Forum Thread

Gun Control

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 46 - 60 of 254 Prev 2 3 4 5 6 .. 17 Next
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    TJ Wrote:

    Chet I don't think being the most powerful of their kind hundreds of years apart allows them to be discussed as anywhere near equal.

    As an exaggerated example consider this. A person with a modern machine gun type assault weapon could stand holding the loaded weapon with a large clip... sneeze due to seasonal allergies and with an unanticipated flinch accidentally shoot 30 others if as is common in America- they are bragging about their new toy at a picnic. If you sneezed with a musket, one might get shot. Not 30. That's why it's 1000 times more dangerous because there's no limits on who can buy 1 or 10.

    Tony, the problem with Chet is that he can't think or transfer his mind into 1800. He talks his way out as Trump does.

    He forgets that this country is the champion of killing its own people by guns, as an national hobby. But people here are indoctrinated that "terrorists" are more dangerous. What a joke!!

    Anyway "facts"may help Chet.

    I used to have an set of 1775 French pistols with flintlock; just to load them it took lots of time for just "one" shot. During that time these guns were "hand" made; not the robot factory production as now. Because of that they were very expensive for that time and only few private people where able to afford those The "militia" was mentioned as who could have these guns, not the public. Of course "settlers" were allowed to have these for their own protection to defend against Indians or dangerous wildlife without "rules" at that time.Thus there is no comparison whatsoever with 2017. The whole 2nd Amendment should be abolished and new laws, based upon countries who have proper laws as well have the lowest gun death per percent of inhabitants should be drafted and approved..

    This looks to me more important even than abolishing ACA., because guns kills more people than just about anything else.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Dutch I challenge you to list (from most to fewest) causes of death in the United States. Gun deaths are the leading causes of death in the US. Truth is - they are right there with automobiles in contributing to deaths of people in the US. Truth is - we love our automobiles and the 35,000 people dying in them each year, hundreds of thousands injured, billion in damages ..... its all worth it, isn't it? ban automobiles and you'd save how many lives and how much damages?

    Deaths occurring using guns are almost always by the criminal hand - the problem isn't the instrument used but the criminal itself.

    Funny how guns are so bad and the leaders of the Democratic party demand disarming America .... but those same leaders use body guards who are heavily armed to protect themselves and their family every minute of the day.

    Truth is - they want their guns, they don't anyone else to have guns and that is why we have the 2nd Amendment

  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    conservativecat Wrote:

    Dutch I challenge you to list (from most to fewest) causes of death in the United States. Gun deaths are the leading causes of death in the US. Truth is - they are right there with automobiles in contributing to deaths of people in the US. Truth is - we love our automobiles and the 35,000 people dying in them each year, hundreds of thousands injured, billion in damages ..... its all worth it, isn't it? ban automobiles and you'd save how many lives and how much damages?

    Deaths occurring using guns are almost always by the criminal hand - the problem isn't the instrument used but the criminal itself.

    Funny how guns are so bad and the leaders of the Democratic party demand disarming America .... but those same leaders use body guards who are heavily armed to protect themselves and their family every minute of the day.

    Truth is - they want their guns, they don't anyone else to have guns and that is why we have the 2nd Amendment

    You don't get it. "guns" are tools to kill; you can't built an house with it. Yes if you "sow" enough "hate" then you may need an gun. 22,000 people's lives could be saved per year; how many did "terrorist" kill per year??? My neighbor had an whole big room filled full with guns, he died; did it help him; I guess not. You call this "civilized"; I don't.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    TJ, Here is what I wrote:

    "BTW when the second amendment was written the musket was analogous to an AR15. Nobody wants to talk common sense, objectivity and rationality. Just keep throwing out derogatory names about a sensitive issue."

    The discussion is about the 2nd Amendment and what was in the minds of the law makers. In the structure of my sentence the subject was the 2nd amendment, the musket was the weapon of the times and in a discussion at that time the musket was the weapon of discussion. That makes the musket analogous to the weapon of discussion of today. That in no way compares the the guns to each other. It just compares their roles as the weapon of the time in the discussion. Dutch just simply attacks and rephrases the conversation to suit his argument.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    "Chet I don't think being the most powerful of their kind hundreds of years apart allows them to be discussed as anywhere near equal."
    Tony, Dont let Dutch distract because he doesn't care what I say he just automatically attacks what I say.
    What I said was that in 1791 when the 2nd Amendment was passed the musket was the most ultimate destructive modern weapon of the times. That means that the lawmakers wrote that law with full knowledge that the people would have in their homes guns that were the most powerful destructive weapons available to mankind. They knew that they were making available the most dangerous weapon on earth that a person could carry and shoot to kill.
    Dutch, In 1791 the musket was the most powerful dangerous destructive rifle that existed. So when the law was passed it was passed with the full knowledge that it was letting everyday citizens have in their homes that most powerful weapon that was available even to the military. It is idiotic to try and say anything different.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    You don't get it. "guns" are tools to kill; you can't built an house with it.

