Virginia Governor offers reasonable gun control legislation

They are gonna take our guns away !! Bla bla bla !


Figure Id get it out the way.
 
Only practical and wise gun control law worthy of consideration has nothing to do with guns but parenting. The gun control mantra people scream about wont control guns nor violence. But educating people on early childhood psychology would. Need to eliminate the urge to become violent in the first place, not control the means the violence gets expressed.
 
There is far to little information to form an opinion. The statement "temporarily confiscating firearms from those involved in domestic-violence situations" appears to be another gun confiscation scheme. Innocent until proven guilty is precluded with punishment before conviction. If this meets your definition of reasonable I don;t think we are speaking the same language.
 
There is far to little information to form an opinion. The statement "temporarily confiscating firearms from those involved in domestic-violence situations" appears to be another gun confiscation scheme. Innocent until proven innocent is precluded with punishment before conviction. If this meets your definition of reasonable I don;t think we are speaking the same language.


Ich glaube, ihr spricht sowieso nicht die gleiche Sprache.

Also, versuch es noch Mal, diesmal mit Talent, gelle?
 
From the OP link:

The sort of proposals McAuliffe is talking about — such as forbidding gun ownership by those convicted of domestic violence or temporarily confiscating firearms from those involved in domestic-violence situations — do not treat all gun owners as criminal wannabes. In fact, they leave all gun owners alone — except for the very few who have shown an inclination toward violence. Attorney General Mark Herring is correct when he says this “should not be a hard stand to take.”...

....Gilbert should familiarize himself with Virginia’s DUI laws. Anyone arrested for having a blood alcohol level above 0.08 is immediately subject to a seven-day administrative revocation of his driver’s license, and will suffer restricted driving privileges for a year upon conviction. He might have an ignition interlock put on his car; violate the interlock restrictions, and you lose your license completely. Driving on a suspended license after an alcohol-related offense will get your car impounded.

All of that is “taking away cars” from people who have shown an inclination to drunken driving.

Some drunken drivers are referred to substance-abuse treatment. While in treatment, they are forbidden to use alcohol. That is “taking away alcohol” to keep people from hurting other people while driving drunk.

But these restrictions apply only to those who drive drunk — just as the gun violence-restraining order restrictions apply only to those in domestic-abuse situations. In each case, the restraints are narrowly tailored to restrict the rights of offenders, not the rights of all law-abiding citizens.
 
Only practical and wise gun control law worthy of consideration has nothing to do with guns but parenting. The gun control mantra people scream about wont control guns nor violence. But educating people on early childhood psychology would. Need to eliminate the urge to become violent in the first place, not control the means the violence gets expressed.

Finally somebody that gets it..... You sure you don't want to be President, we could use somebody in charge with some common sense and the ability to differentiate between the circumstances of a problem and the CAUSE OF A PROBLEM. :D
 
Only practical and wise gun control law worthy of consideration has nothing to do with guns but parenting. The gun control mantra people scream about wont control guns nor violence. But educating people on early childhood psychology would. Need to eliminate the urge to become violent in the first place, not control the means the violence gets expressed.

Finally somebody that gets it..... You sure you don't want to be President, we could use somebody in charge with some common sense and the ability to differentiate between the circumstances of a problem and the CAUSE OF A PROBLEM. :D

Except education funding is also being cut.

I want to see if the NRA will now defend domestic abusers. I expect they will.....
 
Only practical and wise gun control law worthy of consideration has nothing to do with guns but parenting. The gun control mantra people scream about wont control guns nor violence. But educating people on early childhood psychology would. Need to eliminate the urge to become violent in the first place, not control the means the violence gets expressed.

Finally somebody that gets it..... You sure you don't want to be President, we could use somebody in charge with some common sense and the ability to differentiate between the circumstances of a problem and the CAUSE OF A PROBLEM. :D

Except education funding is also being cut.
Throwing money at a problem and educating people are two entirely different things, we've tried the throwing money at it approach and it's just made things a freakin' mess, now lets try electing leaders that actually persuade instead of making promises with other peoples money and offering up empty platitudes.

I want to see if the NRA will now defend domestic abusers. I expect they will.....

Uh-huh, I'm sure that'll come right after the NRA publishes it's handbook on ritual human sacrifice..... sheesh talk about silly.
 
Editorial: A gun-control proposal worth considering

It is a start ans should be considered. The NRA money will begin rolling out on this one!

It's already federal law, has been for many years.

Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban

Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Virginia proposal speaks to anyone "involved" in domestic violence resulting ina restraining order.

Didn't read the link did ya?

From the link:
The act bans shipment, transport, ownership and use of guns or ammunition by individuals convicted of misdemeanordomestic violence, or who are under a restraining (protection) order for domestic abuse that falls within the criteria set by 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8). The act also makes it unlawful to knowingly sell or give a firearm or ammunition to such persons.

Now do you understand why we keep saying enforce the laws on the books BEFORE you come up with new ones? Maybe you and the governor don't know as much as you think you do.
 
Also from your link:
109 domestic-violence homicides last year, 64 were committed with a firearm.

Proves that weapons of opportunity are used in domestic violence situations, if the person is bent on killing, they will find a way, if guns aren't available.
 
You didn't MY link, did you. The Virginia proposal does not require a conviction.....try reading it.....

The key word is "involved" not convicted.
 
Virginia Governor offers reasonable gun control legislation


TRANSLATION: We know this is unconstitutional, but we're trying to slip in in anyway, in hopes that people won't notice it violates the 2nd. Once we get them used to government having the power to decide who can and can't have guns (power specifically forbidden by the 2nd for ALL cases), we'll be able to put more in place, little by little.
 
Virginia Governor offers reasonable gun control legislation


TRANSLATION: We know this is unconstitutional, but we're trying to slip in in anyway, in hopes that people won't notice it violates the 2nd. Once we get them used to government having the power to decide who can and can't have guns (power specifically forbidden by the 2nd for ALL cases), we'll be able to put more in place, little by little.

We will see.....
 
You didn't MY link, did you. The Virginia proposal does not require a conviction.....try reading it.....

The key word is "involved" not convicted.

Both apply to anyone "involved" who is placed under a restraining/protection order Stop with the semantics games, semantics are the last bastion of a loser. Just admit the law already exist at the federal level and move on.
 

Forum List

Back
Top