There is simply no denying it is time for "common sense" gun laws

[Wilbur Right]

Then the bad guy simply shoots the teacher first.

But if ALL law-abiding adults were allowed to carry concealed.... most of them still wouldn't bother. But a few would. And the murderer wouldn't know which ones they were.

How many adults do you think are in a classroom? Why not arm the kids? Above the age of 10 of course.

 

[dannyboys]

We have seen it far too often. Way too many tragic and unnecessary deaths. We have reached the point that no honest person could deny that it is time for "common sense" gun laws. Barack Obama has preached this for 8 straight years now and he has been right all along.

Wherever guns are banned (public schools, universities, movie theaters, etc.) - horrific tragedy ensues. Wherever guns are prevalent (White House, police departments, NRA meetings, etc.) peace and security ensues. Anybody with "common sense" would look at the indisputable reality and immediately implement "common sense" gun laws which would permit firearms everywhere, all the time. Fully automatic weapons in every building (just the Secret Service has while the president is in public). Teachers with guns on them. College students conceal carrying.

Anybody who doesn't support these basic "common sense" gun laws clearly isn't interested in public safety, preserving human life, or security. Instead they are simply interested in control. This one is so obvious - both sides can agree on it. Again - unless someone is more interested in a control/oppression agenda.

You are aware more people are accidently killed by firearms than are killed in mass shootings? The number of accidental deaths just jumped up dramatically. Your answer to the problem kills more than the problem.

I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a nanny-state where the government tells us what's good for us and makes decisions for us because we're "not able to". If people are stupid and get themselves killed a gun-that's their fault and problem, don't make me suffer as a responsible gun owner.

If you start letting guns into schools and areas with lots of people more innocent people will become victims of accidents. If the solution kills more than the problem, how is it a solution?

How many times has a person carrying concealed weapon in a public place accidentally shot anyone?

Like NEVER!
LIB are fucking cowards and pussies.
Show them a photo of any firearm and they will start to shake at the knees.
Seen it dozens of times in VN.
Picture this: A small undermaned platoon gets into a firefight. It lasts five minutes.
EVERY REP's barrel so so fucking hot you can't touch it.
EVERY fucki9ng LIB coward's barrel is fucking cold!
There used to be some jokes about this........regarding a man's 'manhood'.
When I see a fucking LIB man prancing around today wearing a fucking 'man-bun' I want to..........well. Better that thought remains private.

 

[NoNukes]

We have seen it far too often. Way too many tragic and unnecessary deaths. We have reached the point that no honest person could deny that it is time for "common sense" gun laws. Barack Obama has preached this for 8 straight years now and he has been right all along.

Wherever guns are banned (public schools, universities, movie theaters, etc.) - horrific tragedy ensues. Wherever guns are prevalent (White House, police departments, NRA meetings, etc.) peace and security ensues. Anybody with "common sense" would look at the indisputable reality and immediately implement "common sense" gun laws which would permit firearms everywhere, all the time. Fully automatic weapons in every building (just the Secret Service has while the president is in public). Teachers with guns on them. College students conceal carrying.

Anybody who doesn't support these basic "common sense" gun laws clearly isn't interested in public safety, preserving human life, or security. Instead they are simply interested in control. This one is so obvious - both sides can agree on it. Again - unless someone is more interested in a control/oppression agenda.

You are aware more people are accidently killed by firearms than are killed in mass shootings? The number of accidental deaths just jumped up dramatically. Your answer to the problem kills more than the problem.

I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a nanny-state where the government tells us what's good for us and makes decisions for us because we're "not able to". If people are stupid and get themselves killed a gun-that's their fault and problem, don't make me suffer as a responsible gun owner.

If you start letting guns into schools and areas with lots of people more innocent people will become victims of accidents. If the solution kills more than the problem, how is it a solution?

How many times has a person carrying concealed weapon in a public place accidentally shot anyone?

Like NEVER!
LIB are fucking cowards and pussies.
Show them a photo of any firearm and they will start to shake at the knees.
Seen it dozens of times in VN.
Picture this: A small undermaned platoon gets into a firefight. It lasts five minutes.
EVERY REP's barrel so so fucking hot you can't touch it.
EVERY fucki9ng LIB coward's barrel is fucking cold!
There used to be some jokes about this........regarding a man's 'manhood'.
When I see a fucking LIB man prancing around today wearing a fucking 'man-bun' I want to..........well. Better that thought remains private.

