Florida High School Shooting

[glenn1]

It never ceases to amaze me how people like to scream repeal 2a every time something bad happens but you don't hear them doing the same when there's an auto accident or other life taking tragedy. Others can't seem to understand that the legislative branch is failing to perform their duty to craft laws that address our current problems.

We need a firearms act that closes the loopholes to ownership for people who aren't supposed to purchase or possess a gun. Every aspect of gun ownership needs to be reviewed such as with the mental health perspective, ghost guns, private sales and the gifting of guns to persons who would not otherwise be able to purchase one for themselves.

Your side might want to start by listening to the actual suggestions being made by the other side. For example most of the program folks here have suggested they would be fine with background checks for all provided they were low-cost and easy. The unspoken part of that is “but I won’t if you deliberately or negligently make it prohibitively expensive or difficult for me to comply with.”

For example, currently if a father wanted to gift a firearm to his son and both were police officers, In most states they have to go to a FFL license holder and pay a large fee to make that happen. Mind you this is for two police officers who the state literally requires to carry guns every day.

If you started with the premise “ how can I make this easy and supporting an objective gun owners might agree with also” you would likely have a lot more success. Instead, many firearms laws were written as if you saw gun owners as your ex-girlfriend who you were trying to get even with.

 

[SlowSpyder]

One bought and paid for...

How does it feel to be wrong, and wrong again?? You keep going back to this bubble protector.

 

[glenn1]

I have no intention of making people choose their guns or their life. That choice will be theirs to make if laws are passed. IF they choose to fight the government, that's not my fault, dummy. If the will of the majority is such that the laws are changed, then compliance with that law is a personal choice for those that would rather reject society as a whole to continue to maintain their strong sexual relationship with their guns.

I'm sure people will resist and be outraged. I doubt many would actually fire on law enforcement over the issue. And if they do, they are the same as any other criminal wanting suicide by cop.

So let me turn around the earlier question on you, How many gun owners are you willing to see killed in order to reach your aim? Because it will surely surpass the amount of kids being killed in mass shootings at schools. Or maybe it won’t, since previously peaceful gun owners might lash out now that their lives are being threatened. You can get to enjoy a real life home grown Taliban movement right here in the good old US of A.

 

[rommelrommel]

Your side might want to start by listening to the actual suggestions being made by the other side. For example most of the program folks here have suggested they would be fine with background checks for all provided they were low-cost and easy. The unspoken part of that is “but I won’t if you deliberately or negligently make it prohibitively expensive or difficult for me to comply with.”

For example, currently if a father wanted to gift a firearm to his son and both were police officers, In most states they have to go to a FFL license holder and pay a large fee to make that happen. Mind you this is for two police officers who the state literally requires to carry guns every day.

If you started with the premise “ how can I make this easy and supporting an objective gun owners might agree with also” you would likely have a lot more success. Instead, many firearms laws were written as if you saw gun owners as your ex-girlfriend who you were trying to get even with.

In Washington there are lots of FFL’s doing a private transfer for $25, that’s irritating but not ridiculous.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Your side might want to start by listening to the actual suggestions being made by the other side. For example most of the program folks here have suggested they would be fine with background checks for all provided they were low-cost and easy. The unspoken part of that is “but I won’t if you deliberately or negligently make it prohibitively expensive or difficult for me to comply with.”

For example, currently if a father wanted to gift a firearm to his son and both were police officers, In most states they have to go to a FFL license holder and pay a large fee to make that happen. Mind you this is for two police officers who the state literally requires to carry guns every day.

If you started with the premise “ how can I make this easy and supporting an objective gun owners might agree with also” you would likely have a lot more success. Instead, many firearms laws were written as if you saw gun owners as your ex-girlfriend who you were trying to get even with.

