Gun Control?

[Wickabee]

Thirty years ago you could order guns through Sears and we didn't have these problems. Our problems are not from lack of gun control.

I'm referring to your tactic of "take one away take them all away. Whether your right about gun control, that is crap. Take guns from the police? That's just stupid.

All or nothing will leave you with nothing every time. The military uses grenades, we should be able to as well. At least, that's where your line of reasoning leads.

All or nothing. Foolish.

[MadMan1978]

lazy or realistic

taking freedoms because you are scared is not the answer

again 27 people died that day from DD, should we ban it? oh wait, we have!

my big point is your logic comes from fear, not logic.

guns don't kill, cars don't kill, alcohol doesn't kill, it is people

the only ban that will stop this is banning people

and again the worst school killing in US history had nothing to do with guns

and again, the ban will only be for law abiding citizens, the people we should fear less

insanity is called insanity for a reason, you cannot reason with it, nor figure it out, nor stop it

laziness would be blaming an object instead of the human

Jay your DD argument is lame and should not even enter the convo
AS well NO ONE is saying, Or I havent heard it to date on BANNING GUNS
just assault weapons and related items...

the 2nd amendment will still be intact!
and we are holding people responsible, however he had access to an item that killed.
I will agree banning the assault weapons is only part of this.

REPUBLICANS and GUN NUTS need to take a really hard look at this because this time we cannot let it just go away it and be forgotten....

We Banned Lawn Darts but allow a number of items into society and private homes and we say its our rights? I think Priorities are off base if that is the argument.

[tpeichel]

I'm referring to your tactic of "take one away take them all away. Whether your right about gun control, that is crap. Take guns from the police? That's just stupid.

All or nothing will leave you with nothing every time. The military uses grenades, we should be able to as well. At least, that's where your line of reasoning leads.

All or nothing. Foolish.

Your assumption is that the government will always be benevolent, which history shows to be untrue. For instance, we have the current administration that wants to ban "assault" weapons for private citizens while not too long ago they were delivering 2500 of these same weapons to Mexican drug cartels. This administration has a lot of blood on their hands for that scandal.

Historically, tyrannical governments disarm the populace, since it is much easier to control people when they are severely outgunned. A free people will always be able to defend itself against tyranny, that's why even though I am not a gun owner myself, I will always defend the rights of Americans to retain the ability to defend themselves.

[Wickabee]

Actually, a lot of people are talking about banning guns. Oddly, though, not a single person who has mentioned banning guns wants gun control.

I wouldn't bother. Let them argue with themselves over something no one said. The rest of you can move up to Canada and enjoy a land of reason.

[tpeichel]

Just like a republican to once again and deflect from the real issues...
Answering your questions in order

Yes if need be we should...at some point they do have a private life
Across the world we do not need to even address expect to hold manufactures responsible
Who needs more the 6 weapons? collectors? fine remove the firing pins...simple enough



My questrion to you is why are ok in banning Lawn Darts, 3 wheel ATV's and not assault weapons?

Seems something is wrong here
that the Priorities are way off base to the guns are more important the life of the child...

Who would defend themselves or their family with a lawn dart?

[Star_Cards]

Thirty years ago you could order guns through Sears and we didn't have these problems. Our problems are not from lack of gun control.

I'm not sure what this is supposed to say. There are a lot of things that were done 30 years ago that were okay at the time but now seem absurd. when I was a kick in the early 80's we had a car that didn't have seat belts in the back seat and we didn't have a problem with it.

[Wickabee]

Who would defend themselves or their family with a lawn dart?

Hahahahahahahahaha

Wow. Missing the point by that much absolutely HAD to be deliberate. If you won't have serious discussion, why are you here?

[tpeichel]

Really? this is your point?

Yes, I completely disagree that are problems stem from lack of gun control so why cede more of our freedoms to the government?

[Star_Cards]

Your assumption is that the government will always be benevolent, which history shows to be untrue. For instance, we have the current administration that wants to ban "assault" weapons for private citizens while not too long ago they were delivering 2500 of these same weapons to Mexican drug cartels. This administration has a lot of blood on their hands for that scandal.

Historically, tyrannical governments disarm the populace, since it is much easier to control people when they are severely outgunned. A free people will always be able to defend itself against tyranny, that's why even though I am not a gun owner myself, I will always defend the rights of Americans to retain the ability to defend themselves.

the point of your statement isn't lost and there is truth to other governments wanting to disarm it's citizens, but to think that is the case in our situation just doesn't fly with me. besides, even if our government wanted to outgun us, AR15s would have very little effect to the technology that our government has at it's hand. Claiming that they somehow want to disarm us to implement some sort of tyrannical dictator is ridiculous in my opinion. Give the citizens all the assault weapons they want, they would be no match for drones, fighter planes, tanks, helicopters, missiles, grenades, RPGs and more. Banning certain weapons has nothing to do with any sort of disarming so the government can more easily handle us.

[Wickabee]

Yes, I completely disagree that are problems stem from lack of gun control so why cede more of our freedoms to the government?

First sensical thing you've said all morning.