|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 25, 2015 16:49:26 GMT
Did you actually read what I wrote? I didn't say anything about a complete ban on ownership. And pssst, fewer legal guns available for theft also means fewer guns endangering people in the inner city. but you are advocating no longer being allowed to manufacture or sell guns which is pretty much a ban on anybody who doesn't currently own one. What about hunters? Are they no longer allowed to hunt? Solutions like this are why I seriously think about donating to the NRA whichvis funny because a couple of years ago when DH wanted to, I told him I'd find an anti-gun group and give them twice the money. How did Australia get the guns from the criminals? Did they have the amount of guns we do?
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 25, 2015 16:53:55 GMT
I think your "guess" may be incorrect. Most people that I know who own guns (and I am willing to bet that I know more people who own guns than you do) keep them for quite a long time. They aren't discarded willy-nilly. Often an older gun is used as a trade in on a newer gun. People buy used guns from stores all the time. As my kid grows out of his gun, we upgrade him to a better or bigger one. When DH wants a new .357 he trades in his older one for a better model. When DH has sold or bought guns from to or from a private party it has always been someone he knows. You cannot post on ad on craigslist to sell a gun. Many newspapers do not run ads selling weapons. What leads you to your belief that a large percentage of folks own guns because of the what if mentality? We own guns because DH and now both DSs hunt. There is no what if there. DH bought a handgun to take to the shooting range. He doesn't have a CC permit and the gun stays locked in a gun safe at our house when not being used. It is not in our rifle/shotgun case, but is kept in a gun safe in our room which is locked. The gun is loaded. He didn't buy it for what if, but when one night someone came to our door late at night and we realized that with all the guns we had, none were loaded or accessible, we decided to keep this one upstairs. I keep getting accused of having privilege in the other thread, I wonder if there isn't some privilege of living in a suburban area that has quick police response time and enough officers to cover an area. Maybe there are some areas who have long response times. My area has one to two cops on duty at any time (except during our fall festival) and that officer can be anywhere in a large radius. He covers my town, the town near us, and all the rural surrounding areas. It could be 20-40 minutes before he is at my house if I dial 911 and I live mere blocks from the station. Do you know every gun owner in this country? Because if not then you don't know how everyone treats their guns. It's not meant to be a snarky comment just a fact. I think and I have read that illegal guns start out as legal guns and somehow and someway end up in the hands of criminals or gangs or crazies. So how is that happening? It is possible once we find out how this happens we can keep guns out of the hands of criminals etc. Maybe not all but some. To me that would be a good thing don't you agree? And I firmly believe that some gun owners DO treat their guns like an old pair of shoes. How else would you explain the deaths of children because some fool didn't properly secure a loaded gun? You putting yourself in the "just in case" or "what if" category. The people who I think fall in this category are people who don't hunt or don't need them for protection on the job or protection because they live in an area where they would need a gun for protection from critters. They are people who buy guns just because. They have no reason to have a gun but hey why not. They are also the group I feel are mostly responsible for legal guns becoming illegal guns. And "accidents" that result in the death of innocents. Guns are dangerous things and should never be purchased "just because." I do know we can't keep going on the way we are. It has to stop. good for you. Glad your belief is based on something. Shooting is a sport. It is even in the olympics. And luckily for us gun owners, we are going to keep going the way we are and the reason will be people like you. There arr many, many gun owners who would have no problem with sensible gun legislation, but they fear people like you will use it as a stepping stone to ban guns. So they ban together against any gun control measure to make sure you don't get to ban guns entirely.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 25, 2015 16:56:51 GMT
Because you and your guns are going to stop us? You aren't doing anything, LOLWell, you seem awfully threatened by what we're "not" doing, with your absolutes and your all caps. I guess I'd like to know why you just know for certain a majority of citizens and their elected leaders aren't ever going to enact meaningful gun control. Do you have the ability to see into the future? Because that would be pretty cool.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jul 2, 2024 11:02:21 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 17:08:37 GMT
Yes, it's really terrible what's happened in Australia and the UK. Just awful. All those people not being killed by guns. I don't know how they live with it. ![:nod:](//storage.proboards.com/5645536/images/U60p50mxzUNFaJHP0XeB.jpg) It's tough I tell you! It's hard not worrying about being randomly shot at the mall, or the theatre or school....having to 'decide' not to live in fear rather than actually not living in fear. It's a nightmare knowing that even if my home is broken into, they won't be armed with a gun. And hardest of all is not thinking that I need to have a gun to defend myself from anyone and everyone else who might have a gun and might just not be a responsible gun owner. ETA - not proud on myself for sinking to the level of sarcasm but you know......I'll be leaving this thread now. It frustrates me no end, I can't imagine how it must feel to actually have to live this crap. I hate to be the one to break the news to you, but there IS in fact gun violence in London. I've been doing some reading on the gun problems that STILL exist in both the UK and Australia, despite gun bans.
