From ‘liquid biopsies’ to precision medicine, these five developments will change cancer care in the next decade. Learn more.

Reply
Highlighted
Trusted Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
200
Views

Re: Kamala Showing No Love For Donnie (Democratic Debates)

200 Views
Message 1 of 21

If everybody had said that's not possible or that can't be done, this country would never have been built.



    

Report Inappropriate Content
Tags (3)
1
Kudos
200
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
228
Views

Re: Kamala Showing No Love For Donnie (Democratic Debates)

228 Views
Message 2 of 21

@MaVolta 

What is to be offended by? As far as being offended, we have seen how offended victims are by continually being offered thoughts and prayers after mass shootings, versus there being any action at all to try to help prevent the shootings

...in large part thanks to the nra, and repub legislators taking the money, then blocking legislation. 

And as far as being real, we are! We are here discussing, and trying to determine logical laws and legislation to confront problems which exist in our society...

also known as participation! And not party over Country. 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
228
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
246
Views

Re: Kamala Showing No Love For Donnie (Democratic Debates)

246 Views
Message 3 of 21
MaVolta posted..

By all means, let's call NZ a failure before they get started. Australia was very successful with their program, but never mind. Aussies don't think like gun-warped Americans. With attitudes like yours, better keep those thoughts and prayers coming.

=======================================================

"Tentative estimates put the total number of guns in New Zealand at about 1.5 million and the number of weapons that are now banned at up to 175,000. If those numbers are correct, it would mean less than 10% of the banned weapons have been handed in so far." Not a success!

" With attitudes like yours, better keep those thoughts and prayers coming."

People that use calling is very telling and uncalled for on this board...TOS.

I posted a reasonable suggestion. Beto's idea is not...its not even workable.

Get real, its a good thing!


Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
246
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
259
Views

Re: Kamala Showing No Love For Donnie (Democratic Debates)

259 Views
Message 4 of 21

@KidBoy2  - By all means, let's call NZ a failure before they get started. Australia was very successful with their program, but never mind. Aussies don't think like gun-warped Americans. With attitudes like yours, better keep those thoughts and prayers coming.

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
259
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
268
Views

Re: Kamala Showing No Love For Donnie (Democratic Debates)

268 Views
Message 5 of 21

MaVolta posted...

I know exactly what you meant. We do what Australia did. That's the model. New Zealand is in the process of doing the same.



It's one thing to ban the sale of assault weapons, etc. but that doesn't take them out of circulation. The only way to do that is with a buy-back program. Or, maybe have a trade-in program where you trade in your illegal weapon for a legal one. After all, a person can take the buy-back money to get a new gun that is legal.



Will there be people who keep them illegally? Yes. It is illegal to have controlled substances, but there are people who have them. But there are consequences for breaking the law when they get caught. It's why we have an ATF, a DEA, and ICE.



We have a choice. We can be bold and change our attitudes about guns and society like they did in Australia (and elsewhere). Or we can do nothing and keep on burying the dead with people sending thoughts and prayers every few weeks. I choose to vote for change. We are seeing a movement in that direction.



And, by the way, Beto isn't alone either. There are three D's campaigning to run against Sen Cornyn, right here in red-state Texas, who all support mandatory buy-backs of assault weapons.

==================================================================




w New Zealand’s gun buyback program is faring 6 weeks in
World Sep 3, 2019 11:22 AM EDT
WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — Some New Zealand gun owners are upset they’re being compelled to hand over their assault weapons for money. Others believe a government-imposed ban on certain semi-automatics following a March shooting massacre is the best way to combat gun violence. And The Associated Press has found at least one man may have tried to swindle hundreds of thousands of dollars from the system set up to compensate gun owners.

New Zealand is six weeks into an ambitious program to buy tens of thousands of guns from owners across the country. After a lone gunman killed 51 people at two Christchurch mosques nearly six months ago, the government rushed through new laws banning military-style semi-automatics in a move that’s being closely followed around the world.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern told the AP in July that most New Zealanders disagree with the U.S. model under which gun ownership is seen as a constitutional right. The new laws in New Zealand emphasize that gun ownership is instead considered a privilege.

So far, owners have turned in more than 15,000 newly banned guns as well as 64,000 parts and accessories. In return, the government has handed them 32 million New Zealand dollars ($20 million). But nobody has a clear target for the program because authorities haven’t kept track of the number of guns in the country.

Tentative estimates put the total number of guns in New Zealand at about 1.5 million and the number of weapons that are now banned at up to 175,000. If those numbers are correct, it would mean less than 10% of the banned weapons have been handed in so far. Owners have until Dec. 20 to turn them over or potentially face charges.

=================================================================

 

"Owners have until Dec. 20 to turn them over or potentially face charge"  How will that work?  Do they have a list of owners of the banned weapons? Will they go house to house? Is that what Beto wants? 

"Tentative estimates put the total number of guns in New Zealand at about 1.5 million and the number of weapons that are now banned at up to 175,000. If those numbers are correct, it would mean less than 10% of the banned weapons have been handed in so far."


10% .... 20 million...

Its just another "feel good" political motivated program that will not get the crooks to turn in their gins.

Like I said its time to get real....stop the sale and the manufacturing of assault weapons.

It reminds me of the cash for clunkers Obama program that was a very costly government program that was a failure...remember? I do.

https://qz.com/1042742/why-did-cash-for-clunkers-fail-a-new-paper-explains-how-obamas-stimulus-progr...

Part of the link...
The Obama administration accidentally accelerated the Corolla conquest of American roads
By Gwynn GuilfordAugust 2, 2017
When was it, exactly, that petite Toyotas and stubby Hondas came to rule the American road? One milestone in the compact-car takeover dates back to the summer of 2009. Times were, as you’ll recall, pretty dark. The US economy was bleeding jobs. Trillions of dollars in wealth in stocks and home equity had been vaporized. People were clinging to what cash they had—and definitely not spending on cars. With sales nosediving, several flagship US auto companies were on the brink of ruin.

And then came the great Keynesian experiment known best as “cash for clunkers.”

Under the bipartisan program, the federal government offered incentives of between $2,500 and $4,500 to US residents trading in a gas-guzzling, older vehicle to buy a new, more fuel-efficient car. (That’s worth about $2,900 and $5,100 today.)

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
268
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
296
Views

Re: Kamala Showing No Love For Donnie (Democratic Debates)

296 Views
Message 6 of 21

@KidBoy2 wrote:

He stated..  No, I stated ... Simply banning assault weapons isn't enough. To get them out of circulation means a mandatory buy-back, and making it illegal to own one or possess one. Beto's quote is appears before that statement, just to be clear.

mandatory buy-back....that might sound good until you think about it. How would that work? How would you make crooks turn in their assault weapons? How would you find all the assault weapons? Who would pat for the buy back? How much would you have to pay to get people to turn they in?

How will make it illegal to own one? How? Got a answer for that?...if so please advise.

I am for stopping the sale of assault weapons. But that will not keep they off the streets or will a buy back.

Get real


I know exactly what you meant. We do what Australia did. That's the model. New Zealand is in the process of doing the same. 

 

It's one thing to ban the sale of assault weapons, etc. but that doesn't take them out of circulation. The only way to do that is with a buy-back program. Or, maybe have a trade-in program where you trade in your illegal weapon for a legal one. After all, a person can take the buy-back money to get a new gun that is legal. 

 

Will there be people who keep them illegally? Yes. It is illegal to have controlled substances, but there are people who have them. But there are consequences for breaking the law when they get caught. It's why we have an ATF, a DEA, and ICE. 

 

We have a choice. We can be bold and change our attitudes about guns and society like they did in Australia (and elsewhere). Or we can do nothing and keep on burying the dead with people sending thoughts and prayers every few weeks. I choose to vote for change. We are seeing a movement in that direction.

