Keeping guns from criminals - liberals, what is your plan?

[Spoonman]

NRA Doctrine
- No Gun Registrations
- No Owner Registrations
- No Background checks
- No restrictions on guns or magazines


NRA states: Nothing you propose will stop gun violence

Hmmm, sounds a lot like the 2nd amendment. how can they go wrong with that

 

[Spoonman]

We've implemented all of those things, some at the federal and some at the state and local levels, and yet gun violence still exists. How does adding more laws that already aren't working fix the problem?

and it seems to exist most heavily in the areas that have implemented them most heavily.

 

[Wry Catcher]

We've implemented all of those things, some at the federal and some at the state and local levels, and yet gun violence still exists. How does adding more laws that already aren't working fix the problem?

I don't hold to the idea that no solution exists, I agree there is no panacea and we will always experience - hopefully vicariously - gun violence and the murder of innocent men, women and children. But it is reasonable to expect the deaths of innocents can be reduced and the carnage mitigated by the use of the rule of law.

If the spirit of the Second Amendment were fully accepted, drunks and punks, the mentally ill, drug dealers and rapists, felons and terrorists would all be free to own, possess, and have in their custody and control every manner of "arms" at all times.

Even the most ardent gun lovers acknowledge some restrictions are necessary, at least those who are sane. The debate should not now or ever be based on the language of the Second, but upon reasonable and rational discussion of what is in the best interest of our nation and its people.

As I noted before, the Second Amendment as interpreted by the USSC has become obsolete. Sadly and to our nations shame it will take more than the murder of twenty 6 and 7 year old children to restore some semblance of sanity and civility in our country.

 

[Bern80]

NRA Doctrine
- No Gun Registrations
- No Owner Registrations
- No Background checks
- No restrictions on guns or magazines


NRA states: Nothing you propose will stop gun violence

Let's get real for a moment. Yes, some of those things would cut down on gun violence. Just like banning guns altogether would obviously reduce gun violence. Does it make those measures the right thing to do? No. You can even forget about having a second ammendment right to them. On principle, you don't outlaw something entirely that is abused by a small minority. It's entirely impractical.

 

[kaz]

So let's call your guy with the bullet hole the first victim in Washington. The other 11 dead people to you are "red herrings." Got it. I don't think their families think that.

As usual, you haven't "got it". The red herring here is the notion proffered by gun lovers that as other things are illegal yet still obtainable, any gun laws will be similarly ineffective, in spite of convictions for the aforementioned crimes.

Gun lovers seem to think that as nothing can be 100% effective, nothing should be done. that's ridiculous.

That is bull shit. The argument has not been that no gun laws are necessary, but rather that additional laws are meaningless AND that you on the left really do not care about stopping gun violence but rather preventing law abiding citizens from owning any guns at all which won't stop gun violence at all and quite possibly will increase violence.

Immie

We think the people should have access to guns because a free people can defend themselves. The liberals don't want the people to have guns for the same reason...

 

[Yurt]

NRA Doctrine
- No Gun Registrations
- No Owner Registrations
- No Background checks
- No restrictions on guns or magazines


NRA states: Nothing you propose will stop gun violence

liar

 

[kaz]

My plan is quite simple

Anyone wishing to purchase a gun must come and see me first. I can tell within 10 minutes whether you should be allowed to have a gun or not

Okay, this made me chuckle. You and me both.

You know, I'd like to see gun shops being able to do that

In many of our recent massacres, the guy is obviously fruit loops. I'd like to see a gun shop say.....Sorry nutjob, you are not buying a gun from me

Bartenders do it when they refuse a drunk a drink. Why can't gun shops?

And you know that no gun dealers do that because...

 

[candycorn]

There's nothing goofy about it. Guns are inanimate objects. Cars are inanimate objects. In the case of both if used by a person irresponsibly or malicioulsy they can and are involved in injury and death. The differences are their physical forms. My analogy needs know further defense. Yours does given the similarities between the two objects.

