Other Resources The Political Joe » Gun Advocates, What Say You?? Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 16
 
 
2015-12-09 10:26 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by mdg2003 So according to LB there are 400 million guns out there. Who has the other 200 million guns?

Probably an outdated recycled graphic from three months ago.

Here's a graph I just found with data up to 2013.  So I suspect we're well in excess of 400 Million on the impossible to verify guesstimates. Since the gun salesmen in chief went all gun grabber mode in late 2012/2013, I'm sure the graph went up considerably higher the past few years.

I was told yesterday that Monday......the day after President Obama gave his address on how safe he's made us.....was the single biggest day this year for background checks/gun sales.   Go figure.

I always find the irony in Obama and reducing guns in America.  There's no question he truly wants to reduce them, but every time he tries it blows up in his face in a bad way.  I personally wish he'd shut it because it makes it really hard to find ammo cheap.  lol

 



2015-12-13 3:38 PM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.

2015-12-13 6:08 PM
in reply to: jmk-brooklyn

User image

Pro
6838
5000100050010010010025
Tejas
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.




Buying and owning guns is a right guaranteed in our Constitution. Flying on airplanes is a privilege one pays for, not a Constitutional right. Plus the TSA is involved, so logic goes out the window.
2015-12-13 6:51 PM
in reply to: jmk-brooklyn

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.

On the surface I would say it sounds like a good idea similar to not allowing mentally ill people to buy them.  However, when you start looking into who is on the no fly list or who qualifies as mentally ill the argument falls apart quickly.

Here's an article i saw a while back on the no fly list https://theintercept.com/2014/08/05/watch-commander/

In essence, there are several ways such as traveling to certain countries with a certain nationality or even being a controversial tweeter that can lead to you being on the list.  These things do not fall to the level of barring the purchase of a weapon to anyone so they shouldn't now.  I'm sure you can google cases of clerical errors that have put people on as well.  When you compare this to banning felons from purchasing guns, they have gone through an extensive legal process with representation and evidence before they lose their right.  When you compare that to simply being a muslim who travels to pakistan to visit the in-laws it's a lot different.

The other argument is that I don't personally feel it will stop anything even if we did ban everyone on the list.  If somebody is willing to shoot up a mall and commit multiple felonies, they're obviously not going to have a problem breaking the law buying a gun.

2015-12-13 9:23 PM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.

On the surface I would say it sounds like a good idea similar to not allowing mentally ill people to buy them.  However, when you start looking into who is on the no fly list or who qualifies as mentally ill the argument falls apart quickly.

Here's an article i saw a while back on the no fly list https://theintercept.com/2014/08/05/watch-commander/

The other argument is that I don't personally feel it will stop anything even if we did ban everyone on the list.  If somebody is willing to shoot up a mall and commit multiple felonies, they're obviously not going to have a problem breaking the law buying a gun.




That's a ridiculous argument. By that logic, we shouldn't have any laws at all, because some people will always choose to break them.

2015-12-13 10:33 PM
in reply to: jmk-brooklyn

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.

On the surface I would say it sounds like a good idea similar to not allowing mentally ill people to buy them.  However, when you start looking into who is on the no fly list or who qualifies as mentally ill the argument falls apart quickly.

Here's an article i saw a while back on the no fly list https://theintercept.com/2014/08/05/watch-commander/

The other argument is that I don't personally feel it will stop anything even if we did ban everyone on the list.  If somebody is willing to shoot up a mall and commit multiple felonies, they're obviously not going to have a problem breaking the law buying a gun.

That's a ridiculous argument. By that logic, we shouldn't have any laws at all, because some people will always choose to break them.
I see that you have raised me with an even more ridiculous argument. Unlawful possession of a firearm is almost always a tack on offense. Meaning they were committing a felony and were also carrying. You could completely eliminate the "who can legally and illegally possess firearms" laws and it wouldn't change a thing. Bad guys are going to have guns and do bad things with them. Good people will not.


2015-12-13 11:30 PM
in reply to: jmk-brooklyn

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.

Has this been a problem?  Are murders and attacks being carried out by people on the no-fly list who have bought guns legally?  Is this something we now need to stop in order to save lives?

I know where you are coming from, jmk, but this is just another ridiculous, bullchit, idea for a law to make some politician appear that he is hard on guns while actually accomplishing nothing.

Nah.

 

2015-12-14 7:40 AM
in reply to: mdg2003

User image

Extreme Veteran
3025
2000100025
Maryland
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??

Originally posted by mdg2003
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.
Buying and owning guns is a right guaranteed in our Constitution. Flying on airplanes is a privilege one pays for, not a Constitutional right. Plus the TSA is involved, so logic goes out the window.

