A law-abiding responsible gun owner strikes again.

Page 2 of 6 [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,017
Location: Kansas

28 Jun 2016, 3:17 pm

A gun can't be locked out because that would render it useless when it's needed most. People have free will. People have killed people for ions. Not to trivialize what happened here, but again the Left is taking one shooting, blowing it out of proportion and labeling all gun owners as crazy and unable to handle a weapon. You could take guns away from mentally ill people (which this woman was - supposedly), but where does that stop? Who doesn't have a history of anxiety or depression? The man who tried to kill Trump had Autism. There's a lot of Aspies here that I would trust with a gun before some NT's. You want a free country - the freedom comes with people being allowed to have guns.


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


seaweed
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Sep 2015
Age: 31
Posts: 1,380
Location: underwater

28 Jun 2016, 3:42 pm

if nothing changes regarding gun laws then half of the US population gets even more angry and useless and the other half gets even more up their own asses. generally speaking. i want to keep the right to have my guns too but idk what kind of changes would actually work to benefit both humanitarian sides, i just know that possibilities exist. and personally i would not be concerned if it was more difficult to access guns because i'm a rational, non-violent, law-abiding US citizen and that's the literal price of freedom.



Earthbound
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Feb 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 756
Location: USA

28 Jun 2016, 3:48 pm

People will think up any "excuse" or "reason" to keep their precious guns. But what happens when someone you know (and love) get shot or killed by a gun? Then what? Do you continue to look the other way and spout the same old stuff?

Not trying to attack- just making a point. Enough is enough, there NEEDS to be more background checks, needs to be more restrictions.. period. Lives should be saved, not be at risk because of cowards that don't want to offend NRA and/or other people that are supplying them with hush money, bribe money, etc.

There is plenty of responsible gun owners, but there is plenty of people that shouldn't have guns. There needs to be better laws in place to stop them before crimes happen. Also I strongly feel the wait time to get a gun should be increased. NO EXCUSES.



nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,017
Location: Kansas

28 Jun 2016, 4:10 pm

seaweed wrote:
if nothing changes regarding gun laws then half of the US population gets even more angry and useless and the other half gets even more up their own asses. generally speaking. i want to keep the right to have my guns too but idk what kind of changes would actually work to benefit both humanitarian sides, i just know that possibilities exist. and personally i would not be concerned if it was more difficult to access guns because i'm a rational, non-violent, law-abiding US citizen and that's the literal price of freedom.


People think I'm crazy when I say it, but secession would solve all of these problems - guns, abortion, gay rights. States could make their own laws and a person could live in the state of their choosing. That way no certain laws are forced on people against their will. Things would be a lot more peaceful.


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


BaronHarkonnen85
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 26 May 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 297
Location: Tennessee

28 Jun 2016, 4:28 pm

Shooting your daughters is law-abiding, is it?

News to me.


_________________
--Baron Vladimir Harkonnen
The "Enlightenment" was the work of Satan


Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

28 Jun 2016, 4:51 pm

Earthbound wrote:
People will think up any "excuse" or "reason" to keep their precious guns. But what happens when someone you know (and love) get shot or killed by a gun? Then what? Do you continue to look the other way and spout the same old stuff?


The same as if they were killed by club, blade or fist.

Meaning, I'd blame the murderer, because that's the only person responsible.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

28 Jun 2016, 5:02 pm

Oh look, a tragedy being exploited for cheap political points by people who wouldn't even have the guts to enforce the restrictions they want.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


gingerpickles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2016
Age: 60
Gender: Female
Posts: 515
Location: USA

28 Jun 2016, 5:15 pm

The mother is a loon. However what was up?
"Identified As" thru a facebook post. Also had tons of nice stuff on her kids.
The woman is dead so no narrative from her is forthcoming obviously after shooting her kids she decided on suicide by cop.

What was the father's part in this... ?
He is present in the home during the fight. It is his birthday and no one is drunk. How the heck it get so bad?

Quote:
A family spat started inside the married couple’s Houston-area home and spiraled into gun violence that spilled out onto their street.


I will BET money there was a divorce announced (not justification).
Was she just at the party with a gun on her hip? <_<
She ran upstairs for one?

And who said she was responsible? Or law abiding? No former history is known. Maybe she was a juvie girl. Or a gold digger. Or mentally unstable because of depression meds....

I shall with hold harsher judgement for now. I think people that murder their own children are scum.


_________________
FFFFF Captchas.


BitterCoffee
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 4 Mar 2016
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 83

28 Jun 2016, 5:46 pm

nurseangela wrote:
Nothing will get done by the Democrats - they are just all talk. They need to put their own guns up or shut the hell up! And Harry Reid is the biggest doofus of them all.
(This post is to no one in particular that has posted in this thread)

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/06/25/2 ... gun-owners


The Democratic members of congress literally just filibustered the senate to bring forward a gun control vote.
They also just did a sit in on the house floor in order to bring another measure to vote.



