooters are convicted criminals and felons and 70-80% of the victims are the same.......yet in Chicago, felons caught with guns are out of jail in less than 2 years....that is the problem....

Japan fixed their gun problem......30 years for being caught with an illegal gun........that dries that crap up over night....

 

[2aguy]

Getting back to the premise of the thread... How can we prevent a situation like Dallas again, where as you had open carry at a protest, and then the cops didn't know who the shooter was or actually whether or not he had come from amongst the open carry crowd who was at this event ? Was the shooter hidden among the open carry crowd until he slinked off into the shadows to do his evilness?

You can not prevent what happened in Dallas Texas. I have explained it in great detail why it can't be stopped. In addition, you can not stop what happened in Nice France. Bad people are going to do bad things. Terrorists are going to do bad things. There are many mentally unstable people in this world. People go postal all the time.

Bad people will find ways to do their dirty work.

If you know of a solution that will work, and solve the problem, please tell all of us what it is. Thanks.

. Are you a liberal ? Liberals figure that nothing can be prevented or nothing can be stopped or made better if they don't want it to be or don't think it can be. Conservatives are known for a more preventive approach to deterring crime before it happens. The death penalty was a huge conservative value & law against heinous crimes committed, but the libs raised cane about that one, then the conservatives are for waterboarding in order to prevent huge life altering events/disasters to happen again in America, and the libs wanted that stopped. Then the libs don't want us to know who is coming here from the war zones, and we as conservatives say no entry in order to prevent further mayhem and chaos in this nation until further notice.

yes....exactly......when you catch a gun criminal...a real one, not a law abiding gun owner who misses paperwork....you put them in jail for 30 years.....

In Chicago...to address the gun murder rate they wanted to increase the sentence for gun crimes.....the democrats fought it because most of the shooters are black.......and they don't want the heat from the black democrat pressure groups about locking up black men.......

 

[2aguy]

Getting back to the premise of the thread... How can we prevent a situation like Dallas again, where as you had open carry at a protest, and then the cops didn't know who the shooter was or actually whether or not he had come from amongst the open carry crowd who was at this event ? Was the shooter hidden among the open carry crowd until he slinked off into the shadows to do his evilness?

You can not prevent what happened in Dallas Texas. I have explained it in great detail why it can't be stopped. In addition, you can not stop what happened in Nice France. Bad people are going to do bad things. Terrorists are going to do bad things. There are many mentally unstable people in this world. People go postal all the time.

Bad people will find ways to do their dirty work.

If you know of a solution that will work, and solve the problem, please tell all of us what it is. Thanks.

. Are you a liberal ? Liberals figure that nothing can be prevented or nothing can be stopped or made better if they don't want it to be or don't think it can be. Conservatives are known for a more preventive approach to deterring crime before it happens. The death penalty was a huge conservative value & law against heinous crimes committed, but the libs raised cane about that one, then the conservatives are for waterboarding in order to prevent huge life altering events/disasters to happen again in America, and the libs wanted that stopped. Then the libs don't want us to know who is coming here from the war zones, and we as conservatives say no entry in order to prevent further mayhem and chaos in this nation until further notice.

No, I'm NOT a Liberal, Conservative, Moderate, Right Wing, Left Wing, Democrat, Republican, nor anything else except an American for America.

Again, for the fourth or fifth time, what law(s) will prevent crime? What law(s) will prevent gun violence? What law(s) will prevent crazies from going postal? What law(s) will prevent snipers from killing innocent people? You keep going around in circles, avoiding my question, and injecting bullshit that has absolutely nothing to do with laws that will prevent crime and criminal acts of violence.

This is NOT a political problem, this is NOT a Republican problem, this is NOT a Democrat problem, this is NOT a Liberal problem, this is NOT a Conservative problem, this is NOT a Moderate problem, this is NOT a "take sides" problem.

I am an American for America. What law(s) will work? Leave politics out of this. It's not a political issue. It's a common sense issue. It's a simple logic issue.

