Do you support the second amendment?

[Tis_Bearself]

I don’t think gun issues will “go away” but I don’t think a whole bunch of people shouting loudly or going on a protest march is going to provide any new idea or impetus or do anything other than perhaps pressure politicians to pass some weak band-aid of a law to say they did something. People are still free to do it, as it’s a free speech right. I don’t think it’s particularly helpful.

 

[JonNC]

What, me lie?:

Duesenberg:

What “illegal gun trafficking”? All the firearms used in LV were legally procured.

This is your statement!

All of the weapons were legal–I cite that as proof that there is a problem with the “gun control” issue; which, to my pedestrian mind, brings us right back to the manufacturers, distributers, and vendors!

Maran atha!

Agnel

You are forgetting the NICS system. Everyone of the firearms purchases made him subject to the background check, which he passed because he didn’t have a criminal record, and had no history of mental illness, things that would have made him ineligible. In other words, no dealer or manufacturer or vendor broke the law. They followed the law, and they deserve your apology for claiming earlier that they were selling illegal arms.

 

[jcrichton]

Luigi, what does it hurt to force manufacturers, distributors, vendors, and owners to comply with strict laws that would make the gun control part of the solution to gun violence?

…you drop your junker (car) in most cities (at least my part of the woods) and the police will tow it and you will be billed for it–gun enthusiasts purchase hundreds of weapons for the purposes that you describe and the lapsed control cannot distinguish between you and your macho/fetish for guns and the nut-job whose bent on becoming his own version of the equalizer.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

And is that what the first amendment was intended to protect.

I already posted what the SCOTUS says the Second Amendment protects. It protects the right of individuals to keep and bear arms, and it lists as the primary purpose the necessity of the citizen militia to protect a free state from tyranny, both foreign and domestic.

Jon, you don’t see the black-hole on this argument?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[JonNC]

Joe, ever seen movies depicting gun violence?

It’s the ultimate virtual romance: kill, destroy and get away with it.

…problem is, as much of hollowood’s tenets, it does not translate well when introduced into our reality.

So the gun industry sells the weapons through the romanticized ‘guns don’t kill’ slogan. Politicians don’t think that a little red once in a while is much of a loss compare to all that green that they can enjoy:

Maran atha!

Angel

Your continued defaming of the character of others with no proof is disappointing.

 

[jcrichton]

Joh, do you think that it takes quantum mechanics to follow the gun trail from manufacturer to illegal possession?

…unless you believe that those guns were printed out (you know that new printer thing) you must agree that there was a manufacturer, a distributer, and a vendor that made these guns accessible… or are you intimating that it is the police who are making these guns accessible to the criminals?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[JonNC]

Joh, do you think that it takes quantum mechanics to follow the gun trail from manufacturer to illegal possession?

…unless you believe that those guns were printed out (you know that new printer thing) you must agree that there was a manufacturer, a distributer, and a vendor that made these guns accessible… or are you intimating that it is the police who are making these guns accessible to the criminals?

Maran atha!

Angel

I’ve already asked you to follow it. Provide your proof. Specifically, which manufacturer sold which guns illegally to whom? You haven’t done it.
Provide a link. This is a serious charge. If you have proof, I will stand with you to condemn the specific manufacturer. Without, its just bearing false witness.

 

[jcrichton]

Jon, it is naïve to think that as selfish as Americans (and other people are) having access to weapons will guarantee their safety if their government would turn on them.

Rather than spending all those thousands of manpower and dollars on building the ultimate underground shelters, people should become active in the activities of everyday politics (unless you are apolitical as I am).

Which means that citing “militia” defense against foreign and domestic thread is devoid of reality.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Again, my point!

How many weapons does it take to take down daffy duck?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Jon, what is the gun reality–do you truly believe that if the US would turn against its citizens (remember China opening tank fire against a students’ protest?), the citizens would come together and formed a militia that would have a Hail Mary’s prayer?

The capacity for military deployment of weapons is fantabulous (just check out the latest tech and capabilities); average joes and jills packing only works in the scenes hollowood presents in its sci fi and zombie’s scenarios (well and Bruce Lee’s thousands taking turn to fight him one on one).

Couple that with the tenet of hunting for food… how many repeaters does it take to take down daffy duck again?

I know I am pressing (facetious) but know that I am in no way defaming anyone’s character. I am speaking to the romance of owning weapons not to the character of those who hold such romance.

If you, or anyone else on the thread, feels maligned or vilified, I apologize profusely–it is not my intent to disparage anyone.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[JonNC]

=“jcrichton, post:500, topic:452415, full:true”]
Jon, it is naïve to think that as selfish as Americans (and other people are) having access to weapons will guarantee their safety if their government would turn on them.

What does selfishness have to do with it? Is it selfish to want to defend your rights?

