I really don't care about matters relating to a monarch where the people are seen as subjects not citizens. We are talking about the USA-a country that broke away from a corrupt monarchy through the force of arms. As to experience-which others have confirmed as true-I was a world class shooter in shotgun sports (I never lost to any British Skeet shooters when I was on the circuit) and I had an A rating in USPSA when that was the highest class. I was a DOJ prosecutor for 24 years, and in private practice I represented everything from major gun dealers to a Title II maker (machine guns). I was also my component's firearms instructor for those needing to be deputized as Dpty US marshals so they could carry firearms nationally. And I know gun laws and the arguments for and against gun control inside and out. and there are almost no valid arguments for the type of gun control people like Hillary clinton wish to impose on us in the USA
your opinion doesn't really matter on this subject. What is true is that American Citizens are buying up millions upon millions of semi auto pistols and modern sporting rifles and yet crime with such weapons by such people is dropping. So that means we really don't need to do anything that interferes with honest people owing the sort of weapons that cause so much fear and trembling among members of the BM. Nothing you have ever suggested has any logical or empirical arguments supporting your arguments as advancing public safety
We still have more gun deaths by a factor of ten than most countries. It is not acceptable - - - Updated - - - My opinion matters as long as I have the right to vote. And there are many that agree with me. We will not stand by while this bloodbath continues. You are free to do so....we will fight for change
you can say that all you want but you can only believe that if you are either ignorant of the constitution or ignorant of the entire field of criminology and what the current gun laws are. the more you post, the more its obvious to me-an expert in this field-that your real goal is to harass gun owners and try to make recreational shooting too expensive or too much a hassle for average americans. You do this in an effort to bleed the NRA of members and to cut down on the numbers of citizens who make gun rights their main voting issue
you don't care about the blood bath because if you did, you would be targeting your crocodile tears at gangsters who do most of the killing in the USA. People who already face serious penalties if they are caught with a gun. You continually try to BS us into thinking your goal is crime control rather than the harassment of honest gun owners go ahead list your proposals to substantially decrease this "blood bath" which is mainly PROHIBITED persons killing other criminals with guns neither group can LEGALLY own - - - Updated - - - that's a rather pathetic argument. and if you notice, most of the posters aren't finding your mantras very convincing.
I have listed them many times. You are very angry and not open to honest debate. It all comes down to personal attacks. Perhaps after you cool down for a while you will better be able to debate calmly
there is nothing honest about a debate where all you do is say "I don't agree" I repeat my positions all the time given this board constantly has new members who need to be brought up to speed. One of the most disgusting tactics of the BM members is to pretend people like me who aggressively shred the psychobabble of the BM, are "angry" I am not angry at all. I am like a cat eying a mouse. So either put up your arguments and proof or be seen as just another contrarian who proves again its the politics of avid gun rights advocates that upset you. You have almost 11,500 posts, so don't pretend to me its a hardship on you to succinctly list your gun law proposals and why they are both effective and not in violation of our rights
Mandatory training Gun registration Universal background checks You must present your license to purchase guns or ammo Repeal HIPPA laws to report the mentally ill so they can't own guns Prisons are for violent offenders, gun offenses will be dealt with harshly And all this is national I will point out the first time you make it personal.
Mandatory training-unconstitutional and doesn't reach the people who cause most of the problems Gun registration-unconstitutional at a national level-doesn't apply to criminals and is designed to facilitate confiscation when a gun ban is passed in the future. Every group that favors confiscation wants registration. Its also an infringement on my right because it requires me to do something to merely keep firearms I already own. In states that have tried this crap, compliance is less than 20% Universal background checks-unconstitutional when applied to private citizens engaging in INTRA state commerce. its unenforceable without unconstitutional registration and is worthless. there is no evidence background checks has prevented any violent crime You must present your license to purchase guns or ammo-licenses are unconstitutional. presenting an ID to buy ammo or guns is not Repeal HIPPA laws to report the mentally ill so they can't own guns-then you will create a chilling effect where people who are at the start of a mental illness and can understand what you want, WILL NOT go to doctors lest they lose their guns -you will only make things worse. This is a classic case of not understanding the real cost of your poorly thought out proposals Prisons are for violent offenders, gun offenses will be dealt with harshly-that is in place and the NRA and most gun owners s support that assuming the GUN OFFENSES are violent in nature And all this is national-clearly all are unconstitutional under the current supreme court holdings. I don't have a problem with VIOLENT gun offenses being harshly punished I will point out the first time you make it personal.
Nobody said it would be easy. Hillary appoints a few new justices, the democrats win the senate and all bets are off. All of it....and I mean all of it .....is possible
So, you want an all out ban on guns, because that is exactly what Hillary Clinton wants, she does not give a Rat's ass about the decent People that will die at the hands of Blood thirsty Criminals.
so might be a civil war and that seems to be what the anti gun left wants. they want continually harass gun owners and push more and more stupid laws designed to harass gun owners and gradually ban guns. But I note you are unable to tell us how any of those things short of longer sentences on violent criminals will do a damn thing its obvious to me you really don't think the Second amendment is even valid and that liberal judges should just pretend it doesn't exist
obviously so-its clear he's a hater of conservatives and sees gun control as a way to punish those of us who vote against liberal gun banners. People like him hope that the government persecutes or even kills gun owners who won't comply with the idiotic laws he wants.
not yet. but lets be honest-there is no evidence any of that crap will decrease crime other than stiffer sentences on real criminals. And when you pass those laws and there is no decrease in crime (hell you've admitted that a DECREASE IN CRIME is still reason to demand more laws) you will push more laws. and then more laws until there is a ban. you obviously don't think the second amendment means anything. so don't BS us by pretending that a ban isn't on your wish list ultimately. Once you pretend or actually believe, that restricting honest people will somehow impact criminals, you will keep pushing more and more restrictions
yep she supports a complete ban on handguns-or in her twisted speech, she supports the power of any governmental unit to ban handguns in private citizens's homes. She also wants to ban semi auto rifles and she is in favor of the Australian and English gun bans.
Do you realize how pathetic that response is are you going to say to us that you oppose a ban-or more likely you won't say that because it MIGHT BE NECESSARY but I see you are not denying that you have no use for the second amendment and you think hillary should appoint judges that will pretend it doesn't exist - - - Updated - - - you are denying that she said Heller was wrongly decided? SERIOUSLY?
really? why is that -its registration after all how is that a personal attack to say your unsupported response is pathetic.
It is a personal attack because you dare disagree with his Royal Personage, The King of Moldyavia !!!
