Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ladypanther

Ban weapons of mass destruction.....NOW

Recommended Posts

Panthro    9,947

In 1982 21000 people died in alcohol related crashes.

Perhaps we could reduce gun violence by half as well with more laws, regulations,and awareness.

Great example!

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cat    3,780

So, do you blame the airplane as well as the hijackers when they flew it into the Twin Towers in NYC on 9/11?

Do you blame the truck and McVeigh for the bombings in Oklahoma City?

If not, then your arguement of blaming a gun for what a person decided to do is a knee-jerk and rikiculous assertion.

Arguing for consistent checks and processes to buy guns in all states....can get my head around.

Banning a particular gun type....no.

Yes somewhat, that is why we have so much security around airports and why the cock pit is on lock down. (btw I think you mean bomb with McVeigh)

Guns are weapons made with the purpose to kill. We ban nukes because they cause so much damage, as well as missiles, rocket launchers and grenades. I think high max clips should be on that list as well as some guns.

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




MadHatter    9,501

Yes somewhat, that is why we have so much security around airports and why the cock pit is on lock down. (btw I think you mean bomb with McVeigh)

Guns are weapons made with the purpose to kill. We ban nukes because they cause so much damage, as well as missiles, rocket launchers and grenades. I think high max clips should be on that list as well as some guns.

I am for closing the Gun Show Loophole....I am for consistent regulations on purchasing guns (all states should be the same)....I am for requiring a license to purchase any gun....I am for mandatory saftey/usage training courses to get a license to purchase a gun.

But, I am not for the government to decide which guns are OK and which are not. You open that door and you quickly start losing rights.

You see guns as nothing but an instrument of death. You do not see them as many gun owners do....target practicing, hunting, etc. You apparently had biases against guns long before this tragedy occurs.....and are using the tragedy for that agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Panthro    9,947

I am for closing the Gun Show Loophole....I am for consistent regulations on purchasing guns (all states should be the same)....I am for requiring a license to purchase any gun....I am for mandatory saftey/usage training courses to get a license to purchase a gun.

But, I am not for the government to decide which guns are OK and which are not. You open that door and you quickly start losing rights.

You see guns as nothing but an instrument of death. You do not see them as many gun owners do....target practicing, hunting, etc. You apparently had biases against guns long before this tragedy occurs.....and are using the tragedy for that agenda.

That's a slippery slope either way. I want a chain gun.

1237467148_arnold.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zod    14,969

Yes, we had no rights prior to 2004.

Sigh

Good things these jokers are in the dumbass minority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CatofWar    1,063

The good thing is that ct already had an assault weapons ban. http://www.jud.ct.gov/lawlib/law/firearms.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NanuqoftheNorth    7,814

When I was growing up 30 years ago we all knew our neighbors and looked out for one another. Firearms were propped up in the corner of the living room or hanging in a rack on the wall. People were raised to respect and handle firearms safely. I suspect there are still places like that in this nation, but it seems like more often than not our neighborhoods are not as close knit and we need to lock our doors. Our firearms in this new age need to be handled differently as well. It may be unfortunate but it is also true.

Most gun owners are reasonable and responsible, but background checks and safety courses prior to purchase need to be mandatory. Weapons also need to be secured when not in the immediate control of their rightful owners. Lost or stolen weapons need to be reported without delay to the local authorities. These steps won't eliminate every possibility for misuse, but they are simple steps that will help reduce deaths and maiming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




NanuqoftheNorth    7,814

The good thing is that ct already had an assault weapons ban. http://www.jud.ct.go...aw/firearms.htm

Hopefully the state of Connecticut can seize whatever assets the perps mother's estate has to help defer the costs associated with this tragedy. It would be a useful example to others that think the state's laws don't apply to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kurb    4,984

That's a slippery slope either way. I want a chain gun.

1237467148_arnold.gif

I have an acquaintance that has one...that works...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kurb    4,984

Why isn't this plausible?

