New York Times Pressures Credit Card Giants to Blacklist Gun Purchasers

[DisInherited2006]

Perhaps the real reason common sense gun laws bother most persons is because they wouldn’t pass the litmus test to have one…hmmmm: one can wonder

Eighty-seven percent of gun purchasers in America have passed that (PolitiFact | What percentage of gun sales are done without a background check?). Your hyperbole is insulting and reflects poorly on yourself.

 

[DENNYINMI]

Your hyperbole is insulting and reflects poorly on yourself.

With the highest number of guns per capita and the highest gun related deaths per country, I am for common sense gun laws that include universal background checks for ALL gun sales.

I don’t care about your opinion of me, but I do care on what side of history I will be on when common sense gun laws are put in place.

The pendulum swings only so far one way. Enough is enough, and the voters of our future are much smarter than the rugged individualist who selfishly insists that guns are a right from God.

They aren’t.

 

[Cathoholic]

DENNYINMI (concerning the US) . . .

the highest gun related deaths per country,

Are you including Government democides here? Or are you selectively IGNORING those deaths?

Please link to where you are getting these “statistics”.

I think they are “stretchers” (as Tom Sawyer would say).

 

[DENNYINMI]

the most gun deaths (homicides, suicides, and accidental gun deaths) is common knowledge and can be obtained by any statistical information source. my gosh. Thus, homework needs to be done by ones self.

I mean no offense, but persons that own guns know this!!~

 

[DisInherited2006]

Yes, this what I support and have said so in this thread. Congress can regulate the types of guns people can own though, so until the 2nd amendment is repealed it would be a good idea to ban all guns with a capacity greater than one.

My friend, I just want you to know that some of us will be here for you if this ever happens. Good men will risk their personal fortunes, their families safety, and their own lives…all to fight against an oppressive government who would not only remove our rights of self protection, but also YOUR freedoms of expression, of religion, of movement.

Time and time again has history proven to us that when power is too consolidated into the hands of a few in government, this power is used to subjugate the people. And yet time and time again has history proven that good men will rise up against such subjugation.

So you can rest assured, that there WILL be good men who will fight for your freedom, even if you lack the will, the skills, the weapons, or the intestinal fortitude to do so yourself. I consider people with your point of view similar to the Tories of the past who expect a far away authoritarian king to ensure your safety.

Historical note - that never works out well.

Everytown For Gun Safety, which does not advocate for a ban of all guns, but merely for sensible gun regulation.

And yet, they have never met a gun regulation they haven’t endorsed. I’m guessing that if the new Democrat-controlled House submitted an amendment to the constitution clarifying the 2nd Amendment to strictly mean a government controlled militia, your EFGS would advocate/endorse it.

Of course, you would still be semantically correct. Even then the EFGS would not be advocating the total banning of firearms. They would just be for banning the ownership by law-abiding citizens. For these folks, there will always be some animals that are more equal than others, and therefore deserve the protection of guns.

But back to the OP: Imagine if the roles were reversed, and the credit card companies considered not accepting payment to leftist organizations like yours?

We rebuilt Europe and Japan. We held the Soviet Union in check. We went to the moon. It’s really disappointing to hear Americans say “that’s impossible,” whether we’re talking about gun regulation, or health care, or anything else. Seems like we’ve lost the spirit that made America great.

Gun regulation/confiscation/subjugation is entirely possible. See Venezuela, China, Soviet Union, or even much of Chicago as an example.

It’s just not possible HERE, simply because we had to rebuild Europe and Japan AFTER freeing them authoritarian regimes. We’re not going to let that happen. Fortunately our founding fathers wrote the 2nd amendment, and we will defend that in court, on internet discussion boards, and with our blood.

As to health care…you would have to define that as we all have health care, but that’s for another thread.

 

[DisInherited2006]

When you start to act on those wishes and send armed enforcement after me, then I will take appropriate measures to safeguard my rights.

Correction brother. WE will take appropriate measures to safeguard your rights.

Just like I would take appropriate measures to ensure Rosa Parks wouldn’t be forced to the back of the bus.

pointing out why gun-grabbers will have trouble taking guns away from people.

You forgot their lack of intestinal fortitude. Pretty sure this vape store owner would be one of those gun-grabbers (caution language):

(Posted youtube video directly so viewers can go to main source for this incident instead of the many news sources which may give their own biases, if this is against the rules then please forgive me). Not really worried about him coming after my guns.

Am I a representative of the “American Left” (whatever that means to you)?

Middle left, yeah. Not sure if you’re a liberal though. BIG difference.

