Gun Control

[huskerfan2000]

how well did gun control work in Paris? Everything used was outlawed, but they were still used.

[Redux]

how well did gun control work in Paris? Everything used was outlawed, but they were still used.

Well compare Frances gun violence on a daily/monthly/yearly basis and you would see a major difference.

[huskerfan2000]

 

how well did gun control work in Paris? Everything used was outlawed, but they were still used.

Well compare Frances gun violence on a daily/monthly/yearly basis and you would see a major difference.

 

 

 

So then, it isn't the mass shooting's that you are talking about? you just want gun control?

 

Do you want to be just like France?

[huskerfan2000]

let me add this little nugget..

 

 

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

We have this thing called the constitution, France doesn't have that.

[Bigred_inSD]

let me add this little nugget..

 

 

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

We have this thing called the constitution, France doesn't have that.

As I stated earlier I'd we strictly follow that then we have to strictly follow that the constitution wasn't written for colored people or women. So own all the muskets you want white men!

[huskerfan2000]

 

let me add this little nugget..

 

 

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

We have this thing called the constitution, France doesn't have that.

As I stated earlier I'd we strictly follow that then we have to strictly follow that the constitution wasn't written for colored people or women. So own all the muskets you want white men!

 

 

 

Can you point to where in the constitution where it says it isn't for colored people?

 

 

EDIT: I will answer that! You can't, are you taking two separate issues and trying to relate them. Which is by far the dumbest argument I have seen to date.

[Saunders]

"Mass shootings" aren't really the big problem that it's currently being made out to be. Basically, a few years back after Sandy Hook, there was a push to expand the mass shooting criteria, which greatly inflated the numbers. This new criteria included adding a bunch of drug, gang, and crime related shootings, greatly inflating the numbers used by the media (ala VOX). Combine that with the increased media coverage of these events (which is a whole other issue in itself), and it appears to be more common than the past. The FBI however, has kept it's parameters the same, and the reality is, the numbers aren't skyrocketing like you're being led to believe.

 

This is from an article late last year.

 

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/local-news/20151205-mass-shootings-in-the-u.s.-this-year-353--or-4-depending-on-your-definition.ece

 

 

The problem isn't "assault rifles" or "mass shootings" in reality. It's handguns being used in inner city crimes, usually in poor neighborhoods. And it's often drug related, or in conjunction with other illegal activities.

[Redux]

 

 

how well did gun control work in Paris? Everything used was outlawed, but they were still used.

 

Well compare Frances gun violence on a daily/monthly/yearly basis and you would see a major difference.

 

So then, it isn't the mass shooting's that you are talking about? you just want gun control?

 

Do you want to be just like France?

1) That response makes no sense. 2) You would be wise to read the whole thread before spouting off like that.

[Bigred_inSD]

 

 

 

let me add this little nugget..

 

 

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

We have this thing called the constitution, France doesn't have that.

As I stated earlier I'd we strictly follow that then we have to strictly follow that the constitution wasn't written for colored people or women. So own all the muskets you want white men!

 

Can you point to where in the constitution where it says it isn't for colored people?

 

 

EDIT: I will answer that! You can't, are you taking two separate issues and trying to relate them. Which is by far the dumbest argument I have seen to date.

. Then why did black people count as 3/5th of a person and why did we have to amend the constitution to allow women and blacks to vote if they were already included when they wrote the document?

[TAKODA]

 

 

As far as I can tell, there were a bunch of things that went wrong to allow this to happen. I'm still curious to see if people think taking away rights for being investigated (not charged or convicted) by the FBI is a good or bad thing?

Bad thing, right?

 

I mean, what's a greater trampling of our civil liberties -- gun control, or actual trampling?

 

I kind of cringe at suggestions that the FBI should be empowered to take zero chances and better safe than sorry. That doesn't just open the door to catching innocent people particularly of a certain demographic in the crossfire, it opens the door to radicalizing communities who feel they are being designated PNG in this country.

 

I'm all for better efforts at security, but not for a police state where the government's operating motto starts with, "If you have nothing to hide, ... "

 

 

 

 

Only tangentially related, but I had an Uber ride Saturday night with a guy who was a Cook County (Chicago) sheriff for 32 years. He said they are currently being trained in martial law procedure for if/when Trump becomes President. Horrifying.

 

 

Landlord, I thought this point you made above was interesting and while only tangentially related, I would like to say 2 weeks ago I had a dinner meeting with two INS officers (one with ICE), both Hispanic, and they adamantly stated that they hope Trump wins and can't wait until the wall is built as they are tired of the present process. They stated that our border security is tapped out and people from more than Mexico are crossing our southern boarders daily. They catch a majority of them (they speculated) but the point is, that our borders are not as tight as one might think. I know, this shooter was born in the US so this got a bit off topic but as a Muslim extremist (sympathizer), he should not have had the opportunity to buy said guns.

