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.
I don't really care about the founding fathers, and I don't understand peoples' fetishization of them. That's some 1950's public school brainwashing as far as I'm concerned.
Therefore the fact that so-and-so technology predates the constitution is completely irrelevant to me.
4. Prohibit all media from glorifying mass murderers. For example, a murderer should only not be named or he should be given ridiculous nickname. Language such as "most deadly mass shooting in history" should not be used.
Except there are ample examples of exactly the opposite. e between the two states in the volume of homicides is linked only to guns. No other explanation can define it.
I can mention quite few example where the opposite is true....highly restricted states with high murder count and gun friendly ones with low count......there are so man other factors, gun ownership is irrelevant.
1. Stop releasing anybody who is ineligible to own a firearm. They need to stay in prison or hospital until their situations change.
2. Impose a mandatory 10 years minimum sentence without parole for anybody committing any felony with any arm, not just guns. The second time, the person gets life without parole.
3. Abolish background check entirely (see #1) - employment or gun purchase. Either people have paid the debt to the society or they should stay in prison until such time.
4. Prohibit all media from glorifying mass murderers. For example, a murderer should only not be named or he should be given ridiculous nickname. Language such as "most deadly mass shooting in history" should not be used.
5. All accomplices including the straw purchaser should be charged with the same crime as the primary.
6. Parents should be held liable for their children (<18) using their guns to commit crime.
7. Change the prison system so that inmates must work, learn or both.
It is hard to make people, not people any longer.
It does not even say, the right of citizens to keep & bear arms, shall not be infringed.....
Except there are ample examples of exactly the opposite. Once guns are removed from circulation they aren't used in crimes very often. Hawaii has strict gun laws and the fewest guns in circulation of any US state because of this few people are killed by guns in Hawaii. Which helps Hawaii have one of the lowest homicide rates of any US state at around 1.5 per 100,000. Alaska has half the number of people as Hawaii, is cold, sparse, and has less people living below the poverty line but has way more guns per person. Alaska averages about 5.6 homicides per 100,000. Alaska by every measure should have a lower murder rate then Hawaii. Which is small, crowded, warm and has one of the higher rates of poverty. The difference between the two states in the volume of homicides is linked only to guns. No other explanation can define it.
Is it about gun laws, or is it more of a societal issue, and lack of inner city, gang violence? Chicago, California, New York and many other cities, and states have very, very strict gun laws, and gun bans. There is still a high number of murders committed using guns in those places. You won't see gangs, drug dealers, and other criminals turning in their guns. The buy them illegally on the street, or steal them. There will always be an underground market for illegal guns.
Plus, unless the Constitution is amended, and the 2A repealed, you can not legally disarm law abiding citizens.
Now granted, I know the NRA has never been willing to compromise much either, but the first step would be at least to get the media talking about it by the left offering up some sort of middle ground to start from. But to approach gun owners like me who are open-minded and willing to compromise with a "no ARs for anybody, period" mentality, nothing is going to happen.
I was used to think that the NRA was too uncompromising but actually I changed my mind....given the incredible ignorance and ideological bent on the other side the NRA is right to dig their heels in....
The slippery slope danger is very real, the antis final objective is outright ban, one measure at the time, one unfortunate massacre at the time...
I don't really care about the founding fathers, and I don't understand peoples' fetishization of them. That's some 1950's public school brainwashing as far as I'm concerned.
Therefore the fact that so-and-so technology predates the constitution is completely irrelevant to me.
Your reliable insults toward our Country and it's citizens isolate you from relevancy and assure those like you will never win a national election any time soon. So keep it up. Everyone's listening!
I was used to think that the NRA was too uncompromising but actually I changed my mind....given the incredible ignorance and ideological bent on the other side the NRA is right to dig their heels in....
The slippery slope danger is very real, the antis final objective is outright ban, one measure at the time, one unfortunate massacre at the time...
Make no mistake, the LEFT wants to ban, and confiscate all firearms from legal, private ownership. Hillary even stated that in her campaign. She wanted Australian, and UK style gun bans, and forced confiscation. Then she got so much flak, Huma had to walk it back saying she just wanted gun buybacks, still forced, but you'd get compensated for them. Idiots. The entire push for gun registration is to eventually confiscate them. The NRA know this fact.
And without laws, their acts have no consequences.
Is that what you favor?
Not at all.
Breaking laws should have consequences, and they do.
But that is after the fact. It's reactive.
My point is that making more and more laws (gun control) won't stop these events from happening in the first place. More laws just encroach on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. More laws will do nothing to stop criminal law-breaking mass-murder shooters. Obviously, Steve Paddock didn't give a hoot about laws.
But you can't get rid of guns in their entirety either. I'm sure those on the left would love this, but it will never happen in this country. Ever.
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.
