You don't go!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Earl
You bribe me with your tasty mead to make my wife go for you!
It works by the way
Printable View
You don't go!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Earl
You bribe me with your tasty mead to make my wife go for you!
It works by the way
https://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gif
Lemme know when these are on special at Walmart. Free dashboard Jesus.
Sums it up very well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Earl
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Lick
There's no denying there is a problem, but the vast majority of gun owners are responsible in handling their weapons of choice.
The problem is with a population of 300+ million and over 300 million firearms the law of averages will play.
So isn't more logical to actually address the problem: which the small percentage of people who misuse firearms. It doesn't make a lick of sense to pass sweeping legislation which would affect the honest, responsible law abiding citizen rather than the actual problem which is the deranged person/criminal who pulled the trigger at the wrong time.
What has gotten my attention is that some lawmakers and 'gun control' advocates have been focusing on CCW holders.
Weapons permit holder (concealed carry) should have nothing to do with this argument or discussion.
Missouri gave the Feds the names and addresses of all CCW holders in the state and some want identities published publicly.
This is what leads me and others to oppose almost everything 'gun control' advocates are trying to do.
Let's not have driver's licensces because it "inconveniences" those of us who can drive within the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by barbaro
Let's not have stop signs because it incoveniences people who know when to stop and not stop.
Stupid is the only word for the argument that innocent people are inconvenienced by gun regulation, so therefore we should have none. Those innocent people who die as a result will not be inconvenienced by anything anymore.
put your order in soon, the Levi and Wrangler editions run out early.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
Stupid is the only word for legislation which fails to actually punish criminals who break the law.
The proposed legislation didn't address that, so it failed to pass.
Concealed carry permit holders and the vast majority of law abiding gun owners aren't the problem. It's kinda stupid to not see that.
Licensing, registrations, mandating proficiency requirements are fine but first address the problem which the current failure to enforce the current laws.
I respect your argument, Mr G,Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
But using the Driver's License as an example is not applicable.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Earl
The US has more people in jail than any other country in the world.
But you think the problem is that you don't punish crime enough, earl?
You register your car on and annual basis, and need a license to legally operate it.
Yet you think background checks for gun purchases, as supported by 90% of Americans, are an assault on your civil liberties.
The assault on your civil liberties is already there, and blatantly so- it is the refusal of your government to act upon the stated wish of 90% of it's citizens. Your government is in mutiny.
^
The problem with this increased background legislation is the very real threat of a National Database with all gun owners listed. When the tyranny really starts to manifest itself, they will be coming for those guns - 2nd Amendment or not.
Care to elaborate.Quote:
Originally Posted by barbaro
Such as we already have in Australia, the UK etc? Some threat. Neither is it part of the tabled legislation. Neither does it seem to be a problem that there are databases of car owners, dog owners, house owners, owners of stocks and shares, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon Mee
Why don't you elaborate. It was you that made the comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
1. criminals will have unregistered guns and guns not in a database.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
2. why in the hell are dog owners in a govt. database?
Erm....nanny state?
because they are licensed, and the license periodically renewed.Quote:
Originally Posted by barbaro
i'd certainly rather have gun owners registered than dog owners. although i suppose you can kill someone with a dog too.
but it's not part of the tabled legislation, never was. there a comin' for yer guns gets really old, because they are not a comin' for yer guns and have stated this explicitly.
and where do these nutcases get off suggesting that the government of US is planning to invade their own country. why- to take over the government?
Many if not most criminals in jails are in for drug realated crime. If drugs were decriminalized and drug addiction addressed on a social level, there would be some empty jails. Leaving plentyvof room for firearms offenses.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
There already exists a BATF registration/ background check form filed on every gun purchase, In most states there are already waiting periods, trouble is when a felon is caught attempting to buy a firearm nothing is done.
Concealed carry permits all have to pass background checks and throrough scrutiny.
So no new buraucracy is needed if the current system were to function more effectively.
The proposals recently turned down was all polical smoke playing on the emotion from the Sandy Hook tragedy. it was actually kinda.despicable to use those families that way.
