Will Killers or Gang Bangers follow gun control laws?

[EvilCat Breath]

With a completely disarmed and helpless population, the gangs will institute a bloodbath on the nation. Recently in lakes along the border hundreds of decapitated and dismembered bodies were found. This is what happens when the people are disarmed. Liberals will tell you it will be like Australia. It won't. It will be like Rwanda.

 

[beagle9]

NOT legally they can't. It is against the law for a felon to own a weapon already. Yet, they still do! Go figure!

Sure because the market is flooded with guns. There’s zero regulations. It’s almost as if the system is designed so that flooding the markets..... of course they are gun manufacurers. Any company wants to sell more not less.

It should be a big deal when you buy sell or lose a gun. Somethings wrong and the nra doesn’t want to fix it

The NRA is a special interest group that is concerned with protecting the 2A from government intrusion. That is all. They are not responsible for what gun manufacturers do or what is going on in the black market. That doesn't have anything to do with the NRA.

The NRA represents gun and ammo manufacturers - Not you and not me.

Sucker

They do represent me, thankfully. Go NRA! I am SO grateful for this wonderful grassroots organization.

The True Source of the N.R.A.’s Clout: Mobilization, Not Donations

They represent you like unions represent all workers.

The nra doesn’t need to go away just reform

. Nothing wrong with reform.. I agree that everything can be improved.

 

[Tax Man]

Conservatives never have followed the law.

. You tell those lies with a straight face do ya ?

Been my experience in life.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Q. Are "gang banger's" dressed in camouflage, who claim to be members of the Militia?

Q. Have members of the Militia taken the oath to support and defend the Constitution of the U.S. of A.? Or, is the Milita limited to the Nation Guard and the Navy Reserve?

Well with 300 million guns in circulation since forever and a day in this country now, it's just hilarious that you are asking such dumb questions. Not a gun problem, but a societal breakdown is what we have now. Now the tough job is talking all the groups into not fearing each other. Then see who will lay down their guns first. Good luck.

If the middle aged, over weight self proclaimed members of the fake militia end up in a gun fight with the legitimate force, which has taken the oath to support and defend the Constitution (that includes not only the National Guard, the Naval Reserve, but ATF&E, the FBI and every patriotic member of every law enforcement agency (local, state and federal)in our country), the middle aged, over weight fake militia will go the way of David Koresh, Eric Rudolph or Timothy McVeigh.

 

[JoeB131]

More lies and more extremist hyperbole from Joe Shmo.

But as usual, you can't refute a point I made.

Nearly every last mass shooter was able to pass a background check and get some truly devastating firepower.

Every last one of the was found to have a really nasty background of violence and mental instability when someone actually started talking to their neighbors and coworkers.

Gun control laws will always fail because criminals and especially murderers ignore laws.

Yes, the always fail... except in the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, Australia, Canada, Belgium, Holland, Norway....

You know countries were guns are illegal or restricted and they never have these kinds of incidents.

 

[JoeB131]

And you lost me with "mass slaughter caused by the 2nd amendment " Where does it say in the 2nd Amendment to take up arms to slaughter innocent unarmed teenagers? Where? And if t you think LIberty is a distraction, go live in North Korea where you'd fit right in.

The part where it says that "the people" can have arms, if you ignore the "Well-Regulated Militia" part.

It says that crazy people like Nikolas Cruz, Adam Lanza, Steven Paddock, James "Joker" Holmes, Omar Mateen, etc, etc, etc.. have a right to own guns, despite their history of violence or mental instability.

 

[Cellblock2429]

And you lost me with "mass slaughter caused by the 2nd amendment " Where does it say in the 2nd Amendment to take up arms to slaughter innocent unarmed teenagers? Where? And if t you think LIberty is a distraction, go live in North Korea where you'd fit right in.

The part where it says that "the people" can have arms, if you ignore the "Well-Regulated Militia" part.

It says that crazy people like Nikolas Cruz, Adam Lanza, Steven Paddock, James "Joker" Holmes, Omar Mateen, etc, etc, etc.. have a right to own guns, despite their history of violence or mental instability.

/——/ There were plenty of crazies around in 1776. The Founding Fathers didn’t need to spell out everything.

