I see what ya did there.
God bless the “ignore” function.
Here’s an interesting thought for the Trump haters…
For all those who believe Trump is a fascist nazi and want him out of the White House but now you’re calling for stricter gun laws, you either do not know what the Second Amendment is for, you don’t really think Trump is a nazi, or you truly have a mental disorder.
God bless the “ignore” function.
quote:
Originally posted by GeronimoI am so happy that since we made heroine illegal so many years ago we haven’t had any overdoses or deaths since.
If murder was just illegal this senseless act would not have happened.
“Wailord”
1979 17’ Montauk
90 JohnsonWilderness Ride 115
and if forks were banned Rosie O Donald would not be fat. and if this key board was banned Polly could not correct my miss spellings and incorrect grammer.
[/quote]
Bangstick - i was simply saying that stricter laws, like more in depth background checks may prevent a shooting. No, it certainly won’t prevent all. But, if a more in depth check may raise one red flag and gets the gun out of one guy’s hand, isn’t it worth it? What if the shooter isn’t a mentally deranged 64 year old, what if it’s an 18 year old who gets bullied everyday? One day he snaps, goes and buys a handgun and shoots up his school. Why is it so inconceivable that in the extended time from a more in depth background check (even if he passes) something changes for him? Wouldn’t that be worth it? And what was the cost to you? Having to wait a little longer on your next purchase. Yes, I think something as simple as a more in depth check could help in multiple ways, even if it “isn’t a gun issue”. Again, this doesn’t solve every instance, probably doesn’t solve most, but if it solved one then I believe it’s worth it. Maybe stopping just one instance isn’t worth it in most of your eyes, but it is to me. Maybe it would be worth it if you were close to someone that was killed in one of these shootings. Someone mentioned Europe and stabbings. That’s a great point. If this guy in vegas had a knife instead of guns, do you really think the death count would be at 59 and the injured count would be 500+? No of course it wouldn’t. Again, I don’t know why you take the mindset that the issue has to be fully resolved all at once or it’s not worth addressing at all.
At the end of the day, we won’t agree. I own guns, I enjoy hunting and shooting, but I’d give them up if I needed to in an effort to stop these sad events that seem to happen non stop. I wasn’t raised to fear the government like a lot of folks were and so far in my life I haven’t had a reason to believe stricter gun laws will lead to some government take over of our lives.
I was listening to NPR on the way to work…I know, I know… but it is good to know thy enemy!
Anyway, Steven Innskeep was interviewing a Texas father whose daughter was actually shot at the concert. It looks as though she will recover. Innskeep tried his (**()dest to get this guy rattled and to say that we needed more gun control.
The father very eloquently said that humanity and our Godless society is the problem not inanimate firearms.
Honestly, I would have probably gotten pissed and told Innskeep to quit trying to put words in my mouth and either listen to what I have to say or this is interview is over…
“Endeavor to Persevere.
Give,Give… Never Take.”
EC
quote:Heard the same interview. Interesting that's what you got out of it. Innskeep never tried to put words in his mouth. Innskeep asked him if he would support stricter gun laws, the guy said no, he carries, believes in 2nd amendment, thinks it's the person behind the gun. Innskeep asked him what he thought was causing these mass shootings, guy said a Godless society. Interview ended.
Originally posted by pescazorroI was listening to NPR on the way to work…I know, I know… but it is good to know thy enemy!
Anyway, Steven Innskeep was interviewing a Texas father whose daughter was actually shot at the concert. It looks as though she will recover. Innskeep tried his (**()dest to get this guy rattled and to say that we needed more gun control.
The father very eloquently said that humanity and our Godless society is the problem not inanimate firearms.
Honestly, I would have probably gotten pissed and told Innskeep to quit trying to put words in my mouth and either listen to what I have to say or this is interview is over…
“Endeavor to Persevere.
Give,Give… Never Take.”
