The Attack on the 2nd Amendment Continues

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

The fact that the anti sheeple like yourself want to take away freedoms because you have an irrational fear of a object means you probably need to go to a mental hospital. But hey, once you ban guns, is your next move on speech or assembly, to further your nanny state

Nice deflection. For the millionth time, my "fear" are these mentally sick mass shooters going and purchasing guns legally because there is no effective LEGAL way to stop them. And yet another deflection, I did NOT say ban all guns! This is another thing pro gunners are so great about.... their uncanny ability to absolutely unequivocably scare other gun owners that their gun ownership itself is in DANGER! When clearly, it is not, and wouldn't be under what I envision --- a view I've already written about dozens of times here. But your camp is like Fox News: scaring older white people every single night.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

Actually no, you used an example of a suicidal pilot who was able to commit a heinous act due to the failure of authorities to act within their power to do so.

I can't speak for the medical regulations for Germany, so I don't know who acted within what powers. What if his private doctor is limited by HIPAA from sharing something with their equivalent of the FAA? How would the aviation feds know about his mental condition then? This is more complicated an issue than you make it sound.

As far as psychological evaluations are concerned, you as a pilot should understand the issues, ramifications and potential consequences of such measures more than most.

But unlike pro-gunners who only scare other gunners about "OMG! They're gonna ban all guns!" I realize that whatever measure they come up with to find mentally insane pilots, I *KNOW* it will not affect me as a sane pilot. And as long as this measure catches and weeds out the mentally sick, I have no problem with it whatsoever. It's just sad the pro-gunners can't admit to doing the same.

Would it be better to tackle this issue with humane solutions than scream at each other over non solutions and inanimate objects literally millions of Americans safely use daily for responsible, legal uses?

Your side hasn't proposed any humane solutions about mental sickness, except to say that it is mental sickness and don't blame gun owners. No one is doing anything about the mentally sick. And they're all "responsible" until the barrel is pointed at a person... then a law is broken. By then, it's too late.

Wow, we're getting somewhere here, so people who commit crimes, do so even though the law says it's a crime, and it carries penalties?

A written sentence with a yes or no checkbox literally does nothing. Absolutely nothing. Because there is NO way to prove it, one way or the other. Just like the drugs and drinking question on airline apps. But we are subject to an initial drug test (despite the honesty on the application) because you can't just take someone's word for it. The piss test will show the potential drugs in the person at the time. Same with random DOT testing. Other things like the failed checkride question.... the Colgan 3407 CA intentionally lied on his application, disclosing only one checkride failure. Instead of declaring all 4 failures he had prior. He knew that if he disclosed that, he would not have been hired at Colgan. Hey, no harm, no foul right?

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

It's illegal to answer that question dishonestly. If one is quickly willing to break the law and lie on the application, it would be fair to assume that they probably won't adhere to any other laws regarding gun ownership.

Once again, laws only punish those who follow them

The Colgan 3407 CA lied about one question on the app just to get hired. There is no further evidence of any law breaking on his end. Sometimes, you just have to admit that even the "good" guy will get desperate enough to want something so bad, who's gonna notice or say otherwise? That question is as useless as the ink it's written with because there is NO checks/balances to prove a 'no' answer.

 

[TUCKnTRUCK]

It's not an effective law when the only way of stopping said individual is with a pen that is used to check a box for either Yes or No. If this is the kind of law that pro gunners like, no wonder we are already in trouble.

Apparently you don't know the "law" here.

The ATF is supposed to receive a copy of the 4473. The adjudication language is in there as such judgements will show up on the NCIS background check.

Lying on the form is a felony, with a 5 year sentence. It is very enforceable, but, the ATF generally chooses not to prosecute perjury on these forms.

It's not just a check box that goes nowhere without verification.
http://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/gun-background-checks-nics-failure/

You literally already have the Laws you want and don't know it.

 

[Seggy]

And once you disarm the populous,

I can't be armed with an Abrams tank but am managing.

 

[Seggy]

@Seggy I've been to many, many "gun courses." None of which have made society safer, because there is still flesh connected to a trigger each time a round was sent, wherever it was aimed. Change the ass behind the gun, then you will ACTUALLY be safer.

Hence the reason for background checks

Why don't you understand that.

Ahh, I do.

I love target shooting and hunting with my AR. Fantastic for hogs and coyotes.
I love the fact that I can tacti-cool out my AR.

I would love to go target shooting with an Abrams tank but I can't.

The minute our society holds Budwieser responsible for drunk driving, maybe, just maybe you progressives will muster some culture change.

Notice how there are restrictions on buying liquor? There are MANY parallels between the gun rights debate and the tobacco debate.

 

[TUCKnTRUCK]

Hence the reason for background checks



Ahh, I do.



I would love to go target shooting with an Abrams tank but I can't.



Notice how there are restrictions on buying liquor? There are MANY parallels between the gun rights debate and the tobacco debate.

You can have an Abrams, you can also shoot one if you're willing to pay for it.

Tobacco and liquor are not protected by the constitution, and the only federally imposed restrictions on their purchase are based off age.... Which, guess what else is regulated by age? Are you saying the basic minimum for a handgun purchase should be a minimum age of 18?

