Common Sense Gun Laws

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:- license and pass a safety test (just like we have for cars)
- license can be taken away for violations, safety hazards (just like for cars)
- insurance required (just like we have for cars)
- police need to have more powerful weapons that citizenry are allowed (just like for cars, police can access equipment citizenry can’t)

Americans love cars just like they love guns. But we seem not to have totally lost their mind over them.

I absolutely disagree with your stance on police. They and the rest of us non military need nothing more than a handgun and in reality I'd prefer not even that.

Those in the military can have other styles of guns when on duty only. Not to be kept at home. Same for those that hunt.they can go to designated areas and sign in and out

This is not constitutional. But even if it was now you do not have the support needed to do anything.

Excellent image. We don't have to accept this extremely perverted nonsense the gun nuts try to sell about the 2nd amendment.

This is our country to set the rules that we want. The usa does not belong to daniel defense and it's Ilk so they can shove off.

Play on words like this is asinine and convinces no one. By this same rationale, we can't maintain a police department for the purpose of public peace keeping if individual police officers may be corrupt.

To the contrary, that an assault weapons ban is perfectly legal and desireable is a fact.

What's wrong? You will miss strutting around and shooting your big big big powerful assualt weapon? Awwww. It will be ok.

You have the burden of proof on that.

I don't know where you live that have people strutting around and just shooting their guns off, but I recommend that you move asap.

We had an assualt weapon ban and a high capacity magazines ban and it was fine. It was not struck down....pathetically it expired. It will be even more pathetic if we do not reinstate it.

Recent bans have been ruled unconstitutional. It's highly likely that the original ban was also unconstitutional given recent court outcome. So again, you have the burden of proof.

2A definitely says "well regulated militia"

If SCOTUS isn't specifically addressing that then SCOTUS would be behaving unconstitutionally and shouldn't be allowed to overturn regulation.

That clause does not allow a ban on so-called assault weapons.

We get that you are pleased with shooting or selling weapons that blow people's heads off quickly and efficiently one after the other. But you can find another hobby or another product to sell. If this country does not want these weapons to be legal, then we will arrange to have them not be legal. That's the way the cookie crumbles

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks: "Gun Control" is a dead term. It died at Sandy Hook. The new term is Massacre Reduction. Pass it on.

Yea, seems like a good way to refocus our efforts on the root cause of mental health crisis.

Great idea!!!

In your mind, does only the US have mental health issues?

You can't be this stupid, but yet you are. The US has one of the highest rates of depression in the world, especially depression experienced by men. We also have one of the worst mental health care systems in terms of rates of intervention. The quality of care is the best in the world, but it's just not well utilized.

Depending on what set of statistics you use, the US certainly has a high rate of depression among men, but not sufficiently out of whack with other countries such that we have to live with mass shootings. If you disagree, please post your data source.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks: "Gun Control" is a dead term. It died at Sandy Hook. The new term is Massacre Reduction. Pass it on.

Yea, seems like a good way to refocus our efforts on the root cause of mental health crisis.

Great idea!!!

In your mind, does only the US have mental health issues?

You can't be this stupid, but yet you are. The US has one of the highest rates of depression in the world, especially depression experienced by men. We also have one of the worst mental health care systems in terms of rates of intervention. The quality of care is the best in the world, but it's just not well utilized.

See, the GOP keeps on saying that mental health is the problem, but they do nothing to improve access to mental health care or any kind of healthcare. I couldn't find any psychologists in my area that took health insurance. I called and asked one place that had a sliding scale what we'd qualify for as a family of 3 with a $100k HHI and they told me $190 per session. Our insurance, the best our employers offered, doesn't reimburse out of network expenses. Who can pay $190 every week out of pocket? If mental health is the problem, the GOP needs to put its money where its mouth is and make getting help easier and more affordable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:- license and pass a safety test (just like we have for cars)
- license can be taken away for violations, safety hazards (just like for cars)
- insurance required (just like we have for cars)
- police need to have more powerful weapons that citizenry are allowed (just like for cars, police can access equipment citizenry can’t)

Americans love cars just like they love guns. But we seem not to have totally lost their mind over them.

I absolutely disagree with your stance on police. They and the rest of us non military need nothing more than a handgun and in reality I'd prefer not even that.

