10 Year old Girl Gunned Down in Drive By Shooting. :(

[ivwshane]

You don't think someone who kills his own mother is determined?

Determined and knowledgable are two different things. If someone wants to kill someone they will use a gun if its easy to obtain otherwise they will use another tool. Again nothing is guaranteed and that shouldn't, nor has that ever been the prerequisite for any law. Limit a criminals options and they will have to work harder to achieve their goals, more work opens up the possibility of more errors and other consequences.

You either accept that laws promote certain behaviors or they don't do anything and are useless and therefore unnecessary. There is no gray area, if you think there is then your whole anti anti-gun laws argument is invalid.

But I suspect, like most rational people, you believe laws do work. And I would say that you, like me, believe there are good and bad laws. That is, there are laws that achieve their behavior modification goals and there are laws that don't achieve their goals.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Having to register your gun or provide a backgeound check does not infringe upon your rights to own a gun.

So we shouldn't try to promote safety for anything unless it causes a higher mortality rate then cars?

why does the government need to know every time i exercise a right? registration is currently only required for specific firearms, which makes no sense. if anything, it should be either all or none (IMO). background check is obviously fine to keep crazies from buying guns.

equivalently, would it be acceptable to require ID and background checks to vote? after all, it doesn't infringe on the right to vote.

the majority of firearm homicides are from illegally owned pistols, so attacking a specific "type" of semi-automatic rifle (scary black civilian version of a military rifle) is silly in terms of trying to craft legislation that would actually be effective.

i think we should promote safety in activities that carry risk. to that end, our driver's education programs are a joke. and so is the firearm safety that the state of MD requires (takes about 10 minutes to go through and is a lot of "duh" stuff).

 

[xj0hnx]

You either accept that laws promote certain behaviors or they don't do anything and are useless and therefore unnecessary. There is no gray area, if you think there is then your whole anti anti-gun laws argument is invalid.

Sure thing, as soon as you accept that people that do this kind of thing do not follow, or care about laws, and it does not promote certain behaviors in them. This is what I can not understand, how you people can ignore that criminals, who be very definition do not follow laws, how more laws are going to effect them. Let's see, murder is already illegal, as well, as discharging a firearm in the city limits, as well as assault with intent, assault with a deadly weapon, probably the very possession of the firearm by the individual that did the shooting, all illegal, and against the law. So what new laws in your dream world would have stopped this person? What new laws would make them magically realize they shouldn't do it?

 

[BlueWolf47]

why does the government need to know every time i exercise a right? registration is currently only required for specific firearms, which makes no sense. if anything, it should be either all or none (IMO). background check is obviously fine to keep crazies from buying guns.

equivalently, would it be acceptable to require ID and background checks to vote? after all, it doesn't infringe on the right to vote.

the majority of firearm homicides are from illegally owned pistols, so attacking a specific "type" of semi-automatic rifle (scary black civilian version of a military rifle) is silly in terms of trying to craft legislation that would actually be effective.

i think we should promote safety in activities that carry risk. to that end, our driver's education programs are a joke. and so is the firearm safety that the state of MD requires (takes about 10 minutes to go through and is a lot of "duh" stuff).

So you agree registering all guns would help? Comparing voting to purchasing a firearm is absolutely ridiculous. And I don't disagree with providing an id when voting but wtf does that have to do with this argument.

 

[BlueWolf47]

Sure thing, as soon as you accept that people that do this kind of thing do not follow, or care about laws, and it does not promote certain behaviors in them. This is what I can not understand, how you people can ignore that criminals, who be very definition do not follow laws, how more laws are going to effect them. Let's see, murder is already illegal, as well, as discharging a firearm in the city limits, as well as assault with intent, assault with a deadly weapon, probably the very possession of the firearm by the individual that did the shooting, all illegal, and against the law. So what new laws in your dream world would have stopped this person? What new laws would make them magically realize they shouldn't do it?

Well then why the fuck do we have laws anyway? If criminals are not going to follow the law and they are the only ones who will violate it then why the hell have it.

Because if you didn't have the law then even more crimes would occur. I don't understand why you can't comprehend that the point of gun laws is to make it harder for a criminal to obtain a gun. With your argument we should have vending machines in every neighborhood that's below the poverty line filled with uzis. Don't worry, only the criminals will buy them.

 

[Fenixgoon]

So you agree registering all guns would help? Comparing voting to purchasing a firearm is absolutely ridiculous. And I don't disagree with providing an id when voting but wtf does that have to do with this argument.

how does registration promote safety?

i don't think voting and firearms ownership are as far off as you might think. and in a broader sense, you are simply exercising a right. why does the govenrment need to know when you exercise your rights?

 

[ivwshane]

Sure thing, as soon as you accept that people that do this kind of thing do not follow, or care about laws, and it does not promote certain behaviors in them. This is what I can not understand, how you people can ignore that criminals, who be very definition do not follow laws, how more laws are going to effect them. Let's see, murder is already illegal, as well, as discharging a firearm in the city limits, as well as assault with intent, assault with a deadly weapon, probably the very possession of the firearm by the individual that did the shooting, all illegal, and against the law. So what new laws in your dream world would have stopped this person? What new laws would make them magically realize they shouldn't do it?

You are missing the point and ignoring what I've posted multiple times.

 

[xj0hnx]

Because if you didn't have the law then even more crimes would occur. I don't understand why you can't comprehend that the point of gun laws is to make it harder for a criminal to obtain a gun.

So can you not list any of these new laws that are going to stop criminals? Should be pretty easy for you, just list some new laws that are going to stop criminals.

 

[xj0hnx]

You are missing the point and ignoring what I've posted multiple times.

No, I get it, it just doesn't jive with reality.

 

[ivwshane]

No, I get it, it just doesn't jive with reality.

Lol, obviously you don't get it then, as what I wrote is the reality.

 

[dali71]

Not in my state, where guns laws are virtually non existent
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...10-states-guns-kill-more-people-than-cars-do/

Does that study include suicides and lawful use in self-defense?

 

[Agent11]

The source material doesn't contain the word self or suicide, at all. So I would imagine yes.