. I've already said what needs to be pondered, discussed or legislated over the situation in which got 12 officers either wounded or killed at the protest rally or event in Dallas. The reason that you don't except my ideas or suggestions I think, is because it touches on some sort of gun control at protest events, and as an American myself, well I know that the steel ear muffs are put on when anything pertaining to guns is discussed. I am pro-gun, but I am not for anything like what happened in Texas to those cops. I am for the cops not being ambushed, and I'm for the good guys knowing who there enemy is. It was not good for anyone to be carrying weapons at such an event, but there they were carrying, but for what reason were they carrying there ? Was the shooter amongst the open carry crowd, and therefore the cops paid no attention to him until it was to late ? Where did he come from at the event ? Was he among the crowd or was he there prior to the event or did he enter the event from a back doorway so the speak ?

The reason that you don't except my ideas or suggestions I think, is because it touches on some sort of gun control at protest events, and as an American myself, well I know that the steel ear muffs are put on when anything pertaining to guns is discussed.

Look....you seem a little slow........we are not rejecting your ideas out of a reflex against gun control...we have listened to what you have to say.....we analyzed it and then we showed you how it does nothing at all to stop what happened in Dallas........and you pretend like you don't understand...so you are either dumb, injured in the brain, or a troll.......

Again.....if you enacted every bit of what you want...if you completely banned all carry of guns at the Dallas rally.........the shooter would have driven into that garage, taken out his guns and murdered police......

So please...tell us how we are wrong and how you have a clue?

 

[2aguy]

No.
I'm saying that it's impossible to know who is carrying a weapon and who is not. I'm saying that a permit does nothing. I'm saying whether there are laws, restrictions, or check points, or not, people that want to bring weapons to marches and rallies will do so. How is anyone going to control such? So, why even get a permit? What real purpose does a permit serve? Those that have no intention to harm anyone, shouldn't be worried about anyway. And the bad guys that do have intentions to harm someone, aren't going to apply for permit.

It's basically the same as stupid gun control and attempting to get weapons off our streets. It's impossible.

. I guess I'm mainly talking about open carry like the situation was in Dallas... Yes concealed carry is just that, but if prohibited at a rally or event, then I wouldn't want the law to find me packing at a rally or event if it is not lawful to do so at the specific event. Right Sonny ? An event could OK open or concealed carry, but shouldn't the event organizers accompanied by law enforcement set the guidelines and rules for such ? Otherwise there could be a permit process that would grant permission or not to those who would want to carry openly or concealed at the event. This way law enforcement along with the event organizers might at least know who is packing, and why they are packing at the event right ?

Only the honest people would come forth and apply for such a permit. Those intent on doing harm would never do such a thing. How would law enforcement personnel know who has what unless they set up security check points like airports have? And, who's to say that someone intent on doing harm, wouldn't do as the sniper did from outside the secure zone? A sniper can pick people off from a 1,000 yards away, or farther.

And, unless every single person is scanned and searched, and there is a secure area that no one can enter without passing through a security check point, how will anyone be sure that only those with a permit have arms? In other words, at protests, rallies, riots, and sudden gatherings into the streets, how would it work?

This is a strawman argument that alleges gun laws can only be acceptable if they stop ALL gun crime from happening.

We create laws to mitigate crime and make an orderly society to the best of our ability. We don't demand perfection and then throw away all laws when we can't achieve it.

The entire premise of all your points in this thread is completely worthless.

This is irrelevant to these particular laws though. What you are referring to is the fact that laws, such as laws against murder and theft, have a deterrence factor involved and therefore prevent some crimes from occurring because people do not want to be caught and go to jail.

This dies not apply to gun control law affecting criminals because the very act they are committing is ALREADY ILLEGAL. IOW, there is no deterrence whatsoever to a murderer in gun control - they are already committing a crime and the additional crime on top of it is immaterial to that decision. Making something illegal twice is nonsensical. To think that someone willing to gun down as many people as possible will be deterred because it is illegal to carry a gun simply does not make sense.