If my car wrecks into your car, I'm required to carry liability insurance that will fix your property.

Shouldn't we do the same thing with weapons--force each one to have liability insurance in case they injure someone?

Afterall, they're the same thing...right?

In the sense that the offending party should take responsibility, yes. Though insurance on firearms is unneccessary since, under the law, one is already going to be punished, in most cases, if they hurt someone with their firearm.

Great; you're in jail. What about the injured party? They have to sue you (since you're in jail you're earning is going to go way down). Liability insurance for guns is paramount it would seem.

Comments?

 

[candycorn]

Secondly, your dodging. You conveniently did not quote the second part of what I said which pertains to your actual position; guns need to be eliminated entirely and people who own them should be negatively stigmatized to discourage ownership of firearms. Again, your priorities are horribly misplaced. Cars cause far more injuries and deaths to humans than cars. Yet you seem unwilling to put this same negative stigma on car owners. Why is that? The same policies you advocate could be applied to the automobile, hopefully eliminating the ownership of them eventually and thus eliminating the deaths and injuries they are involved in. Where are your priorities? It seems they are only placed on the ones that don't cause you a personal inconvenience.

Cars are designed to transport.
Guns are designed to injure.

Not anywhere close to the same thing.

However, society has built in responsibility for motorists..insurance.
Society needs to build in responsibility for gun owners..insurance.

As for stigmatizing it; That goes back to the OP. I was asked for a plan and that is the only way to stop mass murders who use firearms; make guns harder to get.

 

[Bern80]

Even the most ardent gun lovers acknowledge some restrictions are necessary, at least those who are sane. The debate should not now or ever be based on the language of the Second, but upon reasonable and rational discussion of what is in the best interest of our nation and its people.

The framers understood the folley of such reasoning. "Well, it's in societies best interest". The road to tyranny is paved with the best intentions. Government based solely on 'what is in societies best intrerest', is nothing more than a benevolent dictatorship.

 

[kaz]

NRA Doctrine
- No Gun Registrations
- No Owner Registrations
- No Background checks
- No restrictions on guns or magazines


NRA states: Nothing you propose will stop gun violence

Sounds right to me.

Then again, I'm not a moderate like you. Right RW? You know, like your party opposes restricting partial birth abortions, requiring parental consent for minors or requiring medical degrees, things like that. Waiting periods to exercise the "right" to an abortion is ridiculous, but a waiting period for a gun is fine.

There really is nothing the left believes they don't flagrantly contradict with another position.

 

[candycorn]

"This country has a mental health problem disguised as a gun problem and a tyranny problem disguised as a security problem"

- Joe Rogan

Let's give everyone healthcare and include lots of mental healthcare.

Sounds like Obamacare is coming along at just the right time.

The GOP is constantly taking these positions; Lets get rid of gun regulations AND do away with healthcare that may identify those who shouldn't have guns....lets force women to have babies AND get rid of any welfare that may help her raise her child.

Bizarre any way you look at it.

 

[kaz]

If the spirit of the Second Amendment were fully accepted, drunks and punks, the mentally ill, drug dealers and rapists, felons and terrorists would all be free to own, possess, and have in their custody and control every manner of "arms" at all times.

And what we have now is they do, and the rest of us don't. And we want to change that? Wow, now that I say it out loud, I just realized how nuts what I'm saying is...

 

[Wry Catcher]

As usual, you haven't "got it". The red herring here is the notion proffered by gun lovers that as other things are illegal yet still obtainable, any gun laws will be similarly ineffective, in spite of convictions for the aforementioned crimes.

Gun lovers seem to think that as nothing can be 100% effective, nothing should be done. that's ridiculous.

That is bull shit. The argument has not been that no gun laws are necessary, but rather that additional laws are meaningless AND that you on the left really do not care about stopping gun violence but rather preventing law abiding citizens from owning any guns at all which won't stop gun violence at all and quite possibly will increase violence.

