No one is going to take your guns

[Amelia]

<snipped>

To that end, why not have a national system where law abiding citizens can go through a battery of permitting and vetting with the goal of safe and lawful use and carriage of firearms.

<snipped>

States' rights.

Watch out, you'll be told you're a RACIST for saying that.

Been called it for less.

 

[Geaux4it]

Joe the lib; I have come to the conclusion is a BS artist. If the discussion is ACA, he was a victim at the hands of insurance companies. Always finds a tie in hopes it would legitimize his flawed thought process of the way things should be. Yes, discuss gun control, and he was in a room next to a suicide attempt with bullets passing through walls. And now, his family has partial origin from Germany.

I call BS.

-Geaux

 

[FA_Q2]

What they have is welfare without shame.

Wow! Didn't anyone tell them Socialism doesn't work?

The German work ethic and self-accountability allows it to work.

Here ?

Not so much.

More takee than givee and feel they're entitled to do so.

De-evolution against a primal drive in the form of an EBT card.

Not really. It has nothing to do with a work ethic or anything like that. It works in many of those nations because those people do not live like Americans. The simple reality is that if you were to have Americans live like Germans they would got bat shit crazy. They don’t have three cars in the garage and 5 TV’s in the house. They don’t even take a shower daily and if you do your landlord will come knocking on your door upset because the water bill is too high. They have far less than Americans and yet we consider many of those here to be ‘poor.’ The view of people in other countries from here is utterly moot as very few Americans have actually been to those places, been inside the people’s homes that live there and spoken to them about the manner that they live. That kind of ignorance of other nations people make comparisons and statics about them utterly useless.

 

[R.C. Christian]

Germany is a socialist shit hole. Lived there, done that.

 

[FA_Q2]

Common sense would tell us we all would know after receiving training, how to safely operate an automobile.
The credential would indicate to law enforcement that "yes i have a firearm. And I am trained in the safe usage of said firearm. So leave me alone!".
In fact the SCOTUS has upheld the Second Amendment in a case vs Wash DC in that the court ruled the Wash DC handgun ban was Unconstitutional. The Court ruled the ban was a violation of the 2nd and 14th Amendments.
Later, Chicago's ban was also overturned when a resident who used his gun in protecting his person and home from an intruder, was arrested and charged. The man subsequently sued the City. The case made it to the SCOTUS.

The core problem here is that driving is not a constitutional right. There are problems with defining rights in a way that allows them to be restricted based on an arbitrary governmental requirement. Would you support the same thing for the exercise of your religion? Your speech? Why then would you treat the second differently?

The only real push back here is in a compelling governmental interest – something that I highly doubt you can provide in this instance considering that there is no real evidence that this ‘training’ would actually accomplish anything of that magnitude. There are very few cases of ignorance of the gun owner in the weapons use being the reason that someone dies. Almost all the accidental deaths are from carelessness. Training does not solve carelessness. Further, most of them are from people that are very adept with there weapons. Being overly familiar tends to make people complacent.

Here's the rub. Gun ownership and the possession of guns is already restricted by a veritable hodgepodge of state and local laws. It's maddening.
For example. Here in NC one if permitted by authority may carry a loaded firearm in their vehicle. The gun must be in 'in plain view'. Cross the state line into SC and the same gun must be out of view in a glove box or compartment and is NOT permitted to be loaded.
In other states, one may carry a loaded weapon but in the case of semi-automatic weapons, there cannot be a round 'in the chamber'..
And in most cases, just because one may carry in one state does not mean they may do so in another. In fact it's damned likely it's prohibited by law..
To that end, why not have a national system where law abiding citizens can go through a battery of permitting and vetting with the goal of safe and lawful use and carriage of firearms.
Any further debate is pointless. We agree to disagree.
Thanks for the discussion.

