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.
So, just to get this straight, you are okay with an insane person going and buying a gun.
The current background checks look for mental records and even asks about it. Adam Lanza was denied. Guess what happened?
Current background checks worked. And bad things will happen. What you need to understand is this perfect safe would you want is NOT going to happen. Freedom had is risks and I'm willing to accept those risks to KEEP my freedom.
No - you are wrong with that statement just as you have been wrong about everything else on this thread with the exception that you know a victim of a mass shooting(I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't make that up).
Let me know when you are goibg to stop making assumptions and begin to actually think critically.
So I'm wrong about being okay with concealed carry, and AR's and semi AR's? Because i've stated that many times in this thread.
OP, you bring up good points, but in your original post you said there are people against BG checks and you have still failed to prove this. The NRA is NOT against them and what you posted about the NRA shows this. Why didn't the states comply with the law to get the funding? It sounds like the states F'd this up, not the NRA.
i agree with right to carry, and i laugh when i see a gun free zone sign.
but why can't we attack the problem from BOTH sides? less access to guns by the mentally ill, and more security, and good guys with guns? why can't we do that?
Like I said I'm not necessarily opposed to it. The only issue I would have is if it were linked to some kind of registration scheme as has been floated before. Still though, you're not looking at a massive impact.
I can understand the argument of getting guns off the streets, but any gun free zone or anti-carry law is a joke, and 30 seconds of analysis should reveal its stupidity to anyone.
So we should compromise. Do the universal BCs but simultaneously back the hell off of law abiding gun owners with ridiculous and ineffective rules. That would be better for everyone.
Democratic Strategist Zerlina Maxwell argued that preventing rape should start by simply “telling men not to rape women.” She was arguing against women using guns as a means of self-defense when she made the questionable remarks. She told salon... “The reality is that we need to be changing how we train and teach young men".
I thought that why women screamed Noooooooo, please god help me, noooooo because they were 'BEGGING" the rapist not to rape.
There's that deliberate and complete misunderstanding of an entire movement again. You're preaching to a choir of nutjobs, and everyone else in the real world understands this concept. So ....[shrug] Rightwing stupidity, nothing new here.
Like I said I'm not necessarily opposed to it. The only issue I would have is if it were linked to some kind of registration scheme as has been floated before. Still though, you're not looking at a massive impact.
I can understand the argument of getting guns off the streets, but any gun free zone or anti-carry law is a joke, and 30 seconds of analysis should reveal its stupidity to anyone.
So we should compromise. Do the universal BCs but simultaneously back the hell off of law abiding gun owners with ridiculous and ineffective rules. That would be better for everyone.
You have some sound views.
You should teach your friend Harriet how not to sound like a complete moron.
Because when liberals get a hold of it they will twist anything into a reason to deny people. Happened to a friend of mine who is a police officer. When he was became an officer back in 05 or 06 he had to get his permit. Well they took some disorderly conduct bull or something stupid, I can't remember exactly, that happened about 15 years prior and were going to approve him to only carry during his shift. The department chief called and had it out with them and eventually they folded but this is just one example of how the left will take the littlest of issues and creep closer and closer in pursuit of their agenda.
Another example is how they want to bar veterans who are deemed "unstable" to have a gun. So the left can take whatever definition they find could be unstable or whatever the sissies find "dangerous" or a "risk," the slightest of things that a huge portion of Americans will experience, the slightest of symptoms, creeping their little way up inch by inch and eventually making it virtually impossible to purchase a gun.
If the left had our safety in mind they'd have the border secured, illegals deported, and a whole lot of other things I can think of and won't say. Until they address those as well, they can shut the hell up about "gun laws."
You have my sympathy however that's not a factual or logical argument for or against anything, it's an appeal emotion.
It's not that I don't want a solution, it's that I'm not such a megalomaniac as to think I can save the world. I am fine with reality and I don't need to fight it in order to feel good at myself. The anti-gun crowd, that's a different story.
Shorter SamBarrow: Too bad, so sad, tough luck. I'm OK, *********.
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.
