otasan56
Member
Our constitutional rights are lining up to be deleted. Starting with the Second Amendment. Will the SC disregard Heller and let AWBII stand? Maybe. I hope that the SC will honor its own Heller decision.
Last edited:
We are going to have to give up something
- Thread starter Sgt.Murtaugh
- Start date
- Status
PT92
Member
Provided no conservative SC Justice either retires/expires I tend to agree.
--Happy Holidays
DammitBoy
Member
I'd be willing to give up the lives of any criminal who uses a gun in a crime. Make it a mandatory death sentence if you commit a crime using a firearm.
Rocketmedic
Member
CCW holder gets in a fistfight, felony battery.
He had a gun. Maybe even exposed.
Death?
That's not justice.
He had a gun. Maybe even exposed.
Death?
That's not justice.
BryanDavis
Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2010
- Messages
- 85
What is this? Haiku?
helitack32f1
Member
Unfortunately it doesn't seem to matter to anyone, especially anti gunners, that NONE of the things listed above would have had any effect on the shooting in Newton. Nor would raising the age of gun ownership. The only thing that would have helped is armed guards and/or teachers and concerned parents.
As usual, the Libs will use the death and mayhem to forward their agenda, and in the process reward criminals by ensuring that even fewer armed citizens will be out there to stop them. Obama's chief of staff once said "You can never let a good crisis go to waste." And, rest assured, they won't.
Adam Lanza was 20 yrs old. If the legal age of purchase were higher than 20 (instead of 18 for a rifle, and 18 for a non FFL handgun), he may have still done the exact same thing if he had access to firearms. But then the story would be slightly different.
Instead of the media stating he used firearms that he could have legally purchased that morning, he would have used illegally obtained firearms. Or he was allowed access to otherwise legal firearms by someone else who may have some explaining to do. The story isn't the same from a gun rights perspective.
Best case, he doesn't have access to firearms. He waits a year. He gets psychiatric treatment and regains his sanity, gets married and has kids. Nothing bad happens.
People who are eventually diagnosed with bipolar or schizophrenia are completely normal - like you or me - until their late teens and early 20's. Just like you or me, they will likely have clean records and easy access to firearms before their illness is even recognized. And they're at an age where they're in school... where school shootings occur.
I wouldn't say it makes NO difference.
Last edited:
GLOOB said:
Last I knew, stealing your mother's firearms after you've killed her would fall under obtaining them "illegally". He broke no shortage of laws as it stands now. Why do people believe that the thousands of existing laws are ineffective, but that some new law would somehow get the desired results? Its not a logical conclusion to jump to. I have an idea! Lets make stealing guns a crime! And murder, too!!! Lets make walking into an elementary school with loaded weapons intent on causing harm a crime. Lets make carrying concealed with a permit a crime. Oh wait a darn minute...all these ARE already current laws, and they had NO IMPACT on this massacre. You really think a raised age limit is going to stop people that are willing to kill their own parents to obtain access to a firearm? How on eath can you honestly believe that it would make a significant difference when time and again, its been proven that criminals commit crime??!?! (Huh, its almost as if the word criminal and crime shared the same root!!! Who would have thought?!?!!?
Steve Raacke
Member
I don't have to give up anything. I haven't done anything wrong.
helitack32f1
Member
I was under the impression that the goal was to stop the violence, not cater to what the media will say after the mass killing. I read one place that the age to acquire a gun in CT is 21 and if that is true, your argument is further invalidated. However, I have also read that they picked up someone in the bushes outside the school after the shooting and I have also read that the AR wasn't used in the shooting. As usual, I don't think the media has a clue and are making it up as they go along. It is hard to know what is true.
109Hammer
Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2010
- Messages
- 109
+1.
109Hammer
Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2010
- Messages
- 109
+1.
Idea
The liberals are using this unfortunate isolated incident to fuel an old agenda. They hide on the moral high road of wanting to reduce gun deaths by banning those ugly black rifles. THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GIVE SOMETHING UP......let's use the same arguement to give them something that they DON'T want. The odds of a mentally ill person charging in my living room and killing my family is much lower than the typical home invasion, ATM robbery, etc.... etc.... If they want to save us from the obscure criminal act lets make them address the common thug too. If they want an AWB lets demand that it be coupled with increased punishment for the common criminal committing crimes with guns. I say anyone committing a crime with a gun gets a minimum of 30 yrs to be served in full. Let's see what that does to their voting pool.
