The solution is enacting good legislation free from emotion and lack of understanding, enforcment of existing laws, and severe punishment for those who choose to break the law.
I'm all for punishing those who choose to break the law regarding firearms. They just make it that more difficult for me to enjoy my rights and my hobby.
Now that is making sense.
You have my full support for that view.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
I have to agree with your above paragraphs. I think you hit it right on the head when you said that there is a big reward (or perceived reward) for going criminal. We do have a huge divide b/t rich and poor and everyone here equates "stuff" with being better and richer. I think the other problems you listed...race, inner city etc... are a direct reflection on that. Everyone wants to get a head and wants to improve (which is good) but they are willing to sacrifice whatever it takes to get there. We are constantly bombarded with what it's like to be rich...turn on mtv or vh1 and all you see is rich people and how they live; it's very easy to get jealous and to want what they have, and it's too bad that some feel the best or easiest way for them to get there is to turn to violence or crime (which can beget violence).
Having lived in the US for 11 years now, I disagree. I actually think that there is such a stark line between "being a criminal" and "being an honest person" that once one crosses the line to "being a criminal" they feel that they have nothing left to lose. Reputation is everything here. It's also a pretty unforgiving society. This is how I explain the fact that in my home country petty theft is much more common: you get a lenient punishment and rebound. Here if you steal and rob might as well kill.
On guns... I think there is a big difference between the mindset "owning a gun is my right, hence I can go buy it if I pass a background check" (US mindset as I see it); and the mindset "owning a gun is NOT my right. I may be a hunter and want a gun for those purposes, but I'll have to get a special permit from the government" (Italian mindset as I see it).
On the first post... guns are things, muslims are people :rolleyes:
... and the will to show I will always be better than before.
i have the dvd of this event...the ocean and all it's beauty calms me down when i'm upset about current events like violence & guns
now that's a wave!
EDIT: to make it pearl jam related now that's a BIG WAVE...Ken Bradshaw would be saying right there: "Got me big wave, ride me a big wave, got me a MOTHERFUCKIN' HUUUUUGE WAVE!"
I realize it's a stretch, just like it's a stretch to suggest that the banning of guns is going to stop violent crimes and accidental deaths.
for the 14th time in about 2 days... once handguns were banned/legislated in Japan, Scotland, Australia, etc... then the number of gun-related accidental deaths or homicides halved!!!
so its not a stretch at all!!!!
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
for the 14th time in about 2 days... once handguns were banned/legislated in Japan, Scotland, Australia, etc... then the number of gun-related accidental deaths or homicides halved!!!
so its not a stretch at all!!!!
1. it's the 13th time
2. I'm not arguing that it will not decrease accidents etc... I said STOP (eliminate) I never said you thought it would cease all accidents or homicides. On a side note, more accidents / homicides occur with shotguns etc..., than with handguns...
3. it is a stretch to say that banning would stop accidents
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
so you are saying background checks have accomplished nothing?
Of course I didnt answer your question. The question is stupid (im assuming it was intended to be) , and the answer is obvious. To say they accomplish nothing would be foolish. To say they stop criminals from getting their hands on weapons, would be more foolish.
1. it's the 13th time
2. I'm not arguing that it will not decrease accidents etc... I said STOP (eliminate) I never said you thought it would cease all accidents or homicides. On a side note, more accidents / homicides occur with shotguns etc..., than with handguns...
3. it is a stretch to say that banning would stop accidents
1. that's right
2. no-one is saying it will STOP all accidents
3. it is a stretch... but it would mean a decrease
if people really really want to own guns then they'll go through the proper admin/checks/licences/etc to get one... they'll deal with the hassle of it all so they can have a gun. no matter how strict you make it!!
people keep using the car analogy as well... so in keeping with that, think about how car admin has changed
in 1943 any fucker could just get in a car and drive it.... no licence, no test to pass, no tax, no seatbelts, no MOT, no insurance, nothing!!! no speed limits on certain roads, etc etc etc
in 2006, we now have... licence, seatbelts, tests, insurance, tax, paperwork aplenty, speed limits, speed bumps, just fucking loadsa stuff
if LEGALLY ABIDING peope want to own and go in cars then they do this no problems.. they might grumble about costs, etc... but law abiding people go with the regulations! so if law-abiding citizens really really want guns, then they'll jump through the appropriate hoops to get one!!!
