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.
With over 90% of murders using illegally guns obtained thru theft, deception, or borrowed, how do see adding more to the already 36 gun laws in the books? Already you have rampant illegal activity but your first inclination is to double down and add more gun laws. You know only law abiding citizens follow laws so why pursue this futile mindset? The problem with regulation is that guns are already regulatedby but the criminals don't follow the laws.
Why not advocate for 20 year mandatory prison sentences for a single gun used in any crime? Why give armed robbers 2 year prison sentences? Wait. Building more prisons isn't popular. You tap people on the wrist for current gun violations and then wonder why illegal gun activity in the big cities is out of control.
It's amazing isn't it that these oh so reasonable "sensible gun laws" people never, never, never advocate stiffer sentences for those who commit crimes with guns. It simply shows their lying when they say banning and confiscation isn't their ultimate goal.
We have issue with psycopaths and crazy people who carry guns, not the guns itself. We're fine the police carrying guns because they went through training program and stuff. Buying a gun is almost like buying pair of new shoes in this country!
OP, people like you won't learn a lesson and care until a family member of yours get shot to death at a school building.. So sad that pro-gun people exist
Tell that to all the people that carried guns so you could come here and say that, without worrying about the Gestapo coming to get you tonight.
Republicans are so much under the control of the NRA that they are afraid to even mention the thought of better background checks cause they may lose that special money that comes they way every election if they bow down to the NRA.
I hope your right. We certainly spend enough money to keep them thinking that way. Donations and maintaining a server for Mailing our messages to Politicians, reminding them who butters their bread, cost a lot of money. Its nice to know your getting your dollars worth.
One way to find out is to ask gun rights defenders if they were provided an alternative weapon that could protect them as well as any gun but without killing their target, would they replace their deadly weapons with this new protective device? Often the answer is a resounding no.
Of course it would be NO. That alternative is already out there, but those all pose a risk to you also, that it may not be as effective as a Bullet or a load of "00 Buckshot." Besides, if it comes to the point where I have to shoot some one to protect my life, my intent is to kill him or remove the threat, in nicer terms.
No, but we do have multi million dollars "don't drink and drive campaigns', teen driving programs at schools that focus in drunk driving, police checkpoints, strict dui laws, laws that put liability on a business that sells alcohol to minors etc etc. I can privately sell a gun to Ted Bundy jr, I don't have to declare Jack because it's my private property does that make any sense to you.
Of course it makes sense. Its not illegal to do so. Same as you can sell your Car without declaring "Jack" even if you sell it to a Drunk who goes out and kills an entire family the week after with it. What's your point?
The government has fighter jets and assault helicopters. And nuclear weapons. And RPGs. In short, their firepower is superior to that of any citizen. There's no way you or anyone else will be able to overcome this if it's ever an issue.
Yes, you should have a right to own a gun for personal and family protection, and to hunt. That's it. Automatic weapons with armor-piercing ammo aren't used for those purposes. Arguing otherwise makes you seem paranoid, fanatical, and unreasonable.
BTW, the 2nd amendment also includes the words "well regulated", which means we can have laws regulating firearms. That's all I'm asking for.
So it is, but no one plans to do War on a Battlefield with the Army. Its not about the rights you "think" we should have, its about the Rights we already have, that are guaranteed by the Constitution.
Automatic weapons are against the Law if you don't have a Class 3 Permit, so again, your misinformed. Do you even know what an Armor Piercing round is? Also the 2nd does not mention regulating "Firearms." Its regulating Militia. Go back and read it again. Its a shame Gun Grabbers are so misinformed , and have no clue.
As for the driver's license analogy: That's why there are requirements to get a license and own a car. I'm just asking for the same reasonable approach to firearms.
How many times do you folks need to be told that a License is not required to own a Car. You get a license to be able to drive the car on public roads, but you can own as many cars as you can buy, with no license, no background checks, no registration, and can take them home as soon as you pay for them.
By That reasonable approach a Felon out on Bail for beating his wife can buy a gun and walk out of the store with it as soon as he paid for it.
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.
