Made with Love

Look what The USA gun makers-sellers are doing now after the last few gun outbreaks.

sorry, one more thing, Until our governments realize that WE the people should vote on topics like this, not a poll, not a survey, but actually vote on a bill then they hold all the power....and lobby groups and generous donations will rule the day.

I forget what country it is, but I saw a documentary on it and what happens is that say, the abortion issue, each voting citizen goes to a polling station and votes whether it should be made legal or not. This happens on every major issue. In this case, if the majority of the citizens vote to ban assault weapons, then they should be banned. No matter what the NRA says, no matter what congress says, if the citizens vote, that's the end of it.
 
sorry, one more thing, Until our governments realize that WE the people should vote on topics like this, not a poll, not a survey, but actually vote on a bill then they hold all the power....and lobby groups and generous donations will rule the day.

I forget what country it is, but I saw a documentary on it and what happens is that say, the abortion issue, each voting citizen goes to a polling station and votes whether it should be made legal or not. This happens on every major issue. In this case, if the majority of the citizens vote to ban assault weapons, then they should be banned. No matter what the NRA says, no matter what congress says, if the citizens vote, that's the end of it.

Yes, a true democracy would be nice. But the US is not a democracy, it's a republic. sigh.

I also agree with your previous point about the intent of the right to bear arms was so citizens could protect themselves from the government. Not sure I agree that our government is even a little bit afraid of us, though. another sigh.
 
Here is another one.


https://www.tampabay.com/news/publi...d-been-complaining-about-slow-service/1266589

ST. PETERSBURG — Florida's controversial "stand your ground" law has been cited in hundreds of cases. People have used it to justify shooting, stabbing, killing and maiming would-be intruders, romantic competitors and rival gang members.

And on Sunday, at a pizza joint in St. Petersburg, a man tried to use it as justification for shooting another customer who was yelling at workers because he wasn't getting his order fast enough.

Police said the incident unfolded about 4 p.m. inside the Little Caesars, 3463 Fourth St. N, after Randall White, 49, got mad about his service.
Another man in line, Michael Jock, 52, of St. Petersburg admonished White.

That "prompted them to exchange words and it became a shoving match," said police spokesman Mike Puetz.
White raised a fist. Jock, a concealed-weapons permit holder, pulled out a .38 Taurus Ultralight Special Revolver.

He fired one round, hitting White in the lower torso. The men grappled and the gun fired again, hitting White in roughly the same spot, police said.
One bullet lodged in a wall in the restaurant, which was occupied by at least two other people.

After the shooting, both men went outside and waited for police. Jock told officers the shooting was justified under "stand your ground," Puetz said.
"He felt he was in his rights," Puetz said. "He brought it up specifically and cited it to the officer."

He told officers he feared for his life. He mentioned that he thought White had an object in his hand, then backed off that when officers pressed him. Florida's "stand your ground law" says people are not required to retreat before using deadly force.
"We determined it did not reach a level where deadly force was required," Puetz said.

Police arrested Jock on charges of aggravated battery with a weapon and shooting within a building. He was released from jail on $20,000 bail.
Jock told the Tampa Bay Times he was meeting with a lawyer today, but declined further comment.

White was treated at Bayfront Medical Center and released. Reached by phone Monday night, he said he felt lucky to be alive. He was also angry.
"There are arguments every day, but how many people pull out a gun? When you pull a gun out and shoot somebody, your life better be in danger," White said. "He was in my face and I pushed him. His life was not being threatened."

White said he got mad because his thin-crust vegetable pie was taking longer than the 10 minutes he was promised.
"Twenty minutes later, I'm like, 'Where's my pizza?' " White said.

White, who admitted he was tired and agitated, started talking about the service. That's when he said Jock "started chewing me out."
White said the gun came out quickly. A shot rang out. The two men wrestled for the gun before the second shot was fired.

White said he still has a bullet fragment in his back.
"I got lucky," he said. "To me, that stand your ground rule … people are twisting it. He's twisting it. I walked in to get a pizza and I got shot … I'm hoping the law prevails. We'll see."
 
Put it this way, if I were a teacher in the US I'd want a concealed weapon with me at all times
 
Does it really matter what kinds of guns are available out there? If bad people want to go out an kill a lot of people they can do it. No guns were used on 9/11 but thousands died. I don't see how preventing good people from getting whatever kind of gun they want will help. Bad people will come up with ways to do bad things! Sheesh

A nutbar with a 30 round clip can kill a lot more/faster than a nutbar with an 8 round clip.

More to the point, why would a civilian need a 30 round magazine? Ditto for an AR-15 assault rifle
 
It's happening in Canada now.

