Common Sense Gun Laws

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This makes a ton of sense. These dealers are clearly not following regulations against selling to obvious straw buyers and/or buyers with criminal records.

But we wouldn’t even know that if the pro-gun types had their way.

For decades they prevented any RESEARCH into guns.

Knowledge is power.

So why are they against the creation of knowledge???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-review-trump-era-ban-gun-bump-stocks-rcna121466

Christ, we are so stupid. We can't get out of our way because a poorly-worded amendment written over 200 years ago, for reasons that no longer even exist, is somehow more important than human lives.

Trying to use modern usage to support unabridged right to gun ownership, does make it read like bad grammar. But it wasn't considered poorly written 200 years ago, and it doesn't mean what people are trying to make it mean today with modern usage. In the 18th Century usage, it didn't mean everyone gets a gun no matter what and for any reason at any time. The clauses must be read together in 18th century usage, which makes it a very limited right. https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2021/07/the-strange-syntax-of-the-second-amendment/

Especially that "well regulated" part. The government is well within its rights to regulate bump stocks and glock switches and all of those other things.

Pro Tip: look up what “well regulated” meant in the context of 18th century prose.

Hint: “regulated” doesn’t mean the same thing today as it did then.

It still meant accountable and responsible in the 18th century. But today we are anything but accountable and responsible.

It did not, actually.

It’s use then was synonymous with what would be best described today as “satisfied” or “equipped “…as in a”well regulated appetite” meaning a person had sufficient food and regular meals. “Well regulated craftsmen” -having ample tools and raw materials with which to work.

Of course you are correct but our friends on the other side are certain they are correct so will discount your response.

They fail to realize that if the good people of Palestine, and yes there are good people there, had a second amendment, then Hamas rule would have ended long ago, there would have been no October 7th and we would not be where we are today.

But no, a population of 2.5 million has lived in terror for years because a ragtag group of radicals ruled because they had guns and everyday good people did not.

Hamas not only terrorizes Israel but the people of Palestine as well, using them as human shields and they have gotten away with it because they have guns and good people didn’t. Let that sink in.

What a bunch of NRA hogwash. All our sky high piles of guns are getting us are death and destruction and insecurity. We spend billions of dollars on police protection for ourselves and they won't even go up against these guns even when a lunatic is slaughtering innocents for hours.

Cops involved in Texas shooting were poorly led, never should have waited that long to enter and eliminate the gunman. NRA is the bogey man for everything wrong in America to liberals.

Have you read about their corruption?

Why are you championing them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Place the mentally ill in well regulated institutions and lock up people who commit crimes with guns using existing laws for a couple of decades and you do two important things. First, dramatically reduce gun violence in America and second create good paying jobs needed to build and operate the appropriate institutions.

Oh, so let them kill their wives or co-workers, so we don’t run the risk of restricting someone’s gun rights until they have demonstrated that they are murderers.

So you put the gun owner’s right to guns ahead of the wife and co-worker’s right to life?

That is how your mind works.

Sick and selfish.

[Anonymous]

Let’s stop egging on these commando-wannabe’s who get off of knowing about lethal weapons.

We are the civilized Americans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-review-trump-era-ban-gun-bump-stocks-rcna121466

Christ, we are so stupid. We can't get out of our way because a poorly-worded amendment written over 200 years ago, for reasons that no longer even exist, is somehow more important than human lives.

Trying to use modern usage to support unabridged right to gun ownership, does make it read like bad grammar. But it wasn't considered poorly written 200 years ago, and it doesn't mean what people are trying to make it mean today with modern usage. In the 18th Century usage, it didn't mean everyone gets a gun no matter what and for any reason at any time. The clauses must be read together in 18th century usage, which makes it a very limited right. https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2021/07/the-strange-syntax-of-the-second-amendment/

Especially that "well regulated" part. The government is well within its rights to regulate bump stocks and glock switches and all of those other things.

Pro Tip: look up what “well regulated” meant in the context of 18th century prose.

Hint: “regulated” doesn’t mean the same thing today as it did then.

It still meant accountable and responsible in the 18th century. But today we are anything but accountable and responsible.

It did not, actually.

It’s use then was synonymous with what would be best described today as “satisfied” or “equipped “…as in a”well regulated appetite” meaning a person had sufficient food and regular meals. “Well regulated craftsmen” -having ample tools and raw materials with which to work.

Of course you are correct but our friends on the other side are certain they are correct so will discount your response.

They fail to realize that if the good people of Palestine, and yes there are good people there, had a second amendment, then Hamas rule would have ended long ago, there would have been no October 7th and we would not be where we are today.

But no, a population of 2.5 million has lived in terror for years because a ragtag group of radicals ruled because they had guns and everyday good people did not.

Hamas not only terrorizes Israel but the people of Palestine as well, using them as human shields and they have gotten away with it because they have guns and good people didn’t. Let that sink in.

What a bunch of NRA hogwash. All our sky high piles of guns are getting us are death and destruction and insecurity. We spend billions of dollars on police protection for ourselves and they won't even go up against these guns even when a lunatic is slaughtering innocents for hours.

Cops involved in Texas shooting were poorly led, never should have waited that long to enter and eliminate the gunman. NRA is the bogey man for everything wrong in America to liberals.

