- Apr 19, 2012
- 32,715
- 6,396
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
How often should people have to renew that do you think?that is where gun safety classes/tests would come in
just as someone who can't pass driver's test, not allowed to drive
if person doesn't pass gun ownership test, no gun
We were talking about in the home.and possibily the sheriff if it was a case of CCW.
homicide is ANY time when another human through ANY means or with any intent takes the life of another. That could be with or without lawful excuse an accident in cold blood or anywhere in between.?
Legal intervention is law enforcement. However, I know they are off in one of their statements in regards to that. They say 500 killed by law enforcement but just last year over 1,000 people were killed by the police.
I thought that when police feel safe enough to not have guns to protect their families then the citizenry can feel safe to do the same.
I actually said I don't think you are. I was hoping to help you see how others might perceive you. I guess it didn't work.
Then all the other free, prosperous nations - all of which (with perhaps rare exceptions) - have much stricter gun laws than the USA are wrong and the USA is right.Toro said:However blaming the tool for the violence instead of the one welding it is foolish.
unexpectedly this is something to notice: the government is playing nursemaid to society , controlling more and more and more every day in everyone's life practically if not actually.that is where gun safety classes/tests would come in
just as someone who can't pass driver's test, not allowed to drive
if person doesn't pass gun ownership test, no gun
I know that you have to renew your DL every few years and I do not even drive for various reasons, so I just thought it would stand to reason there would be a need to renew a gun permit.am not the one to ask as think people should test everytime they renew DL, especially in my state
so for gun ownership, don't know
I know that you have to renew your DL every few years and I do not even drive for various reasons, so I just thought it would stand to reason there would be a need to renew a gun permit.
There are so many of that tool that it would be nearly impossibile to take away even if that would help the violence. What we need is a culture/heart change and education not more laws.Then all the other free, prosperous nations - all of which (with perhaps rare exceptions) - have much stricter gun laws than the USA are wrong and the USA is right.
Not likely.
We all know that guns cannot in and of themselves decide to kill someone. But it is so obvious that it is much easier to take away the tool than to solve the complex mental and social ills that bedevil the USA and other nations.
Every other nation (again, one or two exceptions) realizes and has taken the sane path of not allowing deeply flawed human beings from owning deadly weapons whose only purpose is to kill.
That should be a massive red flag. But I will bet that even if the bodies stack up to your chest, those of you who love your guns will doggedly burrow your heads in the ground. Love of gun appears to be part of the DNA of American culture. But this is a mutated version of healthy DNA - one that cannot recognize what is stunningly obvious to clear thinkers everywhere - no one needs to own an assault rifle.
Cherry-picking again. The fact that some oppressive governments took advantage of unarmed citizens is not much of a case. Look at western Europe over the last 70 or so years. No guns, no oppressive governments, and a much lower body count.Have you ever been to a communist country or seen one up close? I was stationed in Germany in the 50s and 60s. People were literally dying to get out of E. Germany. They didn't have a terrible "gun culture," only the government had guns.
Even with background checks though that only tell what has already happened, given that should they not then have background checks every few years?In my state you only need a gun permit to carry in public. Other than that, no permit needed. Only thing that is required is a background check.
and one doesn't need a semiautomatic/automatic weapon to do so
but it is SUCH easier for a government to take over an unarmed people. Again what we need is a culture/heart change and education no amount of law will change that. A is proven by the fact that other forms of crime have gone up when guns have been removed.Cherry-picking again. The fact that some oppressive governments took advantage of unarmed citizens is not much of a case. Look at western Europe over the last 70 or so years. No guns, no oppressive governments, and a much lower body count.
As the number of dead teenagers grows, their peers will enter the voting demographic and I am hopeful that anachronistic gun culture will be muzzled (pun intended) at the ballot box.
Even with background checks though that only tell what has already happened, given that should they not then have background checks every few years?
The kid who did the shooting yesterday did not use a semiautomatic anything to do what he did. He used a pump shotgun and a revolver. Further proof for all those people who think the problem will be solved if we only get rid of AR15s and other semiautos they like to refer to as "killing machines" and "weapons of war".
They also found other weapons in the school. More like bombs.The kid who did the shooting yesterday did not use a semiautomatic anything to do what he did. He used a pump shotgun and a revolver. Further proof for all those people who think the problem will be solved if we only get rid of AR15s and other semiautos they like to refer to as "killing machines" and "weapons of war".
But there is a fundamental difference between fatal car accidents and gun homicides: in most accidents, the person who caused it did not intend to kill someone. It might have been a momentary lapse of concentration. Or bad conditions. Or deliberately dangerous driving with a disregard for other people's safety. With guns, the person who pulled the trigger usually intended to injury or kill someone.That was meant to rebut people's claims that cars are not meant to kill, but neither thing kills ( in the vest majority of cases without some human force). In other words cars ONLY kill when used incorrectly and guns ( generally) only kill people if the person does SOMETHING. Very rarely does a gun fire itself.
Even most accidents though come down in some sense to human behavior. This is why it is possbile in fatal car accidents ( even if no drugs or alcohol were involved to do some some jail/prison time. The sentence will vary based on different things but just about ANY fatal car accident where someone other than the deceased is determined at fault that person will do time or at least be charged.But there is a fundamental difference between fatal car accidents and gun homicides: in most accidents, there person who caused it did not intend to kill someone. It might have been a momentary lapse of concentration. Or bad conditions. Or deliberately dangerous driving with a disregard for other people's safety. With guns, the person who pulled the trigger usually intended to injury or kill someone.
And the other difference is that society is does not consider road traffic deaths to be acceptable - an unavoidable consequence of using cars, a price worth paying for the freedom to have private car ownership, or the economic benefits. Instead, efforts are made to reduce accidents. Or at least, that is the case in the UK and western European countries. I presume that the USA is similar? In the past 50 years in the UK, road fatalities have reduced from about 8,000 a year to typically 1,800, despite a large increase in population, car ownership, car usage, and traffic congestion. This has been achieved through many different areas, such as: improved car safety, better emergency treatment for victims, changes in road layout and design, making drink driving socially unacceptable. We didn't say "cars must be banned" nor "it's drivers who kill, not cars" as an excuse to do nothing. Although having just looked up the USA statistics, the reduction has been much smaller, I'm now wondering if these comments apply in America?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?