Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Universal Background Checks: If you are opposed, why?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Panzerkamfwagen" data-source="post: 62836788" data-attributes="member: 376848"><p><a href="http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html" target="_blank">Got an interesting article about it</a>.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But yet, as far as I'm aware, no one is proposing to make it available. But yet they don't want to restrict the private sale of guns. Hmm.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It would, indeed. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, you feel it's information we all need to know. So, certainly. At least come up with something.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Are guns more dangerous than cars?</p><p></p><p><a href="http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_accidental_gun_deaths_are_in_the_US_every_year" target="_blank">There's somewhere between 257-300 million firearms in the United States</a>. There's 32,000 firearms related deaths. </p><p></p><p>There's 250 million or so cars in the United States. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year" target="_blank">There were 32,000 deaths from motor vehicle accidents</a>.</p><p></p><p>In terms of accidental deaths, cars are far more dangerous than guns.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>What's fallacious about the historical fact that gun laws generally have followed a historical trend of becoming more and more restrictive? Every gun law that is proposed is generally more restrictive than the last one that was passed. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So how would another law have stopped him? He didn't follow a plethora of other laws. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So there is no guarantee that it will work? If it fails will the government repeal it, or will they pass something else that doesn't work, too?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Dianne Feinstein said it, not me. So, it's a perfectly accurate characterization.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Guns are pretty much inanimate metal. And wood. And polymer. </p><p></p><p>I'm sure you're well aware of how many people who commit murder have a prior criminal history. It's something like 90%. Perhaps the solution isn't to ban inanimate hunks of metal. Perhaps the solution is removing career criminals from society?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Connecticut had an assault weapons ban before Newtown. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So how would a law stop a suicidal maniac?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Laws criminalizing possession of inanimate pieces of metal are just dumb. What benefit does society get from that? Here's a piece of steel. You can have it. Here's a CNC machine. You can have it. But...use the CNC machine to perform a few machining operations on the piece of steel, and you can't have it? What kind of sense does that make? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Was he a convicted felon? Was he the subject of a protection order? Had he been adjudicated mentally defective? If not, then it wouldn't have kept him from buying a gun, unless the gun store said, "No."</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Precursor chemicals to create weapons of mass destruction aren't as dangerous as a rifle? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They're still subject to misuse, so shouldn't they be more heavily regulated. There's a whole government program dedicated to <a href="http://www.dhs.gov/ammonium-nitrate-security-program" target="_blank">regulating the transfer of fertilizer</a>. Wouldn't you want them to watch precursor chemicals, too? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, guns accidentally kill far fewer people than cars. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Some people need killing.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Panzerkamfwagen, post: 62836788, member: 376848"] [url=http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html]Got an interesting article about it[/url]. But yet, as far as I'm aware, no one is proposing to make it available. But yet they don't want to restrict the private sale of guns. Hmm. It would, indeed. Well, you feel it's information we all need to know. So, certainly. At least come up with something. Are guns more dangerous than cars? [url=http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_accidental_gun_deaths_are_in_the_US_every_year]There's somewhere between 257-300 million firearms in the United States[/url]. There's 32,000 firearms related deaths. There's 250 million or so cars in the United States. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year]There were 32,000 deaths from motor vehicle accidents[/url]. In terms of accidental deaths, cars are far more dangerous than guns. What's fallacious about the historical fact that gun laws generally have followed a historical trend of becoming more and more restrictive? Every gun law that is proposed is generally more restrictive than the last one that was passed. So how would another law have stopped him? He didn't follow a plethora of other laws. So there is no guarantee that it will work? If it fails will the government repeal it, or will they pass something else that doesn't work, too? Dianne Feinstein said it, not me. So, it's a perfectly accurate characterization. Guns are pretty much inanimate metal. And wood. And polymer. I'm sure you're well aware of how many people who commit murder have a prior criminal history. It's something like 90%. Perhaps the solution isn't to ban inanimate hunks of metal. Perhaps the solution is removing career criminals from society? Connecticut had an assault weapons ban before Newtown. So how would a law stop a suicidal maniac? Laws criminalizing possession of inanimate pieces of metal are just dumb. What benefit does society get from that? Here's a piece of steel. You can have it. Here's a CNC machine. You can have it. But...use the CNC machine to perform a few machining operations on the piece of steel, and you can't have it? What kind of sense does that make? Was he a convicted felon? Was he the subject of a protection order? Had he been adjudicated mentally defective? If not, then it wouldn't have kept him from buying a gun, unless the gun store said, "No." Precursor chemicals to create weapons of mass destruction aren't as dangerous as a rifle? They're still subject to misuse, so shouldn't they be more heavily regulated. There's a whole government program dedicated to [url=http://www.dhs.gov/ammonium-nitrate-security-program]regulating the transfer of fertilizer[/url]. Wouldn't you want them to watch precursor chemicals, too? Well, guns accidentally kill far fewer people than cars. Some people need killing. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Universal Background Checks: If you are opposed, why?
Top
Bottom