Children shot and killed at Connecticut school

[r.j.s]

Originally Posted by rdowns

We all submit ourselves to regulations. We had one ******* try to light his shoes on fire and set off a bomb and we now inconvenience millions a day to remove their shoes at airports yet we are unwilling to tighten up our gun laws. Why am I, a law abiding shoe owner subjected to these restrictions?

My response there is poorly worded.

I mean, do I just lie back and accept new laws from people that have no intention of being affected by them, or do I speak up for a solution that might actually help, since, as evidenced by the Assault Weapons Ban, people with no clue about firearms writing laws and regulations gets us ban on cosmetic things - rather than any that might be effective.

As for gun regulations, if these nuts are able, by and large, to buy their weapons legally, something is very, very wrong.

Which is why I said we need to look at current laws, making sure they are being enforced and people are doing their job to prevent sales when needed i.e. homicidal desires presented to a doctor should reflect in the NICS check, denying or delaying a sale.

[iJohnHenry]

Originally Posted by balamw

MOD NOTE: Please note that the moderators participating in the substance of the thread are doing so as simple users. They will not moderate the thread.

As more than one mod is now active in the thread, this reduces the number of mods on hand to actually moderate the thread. Please bear with us if we appear to move slowly.

B

Well said, and, after reading this morning's "offerings", I will grant you one more that you need not worry about.

I'm done with this insane thread.

[firestarter]

Originally Posted by Tilpots

"Deeply intolerant of civil disobedience" couldn't be further from the truth. If you're missing that point, you must not understand the right to peacably assemble. If you don't understand the First Amendment, I wouldn't expect you to understand the Second. This also has nothing to do with wings of the political spectrum as as you and others make it out. This is an American founding principle which has served our nation from the start.

I understand the theory... but in practice the US police/security forces seem to regularly overstep the line in their gung-ho/machismo attitude towards civil protest. Sorry, but I don't believe that the US is seen as a world leader in this field.

The NRA should be ones of the first organizations to support healthcare and gun laws. I'd imagine they are beginning to realize that their image is being taken over by certifiable lunatics and madmen.

They should be, but they never will be.

[rdowns]

Originally Posted by r.j.s

My response there is poorly worded.

I mean, do I just lie back and accept new laws from people that have no intention of being affected by them, or do I speak up for a solution that might actually help, since, as evidenced by the Assault Weapons Ban, people with no clue about firearms writing laws and regulations gets us ban on cosmetic things - rather than any that might be effective.



Which is why I said we need to look at current laws, making sure they are being enforced and people are doing their job to prevent sales when needed i.e. homicidal desires presented to a doctor should reflect in the NICS check, denying or delaying a sale.

Would you support background check for all gun sales? Currently, 40% of gun sales happen without one.

[Tilpots]

Originally Posted by firestarter

Sorry, but I don't believe that the US is seen as a world leader in this field.

THE leader, maybe not, but a leader, absolutely. The people of this country protest regularly, peacefully, and proudly. You hear of our exceptions, not our rules.

The NRA will be forced to change and adapt to the current climate. They won't survive otherwise.

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by r.j.s

My response there is poorly worded.

I mean, do I just lie back and accept new laws from people that have no intention of being affected by them ...

Your response is still poorly worded.

As proven by yesterday's events, gun violence can affect anyone.

Everyone has a stake in this matter.

It affects us all.

[725032]

Im done with this thread.

So thankful that i live in the UK

[r.j.s]

Originally Posted by rdowns

Would you support background check for all gun sales? Currently, 40% of gun sales happen without one.

No, and I don't buy that number.

----------

Originally Posted by citizenzen

Your response is still poorly worded.

As proven by yesterday's events, gun violence can affect anyone.

Everyone has a stake in this matter.

It affects us all.

Gun violence affects everyone, gun laws only affect those with the intention of following the law. Criminals and people with no interest in guns are exempt from gun laws.

[rdowns]

Originally Posted by r.j.s

No, and I don't buy that number.

Why and have you got something to refute it?

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by r.j.s

Criminals and people with no interest in guns are exempt from gun laws.

Breaking the law doesn't make one exempt from the law.

ex·empt
/igˈzem(p)t/
Adjective
Free from an obligation or liability imposed on others.

You continue to word things poorly.

Please try again.

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by guzhogi

This is such an awful tragedy. Unfortunately, I doubt no matter how many of these mass killings happen, we will never learn how to stop them.

Not completely. But you can make serious steps to stop them.

Originally Posted by rdowns

Why and have you got something to refute it?