Read the second amendment, buying and owning guns is NOT guaranteed in our constitution. 

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

 

I don't see these militias that everyone belongs to. 

2015-12-14 8:17 AM
in reply to: 0

User image

Pro
6838
5000100050010010010025
Tejas
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
Originally posted by dmiller5

Originally posted by mdg2003
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.
Buying and owning guns is a right guaranteed in our Constitution. Flying on airplanes is a privilege one pays for, not a Constitutional right. Plus the TSA is involved, so logic goes out the window.

Read the second amendment, buying and owning guns is NOT guaranteed in our constitution. 

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

 

I don't see these militias that everyone belongs to. 




Oh noes. We can't buy and sell guns. So the gubmint is supposed to be giving us free guns? Where's my free guns? Where's my free shiite? Wahhhhhhhhhhhh I want my free guns...

< stomps off in rage to protest for free guns. ,

.

Edited by mdg2003 2015-12-14 8:19 AM
2015-12-14 8:36 AM
in reply to: dmiller5

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??

Originally posted by dmiller5

Originally posted by mdg2003
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.
Buying and owning guns is a right guaranteed in our Constitution. Flying on airplanes is a privilege one pays for, not a Constitutional right. Plus the TSA is involved, so logic goes out the window.

Read the second amendment, buying and owning guns is NOT guaranteed in our constitution. 

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

 

I don't see these militias that everyone belongs to. 

There are two distinct messages in the text you just posted.  
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state".  This is simply defining why it is necessary.  Well regulated in the 1700's means that it is in good working order.  So it is important for the people to have good working firearms for the security of the free state.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed:  This is the second statement which is the most important.  The people have the right to bear arms and it shall not be infringed.  So how exactly does this not say quite clearly that I cannot buy and own a gun?

2015-12-14 8:39 AM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Extreme Veteran
3025
2000100025
Maryland
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??


2015-12-14 8:41 AM
in reply to: dmiller5

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??

One of my favorite 2nd amendment pictures.  lol

2015-12-14 8:54 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.

Has this been a problem?  Are murders and attacks being carried out by people on the no-fly list who have bought guns legally?  Is this something we now need to stop in order to save lives?

I know where you are coming from, jmk, but this is just another ridiculous, bullchit, idea for a law to make some politician appear that he is hard on guns while actually accomplishing nothing.

Nah.

 




I guess, but my point is that the NRA and gun owners in general get upset whenever anyone suggests wholesale gun control and they say, correctly, the guns themselves aren't the problem, the bad people who use them to commit crimes are the problem. But, whenever anyone says, "Ok, let's try to restrict ownership of guns by these potentially dangerous people" (people with violent-but not felonious criminal histories, the mentally ill, or in this case, people who are deemed to risky to fly on a commercial aircraft), the gun lobby and gun owners say, "not so fast..."

2015-12-14 9:20 AM
in reply to: 0

User image

Deep in the Heart of Texas
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??

This article from the ACLU explains the problems with the no fly list - no due process: Court Rule No Fly List Unconstitutional 

Just as it would be unconstitutional to ban those on the no fly list from using the internet, email, social media, or speaking at rallies (all means used to promote terrorism), banning gun sales to people placed on the no fly list is equally wrong.  No one, except for terrorists, has a problem with banning guns from being sold to terrorists.  Everyone should have a problem with using the flawed no fly list as a means to identify those whose rights should be taken away. 

ETA:  The briefing paper linked at the end of the article is a good read as well.



Edited by Hook'em 2015-12-14 9:24 AM
2015-12-14 9:45 AM
in reply to: Hook'em

User image

Pro
6838
5000100050010010010025
Tejas
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
I think you can get on the no fly list by being drunk and getting chucked off a plane BEFORE it leaves the gate. I don't think that should prevent someone from owning firearms. Might be a sign that you need some AA, but I don't think it should prevent you from owning a shotgun. Like Hookem said, the no fly list is flawed. I can't see how we could justify using it to deny 2A rights from an individual.
2015-12-14 12:01 PM
in reply to: 0

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??

Yeah......my worry is, "hey, that guy wants a gun, put him on the no fly list".  Next they'll put you on the no-fly list BECAUSE you won guns and want to buy some more.  Buying guns doesn't make you a terrorist.  

I'm pretty damn certain that if you are a suspected  by the FBI to be a terrorist then you can't walk in and buy a gun.....and if you CAN, then what does that say about our "federal background checks".  See......that's the deal for me.  There are already enough laws and avenues on the books to control morons getting/owning/keeping/using guns......but the problem is, the systems for using those controls are dysfunctional.  Fix that!!  How about we not let people out on pre-trial release, or probation, who have robbed someone, shot someone, or used a gun in an unlawful manner.  How damn hard is THAT? 