I would like to have gun owners be part of the process. I don’t believe we are obligated to concede anything, since there’s not much left to concede, given the minimal state of gun regulation in this country.

Okay, your statement about “minimal state of gun regulation in this country” made me change my mind, you’re far left.

We have an incredibly long list of gun regulations in this country ranging from who can and can’t own a firearm, to which kind of firearm one can or can’t own, to where one can or can’t possess them, to where one can or can’t USE such firearms. There are regulations on accessories to them, types of ammunition, etc. Firearms are one of the MOST REGULATED items in the nation. There is an entire department of the Executive Branch that is pretty much dedicated to regulating firearms.

We’re just asking that gun owners recognize than, given the fact that tens of thousands of people die each year in this country from gunshots, something is seriously wrong.

We do recognize this: our culture is decaying. Where do most die from gun violence? In areas where leftist politicians have reigned supreme for decades and therefore destroyed our American culture.

 

[Cathoholic]

DENNYINMI . . .

the most gun deaths (homicides, suicides, and accidental gun deaths) is common knowledge . . .

“Common knowledge” or not, . . . do they include statistics over a few months, or over the last hundred years?

And do they include Governments turning THEIR GUNS on their own unarmed populace?

These are part of the equation too.

Seems to me if we want “common sense” gun laws, seeing the LARGEST segments of gun abuse is . . . Well . . . Common sense.

The problem if this is looked at, this destroys the gun-control narrative.

It suggests anti-gun laws should be directed against Governments and not against law-abiding citizens.

Let’s use “common sense” and look at the whole package.

 

[DENNYINMI]

And do they include Governments turning THEIR GUNS on their own unarmed populace?

If our government with all it’s military might were to (for one day) turn on us and our neighbors, unless you have ballistic missiles, nuclear weapons, tomahawk missiles and automatic military machine guns in stock pile, neither you, I or our neighbors would stand a chance.

Standing up to an oppressive government with the use of military might as citizens is a mystery to me that persons could even suggest such a thing.

In our country we vote. The deaths we’re discussing are NOT from fighting oppressive government regimes. I wouldn’t suggest we attempt it either!~

 

[DisInherited2006]

For all the talk about democracy being built on consensus and the will of the people, it seems that most of the proponents only want the consensus of 50.1% and the other 49.9% of the population can whistle Dixie for all they care.

Which is why our founding fathers had the wisdom to give us not only the 2nd amendment, but also created a Representative REPUBLIC instead of a democracy, because democracies are a terrible place to live for any minority.

Just wish someone would be able to get that through to the Democrats.

Gun regulation in this country is so lax there’s nothing left to concede.

How about the ability to fly through Newark airport, with a firearm checked in accordance with federal laws and airline regulations, and not be arrested and imprisoned when your flight from Newark is delayed?Traveling Man's Gun Arrest Appealed to Supreme Court | Fox News

How about the ability to accidentally drive across a wrong bridge, at night, in a terrible neighborhood, with a legally owned gun in your purse without going to prison? Traveling Man's Gun Arrest Appealed to Supreme Court | Fox News

How about a ceasefire in the war on gun regulations?

 

[DisInherited2006]

and the voters of our future are much smarter than the rugged individualist who selfishly insists that guns are a right from God.

The problem with socialists/democrats/leftists is that when they rely on the “voters of the future”, they forget that as (most) people age they achieve wisdom and an ability to see things from a broader perspective.

Who was it that said “a young man that votes Republican has no heart, and an old man that votes Democrat has no brains”?

 

[Cathoholic]

DENNYINMI

If our government with all it’s military might were to (for one day) turn on us and our neighbors, unless you have ballistic missiles, nuclear weapons, tomahawk missiles and automatic military machine guns in stock pile, neither you, I or our neighbors would stand a chance.

Do you think just because the citizens are relatively helpless in this regard, that it is now OK to abandon the PRINCIPLES the founders founded our country upon?

(That is a “might makes right!” form of totalitarianism you are espousing here DENNYINMI. It is unAmerican. And makes the Second Amendment EVEN MORE important in PRINCIPLE.)

 

[DENNYINMI]

The problem with socialists/democrats/leftists is that when they rely on the “voters of the future”, they forget that as (most) people age they achieve wisdom and an ability to see things from a broader perspective.

Who was it that said “a young man that votes Republican has no heart, and an old man that votes Democrat has no brains”?

The problem with “us” (I’ll gladly include myself in with this group) is that common sense does not mean a ban on guns.

