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.
All of these bans that these idiots come up with only pertains to law abiding citizens that will do no harm with them whatsoever. The terrorists and criminals don't give a damn about your regulations. You think regulations will stop these people? Oh yes, the terrorists are going to stop and read the regulations and go away. Effing dumb a$$es.
All of these bans that these idiots come up with only pertains to law abiding citizens that will do no harm with them whatsoever. The terrorists and criminals don't give a damn about your regulations. You think regulations will stop these people? Oh yes, the terrorists are going to stop and read the regulations and go away. Effing dumb a$$es.
Really? Really???
Again:
My girlfriend's high school friend was shot and killed this past March in Chicago over a simple iPhone robbery. The gun used was the shooter's gun, registered to him. He was a member of a gang in Chicago. Had there been any kind of gun control, the shooter would have been restricted from owning/purchasing a weapon due to his gang affiliation and prior criminal record. Instead, we have a dead 24 year old because the police didn't confiscate all his weapons when arrested for a prior violent crime.
I believe none of those other situation can harm others...
And you would be wrong. Freedom of speech allows dissemination of violent beliefs. Freedom of assembly allows people to assemble to work together for a common purpose (such as blowing things up). Freedom of religion allows churches and other religious institutions to promote the idea that violence in the name of a particular cause (jihad, stopping abortion, etc.) isn't wrong. And lots of dangerous people go free as a result of the 4th - 8th Amendments; we can't just skip the formalities of a trial and toss them straight into jail where we know they belong.
Quote:
If the government believes you are a terrorist threat, you would allow them access to weapons?
If the government has solid evidence that these people are a terrorist threat, let the government prove it in a court of law, and I'll be fine with preventing them from owning firearms. But mere suspicion does not justify stripping anyone of a right!
Quote:
If the US Government believes that those 47,000 people are potential threats to the safety of the public in an airplane, then there is no way I want one walking around with a gun. Why is that hard to comprehend?
The government believed that Senator Edward Kennedy was a potential threat to the safety of the public, and wouldn't allow him to board an airplane.
Until the government uses some form of due process to put people on their secret government watch list, I am not fine with using it for anything but directing the FBI to watch those people's public actions. Anything more than that is crossing a line that shouldn't be crossed, and that the Constitution specifically forbids the government to cross when it comes to denial of rights. Why is that hard to comprehend?
And you would be wrong. Freedom of speech allows dissemination of violent beliefs. Freedom of assembly allows people to assemble to work together for a common purpose (such as blowing things up). Freedom of religion allows churches and other religious institutions to promote the idea that violence in the name of a particular cause (jihad, stopping abortion, etc.) isn't wrong. And lots of dangerous people go free as a result of the 4th - 8th Amendments; we can't just skip the formalities of a trial and toss them straight into jail where we know they belong.
If the government has solid evidence that these people are a terrorist threat, let the government prove it in a court of law, and I'll be fine with preventing them from owning firearms. But mere suspicion does not justify stripping anyone of a right!
The government believed that Senator Edward Kennedy was a potential threat to the safety of the public, and wouldn't allow him to board an airplane.
Until the government uses some form of due process to put people on their secret government watch list, I am not fine with using it for anything but directing the FBI to watch those people's public actions. Anything more than that is crossing a line that shouldn't be crossed, and that the Constitution specifically forbids the government to cross when it comes to denial of rights. Why is that hard to comprehend?
Time to remove owning a gun as a right then
Should be the same as driving a car. Prior record? Can't get a license or purchase a car.
And there is a process specifically enumerated in the Constitution for how to do that. And if the majority of the citizenry thinks the 2nd Amendment is outmoded and needs to go, THAT is the process that should be followed, instead of these attempts to perform a sneaky end run around Constitutional protections, which ultimately weakens the protection of law for everyone.
Google "Jose Padilla" if you want to see where things can go when due process is deliberately ignored in favor of "protecting Americans from terrorists." If the government can do what it did to him, it can do it to YOU - and that should frighten everyone.
I'd rather have someone prove their innocence when tagged as a potential threat than do the above. Got it?
What is so hard to have someone pass a background check and clear being a potential threat to humanity to own a killing machine?
Well.... that's definitely a mess, and I do agree that nobody in their right mind wants to make such a mess. At the same time, , it might be the only option. I'm all to familiar with the aftermath of having to use lethal force. Its an ugly thing, even when the attacker both needed and deserved it. My lady was attacked, and dealing with the aftereffects on her....I wished it bad been me, instead. She had no other option but to do what she did, but that didn't help her any.
My own experience was quite different....still not something I would choose to go through again, but, neither of us had a choice either, and having the means to defend is something I am glad to have had, and to have. On the subject of what one "needs", in terms of a firearm, that is a personal choice, whether a six shot revolver, or a 15 shot autoader, . "Need" is an individual call. That's about all I can say, there. I have an AR 15, that I take with when out in the field. My personal need is such that the rifle suits things. I have mags for it from 5 to 30 rounds. Because I can. That is a good enough reason.
My girlfriend's high school friend was shot and killed this past March in Chicago over a simple iPhone robbery. The gun used was the shooter's gun, registered to him. He was a member of a gang in Chicago. Had there been any kind of gun control, the shooter would have been restricted from owning/purchasing a weapon due to his gang affiliation and prior criminal record. Instead, we have a dead 24 year old because the police didn't confiscate all his weapons when arrested for a prior violent crime.
Really? Really? And just how would a gun control law have prevented a gang member from getting a gun?
My girlfriend's high school friend was shot and killed this past March in Chicago over a simple iPhone robbery. The gun used was the shooter's gun, registered to him. He was a member of a gang in Chicago. Had there been any kind of gun control, the shooter would have been restricted from owning/purchasing a weapon due to his gang affiliation and prior criminal record. Instead, we have a dead 24 year old because the police didn't confiscate all his weapons when arrested for a prior violent crime.
You mention "gun control" not stopping this guy but end the story by blaming the police. Fact is there is a law in place already and the police didn't enforce it. Will they enforce a new law? Maybe if we used stronger words when writing the new law they will enforce 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.