Ban assault rifles

Honestly I can let this one go. There is an argument against it, but at this point in our society its either ban the sale of or start applying the crimes committed by the gun to the owner of the gun and banning is an easier solution

Ban the manufacturing and sales of ammunition that are excessive in destruction i.e. hollow tip, armor piercing, etc.

Partially on board here as well. Hollow Points are good for home defense and hunting. Armor piercing should be banned IE: "Cop Killers"

Reduce magazine sizes

Kinda goes hand in hang with the assault rifle thing. It honestly won't do much, but I would make some concessions here.

Ban hand guns that are deemed to go beyond basic need for stopping power for self defense i.e. .50 caliber Desert Eagles, .357 Magnum

Here I have an issue with someone else telling me what I need to protect my family. That's my decision and caliber is one of the most uninformed overrated argument people can have. If you do some of the above caliber banning is a waste of energy.

Create meaningful and sweeping new regulations on the ability to purchase a gun.

So long as they don't infringe on my rights I can live with this.

Close gun show loopholes

Again, So long as they don't infringe on my rights I can live with this.

impose a stiff federal sales tax on all weapons

Negative, no new taxes. We are taxed enough. I resist all new taxes.

Use revenue from that tax to create and aggressive educational program to educate the public on signs of mental illness that could result in a person doing these things.

I

Use new revenues from that tax to subsidize companies making non-lethal defense products, i.e. stun guns, pepper spray, etc. to make these alternatives even more affordable

Use revenue from tax to increase access and coverage for mental health care.

I would prefer the $ to fund this come from Defense spending cuts (not solider pay/benefits). But I like these ideas.

And cap the number of guns households can legally own. You don't need 10+ guns to protect your family. 1 per member will do the trick. If you already have more than the cap you can keep those guns, but cannot purchase additional guns.

Again this is telling me what I need and don't. I resist things like this. Lets say I am an avid Deer hunter. I may want a 30-06, 12G, 7mm mag, etc to use on different days/stands/hunting styles.

There. Everyone is happy. Done and done. Your 2nd amendment right is not taken away, the power and lethalness of the guns available is greatly reduced, the access to guns is more difficult, and mental health care is expanded.

Surely everyone could get on board with that right??

Mostly! Good ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MadHatter    9,501

That's a slippery slope either way. I want a chain gun.

1237467148_arnold.gif

Don't think you are man enough to handle it.... :sword:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cat    3,780

I am for closing the Gun Show Loophole....I am for consistent regulations on purchasing guns (all states should be the same)....I am for requiring a license to purchase any gun....I am for mandatory saftey/usage training courses to get a license to purchase a gun.

But, I am not for the government to decide which guns are OK and which are not. You open that door and you quickly start losing rights.

You see guns as nothing but an instrument of death. You do not see them as many gun owners do....target practicing, hunting, etc. You apparently had biases against guns long before this tragedy occurs.....and are using the tragedy for that agenda.

So no legit response to me. Just calling me bias. Im sure I could say the same back to you but what does that help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stirs    6,509

It comes down to this.

Ban all weapons that can fire bullets. All the other talk is just "feel good" crap after a tragedy.

Waiting periods, licenses, training, blah, blah, blah. None, none, NONE of these would have stopped the lunatic. It is just an opportunity for folks who have been trying to enact these same restrictions to now have an opportunity to go forward. None of this solves the immediate problem of lunatics.

It has to be a more comprehensive conversation than just the left doing more to restrict firearms. If they walk away with anything less than a total ban on firearms, then the lunatic factor is still there.

Problem not solved. Movies, videos, medicines, psychiatric care, all need to be part of the conversation. If you think it is only a gun problem, then you are a hack and an opportunist that is only wanting to pull something over on the rest of us without solving the actual problem.

Go ahead Shaka Zulu, it's a new day, time for you to neg rep me.

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mav1234    3,115

I don't think very many people feel that we can eliminate every single terrible tragedy relating to guns (because there is not a single person I know that thinks that *guns* are the only reason these tragedies are occurring), but increased regulation might lower the number of them. Specific tragedies might not be possible to prevent with some of the proposals presented here or in the public realm, but they might work towards limiting gun violence, which I think is a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×