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

[candycorn]

100 pages and not one lefty has answered the question posed by the op.

The answer was given...your "punitive tax" nonsense wasn't an answer; it's an excuse...

You've gotten to the hilarious point of trying to argue that London is more violent than Detroit Anyone with eyeballs knows it isn't the truth.

Simply make the guns expensive and the supply dries up. And when the supply goes away it goes away across the board; including criminals.

At the same time; if you use a gun to commit a crime, you need to go away for 10-30 years. No parole. First time offender or lifelong criminal...see ya.

Once again for the slow and ohh so stupid... If a tax on voting is unconstitutional because it INFRINGES the right, then a punitive tax on firearms is also unconstitutional.

All taxes are punitive to some degree. Again, you are only coming up with excuses. At least try to get some good ones and quit with the lame ones.

 

[kaz]

Eventually the guns in circulation will either stop working or end up in Mexico, or both.

Read the op and stop dancing. This is the point it addresses.

I can dance if I want to...

You have no plan, so shut up.

Of course I have a plan. Follow the Constitution and allow people to defend themselves.

One thing I love about the international left is how you're arrogantly condescending to Americans, who you think don't learn anything about the world, while you don't give a crap about learning anything about us...

 

[kaz]

Gee, London is more voilent than Detroit. Who Knew? That would be news to everyone on the planet...including the Mayor of Detroit.

Going 8 year old now?

Gee, London is more violent than Philadelphia. Who Knew? That would be news to everyone on the planet...including the Mayor of Philly.

This is the line of BS the gun loons are trying to sell.

That's a non sequitur to anything I've ever said. Sorry to use such a hard word to an 8 year old.

 

[kaz]

Republican's plan is to make them mandatory for everyone:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...or-felons-rapists-and-murderers-good-job.html

The right to have a gun makes them "mandatory for everyone." Gotcha Skippy. Here's my favorite quote from the article.

"Derbigny ruled that the entire statute -- RS 14:95.1 -- was unconstitutional after voters last year approved by a sweeping majority a constitutional amendment backed by the National Rifle Association. That bill made gun ownership a "fundamental right," on the same level as freedom of speech or religion."

What an insight, three things mentioned in the Bill of Rights are "on the same level." Liberals are all over this, aren't you?

You either didn't read the article you linked or didn't understand it, so I'll give you the 411. The ruling says that Felons who were not convicted of a felony involving gun use cannot be banned from having a gun based on the Amendment. However, felons who were convicted of a felony using a gun can be banned.

So what we have is that Louisiana residents who are not convicted of a Felony involving guns cannot be denied the right to gun ownership. Wow, hard hitting. What is the massive point you believe that makes related to the conversation?

Not too bright, are you "Skippy". You are like a pair of children s scissors, cute, colorful, not too sharp.

» LA Supreme Court to hear argument on whether law barring felons from guns is constitutional

Almost 75 percent of Louisiana voters who cast ballots in November approved adding to the state constitution, “The right of individuals to acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer, and use arms for defense of life and liberty, and for all other legitimate purposes, is fundamental and shall not be denied or infringed, and any restriction on this right must be subjected to strict scrutiny.”

----------------------------------

See that? Even "felons" are allowed "Fundamental rights". It's why they are called "fundamental rights". When Republicans make gun ownership a "fundamental right", they gave that right to felons and rapists and bank robbers and drug dealers. Sheesh, you guys. What's wrong with you?

Try to figure out what is normally considered a "fundamental right".

1) My God man, Google the word "mandatory" because you don't know what it means. Mandatory does not mean "available." They said people have the right to buy a gun, no one is requiring them to do that.

2) No where in the amendment did Louisiana voters say convicted felons can have guns. Rights mean they cannot be taken without ... wait for it ... due process ... of law. A convicted felon has had ... wait for it ... due process.

3) It was a judge who then took the amendment and undid due process, not the Republican party. But even the judge did not give it to all "felons and rapists and bank robbers and drug dealers." He gave it back to the ones who did not commit their crimes with guns. The article you cited isn't saying the crap you're making up.

You are an idiot. But there have to be liberals out there who are reading your crap and see the fallacy. It is their ovine silence I find perplexing.

 

[kaz]

Not for a "fundamental right" dumbass. Why do you think it's going to court? Because liberals want felons to have guns?

Yes and in fact liberals want felons to be the only ones to have guns.

 

[martybegan]

The answer was given...your "punitive tax" nonsense wasn't an answer; it's an excuse...

You've gotten to the hilarious point of trying to argue that London is more violent than Detroit Anyone with eyeballs knows it isn't the truth.

Simply make the guns expensive and the supply dries up. And when the supply goes away it goes away across the board; including criminals.

At the same time; if you use a gun to commit a crime, you need to go away for 10-30 years. No parole. First time offender or lifelong criminal...see ya.

Once again for the slow and ohh so stupid... If a tax on voting is unconstitutional because it INFRINGES the right, then a punitive tax on firearms is also unconstitutional.

