For Americans tired of NRA bullying.

[The Grand Nudger]

What vetting process -would- or -should- have ruled him out?  No charges, no convictions, no declaration that he was unfit. Any of these things would have blipped him at the bc check, contrary to popular belief neither crazy nor criminal can legally purchase or possess a rifle in this country.

In any case, you fail to understand due process. We -do- contend that the accused have a right to face their accuser in this country, and not only that, the right to appeal a ruling. To be legally barred from purchasing or possessing a rifle, under our laws, conditions must be met. It wasn't invented yesterday as an excuse for guns..it's one of the foundations of our justice system. Can you see why a person might be a little unnerved to hear you call it an excuse, and wave it off as though it meant nothing? You're playing into conspiracy theory/fascist left nuts hands when you say shit like that....and then wondering why they say the crazy shit they do. It's like slapping someone in the face repeatedly and then asking, in feigned surprise "umadbro?".

Perhaps they should have consulted the magic 8-ball?  Maybe a pre-crime unit? Is that the sort of gun policy you'd find amenable?

[Brian37]

What vetting process -would- or -should- have ruled him out?  No charges, no convictions, no declaration that he was unfit.  Any of these things would have blipped him at the bc check, contrary to popular belief neither crazy nor criminal can legally purchase or possess a rifle in this country.  

In any case, you fail to understand due process.  We -do- contend that the accused have a right to face their accuser in this country, and not only that, the right to appeal a ruling.  To be legally barred from purchasing or possessing a rifle, under our laws, conditions must be met.  It wasn't invented yesterday as an excuse for guns..it's one of the foundations of our justice system.  Can you see why a person might be a little unnerved to hear you call it an excuse, and wave it off as though it meant nothing?  You're playing into conspiracy theory/fascist left nuts hands when you say shit like that....and then wondering why they say the crazy shit they do.  It's like slapping someone in the face repeatedly and then asking, in feigned surprise "umadbro?".

Perhaps they should have consulted the magic 8-ball?  Maybe a pre-crime unit?  Is that the sort of gun policy you'd find amenable?

Has anyone read the bill are we just assuming this is a "police state issue". 

FYI the proposed bill DOES have an appeal process.

What the do you mean crazy or criminal can't legally get them? The Virginia Tech shooter WAS mentally ill. He had no record when he LEGALLY bought the guns he used to murder 30 people. Not sure you are understanding me here. 

Nobody is promoting "presumption of guilt". I think some here are confusing a call to make less guns an a call for a better vetting process as being the same as "assume guilt". That is absolute nonsense. This is the bologna fear mongering the NRA has scared everybody with.

Vetting is what coaches do before they give you a starting position on a sports team. Vetting is what a MD degree is, that gives you the right to operate on others legally. The Va Tech Shooter who was mentally ill NEVER should have been allowed to buy the two handguns he used to murder 30 people. It would be like handing a medical licence to the mentally ill simply because the person was never diagnosed.

"Criminals will get their hands on them anyway" so "do nothing"...... Nope, sorry again, not buying it.

Lets say I want to be a Secret Service agent. According to the logic of some, any attempt to make sure I can handle the job of protecting the president is a presumption of guilt? This is the horrible logic gun worshipers have? If you claim you want to keep them out of the wrong hands, then tell me why anyone would think "no record" at time of buy is enough? 

It is insane that everyone rightfully wants cops and military to be well trained, but civilians all you need is no record? It isn't presumption of guilt to insure that someone can handle a task and hand a responsibility. Just like you don't automatically get a job just because you want one.

[The Grand Nudger]

What the do you mean crazy or criminal can't legally get them? The Virginia Tech shooter WAS mentally ill. He had no record when he LEGALLY bought the guns he used to murder 30 people. Not sure you are understanding me here. 

Still sure you don't understand due process.  

Nobody is promoting "presumption of guilt". I think some here are confusing a call to make less guns an a call for a better vetting process as being the same as "assume guilt". That is absolute nonsense. This is the bologna fear mongering the NRA has scared everybody with.

No?  Because you do -exactly- that in your comment below.

Vetting is what coaches do before they give you a starting position on a sports team. Vetting is what a MD degree is, that gives you the right to operate on others legally. The Va Tech Shooter who was mentally ill NEVER should have been allowed to buy the two handguns he used to murder 30 people. It would be like handing a medical licence to the mentally ill simply because the person was never diagnosed.

On what basis would you have prevented him from exercising his rights (regardless of whether or not you agree with them), in the absence of a diagnosis?  While we're discussing this, in this context, allow me to suggest that safely operating a firearm is a bit simpler than surgery. You just don't point it at people. Voila.

"Criminals will get their hands on them anyway" so "do nothing"...... Nope, sorry again, not buying it.

Convenient, since I'm not selling it...so why are we discussing it?  

Lets say I want to be a Secret Service agent. According to the logic of some, any attempt to make sure I can handle the job of protecting the president is a presumption of guilt? This is the horrible logic gun worshipers have? If you claim you want to keep them out of the wrong hands, then tell me why anyone would think "no record" at time of buy is enough? 

