Welcome to 'Murica

[BabyPeterzz]

Based on what? Most of these regulations are state mandated so blaming the gun lobby does not really make sense. Here in California, it's ridiculous that amount of hoops I have to jump through and the fees I have to pay in order to get a firearm. And don't get me started on the gun roster and what it does to prices on firearms that are going to fall off the roster.

I'm not sure what you're asking me.

You do know the gun lobby is one of the most powerful lobby's in the country and they not only influence federal law, but state laws as well. I think if the gun lobby is going to site mental health issues as the source of the problems we face, it's only fair that they pay their fair share if they choose to do nothing in terms of further regulation. The gun lobby needs to do more. Period.

 

[Stoked]

I'm not sure what you're asking me.

You do know the gun lobby is one of the most powerful lobby's in the country and they not only influence federal law, but state laws as well. I think if the gun lobby is going to site mental health issues as the source of the problems we face, it's only fair that they pay their fair share if they choose to do nothing in terms of further regulation. The gun lobby needs to do more. Period.

I agree. But we might disagree on what they can do.

But the argument, on the national level, is dominated by extremes. Sadly this is what we are seeing with most debates.

The best solution, imo, is somewhere in the middle and is very involved.

 

[BabyPeterzz]

I agree. But we might disagree on what they can do.

But the argument, on the national level, is dominated by extremes. Sadly this is what we are seeing with most debates.

The best solution, imo, is somewhere in the middle and is very involved.

Once they demonstrate they are willing to meet anywhere near the middle we can talk of whether or not the gun lobby is even taking this issue seriously. Right now, they are concerned with the bottom lines of gun manufactures and those that want unfettered access at the expense of others. The gun control lobby has done nothing but try to find creative solutions that do not include removing the 2nd Amendment. Frankly, gun advocates and the gun lobby has done absolutely nothing in regards to addressing gun violence. I'll reserve the right to place blame on their heads until they come to the table, which they have yet to do.

 

[moevillini]

Based on what? Most of these regulations are state mandated so blaming the gun lobby does not really make sense. Here in California, it's ridiculous that amount of hoops I have to jump through and the fees I have to pay in order to get a firearm. And don't get me started on the gun roster and what it does to prices on firearms that are going to fall off the roster.

oooh, cry harder

I've always wanted to make that post, but never before had the chance. Thanks vinylone. <3


At any rate, you may call those unnecessary hoops that you were required to jump through, but I call them a good start to putting sensible restrictions on firearms purchases.

 

[VINYLONE]

At any rate, you may call those unnecessary hoops that you were required to jump through, but I call them a good start to putting sensible restrictions on firearms purchases.

Sure, restrictions to the law abiding crowd.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/7...crooks-get-guns-from-pals-dont-keep-them-long

I think the criminal class in Chicago are pretty typical.

 

[Miggs]

I'm not sure what the beef is on having tighter, more comprehensive checks in place for people buying guns. If people need to wait a couple weeks then so be it.

I also am not sure why gun owners aren't legally held more responsible when their gun is used (by their son, daughter, etc.) to take, accidentally or not, someone's life. Lock the **** up in one place. The bullets in another if need be. It's really not difficult.

 

[gandalfe]

Based on what? Most of these regulations are state mandated so blaming the gun lobby does not really make sense. Here in California, it's ridiculous that amount of hoops I have to jump through and the fees I have to pay in order to get a firearm. And don't get me started on the gun roster and what it does to prices on firearms that are going to fall off the roster.

Do you not even realize that lobbyists actually work at the state level, as well?

 

[gandalfe]

My point is to show that people are saving their lives on a personal basis every day of every month of every year.

MORE PEOPLE ARE KILLED WITH GUNS THAN SUCCESSFULLY DEFEND THEMSELVES. Find stats to contradict that.

There is nothing I can do from my home to help someone with suicidal ideation.

Except, of course, make it more difficult for them to acquire the most common and most successful method. But you seem to have shown that your fear is more important than someone else's life, so let's just let it go.

 

[Miggs]

VO is a joke here.

On another note, only about 100 people per year are killed in home invasions. That's it. Do the research. I don't feel like posting the few links I just read. They're really not that difficult to find. But gun-wielding people, keep standing by your, I-I-I need a gun in my home to protect my family argument. The number of unintentional deaths in homes by firearms is far, far, FAR greater than the former of which I spoke. Almost 4,000 such deaths in fact from 2005-2009.