 

[TUCKnTRUCK]

Seriously though, "assault" weapons are responsible for %2 of gun crime. People who buy AR's generally don't go use them to knock over the local CVS. Most people don't walk around with their AR's. It's not what they bought it for.

Go knock down the doors of every household living beneath the poverty line, urban minorities, and convicted felons. Search their houses, take all the guns you find.

Almost none of them will be AR's, lots will have been used in crimes, and gun violence will fall significantly.

All you have to do is give up a bit of space on the 4th,2nd, and allow some racial profiling and you will save countless life's!

 

[pullup]

I can't be armed with an Abrams tank but am managing.

Sure you can.

 

[TUCKnTRUCK]

“We spent a whole bunch of time and a whole bunch of political capital yelling and screaming about assault weapons,” Mayor Mitchell J. Landrieu of New Orleans said. He called it a “zero sum political fight about a symbolic weapon.”

On Sept. 13, 1994, President Bill Clinton signed an assault weapons ban into law. It barred the manufacture and sale of new guns with military features and magazines holding more than 10 rounds. But the law allowed those who already owned these guns — an estimated 1.5 million of them — to keep their weapons.

The policy proved costly. Mr. Clinton blamed the ban for Democratic losses in 1994. Crime fell, but when the ban expired, a detailed study found no proof that it had contributed to the decline.

But hey, if you don't want to worry about AR's you can always go move to NYC, Camden, back to Jersey, Detroit or other "fun" places like that.

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

But hey, if you don't want to worry about AR's you can always go move to NYC, Camden, back to Jersey, Detroit or other "fun" places like that.

Hey now, don't lump Detroit in with all those anti-gun places. The police chief actively encourages people to carry a firearm for protection.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

Apparently you don't know the "law" here.

The ATF is supposed to receive a copy of the 4473. The adjudication language is in there as such judgements will show up on the NCIS background check.

Lying on the form is a felony, with a 5 year sentence. It is very enforceable, but, the ATF generally chooses not to prosecute perjury on these forms.

It's not just a check box that goes nowhere without verification.
http://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/gun-background-checks-nics-failure/

You literally already have the Laws you want and don't know it.

Again, judge and courts. MANY people have mental problems, don't even go to a doctor, much less actually end up in court to get an official hearing and then be deemed mentally unfit. That checkbox may check courts, but NOT medical background because of HIPAA.... and you know this damn well.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

“We spent a whole bunch of time and a whole bunch of political capital yelling and screaming about assault weapons,” Mayor Mitchell J. Landrieu of New Orleans said. He called it a “zero sum political fight about a symbolic weapon.”

On Sept. 13, 1994, President Bill Clinton signed an assault weapons ban into law. It barred the manufacture and sale of new guns with military features and magazines holding more than 10 rounds. But the law allowed those who already owned these guns — an estimated 1.5 million of them — to keep their weapons.

The policy proved costly. Mr. Clinton blamed the ban for Democratic losses in 1994. Crime fell, but when the ban expired, a detailed study found no proof that it had contributed to the decline.

But hey, if you don't want to worry about AR's you can always go move to NYC, Camden, back to Jersey, Detroit or other "fun" places like that.

Times be a changing. Wait til the socialist kids grow up and start voting Bernie types more and more. This country will then move away from its conservative core and things like guns will quickly be shunned / outcast. Which is sad, at heart I have more so conservative values than I do liberal, but the general direction of this country is going to the left and doesn't look like it's going to go back.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

Times be a changing. Wait til the socialist kids grow up and start voting Bernie types more and more. This country will then move away from its conservative core and things like guns will quickly be shunned / outcast. Which is sad, at heart I have more so conservative values than I do liberal, but the general direction of this country is going to the left and doesn't look like it's going to go back.

That's why Blue Dog Democrats exist.

 

[TUCKnTRUCK]

Times be a changing. Wait til the socialist kids grow up and start voting Bernie types more and more. This country will then move away from its conservative core and things like guns will quickly be shunned / outcast. Which is sad, at heart I have more so conservative values than I do liberal, but the general direction of this country is going to the left and doesn't look like it's going to go back.

Bernie hails from Vt, a state with the least amount of gun control on the books.

 

[Lawman]

Again, judge and courts. MANY people have mental problems, don't even go to a doctor, much less actually end up in court to get an official hearing and then be deemed mentally unfit. That checkbox may check courts, but NOT medical background because of HIPAA.... and you know this damn well.

Are you a sex offender?

Does you neighborhood know your sex offender status?

I mean yeah I'm sure you probably aren't, but can we really take that chance around other people and their children.

And it's not like we can just ask you one way or the other you should probably be examined in some way by a state official. After all you could always lie on the form to move to whatever community you wanted to live in.

So you shouldn't be allowed to just live where you want to live right, because after all other people need to be protected from the unreasonable risk that you might be something you've never demonstrated yourself to be.

Yeah the parallels are despicable when you substitute the treatment you want to show gun owners for the presumed social/personality disorders you think people need to prove they don't have before they can exercise a right.