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
for the 14th time in about 2 days... once handguns were banned/legislated in Japan, Scotland, Australia, etc... then the number of gun-related accidental deaths or homicides halved!!!
so its not a stretch at all!!!!
Yes, Gun-Related Incidents (accidental deaths or homocides) decrease or halved.
As they should when a total ban on firearms is imposed.
But murder in general increased considerably after the ban of firearms. The statistics prove this.
They simply are not being comitted with firearms.
That tells you something right there.
Once firearms are banned, people are more likely to commit murder. The predators/criminals/murderers feel safer and more confident to carry out their crimes, when they know the population has no firearms to defend themselves with.
You are stuck on "Gun-Related " incidents, when you should be looking at what happens to the overall murder rate, in those countries, when firearms are banned.
A lot of people on this board would like to see a total ban on guns based on a very small fraction of a percentage of firearms being used to comit high profile crimes. The majority of the millions of guns in this country are never used to comit a crime and in fact are used over a million times a year to prevent crime.
So the logic goes...
Based on the small fraction of a percentage of crimes being comitted by Muslim extremeists we should ban the worship of Islam because it is apparently dangerous. That majority of Muslims in the world have never comitted a crime and in fact are appalled by the violence comitted in the name of their religion.
Does anyone get the point I'm trying to make?
The obvious answer to this is that you can't ban an idea. If we were truly determined as a nation we COULD eliminate most guns, but I doubt there'd be many people who would be willing to do what it takes, which would include at the very least a few amendments to the constitution. There is no way to "ban" Islam. You could ban the PRACTICE of Islam, but you can't legislate an idea out of existence.
However, guns dont have to be available anywhere at all times, with noone knowing who has how many either. People should be allowed to own them, certainly. But there are many measures that can be tried and used inbetween "I love my 5 million guns" and "Noone should have guns". and most people here, maybe even dunky, are promoting stricter regulation for the most part. As I understand it, you pretty much dont have any regulation over there.
The laws vary widely from state to state. Ohio and Montana, for example, have very little regulation, while other states like Maryland have much tighter controls. Since we travel freely between the states, this means virtually anyone who wants a gun, or a hundred guns, can get them easily.
Than you are arguing out of ignorance. We have plenty of laws concerning guns and who, when and how they can get them. Unfortunately, as there is in any country, there's a very healthy black market here. Much the same as if you banned them outright, only the people (for the most part) who ARE responsible follow the laws currently in place as far as guns are concerned.
Most guns initially enter the market legally. Smith & Wesson isn't selling to the guy in Brooklyn. They get into the black market because there's nothing stopping anyone from going to a state like Montana or Ohio and stockpiling weapons, then taking them back to a state like New York that has tighter controls in place and selling them on the black market. There needs to be more nation-wide uniformity in our gun laws.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
Of course I didnt answer your question. The question is stupid (im assuming it was intended to be) , and the answer is obvious. To say they accomplish nothing would be foolish. To say they stop criminals from getting their hands on weapons, would be more foolish.
sorry my request for clarification seems stupid to you. 69 said we had all these gun laws and none of them stop a criminal from committing a crime w/ a gun. i think you can't stop ALL of it but i do think some of the laws do prevent crime. they may not stop all crime committed w/ a gun but i bet it cuts down a good bit, especially w/ ppl who are in the heat of the moment.
but by the logic given we should legalize all drugs b/c the drug laws don't work as i can still get any illicit drug rather easily
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
but by the logic given we should legalize all drugs b/c the drug laws don't work as i can still get any illicit drug rather easily
While I disagree with making them legal, id love to see them legalized and regulated. Much in the way guns are. But I guess gun laws go to show that even something legal has a black market. Hell, I'd bet you can buy a freegin toaster on the black market. Illegal marketing of goods has existed as long as goods have existed. You and your ideas and ideals are great, but reality is what it is.