You sound pretty unsure about your masculinity.

 

[dannyboys]

You are aware more people are accidently killed by firearms than are killed in mass shootings? The number of accidental deaths just jumped up dramatically. Your answer to the problem kills more than the problem.

I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a nanny-state where the government tells us what's good for us and makes decisions for us because we're "not able to". If people are stupid and get themselves killed a gun-that's their fault and problem, don't make me suffer as a responsible gun owner.

If you start letting guns into schools and areas with lots of people more innocent people will become victims of accidents. If the solution kills more than the problem, how is it a solution?

How many times has a person carrying concealed weapon in a public place accidentally shot anyone?

Like NEVER!
LIB are fucking cowards and pussies.
Show them a photo of any firearm and they will start to shake at the knees.
Seen it dozens of times in VN.
Picture this: A small undermaned platoon gets into a firefight. It lasts five minutes.
EVERY REP's barrel so so fucking hot you can't touch it.
EVERY fucki9ng LIB coward's barrel is fucking cold!
There used to be some jokes about this........regarding a man's 'manhood'.
When I see a fucking LIB man prancing around today wearing a fucking 'man-bun' I want to..........well. Better that thought remains private.

You sound pretty unsure about your masculinity.

I crap bigger than you.

 

[NoNukes]

I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a nanny-state where the government tells us what's good for us and makes decisions for us because we're "not able to". If people are stupid and get themselves killed a gun-that's their fault and problem, don't make me suffer as a responsible gun owner.

If you start letting guns into schools and areas with lots of people more innocent people will become victims of accidents. If the solution kills more than the problem, how is it a solution?

How many times has a person carrying concealed weapon in a public place accidentally shot anyone?

Like NEVER!
LIB are fucking cowards and pussies.
Show them a photo of any firearm and they will start to shake at the knees.
Seen it dozens of times in VN.
Picture this: A small undermaned platoon gets into a firefight. It lasts five minutes.
EVERY REP's barrel so so fucking hot you can't touch it.
EVERY fucki9ng LIB coward's barrel is fucking cold!
There used to be some jokes about this........regarding a man's 'manhood'.
When I see a fucking LIB man prancing around today wearing a fucking 'man-bun' I want to..........well. Better that thought remains private.

You sound pretty unsure about your masculinity.

I crap bigger than you.

You are full of it?

 

[Little-Acorn]

Thanks Little-Acorn you point out how there is just no getting around the need for mental health screening to catch abusive or criminal behavior before it becomes deadly .

Who does this mental health screening? Government?

You seem to be OK with giving government the authority to decide who can own and carry a gun.

Of course, Americans decided a few centuries ago, that the country would be better off with govt having NO such authority. They believed that even being exposed to the occasional murderer or insane armed person, was better than having a govt that can decide who can own and carry. They had studied a LOT of history of other countries' governments, and come to that conclusion.

Do you have some reason to decide they were wrong? That we are better off with a govt having the authority to decide which of us can own and carry, than if they had no such authority and we had the occasional murderer? (Keep in mind that even today you are more likely to get hit by lightning than to be a victim of a mass-murderer.)

 

[P@triot]

You sound pretty unsure about your masculinity.

You sound like an immature idealist and a coward. "No Nukes". Bwahahahaha. Typical immature idealist libtard. Mutually Assured Destruction brought more peace and stability to the world than anything ever. And your dumb ass wants to get rid of them simply because you pee down your leg every time you see a video of what the bomb is capable of.

Listen junior, stay in the corner playing with your toys. Let the adults handle running the country. Ok?

 

[P@triot]

I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a nanny-state where the government tells us what's good for us and makes decisions for us because we're "not able to". If people are stupid and get themselves killed a gun-that's their fault and problem, don't make me suffer as a responsible gun owner.

If you start letting guns into schools and areas with lots of people more innocent people will become victims of accidents. If the solution kills more than the problem, how is it a solution?

How many times has a person carrying concealed weapon in a public place accidentally shot anyone?

