|
Dear Republicunt Dickheads,
|
 (June 20, 2016 at 11:58 pm)Cecelia Wrote:(June 20, 2016 at 11:31 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: There's already a lot of gun control laws on the books. People need to give up on the Moses complex. No background check needed. "Stolen police gun used to shoot Philly cop in name of Islam" http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2016/01...n_pol.html  (June 21, 2016 at 8:33 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:(June 20, 2016 at 11:58 pm)Cecelia Wrote: And they aren't good enough. Plain and simple. I'm not sure why this is hard for some people to understand. And that's an unfortunate situation. You will always get weapons being stolen. But, if you require universal background checks it would, or at least should, prevent idiots like the Orlando killer getting their hands on weapons LEGALLY. Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni: "You did WHAT? With WHO? WHERE???" 
Why can't the cops hang on to their own guns?
Don't y'all have anything better to bitch about?
 (June 21, 2016 at 8:33 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: No background check needed. Oh, I didn't realize that we needed to prevent 100% of all incidents in order for things like background checks to matter. Oh wait, that's right. We don't. The ease with which a weapon is obtained wouldn't have stopped this one incident, but it would greatly reduce the number of incidents we do see. To me that's a goal worthy of pursuit.
The whole tone of Church teaching in regard to woman is, to the last degree, contemptuous and degrading. - Elizabeth Cady Stanton
We should just take everyone's guns. Kick in the doors and grab them all up. If anyone doesn't like it they will be shot.
None of what was proposed would have prevented the killings in Orlando. What was proposed was never meant to solve the issue, only meaningless knee jerked political theater designed so both parties could walk away assured of a right to demagogue the other leading up to elections.
I simply don't get those that think the terrorist list idea had any merit. Sure, you don't like guns, but to freely give a government nobody the power to deny a citizen a right by adding a name to a list without due process? That terrifies me more than guns. I think it was Padme in Revenge of the Sith that said something close to the following' "So that's how Liberty dies, to thundering applause". Be careful what you wish, the next right or liberty that is revoked by edict could be one you actually give a shit about. But by then it will be too late because you have already welcomed the Trojan horse. I am by no means suggesting we do nothing about guns, I think ownership and resale should be managed similarly to automobiles. The bullshit proposed would have been as effective as praying for no more guns; an impractical and meaningless gesture in order to make oneself feel better and make a grand public display of faux concern.
There is no one solution to the problem. That does not mean that small common-sense steps should not be taken.
Who knows? Once they pass one and find out that the sky doesn't fall maybe they'll get to work on more useful items. Hell. Even Ronald Fucking Reagan supported the Assault Weapons Ban. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2014/0...ld-reagan/ Quote:Before the National Rifle Association became what it was today, Reagan worked with them to ban guns. Specifically, automatic weapons: civilians were legally allowed to own fully automatic rifles until 1986, when Reagan signed the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act banning them. After his Presidency, Reagan backed the Brady gun law establishing many of the major restrictions on gun purchases today. His support for the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban pushed the ban to its two vote margin of victory — according to two of the Congressmen who made the difference.
I have no problem with an assault weapon ban, but an assault weapon ban wouldn't have prevented the Orlando killings. The reason I know this is because that cunt didn't use an automatic or semi-automatic weapon.
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
