Options

Texas shooting, Our fault.

135

Comments

  • Options
    mattsl1983mattsl1983 Posts: 711
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.
  • Options
    fifefife Posts: 3,327
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



  • Options
    PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 49,570
    edited May 2018
    eddiec said:
    You can't be serious. The only fundamental breakdown is America's obsession with guns and easy access to them.
    Yes, though the only real problem is the obsession. The easy access to them is simply a symptom of the obsession. That's why regulation isn't going to actually fix anything (though can help as a kind of bandaid solution - I'm not against regulation). For real change, the obsession has to be cured.... which is basically impossible at this point. Maybe your great great great great great great grandkids will live in an America without a gun fetish.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Options
    mcgruff10mcgruff10 New Jersey Posts: 27,903
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Options
    benjsbenjs Toronto, ON Posts: 8,940
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • Options
    mcgruff10mcgruff10 New Jersey Posts: 27,903
    edited May 2018
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Getting rid of all rifles is a pretty dumb suggestion.  This would be an all out ban   So yeah, no thanks. 
    I can’t even imagine hunting a deer with an air rifle lol. 

    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Options
    mace1229mace1229 Posts: 9,016
    edited May 2018
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    Post edited by mace1229 on
  • Options
    josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 28,310
    America land of me me me 1st who cares if other countries have good common sense gun laws , we are lost here nothing can work to save lives just keep researching till the next massacre happens ....
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • Options
    benjsbenjs Toronto, ON Posts: 8,940
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    What about the other parts then? You ignored a lot of reasonable suggestions regarding checks and balances prior to owning a weapon.
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • Options
    tbergstbergs Posts: 9,247
    benjs said:
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    What about the other parts then? You ignored a lot of reasonable suggestions regarding checks and balances prior to owning a weapon.
    I think those are all great additions. The only change I think it needs is the addition of certain types of rifles for hunting purposes. I think there would also have to be some sort middle ground reached on handgun ownership. Maybe allowing one handgun per person if they pass a more stringent training as well.
    It's a hopeless situation...
  • Options
    PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 49,570
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    I'd guess that about 0.5% of the population actually wants a complete ban on all guns or even all rifles, specifically because of hunting. That number is just a guess, but from all I've observed and read and heard, I have no reason to think it's higher than that. Also, I am pretty sure not a single person in government has ever suggested such a thing. So what about that worries people? I don't see why it's even worth mentioning.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Options
    mcgruff10mcgruff10 New Jersey Posts: 27,903
    benjs said:
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    What about the other parts then? You ignored a lot of reasonable suggestions regarding checks and balances prior to owning a weapon.
    I don’t mind the background checks at all but realize you are talking about a lot bigger of a population here in the u.s.  
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Options
    mcgruff10mcgruff10 New Jersey Posts: 27,903
    Benjs New Jersey has very similar background laws. I have nothing to hide so background the shit out of me. 
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Options
    PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 49,570
    mcgruff10 said:
    benjs said:
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    What about the other parts then? You ignored a lot of reasonable suggestions regarding checks and balances prior to owning a weapon.
    I don’t mind the background checks at all but realize you are talking about a lot bigger of a population here in the u.s.  
    Is that relevant? Are you saying it's harder to do background checks in the US because there are more people, and therefore more background checks? I don't think that argument works - when there are more people, there are both more background checks to do, but also more people to deal with the background checks.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Options
    mcgruff10mcgruff10 New Jersey Posts: 27,903
    PJ_Soul said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    benjs said:
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    What about the other parts then? You ignored a lot of reasonable suggestions regarding checks and balances prior to owning a weapon.
    I don’t mind the background checks at all but realize you are talking about a lot bigger of a population here in the u.s.  
    Is that relevant? Are you saying it's harder to do background checks in the US because there are more people, and therefore more background checks? I don't think that argument works - when there are more people, there are both more background checks to do, but also more people to deal with the background checks.
    I Was just thinking cost wise. But yes, it is harder to do anything with a hell of a lot More people. 

    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Options
    PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 49,570
    edited May 2018
    mcgruff10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    benjs said:
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    What about the other parts then? You ignored a lot of reasonable suggestions regarding checks and balances prior to owning a weapon.
    I don’t mind the background checks at all but realize you are talking about a lot bigger of a population here in the u.s.  
    Is that relevant? Are you saying it's harder to do background checks in the US because there are more people, and therefore more background checks? I don't think that argument works - when there are more people, there are both more background checks to do, but also more people to deal with the background checks.
    I Was just thinking cost wise. But yes, it is harder to do anything with a hell of a lot More people. 