. There should only be a discussion on how to prevent the situation that happened in Dallas. There were factors involved that should not have been allowed at the event. Individual gun ownership and gun rights pertaining to individuals are not the issue here, but carrying weapons to events like this, and without a written permit granting the permission for people to carry to an event like this, should be the issue at hand or the debate now. If those protestors carrying would have had to get a permit for the event, then they would have had to state the reason for carrying a weapon at the event. This would have given the city the right to grant permission or refuse permission for the permit to the group or individual.

Permits....licensing gun owners.....what is it with you left wingers and bureaucratic paperwork as some sort of violence prophylactic.......

Do you really not understand...or are you just trolling?

 

[2aguy]

I'm not intimidated by people who open carry but then again I'm not scared of guns

Then join the Marines, pussy.

What's that got to do with the topic

And I have no plans to join the military. My Dad was a Navy Pilot and got killed for nothing in Nam. I don't owe the fucking government anything

You said you're not scared of guns. Guns fire lead projectiles at thousands of feet per second. If you're not scared of them, you're not rational. Or else you're trying to sound like a tough guy. So, assuming it's the latter, join the military. Guns can't hurt you, after all.

Well, to be honest, I'm also not afraid of people in general who carry guns, but whether someone carrying one in my vicinity might be one of the "nut jobs" who "flips out" while I'm there does concern me. I have to be honest too and note that were s/he carrying a bladed weapon or slingshot, or even a bow and arrows, I'd be a good deal less concerned.

It's fascinating to me that your average rightwinger seems to express white-hot fear of Mexican immigrants, Muslim refugees, and black "thugs" (whether armed or not), yet they're proud in trumpeting their lack of fear of someone walking around without a uniform on, sporting a high-powered assault rifle.

Again, in America, fear knows no sensible rationale.

Is the guy with the rifle actually shooting someone....? If the police show up does he deal with them peacefully and answer their questions.......or does he start shooting at them?

Wow.....you guys....really need help..........

 

[2aguy]

I'm not intimidated by people who open carry but then again I'm not scared of guns

Then join the Marines, pussy.

What's that got to do with the topic

And I have no plans to join the military. My Dad was a Navy Pilot and got killed for nothing in Nam. I don't owe the fucking government anything

You said you're not scared of guns. Guns fire lead projectiles at thousands of feet per second. If you're not scared of them, you're not rational. Or else you're trying to sound like a tough guy. So, assuming it's the latter, join the military. Guns can't hurt you, after all.

Guns do not scare me. I have used and handled them for more than 30 years. I am not afraid of an inanimate object are you?

I bet a chainsaw will make you piss your pants huh?.

And no a gun cannot hurt me it's the human being holding it that can do that

Not always.

6 Americans Have Been Shot by Their Dogs

This argument "guns don't kill, people kill" is beyond spurious and weak. You know damned well guns are more dangerous than fists. They're more deadly than knives or forks or baseball bats or scissors. You're not being honest. No one who trumpets these NRA/gun lobby talking points is.

357,000,000 guns in private hands.....2015..... 586 accidental gun deaths......

356,999,414 to 586....

Accidental car deaths......33,000

 

[beagle9]

With any rally that is organized or march that is conducted, should anyone be allowed to attend the rally with a loaded weapon without proper authorization? Otherwise to just show up with a weapon brandished upon your person, and claiming a right to do so under the Constitution ? For anyone wanting to attend a rally or march, and wanting to do so with a loaded weapon, (I have to ask), should they have to get a separate permit or a permit specifically stating the reason for having the gun coming along with them ? If the reason is not good enough, then should they be denide the permit for carrying a weapon at the specific rally applied for ? Should a bill be created that addresses the issue if there isn't one already ? If a rally is created or a march that is deemed peaceful by the organizers as just that, and it is stated in the permit being granted as such, then shouldn't there be added (due to the peaceful nature) a rule that states no weapons at all are allowed at the event, and a copy of it is to be given to the local police force in order to enforce the rule ?

