Senate Dems unveil new gun control push

a reply to: neo96

Not talking about murder, talking about reducing the ability for criminals to get firearms.

Is it easier to get something when there is a surplus or a dearth of something?

a reply to: neo96

Let me see how psychic I am. I say idiots bat around more laws for another 6 months. After 6 more months of record sales and being told to get bent. Some brilliant person will propose some sort of insurance requirement to purchase a gun. The justification will be that the insurance money can be used for victim ( family members, etc) compensation. Then the same idiots would wonder why the majority of victims have no compensation. Well bright one, because the criminals doing the majority of killing who don't follow laws also won't buy the insurance, that's why. They don't get the publicity since that stays in undesirable locations and no one cares about that, but kill more people each year than the mass shooters getting the publicity.

a reply to: Sremmos80

Here's is what your missing.

Holmes,Lanza,Mercer were not criminals until the days they acted.

Lanza killed his mother remember took her weapons.

You can't do anything about it.

a reply to: FamCore

That makes as much sense as suing the booze maker when someone kills someone in a drunk driving accident.

"It's Time to Stop gun Violence"

An oxymoron for a party that controls the highest crime rates in the country !!

a reply to: neo96

Shifting again, per usual.

So we just need to give up an act like we can't do anything about these killings?

a reply to: xuenchen

An oxymoron for a party that controls the highest crime rates in the country !!

You have been proven wrong about that time and time again, but not surprising you wouldn't care.

a reply to: Sremmos80

The 'shifting' is me losing MORE rights than I already have for something I have, nor any other gun owner has done.

The people that commit those crimes are the guilty party.

Not we the 99% of gun owners.

a reply to: Sremmos80

Making guns illegal will ensure a dearth of firearms the same way that making drugs illegal has ensured a dearth of illegal hard drugs and for the same reasons.

Do you really think the Mexican cartels, for example, couldn't run guns along with the drugs or that they don't already?

It's pure misinformation that most of the guns in Mexico come from the US. They actually come from China.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: neo96

Not talking about murder, talking about reducing the ability for criminals to get firearms.

Is it easier to get something when there is a surplus or a dearth of something?

I think the main point was made, it is already illegal to kill anyone. There are so many ways to kill, if a person wants to commit murder they can use gas and fire, they can uses homemade explosives from household items, they can use knives, ropes many options.

Take away the public's firearms and you have armed police, military, gangsters and criminals and they WILL remain armed. This is also a good recipe for the making of a dictatorship if you end up with leaders using these armed personnel against the people the people are left helpless.

Other countries have taken their publics guns and say how great it worked out, look a little deeper. Many who hate on the USA for still being armed are just jealous because they have already had their Huevos cut off no getting them back!

Here is some more MORONS.

www.msnbc.com...

Watch Mika Brzezinski explain how AR 15s can “blow up animals”

Mainstream LIES.

a reply to: Sremmos80

We might be able to, but it would mean assessing culture, not the tools in the country. And by assessing culture, it would mean taking a hard look at how we conduct ourselves from birth to death including family, faith, society, morals, entertainment, etc., and there are quite a few groups who have a large vested interest in seeing that not happen.

It's much easier to blame a gun than it is the culture at large.

a reply to: ketsuko

Never said we need to make them illegal now did I?
Usual deflection made though when this kind of conversation comes up.

I think people wanting to get their hands on a gun don't have to look for outside sources when we have over 300 million of them, and counting, in the states.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: butcherguy

So what do we do about that?

Not saying gun control will stop people from illegally getting the guns, but if that is the main problem then what are the steps we need to take.

Same as we do for burglary, theft, murder and such. When you apprehend someone doing something illegal, you try them. If they are convicted, you punish them.
Have you ever seen a push to make sure that someone that has had a DUI conviction put on a list that would make it impossible for them to buy or rent a car?

The thing is, if you just get a DUI chances are you haven't hurt anyone. If you did hurt/kill someone, the DUI is the least of your charges.

What you are saying is more like someone who is convinced of misconduct involving a firearm be put onto a list, and people convinced of DUI also be put onto some kind of list.

If the misconduct of a firearm is a felony, then yeah -- they are put on a "list" and can't own a gun. You an also get a felony DUI and potentially never be granted the privilege to drive again along with not being able to ever own a firearm.

a reply to: neo96

My friend blew out the entire side of a caribou with his AR-15, he wasn't happy because he messed up the hide and lost some meat.

the new law is named Illegal Gun crime is now illegal and this time we really mean it! from the redundancy in office caucus caucus dept of Bureau Bureau.

That'll fix 'em!

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: ketsuko

Never said we need to make them illegal now did I?
Usual deflection made though when this kind of conversation comes up.

I think people wanting to get their hands on a gun don't have to look for outside sources when we have over 300 million of them, and counting, in the states.

But it more or less amounts to the same thing in the end. You only inconvenience the legal owners because those like these shooters who are determined to cause harm will find a way to achieve their ends.

So you speak out of both sides of your mouth. "Oh, no! I would never want to make guns illegal" ... but you would indeed support measures to make it harder to impossible for people to legally own. And the reason why is because you desire fewer guns in society and figure if less people own, then there are fewer firearms for crazy people to have.

People like you could care less about the illegal firearms. That is an acceptable loss apparently.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Watch the video ?

Do you think it's acceptable for them to tell us what we should be 'allowed' to own ?

Our rights don't come from talking heads on tv.

They don't come from those shills on capital hill.

They don't come from our next door neighbors.

Our rights are unalienable, and they come from our creator.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Oh, but the DUI thing would never work because someone will come along and argue that it's cruel to deny someone the right to drive because how can they work if they can't drive?

originally posted by: Sremmos80

Not talking about murder, talking about reducing the ability for criminals to get firearms.

Is it easier to get something when there is a surplus or a dearth of something?

It will take the Global NWO agenda to get all the guns off the planet.

Global military authority with at least 100 million soldiers.

The international pirates and bandits will flourish.

The Human Species will be locked into perpetual conflict for centuries.

I think you like that.