This was especially heartbreaking.
Campaigners today called for extra resources to be spent on tackling gun crime in the capital after a five-year-old girl and a shopkeeper were caught in the crossfire of a gang-related shooting in south London.
The young girl and 35-year-old man are in a critical condition in hospital after being shot inside the Stockwell Food and Wine shop on Stockwell Road, south London.
Detectives said they were innocent bystanders in gang shooting. Witnesses said two black youths ran into the shop to hide from a group chasing them. As they sheltered inside, one of the attackers opened fire shooting the five-year-old in the chest and the man in the face.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 25, 2015 17:16:03 GMT
Did you actually read what I wrote? I didn't say anything about a complete ban on ownership. And pssst, fewer legal guns available for theft also means fewer guns endangering people in the inner city. You said "I believe the socially responsible thing to do is to get rid of guns. I think their manufacture and sale in the US should cease immediately"
So you didn't say that you favor a BAN on ownership. You simply said a ban on the manufacture and sale.
Banning the manufacture and sale of legally purchasing a gun is simply going to prevent law-abiding citizens from purchasing a gun. The sale of guns will simply be forced underground, where it cannot be monitored or regulated in any way and there will STILL be criminals with guns. There will still be crazy people illegally buying guns from the gun runners underground and there will still be gun violence in Chicago and movie theatres being shot up.
But it will be much more difficult. Nobody enacts any law thinking it is going to completely eliminate the undesirable behavior. The goal of gun control is to make using one to kill people a lot more difficult, thus reducing the number of deaths. Again, let's look back at other free countries that have serious restrictions on gun purchase and ownership. They simply do not have the rates per capita of gun death like ours. Their overall murder rates are much, much lower than ours. And frankly, you can't put it all on mental health - conservatives cannot simultaneously decry the quality of care available under socialized medicine and then suggest that those countries' murder rates are lower because of their fabulous mental health care. At some point we have to admit that the reduced availability of guns had something to do with it. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that fewer legally purchased guns = fewer guns to steal and be used by criminals. Perhaps you can answer the question we were asking above about why the second amendment is so important today. All the sky-is-falling scenarios posited by Rainbow and others have failed to show up in other countries with gun control; in fact, people are much less likely to die violently in those countries, and so far their governments have failed to convert to totalitarian states over a defenseless populace. In Australia you can still purchase and keep a gun under certain very restricted conditions. Maybe something like that would work here. I just think it's insanity that guns are so readily available in so many places. And I do believe there are a lot of "oh well, I have one just in case" owners because I know a lot of them. A LOT of people in Texas bought guns after Obama was elected - even if they had no interest in purchasing one previously - because they thought he was going to take all the guns away. And all those guns are sitting in people's houses now, just waiting to be stolen by criminals or eventually taken to a pawn shop or sold through private sale to the mentally ill and/or criminals. I also know a lot of people who keep a loaded gun in their bedside drawer "for protection" without any idea how they would use it in a stressful situation, or how they could be sure their kid isn't in the hallway when they fire it because they wanted to see what the noise was, or how they would prevent an intruder who wakes them up in their beds from taking the gun and turning it on them. We have guys who stage open-carry demonstrations in crowded places to intimidate people. We have morons who open fire in public places to protect a PlayStation and are lauded as local heroes. WTF? When do we wake up and realize that we are our own worst problem?
