You can't have my guns.

[OverVolt]

That's interesting.

I had no idea that the US was the only nation with borders.

Looking at the map, crime rate of the neighbors seems to affect crime rate of that country. UK is literally its own little island in the middle of an area with an already low murder rate.

Lots of murders happen at the Mexico border. Considering how many people we lock up in jail, alot of murders probably occur during arrests and whatnot.


although you are being obtuse on purpose to attempt to make a point.

 

[OverVolt]

The Chinese statistic has to be wrong

Something tells me they under-report that.

 

[x-alki]

Cool...

Another guy who fancies himself batman.

And the hypotheticals are flying again! WOO HOO!!!

I should have said protect my family. I never famcied myself as Batman, maybe Captain America.....

 

[edro]

New topic: Abortion!

 

[CVSiN]

I hear this argument a lot. Doesn't seem like it would be a big challenge to deal with this if you wanted a general firearm ban.

You think so?
just try to come down to Texas or the South and ask people to give up their weps..

That would be the first shot in the next revolutionary war.
people are not going to just hand over their guns.

Our Republic (Texas) And Country were built on guns and people are passionate about them.
People have 100s of thousands of dollars in their gun collections.
(My personal weps exceed at least 10k in value)

You really think people are just going to hand over their possessions that in some cases are worth more than cars just because some overreacting numb nuts says so?

not going to happen..

 

[TerryMathews]

I hear this argument a lot. Doesn't seem like it would be a big challenge to deal with this if you wanted a general firearm ban.

Repeal the 2nd. You're never going to have more momentum to do it than now.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

The primary purpose of a car is not to kill though. Passenger airliners are not designed to kill either but they do so when operated poorly or when parts fail on them which is why they are heavily regulated. Military planes are designed as weapons and you can buy them on a limited basis but not the armaments and they are also heavily regulated.

Your point is moot... and stupid.

Up to your second paragraph, you were doing quite well keeping the discussion civil. To bad you undermined the veracity of your own argument with a 6 word insult.

You are missing my point, or choosing to ignore it. My point was, and is, that blame and accountability should be assigned to the person responsible for the act, not the object with which the act was committed.

You have also ignored my other comments, which indicate that I am open to having a discussion on improving gun safety. E.g., if we assume that most gun owners are rationale, sane human beings (a fair assumption), then requiring bio-metric identification on all assault weapons would likely achieve the primary goal at issue, i.e., to prevent weapons from functioning when they are stolen by an insane wacko.

As for my comments being moot, well, sure. I raised them in order to spark a discussion (one of the more common meanings of the term "moot.") If you are indicating that my argument lacks practical merit . . . I disagree. Public safety issues abound with numerous things. Cars, planes, trucks, guns, chemicals, etc. Very few of those things are "banned" outright, and only one is written into the U.S. constitution.

Again, your point that guns are designed to kill, whereas cars and other objects have other purposes is well taken. What I don't understand is why it is so difficult for you to even consider that guns and cars pose comparable (note that I did not say the "same") risks, and thus might be subject to the same or similar regulation?

 

[Ausm]

Liburals want yo damn guns!!

 

[sixone]

What stuff am I making up? Gun owners say this all the time, "we need guns to protect us from the tyranny of government." I thought that was where you were going with the comment I quoted. Apologies if I'm wrong. I was just asking a question. What purpose do guns serve in that respect?

I'm really curious because I've been a law abiding gun owner for more than 20 years and that has never been a reason for me personally.

I'm waiting for you to explain how you got from my comment about being protected from government tyranny to how I'm going to overthrow the government. Please explain this fantastic leap in logic, because I need a good laugh this morning.

 

[Blackjack200]

Are you freaking kidding me?

Did you think I was being sarcastic when I said three hundred million guns a few posts ago? That was the only part that wasn't sarcastic.

This has nothing to do with democrats versus republicans. It has nothing to do with the second amendment, even. None of those thing are factors when the entire concept of someone's argument is logically braindead.

