One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Well, give me some names then
Page <<first <prev 4 of 9 next> last>>
Sep 2, 2019 18:34:17   #
badbob85037
 
Smedley_buzkill wrote:
There are about 100 million gun owners in this country, NOT 11 million. Given the fact that there are about 220 million adults in this country, that makes ownership close to 50%.


I said 11 million super gun owners. Ones owning 10 or more guns. Though I did spell super supper.

Reply
Sep 2, 2019 19:42:21   #
moldyoldy
 
Smedley_buzkill wrote:
This has already been done. The Liberals' solution is "universal background checks." No one but people who aren't going to commit a crime in the first place will pay any attention. Last year there were more than 100,000 stops on FFL gun purchases and less than 100 prosecution follow throughs on the 4600 odd cases that were actually referred for prosecution. The Liberal solution is to mandate more laws that won't be enforced. You cannot "ban semi auto weapons." While some of these attempts have not yet made it to the SCOTUS yet, the Constitution is very clear that you cannot pass an ex post facto law. You cannot make something illegal that was legal when it was done. A gun that was purchased legally must be grandfathered in. There are about 10 million so-called "assault rifles" in private hands right now. Every year more people are killed with knives than with all rifles and shotguns, not just the scary looking ones. Every year more people are killed with clubs than with all rifles and shotguns; not just the scary looking ones.
Calls for banning "high capacity magazines" are equally specious. I can change a magazine out in less than 3 seconds and I'm out of practice. I could do it faster when I was in the Army. Do you actually think that limiting magazines to ten rounds would make a difference?
This has already been done. The Liberals' solution... (show quote)


You don’t understand ex post facto.

Reply
Sep 2, 2019 20:24:04   #
GmanTerry
 
moldyoldy wrote:
You are great at walking down that center median on the highway. Unfortunately, I completely agree with your premise. But, laws can make a difference, in some cases. There are a lot of guns in states that do not sell guns. How can you cross a state line and buy a gun? When will we integrate data bases with violent behavior shown on gun checks?


This is the whole problem. People who do not have a clue about what they are talking about wanting to make laws for all of us. it is not possible to buy guns on the Internet. It is not possible to buy guns in a State where you do not reside. You must fill out a Federal form 4473 to purchase ANY firearm.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4473-part-1-firearms-transaction-record-over-counter-atf-form-53009/download

In addition you must show a picture ID and wait while your State Police do a background check to verify you are not a "prohibited possesser", and are allowed to buy and own a firearm. This is the Federal law. Other places have additional laws like California's 10 day waiting period. If you haven't participated in the process and are ignorant of it you are not qualified to make decisions for the rest of us.
The violent behavior is supposed to be addressed with the background check.

Semper Fi

Reply
 
 
Sep 2, 2019 20:42:15   #
Armageddun Loc: The show me state
 
teabag09 wrote:
In the first place they are magazines not clips. Clips are used to load magazines. I personally use a 5 round magazine for hunting because if I can't hit an animal in the first or second round I shouldn't be shooting at said animal. The other three rounds are either for putting an animal that's wounded down or for my protection from other animals.

I own quite a few 20 and 30 round magazines. Those I use on the range. Sometimes I'm shooting for groups. On occasion I just like to pull the trigger as fast as I can just for the heck of it. I can tell you that doing that is way too inaccurate for a mass shooting but with a steady, measured trigger pull a lot of damage can be done.

I'm a life time NRA member and I have no problem with tightening background checks. I do have a huge problem with registration as with the background check we are already registration in a sense but to take it further we're more heading to confiscation.