|
|
|
Post by gar on Jul 25, 2015 17:16:03 GMT
![:nod:](//storage.proboards.com/5645536/images/U60p50mxzUNFaJHP0XeB.jpg) It's tough I tell you! It's hard not worrying about being randomly shot at the mall, or the theatre or school....having to 'decide' not to live in fear rather than actually not living in fear. It's a nightmare knowing that even if my home is broken into, they won't be armed with a gun. And hardest of all is not thinking that I need to have a gun to defend myself from anyone and everyone else who might have a gun and might just not be a responsible gun owner. ETA - not proud on myself for sinking to the level of sarcasm but you know......I'll be leaving this thread now. It frustrates me no end, I can't imagine how it must feel to actually have to live this crap. I hate to be the one to break the news to you, but there IS in fact gun violence in London. I've been doing some reading on the gun problems that STILL exist in both the UK and Australia, despite gun bans.
This was especially heartbreaking.
Campaigners today called for extra resources to be spent on tackling gun crime in the capital after a five-year-old girl and a shopkeeper were caught in the crossfire of a gang-related shooting in south London.
The young girl and 35-year-old man are in a critical condition in hospital after being shot inside the Stockwell Food and Wine shop on Stockwell Road, south London.
Detectives said they were innocent bystanders in gang shooting. Witnesses said two black youths ran into the shop to hide from a group chasing them. As they sheltered inside, one of the attackers opened fire shooting the five-year-old in the chest and the man in the face.
Believe me you're not breaking any news, you're right, there are isolated gun incidents in large cities from time to time, almost always drug/gang related. No one said it was perfect but you know full well that there's no comparison and I stand by my points about not living in fear of guns/people with guns. Eta - oh and, the shooting you mentioned was, I believe 2012 if it's the one I'm thinking of. After all, it doesn't happen often so its usually big news. Over 3 years ago......
|
|
|
Post by momstime on Jul 25, 2015 17:21:16 GMT
MergeLeft said: "I think we can ban manufacture and sales, and enact laws to hold gun owners very responsible for any wrongdoing or "accident" committed with a gun they own, including if it was stolen because they didn't properly secure it."
Are you prepared to have this same logic/consequences applied to people who have their car stolen and used to commit a crime (hit and run, robbery get away, drug run, etc), or people who have their narcotic prescriptions stolen from their homes and resold on the street? Should those owners be fined? Sent to prison? What? If someone wants to steal something, they will. There is no such thing as securing it completely. And we have seen how well a complete ban on drugs is working along with the epic fail that was prohibition. Prohibition=the dawn of the criminal enterprise.
If someone is hell bent on going out in a blaze of glory they don't need a gun to do it. A car would work, a match would work, dynamite, a bomb, a knife, poison...etc. Stop blaming the guns. Guns don't kill. People kill. It really is as simple as that.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 25, 2015 17:32:18 GMT
MergeLeft said: "I think we can ban manufacture and sales, and enact laws to hold gun owners very responsible for any wrongdoing or "accident" committed with a gun they own, including if it was stolen because they didn't properly secure it." Are you prepared to have this same logic/consequences applied to people who have their car stolen and used to commit a crime (hit and run, robbery get away, drug run, etc), or people who have their narcotic prescriptions stolen from their homes and resold on the street? Should those owners be fined? Sent to prison? What? If someone wants to steal something, they will. There is no such thing as securing it completely. And we have seen how well a complete ban on drugs is working along with the epic fail that was prohibition. Prohibition=the dawn of the criminal enterprise. If someone is hell bent on going out in a blaze of glory they don't need a gun to do it. A car would work, a match would work, dynamite, a bomb, a knife, poison...etc. Stop blaming the guns. Guns don't kill. People kill. It really is as simple as that. no they are not. It has nothing to do with anything other than they don't like guns and they don't like the people who own guns. The murder rate in this country is related to a whole slew of factors, many of which are probably different than in other countries: population centers, gangs, drugs, poverty levels... I live in an area where it is more common to own guns than not and people have multiple guns, whether they be long guns or handguns and yet, we don't have a problem with gun crimes. It isn't for the lack of guns. Wyoming does not have a huge gun crime problem and yet they own more guns up there per 1000 people than anywhere else in our country. Places with the least guns per 1000 people...like new York have higher gun crime rates. Now I am not saying that if more people in new York had legal guns the gun crime rate would go down, I think thatvisba silly argument, but I do think it illustrates that perhaps the number of guns isn't the problem.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 25, 2015 17:38:25 GMT
You aren't doing anything, LOL Well, you seem awfully threatened by what we're "not" doing, with your absolutes and your all caps. I guess I'd like to know why you just know for certain a majority of citizens and their elected leaders aren't ever going to enact meaningful gun control. Do you have the ability to see into the future? Because that would be pretty cool. Adamant is more like it. I can see the future. 2A! (And it is pretty cool.)
