Reply to Mass shooting at KC Chiefs victory parade

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Mass shooting at KC Chiefs victory parade"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If the presence of 800 LEOs ("good guys") isn't enough to deter gun crime, then we are truly living in a lawless time. Expecting "good guys" to bail us out each and every time is simply not realistic. Reducing the number of guns and making it harder to get them is what's needed. [/quote]

I disagree. 
Making it harder for law abiding citizens to own firearms will result in criminals being the ones with the weapons.  
Law abiding citizens should be free to defend themselves and their loved ones.  
After all, when seconds matter, the police are just minutes away.  
The solution is getting criminals off the streets.  Let's find out what the rap sheets are on these shooters. [/quote]

INCORRECT.   Every gun used by a criminal originally started out in the hands of a supposed "law abiding citizen."  Every single one.  That shows that there aren't enough controls on the supposed law-abiders.  There are far too many people who can legally purchase guns skirting laws to funnel them to criminals, there are far too many irresponsible law abiding criminals who fail to secure their guns, who let friends and relatives with criminal records or criminal intent get guns through them and so on.  The more checks, balances and controls in place, the harder it will be for criminals to get guns.  [/quote]

How are laws going to make it harder for criminals to get guns?

The issue: CRIMINALS DON’T ABIDE BY LAWS.

We have laws against murder, rape, kidnapping, theft, drunk driving: those crimes still happen EVERY DAY.

Laws don’t change criminal behavior; laws punish criminals who commit crimes.

I don’t rape people, steal, kill, etc, because I have no desire to do those things. I am not sitting at home thinking: “hmmmm, boy oh boy, I sure would like to go rape and murder some people. But gosh darn it! Those laws say I can’t! So now I can’t! Curse those laws from keeping me from doing evil! Oh well, guess I will go check out my tomato plants in the garden, instead.”

[/quote]

You are very confused. Nobody is saying that illegal guns = no more murder. We are saying that guns have a higher kill rate than other tools that murderers commonly use and therefor fewer guns in circulation = less death and innocent bystander carnage whenever thugs fight or whatever the actions of the criminal. This is not rocket science yet you guys can’t seem to comprehend the actual debate here.[/quote]

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

The reason why gun control will never happen is stated above. Every law abiding gun owner knows they are judged as criminal because our founders gave America the 2nd Amendment, and we dare exercise our constitutional right to own guns.

We know that the powerful politicians who want to enact gun control upon us are protected by men armed with fully automatic weapons and those men are specifically and extensively trained to use those fully automatic weapons with violence against a person who would hurt that powerful politician and their family. Those powerful politicians will not give up their right to be protected by guns, but we must give up our right to protect ourselves with guns?

I don’t ever see posters attack and malign actual criminals who have committed crimes with guns and killed innocent people with guns as viciously as they attack and malign American citizens who are legally armed and responsibly armed and merely exercising their rights guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment.

That’s because the problem isn’t really about gun crime and the death of innocent people. The problem is democrats (a majority) don’t like guns, don’t want Americans to own guns, and want to take away the ability of American citizens to own guns.

How about this: if you use a gun in a rape, theft, or murder, you are executed the same day you are convicted of the rape, theft, or murder.

If you steal a gun, and you are convicted of the theft of that gun, the gun owner or the court will execute you with that gun.

You want to actually change human behavior and criminal behavior, give criminals a reason to be terrified to be convicted of using a gun to commit a crime or to steal a gun.

Instead of fantasizing about using Bradleys and “attack” helicopters on normal Americans, use capital punishment on criminals who are engaging in gun crime. Don’t say it’s cruel or unusual punishment to do so, because you openly admit to wanting the American military to kill law abiding citizens just because they own guns.

[/quote]

Those are some warped and bloodthirsty execution fantasies right there.

You are also making a false comparison with this line: “Those powerful politicians will not give up their right to be protected by guns, but we must give up our right to protect ourselves with guns?”

The politicians don’t carry assault weapons around in self defense. They hire trained security to use the guns. I would be ok if private citizens could hire professional security. [/quote]

Aren’t you a generous person? You are ok with allowing private citizens to hire professional security?

How much does 24 hour private security cost? How do you suggest that Americans pay for that?

Ballpark Costs for Bodyguards:

The average cost to hire a single, experienced armed guard with a military background is $60-$100 per hour. 
That makes the monthly cost for a one-guard security detail working in shifts at a range of $43,200/mo – $72,000/mo.
Annually, that brings the annual total for 24/7 protection to between $518,400/year – $864,000/year.

So you expect Americans to be stripped of their gun rights because criminals don’t obey laws, and pay over half a million for 24 hour private security for an armed guard to have a gun and protect them?

If you vote democrat^^^this is what you vote for. An absolute tw@t explaining you don’t need or deserve the right to protect yourself, your home, our your family.[/quote]

You're a completely unserious person coming it from completely the wrong angle.

It would be much cheaper to vote for robust and coherent gun control policies which would significantly reduce the NEED for armed private security in the first place.  This has been repeately proven in country after country.  [/quote]

We don’t need to pay for private security because we have the 2nd Amendment.

Which countrirs had private citizens paying for 24 hour private security and 
voted for gun control and had their need for private security significantly reduced?

You said it has been proven in country after country? Show data.[/quote]

OMG you don’t need private security because you are not a target. Who do you think you are?[/quote]

The people shot and injured and killed at this parade- the topic of this thread- were they people you consider a target?

Why were they shot? Were the 20 people shot and 1 person killed high value targets?

You are so dumb you can’t process information. The very people we are discussing illustrate the problem you deny exists.

If you like being shot dead in the street, your kids and family helpless and disarmed, and gaslight by democrats- keep voting for democrats.

Parade goers tackled and disarmed these juvenile shooters when about 800 police were present. You can’t depend on police to save your life or your family’s life.

You will be disarmed, the police won’t save you, and democrats will tell you you are crazy because you want to exercise your 2nd Amendment rights.[/quote]

Guns were not illegal when these people were shot so what on earth gives you the idea that the 2nd amendment protects innocent people? Why didn’t anyone shoot the criminals then? My point is that private citizens are not going to protect themselves from stray bullets with their own gun. There would just be more stray bullets whizzing all over the place. Armed security are trained professionals and will not cause the same kind of collateral damage that uncle Buck or aunt Sue would playing Rambo.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics