Breaking - Gunman opens fire during college event at California bar - At Least 12 Dead

Dedicating significant time? No one said that.
Just thinking about being safe in school.

 

Perhaps it can be explained on the part of yourself why firearms in general are not prohibited from private ownership throughout the united states, but non-firearm type weapons, such as bludgeons and slungshots, are outright prohibited from private ownership?

 

Such is not a possibility so long as the school environment tolerates violence being committed against students, and will not take precautions to protect them from harm. They will not even invest in locks for their doors to prevent unauthorized entry by outside parties, so the schools themselves to not take the issue of student safety very seriously.

How many times has the news media reported on a school shooting, committed by someone who freely entered the building, all while carrying a rifle in open view? Why were these individuals allowed to physically enter the building to begin with? Why are entrances and exits not physically secured to prevent such from occurring?

 

I disagree with your premise nothing can be done on the weapons of choice side of the argument.
Have a good day. Done beating a dead horse.

 

That is incorrect. Gun control advocates are not trying to save any lives. They only want to violate people's rights for fun.

No. There is a debate because some people want to violate our rights for no reason, and we refuse to allow them to do so.

Gun control is not about saving any lives, kids or otherwise. The only goal is to violate our rights for fun.

Restrictions on rights are allowed if the restriction can be justified with a good reason, and if the restriction does not impede the exercise of the right.

Restrictions on claymore mines can be justified with a good reason. That makes them different from a weapon that there is no justification for restricting.

That said, if a claymore mine counts as an ordinary infantry weapon, it could be asserted that people have the right to have them because they are essential for militia duty.

 

Restrictions on rights are allowed if the restriction can be justified with a good reason, and if the restriction does not impede the exercise of the right.

It's the unjustifiable restrictions that cause a problem. Like when gun control advocates don't have any justification for a gun control law and just want to violate people's rights for fun.

As above, much depends on whether or not the restriction can be justified with a good reason.

 

The bolded shows you have no interest in discussing. Only spouting RW lies.
Good day.

 

Mass shooting is justified. I said that already.
Now you're just trolling.

 

Guess you didn't even read the article you posted. Here let me quote it for you:

"A Firearms Transaction Record, or Form 4473, is a form promulgated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in the United States Department of Justice that is filled out when a person purchases a firearm from a Federal Firearms License (FFL) holder (such as a gun shop).[1]"

Please read with comprehension and see which transactions are covered. The maybe you can figure out ( I know, counting on your intelligence may be overly optimistc) that it doesn't cover all gun sales.

Now try and remember that your claim was all guns have been registered for fifty years. Perhaps a word like " all" is to hard for you to understand. After all it is one syllable.

 

Condemning the left for their bad behavior is fair game in a political discussion.

I can see why you would associate the presentation of facts with the political right.

However, facts are not lies, much as the left finds them inconvenient.

Mass shootings do not justify gun laws that are not intended to prevent mass shootings and are only designed to violate people's rights for no reason.

No. I am presenting facts that you find inconvenient.

 

If ignorant people choose to demand terrible policies without understanding what they are demanding, they are still legitimately open for condemnation.

Ignorance itself is not bad. Taking a position without knowing what you are talking about is very bad.

I know nothing of brain surgery. If I were to go on a medical discussion board and start spouting gibberish about brain surgery, it would be fair for doctors to condemn me for spouting what I'm sure would be very bad ideas.

 

All sales by licensed dealers within the past 50 years.

What did I win?

My IQ is 170. What's yours?

It covers every sale made by a licensed dealer within the past 50 years.

Every sale by a licensed dealer in the past 50 years has resulted in a Form 4473.

 

Intentional untruths is NOT an argument.

 

Luckily for me, everything that I've said is the full and absolute truth.

 

Another shooting in a "gun free zone".... by now you would think the lefties would learn, but they don't.

 

Years of bitter experience tells me that gun control advocates have no interest in listening to explanations.

If they are demanding to violate our rights for no reason, and if they are not interested in listening to explanations as to why their demands will do nothing other than needlessly violate our rights, I think it's fair to condemn them for trying to needlessly violate our rights.

Presumably they are adults. They can take responsibility for the positions that they advocate. If they freely choose to advocate nonsense without knowing what they are talking about, that does not relieve them of responsibility for having advocated it.

 

Yes except your claim was every gun has been registerd for fifty years. Even a person with such a low IQ should be able to understand the difference between " every gun" and " gun sales by licensed dealers"

Here to help your obvious defects in recall is the rxchange


Courtjester said
And I also think all guns should be registered.

And you replied
We've been doing that for the past 50 years.

So even despite your low IQ a word of one syllable like " all" shouldn't be beyond your understanding. Or perhaps you are stating your IQ in base 2.

 

And that shows the difference to Germany ... because here a burglar must have luck to break into a house hich has guns inside ... and even we have of course a black weapon market too and everyone who wants a gun + ammo can get, but her eit is a clear matter of price which is a multiple time higher as in the USA for the same gun. Why? Because our sharp gun control and the sharp control by Police & Co.

But even we are not 100% sure of such Masackers. We once had a school massager where a teenager made to the unlocked weapon + ammunition km and then a massacre and also died.
The father ended up in jail ... simply because he did not comply with his obligations to lock up the gun and store separately from the ammunition and thus legally bears a partial liability! No laws help against stupidity and ignorance ... sometimes with terrible consequences!

 

Meaning it is not actually possible for yourself to address the points that have been raised regarding safety and the school facility.

 

I am happy to quote you through this thread and others. Here is is again: "Banning AR style weapons and of course limiting clip size."

I especially love how you add "of course" as if "clip size" has anything to do with the number of rounds that can be fired without reloading.

We know that you have many choices on where to parade ignorance and we thank you for choosing this forum.

 

I did.
But you're not honest enough to even believe the definition of arms.

School safety is at the top of any list. But that costs money. Are you willing to have the fed gov't support school safety?

 

No

Security is a local issue

 

See. So school children, especially in poorer schools have no support of conservatives.
Conservatives have no interest in making the country safer from mass shootings.