The Gun Fight in Washington. Your opinons?

That didn't take long

Why is there so much of that? Why are you compulsive about that kind of remark? Why can we not simply have a reasonable discussion?

Bump

s

From my very first car that have only a lap belt in it forward I had always used a seat belt long before there were any laws on the books concerning the matter an so did my family.

Sorry most of us do not need the government to act as a big daddy to us .

I remember those crazy sensors that would not allow you to placed anything on the passenger seat and then start the car or the silly seat belts that would come out on tracks also and how I would curse at such annoying big brother attempts to force me to do something I been doing ever since the first belts were in cars.

I and others needed to short circuit the damn sensors so we could placed such things as grocery bags on the passenger seat.

I am all for stopping the so call war on drug and therefore stop funding arm criminal gangs inside the US and outside the US.

That step alone would cut the murder rate worldwide down however with 300 millions guns in the US the idea of having a war on so call illegal guns would be as pointless as the drug war had been.

Yeah. Instead of hydroponics or meth labs in basements, there'd be milling tools producing Sten guns. The hardest part would be making the barrels, and that's not even very hard these days.

I agree with you on this, Bill...although I still think we have got to do something about the gun violence in our country not associated with drugs.

Well better mental health system that include better monitoring of those who have a mental illness that might result in violence. Gun violence or any other manner of violence.

Better security in such places as schools to deal with the risk of random attacks in whatever form. It does not matter if the attackers are using firearms or knives or explosives.

Lot of things that can be done however violence is violence no matter what the tools and going after one tool is to me kind of pointless.

Applied Common Sense.

How is it applied common sense when "better" is not defined. Nor is how it is made better or who will make it so.

BillRM applied common sense... you rarely do.

I don't underestimate A2Kers to the extent you obviously do. And doubly so for you to think they don't know.

Every post you make is an insult to A2K and its members. It's difficult to imagine you treating your companions any differently.

Neither do I, but I also don't ignore posting patterns of
individual A2Kers and I will do my best to call them out.

It's one assertion after another.

Just as "neither do I" is the last one and I have little doubt many more will follow.

It is no answer to the question--"How is it applied common sense when "better" is not defined. Nor is how it is made better or who will make it so."

People with a modicum of intelligence know that until the question is answered Bill's post makes no sense.

Do you think others want to make things worse? Don't you think they are trying to make things better even though you might disagree? Has Bill got a monopoly on what is better?

Can you not see that denying some citizens the right to bear arms on the basis of some bureaucrat, or army of them, monitoring everybody, with spies and tittle-tattle, is one of the things the FFs were trying to avoid in the land of the free. It would be a good job though for certain types of control freaks.

In a free country due process is required for that sort of separate citizenship. And to get that sort of due process you need communism or fascism. To deny the right to bear arms without a court hearing with evidence and cross-examination is the very opposite of freedom.

And would any of the monitors (dread word to freedom lovers) disqualify themselves or any of their relations and friends? Friends to include those who are inspected by Bill's monitor who bring a brown envelope with them? After all you do need monitors to get any monitoring done.

Neither you nor Bill have envisaged being monitored. It's something for other people not like you.

You're so tangled up in circularities that your head must be whizzing around like a well whipped top.

And we are still nowhere near having things made better.

You silly moocow. Bill's ex-wife might have had him certified from all accounts. And him her. In a cross certification hearing where his mien would be no match for her tears and fictions and histrionics learned from various TV programmes which demonstrate the most effective methods.

That's his guns disposed of. He would have to lie in his bed every night shaking with fear.

If I had the job I would go to the target ranges first. Hey--that might be the way for Mr Obarmy to go.

Did you have a point?

My original question has been answered. Blueveinedtrobber gets the coveted Red Ribbon for "Select Answer." The rest of you thread-jackers and trolls can go away now. You don't have to go home but please don't stay here.

Yeah--Mr Obarmy meets the crisis (what crisis?) with a Department Of Homeland Gun Monitors.

For 200 million adults and 4 million coming of age every year and 4 million to be crossed off. A Hotline advertised for reporting of unusual behaviour. And available to those with a grudge.

We had a case of monitor mania not long ago. There are 7,000 kids waiting to be adopted and more willing couples wishing to adopt than that.

And it takes 3 years and a great deal of trouble to get the job done. One local authority's monitors disqualified one couple because they voted for UKIP which is a party running third in the polls and having elected members of the European parliament who are regularly interviewed on TV. (Not that I agree with them mind you).

They are extremely careful are monitors. That's because if they were not so careful and let the 7000 kids get a mum and dad easily one case going wrong is all over the media and the monitors are in the ****. They ask a lot of very personal questions and make detailed enquiries in the neighbourhood, the workplace and anywhere else the couple are known.

But the main point is the joke of so-called freedom loving gun owners calling for another lot of monitors to monitor gun owners. They won't be monitoring people who don't own or want guns will they now? It's gun owners who do all the shooting. So the present gun owners will be the ones they focus on. The ones who haven't done anything yet to be psychologically profiled by a large number of power-mad citizens of no particular distinction unless the salaries are such as to attract people of distinction. Which they won't be.

Talking points from opposite land...

Why don't you leave Andrei? With posts like that I can't see what you wish to stay for.