 

[Cazadores]

Times be a changing. Wait til the socialist kids grow up and start voting Bernie types more and more. This country will then move away from its conservative core and things like guns will quickly be shunned / outcast. Which is sad, at heart I have more so conservative values than I do liberal, but the general direction of this country is going to the left and doesn't look like it's going to go back.

I agree, happily times are changing. The tone def rhetoric of the corporatist parties is starting to fall on frustrated angry ears.

Clinton ranted on and on about guns. Sanders spoke about income inequality, taking a bite out of corporate welfare and restoring the middle class.

Exit polls indicate among Democrats in New Hampshire tonight the biggest concerns were income inequality, health care, the economy. There were some other ones in there, but guns didn't even make the list.

Sanders ate Clintons lunch, dinner, and dessert.

People want solutions to real problems, not social experiments criminalizing honest citizens for the mere feeling of safety or the pleasure of intellectually vain control freaks with superiority complexes. They are tired of political distractions and divisive nonsense. The informed are growing very tired of lies.

Times are changing, just not in the way you think.

 

[Ozelot]

If you really feel you NEED an AR15 just to feel safe for you/family, perhaps it's time you move. I would never live in a place in which I felt that I NEEDED an AR15 just to be safe.

I don't need an AR-15 I have one because I enjoy firearms and it is my right to have one. What I need is a government who doesn't overstep their boundaries and try to circumvent a right bestowed upon me by being an American Citizen. Oh, yea and this happened http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/02/daniel-zimmerman/388504/

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

Are you a sex offender?

Does you neighborhood know your sex offender status?

I mean yeah I'm sure you probably aren't, but can we really take that chance around other people and their children.

And it's not like we can just ask you one way or the other you should probably be examined in some way by a state official. After all you could always lie on the form to move to whatever community you wanted to live in.

So you shouldn't be allowed to just live where you want to live right, because after all other people need to be protected from the unreasonable risk that you might be something you've never demonstrated yourself to be.

Yeah the parallels are despicable when you substitute the treatment you want to show gun owners for the presumed social/personality disorders you think people need to prove they don't have before they can exercise a right.

Not a good analogy. I'm not a sex offender. But, if I was applying for a job that deals with kids, then absolutely I should be investigated and due diligence done to make sure my prior background is clean and that I'm not convicted (or even accused) of child crimes.

What is wrong with demanding someone be SANE (mentally fit) in order to legally purchase a gun?

I don't need an AR-15 I have one because I enjoy firearms and it is my right to have one. What I need is a government who doesn't overstep their boundaries and try to circumvent a right bestowed upon me by being an American Citizen. Oh, yea and this happened http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/02/daniel-zimmerman/388504/

“In our view, Maryland law implicates the core protection of the Second Amendment—’the right of law-abiding responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home,’

That isn't what the 2nd amendment said.

And besides, since 9/11 have you even counted how many rights you have given away to the government? Or does none of that matter so as long as they leave 2A alone?

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

I agree, happily times are changing. The tone def rhetoric of the corporatist parties is starting to fall on frustrated angry ears.

Clinton ranted on and on about guns. Sanders spoke about income inequality, taking a bite out of corporate welfare and restoring the middle class.

Exit polls indicate among Democrats in New Hampshire tonight the biggest concerns were income inequality, health care, the economy. There were some other ones in there, but guns didn't even make the list.

Sanders ate Clintons lunch, dinner, and dessert.

People want solutions to real problems, not social experiments criminalizing honest citizens for the mere feeling of safety or the pleasure of intellectually vain control freaks with superiority complexes. They are tired of political distractions and divisive nonsense. The informed are growing very tired of lies.

Times are changing, just not in the way you think.

LOL @ implication that Bernie has solutions. Bernie says what it takes to get win primaries and win an election. Period. But at least he says something. That's vastly different than Trump who has LITERALLY presented nothing and yet just won the NH primary by a landslide.

Now, look, I never said the gun topic is SO big to rank as the #1 importance for a Presidential candidate. So no, I wouldn't see this being tied to the same level as health care or the economy.

Income inequality? Come on. Health care and the economy are problems. But it seems every R candidate talks about the first thing they'll do in the WH is repeal Obamacare. One can't just win when it comes to health care.


"They are tired of political distractions and divisive nonsense. The informed are growing very tired of lies."

Well then they are in for a very rude awakening. Trump, Bernie, Clinton, Cruz, take your pick. It won't matter who's in office. It's going to be the same crap repeated this decade. R President, D takes over Congress, nothing gets done. Or D President, R takes over and nothing gets done. The only real solution is to do away with the corrupt two-party system. But as you gun nutters like to say, most people are sheeple and they are too scared of a change from the status quo. Our best chance of seeing any change would be a libertarian candidate like Ron Paul.... that's who I'm writing in my vote for. No way can I vote for any of these current clowns running.

But alas, it will be Cruz/Trump or Clinton/Sanders. And then we will pass the "worst President ever!" title this decade.... seems to be the trend. First it was George Bush WORST President ever! Now it's Obama worst President ever! Next 4 more years, and [C/T/C/S] worst President ever!

The only thing that surprises me is that people actually think something will change.