@oralloy,
Quote:Also, a $200 tax on every gun would be unacceptable.
Why? Cars require that type of tax, often every year.
@H2O MAN,
A basic human right that doesn't require a gun.
@parados,
Most 'free states' are moving away from that.
@parados,
parados wrote:
A basic human right that doesn't require a gun.
Convince every single criminal and political tyrant that you are correct in your thinking.
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:
Most 'free states' are moving away from that.
ROFLMAO..
Which state has stopped requiring a license fee on autos?
@parados,
he yearly part.
So how's it going convincing criminals that you are right and they are wrong?
I bet the NRA could set up an all volunteer pool of trained armed Americans
that could be present in each and every government school in the country.
Any cost would be minimal and all of the children would have at least some protection.
over 100,000 schools, eight hours a day, five days a week? not to mention vetting them all to make sure they're not felons, pedophiles, or have mental problems? dream on.
Rubio Claims Obama Doesn’t Have ‘The Guts’ To Admit He’s Against The Second Amendment
Quote:“I have questions whether or not he’s truly committed to the Second Amendment,” Rubio said during an interview with Laura Ingraham, adding that the administration is testing “how they can infringe on it.
But the Constitution permits a broad range of gun safety measures. As conservative Justice Antonin Scalia concluded in Heller v. DC, the government can restrict ownership of “dangerous and unusual” weapons and that “nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”
(links embedded at the source)
@MontereyJack,
Sorry MJ, you can't volunteer.
@revelette,
Rubio is right, but Obama has expressed his desires to institute victim disarmament in this country.
Obama wants victims disarmed, it is one of his recurring wet dreams.
Adam Lanza, got his guns from his mother who got her guns legally. He had a history of mental illness. I find it ironic that conservatives are now championing mental illness care as a solution when in the past they voted against the 2008 mental illness access bill and are against government being bigger period and yet keep offering these costly solutions to the problems of gun violence. There is no way to have armed guards in all the schools, theaters and malls and all other places where people congregate without some of kind of government help. Not only would it turn the whole country in some kind of armed camp but we couldn't afford it.
@revelette,
revelette wrote:
Adam Lanza, got his guns from his mother who got her guns legally.
Don't be silly, that piece of **** stole one of her guns and murdered her to get the rest of them.
BTW, background checks prevented him from buying guns.
@H2O MAN,
you are too silly for words
Obama said:
"40% of guns are sold through private sellers." Moreover, the study claims that "these sales—which take place in many venues, including gun shows and, increasingly, on the internet... fuel the black market for illegal guns."
Many parts of this assertion are factually flawed or, at the least, very misleading.
First off, the figure of 40% doesn't represent new guns but guns already in circulation, which are being resold on a secondary basis. The intimation that 40% of new guns are being sold illegally is simply myth-making at best, lying at worst.
What's really happening is that people who think like Bloomberg and Obama are guessing that a certain percentage of firearms in the hands of Americans have no paperwork on them because their original sale predates background checks. Thus, their goal is to seal off avenues for private sales in order to force Americans to enter those guns into the system.
As for selling guns on the Internet to avoid background checks, that's another stretch. If a citizen buys a gun from a store via the internet, that gun has to be shipped from a dealer with an Federal Firearms License (FFL) to another dealer with a FFL.
In other words, if a resident of Denver bought a gun from a store in Tampa, the FFL in Tampa would send the gun to an FFL in Denver. Once it arrived, the buyer would pay a fee for shipping, taxes on the gun, as well as any mark-up for services. He would also have to submit to a back-ground check just as if he had bought the gun off a shelf in Denver.
The idea that 40% of gun sales are private is meant to confuse Americans and make them think there is a breakdown in the system somewhere. But there's not.
@H2O MAN,
It's always easy to tell when you are plagiarizing someone Spurt.
@parados,
Facts are what you fear most.
@H2O MAN,
Why would I fear that you can't write a coherent paragraph?
Why would I fear Brietbart.com that gets many of it's facts wrong. Let me ask you, do you think all internet sales of guns are from FFL dealers? Do you really want to argue that no private sellers of guns are on the internet?