Rather than spending all those thousands of manpower and dollars on building the ultimate underground shelters, people should become active in the activities of everyday politics (unless you are apolitical as I am).
Which means that citing “militia” defense against foreign and domestic thread is devoid of reality.

Where on earth are you coming up with this stuff? How many people do you imagine are out there building underground shelters?

Being involved in politics is the norm. That’s why I am a member of a political party, and the NRA. Associating with like minded people is vital.

 

[jcrichton]

Jon, I did not notice the rain today… but when I looked out the window I saw water pooled in the backyard… as I look towards the ski I can see that, though not dark and cloudy, it is not sunny… do I need to have experienced the rain in order to conclude that it indeed rained?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[JonNC]

=“jcrichton, post:502, topic:452415, full:true”]
Jon, what is the gun reality–do you truly believe that if the US would turn against its citizens (remember China opening tank fire against a students’ protest?), the citizens would come together and formed a militia that would have a Hail Mary’s prayer?

A prayer would be a good place to start, but again, I’m not one who thinks the French resistance should have surrendered their arms.

Couple that with the tenet of hunting for food… how many repeaters does it take to take down daffy duck again?

Please, You’re embarrassing yourself. I wouldn’t use a hammer to remove a countersunk phillips head screw. You use the right tools for the right purpose.

I know I am pressing (facetious) but know that I am in no way defaming anyone’s character.

Actually, you are. You’ve accused many good people of criminal activity with no proof.

I am speaking to the romance of owning weapons not to the character of those who hold such romance.

I’ve never thought of it as romance.

 

[Duesenberg]

This is your statement!

All of the weapons were legal–I cite that as proof that there is a problem with the “gun control” issue; which, to my pedestrian mind, brings us right back to the manufacturers, distributers, and vendors!

Maran atha!

Agnel

What’s your point? That the BATFE should have made the slide fire stocks illegal? The BATFE SHOULD have made the novelty stocks illegal, but that’s doesn’t mean there is a problem with “gun control.”

 

[jcrichton]

Jon, it is the purported argument (right to bear arm to protect from foreign and domestic threat)… recall the time when people left their doors open or helped each other (farming, etc.)? Thems were the days.

Today everyone (generalized term to mean the majority of people either do or side on that issue) is self-centered (what can I get) so few people would come together to fight tanks and other military weaponry with their “guns” for the benefit of the community.

The anarchist movement of the sixties and seventies (‘get the government’ and ‘build communes/shelters’) have mostly died down (or left on the hands of the die-hard anarchists). So that "preparing for doomsday domestic threat is void.

The government has weapons that do not need to be manned and can decimate hidden targets or go through walls to get them… so a militia that would bond to fight such odds… that makes the argument about the reason to own guns quite inert.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Gun control is not working.

When 60% of actual people who have access to guns and have used them to kill or commit other crimes have gotten those guns illegally… and when people who commit mass murder have access to automatic weapons and weapons that could be tooled to be more destructive… well the control is not really control is it?

It’s more like that tobacco farce: ‘don’t use cause it can kill’

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[JonNC]

Gun control is not working.

When 60% of actual people who have access to guns and have used them to kill or commit other crimes have gotten those guns illegally… and when people who commit mass murder have access to automatic weapons and weapons that could be tooled to be more destructive… well the control is not really control is it?

Maran atha!

Angel

The goal, then, should be to stop criminals, not the law abiding. Again, there are roughly 6,000 criminal deaths in this country each year due to guns. there are roughly 100 million guns. There are 320 million people. No death is acceptable, but the solution is not to violate the constitutionally protected rights of the American people.

Maybe gun control isn’t working because it is directed at the wrong people. You don’t fix crime by targeting the law abiding.

 

[Duesenberg]

Gun control is not working.

When 60% of actual people who have access to guns and have used them to kill or commit other crimes have gotten those guns illegally… and when people who commit mass murder have access to automatic weapons and weapons that could be tooled to be more destructive… well the control is not really control is it?

It’s more like that tobacco farce: ‘don’t use cause it can kill’

Maran atha!

Angel

That’s right. Gun control is largely worthless (criminals don’t follow laws!) and there is nothing a state can do to make gun control effective.

 

[Duesenberg]

The goal, then, should be to stop criminals, not the law abiding. Again, there are roughly 6,000 criminal deaths in this country each year due to guns. there are roughly 100 million guns. There are 320 million people. No death is acceptable, but the solution is not to violate the constitutionally protected rights of the American people.

Maybe gun control isn’t working because it is directed at the wrong people. You don’t fix crime by targeting the law abiding.

Actually there are in excess of 300M firearms in the US…

Gun control is akin to fighting the problem of drunk drivers by making it more difficult and costly for law-abiding drivers to purchase new motor vehicles.

 

[JonNC]

Actually there are in excess of 300M firearms in the US…

You’re right. I mistyped. I meant to say 300m firearms in the hands of roughly 100m citizens, the vast majority being law abiding