Any unintentional death by firearms should result in an automatic long-term sentence imo. Sort of like the three-strikes law (which is a debacle, I know) but there are no three strikes. Just one and you're out. Implement such a law and let's see how many gun owners just haphazardly leave their firearms lying around. Morons will the first couple years but after a few of these mental midgets do so and their child kills someone and that gun-toting parent is sentenced to 5-10 years in prison, people will get the point. Lock your ****ing gun up.

 

[Stoked]

Once they demonstrate they are willing to meet anywhere near the middle we can talk of whether or not the gun lobby is even taking this issue seriously. Right now, they are concerned with the bottom lines of gun manufactures and those that want unfettered access at the expense of others. The gun control lobby has done nothing but try to find creative solutions that do not include removing the 2nd Amendment. Frankly, gun advocates and the gun lobby has done absolutely nothing in regards to addressing gun violence. I'll reserve the right to place blame on their heads until they come to the table, which they have yet to do.

You don't need to bash them to me. I am not defending them. The NRA (gun lobby) shares a very hefty share of the blame for the inability of society to even civilly discuss this issue.

 

[♪alt13]

MORE PEOPLE ARE KILLED WITH GUNS THAN SUCCESSFULLY DEFEND THEMSELVES. Find stats to contradict that.



Except, of course, make it more difficult for them to acquire the most common and most successful method. But you seem to have shown that your fear is more important than someone else's life, so let's just let it go.

Low estimate of defensive gun uses a year is 100k+ high estimate is 2mil+

how-to-count-the-defensive-use-of-guns

 

[TroutBum]

Vinylone is owning fools left and right.

Common Sense > Irrational Boobitry.

 

[DutchJazzer]

Yet another shooting

when will you people learn only our precious liberal politicians should be protected with guns

rest of population should have gun ban.

time for a gun ban, no it was not a gun free zone there where a few "armed" mall cops


#obamataketheguns!

 

[VINYLONE]

I'm not sure what the beef is on having tighter, more comprehensive checks in place for people buying guns. If people need to wait a couple weeks then so be it.

I also am not sure why gun owners aren't legally held more responsible when their gun is used (by their son, daughter, etc.) to take, accidentally or not, someone's life. Lock the **** up in one place. The bullets in another if need be. It's really not difficult.

Tighter and more comprehensive than what? What more can you learn in 20 days than you can in 10 days? Most waiting periods around the country are 10 days. What would bar someone from owning a firearm? A criminal record? Sure. Buying more than what the state restriction allows? Sure. But all of these things can be found out in virtually seconds.

In regards to your second request, someone just lost a loved one to suicide and you want to put that grieving loved one in jail? I assume that's what you are inferring. I honestly don't know how popular of an idea that would be.

 

[VINYLONE]

MORE PEOPLE ARE KILLED WITH GUNS THAN SUCCESSFULLY DEFEND THEMSELVES. Find stats to contradict that.

Except, of course, make it more difficult for them to acquire the most common and most successful method. But you seem to have shown that your fear is more important than someone else's life, so let's just let it go.

First of all, my apologies for the delay in my response to you...I haven't been on the board in a long timed capacity and I don't want to give you unfocused answers.

First point. Yes, you are probably right, but, again, in the end, if it's me, personally speaking, my life is worth more than anyone else's. I want to live. I DO NOT want to die for naught. I also think you should be made awar that a firearm is an inherent deterrent and many times, a firearm just needs to be shown in order for it to do it's job. Meaning, many times, situations do not get reported to the LE agencies because no crime has been broken or committed.

It also perplexes me why you won't or don't understand my position. That being said, I also don't want you to think that I live in a state of fear. On the contrary, as I've stated numerous times in this conversation, I think this country, as well as the world, is safer today and more peaceful today than it has ever been. I don't own a firearm because I expect to be involved in a violent encounter, but I own it just in case. It's much like the seat belt you referenced earlier or the helmet I wear when I go cycling. I don't wear that seat belt or helmet because I think or know I am going to get into an accident, I wear them in case I do.

 

[VINYLONE]

VO is a joke here.