I'm not sure what side you think I'm on but I do not believe that 2A should be touched! You are correct that both sides must listen to one another's concerns before they will be able to reach an agreement on firearms. 2A provides a free pass as written which is why 18 USC Chapter 44 exists providing additional clarity on Congresses intent in regulating them. Technical law tries to cover existing circumstances and often times has to be revised to remain current which often times occurs many times during the year. While I will agree that some laws are written poorly or contain language that can be difficult to follow we still need them to remain civil.

As for gifting, although some states regulate the gifting of guns not all do nor are they consistent about it which is why I feel that it needs to be performed at the federal level. The other issue is with ghost guns which require absolutely nothing other than buying the kit from a seller and then completing them yourself. I've included a link to my states gun laws for reference but you can access any state's gun laws through the interface and you can clearly see unless you are purchasing a gun from a licensed seller, manufacturer or importer there is no background check.

https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-gun-laws/florida/

Law abiding people will continue to obey the law and those who don't won't care about the laws on the books. This is about doing what is humanly possible to curtail violent acts by these people using firearms and a revision of 18 USC Chapter 44 doesn't touch 2a yet accomplishes the needed changes through legislation just as the constitution outlines for the law to work.

You can't leave this up to executive orders as they are not permanent and one year ago we watched Trump disband Obama's attempt to begin addressing firearms access by mentally impaired persons. Congress needs to amend 18 USC Crimes and Criminal Prosecution to properly address this plus I don't believe that they should alter the first 10 amendments in any way.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

How does it feel to be wrong, and wrong again?? You keep going back to this bubble protector.

Cool story Bro

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Clearly the United States has a problem to the degree the rest of the civilized world doesn't. Why do people think this country can't learn from others??

Because history has repeatedly proven that we can't learn from others. If some other country is doing things differently than the USA then they HAVE to be doing it wrong. There are no other possible answers Any country that doesn't have as many mass murders as us is obviously slacking. America, FUCK YEAH!!

Given how this country thinks the first mass murderer to kill 50 kids with an assault rifle attached to a drone will probably be praised as a national hero. We're #1 in mass murders and #1 in silent death from above as a sign of our dominance. Seems about time someone figures out how to combine those two things.

 

[JSt0rm]

fuck guns and the pussies that own them.

 

[jackstar7]

So let me turn around the earlier question on you, How many gun owners are you willing to see killed in order to reach your aim? Because it will surely surpass the amount of kids being killed in mass shootings at schools. Or maybe it won’t, since previously peaceful gun owners might lash out now that their lives are being threatened. You can get to enjoy a real life home grown Taliban movement right here in the good old US of A.

How are their lives being threatened? In fact, why will they die? Stubbornness? Ego?

Weird how the threat is not actually real until the "victim" gun-owner makes it real by escalating.

I'm not here to kink-shame the gun-fetishists really. I just want an honesty from them that's always been lacking. Either it is irrational fear, or the lulz, but both justifications are pretty shallow.

 

[SlowSpyder]

fuck guns and the pussies that own them.

Luv?

 

[jackstar7]

fuck guns and the pussies that own them.

What's funny is many of the same people are scared of the kitty cat hat-wearing ladies.

 

[UberNeuman]

If you try to enact sensible gun laws those gun owners may have to go out and shoot up another school or at a random crowd of people.

 

[JSt0rm]

If you try to enact sensible gun laws those gun owners may have to go out and shoot up another school or at a random crowd of people.

Oh you can bet 2% of them will start killing cops and shit over it. Im sure that the number of mentally ill gun owners hovers around 20%.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Luv?

Cool story bro

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Luv?

Cool story bro

 

[Younigue]

If you try to enact sensible gun laws those gun owners may have to go out and shoot up another school or at a random crowd of people.

Well "sensible" IS the deal-breaker. Shouldn't they change their argument to 'Don't regulate gunfucks smarts! Staying dumb is guntards GAWD/CONSTITUTIONAL given RIGHT!' Shhh! They don't want to hear that the NRA and the government wants them to be as stupid as they are.

