gun law reform... please!

[Antidisestablishmentarian]

Cars and guns are both "deadly weapons" if used in the right circumstance.

 

[canndo]

Further restricting access to arms will not help the problem.

The most effective approach to dealing with mass shootings by crazy homicidal bastards is to shoot them, then and there.

Period.

History has proven, time and time again, that citizens who do not have access to arms WILL eventually suffer far worse crimes at the hands of their own government than ANY criminal element could ever imagine.

WWII Germany
Soviet era Russia
Kmehr Rouge cambodia
Communist china
North Korea
Communist Cuba

And on, and on, and on.........

Prohibition FAILED with alcohol.
Prohibition FAILED with "drugs".
Prohibition has FAILED with firearms, and the issue will only get WORSE if further restrictions are attempted.

Not a one of those countries have a 200 year history of a Constitutional Republic. When one of those fails due to a lack of civilian owned guns then you might have a point.

 

[Rob Roy]

No more slippery than telling people when, how, and where they can defend themselves.

Agreed. Defensive actions are okay with me. It seems at the root of many problems is ....."telling other people what to do..." eh ?

 

[canndo]

in the mid 90's california had "electrical utility regulation reform", check out how that turned out in the hands of the good democrats of the legislature.

You don't really want to play in that mud Doc, Enron and El Passo Gas were found to have been illegaly gaming the system, regardless of what the "good dems" had in mind and regardless of the state of dereg. A mini-skirted teen may encourage a rapist with those cute wiggles but the crime is still all his.

 

[beenthere]

this is a nice bit of rhetoric.... but Cars have primary purpose other than killing. One can claim that firearms are technicaly tools that put a high speed projectile in a desired location, but fire arms for the most part are designed to kill things. You are not living in a "truely free society and your last statement makes no sense in the modern world. this government is not afraid of your guns.

Nice bit of rhetoric yourself canndo!

But the primary purpose of a gun being to kill things is irrelevant.
The rights of the American people to bear arms in the Second Amendment was for the sole purpose of protection, by infringing those rights, you restrict the ability of Americans to protect themselves.

Care to share your thoughts of why you think drugs should be legalized even though they kill Americans too?

 

[canndo]

if you are busted by the feds, then yes shit might get dicey, but under the new supreme court ruling local and state po-pos are prohibited from enforcing federal laws (lulz), one would asssume this includes prohibitions on intra-state cannabis possession and cultivation.

since my activities are lawful within my state, and i do not engage in inter-state commerce with my dope, therefore federal laws do not apply, even if they do insist that their fictional demon weed "marijuana" holds some nebulous connection to my innocent cannabis plants.

you were of course right it was harry ainslinger. he always looked like a robert to me though. or a richard. a fat mis-shapen sweaty pustulent oozing richard. a flaccid, impotent richard, dangling uselessly, unable to rise beyond the needs of urination.

Wrong Doc, Gonzales v. Raich insists that it does not matter that you do not go out of state for any portion of your grow. Fed still has jusrisdiction over your "commerce" even though you don't sell, even though you don't buy nutes or even seeds from out of state. Try your argument in Fed court and it will last as long as it takes prosecution to remember Gonzales.

 

[canndo]

300,000,000 people in the USA and one stupid mofo. If you want my guns come get them if you can.

More gun toting bravado - If the Feds want your guns, unless yours are unregistered, you will give them up.

 

[cannabineer]

Not a one of those countries have a 200 year history of a Constitutional Republic. When one of those fails due to a lack of civilian owned guns then you might have a point.

Germany was just coming off being a Constitutional republic. The new regime got its foot onto the door republicly.
But the other examples are not comparable at all. cn

 

[Dirty Harry]

Without reading all comments, it is not the guns that kill people, but the person using it that wants to kill people. Lets say all guns were to vanish over night. If someone wanted to kill someone or a group, they will find a way.
Baseball bat, iron pipe, an axe, knife, sword, bow and arrow, hammer, home made bomb, driving a vehicle into a crowd...
The movie shooting was tragic, but what if the person didn't use guns but explosives instead? What if he had multiple pipe bombs strapped to his body and in the dark started lighting them and throwing them all around in the theater? He would of killed more people faster than he could of using the guns. His primary weapon of choice jammed. An iron pipe filled with an explosive mixed with nails and BBs with a simple fuse will work every time.
Hell, he could of got a job working the concession stand and put poison in the popcorn butter. Ever went to a buffet? All the food is in the open and it would not be hard for anyone to poison all the food with cyanide while pretending to be filling his plate.
You can not ban every thing that can be used to kill, and humans have been killing each other before firearms were even invented.
It is not the tool, but the person that kills.

 

[NoDrama]

More gun toting bravado - If the Feds want your guns, unless yours are unregistered, you will give them up.

How many guns are registered?

Answer: None

Argument invalidated.

 

[canndo]

Not me, I think aside from providing food that isn't tainted or diseased, the fast food industry should just be left the fuck alone like all other industries, and then let adults decide whether or not they want to eat food they know is going to make them unhealthy. Kinda like smokes, tobacco should be quality, but if people smoke and die, well wtf it's smoke and you are willingly inhauing it, you are an idiot and what happens is your own damn fault. You coughed the first time you smoked, what the fuck did you keep going for?

People need to regulate themselves, not have the government save them from themselves.

And.... how do they know what is healthy for them and what sorts of things are in those fast food sandwiches? If American citizens can manage themselves with regard to fast food, fine, but they can't and so they need government help.

 

[Mindmelted]

Go to dc or detroit and you can buy a gun on almost any corner from a thug or dirtbag.
You just cant but one from a store legally! All gun control does is keep guns out of law abiding citizens hands.
And anyone tells you diffrent is delusional.

