2 cheerleaders were shot in a Texas supermarket parking lot

It's not.
You don't need to do a background check in Texas as a private seller of firearms.
You need to run it through the police in Illinois if you make a private sale.

And so it seems you do not know the first thing about the topic.

 

that assumes people obey the law-we should compare our respective experiences concerning law enforcement since it appears you have no understanding of how criminals operate

your argument is as silly as saying if we require people to have a prescription to buy oxy, no one will abuse that drug

 

Your "that's true in any state." is still a Tucker Carlson. It's just not.
And we do not need to assume. We got the stats. It's in the OP.

 

and your stats prove nothing. you cannot prove that democrat gun owner harassment laws will decrease violent crime. in fact some of the Democrats wet dreams would turn millions of American citizens into well armed pissed off "criminals" who may well cause all sorts of problems. How many of your beloved gun banning states saw their crime rates go down DUE to their stupid gun laws?

 

Proper training includes shoot/don't shoot decision making - at least the legalities of it, if not the practice. As for your second point? That is exactly why it should be mandatory but of course but in general is not.

 

how are you going to force people who already are committing a federal felony by merely possessing guns show up for training? shoot no shoot-how many cases can you think of where armed private citizens shoot the wrong person by lack of training.

 

The argument related to firearm holders in general not felons. And to firearms safety training as a means of reducing the overall number of deaths, injuries and accidental discharges per annum in general.

 

and guess what-the number of accidental deaths has been going down. and again, you cannot constitutionally demand training as a prerequisite to owning guns. as to carrying concealed, yes you can.

 

Stupid assumption.

 

What speculative nonsense proclaimed as fact. There are dozens of other reasons FOX could have decided to settle all having nothing to do with the amount of damages.

 

Which has been my point form the beginning. The two simplest things that could be done to prevent gun deaths and injuries in the United States without restricting the right of citizens to possess firearms are proper training and proper security when not carried. And yet both have been judged to 'infringe' the rights of firearm owners. Result?

There is nothing that can be done except perhaps to start a betting pool with your buds on what the final death toll will be at the end of each year, winner takes the pot!

 

I'm well aware of American media bias against guns, the NRA and gun owners in general. It's precisely as if the gun ban groups and the stars of the gun ban movement get free advertising.

The only times that guns are in the news is when there is a tragedy or an instance of gun misuse.

Not once have I recently heard or read anything in MSM about guns saving lives (1) or the numerous shooting sports for both men and women.(2)

As you've noted earlier, another topic that is taboo in MSM is Black on Black crime or Black on White crime (I gave examples of both in my Post # 412)

Finally, it is clear that if you want fair, complete and color blind news reporting on anything related to firearms, don't rely on MSM with its egregious bias.

Thanks,

(1). “Guns Used in Self Defense”
https://americangunfacts.com

EXCERPT “According to the National Research Council study done during Obama’s presidency, guns are used for self defense between:

500,000 – 3 Million Times Every Year

(That comes out to 57 – 93 times every hour!)

Because many cases of self defense are not reported to the police, the real number may be on the higher end.” CONTINUED


(2). “Different Types of Competition Shooting"
https://schooloftrades.edu/different-types-of-competition-shooting/

EXCERPT “The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) states that 19 million plus Americans safely invest their time in target practice. They use handguns, shotguns and rifles. Some of this is for fun and much of it is for competitive shooting. Practice makes perfect.” CONTINUED

 

The stats prove that this is actually the case. I already sourced it.
And in fact, there is an entire thread dedicated to this:
\http://www.politicalforum.com/index...rse-in-red-states-it’s-not-even-close.610015/

It's game over. You lost.

 

Read post 438.
It is a safe bet that the red states with weak gun laws are going to be again at the bottom of the list.

Anybody in Texas can just privately sell their guns to who ever they want, without notifying the cops. That includes terrorists, murderers and psychopaths.
And your idea is to proper train those people how to not shoot themselves etc. What a freaking joke.

 

1) No. My 'idea' was NOT that people should be properly trained to shoot each other. (After all, and to be honest if you can't shoot yourself your not really trying!) What I did say was that people should, as far as is reasonably possible be trained to avoid shooting each other! I also suggested BTW that properly securing firearms when not in the physical custody of their owners was also part of the solution.

2) In other words my 'ideas' were limited to what could reasonably done given the limit's imposed by US Constitution on the right to bare arms. That said I also pointed out that even those two limited steps were rejected as valid propositions by the Supreme Court!

Ergo (and as I stated) there is currently nothing that can be done to change the situation without a clarifying amendment to the Constitution of the United States. That being the case? I suggest you relax, sit back and watch the mayhem unfold on TV from the comfort of your living room. Because there is literally nothing else that is going to change the status quo.

 

That which you consider "weak laws" is known elsewhere as freedom. According to some studies, private gun sales have almost no connection to gun crimes. One could argue that promiscuity, the legalizing of abortion, and the increase in out of wedlock births resulting in Fatherless/husbandless homes, is the driving force behind the devaluation of life, murder involving guns, and the increase in crime in general. Closing your eyes to this reality only allows it to fester and worsen. And that is irresponsible and reckless rather than prudent or wise. Blaming guns is an excuse, not a solution.

 

or we could get rid of the woke DAs and judges who let violent felons walk

 

It was on CNN only after it was news and reported by independent news sources.

I'm glad that you've decided to identify as a smart person. Keep up the good work.

 

Good points. For the most part, the media doesn't reflect the real world. When it does, the media is condescending. You can tell by their long faces and finger pointing. The media is generally elitist.

 

Would putting a wall around Illinois keep the riff raff out or in?

 

so you pretend states commit crimes, not individuals

 

Are you finally getting around to the gun show loophole?

 

I'm old enough to be especially fascinated by the amount of information from around the world that is available to us today.
That fascination extends to being able to hear other opinions on things from people around the world; i.e. other forum members

I don't dismiss Western MSM but I look at it with a critical eye and rely heavily on independent media.

At the same time, I think that it's important to take a break from "the news" and just watch the drama that plays out at my bird feeder from time to time.

Thanks,

 

You do realize that blue Illinois has a higher murder rate than red Texas. BTW, Illinois gun regulations are a cake walk. Submit to a background check, yawn thru an ownership course, and walk out with a fourteen round semi auto 10 MM. Then file down the serial number, sell it on the street, and report it stolen.

 

Not really a response to the key points I raised is it? The majority of mass shooters in the US don't have lengthy or violent criminal records prior to committing their violent crimes. A small % do, the vast majority don't! And as you yourself pointed out if it's illegal to remove access to a citizens firearms unless they've been proven guilty of a crime it must also be illegal to detain people forever on the basis that they might commit once their sentence is served. You cant have it both ways.

Finally as I noted there are at least two obvious and reasonable measures neither of which deprive anyone of their right to bear arms which could be imposed in the US were it not for legal precedents forbidding it. Hence my comment that the that as it stands there's NOTHING that can be done to significantly reduce the death toll from firearms in the US (except sit back and enjoy the ride.)