Why We Need Gun Restrictions

RB 60 said:
Yep, that'll stop gangs and criminals from committing gun crimes :palm:
Click to expand...

Exactly. If you want to fix a problem you first have to understand the problem and while mass shootings are sensational and get a lot of ink they're a drop in the bucket as far as gun crime is concerned.

The best thing that can happen in the case the OP highlighted is for the shooter to go to prison for a very long time. You can't prevent someone from leaving the premises and shoot him.
 
Guille said:
Exactly. If you want to fix a problem you first have to understand the problem and while mass shootings are sensational and get a lot of ink they're a drop in the bucket as far as gun crime is concerned.

The best thing that can happen in the case the OP highlighted is for the shooter to go to prison for a very long time. You can't prevent someone from leaving the premises and shoot him.
Click to expand...

What I find funny (well, stupid) is that liberals say criminals in Chicago drive 20 min. across the border to buy guns. Bullshit! They don't because they have to pass a background check to purchase them.
Theft is the biggest supplier of black market guns. Obviously there's a good supply of black market guns in Chicago.
Isn't it a minimum 5 yr. sentence (on top of the crime committed) for committing a crime with a gun, even if it wasn't fired?
 
RB 60 said:
What I find funny (well, stupid) is that liberals say criminals in Chicago drive 20 min. across the border to buy guns. Bullshit! They don't because they have to pass a background check to purchase them.
Theft is the biggest supplier of black market guns. Obviously there's a good supply of black market guns in Chicago.
Isn't it a minimum 5 yr. sentence (on top of the crime committed) for committing a crime with a gun, even if it wasn't fired?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure, it's either 5 or 10 years. And you're right, the problem isn't the availability of guns in Indiana or anywhere else, it's the demand in Chicago that's the problem and it's not even the entire city that's the problem.
 
Guille said:
I'm not sure, it's either 5 or 10 years. And you're right, the problem isn't the availability of guns in Indiana or anywhere else, it's the demand in Chicago that's the problem and it's not even the entire city that's the problem.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure there are places in Chicago that are nice, safe places to live. It's the same in Philadelphia and D.C. If a criminal wants a gun, they'll steal or get one on the black market, just like the Oxycodine addict gets his/hers.
 
RB 60 said:
Yes, I'm sure there are places in Chicago that are nice, safe places to live. It's the same in Philadelphia and D.C. If a criminal wants a gun, they'll steal or get one on the black market, just like the Oxycodine addict gets his/hers.
Click to expand...

I was looking up some numbers earlier. The population of the state of Illinois is about 12.8 million and Chicago is roughly 2.7 million. In 2016 there were 799 firearm homicides in Illinois and there were 762 homicides in Chicago alone. Admittedly the 762 isn't necessarily all firearm related, the reporting on that seems to be deliberately murky but searching on firearm homicide in Chicago repeatedly brought up that number. If you take Chicago away from Illinois you're left with 37 murders in a population of 10.1 million. To make that even worse a heat map of the murders shows two very dangerous parts of Chicago. Some people want to believe this is a national problem, it isn't.
 
Guille said:
I was looking up some numbers earlier. The population of the state of Illinois is about 12.8 million and Chicago is roughly 2.7 million. In 2016 there were 799 firearm homicides in Illinois and there were 762 homicides in Chicago alone. Admittedly the 762 isn't necessarily all firearm related, the reporting on that seems to be deliberately murky but searching on firearm homicide in Chicago repeatedly brought up that number. If you take Chicago away from Illinois you're left with 37 murders in a population of 10.1 million. To make that even worse a heat map of the murders shows two very dangerous parts of Chicago. Some people want to believe this is a national problem, it isn't.
Click to expand...

No, it's not a national problem. I live in rural PA. and almost everyone here owns at least a few firearms. There are very few firearm crimes committed around here compared to the more populated cities.
Yet assholes like domer (who shits his diaper at the mention of a firearm) thinks all gun owners are criminals in waiting.
 
RB 60 said:
Yep, that'll stop gangs and criminals from committing gun crimes :palm:
Click to expand...

Find where I ever stated that you ignorant fuck.