Further discussion is moot? I find that rather laughable as I have made a single statement and then you essentially dropped your point. Can’t debate the topic at all but want to hold onto those convictions? I think there is a thread on cognitive dissonance in the CDZ…

BTW – none of that paragraph has anything to do with my statements at all. The legal mess that current law makes of things is irrelevant to the concept of requiring tests/classes to exercise your rights.

 

[JoeB131]

[

You admire the Vaterland so much, Joey, I'll happily chip in for your one-way ticket!

I can't think of a country I dislike enough to send you to, Jack-axle

 

[JoeB131]

Joe the lib; I have come to the conclusion is a BS artist. If the discussion is ACA, he was a victim at the hands of insurance companies. Always finds a tie in hopes it would legitimize his flawed thought process of the way things should be. Yes, discuss gun control, and he was in a room next to a suicide attempt with bullets passing through walls. And now, his family has partial origin from Germany.

I call BS.

-Geaux

As opposed to your ever changing numbers of how much you have to pay for insurance now?


I never said when my neighbor killed himself the bullets passed through my walls. Your reading comprehension is kind of dull, Cleetus.

I did state that during his first attempt, the bullet shattered his patio window and went out into the common parking area of the place we live. Oddly, the cops in my town didn't take his gun away from him after he lied to them about someone shooting in at him.

A few weeks later, he got it right.


Yes, I've stated a bunch of times, what had changed my mind not only on socialized medicine but Conservatism in general is when I was let go from my last job after I ran up too many medical bills. Done with this nonsense of having to work for health coverage and then hoping they don't turn around and cheat you.

Oh, yeah, and my dad was born in 1925 in a small town called Lahnstein. Look it up. (Lahnstein, not my dad.)

 

[Geaux4it]

Joe the lib; I have come to the conclusion is a BS artist. If the discussion is ACA, he was a victim at the hands of insurance companies. Always finds a tie in hopes it would legitimize his flawed thought process of the way things should be. Yes, discuss gun control, and he was in a room next to a suicide attempt with bullets passing through walls. And now, his family has partial origin from Germany.

I call BS.

-Geaux

As opposed to your ever changing numbers of how much you have to pay for insurance now?


I never said when my neighbor killed himself the bullets passed through my walls. Your reading comprehension is kind of dull, Cleetus.

I did state that during his first attempt, the bullet shattered his patio window and went out into the common parking area of the place we live. Oddly, the cops in my town didn't take his gun away from him after he lied to them about someone shooting in at him.

A few weeks later, he got it right.


Yes, I've stated a bunch of times, what had changed my mind not only on socialized medicine but Conservatism in general is when I was let go from my last job after I ran up too many medical bills. Done with this nonsense of having to work for health coverage and then hoping they don't turn around and cheat you.

Oh, yeah, and my dad was born in 1925 in a small town called Lahnstein. Look it up. (Lahnstein, not my dad.)

Sorry dude, your gigs up.

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

Guy, please. Someone who has to type in his name on each and ever posts seriously has issues with self-identity.

You probably wish your life was as cool as mine.

 

[S.J.]

Or maybe you just let the guy take your TV, and be done with it.

Because, frankly, you guys keep talking about how you are keeping us safe, but I'm a lot more concerned about the gun nuts than I am about criminals.

Nobody gives a shit about keeping YOU safe, we just want to keep our FAMILIES safe. You can die for all we care.

Well, here's the thing, guy, I'm actually concerned about keeping your families safe.

And when a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy, that's probably a legitimate cause of concern.

How about if you worry about your own family and let me worry about mine?

 

[daveman]

Nobody gives a shit about keeping YOU safe, we just want to keep our FAMILIES safe. You can die for all we care.

Well, here's the thing, guy, I'm actually concerned about keeping your families safe.

And when a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy, that's probably a legitimate cause of concern.

How about if you worry about your own family and let me worry about mine?

PinkoJoe wants the government to make all his life's decisions for him, so he projects his inadequacies on everyone else.

And while he can't make his own decisions, he paradoxically thinks he can make them for you and your family.

Progressives are kinda stupid like that.

