Gun Control

[huskerfan2000]

THE LARGEST MASS SHOOTING IN US HISTORY HAPPENED December 29,1890. When 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota were murdered by federal agents & members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY AND PROTECTION. The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children.

Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

The Second Amendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States.

Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.

gun control and what it can lead too

What you've just done here is taken a conversation about how to better regulate the dispersement of guns and turned it into 'here come the Liberals trying to take all our guns."

You can pretty it up all you want.. Gun control is contrary to the second amendment!

So you wouldn't be willing to wait a few days to receive a purchased firearm/require training or evaluation if it meant the number of mass shooting casualities would decrease?It's not an amenedmant issue, it's an issue that as a society we are broken and there are crazy POS out there that want to harm people. As a gun owner I think it's pretty clear we can make some sacrifices if it changes things for the better.

The problem is more laws won't do anything. Why is this so hard to understand. it is already illegal to kill, but it still happens

No, you don't want to get it.
I own 4 guns:

-.22 rifle I bought at 19yrs old. No training, no permit, no nothing. Walked into a Wal Mart and bought it.

-A Glock 17 Gen 4. Went to sheriffs office, bought $10 permit. Got it in mail a couple days later. Went to Scheels and bought it, went home with it

-A Walther P22 for my wife. Had gift cards to Cabelas. Went, waited several hours because Xmas time, bought it and went home with it.

-A Mosin Nagant Russian sniper rifle. Went to a local auction and bought it.

Now you tell me, if I can do that, couldn't some loser who snapped and decides they want to conduct a mass shooting do the same if their background is clean?

That's the problem. It's not the terrorists or gang related gun violence that stricter laws would be aimed at. It's the nutjobs who go unnoticed until they snap. It's those people that shoot up schools then the next day the neighbor says "He was such a nice guy, can't believe he did this". Those are the people that could poetentially be prevented, not fully but a little. Isn't that worth it? Aren't a few hundred lives a year worth a little extra screening?

No, I'm sorry to say, you don't get it..

What law would strop that very same person from getting a gun? Remember they just snapped, allowing them to get guns in the first place. Waiting 2, or 3 or 4 days? how would that have stopped this guy? it wouldn't have!

The problem is not the gun, it is the person. The lack of morality, the lack of respect for human life.

Please, tell me what law would have stopped this guy?

 

[Redux]

THE LARGEST MASS SHOOTING IN US HISTORY HAPPENED December 29,1890. When 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota were murdered by federal agents & members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY AND PROTECTION. The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children.

Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

The Second Amendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States.

Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.

gun control and what it can lead too

What you've just done here is taken a conversation about how to better regulate the dispersement of guns and turned it into 'here come the Liberals trying to take all our guns."

You can pretty it up all you want.. Gun control is contrary to the second amendment!

So you wouldn't be willing to wait a few days to receive a purchased firearm/require training or evaluation if it meant the number of mass shooting casualities would decrease?It's not an amenedmant issue, it's an issue that as a society we are broken and there are crazy POS out there that want to harm people. As a gun owner I think it's pretty clear we can make some sacrifices if it changes things for the better.

The problem is more laws won't do anything. Why is this so hard to understand. it is already illegal to kill, but it still happens

No, you don't want to get it.I own 4 guns:

-.22 rifle I bought at 19yrs old. No training, no permit, no nothing. Walked into a Wal Mart and bought it.

-A Glock 17 Gen 4. Went to sheriffs office, bought $10 permit. Got it in mail a couple days later. Went to Scheels and bought it, went home with it

-A Walther P22 for my wife. Had gift cards to Cabelas. Went, waited several hours because Xmas time, bought it and went home with it.

-A Mosin Nagant Russian sniper rifle. Went to a local auction and bought it.

Now you tell me, if I can do that, couldn't some loser who snapped and decides they want to conduct a mass shooting do the same if their background is clean?

