Something you won't find in your mainstream media

[MiloMorai]

The answer is to punish the people with murderous intent. The worse the punishment the better. Taking guns from law abiding folks is not the answer. Make the criminal pay dearly.

The San Francisco DA over in California chose to not punish criminals. Even the people who happily voted him into office were fed up with his support of criminals.

If your gun is stolen and used in a crime, then you also need to be charged. I suggest 5 years, no parole.

Those that used the gun, 25 years plus what ever the max is for the crime, and no parole.

[FLS]

If your gun is stolen and used in a crime, then you also need to be charged. I suggest 5 years, no parole.

Those that used the gun, 25 years plus what ever the max is for the crime, and no parole.

Same with stolen cars?

[TryHard]

If your gun is stolen and used in a crime, then you also need to be charged. I suggest 5 years, no parole.

You people are nuts.

[RotBaron]

And stolen knives too, right?

The owner of a stolen item is responsible for what the thief does with the item, profoundly absurd.

[Arlo]

Same with stolen cars?

Cars aren't specifically designed to fire bullets (well, except in bad sci fi movies). However, you bring up an interesting potential correlation. Car owners are required to have liability insurance (in most, if not all states). All their motor vehicles must be covered in case of property loss and/or medical cost/loss of life. Granted, not if it is stolen. But what about responsible gun owners whose guns are not stolen? Shouldn't there be liability insurance given the increasing number of handgun death and damages? Shouldn't a responsible law-abiding gun owner be agreeable to such? Or does the Constitution say there's a free pass? 

[TryHard]

I'm going to trust the same police that feel it is necessary to choke a man to death on the ground for stealing but are too much of coward to go run in a school until big daddy border patrol agents show up with less kit than the coward police officers had. Yes these are the people I'm going to give away all my guns to because I trust they will protect me?

The old saying went something like when seconds count police are minutes away.
Well in the case of those kids the police were an hour away while chasing the suspect.

Its down right sickening where people's balls have gone, I've never been more ashamed to be an American.


If the police come door to door to confiscate firearms I will simply inform them I am homeschooled so they will be to scared to go in my house

[Arlo]

All your guns? Hyperbole from the start, there.

[MiloMorai]

You people are nuts.

Where do you the perps get most of their guns?

[guncrasher]

No, everybody isn't. SCOTUS can't amend. So, not end of story. 

they cannot amend but they can interpret laws and the constitution.  that's actually their job.  perhaps in 50 years they could reinterpret the law to say different.

as an example "separate but equal" and not gonna say anymore than that.

I've been here since 79, in the 80's I was a member of the nra.  "they're coming for our guns" turned me sour on the nra.  took me a few years but found out it wasnt true. it's been 40 something years and it hasnt happened.

but another sick fact, 2 shootings at schools and another at a market happened by law abiding citizens who bought the guns legally.  and those are just the ones at the top of my head.  not saying ban guns as I own a couple myself.  but we really need to step back and look at this and come up with a solution.  true it wont stop all shootings, but I guess it will stop some.

by the way, the marines gave me an m16-a2 rifle. I guess I trained for war without an assault weapon.


semp

[FLS]

Cars aren't specifically designed to fire bullets (well, except in bad sci fi movies). However, you bring up an interesting potential correlation. Car owners are required to have liability insurance (in most, if not all states). All their motor vehicles must be covered in case of property loss and/or medical cost/loss of life. Granted, not if it is stolen. But what about responsible gun owners whose guns are not stolen? Shouldn't there be liability insurance given the increasing number of handgun death and damages? Shouldn't a responsible law-abiding gun owner be agreeable to such? Or does the Constitution say there's a free pass? 

You can get insurance if you want it. I expect you'd like mandatory insurance that poor urban people who need protection the most can't afford in order to disarm the law abiding while ignoring the criminals responsible for most violent crime. If you don't count black urban gang shootings, the USA has one of the lowest rates of violent crime in the world. Restricting the law abiding further isn't going to reduce criminal use of an item you can make in any machine shop.

[FLS]

...

by the way, the marines gave me an m16-a2 rifle. I guess I trained for war without an assault weapon.


semp

Try buying one. Selective fire makes it an assault rifle as far as the term has any real meaning. The M-16, now the M4, is the military selective fire version of the pre-existing civilian modern sporting rifle by Armalite.

[Arlo]

You can get insurance if you want it. I expect you'd like mandatory insurance that poor urban people who need protection the most can't afford in order to disarm the law abiding while ignoring the criminals responsible for most violent crime. If you don't count black urban gang shootings, the USA has one of the lowest rates of violent crime in the world. Restricting the law abiding further isn't going to reduce criminal use of an item you can make in any machine shop.

You'd be more accurate in your expectation if you thought I'd prefer the reestablishment of Title XI of the Federal Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 as well as restricting sales to 21 or older, background checks, licensing and regular proficiency testing (which would include mental screening). And the U.S. has the most mass shootings of any nation on Earth.

[Busher]

You can get insurance if you want it. I expect you'd like mandatory insurance that poor urban people who need protection the most can't afford in order to disarm the law abiding while ignoring the criminals responsible for most violent crime. If you don't count black urban gang shootings, the USA has one of the lowest rates of violent crime in the world. Restricting the law abiding further isn't going to reduce criminal use of an item you can make in any machine shop.

Only offered in rebuttal - data compiled on the internet:

19 Countries with the Most School Shootings (total incidents Jan 2009-May 2018):

United States — 288
Mexico — 8
South Africa — 6
India — 5
Nigeria & Pakistan — 4
Afghanistan — 3
Brazil, Canada, France — 2
Azerbaijan, China, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Kenya, Russia, & Turkey — 1

[guncrasher]

Try buying one. Selective fire makes it an assault rifle as far as the term has any real meaning. The M-16, now the M4, is the military selective fire version of the pre-existing civilian modern sporting rifle by Armalite.

all rifles have selective fire.  even the ar15.



semp

[MiloMorai]

Isn't the USofA considered a First World country? Acts more like one of those 's***hole' countries of Africa someone mentioned a couple or so years ago.