In my opinion most of the mass shooter have shown signs of having some sort of mental problems and yet nobody acted to check them out or raise an alarm

In the long run if the Government comes for my guns, I will comply, one bullet at a time. Mike
In the first place they are magazines not clips. C... (show quote)



Reply
Sep 2, 2019 21:47:18   #
moldyoldy
 
GmanTerry wrote:
This is the whole problem. People who do not have a clue about what they are talking about wanting to make laws for all of us. it is not possible to buy guns on the Internet. It is not possible to buy guns in a State where you do not reside. You must fill out a Federal form 4473 to purchase ANY firearm.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4473-part-1-firearms-transaction-record-over-counter-atf-form-53009/download

In addition you must show a picture ID and wait while your State Police do a background check to verify you are not a "prohibited possesser", and are allowed to buy and own a firearm. This is the Federal law. Other places have additional laws like California's 10 day waiting period. If you haven't participated in the process and are ignorant of it you are not qualified to make decisions for the rest of us.
The violent behavior is supposed to be addressed with the background check.

Semper Fi
This is the whole problem. People who do not have ... (show quote)


There are too many loopholes, like private party sales.

Reply
Sep 2, 2019 22:05:05   #
4430 Loc: Little Egypt ** Southern Illinory
 
One gun at a time is how they plan on confiscating our guns

Reply
Sep 2, 2019 22:17:55   #
debeda
 
4430 wrote:
One gun at a time is how they plan on confiscating our guns



Reply
 
 
Sep 2, 2019 22:55:17   #
America 1 Loc: South Miami
 
GmanTerry wrote:
This is the whole problem. People who do not have a clue about what they are talking about wanting to make laws for all of us. it is not possible to buy guns on the Internet. It is not possible to buy guns in a State where you do not reside. You must fill out a Federal form 4473 to purchase ANY firearm.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4473-part-1-firearms-transaction-record-over-counter-atf-form-53009/download

In addition you must show a picture ID and wait while your State Police do a background check to verify you are not a "prohibited possesser", and are allowed to buy and own a firearm. This is the Federal law. Other places have additional laws like California's 10 day waiting period. If you haven't participated in the process and are ignorant of it you are not qualified to make decisions for the rest of us.
The violent behavior is supposed to be addressed with the background check.

Semper Fi
This is the whole problem. People who do not have ... (show quote)


It is possible to buy on the internet, however they have to be sent to a licensed dealer for pickup.
With ID & background check.

Reply
Sep 3, 2019 00:47:53   #
JoyV
 
CodyCoonhound wrote:
Several Reasons follow: Very limited in scope under latest laws. Vast majority of mass shooters have not been declared insane under these laws. Like most crimes that get solved or prevented, it takes someone to take action and the police to follow through.

https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/special-topics/nics/index.html

https://imidatasearch.com/mental-health-records-background-check/

https://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20160106/NEWS/160109963/hipaa-rule-change-part-of-move-to-fight-gun-violence
Several Reasons follow: Very limited in scope unde... (show quote)


Exactly. And one action is to report the diagnosed psychologically unstable individual. Another is to diagnose in the first place. And another to put the info in the database.

What we DON'T need is every person who has ever had a psych treatment or evaluation to be barred from buying guns. This would bar people who have had minor issues. It would
bar every single veteran as there is a psych evaluation at discharge. It would bar everybody who has ever gone into a shelter such as a battered women's shelter, homeless shelter, or anything more than an emergency shelter for a disaster evacuation like for a hurricane or wildfire; as there is usually a mandatory counseling requirement.

Reply
Sep 3, 2019 00:54:45   #
JoyV
 
badbob85037 wrote:
Not some, or most but all school shootings since 1955 have been carried out by ones on pharmaceutical drugs to cure a chemical imbalance or just coming off these drugs. Most of these 200 drugs are not drugs at all but poisons. Average profit on these drugs is $7.5 million a day with over 100 million taking these drugs world wide. This would explain these mass stabbings and fires in gun free nations. Don't expect any politician telling you this as the pharmaceutical industry spends more than any other lobbying group. 6 times that of number two.

Fluoride is the main ingredient in Prozac Fluoride was used by the NAZIs during WWII to make their victims go mad and to this day is poured into our water. All members of the FDA have financial ties to the drug industry. These drugs are being approved twice as fast and twice as many.. No one on Earth knows what a chemical imbalance is.
Not some, or most but all school shootings since 1... (show quote)


Thanks for the info. I knew I'd heard several times of shooters being on, or previously on psych meds. But didn't know all were.