The liberals are using this unfortunate isolated incident to fuel an old agenda. They hide on the moral high road of wanting to reduce gun deaths by banning those ugly black rifles. THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GIVE SOMETHING UP......let's use the same arguement to give them something that they DON'T want. The odds of a mentally ill person charging in my living room and killing my family is much lower than the typical home invasion, ATM robbery, etc.... etc.... If they want to save us from the obscure criminal act lets make them address the common thug too. If they want an AWB lets demand that it be coupled with increased punishment for the common criminal committing crimes with guns. I say anyone committing a crime with a gun gets a minimum of 30 yrs to be served in full. Let's see what that does to their voting pool.
DammitBoy
Member
I'm no rocket surgeon, but when did he use his gun during the crime of a fistfight?
76shuvlinoff
Member
If Congress and the POTUS can't get past the fiscal cliff when are they going to get around to guns?
Deanimator
Member
The ENTIRE budge of the BATFE should be "sequestered".
Rocketmedic
Member
That's the question, isn't it? Advocating mandatory sentences for 'crime' in which a gun was 'used' leaves the quoted areas open to interpretation. Is armed robbery really 'using' the gun if it's only brandished? What about rape if it's only exposed?I'm no rocket surgeon, but when did he use his gun during the crime of a fistfight?
I am not a fan of mandatory sentences. That's what we have judges for.
We don't have to, and shouldn't, give up our 2nd amendment constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Sorry OP, you can decide to give up whatever you want. But don't tell us we "have" to give up anything. NO NEW GUN CONTROL. Period. No compromises, no agreements, the AWB won't do anything to prevent mentally ill people who aren't getting the treatment they need from committing violence.
Do you think maybe that a guy who murders his mom because she wants to send him to a psychiatric facility might have needed some intervention and real treatment from real mental health professionals? Perhaps? Maybe? I know that's a radical idea, actually intervening with psychotic and delusional people who are mentally ill before they commit violent acts.
Or we can ban black guns and limit magazine capacity, and still have the same problems with violent mentally ill people who still aren't getting the treatment they need BEFORE they hurt themselves or others.
NO NEW GUN CONTROL! NO!!!!!
Do you think maybe that a guy who murders his mom because she wants to send him to a psychiatric facility might have needed some intervention and real treatment from real mental health professionals? Perhaps? Maybe? I know that's a radical idea, actually intervening with psychotic and delusional people who are mentally ill before they commit violent acts.
Or we can ban black guns and limit magazine capacity, and still have the same problems with violent mentally ill people who still aren't getting the treatment they need BEFORE they hurt themselves or others.
NO NEW GUN CONTROL! NO!!!!!
JVaughn
Member
Much like our president refuses to consider a tax plan unless it includes the rich paying more, I refuse to accept a gun control plan unless it contains no restrictions. 2A requires 3/4 of states to overturn, it's an amendment. If you can't manage that, then there is nothing to discuss. All the current gun laws are unconstitutional and any future ones would be too. We must stand strong and not accept any restrictions whatsoever. Compromise leads to loss of rights.
Deanimator
Member
Of course it's used. It was used to coerce someone by the threat of deadly force into giving up something which the taker wasn't legally entitled to seize.
By your "logic", if that same robber tries to rob me, I pull my firearm and he flees, I HAVEN'T defended myself because I didn't SHOOT him.
xfyrfiter
Member
Look at what " gun control " has done for Mexico. Some of the most restrictive gun laws in the world, and probably the worst, murder by gun, rate in the world. Gun control has never worked, and never will.
DammitBoy
Member
Deanimator
Member
What I find fascinating (and somewhat suspicious) is the fact that the original comment was absolutely of a kind with comments I've seen over and over that you have no right to respond to deadly force with deadly force because you don't KNOW TO A CERTAINTY that your assailant REALLY meant to kill you since he was prevented from doing so.
There's a general "mind"-set that runs through most anti-gun advocacy, as well as the calls for "compromise" with it...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked