2nd Amendment friendly gun laws

[HomerJS]

History repeating itself. IIRC, Hitler, Stalin,....the British.

http://www.davekopel.org/2A/LawRev/american-revolution-against-british-gun-control.html

Bravo! Pull out the Nazi card.

 

[CycloWizard]

And when was the last time an untrained person was able to commit mass murder with a knife?

December 14, 2012 from the looks of it. Or don't you count that since the elementary students were merely maimed and/or Chinese? If not, perhaps you'll admit a mass killing of Japanese students with a kitchen knife? Oh, that doesn't count since he was trained - as a janitor. Or another in China? How about a mass stabbing stopped by someone carrying a gun? How many does it take before it qualifies as a "mass" attack? Two? Three?

 

[HomerJS]

December 14, 2012 from the looks of it.

You left one important fact...

They are all alive!!

As for the janitor you had to go all the way back to 2001 to make your point. Looks like you defeated your own argument.

If we can cut these mass murders down to one every 12 years instead of 12 every year, its a win.

 

[Genx87]

Why not hold the owner liable for any crimes commited with their gun.

If the mother had not been killed she should have been jailed for life. She knew her son was unstable yet kept guns in the house.

Why are people so willing to punish somebody for somebody else's actions? This reminds me of the idiotic 1st degree murder charges that are brought against anybody who committed a crime and somebody died. Look great for overzealous DA's looking to make a political career. Horseshit for everybody else.

 

[schneiderguy]

We must tread carefully. Surrendering to emotion after a tragedy is how we ended up with The Patriot Act and two useless wars. I'm not saying we have to accept these events as "the new normal" but in a world where humans have free will we must realize that tragedies are inevitable.

For example, after 9/11, we knew we couldn't eliminate planes but we "had to do something" and the result was a loss of freedom. For what? A determined group could still accomplish the same thing no matter how many restrictions we place on our freedom.

The reality is, if we ignore emotion for a moment, we don't have to do something other than make peace with the fact that humans are capable of unimaginable evil and no amount of legislation can possibly stop it from ever happening.

One common idea I've heard in the last few days is that "we can't allow the rights of a few to trump the needs of the many." That is utter horseshit. The Second Ammendment is everyone's right, regardless of whether or not we choose to exercise it.

Well said.

 

[Fayd]

Bravo! Pull out the Nazi card.

read the link you halfwit.

 

[jpeyton]

If you support gun owners rights, I would take a lesson from the NRA and keep quiet right now.

1) No actual legislation has been proposed at the state or federal level. Arguing over fairy tale legislation from anti-gun activists who can't even begin to describe the logistics of regulating 300 million firearms, countless magazines and rounds of ammunition, is a pointless exercise.

2) The anti-gun activists are on an emotional roller coaster right now. Facts need not apply to them. The Newtown incident happened only 3 days ago. Wait a few weeks, until the bandwagon ride ends and the media coverage subsides. The anti-gun rhetoric will tone down quite a bit.

3) Obama's only near-term shot at regulating firearms is through an executive order, which you have no influence over anyway. A 33-seat GOP firewall already exists in the House.

 

[CycloWizard]

You left one important fact...

They are all alive!!

As for the janitor you had to go all the way back to 2001 to make your point. Looks like you defeated your own argument.

If we can cut these mass murders down to one every 12 years instead of 12 every year, its a win.

Ah, so we don't need to worry about knives since they only kill people some times and we're ok with people getting maimed - understood. What about all of the other recent links I posted where the people died? I suppose you'll just neglect those facts since they don't coincide with your opinion.

 

[HomerJS]

Why are people so willing to punish somebody for somebody else's actions? This reminds me of the idiotic 1st degree murder charges that are brought against anybody who committed a crime and somebody died. Look great for overzealous DA's looking to make a political career. Horseshit for everybody else.

You can't have gun ownership without responsibility.

 

[highland145]

Bravo! Pull out the Nazi card.

Well, I couldn't figure out how to pull the race card. Maybe you could help?

The Brits were Nazi's....who knew?

Guess I should have pulled the communist card. Or maybe the socialist card. Or the "let me give Homer a reason to post" card.

I was responding to Jaepheth's post about registration which lead to confiscation. Confiscation was the reason for the 2nd in the 1st place.

That's it. It's the Brit's fault. Let's ban 'em.

 

[CycloWizard]

If you support gun owners rights, I would take a lesson from the NRA and keep quiet right now.

1) No actual legislation has been proposed at the state or federal level. Arguing over fairy tale legislation from anti-gun activists who can't even begin to describe the logistics of regulating 300 million firearms, countless magazines and rounds of ammunition, is a pointless exercise.

2) The anti-gun activists are on an emotional roller coaster right now. Facts need not apply to them. The Newtown incident happened only 3 days ago. Wait a few weeks, until the bandwagon ride ends and the media coverage subsides. The anti-gun rhetoric will tone down quite a bit.

3) Obama's only near-term shot at regulating firearms is through an executive order, which you have no influence over anyway. A 33-seat GOP firewall already exists in the House.

Really, your best argument is to tell those you disagree with to shut up until you can put a plan on paper? Typical.

