ANTI-GUN RESEARCHERS ADMIT TO INCLUDING INJURIES FROM NON-GUN OBJECTS IN “FIREARM INJURY” DATA

He means those that support the left ideology will be judged sane, those with different points of view must be, in their, eyes, insane.

As for training he's been asked many times what such a requirement program would entail, but he refuses, or more likely, can't put together a competent answer on that.

 

Nope. We need universal background checks supported by gun registration. And we need to stop selling guns to suspected terrorists on the watch list

 

whoa hold on. you're adding **** now. registration wasnt part of your original statement of what we need.

see, this is a big part of the reason that people are so opposed to what ur 'side' calls reasonable restrictions. historically, whenever we concede to something you require, theres always *another* requirement just waiting.

many 2A supporters (the wide majority) worry that this tendency of you gun controllers to always have yet another 'reasonable restriction' waiting in ur back pocket will end up 'de facto' regulating away all our gun rights. And so the 'line in the sand' gets drawn.

 

Ok. You can play the slippery slope argument if you want. That does not mean we should do nothing

 

I fully support you defending your domicile with chemical weapons as a self defense measure.

Mustard gas works well I hear.

 

Can we take away any guns they already legally own? Will the government give us full transparency on who's on it, and how you get on or off of it?

Will we also prevent those on this obscure list from renting trucks?

 

so long as toddlers are frequently barred from flying because they're on the terror watch list, you arent going to gain the support necesssry to use it as a means for gun control.
and no, im not saying toddlers should have guns. im saying the watch list needs a serious overhaul in the direction of accuracy, accountability and due process before you can promote using it as a means to restrict constitutional rights without sounding rediculous.

 

lets try this from a different perspective...
do you (VG and or other gun control advocates) agree that constitutional rights should only be restricted within the bounds of due process, so all individuals have access to representation, ability to face their accuser and defend themselves in a court of law *before* they are denied any constitutional rights?

 

No I do not agree. There are many examples where due process can and should be sought after rights are denied. By the way you agree with this too. You could not arrest anyone in your scenario.

 

They do not legally own it if they can not pass the background check. Sure. No it will not absolutely prevent every attack.....but you knew that

 

Arrest is part of due process.

 

Then denial of a gun can be part of the same process

 

There is no background check involved in merely owning a gun. Once someone is put on the list, can the government ignore their 4th Amendment and property rights and just search their premises and confiscate any guns?

 

They aren't arrested for being on the list. They are arrested when they actually commit a crime.

 

No only when there is probable cause a crime has been committed.

 

There can be. When you bring it in for registration

 

Agreed. That has nothing to do with getting on some list. They aren't suspected of committing a crime.

 

Ok. So, would you agree with my previous statement given the provision of arrest?
If the authorities have 'reasonable suspicion' that a gun owner is a threat, they can arrest them and hold them for 48 hours while they gather evidense.
(yes, im playing your game, this is OF COURSE how it already works... you can be held for 48 hours for no reason).

OR do you think gun owners should be treated differently than other people who are 'reasonably suspected' to be a threat?

 

We don't have registration and never will. Besides, if they're terrorists they won't bother to register their guns, anyway.

 

You are mixing a lot of things up. Reasonable suspicion is used for a search. Probable cause is used for an arrest. You can not detain someone without probable cause

 

VG's comment: "Nope. We need universal background checks supported by gun registration. And we need to stop selling guns to suspected terrorists on the watch list."

It is stuff like this that shows me that gun control advocates have abject contempt for the Constitution. Anyone could be put on the terrorism watch list - even newborn children. Ted Kennedy was on the terrorism watch list. There is no due process whatsoever to have yourself put on the list... but people like VG want to strip people of their Constitutional rights if they get put on a list that is by definition arbitrary and capricious.

This is just more evidence that the Republic the Founders sought to create to protect individual rights and liberties is being undermined by an ever more totalitarian, authoritarian government... and people like VG and his ilk are directly contributing to it, and as such prove themselves enemies of the Constitution.

 

Never? They said t he Cubs would never win the World Series. They said man would never fly. I love it when they say never.

 

I have never seen so much support for suspected terrorists in my life

 

Would it make a huge difference? How many murders are committed with air guns? Of course, it is extremely hypocritical for pro-gunners to point this out while refusing to acknowledge the frauds on their own side.

 

Have you ever pointed out the frauds on your side?