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.
You should be able to have a society that allows private gun ownership while still having common sense things like comprehensive background checks, not having high-capacity firearms, and not letting people considered dangerous enough not to be allowed on an airplane being allowed to buy guns.
Comprehensive background checks: We already have them. More than we need, actually.
High Capacity firearms: What is your definition of high capacity? 30 rounds? 20 rounds? 10? 7? 2? The idea that the number of rounds which fit in a magazine somehow equates to a person being more violent is ridiculous. If you limit magazines to 10 rounds, what's to stop someone from carrying 3 magazines and hot swapping? Have you ever seen someone hot swap a magazine? Do you even know what hot swapping is?
No-fly no-buy list: Can you tell us how someone ends up on the no-fly list? Is there a due process which takes place? Is it random? Does it depend upon reports from neighbors? Criminal record? What exactly is the process? Because quite frankly, nobody has been able to figure it out yet, and getting off of the no-fly list is an exercise in futility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient
The truth is that more guns amongst the general populace will not make this society safer; they will make it more dangerous. You may have a better chance of people at the bar or school having a firearm and using it to dispatch an attacker, but it will be far outweighed by the sheer quantitative factor of more people from all backgrounds with easy access to firearms walking around everywhere with loaded weapons. It just won't work the way it's advertised.
Hmm, as gun ownership and concealed carry have gone up, violent crime has gone down. We're at nearly historic lows now, and more people are carrying firearms than at any time since the 1800s. So, yeah, apparently more guns does lead to a safer society. Perhaps you should study psychology and/or history to figure out why that is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient
Living with constant fear and acceptance of death of our young people in schools and such for the sake of some obtuse allegiance to a very outmoded, fanatical reading of the Second Amendment is a fairly stupid tradeoff to make, but that's where we are.
If you really, truly, deeply care about the well-being of our children, push for the repeal of the Gun Free Zone law. We have turned our schools into hunting preserves for sociopaths under the misguided notion that a sign will stop someone with a gun from carrying out an attack. If you aren't willing to get rid of the GFZ and allow responsible adults to carry a weapon which will give them a chance to stop an attacker, then all you're doing is trying to play an emotional "do it for the children" card. Sorry, but that's how we got to this point in the first place, by listening to hoplophobic liberals whine about saving children while they strip every possible defense they can from law-abiding citizens.
You didn't answer my question. Do you consider the continual mass shootings to be no problem for this country? Just another ho-hum day in America?
Yes, the continual terrorist attacks are a huge problem. Unfortunately, Mullah Obama and his lemminglike followers refuse to even acknowledge the problem, much less address it.
So continual (fill in the blank) are no problem to you?
Why are guns the only thing subjected to such nonsense?
Probably because they are responsible for hundreds of innocent people being gunned down every year doing things that shouldn't be considered dangerous, like going to a movie or school or a night club. But we can't talk about that.
The inconvenience would suck. But being gunned down by someone who was on the FBI terrorist watch list but was allowed to buy a gun anyway, because even would-be terrorists must never have that right infringed, would suck more.
you're not rationalizing this at all.
ambiguous lists without due process is a violation of our constitution.
if you're PO'd, take it out on the FBI who was inept enough to NOT put this guy on a list within the NICS system despite interviewing him 3x - same EXACT thing for the Tsarnaev brothers. and the FBI even got intel from the Russians on them, and did SQUAT!
ambiguous lists without due process is a violation of our constitution.
So what are your ideas to stop the continual mass shootings? Or do you feel that everything is just fine the way it is and there is no need to do anything?
Probably because they are responsible for hundreds of innocent people being gunned down every year doing things that shouldn't be considered dangerous, like going to a movie or school or a night club. But we can't talk about that.
you can talk all you want. but please look up the stats first.
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.