EC
quote:
Originally posted by troutguy7613Bangstick - i was simply saying that stricter laws, like more in depth background checks may prevent a shooting. No, it certainly won’t prevent all. But, if a more in depth check may raise one red flag and gets the gun out of one guy’s hand, isn’t it worth it? What if the shooter isn’t a mentally deranged 64 year old, what if it’s an 18 year old who gets bullied everyday? One day he snaps, goes and buys a handgun and shoots up his school. Why is it so inconceivable that in the extended time from a more in depth background check (even if he passes) something changes for him? Wouldn’t that be worth it? And what was the cost to you? Having to wait a little longer on your next purchase. Yes, I think something as simple as a more in depth check could help in multiple ways, even if it “isn’t a gun issue”. Again, this doesn’t solve every instance, probably doesn’t solve most, but if it solved one then I believe it’s worth it. Maybe stopping just one instance isn’t worth it in most of your eyes, but it is to me. Maybe it would be worth it if you were close to someone that was killed in one of these shootings. Someone mentioned Europe and stabbings. That’s a great point. If this guy in vegas had a knife instead of guns, do you really think the death count would be at 59 and the injured count would be 500+? No of course it wouldn’t. Again, I don’t know why you take the mindset that the issue has to be fully resolved all at once or it’s not worth addressing at all.
At the end of the day, we won’t agree. I own guns, I enjoy hunting and shooting, but I’d give them up if I needed to in an effort to stop these sad events that seem to happen non stop. I wasn’t raised to fear the government like a lot of folks were and so far in my life I haven’t had a reason to believe stricter gun laws will lead to some government take over of our lives.
<hr height="1" n
Criminals will not obey gun laws. Gun laws only make liberals feel better
liberal logic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYVqmBaqgPU
Proline 201WA
Aloha 24ft pontoon (LooneyToon)
Old Town stern with 7.5 johnson
Troutguy, I’m not trying to discredit your thoughts, comments and concerns but the fact remains, the only persons impacted by new, more or “stricter” gun laws are those law abiding firearms owners that are already the only persons impacted by gun laws.
That said, what exactly would a “more in-depth background check” entail? NICS uses a Federal database to run current background checks. What is available that is “more in-depth” than that? What isn’t/doesn’t the current background check missing that a more in-depth background check pick up on? Further more, how will a more in-depth background check or extended wait times keep firearms out of the hands of the gang bangers and the street thugs that make cities like Chicago so deadly and dangerous?
To your thought of “one solution” being worth it and referencing your “Las Vegas shooter having a knife instead” comment; if “one solution” is worth it to you, why would even one life being lost by a stabbing versus multiple lives lost by gunfire be acceptable to you? Using you’re own analogy, wouldn’t “just one” life lost be too many. I mentioned the Las Vegas shooter having only handguns and/or knives walking amongst the concert goers and while he may not have killed 59 people, he could easily have still killed several.
Again, how does any “more in-depth background check” or extended wait times keep firearms out of the hands of the people that are committing the majority of firearm related murders/crimes in this country? You’re asking more concessions from law abiding gun owners when law abiding gun owners are the only ones making concessions and yet are still following/adhering to the laws.
There were mass murders and mass murderers long before firearms existed. From then to now, what it is the common denominator? Answer…people.
God bless the “ignore” function.
What they won’t come out and say is, “more in depth” means limits. They want to track purchases and put limits because they believe anyone who buys 10 guns or 3000 rounds is a psycho and they want to flag them and/or stop them from purchasing again. They don’t want to say what details they plan to add to the background check.
Bottom line, I passed a SLED background check. I should be able to buy whatever I want and how much I want and carry in any state or city I want until I do something to have a record and revoke that privilege. Did you know you could spank your kid in public and under the current laws if I get charged for that because some nimwit lib thinks I shouldn’t, then you couldn’t buy a gun anymore.
Yeah, more laws on the books and background checks is the answer.
People talk about how it’s the end of the world with these mass shootings like it is the most horrific thing to live with. 450 kids under the age of 5 are murdered each year by their parents and over a thousand more over the age of 5. Mostly all by their father. That’s a problem, that’s a tragedy. That’s something to spend some legislation on in this country, not the (**() gun purchases.
