Christmas comes EARLY this Year.....for the....N R A !

[Ms Tree]

Have you stoped beating your wife yet?
 
The fact that we feel the need to defend our rights with guns I think points to the fact that the system has failed.  Other societies have maintained their freedoms with out the need to kill people. 

 

[KCFlyer]

So now the right to Liberty and to self defense is a disaster? An individual has only those rights which they can defend. What do you suggest? We arm ourselves with tree branches?
 
Guns in the hands of the individual eventually keep government at a respectful distance.
 
“When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.” -Thomas Jefferson
 
"Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it" - Malcolm X
 

 
What gets me about the gun debate is that the "pro gun" side has an "all or nothing" view.  Personally, I don't oppose people owning as many pistols, rifles or shotguns as they want....but I only oppose these "non automatic automatic weapons".  Because the pro gun folks like to point out that the AK's and the like are NOT automatic weapons, although there is video after video on youtube on how to make a "non automatic" weapon fire a hundred shots a minute with a technique called "bump firing".  There are even "bump fire" stocks to make it easier to do.  And I wonder....why on earth does the average citizen need a weapon like this?  If you can't kill an intruder coming in your front door when you have a Smith and Wesson in your hand, then rather than buying a "scattershot" non automatic automatic weapon....it'd be a helluva lot cheaper to take a few shooting lessons at the local gun range.  
 
I guess we need those non automatic automatic weapons to protect us should our government turn on us....but if you think about it, they've got tanks, bombers and missiles in their arsenal...so some fool shooting his AK with a bump stock on it doesn't really stand much of a chance. 

 

[KCFlyer]

 

 

 

[Ms Tree]

I do not care what guns people own.  I just wanted them treated like we treat homes and cars.  They have serial numbers that can be traced.  All weapons should be registered from point of manufacture to purchasing store to who ever buys the guns.  No person to person sales.  All guns must have their registrations renewed every year or two.  All sales must be run through a back ground check and title of ownership  must be transfered.  If your guns are stolen and they were not properly secured (gun safe) then you are responsible for the weapons.   
 
No violation of the first and gun owners are held responsible for their guns.  

 

[eolesen]

Yes, gun registration worked great in 1930's Germany, especially the part where they knew where to confiscate them...

Those opposed to gun ownership think that some slight infringement is OK, yet have no problem screaming "no infringement on freedom of speech" when it comes to burning a flag or saying the Pledge of Allegiance.

My home doesn't have a serial number. I can burn it down without notifying anyone. There was no government background check in order for me to buy it, and they can't restrict who I choose to sell it to.

My cars? I sold those without background checks, too, and there wasn't a requirement for me to notify anyone that I sold it. The person who bought it didn't need to, either, unless he was choosing to have it licensed and titled for operating on a public highway (he wanted it for operating on his farm, and didn't really care if it was going to pass emissions or not).

For all the cries of gun violence, there's very little recognition from liberals that the vast majority of all gun violence is done by criminals.

News flash: criminals are not going to follow the laws, regardless how restrictive they get. Meth and cocaine are illegal, too, yet there's no shortage of it anywhere in the US.

 

[delldude]

Then maybe someone can give me an answer to this question. (and) it's a legit/serious question.
 
WHY, in these countries where gun control is strict, are the inhabitants rarely getting killed ?
 
1. New Zealand
2. Iceland
3. Belgium
4. the Netherlands
5. Austrailia
6. Norway
7. Denmark
8. Finland
9. Sweden
10. Canada
 
??

 
 
Liberal assholes dominate the land?

 

[KCFlyer]

News flash: criminals are not going to follow the laws, regardless how restrictive they get. Meth and cocaine are illegal, too, yet there's no shortage of it anywhere in the US.

You are SO correct.  Ted Bundy killed 30 women and didn't use a gun in a single one of them.  He completely disregarded the laws we have on the books about murder.  Should we abolish those laws since many aren't going to follow them anyways?  

 

[SparrowHawk]

That's because Liberty is an all or nothing thing. You either have it or you don't. If you look throughout history, Liberty was won by armed conflict.
 
Inanimate objects pose no threat. Only the humans who own them present a threat. Guns, Missles & Armored Vehicles are inanimate objects. As are cars, Boats, Snow Machines. All of them have the capability of causing death or injury. 
 
I mentioned Snow Machnes because I know more people killed riding a snow machine then I do then was murdered. The price of Liberty is the risk that some lunatic someplace may decide to commit an atrocity. It's a risk I'm willing to take.

 

[Ms Tree]

Yes, gun registration worked great in 1930's Germany, especially the part where they knew where to confiscate them...

Those opposed to gun ownership think that some slight infringement is OK, yet have no problem screaming "no infringement on freedom of speech" when it comes to burning a flag or saying the Pledge of Allegiance.

