quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: I dont agree with legalizing drugs. Marijuana would be as far as I would go.
Well some drugs are already legal (and just as or more harmful than the illegal ones)....but I don't see people killing other people over their beer and whiskey territory..
-------------------- ***********************
It's all in the timing... Posts: 4303 | From: DSA | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
or, for that matter, the relatively under-armed Iraqi insurgents.
In an end-game scenario, the threat is that we would be nuked/bio-massed--precisely because no army in history or the foreseeable future would enjoy an occupational foray.
If I understand your overall view, I agree there's a lot of macho dudes who would be ABSOLUTELY dismayed to have to actually fend off a decent SWAT attack, not to mention, let's say, a SEAL team.
As we've seen abroad, however, the problem is not in securing a coordinate.
The problem is securing all the nooks and crannies surrounding that coordinate. [/QB]
I think you got it, and I understand where everyone is coming from. I don't agree with everything but that's more than ok with me. I just don't see the need for the people to arm them selves "in case" the the Gov. attacks. Ya that is an over simplification on what we are talking about but at the same time, to accept all of the accidental deaths, innocent bystander deaths, Idiot with gun deaths, as a "cost of doing business", I have a hard time with that.
I also understand that lots of bad people have guns. And they got them cause there are lots of guns going around.
Militia VS Military, that will be a video game one day. But don't tell anyone. Maybe I can get royalties.
Seriously. There is no question about it, IT would be a "war to end all wars" as they say. Lots of defections on both sides and lots of people crossing borders to get away.
If it did happen, it won't happen at the flip of a switch. The Gov. will "lead" the country in a direction for ten years and will have lots of "people" support before it goes against the "armed populace". The armed populace will not have a plan, will not be able mobilize forces where needed, and will not have the communications they take for granted every day. It will be mayhem to say the least. If it did happen they will not take on the whole country at once. State by State. My money is on the Military.
Your cell phone is, and will become, a bullziiii.
I just don't see the positives of "100%" gun ownership VS the negatives of the unintended deaths and how it impacts family's. Add to that the intended deaths of everyone who may well still be alive if guns were not so popular a long time ago.
Posts: 105 | From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Robot: As long as democracy is in power I don't see how a comparison can be made with these Country’s, other than to prove the success of a democratic system. If you feel that the USA could become a “communist” country and go after it’s people for some kind of “monetary gain” then I have no comment on that. I wouldn’t even know where to start. I do not think that is in the cards for the next century.
it's not "communism" that's "evil", it's one party rule that's evil.
a few years ago? i was concerned that the Dems seemd to be headed for the bottom, now it's the other party.
this is really bad because the "rubber band" may break on one of these party "dives" one of these times, and it could be either party
one party rule is in effect a dictatorship by proxy.
Iran? they are a democracy of one party. they are not counted as members of the free world.
the sheer number of personal firearms in the US is a tactical nightmare for any type dictator that is not an extreme populist. however, Hitler was very popular too..
there is no good answer to most of lifes hardest questions, that's why they are hard questions.
i'll take my chances with an armed populace over an disarmed populace any day.
there will always be evil people and dumb people and that's just how it is. [/QB]
Yes but most people associate one party rule with Communism and Dictator's cause there is no other choice.
Put Hitler on a ballot today and he would have a fighting chance in Germany or Austria IMO. That's sad.
It is all about what the people are told and what they learn. In this century information flows so fast it is hard to conceal anything, well almost but you know what I saying.
People I talked to in Russia last year still believe they helped Poland by occupying them. Not their fault but they were lied to about the whole thing. That is harder to do here, sorta.
Posts: 105 | From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
People I talked to in Russia last year still believe they helped Poland by occupying them.
exactly.
and Clinton would have helped th epeople by taking away all guns if'n he coulda- then Cheney would never have left office. Or Obama would or any other person who gets the power in hand and then convinces themselves they ave to "protect" everybody from (place any and all fears rational or not here)..