Have you read about their corruption?

Why are you championing them?

Can you read, not championing them. Their performance was horrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This makes a ton of sense. These dealers are clearly not following regulations against selling to obvious straw buyers and/or buyers with criminal records.

Then go in and arrest them under existing law for selling to those with criminal records or straw purchasers. Problem solved, thread over.

[Anonymous]

Trumpers think Trump
Is going to let you keep your guns


Hahahaha

Dictators do not allow their subjects to own guns.

Fun times

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This makes a ton of sense. These dealers are clearly not following regulations against selling to obvious straw buyers and/or buyers with criminal records.

Then go in and arrest them under existing law for selling to those with criminal records or straw purchasers. Problem solved, thread over.

And why is the government not negotiating a deep discount on volume purchases directly with the gun manufacturer? Why are they paying middle man’s fees to dealers that are breaking existing gun laws.

[Anonymous]

there is no fixing this country, it is sick,

Americans in general are demented and insane and getting more so. I would say try to leave while you still can.

americans buy on average 30 million firearms a year, 475 million has been sold in the last 20 years.

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/nics_fire..._month_year.pdf/view

firearms sales have tripled from 10 million a year in 1999 to close to 30 million a year today.

In recent years, american buy somewhere around ~20-22 million handguns and 8-10 million long guns rifles/shoguns every single year. by comparison, all US police, federal law enforcement and military procures under 100,000 long guns a year. The world's military/police forces on a good year procures ~300-400k long guns a year. The american civilian procures more long guns than the entire police/military of the planet by somewhere close to 15-20 to 1.

CIA estimates back in the 90s was that the soviet old coldwar stockpile of small arms during the coldwar was about 50-75 million, maybe with 2/3 still functional. American in the last 20 years have stockpilled somewhere close to 60-80 million long guns. american civilian's stockpile of deadly weapons already dwarfs the soviet stockpiles meant to fight WW3,

Face it. we are never getting rid of "assault weapons", any gun control measures will be half assed and once the shooting gets out of the headlines, calls for "reform" will cool and demented Americans will keep stockpiling their arsenals and the mass shootings will continue.

Leave this insane place while you still can.

[Anonymous]

Last 2 posts say it all.

Feds know that most of the guns used in crime come from a small number of bad dealers but won’t use existing laws to lock them up.

2nd amendment is working for the law abiding citizens who are prepared to repel any invasion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Last 2 posts say it all.

Feds know that most of the guns used in crime come from a small number of bad dealers but won’t use existing laws to lock them up.

2nd amendment is working for the law abiding citizens who are prepared to repel any invasion.

It is not working for anyone. We don't have to tolerate destroying our peace to accommodate lunatics preparing for bogus invasions.

[Anonymous]

NP. I flipped sides on this issue after Foreign Service assignments in “developing” (she said, euphemistically) countries. The crude term would be shithole countries. Contacts in human rights NGOs and the independent media would get hauled away in the middle of the night and have the crap beat out of them for days. A couple never did return home.

I came to believe that the only thing more horrible than all people having the constitutionally protected ability to kill with the press of a button is a country where all people DON’T have the ability to kill with the press of a button.

I would amend that ^^^ to say all people of sound mind and good morals - meaning no criminal history. Which is easily achievable with some slight fine tuning to the status quo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
It is not working for anyone. We don't have to tolerate destroying our peace to accommodate lunatics preparing for bogus invasions.

PP retired FSO here to add: I don’t think it’s about repelling invasions. It’s about the ability to kill any individual or collective group that would offer you violence. Guess I’ve spent too much time reading history books and living in dictatorships, but I don’t trust people or parties who want me to cede that power to the Collective.

No country has lasted forever and I think we’d be naive to assume the US could not go the way of Stalinist Russia or Hitler’s Reich.

Any time a party or ilk says they want to take away guns, it makes me think that they would eventually try totalitarian things that would necessitate shooting them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. I flipped sides on this issue after Foreign Service assignments in “developing” (she said, euphemistically) countries. The crude term would be shithole countries. Contacts in human rights NGOs and the independent media would get hauled away in the middle of the night and have the crap beat out of them for days. A couple never did return home.

I came to believe that the only thing more horrible than all people having the constitutionally protected ability to kill with the press of a button is a country where all people DON’T have the ability to kill with the press of a button.

I would amend that ^^^ to say all people of sound mind and good morals - meaning no criminal history. Which is easily achievable with some slight fine tuning to the status quo.

We can just as easily use a non shithole country as a model to influence our choices. There are countries where people live prosperous, productive lives without fear of gun violence and without fear of being hauled away in the middle of the night. Let's have that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last 2 posts say it all.

Feds know that most of the guns used in crime come from a small number of bad dealers but won’t use existing laws to lock them up.

2nd amendment is working for the law abiding citizens who are prepared to repel any invasion.

It is not working for anyone. We don't have to tolerate destroying our peace to accommodate lunatics preparing for bogus invasions.

What would you call the millions pouring across our Southern border? Invasion would be one word that comes to mind.

Well why didn't you just say that immigrants should to be mowed down with bullets by gun nuts. That sounds like such a great idea.