Members banned from this thread: CEngelbrecht


Page 4 of 68 FirstFirst ... 234561454 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 676
Thanks Tree248Thanks

Thread: Gun Control - Suggestions from Right-Wing Members

  1. #31
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,624
    Thanks
    366

    From
    Florida
    Current law prevents those who have been adjudicated mentally incompetent from purchasing firearms. That definition could be improved to include more people who have been flagged as posing possible danger to themselves or others, at least for a reasonable term. I'd happily go along with that. And that expansion of scope still wouldn't have prevented this mass shooting.

  2. #32
    Human Bean KnotaFrayed's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    12,673
    Thanks
    10547

    From
    Here
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    Have a two part counter question for those Left leaning members.

    1. What new gun regulations are missing from the current laws?

    2. Which of these new regulations being proposed would have had an impact in preventing/mitigating the event that just happened in Las Vegas??
    May I ask you some questions along the same lines? Who has resisted any sort of gun control and called for things like open carry?

    Are firearms illegal in Las Vegas? How do over 500 people get wounded and almost 60 people end up with wounds that kill them, before all law enforcement, not some private armed citizen (isn't that the argument for more people arming themselves?) discovered the shooter killed himself? Firearms in the hands of citizens as a deterrent to things like this, worked how, in this incident?

    Perhaps there appear to be some problems with looking to firearms as a solution, since shooters appear, in their minds, to believe their "solution" is also to use firearms.

    Remember, this shooter had no criminal record....so was "law abiding", right up to the point he began shooting at people and shot over 560 people, before killing himself, not being taken out.

    So how does one or a society, put more firearms into the hands of their society when that society has a problem with firearms in the hands of the people of their society, then call it, a "solution"?

    Do Americans even want to work on solutions, rather than resist doing anything, because it is not going to stop it 100%? How is it we can send people to the moon and build spaceships that last for more than a decade at an estimated 1.2 billion kilometers (over 746 million miles) away, yet we cannot seem to solve both this and our health care concerns, even to the point most other developed nations have?
    Last edited by KnotaFrayed; 2nd October 2017 at 03:37 PM.
    Thanks from MaryAnne, Leo2, HenryPorter and 2 others

  3. #33
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,624
    Thanks
    366

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt Sands View Post
    I think little old grannies should be able to able to carry a weapon. I believe you should be able to hunt if you live in rural areas with weapons. But it doesn't really work in cities.

    Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
    Are there no vulnerable grannies in cities?
    Thanks from George Meyers

  4. #34
    Moderator HayJenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    40,327
    Thanks
    31334

    From
    CA
    In a tweet Monday afternoon, Caleb Keeter, a guitarist for the Josh Abbott Band, said some of the band’s crew members had firearms on the tour bus with them but realized those weapons were “useless” given the circumstances of the shooting.

    “We couldn’t touch them for fear police might think that we were part of the massacre and shoot us,” Keeter wrote. “A small group (or one man) laid waste to a city with dedicated, fearless police officers, desperately trying to help, because of access to an insane amount of fire power.” The fear he felt in the moment and the inability to act was why, he said, the country needs “gun control RIGHT. NOW.”

    The band played hours before the shooting, but according to a statement in Rolling Stone from Josh Abbott, the members of the band were on the concert grounds during the attack.

    After a massive response, including some who shamed Keeter’s change of heart prompted by being put in danger, Keeter owned up to his feelings: “I saw this happening for years and did nothing,” he said in a reply to one Twitter user. “But I'd like to do what I can now.”

    https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/...ng-gun-control
    Thanks from HenryPorter

  5. #35
    Veteran Member HenryPorter's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    19,309
    Thanks
    9983

    From
    N48 51.489 E2 17.67119
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronwyn View Post
    There's no way you can take away guns from Americans. Even the law abiding ones.
    I agree with gun safety training, but that is not going to stop criminals.
    Criminals do not care about laws.
    What you seem to imply then (I say this respectfully because you did an excellent OP on the original thread for this incident) is, there is nothing we can do about this because we would infringe rights. One gun owners right trumps 600 other individuals rights? To me, a liberal, that's just not rational.
    Thanks from Babba, Ian Jeffrey and Leo2

  6. #36
    New Member
    Joined
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    220
    Thanks
    76

    From
    US
    Quote Originally Posted by Otto Throttle View Post
    Are there no vulnerable grannies in cities?
    I'm getting ready for a privatized militia patrol over individual communities.


    Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk

  7. #37
    Veteran Member PACE's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    21,268
    Thanks
    18063

    From
    None of your business
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    It's obvious that conservatives aren't hot on gun control. Whether it's keeping them out of the hands of the mentally unstable, or putting limits on clip sizes, or basic gun registration, conservatives are largely united against them.

