Filibuster for Gun Safety

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yet, again, fine-I'm willing to compromise that current laws can be better enforced. Help us figure out how to do that. Help us to figure out how to keep obvious whackos like this dude and Lanza and countless others from obtaining weapons.

But ffs, help us do something, anything, to stop this insanity.

One of the things we can do is to stop demonizing people who report things that are suspicious.
Remember how the teacher who reported the “clock boy” incident was treated and how this administration embraced clock boy and his family?
This kind of nonsense really discourages others to report suspicious behavior for fear they will be raked over the coals.

because at some point someone will use racial profiling for innocuous situations, kind of like that elderly Indian man who was walking in a neighborhood, and someone called the cops. The cop tackled the man, and now he's paralyzed. All because he was walking while brown.

https://www.rt.com/usa/329006-alabama-police-indian-national/

"In February 2015, Parker, who was responding to a "skinny black guy" walking suspiciously in a Madison, Alabama, neighborhood, encountered non-English speaking Indian national Sureshbhai Patel, who was walking near his son's house. Police dashcam video captured Parker slamming the grandfather, then 57, to the ground, leaving him partially paralyzed."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who filibustering to protect us from criminals? Criminals will not surrender their guns. If they don't have one yet need one, they'll get one. That's wha criminals do. They don't obey law.

How many 'criminals" have shot up schools and workplaces? Most of these guys bought guns legally, and even passed a background check. These guys weren't criminals until they started shooting at people.

I have kids. I don't worry about "criminals" shooting the school. I do worry about the crazies who can buy guns easily because they don't have a criminal record yet shooting the schools.

How many "criminals" have you shot at, or how many times have you had to use a gun to protect yourself from a criminal? Yes, I know it happens. But you know what seems to happens more frequently? Kids dying from an accidental shooting either from their own hands or other kids' hands. You know how many school shootings there were? Probably more than the number of times you might've had to use that gun to protect yourself.

This emotional tirade, based upon the author's unnatural fear of guns, is completely devoid of facts.

Every shooter that shot up a school or bar was a criminal! They intended to commit a crime, set a plan, and executed a plan. They put a lot of time and effort into their plans - Columbine and San Hook illegally procured guns by theft. Orlando did so legally buT he would have found a way to murder all those people with or without legally getting guns. You don't spend all that time and effort planning something only to give up because you can't buy a gun. He could have made PVC pipe bombs just as easy (Columbine duo made almost a 100) or done something else. He planned on breaking the law by illegally carrying a handgun without a license, he illegally carried weapons into an establishment that sold alcohol, he illegally carried gun into an establishment with a no-carry sign, he illegally fired a weapon in a public establishment, he illegally shot over 100 individuals, and he illegally murdered 49 others. But I'm sure he NEVER would have illegally found a means to procure a weapon if he couldn't have legally bought one. How silly of me.

We can't even enforce current law and you think new ones will solve everything. Why not question why the FBI wasn't informed of his intent to purchase when the first gun shop turned him away and report suspicious behavior? Or when Disney reported his suspicious behavior? The FBI had him! What stopped them? Fix those laws. Enforce current laws.

? Every shooter was not a criminal until they shot up a school. And many of the shooters got the guns legally.

As I stated before, there are crazy people everywhere, and no, you can't stop every crazy person, but we should make it harder, not easier for them to kill so many people in the span of a few minutes, and I'm not just talking about the shooting in Orlando.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yet, again, fine-I'm willing to compromise that current laws can be better enforced. Help us figure out how to do that. Help us to figure out how to keep obvious whackos like this dude and Lanza and countless others from obtaining weapons.

But ffs, help us do something, anything, to stop this insanity.

One of the things we can do is to stop demonizing people who report things that are suspicious.
Remember how the teacher who reported the “clock boy” incident was treated and how this administration embraced clock boy and his family?
This kind of nonsense really discourages others to report suspicious behavior for fear they will be raked over the coals.

because at some point someone will use racial profiling for innocuous situations, kind of like that elderly Indian man who was walking in a neighborhood, and someone called the cops. The cop tackled the man, and now he's paralyzed. All because he was walking while brown.

https://www.rt.com/usa/329006-alabama-police-indian-national/

"In February 2015, Parker, who was responding to a "skinny black guy" walking suspiciously in a Madison, Alabama, neighborhood, encountered non-English speaking Indian national Sureshbhai Patel, who was walking near his son's house. Police dashcam video captured Parker slamming the grandfather, then 57, to the ground, leaving him partially paralyzed."