That's the problem. It's not the terrorists or gang related gun violence that stricter laws would be aimed at. It's the nutjobs who go unnoticed until they snap. It's those people that shoot up schools then the next day the neighbor says "He was such a nice guy, can't believe he did this". Those are the people that could poetentially be prevented, not fully but a little. Isn't that worth it? Aren't a few hundred lives a year worth a little extra screening?

No, I'm sorry to say, you don't get it..

What law would strop that very same person from getting a gun? Remember they just snapped, allowing them to get guns in the first place. Waiting 2, or 3 or 4 days? how would that have stopped this guy? it wouldn't have!

The problem is not the gun, it is the person. The lack of morality, the lack of respect for human life.

Please, tell me what law would have stopped this guy?

Way to ignore most of the post. I'll suggest again, read the whole thread.

 

[huskerfan2000]

THE LARGEST MASS SHOOTING IN US HISTORY HAPPENED December 29,1890. When 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota were murdered by federal agents & members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY AND PROTECTION. The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children.

Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

The Second Amendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States.

Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.

gun control and what it can lead too

What you've just done here is taken a conversation about how to better regulate the dispersement of guns and turned it into 'here come the Liberals trying to take all our guns."

You can pretty it up all you want.. Gun control is contrary to the second amendment!

So you wouldn't be willing to wait a few days to receive a purchased firearm/require training or evaluation if it meant the number of mass shooting casualities would decrease?It's not an amenedmant issue, it's an issue that as a society we are broken and there are crazy POS out there that want to harm people. As a gun owner I think it's pretty clear we can make some sacrifices if it changes things for the better.

The problem is more laws won't do anything. Why is this so hard to understand. it is already illegal to kill, but it still happens

No, you don't want to get it.I own 4 guns:

-.22 rifle I bought at 19yrs old. No training, no permit, no nothing. Walked into a Wal Mart and bought it.

-A Glock 17 Gen 4. Went to sheriffs office, bought $10 permit. Got it in mail a couple days later. Went to Scheels and bought it, went home with it

-A Walther P22 for my wife. Had gift cards to Cabelas. Went, waited several hours because Xmas time, bought it and went home with it.

-A Mosin Nagant Russian sniper rifle. Went to a local auction and bought it.

Now you tell me, if I can do that, couldn't some loser who snapped and decides they want to conduct a mass shooting do the same if their background is clean?

That's the problem. It's not the terrorists or gang related gun violence that stricter laws would be aimed at. It's the nutjobs who go unnoticed until they snap. It's those people that shoot up schools then the next day the neighbor says "He was such a nice guy, can't believe he did this". Those are the people that could poetentially be prevented, not fully but a little. Isn't that worth it? Aren't a few hundred lives a year worth a little extra screening?

No, I'm sorry to say, you don't get it..

What law would strop that very same person from getting a gun? Remember they just snapped, allowing them to get guns in the first place. Waiting 2, or 3 or 4 days? how would that have stopped this guy? it wouldn't have!

The problem is not the gun, it is the person. The lack of morality, the lack of respect for human life.

Please, tell me what law would have stopped this guy?

Way to ignore most of the post. I'll suggest again, read the whole thread.

I don't need to read the whole thread, just the last post of yours.. What law would have stopped this guy?

I see you have 4 guns good for you.. how the heck are you supposed to know if someone snaps years or even months down the rode? You can't!

I get the guy would have been able to get guns.. ok.. if others would have had a gun many fewer people would have died. Possibly even none would have.

 

[huskerfan2000]

There isn't any law, short of disarming everyone in the entire world, that can stop a person from getting a gun. Drugs are illegal but those are still around..

 

[Redux]

THE LARGEST MASS SHOOTING IN US HISTORY HAPPENED December 29,1890. When 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota were murdered by federal agents & members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY AND PROTECTION. The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children.

Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

The Second Amendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States.

Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.

gun control and what it can lead too

What you've just done here is taken a conversation about how to better regulate the dispersement of guns and turned it into 'here come the Liberals trying to take all our guns."

You can pretty it up all you want.. Gun control is contrary to the second amendment!

So you wouldn't be willing to wait a few days to receive a purchased firearm/require training or evaluation if it meant the number of mass shooting casualities would decrease?It's not an amenedmant issue, it's an issue that as a society we are broken and there are crazy POS out there that want to harm people. As a gun owner I think it's pretty clear we can make some sacrifices if it changes things for the better.

The problem is more laws won't do anything. Why is this so hard to understand. it is already illegal to kill, but it still happens

No, you don't want to get it.I own 4 guns:

-.22 rifle I bought at 19yrs old. No training, no permit, no nothing. Walked into a Wal Mart and bought it.

-A Glock 17 Gen 4. Went to sheriffs office, bought $10 permit. Got it in mail a couple days later. Went to Scheels and bought it, went home with it

-A Walther P22 for my wife. Had gift cards to Cabelas. Went, waited several hours because Xmas time, bought it and went home with it.

-A Mosin Nagant Russian sniper rifle. Went to a local auction and bought it.

Now you tell me, if I can do that, couldn't some loser who snapped and decides they want to conduct a mass shooting do the same if their background is clean?

That's the problem. It's not the terrorists or gang related gun violence that stricter laws would be aimed at. It's the nutjobs who go unnoticed until they snap. It's those people that shoot up schools then the next day the neighbor says "He was such a nice guy, can't believe he did this". Those are the people that could poetentially be prevented, not fully but a little. Isn't that worth it? Aren't a few hundred lives a year worth a little extra screening?

No, I'm sorry to say, you don't get it..

What law would strop that very same person from getting a gun? Remember they just snapped, allowing them to get guns in the first place. Waiting 2, or 3 or 4 days? how would that have stopped this guy? it wouldn't have!

The problem is not the gun, it is the person. The lack of morality, the lack of respect for human life.

Please, tell me what law would have stopped this guy?

Way to ignore most of the post. I'll suggest again, read the whole thread.

I don't need to read the whole thread, just the last post of yours.. What law would have stopped this guy?

I see you have 4 guns good for you.. how the heck are you supposed to know if someone snaps years or even months down the rode? You can't!

I get the guy would have been able to get guns.. ok.. if others would have had a gun many fewer people would have died.

Yes, you do need to read the rest of the thread.

I spent all Monday and part of yesterday defending the the fact that simple law adjustments and waiting periods aren't the answer or quick fix many think they could be.

So I'll ask again, is a little extra screening or some new regulating etc. really too much to ask to TRY and prevent some casualties? Simple yes or no will suffice.

 

[Enhance]

There isn't any law, short of disarming everyone in the entire world, that can stop a person from getting a gun. Drugs are illegal but those are still around..

I don't understand your obstinance. Using your rhetoric and argument's foundation, you could argue all laws are pointless because people are going to break them. That's a fundamentally flawed perspective.

A lot of things in this country have been studied and adjusted. 50-60 years ago seat belts weren't in many cars, but researchers studied their benefits and now the vast majority of people use them, saving thousands if not millions of lives. Why can't we take a similar analytical approach to guns?

Your conscience appears to be completely accepting of the 23,000 people that have been shot and almost 6,000 that have died this year due to gun violence. This is astronomically worse than any other country in the world. Those deaths can be attributed to a number of things, but illegal weapon sales and poor gun owner responsibility play a key role.

There are a lot of things we could do to address the problem outside of confiscating weapons.

 

[huskerfan2000]

THE LARGEST MASS SHOOTING IN US HISTORY HAPPENED December 29,1890. When 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota were murdered by federal agents & members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY AND PROTECTION. The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children.

Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

The Second Amendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States.

Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.

gun control and what it can lead too

What you've just done here is taken a conversation about how to better regulate the dispersement of guns and turned it into 'here come the Liberals trying to take all our guns."

You can pretty it up all you want.. Gun control is contrary to the second amendment!

So you wouldn't be willing to wait a few days to receive a purchased firearm/require training or evaluation if it meant the number of mass shooting casualities would decrease?It's not an amenedmant issue, it's an issue that as a society we are broken and there are crazy POS out there that want to harm people. As a gun owner I think it's pretty clear we can make some sacrifices if it changes things for the better.

The problem is more laws won't do anything. Why is this so hard to understand. it is already illegal to kill, but it still happens

No, you don't want to get it.I own 4 guns:

-.22 rifle I bought at 19yrs old. No training, no permit, no nothing. Walked into a Wal Mart and bought it.

-A Glock 17 Gen 4. Went to sheriffs office, bought $10 permit. Got it in mail a couple days later. Went to Scheels and bought it, went home with it

-A Walther P22 for my wife. Had gift cards to Cabelas. Went, waited several hours because Xmas time, bought it and went home with it.

-A Mosin Nagant Russian sniper rifle. Went to a local auction and bought it.

Now you tell me, if I can do that, couldn't some loser who snapped and decides they want to conduct a mass shooting do the same if their background is clean?

That's the problem. It's not the terrorists or gang related gun violence that stricter laws would be aimed at. It's the nutjobs who go unnoticed until they snap. It's those people that shoot up schools then the next day the neighbor says "He was such a nice guy, can't believe he did this". Those are the people that could poetentially be prevented, not fully but a little. Isn't that worth it? Aren't a few hundred lives a year worth a little extra screening?

No, I'm sorry to say, you don't get it..

What law would strop that very same person from getting a gun? Remember they just snapped, allowing them to get guns in the first place. Waiting 2, or 3 or 4 days? how would that have stopped this guy? it wouldn't have!

The problem is not the gun, it is the person. The lack of morality, the lack of respect for human life.

Please, tell me what law would have stopped this guy?

Way to ignore most of the post. I'll suggest again, read the whole thread.

I don't need to read the whole thread, just the last post of yours.. What law would have stopped this guy?

I see you have 4 guns good for you.. how the heck are you supposed to know if someone snaps years or even months down the rode? You can't!

I get the guy would have been able to get guns.. ok.. if others would have had a gun many fewer people would have died.

Yes, you do need to read the rest of the thread.

I spent all Monday and part of yesterday defending the the fact that simple law adjustments and waiting periods aren't the answer or quick fix many think they could be.

So I'll ask again, is a little extra screening or some new regulating etc. really too much to ask to TRY and prevent some casualties? Simple yes or no will suffice.

it isn't a simple "yes" or "no" and you know it... Do you have any proof it will make the slightest bit of difference? No, you don't.. so you are willing to allow further infringement not knowing if it will matter?

What you argued before doesn't mean anything. You are NOW talking about gun control..

You don't throw something against the wall and hope it sticks, especially when those laws further infringe on the peoples right to bear arms!

AND you continue to ignore my question.. it is a simple question to answer!

 

[Landlord]

What law would strop that very same person from getting a gun? Remember they just snapped, allowing them to get guns in the first place. Waiting 2, or 3 or 4 days? how would that have stopped this guy? it wouldn't have!

Let's assume for a second a country where there is a single database of gun permits/ownership, where it takes longer than a few hours or a few days to clear the application process, and where you get flagged for such things as past mental illness, misdemeanors, etc.

Now let's assume that Person X has had a mental breakdown and wants to kill himself and others with him. He has a history of seeing a counselor at younger ages, and has been a productive member of society but takes pills for depression.

He immediately needs to buy a gun. He goes to Scheels. Well, they can't sell it to him without a permit. So then he has to go apply for one. In the process of applying, the database shows his non-criminal yet still flagged history so he has to do a psych eval or whatever.