Immie

We think the people should have access to guns because a free people can defend themselves. The liberals don't want the people to have guns for the same reason...

So you do not support restricting the ability of drunks and punks, rapists and child molesters, the mentally ill and felons, terrorists and drug dealers from owning, possessing and having in their custody and control guns?

 

[Spoonman]

Secondly, your dodging. You conveniently did not quote the second part of what I said which pertains to your actual position; guns need to be eliminated entirely and people who own them should be negatively stigmatized to discourage ownership of firearms. Again, your priorities are horribly misplaced. Cars cause far more injuries and deaths to humans than cars. Yet you seem unwilling to put this same negative stigma on car owners. Why is that? The same policies you advocate could be applied to the automobile, hopefully eliminating the ownership of them eventually and thus eliminating the deaths and injuries they are involved in. Where are your priorities? It seems they are only placed on the ones that don't cause you a personal inconvenience.

Cars are designed to transport.
Guns are designed to injure.

Not anywhere close to the same thing.

However, society has built in responsibility for motorists..insurance.
Society needs to build in responsibility for gun owners..insurance.

As for stigmatizing it; That goes back to the OP. I was asked for a plan and that is the only way to stop mass murders who use firearms; make guns harder to get.

considering cares are made to transport, they kill more people then guns.

only .000036 guns owned by americans ever kills. if they are made to kill i have to admit they are pretty inefficient at doing that .

 

[kaz]

Cars are designed to transport.
Guns are designed to injure.

Nonsense. Guns are designed for sports like target practice and hunting and to defend ourselves. Guns are not designed to injure. Using a gun to commit a crime is as much a misuse as driving into someone intentionally with your car.

 

[Spoonman]

That is bull shit. The argument has not been that no gun laws are necessary, but rather that additional laws are meaningless AND that you on the left really do not care about stopping gun violence but rather preventing law abiding citizens from owning any guns at all which won't stop gun violence at all and quite possibly will increase violence.

Immie

We think the people should have access to guns because a free people can defend themselves. The liberals don't want the people to have guns for the same reason...

So you do not support restricting the ability of drunks and punks, rapists and child molesters, the mentally ill and felons, terrorists and drug dealers from owning, possessing and having in their custody and control guns?

why? will they be raping and molesting the guns?

 

[kaz]

That is bull shit. The argument has not been that no gun laws are necessary, but rather that additional laws are meaningless AND that you on the left really do not care about stopping gun violence but rather preventing law abiding citizens from owning any guns at all which won't stop gun violence at all and quite possibly will increase violence.

Immie

We think the people should have access to guns because a free people can defend themselves. The liberals don't want the people to have guns for the same reason...

So you do not support restricting the ability of drunks and punks, rapists and child molesters, the mentally ill and felons, terrorists and drug dealers from owning, possessing and having in their custody and control guns?

What I am saying is that our laws are not doing that. They are allowing those people to have guns and preventing honest citizens from having guns.

That point has been stated, like in the freaking OP, and repeated so many times, it's hard to take that you are approaching this debate with any integrity at all.

 

[kaz]

"This country has a mental health problem disguised as a gun problem and a tyranny problem disguised as a security problem"

- Joe Rogan

Let's give everyone healthcare and include lots of mental healthcare.

Sounds like Obamacare is coming along at just the right time.

The GOP is constantly taking these positions; Lets get rid of gun regulations AND do away with healthcare that may identify those who shouldn't have guns....lets force women to have babies AND get rid of any welfare that may help her raise her child.

Bizarre any way you look at it.

Actually it's an incredibly stupid way to look at it. Oh, you mean us...

 

[Steven_R]

We think the people should have access to guns because a free people can defend themselves. The liberals don't want the people to have guns for the same reason...

So you do not support restricting the ability of drunks and punks, rapists and child molesters, the mentally ill and felons, terrorists and drug dealers from owning, possessing and having in their custody and control guns?

why? will they be raping and molesting the guns?

I've fingerfucked many a gun at the gun store I admit...