Yep....as long as you are not a felon and commit no crime with the weapon.....what is the issue? It is a Right....not a privilege........again....they have committed no crime....broken no law.......

Public streets.........

. In my opinion a citizen should have to have a reason for open carrying a gun, and that reason should immediately be stated if an officer questions as to what is your purpose here, and what is your purpose for carrying the weapon that you are carrying here in this public place ? If your reason isn't good enough, then the weapon must be put away or it will be taken away. Now if you are traveling from one destination to another, and you want to carry openly to intimidate a would be criminal from trying you if thinking about it, then great. If you are protecting your property then great or if your protecting your business then great, but carrying openly at a march or rally when there are already the police and protections in place is just wrong.

 

[2aguy]

With any rally that is organized or march that is conducted, should anyone be allowed to attend the rally with a loaded weapon without proper authorization? Otherwise to just show up with a weapon brandished upon your person, and claiming a right to do so under the Constitution ? For anyone wanting to attend a rally or march, and wanting to do so with a loaded weapon, (I have to ask), should they have to get a separate permit or a permit specifically stating the reason for having the gun coming along with them ? If the reason is not good enough, then should they be denide the permit for carrying a weapon at the specific rally applied for ? Should a bill be created that addresses the issue if there isn't one already ? If a rally is created or a march that is deemed peaceful by the organizers as just that, and it is stated in the permit being granted as such, then shouldn't there be added (due to the peaceful nature) a rule that states no weapons at all are allowed at the event, and a copy of it is to be given to the local police force in order to enforce the rule ?

Yep....as long as you are not a felon and commit no crime with the weapon.....what is the issue? It is a Right....not a privilege........again....they have committed no crime....broken no law.......

Public streets.........

. In my opinion a citizen should have to have a reason for open carrying a gun, and that reason should immediately be stated if an officer questions as to what is your purpose here, and what is your purpose for carrying the weapon that you are carrying here in this public place ? If your reason isn't good enough, then the weapon must be put away or it will be taken away. Now if you are traveling from one destination to another, and you want to carry openly to intimidate a would be criminal from trying you if thinking about it, then great. If you are protecting your property then great or if your protecting your business then great, but carrying openly at a march or rally when there are already the police and protections in place is just wrong.

Yeah...and you also think that blacks should pay a Tex to vote and be able to pass a literacy test to vote too...right? That is the same thing guys like you did to blacks and their right to vote.......


A law abiding citizen does not have to justify carrying a gun if they commit no crime......end of story.....

 

[FA_Q2]

No.
I'm saying that it's impossible to know who is carrying a weapon and who is not. I'm saying that a permit does nothing. I'm saying whether there are laws, restrictions, or check points, or not, people that want to bring weapons to marches and rallies will do so. How is anyone going to control such? So, why even get a permit? What real purpose does a permit serve? Those that have no intention to harm anyone, shouldn't be worried about anyway. And the bad guys that do have intentions to harm someone, aren't going to apply for permit.

It's basically the same as stupid gun control and attempting to get weapons off our streets. It's impossible.

. I guess I'm mainly talking about open carry like the situation was in Dallas... Yes concealed carry is just that, but if prohibited at a rally or event, then I wouldn't want the law to find me packing at a rally or event if it is not lawful to do so at the specific event. Right Sonny ? An event could OK open or concealed carry, but shouldn't the event organizers accompanied by law enforcement set the guidelines and rules for such ? Otherwise there could be a permit process that would grant permission or not to those who would want to carry openly or concealed at the event. This way law enforcement along with the event organizers might at least know who is packing, and why they are packing at the event right ?

Only the honest people would come forth and apply for such a permit. Those intent on doing harm would never do such a thing. How would law enforcement personnel know who has what unless they set up security check points like airports have? And, who's to say that someone intent on doing harm, wouldn't do as the sniper did from outside the secure zone? A sniper can pick people off from a 1,000 yards away, or farther.

