Gun News Talk

[Accountable]

not the first time ( or the second tee hee) that you have said that

Yup. It's the only legal recourse to making a change, but everybody is afraid to even discuss it.

 

[Joe the meek]

Excellent Post Jackass Master

It would be nice however to let people know that he personally did NOT write it.

Also a thing called a paragraph, but you have to watch out for that when you copy and paste lol

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

Sometime facts are inconvenient. You want stringent gun control. Some of those countries have it. You have no answer to that other than this tripe? You are a fucking trip dude.

It would take a while to look into the data that you have provided, and try to find some common themes between somewhere like Guatemala and the USA.
Fact is, there aren't any, and until you stop being foolish and start comparing the USA with similar nations, it's a huge waste of my time even bothering to poke holes in this kind of elementary-school statistics.

Face it, muppet. You didn't compare like for like because in a like for like comparison, the USA would get pissed on every time.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

That's true. You're with his head stuck somewhere else.

Again, you respond to truth with insults. Clearly you're tank is as empty as The Man's. The Constitution may be a nice comforting binky for you, but sooner or later every child has to learn to cope without a fake nipple in their mouth.

 

[Jackass master]

It would be nice however to let people know that he personally did NOT write it.

Also a thing called a paragraph, but you have to watch out for that when you copy and paste lol

Try clicking on the link headline Joe. :tooth

 

[porterjack]

Yup. It's the only legal recourse to making a change, but everybody is afraid to even discuss it.

because they know deep down it would be too hard to achieve?

 

[Accountable]

because they know deep down it would be too hard to achieve?

I think it's a fundamental lack of trust in our fellow man. Many Americans think that some "common sense" gun control measures would be wise, but suspect that if they budge at all on the Second Amendment then they risk full prohibition. Others might honestly believe their own histrionics that if they allow the freedom emphatic in the phrasing of the Second Amendment then people will be gunning each other down in suburbia over not cleaning up dog poo.

Of course, if the average American would stop and think for a second, they would realize that the average American is just like them, and can be trusted not to abuse liberty. Culture is the best governor. The Second Amendment has been around far longer than this manufactured crisis.

 

[Accountable]

Again, you respond to truth with insults.

Not true, but clearly you did.

 

[Minor Axis]

Prove that

I dare ya

The NRA is against each and every suggestion that involves gun regulation. Their track record is long and established. You can disprove me if you want to.

 

[Accountable]

The NRA is against each and every suggestion that involves gun regulation. Their track record is long and established. You can disprove me if you want to.

I'd actually started out to support you, figuring that it would be easy to find the NRA fighting against banning machine guns in the '30s. I was wrong:

The National Rifle Association was founded in 1871 by two men, a lawyer and a former reporter from the New York Times. For most of its history, the N.R.A. was chiefly a sporting and hunting association. To the extent that the N.R.A. had a political arm, it opposed some gun-control measures and supported many others, lobbying for new state laws in the nineteen-twenties and thirties, which introduced waiting periods for handgun buyers and required permits for anyone wishing to carry a concealed weapon. It also supported the 1934 National Firearms Act—the first major federal gun-control legislation—and the 1938 Federal Firearms Act, which together created a licensing system for dealers and prohibitively taxed the private ownership of automatic weapons (“machine guns”). The constitutionality of the 1934 act was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1939, in U.S. v. Miller, in which Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s solicitor general, Robert H. Jackson, argued that the Second Amendment is “restricted to the keeping and bearing of arms by the people collectively for their common defense and security.” Furthermore, Jackson said, the language of the amendment makes clear that the right “is not one which may be utilized for private purposes but only one which exists where the arms are borne in the militia or some other military organization provided for by law and intended for the protection of the state.” The Court agreed, unanimously. In 1957, when the N.R.A. moved into new headquarters, its motto, at the building’s entrance, read, “Firearms Safety Education, Marksmanship Training, Shooting for Recreation.” It didn’t say anything about freedom, or self-defense, or rights.

Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/04/23/120423fa_fact_lepore#ixzz2L51WKAzt

Would the decision-makers of the NRA do the same if they were in the same position? Probably not.

 

[buffalo hunter]

Some here might find this article and video (at the link) interesting as it is related to the topic of this thread.

The Problem Is Not Gun Laws’: Watch the Emotional Speech by a Sandy Hook Victim’s Dad That Got a Standing Ovation

. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...hook-victims-dad-that-got-a-standing-ovation/

 

[Alien Allen]

I think it's a fundamental lack of trust in our fellow man. Many Americans think that some "common sense" gun control measures would be wise, but suspect that if they budge at all on the Second Amendment then they risk full prohibition. Others might honestly believe their own histrionics that if they allow the freedom emphatic in the phrasing of the Second Amendment then people will be gunning each other down in suburbia over not cleaning up dog poo.