And by definition heat of the moment doesnt give the benefit of thinking about what you are doing. As pointed out above by another poster, crime and murder rates RISE in areas where guns are prohibited.
I have no great answer to how to solve the problem of criminals aquiring guns. I do know however, that taking them away from law abiding citizens is NOT the answer.
Question:
What do Gun people have against Gun Licensing and Registration? Why is that such a big deal?
...
I am a firm believer in the Constitutuion and Bill Of Rights of the United States. I do not advocate the total removal of guns from the private sector, but, i believe that there are WAAAAAYY too many idiots in the Public and most of them should NOT be running around with fucking guns. Just go to a swap meet or a NASCAR race and look at the crowd... drive on the freeways of Los Angeles and look in the other cars... do you really think you would be safer if they were all armed?
And stiffen the penalties on unlicensed/unregistered guns, as well as crimes commited using guns. Throw those asshole in prison instead of the guys just smoking pot and snorting cocaine.
All I know is this... America has a lot of dickheads living here. I don't want dickheads with guns running around here.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
i've read most of the post concerning this thread and no one has a really good answer to fix this major problem of too many guns in the posession of assholes in america i include myself because i sure as hell don't know what the solution is i will make sure no one in my family never buys a gun as long as they live under my roof but i do know if no bill or legislation gets created to fix this problem more innocent bystanders will get killed, just had to put my 2cents into this discussion......
ps: if there is a bill or legislation concerning this matter it needs to be revamped or updated or what ever.
i've read most of the post concerning this thread and no one has a really good answer to fix this major problem of too many guns in the posession of assholes in america i include myself because i sure as hell don't know what the solution is i will make sure no one in my family never buys a gun as long as they live under my roof but i do know if no bill or legislation gets created to fix this problem more innocent bystanders will get killed, just had to put my 2cents into this discussion......
ps: if there is a bill or legislation concerning this matter it needs to be revamped or updated or what ever.
...
How about taxing the shit out of ammo? And while we're at it... tax the shit out of tobacco and alcohol.
Earmarking the taxes for Gun Safety Courses taught at local Law enforcement agencies, Gun Licensing/Registration funding, gun related trauma, etc... Just as taxes for cigarettes and booze are earmarked for health issues concering those things.
Reg'lur Joe Taxpayer that doesn't smoke or shoot up the fucking place and isn't a fucking alcoholic won't be paying for the ones who do.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
...
How about taxing the shit out of ammo? And while we're at it... tax the shit out of tobacco and alcohol.
Earmarking the taxes for Gun Safety Courses taught at local Law enforcement agencies, Gun Licensing/Registration funding, gun related trauma, etc... Just as taxes for cigarettes and booze are earmarked for health issues concering those things.
Reg'lur Joe Taxpayer that doesn't smoke or shoot up the fucking place and isn't a fucking alcoholic won't be paying for the ones who do.
these are all great suggestions that i did not think to bring up so i agree totally tax the shit out of all these things......
these are all great suggestions that i did not think to bring up so i agree totally tax the shit out of all these things......
They already do. Taxes won't mean less purchasers. And stricter laws wont either. Someone used the drug example. Drug laws are pretty stiff here, compared to abroad. And we have how many people who still want, buy, and use their drugs sitting in jail? Stricter laws just equals more law breakers. And when it becomes cheaper to buy something on the black market than it does to do so legally, people will go to the cheapest source. Legal or not. Alchohol prohibition worked well for us in the past didnt it?
Banning guns makes as much sense as banning Islam.