BitterCoffee
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 4 Mar 2016
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 83

28 Jun 2016, 5:51 pm

Republicans in Missour repealed their universal background check law, the result was a 25% increase in homicides compared to other states[1]. California and Connecticut saw similar declines in gun deaths and homicides when they enacted universal background check laws[2][3].
The "assault rifle" ban in the 90's resulted in 85% less deaths in mass shootings[4].
Gun control saves lives, republicans need thousands of people need to die so criminals can have the ability to kill 50 people in a minute.

[1]http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/02/13/1589161/study-gun-homicides-increased-25-percent-after-missouri-background-check-laws-repeal/
[2]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26066959
[3]http://scienceblog.com/58818/broader-background-checks-and-denial-criteria-could-help-prevent-mass-shooting-catastrophes/
[4]http://election.princeton.edu/2012/12/14/did-the-federal-ban-on-assault-weapons-matter/



0regonGuy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Apr 2015
Posts: 658
Location: Oregon Coast

29 Jun 2016, 12:11 am

seaweed wrote:
wouldn't say she's law abiding or responsible..of course there was no way to really know that before she jumped off the edge.


She was the typical "law abiding and responsible gun owner" poster child for the NRA, right up until she did this. Gun fanatics are like pit bulls. They never hurt anyone, until they do. Which is why we shouldn't even take this "I'm a responsible gun owner" BS seriously.


_________________
Autism Social Forum
A place for autistic people to discuss their interests.


0regonGuy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Apr 2015
Posts: 658
Location: Oregon Coast

29 Jun 2016, 12:20 am

Earthbound wrote:
People will think up any "excuse" or "reason" to keep their precious guns. But what happens when someone you know (and love) get shot or killed by a gun? Then what? Do you continue to look the other way and spout the same old stuff?


"There is one argument, and one argument alone for having a gun, and this is the argument: f**k off, I like guns," - Jim Jefferies


_________________
Autism Social Forum
A place for autistic people to discuss their interests.


ZenDen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,730
Location: On top of the world

29 Jun 2016, 12:38 pm

BitterCoffee wrote:
Republicans in Missour repealed their universal background check law, the result was a 25% increase in homicides compared to other states[1]. California and Connecticut saw similar declines in gun deaths and homicides when they enacted universal background check laws[2][3].
The "assault rifle" ban in the 90's resulted in 85% less deaths in mass shootings[4].
Gun control saves lives, republicans need thousands of people need to die so criminals can have the ability to kill 50 people in a minute.

[1]http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/02/13/1589161/study-gun-homicides-increased-25-percent-after-missouri-background-check-laws-repeal/
[2]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26066959
[3]http://scienceblog.com/58818/broader-background-checks-and-denial-criteria-could-help-prevent-mass-shooting-catastrophes/
[4]http://election.princeton.edu/2012/12/14/did-the-federal-ban-on-assault-weapons-matter/


If you can pick and choose you can eventually find something that seems to back you up:

"[4]http://election.princeton.edu/2012/12/14/did-the-federal-ban-on-assault-weapons-matter/":

On this site a chart is available to show a temporary increase in gun crimes during the period when so called "assault weapon LIKE" rifles were NOT sold. I'll repeat: The ban on certain weapons did NOT make the gun crime rate (caused by the use of these weapons) go down AT ALL. The test to see if these weapons were related to higher crime rates PROVED there was NO correlation.

Additionally this chart shows after a peak of gun crimes during this period, the rate then fell to historic lows. Not at all what you were trying to propose. Nevertheless your statistics DO show the relative minor roll these semi-automatic rifles play in crime.



Lukeda420
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,640
Location: Chicago suburbs.

29 Jun 2016, 12:44 pm

The AWB had a limited effect because it only lasted ten years and it didn't take any weapons that were already in circulation. Had the ban stayed in effect the amount of assault rifles would dwindle and you'd see a greater effectiveness in the law.



ZenDen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,730
Location: On top of the world

29 Jun 2016, 12:58 pm

Lukeda420 wrote:
The AWB had a limited effect because it only lasted ten years and it didn't take any weapons that were already in circulation. Had the ban stayed in effect the amount of assault rifles would dwindle and you'd see a greater effectiveness in the law.


Well it's nice you can supply your own day dreams for facts, but no such "facts" exist.

Ten years is enough time to begin to see a correlation AND THERE WAS NONE...THAT'S "THE FACTS". In fact there may have been "negative" correlation.

And not mere speculation. Of all the semi-automatic weapons feared the most I'd say 99% are owned by honest citizens like you or myself. How many of these were used in a criminal manner? How many were used in an illegal manner?

And about the Big Lie calling sporting weapons "assault" weapons? This proves the fallacious intent of the whiners and obviates their argument.



Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

29 Jun 2016, 1:07 pm

ZenDen wrote:
Ten years is enough time to begin to see a correlation AND THERE WAS NONE.


My parents still use an old school rotary phone from the 70's, so does my aunt (they do own cells, but that is their primary phone and most used). The first Mario Bros came out in 85, 30 some years later people still play it, there are still cartridges around and systems to play them on. It takes a lot longer than a decade to knock something out of circulation. Once it's truly out of circulation then you can make a determination of success or failure.