I totally disagree with pp. There's a vast area between making sure we don't demonize those who bring up concerns, and a cop who really went off the rails for a man peacefully walking through a quiet neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yet, again, fine-I'm willing to compromise that current laws can be better enforced. Help us figure out how to do that. Help us to figure out how to keep obvious whackos like this dude and Lanza and countless others from obtaining weapons.

But ffs, help us do something, anything, to stop this insanity.

One of the things we can do is to stop demonizing people who report things that are suspicious.
Remember how the teacher who reported the “clock boy” incident was treated and how this administration embraced clock boy and his family?
This kind of nonsense really discourages others to report suspicious behavior for fear they will be raked over the coals.

because at some point someone will use racial profiling for innocuous situations, kind of like that elderly Indian man who was walking in a neighborhood, and someone called the cops. The cop tackled the man, and now he's paralyzed. All because he was walking while brown.

https://www.rt.com/usa/329006-alabama-police-indian-national/

"In February 2015, Parker, who was responding to a "skinny black guy" walking suspiciously in a Madison, Alabama, neighborhood, encountered non-English speaking Indian national Sureshbhai Patel, who was walking near his son's house. Police dashcam video captured Parker slamming the grandfather, then 57, to the ground, leaving him partially paralyzed."

I totally disagree with pp. There's a vast area between making sure we don't demonize those who bring up concerns, and a cop who really went off the rails for a man peacefully walking through a quiet neighborhood.

PP here. Of course. I totally agree with that. My point was that some people will not only use racial profiling, but some will take it to the extreme because of some perceived threat.

It's not all that different to how minorities are pulled over more frequently than white people. Talk to a Black man, and now a ME man. Some people will use this excuse to beat up on innocents, like the Seikhs who were beat up because some asshole thought he was a ME terrorist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yet, again, fine-I'm willing to compromise that current laws can be better enforced. Help us figure out how to do that. Help us to figure out how to keep obvious whackos like this dude and Lanza and countless others from obtaining weapons.

But ffs, help us do something, anything, to stop this insanity.

I am a supporter of 2nd amendment (clearly). However, I do think gun ownership comes with a lot of responsibility. Only concealed carry holders are have to take a class, demonstrate safety and security, and hold a license. I do think anyone that wants to own a gun should have to go through these regulations. I have zero issue having gun holders maintain a licensing requirement. I think all gun owners should be required to own gun safes. Ours is 1000 lbs empty and bolted to the floor-no why anyone without the code (only my husband and I) could get in to access a gun. But I also know guns will still be procured illegally-more funds and support is needed for police and law enforcement to do their job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who filibustering to protect us from criminals? Criminals will not surrender their guns. If they don't have one yet need one, they'll get one. That's wha criminals do. They don't obey law.

How many 'criminals" have shot up schools and workplaces? Most of these guys bought guns legally, and even passed a background check. These guys weren't criminals until they started shooting at people.

I have kids. I don't worry about "criminals" shooting the school. I do worry about the crazies who can buy guns easily because they don't have a criminal record yet shooting the schools.

How many "criminals" have you shot at, or how many times have you had to use a gun to protect yourself from a criminal? Yes, I know it happens. But you know what seems to happens more frequently? Kids dying from an accidental shooting either from their own hands or other kids' hands. You know how many school shootings there were? Probably more than the number of times you might've had to use that gun to protect yourself.

This emotional tirade, based upon the author's unnatural fear of guns, is completely devoid of facts.

.



Every shooter that shot up a school or bar was a criminal! They intended to commit a crime, set a plan, and executed a plan. They put a lot of time and effort into their plans - Columbine and San Hook illegally procured guns by theft. Orlando did so legally buT he would have found a way to murder all those people with or without legally getting guns. You don't spend all that time and effort planning something only to give up because you can't buy a gun. He could have made PVC pipe bombs just as easy (Columbine duo made almost a 100) or done something else. He planned on breaking the law by illegally carrying a handgun without a license, he illegally carried weapons into an establishment that sold alcohol, he illegally carried gun into an establishment with a no-carry sign, he illegally fired a weapon in a public establishment, he illegally shot over 100 individuals, and he illegally murdered 49 others. But I'm sure he NEVER would have illegally found a means to procure a weapon if he couldn't have legally bought one. How silly of me.

We can't even enforce current law and you think new ones will solve everything. Why not question why the FBI wasn't informed of his intent to purchase when the first gun shop turned him away and report suspicious behavior? Or when Disney reported his suspicious behavior? The FBI had him! What stopped them? Fix those laws. Enforce current laws.

? Every shooter was not a criminal until they shot up a school. And many of the shooters got the guns legally.

As I stated before, there are crazy people everywhere, and no, you can't stop every crazy person, but we should make it harder, not easier for them to kill so many people in the span of a few minutes, and I'm not just talking about the shooting in Orlando.

.

Why do all shootings happen in gun-free zones? Because the majority of gun owners obey the law. If you are crazy and want to kill a bunch people you want to first make sure you can do that by choosing a place where almost no one can fire back. I know there was one off duty cop. But he couldn't get close enough to routine fire without worrying about hitting someone. And I say this with the utmost respect for law enforcement but most cannot hit a moving target-they just do t practice it (although defensive pistol practice is becoming more popular). Do you think a shooter would try and attack a place when 50 out of the 300 May have been armed? probably not. Crazy people are crazy, not stupid. Why did the Boston marathon bomber use pressure cooker bombs and not guns? Too much security that would have fired back? I don't know. The issue with Orlando is not the gun. The gun is a tool. Taking away the fun doesn't make what he did harder necessarily. He could have just as easily driving a car into the building with a homemade bomb. What would have made it harder for these guys would be to imprison them when we had the chance. Or had better monitoring in place but again lots of crazy people with limited money and resources to track them all. Some will slip through so we need a fall back. Maybe one cop in a bar that holds 350 isn't enough. Maybe one cop per 25 people. Plainclothes cops in large numbers would make someone think twice. So maybe they decide not to use a gun-maybe they decide to make a bomb instead and maybe the us can better track who are purchasing material to build bombs or googling it and they can catch these guys sooner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who filibustering to protect us from criminals? Criminals will not surrender their guns. If they don't have one yet need one, they'll get one. That's wha criminals do. They don't obey law.

How many 'criminals" have shot up schools and workplaces? Most of these guys bought guns legally, and even passed a background check. These guys weren't criminals until they started shooting at people.

I have kids. I don't worry about "criminals" shooting the school. I do worry about the crazies who can buy guns easily because they don't have a criminal record yet shooting the schools.

How many "criminals" have you shot at, or how many times have you had to use a gun to protect yourself from a criminal? Yes, I know it happens. But you know what seems to happens more frequently? Kids dying from an accidental shooting either from their own hands or other kids' hands. You know how many school shootings there were? Probably more than the number of times you might've had to use that gun to protect yourself.

This emotional tirade, based upon the author's unnatural fear of guns, is completely devoid of facts.

.

At



Every shooter that shot up a school or bar was a criminal! They intended to commit a crime, set a plan, and executed a plan. They put a lot of time and effort into their plans - Columbine and San Hook illegally procured guns by theft. Orlando did so legally buT he would have found a way to murder all those people with or without legally getting guns. You don't spend all that time and effort planning something only to give up because you can't buy a gun. He could have made PVC pipe bombs just as easy (Columbine duo made almost a 100) or done something else. He planned on breaking the law by illegally carrying a handgun without a license, he illegally carried weapons into an establishment that sold alcohol, he illegally carried gun into an establishment with a no-carry sign, he illegally fired a weapon in a public establishment, he illegally shot over 100 individuals, and he illegally murdered 49 others. But I'm sure he NEVER would have illegally found a means to procure a weapon if he couldn't have legally bought one. How silly of me.

We can't even enforce current law and you think new ones will solve everything. Why not question why the FBI wasn't informed of his intent to purchase when the first gun shop turned him away and report suspicious behavior? Or when Disney reported his suspicious behavior? The FBI had him! What stopped them? Fix those laws. Enforce current laws.

? Every shooter was not a criminal until they shot up a school. And many of the shooters got the guns legally.

As I stated before, there are crazy people everywhere, and no, you can't stop every crazy person, but we should make it harder, not easier for them to kill so many people in the span of a few minutes, and I'm not just talking about the shooting in Orlando.

.

Why do all shootings happen in gun-free zones? Because the majority of gun owners obey the law. If you are crazy and want to kill a bunch people you want to first make sure you can do that by choosing a place where almost no one can fire back. I know there was one off duty cop. But he couldn't get close enough to routine fire without worrying about hitting someone. And I say this with the utmost respect for law enforcement but most cannot hit a moving target-they just do t practice it (although defensive pistol practice is becoming more popular). Do you think a shooter would try and attack a place when 50 out of the 300 May have been armed? probably not. Crazy people are crazy, not stupid. Why did the Boston marathon bomber use pressure cooker bombs and not guns? Too much security that would have fired back? I don't know. The issue with Orlando is not the gun. The gun is a tool. Taking away the fun doesn't make what he did harder necessarily. He could have just as easily driving a car into the building with a homemade bomb. What would have made it harder for these guys would be to imprison them when we had the chance. Or had better monitoring in place but again lots of crazy people with limited money and resources to track them all. Some will slip through so we need a fall back. Maybe one cop in a bar that holds 350 isn't enough. Maybe one cop per 25 people. Plainclothes cops in large numbers would make someone think twice. So maybe they decide not to use a gun-maybe they decide to make a bomb instead and maybe the us can better track who are purchasing material to build bombs or googling it and they can catch these guys sooner.