Chavez got in on popularity. he prolly won't leave until he dies. but he WAS VOTED in...
that's the problem.
can anybody tell me what the plan is if Obama (or anybody else) declares martial law in Oct before an election and cancels them until further notice?
to MY knowledge there is none. who would remove the Commander in Cheif of the most powerful military in the world? the military? and then?
the 2nd amendment is about balancing powers just like the Judiciary, the Executive and the Congressional system is designed to balance each others powers. the 2nd balances against the three of them. that's what "free state" means- a state of freedom
people who think we've gotten beyond the "need" for that are not realistic in their apraisal of the actual amount of and type of greed in the human race.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
to those of you who think American troops won't fire on Americans this is one of the more milder times they did our history is full of such instances of this,try our period of labor unrest in they 1880's until the turn of the century. Anyway here is what the miltary can do to there fellow brothers in arms all of you know this
The Bonus Army In 1924, a grateful Congress voted to give a bonus to World War I veterans - $1.25 for each day served overseas, $1.00 for each day served in the States. The catch was that payment would not be made until 1945. However, by 1932 the nation had slipped into the dark days of the Depression and the unemployed veterans wanted their money immediately. In May of that year, some 15,000 veterans, many unemployed and destitute, descended on Washington, D.C. to demand immediate payment of their bonus. They proclaimed themselves the Bonus Expeditionary Force but the public dubbed them the "Bonus Army." Raising ramshackle camps at various places around the city, they waited.
The veterans made their largest camp at Anacostia Flats across the river from the Capitol. Approximately 10,000 veterans, women and children lived in the shelters built from materials dragged out of a junk pile nearby - old lumber, packing boxes and scrap tin covered with roofs of thatched straw.
Discipline in the camp was good, despite the fears of many city residents who spread unfounded "Red Scare" rumors. Streets were laid out, latrines dug, and formations held daily. Newcomers were required to register and prove they were bonafide veterans who had been honorably discharged. Their leader, Walter Waters, stated, "We're here for the duration and we're not going to starve. We're going to keep ourselves a simon-pure veteran's organization. If the Bonus is paid it will relieve to a large extent the deplorable economic condition."
June 17 was described by a local newspaper as "the tensest day in the capital since the war." The Senate was voting on the bill already passed by the House to immediately give the vets their bonus money. By dusk, 10,000 marchers crowded the Capitol grounds expectantly awaiting the outcome. Walter Waters, leader of the Bonus Expeditionary Force, appeared with bad news. The Senate had defeated the bill by a vote of 62 to 18. The crowd reacted with stunned silence. "Sing America and go back to your billets" he commanded, and they did. A silent "Death March" began in front of the Capitol and lasted until July 17, when Congress adjourned.
A month later, on July 28, Attorney General Mitchell ordered the evacuation of the veterans from all government property, Entrusted with the job, the Washington police met with resistance, shots were fired and two marchers killed. Learning of the shooting at lunch, President Hoover ordered the army to clear out the veterans. Infantry and cavalry supported by six tanks were dispatched with Chief of Staff General Douglas MacArthur in command. Major Dwight D. Eisenhower served as his liaison with Washington police and Major George Patton led the cavalry.
By 4:45 P.M. the troops were massed on Pennsylvania Ave. below the Capitol. Thousands of Civil Service employees spilled out of work and lined the streets to watch. The veterans, assuming the military display was in their honor, cheered. Suddenly Patton's troopers turned and charged. "Shame, Shame" the spectators cried. Soldiers with fixed bayonets followed, hurling tear gas into the crowd.
By nightfall the BEF had retreated across the Anacostia River where Hoover ordered MacArthur to stop. Ignoring the command, the general led his infantry to the main camp. By early morning the 10,000 inhabitants were routed and the camp in flames. Two babies died and nearby hospitals overwhelmed with casualties. Eisenhower later wrote, "the whole scene was pitiful. The veterans were ragged, ill-fed, and felt themselves badly abused. To suddenly see the whole encampment going up in flames just added to the pity."