Like NEVER!
LIB are fucking cowards and pussies.
Show them a photo of any firearm and they will start to shake at the knees.
Seen it dozens of times in VN.
Picture this: A small undermaned platoon gets into a firefight. It lasts five minutes.
EVERY REP's barrel so so fucking hot you can't touch it.
EVERY fucki9ng LIB coward's barrel is fucking cold!
There used to be some jokes about this........regarding a man's 'manhood'.
When I see a fucking LIB man prancing around today wearing a fucking 'man-bun' I want to..........well. Better that thought remains private.

You sound pretty unsure about your masculinity.

I crap bigger than you.

Sadly, your crap is exponentially more intelligent than he is as well....

 

[NoNukes]

You sound pretty unsure about your masculinity.

You sound like an immature idealist and a coward. "No Nukes". Bwahahahaha. Typical immature idealist libtard. Mutually Assured Destruction brought more peace and stability to the world than anything ever. And your dumb ass wants to get rid of them simply because you pee down your leg every time you see a video of what the bomb is capable of.

Listen junior, stay in the corner playing with your toys. Let the adults handle running the country. Ok?

You sound even more insecure. Big man at the keyboard.

 

[dannyboys]

You sound pretty unsure about your masculinity.

You sound like an immature idealist and a coward. "No Nukes". Bwahahahaha. Typical immature idealist libtard. Mutually Assured Destruction brought more peace and stability to the world than anything ever. And your dumb ass wants to get rid of them simply because you pee down your leg every time you see a video of what the bomb is capable of.

Listen junior, stay in the corner playing with your toys. Let the adults handle running the country. Ok?

You sound even more insecure. Big man at the keyboard.

You poor little pussy.
People call you out here for being an asshole and you can't take it.
Typical LIB coward.
Still hiding your hoodie with Trayvon's twelve year old face on it?
Face it.
You're a loser.

 

[g5000]

We have seen it far too often. Way too many tragic and unnecessary deaths. We have reached the point that no honest person could deny that it is time for "common sense" gun laws. Barack Obama has preached this for 8 straight years now and he has been right all along.

Wherever guns are banned (public schools, universities, movie theaters, etc.) - horrific tragedy ensues. Wherever guns are prevalent (White House, police departments, NRA meetings, etc.) peace and security ensues. Anybody with "common sense" would look at the indisputable reality and immediately implement "common sense" gun laws which would permit firearms everywhere, all the time. Fully automatic weapons in every building (just the Secret Service has while the president is in public). Teachers with guns on them. College students conceal carrying.

Anybody who doesn't support these basic "common sense" gun laws clearly isn't interested in public safety, preserving human life, or security. Instead they are simply interested in control. This one is so obvious - both sides can agree on it. Again - unless someone is more interested in a control/oppression agenda.

A totally false premise.

Even our bases in Afghanistan and Iraq were places of mass shootings even though our troops are armed to the teeth in those places.

 

[g5000]

Two U.S. troops killed in apparent ‘insider’ attack by Afghan soldier

Men in Afghan Uniforms Shoot and Kill Two NATO Troops at Afghanistan Base

 

[koshergrl]

We have seen it far too often. Way too many tragic and unnecessary deaths. We have reached the point that no honest person could deny that it is time for "common sense" gun laws. Barack Obama has preached this for 8 straight years now and he has been right all along.

Wherever guns are banned (public schools, universities, movie theaters, etc.) - horrific tragedy ensues. Wherever guns are prevalent (White House, police departments, NRA meetings, etc.) peace and security ensues. Anybody with "common sense" would look at the indisputable reality and immediately implement "common sense" gun laws which would permit firearms everywhere, all the time. Fully automatic weapons in every building (just the Secret Service has while the president is in public). Teachers with guns on them. College students conceal carrying.

Anybody who doesn't support these basic "common sense" gun laws clearly isn't interested in public safety, preserving human life, or security. Instead they are simply interested in control. This one is so obvious - both sides can agree on it. Again - unless someone is more interested in a control/oppression agenda.

I deny it.

So there. Your thread and your stupid OP is based on a FALSE PREMISE.

 

[emilynghiem]

Thanks Little-Acorn you point out how there is just no getting around the need for mental health screening to catch abusive or criminal behavior before it becomes deadly .

