Started By
Message
re: Is there anything funnier than a gun control advocate who doesnt know guns?
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:14 pm to stevengtiger
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:14 pm to stevengtiger
quote:
If you don't have to take a mental health evaluation to drive a car, purchase alcohol or fly on a plane, then you should not have to in order to purchase something that you are allowed to constitutionally.
The laws for illegal possession are already pretty strict especially if you are a convicted felon or have a gun on you while committing a crime.
What by your definition are "military style" weapons? Your AK47 reference earlier was pretty laughable. Please explain yourself more thoroughly if you want anyone to take you seriously with that. Not trying to rude either
You do have to pass a driving test, have basic level of insurance to drive...etc. Just because it is constitutionally protected doesn't mean it is without regulation. Should a 5 year old be able to carry a gun to school? They are protected by the constitution after all. There are obviously restrictions on gun ownership, that is just part of the deal.
I realize that the current laws are relatively strict, but why not make them more stringent? No parole type situations. Ups the ante and people are less likely to commit the crime.
"military style" is where it might get murky. Very difficult to separate various models and types. But I think some clarification would have to be a priority on this one.
2
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:15 pm to stevengtiger
quote:
If you don't have to take a mental health evaluation to drive a car, purchase alcohol or fly on a plane, then you should not have to in order to purchase something that you are allowed to constitutionally.
Cars, planes, and alcohols primary functions aren't to kill either.
Guns are designed around lethality.
Guns suck.
This post was edited on 4/7/15 at 2:16 pm
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:19 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
You do have to pass a driving test, have basic level of insurance to drive...etc. Just because it is constitutionally protected doesn't mean it is without regulation. Should a 5 year old be able to carry a gun to school? They are protected by the constitution after all. There are obviously restrictions on gun ownership, that is just part of the deal.
You are trolling on a level right now that I can't seem to understand. I am not even going to break down everything that is wrong in your point here.
quote:
Ups the ante and people are less likely to commit the crime.
People who commit these crimes don't care about the laws in the first place. Hence criminal.
quote:
Very difficult to separate various models and types
Not really imo. Fully auto, explosives, silencers is military equipment. You can buy and equip a shotgun that would make most gun control nuts say should be for military use only.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:20 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
Mental health evaluations are one of the biggest things for me
So we need some liberal psych doctor to start deciding who can and can't purchase weapons? Those are the same people who don't think we need guns. That is the ultimate control right there.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:20 pm to wadewilson
@wadewilson.
Dude. You have to calm down. We aren't actually in Congress enacting laws.
And since it is so important to you...I don't know why NY law is the way that it is. BAM. I don't know.
Dude. You have to calm down. We aren't actually in Congress enacting laws.
And since it is so important to you...I don't know why NY law is the way that it is. BAM. I don't know.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:21 pm to Rebelgator
quote:
Cars, planes, and alcohols primary functions aren't to kill either.
But they do everyday and kill alot more people than guns. If you have to get a pysch test to obtain a firearm, I would argue that you should to drive a car as well.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:25 pm to Rebelgator
quote:
Guns are designed around lethality.
Since there is zero chance of removing these lethal weapons from bad people and aggressive forces like police and military, decent people are going to continue to want them for protective purposes.
A different world, a different path taken by humanity and this question wouldn't be a question.
But it is.
Can't take guns away from decent people as long as bad and oppressive forces have them.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:26 pm to stevengtiger
quote:
If you don't have to take a mental health evaluation to drive a car, purchase alcohol or fly on a plane, then you should not have to in order to purchase something that you are allowed to constitutionally.
5 year olds are covered under the constitution. Should they be able to buy guns and take them to school?
quote:
People who commit these crimes don't care about the laws in the first place. Hence criminal.
People speed because the penalty is not severe enough to warrant a change in behavior. If the penalty for speeding was 5 years in prison, I bet alot less people would speed.
quote:
Not really imo. Fully auto, explosives, silencers is military equipment. You can buy and equip a shotgun that would make most gun control nuts say should be for military use only.
you are definitely entitled to that opinion, but if it was simple, I don't think it would be such a debate right now.
quote:
But they do everyday and kill alot more people than guns. If you have to get a pysch test to obtain a firearm, I would argue that you should to drive a car as well
I'd be fine with taking a psych test to drive. Plastic bags have killed people too, but that is not the intended use. The point by rebelgator was that guns are made to harm things. That is their primary function
This post was edited on 4/7/15 at 2:30 pm
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:31 pm to 5thTiger
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:33 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
5 year olds are covered under the constitution. Should they be able to buy guns and take them to school?
To purchase and open carry federal law states you must be 18 years old. Already regulated.
quote:
People speed because the penalty is not severe enough to warrant a change in behavior
You are comparing a petty crime (speeding) to a felony crime (possesion of a firearm). Carrying or using a firearm can bring about a life sentence depending on the crime, state and previous convictions.
quote:
I don't think it would be such a debate right now.