All taxes are punitive to some degree. Again, you are only coming up with excuses. At least try to get some good ones and quit with the lame ones.

Taxes are supposed to be about funding government, not forcing people to follow your precious little social policies or pay a fine.

We have lost sight of that.

 

[candycorn]

Once again for the slow and ohh so stupid... If a tax on voting is unconstitutional because it INFRINGES the right, then a punitive tax on firearms is also unconstitutional.

All taxes are punitive to some degree. Again, you are only coming up with excuses. At least try to get some good ones and quit with the lame ones.

Taxes are supposed to be about funding government, not forcing people to follow your precious little social policies or pay a fine.

We have lost sight of that.

The tax will fund the government sir.

The police that investigate the shootings, the police that have to mop the blood off the sidewalks, the courts that prosecute the shootings, the emergency rooms that have to remove the shrapnel...those dixie cups they place over the spent shell casings.

All costs money.

At the very least if we're forcing drivers like me who have very few if any accidents to carry liability insurance 24/7, we should at least force gun owners who have very few if any shootings to carry equitable insurance for the elements who aren't so careful.

 

[MonaGonna]

Pass a constitutional amendment reversing the second amendment about the guns. Then restrict their sale very heavily to real hunters only, or something like that.

 

[Steven_R]

Pass a constitutional amendment reversing the second amendment about the guns. Then restrict their sale very heavily to real hunters only, or something like that.

Let's say you get your way and guns are heavily restricted. I'm not giving up my guns, ever. Are you willing to kick in my front door to take them from me physically, or will you be content to rely on your righteous indignation while you send other people's husbands and sons and fathers into harm's way? How many dead cops is it worth in your mind to disarm 100,000,000 gun owners who did nothing illegal today and will never do anything illegal just because of a small minority of owners?

 

[MonaGonna]

Pass a constitutional amendment reversing the second amendment about the guns. Then restrict their sale very heavily to real hunters only, or something like that.

Let's say you get your way and guns are heavily restricted. I'm not giving up my guns, ever. Are you willing to kick in my front door to take them from me physically, or will you be content to rely on your righteous indignation while you send other people's husbands and sons and fathers into harm's way? How many dead cops is it worth in your mind to disarm 100,000,000 gun owners who did nothing illegal today and will never do anything illegal just because of a small minority of owners?

Grandfathering everyone's LEGAL guns would have to do. But eventually, they'll either all stop working, or real gun enthusiasts will take care of them so that they work for generations. But all the crooks... the gun will jam and they'll toss it.
I'd also make it a lot harder to buy bullets. It seems like buying bullets is no problem. That's not good.

 

[Bern80]

All taxes are punitive to some degree. Again, you are only coming up with excuses. At least try to get some good ones and quit with the lame ones.

Taxes are supposed to be about funding government, not forcing people to follow your precious little social policies or pay a fine.

We have lost sight of that.

The tax will fund the government sir.

The police that investigate the shootings, the police that have to mop the blood off the sidewalks, the courts that prosecute the shootings, the emergency rooms that have to remove the shrapnel...those dixie cups they place over the spent shell casings.

All costs money.

At the very least if we're forcing drivers like me who have very few if any accidents to carry liability insurance 24/7, we should at least force gun owners who have very few if any shootings to carry equitable insurance for the elements who aren't so careful.

But that isn't your intent. And like it or not that's what's at question. Your misguided intent is to stigamatize and penalize gun ownership by any means possible. Well you don't have the right to do that because that would be infringing on my right to have a gun. You do have the right to try to get the 2nd ammendment repealed through the processes outlined in the constitution, but you have yet to establish a rationale argument for doing so. And no, holding up pictures of children is not a rationale argument. That is a plea to emotion and a misguided one at that.

 

[Bern80]

Pass a constitutional amendment reversing the second amendment about the guns. Then restrict their sale very heavily to real hunters only, or something like that.

Do you or do you not have the right to life?

 

[Steven_R]

Pass a constitutional amendment reversing the second amendment about the guns. Then restrict their sale very heavily to real hunters only, or something like that.

Let's say you get your way and guns are heavily restricted. I'm not giving up my guns, ever. Are you willing to kick in my front door to take them from me physically, or will you be content to rely on your righteous indignation while you send other people's husbands and sons and fathers into harm's way? How many dead cops is it worth in your mind to disarm 100,000,000 gun owners who did nothing illegal today and will never do anything illegal just because of a small minority of owners?

Grandfathering everyone's LEGAL guns would have to do. But eventually, they'll either all stop working, or real gun enthusiasts will take care of them so that they work for generations. But all the crooks... the gun will jam and they'll toss it.
I'd also make it a lot harder to buy bullets. It seems like buying bullets is no problem. That's not good.

So guns are so bad that nobody should have them...but we'll wait until a few generations down the road to get them all because of grandfathering? Nope. If guns are that bad you have to get them all right now, police casualties be damned, or guns really aren't that bad. Which is it?

