Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by James California, Dec 28, 2019.
Because.... you believe correlation proves causation?
You must be unaware of federal law to this effect.
Any number of people are not legally permitted to possess a firearm; only a handful of these are criminals.
Sorry the democrats have pretty much said that they are coming for the guns.. I'm not paranoid, they are out to get me and have said so.
That's how freedom works - you retain your rights and freedoms until they are removed through due process.
Why do you hate freedom?
No democrat has said they're coming for your guns. That's where you're paranoid. Wanting guns like the guns that 'seem' to be used a lot in mass killings are what the dems and most responsible citizens want.
You cannot possible have typed this with a straight face.
Except for the fact that they have indeed stated such.
If even a single type of legally owned firearm is targeted, it is no different than targeting all firearms equally.
you know i just missed the comma
It should read . No, Democrats have said they are coming for our guns
I would appreciate it if you could prove that statement. Till then I consider it BS.
Somehow I do. The easier it is to own lethal weapons, the more they are used.
I assume that most people who shot someone dead wish they used a taser or pepper spray instead of a firearm at that time.
"A gunman killed two people during a Sunday morning service at a church in White Settlement before members of the congregation fatally shot him, authorities say."
Only a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun. This is the way it is supposed to work. I personally know of two congregations where church members have concealed carry permits and are encouraged to bring their weapons to church.
I've sat in church services with at least 5 guns on my pew alone. My wife saw the footage from yesterday and realizes that she needs to adjust her carry practices. We may get more training soon.
California is an example of how you are incorrect. Certain common firearms are banned in CA and it is illegal to sell or transfer them. Since the family may not legally inherit these guns, they will be CONFISCATED upon death.
California just came up with whats called a Gun Restraining Order that allows guns to be CONFISCATED without due process.
What you claim most responsible people want is false.
Its a good feeling. Not a good feeling that it is necessary, but a good feeling that they are there.
Some correlations are causal (such as smoking and lung cancer).
Who? Beto O'Rourke? Seems like a short list ....
You assume wrong. If you are confronting someone with a gun, tasers and pepper sprays are just about worthless.
Obama, Clinton, Biden, Warren,
All of them want bans on Americans most popular firearms that are used in the least amount of crime..
No, that would produce useless data. Instead look at total violent crime. It does no good to only consider gun crime if a population simply uses different weapons if guns aren't available.
The more I hear about the White Settlement Texas church shooting, the more impressed I am. The parishioner who stopped the shooter was a fire arms instructor. He trained other members of the church how to respond. He held his fire until he had a clear shot.
"A parishioner named Jack Wilson — who volunteers for the church’s armed security team and trained others in the church to use firearms to protect the congregations — confronted Kinnunen almost immediately, shooting and killing him, according to the Associated Press. Two parishioners, including one who volunteered on the security team, were also killed during the shooting.
“I am very sad in the loss of two dear friends and brothers in CHRIST, but evil does exist in this world and I and other members are not going to allow evil to succeed,” Wilson wrote on Facebook after the shooting.
Local media reports that a livestream of the church service—which appears to have been removed from the internet—shows at least one churchgoer firing back at the shooter while dozens seek shelter under pews."
This is absolutely the best example of how these "gun free zones" should be protecting themselves. There is no way to know how many lives were saved with their trained disciplined response.
Every individual who applauded when Beto O'Rourke made his statement of coming to take legally owned firearms is also on the list. They would have absolutely no reason to applaud if they did not agree with his statement and position.
But they would've allowed people who already owned assault rifles to keep them. O'Rourke was the only advocating confiscation.
Don’t forget Diane Feinstein.... “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them... 'Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in,' I would have done it.”
Also see democratically proposed and currently pending SB 16 in the Virginia Senate, which if passed will ban all “assault firearms”—defined broadly to include a broad range of rifles, shotguns, and handguns. The bill does not use the word “confiscate” but it is an outright ban on all such arms regardless of whether currently owned at the time of enactment or not. If enacted, you either destroy your gun, surrender it without compensation, or keep it and become a felon if caught.
Maybe, remember, they are progressives, that means when you give them an inch they take a mile. It starts with a semi automatic rifle ban. Again the most popular guns that are used in the least amount of crime.
Hillary said she thought the Australian buy back was a great idea for America. That means she is for confiscating our guns and she is the most moderate of Democrats.
All of them would take away all of our guns. And they would say so if they could and still get elected.
Separate names with a comma.