References: Bartlett, John Henry, The Bonus March and the New Deal (1937); Daniels, Roger, The Bonus March; an Episode of the Great Depression (1971).
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: bigfoot, the problem is not guns. 510 people murdered in chicago....who do you think those 80% killed by gunfire mostly were? gang bangers...thugs. There are gangs all over chicago.
Let's say that is correct and it is gang bangers... what is the solution? Arm more citizens and create more violence or perhaps have more gang intervention programs and steer kids away from gangs instead or as well? ... Like i said if you are not part of the solution then you are part of the problem... if you spew Constitution amendments that it is ok to own guns then guess what these young kids will think and do... Own Guns!... we should be finding ways to steer them away from guns, drugs and gangs instead. Even if you only turn 1 kid away from that life it is one kid who won't kill or you have to maybe face someday with your own gun.
quote:They can call for more and more and more restrictions on guns, but look at crack or other drugs....illegal and still plentiful just like guns would be if they were totally outlawed.
So the solution to you is that since it's hopeless then just have no restrictions whatsoever... just have a free for all...
quote:How do drugs get into the US? SMUGGLED, how would guns get into America if banned? SMUGGLED. Homemade guns would be huge just like homemade whiskey.
People dont get it. Drug cartels in Columbia will ship guns with cocaine shipments to arm the dealers to protect their product from other gangs in the streets. These people use F'n submarines now for crying out loud....submarines bought from N korea or Russia to smuggle drugs from Columbia to California coasts and people think making guns "harder to get" is going to stop violence?
Here's a tidbit that you perhaps will find fascinating but still do not get it: The U.S. is the #1 supplier of guns to these Cartels thereby prolonging the violence and keeping them in business to supply our kids with drugs. Don't you think that at least if we shouldn't restrict gun ownership here then perhaps we should try our damn hardest to cut off the gun supply going south of the border?. Makes sense dontcha think. This wouldn't stomp on your constitutional right to own a gun Moo man. Stop Mooing.
"The federal system for tracking gun sales, crafted over the years to avoid infringements on Second Amendment rights, makes it difficult to quickly spot suspicious trends and to identify people buying for smugglers, law enforcement officials say."
That as well as banning gun sales via gun shows and sales via non storefronts (home gun sales etc.) should also be banned. Gun sales should only be through a store front much like prescription drugs should only be sold through a pharmacy so no illegalities happen or are more difficult to happen.
Ok Mach...so lets do it YOUR way...get rid of guns. Then what? You still have gangs, gang violence, drug trafficking, killings, murders in the home, and the rest. So now what? People who dont like guns got their way it is 2020 and guns are being smuggled in through Mexico with drugs and people who dont abide by the law have them.
Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: Ok Mach...so lets do it YOUR way...get rid of guns. Then what? You still have gangs, gang violence, drug trafficking, killings, murders in the home, and the rest. So now what? People who dont like guns got their way it is 2020 and guns are being smuggled in through Mexico with drugs and people who dont abide by the law have them.
You really are more entertaining then to be taken seriously ala PMS lol You have some reading comprehension problem. I have never said to ban guns in general with the exception of Assault weapons. That I will admit I said. If you like I can quote what I have said throughout this thread and others. These are just some of the highlights:
1. Ban gun sales via gun shows, private home sales between owners or dealer to customer, internet sales. I believe this is where most illegal sales occur and that sales should only be through storefronts where gun sales are easier to keep track of even though illegal sales occur there to. For that read # 2.
2. Stricter sentences and fines for illegal gun sales. Also i believe that if you knowingly sell a gun illegally and it is used in a commission of a violent crime that you should also be charged with that crime or accessory. That would put the fear of God so to speak to some of these illegal gun dealers and such.