 

And, by the way, Beto isn't alone either. There are three D's campaigning to run against Sen Cornyn, right here in red-state Texas, who all support mandatory buy-backs of assault weapons.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
296
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
356
Views

Re: Kamala Showing No Love For Donnie (Democratic Debates)

356 Views
Message 7 of 21

@KidBoy2 

Ideas are real...

When proposing an idea, then developing a goal, it’s appropriate to figure out how to get there. Beto was proposing an idea. Why is wrong to at least discuss it?

No one has stated exactly how you would get there, and it certainly is not a law yet. 

 

And good for Harris! 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
356
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
363
Views

Re: Kamala Showing No Love For Donnie (Democratic Debates)

363 Views
Message 8 of 21
MaVolta posted this rant...

What is unrealistic is to place a ban on these two guns (along with the high capacity magazines and bullets that go with them) without making it illegal to own one. What is unrealistic is the worn out thinking that these two weapons have a legitimate purpose other than to cause mass destruction. What is unrealistic is the NRA talking point that taking these two weapons out of circulation infringes on anyone's 2nd Amendment rights. What is unrealistic is to think these mass shootings won't keep happening again, and again, until Americans finally get sick enough of seeing their kids, their family, their friends, their neighbors, die or critically injured because someone had one of these weapons. What is unrealistic is to think it won't be your neighborhood next. How many more people must die or suffer life-long injuries or mental distress before we just say no?

=======================================================

I do not think you know or want to know why I posted "Beto saying that shows he is not a realist"

He stated.."" Simply banning assault weapons isn't enough. To get them out of circulation means a mandatory buy-back, and making it illegal to own one or possess one"

mandatory buy-back....that might sound good until you think about it. How would that work? How would you make crooks turn in their assault weapons? How would you find all the assault weapons? Who would pat for the buy back? How much would you have to pay to get people to turn they in?

How will make it illegal to own one? How? Got a answer for that?...if so please advise.

I am for stopping the sale of assault weapons. But that will not keep they off the streets or will a buy back.

Get real






Report Inappropriate Content
Tags (3)
0
Kudos
363
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
381
Views

Re: Kamala Showing No Love For Donnie (Democratic Debates)

381 Views
Message 9 of 21

@KidBoy2 wrote:
MaVolta posted..

Beto clearly had his best moment with "Hell yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47. "We're not going to allow it to be used against our fellow Americans anymore." Simply banning assault weapons isn't enough. To get them out of circulation means a mandatory buy-back, and making it illegal to own one or possess one. I'm glad he has the courage to stand up for his convictions. Finally, a D who won't apologize for taking a stand!

===================================================================
Beto saying that shows he is not a realist.


What is unrealistic is to place a ban on these two guns (along with the high capacity magazines and bullets that go with them) without making it illegal to own one. What is unrealistic is the worn out thinking that these two weapons have a legitimate purpose other than to cause mass destruction. What is unrealistic is the NRA talking point that taking these two weapons out of circulation infringes on anyone's 2nd Amendment rights. What is unrealistic is to think these mass shootings won't keep happening again, and again, until Americans finally get sick enough of seeing their kids, their family, their friends, their neighbors, die or critically injured because someone had one of these weapons. What is unrealistic is to think it won't be your neighborhood next. How many more people must die or suffer life-long injuries or mental distress before we just say no

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
381
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
394
Views

Re: Kamala Showing No Love For Donnie (Democratic Debates)

394 Views
Message 10 of 21
MaVolta posted..

Beto clearly had his best moment with "Hell yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47. "We're not going to allow it to be used against our fellow Americans anymore." Simply banning assault weapons isn't enough. To get them out of circulation means a mandatory buy-back, and making it illegal to own one or possess one. I'm glad he has the courage to stand up for his convictions. Finally, a D who won't apologize for taking a stand!

===================================================================
Beto saying that shows he is not a realist.

Report Inappropriate Content
Tags (2)
0
Kudos
394
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Are you new to the online community? Say Hi and tell us a bit about yourself, your interests, and how we can help make this community a great experience for you!


close-up group of seniors smiling at camera

Top Authors