Exactly, you should ban both guns and bomb-making equipment instead, oh and video-making gear for jihadists, and swords and whatever else fundamentals use.
"We have to change the concept of patriotism to one of “matriotism” — love of humanity that transcends war. A matriarch would never send her own children off to wars that kill other people’s children." Cindy Sheehan --- London, Brixton, 14 July 1993 London, Wembley, 1996 London, Wembley, 18 June 2007 London, O2, 18 August 2009 London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 31 July 2012 Milton Keynes Bowl, 11 July 2014
London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 06 June 2017
They already do. Taxes won't mean less purchasers. And stricter laws wont either. Someone used the drug example. Drug laws are pretty stiff here, compared to abroad. And we have how many people who still want, buy, and use their drugs sitting in jail? Stricter laws just equals more law breakers. And when it becomes cheaper to buy something on the black market than it does to do so legally, people will go to the cheapest source. Legal or not. Alchohol prohibition worked well for us in the past didnt it?
...
Who's talking about 'less purchasers'? Make the users of these items pay for the consequnces of these products... what's wrong with that?
Make smokers pay for the issues caused by smoking, alcoholics pay for the consequences of alcohol use and gun shooters pay for the results of gun accidents and gun shot wounds.
Why should those of us who don't smoke, don't shoot guns and aren't alcoholics pay for the shit the people who do?
That's my question.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
...
Who's talking about 'less purchasers'? Make the users of these items pay for the consequnces of these products... what's wrong with that?
Make smokers pay for the issues caused by smoking, alcoholics pay for the consequences of alcohol use and gun shooters pay for the results of gun accidents and gun shot wounds.
Why should those of us who don't smoke, don't shoot guns and aren't alcoholics pay for the shit the people who do?
That's my question.
If I'm a gun owner who never shot someone, and never caused nor incurred any damages via my gun, why the fuck would or should I pay for that? Liberally diseased thinking at its finest.
...
Who's talking about 'less purchasers'? Make the users of these items pay for the consequnces of these products... what's wrong with that?
Make smokers pay for the issues caused by smoking, alcoholics pay for the consequences of alcohol use and gun shooters pay for the results of gun accidents and gun shot wounds.
Why should those of us who don't smoke, don't shoot guns and aren't alcoholics pay for the shit the people who do?
That's my question.
Of course you are assuming that our government is capable of directing taxes collected to specific expenditures. With our current system - not fucking likely.
If I'm a gun owner who never shot someone, and never caused nor incurred any damages via my gun, why the fuck would or should I pay for that? Liberally diseased thinking at its finest.
...
And I have a beer or two every once in a while and smoke a cigarette every now and then... so what? You won't find me crying about it. I don't care if that beer cost a little more if I know the fucker that drinks a pint of cheap whiskey every day has to pay for his hospital bills instead of me when his liver shuts down. Make the fuckers that cause the shit... pay for trhe shit.
And how much ammo do you buy per year? Offset that against your tax dollars burned in trauma centers and see which is greater.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Of course you are assuming that our government is capable of directing taxes collected to specific expenditures. With our current system - not fucking likely.
...
Then you know what?
FIX THE FUCKING GOVERNMENT!!!
Don't accept its ineptness and corruption.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
...
And I have a beer or two every once in a while and smoke a cigarette every now and then... so what? You won't find me crying about it. I don't care if that beer cost a little more if I know the fucker that drinks a pint of cheap whiskey every day has to pay for his hospital bills instead of me when his liver shuts down. Make the fuckers that cause the shit... pay for trhe shit.
And how much ammo do you buy per year? Offset that against your tax dollars burned in trauma centers and see which is greater.
How does US paying more for our rights equal the "abuser" having to pay for it himself. Now, if you're telling me you simply feel that those who choose to abuse, are RESPONISIBLE THEMSELVES, then I agree. I dont understand how higher taxes would enable or force them to pay for it themselves? What did I miss? If you're bitching about our tax dollars paying for morons who cant or wont pay for their own problems, you're preaching to the choir.