 

[beagle9]

And you lost me with "mass slaughter caused by the 2nd amendment " Where does it say in the 2nd Amendment to take up arms to slaughter innocent unarmed teenagers? Where? And if t you think LIberty is a distraction, go live in North Korea where you'd fit right in.

The part where it says that "the people" can have arms, if you ignore the "Well-Regulated Militia" part.

It says that crazy people like Nikolas Cruz, Adam Lanza, Steven Paddock, James "Joker" Holmes, Omar Mateen, etc, etc, etc.. have a right to own guns, despite their history of violence or mental instability.

.Enjoy your fun while it last, because conservatives are gonna clean up the dang Demon-crat mess like they always have to. Then you won't be able to create those Boogeymen for your agenda's anymore.

 

[JoeB131]

/——/ There were plenty of crazies around in 1776. The Gounding Fathers didn’t need to spell out everything.

Here's the thing. The Founding (not gounding) Slave Rapists may have had plenty of crazies in their days.

But in their days, the fire rate on a musket was maybe three shots a minute if you were highly trained, and the range was less than 50 meters, and they just weren't that lethal. They were expensive to produce and not everyone had access to them.



It's why the muskets had bayonets on them.

An AR-15 can fire 45 rounds a minute! The range is about 450 meters. And the Gun Industry is pushing them onto the crazies...

 

[JoeB131]

Enjoy your fun while it last, because conservatives are gonna clean up the dang Demon-crat mess like they always have to. Then you won't be able to create those Boogeymen for your agenda's anymore.

Guy, you haven't won the popular vote in a fair election since 1988. There just aren't enough angry white males to keep it up, and the kids who have to do active shooter drills now will be the ones voting for politicians in near future.

I actually watched footage of an active shooter drill. It basically consisted of tipping over your desks, hiding behind them and holding a thick textbook in front of your face.

"Damn, I left my textbook in my locker, man!"

 

[Cellblock2429]

/——/ There were plenty of crazies around in 1776. The Gounding Fathers didn’t need to spell out everything.

Here's the thing. The Founding (not gounding) Slave Rapists may have had plenty of crazies in their days.

But in their days, the fire rate on a musket was maybe three shots a minute if you were highly trained, and the range was less than 50 meters, and they just weren't that lethal. They were expensive to produce and not everyone had access to them.



It's why the muskets had bayonets on them.

An AR-15 can fire 45 rounds a minute! The range is about 450 meters. And the Gun Industry is pushing them onto the crazies...

/——-/ I corrected my typo. And the generals would line up 100 men to fire at once. The volley could vaporize their enemies. Ever see any re-enactments of battles up through the civil war?

 

[2aguy]

More lies and more extremist hyperbole from Joe Shmo.

But as usual, you can't refute a point I made.

Nearly every last mass shooter was able to pass a background check and get some truly devastating firepower.

Every last one of the was found to have a really nasty background of violence and mental instability when someone actually started talking to their neighbors and coworkers.

Gun control laws will always fail because criminals and especially murderers ignore laws.

Yes, the always fail... except in the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, Australia, Canada, Belgium, Holland, Norway....

You know countries were guns are illegal or restricted and they never have these kinds of incidents.

Britain...gun crime going up.

Australia, gun crime going up.

France, criminals and terrorists get guns easily. Terrorists...on government terrorist watch lists, many with criminal records, in a country where fully automatic military rifles are completely banned and illegal......got fully automatic military rifles easily.

Canada...gun crime up.

Japan....very low crime rate, due to culture and police state.

You of course failed to name Switzerland, where homes have fully automatic military rifles and a low gun crime rate......

Norway......mass shooter murdered 77, mostly children...

German had mass shootings last year......

Belgium...mass shootings...2011 Liège attack - Wikipedia

And Belgium had the most gun deaths in Europe.....while Switzerland with the most guns, did not...Belgium leads Western Europe in gun-related homicides

you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Apparently today is Stupid Poll Day. Not a manner of whether they will follow gun control laws or they don't --- NRA Sucker.

But if they're guilty of a felony and can't go to Armslist or any of a dozen other sites or a gun show in around 22 states and buy from an unlicensed seller .. it will make it tougher on them to find their preferred implement of destruction.

