Gun control debate (merged)

[loggervol]

If a law abiding citizen breaks a law. They are no longer law abiding.

A unconstitutional law. There is that pesky document again.

 

[luthervol]

A unconstitutional law

I'm not really sure what tangent we've taken.
But let's try this..........
If someone is suspected of having a high potential of becoming a mass shooter within the next few days, what should be done?

 

[loggervol]

I'm not really sure what tangent we've taken.
But let's try this..........
If someone is suspected of having a high potential of becoming a mass shooter within the next few days, what should be done?

And I say, someone that’s following the constitution, shouldn’t be labeled or flagged as being a criminal or a threat.

That’s what you just said about someone unwilling to hand over firearms because of an unconstitutional amendment.

 

[luthervol]

And I say, someone that’s following the constitution, shouldn’t be labeled or flagged as being a criminal or a threat.

That’s what you just said about someone unwilling to hand over firearms because of an unconstitutional amendment.

I honestly have no clue what you are talking about.
What did I say about someone unwilling to hand over firearms because of an unconstitutional amendment?

 

[85SugarVol]

I think his point was that Japan's struggles with mass attacks are not even in the same universe as are the US's struggles.

He doesn’t make points.

The exchange he jumped in on was one I was having with BB.

Japan does not struggle with mass shootings. Japan does struggle with mass attacks.

That was the only point.

 

[loggervol]

What happens when people don’t turn over their firearms? You said this.

That's one of the many problems. What does happen? Warn their employers? Put them on a high risk watch list? Monitor their movements and communications? There is no easy answer for what to do when someone is identified as a potential mass shooter.
Any suggestions on your end?

 

[luthervol]

What happens when people don’t turn over their firearms? You said this.

Sure. I was attempting to answer your question.
What does that have to do with an unconstitutional amendment?

 

[85SugarVol]

I’m just focused on the clear indication that they were both nucking futs. That’s all I really need but that’s just me.

I understand the labels game when the conversation is “199 ‘mass shootings’ so far this year!”

True mass attacks like Allen & Nashville are another thing entirely. Crazy people doing horrible things.

I couldn’t care less about the Trans angle with Nashville and that manifesto - redact all of that, I won’t care. I want the detailed target assessments she made.

 

[loggervol]

Sure. I was attempting to answer your question.
What does that have to do with an unconstitutional amendment?

We don’t have any laws at this time requiring people to hand over their firearms. I’m not sure but I think he meant, if there was an unconstitutional amendment passed. That would be the only way I see people being forced to hand over firearms to the government.

 

[turbovol]

--You ban all assault/semi-assault rifles immediately--and forever.
--You raise the legal age to purchase a gun to 21.
--You require a license from anyone who wishes to purchase a gun, and sell a gun only after the would-be purchaser has had a thorough background check.
---Anyone with a criminal record, a record of mental troubles of any kind (psychiatric visits, documented drug addict, anyone on medication for
mental issues), anyone who's had a protection order taken out against them, etc. is banned from purchasing a gun.
---You get rid of permitless concealed carry and require permits again.
---You reinstate 'stop and search' by police when there is a reasonable reason to think that individuals might be carrying guns.
---You start devoting lots more money to mental-health treatment in America--but we should be under no illusion that that alone
is going to put a dent in gun violence as I'd suggest that upwards of two-thirds of the people who have some kind of mental issue aren't
even aware of it themselves, or they might be aware but have no wish to seek treatment. A man with a serious anger issue is a man with a mental
issue--but he's probably not getting any treatment for it, for example. It's also worth noting that Republicans have consistently voted against
legislation to increase spending for mental health.
---You also get rid of the deranged "stand your ground" laws in those states that have passed them. They're terrible laws--passed by Republicans, of course---that basically give people license to shoot others for the flimsiest of reasons. "Well, he pushed me and my life felt threatened, so I shot him."

Yes, you start making it a little harder to purchase guns, you get rid of the most dangerous weapons, you take a hard line on anybody
who might pose a risk to public safety should he buy a gun, you devote more resources to mental health.....A starting point....

 

[loggervol]

I don’t want to call anyone the enemy but if a person wants to step over my constitutional rights. They are definitely not my friend.

