STOP participating in the Thoughts & Prayers SCAM

[MaVolta]

---

Fishslayer777 wrote:
Well since automatic weapons are regulated and not available to the general public, criminals and mentally impaired can not have arms, and those who pose a threat too.... then what more do you want?
And if you want more and we still have innocent people killed.... then what? more regulation?

Better enforcement might be a good place to begin. Getting the guns away from the criminal elements and the mentally incompetent. Let's start in Chicago... since the murder rate is the highest and then the other 29 cities.

Just a coincidence that the cities/urban areas are all democratic bastions . Go figure.

The proposed laws that I mentioned are not the be-all-end-all solution, but are measures that would certainly help, especially a gun registry, expanded background checks and better data reporting, and closing up the gun show loop-holes. Finally, ban assault style weapons, armor piercing bullets, extreme magazines, and body armor. No one has need of these outside the military and law enforcement. 

The right always cites that the laws on the books are sufficient, and you just stated that we need better enforcement. Exactly what should law enforcement be doing that isn't being done? What laws are not being enforced that would stop these mass shootings? I have yet to hear anyone from the right answer those questions. 

[alferdpacker]

---

---

---

Fishslayer777 wrote:
Well since automatic weapons are regulated and not available to the general public, criminals and mentally impaired can not have arms, and those who pose a threat too.... then what more do you want?
And if you want more and we still have innocent people killed.... then what? more regulation?

Better enforcement might be a good place to begin. Getting the guns away from the criminal elements and the mentally incompetent. Let's start in Chicago... since the murder rate is the highest and then the other 29 cities.

Just a coincidence that the cities/urban areas are all democratic bastions . Go figure.

---

While automatic weapons are regulated - as a general rule - nearly any law abiding citizen who isn't insane, isn't openly seditious or rabidly anti-government CAN legally acquire a full automatic weapon - if the citizen has between ten and fifty thousand dollars available for the purchase price of a full auto weapon.   In that context, the $200 Federal Excise Tax, and lawyer consultation fees are quite literally "chump change".

What does mentioning Chicago have to do with the fact that "thoughts and prayers" is a scam that evades and denies the magnitude of the problem society faces from white male mass murderers - the majority of mass murderers?

Statistically, being a white male wanting to buy a semi-auto military look alike SHOULD trigger a mandatory psychiatric examination before allowing the purchase.

[Fishslayer777]

You want a complete ban.... never gonna happen.

[Richva]

---

Fishslayer777 wrote:
Well since automatic weapons are regulated and not available to the general public, criminals and mentally impaired can not have arms, and those who pose a threat too.... then what more do you want?
And if you want more and we still have innocent people killed.... then what? more regulation?

Better enforcement might be a good place to begin. Getting the guns away from the criminal elements and the mentally incompetent. Let's start in Chicago... since the murder rate is the highest and then the other 29 cities.

Just a coincidence that the cities/urban areas are all democratic bastions . Go figure.

---

Yeah, those **bleep** Democrats!  Also a coincidence that every other developed country in the world (and quite a few less developed ones) have such a lower incidence of gun violence than the U.S.  Oh right, they all ban guns.   

[Fishslayer777]

Well since automatic weapons are regulated and not available to the general public, criminals and mentally impaired can not have arms, and those who pose a threat too.... then what more do you want?
And if you want more and we still have innocent people killed.... then what? more regulation?

Better enforcement might be a good place to begin. Getting the guns away from the criminal elements and the mentally incompetent. Let's start in Chicago... since the murder rate is the highest and then the other 29 cities.

Just a coincidence that the cities/urban areas are all democratic bastions . Go figure.

[MaVolta]

---

Fishslayer777 wrote:
Constitutional Bottom line .... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Protecting rights ain't cheap... ask AARP.

---

No proposed law infringes on the right to keep and bear arms. Congress does have the authority to say which arms one can keep and bear. Congress also has the authority to deny such privileges to criminals, the mentally incompetent, or those who pose a threat to the security of it's citizens. There is nothing in the Constititution to prevent that, only $$$$$$$$$$$$$. When $$$$$$$$ speak, Congress bows.

[Fishslayer777]

I already have legal protected 2nd amendment access... so what's your point?

[Olderscout66]

Constitutional bottom line:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,

Want to have access to a semi-automatic weapon? Join the National Guard.

Protecting lives ain't cheap in the face of the GOPNRA - ask the parents of Sandy Hook Elementary.

[Fishslayer777]

Constitutional Bottom line .... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Protecting rights ain't cheap... ask AARP.

[MaVolta]

---

rk9152 wrote:

---

MaVolta wrote:

The fact remains, it's about money. Want proof?

 Well, yes and no. It is all about individual citizens wanting their rights protected. They look to the NRA to do that and the NRA uses money as a vehicle to protect those rights.

---

That seems to be the perception on the right. But exactly what law has been proposed that would deny your rights to gun ownership? The answer is none if you are a law abiding, mentally competent citizen. 

Post Sandy Hook, the Obama Administration proposed expanding background checks, and closing up the gun show loopholes. All of those were opposed by the gun lobby group. Congress refused to expand background checks, even at the pleading of Sandy Hook parents, out of fear of the gun lobby group.

Post San Bernardino, a law was proposed to deny the sale of firearms to those on the terrorist no-fly list. That proposal was also challenged strongly by the gun lobby and went nowhere. We can deny them their rights to board a plane, but restricting their right to gun ownership was just a bridge too far for the gun rights group. 

These were just a few common sense measures that could have been taken to keep guns out of the hands of at least some of the wrong people. Other ideas have been floated, such as a national gun registry to help law enforcement with gun trafficking. All guns on the black market were once purchased legally. Finding those crossover buyers/sellers could help shut down the black market trade, which is where (according to the NRA) that the bad guys get most of their weapons. Registration doesn't take away anyone's gun(s). But no, that's an invasion of privacy, so says the gun lobby.

Mexico has stronger gun laws than the US. Most of the gun crimes committed there have been traced to purchases on the black market coming from the US. Perhaps Mexico should consider building a wall to keep US gun traffikers out of Mexico (just a thought).

Bottom line - thou shalt have no gun regulations, period, and we've got the $$$$$$$ to stop it (see my earlier post).