...
Then you know what?
FIX THE FUCKING GOVERNMENT!!!
Don't accept its ineptness and corruption.
No shit, we are supposed to control the government. But all people ever do is wait around and complain, like nothing can ever be changed!! It's so lazy and american to simply want to throw out the system instead of getting off your ass and fixing the problems within it.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
How does US paying more for our rights equal the "abuser" having to pay for it himself. Now, if you're telling me you simply feel that those who choose to abuse, are RESPONISIBLE THEMSELVES, then I agree. I dont understand how higher taxes would enable or force them to pay for it themselves? What did I miss? If you're bitching about our tax dollars paying for morons who cant or wont pay for their own problems, you're preaching to the choir.
...
Earmark the taxes paid on Tobacco, Alcohol and Guns and Ammo to pay for the shit associated with them. If the excuse is that the government is corrupt and will spend it on hookers and booze in D.C, then the problem is THE GOVERNMENT.
If taxes collected from alcohol went to alcohol education and alcohol related issues... them make the fucker that are drinking the shit pay for it. Same goes for cigarettes and firearms.
...
Look through this entire thread and see who is tossing out ideas for solutions, rather than off-tangent bitching. Toss out some ideas to solve the problem or ideas to build on the ideas out there instead of simply looking for some way to tear them down and let the ineptness, corruption and status quo to continue.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
well, your argument based on analogy is a good one. but, the fact is, both are guaranteed, protected rights given to all citizens of this country. as far as banning a religion in another country, we have NOTHING. so, good day.
A lot of people on this board would like to see a total ban on guns based on a very small fraction of a percentage of firearms being used to comit high profile crimes. The majority of the millions of guns in this country are never used to comit a crime and in fact are used over a million times a year to prevent crime.
So the logic goes...
Based on the small fraction of a percentage of crimes being comitted by Muslim extremeists we should ban the worship of Islam because it is apparently dangerous. That majority of Muslims in the world have never comitted a crime and in fact are appalled by the violence comitted in the name of their religion.
but by the logic given we should legalize all drugs b/c the drug laws don't work as i can still get any illicit drug rather easily
I'm for this too! But with that come responsibility. Your insurance rates would be sky high if you develop a heroin addiction and if you comit crime while under the influence you should suffer huge penalties. I'm all for the legalization, TAXATION, and regulation of narcotics.
Comments
You have my full support for that view.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Having lived in the US for 11 years now, I disagree. I actually think that there is such a stark line between "being a criminal" and "being an honest person" that once one crosses the line to "being a criminal" they feel that they have nothing left to lose. Reputation is everything here. It's also a pretty unforgiving society. This is how I explain the fact that in my home country petty theft is much more common: you get a lenient punishment and rebound. Here if you steal and rob might as well kill.
On guns... I think there is a big difference between the mindset "owning a gun is my right, hence I can go buy it if I pass a background check" (US mindset as I see it); and the mindset "owning a gun is NOT my right. I may be a hunter and want a gun for those purposes, but I'll have to get a special permit from the government" (Italian mindset as I see it).
On the first post... guns are things, muslims are people :rolleyes:
we could just forget this happened
http://www.kenbradshaw.com/order2/
i have the dvd of this event...the ocean and all it's beauty calms me down when i'm upset about current events like violence & guns
now that's a wave!
EDIT: to make it pearl jam related
would you call it a "big wave"? to keep it pj related.
for the 14th time in about 2 days... once handguns were banned/legislated in Japan, Scotland, Australia, etc... then the number of gun-related accidental deaths or homicides halved!!!
so its not a stretch at all!!!!
1. it's the 13th time
2. I'm not arguing that it will not decrease accidents etc... I said STOP (eliminate) I never said you thought it would cease all accidents or homicides. On a side note, more accidents / homicides occur with shotguns etc..., than with handguns...