Maybe in that process he is denied the permit and never gets access to a very efficient tool for killing. Or, maybe he still does get the permit. Even then, it's likely taken him at least 2 weeks, in which time he might come out of depressive rage, someone might see a warning sign that he's suffering from some mental ailment, he might kill himself by some other means (psychotic people aren't necessarily known for their patience), etc.

Simple, non-oppressive restrictions and safeguards make for an environment where there are better chances for this story to turn a different direction. They don't stop it outright, but they give him and the people he wants to target more of a fighting chance.

Now you tell me, what are the cons of laws like this? They obviously don't protect everyone from everything, but you can't say that they wouldn't stop at least ONE person in our country from killing a bunch of others. You can't say that at least ONE of the 23 toddlers that have gotten their hands on guns this year probably wouldn't have been able to were regulations like this in place. So what's the downside that doesn't make saving even a few lives worth it?

 

[Redux]

THE LARGEST MASS SHOOTING IN US HISTORY HAPPENED December 29,1890. When 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota were murdered by federal agents & members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY AND PROTECTION. The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children.

Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

The Second Amendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States.

Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.

gun control and what it can lead too

What you've just done here is taken a conversation about how to better regulate the dispersement of guns and turned it into 'here come the Liberals trying to take all our guns."

You can pretty it up all you want.. Gun control is contrary to the second amendment!

So you wouldn't be willing to wait a few days to receive a purchased firearm/require training or evaluation if it meant the number of mass shooting casualities would decrease?It's not an amenedmant issue, it's an issue that as a society we are broken and there are crazy POS out there that want to harm people. As a gun owner I think it's pretty clear we can make some sacrifices if it changes things for the better.

The problem is more laws won't do anything. Why is this so hard to understand. it is already illegal to kill, but it still happens

No, you don't want to get it.I own 4 guns:

-.22 rifle I bought at 19yrs old. No training, no permit, no nothing. Walked into a Wal Mart and bought it.

-A Glock 17 Gen 4. Went to sheriffs office, bought $10 permit. Got it in mail a couple days later. Went to Scheels and bought it, went home with it

-A Walther P22 for my wife. Had gift cards to Cabelas. Went, waited several hours because Xmas time, bought it and went home with it.

-A Mosin Nagant Russian sniper rifle. Went to a local auction and bought it.

Now you tell me, if I can do that, couldn't some loser who snapped and decides they want to conduct a mass shooting do the same if their background is clean?

That's the problem. It's not the terrorists or gang related gun violence that stricter laws would be aimed at. It's the nutjobs who go unnoticed until they snap. It's those people that shoot up schools then the next day the neighbor says "He was such a nice guy, can't believe he did this". Those are the people that could poetentially be prevented, not fully but a little. Isn't that worth it? Aren't a few hundred lives a year worth a little extra screening?

No, I'm sorry to say, you don't get it..

What law would strop that very same person from getting a gun? Remember they just snapped, allowing them to get guns in the first place. Waiting 2, or 3 or 4 days? how would that have stopped this guy? it wouldn't have!

The problem is not the gun, it is the person. The lack of morality, the lack of respect for human life.

Please, tell me what law would have stopped this guy?

Way to ignore most of the post. I'll suggest again, read the whole thread.

I don't need to read the whole thread, just the last post of yours.. What law would have stopped this guy?

I see you have 4 guns good for you.. how the heck are you supposed to know if someone snaps years or even months down the rode? You can't!

I get the guy would have been able to get guns.. ok.. if others would have had a gun many fewer people would have died.

Yes, you do need to read the rest of the thread.

I spent all Monday and part of yesterday defending the the fact that simple law adjustments and waiting periods aren't the answer or quick fix many think they could be.

So I'll ask again, is a little extra screening or some new regulating etc. really too much to ask to TRY and prevent some casualties? Simple yes or no will suffice.

it isn't a simple "yes" or "no" and you know it... Do you have any proof it will make the slightest bit of difference? No, you don't.. so you are willing to allow further infringement not knowing if it will matter?

