The Hypocrisy of Gun Control Advocates

Originally posted by MagicWand67
reply to post by sumgai

 

Wouldn't background checks prevent at-risk people - like what you just described - from obtaining a lethal weapon? What's wrong with taking a psych evaluation before you buy a gun? What, you worried you'd fail?

What about banning SOME guns (i.e. assault rifles, sub-machine guns, automatic pistols, etc.)?

If it's not already, how about a mandatory firearms safety test, when you buy a gun? Just like how you can't get a driver's license without passing a government approved test.

Why are pro-gun people in such an uproar when people want to enact SOME regulations on guns that would prevent irresponsible users gaining access to lethal and deadly weapons.

I believe, as a society on the issue of guns, we can have the best of both worlds.

I have no problem with any of the above regulations being mandatory.

I agree that some regulation is a good thing.

All of those measures and more are in place in New Jersey and CT. Did a whole lot of good, huh?

Originally posted by exponent
Could you list some comparable killing sprees carried out with a knife or a bat? You seem to be pretty convinced this is possible.

9/11 -> 3000 people -> supposedly with nothing but boxcutters!



One of the largest mass murders in the country took place without any guns involved ...

reply to post by Spacespider


Interesting picture ya got there. What is the relationship to each countries population? There are 330 million here...how many In Finland? Germany?

Your attempt to paint a picture is fail. Fatal crime in the ratio of population is the indicator...not just raw numbers...nice try.

reply to post by MagicWand67


We ARE blaming society as a whole and saying many of them are not mentally capable of handling a weapon so why do organizations continue to relentlessly push them on people who can't handle them?

Why don't people manufacturing and selling guns ever take responsibility for their product? Cigarette manufacturers have to cough up responsibility for senseless deaths they cause. Why not guns?

What part of the word CONTROL do you have a problem with?

I could see if your complaint was against people who want to ban guns outright.

You are against CONTROL and that is just sick and depraved.

Mental health is an issue and as long as the gun lobby sees fit to arm every citizen through pervasive advertising I think they should be responsible for making sure these United States is able to pass a mental health evaluation. The NRA and gun lobby should foot the bill for free mental health screening, medication and treatment for everyone in the country before they take the irresponsible step of pushing firearms on them.

Who do they think they are kidding anyway....?

Like people don't know - the NRA, along with "so called Patriots" and fierce 2nd amendment advocates are mounting their own little revolution and stockpiling arms and ammo for it.

Planning like the terrorist they are, for the day they storm and take over our government, AND the rest of us by enacting their own "Tea Party Mob" rule of law.

They can't wait to bring back Christ in Christmas, prayer in school.... and the hangings. But they need to stockpile the guns and ammo first.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by Jeremiah65
reply to post by Spacespider

 

Interesting picture ya got there. What is the relationship to each countries population? There are 330 million here...how many In Finland? Germany?

Your attempt to paint a picture is fail. Fatal crime in the ratio of population is the indicator...not just raw numbers...nice try.

Actually it succeeded very well.
Those numbers are per capita Einstein.

A word to the wise is sufficient.
Sadly - The stupid never learn.
They can't even be taught.
I know dogs smarter than some people here.

Originally posted by Logman
Only Americans feel the need to own lots of guns. It's because your society is broken. Whether it's society or guns, YOU have a big problem. These mass shootings happen in other countries once decade (if that). In American it's every 3-4 months.

But sure, keep advocating for gun freedoms, keep living in a violent, broken society where you are free.....to die at the hands of a gunman.

You dont live hear so how would you know?
You sound like your just spurting out propaganda from your homeland.

Originally posted by MagicWand67
reply to post by newcovenant

 

You are against CONTROL and that is just sick and depraved.

Try reading again.

I think you're mentally ill.

Seek some help.

I don't think I will read it again. Reprehensible and repulsive enough the first time.
As if you care about those victims. What a phony bunch of fake sympathy. Alligator tears.
If you cared about those kids, those teachers or the next group of innocent children this happens to - your first instinct would NOT be a personal quest to "protect gun rights." Anyone can see through this - if they want to.

Thanks for the unsolicited medical advice but if you want to prove me wrong (which you haven't)....Change your title. It reads as if you are criticizing ADVOCATES OF GUN CONTROL.
Go figure. Yeah I know, you explain how you are not really against "control" ....well actually, you don't.

Originally posted by MegaMind

Originally posted by exponent
Could you list some comparable killing sprees carried out with a knife or a bat? You seem to be pretty convinced this is possible.

9/11 -> 3000 people -> supposedly with nothing but boxcutters!

One of the largest mass murders in the country took place without any guns involved ...

edit on 15-12-2012 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)

The flu killed more people than that.
Nothing but a virus.

And your point is.....? What?

