My favorite part of Obama's Speech
Does this mean he's going to punish Eric Holder?
Pres Obama said:
Does this mean he's going to punish Eric Holder?
Gun Control: A Realistic Look
- Thread starter RBBailey
- Start date
The whole "if there's one life to be saved" nonsense is simply directed to emotional people who could care less about actually thinking logically, i.e. the low information voter.
Let's say that there were a complete ban on gun sales starting today. You could make a strong case that the new gun sale ban would save lives, but at what cost? How many people would die because they didn't have the means to defend themselves?
The big problem is that the average person out there doesn't have the capacity to have an attention span to process three sentences.
Let's say that there were a complete ban on gun sales starting today. You could make a strong case that the new gun sale ban would save lives, but at what cost? How many people would die because they didn't have the means to defend themselves?
The big problem is that the average person out there doesn't have the capacity to have an attention span to process three sentences.
brian4d said:
Yes, you are to understand that I wish for a world with guns. How can I express it any more simply? Guns are good. They allow one to provide meat to eat as well as defending themselves. They are a tool. The same with an axe. I could use it to cut down a tree one day and then use it to defend myself the next. There is nothing evil about a tool. I'm sorry that I don't buy into your utopian fantasy.
It always cracks me up when people make comments like this: "I personally think if gun manufactures put 1/2 the time and effort developing tasers as they did new guns there would be some very nice tasers out there for personal defense." Really, you're smarter than the CEOs of gun manufacturers in regards to steering their businesses?
Well, that wasn't nearly as bad as most of you were expecting now was it? No way an AW ban will pass the House. MAYBE mandatory BG checks, which I'm actually ok with, as long as it's not paired with registration.
I'm a little worried that the mental health statues will amount to denying a lot of vets the 2nd amendment due to a PTSD designation... but the jury is still out on whether or not this worry is founded.
I'm a little worried that the mental health statues will amount to denying a lot of vets the 2nd amendment due to a PTSD designation... but the jury is still out on whether or not this worry is founded.
knewsom said:
I guess you think it's your doctors business to ask about guns in your home, too? Can the doctor not do his/her job without knowing this information?
Do you not see where this is going? The government is passing the buck to doctors all in the name of Obamacare to prevent school shootings......
pinkytoe69 said:
And here's a good editorial about varying results from similar policies. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/335848/gun-control-ignorance-thomas-sowell
The phrase "Guns don't kill people, people kill people," is very cliche; however, there is still merit in the statement thinking of people as individuals or people as a society.
There is no perfect solution. Even if you took away all the guns you would still have crime and murders. So clearly it would not have the perfect result that advocates desire.
Just look at what New York just did to it's citizens with it's new ban.. That's what we can look forward to.. Ten rounds wasn't good enough, they had to drop that to seven and you have a year to get rid of any mag that holds more than that to some one out of state. So you can't even keep what you already have.
mgreenspan said:
Culture is probably the most important factor.
Im guessing daily life in chi-town does not revolve around sunny skies, relaxation, marijuana, and the beach.
ptschram
Well-known member
How long will it be until someone finds a way to mis-use the background check process?
Will we see prohibited persons arrested, prosecuted and incarcerated for trying to obtain a firearm? Until this happens, just how effective can any of this be?
I can see it now, a LEO in every gun shop in the event a prohibited person tries to obtain a firearm.
Yep, this will stop violence right now!
Will we see prohibited persons arrested, prosecuted and incarcerated for trying to obtain a firearm? Until this happens, just how effective can any of this be?
I can see it now, a LEO in every gun shop in the event a prohibited person tries to obtain a firearm.
Yep, this will stop violence right now!
ptschram said:
what it will do for sure is unleash the facist ATF thugs on legal business owners....
ptschram
Well-known member
Jake said:
There is a reason they are referred to as BATFags.
If we have a law that says it is unlawful for a prohibited person to even try to obtain a firearm, why do we not arrest them when they try, but merely allow them to waltz out of the building?
A private party cannot determine the stolen status of a firearm without being in the presence of a LEO with the firearm so that it can be confiscated if found to be stolen. I don't see how these new "laws" will benefit this either.
Bread and circuses, bread and circuses. I coulda had toast!
A new, non-gun related crisis needs to surface to divert the progressives' attention away from this one.
Here's a link to a pdf of a novel about gun control: http://www.zjstech.net/~ddixson/Unintended_Consequences.pdf
I haven't read it so I can't make a comment about it.
I haven't read it so I can't make a comment about it.
D Chapman said:
I don't think it's any business of a doctor. ...but they've been asking for YEARS. The ACA had a little clause that Republicans had added at some point saying that Doctors are no longer permitted to do this. The EO in question seeks to clarify the position (under the presumption that it had been taken out), and if it had not been, repeal that bit of policy with new legislation.
...and if an AWB does pass, it's basically going to be meaningless, as you can omit the pistol grip, flash hider, bayonet mount, etc. and have a rifle that functions exactly the same as before. How do you think us CA boys have ARs?
Remember fellas, this is the opening bid.
Mike_Rupp said:
You missed my point entirely because I posed a question that should have been in a new thread. I agree with guns, I agree that they have helped mankind dramatically in the long run. Would you have thought in the 1960's you could turn the lights of your house on with a phone that's carried in your pocket by 2010? Think big or go home, that's what America was built on. Like I said, guns are old technology. My utopian fantasy? Not quite, but good try lumping be into a category I don't belong. I could say you think small, but I'll hold off, for now.
http://www.gizmag.com/metal-storm-maul-taser-ammunition/19284/