On another note, only about 100 people per year are killed in home invasions. That's it. Do the research. I don't feel like posting the few links I just read. They're really not that difficult to find. But gun-wielding people, keep standing by your, I-I-I need a gun in my home to protect my family argument. The number of unintentional deaths in homes by firearms is far, far, FAR greater than the former of which I spoke. Almost 4,000 such deaths in fact from 2005-2009.

Any unintentional death by firearms should result in an automatic long-term sentence imo. Sort of like the three-strikes law (which is a debacle, I know) but there are no three strikes. Just one and you're out. Implement such a law and let's see how many gun owners just haphazardly leave their firearms lying around. Morons will the first couple years but after a few of these mental midgets do so and their child kills someone and that gun-toting parent is sentenced to 5-10 years in prison, people will get the point. Lock your ****ing gun up.

If you want to be a part of an adult conversation, then it behooves you to understand the position of those involved. I agree with you, "home invasions" are extremely rare. I've never said the opposite. Personally speaking, I don't have much direct involvement with suicide other than that one friend of mine but on the contrary, I do have personal experience with more than a few instances where a firearm was used to de-escalate a violent situation.

I will agree with you, that there are many irresponsible firearm owners and there are myriad firearm owners who do NOT respect the power and the discipline of owning a firearm. You will hear no argument from me on that point.

 

[VINYLONE]

I wonder if anyone else saw this recent story:

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/china-keeps-lid-on-massacre-in-which-more-than-50-died/

BAICHENG, China — Armed with only knives, the assailants struck at the coal mine in the dead of night, first killing the security guards and then setting upon the miners as they slept in their dormitory beds. Before the Sept. 18 rampage was over, more than 50 people were dead, at least five of them police officers, and dozens more had been wounded, according to victims’ relatives and residents.

 

[VINYLONE]

Here's some more food for thought...

https://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

Since at least 1965, the false assertion that the United States has the industrialized world’s highest murder rate has been an artifact of politically motivated Soviet minimization designed to hide the true homicide rates.2 Since well before that date, the Soviet Union possessed extremely stringent gun controls3 that were effectuated by a police state apparatus providing stringent enforcement.4 So successful was that regime that few Russian civilians now have firearms and very few murders involve them.5 Yet, manifest success in keeping its people disarmed did not prevent the Soviet Union from having far and away the highest murder rate in the developed world.6 In the 1960s and early 1970s, the gun‐less Soviet Union’s murder rates paralleled or generally exceeded those of gun‐ridden America. While American rates stabilized and then steeply declined, however, Russian murder increased so drastically that by the early 1990s the Russian rate was three times higher than that of the United States. Between 1998‐2004 (the latest figure available for Russia), Russian murder rates were nearly four times higher than American rates. Similar murder rates also characterize the Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and various other now‐independent European nations of the former U.S.S.R.7

 

[DutchJazzer]

the problem with giving in to the gun control, is it wont stop Oregon. it wouldn't have stopped sandy hook.
all **** the left wants to put in place wont stop 1 bit!

so lets say assault weapons are banned.
Oregon shooter did not use assault weapons, so you think it will stop the next mass shooting no IT WON'T

so when the next shooting happens public outcry will be there instead of doing the logical thing and undo measures taken, and tackle the problem from a different angle. the left will put more none working gun restrictions in place. but those new restrictions wont stop the next shooting
so rinse repeat rinse repeat, until are guns are illegal. or the right stands up and starts DEFENDING their right to be armed.


the reality is easily proven give a crate of "THE DEADLIEST" fully loaded guns to a monastery and see what happens.
now drop the same crate of guns in mental health prison an watch what happens.

the simple fact is there are good and evil people in the world.
the left acts like there is no such thing as evil, or people do evil **** cus evil **** happened to them.

because of the act of evil people, the good people should lose their right?


the left isnt about gun control the left is about gun ban

 

[VINYLONE]

I wonder if Mr. Gandalfe would support this protest...

University of Texas students to wield sex toys in protests against guns

https://www.reuters.com/article/201...I420151013?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews

"Campus (*****) Carry" day is on track at the University of Texas and students who pack sex toys to protest a new law that expands the right to carry guns on campus will not be punished, university officials said on Tuesday.