And, unless every single person is scanned and searched, and there is a secure area that no one can enter without passing through a security check point, how will anyone be sure that only those with a permit have arms? In other words, at protests, rallies, riots, and sudden gatherings into the streets, how would it work?

This is a strawman argument that alleges gun laws can only be acceptable if they stop ALL gun crime from happening.

We create laws to mitigate crime and make an orderly society to the best of our ability. We don't demand perfection and then throw away all laws when we can't achieve it.

The entire premise of all your points in this thread is completely worthless.

This is irrelevant to these particular laws though. What you are referring to is the fact that laws, such as laws against murder and theft, have a deterrence factor involved and therefore prevent some crimes from occurring because people do not want to be caught and go to jail.

This dies not apply to gun control law affecting criminals because the very act they are committing is ALREADY ILLEGAL. IOW, there is no deterrence whatsoever to a murderer in gun control - they are already committing a crime and the additional crime on top of it is immaterial to that decision. Making something illegal twice is nonsensical. To think that someone willing to gun down as many people as possible will be deterred because it is illegal to carry a gun simply does not make sense.

. There should only be a discussion on how to prevent the situation that happened in Dallas. There were factors involved that should not have been allowed at the event. Individual gun ownership and gun rights pertaining to individuals are not the issue here, but carrying weapons to events like this, and without a written permit granting the permission for people to carry to an event like this, should be the issue at hand or the debate now. If those protestors carrying would have had to get a permit for the event, then they would have had to state the reason for carrying a weapon at the event. This would have given the city the right to grant permission or refuse permission for the permit to the group or individual.

Again, meaningless.

Sure, the state could have denied those people the legal ability to carry there. However, you are ignoring that the ability to kill those police was already illegal - he was already willing to not only commit a crime but one of the most heinous crimes that you can commit. A crime that carries with it the maximum punishments possible. You are hoping that attaching a minor offense (or an offense of any magnitude for that manner) would have some sort of implications to someone already set on killing and that is flat out nonsensical.

The criminal has already designed to kill and will use whatever implement they so choose - the laws regrading the possession and carrying of the device will be irrelevant to someone hell bent on carnage.

 

[FA_Q2]

View attachment 81555

. What's impossible ? That if I want to attend a rally that is divisive but peaceful, and if I feel the need to carry my weapon for protection while there, then your saying that there is no permit process for me to do so or that it is impossible to have me fill out a form to grant me the authority to carry openly my weapon at the rally in which I am seeking to attend for my personal protection ? A permit in which puts my name on a granted permit list of possible carry holders in which may be attending the rally and attending it while armed ?

No.
I'm saying that it's impossible to know who is carrying a weapon and who is not. I'm saying that a permit does nothing. I'm saying whether there are laws, restrictions, or check points, or not, people that want to bring weapons to marches and rallies will do so. How is anyone going to control such? So, why even get a permit? What real purpose does a permit serve? Those that have no intention to harm anyone, shouldn't be worried about anyway. And the bad guys that do have intentions to harm someone, aren't going to apply for permit.

It's basically the same as stupid gun control and attempting to get weapons off our streets. It's impossible.

Then obviously there's no reason to oppose such laws and regulations.

And when the democrats instituted Poll Taxes and Literacy tests to keep blacks from voting...there was really no reason to oppose those laws either..right?

There was no rational basis for those rules. There is a rational basis to require people handling a lethal weapon to do so after proving that they're not dangerous and after proving they're competent to do so.

Oh, and even 6th graders know those were Dixiecrats, who are Republicans now.

Nice attempt at an equivalency, though.

Ratinal basis is not what is required either - it is a compelling state interest. As there have been gun control measures passed all over the planet that show gun control does not reduce homicides the compelling state interest not present. It simply does not work - you want to address homicides and death then you need to address the underlying CAUSE rather than the instrument in which it is carried out.