What you argued before doesn't mean anything. You are NOW talking about gun control..

You don't throw something against the wall and hope it sticks, especially when those laws further infringe on the peoples right to bear arms!

AND you continue to ignore my question.. it is a simple question to answer!

I'll just assume your answer is No. Good day.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Lets pretend for a second that he was unable to aquire firearms. Does he still commit acts of violence via different means?

If you answer no to that I have nothing to say to you.

Well, it's a pointless question, so the answer doesn't matter. Without a gun he was far less likely to be able to kill that many. If bomb-making was easier, more people would do it.

OK City bombing was a pretty simple and easily to buy device, fertilizer diesel fuel and a home made detonator. im not sure if this is the angle Redux is going for but it can be done and on a large scale.

Perpetrated by a freedom-loving American Marine who thought the country had gone off the rails under Democratic leadership.

How do we register and ban those kinda people?

 

[huskerfan2000]

There isn't any law, short of disarming everyone in the entire world, that can stop a person from getting a gun. Drugs are illegal but those are still around..

I don't understand your obstinance. Using your rhetoric and argument's foundation, you could argue all laws are pointless because people are going to break them. That's a fundamentally flawed perspective.

A lot of things in this country have been studied and adjusted. 50 years ago seat belts weren't in cars, but researchers studied their benefits and now the vast majority of people use them, saving thousands if not millions of lives. Why can't we take a similar analytical approach to guns?

Your conscience appears to be completely accepting of the 23,000 people that have been shot and almost 6,000 that have died this year due to gun violence. This is astronomically worse than any other country in the world. Those deaths can be attributed to a number of things, but illegal weapon sales and poor gun owner responsibility play a key role.

There are a lot of things we could do to address the problem outside of confiscating weapons.

Are you also complaining about abortions, or is that ok with you.. you know it is a choice after all, right? What about car deaths, there were 33,000ish motor vehicle traffic deaths, are you championing for car removal?

You are 100% correct, there are a number of things we could address outside of guns.. Are you championing for those, or just gun restrictions?

EDIT: on seat belts.. There is no way to predict if a seat belt will save you life or actually hurt you, it depends on the wreck itself.

 

[zoogs]

I get you are for gun control, but please don't pretend guns are not the most important factor for why this country is what it is.. FREE!

And here I thought our freedoms that made us free.

It was being able to own anything we want, all along!

Wait, that's not true. We can own many things, but none of them are treated as sacred constitutional protections.

Except guns. So our ability to own this one kind of product in particular. That's the key to our ever-loving freedom.

America!

It was said jokingly earlier in this thread, but in a very real sense. Don't make anyone mad in this country. They'll shoot you.

That crackling of eggshells beneath your feet is the sweet tune of liberty, friend!

 

[huskerfan2000]

THE LARGEST MASS SHOOTING IN US HISTORY HAPPENED December 29,1890. When 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota were murdered by federal agents & members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY AND PROTECTION. The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children.

Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

The Second Amendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States.

Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.

gun control and what it can lead too

What you've just done here is taken a conversation about how to better regulate the dispersement of guns and turned it into 'here come the Liberals trying to take all our guns."

You can pretty it up all you want.. Gun control is contrary to the second amendment!

So you wouldn't be willing to wait a few days to receive a purchased firearm/require training or evaluation if it meant the number of mass shooting casualities would decrease?It's not an amenedmant issue, it's an issue that as a society we are broken and there are crazy POS out there that want to harm people. As a gun owner I think it's pretty clear we can make some sacrifices if it changes things for the better.

The problem is more laws won't do anything. Why is this so hard to understand. it is already illegal to kill, but it still happens

No, you don't want to get it.I own 4 guns:

-.22 rifle I bought at 19yrs old. No training, no permit, no nothing. Walked into a Wal Mart and bought it.

