Little Ball of Hate

That's funny. I seem to remember a news story from a city in France involving a truck. How many did he k**l? I believe it was more than any mass shooting I've heard of. And I don't believe it's possible for 'anyone' to just walk into a gun store and buy a gun. They've got these things called background checks. But they don't work as intended, because the stupid liberal scum sucking democrats will not allow us to put mental patients on the list. There is more than one mass shooting that may have been prevented if they allowed this. Also, as terrible as mass shootings are, they amount for an insignificant number of the total gun deaths in America. More people are k**led by blunt objects. Should we ban baseball bats?

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Personally, I don't hunt. But thanks.

Morgan

LB, the truck story is vague and not credible without some fact's or link. Was it an accident or intentional? Now you're saying it's more than any mass shooting you've heard of, does this include our latest in Florida where it k**led 50 people, probably not even close.
Now as far as Dem's being against putting people with mental disabilities on the list, they were the proponents of that list. We've already covered bat's, hammers and how anything can be used as a weapon and so again I will say it is in the rapid execution of life a gun is proficient in.

Morgan

Me neither I thought from this thread you were a gun advocate and h****r, than happen to find this link for a gun called the meateater,
oh well cheers

Little Ball of Hate

You're barking up the wrong tree. Everyone could own nukes, and we'd be perfectly safe if no one used them. Same with guns, or spears, or even rocks. Guns are here to stay. You can't get rid of them. And even if you could, it would not save one life. You're just as dead, if someone pushes you in front of a speeding truck.

And what do you mean vague and not credible? Have you forgotten the Bastille day attack already? A rag head drove a 19 ton truck into a crowd, k*****g at least 84 people, and injuring over a hundred others. Tell me you didn't forget about that. I'll understand if you did forget. I mean, those deaths weren't caused by bullets, so you really don't care. It also conflicts with the lefts tendency to support Islam, no matter how violent they act. By the way, the driver of that truck was a muslim, if I remember correctly. A muslim without a gun, no less. When are you i***ts going to start banning trucks?

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

I think hunting and college football are both fine sports, but currently participate in neither.

I'm a freedom advocate really, not a gun advocate. An armed citizenry is necessary for a liberty to be maintained. Otherwise my care for firearms would be minimal.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

The truck, k*****g, some 85 people I believe, was committed in France, shortly after the Muslim attack where guns were used..Used in a country that does not allow guns, as well..
Had someone or some had one it may not have resulted in as many deaths..???

The professed k**ler in the truck intended to k**l those people as he continued to drive down the road taking out as many as he could..

As for your contention the democrats were the proponents of the list for the mentally incompetent, actually the NRA started addressing it back in 1966...

In 1968 legislation was enacted using the proper bases for mentally disabled not owning..That of course is a person "adjudicated mentally incompetent" and not just an assumption the person is mentally incompetent or done by association of some no fly list, that often enough the people themself do not even know they are on that list or why...

Once again perfectly sound, logically law on the books to be enforced, yet we need a new law on it...Why?? As if we don't already have enough laws on the books half the legislators don't know of and certainly do not enforce...

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20130124/mental-health-and-firearms

Since 1966, the National Rifle Association has urged the federal government to address the problem of mental illness and violence. As we noted then, “the time is at hand to seek means by which society can identify, treat and temporarily isolate such individuals,” because “elimination of the instrument by which these crimes are committed cannot arrest the ravages of a psychotic murderer.”[1]

More recently, the NRA has supported legislation to ensure that appropriate records of those who have been judged mentally incompetent or involuntarily committed to mental institutions be made available for use in firearms t***sfer background checks. The NRA will support any reasonable step to fix America’s broken mental health system without intruding on the constitutional rights of Americans.

Federal Law

Since 1968, federal law has barred the possession or acquisition of firearms by anyone who “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”[2]

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has issued regulations that define an “adjudication” as a “determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person is, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease: (1) Is a danger to himself or to others; or (2) Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.” This includes a finding of insanity or incompetency in a criminal case.[3]

“Committed to a mental institution” is defined as a “formal commitment of a person to a mental institution by a court, board, or other lawful authority.” The definition makes clear that “[t]he term does not include a person in a mental institution for observation or a voluntary admission.” The Supreme Court has held that an involuntary commitment is a serious deprivation of liberty that requires due process of law under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.[4]
<snip>

Oppps, sorry lilltle, your post was not posted when I started mine..

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Facts having no impact on the left exposes the fact that they don't give a flying crap about the lives of innocent people that are murdered. Their only desire is to control the population, by any means necessary.

Little Ball of Hate

I'm sure that liberals would be more than happy to enforce laws preventing mentally unstable people from having guns...As long as they get to decide who is mentally unstable. You know. People like Veterans, Christians, people who believe in the Constitution and limited government.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

A true statement, Dave..They only know guns k**l and we don't need them...

They never even acknowledge your law abiding citizen that went the legal process of own and carry are not the perpetrators of gun violence...

If they believed as they profess that owning is not the issue then why aren't they out there calling for:

Enforcement of the laws already in place..

Demanding strict adherence to the laws rather than all this damn plea bargaining done to let the true felons skate..

Going after the gangs that cause the gun violence, rather than the law abiding citizen...

Cleaning out the ghetto slums that certainly lend propensity to the underground markets of illegal weapons
and concentrating on a national data base of those underground markets...They can sure glean all our private information at the click of a button, can't they??

Such logical solutions that would really target the issues and yet, it's grab the gun of the legal citizen...

Also I don't care what hopped up excuse they use, there is a movement by this Administration to strip citizens of their weapons ..Witness BO's signing with the UN on that International Treaty to remove weapons viewed as a threat..Unenforceable given our second amendment, but it dang sure didn't stop the "Constutional lawyer"from not signing it, did it??

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Well you address it as it is..They want a blanket your crazy, because I said so, therefore no gun for you, rather than protect the rights of citizen with due process of law..A finding necessary, in other words...

Even vets have been targeted now little....I'm sure you're aware of it..

And you know, Christians don't need guns....geeeeezzzz..

As for small government, riiiiighhhhttt...Where has most of our jobs growth been ?????

Little Ball of Hate

Every gun owner in this country should be camped in front of the White House, armed, and demanding that our elected officials follow the Constitution. Never happen, but if we could just get a couple hundred thousand to do it, we might be able to make some changes to how our elected officials view gun control. This is OUR country, damnit! Not the governments. Not special interest groups. OURS!

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Not a bad idea, but with just a few months left, hopefully we'll see a shift back to Constitutional law, not the make believe of late...

Also, Thank God the SCOTUS has ruled consistent with the Constitution no matter how often it's been challenged...That is the strongest measure the people can rely upon..

The SCOTUS has only, modified, not stricken, previous rulings ten times in its entire existence..With due consideration well afforded as to why....They do not do so so as to keep In tact the firmness of law and not allow their ruling to be the rulings of error or constant change...
Imagine what inconsistency in the highest court of our Nation would do...

Likewise people do protest by their affiliation of and support of the NRA, as well as screaming to our representatives..We must never "buckle or allow it"..To lose one right is to lose all..Give an inch they take a mile is so very true with government....

I do love each your passion!!! Ours it is!!!