Those in the military can have other styles of guns when on duty only. Not to be kept at home. Same for those that hunt.they can go to designated areas and sign in and out

This is not constitutional. But even if it was now you do not have the support needed to do anything.

Excellent image. We don't have to accept this extremely perverted nonsense the gun nuts try to sell about the 2nd amendment.

This is our country to set the rules that we want. The usa does not belong to daniel defense and it's Ilk so they can shove off.

Play on words like this is asinine and convinces no one. By this same rationale, we can't maintain a police department for the purpose of public peace keeping if individual police officers may be corrupt.

To the contrary, that an assault weapons ban is perfectly legal and desireable is a fact.

What's wrong? You will miss strutting around and shooting your big big big powerful assualt weapon? Awwww. It will be ok.

You have the burden of proof on that.

I don't know where you live that have people strutting around and just shooting their guns off, but I recommend that you move asap.

We had an assualt weapon ban and a high capacity magazines ban and it was fine. It was not struck down....pathetically it expired. It will be even more pathetic if we do not reinstate it.

Recent bans have been ruled unconstitutional pending appeal. It's likely scotus will rule on this again. It's highly likely that the original ban was also unconstitutional given recent court outcome. So again, you have the burden of proof.

Scotus? One scotus rules a right is constitutional and the next one strips it away. Scotus is political and the rulings will change according to who is on the court.

Right, so there is no definite proof that assault weapons ban is constitutional. That's my point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:- license and pass a safety test (just like we have for cars)
- license can be taken away for violations, safety hazards (just like for cars)
- insurance required (just like we have for cars)
- police need to have more powerful weapons that citizenry are allowed (just like for cars, police can access equipment citizenry can’t)

Americans love cars just like they love guns. But we seem not to have totally lost their mind over them.

I absolutely disagree with your stance on police. They and the rest of us non military need nothing more than a handgun and in reality I'd prefer not even that.

Those in the military can have other styles of guns when on duty only. Not to be kept at home. Same for those that hunt.they can go to designated areas and sign in and out

This is not constitutional. But even if it was now you do not have the support needed to do anything.

Excellent image. We don't have to accept this extremely perverted nonsense the gun nuts try to sell about the 2nd amendment.

This is our country to set the rules that we want. The usa does not belong to daniel defense and it's Ilk so they can shove off.

Play on words like this is asinine and convinces no one. By this same rationale, we can't maintain a police department for the purpose of public peace keeping if individual police officers may be corrupt.

To the contrary, that an assault weapons ban is perfectly legal and desireable is a fact.

What's wrong? You will miss strutting around and shooting your big big big powerful assualt weapon? Awwww. It will be ok.

You have the burden of proof on that.

I don't know where you live that have people strutting around and just shooting their guns off, but I recommend that you move asap.

We had an assualt weapon ban and a high capacity magazines ban and it was fine. It was not struck down....pathetically it expired. It will be even more pathetic if we do not reinstate it.

Recent bans have been ruled unconstitutional. It's highly likely that the original ban was also unconstitutional given recent court outcome. So again, you have the burden of proof.

2A definitely says "well regulated militia"

If SCOTUS isn't specifically addressing that then SCOTUS would be behaving unconstitutionally and shouldn't be allowed to overturn regulation.

That clause does not allow a ban on so-called assault weapons.

We get that you are pleased with shooting or selling weapons that blow people's heads off quickly and efficiently one after the other. But you can find another hobby or another product to sell. If this country does not want these weapons to be legal, then we will arrange to have them not be legal. That's the way the cookie crumbles

+1 Imagine valuing a dangerous hobby over the lives of children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:- license and pass a safety test (just like we have for cars)
- license can be taken away for violations, safety hazards (just like for cars)
- insurance required (just like we have for cars)
- police need to have more powerful weapons that citizenry are allowed (just like for cars, police can access equipment citizenry can’t)

Americans love cars just like they love guns. But we seem not to have totally lost their mind over them.

I absolutely disagree with your stance on police. They and the rest of us non military need nothing more than a handgun and in reality I'd prefer not even that.

Those in the military can have other styles of guns when on duty only. Not to be kept at home. Same for those that hunt.they can go to designated areas and sign in and out

This is not constitutional. But even if it was now you do not have the support needed to do anything.