Of course, if the average American would stop and think for a second, they would realize that the average American is just like them, and can be trusted not to abuse liberty. Culture is the best governor. The Second Amendment has been around far longer than this manufactured crisis.

But the majority of our elected leaders are not average Americans apparently as they continue to chip away at our liberties. Which makes it quite the problem when those who govern you can not be trusted. And that is the reason they crafted the 2nd amendment. That is an inconvenient truth which the anti gun crowd dismiss as sheer folly. Are those anti gun folks then to be trusted?

From every credible report gun violence has gone down over the last couple of decades. So you have a liberal socialist leaning media and the clowns in government making something more than it is. And the anti gun folks lap it up like a cat with milk. Fancy that.

 

[Jackass master]

And they refuse to prosecute and lock up the gang bangers. Or better yet execute their sorry asses. As much as I detest Mayor Mike his PD enforcing a controversial stop and shake policy on the gang bangers is the reason NYC has a dramatically lower murder rate than D.C. and Chicago. Again folks, the problem is the people, not the gun.

 

[Alien Allen]

NYC got its act cleaned up before Bloomberg. Guiliani did that. People forget what a cesspool Times Square had become before that.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

Not true, but clearly you did.

Aw come on....you can do better. Give me a decent reason* for retaining ready access to firearms for America's criminal community.



*obsolete hayseed amendments to the Constitution that have been corrupted by the NRA do not qualify.

 

[The Man]

What "criminal community" is granted readily access to firearms here in America?

 

[Accountable]

Aw come on....you can do better. Give me a decent reason* for retaining ready access to firearms for America's criminal community.



*obsolete hayseed amendments to the Constitution that have been corrupted by the NRA do not qualify.

It's a right. I understand it's a foreign concept for you because you're a subject, but that's just too fucking bad. It makes no difference what a subject opines in this matter.

 

[Minor Axis]

I'd actually started out to support you, figuring that it would be easy to find the NRA fighting against banning machine guns in the '30s. I was wrong:



Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/04/23/120423fa_fact_lepore#ixzz2L51WKAzt

Would the decision-makers of the NRA do the same if they were in the same position? Probably not.

For it to mean anything we have to keep the references from 1960 on.
The NRA's main proposals seem to deal with "gun education" and keeping guns out of mentally deficient people. If you mention anything that concerns the registration or tracking of guns, as we do with automobiles they are against it. Police love the idea of gun fingerprinting. NRA is against it. Larger magazines, against. So why would a group of people who promote hunting have an issue with larger magazines in "assault" rifles? It is because they believe any regulation involving guns is step 1 and step 5 is that guns are banned.

Their slogan "guns don't kill people..." is ludicrous, refusing to deal with the the gun violence problem we have in the U.S.

Part of the NRA's anti-gun organization list:

[A.A.R.P.
American Medical Association
American Academy of Pediatrics
Central Conference of American Rabbis
Congress of National Black Churches, Inc.
National Association of Police Organizations
National Association of School Safety and Law Enforcement Officers
National Spinal Cord Injury Association
United States Catholic Conference
YWCA of the U.S.A.

New Yorker Magazine

 

[Alien Allen]

gotta blame it on the gun

otherwise heaven forbid one would have to be responsible for their actions

I notice nobody refuting the data and facts that gun violence has gone down in the last 20 years

Where were the whiners back 30 years ago demanding we disarm?

And make no mistake that is exactly what is desired by the anti gun crowd. They know how to work mission creep. They had good teachers with the anti cigarette activist crowd.

You start with the so called assault weapons. Which only a fraction of the gun deaths are caused by. If you doubt me then check and see what the last assault weapon ban accomplished. Don't hold your breath looking for the supportive data.

So then the assault weapon ban is not enough and of course the next step is the hand gun.

Then eventually they will go after shot guns because they can hold up to 5 shots and we can not have that.

By then the vegans will have taken over and no meat allowed so what the fuck. No need for any hunting rifles. And sport shooting would just be too damn barbaric and it would bring back thoughts to the wild west so there ya go it must be stopped also. Please be sure to turn off the light when you are the last one out the door.

 

[The Man]

For it to mean anything we have to keep the references from 1960 on.
The NRA's main proposals seem to deal with "gun education" and keeping guns out of mentally deficient people. If you mention anything that concerns the registration or tracking of guns, as we do with automobiles they are against it. Police love the idea of gun fingerprinting. NRA is against it. Larger magazines, against. So why would a group of people who promote hunting have an issue with larger magazines in "assault" rifles? It is because they believe any regulation involving guns is step 1 and step 5 is that guns are banned.

Their slogan "guns don't kill people..." is ludicrous, refusing to deal with the the gun violence problem we have in the U.S.

Part of the NRA's anti-gun organization list:

New Yorker Magazine

Upon reading your link...I followed where they got their list which led me to a non functioning link