Go ahead. Explain how to collect all the firearms in the country and make us all 'safe.' How to get all the firearms out of criminal hands. How to stop all importation. Hell, how to get rid of all the ammunition, even; because I could make a firearm with basic fabrication tools. Give me a CAD program and a CNC mill and I'll build my own damned fully automatic rifle.

Or someone could just, you know, blow up an occupied building with a bomb. Or fly a plane into it. But it's not like that kinda thing has ever happened.

PLEASE, OH MERCIFUL LEADERS, RID SOCIETY OF ALL THINGS THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE USED TO HARM SOMEONE. THE POINTY OBJECTS, I FEAR THEM.

lol.

im pretty sure there would be blood on the streets if the government even thought about going around rounding up guns.

lol.

You think so?
just try to come down to Texas or the South and ask people to give up their weps..

That would be the first shot in the next revolutionary war.
people are not going to just hand over their guns.

Our Republic (Texas) And Country were built on guns and people are passionate about them.
People have 100s of thousands of dollars in their gun collections.
(My personal weps exceed at least 10k in value)

You really think people are just going to hand over their possessions that in some cases are worth more than cars just because some overreacting numb nuts says so?

not going to happen..

LOL.

Where did I say I would round up all the weapons? Gun nuts are so funny.

 

[TerryMathews]

lol.



lol.



LOL.

Where did I say I would round up all the weapons? Gun nuts are so funny.

I hear this argument a lot. Doesn't seem like it would be a big challenge to deal with this if you wanted a general firearm ban.

The context of your quote was dealing with existing privately owned firearms. How do you define a "general firearms ban"?

 

[Blackjack200]

The context of your quote was dealing with existing privately owned firearms. How do you define a "general firearms ban"?

A simple ban on the possession, sale, use, manufacture, import, etc. of firearms.

I said it would not be that difficult to deal with the guns already owned by Americans, not that I would round them up. Some simple steps would include:

- Severe penalties for possession, trasportation, use, purchase, or sale of a firearm.
- Even more severe penalties for selling a gun that is subsequently used in a crime, including asset forfeiture. (Same penalty for possessing a gun that is stolen and then used in a crime.) Every person in the chain of sale is equally responsible, so if you sell it to you're brother, and he sells it to a guy who kills someone, you're fucked.
- Offer $100 per gun for owners to turn in their guns (yes, I know guns cost a lot more than that.
- Offer amnesty for any American that possesses a firearm in violation of the law but wishes to surrender it.

Would it be perfect? No. Would it stop all gun crime? No. Would it make a big difference? I think it would.

I sure as shit wouldn't keep my guns if those were the laws. Yes, I know some people would, but I think they'd be pretty hesitent

 

[Farmer]

A simple ban on the possession, sale, use, manufacture, import, etc. of firearms.

I said it would not be that difficult to deal with the guns already owned by Americans, not that I would round them up. Some simple steps would include:

- Severe penalties for possession, trasportation, use, purchase, or sale of a firearm.
- Even more severe penalties for selling a gun that is subsequently used in a crime, including asset forfeiture. (Same penalty for possessing a gun that is stolen and then used in a crime.) Every person in the chain of sale is equally responsible, so if you sell it to you're brother, and he sells it to a guy who kills someone, you're fucked.
- Offer $100 per gun for owners to turn in their guns (yes, I know guns cost a lot more than that.
- Offer amnesty for any American that possesses a firearm in violation of the law but wishes to surrender it.

Would it be perfect? No. Would it stop all gun crime? No. Would it make a big difference? I think it would.

I sure as shit wouldn't keep my guns if those were the laws. Yes, I know some people would, but I think they'd be pretty hesitent

Pretty far fetched there.

 

[TerryMathews]

A simple ban on the possession, sale, use, manufacture, import, etc. of firearms.