The father of a slain B.C. Lower Mainland gang member has been charged with threatening to kill children at a kindergarten or elementary school, CBC News has learned.
According to information sworn to obtain a search warrant for the home of Michael Denis LeClair, the 59-year-old allegedly expressed "a desire to use violence to take the law into his own hands and seek revenge for the death of his son."

Kevin LeClair was shot at a Langley shopping centre on Feb. 6, 2009.He was a member of the Red Scorpion gang, a criminal organization in the Fraser Valley allegedly headed by brothers Jarrod and Jamie Bacon.
Two men were charged in January 2011 with Kevin LeClair's murder, but fled prior to arrest and remain at large.

Michael LeClair is a retired RCMP officer. He was arrested last month and charged with uttering a threat to three leaders of a victim support group "to cause death or bodily harm to children in kindergarten and elementary school."

He has also been charged with seven counts under the Firearms Act in connection with the alleged possession of a shotgun and a Winchester 30-30 rifle.
The allegations contained in the search warrant are a police theory of the case and none has been proven in court.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/brit...12/18/bc-threat-to-children-rcmp-officer.html

 
Does it really matter what kinds of guns are available out there? If bad people want to go out an kill a lot of people they can do it. No guns were used on 9/11 but thousands died. I don't see how preventing good people from getting whatever kind of gun they want will help. Bad people will come up with ways to do bad things! Sheesh

That's the argument that the NRA uses, if you make it illegal to own guns, then only criminals will have guns.....well, the problem with that logic is that why make it easy for them? If you put 1000000 guns in the hands of 1000000 people, you'll get infinitely more shootings than you would if you put 100 guns in the hands of 1000000 people.....

Take that pizza parlor story for example...if buddy couldn't get his hands on a handgun, and didn't have a carry permit, no shots would have been fired right? The only thing that would have happened is maybe they would have fought and maybe a bloody nose and some bruises....if buddy had been a better shot, someone might have died....

Then you get into "only criminals will have guns" ok, so we have restrictive gun ownership laws up here....we had..what? 54 incidents where a gun was used to kill someone? what was it in the US? 10,000? I rest my case......Funny, the only country with lax gun laws is the only country that has the sandy look sort of thing occuring......
 
That's the argument that the NRA uses, if you make it illegal to own guns, then only criminals will have guns.....well, the problem with that logic is that why make it easy for them? If you put 1000000 guns in the hands of 1000000 people, you'll get infinitely more shootings than you would if you put 100 guns in the hands of 1000000 people.....

Take that pizza parlor story for example...if buddy couldn't get his hands on a handgun, and didn't have a carry permit, no shots would have been fired right? The only thing that would have happened is maybe they would have fought and maybe a bloody nose and some bruises....if buddy had been a better shot, someone might have died....

Then you get into "only criminals will have guns" ok, so we have restrictive gun ownership laws up here....we had..what? 54 incidents where a gun was used to kill someone? what was it in the US? 10,000? I rest my case......Funny, the only country with lax gun laws is the only country that has the sandy look sort of thing occuring......
The problem is though tboy that US is currently flooded with 300 million guns. The genie is out of the bottle, and you cant get it back in.

How on earth is the US government gonna confiscate 300 million firearms?? And you know the criminals will never hand them in, just law-abiding citizens will
 
How about a nutbar with 4 guns with 8 round clips. I think everyone is missing the point. It's not the gun...its the nutbar!

Or a nutbar with 4 guns and 30 round clips?

Bad people will do bad things, no doubt. This about access to tools of destruction.

Can you clarify your position - are you for or against gun control? Are you for nutbar control?
 
If we're ever gonna implement nutbar-control we have a lot of work ahead of us....LOL
 
The problem is though tboy that US is currently flooded with 300 million guns. The genie is out of the bottle, and you cant get it back in.

How on earth is the US government gonna confiscate 300 million firearms?? And you know the criminals will never hand them in, just law-abiding citizens will

sure, that is also an excuse the NRA will use but, you have to start somewhere.....by putting limits on now, you may prevent another 100 million guns from going into the wrong hands...hell, if you stop ONE gun from going into the wrong hands, then it is worth it....

I don't think it is so much how many guns are out there, as primo states, it isn't the gun that kills, it is the person.

