Why the liberals are lossing the debate about guns.

[Brain357]

I'd love to see you shoot a pump-action shotgun 155 times in less than 5 minutes.

Ajh, ignorance....
3" magnum shells carry 12 00 buckshot pellets. That's 13 shots. I'd have to reload once.

You wouldn't even need to reload if you got a magazine fed shotgun.

So you see why limiting the capacity of magazines is important. Thank you.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So it might save a few victims of the crime, but you can't be bothered with that. How heroic.

How would it save anybody? Be specific.

Well if we required background checks for every gun purchase it would make it more difficult for criminals to get guns. Some of the crazies might even change their mind before they are able to get one. If the criminal has to get a gun by illegal means they have a chance of getting caught at the time of purchase rather than after the crime.

Lowering the capacity of magazines would require more reloading which would give people more of a opportunity to escape.

Obviously gun laws aren't the only thing that needs to be done, but these two things could save some lives and that would make it worth it for me.

I am talking about background checks for condoms, not guns. We already have those.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yes and obviously there are. But enforcing them means we all need to work together. Which for guns means making it harder for them to get the guns in the first place. Even if it means a little more work for your to obtain gun number 52 in your collection. I'd rather criminals get caught trying to buy a gun illegally rather than after using it.

If you see somebody breaking into your neighbors house you'd call the police wouldn't you? We all need to work together.

What if I don't like you, or the law, am I still required to work with you to enforce it? Does it work the other way, or am I the only one forced to enforce laws that I do not like? If we make a law that makes it harder to get abortions,a re you required to help enforce it?

In other words, **** off.

Ok, so I guess your not really a law abiding gun owner. You just follow the laws you like. That doesn't make for a very good society. I guess all gun owners aren't these nice law abiding citizens then?

I would like to see a law that makes it harder to get abortions actually. Its far too easy to not get pregnant for people to be having abortions. I put value in life whether it is in the womb or not. Am I to believe you don't care about people out of the womb, but your a big anti abortion person? That makes little sense.

Law is very important for our society. I will follow the law. I may work to get some laws changed, but while they are the law I will follow them.

I do not own guns, so I cannot possibly aide by any of the laws, can I?

 

[nitroz]

Yep. Theyre lossing allright.

 

[Brain357]

How would it save anybody? Be specific.

Well if we required background checks for every gun purchase it would make it more difficult for criminals to get guns. Some of the crazies might even change their mind before they are able to get one. If the criminal has to get a gun by illegal means they have a chance of getting caught at the time of purchase rather than after the crime.

Lowering the capacity of magazines would require more reloading which would give people more of a opportunity to escape.

Obviously gun laws aren't the only thing that needs to be done, but these two things could save some lives and that would make it worth it for me.

I am talking about background checks for condoms, not guns. We already have those.

Only if you buy from a dealer. Leaves a big loophole.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Well if we required background checks for every gun purchase it would make it more difficult for criminals to get guns. Some of the crazies might even change their mind before they are able to get one. If the criminal has to get a gun by illegal means they have a chance of getting caught at the time of purchase rather than after the crime.

Lowering the capacity of magazines would require more reloading which would give people more of a opportunity to escape.

Obviously gun laws aren't the only thing that needs to be done, but these two things could save some lives and that would make it worth it for me.

I am talking about background checks for condoms, not guns. We already have those.

Only if you buy from a dealer. Leaves a big loophole.

Only in the minds of ignorant fools.

 

[Brain357]

I am talking about background checks for condoms, not guns. We already have those.

Only if you buy from a dealer. Leaves a big loophole.

Only in the minds of ignorant fools.

So your saying if you buy a gun from the guy down the street you still have to get a background check? I think you need to do some more research. You don't seem to have much credibility on this subject. It's not that hard to get around background checks now.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Only if you buy from a dealer. Leaves a big loophole.

Only in the minds of ignorant fools.

So your saying if you buy a gun from the guy down the street you still have to get a background check? I think you need to do some more research. You don't seem to have much credibility on this subject. It's not that hard to get around background checks now.

currently at least here

you do not have to do a background check to buy a firearm from joe down the street

as long as joe is not a FFL dealer

 

[Uncensored2008]

You know......................making straw purchases a felony may have kept the CO warden alive, because the chick that bought him the weapon he used to kill him, as well as a TX policeman, knew she would go to jail for life, maybe she wouldn't have bought it for him.

Yeah, because accessory to murder isn't a big deal...

******* leftists, stupid as lampposts...

 

[Uncensored2008]

why do you believe that a criminal is going to obey a magazine limit

why do you want to limit the number of life savers

an honest gun owner can have

are you willing to have the police to have to reload after every 5 or ten shots

Tell that to the parents of all those toddlers. Send them a message and tell them how your plan protects their children.

Fallacy: Appeal to emotion
Thank you for demonstrating so very clearly why the anti-gun loons are losing the argument,

Further, 1st through 5th graders are not toddlers. Even further, Rdean would love to kill actual toddlers in the name of "choice." Abortion up to 3 years old is something the leftists could really get behind.

 

[Uncensored2008]

why do you believe that a criminal is going to obey a magazine limit

I hear this one alot. Why is it that criminals aren't using machine guns and grenades? Do they choose to follow the laws against those?

They use what you would call "machine guns" all the time.

Full auto Mac-10, Tec-9, and Uzi's are favorites of the gangbangers.

Your straw man fails, crawl back to the hate sites for new falsehoods to spread in your quest to end civil rights.

 

[legaleagle_45]

Only if you buy from a dealer. Leaves a big loophole.

How do you suppose a requirement to conduct a background check in private transactions can be enforced?

Presently, there are more than 300,000,000 firearms in private hands in the USA, most of them unregistered so the government has no idea who owns any specific firearms. As such, the governement has no way of knowing whether a specific firearm has been transfered illegaly and without a background check.