 

[NoDrama]

And.... how do they know what is healthy for them and what sorts of things are in those fast food sandwiches? If American citizens can manage themselves with regard to fast food, fine, but they can't and so they need government help.

Jesus H christ on a Popsicle stick. A few fat asses with poor self control eat too much fast food and you think the government should take over those people's lives? Really?

Holy fucking shit

 

[canndo]

We need to amend all the gun laws to recognize and uphold and not infringe upon or contradict the second amendment.
Everyone should be able to get any guns and weapons they want legally.

Without a requirement for registration. Too many people take for granted that there will always be mass killings in this country. We balance our freedoms, currently we allow very sick people more freedom than we intend to allow well people who wish to own a weapon. If it is true that a sick person will find a way to harm others, gun or no gun then would it not be wise to encourage a few more laws allowing society to at least temporarily hold and manage folks who are mentaly ill? It is true that not all shooters are ill, some are simply evil and there really is nothing our society can do about evil, but we can tighten our ability to deal with the mentaly sick before they get to the point where they have to fly into an IRS building (I think he was sick), or shoot up a movie theater.

More to the point is the current animosity toward groups. I cannot prove conclusively that this animosity is an empowering force to violence but we don't often see sick people shooting up "main stream" institutions.

 

[Dirty Harry]

How many guns are registered?

Answer: None

Argument invalidated.

Unfortunately when one legally buys a firearm, you have to fill out paperwork to buy it. That may not be officially registered, but there is a record that you bought and now own a firearm. That is all the information the Govt. needs to come to your door to take them away. If you say they were stolen, you better have a police report to prove it. You sold it? They will want to know who to.
Either way, if they want the firearms, they know where to do looking for them and will trash your place looking for them.
I hate to say it, but if gun confiscation ever happens, only the criminals will keep theirs because they didn't legally buy them so there is no record of the purchase.

 

[cannabineer]

Without a requirement for registration. Too many people take for granted that there will always be mass killings in this country. We balance our freedoms, currently we allow very sick people more freedom than we intend to allow well people who wish to own a weapon. If it is true that a sick person will find a way to harm others, gun or no gun then would it not be wise to encourage a few more laws allowing society to at least temporarily hold and manage folks who are mentaly ill? It is true that not all shooters are ill, some are simply evil and there really is nothing our society can do about evil, but we can tighten our ability to deal with the mentaly sick before they get to the point where they have to fly into an IRS building (I think he was sick), or shoot up a movie theater.

More to the point is the current animosity toward groups. I cannot prove conclusively that this animosity is an empowering force to violence but we don't often see sick people shooting up "main stream" institutions.

That Batman showing was as mainstream as it gets. cn

 

[canndo]

No, the 2nd amendment does not confer the right to own weapons. NONE of the amendments confer rights on US Citizens, whomever told you that was wrong. The second Amendment prohibits government from dicking around with citizens rights to own firearms.

The constitution does not convey rights to you, you had those rights given to you by the mere fact that you are human.

Actually, the punishments for posession of firearms while in the posession of "narcotics" are far more severe than either alone. Technicaly, the posession of a firearm in the comission of any crime - including intent to distribute, distribution, intent to manufacture or manufacture will bring you a longer manditory sentence and this is even if you have never before been convicted of any crime. Ownership of firearms while having a medical card is still an ongoing debate.

 

[canndo]

A little proof of the total hypocrisy of the left and especially the liberals and progressives on this forum.
I'd like to hear the lefties on this forum who are so hell bent with changing the existing gun laws anytime a shooting death makes national headlines. Where is your outrage for the drug overdose deaths which are even higher.
The hypocrisy is that they want to restrict lawful gun owners rights by ridding the US of it's millions of guns, then turn around and advocate the legalization of drugs.



According to a little noticed January report from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), drug overdoses killed more than 33,000 people in 2005, the last year for which firm data are available. That makes drug overdose the second leading cause of accidental death, behind only motor vehicle accidents (43,667) and ahead of firearms deaths (30,694). http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2008/mar/21/drug_overdose_deaths_are_going_t

A silly comment Beenthere. If we begin to encounter people putting drugs in the water supply in order to kill or injure numbers of people we will see suggested laws limiting those substances. We do see laws limiting the sale of legitimate drugs that are precursors to meth, we see laws limiting the sale of legitimate chemical precursors as well.

Hence, no hypocrisy is evident.

 

[canndo]

Go to dc or detroit and you can buy a gun on almost any corner from a thug or dirtbag.
You just cant but one from a store legally! All gun control does is keep guns out of law abiding citizens hands.
And anyone tells you diffrent is delusional.

Then call me delusional. I contend that should laws be enacted that limits legitimate citizens from owning firearms that those legitimate citizens will aquire them from other sources.

 

[NoDrama]

Unfortunately when one legally buys a firearm, you have to fill out paperwork to buy it. That may not be officially registered, but there is a record that you bought and now own a firearm. That is all the information the Govt. needs to come to your door to take them away. If you say they were stolen, you better have a police report to prove it. You sold it? They will want to know who to.
Either way, if they want the firearms, they know where to do looking for them and will trash your place looking for them.
I hate to say it, but if gun confiscation ever happens, only the criminals will keep theirs because they didn't legally buy them so there is no record of the purchase.

Umm no, it doesn't work like that. The STORE that you bought your firearm from keeps the record of the sale for 3 years, then burns/shreds them. The government is NEVER in the loop.

Registration of firearms would be in opposition to the 2nd amendment.

Even if they come, tell em you sold them all at the gun show. You don't need to keep a record of who you sold to at a gun show.