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.
Sit on your hands, wave em in the air, cover your eyes...whatever.
No matter what you do with your hands, you can't stop a determined
nutcase bent on hurting people. Disarming the public won't help.
Actually yes you can, most mass shooters show major signs that people choose to ignore until something bad happens. We need to stop ignoring the warning signs.
Sit on your hands, wave em in the air, cover your eyes...whatever.
No matter what you do with your hands, you can't stop a determined
nutcase bent on hurting people. Disarming the public won't help.
Exactly, or layer BS laws onto existing laws. Laws that make Granddad and his rifle a felon if he doesn't "register" it. Or tax it to the point only the rich can afford it.
So basically we shouldn't be concerned until mass shootings are happening daily in each state....that logic makes no sense, but it is what I have come to expect from so many people on this site.
You didn't address my analogy. Why focus on the 12 pennies when there are $4,000 being lost in another part of the budget?
You assume I think the problem is the tool, that is not the problem, the access to the tool by people who shouldn't have access is more of an issue. That doesn't mean the GOP cannot propose changes that would affect the actual problem.
This isn't about preventing all mass shootings because things like this will happen, the issue is that it is becoming a common occurrence to the point where it is often times happening monthly to bi-weekly.
I don't see us reaching any middle ground until the GOP starts proposing bills that address this issue. Unfortunately I don't have any faith in the GOP ever doing that.
You have to be VERY careful when you propose laws be made that restrict the liberties of law-abiding citizens.
Who will determine "who should and shouldn't have access"? Some on this very forum have made assertions that the very fact that you WANT to own a firearm shows a mental defect.
If we had faith in a non partisan, fair minded entity that we could trust to make those calls without fear of abuse, MAYBE you could get a bit of dialogue going down this road, but as it stands now, there is no way.
Furthermore, once again we are left with the fact that most of the offenders in these cases would have been cleared by any measurable standard.
Lastly, even as bad as you try to portray it to be, we are still talking about a small fraction of a percent of victims, which is not the blight that would demand people rush to relinquish their rights, in a vain attempt to feel good about having "done something besides sit on our hands".
your "solutions" are not falling on deaf ears, in fact we accept the fact that you are trying. however we also note that your "solutions" violate the second amendment.
as i have said, come up with a solution that does not violate the second amendment, does not restrict the rights of law abiding citizens, and punishes the criminals at the same time, and i am more than willing to listen, and perhaps even push your point of view forward.
and i realize that is not an easy thing to do, so credit to you for at least trying. but one thing i have asked for all along is that we enforce the laws that are on the books already. it is already illegal for a convicted criminal to own a gun, and it is already illegal for one that has been adjudicated mentally defective to own a gun. so tell me how is it going to make a difference to make it more illegal for these people to own a gun? what they are saying gun laws dont affect me, but wait this law that urbanlife78 came up with is going to make me think twice before i buy an illegal gun and commit a crime?
That is why I would rather hear solutions from those right of the political spectrum (including those that side with those right of the political spectrum on the subject of gun control.) What solutions should be done that satisfies the need to not violate the second amendment?
If it is illegal for those that are convicted criminals or people with mental health issues from having access to guns, then we need to start researching how they are getting access to guns and targeting those problems. Say we don't need a single new law, we just need to actually enforce the ones we have, then I would be 100% happy with that. So that brings up the question, why are we not fully enforcing the laws we already have?
Those that sell guns illegally should be looking at long prison sentences and we should be actively hunting those that do sell guns illegally.
Please show me where I wrote that you wrote that. It's just one of the ridiculous "solutions" being tossed around in other threads. Punish the masses because a fraction of people commit mass shootings.
And it's doubtful the next one will happen in San Diego because we have campus cops!
When you comment on my post and mention banning guns, then I am to assume you are talking to me....maybe next time don't quote me when you say that.
Actually yes you can, most mass shooters show major signs that people choose to ignore until something bad happens. We need to stop ignoring the warning signs.
Did YOU notice any "signs"?
What would you propose that would increase the likelihood that someone didn't ignore the warning signs?
Last edited by chadgates; 11-03-2015 at 04:01 PM..
That is why I would rather hear solutions from those right of the political spectrum (including those that side with those right of the political spectrum on the subject of gun control.) What solutions should be done that satisfies the need to not violate the second amendment?
If it is illegal for those that are convicted criminals or people with mental health issues from having access to guns, then we need to start researching how they are getting access to guns and targeting those problems. Say we don't need a single new law, we just need to actually enforce the ones we have, then I would be 100% happy with that. So that brings up the question, why are we not fully enforcing the laws we already have?
Those that sell guns illegally should be looking at long prison sentences and we should be actively hunting those that do sell guns illegally.
I don't think you will find gun advocates (that would be a much simpler term than trying to slide a "right wing" jab into every post) who would not support this 100%.
What would you propose that would increase the likelihood that someone didn't ignore the warning signs?
They would scream bloody murder if we used some tools at our disposal like monitoring IP addresses/computer patterns for sites these guys hit posting about wanting to shoot places up. Which is what many of them do before it happens.
But, for some reason that's off the table but sticking the screws to law abiding gun owners apparently isn't.
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.