That is already a law. Do you think that banning a weapon is going to stop school shootings or what? Answer the question or GTFO.

Do you think that banning murder will stop people from murdering?

Well, murder is banned, and murders happen every single day, so I would say NOPE. The purpose of laws against murder are to punish the murderer, not to prevent the murders. Don't be dense.

Don't be dense


asking too much

--LOL

 

[2aguy]

And you lost me with "mass slaughter caused by the 2nd amendment " Where does it say in the 2nd Amendment to take up arms to slaughter innocent unarmed teenagers? Where? And if t you think LIberty is a distraction, go live in North Korea where you'd fit right in.

The part where it says that "the people" can have arms, if you ignore the "Well-Regulated Militia" part.

It says that crazy people like Nikolas Cruz, Adam Lanza, Steven Paddock, James "Joker" Holmes, Omar Mateen, etc, etc, etc.. have a right to own guns, despite their history of violence or mental instability.

Wrong on all counts......the cops never put them through the system.....the orlando nightclub shooter had 3 interviews with trained FBI interrogators, a year long in depth background check, an under cover approach by an FBI agent, and passed background checks for his job and for every gun he bought...he passed all of it....

You have to lie, because nothing you say is remotely true or accurate.

 

[Moonglow]

Apparently today is Stupid Poll Day. Not a manner of whether they will follow gun control laws or they don't --- NRA Sucker.

But if they're guilty of a felony and can't go to Armslist or any of a dozen other sites or a gun show in around 22 states and buy from an unlicensed seller .. it will make it tougher on them to find their preferred implement of destruction.

That is already a law. Do you think that banning a weapon is going to stop school shootings or what? Answer the question or GTFO.

Do you think that banning murder will stop people from murdering?

Well, murder is banned, and murders happen every single day, so I would say NOPE. The purpose of laws against murder are to punish the murderer, not to prevent the murders. Don't be dense.

Don't be dense


asking too much

--LOL

You're drooling again...

 

[Ame®icano]

Criminals don't care about the law, they only care about not getting caught for breaking it.

The question I'd like to ask is, can Congress create law that infringe our right?

The answer is - NO.

There are no rights. There are only privileges society thinks you should have. Any fool who thinks he has "Rights' needs to look up "Japanese-Americans, 1942"

The real question is, will the 78% of us who don't own guns and have no use for them get sick and tired of the 3% who are stockpiling guns like the Zombies are coming? (Somewhere in between there are 18% who own maybe one gun, and aren't fanatics about it. They don't want their kids going to school with Nikolas Cruz, either.)

If they don't like guns, fine... two thirds of both houses of Congress, propose the amendment, have it ratified by three fourths of the States and amend the Constitution. Stop treating Constitution like shit by going around it.

Again, WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT. "Well Regulated Militia". That means the government can determine who can buy a gun, what kind of gun he can own, and if he has a real need for it.

The bizarre interpretation that gun ownership was a "right" is a relatively new one.

It seems that Bill of rights magically became Bill of Privileges, because you say so.

And how much leftists care about rights, and about the constitution can ask Japanese-Americans in 1942.

 

[Ame®icano]

This is a truly ignorant and idiotic post.

No one is trying to ‘disarm’ the country – this is yet another ridiculous rightwing lie.

Spare us of your slippery slope...

Last time we heard "no one is trying to take over the health care"... just to find out that was the plan all along.

 

[Wry Catcher]

How do we know your not a foreign agent operating to try and disarm a country by spewing your constant bullcrap here or elsewhere for that matter upon the social media networks upon the web ???? Let me make this clear to you or anyone else whom operates like you - We won't give up our guns, and the only way we will is if they are taken from us after we are dead.

I don't have a problem with that.

The use of human carnage carried out by mentally deranged individuals isn't going to be used by Demon-crats to try and dis-arm the citizens, because it won't work. Now if the Demon-crats & republican's come up with a plan to surgically remove the gun's from the bad guy's in this country, then we are all for that, and as far as the mentally ill go, well they will be looked at for signs of their conditions, identified, and hopefully appropriate treatment will be given in each case as is needed.

But here's the problem with that. Every mass shooter was able to pass a background check. Usually they had no criminal record and their mental health history wasn't readily available.