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 25, 2015 17:57:56 GMT
Well, you seem awfully threatened by what we're "not" doing, with your absolutes and your all caps. I guess I'd like to know why you just know for certain a majority of citizens and their elected leaders aren't ever going to enact meaningful gun control. Do you have the ability to see into the future? Because that would be pretty cool. Adamant is more like it. I can see the future. 2A! (And it is pretty cool.)OK. ![:rolleyes:](//storage.proboards.com/5645536/images/Ui47LhQw2NqWVWNNqtfM.jpg) This is what you do when you've run out of substantive arguments, so we'll just leave it there.
|
|
|
Post by roundtwo on Jul 25, 2015 17:58:42 GMT
I saw a a great response to this tired cliché the other day - " Saying "guns don't kill people" is like saying "defibrillators don't save people"
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 25, 2015 18:08:23 GMT
MergeLeft said: "I think we can ban manufacture and sales, and enact laws to hold gun owners very responsible for any wrongdoing or "accident" committed with a gun they own, including if it was stolen because they didn't properly secure it." Are you prepared to have this same logic/consequences applied to people who have their car stolen and used to commit a crime (hit and run, robbery get away, drug run, etc), or people who have their narcotic prescriptions stolen from their homes and resold on the street? Should those owners be fined? Sent to prison? What? If someone wants to steal something, they will. There is no such thing as securing it completely. And we have seen how well a complete ban on drugs is working along with the epic fail that was prohibition. Prohibition=the dawn of the criminal enterprise. *sigh* I don't understand the attitude that because an action doesn't solve every single problem ever, well then, we just shouldn't even try. You and I both know that guns are not in the same class as cars and medications and other things that might be stolen, and it's disingenuous to pretend that you don't. By your logic, we should not only legalize heroin and meth but make them widely available at Walmart and drugstores around the country, because banning them just hasn't worked. The evidence is in favor of gun control. Where strict control exists at a nationwide level, homicide rates are dramatically lower than in the U.S. It's willful ignorance and selfishness to pretend otherwise. Comparing state to state or city to city is useless, because we don't control movement of people or goods between states or cities. I'm not foolish enough to think that making gun ownership very restricted will completely prevent gun violence, but based on evidence - not political grandstanding about rights written into a document more than two centuries old to govern a country that might as well have been on a different planet for all the resemblance it bears to the current U.S. - we know that strict nationwide gun control makes people safer. Period.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 25, 2015 18:12:44 GMT
I saw a a great response to this tired cliché the other day - " Saying "guns don't kill people" is like saying "defibrillators don't save people" Lame response. Neither will do anything unless a person uses it.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 25, 2015 18:14:10 GMT
Adamant is more like it. I can see the future. 2A! (And it is pretty cool.) OK. ![:rolleyes:](//storage.proboards.com/5645536/images/Ui47LhQw2NqWVWNNqtfM.jpg) This is what you do when you've run out of substantive arguments, so we'll just leave it there. I'm fine with that. 2A is here to stay.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 25, 2015 18:16:52 GMT
And luckily for us gun owners, we are going to keep going the way we are and the reason will be people like you. There arr many, many gun owners who would have no problem with sensible gun legislation, but they fear people like you will use it as a stepping stone to ban guns. So they ban together against any gun control measure to make sure you don't get to ban guns entirely. Does that really make sense? It seems pretty childish to me. "I'm so afraid of you possibly getting what I think you want that I'm going to vote against something that might benefit all of us." I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 25, 2015 18:17:10 GMT
MergeLeft said: "I think we can ban manufacture and sales, and enact laws to hold gun owners very responsible for any wrongdoing or "accident" committed with a gun they own, including if it was stolen because they didn't properly secure it." Are you prepared to have this same logic/consequences applied to people who have their car stolen and used to commit a crime (hit and run, robbery get away, drug run, etc), or people who have their narcotic prescriptions stolen from their homes and resold on the street? Should those owners be fined? Sent to prison? What? If someone wants to steal something, they will. There is no such thing as securing it completely. And we have seen how well a complete ban on drugs is working along with the epic fail that was prohibition. Prohibition=the dawn of the criminal enterprise. *sigh* I don't understand the attitude that because an action doesn't solve every single problem ever, well then, we just shouldn't even try. You and I both know that guns are not in the same class as cars and medications and