Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: OK, here are some suggestions without impeding 2A rights. [View all]ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)190. Because you are trying to solve problems in society with a less than adequate
technical solutions. Address the underlying problems.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
216 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
if its not a flintlock musket or pistol you have no right to have one, as we know
msongs
Dec 2012
#2
Yep, and the 1st amendment only applies to newspapers, books, and soapboxes - not the internet,
kelly1mm
Dec 2012
#9
thank you for stating this so much better than I did below. but, this mental stuff has to be careful
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2012
#13
microchips. how sci-fi of you. define mental instability. GPS chip? kiss my ass.
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2012
#10
you do realize that most pros get in the field to try and understand their own neuroses/psychoses?
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2012
#19
There isn't a lot of gun violence to begin with. 300 million people, 100 million guns
Ashgrey77
Dec 2012
#206
Tell that to the families of the 30,000+ who lose their lives every year.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2012
#208
My whole point to you was they wouldn't have been stolen with this technology
Starboard Tack
Dec 2012
#91
Because you are trying to solve problems in society with a less than adequate
ProgressiveProfessor
Dec 2012
#190
Right Mr. Negativity, except it will be you who loses his guns, not me.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2012
#209
That is a good step in the right direction but would it be expensive to implement?
JDPriestly
Dec 2012
#12
Only as long as law enforcement agencies agree to the same conditions in reference to the technology
Remmah2
Dec 2012
#18
Nothing is going to work every time, but if it works sometimes it could save lives
Bjorn Against
Dec 2012
#114
I'll have to think about some of those...the tracking thing sounds too Patriot Act to me.
Common Sense Party
Dec 2012
#28
Not all. Quite a few are very positive. I'm really encouraged by the response.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2012
#101
It's not embarrassment, it's because it's none of your fucking business that I'm carrying
Kennah
Dec 2012
#148
This is an argument I have often with open carriers. I'm safer being anonymous.
Kennah
Dec 2012
#166
Correct. It would be a defacto registration system for certain types of weapons.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2012
#84
You can't require something until the technology is actually available.
GreenStormCloud
Dec 2012
#184
What laws do you support that protect an individual's inalienable right to self-defense against
jody
Dec 2012
#170