Who does this mental health screening? Government?

You seem to be OK with giving government the authority to decide who can own and carry a gun.

Of course, Americans decided a few centuries ago, that the country would be better off with govt having NO such authority. They believed that even being exposed to the occasional murderer or insane armed person, was better than having a govt that can decide who can own and carry. They had studied a LOT of history of other countries' governments, and come to that conclusion.

Do you have some reason to decide they were wrong? That we are better off with a govt having the authority to decide which of us can own and carry, than if they had no such authority and we had the occasional murderer? (Keep in mind that even today you are more likely to get hit by lightning than to be a victim of a mass-murderer.)

Dear Little-Acorn, Because govt cannot do this (cannot as in both not having jurisdiction and NOT being designed or being capable of this level of personal counseling), this remains the choice of the people.

Surprise! The solution is not through govt. There is no substitute for people taking personal responsibility and teaching their children and community how to enforce laws, and how to deal with abusive people BEFORE danger or disaster strikes.

In the Christian circles, it is well established that spiritual healing not only diagnoses the root cause of dangerous sickness, but can CURE it. Do you think THAT can be "regulated or provided" by govt any time soon? No, by its nature govt CANNOT go there. It is up to people to work out their own policies and practices similar to how churches have their own rules that people follow by choice and use that to teach obedience, and counsel people with addiction or abuse issues that govt is obviously ill equipped and NOT designed or authorized to handle.

The most I could see happening Little-Acorn is local homeowners and civic associations COULD implement ordinances whereby any abusive behavior could be reported as "nuisance" or "public health and safety" complaints that required counseling or screening to resolve the problem; and if people don't agree to sign on to this policy, then they aren't allowed to live in that neighborhood. Something like that.

On a larger scale, if entire districts work with their schools and police to train all residents on what are the police procedures, and teach the basic Bill of Rights on due process of laws, checks on both govt and on 1st and 2nd Amendment rights of people in enforcing laws; then this process will automatically screen out problems where people are either unwilling or unable to comply with laws.

Also, if immigration laws are going to crack down on criminals getting "amnesty" why not crack down on natural born citizens getting "amnesty" for breaking laws -- why not require ALL citizens to sign agreement to pay financial and legal costs of any infraction or abuse committed, so that nobody "free loads" off law abiding taxpayers? That's another way to "screen out" criminal and abusive types who aren't working to pay costs but keep dumping a larger burden on taxpayers than they are able to pay. And if they are legally incompetent because of behavioral issues, they would need to get help of a co-signer or co-sponsor to cover their costs and take over legal and financial responsibility for any citizen who can't sign for this themselves.

That's an extreme, but I would have states consider it, in order to turn around the backwards prison and welfare culture that keep rewarding people for relying on govt welfare and taxpayers, and punishes them if they try to become independent and don't have help. They would be REQUIRED to have a sponsor to agree to cover their costs in order to invoke rights of citizenship, which isn't free. Someone has to pay, so this process of getting signed agreement would weed out the lawabiding citizens from the ones with either mental or social problems that require assistance to follow laws and not be a burden to other taxpayers.

IF such a plan could be adopted by the people of each district or state, depending what version of this they could agree on. I wouldn't pass it without a consensus of the population affected, because the only way it works is if ALL people in a district or state AGREE to common standards of law enforcement.

 

[g5000]

ISIL suicide attackers storm army base in Iraq

Suicide bomber attacks military convoy in Afghanistan

Multiple suicide bombers attack Iraqi military base

Suicide bombers kill three soldiers in attack on Iraq base


So much for the stupid theory that areas where manly men are armed to the teeth don't get attacked. So much for the stupid theory only "gun free zones" are attacked by terrorists.

 

[P@triot]

We have seen it far too often. Way too many tragic and unnecessary deaths. We have reached the point that no honest person could deny that it is time for "common sense" gun laws. Barack Obama has preached this for 8 straight years now and he has been right all along.

Wherever guns are banned (public schools, universities, movie theaters, etc.) - horrific tragedy ensues. Wherever guns are prevalent (White House, police departments, NRA meetings, etc.) peace and security ensues. Anybody with "common sense" would look at the indisputable reality and immediately implement "common sense" gun laws which would permit firearms everywhere, all the time. Fully automatic weapons in every building (just the Secret Service has while the president is in public). Teachers with guns on them. College students conceal carrying.