 

[tyroneweaver]

Did you know that JFK was a life long member of the NRA

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Did you know that JFK was a life long member of the NRA

Yes.

Along with millions of his fellow liberals.

 

[Ernie S.]

[

Since police are not obligated to come to your aid, who will?

-Geaux

Or maybe you just let the guy take your TV, and be done with it.

Because, frankly, you guys keep talking about how you are keeping us safe, but I'm a lot more concerned about the gun nuts than I am about criminals.

I worked hard to be able to by my TV and other possessions. I'll be damned if I let you or anyone take it from me.

 

[Ernie S.]

[

The British weren't worried about them either.
Snipers in trees, or hidden in prepared blinds with a decent supply of ammunition will take out advancing enemy infantry at about 10:1.

Yeah, you keep telling yourself that.

Can tell you never served in the military.

I have 4 high caliber rifles, a half dozen shotguns, a few pistols and a couple thousand rounds of ammunition. I can part your hair at 300 yards with a rifle, drop a rifled slug in your heart at 100 yards with a shotgun or at 25 yards with a pistol. I am well trained and well practiced. My military service is irrelevant.

 

[Ernie S.]

Again, most gun deaths are suicides, domestic arguments and accidents...

I mean, I know that you guys piss yourself at the thought of the scary black man you think is out there with a gun, but the fact is, if you are murdered, it will probably be by someone you know.

Depends on how the categories are set up. While a very large percentage of gun murders are among people who know each other, gang associations and rivalries are usually included in that.
The truth is, nearly half of all gun deaths are gang related and more than half are committed by just 6% of the population.

That sounds like a great argument to limit who is allowed to own a gun.

Oh, wait, that's probably not what you were going for there.

Not quite, but with current requirements for gun purchase, if laws were effective. the murder rate would be cut in half overnight. The point is that the only people that really care about new gun laws are the people that aren't going to shoot anyone except in self defense.

There really is no point to additional legislation. Who needs 10,000 gun laws when "Thou shalt not kill" should suffice?

 

[Ernie S.]

[

Or maybe you just let the guy take your TV, and be done with it.

Because, frankly, you guys keep talking about how you are keeping us safe, but I'm a lot more concerned about the gun nuts than I am about criminals.

Exactly. Let him rape your kids too.

Considering that a kid is 43 times more likely to be killed by a gun in the home than by a bad guy, they are better off taking their chances.

Hey, you know what, all those other industrialized countries where they don't let every yahoo own a gun? They don't have the rapes, the murders, or the robberies we have for some reason.

Now why is that?

That bullshit 43X line again. I keep telling you where the author of that study debunked his own claims, but you keep trying to use it.

 

[Ernie S.]

Or maybe you just let the guy take your TV, and be done with it.

Because, frankly, you guys keep talking about how you are keeping us safe, but I'm a lot more concerned about the gun nuts than I am about criminals.

Nobody gives a shit about keeping YOU safe, we just want to keep our FAMILIES safe. You can die for all we care.

Well, here's the thing, guy, I'm actually concerned about keeping your families safe.

And when a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy, that's probably a legitimate cause of concern.

More bullshit!

 

[Geaux4it]

&#8220;The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it away.&#8221;
&#8213; Thomas Jefferson

-Geaux

 

[Ernie S.]

I will repeat what I have shown you 4 or 5 times in the past. If you insist on using Kellerman's bogus numbers, I'll post a thread to discuss Kellerman, OK?

Several academic papers have been published severely questioning Kellerman's methodology, selective capture of data, and refusal to provide raw data from his gun-risk studies so as to substantiate his methods and result validity. While Kellerman has backed away from his previous statement that people are “43 times more likely” to be murdered in their own home if they own and keep a gun in their home, he still proposes that the risk is 2.7 times higher. The critiques included Henry E. Schaffer,[7] J. Neil Schuman, and criminologists Gary Kleck,[8] Don Kates, and others.[9]

Additional reading on the subject: