[QUOTE=Monkeydad;1003929]I just wish this President would get as angry when Americans are murdered in Benghazi and Boston as he does when his bills are defeated (by his own party). He blew a gasket yesterday in the Rose Garden.[/QUOTE]

That's a great point!

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1003881]Rubber bullets kill too.[/quote]

they can yes, but its much less likely.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

In 2010, under the current gun control laws, 48,000 felons attempted to illegally (because they aren't allowed) purchase firearms. Only 44 prosecutions came from those known attempts.

More gun control? Use the rules already on the books, FFS!

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1003877]You say I miss the point yet clearly you're the one 'not getting it'. Look at the numbers for vehicular deaths and injuries. They are NOT designed to KILL. Think about that. [B][U]NOT DESIGNED TO KILL.[/U][/B] Now look at the numbers again.

That many deaths from something [U][B]NOT DESIGNED OR INTENDED TO KILL. [/B][/U]

Getting it yet?[/quote]

Youre not getting it. Numbers have nothing to do with anything. By your logic, Hearts are designed to kill because heart attacks kill more people than guns and car accidents.

Cars kill alot of people due to a number of factors, ranging from poor maintenance, drivers not paying attention, bad weather, etc. But the automobile is not a weapon. its a transportation tool that is dangerous if not used properly.

Handguns ARE weapons specifically designed to kill or injure another human being. You may use it for target practice, but that doesnt change the reason guns exist.

[quote]Yet they don't have to be used for the deterrent to work. Have you thought about your position on this at all? Serious question.[/quote]

If you dont plan on using the gun, and only want it to serve as a deterrent, then you dont need ammo at all. In fact, you dont even need a real gun. You could just have a prop gun.

The more you type, its obvious that there is no logic to your position. You just want to argue that you should have guns because you enjoy them and want to be prepared to shoot someone if they mess with you. That seems to be your position. its one i dont respect or agree with. I think Handguns are inherrently evil devices and society would be safer as a whole if they were illegal.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1003979]In 2010, under the current gun control laws, 48,000 felons attempted to illegally (because they aren't allowed) purchase firearms. Only 44 prosecutions came from those known attempts.

More gun control? Use the rules already on the books, FFS![/quote]

I want two fairly simple changes.

1) Anyone who sells a gun is responsible for doing a full background check on the individual. Any time someone buys a gun, a background check should be run and gun registered to person X.
2) Any time THAT WEAPON is used in a crime, that person has a certain amount of responsibility for said crime. I don't want to see them take full responsibility, but there are penalties for your weapon being used in a criminal fashion. Another crime on this is anyone found with an unregistered weapon also faces a charge and the weapon is confiscated.

These changes would in turn make sure that only people that fulfill all the requirements for gun ownership are able to purchase them, and that those people are responsible for the way that weapon is used.

I don't feel as if either of those are overbearing. People can still have their guns, they just have to go through a background check and gun registration.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;1003982] I think Handguns are inherrently evil devices and society would be safer as a whole if they were illegal.[/quote]

Oh, dear.......it's an inanimate object.

If you make firearms illegal only law breakers will have them. Not smart.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Daseal;1003993]I want two fairly simple changes.

1) Anyone who sells a gun is responsible for doing a full background check on the individual. Any time someone buys a gun, a background check should be run and gun registered to person X.
2) Any time THAT WEAPON is used in a crime, that person has a certain amount of responsibility for said crime. I don't want to see them take full responsibility, but there are penalties for your weapon being used in a criminal fashion. Another crime on this is anyone found with an unregistered weapon also faces a charge and the weapon is confiscated.

These changes would in turn make sure that only people that fulfill all the requirements for gun ownership are able to purchase them, and that those people are responsible for the way that weapon is used.

I don't feel as if either of those are overbearing. People can still have their guns, they just have to go through a background check and gun registration.[/quote]

I agree with your suggestion, however those things are in place and just need to be enforced. What troubles me is the call for MORE laws.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1004000]I agree with your suggestion, however those things are in place and just need to be enforced. What troubles me is the call for MORE laws.[/quote]

Private sellers don't have to run background checks, correct? If those are on the books, great, enforce them!

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1003845]Treehuggers/liberals/bleeding hearts......same thing.[/quote]


If ignorance is bliss, you must be in heaven.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1004003]If ignorance is bliss, you must be in heaven.[/quote]

*Common sense is restricted to 16 oz. per person in NY.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Daseal;1004002]Private sellers don't have to run background checks, correct? If those are on the books, great, enforce them![/quote]

How do private citizens do "background checks" on other private citizens?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1004003]If ignorance is bliss, you must be in heaven.[/quote]

Go troll somewhere else.
Your routine is getting stale.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1003996]Oh, dear.......it's an inanimate object.

If you make firearms illegal only law breakers will have them. Not smart.[/quote]

The companies making them would only be able to sell to law enforcement or the military. Eventually, they'd be taken out of circulation.

