California's Hateful Gun Laws are worthless

none of those apply to felons who buy guns from straw puchasers or other felons

as usual=you push laws designed only to harass lawful gun buyers

 

Now the truth is coming out. We see now more and more that pro gunners see this as a BLACK problem. Guess what their obvious solution must be

 

There's no way to stop that.

When the Clinton gun ban was in effect from '94 to '04 it was a Federal Felony to be in possession of standard capacity magazines marked "Military/LE Only"... yet criminals were regularly arrested in possession of them.

Plain and simple, you can't prevent people who are willing to violate the law from getting whatever they want.

 

No they are designed to save lives. You push for repeal of laws and that will result in more gun deaths

 

How does obtaining a gun license prevent suicides? I have a gun license. I could easily become depressed and off myself. So how did my having a license help?
MA doesn't have waiting periods and has a lower gun death rate than CA.
Mental health background checks are only as good as the info in the system. Not everyone who has mental health issues or even depression is medically diagnosed. What about those who end up with depression AFTER going through background checks to get a license?

 

Who is this "we" you keep referring to?

Is there somebody with you under your rock?



And why do you keep avoiding the fact that young black men, at about five percent of the overall population, kill about half of all cops killed with guns in America?

How long can you keep dodging? It's quite revealing of the weakness of your position.

Here's another question to add to your list:

Why do you want to get rid of guns when multiculturalism is the problem?

 

You can reduce the odds though....a better system not a perfect one

 

I need to see your plan to reduce gun suicides in detail first.

I am not here just to play defense

 

What is your solution to this problem as you see it?

 

The problem is that you are dodging my questions.

What is your solution to THAT problem as you see it?

 

Having peer reviewed your posts here I find them seriously lacking and suspect that if you teach constitutional law it is perhaps at a backwoods Militia camp.

 

Well I don't see that as the problem.

But clearly you do. So what is your solution? Don't run....just be honest

 

As a peer I concur with your peer review

 

Hahahahaha...and here you go again avoiding answering direct questions. Not that anyone is at all surprised. It IS your M.O.

If you offer up ideas then you need to expect to get called on it. Not sure why you think you're above that. I don't have a plan to reduce gun suicides as there is no way to reduce gun suicides other than to get rid of all guns. Which I am not in favor of doing. But let's be honest...you have no plan to reduce gun deaths. If you did you'd man up and voice it.

 

If you want to insult me we can just end this debate right now.

 

Where did I insult you?

 

You flatter yourself.

You don't debate.

You just banter and play games and never offer facts or respond to facts offered to you.

 

Read it again. I don't have an MO. I am a person engaging in respectful debate and I have given evidence for all my positions with you in this thread.

But we can stop at any time

 

You have a question pending on the table

 

And since all firearms currently available on the private market qualify as being in common use, there is no reason to believe the second amendment does not protect a right to legally carry them outside of the home for what are ultimately legal purposes.

 

How is pointing out a fact an insult? You DO avoid answering questions.

 

The 9th circuit agrees.

 

Oh gosh.......I don't know......maybe you could start answering questions and making honest responses?

(Just a wild and crazy idea.)

 

Case in point....you didn't answer ONE question I asked.

 

The question was can some firearms be banned from civilian use. The answer: yes they can. That was my point.