RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


thishereboi -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 5:59:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leadership525

All those who would deny a person the right of self defense with a firearm because of a misdemeanor , would you also castrate a pedophile for committing a felony with a child?


An old english teacher of mine once said "if a man doesn't know how to use his tools he should have them taken away"

I wouldn't have a problem with that.




Owner59 -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 7:33:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

in spite of Kirata`s...

And you guys(Kirata)...

The only concern I've ever raised with regard to background checks was addressed to how they'll be implemented. I've never expressed any opposition to background checks in principle. I do think the 10-round magazine limit is overkill. A lot of perfectly ordinary self-defense handguns hold more than 10 rounds. If you're going to ban high-capacity magazines, then at least set the limit at 20 rounds. On the other hand, I see that one of the bills headed for the Colorado House raises the training requirements for a concealed-weapons permit, and I'd be willing to bet that it doesn't raise them as much as I'd like to see.

So please find someone else to make shit up about.

K.






Umm, no...




Owner59 -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 7:44:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

It`s backround checks IN EVERY STATE on EVERY SALE,private,family or otherwise...

that might stop some but not everyone.. that one nutbar that killed the first responders to the house fire he set got his guns cuz he sucked some dumb chick into buying them for him (cuz he know as an ex-con he would be turned down)..

and then there is this..

Trusts Offer a Legal Loophole for Buying Restricted Guns [8|]
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/us/in-gun-trusts-a-legal-loophole-for-restricted-firearms.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0



True...

There isn`t one thing that will solve every problem.

But saying that we "already have gun laws on the books"(a common NRA ploy) is like holding up a sieve and saying "look at all the places where there aren`t any holes.

The main reason illegal weapons get into states with tough gun laws is that they are brought in from states with looser/no gun laws.



The system must be federalized and we can`t let the gun-nuttery stop that from happening.This country belongs to everyone...not just gun owners.




slvemike4u -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 7:48:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: TricklessMagic

Before the SAFE Act this was illegal to do anyways. You can't knowingly sell a firearm to a felon. The second someone says misdemeanor, felony, or domestic violence you need to assume they aren't allowed to have the firearm and you need to cancel the sale, simple as that. This idiot was caught, great, these types need to be arrested anyways. Knowingly selling to criminals is wrong now this guy is going to prison. Next?

You can legally buy a gun in most states if you have a non domestic violence misdemeaner.
Other than that it has been ilegal to sell a gun to a felon for as long as I can remeber and that's a long time.

And yet felons are in fact in possession of guns.
Where do you suppose they get them from ?




slvemike4u -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 7:51:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TricklessMagic

Well Colorado has a right to manage Colorado, just as the folks of Colorado have a right to attempt to challenges the validity of any laws in court. Funny enough Colorado again completely managed to pass over the cause of the mass shootings. Adam Lanza stole his mother's gun, and Holmes was a nut, and both were prescribed anti-depressants. So that whole universal background check thing should come in really handy. I mean it wouldn't have stopped Adam Lanza or Homes, but you know good luck with that. I mean tough restrictions have stopped illegal guns from making their way into NYC, D.C., Chicago, California, Russia, Mexico, Norway, England, France, Japan, etc. etc..

Though challenging Universal Background checks seems virtually impossible. Granted what guns I don't want to build for myself I have little problem purchasing through legitmate FFL vendors.

Oh and yes I'm up for castrating pedophiles who have improperly touched children. You get busted with kiddie porn you go to prison and wear the badge of shame of being on the sex offender registry (it is not victimless because some kid had to be harmed to make the porn), they touch a kid, there's too strong a chance of them doing it again. But I also want pedophiles in gen. pop as opposed to isolation and protective custody, let the animals have at them and be of some service or value to society.

Mind you I don't have a problem with universal background checks so much as I have a problem with a registry, can you remember the Weimar Republic of Germany and the horror that followed. So you can put me down for Universal Background checks.

Oh and I'm pro-choice (and pro-abortion), pro gay marriage and pro gay adoption, but again too often those who support these things also go against my gun rights so I can't vote for those politicians unfortunately, get your hands off my guns and I'll vote for legalized weed, gay marriage, gay adoption, and immigration reform (let folks buy their way into citizenship so long as they don't commit crimes for a period of eight years and maintain employment six out of eight years, set the citizenship fee at $50,000 to include all biological minor children of the applicant and one spouse, and put them on a ten year payment plan, if they can pay it off in less than years they still have to have a good record for eight years).

Once again perfection is enemy to what could be helpful.
Rape laws do not stop all rapes......so let's do away with them




slvemike4u -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 7:54:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

House moms and soccer dads aren`t weak and they vote.


They count too and don`t live in fear of paranoid mythical fantasies but rather of real threats...kooks with guns.



Yup. The "weak" ones are the paranoid nuts who need guns to make them feel complete.


Quoted for truth........




tj444 -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 8:06:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59
The system must be federalized and we can`t let the gun-nuttery stop that from happening.This country belongs to everyone...not just gun owners.


good luck with making that happen and turning the tide & then keeping it turned.. I see how things go here, abortion clinics are being shut down in various states, access to birth control is even being fought, gay marriage.. etc etc.. progress that has been made seems to face unrelenting opposition that wants to chip away at that progress, twist laws around and drag everyone back to the dark ages.. Its really very strange that things I took for granted in my home country, issues that were settled decades ago are so hard fought here..




