What Happens After Calls for New Gun Restrictions? Sales Go Up

  • Thread starter Thread starter didymus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Theo520 said:
How so? I expect the labeling to be highly subjective.

If we go with ties to recent violence then suddenly Bernie supporters are all on the ban list.

Unions have a checkered past as well, and might be deemed a ‘hate group’

Or do you advocate we only include conservative groups, pro-life protesters and such?
Click to expand...
Let’s be honest about the Bernie and Trump supporters. Both sides have stood up for their beliefs. Both sides (it has been both sides) have fought for what they believe, unfortunately with physical damage. Would I consider 1 or both hate groups? Of course not.

Unions could have checkered pasts, but who doesnt? I wouldnt consider them as a whole as a hate group, we would have to check individually.

Conservative groups and liberal groups can be considered hate groups.
I have been to several pro life marches here in Dallas with the Dallas Diocese and things have been peaceful. That’s how most of those are, nothing hateful about that.
 
Brendan said:
So you would have all historical reenactors thrown into prison, since no flintlocks would be allowed at all?

http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.town...2ab2e2/5550d45a1c297.image.jpg?resize=507,760

So having someone portray history at a park, and let people see and ask questions would be illegal.

As I have said before, your proposals are absurd…
Click to expand...
please, most of these guns are not to start a war. Give me an adult answer not a sentimental one. Yeah, were going to go arrest homeboy in the picture, come on now, you know what I mean and your just trying to play a victim.

My ideas wont change even after the picture, b/c that guy is not stirring trouble.
 
chero23 said:
**No, they have all the right in the world to complain. But they should be complaining about the dropped investigations and not that a citizen who had no convictions was able to buy a gun. They should be complaining that the PC culture in this country let someone off the watch list. Maybe the government should stop with the PC junk that got the investigation canceled. Terrorism investigations should not be stopped because someone said the word “racism”. Follow the facts where ever they lead.
**

People on the right have been the ones complaining that Obama and the FBI should have done more with this guy (Omar). Have you said that to the right wing people? I dont think so.
Click to expand...
I am one of the “right wing people” and I said it. Should I have told myself? The FBI should not have dropped the investigation in my opinion. Who else would you like me to tell?
chero23 said:
****First, this has nothing to do with what is being discussed. Second, those abusive husbands dont need a gun to kill. Third, you dont even say they were killed with a gun, you are just trying to link these horrible tragedies to guns to make it it seems like the unconstitutionally vague laws you are proposing are necessary and would make a difference. Nothing you have suggested would stop an abusive husband from killing their wife.
I would bring in abusive husbands into the conversation b/c, true they can kill the spouse with something else besides a gun but a gun can still be used. Like I said, if the person is in a terrorist list, being investigated for terrorism ties, cartel, hate groups, and domestic violence, they can not buy a gun. Let me repeat myself, they can not buy a gun.
Click to expand...
You have been proposing that people investigated or accused of something then cleared of wrong doing should be barred from purchasing guns. That is a TERRIBLE idea. The government should not be able to take away anything from you unless you have been convicted by a court.
 
chero23 said:
B/c it is bigger. Can a regular handgun cause more harm than a flint to which you are talking about? Probably so. But, that is what I have proposed and wouldnt change.
Click to expand...
If this statement doesn’t prove that they have absolutely no clue what they are talking about then I don’t know what will.
 
chero23 said:
please, most of these guns are not to start a war. Give me an adult answer not a sentimental one. Yeah, were going to go arrest homeboy in the picture, come on now, you know what I mean and your just trying to play a victim.

My ideas wont change even after the picture, b/c that guy is not stirring trouble.
Click to expand...
are gangs, terrorist, drug cartels, violent criminals are using muzzle loading flintlock weapons for their gang/drug wars and crime??? please point to an example of any crime committed with a flintlock weapon.
 
chero23 said:
please, most of these guns are not to start a war. Give me an adult answer not a sentimental one. Yeah, were going to go arrest homeboy in the picture, come on now, you know what I mean and your just trying to play a victim.