I said it would not be that difficult to deal with the guns already owned by Americans, not that I would round them up. Some simple steps would include:

- Severe penalties for possession, trasportation, use, purchase, or sale of a firearm.
- Even more severe penalties for selling a gun that is subsequently used in a crime, including asset forfeiture. (Same penalty for possessing a gun that is stolen and then used in a crime.) Every person in the chain of sale is equally responsible, so if you sell it to you're brother, and he sells it to a guy who kills someone, you're fucked.
- Offer $100 per gun for owners to turn in their guns (yes, I know guns cost a lot more than that.
- Offer amnesty for any American that possesses a firearm in violation of the law but wishes to surrender it.

Would it be perfect? No. Would it stop all gun crime? No. Would it make a big difference? I think it would.

I sure as shit wouldn't keep my guns if those were the laws. Yes, I know some people would, but I think they'd be pretty hesitent

So you're using "rounding them up" in a literal sense.

Still got that pesky second to deal with. Got your petition ready?

 

[Blackjack200]

And this is all academic because I don't think there's much of a chance of a general firearms ban. But who knows, maybe at some point enough people will get tired of having their safety compromised by a bunch of gun-crazy idiots and demand change.

 

[Blackjack200]

Pretty far fetched there.

Agree, but the point is that its a practical way to deal with existing firearms if there ever was a ban

So you're using "rounding them up" in a literal sense.

Still got that pesky second to deal with. Got your petition ready?

Of course, did you look at the post I was responding to? No I don't plan on running around with a petition. Unlike gun nuts my life is not defined by this issue. I'll be heading up to Cape Cod this Saturday, giving not-one-fuck about guns while half the members in this topic will probably be beating off to the latest youtube video of some hillbilly denting steel targets with his Glock/Sig/FN/Colt/AR/AK/Mosin/Whatever.

 

[Farmer]

And this is all academic because I don't think there's much of a chance of a general firearms ban. But who knows, maybe at some point enough people will get tired of having their safety compromised by a bunch of gun-crazy idiots and demand change.

Nah, things will probably remain pretty much the same. Thanks for playing though.

 

[sixone]

And this is all academic because I don't think there's much of a chance of a general firearms ban. But who knows, maybe at some point enough people will get tired of having their safety compromised by a bunch of gun-crazy idiots and demand change.

People are already tired of having their safety compromised by gun-crazy idiots. That's why they buy guns: to protect themselves and their families and their businesses.

The "gun crazy idiots" are the ones who have no respect for others, and who think it's okay to kill innocent people. Do you understand the difference between them and gun owners who pose no threat to people like you?

 

[Blackjack200]

Nah, things will probably remain pretty much the same. Thanks for playing though.

Agree. Happy? Glad you don't have to bury any children this week.

People are already tired of having their safety compromised by gun-crazy idiots. That's why they buy guns: to protect themselves and their families and their businesses.

The "gun crazy idiots" are the ones who have no respect for others, and who think it's okay to kill innocent people. Do you understand the difference between them and gun owners who pose no threat to people like you?

Gun owners pose no threat to me if they own guns because they live in a country with asinine gun laws and feel that they might need to protect themselves in the environment that results.

Gun owners pose a mild threat to me if they own guns because they think that they are going to protect themselves from government tyranny and mall/theatre/school mass murderers. Mostly because they are ossifying the outdated gun laws. The threat is mild because these attacks are still relatively rare.

 

[CVSiN]

A simple ban on the possession, sale, use, manufacture, import, etc. of firearms.

I said it would not be that difficult to deal with the guns already owned by Americans, not that I would round them up. Some simple steps would include:

- Severe penalties for possession, trasportation, use, purchase, or sale of a firearm.
- Even more severe penalties for selling a gun that is subsequently used in a crime, including asset forfeiture. (Same penalty for possessing a gun that is stolen and then used in a crime.) Every person in the chain of sale is equally responsible, so if you sell it to you're brother, and he sells it to a guy who kills someone, you're fucked.
- Offer $100 per gun for owners to turn in their guns (yes, I know guns cost a lot more than that.
- Offer amnesty for any American that possesses a firearm in violation of the law but wishes to surrender it.

Would it be perfect? No. Would it stop all gun crime? No. Would it make a big difference? I think it would.