3. Ban sales to mentally ill specifically incurable diseases. Which diseases should not be sold to should be debated by State and Federal Gov't's though Schizophrenia goes without saying.
4. Encourage the young not to own guns because afterall the less the young think it is ok the less crime there will be and the less reason anyone has to own a gun other then hunting , target practicing etc. No it's not a perfect world, just making a better world. If you are not the solution to the problem you are the problem.
5. Stop the flow of illegal guns south of the Border. Everyone says it is there problem and not ours but that is so not true. Other then money, guns is what keeps the Cartels in business which in turn they flow our streets with their drugs to our kids. Can we stop all illegal guns to the South. Of course not but we shouldn't give up and make it easier for them neither.
6. Stricter background checks with a national database so only the lawful can own them. A background check of 1 month is reasonable to make sure none slip through the cracks. What's the rush to own a gun? You can wait patiently 1 month to make sure everything is done right.
7. Tracking of gun sales be allowed to see if there are any trends from particular buyers that identify them as straw buyers etc.
Anyways these are just some of the things i believe in doing pertaining to the gun issue.Others can add to that list if they have any ideas that are reasonable. I am not advocating banning guns altogether as you can see Cow man so please stop putting words in my mouth and read what I say for once because what I have said is reasonable.I will stand by the Constitution even if I believe it is antiquated and hasn't evolved much with the times. But I do not believe that our Founders wished a free for all of gun ownership and if they did they didn't anticipate times changing and their ideas evolving accordingly. But c'est la vie. And btw guns flow south and not North in terms of gun trafficking.
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
ban guns in general with the exception of Assault weapons
LOL, you don't even know what an assault weapon is.
in general theory? every tool used by someone to assualt another is an assualt weapon. steak knife, baseball bat, golf clubs ets...
furthermore, you cannot show me evidence that military style assault weapons are used by criminals in the US. they are less than 1percent. the shotgun used n this case would not be covered.
an assualt weapon should be defined as th esame thing that our miltary uses to assault the enemy. in which case? it would be (mostly)9MM semi's and m16/m-4's
the news tells you what to think and you parrot it.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ban sales to mentally ill specifically incurable diseases. Which diseases should not be sold to should be debated by State and Federal Gov't's though Schizophrenia goes without saying.
already been done.
this is why you have no argument to make here. you don't even know what the laws are already.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stop the flow of illegal guns south of the Border. Everyone says it is there problem and not ours but that is so not true. Other then money, guns is what keeps the Cartels in business which in turn they flow our streets with their drugs to our kids. Can we stop all illegal guns to the South. Of course not but we shouldn't give up and make it easier for them neither.
LOL...
stop the drugs coming the other way? can't be done... when you wish upon a star.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stricter background checks with a national database so only the lawful can own them. A background check of 1 month is reasonable to make sure none slip through the cracks. What's the rush to own a gun? You can wait patiently 1 month to make sure everything is done right.
stricter for what?
we can get a couple grand from our bank account in a second... waiting won;t make it "better" just longer
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
banning dope and alcohol just made them more desirable to certain people...
banning assault weapons is a gun ban.
you cannot define to me a legal gun that should be banned because it is an assault weapon. the media tells you what one is but they are just trying to ban them all.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
MAch you are misinformed. The mentally ill are not allowed to buy guns. You said "encourage the young not to own guns"
Are you serious? Do you know how many young men go sport shooting or hunting with their fathers? How many of those young boys who get involved in sportsmanship and contribute more money to animal and land conservation than you ever will show up in gangs?
You dont need stricter background checks. A background check is a background check. Your examples are prime steak on the platter of what the left sees as useful. Making more and more laws while not focusing on what is already on the books.
You also do not know what an assault weapon is. MSNBC makes them out to be M-60 machine guns and full auto. You go to a gun show you buy an SKS with a 10 rd box magazine...big freakin deal. you can only shoot as many rounds as you can pull the trigger. If you really want to own a class 3 weapon then you go through the ATF and they conduct a background check. If you think the ATF needs to learn how to do a better background check you should go call them and let them know the best way to do that.