    Therefore, I invite them to propose ideas that will mitigate gun violence in our country. I'm not asking for ideas that will "solve" the problem 100%. I'm not looking for ideas that would have specifically have prevented the recent tragedy in Las Vegas. I'm just looking for general conservative-friendly ideas that will help - even a little.

    I'm respectfully asking left-wingers to refrain from dismissive jabs and insults. I've kept this OP free of them, and I'm trying to make this a sincere, open invitation.

    As a conservative, what suggestions do you endorse that could mitigate the problem of gun violence in the United States?
    Yes, there are many patents pending for smart gun technology:

    https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/fi...V%20160719.pdf

    We must start a dialogue on how to test, and validate these inventions in a more efficient manner, I would argue giving the gun industry itself the right to set standards for firearms, (similar to the automotive industry, or any other industry that uses or produces devices that could be harmful to human life) is also a constraint.

    Additionally, just as we have tightened our security post 9/11 (for example: getting on a plane, one way ticket, no luggage, gets you a bit more scrutiny, unless you "pay" for the right to glide thru faster, as in the case with many who travel for business) same should be applied to those who clearly "case" areas like this shooter did in Vegas; it is now coming out that he visited many resorts looking for the right vantage point, additionally, luggage, all LUGGAGE should be scanned; no exceptions, every airport has massive vacuum chambers where luggage is scanned, BUT the scanning done on the belt is decidely different that the scan that occurs in those chambers, make that a mandatory requirement.

    Ammonium nitrate, regulate it, you have to get a license to purchase lidocaine as a dentist, and you MUST account for all use, FDA regulated, OR you lose the ability to purchase, do that with materials that can used in explosives, and please, spare me the inefficiency argument; if we can move hazardous material like gasoline in an efficient manner, we can do this.

    No silencers; stop that legislation, we are hardly able to keep up with this current copious number of firearms in this country as it is.

    Block the intra state sales; you cannot bring a lot of goods to various states; I see no reason why there is no challenge to the 95 corridor that brings guns from Georgia to NYC.

    Challenge that corridor.

    Finally, wifi,,, we are getting into the realm where we should be developing firearms that can be "disabled", I have no qualms with a firearm in the hands of a hunter or avid target shooter, but I DO have issue with a gun in the hands of someone cannot be stopped BEFORE they kill,

    If you look thru the patents you will find one for wifi firearms; it's time.
    Thanks from MaryAnne, HayJenn and Blues63

  8. #38
    Veteran Member MaryAnne's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    43,763
    Thanks
    31213

    From
    Englewood,Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Otto Throttle View Post
    Current law prevents those who have been adjudicated mentally incompetent from purchasing firearms. That definition could be improved to include more people who have been flagged as posing possible danger to themselves or others, at least for a reasonable term. I'd happily go along with that. And that expansion of scope still wouldn't have prevented this mass shooting.
    How many times do I have to post this? Trump quietly rescinded Obama's law.

    FACT CHECK: Did Congress Legalize Gun Purchases for People With Mental Impairments?
    Thanks from HenryPorter

  9. #39
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    49,279
    Thanks
    23252

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt Sands View Post
    People will try to claim that we are politicizing this horrible event.
    The nature of what happened in both cases is political, and that is unavoidable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt Sands View Post
    Ironically, now we will need more safety, and that will play into the argument that we should have more guns.
    It will expand police power. It will expand police brutality.
    It will expand violating all of our civil rights except for the ones in the Second Amendment.
    Indeed. It makes one wonder how we would protect ourselves against a highly militarized and hostile police force.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt Sands View Post
    There are 27 amendments to the Constitution and they are all equally important.
    It is hard to effectively make a statement like "equally important." It is true that we cannot uphold some rights at the expense of others, though.
    Thanks from Dirt Sands

  10. #40
    Veteran Member MaryAnne's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    43,763
    Thanks
    31213

    From
    Englewood,Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Otto Throttle View Post
    Are there no vulnerable grannies in cities?
    I live in a city,do not carry a gun, but taking suggestions from Police friends I know how to defend myself when threatened. I did one,almost ran over the jerk. He jumped 4 feet sideways.

    There are many ways to protect yourself.

Page 4 of 68 FirstFirst ... 234561454 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 113
    Last Post: 30th August 2017, 04:17 PM
  2. Replies: 69
    Last Post: 29th September 2016, 06:58 AM
  3. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 14th March 2016, 03:44 PM
  4. Replies: 118
    Last Post: 17th May 2013, 02:08 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 16th April 2013, 03:08 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed