When is it gonna be enough?

[dogs4thewin]

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

How often should people have to renew that do you think?

 

[Hank77]

and possibily the sheriff if it was a case of CCW.

We were talking about in the home.

 

[dogs4thewin]

?
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.

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.

 

[mama2one]

x

 

[Invalidusername]

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.

Others perceive me however they want to. If I agreed with your worldview and used similar terminology, you would absolutely agree with me. You and others just CHOOSE to perceive my comments in said manner. It's all about me not apologizing about my unconventional views and defending it without any "I hope I don't offend you." comments.

I honestly don't care if the truth offends you and makes me look like a "red neck" which apparently as a Christian, you don't love red necks for some reason. I guess Jesus hates red necks too.

 

[expos4ever]

However blaming the tool for the violence instead of the one welding it is foolish.

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.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

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

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.
WITHOUT government mandated insurance and controlled drug use, everyone would have access to the prevention of most disease and those knowledgeable could readily cure them 95% of the time for a few dollars (compared to current costs of maintaining the sickness industry).
WITHOUT government mandated drivers license and tests, without government controls on so many fields, government wouldn't be so close to owg..... oh, wait... the nwo is the goal and purpose and what God says would happen ....

Mankind couldn't grow towards God, it has always grown away from God
as written "the wicked will be becoming more wicked" .....
and "the whole world" (not part of it)
will serve demons and refuse to turn to God, won't even think of calling on God,

never even considers

letting God be in charge, nor Giving God control, nor Following Jesus.

By faith.
Trust God even though the whole world all around refuses to.

 

[dogs4thewin]

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.

 

[Invalidusername]

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.

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.

 

[dogs4thewin]

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.

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.

 

[expos4ever]

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.

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.

 

[dogs4thewin]

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.

Even with background checks though that only tell what has already happened, given that should they not then have background checks every few years?

 

[Aldebaran]

and one doesn't need a semiautomatic/automatic weapon to do so

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".

 

[dogs4thewin]

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.

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.

 

[Invalidusername]

Even with background checks though that only tell what has already happened, given that should they not then have background checks every few years?

Mainly they only do the background check when you go to the store to purchase a gun. Imagine how many background checks they would be doing daily if they had to update it every few years on each customer.

Anyways background checks are only a preventive measure for licensed retailers. People who fail a background check will just purchase a gun second hand from a non-licensed retailer, friends, or neighbors. Like the popular saying goes, "Criminals don't follow laws."

 

[Steve Petersen]

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".

If only he had muzzle-loaders!

 

[dogs4thewin]

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.

 

[HantsUK]

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.

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.

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?

(edit - correct a typo)

 

[dogs4thewin]

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?

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.

 

[Discreetuser01]

No such thing as an accident, someone screwed up.