3. it is a stretch to say that banning would stop accidents
Of course I didnt answer your question. The question is stupid (im assuming it was intended to be) , and the answer is obvious. To say they accomplish nothing would be foolish. To say they stop criminals from getting their hands on weapons, would be more foolish.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
1. that's right
2. no-one is saying it will STOP all accidents
3. it is a stretch... but it would mean a decrease
if people really really want to own guns then they'll go through the proper admin/checks/licences/etc to get one... they'll deal with the hassle of it all so they can have a gun. no matter how strict you make it!!
people keep using the car analogy as well... so in keeping with that, think about how car admin has changed
in 1943 any fucker could just get in a car and drive it.... no licence, no test to pass, no tax, no seatbelts, no MOT, no insurance, nothing!!! no speed limits on certain roads, etc etc etc
in 2006, we now have... licence, seatbelts, tests, insurance, tax, paperwork aplenty, speed limits, speed bumps, just fucking loadsa stuff
if LEGALLY ABIDING peope want to own and go in cars then they do this no problems.. they might grumble about costs, etc... but law abiding people go with the regulations! so if law-abiding citizens really really want guns, then they'll jump through the appropriate hoops to get one!!!
Yes, Gun-Related Incidents (accidental deaths or homocides) decrease or halved.
As they should when a total ban on firearms is imposed.
But murder in general increased considerably after the ban of firearms. The statistics prove this.
They simply are not being comitted with firearms.
That tells you something right there.
Once firearms are banned, people are more likely to commit murder. The predators/criminals/murderers feel safer and more confident to carry out their crimes, when they know the population has no firearms to defend themselves with.
You are stuck on "Gun-Related " incidents, when you should be looking at what happens to the overall murder rate, in those countries, when firearms are banned.
The overall murder rate is the key point.
The laws vary widely from state to state. Ohio and Montana, for example, have very little regulation, while other states like Maryland have much tighter controls. Since we travel freely between the states, this means virtually anyone who wants a gun, or a hundred guns, can get them easily.
Most guns initially enter the market legally. Smith & Wesson isn't selling to the guy in Brooklyn. They get into the black market because there's nothing stopping anyone from going to a state like Montana or Ohio and stockpiling weapons, then taking them back to a state like New York that has tighter controls in place and selling them on the black market. There needs to be more nation-wide uniformity in our gun laws.
sorry my request for clarification seems stupid to you. 69 said we had all these gun laws and none of them stop a criminal from committing a crime w/ a gun. i think you can't stop ALL of it but i do think some of the laws do prevent crime. they may not stop all crime committed w/ a gun but i bet it cuts down a good bit, especially w/ ppl who are in the heat of the moment.
but by the logic given we should legalize all drugs b/c the drug laws don't work as i can still get any illicit drug rather easily
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
While I disagree with making them legal, id love to see them legalized and regulated. Much in the way guns are. But I guess gun laws go to show that even something legal has a black market. Hell, I'd bet you can buy a freegin toaster on the black market. Illegal marketing of goods has existed as long as goods have existed. You and your ideas and ideals are great, but reality is what it is.
And by definition heat of the moment doesnt give the benefit of thinking about what you are doing. As pointed out above by another poster, crime and murder rates RISE in areas where guns are prohibited.
I have no great answer to how to solve the problem of criminals aquiring guns. I do know however, that taking them away from law abiding citizens is NOT the answer.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
What do Gun people have against Gun Licensing and Registration? Why is that such a big deal?
...
I am a firm believer in the Constitutuion and Bill Of Rights of the United States. I do not advocate the total removal of guns from the private sector, but, i believe that there are WAAAAAYY too many idiots in the Public and most of them should NOT be running around with fucking guns. Just go to a swap meet or a NASCAR race and look at the crowd... drive on the freeways of Los Angeles and look in the other cars... do you really think you would be safer if they were all armed?