Edited by Left Brain 2015-12-14 12:06 PM


2015-12-14 12:19 PM
in reply to: 0

User image

Elite
3515
20001000500
Romeoville, Il
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.

Has this been a problem?  Are murders and attacks being carried out by people on the no-fly list who have bought guns legally?  Is this something we now need to stop in order to save lives?

I know where you are coming from, jmk, but this is just another ridiculous, bullchit, idea for a law to make some politician appear that he is hard on guns while actually accomplishing nothing.

Nah.

 




I guess, but my point is that the NRA and gun owners in general get upset whenever anyone suggests wholesale gun control and they say, correctly, the guns themselves aren't the problem, the bad people who use them to commit crimes are the problem. But, whenever anyone says, "Ok, let's try to restrict ownership of guns by these potentially dangerous people" (people with violent-but not felonious criminal histories, the mentally ill, or in this case, people who are deemed to risky to fly on a commercial aircraft), the gun lobby and gun owners say, "not so fast..."




Personally, as a gun owner and advocate of the 2nd amendment, my problem lies where blame seems to be placed. What I mean is, I really would not have a problem with more regulation. However, that regulation has to be done in the right way. It makes no sense to me to make it more difficult for law abiding, sane citizens from purchasing firearms. We don't need to do this in order to stop the madness we've seen lately. In fact, none of the recent executive actions would have stopped any of the recent events. The adminstration has admitted so. The real problem is competency. Our government needs to get it's own house in order. It needs to enforce current laws. In the City of Chicago, routinely, gun offenders get let back on the streets. They continue to get and use illegal weapons, and get their hands slapped and let back on the street. The DOJ NEEDS to prosecute them to the full extent and keep them off the streets. There are scores and scores of stories about individuals that should have been locked up for gun offenses and then go out and commit violent crimes. The government has been completely incompetent in enforcing these laws. Furthermore, they've been incompetent on creating the no fly list. The list is a joke. I've personally known people on it. They have no idea how they got on it. They are far from anything related to terrorist. Once your on it it's impossible to get off, even if you legit don't belong on it. So that leads me to 2 big reasons I wouldn't advocate the no fly list as deal breaker for gun purchase.

1. The government has proven incompetence in maintaining this list time and time again
2. There is no other right in the constitution that can be taken away, and only given back after you petition the government

Can you imagine if they took away any other basic rights and required you to petition the government to get it back????????????

I mean holy crap!!! What if they your on the no fly list and they decided to you got arrested for murder. You didn't commit the murder, but your right to a lawyer was taken away because you're on the no fly list??????? So then you have to petition the government to get back your right. In the meantime you go to trial and lose!!!!

or how about we subject people to cruel and unusual punishment till you can get off the list??? LOL love that one!!

That's just INSANE!!

Edited by Meulen 2015-12-14 12:24 PM
2015-12-14 12:23 PM
in reply to: Meulen

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??

Originally posted by Meulen
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.

Has this been a problem?  Are murders and attacks being carried out by people on the no-fly list who have bought guns legally?  Is this something we now need to stop in order to save lives?

I know where you are coming from, jmk, but this is just another ridiculous, bullchit, idea for a law to make some politician appear that he is hard on guns while actually accomplishing nothing.

Nah.

 

I guess, but my point is that the NRA and gun owners in general get upset whenever anyone suggests wholesale gun control and they say, correctly, the guns themselves aren't the problem, the bad people who use them to commit crimes are the problem. But, whenever anyone says, "Ok, let's try to restrict ownership of guns by these potentially dangerous people" (people with violent-but not felonious criminal histories, the mentally ill, or in this case, people who are deemed to risky to fly on a commercial aircraft), the gun lobby and gun owners say, "not so fast..."
  However, that regulation has to be done in the right way. It makes no sense to me to make it more difficult for law abiding, sane citizens from purchasing firearms. We don't need to do this in order to stop the madness we've seen lately. In fact, none of the recent executive actions would have stopped any of the recent events. The adminstration has admitted so. The real problem is competency. Our government needs to get it's own house in order. It needs to enforce current laws. In the City of Chicago, routinely, gun offenders get let back on the streets. They continue to get and use illegal weapons, and get their hands slapped and let back on the street. The DOJ NEEDS to prosecute them to the full extent and keep them off the streets. There are scores and scores of stories about individuals that should have been locked up for gun offenses and then go out and commit violent crimes. The government has been completely incompetent in enforcing these laws.