That's how our laws work.  We have to wait for someone to actually -commit- a crime...before we penalize them for same-said hypothetical future crime.  Hey, maybe that;s a weakness...maybe that leaves the door open for tragedy...it's certainly been opined upon as-such before. Got any precogs hiding in the wings?

It is insane that everyone rightfully wants cops and military to be well trained, but civilians all you need is no record? It isn't presumption of guilt to insure that someone can handle a task and hand a responsibility. Just like you don't automatically get a job just because you want one.

The cops and the military are expected to shoot at, in,  and around people.  Civilians are not...and it's illegal to do so.  The analogy would be woefully poor if you -hadn't- managed to babble about jobs...to which no one has any right, unfortunately. You also don't get to automatically have a gun just because you want one, legally. You have to be vetted for age, for the type of rifle pursuant to state laws, for criminal and mental health history. That;s what the background checks - which are required- do.

This isn't the wild fucking west, lol......we have laws. Some of which are poor...granted, as I said..I have an illegal 22 and a legal assualt rifle under a law that calls itself an assault weapon ban. Figure that shit out for me, and how it's the fault of the NRA or gun manufacturers?

[Gawdzilla]

I would like to publicly apologize to Captain Awesome. I mistook him for someone in a conversation I was having elsewhere. Plus I was just coming off having my favorite pickup effectively destroyed and was in a very fell mood.

[Disciple]

You know, what we also need is common sense bomb legislation. We also would do good to have some type of murder regulations I think. Laws in place to ban all drugs including alcohol too. If we could just get murder banned then we wouldn't have to even worry about the guns and peoples freedoms to defend themselves in any way they see fit right? Laws don't stop a damn thing is why that all seems absurd. Why is it that so called assault rifles are used in less than 5% of murders but that's what all the anti-gun propaganda is about? Shouldn't you be more worried about handguns? More people are killed with knives and falling in the bathtub than with "assault rifles" each year.  BTW good luck getting all of them off the streets. One gun shop in Georgia in the last week sold 15,000 AR's.  And I would wager, none of them will ever kill a human.  Stop letting our illegitimate government frighten you so easily. They're trying to disarm you.

[Gawdzilla]

Gunners' paranoia about being disarmed is putting the rest of the population in danger. My rights may stop where theirs begin, but when they believe their rights extend to the maximum range of their guns we have a problem.

[The Grand Nudger]

So step one would have to be - stop justifying their paranoia - ....right? If they want to walk through the walmart babbling about obama, hillary and brownshirts coming for their guns and bibles (in that order), fine..whatever - loons. For us non-loony folks, the level of discourse needs to be brought up a few notches above uninformed hysteria. Feeding their delusions by incompetence or deceit is only going to calcify their position, and their support for circus acts like the NRA.

[KUSA]

You know, what we also need is common sense bomb legislation. We also would do good to have some type of murder regulations I think. Laws in place to ban all drugs including alcohol too. If we could just get murder banned then we wouldn't have to even worry about the guns and peoples freedoms to defend themselves in any way they see fit right? Laws don't stop a damn thing is why that all seems absurd. Why is it that so called assault rifles are used in less than 5% of murders but that's what all the anti-gun propaganda is about? Shouldn't you be more worried about handguns? More people are killed with knives and falling in the bathtub than with "assault rifles" each year.  BTW good luck getting all of them off the streets. One gun shop in Georgia in the last week sold 15,000 AR's.  And I would wager, none of them will ever kill a human.  Stop letting our illegitimate government frighten you so easily. They're trying to disarm you.

Good post.

[Gawdzilla]

So step one would have to be - stop justifying their paranoia - ....right?  If they want to walk through the walmart babbling about obama, hillary and brownshirts coming for their guns and bibles (in that order), fine..whatever - loons.  For us non-loony folks, the level of discourse needs to be brought up a few notches above uninformed hysteria.  Feeding their delusions by incompetence or deceit is only going to calcify their position, and their support for circus acts like the NRA.

To my cousins I would say "Stop thinking you need three hundred guns to protect you from the government. I know you're on three or four watch lists, but that's because you need to be watched." 

I don't pack any more, and when I did, it was on orders from the government. Only needed a gun once and I might have won that fight without it. I look back now and think "I used the gun because I had it, not because I had to use it as my only means of defense." Bad luck for the guy who brought a knife to a gun fight, but he made choices too.

[Brian37]

Ok so the second time in less than a week, I got a gun nutter to say, "no Brian, you should not be allowed to own a gun". Why, because I was cussing and acting crazy. EXACTLY MY POINT YOU DUMBASSES.

So today I was called "irrational" and a "ranting baby'...... They cant have it both ways. It is the same cherry picking you get with theists. They mean what they mean until they mean something different.

YES we should keep guns out of the hands of the "irrational".

But here is where they are wrong. They want to equate rightful anger to death, and a desire to reduce it as the same as being "irrational".

But doesn't matter to me. I agree why the fuck would you trust "irrational" people with firearms? Same bullshit screaming GOP did running away from their own words when Obama modeled the ACA after Romney's state model.

So religious "irrational" people should have or not have access to weapons?

Gun nutters, " No they should not have access to weapons".

Sane people, " We agree, so lets do something about it."

Gun nutters, "NO"