For eg:
1) repeal the carry laws. Private citizens can no longer carry in the open or conceal a handgun unless they have a carry permit which to obtain one, they'd have to go through psychological testing, and pass a proficiency exam (using a simulator like how they test cops).
2) Ban the sale or possession of automatic weapons or adapter kits. Sorry, a shotgun is fine for home defence (which is what the right to bear arms is about) you don't need an ak uzi or M14A1 or an M15. Either ban them or again, like handguns, make the owner take courses, and pass a practical exam. If they can't handle the weapon, they don't get to keep it (oh and they'd have to use THEIR weapon during the testing so if they fail, you've got one off the streets).
3) Write restrictive well thought out laws on their use. For example: if you shoot a 10 yr old girl dressed like a skunk, you go to jail, for 50 yrs...automatic. or if you pull one on a customer in a pizza shop......or if you use one in the commission of a crime, an automatic 10 yr jail term......
4) like we have, make it necessary to have the weapon in a locked gun case in the trunk.
5) mandatory background checks on anyone wishing to purchase a firearm and a 5 day waiting period while this is being carried out.
6) Make the laws the same in ALL states.

The thing is, the current laws require someone to have common sense while owning a gun, and we ALL know that common sense is rare in the US and similarly, up here.......
 
sure, that is also an excuse the NRA will use but, you have to start somewhere.....by putting limits on now, you may prevent another 100 million guns from going into the wrong hands...hell, if you stop ONE gun from going into the wrong hands, then it is worth it....

I don't think it is so much how many guns are out there, as primo states, it isn't the gun that kills, it is the person.

For eg:
1) repeal the carry laws. Private citizens can no longer carry in the open or conceal a handgun unless they have a carry permit which to obtain one, they'd have to go through psychological testing, and pass a proficiency exam (using a simulator like how they test cops).
2) Ban the sale or possession of automatic weapons or adapter kits. Sorry, a shotgun is fine for home defence (which is what the right to bear arms is about) you don't need an ak uzi or M14A1 or an M15. Either ban them or again, like handguns, make the owner take courses, and pass a practical exam. If they can't handle the weapon, they don't get to keep it (oh and they'd have to use THEIR weapon during the testing so if they fail, you've got one off the streets).
3) Write restrictive well thought out laws on their use. For example: if you shoot a 10 yr old girl dressed like a skunk, you go to jail, for 50 yrs...automatic. or if you pull one on a customer in a pizza shop......or if you use one in the commission of a crime, an automatic 10 yr jail term......
4) like we have, make it necessary to have the weapon in a locked gun case in the trunk.
5) mandatory background checks on anyone wishing to purchase a firearm and a 5 day waiting period while this is being carried out.
6) Make the laws the same in ALL states.

The thing is, the current laws require someone to have common sense while owning a gun, and we ALL know that common sense is rare in the US and similarly, up here.......
Tboy, if they ban guns people will just resort to bombing schools. In fact you can cause just as much damage if not more damage by ramming a truck full of fertilizer through the front doors.

Just one example: https://news.yahoo.com/mass-school-bombing-1927-puts-sandy-hook-context-185608674.html

[h=2]Mass school bombing in 1927 puts Sandy Hook in context[/h]The Sandy Hook tragedy in Connecticut has horrified Americans and in some cases, opened up wounds from a similar disaster in 1927 that have yet to heal.

On Friday, a deranged gunman killed himself and 26 other people at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut. The dead included 20 students, and the act sparked mass mourning and outrage worldwide.
The debate over the Sandy Hook tragedy has also led to discussions about gun control, mental illness, and the media’s role in covering such a horrific story.

In particular, the debate over assault weapons and the Second Amendment will be brought to the forefront in 2013. President Barack Obama pretty much said so at a public memorial event on Sunday night.
But what if such a terrible even happened in a different time? How would people have reacted, and would there be such a public outrage or intense debate about constitutional issues?

On May 18, 1927, a part-time caretaker at a school in Bath, Michigan, killed 45 people, including 38 children, when he blew up a school and then killed himself, along with two first responders at the scene. Another 58 people were wounded.

The 38 children were in grades three through six.

The Bath School Bombing faded quickly from history. What media there was in 1927 left the town after about a week, since aviator Charles Lindbergh had started on his flight to Europe.
However, there are parallels between the Sandy Hook and Bath disasters that are worth discussing.

The killer in the Bath School Bombing, Andrew Kehoe, spent months placing explosives inside the school. He used his job as a handyman to wire together two types of explosives, in an elaborate plan to bring down the building while it was occupied with students and teachers.

Kehoe also rigged his car with explosives and shrapnel, as well as his house.

Once Kehoe blew up his own house, he used a detonator to blow up part of the school. School Superintendent Emory Huyck performed heroically, rescuing children and adults from the disaster scene. After about 30 minutes, Kehoe drove up to Huyck and motioned him over to his truck.

Kehoe then blew up the truck, killing himself, Hucyk, and several others, including a child who survived the first blast.

