The Challenge is made: Gun Control

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by texassapper

Yes, numbnuts, it's called the 2nd amendment. We don't need more legislation we need minorities to stop shooting each other.

they will stop eventually ... in about 5 years there won't be anyone left.

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

My gun control is pretty darned fine. Nice tight groupings with pistol at 7 yards and rifle at 100-200 yards. I'm good with that. Obviously, I don't calibrate for shotgun, as it is kinda forgiving on precision.
.
But I'm wondering about car control. Seems to be the big fish in the ocean. Though, most cars do not drive themselves. So there is that pesky connection that needs to be solved with idiot control all over again.

In the graphic below there is one, single, solitary thing in control of the inanimate object -- an idiot.

[1blackman1]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Have the republicans come up with any gun legislation yet? I think we’re still waiting on 10 of them in the Senate to come up with something. Surely it can’t be that hard since the Dems basically said they’ll pass whatever 10 republicans can agree to.

I thought the OP stated that a real debate on gun legislation was to be had here in this thread. Haven't really seen that but then RacistSapper is on ignore so if he actually had anything intelligent to say I would miss it. But I know that hasn't happened so I haven't missed anything from him I am sure.

Still waiting on the good ole intelligent responses from good ole Republicans. I just know none will be coming. The republicans in congress and the senate are already trying to play the delaying game.

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

I thought the OP stated that a real debate on gun legislation was to be had here in this thread. Haven't really seen that but then RacistSapper is on ignore so if he actually had anything intelligent to say I would miss it. But I know that hasn't happened so I haven't missed anything from him I am sure.

What a twat... I know you can see my post because it was quoted. And by the way, I don't hate people by race... I hate them by their actions. Now if a majority of people who look a certain way behave like animals... well that's not my fault is it? They should look to their mothers and fathers (if they know who they are) for why they behave a certain way.

[reddog1951]

"In the graphic below there is one, single, solitary thing in control of the inanimate object -- an idiot."

Agree wholeheartedly. Many here qualify. More intent on protecting their precious "rights" endowed by their ancestors over 200 years ago that may or may not have had relevance in their time vis a vis our contemporary issues, than in identifying and enacting change to at least mitigate the issues. I wish I had THE answer, but I don't and don't think anyone here does, but I do think some think some actions could help, such as background check and waiting period prior to purchase (yes allow "Emergency exceptions" by legal authorities) and strict accountability for legitimate gun owners for unauthorized use by others (I don't mean theft, but do mean uncontrolled access by kids, etc.) would help. Not opposed to citizens carrying, but afraid there are way too many Barney Fifes out there.

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by reddog1951

"Agree wholeheartedly. Many here qualify. More intent on protecting their precious "rights" endowed by their ancestors over 200 years ago

That's right, genius. A document written by men that understood human nature and government better than you or any of the morons in the government today.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

that may or may not have had relevance in their time vis a vis our contemporary issues,

Human nature (and thus evil) never changes. Those rights are just as relevant today as when that document was written. Witness the assault on free speech today? Used to be you'd here people use the phrase "It's a free Country" There's a reason nobody says that today.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

than in identifying and enacting change to at least mitigate the issues.

SHows just how little you know and understand about what the Founders did for you. They actually provided a mechanism to change the laws and mitigate the issues... it's called an Amendment process. Just because Democrats are too stupid to use that process doesn't mean the Founders didn't provide for one.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

I wish I had THE answer, but I don't and don't think anyone here does,

Of course you think you have the answers... that's why you write snidely about our "precious" rights. Your solution is to take your neighbors rights away from him.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

but I do think some think some actions could help, such as background check and waiting period prior to purchase (yes allow "Emergency exceptions" by legal authorities) and strict accountability for legitimate gun owners for unauthorized use by others (I don't mean theft, but do mean uncontrolled access by kids, etc.) would help.

How would that have prevented Uvalde? And honestly, if the cops are going to stand in the hallway while children are being slaughtered, you can fcuk off if you think I'm going to rely on the authorities to protect me and mine. The saying goes when seconds count the cops are minutes away... but even when they get there in time, they don't do fcuk all. No. Fcuk you if you think disarming law abiding citizens is the answer.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

Not opposed to citizens carrying, but afraid there are way too many Barney Fifes out there.

Yes, and apparently they all work for the Uvalde Police department.

You're another know nothing with no new ideas that aren't simply "deprive my neighbors of their rights to solve an issue they had nothing to do with."

[eccieuser9500]

^^^^


ECHO!

[reddog1951]

So Sap...per, reverts to the usual response of the hard core "rightists" here by attacking the writer personally rather than address the issue.
So, I'll take the high road on one of his posits. Let's say the Uvlade shooter was a pissed off little disturbed kid, which is likely. Now let's say he had to be subject to a background check and a 3 day waiting period before he was allowed to purchase his weapon(s) on his 18th birthday. Maybe the background would have thrown a red flag, maybe he would have cooled off in 3 days....in some regard some of these mass shootings almost ring as crimes of passion. Maybe if your wife catches you cheating and in a rage goes out to buy a gun and off you, a little chill time might make a difference...in your life. Ask the parents of the slaughtered kids, not me.