That’s one of the problems with you cretinous shitwads. You live in a binary world. Black and white. Everything or nothing.

Barrel stroking morons.
 
RB 60 said:
What I find funny (well, stupid) is that liberals say criminals in Chicago drive 20 min. across the border to buy guns. Bullshit! They don't because they have to pass a background check to purchase them.
Theft is the biggest supplier of black market guns. Obviously there's a good supply of black market guns in Chicago.
Isn't it a minimum 5 yr. sentence (on top of the crime committed) for committing a crime with a gun, even if it wasn't fired?
Click to expand...

How about a 25 year federal sentence instead?
 
RB 60 said:
No, it's not a national problem. I live in rural PA. and almost everyone here owns at least a few firearms. There are very few firearm crimes committed around here compared to the more populated cities.
Yet assholes like domer (who shits his diaper at the mention of a firearm) thinks all gun owners are criminals in waiting.
Click to expand...


Find where I said that, you illiterate shitstain.

You’re starting to lie in every post. Color me shocked.
 
Old Trapper said:
Love the ignorance of the right that is going to destroy this country from within. Never said guns could not make one safer. Did say more guns do not make one safer. Can you see the difference? Should I spell it out for you in big letters?
Click to expand...

if i'm walking down the street carrying my gun, i'm safer. if my wife is walking down the street with me and she's carrying her gun, now i'm even safer and so is she.

i just proved your theory wrong.
 
Old Trapper said:
The right wing will never admit it since common sense is not their forte, however, this is a good example of why we do need more restrictions. And please, for the useful idiot toadies, don't try to make this into gun confiscation like you NRA masters have told you:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/killed-sh...o-shows-florida-store-owner/story?id=58506648
Click to expand...

Why should law abiding citizens be punished for the actions of people like the shop owner in that video? We already have laws for that. We also have that pesky little second amendment. Much to your chagrin, I'm sure.
 
Ralph said:
You are confusing the 1st amendment rights of speech and opinion with the 2nd amendment right to bear arms to protect yourself against enemies both foreign and domestic......right now the greatest threat to this nation and its constitutional rights is obvious....its left wing fascism. Just because your right of free speech does not agree with those you are opposed to does not give you the right take away their own rights of speech and self protection from people just like you while you wave the false flags.

FYI: Have you looked at reality lately? The 2nd amendment has been regulated to hell and back.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as left wing fascism you fucking retard.
 
Last edited:
TrippyHippy said:
Stand your ground does not apply to this case as surveillance video and eyewitness reports seem to indicate the shopowner's life was never in any danger. The court will likely rule as such. Self-defense was the purpose of that law, the purpose was not so shopowners can play judge, jury, and executioner for petty crimes. So...I fail to see, first of all, how this case is a valid argument against stand your ground laws nor how it is a a valid argument in favor of more gun restrictions. This man will likely be going to prison, that is the current law functioning the way it's supposed to. And in favor of the victim in question.

Had the thief been wielding and brandishing a weapon, that'd be different and frankly the shopowner should have the legal right to self-defense in that event.
Click to expand...

The thief was wielding a hatchet.
 
Old Trapper said:
Mandatory background check for one. Making "bump stocks" illegal for another instead of allowing the NRA to sell them. Most of those 20,000 laws are only for specific areas, and do not apply to all areas. Then you have areas like Florida with its phony ass "stand your ground" laws. In this case the prosecuting attorney says the law does not apply:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/city-official-charged-murder-state-rejects-stand-ground/story?id=58629913
Click to expand...

Can you tell us exactly how the incident in you OP would've been prevented by mandatory background checks? Please be specific, and detailed. Tell us exactly what, in the shop owner's background would've prevented him from having a firearm, and using it in such an irresponsible manner.

Also, could you please link us to the NRA website which has bump stocks for sale.

Oh and yeah, banning bump stocks will solve the problem.


I think what we really need are restrictions on left wing loons.
 
Rune said:
The thief was wielding a hatchet.
Click to expand...

He wasn't exactly wielding it. He was holding it by the head, and trying to escape. Had he been wielding it, and threatening the shop owner, then deadly force would've certainly been justified. In this case, it just wasn't. Here's a good analysis of the incident.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top