Gun Control & RKBA

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)

17. because

Reply to 1965Comet (Reply #14)

Wed Dec 28, 2016, 04:36 PM

Dec 2016

1) it takes the focus off of the real issues, and scapegoats people who have nothing to do with the problem. Also, they don't get the guns legally anymore than they get their drugs.

2)See above, and your statistic is for all homicides combined. Also, the terrorists in San Bernadino did not get their guns legally under California law. Would it matter if they got machine guns from the black market like the attacks in Europe? Would it matters if they used homemade flamethrowers? Even before NICS, criminals rarely went to gun stores and even more rare did they go to gun shows. Besides, more people are beaten to death by the "unarmed" than all rifles combined, let alone "assault weapons".

All of them are different issues with different causes, and thus all have different and complex solutions. Restricting civil liberties or Constitutional rights for the vast majority of people who do not engage in any of these, and never will, is not only ineffective but illiberal.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

43 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Anti-Gun Control argument fail... [View all] 1965Comet Dec 2016 OP

They're not known for thinking ahead even one step...nt HAB911 Dec 2016 #1

Submitted for reference HAB911 Dec 2016 #2

Deserves, no, demands an OP of it's own. nt flamin lib Dec 2016 #4

Fake study. Kang Colby Dec 2016 #20

Not known for thinking at all. flamin lib Dec 2016 #10

I suggest that this is less of a... discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #3

All throughout President Obama's term sarisataka Dec 2016 #5

Huh? 1965Comet Dec 2016 #6

I misunderstood your sarisataka Dec 2016 #7

No worries, we are on the same side here. 1965Comet Dec 2016 #8

your website isn't a valid source gejohnston Dec 2016 #9

My source 1965Comet Dec 2016 #11

the FBI excludes gang related gejohnston Dec 2016 #13

I don't understand why we need to differentiate... 1965Comet Dec 2016 #14

because gejohnston Dec 2016 #17

more 1965Comet Dec 2016 #25

It is my belief that rights are innate in humans. They cannot be "taken away". discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #27

Ok 1965Comet Dec 2016 #28

re: "...the right to self-defense has nothing to do specifically with hand guns..." discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #29

One could say the same thing about the gun in the hand of the criminal. 1965Comet Dec 2016 #34

re: "...we already do not allow certain weapon systems...the right is not absolute." discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #38

just a few things gejohnston Dec 2016 #32

Further looking into things 1965Comet Dec 2016 #12

their definition includes gejohnston Dec 2016 #15

more 1965Comet Dec 2016 #16

even more gejohnston Dec 2016 #19

MORE more 1965Comet Dec 2016 #21

"... if we were to just ban handguns..." discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #23

That is all nice, 1965Comet Dec 2016 #24

Name anything... discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #26

I agree that pistols are excellent for self defense 1965Comet Dec 2016 #30

Point by point discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #37

Since the #1 priority of the gun control lobby is outlawing the most popular *rifles*, benEzra Jan 2017 #43

no. gejohnston Dec 2016 #31

mass shooting tracker is an admitted propagandist pushing an ideology. 1965Comet Dec 2016 #33

he inflates the numbers gejohnston Dec 2016 #35

The definition 1965Comet Dec 2016 #36

"Confirmed: Heat-seeking Missile Flies up Gun-controllers' Own Arse." Eleanors38 Dec 2016 #18

Uh, this was a right-wing attempt to smear the President, 1965Comet Dec 2016 #22

Oh, I am aware of the RW posting; they don't miss many opportunities, Eleanors38 Dec 2016 #39

I haven't seen this... 1965Comet Dec 2016 #40

I don't really care whether anyone wants to use the new Mass Shooting measure... Eleanors38 Dec 2016 #41

" writing in Yahoo, Nov. 10, 1915." oneshooter Dec 2016 #42