 

While the "Gun Control" issue is a separate topic from the Orlando shootings, the fact that they are intertwined in this discussion is because Potus chose to reiterate "Gun Control" in his address to the nation regarding this tragedy. Once again, I will say that we "need" better/deeper scrutiny when giving people the green light to purchase weapons of any sort. Too bad if it causes me (a law abiding citizen) an extra week, month or additional time to obtain my permit. Deal with it!

 

The reason I am even in this conversation in the first place is to make sure that people recognize that the gun did not and does not cause the crimes we see daily, weekly, monthly. It is the end user who is in question here and since Potus is the one who tied the two together, I am insuring that people look at the two separately. I draw your attention to what bnilhome posted as this is one of the problems behind (this tragedy) that should have caused him to be subjected to further scrutiny and not able to buy a gun legally.

 

Here is the link provided by bnilhome, suggest everyone reads it. +1 bnilhome for the find!

 

http://www.wnd.com/2...-dept-scrubbed/

[HuskerNation1]

how well did gun control work in Paris? Everything used was outlawed, but they were still used.

Exactly. Somehow those who feel gun control is the answer to this issue seem to always overlook this reality. Perhaps its because the leaders they look up too (Obama and Hillary) are using the fun control issue to hide from their failures in fighting terrorism. For them its easy to use guns as a scapegoat for their failures. The FBI was tracking the Orlando killer and Hillary and Obama told them to stop as they feared a Muslim backlash.

[Enhance]

 

 

let me add this little nugget..

 

 

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

We have this thing called the constitution, France doesn't have that.

As I stated earlier I'd we strictly follow that then we have to strictly follow that the constitution wasn't written for colored people or women. So own all the muskets you want white men!

 

 

 

Can you point to where in the constitution where it says it isn't for colored people?

 

 

EDIT: I will answer that! You can't, are you taking two separate issues and trying to relate them. Which is by far the dumbest argument I have seen to date.

 

Just for factual clarification - you're right, the constitution never explicitly denies its services to black people or any other race. However, because of that, our forefathers did interpret the Constitution in a way to ban voting rights/civil rights to women and black people. The Constitution had to later be amended to address these concerns.

 

The Constitution is a living, breathing piece of legislation.

[ZRod]

 

how well did gun control work in Paris? Everything used was outlawed, but they were still used.

Exactly. Somehow those who feel gun control is the answer to this issue seem to always overlook this reality. Perhaps its because the leaders they look up too (Obama and Hillary) are using the fun control issue to hide from their failures in fighting terrorism. For them its easy to use guns as a scapegoat for their failures. The FBI was tracking the Orlando killer and Hillary and Obama told them to stop as they feared a Muslim backlash.

Or maybe it's because we're smart enough and open minded enough to relize that you can not stop them all, but doing something is better than nothing. The status quo is not working.

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

 

let me add this little nugget..

 

 

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

We have this thing called the constitution, France doesn't have that.

As I stated earlier I'd we strictly follow that then we have to strictly follow that the constitution wasn't written for colored people or women. So own all the muskets you want white men!

 

 

 

Can you point to where in the constitution where it says it isn't for colored people?

 

 

EDIT: I will answer that! You can't, are you taking two separate issues and trying to relate them. Which is by far the dumbest argument I have seen to date.

 

Just for factual clarification - you're right, the constitution never explicitly denies its services to black people or any other race. However, because of that, our forefathers did interpret the Constitution in a way to ban voting rights/civil rights to women and black people. The Constitution had to later be amended to address these concerns.

 

The Constitution is a living, breathing piece of legislation.

 

 

Ted Cruz would like a word with you, sir.

[Danny Bateman]

 

how well did gun control work in Paris? Everything used was outlawed, but they were still used.

Exactly. Somehow those who feel gun control is the answer to this issue seem to always overlook this reality. Perhaps its because the leaders they look up too (Obama and Hillary) are using the fun control issue to hide from their failures in fighting terrorism. For them its easy to use guns as a scapegoat for their failures. The FBI was tracking the Orlando killer and Hillary and Obama told them to stop as they feared a Muslim backlash.

 

 

List of countries by firearm-related death rate

 

Go ahead and look at where France and Belgium are on that list, since they're the two most recent examples after Orlando of attacks.

 

There are nearly 4x the amount of firearm-related deaths here as in France. More than 5x here than in Belgium.

 

We are far and away the world leader in firearm-related suicides.

 

I look at the big picture here. We can do a hell of a lot better. Doing nothing out of fear is just not acceptable.