Investigators later found more than 500 pounds of unexploded dynamite under the school. Kehoe had intended to kill hundreds of people, mostly students, but his wiring was faulty.

Kehoe had financial problems and was upset about having to pay taxes. He had killed his own wife before blowing up his house.

But the parallels to Sandy Hook are not in the method and motivation behind Kehoe’s madness. They come from the stories of heroism and compassion.

Bath was a small town, so all pitched in to clear the rubble, find the victims, and offer assistance. Help streamed in from the neighboring town of Lansing.

Michigan’s governor arrived that afternoon and helped to cart away the rubble. During the rescue efforts, the Michigan State Police had to disarm the huge cache of explosives that never went off.
In the days that followed, contemporary accounts said more than 50,000 people descended on Bath, either to offer help or to see the disaster scene.

“Relief workers could not get in or out of the village unless accompanied by motorcycle policemen and even then they made slow time,” said one newspaper
account.

In the end, the state set up a relief fund for the school, which received numerous public and private donations. One politician wrote a personal check for $75,000.

And the population of Bath, once the outsiders left, went back to farming and grieved. Unlike today, there were no 24-hour TV news cameras remaining on the scene or talk shows debating the merits of the Second Amendment.

But the wounds from the Bath School Bombing followed the survivors for generations. In recent years, people who were in the building were opening up about their experiences, as they reached their 90s.
In 2009, National Public Radio spoke with two survivors and the daughter of a third.

“You wouldn’t think a church member could do such a thing, would you?” said a 97-year-old man, Willis Cressman. “He was the caretaker of the school. In fact, I saw him that morning. He was working on a door, and he smiled at us as we walked in.”

Cressman’s niece noted something that will also follow the Sandy Hook survivors throughout their lives.

“Years later, we still look at ourselves as survivors. So you look after one another differently, because you know that the absolute unthinkable can happen, even going to school,” said Johanna Cushman-Balzer.
The Bath disaster hadn’t been entirely forgotten in recent years.

In July, The Christian Science Monitor spoke with author Arnie Bernstein, who spoke extensively with Bath survivors when he wrote his book, Bath Massacre: America’s First School Bombing.

“When I came in, it had been eight decades, and nobody had talked about it. It was just this scar on the land,” Bernstein said. He also spoke with a 99-year-old woman who wanted to describe what happened to her young brother, who was killed in the explosion, so other generations could understand.

“Out of that horror, out of the one or two people who commit these kinds of crimes, comes the good, the tremendous good that you see in the wake of these things. Our humanity comes through in the face of evil and the inexplicable,” Bernstein told the Monitor.

According to a detailed website about the Bath disaster, only 13 survivors were alive as of October 2012
 
yes esco, I admit it, there will always be those who are fucked enough to find a way to do someone else harm...the trick is to make it as difficult as possible for them to do it without removing an innocent person's rights.....

It is my understanding that dynamite is more difficult to get your hands on now than guns (well, that's obvious lol) and moreso than it was then. I also know it is pretty much impossible for non-military to get their hands on amfor or c4....

After oklahoma city, I recall reading that not just anyone can go out and buy enough fertilizer to build a bomb. I believe you have to a) have a valid reason to purchase it (ie: a farmer) then b) have a valid reason to purchase enough to do any damage (ie: a farmer with a large farm). Now I know there are ways and means to circumvent any safeguards but again, the trick is to make it so difficult to do, not just any loonie can do it.
 
I believe the main focus of the US government will be the AR-15 semi automatic assault rifle which was used in the last 3 mass shootings and should be banned and removed from every civilians household. This will also hopefully be followed up by waiting periods and background checks for everyone in a household which a gun will be stored.
 
Anyone who thinks criminals will obey guns laws


Is a special kind of stupid
 
Gun control isn't about the belief that criminals will respect the law. It's about making it more difficult to get and making it illegal to own certain weapons.

My two year old is not yet capable of rational and moral thinking. If I take away his hockey stick, he'll use a spatula to bang on the coffee table. Leaving my machete in the living room for him would be irresponsible and plain stupid.
 
Anyone who thinks criminals will obey guns laws


Is a special kind of stupid

If something isn't available it cannot be had. Assault/Military weapons should be only for the military or police department. Would you allow civilians to drive around the city in a tank, probably not so why should anyone own weapons specifically designed to mow people down??
 
The argument from the NRA will be that semi-auto weapons are available for hunters and this should be no different. And that if you wanted to modify the non-military style firearms to fire auto, you can. They will fail to recognize the bad-ass image and appeal military/assault style weapons project.
 
Back
Top Bottom