 

[hog88]

--You ban all assault/semi-assault rifles immediately--and forever.
--You raise the legal age to purchase a gun to 21.
--You require a license from anyone who wishes to purchase a gun, and sell a gun only after the would-be purchaser has had a thorough background check.
---Anyone with a criminal record, a record of mental troubles of any kind (psychiatric visits, documented drug addict, anyone on medication for
mental issues), anyone who's had a protection order taken out against them, etc. is banned from purchasing a gun.
---You get rid of permitless concealed carry and require permits again.
---You reinstate 'stop and search' by police when there is a reasonable reason to think that individuals might be carrying guns.
---You start devoting lots more money to mental-health treatment in America--but we should be under no illusion that that alone
is going to put a dent in gun violence as I'd suggest that upwards of two-thirds of the people who have some kind of mental issue aren't
even aware of it themselves, or they might be aware but have no wish to seek treatment. A man with a serious anger issue is a man with a mental
issue--but he's probably not getting any treatment for it, for example. It's also worth noting that Republicans have consistently voted against
legislation to increase spending for mental health.
---You also get rid of the deranged "stand your ground" laws in those states that have passed them. They're terrible laws--passed by Republicans, of course---that basically give people license to shoot others for the flimsiest of reasons. "Well, he pushed me and my life felt threatened, so I shot him."

Yes, you start making it a little harder to purchase guns, you get rid of the most dangerous weapons, you take a hard line on anybody
who might pose a risk to public safety should he buy a gun, you devote more resources to mental health.....A starting point....

Yes, who wouldn't want to live in a police state? No cop ever would abuse the "stop and frisk" authority and WTH lets raise the age for joining the military to 21 too.

 

[TheDeeble]

--You ban all assault/semi-assault rifles immediately--and forever.
--You raise the legal age to purchase a gun to 21.
--You require a license from anyone who wishes to purchase a gun, and sell a gun only after the would-be purchaser has had a thorough background check.
---Anyone with a criminal record, a record of mental troubles of any kind (psychiatric visits, documented drug addict, anyone on medication for
mental issues), anyone who's had a protection order taken out against them, etc. is banned from purchasing a gun.
---You get rid of permitless concealed carry and require permits again.
---You reinstate 'stop and search' by police when there is a reasonable reason to think that individuals might be carrying guns.
---You start devoting lots more money to mental-health treatment in America--but we should be under no illusion that that alone
is going to put a dent in gun violence as I'd suggest that upwards of two-thirds of the people who have some kind of mental issue aren't
even aware of it themselves, or they might be aware but have no wish to seek treatment. A man with a serious anger issue is a man with a mental
issue--but he's probably not getting any treatment for it, for example. It's also worth noting that Republicans have consistently voted against
legislation to increase spending for mental health.
---You also get rid of the deranged "stand your ground" laws in those states that have passed them. They're terrible laws--passed by Republicans, of course---that basically give people license to shoot others for the flimsiest of reasons. "Well, he pushed me and my life felt threatened, so I shot him."

Yes, you start making it a little harder to purchase guns, you get rid of the most dangerous weapons, you take a hard line on anybody
who might pose a risk to public safety should he buy a gun, you devote more resources to mental health.....A starting point....

 

[loggervol]

--You ban all assault/semi-assault rifles immediately--and forever.
--You raise the legal age to purchase a gun to 21.
--You require a license from anyone who wishes to purchase a gun, and sell a gun only after the would-be purchaser has had a thorough background check.
---Anyone with a criminal record, a record of mental troubles of any kind (psychiatric visits, documented drug addict, anyone on medication for
mental issues), anyone who's had a protection order taken out against them, etc. is banned from purchasing a gun.
---You get rid of permitless concealed carry and require permits again.
---You reinstate 'stop and search' by police when there is a reasonable reason to think that individuals might be carrying guns.
---You start devoting lots more money to mental-health treatment in America--but we should be under no illusion that that alone
is going to put a dent in gun violence as I'd suggest that upwards of two-thirds of the people who have some kind of mental issue aren't
even aware of it themselves, or they might be aware but have no wish to seek treatment. A man with a serious anger issue is a man with a mental
issue--but he's probably not getting any treatment for it, for example. It's also worth noting that Republicans have consistently voted against
legislation to increase spending for mental health.
---You also get rid of the deranged "stand your ground" laws in those states that have passed them. They're terrible laws--passed by Republicans, of course---that basically give people license to shoot others for the flimsiest of reasons. "Well, he pushed me and my life felt threatened, so I shot him."