 

[kaz]

Pass a constitutional amendment reversing the second amendment about the guns. Then restrict their sale very heavily to real hunters only, or something like that.

The question in the op addresses this repetition of your shallow point. Get over your international leftist elitist attitude and learn something about the country you unhesitatingly lecture.

 

[kaz]

All taxes are punitive to some degree. Again, you are only coming up with excuses. At least try to get some good ones and quit with the lame ones.

Taxes are supposed to be about funding government, not forcing people to follow your precious little social policies or pay a fine.

We have lost sight of that.

The tax will fund the government sir.

The police that investigate the shootings, the police that have to mop the blood off the sidewalks, the courts that prosecute the shootings, the emergency rooms that have to remove the shrapnel...those dixie cups they place over the spent shell casings.

All costs money.

At the very least if we're forcing drivers like me who have very few if any accidents to carry liability insurance 24/7, we should at least force gun owners who have very few if any shootings to carry equitable insurance for the elements who aren't so careful.

Begging the question: Assuming the truth of your own argument. You do love doing that. If we had gun laws, bam, no guns. And yet you have zero idea how to accomplish that other than the war on drugs template, which doesn't work. But since we won't follow your idea, then we get stuck with the cost of the crimes that happen now. What a load.

And Marty's obvious point you didn't grasp was that punitive taxes are designed to punish, not to raise revenue. If the money raised is spent, that doesn't change that the purpose of the tax was to punish. And who does it punish? Honest citizens. You just make it easier for criminals to commit crimes by lowering the risk for them.

 

[kaz]

Pass a constitutional amendment reversing the second amendment about the guns. Then restrict their sale very heavily to real hunters only, or something like that.

Let's say you get your way and guns are heavily restricted. I'm not giving up my guns, ever. Are you willing to kick in my front door to take them from me physically, or will you be content to rely on your righteous indignation while you send other people's husbands and sons and fathers into harm's way? How many dead cops is it worth in your mind to disarm 100,000,000 gun owners who did nothing illegal today and will never do anything illegal just because of a small minority of owners?

Grandfathering everyone's LEGAL guns would have to do. But eventually, they'll either all stop working, or real gun enthusiasts will take care of them so that they work for generations. But all the crooks... the gun will jam and they'll toss it.
I'd also make it a lot harder to buy bullets. It seems like buying bullets is no problem. That's not good.

Buying pot is no problem and that's already illegal. Maybe your plan won't work. Which we know because it doesn't work...

 

[Steven_R]

And no, holding up pictures of children is not a rationale argument. That is a plea to emotion and a misguided one at that.

It just occurred to me that the pictures of dead kids is a great tool. Maybe we should start countering with pictures of Randy Weaver's kids or the kids at Waco or the agent pulling Elian Gonzalez from his aunt's arms at gunpoint. After all, the police and military are the only ones professional enough to use guns responsibly.

 

[MonaGonna]

Let's say you get your way and guns are heavily restricted. I'm not giving up my guns, ever. Are you willing to kick in my front door to take them from me physically, or will you be content to rely on your righteous indignation while you send other people's husbands and sons and fathers into harm's way? How many dead cops is it worth in your mind to disarm 100,000,000 gun owners who did nothing illegal today and will never do anything illegal just because of a small minority of owners?

Grandfathering everyone's LEGAL guns would have to do. But eventually, they'll either all stop working, or real gun enthusiasts will take care of them so that they work for generations. But all the crooks... the gun will jam and they'll toss it.
I'd also make it a lot harder to buy bullets. It seems like buying bullets is no problem. That's not good.

Buying pot is no problem and that's already illegal. Maybe your plan won't work. Which we know because it doesn't work...

Comparing bullets to pot is, as you yourself even know, laughable. That aside, nobody's tried my suggestions anyways, so on what do you base your "because it doesn't work" statement?

 

[kaz]

And no, holding up pictures of children is not a rationale argument. That is a plea to emotion and a misguided one at that.

It just occurred to me that the pictures of dead kids is a great tool. Maybe we should start countering with pictures of Randy Weaver's kids or the kids at Waco or the agent pulling Elian Gonzalez from his aunt's arms at gunpoint. After all, the police and military are the only ones professional enough to use guns responsibly.

So you don't think when someone breaks into your home that making sure you're unarmed to defend them shows how much liberals care about kids? When the government murders Randy Weaver's wife and all the women and children in Waco to your point they suddenly become acceptable losses. Just like government giving Grandma's home in New London to a corporation was an acceptable loss.

The only consistency in liberal arguments is love of government. Your having a gun isn't expanding the power of government. That's the issue. They could give a crap about children dying. Now exploiting the death of children, that they're all over...

 

[Steven_R]

Let me see...it is impossible to even look at a gun or box of ammunition without a FIOD card in Illinois, but Chicago is one of the most dangerous places on Earth. The same is true in DC and Baltimore.