Author Topic: gun control... (Read 6953 times)

Curval · « **Reply #210 on:** April 20, 2007, 10:01:01 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Are you going to psychologically screen every single person, a multi hour appointment with a shrink? That's impossible.

Even if you did, someone would slip through the cracks. You know that.

Indeed.

Just look at lazs as an example:

Former biker and meth dealer
Feels the need to avoid black people
Wants to take the vote away from women

I'd be facinated to hear what a shrink would say about him, his writings on this BBS and whether or not he should be "allowed" to own guns.

Then I'd be interested in what would happen if they tried and take 'em away from him.

...and in all honesty he is probably someone who SHOULD have the right to own his guns given his respect for them and his experience.

Makarov9 · « **Reply #211 on:** April 20, 2007, 10:01:47 AM »

Just saw this article linked in Digg. It's about "Guntown USA", where a town required all households to be armed. Crime rate plunged and the population greatly increased. They compare it to a town where all guns were outlawed and crime rate increased.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55288

Never understood why people are so willing to give up their rights to defend themselves and their families...

Chairboy · « **Reply #212 on:** April 20, 2007, 10:04:15 AM »

Blast, ya beat me to it. I was coming here with the same link. Fantastic stuff.

Great side effect of requiring gun ownership: Felons can't buy guns, so... they don't move to your town. Voilla!

Makarov9 · « **Reply #213 on:** April 20, 2007, 10:12:29 AM »

Yep, interesting article. BTW, the Digg site also has some good arguments about the subject from viewers:

http://digg.com/politics/25_years_murder_free_in_Gun_Town_USA

MrRiplEy[H] · « **Reply #214 on:** April 20, 2007, 10:14:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
Yeager,

Who determines that "NEED" thing? Is it someone determining that another reall.y "needs" a firearm? That is called licensing and is contrary to the concept of a right. Rights are not granted on a "need" basis. Priveledges, like driving where a license is required, and can be revoked, are licensed by the state.

ripley, I 'm still waiting for you to back up your allegations.

What allegiations? It's a clear statistic. Compare the amount of armed crime in your country to another with strict gun laws.

Yeager · « **Reply #215 on:** April 20, 2007, 10:15:09 AM »

You have no solution except wishing to do better.
====
and you as well, except I dont get any of the "wishing to do better" part from you. Your going to accept mass murder as a means to an end to preserve your rights. It must be tolerated is all I sense that your implying.
Is that your position?

Bear in mind that the status of our rights can be changed by a constitutional convention, and thats what will eventually end up happening if we gun rights advocates continue to sit on our hands and insist that nothing must be changed, that nothing can be changed which would appear to be your position. But its no longer mine. Im not going to continue with that mind set.

Hornet33 · « **Reply #216 on:** April 20, 2007, 10:16:28 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Yeager
I have a Virginia CCW and I DID have to provide proof of firearms training and get finger printed in order to get it. I don't feel that violated my rights at all. As a law abiding citizen and those are the laws I followed them and got my permit.
====
Perhaps the requirement to purchase/own a handgun should be that you NEED a CCW. Toad and Mav and you others, the only thing you are saying is that we are going to have to continue "biting the bullet" and having these slaughters of innocents to the "yet to be diagnosed" mentally ill who find it so damned easy to purchase a firearm legally and go wipe dozens of people off the map permanently.

OK but how about the states that don't have a CCW? I guess the people that live there don't get to buy a gun?

A CCW is nothing more than a permit to conceled carry, NOT own. It's just like you DO NOT need a drivers liscence to own a car, just to drive it. I don't need a CCW to own any of the weapons I have but I do need it if I want to carry one of my weapons.

The real tradgedy in all this is that those 32 people died because the college took away their RIGHT to provide for their own protection. It's already been reported that 3 of the victims had a valid Virginia CCW but because of campus rules they were not allowed to carry there. They followed those rules under the false assumption that the college would be able to provide for their personal protection.

Gun free zones do nothing but give the "yet to be diagnosed" mentaly unstable folks a target rich enviroment to do these types of things. ALL of the mass killings in the past 15 years, including 9/11, occured in "gun free" zones. Why do you think that is?

With ALL the gun laws in this country, and there are a ton of them, we don't need any new ones. How about enforcing the ones already on the books. Then come the arugment that "the current laws don't work". Well DUH!!! How many criminals do you know that obey the laws? That's why they are called criminals.

So, how do you prevent someone from buying a gun and doing something like this? Short answer is YOU CAN'T!!!!! The only option left is to allow the citizens of this country to maintain their Constitutional RIGHT to defend themselves. As an American citizen you have the CHOICE to accept the personal responsability to protect yourself and others or not to. Those 32 people were DENIDE that choice and they paid for it with their lives, so who is really to blame here?