    Well same goes with the cost. More people = more money. And don't people pay to get registered anyhow?
    I actually totally disagree with your entire statement here. Why do you think that? It's not true at all. In many cases it is actually much easier to things with more people. I think it's much harder to accomplish many things when people are more spread out and when there aren't as many people contributing to things.
    In any case, the USA manages to keep track of whole lot of other things, so I don't see why suddenly a gun registry in particular throws up a bunch of complications. The USA is perfectly capable of doing it. This just seems like an excuse to me.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Options
    benjsbenjs Toronto, ON Posts: 8,940
    mcgruff10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    benjs said:
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    What about the other parts then? You ignored a lot of reasonable suggestions regarding checks and balances prior to owning a weapon.
    I don’t mind the background checks at all but realize you are talking about a lot bigger of a population here in the u.s.  
    Is that relevant? Are you saying it's harder to do background checks in the US because there are more people, and therefore more background checks? I don't think that argument works - when there are more people, there are both more background checks to do, but also more people to deal with the background checks.
    I Was just thinking cost wise. But yes, it is harder to do anything with a hell of a lot More people. 

    People on here have proposed full-time security checks at public institutions like high schools. That has the byproduct of increased fear by greater perception of risk amongst children, full-time personnel additions at every school, longer hours to secure the facilities, likely disengagement of students due to longer days for security checks, etc.

    People only look at the prospective solutions as holistically as is convenient for them, and no more.

    If the government wants to find the funds, they will. That’s an if.
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • Options
    bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 15,544
    There wouldn't be a problem if everyone shot as badly as the people on the A-Team back in the day.  They had a gunfight every episode but I don't think anyone ever got hit.
  • Options
    mace1229mace1229 Posts: 9,016
    benjs said:
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    What about the other parts then? You ignored a lot of reasonable suggestions regarding checks and balances prior to owning a weapon.
    In theory I’m for the rest of the ideas. I say in their because I’d be curious about the cost and logistics behind all that. I can’t imagine going down to the DMV once a year for a driving test, takes me half a day to just get my driving record, and that’s just a piece of paper that takes 15 seconds to look up. And I think that’s what makes a lot of people cautious, it’s perfectly reasonable to question how smooth and efficient the government would ha for that. And with the cost of healthcare, what’s the cost of yearly mental-health evaluations and who pays for it? I’m assuming the gun owner, but that wouldn’t fly either if they’re $500 a pop.
    i would say start with a one-time mental check and safety course, background check for every purchase, 
  • Options
    PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 49,570
    edited May 2018
    I completely support the gun owners paying for all those expenses. Why wouldn't that fly? I don't see why it shouldn't be expensive. That doesn't violate anyone's rights assuming you're going by how America operates in general. Hell, it wouldn't even be out of the ordinary.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Options
    mcgruff10mcgruff10 New Jersey Posts: 27,903
    PJ_Soul said:
    I completely support the gun owners paying for all those expenses. Why wouldn't that fly? I don't see why it shouldn't be expensive. That doesn't violate anyone's rights assuming you're going by how America operates in general. Hell, it wouldn't even be out of the ordinary.
    As long as it is reasonable I have no problem. Hell I pay an extra $15 very time I buy a firearm just for last background check. 
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Options
    benjsbenjs Toronto, ON Posts: 8,940
    edited May 2018
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    What about the other parts then? You ignored a lot of reasonable suggestions regarding checks and balances prior to owning a weapon.
    In theory I’m for the rest of the ideas. I say in their because I’d be curious about the cost and logistics behind all that. I can’t imagine going down to the DMV once a year for a driving test, takes me half a day to just get my driving record, and that’s just a piece of paper that takes 15 seconds to look up. And I think that’s what makes a lot of people cautious, it’s perfectly reasonable to question how smooth and efficient the government would ha for that. And with the cost of healthcare, what’s the cost of yearly mental-health evaluations and who pays for it? I’m assuming the gun owner, but that wouldn’t fly either if they’re $500 a pop.
    i would say start with a one-time mental check and safety course, background check for every purchase, 
    Proposed are safe and logical regulation of guns (which your peers on here would call “common sense gun control”) before what would probably amount to less than a cup of coffee a day for a year plus an assessment to not only prove you a safe and reasonable gun user, but also give the added benefit of early detection of mental issues.

    You struggle with the horrendous reality of a buck a day gone, a training course with potentially redundant information, and a mental assessment. Others struggle with an abundance of dead children. Priorities, eh?  
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • Options
    mcgruff10mcgruff10 New Jersey Posts: 27,903
    benjs said:
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite common sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
    This is why this won’t work in America. When a suggestion arises to follow the lead of a country exponentially safer than your own, you ridicule it as though it’s some hilarious joke. I’m currently in Kanazawa and have been touring Japan for nearly two weeks now and you’re right, this will never fly. Concepts of care and concern, empathy, dignity, logic, honour and respect are innate to every person I’ve met here. In America? Not so much.