other things that might be stolen, and it's disingenuous to pretend that you don't. By your logic, we should not only legalize heroin and meth but make them widely available at Walmart and drugstores around the country, because banning them just hasn't worked. The evidence is in favor of gun control. Where strict control exists at a nationwide level, homicide rates are dramatically lower than in the U.S. It's willful ignorance and selfishness to pretend otherwise. Comparing state to state or city to city is useless, because we don't control movement of people or goods between states or cities. I'm not foolish enough to think that making gun ownership very restricted will completely prevent gun violence, but based on evidence - not political grandstanding about rights written into a document more than two centuries old to govern a country that might as well have been on a different planet for all the resemblance it bears to the current U.S. - we know that strict nationwide gun control makes people safer. Period. If you don't like our freedoms here you are free to go elsewhere. Nobody is making you stay.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 25, 2015 18:19:28 GMT
*sigh* I don't understand the attitude that because an action doesn't solve every single problem ever, well then, we just shouldn't even try. You and I both know that guns are not in the same class as cars and medications and other things that might be stolen, and it's disingenuous to pretend that you don't. By your logic, we should not only legalize heroin and meth but make them widely available at Walmart and drugstores around the country, because banning them just hasn't worked. The evidence is in favor of gun control. Where strict control exists at a nationwide level, homicide rates are dramatically lower than in the U.S. It's willful ignorance and selfishness to pretend otherwise. Comparing state to state or city to city is useless, because we don't control movement of people or goods between states or cities. I'm not foolish enough to think that making gun ownership very restricted will completely prevent gun violence, but based on evidence - not political grandstanding about rights written into a document more than two centuries old to govern a country that might as well have been on a different planet for all the resemblance it bears to the current U.S. - we know that strict nationwide gun control makes people safer. Period. If you don't like our freedoms here you are free to go elsewhere. Nobody is making you stay.No. This is still a country where citizens can make changes through our elected representatives, and there are a growing number of people who think nationwide gun control is the answer. If you don't like that, you can leave.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jul 2, 2024 11:02:21 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 18:22:04 GMT
If you don't like our freedoms here you are free to go elsewhere. Nobody is making you stay. No. This is still a country where citizens can make changes through our elected representatives, and there are a growing number of people who think nationwide gun control is the answer. If you don't like that, you can leave. I believe in nationwide gun control...I do not believe in a nationwide gun ban.
ANd based on the proposal Sarah posted about...that initially failed in 2013 and has little chance of going anywhere in 2015, I'd be surprised if gun ban would take place in our nation in our lifetime. I think even our elected officials know it's not going to happen.
But good luck with your nationwide gun ban.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 25, 2015 18:23:54 GMT
MergeLeft said: "I think we can ban manufacture and sales, and enact laws to hold gun owners very responsible for any wrongdoing or "accident" committed with a gun they own, including if it was stolen because they didn't properly secure it." Are you prepared to have this same logic/consequences applied to people who have their car stolen and used to commit a crime (hit and run, robbery get away, drug run, etc), or people who have their narcotic prescriptions stolen from their homes and resold on the street? Should those owners be fined? Sent to prison? What? If someone wants to steal something, they will. There is no such thing as securing it completely. And we have seen how well a complete ban on drugs is working along with the epic fail that was prohibition. Prohibition=the dawn of the criminal enterprise. If someone is hell bent on going out in a blaze of glory they don't need a gun to do it. A car would work, a match would work, dynamite, a bomb, a knife, poison...etc. Stop blaming the guns. Guns don't kill. People kill. It really is as simple as that. no they are not. It has nothing to do with anything other than they don't like guns and they don't like the people who own guns. The murder rate in this country is related to a whole slew of factors, many of which are probably different than in other countries: population centers, gangs, drugs, poverty levels... It has nothing to do with what I like or don't like. I base my opinions on the evidence at hand. If you have something showing that something other than easy gun availability drives our higher murder rate, by all means, share it. Frankly, I think your opinions are based on the fact that you do like guns, and not on rational consideration of the evidence at hand.