“Wailord”
1979 17’ Montauk
90 Johnson
Wilderness Ride 115
I’m prepared for the rebuttal to my comment to be something like, “So you’re saying we should just do nothing” or “We should just let people murder hundreds of people” or some sensationalized drivel like that. That’s to be expected when knee jerk reaction is the basis of the argument.
God bless the “ignore” function.
The hard truth is that the country is a breeding ground for evil and they don’t want to admit it. All this let genders be neutral, free loving, agnostic attitude is what creates all this mess.
Hey, that person should be free to express their identity, it’s ok to have sex at 13 then have abortions. Oh, now some of those same people have child pornography on their computers. I am so shocked and surprised. Who would have thought.
Focus on the evil folks.
“Wailord”
1979 17’ Montauk
90 Johnson
Wilderness Ride 115
bangstick- I have absolutely no clue what more in depth background checks or stricter laws would entail. I’m not a law maker, nor a social scientist that has studied these issues professionally, so I’m not educated enough from that standpoint to comment. I am saying that if I had to make some sacrifices even to see if something would work, I’d be fine with it. You say with some conviction that stricter laws won’t work. I wish I had your ability to know what laws will and won’t work without passing them.
And if you can’t see the difference between a scenario where 5 people are stabbed to death versus 59 killed and 500+ Injured from firearms, then I’ll admit my loss because I have no arguments that would work with your reasoning. The math says the difference is 54 more people alive and 500 less people injured.
And Geronimo - if you want to blame all the shootings in our country as being evil resulting from the gay and transgender communities becoming more accepted, then I couldn’t have an intelligent conversation with you. That was an incredibly ignorant and uneducated comment. Get outside of whatever bubble you live in and go talk to folks that arent like you. You might just learn something about the people you’re so afraid of and using as a scapegoat.
I like my clean bubble.
“Wailord”
1979 17’ Montauk
90 Johnson
Wilderness Ride 115
This is the Clinton Administration enforcing gun laws! 82 Dead!
quote:
Originally posted by GeronimoI like my clean bubble.
“Wailord”
1979 17’ Montauk
90 JohnsonWilderness Ride 115
At least you admit to living in one. Let’s people that are able to think critically and with an open mind know what they’re up against.
I’ve been reading alot of articles lately about this subject, articles written from both sides, trying to understand both point of views. This article seems to be the most un-biased article ive read so far. I personally do not believe stricter gun laws are the answer, but this article does shed some light on both sides and has many sourced facts. I understand what troutguy is saying, but dont necessarily agree thats the answer. If i knew that giving up all my guns would save just one massacre, then i would do it in a minute. But in all the research ive done(not just since the Vegas shooting) I havent seen any facts that show that stricter gun laws will prevent such a tragedy. We can all provide 100’s of examples of when law abiding citizens have prevented crime and also when someone has legally purchased firearms and still committed crimes. but i think we can all agree that without a doubt, that its a “people” issue more than its a “law” issue.
http://people.howstuffworks.com/strict-gun-laws-less-crime.htm
Proline 201WA
Aloha 24ft pontoon (LooneyToon)
Old Town stern with 7.5 johnson
Wanna know the one real danger of the background checks??? It ,
“background checks” , creates a database that can and in history, HAS</font id=“red”> led to the collection of all firearms , very effectivly dis-arming the populance…NAZI Germany… Hitler just waltz in and collected the weaponry of its citizens because he had a list "database"of where they were all at… Do you all think it can’t happen here !!! If so, BEND OVER AND GREASE UP snowflakes, cause it can and most likely will !!! Question is; how long until ?
quote:
Originally posted by EasyThis is the Clinton Administration enforcing gun laws! 82 Dead!
Glad that monster passed away. What did she say about the 21 children, collateral damage.
“Wailord”
1979 17’ Montauk
90 Johnson
Wilderness Ride 115