    To be fair, they're also tools for defense. Tell me how many lives were saved last year from guns? Its a huge number from literally someone defending themselves to just the threat of someone having a gun deterring the crime.

    Guns are GOOD - they've stopped just about every mass shooting ever to happen, they've stopped robberies and rapes and crimes.

    Yes if you "sow" enough "hate" then you may need an gun.

    or a knife, or a truck, or an airplane, or a baseball bat or ..... you see the trend, people find their weapons if they want to.

    22,000 people's lives could be saved per year; how many did "terrorist" kill per year???

    A small number compared to smoking ... do you wish to ban smoking ? A smaller number than automobiles, do you want to ban those? Abortion kills 1 million a year +/- , ban abortion?

    I wish there were no killings, no gun deaths. If every person that was a victim of a shooting had a gun and shot the criminal first, how great would that be?

    Guns are great - its why Hillary and Obama Boxer and Feinstein and Hollywood and Police officers etc have as many around them as they can for protection.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    conservativecat Wrote: A small number compared to smoking ... do you wish to ban smoking ? A smaller number than automobiles, do you want to ban those? Abortion kills 1 million a year +/- , ban abortion?

    Not true. Not true. Not true. You're off by about 400,000.

    I guess this doesn't matter because Donald supporters believe in alternative facts. Your feelings matter more than facts ever will, right?


    Automobiles can't walk into an elementary school and indiscriminately slaughter 20 children and six teachers. A cigarette can't walk into a movie theater and slaughter 12 people and injure 70 more. And a woman who was raped or found out her fetus has a terminal condition making the excruciating decision to terminate her pregnancy doesn't affect your life one damn bit.

    And us dirty liberals calling for sensible gun control are not saying that we think you shouldn't be able to own any guns at all. We're calling for laws that prevent weapons of war from flooding our streets. You have a right to hunt and protect yourself if someone breaks into your house; you don't have a right to walk into an elementary school and kill twenty defenseless six year old's.

    Donald supporters need to go back to school and learn what logical fallacies are.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    No matter how much Dutch rants and raves about death by guns he knows nothing is going to change it other than as I have said which is unwarranted search and seizure to confiscate guns. With all the misguided information all that happens is there are new massive amounts of guns with more massive numbers of gun laws for open carry and concealed carry. Everybody knows the only way to eliminate gun deaths is gun confiscation. Gun deaths and gun violence is on the rise yet neither side will advocate massive numbers of police to combat gun violence. Republicans don't want to pay for them and Democrats don't want to see them. So Dems and Repubs march hand in hand letting gun deaths climb.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: No matter how much Dutch rants and raves about death by guns he knows nothing is going to change it other than as I have said which is unwarranted search and seizure to confiscate guns.

    Laws banning certain types of guns and the manufacture of certain types of bullets could easily be implemented without a single unwarranted search and seizure.

    As I've said many times - you are entitled to shoot a deer in the woods; you aren't entitled to shoot me while I'm enjoying a movie.

    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Everybody knows the only way to eliminate gun deaths is gun confiscation. Gun deaths and gun violence is on the rise yet neither side will advocate massive numbers of police to combat gun violence. Republicans don't want to pay for them and Democrats don't want to see them. So Dems and Repubs march hand in hand letting gun deaths climb.

    It terrifies me that we are now living in a post-fact world. Whatever we believe is true is now true. Facts be damned.

    No, gun deaths and gun violence are not on the rise. The fact is that we are living in the most peaceful time this country has seen in nearly four decades.

    No, the only way to eliminate gun deaths isn't gun confiscation. The fact is that making it harder for people to buy guns, especially during a vulnerable time in their lives, dramatically reduces gun deaths.

    It depresses me to no end that facts have now become a debatable topic.

  • Independent
    Washington
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    conservativecat Wrote:

    Abortion kills 1 million a year +/- , ban abortion?

    You got me thinking, I wonder how many abortions occur each year because the mother has health problems and the medical advice from multiple sources is that the pregnancy is high risk to the mother health. And I suspect in nearly all those cases, the parents want to have the baby, struggled with the decision before deciding.