Reply
Sep 3, 2019 01:01:04   #
JoyV
 
moldyoldy wrote:
There are too many loopholes, like private party sales.


Private party sales are almost always to family members or friends. If someone is purposely buying guns to resell, they are acting as a dealer and should have a gun dealer license. If they don't, they are in violation. So this is not a loophole but a case of breaking the law.

Private citizens will almost never sell their guns to a stranger.

Reply
 
 
Sep 3, 2019 09:23:58   #
working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina
 
maximus wrote:
I'm a little confused by your post. Rather than ask you to clarify, I'll just point out an undeniable fact; the cities with the strictest gun laws have the highest gun violence rates.

Here is the violent crime rates in Kennesaw, GA. from 2001 to 2017, a town where it is the law that everyone must own a gun.

Violent crime rate in 2017 Kennesaw: 130.3 U.S. Average: 214.8
Violent crime rate in 2016 Kennesaw: 106.7 U.S. Average: 216.3
Violent crime rate in 2015 Kennesaw: 91.1 U.S. Average: 208.5
Violent crime rate in 2014 Kennesaw: 64.8 U.S. Average: 200.7
Violent crime rate in 2013 Kennesaw: 54.3 U.S. Average: 204.3
Violent crime rate in 2012 Kennesaw: 50.8 U.S. Average: 214.5
Violent crime rate in 2011 Kennesaw: 34.8 U.S. Average: 214.1
Violent crime rate in 2010 Kennesaw: 32.9 U.S. Average: 223.2
Violent crime rate in 2009 Kennesaw: 49.9 U.S. Average: 238.0
Violent crime rate in 2008 Kennesaw: 49.7 U.S. Average: 252.4
Violent crime rate in 2007 Kennesaw: 59.7 U.S. Average: 259.7
Violent crime rate in 2005 Kennesaw: 60.3 U.S. Average: 258.9
Violent crime rate in 2004 Kennesaw: 55.2 U.S. Average: 256.0
Violent crime rate in 2003 Kennesaw: 53.6 U.S. Average: 262.6
Violent crime rate in 2002 Kennesaw: 61.8 U.S. Average: 272.2
Violent crime rate in 2001 Kennesaw: 51.4 U.S. Average: 276.6

It would seem that more guns equal less crime.
I'm a little confused by your post. Rather than as... (show quote)


Not the conclusion I would draw from your data. While the violent crime rate for the US went down 25% during your time frame the violent crime rate for Kennesaw more than doubled.

Reply
Sep 3, 2019 10:32:14   #
Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI
 
4430 wrote:
One gun at a time is how they plan on confiscating our guns


Just who are they?

Reply
Sep 3, 2019 10:52:46   #
4430 Loc: Little Egypt ** Southern Illinory
 
Floyd Brown wrote:
Just who are they?


The gun hating Demo's in Congress that's who !

Reply
Sep 3, 2019 12:50:30   #
maximus Loc: Chattanooga, Tennessee
 
working class stiff wrote:
Not the conclusion I would draw from your data. While the violent crime rate for the US went down 25% during your time frame the violent crime rate for Kennesaw more than doubled.


Agreed, but still well below the national average. I used Kennesaw because I met a couple from there who were visiting my hometown. Actually, I was shocked to see the rise of violent crime there, but as I said, it's still well below the national average.
From what I understand to be true, if one were to remove the 4 deadliest cities off the list, that America would fall to second place for the least violent gun crime. Chicago, New York city, Detroit, and San Frisco are the four cities...all have stringent gun laws and are democratically governed ( I say democratically governed NOT to throw my political view into the fray, but it's just the way it is). All have very high rates of violent gun crimes.
It's impossible to do away with crime, but it's ludicrous to ignore the fact that cities where citizens are armed are safer than those with tough gun laws and unarmed citizens by far.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 9 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.