Excellent image. We don't have to accept this extremely perverted nonsense the gun nuts try to sell about the 2nd amendment.

This is our country to set the rules that we want. The usa does not belong to daniel defense and it's Ilk so they can shove off.

Play on words like this is asinine and convinces no one. By this same rationale, we can't maintain a police department for the purpose of public peace keeping if individual police officers may be corrupt.

To the contrary, that an assault weapons ban is perfectly legal and desireable is a fact.

What's wrong? You will miss strutting around and shooting your big big big powerful assualt weapon? Awwww. It will be ok.

You have the burden of proof on that.

I don't know where you live that have people strutting around and just shooting their guns off, but I recommend that you move asap.

We had an assualt weapon ban and a high capacity magazines ban and it was fine. It was not struck down....pathetically it expired. It will be even more pathetic if we do not reinstate it.

Recent bans have been ruled unconstitutional pending appeal. It's likely scotus will rule on this again. It's highly likely that the original ban was also unconstitutional given recent court outcome. So again, you have the burden of proof.

Scotus? One scotus rules a right is constitutional and the next one strips it away. Scotus is political and the rulings will change according to who is on the court.

Right, so there is no definite proof that assault weapons ban is constitutional. That's my point.

There is no definite anything. We the people. If we want abortions to not be constitutional, rights, we make a plan to get justices on the court that will strike down that right and voila...it is no longer a constitutional right.

If justices are put on the court that will uphold a ban then they will up uphold a ban.

[Anonymous]

The votes are not there to do more than red flag laws, enhanced background checks, maybe waiting periods, maybe high capacity magazines, Juvi record considered for under 25, maybe raise age to 21. Beyond that, votes are not there.

You act as if it is a small minority. It’s not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks: "Gun Control" is a dead term. It died at Sandy Hook. The new term is Massacre Reduction. Pass it on.

Yea, seems like a good way to refocus our efforts on the root cause of mental health crisis.

Great idea!!!

In your mind, does only the US have mental health issues?

You can't be this stupid, but yet you are. The US has one of the highest rates of depression in the world, especially depression experienced by men. We also have one of the worst mental health care systems in terms of rates of intervention. The quality of care is the best in the world, but it's just not well utilized.

See, the GOP keeps on saying that mental health is the problem, but they do nothing to improve access to mental health care or any kind of healthcare. I couldn't find any psychologists in my area that took health insurance. I called and asked one place that had a sliding scale what we'd qualify for as a family of 3 with a $100k HHI and they told me $190 per session. Our insurance, the best our employers offered, doesn't reimburse out of network expenses. Who can pay $190 every week out of pocket? If mental health is the problem, the GOP needs to put its money where its mouth is and make getting help easier and more affordable.

The US spends about as much on mental health services, relative to all healthcare spending, as other countries. Which is to say, a lot. In the debate about gun violence, citing mental health as an issue is not a call to improve mental health services. The kinds of mental health issues we are talking about are sort of treatable, but not curable in any way. When citing mental health as an issue, the objective is to get guns out of the hands of those that are ill, and to get those that are ill on NICS so they can’t legally take possession.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The votes are not there to do more than red flag laws, enhanced background checks, maybe waiting periods, maybe high capacity magazines, Juvi record considered for under 25, maybe raise age to 21. Beyond that, votes are not there.

You act as if it is a small minority. It’s not.

Well the votes were not there for overturning Roe and a concerted effort was made and overturned it will be. No one is under the illusion that this will change tomorrow but it there is will to do something and an effective strategy to accomplish it, then it can happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:- license and pass a safety test (just like we have for cars)
- license can be taken away for violations, safety hazards (just like for cars)
- insurance required (just like we have for cars)
- police need to have more powerful weapons that citizenry are allowed (just like for cars, police can access equipment citizenry can’t)

Americans love cars just like they love guns. But we seem not to have totally lost their mind over them.

I absolutely disagree with your stance on police. They and the rest of us non military need nothing more than a handgun and in reality I'd prefer not even that.

Those in the military can have other styles of guns when on duty only. Not to be kept at home. Same for those that hunt.they can go to designated areas and sign in and out

This is not constitutional. But even if it was now you do not have the support needed to do anything.

Excellent image. We don't have to accept this extremely perverted nonsense the gun nuts try to sell about the 2nd amendment.

This is our country to set the rules that we want. The usa does not belong to daniel defense and it's Ilk so they can shove off.

Play on words like this is asinine and convinces no one. By this same rationale, we can't maintain a police department for the purpose of public peace keeping if individual police officers may be corrupt.

To the contrary, that an assault weapons ban is perfectly legal and desireable is a fact.

What's wrong? You will miss strutting around and shooting your big big big powerful assualt weapon? Awwww. It will be ok.

You have the burden of proof on that.

I don't know where you live that have people strutting around and just shooting their guns off, but I recommend that you move asap.

We had an assualt weapon ban and a high capacity magazines ban and it was fine. It was not struck down....pathetically it expired. It will be even more pathetic if we do not reinstate it.

Recent bans have been ruled unconstitutional. It's highly likely that the original ban was also unconstitutional given recent court outcome. So again, you have the burden of proof.

2A definitely says "well regulated militia"

If SCOTUS isn't specifically addressing that then SCOTUS would be behaving unconstitutionally and shouldn't be allowed to overturn regulation.

That clause does not allow a ban on so-called assault weapons.

We get that you are pleased with shooting or selling weapons that blow people's heads off quickly and efficiently one after the other. But you can find another hobby or another product to sell. If this country does not want these weapons to be legal, then we will arrange to have them not be legal. That's the way the cookie crumbles

+1 Imagine valuing a dangerous hobby over the lives of children.

The GOP apparently doesn't care. The $$$ from the hobby are more important.

[Anonymous]

POTUS jabbering on about 9 mm rounds- really, is gun control going to be lead by this senile old fool?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:- license and pass a safety test (just like we have for cars)
- license can be taken away for violations, safety hazards (just like for cars)
- insurance required (just like we have for cars)
- police need to have more powerful weapons that citizenry are allowed (just like for cars, police can access equipment citizenry can’t)

Americans love cars just like they love guns. But we seem not to have totally lost their mind over them.

I absolutely disagree with your stance on police. They and the rest of us non military need nothing more than a handgun and in reality I'd prefer not even that.

Those in the military can have other styles of guns when on duty only. Not to be kept at home. Same for those that hunt.they can go to designated areas and sign in and out

This is not constitutional. But even if it was now you do not have the support needed to do anything.

Excellent image. We don't have to accept this extremely perverted nonsense the gun nuts try to sell about the 2nd amendment.

This is our country to set the rules that we want. The usa does not belong to daniel defense and it's Ilk so they can shove off.

Play on words like this is asinine and convinces no one. By this same rationale, we can't maintain a police department for the purpose of public peace keeping if individual police officers may be corrupt.

To the contrary, that an assault weapons ban is perfectly legal and desireable is a fact.

What's wrong? You will miss strutting around and shooting your big big big powerful assualt weapon? Awwww. It will be ok.

You have the burden of proof on that.

I don't know where you live that have people strutting around and just shooting their guns off, but I recommend that you move asap.

We had an assualt weapon ban and a high capacity magazines ban and it was fine. It was not struck down....pathetically it expired. It will be even more pathetic if we do not reinstate it.

Recent bans have been ruled unconstitutional pending appeal. It's likely scotus will rule on this again. It's highly likely that the original ban was also unconstitutional given recent court outcome. So again, you have the burden of proof.

Scotus? One scotus rules a right is constitutional and the next one strips it away. Scotus is political and the rulings will change according to who is on the court.

Right, so there is no definite proof that assault weapons ban is constitutional. That's my point.

There is no definite anything. We the people. If we want abortions to not be constitutional, rights, we make a plan to get justices on the court that will strike down that right and voila...it is no longer a constitutional right.

If justices are put on the court that will uphold a ban then they will up uphold a ban.

We need to find them, vet them and work in getting a scotus for the people asap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:POTUS jabbering on about 9 mm rounds- really, is gun control going to be lead by this senile old fool?

Still bitter he defeated tiny hands? It will be ok.

[Anonymous]

My AR-15 is my freedom machine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My AR-15 is my freedom machine.

Is that from one of those stupid daniel defense promos?