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)
View Poll Results: Who is responsible for your safety?
The government 4 6.78%
The police 2 3.39%
The politicians 0 0%
Other gun owners 0 0%
I donít know but not me. 1 1.69%
I am responsible for the safety of my family and myself. 52 88.14%
Voters: 59. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Today, 08:40 AM
 
Location: Florida
5,686 posts, read 3,707,473 times
Reputation: 10638

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post
Neither are 99.99% of the firearms owned in this country. But that isn't what I asked.

I said name the property you own where someone else's opinion on whether they felt you did or did not "need" it was the basis for you being legally allowed to purchase it.
Prescription birth control. (Referring to pharmacists who feel that they should not have dispense medication based on their religious beliefs... beliefs which seem to only involve sexually active women for some curious reason).

That's all I can think of offhand. I don't know that anyone's feelings about whether someone "needs" a gun would ever have any impact on the legality of having a gun, though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Today, 08:42 AM
 
Location: Pacific Beach/San Diego
3,805 posts, read 2,506,677 times
Reputation: 3762
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post
Neither are 99.99% of the firearms owned in this country. But that isn't what I asked.

I said name the property you own where someone else's opinion on whether they felt you did or did not "need" it was the basis for you being legally allowed to purchase it.
99.99% of car rides don't end in accidents - - why have airbags? Why have seatbelts?

I don't understand the idea behind why responsible gunowners wouldn't want to make sure that irresponsbile people have a harder time getting guns. Does that small bit of inconvenience really bother you that much?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 08:48 AM
 
Location: USA
18,526 posts, read 9,100,187 times
Reputation: 13911
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristramShandy View Post
99.99% of car rides don't end in accidents - - why have airbags? Why have seatbelts?

I don't understand the idea behind why responsible gunowners wouldn't want to make sure that irresponsbile people have a harder time getting guns. Does that small bit of inconvenience really bother you that much?
The vast majority of firearm sales go through an FFL dealer with a background check and form 4473 (Fed). So gun owners already pay extra, and go through the bureaucracy to purchase a gun. What we fear, and it has happened on the State level, that government puts up so many barriers and increases cost so much it becomes PROHIBITIVE. Look at NY, CA, MD< NJ, CT, RI, HI, IL, and other states.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 08:48 AM
 
7,097 posts, read 2,576,314 times
Reputation: 3867
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristramShandy View Post
I'm knocking the fear of having your guns taken away.
If the entire media ad political class were talking about banning manufacture, sales and POSSESSION of any item in your home that you paid thousands of dollars for, would this not concern you?

The mere possession of that which was legal yesterday, that you paid thousands of dollars for, is now illegal and you simply possessing that thing constitutes a crime? This wouldn't bug you or at least make you think "WTF?"

Look around your house and find something that cost you a ton of money. Now have an entire party and most of the media condemning you as criminal for owning it, and declaring how badly they want tot take that away from you and prevent you from ever owning it in the future.

You poo poo the discussion because it's currently an item you don't care about and find distasteful, but what happens when it is something you care about, but you long ago ceded your property rights to Leviathan?

And beyond your property rights, what if the political and media classes were shrieking that you being able to lock your doors and windows at night should be made illegal? Or even having physical barriers such as doors and windows should be illegal? Working out, getting stronger...that's illegal too, because well, you could do more harm if you got mad, and other people who were strong got mad, and look what they did.

I just cannot fathom the mindset that says yes, because a dog crapped on a carpet in El Paso, I should be allowed to take your dog away from you and ban dogs. Oh wait, there is a movement to already do that...the whole "ban pit bulls" thing, where literally, a dog bites someone in CA, so all dogs of the same breed should be outlawed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 08:54 AM
 
2,145 posts, read 444,345 times
Reputation: 1060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegabern View Post
Collective society.
In other words "nobody".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 08:57 AM
 
7,097 posts, read 2,576,314 times
Reputation: 3867
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristramShandy View Post
I don't understand the idea behind why responsible gunowners wouldn't want to make sure that irresponsbile people have a harder time getting guns. Does that small bit of inconvenience really bother you that much?
They aren't talking about just making it harder for irresponsible people to get guns. They are talking about, with legislation (proposed and actually passed) that:
  • Violates your rights protected by the 4th-8th Amendments. (red flag laws)
  • Strips you of your rights without due process and then forces you to prove your innocence in order to regain your rights. (red flag laws)
  • Outlaws entire categories of property that were legal yesterday and makes merely possessing that same property illegal tomorrow. (SB 66)
  • Allows agents of the state to actually, literally enter your home and take your property by force, without you having ever committed a crime of any sort. (red flag laws)
I can keep going, but we aren't just talking about a minor administrative annoyance added to the existing purchase process of firearms. I own suppressors and have a CCW....believe me, I am fully aware of the bureaucratic annoyances of firearms purchases. What these new "no more shootings" knee jerk laws are aiming for goes way beyond simply making it a bit tougher for a shady character to purchase a firearm at a store. It's wildly disingenuous to suggest otherwise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 09:01 AM
 
2,145 posts, read 444,345 times
Reputation: 1060
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristramShandy View Post
99.99% of car rides don't end in accidents - - why have airbags? Why have seatbelts?

I don't understand the idea behind why responsible gunowners wouldn't want to make sure that irresponsbile people have a harder time getting guns. Does that small bit of inconvenience really bother you that much?
Because "irresponsible" is a nebulous and subjective term, subject to weaponization by the left.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 09:15 AM
 
Location: Haiku
4,387 posts, read 2,655,772 times
Reputation: 6448
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Warren v. District of Columbia.


Government has no obligation to protect, or keep you safe.
So you are saying that the government has no obligation to keep out illegal immigrants that might be a threat to my safety and has no obligation to fight a war with an invading army and has no obligation to stop terrorists like the 9/11 acts?

That makes no sense since it does all those things. Maybe they have no "obligation" but they do it anyway. We obviously have the FBI, prisons, police forces at city, county and state levels across the country, so maybe this lack of obligation is just a theoretical thing, and in all actuality the government does spend billions to keep Americans safe.

I think this whole argument is just being used as a justification for owning guns. But why do you need such justification since SCOTUS has already sided with gun rights people?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 09:22 AM
 
Location: Pacific Beach/San Diego
3,805 posts, read 2,506,677 times
Reputation: 3762
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open-D View Post
Because "irresponsible" is a nebulous and subjective term, subject to weaponization by the left.
Would you say that people who are schizophrenic are irresponsible? Somebody who has used a gun to commit a crime in the past? Somebody who has harmed children in the past?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 09:22 AM
 
Location: CA
4,366 posts, read 1,888,551 times
Reputation: 5627
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristramShandy View Post
99.99% of car rides don't end in accidents - - why have airbags? Why have seatbelts?

I don't understand the idea behind why responsible gunowners wouldn't want to make sure that irresponsbile people have a harder time getting guns. Does that small bit of inconvenience really bother you that much?
Do you consider white nationalists to be irresponsible?
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

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
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top