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.
Indeed, the solution is simple : Amend the constitution to repeal the 2nd amendment, and pass a law making all guns illegal.
I used to support the second amendment , and I own about a dozen guns. But lately I have gotten the impression that gun supporters have no answer for routine mass shootings, and consider them an acceptable price to pay. I do not share that view.
I also don't think guns are an effective "weapon against tyranny," which is the other rationale I keep hearing.
"Indeed, the solution is simple : Amend the constitution to repeal the 2nd amendment, and pass a law making all guns illegal."
You are living in Utopia if you think the criminals or the insane would be affected by repeal of the 2nd Amendment.
Nope. Just find your position to be anti-American at its very core. But if that's what you believe, you should put your words into action. Otherwise it's just fluff.
"Putting my words into actions" would mean running for legislative office on the basis of a 2nd amendment repeal, not voluntarily giving away my guns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
"Indeed, the solution is simple : Amend the constitution to repeal the 2nd amendment, and pass a law making all guns illegal."
You are living in Utopia if you think the criminals or the insane would be affected by repeal of the 2nd Amendment.
Repealing the 2nd amendment would just enable states to ban guns outright.
Once they did that, you'd go to prison for owning a gun, which would solve the problem in due course.
If the goal was to reduce accidental deaths, the government would simply provide free lock boxes with every handgun purchase. It would cost far less per life saved than just about anything else. Then start prosecuting owners who give the wrong people (kids, for example) access to weapons.
FACT: Not one single recent mass shooting would have been stopped by a background check or expanded background check. In fact, all guns used in recent attacks were purchased legally. With one notable exception of course: The FBI failed to stop the Charleston shooter through the background check process already in place. THE FBI!
Now, Barack is poised to expand background checks to higher volume gun dealers, which will be 100% meaningless. Obviously.
Do liberals and Democrats understand this? If not, why not?
If the goal was to reduce accidental deaths, the government would simply provide free lock boxes with every handgun purchase. It would cost far less per life saved than just about anything else. Then start prosecuting owners who give the wrong people (kids, for example) access to weapons.
FACT: Not one single recent mass shooting would have been stopped by a background check or expanded background check. In fact, all guns used in recent attacks were purchased legally. With one notable exception of course: The FBI failed to stop the Charleston shooter through the background check process already in place. THE FBI!
Now, Barack is poised to expand background checks to higher volume gun dealers, which will be 100% meaningless. Obviously.
Do liberals and Democrats understand this? If not, why not?
Guy, they don't care; the intention is solely to burden legal/licensed gun owners.
Indeed, the solution is simple : Amend the constitution to repeal the 2nd amendment, and pass a law making all guns illegal.
I used to support the second amendment , and I own about a dozen guns. But lately I have gotten the impression that gun supporters have no answer for routine mass shootings, and consider them an acceptable price to pay. I do not share that view.
I also don't think guns are an effective "weapon against tyranny," which is the other rationale I keep hearing.
We have plenty of answers to prevent or stop mass shootings.. We refuse to be victims of any such criminal events by being armed and ready to defend ourselves. It is a fact that the number of armed law-abiding citizens who have defended themselves with guns exceeds the number of people who were victims of mass shootings. And if there were any armed individuals at those mass shootings, they could have stopped such deranged individuals before they fired the first shot.
Obama is only trying to make himself look good by pretending he is doing something, where in fact he is not, any such regulations will not prevent a criminal or a mass shooter from getting weapons to kill others. If they can't get guns, they'll go through other illegal means to get them, or use something else, like cars loaded with explosives, or they'll learn how build pipe bombs from materials that are readily available. The proof can be seen how laws and regulations that pertain to guns have failed to keep guns out of the hands of criminals for the last 48 years, since the first major gun control laws were enacted in 1968. All what such useless laws do is lead to more laws that will only affect the decent law-abiding citizens.
Nope. Just a simple locking box. Keyed or combo doesn't matter.
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.