Anybody who doesn't support these basic "common sense" gun laws clearly isn't interested in public safety, preserving human life, or security. Instead they are simply interested in control. This one is so obvious - both sides can agree on it. Again - unless someone is more interested in a control/oppression agenda.

A totally false premise.

Even our bases in Afghanistan and Iraq were places of mass shootings even though our troops are armed to the teeth in those places.

Bwahahahahah!!!! You call TWO killed a "mass shooting". Idiot.

 

[g5000]

G5000 in 2012:

I have said many times that once we make our airplanes invulnerable to terrorist attacks, it will only be a matter of time before terrorists begin blowing up buses and pizza restaurants. Israel's El Al airlines are bulletproof and so they are attacked by suicide bombers on buses and in night clubs and restaurants.

Exactly what I predicted has come to pass. Paris: night clubs and restaurants. Orlando: night club.

Buses and malls are next.

 

[g5000]

We have seen it far too often. Way too many tragic and unnecessary deaths. We have reached the point that no honest person could deny that it is time for "common sense" gun laws. Barack Obama has preached this for 8 straight years now and he has been right all along.

Wherever guns are banned (public schools, universities, movie theaters, etc.) - horrific tragedy ensues. Wherever guns are prevalent (White House, police departments, NRA meetings, etc.) peace and security ensues. Anybody with "common sense" would look at the indisputable reality and immediately implement "common sense" gun laws which would permit firearms everywhere, all the time. Fully automatic weapons in every building (just the Secret Service has while the president is in public). Teachers with guns on them. College students conceal carrying.

Anybody who doesn't support these basic "common sense" gun laws clearly isn't interested in public safety, preserving human life, or security. Instead they are simply interested in control. This one is so obvious - both sides can agree on it. Again - unless someone is more interested in a control/oppression agenda.

A totally false premise.

Even our bases in Afghanistan and Iraq were places of mass shootings even though our troops are armed to the teeth in those places.

Bwahahahahah!!!! You call TWO killed a "mass shooting". Idiot.

It proves your claim that only "gun free zones" are attacked is utter bullshit.

 

[g5000]

You can't make the whole country an armed camp. I've been to countries like that. It won't be America any more.

So you better figure out something else.

 

[emilynghiem]

ISIL suicide attackers storm army base in Iraq

Suicide bomber attacks military convoy in Afghanistan

Multiple suicide bombers attack Iraqi military base

Suicide bombers kill three soldiers in attack on Iraq base


So much for the stupid theory that areas where manly men are armed to the teeth don't get attacked. So much for the stupid theory only "gun free zones" are attacked by terrorists.

Dear g5000
Of course army bases and any collection of military troops are going to be attacked during wartime.
That's its own scenario where that's the whole point is to attack the leadership and patrols of the opposition.

What the argument refers to is people who mentally geared up on killing as many as possible before being gunned down, too often end up choosing campuses, some choose crowded theatres, etc. as easier targets.

They will pick out targets where they can make the bigger media statement to terrorize more people.

Now it has been pointed out some commit suicide by taking out cops and targeting policed stations that are armed. If their political issue is with police they may target that. Just like people with domestic relation abuse or harassment/stalking issues with a PARTICULAR person may target that person, their kids, their homes or jobs or wherever they are at the time to take that person out and anyone else with them include themselves.

People who want to kill as many innocent civilians as possible will choose a target that makes that possible.

In the case of the Ft. Hood shooter, he had a particular grievance against the war and shot out a military base of unarmed personnel. So this was considered both workplace violence by the administration and was considered a terrorist attack by others.

Some attacks have particular targets as part of their agenda, and some just want to kill innocent people related or not.

The common factor is the criminal and mental illness of the shooter.
Ironically g5000 the solutions I have found to addressing this most effectively
come out of the Christian practices on spiritual healing to diagnose and cure such addictions and disorders,
but guess what, this is the one group the LIBERAL LEFT hates the most and blames and bashes; so the
group that rejects the solution is the same one pushing to "overcompensate after the fact" with govt regs INSTEAD of the outreach necessary to identify and CURE criminal and mental illness. How ironic is that!