We should not take measures to protect against the flu?
Or terrorism?
Or gun violence?

reply to post by MagicWand67



I agree....but remember...let's not forget the hypocrisy of gun rights advocates either.

The same people who are "all about" their 2nd Amendment rights are also too cheap to spend money on any social programs whatsoever and have a strong tendency to take the side of insurance companies in denying claims for psychiatric care because they associate it such things with "hippies" or whatever.

Yeah...who would have thought that people would occasionally go nuts in a culture which simply dumps it's crazy people out on the street to fend for themselves. I mean...what could possibly go wrong? Besides...I don't want my taxes to go up.

reply to post by newcovenant


You're exactly the type of person I was talking about.

You sit there, on your imaginary high horse, flinging insults at people who you know nothing about.

I have said numerous times in this thread that I support background checks and regulations.

Of course you don't bother to read any of that and just start hurling insults without a clue of what you're talking about.

You are emotionally unstable. Do you fly off the handle at innocent strangers all the time or just people on the internet where it's safe to hide behind your computer keyboard?

Maybe you're against guns because you know you're a nut job who can't control themselves. People like you are the ones who shouldn't have guns.

reply to post by milominderbinder


I can't argue with you there.

But on the gun control issue alone they have agreed to allow reasonable regulations.

I think it's a shame that so many people jump on the band wagon after these tragedies.

What about all the hundreds of homeless kids that die from starvation each year?

What about thousands of innocent kids killed by bombing other countries?

What about the hundreds of kids shot in the ghetto?

Where is the outrage for all of those tragedies?

Only when a bunch of rich white kids are killed and it's plastered all over the media.

That's when all these squawkers start popping out of the wood works shouting bloody murder.

War mongering? Why are we discussing war? Last I checked, war is the only thing that decides who is right or wrong. Oh, and gets anything done.

A civilization should always be prepared for war and it should be on your mind continually because if you lose ..... Lets say you just don't want to lose.

As long as as we have cultures, religions, boundaries, and scarcity, war will exist.

War is as natural as breathing. So stop your talk about War Mongering when, obviously, the world itself provokes it.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere

All of those measures and more are in place in New Jersey and CT. Did a whole lot of good, huh?

Universal background checks is a good idea. It's pretty easy for a person to buy a gun out of state and bring it to a heavy regulation state. That's not what happened in CT, but still....it's too easy for an irresponsible person to buy weaponry.

I don't see why requiring background checks would be a problem...

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17


The news has reported that all the weapons were registered to his mother.

She actually 5 weapons. They found a shotgun and another rifle at the home.

Background checks are a good idea. They just don't work against the criminally insane.

Originally posted by PatrickGarrow17

I don't see why requiring background checks would be a problem...

Background checks are mandatory for all FFL purchases. In every state.

It is unlawful for a private sale to occur to any individual you know to not be able to pass a background check. In every state.

Now here's the fun part: Private individuals have wanted for some time to be able to access the NICS system and do checks before making sales yet the government consistently blocks it. You might ask yourself why. Why do the politicians fight to keep this "gun show loophole" open? Even the anti-gun ones ignore it in favor of more restrictive regulations all around rather than simply permitting the use of the NICS system.

It's not that I, as a private seller, dont want to check out the purchaser. It's that I am forbidden to check out that buyer.

For the most part I'm alright with putting all sales through NICS. Not because I believe it is some magic pill to ending assaults or murders but because I'd love to be able to cover my own ass if some purchaser decides to commit a crime.

Newscasters and politicians make it sound like the private seller is being intentionally reckless when the reality is the law prohibits that seller from running a check.

reply to post by MagicWand67

Is it because they do not want to accept any personal responsibility for the problem?

Yeah, because it's alot easier to point the finger at someone else than yourself. There all hypocrites.

reply to post by MagicWand67


I bet if the mainstream media started to report every single fatal DUI accident on the news, the radio, the papers, then everyone will start jumping on the bandwagon. Ban alcohol! Ban alcohol! No wait that's no good. Alcohol makes money for the U S of A. Can't ban it.

What about drug related deaths? Boy the news media don't have to worry about looking for something to report everyday then. Ban drugs! Ban drugs! Oh wait, they're banned already. Humm why are they're still so many people doing drugs?

Originally posted by spangledbanner
Arent the people that own guns for protection the ones living in fear?

Any country in Europe or UK has lower gun crime than America. Lower deaths from guns. Way lower. People in Europe and the UK are not so very afraid of criminals I guess.

I guess you dont know about Switzerland

The vast majority of men between the ages of 20 and 30 are conscripted into the militia and undergo military training, including weapons training. The personal weapons of the militia are kept at home as part of the military obligations; Switzerland thus has one of the highest militia gun ownership rates in the world.

How many times have they been invaded?