I sure as shit wouldn't keep my guns if those were the laws. Yes, I know some people would, but I think they'd be pretty hesitent

hahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahah ... breathes....hahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahaahahahaha

Um yeh.. not gonna happen.. again if you want to start a war within America that is how you start it.

You cannot take what belongs to people.
And you sure as hell are not going to make hunting and sport shooting and any number of other MONEY DRIVEN Hobbies illegal.
not to mention the billion dollar a year corporations that rely on civilian sales.

You think putting all those guns and ammo makers out of business is going to help the economy either?

This is a fairy tale and will never happen.
But if Obummer is dumb enough to try he will be dealing with a new American Revolution. and there are FAR more people with guns than there are Police and Military to come take them.

 

[SaurusX]

The problem you'll find with rounding up the guns is that you have two sides, those with the guns who want to keep them and those without guns who want to take them away. Serious question: who wins?

 

[CVSiN]

People are already tired of having their safety compromised by gun-crazy idiots. That's why they buy guns: to protect themselves and their families and their businesses.

The "gun crazy idiots" are the ones who have no respect for others, and who think it's okay to kill innocent people. Do you understand the difference between them and gun owners who pose no threat to people like you?

has nothing to do with "gun crazy idiots" has to do with "Mentally Insane Criminals"
they will find a way to kill the same people they did with or without guns.

Again look at crime as a whole.
very few crimes are committed by registered gun owners.
They are committed by thieves that either bought stolen black/gray market weps, stole the weps themselves.

The problem is gun owners not securing their weapons properly as well as the holes in the law that allow weapons ( rifles) to be sold on the spot with no checks at all and no cooldown period.

That is where I support more control.
Rifles need the same checks done as handguns.
and owners should be held responsible for properly controlling and storing their weapons.

If those weapons from the shooting had been properly stored and secured in a gun safe the combo would have died with the mother.
And junior would have had to find his weapons elsewhere.

All weapons should be stored in combination gun safes with keyed trigger guards installed at all times unless at the range or hunting.

if every gun owner did this as well as more controls on the sales of rifles. It would be a huge step in the right direction.

 

[Blackjack200]

hahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahah ... breathes....hahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahaahahahaha

Um yeh.. not gonna happen.. again if you want to start a war within America that is how you start it.

You cannot take what belongs to people.
And you sure as hell are not going to make hunting and sport shooting and any number of other MONEY DRIVEN Hobbies illegal.
not to mention the billion dollar a year corporations that rely on civilian sales.

You think putting all those guns and ammo makers out of business is going to help the economy either?

This is a fairy tale and will never happen.
But if Obummer is dumb enough to try he will be dealing with a new American Revolution. and there are FAR more people with guns than there are Police and Military to come take them.

Lol. Yeah, you're really helping the image of gun owners here. "Obummer", wow, that's witty.

The problem you'll find with rounding up the guns is that you have two sides, those with the guns who want to keep them and those without guns who want to take them away. Serious question: who wins?

I think this is the third or fourth time I'm saying that I wouldn't round up (or "take away") the guns. Besides the obvious hazard to law enforcement agents, it's a violation of people's privacy to barge into their houses and start searching for guns.

 

[Blackjack200]

has nothing to do with "gun crazy idiots" has to do with "Mentally Insane Criminals"
they will find a way to kill the same people they did with or without guns.

...

If those weapons from the shooting had been properly stored and secured in a gun safe the combo would have died with the mother.
And junior would have had to find his weapons elsewhere.

All weapons should be stored in combination gun safes with keyed trigger guards installed at all times unless at the range or hunting.

if every gun owner did this as well as more controls on the sales of rifles. It would be a huge step in the right direction.

But if "Mentally Insane Criminals" will "find a way to kill the same people they did with or without guns", why does it matter if we keep guns out of their hands?

Lol.

 

[sixone]

But if "Mentally Insane Criminals" will "find a way to kill the same people they did with or without guns", why does it matter if we keep guns out of their hands?

Lol.

If you have a way to limit the opportunities for mentally insane criminals, without having any effect on law-abiding citizens, I'd love to hear it.