Thus, a law which requires universal background checks will be one of two types:

1.) One which depends upon the voluntary compliance of honest sellers who are unwilling to sell their firearm to persons unknown to them and in violation of law; or,

2.) One which is coupled with universal firearms registration or record keeping requirements so as to provide a means to to effectively enforce the requirement of background checks.

Laws along the lines of the first type will easily pass in Congress and if they are relatively easy to comply with and are cheap, will have a ~30% compliance ratio... meaning that 30% of the private transactions which should have a background check will have a background check.

Laws along the lines of the 2nd type will not pass Congress for the foreseeable future. You want something done, then advocate passage of the 1st type of law.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Only if you buy from a dealer. Leaves a big loophole.

How do you suppose a requirement to conduct a background check in private transactions can be enforced?

Presently, there are more than 300,000,000 firearms in private hands in the USA, most of them unregistered so the government has no idea who owns any specific firearms. As such, the governement has no way of knowing whether a specific firearm has been transfered illegaly and without a background check.

Thus, a law which requires universal background checks will be one of two types:

1.) One which depends upon the voluntary compliance of honest sellers who are unwilling to sell their firearm to persons unknown to them and in violation of law; or,

2.) One which is coupled with universal firearms registration or record keeping requirements so as to provide a means to to effectively enforce the requirement of background checks.

Laws along the lines of the first type will easily pass in Congress and if they are relatively easy to comply with and are cheap, will have a ~30% compliance ratio... meaning that 30% of the private transactions which should have a background check will have a background check.

Laws along the lines of the 2nd type will not pass Congress for the foreseeable future. You want something done, then advocate passage of the 1st type of law.

i do not buy or sell firearms to folks that i do not know

in someway

that pretty much goes for FFLs as well

as for selling - i would not want a firearm to fall into the wrong hands

as for buying- i would not want to have an illegally obtained or used firearm in my home

 

[legaleagle_45]

i do not buy or sell firearms to folks that i do not know

in someway

that pretty much goes for FFLs as well

as for selling - i would not want a firearm to fall into the wrong hands

as for buying- i would not want to have an illegally obtained or used firearm in my home

The 30% number I employed surprised me as well as I thought it would be higher. It is drawn from the experience in California. I am not sure if it is because compliance with California law is difficult or expensive. My guess is that it is also a registration avoidance reaction.

 

[jon_berzerk]

i do not buy or sell firearms to folks that i do not know

in someway

that pretty much goes for FFLs as well

as for selling - i would not want a firearm to fall into the wrong hands

as for buying- i would not want to have an illegally obtained or used firearm in my home

The 30% number I employed surprised me as well as I thought it would be higher. It is drawn from the experience in California. I am not sure if it is because compliance with California law is difficult or expensive. My guess is that it is also a registration avoidance reaction.

if registering a firearm to buy it or sell it is on the table

all bets are off we already have a certain amount of registration

through the 4473 form

to me a fair way to have background checks between two private folks

if one is to be

would be to have a background check through the sheriff good for a certain amount of time

a couple of years

and you flash it out to the seller before the buy

 

[P@triot]

"the constitution did not guarantee public safety, it guaranteed liberty"​

End of Story​

The Epic Gun Control Testimony You?ve Been Waiting For: ?The Constitution Did Not Guarantee Public Safety, It Guaranteed Liberty? | Video | TheBlaze.com

 

[bigrebnc1775]

"the constitution did not guarantee public safety, it guaranteed liberty"​

End of Story​

The Epic Gun Control Testimony You?ve Been Waiting For: ?The Constitution Did Not Guarantee Public Safety, It Guaranteed Liberty? | Video | TheBlaze.com

Never heard it said like that but that is one of the most truthful comment I think I have ever read.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Only if you buy from a dealer. Leaves a big loophole.

Only in the minds of ignorant fools.

So your saying if you buy a gun from the guy down the street you still have to get a background check? I think you need to do some more research. You don't seem to have much credibility on this subject. It's not that hard to get around background checks now.

I don't recall saying that, but let me spell it out for you, since you are declaring yourself to be an ignorant fool. It is not a loophole to exempt non dealers from complying with a requirement for dealers.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

i do not buy or sell firearms to folks that i do not know

in someway

that pretty much goes for FFLs as well

as for selling - i would not want a firearm to fall into the wrong hands

as for buying- i would not want to have an illegally obtained or used firearm in my home

The 30% number I employed surprised me as well as I thought it would be higher. It is drawn from the experience in California. I am not sure if it is because compliance with California law is difficult or expensive. My guess is that it is also a registration avoidance reaction.

If you claim that 30% of firearms sales in California are not subject to background checks I will call you a liar to your face.

If you want to expand it to all of the United States I will still call you a lair.

 

[legaleagle_45]

If you claim that 30% of firearms sales in California are not subject to background checks I will call you a liar to your face..

I believe you misunderstand me... First, my 30% figure specifically excludes all retail sales. California has a "universal background check" requirement for all firearms sale. It is called Personal Firearms Eligibility Check and is based upon the California Penal Code Section 30105. While there is no question that almost all retail sales have background checks, estimates for the actual compliance by PRIVATE sellers of firearms in California is calculated to be at the 30% level. Figures derived from "Imagining Gun Control in America: Understanding the Remainder Problem" available for down load here:

Imagining Gun Control in America: Understanding the Remainder Problem by Nicholas Johnson :: SSRN

My actual claim is that 100% of firearm sales are subject to background checks in California but of those sales in which a private party is the seller, the background check is complied with only 30% of the time. One of the primary reasons for this non compliance is that California's sytem is actually backdoor registration. Still going to call me a liar?