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)
 
Old 10-08-2015, 12:30 PM
 
Location: Sugarmill Woods , FL
6,234 posts, read 8,450,396 times
Reputation: 13809

Advertisements

Apply the proposed new gun laws to the incidents they are meant to stop, then analyze. Would these laws actually have made any difference or prevented the perpetrators actions? From what I have read they would not have. So why make more laws that don't accomplish their supposed objective?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-08-2015, 12:34 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,123,991 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbones View Post
I know, some seem to think that a murderer is going to be deterred by a 10 year sentence when the crime they are about to commit carries life or death. It's really bizarre to witness.
It's called risk mangement. Gun supporters aren't calling to repeal all the murder and violent crimes that don't work to stop 100% violent crime......

It's ok to admit you feel safe with a gun under your pillow....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2015, 12:36 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,829,035 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by froglipz View Post
Apply the proposed new gun laws to the incidents they are meant to stop, then analyze. Would these laws actually have made any difference or prevented the perpetrators actions? From what I have read they would not have. So why make more laws that don't accomplish their supposed objective?
Because the objective is not to reduce crime, but remove guns from society. All you have to do is look at the laws being pushed in anti gun states like California and New York to see the desired result. We have the strictest guns laws in the nation, yet every year anti gun democrats propose 20 or so new gun laws to further restrict civil rights.

It will never stop. They will never have enough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2015, 12:36 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,123,991 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by froglipz View Post
Apply the proposed new gun laws to the incidents they are meant to stop, then analyze. Would these laws actually have made any difference or prevented the perpetrators actions? From what I have read they would not have. So why make more laws that don't accomplish their supposed objective?
Then we need to reevaluate the laws and see where can make it better. I think a single federal system would be better than the patchwork of state laws and loopholes. Illinois can have the toughest gun laws but it's tough when the neighboring state has laws more lax.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2015, 12:37 PM
 
13,898 posts, read 6,452,130 times
Reputation: 6960
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
It's called risk mangement. Gun supporters aren't calling to repeal all the murder and violent crimes that don't work to stop 100% violent crime......

It's ok to admit you feel safe with a gun under your pillow....
no, it's called stupidity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2015, 12:38 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,123,991 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life View Post
Because the objective is not to reduce crime, but remove guns from society.
Stop with that paranoid bs. It would take an incredibly horribly act for us to go that far.

However, how does the rest of the developed world not fall into anarchy without the right to bear arms? What's so special about the 2nd amendment again?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2015, 12:39 PM
 
13,898 posts, read 6,452,130 times
Reputation: 6960
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
Then we need to reevaluate the laws and see where can make it better. I think a single federal system would be better than the patchwork of state laws and loopholes. Illinois can have the toughest gun laws but it's tough when the neighboring state has laws more lax.
How is that tough? As soon as they bring the guns across state lines they broke the law. What new law would stop that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2015, 12:39 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,829,035 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
Then we need to reevaluate the laws and see where can make it better. I think a single federal system would be better than the patchwork of state laws and loopholes. Illinois can have the toughest gun laws but it's tough when the neighboring state has laws more lax.
Studies show that crime guns, generally, do not come from out of state. Meaning, one states laws really has no impact on other states.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2015, 12:40 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,123,991 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbones View Post
no, it's called stupidity.
Nope. It's okay to be afraid....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2015, 12:41 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,663,022 times
Reputation: 18521
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadgates View Post
SHOULD NOT BE is the more factual statement.

Though the framers absolutely saw that as the very thing they feared most.



Many think it says "Should not be Infringed. That gives a wide open "maybe" gap to wiggle in.

But for those that cannot get around it, it clearly says and I say and yell.. "Shall Not be Infringed". Which means NO... Never Ever. Period.. You try... and we use the very Amendment do defend it.

That is why we always had the same weapons as the government had, until the Civil War and the Federal Government saw what equal weapons can do, when they the government wants to Writ Habeus Corpus anytime they want.

They have taken our weapons so that we could never truly battle the government again on equal terms.... The Federal Government IS MORE POWERFUL THAN THE PEOPLE. and the US Constitution doesn't mean crap to them any longer.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:58 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