I applaud our governments job on keeping us safe from the e-coli out break from contaminated lettuce, also forging recalls on cars that cause deaths, cribs and baby items that do the same…but the rugged individualist gun rights selfishly clung to by certain people and those that line their pockets from gun lobbyists? crickets

 

[Cathoholic]

DENNYINMI . . .

The problem with “us” (I’ll gladly include myself in with this group) is that common sense does not mean a ban on guns.

Nobody will define what “common sense gun laws” are DENNYINMI. At least in a manner that does not constantly keep changing.

"Common sense gun laws" is a synonym for incremental disarmament of good, hard-working, law-abiding citizens.

 

[DisInherited2006]

I personally would not want a full auto.

With appropriate trigger control giving you three round bursts full auto can be relatively accurate. Plus there is the benefit of suppression fire.

Likewise our police (even though typically they do NOT have full auto arms).

Police are increasingly getting full auto armaments. This worries me less than the encroachment of “cannot take risk” training they receive, which puts our populace at greater risk.

pons) I would be more than happy to give them up in exchange for universal concealed carry.

I think universal conceal carry is coming. Reciprocity is in our Constitution in Title IV section 1.

And how would you know that they are “good honest law-abiding citizens” without background checks?

We don’t need to. Remember innocent until proven guilty?

A background check would have been redundant.

Unless you were building a list of whom owned what…

So “just trust me on this” should be the standard? Sorry, that won’t work.

And it doesn’t work. Current law is the reasonable person standard.

If “Civil War 2” refers to the nonviolent protest movement you’re planning then I wish you the best.

That’s not very warlike then, is it. Just like other wrongs you (we) would wish upon the world, it isn’t until you act upon those wrongs that good men are forced to stand up against you.

War is politics, by other means.

 

[DENNYINMI]

Common sense could begin with universal background checks for ALL sales cathoholic.

Since I was raised with common sense respect for guns, am law abiding, and don’t need an AK-47 to hunt a dear, I’d be in no fear of having my gun removed.

But…I can only speak for myself.

 

[DisInherited2006]

We already offer tens of thousands of lives a year to the gun cult. We don’t seem to be getting much in return for our sacrifice except some happy gun company executives.

Not to the gun cult. Few violent gun offenders are members of the healthy gun/hunting/patriotic/personal protective culture of America. Most are the antithesis of this. Funny thing is, your desired gun confiscation would just ensure these violent gun offenders were unobstructed in their goals.

Want to see a gun cult? Go to a rural firearms range. Go on facebook, find a local hunting organization, and ask to tag along. Yes, they will have those scary guns with them, but you may just realize what the American gun culture really means. This is an honest suggestion, if you go on FB, find your local organization, declare yourself a leftist who wants to take away everyone’s guns but is open to an education on gun culture and wants to go on a bird (?) hunt to see what it’s like then I’m sure you will be taken up on the offer. And I guarantee you will come home safely (well, unless you don’t listen to the rules and get in front of the bird dogs).

 

[Inisfallen]

With appropriate trigger control giving you three round bursts full auto can be relatively accurate. Plus there is the benefit of suppression fire.

Where do you live that you think you might need the capacity for “suppression fire?”

I sure don’t want to live there, and I grew up in New York City in the bad old days of the 70s and 80s, when we had more than 2,000 homicides in some years. And I’ve traveled all over the world, including the third world, through some terrible places, and I’ve never felt the need for a gun, let alone the capacity for “suppression fire.”

 

[Guinness]

Since I was raised with common sense respect for guns, am law abiding, and don’t need an AK-47 to hunt a dear, I’d be in no fear of having my gun removed.

If you were hunting deer and ran into a bear, that AK-47 would come in pretty handy.

Common sense could begin with universal background checks for ALL sales cathoholic.

We already have universal background checks to the degree it is practical. Mandating background checks for private sales isn’t practical because of the lack of and impossibility of creating a national firearms registry.

 

[DisInherited2006]

Where do you live that you think you might need the capacity for “suppression fire?”

When you are up against multiple adversaries and you or your team is moving toward your goal.

I sure don’t want to live there,

I’m sure Jonathan Harrington’s wife felt the same way during the battle of Lexington.

 

[Guinness]

Where do you live that you think you might need the capacity for “suppression fire?”

If you’re the victim of a home invasion, being able to suppress the fire of your assailants until the police arrive would be a nice option to have.

I grew up in New York City in the bad old days of the 70s and 80s, when we had more than 2,000 homicides in some years.

NYC has always had some of the strictest gun laws in the country. The laws of the 70s and 80s were arguably more restrictive than what exists now under Heller and subsequent cases.