Yes, you start making it a little harder to purchase guns, you get rid of the most dangerous weapons, you take a hard line on anybody
who might pose a risk to public safety should he buy a gun, you devote more resources to mental health.....A starting point....

So, ex military with ptsd are the first people on your list.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

 

[Pepe_Silvia]

--You ban all assault/semi-assault rifles immediately--and forever.
--You raise the legal age to purchase a gun to 21.
--You require a license from anyone who wishes to purchase a gun, and sell a gun only after the would-be purchaser has had a thorough background check.
---Anyone with a criminal record, a record of mental troubles of any kind (psychiatric visits, documented drug addict, anyone on medication for
mental issues), anyone who's had a protection order taken out against them, etc. is banned from purchasing a gun.
---You get rid of permitless concealed carry and require permits again.
---You reinstate 'stop and search' by police when there is a reasonable reason to think that individuals might be carrying guns.
---You start devoting lots more money to mental-health treatment in America--but we should be under no illusion that that alone
is going to put a dent in gun violence as I'd suggest that upwards of two-thirds of the people who have some kind of mental issue aren't
even aware of it themselves, or they might be aware but have no wish to seek treatment. A man with a serious anger issue is a man with a mental
issue--but he's probably not getting any treatment for it, for example. It's also worth noting that Republicans have consistently voted against
legislation to increase spending for mental health.
---You also get rid of the deranged "stand your ground" laws in those states that have passed them. They're terrible laws--passed by Republicans, of course---that basically give people license to shoot others for the flimsiest of reasons. "Well, he pushed me and my life felt threatened, so I shot him."

Yes, you start making it a little harder to purchase guns, you get rid of the most dangerous weapons, you take a hard line on anybody
who might pose a risk to public safety should he buy a gun, you devote more resources to mental health.....A starting point....

 

[volfanhill]

--You ban all assault/semi-assault rifles immediately--and forever.
--You raise the legal age to purchase a gun to 21.
--You require a license from anyone who wishes to purchase a gun, and sell a gun only after the would-be purchaser has had a thorough background check.
---Anyone with a criminal record, a record of mental troubles of any kind (psychiatric visits, documented drug addict, anyone on medication for
mental issues), anyone who's had a protection order taken out against them, etc. is banned from purchasing a gun.
---You get rid of permitless concealed carry and require permits again.
---You reinstate 'stop and search' by police when there is a reasonable reason to think that individuals might be carrying guns.
---You start devoting lots more money to mental-health treatment in America--but we should be under no illusion that that alone
is going to put a dent in gun violence as I'd suggest that upwards of two-thirds of the people who have some kind of mental issue aren't
even aware of it themselves, or they might be aware but have no wish to seek treatment. A man with a serious anger issue is a man with a mental
issue--but he's probably not getting any treatment for it, for example. It's also worth noting that Republicans have consistently voted against
legislation to increase spending for mental health.
---You also get rid of the deranged "stand your ground" laws in those states that have passed them. They're terrible laws--passed by Republicans, of course---that basically give people license to shoot others for the flimsiest of reasons. "Well, he pushed me and my life felt threatened, so I shot him."

Yes, you start making it a little harder to purchase guns, you get rid of the most dangerous weapons, you take a hard line on anybody
who might pose a risk to public safety should he buy a gun, you devote more resources to mental health.....A starting point....

You love you some gubment and hate you some freedom


Also stop and frisk is racist. Stop being racist. It's also been deemed unconstitutional. That pesky document getting in your way again. Thank god our founders knew how dangerous people like you could be.

NYPD’s Infamous Stop-and-Frisk Policy Found Unconstitutional - The Leadership Conference Education Fund

 

[turbovol]

This is where we come to an impasse. I cannot in good faith rely on law enforcement to be at the right place at the right time, every time. And, I cannot rely on government to make the right decisions for me and my family when I may have to protect my family from someone that would do us harm.

When government start taking away rights, where do they stop. A surveillance state is not the right way. I don’t want to live in a communist government and l would think no matter how corrupted someone’s mind is, they should feel the same.