ANYONE who owns a rapid fire gun CAN NOT claim to be a RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNER! h Hey, I don't make the rules, common sense does.

 

[Jhhnn]

Your side might want to start by listening to the actual suggestions being made by the other side. For example most of the program folks here have suggested they would be fine with background checks for all provided they were low-cost and easy. The unspoken part of that is “but I won’t if you deliberately or negligently make it prohibitively expensive or difficult for me to comply with.”

For example, currently if a father wanted to gift a firearm to his son and both were police officers, In most states they have to go to a FFL license holder and pay a large fee to make that happen. Mind you this is for two police officers who the state literally requires to carry guns every day.

If you started with the premise “ how can I make this easy and supporting an objective gun owners might agree with also” you would likely have a lot more success. Instead, many firearms laws were written as if you saw gun owners as your ex-girlfriend who you were trying to get even with.

So where are the bills to make it the way you say you want it? Who controls Congress & the Executive branch?

 

[Fenixgoon]

Well "sensible" IS the deal-breaker. Shouldn't they change their argument to 'Don't regulate gunfucks smarts! Staying dumb is guntards GAWD/CONSTITUTIONAL given RIGHT!' Shhh! They don't want to hear that the NRA and the government wants them to be as stupid as they are.

ANYONE who owns a rapid fire gun CAN NOT claim to be a RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNER! h Hey, I don't make the rules, common sense does.

why exactly is that? and what constitutes "rapid fire"?

even bolt-action firearms can be "rapid fired" with enough practice. revolvers can be shot quite quickly as well.

unless you mean semi-auto firearms. which, while i disagree, at least is coherent and clearly defined. "rapid fire" is totally subjective.

 

[glenn1]

So where are the bills to make it the way you say you want it? Who controls Congress & the Executive branch?

I’m not your Congressperson, ask them your first question. The second is rhetorical and I can’t change it anyway, all I can do is vote for someone whose approach would mirror my preference. As a libertarian
I can say there’s extremely little this President or Congress is doing I approve of.

 

[Younigue]

why exactly is that? and what constitutes "rapid fire"?

even bolt-action firearms can be "rapid fired" with enough practice. revolvers can be shot quite quickly as well.

unless you mean semi-auto firearms. which, while i disagree, at least is coherent and clearly defined. "rapid fire" is totally subjective.

Not really. Any gun that can kill 17 children in a very short period of time. Let's ditch 'em!

 

[Puffnstuff]

ANYONE who owns a rapid fire gun CAN NOT claim to be a RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNER! h Hey, I don't make the rules, common sense does.

My dear I must disagree with you on that point for I have owned such weapons and never ever had any intent to harm anyone nor were any of my weapons used to threaten another person or commit a crime. They were properly kept in a locked gun safe that was properly secured to the foundation of my home. My kids are kind and respectful to others and would never consider harming another person.

There are jackasses in this world who think about hurting other people all the time and its this mentality that doesn't need to own anything harmful to another person.

 

[glenn1]

ANYONE who owns a rapid fire gun CAN NOT claim to be a RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNER! h Hey, I don't make the rules, common sense does.

That must make Uncle Sam the worlds most irresponsible person by several orders of magnitude.

 

[jackstar7]

As a libertarian I can say there’s extremely little this President or Congress is doing I approve of.

Ah, libertarianism. The ultimate in privilege.

 

[Jhhnn]

I’m not your Congressperson, ask them your first question. The second is rhetorical and I can’t change it anyway, all I can do is vote for someone whose approach would mirror my preference. As a libertarian
I can say there’s extremely little this President or Congress is doing I approve of.

Yeh, it's funny how the Libertarian Rich beat the cash out of the GOP in the form of a raid on the Treasury.....

 

[glenn1]

Ah, libertarianism. The ultimate in privilege.

Yeah I guess advocating for such “privileges” as not having the government spy on you, or not trying to restrict whether you can get married or buy a Happy Meal is beyond what the big 2 parties can offer.