Do you support the gun control measures that NJ has passed?-Poll (Representatives, interstate)
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.
Then we need to take steps to protect ourselfs against irresponsible gun owners. Having the "right" to do something doesn't allow you the right to infringe on others safety.
Owning a gun, any gun, infringes on no one's safety.
Shooting someone infringes upon their safety. Except in certain very limited circumstances, shooting someone is already illegal.
So it's a never ending arms race between the bad guys & the good guys? If a burglar uses a blow torch then i deserve a flamethrower. It's such an infantile & regressive way to go about your life. Other modern countries have crime & break-ins but a fraction of the gun murders we do. Every solution overseas isn't solved by killing something. Kind of how our foreign policy operates as well. A lot of Americans first instinct is to bomb sh#t into oblivion (Iraq/Syria). It's one of our worst flaws as a society...the other being fake religiosity.
You guys really have a problem constructing a logical argument.
You suggested that because a few wackos had a shootout with the cops in Hollywood using AR-15's that people must be insane to think that ordinary law abiding citizens be allowed to own such weapons.
I responded that the actions of criminals are a poor reason to limit the types of firearms that law abiding citizens should be able to own. The net result of that approach is always that law abiding citizens are disarmed and criminal behavior continues unchecked. Further, I suggested we should focus on actions that are criminal, not mere possession of objects by law abiding citizens.
Your response is that all of a sudden I've proposed some sort of arms race between criminals and citizens. Where the heck did I say anything like that? My argument is that the actions of criminals should not be used to limit the rights of the law abiding. It doesn't work almost by definition because ... wait for it ... criminals are not law abiding.
You should check your crime statistics about other countries. What you will find is that while gun crimes are lower, overall rates of violent crimes are as high or higher. Not a surprising result when you disarm potential victims of crime! How do you suggest those who are physically disadvantaged - women, the aged, those with physical disabilities - protect themselves against the typical criminal who is overwhelmingly young and male?
Sure we could be like England where if a criminal breaks into your house and threatens you with an axe, and you shoot him with your bird hunting shotgun you become the criminal. Sorry, no thanks. I knew there was a reason we fought that war with those guys back in the 1700's.
Hitler was elected to office. Read about the Warsaw ghetto uprising. Learn.
German Jews were Germans & quite integrated into German society. When Hitler over time became the fascist, racist scum with a huge military, for many Jews it was already too late. Those that could escape did. But to say an armed Jewish populace was going to overtake the wehrmacht is ludicrous. As ludicrous as gunnutz here thinking they'd stand a chance against our military if some cracker, anti-Obama militia in Montana decided to stage a "coup." Good luck with that.
Owning a gun, any gun, infringes on no one's safety.
Shooting someone infringes upon their safety. Except in certain very limited circumstances, shooting someone is already illegal.
Shooting someone is illegal ? Really ? I guess that explains by no one ever gets shot ?
Shooting someone is illegal ? Really ? I guess that explains by no one ever gets shot ?
My point exactly. The act that actually infringes upon other's rights is already illegal. Stop trying to penalize something that doesn't infringe upon any rights.
My point exactly. The act that actually infringes upon other's rights is already illegal. Stop trying to penalize something that doesn't infringe upon any rights.
My point exactly. The act that actually infringes upon other's rights is already illegal. Stop trying to penalize something that doesn't infringe upon any rights.
Alright, you win. You get a bazooka, can drive a tank and park on top of compact cars at the Shop Rite and even blow up squirrels with TNT in your backyard. Because of your rights. And not hurting anyone else.
Yes, I support politicians voting for laws that violate the federal constitution and infringe of the basic human liberties that this country was founded upon.
Florida Gentleman
wrote
>Your "logic" would make Spocks head explode
The logic against stricter gun laws is that:
1.They have never been shown to reduce the crime or murder rate. Even the CDC issued a report a few years ago stating that the studies of this are too conflicting to draw any conclusions.
2.The freedom to own a firearm is important to many, possibly most, Americans. A truly free society should be very reluctant to have the government infringe on such rights.
3.Practically any freedom may be abused: A person may drink and drive, own a gun and murder someone, fornicate and spread venereal disease, etc., etc. That is not justification to infringe on such freedoms.
4.The argument that the government is just imposing "reasonable" regulation breaks down when examined. It is not reasonable to make people give up their right to privacy in their medical records (This puts many people like those treated for a mental illness into a national database and bars them from owning a gun. But as has been pointed out, many studies have found that the mentally ill are no more violent or dangerous than anyone else. In fact, they are much more likely to be the victims than the perpetrators of crime and violence. Even those with a serious mental illness like schizophrenia are not dangerous and tend to be passive). The over $100 in fees, requirement in NJ to have two people send letters of recommendation to the police, etc., etc. pass the level of "reasonable" regulation.
Florida Gentleman
wrote
>Your "logic" would make Spocks head explode
The logic against stricter gun laws is that:
1.They have never been shown to reduce the crime or murder rate. Even the CDC issued a report a few years ago stating that the studies of this are too conflicting to draw any conclusions.
2.The freedom to own a firearm is important to many, possibly most, Americans. A truly free society should be very reluctant to have the government infringe on such rights.
3.Practically any freedom may be abused: A person may drink and drive, own a gun and murder someone, fornicate and spread venereal disease, etc., etc. That is not justification to infringe on such freedoms.
4.The argument that the government is just imposing "reasonable" regulation breaks down when examined. It is not reasonable to make people give up their right to privacy in their medical records (This puts many people like those treated for a mental illness into a national database and bars them from owning a gun. But as has been pointed out, many studies have found that the mentally ill are no more violent or dangerous than anyone else. In fact, they are much more likely to be the victims than the perpetrators of crime and violence. Even those with a serious mental illness like schizophrenia are not dangerous and tend to be passive). The over $100 in fees, requirement in NJ to have two people send letters of recommendation to the police, etc., etc. pass the level of "reasonable" regulation.
Laughable nonsense !!!
Multiple surveys all show that 93% of the people truly free society you mention want stricter gun laws and background checks !!!
The mentally ill are prohibited from owning guns, however, if they manage to pass the level of reasonable regulation by having two of their cell mates send in letters of recommendation and they do purchase a gun the good news is that we still don't need to worry because schizophrenics are not dangerous !!!
Have you ever considered a career in comedy ???
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.