The self-protection argument is nothing more than an NRA marketing campaign. It's a scheme to sell guns--has been for, what, 30 years? The chances that anyone would actually need a gun for self-protection are incredibly remote--you're more likely to accidentally shoot yourself or some innocent person. The NRA likes to throw out stats showing huge numbers of cases where "good guys with guns" stopped "bad guys with guns"--but their numbers are totally fraudulent. Bad guys with guns ARE shot and killed--as happened with the Texas mall killer, but it usually happens after they've murdered a half dozen or more people.

The "responsible gun owner" notion is a myth. Once someone buys a guy, he has the potential to become a bad guy with a gun. Why do so many young urban black men carry guns? Answer: self protection! They get guns--most of them--for the same reason you do--except they have a more legitimate need than some guy in an American suburb. Now, once they get a gun, some of them do stupid things--decide to use their gun to rob somebody of $40 or a bag of weed---and end up dead or in prison, but a lot of them get guns in the first place because they know other people in their neighborhood or peer group have guns. Look at the white gun crazies: They argue even MORE people should get guns to protect themselves against all the other people with guns. It's insane, stupid--uncivilized.

Life circumstances change constantly. "Good guys" get into divorce and custody battles with their wives/ex-wives, get angry and start shooting. It happens a lot. Sacked employees come back to the office with a gun to take their revenge. Multiple cases. Mental problems develop. Look at the Las Vegas shooter---deadliest mass shooting in American history. No criminal record. No documented mental problems--though he'd clearly developed some at some point before killing 67 people (or whatever the number) and wounding some 200 others. No case better illustrates the problem with easy gun ownership and lax regulations.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/02/us/las-vegas-attack-stephen-paddock-trnd/index.html

 

[turbovol]

You love you some gubment and hate you some freedom


Also stop and frisk is racist. Stop being racist. It's also been deemed unconstitutional. That pesky document getting in your way again. Thank god our founders knew how dangerous people like you could be.

NYPD’s Infamous Stop-and-Frisk Policy Found Unconstitutional - The Leadership Conference Education Fund

yea, I know about stop and frisk. I'm not opposed to it in urban areas awash in guns....It's one thing I'm conservative about....

As for government vs. "freedom," we have a serious gun-violence problem in America. Go take a look at the photo circulating of the dead in Allen, Texas--including the 5-year-old kid. I don't care about some redneck's desire to play with assault rifles because he's got so little else going on his life....Sorry.

 

[loggervol]

The self-protection argument is nothing more than an NRA marketing campaign. It's a scheme to sell guns--has been for, what, 30 years? The chances that anyone would actually need a gun for self-protection are incredibly remote--you're more likely to accidentally shoot yourself or some innocent person. The NRA likes to throw out stats showing huge numbers of cases where "good guys with guns" stopped "bad guys with guns"--but their numbers are totally fraudulent. Bad guys with guns ARE shot and killed--as happened with the Texas mall killer, but it usually happens after they've murdered a half dozen or more people.

The "responsible gun owner" notion is a myth. Once someone buys a guy, he has the potential to become a bad guy with a gun. Why do so many young urban black men carry guns? Answer: self protection! They get guns--most of them--for the same reason you do--except they have a more legitimate need than some guy in an American suburb. Now, once they get a gun, some of them do stupid things--decide to use their gun to rob somebody of $40 or a bag of weed---and end up dead or in prison, but a lot of them get guns in the first place because they know other people in their neighborhood or peer group have guns. Look at the white gun crazies: They argue even MORE people should get guns to protect themselves against all the other people with guns. It's insane, stupid--uncivilized.

Life circumstances change constantly. "Good guys" get into divorce and custody battles with their wives/ex-wives, get angry and start shooting. It happens a lot. Sacked employees come back to the office with a gun to take their revenge. Multiple cases. Mental problems develop. Look at the Las Vegas shooter---deadliest mass shooting in American history. No criminal record. No documented mental problems--though he'd clearly developed some at some point before killing 67 people (or whatever the number) and wounding some 200 others. No case better illustrates the problem with easy gun ownership and lax regulations.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/02/us/las-vegas-attack-stephen-paddock-trnd/index.html

Constitution

 

[volfanhill]

yea, I know about stop and frisk. I'm not opposed to it in urban areas awash in guns....It's one thing I'm conservative about....