My goodness you are full of misinforamtion!
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
We have no where near reasonable gun laws in this country all you have to do is read the paper or watch the local news in your own town.
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by raybond: We have no where near reasonable gun laws in this country all you have to do is read the paper or watch the local news in your own town.
That doesnt make sense.
Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I never thought to see you posting talking points Glass.
Just goes to show every person has their issue I guess.
-------------------- No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues. Posts: 5178 | From: Up North | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Bigfoot: I never thought to see you posting talking points Glass.
Just goes to show every person has their issue I guess.
i expected this discussion to heat up as soon as it became clear that we would most likely have all Dems running things again.
under Clinton? the liberals actually began to rewrite history and try to re-interpret the meaning of the Constitution.
there was a history professor at Emory that lost his tenured position for providing false data to support his claims that the founders never meant for the people to be armed, and that the militias were Govt sponsored.
militias are private citizens--non-govt. the govt is the reason we should be armed. not hunting or sporting or hobbies. it's about keeping the govt balanced, and it always was meant that way, no amount of editing history will change that. we were fighting a revolution just a few years before the 2nd was written, and that IS what was on their minds. it doesn't matter if you are liberal or conservative, partisan or not, the govt is not supposed to be the only means of affording yourself security.
the fastest way for the GOP to get back into power would be for the Dems to start banning guns.
the odd part is that just talking about doing it increases gun sales dramatically yet they do keep talking about it.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe it is a big conspiracy and the Dems are being paid off by the gun lobbyists under the table with laundered money from green shell companies!!!
Sorry...couldn't resist. Lots of conspiracies on the board recently.
So you been gearing yourself up for this thread for the past 3 months eh Glass? It's kinda funny but personally it seems to me that everybody except the Pres and the democratic leadership is talking about this.
Well, like I and the others who are debating (what I suppose would be considered the left side of this argument) have all stated now....We are not out to disarm the populous. The reasons behind having an armed society have been examined and accepted.
I am not interested in getting into the clusterf*ck of trying to define what gun is what type of weapon. I'll admit freely that I don't know. What I do know is that the bayonett lug is banned (which is silly) and I know that a fully automatic AK-47 killed three boys ages 13, 15, and 17 less than three months ago despite being banned. http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/triple-shooting-022009.html (It doesn't say it was an AK in this article but it does in others)
All that to say I don't like fully automatics but otherwise I am not terribly interested in the further banning of specific guns.
What I do want is mandatory firearms training for anyone who wants to own a weapon. I think everyone should have to go through the classes that conceal and carry folks do even if they aren't planning on seeking a carry permit. There is a lot of good info in those classes and they should be utilized. Call it judo honor sessions for gun owners.
I want a background check that is thorough. I don't care about a wait period. A wait period is meaningless unless they are doing something with the time and in this day and age I feel that a check for a gun owner should take as long as a settlement of sold stock funds should take (i.e. A hell of a lot less than T+3). I myself (and I am assuming Mach) feel the current checks seem to be a little more haphazard than I am comfortable living with and would like to see the process streamlined and enhanced. CCM, feel free to call it E Verify for gun owners if that makes it easier to swallow.
I personally would like to see state registration of guns. I don't care if you sell em or not but if you do I think you should have to transfer a title along with the gun so there is ALWAYS someone responsible for weapon. A gun without an owner is an incident waiting to happen. I understand the fears of databases but...really...If the government goes rogue are you really planning on setting up your base of operation in your own house if you've decided it's time to go Rambo on their ass?
I want the southern border leaks closed. I want the southern border leaks closed for SO MANY reasons. I want smart technology electric eyes covering multiple spectrum's watching the entire stretch a mile deep with rapid response deployment squads every ten miles and a dedicated rail line behind the observation zone for high speed pickup and delivery of intercepts. I want every personal vehicle sniffed and every commercial vehicle fully examined. If I could without being demonized as a protectionist I'd have facilities built and require all product coming into the county to be unpacked, examined, and then repacked in different vehicles before being allowed to enter.