I live this every day!!  This ^^^^  is absolute TRUTH!

2015-12-14 12:31 PM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Elite
3515
20001000500
Romeoville, Il
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Meulen
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Can someone explain to my why people on the no-fly list shouldn't be excluded from being able to buy guns? That seems like a no brainier to me.

Has this been a problem?  Are murders and attacks being carried out by people on the no-fly list who have bought guns legally?  Is this something we now need to stop in order to save lives?

I know where you are coming from, jmk, but this is just another ridiculous, bullchit, idea for a law to make some politician appear that he is hard on guns while actually accomplishing nothing.

Nah.

 

I guess, but my point is that the NRA and gun owners in general get upset whenever anyone suggests wholesale gun control and they say, correctly, the guns themselves aren't the problem, the bad people who use them to commit crimes are the problem. But, whenever anyone says, "Ok, let's try to restrict ownership of guns by these potentially dangerous people" (people with violent-but not felonious criminal histories, the mentally ill, or in this case, people who are deemed to risky to fly on a commercial aircraft), the gun lobby and gun owners say, "not so fast..."
  However, that regulation has to be done in the right way. It makes no sense to me to make it more difficult for law abiding, sane citizens from purchasing firearms. We don't need to do this in order to stop the madness we've seen lately. In fact, none of the recent executive actions would have stopped any of the recent events. The adminstration has admitted so. The real problem is competency. Our government needs to get it's own house in order. It needs to enforce current laws. In the City of Chicago, routinely, gun offenders get let back on the streets. They continue to get and use illegal weapons, and get their hands slapped and let back on the street. The DOJ NEEDS to prosecute them to the full extent and keep them off the streets. There are scores and scores of stories about individuals that should have been locked up for gun offenses and then go out and commit violent crimes. The government has been completely incompetent in enforcing these laws.

I live this every day!!  This ^^^^  is absolute TRUTH!




yeah! Unfortunately, I think there may be a bigger conspiracy there. I don't think they want to enforce the current law. If they did, it would be very difficult to push their agenda. What boggles my mind is that the media doesn't report this. It's out there if you dig for it, but far from in your face. The chart in the first post tells a very interesting story. There are only 4 million or so members of the NRA, however there are more than 300million guns out there. Even if some people have multiples thats potentially 100 million gun advocates!!! Only 120 million people voted in the last presidential election!!!! Those numbers are staggering! and when the media and the POTUS tells you the NRA DOES NOT represent the majority of American people, there's really no way that's a correct statement!!
2015-12-17 3:19 PM
in reply to: jeffnboise

User image

Master
2802
2000500100100100
Minnetonka, Minnesota
Bronze member
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
This continues to pi$$ me off and makes me shake my head in disbelief. Bill Moyers wrote this today about the deficit spending budget bill (thanks Repubs for your awesome fiscal responsibility!) that will (likely) pass:

"Thanks to the Republican-controlled House, and to the applause of the firearms industry, even in the wake of San Bernardino and every other mass killing this year, the bill still bans federal funding for public-health scientists to study the causes of gun violence."

Ok Gun Advocates, explain to me why the CDC, NIH and others should continue (since 1996) to be banned from receiving federal funds to study this?
2015-12-18 4:01 PM
in reply to: ejshowers

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
Originally posted by ejshowers

This continues to pi$$ me off and makes me shake my head in disbelief. Bill Moyers wrote this today about the deficit spending budget bill (thanks Repubs for your awesome fiscal responsibility!) that will (likely) pass:

"Thanks to the Republican-controlled House, and to the applause of the firearms industry, even in the wake of San Bernardino and every other mass killing this year, the bill still bans federal funding for public-health scientists to study the causes of gun violence."

Ok Gun Advocates, explain to me why the CDC, NIH and others should continue (since 1996) to be banned from receiving federal funds to study this?


Whoa, whoa-- don't all answer at once! One at a time.... you in the back...the one with the "Nebraska Loves Trump" shirt....


2015-12-18 9:46 PM
in reply to: 0

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??

Originally posted by ejshowers This continues to pi$$ me off and makes me shake my head in disbelief. Bill Moyers wrote this today about the deficit spending budget bill (thanks Repubs for your awesome fiscal responsibility!) that will (likely) pass: "Thanks to the Republican-controlled House, and to the applause of the firearms industry, even in the wake of San Bernardino and every other mass killing this year, the bill still bans federal funding for public-health scientists to study the causes of gun violence." Ok Gun Advocates, explain to me why the CDC, NIH and others should continue (since 1996) to be banned from receiving federal funds to study this?