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    What about the other parts then? You ignored a lot of reasonable suggestions regarding checks and balances prior to owning a weapon.
    In theory I’m for the rest of the ideas. I say in their because I’d be curious about the cost and logistics behind all that. I can’t imagine going down to the DMV once a year for a driving test, takes me half a day to just get my driving record, and that’s just a piece of paper that takes 15 seconds to look up. And I think that’s what makes a lot of people cautious, it’s perfectly reasonable to question how smooth and efficient the government would ha for that. And with the cost of healthcare, what’s the cost of yearly mental-health evaluations and who pays for it? I’m assuming the gun owner, but that wouldn’t fly either if they’re $500 a pop.
    i would say start with a one-time mental check and safety course, background check for every purchase, 
    Proposed are safe and logical regulation of guns (which your peers on here would call “common sense gun control”) before what would probably amount to less than a cup of coffee a day for a year plus an assessment to not only prove you a safe and reasonable gun user, but also give the added benefit of early detection of mental issues.

    You struggle with the horrendous reality of a buck a day gone, a training course with potentially redundant information, and a mental assessment. Others struggle with an abundance of dead children. Priorities, eh?  
    I would see no reason to take a course every year.  I mean don’t have to pass a driving course every year.  Shit I have my boat liscense and I don’t need to take anything except for An initial test. 

    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Options
    my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    mcgruff10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    I completely support the gun owners paying for all those expenses. Why wouldn't that fly? I don't see why it shouldn't be expensive. That doesn't violate anyone's rights assuming you're going by how America operates in general. Hell, it wouldn't even be out of the ordinary.
    As long as it is reasonable I have no problem. Hell I pay an extra $15 very time I buy a firearm just for last background check. 
    How often do you buy a gun brother?
  • Options
    mcgruff10mcgruff10 New Jersey Posts: 27,903
    edited May 2018
    my2hands said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    I completely support the gun owners paying for all those expenses. Why wouldn't that fly? I don't see why it shouldn't be expensive. That doesn't violate anyone's rights assuming you're going by how America operates in general. Hell, it wouldn't even be out of the ordinary.
    As long as it is reasonable I have no problem. Hell I pay an extra $15 very time I buy a firearm just for last background check. 
    How often do you buy a gun brother?
    1-2 a year.
    I still can't get over the suggestion of turning in all rifles for air guns lol.  "Mr. Intruder stop!  I have an air gun!  You have been warned."
    Post edited by mcgruff10 on
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Options
    BentleyspopBentleyspop Craft Beer Brewery, Colorado Posts: 10,555
    mcgruff10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    I completely support the gun owners paying for all those expenses. Why wouldn't that fly? I don't see why it shouldn't be expensive. That doesn't violate anyone's rights assuming you're going by how America operates in general. Hell, it wouldn't even be out of the ordinary.
    As long as it is reasonable I have no problem. Hell I pay an extra $15 very time I buy a firearm just for last background check. 
    "Every  time"?
    How often is that?
    Do you live in Camden? Newark? Paterson and your worried about Johnny Sack?
  • Options
    mcgruff10mcgruff10 New Jersey Posts: 27,903
    edited May 2018
    mcgruff10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    I completely support the gun owners paying for all those expenses. Why wouldn't that fly? I don't see why it shouldn't be expensive. That doesn't violate anyone's rights assuming you're going by how America operates in general. Hell, it wouldn't even be out of the ordinary.
    As long as it is reasonable I have no problem. Hell I pay an extra $15 very time I buy a firearm just for last background check. 
    "Every  time"?
    How often is that?
    Do you live in Camden? Newark? Paterson and your worried about Johnny Sack?
    Yes it is a law in new jersey that "every" time you buy a firearm you pay $15 for one last instant background check (which I have zero problems with).  My in laws are 100% italian but no Johnny Sack's amongst them lol.  Great show though!  Damn I miss it.
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Options
    my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    mcgruff10 said:
    my2hands said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    I completely support the gun owners paying for all those expenses. Why wouldn't that fly? I don't see why it shouldn't be expensive. That doesn't violate anyone's rights assuming you're going by how America operates in general. Hell, it wouldn't even be out of the ordinary.
    As long as it is reasonable I have no problem. Hell I pay an extra $15 very time I buy a firearm just for last background check. 
    How often do you buy a gun brother?
    1-2 a year.
    I still can't get over the suggestion of turning in all rifles for air guns lol.  "Mr. Intruder stop!  I have an air gun!  You have been warned."
    I'm not an expert but I think a shotgun with buckshot would be more effective than a hunting rifle for home defense?
  • Options
    mace1229mace1229 Posts: 9,016
    PJ_Soul said:
    I completely support the gun owners paying for all those expenses. Why wouldn't that fly? I don't see why it shouldn't be expensive. That doesn't violate anyone's rights assuming you're going by how America operates in general. Hell, it wouldn't even be out of the ordinary.
    There have been many here who claim to not be for a ban, but then say they would be for measures that just make it impractical for the average person to afford one.
    i think yearly mental checks and safety courses and everything else would add up very quickly, and if run by the government would no doubt be ineffective and a waste of time. I’ve spent a half day at the DMV just to get a copy of my driving record, how much worse would this process be?
    i think a required safety course is reasonable. I think a mental health check is reasonable. I think background checks and registering your gun is reasonable. Doing all that every year will very likely price the average gun owner out of owning guns.
    id even be fine with linking your dr visits to the registeation, so if you take antidepressants or other medications or warning signs them that could flag another check. Have a number friends and family and neighbors can call, like they do with child protective services. Just doesn’t seem necessary to do it every year for everyone. I think I’ve provided more than a fair compromise for gun control, demanding more than that will just make gun owners not want to do anything.
  • Options
    mace1229mace1229 Posts: 9,016
    edited May 2018