my wedding our venue required 1 officer per 50 people since we were serving alcohol as a precaution. That's seems reasonable. 1 cop for 300 is probably not enough. The toddler that died at Disney was tragic and many would say it was Disneys responsibility to provide for the safety of its patrons (as much as they could) so isn't it also then any business owners responsibility? Maybe require at least 1 cop per 100? But then there is the debate over cost and is that a police state? Again I don't know. I do know BOTH sides have to be willing to compromise. As a gun owner I'm fine having mandatory license's for ownership but I can't speak for all them. Or making semi-auto rifles like AR15 a class C (or new glass) firearm. However I don't believe that will solve the issue since in get real banning things only seems to make it easier for criminals. Ban drugs, gangs see drugs as a means to make money, drugs become s bigger issue. I think an AR15 gun ban will do the same, but the other side doesn't believe that and since both sides need to give and I get that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who filibustering to protect us from criminals? Criminals will not surrender their guns. If they don't have one yet need one, they'll get one. That's wha criminals do. They don't obey law.

How many 'criminals" have shot up schools and workplaces? Most of these guys bought guns legally, and even passed a background check. These guys weren't criminals until they started shooting at people.

I have kids. I don't worry about "criminals" shooting the school. I do worry about the crazies who can buy guns easily because they don't have a criminal record yet shooting the schools.

How many "criminals" have you shot at, or how many times have you had to use a gun to protect yourself from a criminal? Yes, I know it happens. But you know what seems to happens more frequently? Kids dying from an accidental shooting either from their own hands or other kids' hands. You know how many school shootings there were? Probably more than the number of times you might've had to use that gun to protect yourself.

This emotional tirade, based upon the author's unnatural fear of guns, is completely devoid of facts.

.



Every shooter that shot up a school or bar was a criminal! They intended to commit a crime, set a plan, and executed a plan. They put a lot of time and effort into their plans - Columbine and San Hook illegally procured guns by theft. Orlando did so legally buT he would have found a way to murder all those people with or without legally getting guns. You don't spend all that time and effort planning something only to give up because you can't buy a gun. He could have made PVC pipe bombs just as easy (Columbine duo made almost a 100) or done something else. He planned on breaking the law by illegally carrying a handgun without a license, he illegally carried weapons into an establishment that sold alcohol, he illegally carried gun into an establishment with a no-carry sign, he illegally fired a weapon in a public establishment, he illegally shot over 100 individuals, and he illegally murdered 49 others. But I'm sure he NEVER would have illegally found a means to procure a weapon if he couldn't have legally bought one. How silly of me.

We can't even enforce current law and you think new ones will solve everything. Why not question why the FBI wasn't informed of his intent to purchase when the first gun shop turned him away and report suspicious behavior? Or when Disney reported his suspicious behavior? The FBI had him! What stopped them? Fix those laws. Enforce current laws.

? Every shooter was not a criminal until they shot up a school. And many of the shooters got the guns legally.

As I stated before, there are crazy people everywhere, and no, you can't stop every crazy person, but we should make it harder, not easier for them to kill so many people in the span of a few minutes, and I'm not just talking about the shooting in Orlando.

.

Why do all shootings happen in gun-free zones? Because the majority of gun owners obey the law. If you are crazy and want to kill a bunch people you want to first make sure you can do that by choosing a place where almost no one can fire back. I know there was one off duty cop. But he couldn't get close enough to routine fire without worrying about hitting someone. And I say this with the utmost respect for law enforcement but most cannot hit a moving target-they just do t practice it (although defensive pistol practice is becoming more popular). Do you think a shooter would try and attack a place when 50 out of the 300 May have been armed? probably not. Crazy people are crazy, not stupid. Why did the Boston marathon bomber use pressure cooker bombs and not guns? Too much security that would have fired back? I don't know. The issue with Orlando is not the gun. The gun is a tool. Taking away the fun doesn't make what he did harder necessarily. He could have just as easily driving a car into the building with a homemade bomb. What would have made it harder for these guys would be to imprison them when we had the chance. Or had better monitoring in place but again lots of crazy people with limited money and resources to track them all. Some will slip through so we need a fall back. Maybe one cop in a bar that holds 350 isn't enough. Maybe one cop per 25 people. Plainclothes cops in large numbers would make someone think twice. So maybe they decide not to use a gun-maybe they decide to make a bomb instead and maybe the us can better track who are purchasing material to build bombs or googling it and they can catch these guys sooner.

I don't understand this part... none of these guys did anything prior to these incidents that would have put them in jail. When did we "have the chance" to put these guys in jail? Your post makes no sense. Yes, these people go after easy targets. That's why we should make getting a gun harder. A person is a gun-toting law abiding citizen, until they are not. People sometimes get really angry, and go off the wall, or "postal" -- remember how this terminology came into our lexicon. If you make getting a gun a lot harder, there is less chance of gun deaths.

[Anonymous]

Did making drugs illegal make them harder to get? I've never even smoked a cigarette but I'm pretty sure I could get illegal drugs with less hassle and less waiting than going to a doctor, faking an illness, getting a prescription, and going to the pharmacy to get a legal one.

[Anonymous]

See, I think we opened pandora's box when that idiotic penis extension gun was sold to the public. That never should have happened. Ever. We allowed guns to be treated as toys.

I wish people would be reasonable and stop buying the damn things and give them up to authorities in some buyback program, but that is wishful think to on my part.

And then people start the "what if someone else had had a gun?" Or "what do you expect, it was a gun free zone" bullshit.

I hate that this is the nonsense we live with in this country. I for one think we are insane to say "this is the price of our freedom". This shit will continue. But I don't know how to stop it because we have a crazy gun culture that we can never walk back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yet, again, fine-I'm willing to compromise that current laws can be better enforced. Help us figure out how to do that. Help us to figure out how to keep obvious whackos like this dude and Lanza and countless others from obtaining weapons.

But ffs, help us do something, anything, to stop this insanity.

I am a supporter of 2nd amendment (clearly). However, I do think gun ownership comes with a lot of responsibility. Only concealed carry holders are have to take a class, demonstrate safety and security, and hold a license. I do think anyone that wants to own a gun should have to go through these regulations. I have zero issue having gun holders maintain a licensing requirement. I think all gun owners should be required to own gun safes. Ours is 1000 lbs empty and bolted to the floor-no why anyone without the code (only my husband and I) could get in to access a gun. But I also know guns will still be procured illegally-more funds and support is needed for police and law enforcement to do their job.

So I appreciate how responsible you are, but why do you have guns? If you hunt, sure, sounds good. Then you should only have rifles, right? Not guns solely designed to kill people. If you have it for "protection", please explain how you would get through your safe and load your gun in time once you hear somebody break a window.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did making drugs illegal make them harder to get? I've never even smoked a cigarette but I'm pretty sure I could get illegal drugs with less hassle and less waiting than going to a doctor, faking an illness, getting a prescription, and going to the pharmacy to get a legal one.

Well maybe that tells us more about the company you keep than how hard it is for the average person to score heroin.

[Anonymous]

Why can't gun controllers explain how their fantasies will produce crime reduction? Do gun controllers really believe that more gun control laws will keep criminals from getting guns?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why can't gun controllers explain how their fantasies will produce crime reduction? Do gun controllers really believe that more gun control laws will keep criminals from getting guns?

again, these shooters weren't criminals until they shot someone. When they bought the gun, they weren't criminals, so that's why some of us want no guns or extremely tight gun control. Get it? We are not saying it's going to stop crime. We are saying that it will reduce gun deaths, and certainly the ability to shoot 20 5/6 yr olds in a span of several minutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't gun controllers explain how their fantasies will produce crime reduction? Do gun controllers really believe that more gun control laws will keep criminals from getting guns?

again, these shooters weren't criminals until they shot someone. When they bought the gun, they weren't criminals, so that's why some of us want no guns or extremely tight gun control. Get it? We are not saying it's going to stop crime. We are saying that it will reduce gun deaths, and certainly the ability to shoot 20 5/6 yr olds in a span of several minutes.

That's not legally correct. A felon cannot own a gun or ammunition.

I don't know of the Orlando murderer's criminal history. I do know he was a total whack job. His ex-wife said he was bipolar. Even if by some mystical operation he couldn't have gotten a gun, does anyone think he wouldn't have committed murder?

Guns were not the cause of the massacre in Orlando. That whack job could have done more damage with horse shit. Timothy McVeigh blew up a building and murdered ~100 people using horse shit.

Complete gun confiscation, which is the New World Order end game, will not prevent criminals from getting guns. Why is this so hard for liberals to comprehend? Or do liberals have an ulterior motive? I think that I'll go with the latter.