Because it's REALLY dumb to spend money on a study that everybody knows the answer to.......the cause of gun violence is.......

~drum roll please~

People point guns at other people and pull the trigger.

Now here's where it gets crazy......someone lets those people out of jail to do it again and again.  How about we commission a study to find the dumbarses responsible for THAT. (my money says it's primarily liberal judges who think we need more gun control)



Edited by Left Brain 2015-12-18 9:50 PM
2015-12-18 10:46 PM
in reply to: jmk-brooklyn

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
Originally posted by ejshowersThis continues to pi$$ me off and makes me shake my head in disbelief. Bill Moyers wrote this today about the deficit spending budget bill (thanks Repubs for your awesome fiscal responsibility!) that will (likely) pass:"Thanks to the Republican-controlled House, and to the applause of the firearms industry, even in the wake of San Bernardino and every other mass killing this year, the bill still bans federal funding for public-health scientists to study the causes of gun violence."Ok Gun Advocates, explain to me why the CDC, NIH and others should continue (since 1996) to be banned from receiving federal funds to study this?
Whoa, whoa-- don't all answer at once! One at a time.... you in the back...the one with the "Nebraska Loves Trump" shirt....
I think I'm starting to get under your skin. Hehe. My trump shirt just says Trump 2016, but I like your idea.
2015-12-19 9:33 AM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
Originally posted by ejshowersThis continues to pi$$ me off and makes me shake my head in disbelief. Bill Moyers wrote this today about the deficit spending budget bill (thanks Repubs for your awesome fiscal responsibility!) that will (likely) pass:"Thanks to the Republican-controlled House, and to the applause of the firearms industry, even in the wake of San Bernardino and every other mass killing this year, the bill still bans federal funding for public-health scientists to study the causes of gun violence."Ok Gun Advocates, explain to me why the CDC, NIH and others should continue (since 1996) to be banned from receiving federal funds to study this?
Whoa, whoa-- don't all answer at once! One at a time.... you in the back...the one with the "Nebraska Loves Trump" shirt....
I think I'm starting to get under your skin. Hehe. My trump shirt just says Trump 2016, but I like your idea.


It's all in good fun.

2015-12-19 9:41 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Gun Advocates, What Say You??
Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by ejshowers This continues to pi$$ me off and makes me shake my head in disbelief. Bill Moyers wrote this today about the deficit spending budget bill (thanks Repubs for your awesome fiscal responsibility!) that will (likely) pass: "Thanks to the Republican-controlled House, and to the applause of the firearms industry, even in the wake of San Bernardino and every other mass killing this year, the bill still bans federal funding for public-health scientists to study the causes of gun violence." Ok Gun Advocates, explain to me why the CDC, NIH and others should continue (since 1996) to be banned from receiving federal funds to study this?

Because it's REALLY dumb to spend money on a study that everybody knows the answer to.......the cause of gun violence is.......

~drum roll please~

People point guns at other people and pull the trigger.




Ok, but again, this is an example of someone saying, "guns themselves aren't the problem, so let's try to find out what conditions create the greatest risk for gun violence?" Is it strict gun laws? Lenient gun laws? Economic factors? Everyone has their theories and it's all just conjecture without scientific study. But, again, when someone says, "we can't stem gun violence by limiting guns, so let's try to find another way to do it", the gun lobby says, "no can do."

If i was really cynical, I'd be inclined to think that the gun lobby doesn't want to reduce gun violence because it would be bad for business.
New Thread
Other Resources The Political Joe » Gun Advocates, What Say You?? Rss Feed  
 
 
of 16
 
 
RELATED POSTS

Gun advocates plan 5k run Pages: 1 2

Started by DanielG
Views: 2765 Posts: 27

2013-07-05 3:15 PM 1_Mad_Madone

Medical Groups Oppose Gun-Law Change To Share Mental Health Records

Started by DanielG
Views: 1885 Posts: 11

2013-06-19 2:04 PM powerman

CA "Gun Control" Bill basically bans all firearms

Started by bcart1991
Views: 2144 Posts: 6

2013-06-03 10:30 PM SevenZulu

'The' Gun Thread Pages: 1 ... 45 46 47 48

Started by Ron
Views: 40922 Posts: 1177

2013-06-21 10:20 AM powerman

Gun threads - UPDATE

Started by Ron
Views: 2890 Posts: 2

2013-06-06 12:18 PM Ron
RELATED ARTICLES
date : March 19, 2013
author : AMSSM
comments : 4
The doctor says not to run again. Ever. Needless to say, I’m not taking this very well. Can I recover from this? Where should I go from here?