I want marijuana legalized. Not so much for the drug (don't really care about that one way or another) but for the industry. Hemp is an amazing agricultural product that we ignore to our own detriment. Marijuana is also by far the largest illegal drug used in America. Take away the primary product and these cartels stop extending their tentacles everywhere like coca-cola and start acting more like Jones soda.
P.S. I love your current tagline Glass.
-------------------- No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues. Posts: 5178 | From: Up North | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
BF pretty much answered everything I want to say but I will humor Glass ** cough ** I mean Cow since it was Cow who replied to my post? Funny lately it seems others answer for Cow when I post to the Moo man... wonder why...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: ban guns in general with the exception of Assault weapons
LOL, you don't even know what an assault weapon is.
Funny, I don't recall that I tried to define what an assault weapon is. I only recall saying I want such weapons banned and leave it to the politicians to define what they are. Though BF answered for me already.
And in general theory you knew exactly what i meant Cow, oops i mean Glass.
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Ban sales to mentally ill specifically incurable diseases. Which diseases should not be sold to should be debated by State and Federal Gov't's though Schizophrenia goes without saying.
already been done.
this is why you have no argument to make here. you don't even know what the laws are already.
Actually I can read them state by state:
"Allstocks wouldn't let me post a link because of parentheses so: google >>> gun laws in united states wiki <<< key words
But to tell you the truth I think there is too many laws crisscrossing each other and their should be more uniform laws. From what i can read there is a Federal, State and local law in each state. To me there should only be a federal and state law only. No local ones are needed or they should be integrated into the state laws.
As for mental illnesses, you and me both know they can walk into a gun store and buy a gun with no way for the gun store owner to do a background check to indicate the person has a history of mental disease. If so then show me.
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
stop the drugs coming the other way? can't be done... when you wish upon a star.
You have a weird sense of humor Cow, i mean Glass. I never said drugs nor guns could be completely stopped from flowing to or from South of the Border. what I did say is we should TRY to stop guns from going South of the Border which keeps the Cartels in business along with laundered money and drugs.
Frankly i am quite surprised that you suggest we do nothing about illegal destructive products flowing south and north of our borders and just let it flow free because we can't stop it all.
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Stricter background checks with a national database so only the lawful can own them. A background check of 1 month is reasonable to make sure none slip through the cracks. What's the rush to own a gun? You can wait patiently 1 month to make sure everything is done right.
stricter for what?
we can get a couple grand from our bank account in a second... waiting won;t make it "better" just longer
"State alternatives to the background check, such as state-issued handgun permits or mandatory state or local checks, may still bypass the NICS check."
Correct me if I am wrong Cow, I mean Glass but if the state bypasses the NICS check and only do a state check then couldn't a criminal from another state who settles in a new state obtain a gun permit since he or she perhaps has no record in that new state?
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Tracking of gun sales be allowed to see if there are any trends from particular buyers that identify them as straw buyers etc.
when this is done? the govt keeps lists of owners.
then they can go round them up first. this was blocked to keep fascists out of power.
you don't want fascists do you?
So because of your paranoia of the Gov't ,which imo will never turn into a Fascist state EVER,you are willing to let straw buyers slip through the cracks and buy guns illegally for others which will be used in violent crimes thereby causing deaths that could of been avoided? Is that what you want then?
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: we already have reasonable gun laws.
it's people that are unreasonable.
banning dope and alcohol just made them more desirable to certain people...
banning assault weapons is a gun ban.
you cannot define to me a legal gun that should be banned because it is an assault weapon. the media tells you what one is but they are just trying to ban them all.
I don't speak for the media, i speak for myself and it is not the media that tells me how to think any more so then they do to u.
