What is better, no guns, or more guns?

[Warren Zevon]

1 minute ago, LeviF91 said:

 

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

 

Government laws regarding background checks and banning military style weapons does not infringe on my right to keep and bear Arms.

[Justice]

Let’s just keep track of the Sudafed. That’s far more dangerous than guns. 

[TakeYouToTasker]

3 minutes ago, garybusey said:

 

Government laws regarding background checks and banning military style weapons does not infringe on my right to keep and bear Arms.

You have an absolute right to keep and bear arms.  Any artificial limitations placed on you by an authority which prevent you from keeping or bearing arms is by definition an infringement.

 

You'll need to make a better argument.

Edited February 15, 2018 by TakeYouToTasker

[Warren Zevon]

Just now, TakeYouToTasker said:

You have an absolute right to keep and bear arms.  Any artificial limitations placed on you by an authority which prevent you from keeping or bearing arms is by definition an infringement.

 

You'll need to make a better argument.

 

It's not an argument. It's what I believe.

 

We disagree.

[row_33]

12 minutes ago, garybusey said:

 

Government laws regarding background checks and banning military style weapons does not infringe on my right to keep and bear Arms.

 

there is a process for repealing the 2nd amendment, at least one amendment has been repealed in US history

 

get going

 

 

[TakeYouToTasker]

2 minutes ago, Justice said:

Let’s just keep track of the Sudafed. That’s far more dangerous than guns. 

Tracking Sudafed purchases is, in fact, a violation of the rights of US citizens.  There is, however, no Constitutional Amendment expressly forbidding the government from placing restrictions on Sudafed purchases, and our sad state of Constitutional law permits it, so here we are.

 

As you know, there is a Constitutional protection for gun ownership however. 

3 minutes ago, garybusey said:

 

It's not an argument. It's what I believe.

 

We disagree.

You're entitled to as many bad and factually inaccurate opinions as you'd like, but that doesn't validate them in any way.

[Justice]

If slogans were honest:

 

The AR-15. “It’s what’s used when you need to kill a bunch of Mofos”

 

Instead of that you might find:

 

“The AR-15. Because that deer had it coming to him”

Edited February 15, 2018 by Justice

[DC Tom]

11 minutes ago, garybusey said:

 

Government laws regarding background checks and banning military style weapons does not infringe on my right to keep and bear Arms.

 

What sort of mental midgetry is this?  Banning types of arms ABSOLUTELY DOES infringe in your right to keep and bear arms.  By definition.

 

You're entitled to your opinion.  We're also entitled to mock you without mercy when the entire basis for your opinion can only be a complete lack of understanding of the concept of "infringe."  

[Warren Zevon]

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

What sort of mental midgetry is this?  Banning types of arms ABSOLUTELY DOES infringe in your right to keep and bear arms.  By definition.

 

You're entitled to your opinion.  We're also entitled to mock you without mercy when the entire basis for your opinion can only be a complete lack of understanding of the concept of "infringe."  

 

Go for it. 

 

Are you against the government banning citizens from owning nuclear weapons?

Edited February 15, 2018 by garybusey

[gatorbait]

Can we make it harder to get assault rifles? Forget taking them away or outlawing them. What if there were more lengthy background checks involving psych evaluations, social media examinations and juvenile record sharing? Add in longer waiting times to receive them and heavily regulated gun shows. This will cost a lot so increase the price of assault weapons and their ammunition. 

 

Something needs to be done without taking guns away or banning them. 

[IDBillzFan]

24 minutes ago, garybusey said:

 

It wasn't insulting. He's a right wing snowflake.

 

No matter how many times you leftists try to re-purpose the word snowflake, it will never happen until you all stop getting triggered by micro-agressions to your cis-genger stupidity.

[Justice]

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

What sort of mental midgetry is this?  Banning types of arms ABSOLUTELY DOES infringe in your right to keep and bear arms.  By definition.

 

You're entitled to your opinion.  We're also entitled to mock you without mercy when the entire basis for your opinion can only be a complete lack of understanding of the concept of "infringe."  

They want their cake and eat it too, because you never can have enough bullets and clips, amirite? Unfortunately there is no middle ground to be had here. 

[Buddy Hix]

As a Canadian who is a card carry Conservative and gun owner I feel the pro gun crowd in this thread are absolute lunatics and are the main reason your country will never move past this problem.

 

The reason your country has so many shootings is because your country has so many guns. Period. End of story.