My home doesn't have a serial number. I can burn it down without notifying anyone. There was no government background check in order for me to buy it, and they can't restrict who I choose to sell it to.

My cars? I sold those without background checks, too, and there wasn't a requirement for me to notify anyone that I sold it. The person who bought it didn't need to, either, unless he was choosing to have it licensed and titled for operating on a public highway (he wanted it for operating on his farm, and didn't really care if it was going to pass emissions or not).

For all the cries of gun violence, there's very little recognition from liberals that the vast majority of all gun violence is done by criminals.

News flash: criminals are not going to follow the laws, regardless how restrictive they get. Meth and cocaine are illegal, too, yet there's no shortage of it anywhere in the US.

None of which has anything to do with the point I made.
 
Not transferring the title to a car you owned is pretty short sighted.  Something happens with that car you can be held culpable.
 
If guns are required to be registered from point of manufacture forward and the penalties are substantial enough, far fewer new weapons will get into the hands of those who should not have them.

 

[Ms Tree]

You are SO correct.  Ted Bundy killed 30 women and didn't use a gun in a single one of them.  He completely disregarded the laws we have on the books about murder.  Should we abolish those laws since many aren't going to follow them anyways?  

Along that line of though we could get rid of all laws.  Criminals dont follow any of them so why bother? 

 

[Ms Tree]

That's because Liberty is an all or nothing thing. You either have it or you don't. If you look throughout history, Liberty was won by armed conflict.
 
Inanimate objects pose no threat. Only the humans who own them present a threat. Guns, Missles & Armored Vehicles are inanimate objects. As are cars, Boats, Snow Machines. All of them have the capability of causing death or injury. 
 
I mentioned Snow Machnes because I know more people killed riding a snow machine then I do then was murdered. The price of Liberty is the risk that some lunatic someplace may decide to commit an atrocity. It's a risk I'm willing to take.

Liberty is not an all or nothing.  There are limitations to all rights.  You cannot yell fire.  You cannot incite a riot. 
 
Some things are designed to kill, others are not. 
 
How many people actually are killed by snow machines verses guns? 

 

[eolesen]

None of which has anything to do with the point I made.
 
Not transferring the title to a car you owned is pretty short sighted.  Something happens with that car you can be held culpable.
 
If guns are required to be registered from point of manufacture forward and the penalties are substantial enough, far fewer new weapons will get into the hands of those who should not have them.

Yes, and that's an entirely ignorant point of view.

Registration isn't just accountability. It's also the vehicle to support confiscation.

You might trust your government to use discretion and respect your private information, but I don't.

We've already seen gun owner data being misused with the creation of the website showing the map of all registered gun owners in certain counties of a seriously liberal state.

I'm not required to register my firearms, and I'd probably refuse to do it even if it were required. My right to own it can't be infringed, and registration is one of the most basic forms of infringement I can think of.

We used to live in a place that "required" a garage sale license, and I've lived in counties and towns who required dog and bike licenses. Sorry, those are just cash grabs. Label me a bike or garage sale license evader if you will, but I ain't buying one.

The county has no business requiring a license for anything I have or do in my home.

 

[SparrowHawk]

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 33,561 people died in traffic crashes in 2012 in the United States (latest figures available), including an estimated 10,322 people who died in drunk driving crashes, accounting for 31% of all traffic deaths that year.
 
Snow Machines - 200 fatalities on avg. 14,000 annual injuries.
 
Since the CDC began publishing data in 1981, gun suicides have outnumbered gun homicides. But as gun homicides have declined sharply in recent years, suicides have become a greater share of all firearm deaths: 
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/24/suicides-account-for-most-gun-deaths/
 
As with most things Liberal and Progressive your argument holds no water.

 

[Ms Tree]

Back at ya.
 
I do not agree.
 
No I d not trust them.
 
Easy to prevent.
 
Registration does not infringe gun ownership anymore than it infringes car ownership.
 
Yippy.
 
I believe guns are an exception.  As is food production.  Building code enforcement.  Just to mention a few.

 

[Ms Tree]

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 33,561 people died in traffic crashes in 2012 in the United States (latest figures available), including an estimated 10,322 people who died in drunk driving crashes, accounting for 31% of all traffic deaths that year.
 
Snow Machines - 200 fatalities on avg. 14,000 annual injuries.
 
Since the CDC began publishing data in 1981, gun suicides have outnumbered gun homicides. But as gun homicides have declined sharply in recent years, suicides have become a greater share of all firearm deaths: 
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/24/suicides-account-for-most-gun-deaths/
 
As with most things Liberal and Progressive your argument holds no water.

Perhaps I should have clarified.  By killed I meant killed as in homicide.  Either way there are are far more people killed by guns than by snow machines.  How many people are ;killed' as in homicide, with a gun?