You are correct that the 2nd amendment could be repealed or modified, but it is people of your mindset, unwilling to consider that a change might(?) be necessary that prevent the topic from even being considered, not the "Libs".

Give a solution that preserves your "rights" and protects others instead of attacking other viewpoints. You want well trained armed guards, ok. Schools, churches, theaters, graduation ceremonies, etc.? What does one cost? You paying? You want armed regular citizens? Ladies and gentlemen, I present you Barney Fife.

[Precious_b]

Wonder at all the objects in WK attachment.
Are all the numbers on it directly involved with intentional mass murder?

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by reddog1951

So Sap...per, reverts to the usual response of the hard core "rightists" here by attacking the writer personally rather than address the issue.

Sorry. If you're going to post drivel, you deserve to be laughed at and ridiculed for it. Think of it as tough love, dumbass.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

So, I'll take the high road on one of his posits. Let's say the Uvlade shooter was a pissed off little disturbed kid, which is likely.

I'd say without question the shooter was disturbed. Kid? No. He was 18. We allow 18 year olds to go to war and vote. By definition he's an adult.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

Now let's say he had to be subject to a background check and a 3 day waiting period before he was allowed to purchase his weapon(s) on his 18th birthday.

He had no criminal history. Nothing in his record that would have prevented him from purchasing his weapon even with a 3 day waiting period. So he'd have still been able to purchase.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

Maybe the background would have thrown a red flag, maybe he would have cooled off in 3 days....

What other fundamental rights are you willing to give up for MAYBE? Maybe, maybe, maybe. Maybe if the cops had done their jobs, 19 kids wouldn't be dead. Maybe if the teacher hadn't propped open a door, he wouldn't have accessed the school. Maybe if his parents weren't drug addled dipshits he wouldn't have been so fcuked in the head. Maybe maybe maybe...

Originally Posted by reddog1951

in some regard some of these mass shootings almost ring as crimes of passion.

Don't think you should quit your day job to apply for that FBI criminal profiler job. The nutcase planned and executed his little attack plan over a period longer than 3 days. He told people on line who did nothing. In the case of the Buffalo shooter he was actually conversing with a retired federal agent! The columbine shooters planned for months.

School shootings are not crimes of passion. You're just simply wrong. So wrong as to be laughable.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

Maybe if your wife catches you cheating and in a rage goes out to buy a gun and off you, a little chill time might make a difference...in your life.

If she goes out to buy a weapon then it's planned. It's premeditated. It's not a crime of opportunity or "passion". Never going to happen in any case, since we're completely honest... when I go bang my SB, she knows exactly where I am and she will tell me to have fun.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

Ask the parents of the slaughtered kids, not me.

Why would I ask the parents of slaughtered kids about my wife waiting 3 days to buy a weapon to shoot me? You just make zero sense. I certainly wouldn't ask you as you are demonstrating you have no ability to think critically.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

You are correct that the 2nd amendment could be repealed or modified,

Thanks for the confirmation that everything you previously wrote was worthless. Our Founders did have the foresight to plan for a time 200 years in the future when conditions might be different.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

but it is people of your mindset, unwilling to consider that a change might(?) be necessary that prevent the topic from even being considered, not the "Libs".

Aw... sorry. Welcome to representative democracy, crybaby. You don't get to demand change and enact what you want when you want. There are more than 24000 gun laws on the books in the United States despite the 2nd amendment. You want to punish the innocent for the actions of a lunatic. Why aren't you pushing MANDATORY jail time for threatening to shoot up a school? Why aren't you pushing mandatory jail time for police failing to execute their duty to protect and serve? Why aren't you pushing for armed, trained teachers? Why aren't you pushing for 60 Billion sent to Ukraine to be spent on US school security instead? We know why. Because Liberals LOVE school shootings. They further their goal of disarming the populace so they can REALLY be authoritarians... so the government has the monopoly on violence. Why don't YOU explain those fact to the parents of slaughtered children?

Originally Posted by reddog1951

Give a solution that preserves your "rights" and protects others instead of attacking other viewpoints.

I just did. You need more? I got lots of them, but liberals won't like them because they revolve around personal responsibility and liberals don't believe in that. They believe in rights without consequences... hence kill a baby if you're too stupid to use a rubber.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

You want well trained armed guards, ok.

No. I want citizens to be allowed to defend themselves.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

Schools, churches, theaters, graduation ceremonies, etc.?

Sure, why not? Why should a shooter be assured that no law abiding citizen will have the ability to ventilate them?

Originally Posted by reddog1951

What does one cost?

