Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've already told you, I want to know how, after the entire United States is gun-free, you plan to keep it that way. Are you next going to advocate for building an impassable barrier around our borders? Stricter penalties would be great. I'm all for those now. I'm also for stricter background checks on firearms purchasers. However, those will only affect people who care about the law and the consequences of their actions. Now let's talk about criminals who, by definition, aren't going to care that what they are doing is illegal. How do you plan to keep criminals from obtaining illegal firearms from the Mexican cartels who currently supply them with illegal drugs?
I actually don't think you have an answer, and your wish to make guns illegal will, in fact, have the effect of turning our United States into a third world country that is overrun with gangland overlords. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt, though, and letting you answer the question anyway.
very nice post.
a border barrier might be nice, though.
at least this gun discussion is making people think about whether they want to be responsible for their own safety or want someone else to. I think some people are waking up to the idea that they CAN protect themselves and their loved ones with adequate training.
Once again, the laws won't work if they aren't enforced. That is the situation we are currently in. In order for the law to be a deterrent, it needs to be enforced, after all.
Which magical laws are not being enforced, that, if enforced, would change the gun crime landscape of this country? Can you give me 1?
Quote:
Where are these firearms that are littering the landscape here?
And here's the map. File:World map of civilian gun ownership.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Blood red indicates countries where the most guns PER CAPITA are found. Notice the gigantic blood red section is the U.S. The other (tiny) blood red section is (I think) Yemen, where there's a battle to pass gun control because it is as out of control and nightmarish as it is in the U.S.
Please stop pretending I'm stupid and that somehow your bs will fly. It's not working.
Quote:
As per your interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, in which the only people who should own firearms must belong to a militia
What interpretation? It says it right in the SECOND AMENDMENT:
A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
What it DOES NOT say is: Individual gun owners, being necessary to the security of a free State...
What you would actually like it to say is: Individual gun owners, being necessary to the security of a free State, should be permitted to freely purchase, distribute, own, and otherwise do any d*mned thing they feel like with guns.
Please stop thinking everyone is stupid or cannot read.
Quote:
First of all, your use of the "good ole boy" term as a derogatory statement is both inaccurate and insulting. It is not the typical "good ole boy" (by which I'm assuming you are referring to someone from the country, due to context) who uses a firearm in a crime. For the most part, people who live in the country are far more respectful of others than those who live in cities, and firearms are not just something they carry for self-defense, but are a tool that they use to put food on the table.
Frankly, I don't care if you're a good ole boy, a Wall Street tycoon, or whatever it is you are. And as for eating, if you can't get food on the table from a supermarket, then you must be living off the land fully. Are you?
Quote:
You seem to be under the impression that I'm trying to change your mind when it comes to your position on firearms.
I don't know whether you're trying to change my mind, your mind, or you just enjoy deception.
And here's the map. File:World map of civilian gun ownership.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Blood red indicates countries where the most guns PER CAPITA are found. Notice the gigantic blood red section is the U.S. The other (tiny) blood red section is (I think) Yemen, where there's a battle to pass gun control because it is as out of control and nightmarish as it is in the U.S.
So, we have nearly 9 firearms per 10 people, yet we see firearms homicide rates at 4 per 100,000. It seems that if the prevalence of guns were the real issue we'd be seeing much higher homicide rates. Perhaps the real issue is something other than guns
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua
Please stop pretending I'm stupid and that somehow your bs will fly. It's not working.
I have not claimed that you were stupid. Emotional and illogical, yes, but stupid, no.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua
What interpretation? It says it right in the SECOND AMENDMENT:
A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
What it DOES NOT say is: Individual gun owners, being necessary to the security of a free State...
What you would actually like it to say is: Individual gun owners, being necessary to the security of a free State, should be permitted to freely purchase, distribute, own, and otherwise do any d*mned thing they feel like with guns.
Actually, it doesn't matter what I would like for the 2nd Amendment to say. What matters is how the SCOTUS has interpreted the 2nd Amendment, and their interpretration says that the 2nd Amendment protects the right of the individual to keep and bear arms. Until and unless they change their minds or the 2nd Amendment is modified through a legal process, that's the law.
For the record, I've already said that I think we should close the loopholes that allow private sales of firearms without a background check. I've also already stated that certain people should not own firearms, mainly those who would cause a verifiable threat to their fellow citizens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua
Please stop thinking everyone is stupid or cannot read.
