Why is gun control so difficult in the US?

Some of us view "regulation" as infringement
or at the very least
regulation has the potential to become infringement

so
You do not want the elephant to stand on your foot;
is it ok with you if the elephant stands on your toe?
 
sculptor said:
Some of us view "regulation" as infringement
or at the very least
regulation has the potential to become infringement

so
You do not want the elephant to stand on your foot;
is it ok with you if the elephant stands on your toe?
Click to expand...
I don't support you think this whole thing has gone completely over the top? 3% of the American Public own 1/2 of the guns in the country.

As for regulation, the original intent referred to the Regulations (stolen from the British King) that defined how milita were to be trained. Now I now the NRA bought a different definition but being a historian I'm still in favor of the old one.

I do worry that people like you appear to panic when legislation is mentioned.
 
Most Americans don't own even one gun. Most Americans who own a gun own just one. We have as many guns as people in the US. Do the math.
 
sculptor said:
Article V:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress;

OK so an amendment to repeal the 2nd amendment is possible
............
(good luck with that)
:rolleyes:
....................................................

I ain't gonna vote for it.
Click to expand...
are you hell bent on showing just how stupid you can be. there is nothing in the second amendment that prohibits the banning of semiautomatic rifles.
 
Vociferous said:
Nope. You're just ignorant. The federal government cannot keep such records because that would be a de facto national gun registry, that would be a first step in any confiscation scheme. The record retention I posted are the requirements for every FFL (gun dealer). So with a court order/probable cause (due process), law enforcement can check those records.
Click to expand...
only ignorant one here is you. hell at least one state did have a gun registry in the early days of the country. the fact you believe NRA propaganda doesn't make it right.
 
iceaura said:
This is an example of the kind of damage the strawman arguments do.
I have been the foremost poster on this forum, for years now, of common sense changes in the gun laws of the US and its States and what needs to happen to get them enacted. AFAIK I've been more explicit and detailed and insistent on that exact topic than anyone else posting here.
And I get that shit, from somebody who thinks dismissing the US Constitution and disarming its population poses no risk to anyone's freedoms because a rifle can't take out a tank, or something.

So does everybody else. Literally - more than 80% of the card-carrying members of the NRA are on board with that one.

So: why don't we have them?
Click to expand...
bull shit. that is a flat out lie. You peddled that tripe to feel high and mighty but you attack anyone who wants actual common sense change on gun laws. you are an extremist who supports the borderline terrorist NRA viewpoint on gun laws in this country. you have peddled lies and disinformation that protects criminals access to guns.
 
Bowser said:
That might be part of the problem if I understand you correctly. Paranoid as it might sound, some people are highly suspicious of a "Federal Registry"--should that be of gun ownership. They see it as a possible first step in gun confiscation.
Click to expand...
so your insanity is a reason to keep getting people killed?
 
sculptor said:
Some of us view "regulation" as infringement
or at the very least regulation has the potential to become infringement
Click to expand...
Do you have the same views on regulations against drunk driving, requirements for pilot's licenses and regulations against lead paint?

You do not want the elephant to stand on your foot;
is it ok with you if the elephant stands on your toe?
Click to expand...
Neither one.

Good thing the NRA doesn't run zoos. "Elephants don't cause broken feet - PEOPLE cause broken feet! There is NO NEED to put elephants in cages, or to keep them out of the kid's area. My elephant never stepped on anyone's foot. Why are you trying to GRAB MY ELEPHANT? Why not look at the real problem - incompetent, lazy zookeepers who can't control their elephants? Regulating free-running elephants just hurts legal elephant owners who can control their elephants."

"What did you say? The elephant stepped on your child and he's in a wheelchair now? Thoughts and prayers. Too soon to do anything about that. No way to prevent it in the future. Nothing anyone could have done. These things happen. That's life."
 
Vociferous said:
Who is making that argument here? Not me.

More Guns, Less Crime is a book by John Lott that says violent crime rates go down when states pass "shall issue" concealed carry laws. He presents the results of his statistical analysis of crime data for every county in the United States during 29 years from 1977 to 2005. Each edition of the book was refereed by the University of Chicago Press. The book examines city, county and state level data from the entire United States and measures the impact of 13 different types of gun control laws on crime rates. The book expands on an earlier study published in 1997 by Lott and his co-author David Mustard in The Journal of Legal Studies[1] and by Lott and his co-author John Whitley in The Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/More_Guns,_Less_Crime​

Studies to the contrary all seem to either not specify "legally owned", not account for the legal/illegal owned ratio, or just make assumptions based solely on guns per household.
When are my fellow citizens going to quit relying on incompetent police and government and try a real test of self-defense, where "gun-free zones" aren't such an appealing target?
Click to expand...
are you kidding? john fucking lott. that studt has been debunked more than once. there is serious debate that he never actually did the study. you lost all credibility quoting this fraud.
 
iceaura said:
The origin of the 2nd Amendment is documented, the motives clear, the historical considerations and factors blatantly obvious and the time and to this day. This isn't a judgment call - whatever one may think of the modern relevance of the circumstances of 1780, their contemporary nature is nailed down.
Click to expand...
this is all true which makes your insistence to lie about it all the more bewildering
 
pjdude1219 said:
so your insanity is a reason to keep getting people killed?
Click to expand...
But it's not the insanity of the responsible gun owner that is killing people. That's what you're missing. I understand you want to blame gun owners, NRA and Republicans, but they didn't pull the trigger.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top