The media and others use the term "Assault weapon" broadly imo but i use it when i mean fully automatic firearm and similar type of weapons... I don't profess to be an expert on firearms any more so then u pretend to be more knowledgeable at poker then me. But to me it is pretty simple which firearms we mean and that usually means rapid fire ones. Which ones in particular can be debatable but it's pretty tiring to see you and others try to pretend you don't know what me and people with my views mean when it comes to assault weapons.
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mach...you remind me of the little dweeb back in high school that thought they "knew it all"...
you know...the guy that no one liked because he always had an "answer" for everything...yet you could clearly see that he was merely attempting to prove himself as intelligent by spewing bull$hit...
In this thread, you have proven that you don't know a damn thing about guns or gun laws nor do you have any viable solutions to the problems you complain about...yet you act like you're an expert...and claim to have all the answers...
-------------------- ***********************
It's all in the timing... Posts: 4303 | From: DSA | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: MAch you are misinformed. The mentally ill are not allowed to buy guns. You said "encourage the young not to own guns"
Are you serious? Do you know how many young men go sport shooting or hunting with their fathers? How many of those young boys who get involved in sportsmanship and contribute more money to animal and land conservation than you ever will show up in gangs?[quote] The gangs' sport shooting and hunting are human beings. We should be advocating education, entrepreurship etc. to the gangbangers and not proflitering the country with guns and giving them the idea it's cool to own a gun and blow sh*t up with them. But sadly we do not do that.
[quote]You dont need stricter background checks. A background check is a background check. Your examples are prime steak on the platter of what the left sees as useful. Making more and more laws while not focusing on what is already on the books.
Some states bypass the NCIS and only do a state check therefor criminals with criminal records in other states do not show up on their computers as such and there is no background check to determing a mentally ill person as far as i seen.
quote:You also do not know what an assault weapon is. MSNBC makes them out to be M-60 machine guns and full auto. You go to a gun show you buy an SKS with a 10 rd box magazine...big freakin deal. you can only shoot as many rounds as you can pull the trigger. If you really want to own a class 3 weapon then you go through the ATF and they conduct a background check. If you think the ATF needs to learn how to do a better background check you should go call them and let them know the best way to do that.
My goodness you are full of misinforamtion!
I already replied to Cow, I mean Glass, no i mean Cow about this in the post above lol you guys must wear the same undies... get ur own undies...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
So because of your paranoia of the Gov't ,which imo will never turn into a Fascist state EVER,you are willing to let straw buyers slip through the cracks and buy guns illegally for others which will be used in violent crimes thereby causing deaths that could of been avoided? Is that what you want then?
it'snot paranoia NYC already did it.
they told people to register, then they TOOK their guns
you know nothing
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
fully automatic firearm and similar type of weapons.
they require a special tax tranfer stamp and a special permit. they are not being used in crimes. they are in fact fully historically documented and their owners are on lists.
you know nothing
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: Mach...you remind me of the little dweeb back in high school that thought they "knew it all"...
you know...the guy that no one liked because he always had an "answer" for everything...yet you could clearly see that he was merely attempting to prove himself as intelligent by spewing bull$hit...
In this thread, you have proven that you don't know a damn thing about guns or gun laws nor do you have any viable solutions to the problems you complain about...yet you act like you're an expert...and claim to have all the answers...
I don't recall calling myself an expert or a know it all. I thought we were having a debate and we post each others' opinions.
Before you start being a d*ckhead as usual when I didn't start sh*t with you then perhaps point out where I was ignorant of gun laws (i posted a link of state by state gun laws), guns (i made myself clear which guns I meant), viable solutions (i suggested solutions that can be tweeked by the board or politicians or your mother)...
I really don't give a f*cking rat's azz if you like me or not Retired... you also have me confused with someone who gives a damn what you have to say... as usual if you do not like what i have to say then ignore my posts... if not then contribute to them intelligently and not as an azzhole... otherwise go back to your retirement to rest in pasture...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