Your solution is trained "professionals"... we already saw how that worked out with the trained professional police force standing in the hallway like pussies. No I prefer not to leave the defense of me and mine to "professionals" because at the end of the day, they are more concerned about "coming home safe" than about the lives of the women and children around them. Every last one of those turd burglars deserve to be tormented by the cries of those kids to the end of their days and beyond. They were nothing more than publicly paid rent a cops and should be ashamed of themselves. Public safety is the LAST thing on their agenda... they are more interested in handing out speeding tickets to make their quota.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

You paying?

Dumbass, we ALREADY pay. Maybe we should stop hiring diversity officers and CRT teachers to allow teachers to take weapons training. I guarantee most ranges would LOVE to teach educators for free or reduced cost... they understand how fragile our civil rights are. you should too if you had paid attention over the last couple of years.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

You want armed regular citizens?

We already have them.. I just want more of them and an end to the gunfree zone bullshit.

Originally Posted by reddog1951

Ladies and gentlemen, I present you Barney Fife.

LOL... well a woman stopped a shooter at a HS graduation party a couple of days after Uvalde... it appears that not everyone is Barney Fife. And I will point out again that Barney was a COP. Just like the ones in Uvalde who did more to restrain parents than to take out an active school shooter. EVERY dime that parents ever paid in taxes to the Uvalde police was wasted. EVERY last dime. The clowns in the GOVERNMENT provided police even had an active shooter training this year and STILL couldn't do fcuk all.

Your unfounded faith in "professionals" brought us Uvalde and 19 dead kids, not my belief in the 2nd Amendment.

[1blackman1]

Still waiting on the right to come up with some suggestions from the right that’ll pass into law. House Dems with about 6 republicans passed age 21 for assault style weapons purchases. House republicans voted against that for reasons like

We didn’t ban airplanes after 9/11

People need AR15s to shoot prairie dogs

There were some other asinine rationales but those two are so good no others are needed.

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

So adulthood starts at 21 years old now? So that would be applied across the board. Right? So no gender changing, no sawing off of the tallywhacker, no alcohol, no military, no contracts, no smoking, etc. Right?

People are not required by the US Constitution to have a reason to purchase and/or own a gun. You know that. Right?

What is an AR15 anyway? You do know that the AR15 is a reference platform. Right? Generally means parts are interchangeable, i.e. mix 'n match. Nothing more.

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Still waiting on the right to come up with some suggestions from the right that’ll pass into law. House Dems with about 6 republicans passed age 21 for assault style weapons purchases. House republicans voted against that for reasons like

We didn’t ban airplanes after 9/11

People need AR15s to shoot prairie dogs

There were some other asinine rationales but those two are so good no others are needed.

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

What is an AR15 anyway? You do know that the AR15 is a reference platform. Right? Generally means parts are interchangeable, i.e. mix 'n match. Nothing more.

Don't expect affirmative action man to understand what you're talking about. He's not able to reason for himself... he's still on the democrat plantation but at least he's in the big house though, amiright?

[reddog1951]

To all especially sapper. Yes, 18 is currently adult in most cases although have to be 21 to but cigarettes in my locale. That makes no sense logically. I see nothing wrong with raising legal age of majority to 21 for all "adult" activity as it once was (maybe except for 18 y/o pussy LOL) with perhaps except for active military duty as a good career path for some youth, but IMO even then no voting till 21. I know I'll raise a shit storm, but there is no conscription currently..all voluntary enlistment, so in my view just another job.

The constitution does not specially address guns...it addresses "arms", the definition of which is debatable. One already cannot legally "bear" an automatic "gun". Too lazy to search, but I think generally not nuclear weapons, surface to air missles, etc., so it's an issue of where the "line" is drawn. Our reverered founding fathers were great, but could never have envisioned the "lines" presented today, so they wisely granted mechanisms to adapt to what they couldn't envisioned. "Strict" constitutionists sometimes miss that point, either fundamentally or intentionally.

Not opposed to mandatory jail time as suggested above for certain offenses, actually in favor of accountability for negligent parents or other enablers of such offenders as I have previously posted, so don't know where that whine comes from.

Yes, there was a woman that "saved the day" by taking out a shooter. She should be applauded, I agree. I know a few like her and wouldn't mess with her. I also know a few (maybe many) armed cowboys whose dicks are shorter than their guns...and they worry me, especially after a drink or two.

Police definitely failed at Ulvade, I agree. I also think that police can't respond "in time" in most situations due to logistics. Do I think a 100 lb 23 y/o recent grad female teacher (forgive my sexism..should have said hot teacher) would take out a gun man..wouldn't bet on it even if "trained"....oh, yeah she should be paid far more for hazardous duty. Or your priest, or rabbi, etc.

Like I said, I don't have the "answer", and I doubt you do either. But, something needs to change and all might have to "give" a bit.

Sidenote: WTF does funding for Ukraine have to do with this topic? Diversion 101 course, I guess.

[Salty Again]

... Surely sound like YOU are a proponent of taking-away
people's gun rights, mate. ... You either ARE or you AREN'T.
There's NO in-between.

### Salty