Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-09-2016, 01:09 PM
 
Location: The D-M-V area
13,691 posts, read 18,458,970 times
Reputation: 9596

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
If someone is so dangerous to the society that we don't trust him with a gun, why do we allow him to walk among us, to be near our children, and to have access many things that are more dangerous than guns?

How does a background check prevent crime exactly if it actually does? When was the last time background check actually prevented a crime? Criminals have never had trouble with getting a gun. Background check is just like a restraining order which never stopped a husband from killing his spouse.

Wouldn't it be more effective to have a "gun test?" If the person can't be trusted with a firearm, he or she should remain incarcerated.

Criminals don't need to have a background check, they can get whatever weapons they want and will do it outside of the law.

Your every day person who wants to acquire a weapon legally will take the background check.

Doing away with background checks won't make less gun violence.

However, every instance of gun violence isn't with an unregistered firearm either.

The problem isn't with the registration of firearms, it's with people who use firearms to commit violence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-09-2016, 01:18 PM
 
26,694 posts, read 14,569,031 times
Reputation: 8094
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
We don't trust those convicted of a DUI with driving a car (at least for awhile) but yet they can walk.

Again, it can simply be a deterrent.
If I follow the liberal logic of "my life triumph your rights," why should we allow those dangerous people to walk on the street?

It defies common sense to implement background check to do what? Feel better? I don't feel anybody knowing those dangerous people are among us. At least "gun free zone" makes me feel better.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2016, 01:22 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,222,338 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
If I follow the liberal logic of "my life triumph your rights," why should we allow those dangerous people to walk on the street?
This isn't a "liberal/conservative" thing and that you have to make so probably should let the rest of us understand we are wasting our time.

Quote:
It defies common sense to implement background check to do what? Feel better? I don't feel anybody knowing those dangerous people are among us.
I can buy all the guns I want without one. Matter of fact, if I wanted one I would make sure to buy one from a source where I didn't have to bother with a background check.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2016, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Newport Beach, California
39,232 posts, read 27,611,062 times
Reputation: 16072
what about people committed white collar crimes? They should never purchase a gun to defend themselves?

What about dishonorably discharged soldiers? The reasons they cannot own a gun legally is.....?

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2016, 01:36 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,419,987 times
Reputation: 4190
Well then, maybe convicted felons should give up their right to:

Due process
Equality
Unreasonable searches
Gay marriage
Abortion
Right to a speedy trial
Freedom from torture

And heck, maybe we just suspend the 5th and torture them into a confession. They're only felons. Nobody will care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2016, 01:41 PM
 
Location: Newport Beach, California
39,232 posts, read 27,611,062 times
Reputation: 16072
There have been a lot of times that ex felons haven't been offered an opportunity because of the stigma. If they have served their time, what is the big deal of offering them a second chance? Sheesh, they cannot even purchase a gun to defend themselves and their loved ones? Talking about being judgmental. Holy Crap!

A lot of companies have a blanket policy that excludes anyone who's had any contact with the criminal justice system.

My mom's retail stores hired two ex felon who happened to be former military. The way I see it they are more disciplined than ANY civilians I know. They always show up 15 minutes prior and they are hard workers who never give you any trouble.

I have no ideas why some people act so superior. Your angelic son or husband might be a closet child molester, Just sayin'
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2016, 01:51 PM
 
33,387 posts, read 34,847,766 times
Reputation: 20030
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
Again, if we don't trust them with guns, why should we allow them to walk on the street?
we are a country that believes in second chances, for the most part. however we couch those second chances by spoon feeding these convicted felons and making them work to re earn their rights. thus we let these convicted felons walk the streets after they have spent some time in prison. if they decide to follow the rules of society, then they can get their rights back through due process. if not then we send them back to prison to finish out their sentence, along with adding on what ever else we decide to punish them with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2016, 01:52 PM
 
Location: Newport Beach, California
39,232 posts, read 27,611,062 times
Reputation: 16072
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
we are a country that believes in second chances, for the most part. however we couch those second chances by spoon feeding these convicted felons and making them work to re earn their rights. thus we let these convicted felons walk the streets after they have spent some time in prison. if they decide to follow the rules of society, then they can get their rights back through due process. if not then we send them back to prison to finish out their sentence, along with adding on what ever else we decide to punish them with.
Well, even the dishonorably discharged soldiers cannot own a gun legally. I find it ridiculous to be completely honest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2016, 01:55 PM
 
33,387 posts, read 34,847,766 times
Reputation: 20030
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilyflower3191981 View Post
Well, even the dishonorably discharged soldiers cannot own a gun legally. I find it ridiculous to be completely honest.
they too can petition to have their rights fully restored through the courts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2016, 02:16 PM
 
131 posts, read 112,504 times
Reputation: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilyflower3191981 View Post
There have been a lot of times that ex felons haven't been offered an opportunity because of the stigma. If they have served their time, what is the big deal of offering them a second chance? Sheesh, they cannot even purchase a gun to defend themselves and their loved ones? Talking about being judgmental. Holy Crap!

A lot of companies have a blanket policy that excludes anyone who's had any contact with the criminal justice system.

My mom's retail stores hired two ex felon who happened to be former military. The way I see it they are more disciplined than ANY civilians I know. They always show up 15 minutes prior and they are hard workers who never give you any trouble.

I have no ideas why some people act so superior. Your angelic son or husband might be a closet child molester, Just sayin'
I'm really not singling you out; in fact, I happen to agree with you in regard to people being offered a second chance. However, how quickly would YOU [or someone you know] sue a company for negligent hiring of an ex-con that turns around and rapes, robs or assaults you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:15 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top