And stiffen the penalties on unlicensed/unregistered guns, as well as crimes commited using guns. Throw those asshole in prison instead of the guys just smoking pot and snorting cocaine.
All I know is this... America has a lot of dickheads living here. I don't want dickheads with guns running around here.
Hail, Hail!!!
ps: if there is a bill or legislation concerning this matter it needs to be revamped or updated or what ever.
How about taxing the shit out of ammo? And while we're at it... tax the shit out of tobacco and alcohol.
Earmarking the taxes for Gun Safety Courses taught at local Law enforcement agencies, Gun Licensing/Registration funding, gun related trauma, etc... Just as taxes for cigarettes and booze are earmarked for health issues concering those things.
Reg'lur Joe Taxpayer that doesn't smoke or shoot up the fucking place and isn't a fucking alcoholic won't be paying for the ones who do.
Hail, Hail!!!
www.myspace.com/jensvad
Excellent point. One of the most violent periods in American history.
Exactly, you should ban both guns and bomb-making equipment instead, oh and video-making gear for jihadists, and swords and whatever else fundamentals use.
---
London, Brixton, 14 July 1993
London, Wembley, 1996
London, Wembley, 18 June 2007
London, O2, 18 August 2009
London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 31 July 2012
Milton Keynes Bowl, 11 July 2014
Who's talking about 'less purchasers'? Make the users of these items pay for the consequnces of these products... what's wrong with that?
Make smokers pay for the issues caused by smoking, alcoholics pay for the consequences of alcohol use and gun shooters pay for the results of gun accidents and gun shot wounds.
Why should those of us who don't smoke, don't shoot guns and aren't alcoholics pay for the shit the people who do?
That's my question.
Hail, Hail!!!
If I'm a gun owner who never shot someone, and never caused nor incurred any damages via my gun, why the fuck would or should I pay for that? Liberally diseased thinking at its finest.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
And I have a beer or two every once in a while and smoke a cigarette every now and then... so what? You won't find me crying about it. I don't care if that beer cost a little more if I know the fucker that drinks a pint of cheap whiskey every day has to pay for his hospital bills instead of me when his liver shuts down. Make the fuckers that cause the shit... pay for trhe shit.
And how much ammo do you buy per year? Offset that against your tax dollars burned in trauma centers and see which is greater.
Hail, Hail!!!
Then you know what?
FIX THE FUCKING GOVERNMENT!!!
Don't accept its ineptness and corruption.
Hail, Hail!!!
How does US paying more for our rights equal the "abuser" having to pay for it himself. Now, if you're telling me you simply feel that those who choose to abuse, are RESPONISIBLE THEMSELVES, then I agree. I dont understand how higher taxes would enable or force them to pay for it themselves? What did I miss? If you're bitching about our tax dollars paying for morons who cant or wont pay for their own problems, you're preaching to the choir.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
No shit, we are supposed to control the government. But all people ever do is wait around and complain, like nothing can ever be changed!! It's so lazy and american to simply want to throw out the system instead of getting off your ass and fixing the problems within it.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Earmark the taxes paid on Tobacco, Alcohol and Guns and Ammo to pay for the shit associated with them. If the excuse is that the government is corrupt and will spend it on hookers and booze in D.C, then the problem is THE GOVERNMENT.
If taxes collected from alcohol went to alcohol education and alcohol related issues... them make the fucker that are drinking the shit pay for it. Same goes for cigarettes and firearms.
...
Look through this entire thread and see who is tossing out ideas for solutions, rather than off-tangent bitching. Toss out some ideas to solve the problem or ideas to build on the ideas out there instead of simply looking for some way to tear them down and let the ineptness, corruption and status quo to continue.
Hail, Hail!!!
from my window to yours
I'm for this too! But with that come responsibility. Your insurance rates would be sky high if you develop a heroin addiction and if you comit crime while under the influence you should suffer huge penalties. I'm all for the legalization, TAXATION, and regulation of narcotics.