  • Independent
    Washington
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I would feel more comfortable with private individuals owning guns if there were a series of licences exams that required training and inspection.

    To get licence A, the gun owner has to demonstrate some basic level of competency in owning\using a basic weapon. That licence would entitle him to buy\use specific weapons used for hunting and protection.

    To get license B, a person must have licence A. Licence B would require a higher level of training and passing of written and demonstration exams. Once at Level B, the person would be able purchase\use a much broader range of weapons that he\she has demonstrated qualified to use.

    The licencing process would have many levels and ideally take no less than 10 years to squire a "Masters" level of licenses, and maybe a "Grand Master" licence after 15-20 years to those who demonstrate high skills, responsibility of the use of weapons, and a perfect record of personal conduct when using weapons, as well as training others.

    When a something of value needs to be earned, then people take the responsibility seriously, and they like being recognized by having a ranking system that requires them prove to their peers they've are part of elite group of people that not everyone is able to rise too. Yet, the ranking system at the lowest level, does not block people from getting a basic weapon for hunting or self protection.

    Let the NRA run the program as set forth by government guidelines (laws).

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    jaredsxtn said:

    "No, gun deaths and gun violence are not on the rise. The fact is that we are living in the most peaceful time this country has seen in nearly four decades."

    So why do we need gun control??

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Rising gun violence fuels crime surges in many cities, FBI says
    USA Today › story › news › 2016/09/26
    Sep 26, 2016 - WASHINGTON — Overall violent crime in the U.S. increased by nearly 4% last year, the ...
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    There is a good chance that crime and violence will sky rocket in proportion to the escalating war on opioids. Cold turkey to addicts besides being cruel and unusual will force addicts into stealing and killing to get diminishing and more expensive illegal drugs. Humanitarians and progressives are strangely silent on this human atrocity.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    jaredsxtn abortion stats have dropped - you're right. Pro life is winning the fight slowly, but surely. Still, we're killing what, 650,000 unborn babies? That's pretty high compared to what, 35,000 gun deaths ?

    We're calling for laws that prevent weapons of war from flooding our streets.

    You already have them - dozens and dozens of them. Chicago and NYC are the top two .... in gun deaths AND laws gun laws !

    If more laws and less guns = less gun crime, you'd see it in NYC and CHI and other places, its simply not true.

    you don't have a right to walk into an elementary school and kill twenty defenseless six year

    who has ever said that was a right? schools are gun free zones - you have your laws saying nobody can take guns there. tell me then how school shootings happen?

    that's right - crazies break the law ......... 1 law, 500 laws ... it doesn't matter to them because they're crazy

    No, gun deaths and gun violence are not on the rise. The fact is that we are living in the most peaceful time this country has seen in nearly four decades.

    and more guns were sold under Obama in 8 years than every in the history of the US ........... more guns = less crime

    right ?

    The fact is that making it harder for people to buy guns, especially during a vulnerable time in their lives, dramatically reduces gun deaths.

    You think making it harder for a crazy to get a gun in the US is going to deter him/her? really ?

    You got me thinking, I wonder how many abortions occur each year because the mother has health problems and the medical advice from multiple sources is that the pregnancy is high risk to the mother health. And I suspect in nearly all those cases, the parents want to have the baby, struggled with the decision before deciding.

    wwjd you can fact check, different numbers float around .... but from 1-5% depending on source

    abortionfacts.com/facts/8

    I'm pro-life after being pro-abortion most of my life. I say right now - we could pass a law that says abortion is ok for rape, incest, health of mother and most pro-life and most pro-abortion people would accept that. We could save 90-95 of the 650,000 or more babies lives every year.

    Makes gun deaths look insignificant doesn't it ?

    wwjd so abolish the 2nd Amendment? maybe we need license for freedom of speech and religion too? a license to vote maybe ?

    The 2nd was designed in a time where the Govt didn't fear the people. Citizens killed each other in 1700's just like they do today - its just not glamorized in the news and high profile.

    Constitutional Rights - I am against messing with them, if we mess with the 2nd, then we mess with all them - the precedence is set

    There are more states than ever concealed carry. That's good. Every criminal in AR knows his next victim might be packing a .45 ........... makes them think twice. You will never stop gang bangers - you can remove magically every gun in America right now ... and guns will be restocked in a matter of days from Mexico and other countries. Its a fool's dream of an unarmed USA ..... because then legal citizens are banned from guns, then only the Govt and Criminals will have them