 

Having more hoops to jump through in order to be a gun owner and restrictions on what type of gun one can own as well as restrictions on how and where you can take your gun reduces the amount of guns purchased, which in turn reduces gun violence.

 

Arming teachers (lmfao), needing guns to keep you safe (lol) and every other moronic statement like that is not addressing the root cause of the problem...which is too many guns. 

 

Instead of the 2nd amendment/pro gunners racking their brains for scenarios and reasons to keep adding more guns, why don't you try and figure out a way to reduce the number?

 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

3 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

The reason your country has so many shootings is because your country has so many guns. Period. End of story.

 

 

Is that your expert opinion?

 

[Justice]

2 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

As a Canadian who is a card carry Conservative and gun owner I feel the pro gun crowd in this thread are absolute lunatics and are the main reason your country will never move past this problem.

 

The reason your country has so many shootings is because your country has so many guns. Period. End of story.

 

Having more hoops to jump through in order to be a gun owner and restrictions on what type of gun one can own as well as restrictions on how and where you can take your gun reduces the amount of guns purchased, which in turn reduces gun violence.

 

Arming teachers (lmfao), needing guns to keep you safe (lol) and every other moronic statement like that is not addressing the root cause of the problem...which is too many guns. 

 

Instead of the 2nd amendment/pro gunners racking their brains for scenarios and reasons to keep adding more guns, why don't you try and figure out a way to reduce the number?

 

Come on now, bro, we should have a kindergarten cop type teacher in every class in America. That’ll do the trick. Arnold Schwarzenegger should be available. 

[row_33]

11 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

As a Canadian who is a card carry Conservative and gun owner I feel the pro gun crowd in this thread are absolute lunatics and are the main reason your country will never move past this problem.

 

The reason your country has so many shootings is because your country has so many guns. Period. End of story.

 

Having more hoops to jump through in order to be a gun owner and restrictions on what type of gun one can own as well as restrictions on how and where you can take your gun reduces the amount of guns purchased, which in turn reduces gun violence.

 

Arming teachers (lmfao), needing guns to keep you safe (lol) and every other moronic statement like that is not addressing the root cause of the problem...which is too many guns. 

 

Instead of the 2nd amendment/pro gunners racking their brains for scenarios and reasons to keep adding more guns, why don't you try and figure out a way to reduce the number?

 

 

I'm very grateful Canada hasn't been hit by violence of this nature or a terrorist act so far...

 

But we don't have a military or a hunting culture or a criminal component that necessitates guns here in Canada.

[DC Tom]

8 minutes ago, garybusey said:

 

Go for it. 

 

Are you against the government banning citizens from owning nuclear weapons?

 

What does that have to do with you not understanding the the definition of "infringe?"

[Warren Zevon]

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

What does that have to do with you not understanding the the definition of "infringe?"

 

We've already established I'm an idiot and my opinion is wrong.

 

Are you against the government banning citizens from owning nuclear weapons?

[Buddy Hix]

3 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Is that your expert opinion?

 

I believe the correlation between number of guns and gun violence is well documented. If you'd spent as much time searching Google for that relationship as you did typing that question you'd have your evidence.

[LeviF]

12 minutes ago, gatorbait said:

Can we make it harder to get assault rifles? Forget taking them away or outlawing them. What if there were more lengthy background checks involving psych evaluations, social media examinations and juvenile record sharing? Add in longer waiting times to receive them and heavily regulated gun shows. This will cost a lot so increase the price of assault weapons and their ammunition. 

 

Something needs to be done without taking guns away or banning them. 

 

Skipping the fact that these are all infringements for now.  Who does the psych e v a l?  What are the criteria?  Who decides what social media (free speech) keeps you from gun ownership? 

 

11 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

As a Canadian who is a card carry Conservative and gun owner I feel the pro gun crowd in this thread are absolute lunatics and are the main reason your country will never move past this problem.

 

The reason your country has so many shootings is because your country has so many guns. Period. End of story.

 

Having more hoops to jump through in order to be a gun owner and restrictions on what type of gun one can own as well as restrictions on how and where you can take your gun reduces the amount of guns purchased, which in turn reduces gun violence.

 

Arming teachers (lmfao), needing guns to keep you safe (lol) and every other moronic statement like that is not addressing the root cause of the problem...which is too many guns. 

 

Instead of the 2nd amendment/pro gunners racking their brains for scenarios and reasons to keep adding more guns, why don't you try and figure out a way to reduce the number?

 

 

You can show yourself out now, Fudd.