You selectively ignore the parts of my posts that you don't wish to answer, then ask me to stop thinking that you can't read. Okay, you win. You can read, but your comprehension skills are fairly poor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua
Frankly, I don't care if you're a good ole boy, a Wall Street tycoon, or whatever it is you are. And as for eating, if you can't get food on the table from a supermarket, then you must be living off the land fully. Are you?
Once again, comprehension is your friend. I made it very clear that I no longer reside in the country and haven't for many years. All of my food comes from a) the supermarket, b) the local butcher, or c) on rare occasions from friends who have extra venison. On the other hand, I've known people who were raising a family of 5 or 6 kids on about $15,000 a year that considered hunting to be their main source of meat. They were too proud to accept government aid, and they really did, for the most part, live off the land. I say for the most part because once in a while they would splurge and go out for dinner, usually anniversaries and birthdays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua
I don't know whether you're trying to change my mind, your mind, or you just enjoy deception.
I already told you, I'm not trying to change your mind, I just enjoy pointing out the holes in your arguments. You can stop responding anytime you want, but you keep coming back and posting more logical inconsistencies so I have to assume you enjoy this conversation as much as I do.
Location: Currently I physically reside on the 3rd planet from the sun
2,220 posts, read 1,878,859 times
Reputation: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieB.Good
Blacks & Hispanics are the biggest group of victims of gun violence in America. They tend to live in areas with higher than normal gun violence and criminal activity. Their support of gun-control measures sits around ~70%
According to the Conservative talking point (mostly coming from safe, rural America), we need to increase access & # of guns so people are safe from the criminals, otherwise only criminals will be armed. Yet the people that actually have to deal w/ criminals & gun violence overwhelmingly disagree with that position, and support gun control.
Which side is more credible in this discussion on what would be the best solution to tackle gun violence? People that deal w/ gun violence at a significantly lower rate or people that deal w/ gun violence at a significantly higher rate
Compared with urban settings, rural areas had a higher percentage of gun deaths from shotguns and rifles and a higher percentage from suicides and accidents Two similarities, however, stand out as more important than the confirmed hypothesized differences: handguns accounted for more than 50% of gun deaths, and suicides accounted for nearly 70% of gun deaths in both urban and rural areas Medscape: Medscape Access
Well number one, you really need to learn how to edit your posts so that they are clean and neat and keep the forum clean and neat. If someones reply to me looks that way I usually won't even bother to read it. I took the liberty of cleaning your post up and it took me all of 30 seconds.
Number two, it says right here that.....
Quote:
rural areas had higher percentage from suicides and accidents
I don't consider suicides or accidents being a part of the problem, because this entire debate is about gun violence. Neither are violent acts by one person to another.
Quote:
Two similarities, however, stand out as more important than the confirmed hypothesized differences: handguns accounted for more than 50% of gun deaths
And don't you find it funny then, that handguns are not the main focus of legislation being proposed in congress? This just proves that anti-gunners will get behind any kind of gun control measure, whether it has substance or not.
Like I said, rural America is not the problem here. Most of us have guns, and most everyone knows that we all have guns, hence a safer living situation. I would walk my streets and roads anytime of day or night, and feel completely safe. Would I do the same thing in a city like Chicago? Not on your life! { or mine }
What interpretation? It says it right in the SECOND AMENDMENT:
A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
What it DOES NOT say is: Individual gun owners, being necessary to the security of a free State...
Ahhh but wait.............
A MILITIA in the time of the founding fathers WAS individual gun owners.
So you may be thinking, "ok, the definition of militia has changed"..... Thats very true. Why don't you do some research on just how the founders felt about the common man owning firearms then. When you do, there will be no debate that the second protects an individuals right to bear arms in their minds. There are several quotes that are telling to the issue. That was the intent.
Quote:
Please stop thinking everyone is stupid or cannot read.
It isn't that you can't read.... what it appears that you are incapable of is educating yourself on what it is you are reading.
But you just got through telling me that you didn't know where all these bazillion guns were. Make up your mind, will ya?
Quote:
I have not claimed that you were stupid. Emotional and illogical, yes, but stupid, no.
What you mean is that I'm angry that my country finds itself in this gun crime situation, and angry that individuals like you want it exactly as it is - chaotic and dangerous.
Quote:
Actually, it doesn't matter what I would like for the 2nd Amendment to say.
Ahhh, so you're not one of those right wing Constitutional right wingers that live and die by the Constitution, eh? For you the Supremes are far more important. I'm seeing how much of a cafeteria patriot you are - a bit of this, and a bit of that, but just not everything, as it will land you gunless.