-A Glock 17 Gen 4. Went to sheriffs office, bought $10 permit. Got it in mail a couple days later. Went to Scheels and bought it, went home with it

-A Walther P22 for my wife. Had gift cards to Cabelas. Went, waited several hours because Xmas time, bought it and went home with it.

-A Mosin Nagant Russian sniper rifle. Went to a local auction and bought it.

Now you tell me, if I can do that, couldn't some loser who snapped and decides they want to conduct a mass shooting do the same if their background is clean?

That's the problem. It's not the terrorists or gang related gun violence that stricter laws would be aimed at. It's the nutjobs who go unnoticed until they snap. It's those people that shoot up schools then the next day the neighbor says "He was such a nice guy, can't believe he did this". Those are the people that could poetentially be prevented, not fully but a little. Isn't that worth it? Aren't a few hundred lives a year worth a little extra screening?

No, I'm sorry to say, you don't get it..

What law would strop that very same person from getting a gun? Remember they just snapped, allowing them to get guns in the first place. Waiting 2, or 3 or 4 days? how would that have stopped this guy? it wouldn't have!

The problem is not the gun, it is the person. The lack of morality, the lack of respect for human life.

Please, tell me what law would have stopped this guy?

Way to ignore most of the post. I'll suggest again, read the whole thread.

I don't need to read the whole thread, just the last post of yours.. What law would have stopped this guy?

I see you have 4 guns good for you.. how the heck are you supposed to know if someone snaps years or even months down the rode? You can't!

I get the guy would have been able to get guns.. ok.. if others would have had a gun many fewer people would have died.

Yes, you do need to read the rest of the thread.

I spent all Monday and part of yesterday defending the the fact that simple law adjustments and waiting periods aren't the answer or quick fix many think they could be.

So I'll ask again, is a little extra screening or some new regulating etc. really too much to ask to TRY and prevent some casualties? Simple yes or no will suffice.

it isn't a simple "yes" or "no" and you know it... Do you have any proof it will make the slightest bit of difference? No, you don't.. so you are willing to allow further infringement not knowing if it will matter?

What you argued before doesn't mean anything. You are NOW talking about gun control..

You don't throw something against the wall and hope it sticks, especially when those laws further infringe on the peoples right to bear arms!

AND you continue to ignore my question.. it is a simple question to answer!

I'll just assume your answer is No. Good day.

Ah yes, run away from answering my question.. Good idea!

 

[huskerfan2000]

I get you are for gun control, but please don't pretend guns are not the most important factor for why this country is what it is.. FREE!

And here I thought our freedoms that made us free.

It was being able to own anything we want, all along!

Wait, that's not true. We can own many things, but none of them are treated as sacred constitutional protections.

Except guns. So our ability to own this one kind of product in particular. That's the key to our ever-loving freedom.

America!

It was said jokingly earlier in this thread, but in a very real sense. Don't make anyone mad in this country. They'll shoot you. That crackling of eggshells beneath your feet is the sweet tune of liberty, friend.

I'm sure the British just said.. "Go you are free because you are free".. lol, good one.

 

[HuskerShark]

THE LARGEST MASS SHOOTING IN US HISTORY HAPPENED December 29,1890. When 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota were murdered by federal agents & members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms “FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY AND PROTECTION”. The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children.


Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

The Second Amendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States.

Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.

gun control and what it can lead too

To be fair, I, like you, am vehemently against any attempts to get rid of or severely hinder the 2nd amendment. What a lot of people lose sight of (which I did for a long time as well) is that there are very few people who are advocating that people turn in their weapons. And the ones who are advocating that ought to know that it's not feasible and would lead to mass bloodshed across the country.

BUT, as many have said already, it's WAY too easy to obtain a weapon right now, and something needs to be done about that (within reason and the confines of common sense).