I'm also for stiffer penalties for crime and increased executions, and that would lower the number of lawbreakers out there.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1004019]How do private citizens do "background checks" on other private citizens?[/quote]

Are you kidding? There are tons of services that allow you to do background checks. every intelligent small business owner does it.

Of course, the ideal solution would be to require special training to receive a gun liscense and purchase a gun. And that gun would have a fingerprint sensor like the one in the latest bond film so no one but the authorized purchaser could use it. This would eliminate people with criminal records from being able to purchase or use handguns.

Just like we have car inspections every year and periodic drivers liscense reneawls, the gun owners would periodically be required renew their liscense. They would also have to bring the gun in for inspection to prove they still owned it.

The whole process would be expensive and generate revenue for the government. You could argue that it would make it excessively hard for poor people to purchase guns, but to me, thats a good thing. Poverty is a breeding ground for violent crime.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

I dont own a small business.
And asking private citizens to do the job of law enforcement officials is the wrong way to go about it.
You want a hand gun?
You go to the cop shop/courthouse with 20 bucks.
You show them your drivers license and tell them you want a gun purchase ticket.
They run your name on the spot and give you the ticket which expires in 30 days.
You take the ticket to the gun store and show it to the seller and walk out with your firearm.
That's how its done in Michigan for hand guns.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1002866]Cars are designed for transportation, look at how many people are killed by the misuse of them. Still readily available, still not banned.
.[/quote]

Watch this ,Jon answers your question.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K13HdTsW_E0]jon stewart on gun control - YouTube[/ame]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

No, he doesn't. He's funny, but he really should just stick to funny.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1004021]Go troll somewhere else.
Your routine is getting stale.[/quote]


Ok so people who think the gun lovers are right wing nuts are ...trolls now.

More Gun control....


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5lKF3K5jO8]jon stewart on gun control , part two - YouTube[/ame]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1004031]No, he doesn't. He's funny, but he really should just stick to funny.[/quote]

Way to ignore the facts.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1004029]I dont own a small business.
And asking private citizens to do the job of law enforcement officials is the wrong way to go about it. [/quote]
now im confused. YOu think private citizens should be allowed to SELL guns, but the government should do background checks on the people they sell to? Please explain to me how that process should work.


[quote]You want a hand gun?
You go to the cop shop/courthouse with 20 bucks.
You show them your drivers license and tell them you want a gun purchase ticket.
They run your name on the spot and give you the ticket which expires in 30 days.
You take the ticket to the gun store and show it to the seller and walk out with your firearm.
That's how its done in Michigan for hand guns.[/quote]

No i dont want a handgun. but i see problems with that process (atleast with how i understand it) I cant fathom how they could run a persons name on the spot and determine you dont have a criminal record or other red flags that should prevent you from owning a gun. how do you truly verify that the person who has the ticket is the same person that buys the gun? How do you ensure that the seller even verifies the ticket?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1004032]Ok so people who think the gun lovers are right wing nuts are ...trolls now.

More Gun control....


[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5lKF3K5jO8]jon stewart on gun control , part two - YouTube[/url][/quote]

No, you're just trying to piss me off and be an ass.
Nothing to do with guns.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;1004040]now im confused. YOu think private citizens should be allowed to SELL guns, but the government should do background checks on the people they sell to? Please explain to me how that process should work.




No i dont want a handgun. but i see problems with that process (atleast with how i understand it) [COLOR="Red"]I cant fathom how they could run a persons name on the spot and determine you dont have a criminal record or other red flags that should prevent you from owning a gun[/COLOR]. how do you truly verify that the person who has the ticket is the same person that buys the gun? How do you ensure that the seller even verifies the ticket?[/quote]

[COLOR="Red"]The same way a cop knows if you're wanted when he pulls you over for a taillight issue. The police have that info at their fingertips. whats not to understand?[/COLOR]

And you'll be glad to know I can buy and sell all the rifles I want with zero paperwork, its only hand guns they care about.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1004033]Way to ignore the facts.[/quote]

Which facts? The claims of reduced drink drive deaths?

[I]Despite overall marked reductions in alcohol–related traffic deaths since the early 1980s, there has been little reduction since the mid–1990s, and alcohol–related traffic deaths have increased slightly in the past 3 years.[/I]

[URL="http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh27-1/63-78.htm"][SIZE=2]Epidemiology and Consequences of Drinking and Driving[/SIZE][/URL]

These actual facts were ignored in his diatribe because they didn't fit the narrative.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

I was reading in an editorial that the majority of guns used illegally in the U.S. are guns that are stolen from homes or cars from citizens that purchased them legally. NOt sure if any of you who have more of a vested interest in this topic have data to back that statement.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=BaltimoreSkins;1004106]I was reading in an editorial that the majority of guns used illegally in the U.S. are guns that are stolen from homes or cars from citizens that purchased them legally. NOt sure if any of you who have more of a vested interest in this topic have data to back that statement.[/quote]

You'd first need to define what you mean by 'used illegally'.