 

[HomerJS]

Ah, so we don't need to worry about knives since they only kill people some times and we're ok with people getting maimed - understood. What about all of the other recent links I posted where the people died? I suppose you'll just neglect those facts since they don't coincide with your opinion.

Bit of a strawman but you already knew that. I can't think of any law that removes 100% of a threat. Goal here is mitigation. w/o infringing on 2nd amendment rights.

So is your position, do nothing? I want you to speak up.

 

[zsdersw]

So is your position, do nothing? I want you to speak up.

When the choices are, as you're laying out, between doing nothing and doing something stupid, yes.. I choose nothing.

 

[HomerJS]

When the choices are, as you're laying out, between doing nothing and doing something stupid, yes.. I choose nothing.

Stupid? Opinion. That is the first answer amongst "unabashed" 2nd amendment supporters. Most had just lashed out with unsupported generalities (commie, nazi, lefty, socialist)

I'll ask another question. Would you advocate eliminating bans on all weapons? If not, why not?

 

[zsdersw]

Stupid? Opinion. That is the first answer amongst "unabashed" 2nd amendment supporters. Most had just lashed out with unsupported generalities (commie, nazi, lefty, socialist)

It's not opinion at all. We don't need more gun control laws than we already have.

I'll ask another question. Would you advocate eliminating bans on all weapons? If not, why not?

No. I don't think nuclear weapons, armed tanks, armed military aircraft, missiles, and naval weaponry is in the domain of citizen ownership.

 

[DCal430]

I would add the following:

1. Gun owners must undergo mental health evaluations every 6 months.

2. A random 10-20% of gun onwers will find themself and their property subject to random police searches. Basically the police will enter your home without any prior notice and search around your property for any criminal activity.

3. Current gun owners must hand in current guns for new ones that are tagged and tracked. Those who fail will face steep penalities, ie very long jail time.

4. All bullets shall be registered, anyone who uses an unregistered bullet will face steep panalties.

5. Actually I would also add gun owners themself should have tracking devices implanted into them. They cannot be trusted were they go.

 

[Genx87]

You can't have gun ownership without responsibility.

Putting somebody in jail for life because somebody took their weapon and killed somebody with it is absurd. There is a disconnect in that logic. The person doing time in jail didn't commit the crime.

 

[zsdersw]

You can't have gun ownership without responsibility.

... says someone who thinks government knows best.

 

[shortylickens]

Thats all well and good but why do you folks oppose Voter ID's so much?

 

[HomerJS]

It's not opinion at all. We don't need more gun control laws than we already have.



No. I don't think nuclear weapons, armed tanks, armed military aircraft, missiles, and naval weaponry is in the domain of citizen ownership.

So you are in favor of some/reasonable regulation of weapons. We just now have to define resonable.

Also remember even "reasonable laws" sometines require revision.

 

[HomerJS]

... says someone who thinks government knows best.

Come on dude, stick to the point. Going off on a Fox News rant loses you credibility.

 

[xj0hnx]

We must tread carefully. Surrendering to emotion after a tragedy is how we ended up with The Patriot Act and two useless wars. I'm not saying we have to accept these events as "the new normal" but in a world where humans have free will we must realize that tragedies are inevitable.

For example, after 9/11, we knew we couldn't eliminate planes but we "had to do something" and the result was a loss of freedom. For what? A determined group could still accomplish the same thing no matter how many restrictions we place on our freedom.

The reality is, if we ignore emotion for a moment, we don't have to do something other than make peace with the fact that humans are capable of unimaginable evil and no amount of legislation can possibly stop it from ever happening.

One common idea I've heard in the last few days is that "we can't allow the rights of a few to trump the needs of the many." That is utter horseshit. The Second Ammendment is everyone's right, regardless of whether or not we choose to exercise it.

Just going to say, I would have never imagined seeing this post from you. :thumbsup:

 

[zsdersw]

Come on dude, stick to the point. Going off on a Fox News rant loses you credibility.

Making a bureaucratic statement like "you can't have gun ownership without responsibility" makes you lose credibility.

 

[jpeyton]

Really, your best argument is to tell those you disagree with to shut up until you can put a plan on paper? Typical.

I'm not telling you guys to shut up. Talk all you want. It will be no different than the anti-gun circle-jerks on CNN, NBC, etc.

I'm simply saying there is no reason it would be advantageous to have a discussion at this time, 3 days after the incident. I'll wait until you blow your wads and see what still remains a month from now.

 

[xj0hnx]

I would add the following:

1. Gun owners must undergo mental health evaluations every 6 months.

2. A random 10-20% of gun onwers will find themself and their property subject to random police searches. Basically the police will enter your home without any prior notice and search around your property for any criminal activity.

3. Current gun owners must hand in current guns for new ones that are tagged and tracked. Those who fail will face steep penalities, ie very long jail time.

4. All bullets shall be registered, anyone who uses an unregistered bullet will face steep panalties.

5. Actually I would also add gun owners themself should have tracking devices implanted into them. They cannot be trusted were they go.

Heil DCal430 and zee Fourth Reich