Do YOU Prefer the Banning of Guns or the Requirement to Own Guns?

[Into the Night]

Get rid of the damn guns. https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/9212725/australia-buyback

Unconstitutional.

 

[Nordberg]

Unconstitutional.

Incorrect. You cannot understand the 2nd amendment. Or, it seems nearly anything else.

 

[Into the Night]

Incorrect. You cannot understand the 2nd amendment. Or, it seems nearly anything else.

Nah. It's not that. You just discard the 2nd amendment, along with the rest of the Constitution of the United States.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Seriously, you and I both know that ain't happening. The worst case scenario for our resident gunners is the re-instatement of the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994,. Even then, the little paranoids will have legal access to more guns and rifles than they could shake a stick at.

No it's a new era,being dominated by the rise of women, it won't be long till they become dominant in Congress!And guns will be the first victim of a feminist Congress!

Okay, that's just silly.

 

[Taichiliberal]

...and you're well known for your love of pink sword fights.

How is the hell does this meme pass through all the "rules"?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

How is the hell does this meme pass through all the "rules"?

Did you report it?

Why wouldn’t it pass the rules? Which rule, specifically, do you want to see me banned for?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Um, NO? As it stands, there are strict requirements in most states to have a conceal carry permit. Open carry is essentially rare in the America...and given the rash of mass shootings and gangs that can't shoot straight, its a damned good thing for both.

The OP was pure BS, as I previously proved. Silly for anyone to try and defend or build on it.

Strict requirements ? All I did was demonstrate common sense gun safety and ask..

All YOU did was just regurgitate a bunch of failed LaPierre style NRA talking points wrapped in your supposition and conjecture. You did this is as some sort of defense of the OP, which is indefensible. Nothing I referred to is inaccurate.

 

[Celticguy]

All YOU did was just regurgitate a bunch of failed LaPierre style NRA talking points wrapped in your supposition and conjecture. You did this is as some sort of defense of the OP, which is indefensible. Nothing I referred to is inaccurate.

No. I told you what I personally had to do by way of "strict requirements" to get my CCP.

You seem to be attempting to have me saying things I did not say or imply.

Its not my fault you laid out a false presumption but that's common for gun grabbers.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Um, NO? As it stands, there are strict requirements in most states to have a conceal carry permit. Open carry is essentially rare in the America...and given the rash of mass shootings and gangs that can't shoot straight, its a damned good thing for both.

The OP was pure BS, as I previously proved. Silly for anyone to try and defend or build on it.

You are BS. 30 states allow unlicensed open carry. https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/terminology/carry-types/open-carry/

don't talk about things you know nothing about

As the old saying goes, the devil is in the detail. I've highlighted the points from your source that shows unlicensed open carry is not without it's stipulations, and certainly not the willy nilly free for all you insinuate (which is rare when all things are considered):

Open carry means to to carry a firearm in public in circumstances where the firearm is fully or partially (e.g, holstered) visible to others. Some states specify that open carry occurs when the weapon is “partially visible,” while others may require the weapon to be “fully visible” to be considered carried openly. States may impose various restrictions including age limits, criminal history conditions, geographic limits, etc.


Permissive Open Carry States — Allow gun owners who can legally possess a firearm, to openly carry a gun without a permit or license (includes Alaska, New Mexico, West Virginia and Utah)


Licensed Open Carry/Not Addressed States — Allow gun owners to carry firearms openly only after they are issued a permit or license (includes Connecticut and Indiana) or open carry is not specifically addressed in state statutes, but a permit or license is required to carry a handgun (Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York). Although open carry may not be expressly prohibited in these states, individuals may want to proceed with caution as open carry may be uncommon and may cause alarm in public.


Anomalous Open Carry States — Carrying a gun openly may be either generally lawful or legal under state law, but local governments may have gun laws that differ from the state’s laws (Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oregon, Tennessee), may be extremely limited (in California, the sheriff of any county with a population under 200,000 people, or the chief of police of a city within that county, may issue licenses to carry a loaded, exposed handgun) or criteria may differ for residents v. non-residents (in Michigan open carry is allowed without a permit for residents that are at least 18 years old and who can legally possess a firearm, provided the gun is registered in their name. However, non-residents must have a permit from their home state).

 

[Taichiliberal]

We have to do a better job of screening the idiots out of the pack. So, it pretty much comes down to licensing sellers and owners. If I had my way, each state would adapt licensing and Title for every weapon in the state.

Back in the early 1900's it was determined that Automobiles were also deadly in the wrong hands and were a danger of being stolen. The states worked together to create a licensing system for ownership and sales, and a Title system mandatory for every automobile in their state.

I am not sure where we would all be without it! Can you even imagine?

For years I've proposed in conversations like these that we treat guns like we do cars.....FOR EVERY STATE you have to be a certain age, be issued an owners license, pass owner education tests, have the weapon licensed to you, officially transfer ownership during any sales and have license and ownership registered when you move to another state. This would be added to something similar to the 1994 AWB.