Owner59 -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 8:47:23 AM)

I agree.....it ain`t over till it`s over.Most everything,is in flux,whether we see it or not.


However.....when I was young....midwest states were red and that was it.


Who knew then that one day,someone like President Obama would win some of them?


I don`t see things so grimly.Progressivism and liberalism are becoming the norm and are growing.


The few push backs,like against abortion/privacy rights, gun rules,voting rights,etc..... are pretty desperate,if one listens to the verbiage.


Gay rights,legalized pot,the ACA....it`s passing and subsequent reaffirmation are signs of progress.


And unfortunately,it will take the extreme attempts to out-law abortions to motivate folks enough to reject the extremists pushing them.






lovmuffin -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 9:36:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

And yet felons are in fact in possession of guns.
Where do you suppose they get them from ?




From the gun fairy of course. [8D]




tazzygirl -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 9:42:24 AM)

Denial




Owner59 -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 9:52:30 AM)

They`re get them from DBs like the one mentioned in the OP.

This isn`t rocket science....We know what to do but aren`t doing it.

But if it was science.....would we ignore what we needed to do,to look at and to examine to solve the scientific problem because some political hack,NRA nut said we should?!

This is just dumb.....and folks are getting tired of the run around.


They`re NOT going to stand for it much longer.




slvemike4u -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 9:57:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Denial

What does a river in Egypt have to do with all of this ?




lovmuffin -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 10:05:55 AM)

FR

It seems some of you pro gun folks don't have a problem with a misdemeanor disability for legal gun possession. I don't think a person should be disbarred from the possession of arms unless they have a felony record. Adding this domestic violence crap to the list of disqualifications was part of the Clinton legislation I believe and just after it passed there was an issue with literally thousands of cops then having a gun disability. I heard about it for a short time but then nothing about it after that. I've wondered ever since how that one was solved.


Many times felonies are plea bargained down to misdemeanors. It's just another problem with the criminal justice system and many times a person with a violent domestic was railroaded or set up. It could have been a situation of just a loud argument and one spouse calling the cops on the other in a fit of rage. Unless the domestic involves assault and battery and rises to the level of felony it shouldn't be a gun disability nor should a felony assault be plea bargained down.





Owner59 -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 10:24:45 AM)

I`m pro gun and I don`t have a problem with misdemeanor disability.


If someone is adjudicated to the point where they`re found guilty of or was pleaded down to a misdemeanor(s).....they shouldn`t be allowed to have firearms.


And I don`t think DV laws that pro-actively protect domestic partners, should be changed because they are abused by some people....




hlen5 -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 10:40:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TricklessMagic

.................or willing choose to live in a bad neighborhood,........


Who willingly chooses to live in a bad neighborhood?




lovmuffin -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 11:10:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

I`m pro gun and.........

and I'm the Easter Bunny


If someone is adjudicated to the point where they`re found guilty of or was pleaded down to a misdemeanor(s).....they shouldn`t be allowed to have firearms.

They shouldn't get pleaded down in the first place


And I don`t think DV laws that pro-actively protect domestic partners, should be changed because they are abused by some people....






I'm not suggesting the laws get changed but that misdemeanors don't rise to the level of a felony for gun disability and too often felonies are plea bargained away when they shouldn't be.




tazzygirl -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 11:36:05 AM)

And some states have started restoring gun rights to convicted felons.




lovmuffin -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 12:44:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

And some states have started restoring gun rights to convicted felons.



On its face I'm apposed to that but given time, law abiding behavior and depending on the felony I don't have a problem with that. I wouldn't restore gun right to a bank robber or a habitual batterer and many others.




BamaD -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 6:23:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: TricklessMagic

Before the SAFE Act this was illegal to do anyways. You can't knowingly sell a firearm to a felon. The second someone says misdemeanor, felony, or domestic violence you need to assume they aren't allowed to have the firearm and you need to cancel the sale, simple as that. This idiot was caught, great, these types need to be arrested anyways. Knowingly selling to criminals is wrong now this guy is going to prison. Next?

You can legally buy a gun in most states if you have a non domestic violence misdemeaner.
Other than that it has been ilegal to sell a gun to a felon for as long as I can remeber and that's a long time.

And yet felons are in fact in possession of guns.
Where do you suppose they get them from ?

Obviously they got them illegally imageine that criminals ignoring gun laws who would have thought.




BamaD -> RE: Post Sandy Hook Gun Rules Nab 1st Douche-bag... (3/16/2013 6:26:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

I`m pro gun and I don`t have a problem with misdemeanor disability.


If someone is adjudicated to the point where they`re found guilty of or was pleaded down to a misdemeanor(s).....they shouldn`t be allowed to have firearms.


And I don`t think DV laws that pro-actively protect domestic partners, should be changed because they are abused by some people....


Saying you are pro gun is like say MLK was pro slavery




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875