|
|
|
Post by katieanna on Jul 25, 2015 18:25:06 GMT
I saw a a great response to this tired cliché the other day - " Saying "guns don't kill people" is like saying "defibrillators don't save people" You still need someone to operate the defibrillator in order for it to save someone. It doesn't do it all on its own..just like a gun doesn't kill someone all on its own. There is no legislation that will solve this problem...without affecting the rights and liberties of others. The problem lies within the hearts of those who are doing the killing; that's a good place to start. Now the problem is...where do you go from here?
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 25, 2015 18:25:13 GMT
Does that really make sense? It seems pretty childish to me. "I'm so afraid of you possibly getting what I think you want that I'm going to vote against something that might benefit all of us." I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. We know what you want, you already told us. You want it to be illegal to buy a gun in this country. You will not get what you want here, but you are free to go to places that do forbid it. So why not go there? It's everything you want, you can get it now, and don't have to wait. Cool, eh?
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 25, 2015 18:27:00 GMT
No. This is still a country where citizens can make changes through our elected representatives, and there are a growing number of people who think nationwide gun control is the answer. If you don't like that, you can leave. I believe in nationwide gun control...I do not believe in a nationwide gun ban.
ANd based on the proposal Sarah posted about...that initially failed in 2013 and has little chance of going anywhere in 2015, I'd be surprised if gun ban would take place in our nation in our lifetime. I think even our elected officials know it's not going to happen.
But good luck with your nationwide gun ban.
The "control" you propose is meaningless and will do nothing to keep guns from falling readily into the hands of criminals, so it's false to say you're in favor of gun control. You're in favor of the status quo. Australia does not a have a gun ban. They have very narrow restrictions on who can own a gun and why. So far it's been successful for them. I don't understand the animosity toward moving toward something like that for us. PS - Ten years ago I would never have though gay marriage would be legal nationwide, either. Sometimes things happen more quickly than you think.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 25, 2015 18:27:38 GMT
Does that really make sense? It seems pretty childish to me. "I'm so afraid of you possibly getting what I think you want that I'm going to vote against something that might benefit all of us." I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. We know what you want, you already told us. You want it to be illegal to buy a gun in this country. You will not get what you want here, but you are free to go to places that do forbid it. So why not go there? It's everything you want, you can get it now, and don't have to wait. Cool, eh?Because I will not be run out of my country by bullies with guns. Period.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 25, 2015 18:32:28 GMT
If you don't like our freedoms here you are free to go elsewhere. Nobody is making you stay. No. This is still a country where citizens can make changes through our elected representatives, and there are a growing number of people who think nationwide gun control is the answer. If you don't like that, you can leave. They can "think" whatever they want, but they can't take 2A away. It's a right, and your stance is exactly why we need it. You don't get to decide for me that I don't get to defend myself. Not gonna happen. Thank GOD for the NRA.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jul 2, 2024 11:02:21 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 18:38:06 GMT
And I firmly believe that some gun owners DO treat their guns like an old pair of shoes. good for you. Glad your belief is based on something. Shooting is a sport. It is even in the olympics. And luckily for us gun owners, we are going to keep going the way we are and the reason will be people like you. There arr many, many gun owners who would have no problem with sensible gun legislation, but they fear people like you will use it as a stepping stone to ban guns. So they ban together against any gun control measure to make sure you don't get to ban guns entirely. Someone is getting a little testy here. Why is that? Because you didn't like that I think some people buy guns for the wrong reason? Or that I said illegal guns started out life as legal and somehow they became illegal used by criminals, gangs, & crazies and that it might be a good idea to find out how and do what can be done to stop it. I certainly know you don't like the sentence above. Why is that? Do you honestly believe that all gun owners are responsible gun owners and take care in how they secure their guns and do their due diligence when they sell their guns in a private sale? By the way I don't hate gun owners and if I wanted guns banned I would just say so. What I am tired of is all these senseless killings by guns. Especially when its children and innocent bystanders just going about their day. And all the excuses and deflections instead of dealing with the problem. So here we are. This thread is just about ready to die? It's pretty much run it course. People posted their sorrow for the victims, people got into a heated debate about what should be done and what shouldn't be done. Now the thread will die , just like people's interest off the board, and folks will move on until the next time and the cycle will start all over again. Nothing will get done and more people will die by gun....