As for government vs. "freedom," we have a serious gun-violence problem in America. Go take a look at the photo circulating of the dead in Allen, Texas--including the 5-year-old kid. I don't care about some redneck's desire to play with assault rifles because he's got so little else going on his life....Sorry.

There is a method to change the law. Use it . Until then sorry not sorry that you can't stomp on constitutionally protected freedoms. And even more fun is your position that you are cool with accosting POC if it's in an urban area. Good lord.

 

[C-south]

Maybe your own words will "trigger" your memory.

Sure. That was a knee jerk response by me and I believe it was Hogg who had a better response. The main intent of the founding fathers and the 2A was having the ability to defend ourselves against the government but it wasn’t the sole purpose.

 

[C-south]

--You ban all assault/semi-assault rifles immediately--and forever.
--You raise the legal age to purchase a gun to 21.
--You require a license from anyone who wishes to purchase a gun, and sell a gun only after the would-be purchaser has had a thorough background check.
---Anyone with a criminal record, a record of mental troubles of any kind (psychiatric visits, documented drug addict, anyone on medication for
mental issues), anyone who's had a protection order taken out against them, etc. is banned from purchasing a gun.
---You get rid of permitless concealed carry and require permits again.
---You reinstate 'stop and search' by police when there is a reasonable reason to think that individuals might be carrying guns.
---You start devoting lots more money to mental-health treatment in America--but we should be under no illusion that that alone
is going to put a dent in gun violence as I'd suggest that upwards of two-thirds of the people who have some kind of mental issue aren't
even aware of it themselves, or they might be aware but have no wish to seek treatment. A man with a serious anger issue is a man with a mental
issue--but he's probably not getting any treatment for it, for example. It's also worth noting that Republicans have consistently voted against
legislation to increase spending for mental health.
---You also get rid of the deranged "stand your ground" laws in those states that have passed them. They're terrible laws--passed by Republicans, of course---that basically give people license to shoot others for the flimsiest of reasons. "Well, he pushed me and my life felt threatened, so I shot him."

Yes, you start making it a little harder to purchase guns, you get rid of the most dangerous weapons, you take a hard line on anybody
who might pose a risk to public safety should he buy a gun, you devote more resources to mental health.....A starting point....

You lost everyone with your second word.

 

[C-south]

The self-protection argument is nothing more than an NRA marketing campaign. It's a scheme to sell guns--has been for, what, 30 years? The chances that anyone would actually need a gun for self-protection are incredibly remote--you're more likely to accidentally shoot yourself or some innocent person. The NRA likes to throw out stats showing huge numbers of cases where "good guys with guns" stopped "bad guys with guns"--but their numbers are totally fraudulent. Bad guys with guns ARE shot and killed--as happened with the Texas mall killer, but it usually happens after they've murdered a half dozen or more people.

The "responsible gun owner" notion is a myth. Once someone buys a guy, he has the potential to become a bad guy with a gun. Why do so many young urban black men carry guns? Answer: self protection! They get guns--most of them--for the same reason you do--except they have a more legitimate need than some guy in an American suburb. Now, once they get a gun, some of them do stupid things--decide to use their gun to rob somebody of $40 or a bag of weed---and end up dead or in prison, but a lot of them get guns in the first place because they know other people in their neighborhood or peer group have guns. Look at the white gun crazies: They argue even MORE people should get guns to protect themselves against all the other people with guns. It's insane, stupid--uncivilized.

Life circumstances change constantly. "Good guys" get into divorce and custody battles with their wives/ex-wives, get angry and start shooting. It happens a lot. Sacked employees come back to the office with a gun to take their revenge. Multiple cases. Mental problems develop. Look at the Las Vegas shooter---deadliest mass shooting in American history. No criminal record. No documented mental problems--though he'd clearly developed some at some point before killing 67 people (or whatever the number) and wounding some 200 others. No case better illustrates the problem with easy gun ownership and lax regulations.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/02/us/las-vegas-attack-stephen-paddock-trnd/index.html

Lol. You should’ve lived in the late 1700s.

 

[NurseGoodVol]

I saw it, but I'm not going to post it on this board. One of the victims had half his face blown off.

Just unbelievable you "Christians" tolerate this stuff.

Blaming Christian’s for lawlessness? Stretch.