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.
There was no problem with guns in Kansas last night. The shooter didn't have a right to legally own guns. So, by common gun lobby logic, there is nothing to talk about, he was breaking the law just possessing guns. The other little law he broke, don't shoot people, doesn't matter to anyone EXCEPT one of the 3 dead, the 14 injured (can you IMAGINE getting shot in your shoulder or leg?), their families, their co-workers terrorized, etc. Just about their entire community. No big deal, right? Has nothing to do with guns, gun owners, gun sellers or gun marketers/manufacturers. Right?
There was no problem with guns in Kansas last night. The shooter didn't have a right to legally own guns. So, by common gun lobby logic, there is nothing to talk about, he was breaking the law just possessing guns. The other little law he broke, don't shoot people, doesn't matter to anyone EXCEPT one of the 3 dead, the 14 injured (can you IMAGINE getting shot in your shoulder or leg?), their families, their co-workers terrorized, etc. Just about their entire community. No big deal, right? Has nothing to do with guns, gun owners, gun sellers or gun marketers/manufacturers. Right?
it doent have anything to do with law abiding citizens, gun manufacturers, or legal gun sellers.
you already indicated that the shooter was not legally allowed to own firearms, so how did he get them? chances are he got them from an ILLEGAL seller of guns, and thus obtained them ILLEGALLY.
so by common gun grabber logic we have to create new laws to prevent guys like this from buying guns, even though they already have laws AGAINST it, but in the end the new laws only affect law abiding citizens, not criminals. why? because instead of enforcing the laws already on the books, government these days would rather make new laws that criminals wont follow.
it doent have anything to do with law abiding citizens, gun manufacturers, or legal gun sellers.
you already indicated that the shooter was not legally allowed to own firearms, so how did he get them? chances are he got them from an ILLEGAL seller of guns, and thus obtained them ILLEGALLY.
so by common gun grabber logic we have to create new laws to prevent guys like this from buying guns, even though they already have laws AGAINST it, but in the end the new laws only affect law abiding citizens, not criminals. why? because instead of enforcing the laws already on the books, government these days would rather make new laws that criminals wont follow.
A well stated illustration of the common logic of the gun lobby. Thank you.
There was no problem with guns in Kansas last night. The shooter didn't have a right to legally own guns. So, by common gun lobby logic, there is nothing to talk about, he was breaking the law just possessing guns. The other little law he broke, don't shoot people, doesn't matter to anyone EXCEPT one of the 3 dead, the 14 injured (can you IMAGINE getting shot in your shoulder or leg?), their families, their co-workers terrorized, etc. Just about their entire community. No big deal, right? Has nothing to do with guns, gun owners, gun sellers or gun marketers/manufacturers. Right?
I only ask that we apply the rule equally without discrimination.
For example, in this case you think it's the gun's problem. What about when someone uses a knife or a car to kill? Is that the knife or car's problem?
Consistency is what I am looking for!
Last edited by lifeexplorer; 02-26-2016 at 09:48 AM..
There was no problem with guns in Kansas last night. The shooter didn't have a right to legally own guns. So, by common gun lobby logic, there is nothing to talk about, he was breaking the law just possessing guns. The other little law he broke, don't shoot people, doesn't matter to anyone EXCEPT one of the 3 dead, the 14 injured (can you IMAGINE getting shot in your shoulder or leg?), their families, their co-workers terrorized, etc. Just about their entire community. No big deal, right? Has nothing to do with guns, gun owners, gun sellers or gun marketers/manufacturers. Right?
Right! He'd be down at the local homeless shelter knitting sweaters if it wasn't for that darned gun. No wait, maybe helping to bake girl scout cookies? Guns turn people into drug crazed pyschos, alcoholics, demons that want to kill children. All of these evils of today are from the invention of a piece of steel that hold a brass case filled with gun powder. Heck, I'll go out on a limb and guess that divorces, wife beatings and gas prices would be lower if it wasn't for those damn guns.
A well stated illustration of the common logic of the gun lobby. Thank you.
You anti gun nuts really only see and hear what you want to, don't you? Current laws didn't work and/or weren't enforced so you people think that more laws are the answer, just brilliant. How about doing something really crazy like ENFORCE THE LAW? Of course once that gets through your partisan biased filter it's going to be "we need more laws".
you asolutely are trying to take away americans gun rights. look t some of the things that have been suggested in the past threads on this subject;
psychological evaluations
banning certain firearms
licensing
registration
the first suggestion makes it possible for some with an agenda to make it seem like every american that wants a firearm is mentally unstable and thus is not allowed to own one.
banning certain weapons is the first step in banning all guns. its called incrementalism. ban a few "evil" guns now, then later on you can convince the public that there are more guns that need banning, and more. each time you demonize the guns you want banned in some manner.
licensing and registration are both disallowed by federal law for a reason, they create confiscation lists the various government agencies can use to ultimately confiscate the firearms of law abiding americans.
as for people sitting in jail for years before they go to trial, prove it. there are federal and state and local laws that require suspects be arraigned with in a certain period of time, otherwise the charges against them are dropped. and reasonable bail is allowed by law. in fact many times the suspect is back on the streets before the cops finish their paperwork.
You will not change my mind on this subject. I'm NOT interested in being right- maybe that is important to you. Have a good day.
There was no problem with guns in Kansas last night. The shooter didn't have a right to legally own guns. So, by common gun lobby logic, there is nothing to talk about, he was breaking the law just possessing guns. The other little law he broke, don't shoot people, doesn't matter to anyone EXCEPT one of the 3 dead, the 14 injured (can you IMAGINE getting shot in your shoulder or leg?), their families, their co-workers terrorized, etc. Just about their entire community. No big deal, right? Has nothing to do with guns, gun owners, gun sellers or gun marketers/manufacturers. Right?
Exactly. The penalty for for illegal possession as well as straw purchase is so minor that it's not a deterrent to career criminals if it even gets prosecuted at all - 'Straw Buyers' Of Guns Break The Law
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.