Let's take James Holmes as an example. He was able to buy an AR-15 and a 100 round drum magazine, and it didn't raise any red flags. But if someone had talked to his school, where they were in the process of discharging him mental instability, they would have known he was nuts. The guy thought he was the Joker from the Batman comics.

Of course, once you do meaningful background checks, gun ownership isn't a "right" anymore, it becomes a privilege. A privilege that will be more and more restricted as guys slip through the cracks.

More to the point, the gun industry is based on selling to the least stable people, people who probably couldn't pass a check if people talked to their coworkers and neighbors.

Come get'em tough guy.

Tough guys don`t need guns.

Especially when they go to Safeway, Piggly Wiggly or Winn-Dixie, their mail box or while sitting in their home playing tough guy. It must suck to be paranoid all the time.

.

You see yourself as coming to the rescue of your homies ? You worried they can't debate their way out of the situations they get themselves into ?? Look if you sling tough guy talk, then get ready to get it back.. Joe said he wish me dead, yet you come running to his rescue. Pathetic.

My "homies"? You come across as very immature, and out of touch with reality.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Criminals don't care about the law, they only care about not getting caught for breaking it.

The question I'd like to ask is, can Congress create law that infringe our right?

The answer is - NO.

There are no rights. There are only privileges society thinks you should have. Any fool who thinks he has "Rights' needs to look up "Japanese-Americans, 1942"

The real question is, will the 78% of us who don't own guns and have no use for them get sick and tired of the 3% who are stockpiling guns like the Zombies are coming? (Somewhere in between there are 18% who own maybe one gun, and aren't fanatics about it. They don't want their kids going to school with Nikolas Cruz, either.)

If they don't like guns, fine... two thirds of both houses of Congress, propose the amendment, have it ratified by three fourths of the States and amend the Constitution. Stop treating Constitution like shit by going around it.

Again, WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT. "Well Regulated Militia". That means the government can determine who can buy a gun, what kind of gun he can own, and if he has a real need for it.

The bizarre interpretation that gun ownership was a "right" is a relatively new one.

It seems that Bill of rights magically became Bill of Privileges, because you say so.

And how much leftists care about rights, and about the constitution can ask Japanese-Americans in 1942.

Criminals don't care about the law, they only care about not getting caught for breaking it.

The question I'd like to ask is, can Congress create law that infringe our right?

The answer is - NO.

There are no rights. There are only privileges society thinks you should have. Any fool who thinks he has "Rights' needs to look up "Japanese-Americans, 1942"

The real question is, will the 78% of us who don't own guns and have no use for them get sick and tired of the 3% who are stockpiling guns like the Zombies are coming? (Somewhere in between there are 18% who own maybe one gun, and aren't fanatics about it. They don't want their kids going to school with Nikolas Cruz, either.)

If they don't like guns, fine... two thirds of both houses of Congress, propose the amendment, have it ratified by three fourths of the States and amend the Constitution. Stop treating Constitution like shit by going around it.

Again, WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT. "Well Regulated Militia". That means the government can determine who can buy a gun, what kind of gun he can own, and if he has a real need for it.

The bizarre interpretation that gun ownership was a "right" is a relatively new one.

It seems that Bill of rights magically became Bill of Privileges, because you say so.

And how much leftists care about rights, and about the constitution can ask Japanese-Americans in 1942.

Marbury v. Madison and Stare Decisis, not because anyone said so.

Res judicata: ‘A matter that has been decided’ – The principle that when a matter has been finally adjudicated upon by a court of competent jurisdiction it may not be reopened or challenged by the original parties or their successors in interest. It is also known as action estoppel. It does not preclude an appeal or a challenge to the jurisdiction of the court. Its justification is the need for finality in litigation.

 

[JoeB131]

/ I corrected my typo. And the generals would line up 100 men to fire at once. The volley could vaporize their enemies. Ever see any re-enactments of battles up through the civil war?

We weren't talking about the Civil War, we were talking about the Revolutionary War.

To put in in perspective, the entire fatalities in 8 years of the Revolutionary War was 37,000 on the America side. We lose that many to gun violence every year.

The fact you had to line up hundreds of them to be effective was why militias had to be "Well-Regulated". as in "not one crazy guy with enough firepower to take out a school!"