    benjs said:
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mace1229 said:
    benjs said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    fife said:
    dignin said:
    Why does someone get classified an anti-gunner just because they want common sense gun laws?
    What is common sense gun laws?  It sounds really good to say, but what exactly is it?  I’ll stand behind you 100 percent if it’s good, but no one actually defines common sense gun laws.  And as a heads up, have some research behind what it is and what you are saying is common sense gun laws.  As a person speaking to you that believes I the 2nd amendment, I’m also a none gu owner.  I have nothing to win or gain in this debate aside my ideology of the 2nd amendment.  I’ve been wrong before and my world didn’t crash down.  But what is common sense gun laws?
    It's hard to take you seriously with a post like this. Go over to the gun violence thread and read up, you might learn something.

    In fact, mods should merge this thread with the gun violence thread....this one is redundant. 


    I don’t think it is at all redundant.  The other gun thread is 100’s of pages long.  This shooting happened to involve two guns that aren’t even up for debate to be restricted.  But you are the second person to cite commonIf  sense gun laws but not explaining what they are.  I’ll meet you on the other post.  I apologize if you find my question and wondering hard to be taken seriously.

    here are some common sense laws.

    If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam.

    the only change I would make is that you would have a mental health check every year.



    Yeah this would never fly lol. Air rifles? What am I ten?
     

    Your country’s mass murders will continue as will the apathy of those who cling to their right to bear arms. 
    Everyone keeps saying "no one wants to ban your guns," and mocks those who think thats what people want.
    But that is exactly what your suggestion is. Bans everything except a shotgun. 
    Most gun owners are for more gun laws, just not all out gun bans. And why that suggestion won't get any support from any gun owner.
    What about the other parts then? You ignored a lot of reasonable suggestions regarding checks and balances prior to owning a weapon.
    In theory I’m for the rest of the ideas. I say in their because I’d be curious about the kcost and logistics behind all that. I can’t imagine going down to the DMV once a year for a driving test, takes me half a day to just get my driving record, and that’s just a piece of paper that takes 15 seconds to look up. And I think that’s what makes a lot of people cautious, it’s perfectly reasonable to question how smooth and efficient the government would ha for that. And with the cost of healthcare, what’s the cost of yearly mental-health evaluations and who pays for it? I’m assuming the gun owner, but that wouldn’t fly either if they’re $500 a pop.
    i would say start with a one-time mental check and safety course, background check for every purchase, 
    Proposed are safe and logical regulation of guns (which your peers on here would call “common sense gun control”) before what would probably amount to less than a cup of coffee a day for a year plus an assessment to not only prove you a safe and reasonable gun user, but also give the added benefit of early detection of mental issues.

    You struggle with the horrendous reality of a buck a day gone, a training course with potentially redundant information, and a mental assessment. Others struggle with an abundance of dead children. Priorities, eh?  
    This is part of the problem I have with gun control. I agree with many of the suggestions, and disagree with a single point and that makes me unreasonable, even though what I was willing to agree to is a world of a difference from what we have now. Does anyone not understand where the fear of “give an inch take a mile” comes from?
    It’s clearly not enough of a start when I just said I’d have no issue with mental health check, background checks for every sale, required safety courses and instead of agreeing that is at least a good start, the immediate jump is to criticize my comments and ridicule and mock the ideas. Your language of “horrendous reality” no doubt is meant to minimize my point and make me put to be the bad guy. But the reality is that’s why compromises aren’t made. I’ve seen every gun owner on this thread with the exception of maybe 1 say they want change and regulations, but then when anti-gun groups are unwilling to compromise then that’s exactly what they get, no comprimise.                                                                                   

    Post edited by mace1229 on
Sign In or Register to comment.