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.
Cruz was a legal gun owner. Most of the people who commit mass murder with guns got them from legal gun owners or purchased them legally. Most laws aren't designed for everyone, anyway. There are laws against rape and murder even though most people will never do either.
"Responsible gun owners" have had years to come to the table with solutions. Instead, they only offer "thoughts and prayers" and throwing yet more guns into every situation. That is NOT rational, and until they become so, yeah... gun nut fits.
Not sure what your point is, he is the 0.00001% that doesn't fit into the other category I mentioned, I figured that was obvious?
And have those laws 100% eliminated rape and murder? No, they have not, nor will any law ever do so. There are criminals and bad people in every society, we cant let that .00001% of the population be the driver of making our laws so restrictive that society doesn't function well. Governing to the lowest common denominator by default puts way too many restrictions on way too many people.
Cruz was a legal gun owner. Most of the people who commit mass murder with guns got them from legal gun owners or purchased them legally. Most laws aren't designed for everyone, anyway. There are laws against rape and murder even though most people will never do either.
"Responsible gun owners" have had years to come to the table with solutions. Instead, they only offer "thoughts and prayers" and throwing yet more guns into every situation. That is NOT rational, and until they become so, yeah... gun nut fits.
Well, do tell, what are some "common sense" gun laws that could enhance the current 20k laws on the books? Step up, you want the laws, what are they?
Just right of the top of my head, we have introduced the 4473, certain cities have waiting periods, some cities you have to register your guns.....
No its not. It is an argument against enacting yet more laws, when there are already thousands of gun laws, and laws against murder, etc on the books already. More laws will only affect the law abiding. ENFORCE THE EXISTING myriad of laws.
He is disliked because he is IGNORANT of guns, existing gun laws, and wants to take rights away from the law abiding that won't protect school students anymore than what we already have.
That's a terrible argument. If a law isn't working, you change it to make it more effective, not give up on all laws altogether. That's insane. And again, Cruz followed existing laws in Florida.
Literally no one's right to own guns is under threat. The 2nd makes no mention of the age one can buy a gun, what type of gun people can and can't own, etc. Common sense limitations on the 2nd is no different than the 1st having limitations such as libel laws or not inducing panic.
Doesn't that make them criminals? Not exactly supportive of "responsible gun owners". More law and order wisdom from the Right.
The laws are unconstitutional, but yes they are breaking the law. The question is, are the actually using the guns in crime? NO, they are not. They are using them responsibly. Why isn't the state enforcing the law?
Also, at what point do law abiding people, peacefully engage in civil disobedience when their government passes laws that are clearly illegal? What if slavery, or even discrimination were made legal again? Would you not protest that?
Please, you definitely implied it with the "needs something else done" comment.
It shows more about you that you're more concerned with some curse words than his point that kids, among many others, are dying because of America's refusal to address its gun problem. Oh no, bad words! Give me a break.
Just because you think of violence, I don't, how about upgrading your personal vocabulary, so you can talk like you know something?
No, I expect him to provide rational thought and a path forward, he clearly is not providing that.
I could care less about bad words, but again, and this seems to really hard for you to grasp, if you want people to listen to you explain yourself rationally....no need to curse.
What do college admissions have to do with anything? And how could you possibly know why he was rejected? And how would people know he was even rejected?
He whined about it on twitter. Says he's going to take a "gap year" because of the rejections.
Colleges are clamoring for SJWs. He'd be the darling of college campuses anywhere if he wasn't bullying fellow Americans exactly like Hillary did in the 2016 presidential election. She lost because of it. David Hogg is making the same mistake, calling millions of law-abiding Americans killers and saying they have blood on their hands simply because they own guns and are NRA members.
Quote:
This seems like something right-wing sites are spreading, along with fake yearbook photos and Emma Gonzalez tearing up the Constitution.
While the Constitution photo may have been fake, the photos of Emma wearing a military jacket with a Cuban Flag on it are not.
Here's the problem with that: By doing so, she advocates following the Cuban model of government... Disarm citizens, and then mass execute them. It began under Castro with mass summary executions of Batista officials and soon progressed to thousands of LGBTs and other "enemies of the state," etc. The irony is that she claims to be Bisexual. So she's supporting a regime that disarmed and then executed those of her kind.
There are some really ugly actions being taken by both David and Emma, who apparently are devoid of historical knowledge and irrationally react to events emotionally instead of using critical thinking skills.
Quote:
So criminals don't obey laws... I have seen this argument made many, many times. That is an argument for having no laws at all. Is that what you're saying? That laws aren't followed by the people who break them, so lets not waste any time having any?
I'm saying don't apply restrictions to those who AREN'T the problem. Especially don't disarm them or restrict their access to a means of self-defense. All that does is make them soft targets for the criminals who won't obey gun laws, unable to defend themselves. Have you noticed that the mass shootings occur in "gun-free zones?" Schools, movie theaters, churches, concert venues, etc. Guess why. The shooter knows the victims can't fight back.
That's a terrible argument. If a law isn't working, you change it to make it more effective, not give up on all laws altogether. That's insane. And again, Cruz followed existing laws in Florida.
Literally no one's right to own guns is under threat. The 2nd makes no mention of the age one can buy a gun, what type of gun people can and can't own, etc. Common sense limitations on the 2nd is no different than the 1st having limitations such as libel laws or not inducing panic.
Quote:
“And to your point, Mr. Baker, regarding the lack of prosecutions on lying on Form 4473s, we simply don’t have the time or manpower to prosecute everybody who lies on a form, that checks a wrong box, that answers a question inaccurately.”
Well, do tell, what are some "common sense" gun laws that could enhance the current 20k laws on the books? Step up, you want the laws, what are they?
Just right of the top of my head, we have introduced the 4473, certain cities have waiting periods, some cities you have to register your guns.....
What has the "anti-gun nuts" provided?
Limitations on types, limitations on magazine capacity, mandatory waiting periods, mandatory universal background checks on all purchases, even at gun shows and other evens. 100% registration. No unregulated private sales. That's a good start, at least. And they must be national. One city having stricter rules while another doesn't just doesn't work. There is nothing to stop someone from just going to buy them in a city/state with less rules, which is exactly the situation we have now.
People would still otherwise be able to have guns for self-defense, hunting, etc.
Limitations on types, limitations on magazine capacity, mandatory waiting periods, mandatory universal background checks on all purchases, even at gun shows and other evens. 100% registration. No unregulated private sales. That's a good start, at least. And they must be national. One city having stricter rules while another doesn't just doesn't work. There is nothing to stop someone from just going to buy them in a city/state with less rules, which is exactly the situation we have now.
People would still otherwise be able to have guns for self-defense, hunting, etc.
As a non-gun owner I find this to be a horrible idea. Why not just publish a list of what homes to come rob?
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.