This raises all types of hell with gun "purest" who think they have a Constitutional right to buy a gun(s) without any accountability to any law enforcement agency, carry it when and where ever they please and sell it without any transaction records. That you have an increase in gang violence, "iron pipelines" and mass shootings doesn't seem to phase these folks....thus resulting in nonsense like the OP here.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Did you report it?

Why wouldn’t it pass the rules? Which rule, specifically, do you want to see me banned for?

Nope.....not aimed at me. I guess this doesn't count as "porn" or a slur against another poster.

To me, it's just sick. But, as they say, there's no accounting for taste.

 

[Geeko Sportivo]

For years I've proposed in conversations like these that we treat guns like we do cars.....FOR EVERY STATE you have to be a certain age, be issued an owners license, pass owner education tests, have the weapon licensed to you, officially transfer ownership during any sales and have license and ownership registered when you move to another state. This would be added to something similar to the 1994 AWB.

This raises all types of hell with gun "purest" who think they have a Constitutional right to buy a gun(s) without any accountability to any law enforcement agency, carry it when and where ever they please and sell it without any transaction records. That you have an increase in gang violence, "iron pipelines" and mass shootings doesn't seem to phase these folks....thus resulting in nonsense like the OP here.

Thanks, I've been saying this for years.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
All YOU did was just regurgitate a bunch of failed LaPierre style NRA talking points wrapped in your supposition and conjecture. You did this is as some sort of defense of the OP, which is indefensible. Nothing I referred to is inaccurate.

No. I told you what I personally had to do by way of "strict requirements" to get my CCP.

You seem to be attempting to have me saying things I did not say or imply.

Its not my fault you laid out a false presumption but that's common for gun grabbers.

No, that was NOT what I was responding to. To save, this is what I was responding to:

Originally Posted by Celticguy View Post
Pols only ban guns for fear of them being used against themselves.
This is exactly the reason they were constitutionally protected in the first place.
That's also why they are more concerned about rifles than handguns despite the fact that Giffords and Reagan were shot with handguns. Rifles allow one to be much farther away from your target and harder for the protective services to defend against.

I would prefer everyone be required to conceal or open carry. Good reason to be polite.

Nothing there about your personal trials and tribulations. The chronology of the posts supports my responses. What you said then is not factually supported, as I pointed out.

 

[Nordberg]

Unconstitutional.

You have a special kind of ignorance coupled with an insane belief you know what you are talking about. As I posted before.
Warren Burger chief justice of the supreme court said
The gun lobbyists' interpretation of the 2nd amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American people by special interest groups that I have seen in my lifetime.
The real purpose of the 2nd amendment was to insure that state armies would be maintained for the defense of the state. The very language of the 2nd refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires.
Chief justice v right-wing idiot...you lose.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Nope.....not aimed at me. I guess this doesn't count as "porn" or a slur against another poster.

To me, it's just sick. But, as they say, there's no accounting for taste.

Why would it be “porn”? Slurs against another poster on JPP???? Please say it ain’t so!

Why is it sick, Liberal? Is it because I made it or because you are defending poor little Fredo?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Why would it be “porn”? Slurs against another poster on JPP???? Please say it ain’t so!

Why is it sick, Liberal? Is it because I made it or because you are defending poor little Fredo?

Dutch, I'm not into bickering just for the sake of it. I was commenting on the meme itself, NOT your flame war.

Like I said, there's no accounting for taste. I don't like homo-erotic imagery on any level, and get real tired with the flame wars that are all "you're a homo having gay sex". Real grade school stuff. If that's your thing, go for it. I was just surprised Damo & company let that one pass....but given all the other rules being constantly broken here, I shouldn't have been surprised. And the beat goes on.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Dutch, I'm not into bickering just for the sake of it...

We’ll have to agree to disagree on that point, liberal since, despite all the comments and memes on JPP, this is the first time I’ve seen you so upset over one. Wassup?

 

[RB 60]

Well, if every adult 18 something had to do 3 or 4 months of military training (think bootcamp +) that would pretty much do the trick. It'd easily weed out 90% of the 'problem children' in terms of guns. If you didn't satisfactorily complete that training, no gun for you! That would meet the "militia" and "well regulated" parts of the 2nd Amendment-- you go military basic training and were determined to not be a criminal, idiot, or simpleton.
You then get an ID card to prove you were trained, and the government will pay you annually a small amount to buy ammunition to go and practice at a range with. Go with friends, take the family. If you do good shooting you get a plaque or other reward, maybe some cash...

No ID cards, but score cards. Gun clubs run leagues that do just that. Then, you can participate in sanctioned matches. I've got hundreds of govt. rounds, all in ammo clips and in ammo boxes.

 

[RB 60]

Government force? yeah, like the left shoving things down your throat. Your terms are heavily slanted. You have people on their own turn in their guns. Other nations have done it successfully.

Turn in my guns?

 

[RB 60]

It's called eminent domain and is perfectly legal. The US government, assuming that they had some legal means to confiscate everyone's firearms would have to compensate them for the loss. That would run into the trillions of dollars and make taking everyone's guns impossible on cost alone.

That ain't all that would make taking everyone's guns impossible.