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 25, 2015 18:39:30 GMT
No. This is still a country where citizens can make changes through our elected representatives, and there are a growing number of people who think nationwide gun control is the answer. If you don't like that, you can leave. They can "think" whatever they want, but they can't take 2A away. It's a right, and your stance is exactly why we need it. You don't get to decide for me that I don't get to defend myself. Not gonna happen. Thank GOD for the NRA.And thank god you don't get to tell me or the millions like me how to vote or who to elect. See you at the ballot box.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 25, 2015 18:41:24 GMT
We know what you want, you already told us. You want it to be illegal to buy a gun in this country. You will not get what you want here, but you are free to go to places that do forbid it. So why not go there? It's everything you want, you can get it now, and don't have to wait. Cool, eh? Because I will not be run out of my country by bullies with guns. Period. Bullies? I offered a solution for you (that has what you said you desired) and if you elect not to accept it then fine. Don't. Knock yourself out, LOL.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 25, 2015 18:44:34 GMT
They can "think" whatever they want, but they can't take 2A away. It's a right, and your stance is exactly why we need it. You don't get to decide for me that I don't get to defend myself. Not gonna happen. Thank GOD for the NRA. And thank god you don't get to tell me or the millions like me how to vote or who to elect. See you at the ballot box. LOL. Elect whomever you wish, it will not change that 2A is a right in this country.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jul 2, 2024 11:02:21 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 18:50:40 GMT
I believe in nationwide gun control...I do not believe in a nationwide gun ban.
ANd based on the proposal Sarah posted about...that initially failed in 2013 and has little chance of going anywhere in 2015, I'd be surprised if gun ban would take place in our nation in our lifetime. I think even our elected officials know it's not going to happen.
But good luck with your nationwide gun ban.
The "control" you propose is meaningless and will do nothing to keep guns from falling readily into the hands of criminals, so it's false to say you're in favor of gun control. You're in favor of the status quo. Australia does not a have a gun ban. They have very narrow restrictions on who can own a gun and why. So far it's been successful for them. I don't understand the animosity toward moving toward something like that for us. PS - Ten years ago I would never have though gay marriage would be legal nationwide, either. Sometimes things happen more quickly than you think. And I said several pages ago that it's MUCH easier to give rights to people (gay marriage YAY!) than it is to take someone's rights away.
I am NOT in favor of the status quo, thank you very much. Do we have the same laws, nationwide in regards to who is able to buy guns, how long a wait, what kind of guns/ammunition and what kind of background check is required? I'm 99.9% sure that the answer is NO. So why are we jumping ahead to a nation wide ban on the manufacture and purchase of guns by those legally allowed to buy them before trying something as simple as making the common sense laws the same regardless of what city, county, or state that you live in.
Why are we jumping ahead from A to Z while skipping H - P in the middle. We haven't seriously tried common sense laws in this nation. I totally support doing that FIRST before I'd support a nation-wide ban on the manufacture or sale of a gun. Who knows...maybe if we try enacting common sense laws that don't work for years, I'd be in favor of your ban. But I'm in no way supportive of jumping from where we are now to an all out ban without trying other sensible solutions first.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jul 2, 2024 11:02:21 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 18:52:07 GMT
I saw a a great response to this tired cliché the other day - " Saying "guns don't kill people" is like saying "defibrillators don't save people" You still need someone to operate the defibrillator in order for it to save someone. It doesn't do it all on its own..just like a gun doesn't kill someone all on its own. There is no legislation that will solve this problem...without affecting the rights and liberties of others. The problem lies within the hearts of those who are doing the killing; that's a good place to start. Now the problem is...where do you go from here? Perfect response!
|
|