+1

----------

Originally Posted by r.j.s

Criminals and people with no interest in guns are exempt from gun laws.

If this were true how come the guy in China who attacked some schoolchildren a couple of days ago didn't use a gun?

[r.j.s]

Originally Posted by rdowns

Why and have you got something to refute it?

Because the government doesn't need to be involved in every private sale.

You bring this up every time. Go look for one of my previous answers, it hasn't changed.

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by r.j.s

Because the government doesn't need to be involved in every private sale.

So basically you have no evidence whatsoever to refute the 40% figure.

[r.j.s]

Originally Posted by Eraserhead

So basically you have no evidence whatsoever to refute the 40% figure.

If you read the origin of the 40% number, you'll see that it's basically a guess, so there really isn't any evidence to support it either, except that it keeps getting touted by gun control advocates.

But, here you go, from rdowns' link even:

The best information on the informal gun market is based on a survey and is about 15 years old. Current regulations don’t allow direct tallies of sales of this sort.

[dscuber9000]

Originally Posted by Eraserhead

So basically you have no evidence whatsoever to refute the 40% figure.

What, you don't trust his gut feeling over the reported number of Pulitzer Prize-winning journalists?

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by Tilpots

THE leader, maybe not, but a leader, absolutely.

Do you have any evidence or knowledge of protest movements in other countries to be able to make a meaningful comparison?

[rdowns]

Originally Posted by r.j.s

If you read the origin of the 40% number, you'll see that it's basically a guess, so there really isn't any evidence to support it either, except that it keeps getting touted by gun control advocates.

An educated guess and one that makes sense. Gun shows are nothing more than a place to conduct unregistered gun sales and it stands to reason that sales through the Internet will have risen, as they have in every industry.

I say we need a nice stiff tax on gun sales to fund the infrastructure needed to regulate them properly.

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by r.j.s

If you read the origin of the 40% number, you'll see that it's basically a guess,

No its based on actual data - albeit 15 year old data.

And I sure a significant number of gun sales happen online now, so its perfectly possible that the true figure today is a bit higher, and you've presented zero evidence to suggest that the figure today is lower.

As it's a posting requirement for this forum to produce evidence to backup your claims if you don't have any contrary evidence you shouldn't be posting here.

[r.j.s]

Originally Posted by Eraserhead

No its based on actual data - albeit 15 year old data.

No, it's based on a 15-year-old survey, not actual data.

Let's try to stay on topic please, rather than further derailing the thread into this so called "gun show loophole"

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by r.j.s

No, it's based on a 15-year-old survey, not actual data.

Which is actual data. You'd take a political poll as actual data. I'd take a survey of people's opinions on a topic as actual data.

Originally Posted by r.j.s

Let's try to stay on topic please, rather than further derailing the thread into this so called "gun show loophole"

Just because you're a moderator doesn't mean you don't have to follow the evidence rules that everyone else has to follow.

[r.j.s]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

Breaking the law doesn't make one exempt from the law.



You continue to word things poorly.

Please try again.

Since you just want to bicker, rather than actually contribute, I'll reword it for you:

Criminals and people with no interest in guns don't give a flying **** what the law says.

----------

Originally Posted by Eraserhead

Which is actual data. You'd take a political poll as actual data. I'd take a survey of people's opinions on a topic as actual data.

A survey is not nearly the same as actual data on sales.

Just because you're a moderator doesn't mean you don't have to follow the evidence rules that everyone else has to follow.

I provided a source, so I don't know why you keep bringing up nonsense. I said I don't buy into that number because it is based on a 15-year-old survey, I never offered up a different number.

[copykris]

Originally Posted by r.j.s

Gun violence affects everyone, gun laws only affect those with the intention of following the law. Criminals and people with no interest in guns are exempt from gun laws.

adam lanza was not a criminal

[gri]

Originally Posted by nickn

Yesterday there was a crazy man in China who stabbed 22 children in an elementary school. Clearly he was not stopped soon enough, as you claim will happen... To you and the rest of the anti-gun people on this forum, what is your next move, ban all knives??? Have fun eating!

A dinner knife unlike an assault knife, has a blunt tip...

[r.j.s]

Originally Posted by copykris

adam lanza was not a criminal

And neither were all the people in prisons.

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by r.j.s

A survey is not nearly the same as actual data on sales.

Sure, but you haven't provided any evidence at all.

Originally Posted by r.j.s

I provided a source, so I don't know why you keep bringing up nonsense.

No you didn't.