I don't think there is a debate unless you can tell me what your opinion of a "military style" weapon consist of.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:37 pm to Roger Klarvin
When a gun kills somebody without a human touching it, we can entertain bans. Until then, liberal hippies can frick off.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:42 pm to stevengtiger
quote:
Already regulated
The constitutional right to bear arms is regulated, and is legal to do so. Hence, the mental evaluations.
quote:
You are comparing a petty crime (speeding) to a felony crime (possesion of a firearm). Carrying or using a firearm can bring about a life sentence depending on the crime, state and previous convictions.
Crime is crime, is it not? The more the penalty, the less likely it is to commit the crime.
quote:
I don't think there is a debate unless you can tell me what your opinion of a "military style" weapon consist of
Cmon now. don't be like that.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:52 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
Cmon now. don't be like that.
Not sure whats funny? I gave you a few examples and you hvae not given any. Where is the debate?
quote:
The constitutional right to bear arms is regulated, and is legal to do so. Hence, the mental evaluations.
What?
quote:
Crime is crime
No. There are different levels of crime that bar different punishment. Misdemeanor crime is not felony crime.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:52 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
Dude. You have to calm down. We aren't actually in Congress enacting laws.
And since it is so important to you...I don't know why NY law is the way that it is. BAM. I don't know.
A. I'm perfectly calm.
B. You've shown very poor knowledge of gun laws and basic gun facts.
C. You've continually ignored questions that would give you the opportunity to elaborate your views.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 2:54 pm to wadewilson
quote:
You've shown very poor knowledge of gun laws and basic gun facts.
Check
quote:
You've continually ignored questions that would give you the opportunity to elaborate your views
Check
Seriously hope this dude is just trolling for bites. I have bitten hard but can't keep going. I feel like I am discussing a constitutional right with a 7th grader.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 3:00 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
5 year olds are covered under the constitution. Should they be able to buy guns and take them to school?
Why can't 5 year olds vote or buy alcohol?
quote:
People speed because the penalty is not severe enough to warrant a change in behavior. If the penalty for speeding was 5 years in prison, I bet alot less people would speed.
People who murder do so because penalties for murder are not strong enough to warrant a decrease in murdering. If the penalty for murder was lethal injection, I bet - oh, wait.
quote:
you are definitely entitled to that opinion, but if it was simple, I don't think it would be such a debate right now.
No, it's a debate because people like you, under the guise of protection, do not believe that Americans should own anything beyond bolt-action rifles and pump shotguns.
quote:
The point by rebelgator was that guns are made to harm things. That is their primary function
So we should only give them to police, who more often than not are no more responsible than the average American?
Posted on 4/7/15 at 3:02 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
Just because it is constitutionally protected doesn't mean it is without regulation.
Show me where in the constitution that driving a car is a "right".
You still never answered my question of how many guns have killed people.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 3:03 pm to stevengtiger
quote:
Not sure whats funny? I gave you a few examples and you hvae not given any. Where is the debate?
I find it funny that you are so rustled by my lack of defining "military weapons"
quote:
What?
You argued that it is your constitutional right to buy and own guns. I said the bit about 5-year olds. You then pointed to the regulation about 18 year olds (I'm assuming you believe this regulation is perfectly acceptable), Then...I pointed out that you accept the fact that your constitutional right to buy and own guns is in fact able to be regulated, and that in that regulation mental health evaluations are a legal possibility without violating your constitutional rights.
quote:
There are different levels of crime that bar different punishment. Misdemeanor crime is not felony crime.
I agree. Thats why different levels of crime have different punishments. I'm arguing to raise the punishments. Using the sociology of the human mind with the economic principal of cost-benefit analysis, I concluded that Americans respond to penalties. Using a very simple example of speeding, I showed that human behavior would likely change when the penalty is increased.
This post was edited on 4/7/15 at 3:05 pm
Posted on 4/7/15 at 3:04 pm to 5thTiger
Mental evaluations rely on subjective analysis by people who may or may not be biased.
If anything, the GCA of 86 and 68 need to be reevaluated and many of the restrictions, done away with due to the UnConstitutional nature of them.
If anything, the GCA of 86 and 68 need to be reevaluated and many of the restrictions, done away with due to the UnConstitutional nature of them.
Posted on 4/7/15 at 3:05 pm to stevengtiger
quote:
Seriously hope this dude is just trolling for bites. I have bitten hard but can't keep going. I feel like I am discussing a constitutional right with a 7th grader.
I'm just continuing this because this is an almost-perfect example of the two opposing sides in the gun debate. The only thing this guy hasn't done yet is scream about murdered children.
Page 7 of 10
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News