My ideas wont change even after the picture, b/c that guy is not stirring trouble.
Click to expand...
he is holding a flintlock, which you would like to see banned.
But no flints, simple as that.
Click to expand...
That is why your proposals are absurd…
 
So Chero,

Let’s assume that the guy in the picture that I posted did NOT have a permit for the musket.

How many years in prison should he have to serve?

As far as size the Potzdam Model 1740 Musket is 56 1/2 inches long.
 
Also,

Here is someone with a Tec-9 9mm semi-automatic handgun.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Assuming that this person also does not have a permit for this handgun, how many years in prison should he get.

(for comparison purposes , the Tec-9 is 11 1/2 inches long)
 
oliver927 said:
I am one of the “right wing people” and I said it. Should I have told myself? The FBI should not have dropped the investigation in my opinion. Who else would you like me to tell?

You have been proposing that people investigated or accused of something then cleared of wrong doing should be barred from purchasing guns. That is a TERRIBLE idea. The government should not be able to take away anything from you unless you have been convicted by a court.
Click to expand...
Yes you should have told yourself.

I never said they should be barred. You might want to reread my threads. I have repeatedly said, if you are cleared you are free.

It was written in english, you can read it.
 
oliver927 said:
are gangs, terrorist, drug cartels, violent criminals are using muzzle loading flintlock weapons for their gang/drug wars and crime??? please point to an example of any crime committed with a flintlock weapon.
Click to expand...
My position stands
 
Brendan said:
he is holding a flintlock, which you would like to see banned.

That is why your proposals are absurd…
Click to expand...
You know, with your mentality, we should also ban cops who carry AK47s. How is this guy in the parade going to start a war? He is not.

For parade purposes that’s fine, for home use, nope.

Call it absurd all you like, I’m not losing any sleep over it.
 
Brendan said:
So Chero,

Let’s assume that the guy in the picture that I posted did NOT have a permit for the musket.

How many years in prison should he have to serve?

As far as size the Potzdam Model 1740 Musket is 56 1/2 inches long.
Click to expand...
Was the guy there using it for a parade? Were others there using it as part of a parade? Was his gun loaded with bullets?

You gotta ask those questions.

You got the mentality that with my proposal if there was a military parade I would put all of them in jail. Please be an adult, use common sense.
 
chero23 said:
Was the guy there using it for a parade? Were others there using it as part of a parade? Was his gun loaded with bullets?

You gotta ask those questions.

You got the mentality that with my proposal if there was a military parade I would put all of them in jail. Please be an adult, use common sense.
Click to expand...
Where did you mention these exceptions in your proposals?
 
chero23 said:
5 years in prison, plus if he has any priors.
Click to expand...
What if he was carrying that in a parade?

Is it still 5 years?

Do your other exceptions apply here?

Are there any other execeptions that you did not mention
 
Brendan said:
What if he was carrying that in a parade?

Is it still 5 years?

Do your other exceptions apply here?

Are there any other execeptions that you did not mention
Click to expand...
Parade then no, why would them man have to go to jail!!!

Well we didn’t talk about every minute detail.

I’m pretty sure other exceptions would be there, but they would be minimal. Besides, the guy holding the flint is at a parade, he doesnt have it as his 1st line of defense at home.

Your question was why would someone had owned a flint an didnt have a permit for it, get more time than a person with a regular hnadgun.

My response to you was simple, if your law abiding get the permit. Easy as 1,2,3
 
chero23 said:
.

Your question was why would someone had owned a flint an didnt have a permit for it, get more time than a person with a regular hnadgun.

My response to you was simple, if your law abiding get the permit. Easy as 1,2,3
Click to expand...
That is not the answer to the question. How much prison time would the guy with the flintlock get if he did not have permit.

Since the question is in regards to length of time, the expected response would be either zero or a positive real number.

So how much prison time would he get for having a flintlock without a permit?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top