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.
why would i lament violent people being denied guns.????
the issue of 2nd amendment people is that you need to stop attempting to disarm homeowners and doing it at taxpayer expense.
I know a guy that was upset about his wife leaving him. She successfully obtained a restraining order against him. The day he was served those papers he went to her job, jumped over the counter and killed her at point blank range. While tragic, I truly believe that he would have harmed her with ANY weapon he could have found at that point. Not having access to a gun would not have saved her life.
It's an unfair connection to equate ALL gun owners as being violent or all of those without guns as non-violent. They don't necessarily go hand-in-hand either way.
People can be convicted for illegal firearms even when there isn't enough evidence to convict them of their other crimes such as being a hit man for a gang or killing border patrol agents to expedite international commerce. Then, while they're incarcerated for firearms violations, the other evidence can be developed by ongoing investigations that might take years. So they should spend years in jail for firearms violations.
So it's not just feel good legislation. Being in possession of firearms after being convicted of a felony should be considered an extremely serious crime which should result in a very long prison sentence.
Another weapon than a gun could have been used to kill her just as dead. But, the key issue, is that the other weapon would take more time to use effectively. By the time it's used, she and/or her associates could put up some kind of defense.
Adam Lanza, without guns, could have broken in to Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT, and killed some kids. But not nearly as many. And maybe none, depending on luck. With his guns, the odds were that he would kill lots of them. It was luck that he only killed 20. Without guns, the same amount of luck might have resulted in him not succeeding in killing any.
So it's not just feel good legislation. Being in possession of firearms after being convicted of a felony should be considered an extremely serious crime which should result in a very long prison sentence.
I thought possession of firearms was illegal for ALL felons. I was just looking for information on that because I started to write that in my original response and wanted to check the laws before posting about it. It seems like a "given" but who knows.
I'm a gun owner and a holder of a concealed handgun permit and I agree with the courts decision. I also have a particular dislike of men that abuse women and anyone that abuses animals.
What about women that abuse men? I am assuming that you have a particular dislike for them as well, correct?
1) government banning guns away from criminal ( i agree)
2) she hates guns
3) she a liberal preaching the liberal mindset
4) she against freedom and hates uncle ted for his freedom
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.
