|
heavyblinker -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/15/2017 8:15:04 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jlf1961
quote:
ORIGINAL: heavyblinker
What I don't get is why the pro-gun crowd keeps saying 'it would work if only all of these millions of people across the country always did their job perfectly every single time and never made mistakes' without recognizing that the issue is that a system where they are expected to do so is exactly the problem.
Hmm, how about when you people figure out that the people who are paid to do their jobs aren't, and the people you elect to do fix little problems that we have constantly pointed out dont, or the fact that 54% of American legally own guns and of that number less than .00001% of them actually break the law using guns.
But hey, forget about the couple of million law abiding gun owners, and fuck them over in the name of public safety.
I have used Timothy McVeigh as an example before, and people keep saying it not valid.
What you and everyone else seems to forget, is that Timothy McVeigh, had the legal right to own guns, and did own guns, including at least one AR framed firearm...
What exactly did he use to kill all those people in Oklahoma City again?
You people are perfectly happy with the idea of punishing all gun owners, for the crimes of a few.
That is perfectly alright.
You blindly blame millions for the acts of a very small minority of gun owners, and balk at the blaming of all Muslims for the acts of a minority of that world population.
Its the same fucking logic.
The local law enforcement people did not do their jobs, but it is the fault of the gun owners.
The existing laws are not enforced.
That is the gun owners fault as well.
If the laws are not being enforced now, by those very people paid to enforce them, how the fuck is that the fault of the gun owners?
Guess what dumbass, all those wonderful anti gun liberals you keep electing to get rid of guns supported and passed a law that made it impossible to sue retailers who, in good faith sold a gun or guns to someone that legally could not buy a gun because the database to prevent such a sale is flawed.
Did they pass a law to make the back ground check system use ALL the databases that would have prevented the sale in the first place?
Fuck NO!
There are three crime databases operated by the US Department of Justice, the one used for gun purchase back ground checks is not mandatory for state or local law enforcement to participate in, but the other two are.
Those other two databases has all the information that would prevent gun sales to those individuals by law from buying a gun in the first place.
That was point one.
Point two:
By federal law, any individual under investigation for any felony crime (crimes punishable by more than a year in jail) is prohibited from possessing or purchasing a firearm until 1) they are cleared of all charges prior to going to trial, or b) are found not guilty in court, which means that the cops are supposed to seize and store any guns the person might own until 1 or 2 happens.
If a restraining order is filed on someone, they have to seize and store said weapons and if the order is not rescinded, dispose of said weapons.
And if you notice, BamaD, the one poster who screams so loudly about registration leading to confiscation, actually pointed that out twice, proving that a gun owner is perfectly okay with guns being confiscated when the laws are broke.
A fact you might want to consider when the truth is that all gun owners actually agree with that law.
The problem is that you actually consider it a personal attack whenever someone suggests that maybe guns should be more difficult to access.
I know how the background check system works... you've explained it over and over, and bitched over and over about people not doing their jobs properly.
I am saying that human errors are not going to go away, and we to recognize that problem and make laws around that.
|
|
|
|