In the commission of a crime or just transferred to another person?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

The article was referring to criminal activity.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1004042][COLOR="Red"]The same way a cop knows if you're wanted when he pulls you over for a taillight issue. The police have that info at their fingertips. whats not to understand?[/COLOR]

And you'll be glad to know I can buy and sell all the rifles I want with zero paperwork, its only hand guns they care about.[/quote]

well thats the thing. any review like that cant quite be inclusive enough. how do they know he doesnt have mental health issues, for example? What if he's using a fake ID?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=BaltimoreSkins;1004106]I was reading in an editorial that the majority of guns used illegally in the U.S. are guns that are stolen from homes or cars from citizens that purchased them legally. NOt sure if any of you who have more of a vested interest in this topic have data to back that statement.[/quote]

That wouldnt surprise me at al though. Why would a criminal buy a gun when he can just steal it? fingerprint guns would prevent this.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Fingerprints guns.....thats quite amusing.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;1004223]That wouldnt surprise me at al though. Why would a criminal buy a gun when he can just steal it? fingerprint guns would prevent this.[/quote]

The Dynamic [I]Grip[/I] Recognition (DGR) [I]biometric[/I] authorizing technology recently patented by the NJIT will enable the creation of a 'personalized' handgun.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Yea'll we'll convert the 300+ million privately owned firearms that already exist to that technology.
pffffttttttt

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1004265]Yea'll we'll convert the 300+ million privately owned firearms that already exist to that technology.
pffffttttttt[/quote]

Look great on a musket.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Yep, awesome way to trash a Garand.


We're sorry to report that your husband and your daughter are dead.
He tried to defend himself with his pistol but the battery on the fingerprint reader died.
His hands were dirty and he was wearing a band aid so it wouldnt work anyway.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1004269]Yep, awesome way to trash a Garand.


We're sorry to report that your husband and your daughter are dead.
He tried to defend himself with his pistol but the battery on the fingerprint reader died.
His hands were dirty and he was wearing a band aid so it wouldnt work anyway.[/quote]

Or another scenario:
you hear the intruder, grab your pistol, as you get to him you struggle, he gets the weapon from you, points and.... click, it doesn't work because it's not keyed to him. you scuffle again, and get the gun back, and he surrenders(or you shoot him - whichever ending you want)



For the people using the car argument before, this is the same as a key. Cars have ignition switches, keys, etc. No reason not to have that safety on new handguns. Offer mod kits for those who want them and grandfather existing weapons. Safety laws change as we learn how to make things safer, we can do that with handguns, and that way you don't push the government to infringe on critical rights laid out in the Constitution.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1004295]Or another scenario:
[COLOR="Red"]you hear the intruder, grab your pistol, as you get to him you struggle, he gets the weapon from you, points and.... click, it doesn't work because it's not keyed to him. you scuffle again, and get the gun back, and he surrenders(or you shoot him - whichever ending you want)
[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Red"]Thats pretty far fetched...almost silly.[/COLOR]


For the people using the car argument before, this is the same as a key. Cars have ignition switches, keys, etc. [COLOR="Lime"]No reason [/COLOR]not to have that safety on new handguns. Offer mod kits for those who want them and grandfather existing weapons. Safety laws change as we learn how to make things safer, we can do that with handguns, and that way you don't push the government to infringe on critical rights laid out in the Constitution.[/quote]

[COLOR="Lime"]I can think of a lot of reasons. Starting with malfunctions and nonfires. Not to mention how hard that would make to sell a used gun.The firearms industry and the NRA would never let that happen. The whole thing is far fetched.[/COLOR]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

I bet gun owners in Boston are happy to have the home protection today.

What else would you do if a runaway terrorist picks your house to hide in?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1004295]Or another scenario:
you hear the intruder, grab your pistol, as you get to him you struggle, he gets the weapon from you, points and.... click, it doesn't work because it's not keyed to him. you scuffle again, and get the gun back, and he surrenders(or you shoot him - whichever ending you want)[/quote]

Here's a scenario that's just as plausible: You go swimming in the ocean, you get a whale caught up your arse. Greenpeace are coming at you in a dingy, what do you do?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

There should be flukeprint sensors for whales that want to buy guns.
Of course a whale holding an AR-15 would really be a tight fit, albeit painful.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;1004223]That wouldnt surprise me at al though. Why would a criminal buy a gun when he can just steal it? fingerprint guns would prevent this.[/quote]

I think the best thing is for gun owners to have their firearms locked up safely at all times when not in use, and I don't mean in a glove compartment in a locked car or a closed drawer in a locked house, but an actual safe.

[QUOTE=BaltimoreSkins;1004329]I think the best thing is for gun owners to have their firearms locked up safely at all times when not in use, and I don't mean in a glove compartment in a locked car or a closed drawer in a locked house, but an actual safe.[/QUOTE]

Thus making it useless. No, I will keep mine virtually undetectable and close to hand. If someone broke into my place I want it handy.