So you are irrevocably one of the 10% minority, OK- you are entitled to your opinion. But a democratic government is not entitled to ignore the stated wish of 90% of it's constituents, and toss out current legislation tabled before them on that basis. Thus, they are in mutiny. Technically, I believe they could be tried for Treason.
As I said the frightened little chaps have been scared witless by the likes of the NRA that any kind of gun control will be the slippery slope to having all their guns taken off them. That will leave them feeling all naked and vulnerable was they brave the crime ridden streets of america.
What in their fear they are missing is that the laws that they are resisting close the loop holes that allow criminals easy access to guns and bullets. criminals who create the climate of fear that sends the chaps out buying guns, bullets and resisting gun control.
The arms manufactures do very well out of this little vicious circle, not sure anyone else does.
I doubt it. The NRA probably bribe the judges as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
The comparison was clear in the context it was made. If you can't defend your difference with it, don't exptect other to do it for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by barbaro
I do believe I took that picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
Hard to argue against the logic of gun-toting redneck douchebags like this:
God's will eh? Funny, when the mussies say that, they're called fanatics.Quote:
5-year-old Kentucky boy fatally shoots 2-year-old sister
From Leigh Remizowski, CNN
May 2, 2013 -- Updated 0233 GMT (1033 HKT)
(CNN) -- A Kentucky mother stepped outside of her home just for a few minutes, but it was long enough for her 5-year-old son to accidentally shoot and kill his 2-year-old sister with the .22-caliber rifle he got for his birthday, state officials said.
The shooting in southern Kentucky has been ruled an accident, Kentucky State Police Trooper Billy Gregory said.
"It's just one of those nightmares," he said, "a quick thing that happens when you turn your back."
Young children in the area are often introduced to guns at an early age, Gregory said.
"In this part of the country, it's not uncommon for a 5-year-old to have a gun or for a parent to pass one down to their kid," he said.
On Wednesday, state police were still investigating toddler Caroline Sparks' death, CNN affiliate WLEX reported.
Her family kept the Crickett rifle in what they considered to be a safe spot, Cumberland County Coroner Gary White told the CNN affiliate.
The boy was playing with it Tuesday when it accidentally went off and killed his sister, White said.
"The little Crickett rifle is a single-shot rifle, and it has a child safety," White told CNN. "It's just a tragic situation."
The Crickett website features three .22-caliber rifle models for kids, with shoulder stock colors ranging from pink to red, white and blue swirls. "My first rifle" is the company's slogan.
Family members Wednesday described the shooting as an accident.
"He just picked (the gun) up before he realized it," grandmother Linda Riddle told WLEX.
Riddle said her granddaughter enjoyed singing and playing outdoors, and she loved her brother.
"It's just tragic," uncle David Mann told the CNN affiliate. "It's something that you can't prepare for."
Riddle said she is devastated, but comforted knowing that her granddaughter is in a better place.
"It was God's will. It was her time to go, I guess," she told WLEX.
"I just know she's in heaven right now and I know she's in good hands with the Lord."
Caroline Sparks' death comes after two other incidents in recent months involving young children shooting others. In early April, a 4-year-old boy in Tennessee shot and killed a 48-year-old woman, and just days later, 6-year-old Brandon Holt was killed in New Jersey after being shot in the head by his 4-year-old playmate.
:rolleyes:
^Insanity
Obviously this wouldn't have happened if the two-year-old had been carrying.Quote:
5-year-old Kentucky boy fatally shoots 2-year-old sister
I blame video games. If not for violent, hyper-realistic video games like Big Bird Teaches Typing, this kid never would have committed this atrocious but totally unforeseeable act.
I guess the little bugger was lucky not to be put on trial as an adult and given the needle.
But in all seriousness, what kind os moron gives a loaded gun to a five year old. A girl is dead and that little boy is going to carry the guilt of this to his grave. Just a little bit of common sense or perhaps a bit of personal responsibility boonmee bangs on about and this would never have happened.
clearly a family that should never ever have been allowed near a gun now or then.