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="A2SG" data-source="post: 62857056" data-attributes="member: 227164"><p>And someone is victimized if someone who shouldn't be allowed to have an assault weapon gets one. Sorry, did I say victimized? I meant massacred.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Bully for you. I'd say you're in a very small minority.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, if we do nothing we all but guarantee <a href="http://www.thenation.com/blog/171774/fifteen-us-mass-shootings-happened-2012-84-dead#" target="_blank">more massacres</a>.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Okay then.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The right to bear arms isn't absolute.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>What goalposts? If you photocopy a $20 bill and try to pass it off as real, that's counterfeiting. Counterfeiting is illegal.</p><p></p><p>The point being, photocopiers are legal to own and use, but certain uses are illegal. We can, and do, outlaw certain specific uses of legal objects.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I never said it was.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Okay then.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yup. The problem is people who shouldn't own guns are allowed to buy them without a background check beforehand. Not only guns, but assault weapons.</p><p></p><p>If you don't see that as a problem, then we're not living in the same reality.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Or we could close the loophole were people who can't pass a background check can still buy guns anyway.</p><p></p><p>As to prosecution of firearm related crimes, there is something that can be done to facilitate that: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/us/politics/obama-urges-senate-to-confirm-todd-jones-as-atf-director.html?_r=0" target="_blank">confirm a director of ATF now</a>.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And doing nothing will do....well, nothing.</p><p></p><p>Still not a better solution.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Let me see if I get your point here: people circumvent the law so....what? No laws?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And your point is....?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Who said it would?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Whether or not you agree, the fact is it's perfectly valid. And popular support means it will likely pass.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And your point is....?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Maybe it will, maybe it won't...but as I said, doing nothing will all but guarantee more massacres.</p><p></p><p>I, for one, don't favor that.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Who said any law can ensure safety?</p><p></p><p>The best we can hope for is to do something that might help, because doing nothing won't.</p><p></p><p>If you don't agree with these ideas, feel free to offer your own...but all I've heard so far is more guns, and as I said, I don't buy that as an answer.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Everyone?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If you're seriously suggesting arming first grade teachers and you don't see a problem there, then I truly am not able to communicate with you.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Let me see here...they weren't armed before, and they aren't armed now... Um....</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'd rather see a cop on detail in a school than armed teachers, I have to say.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Or we could try to find a sane solution.</p><p></p><p>Universal background checks and limiting the availability of assault weapons seem like reasonable ideas to me.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm sure I would if I needed to. Which is another reason why I don't feel the need to own one myself.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think it's unreasonable to limit the availability of something as dangerous as an assault weapon. We already limit other forms of weaponry that are dangerous, like nuclear weapons and the like.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Good, but there need to be more.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Oh goodie.</p><p></p><p>-- A2SG, give more ideas to the sociopaths out there, whydon'cha....</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="A2SG, post: 62857056, member: 227164"] And someone is victimized if someone who shouldn't be allowed to have an assault weapon gets one. Sorry, did I say victimized? I meant massacred. Bully for you. I'd say you're in a very small minority. Well, if we do nothing we all but guarantee [URL="http://www.thenation.com/blog/171774/fifteen-us-mass-shootings-happened-2012-84-dead#"]more massacres[/URL]. Okay then. The right to bear arms isn't absolute. What goalposts? If you photocopy a $20 bill and try to pass it off as real, that's counterfeiting. Counterfeiting is illegal. The point being, photocopiers are legal to own and use, but certain uses are illegal. We can, and do, outlaw certain specific uses of legal objects. I never said it was. Okay then. Yup. The problem is people who shouldn't own guns are allowed to buy them without a background check beforehand. Not only guns, but assault weapons. If you don't see that as a problem, then we're not living in the same reality. Or we could close the loophole were people who can't pass a background check can still buy guns anyway. As to prosecution of firearm related crimes, there is something that can be done to facilitate that: [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/us/politics/obama-urges-senate-to-confirm-todd-jones-as-atf-director.html?_r=0"]confirm a director of ATF now[/URL]. And doing nothing will do....well, nothing. Still not a better solution. Let me see if I get your point here: people circumvent the law so....what? No laws? And your point is....? Who said it would? Whether or not you agree, the fact is it's perfectly valid. And popular support means it will likely pass. And your point is....? Maybe it will, maybe it won't...but as I said, doing nothing will all but guarantee more massacres. I, for one, don't favor that. Who said any law can ensure safety? The best we can hope for is to do something that might help, because doing nothing won't. If you don't agree with these ideas, feel free to offer your own...but all I've heard so far is more guns, and as I said, I don't buy that as an answer. Everyone? If you're seriously suggesting arming first grade teachers and you don't see a problem there, then I truly am not able to communicate with you. Let me see here...they weren't armed before, and they aren't armed now... Um.... I'd rather see a cop on detail in a school than armed teachers, I have to say. Or we could try to find a sane solution. Universal background checks and limiting the availability of assault weapons seem like reasonable ideas to me. I'm sure I would if I needed to. Which is another reason why I don't feel the need to own one myself. I don't think it's unreasonable to limit the availability of something as dangerous as an assault weapon. We already limit other forms of weaponry that are dangerous, like nuclear weapons and the like. Good, but there need to be more. Oh goodie. -- A2SG, give more ideas to the sociopaths out there, whydon'cha.... [/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