Quote:
For the record, I've already said that I think we should close the loopholes that allow private sales of firearms without a background check.
It's not enough. There need to be the same rigorous requirements as those required for ownership of a car, and gun ownership needs to be public. I want all gun licenses listed publicly on a website with the name, address, etc. I want the punishment for ownership of illegal guns to carry with it hugely long sentences without parole. I want guns to be sold only via licensed brokers, I want there to be NO licenses available to carry concealed weapons. Either you carry it publicly, unloaded, and with the license stuck on top of the weapon, or you do not get a license. Want more?
Quote:
I've also already stated that certain people should not own firearms, mainly those who would cause a verifiable threat to their fellow citizens.
Oh yeah? And how are you going to predict when one of you gun owners is going to lose it and shoot somebody?
Quote:
You selectively ignore the parts of my posts that you don't wish to answer, then ask me to stop thinking that you can't read. Okay, you win. You can read, but your comprehension skills are fairly poor.
Actually, I don't have as much idle time as you do. I respond to whatever is most outrageous and preposterous in your responses.
Both sides are credible. This is America. Everyone is equal.
People in cities don't support gun control because they are mostly Democrats. And their leaders tell them how to think. In this case thir leaders have told them to support gun control. So they do.
People in rural areas are more self-sufficient and can think for themselves. They understand that gun control violates the Constitution. And gun control leads to more crime.
pretty much this
Meanwhile people who do not follow laws anyways... gangs, druggies, criminals go out and commit more violence
gun ownership needs to be public. I want all gun licenses listed publicly on a website with the name, address, etc.
Could you please tell me one good thing that listing all legal gun owners in some public database would accomplish? I'm genuinely asking you. I'm interested in your answer because how you answer will determine if you are serious or not or if you are just making a bunch of garbage up to get a reaction out of someone.
So please, tell me even ONE good thing that listing the names and adresses of all legal gun owners would accomplish, because I can think of several negative effects that would come of a seemingly useless database such as the one you suggest.
Quote:
I want the punishment for ownership of illegal guns to carry with it hugely long sentences without parole.
Yep, because thats worked so well as a punishment for murder right? The threat of the death penalty has saved many lives
Quote:
, I want there to be NO licenses available to carry concealed weapons.
So let me get this straight........ you want everyone who would otherwise go through a class and pass tests to be able to legaly carry a gun to be disarmed, while criminals and thugs walk the streets right next to you with their conclealed weapons? Do you liberals even think before you propose such nonsense or does it naturaly just flow out of you like the diarrhea that it is?
Quote:
Either you carry it publicly, unloaded,
What would be the point of carrying an unloaded weapon?
Quote:
Want more?
Yes, I want to hear more. Please, tell me more, I'm getting a good laugh out of you swinging for the fences with all of your "I want" "I want" ....... The things you suggest are never going to happen, not ever. They are extremely liberal, even by liberal standards, and while I worry today that soon my right to keep and bear arms may infact be infringed, I take some level of comfort knowing that radicals like you will never fully get "what you want"......... not in our lifetime anyway.
Could you please tell me one good thing that listing all legal gun owners in some public database would accomplish? I'm genuinely asking you. I'm interested in your answer because how you answer will determine if you are serious or not or if you are just making a bunch of garbage up to get a reaction out of someone.
So please, tell me even ONE good thing that listing the names and adresses of all legal gun owners would accomplish, because I can think of several negative effects that would come of a seemingly useless database such as the one you suggest.
I can't think of anything negative coming out of me being able to know the nutjobs around me who own guns and ammo. I can think only of positive things - I stay away from the nutjobs, I don't invite them to anything, I won't go into the homes of the nutjobs if invited, etc. etc. Very helpful.
Yep, because thats worked so well as a punishment for murder right? The threat of the death penalty has saved many lives
So let me get this straight........ you want everyone who would otherwise go through a class and pass tests to be able to legaly carry a gun to be disarmed, while criminals and thugs walk the streets right next to you with their conclealed weapons? Do you liberals even think before you propose such nonsense or does it naturaly just flow out of you like the diarrhea that it is?
What would be the point of carrying an unloaded weapon?
Yes, I want to hear more. Please, tell me more, I'm getting a good laugh out of you swinging for the fences with all of your "I want" "I want" ....... The things you suggest are never going to happen, not ever. They are extremely liberal, even by liberal standards, and while I worry today that soon my right to keep and bear arms may infact be infringed, I take some level of comfort knowing that radicals like you will never fully get "what you want"......... not in our lifetime anyway.[/quote]
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