I persoanly feel that anyone who promotes the banning of firearms in this country is an enemy of this country. I have sworn 3 different times to Preserve, Protect, and Defend the Constitution of the United States against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. With that in mind I will fight anything or anyone who tries to deprive myself and others of those rights. In this case that means the 2nd Amendment.

And before you ask, does that mean I'm willing to take a life and risk my own, bet your bellybutton it does. If your not willing to fight to protect yourself, and you rights, how can you call yourself an American?

Yeager · « **Reply #217 on:** April 20, 2007, 10:19:20 AM »

Those 32 people were DENIDE that choice and they paid for it with their lives, so who is really to blame here?
====
Im sure there were those in that group who would have been able to defend themselves given the chance, but why must we live in a nation where we have to be armed at school? In the supermarket? at the library?

Man I dont like that.

Hornet33 · « **Reply #218 on:** April 20, 2007, 10:32:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Yeager
Those 32 people were DENIDE that choice and they paid for it with their lives, so who is really to blame here?
====
Im sure there were those in that group who would have been able to defend themselves given the chance, but why must we live in a nation where we have to be armed at school? In the supermarket? at the library?

Man I dont like that.

What other option is there? Do you trust the Government THAT much that your willing to place your personal safety and liberty in their hands?

Yeah it sucks that stuff like this happens but how do you go about ENFORCING laws on people that don't care about the law? By depriving everyone else that does follow the law? That makes NO sense at all.

We do not live in a perfect country. Far from it, but the only way it will ever get any better is for the citizens of this country to stand up and take responsibilty for themselves. Too many people feel that this country OWES them something. That's a big pile of bull and you know it.

You want your freedom, then you have to be willing to accept the responsibilty that comes with it. Sometimes that might mean fighting for it, be it with a pen or the sword and not every enemy of this country is overseas, some of them are right here in your own backyard.

You have to be ready to defend your freedom anytime, anywhere, against any enemy. If your not, how can you truely be free?

Toad · « **Reply #219 on:** April 20, 2007, 10:33:22 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Yeager
, that nothing can be changed which would appear to be your position. But its no longer mine. Im not going to continue with that mind set.

LOL!

You continue to miss the point.

I'm not against workable, reasonable, affordable ideas.

The point is that you are all fired up for change and can't begin to think of one that would be any of those things. let alone all of them.

C'mon... let's hear it. SURELY you have an idea? Something?

Haven't seen it so far but I'm ready to read it.

indy007 · « **Reply #220 on:** April 20, 2007, 10:38:49 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
What allegiations? It's a clear statistic. Compare the amount of armed crime in your country to another with strict gun laws.

You mean like Switzerland? Low crime, low murder rate.

They give out automatic weapons to their citizens.

john9001 · « **Reply #221 on:** April 20, 2007, 11:12:51 AM »

the news reported that the killer went to a gun range to practice shooting his guns.

now why did he not go to that gun range to kill people?

answer-- the gun range is full of people with loaded guns that know how to use them.

he may have been crazy, but he wasn't stupid. Better to go to a "gun free zone" to kill people.

Yeager · « **Reply #222 on:** April 20, 2007, 11:29:31 AM »

you are all fired up for change and can't begin to think of one that would be any of those things. let alone all of them.

C'mon... let's hear it. SURELY you have an idea? Something?
====
A four step process:

A) I suggest upgrading the current federal background check to the level of a government security clearance.

B) I suggest a federal mandate requiring a Mental Health Evaluation prior to any firearms purchase.

B) I suggest a requirment to pass a mandatory Frearms Safety Training course prior to any firearms purchase, after passing the mental health evaluation.

C) I suggest a requirment that a concealed carry permit be obtained after passing both the MHE and the FST before any purchase of a concealable firearm.

Now go ahead and shoot every one of these (pun intended) ideas down. They are no doubt unworkable in your opinion. Heck, maybe post some ideas of your own. Oh wait......there is no problem so why bother. The machinery is working just as it should.

Of course we could just arm everyone, no restrictions. None. I would support that.

Shamus · « **Reply #223 on:** April 20, 2007, 11:37:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Yeager

B) I suggest a federal mandate requiring a Mental Health Evaluation prior to any firearms purchase.

I suggested this a page or so back....but I was joking.

shamus

Yeager · « **Reply #224 on:** April 20, 2007, 11:49:16 AM »

I'm not against workable, reasonable, affordable ideas.
====
what might these be?