Guns for nuts

[fordman1]

I just read a survey that said 79% of Americans believe that mental ill people should not be allowed to buy guns.

My question is who are the 21% who think nuts should be allowed to buy guns????

Or are there that many nuts?

[ChuckR]

One of the problems is that a NUT may only be identified AFTER they do something nutty. We just had the Electric Daisy Event. Of the 135k that came, only 22 arrests for drugs and 8 for DUI. If you saw the outfits it would be easy to say some are nutty. There would be no way to identify who might be a terrorist in the future.
I propose that Vigilance by everyone with an eye on behavior that might be dangerous to others is all we can do.
Yes, I want all weapons dealers to be extra vigilant. Nuts don't throw nuts.

[Amyers]

I would suggest 21% of the population being nuts is a very low number.

[1VegasBowler]

While the 21% think nuts should be able to buy guns, what about those who are starting to "lose it" and have guns in their possession already??

[fordman1]

It might not be a bad idea to have something in place to keep mentally ill people from getting or keeping guns.
Since the funding for many of the mental health facilities dried up there are plenty of them everywhere.

If you see your neighbor talking to his self and answering their invisible friend maybe they don't need a gun??

Yet 21% of the people in the survey said it was ok.

[Amyers]

It might not be a bad idea to have something in place to keep mentally ill people from getting or keeping guns.
Since the funding for many of the mental health facilities dried up there are plenty of them everywhere.

If you see your neighbor talking to his self and answering their invisible friend maybe they don't need a gun??

Yet 21% of the people in the survey said it was ok.

Don't call my friends invisible just because you can't see them doesn't mean they aren't there. Lol

[ChuckR]

Don't call my friends invisible just because you can't see them doesn't mean they aren't there. Lol

Reminds me of a Jimmy Stewart movie. HARVEY who was an invisible rabbit.

[jimgilmore]

So whom is making the determination that your mentally ill ?
Just because I'm paranoid does not mean that there is no one out to get me.

[fordman1]

I have already started a list.
Amyers and his invisible friend.
Jimmy the paranoid guy.
Not sure about 1Vegasbowler yet but I got my eye on him.
Me if I ever get so scared I have to buy a gun.
Anybody who thinks they need a AR-15 to hunt?
That's like fishing with dynamite.

[Jessiewoodard57]

naw the AR is to pull out when those attacking have lots of firepower ....you could hunt with it if you wanted to but I would prefer not to have to look for miles for the deer so I would use a 30-06 much more stopping power.

[Timmyb]

naw the AR is to pull out when those attacking have lots of firepower ....you could hunt with it if you wanted to but I would prefer not to have to look for miles for the deer so I would use a 30-06 much more stopping power.


This is the biggest misconception about the AR (besides its initials, which most get wrong). It is not a powerful gun. Yes, by definition it is a rifle, and can shoot farther than handgun or shotgun. It is not a heavy load, does not have a huge powder load, and a relatively low FPS compared to most semi-automatic hunting rifles (most of which you can get a 30-round clip for). If I were the kind of guy who wanted to do a LOT of damage, it certainly wouldn't be with an AR.

[fordman1]

AR means Assault Rifle. It is for use clearing urban areas where you just want to kill the people nearby. The hunting rifle is usually a 30.6 better for distance. Why anyone would need a 30 round clip to bring down a deer is not clear. Maybe hunting should be done by Bow not firearms. Or make the rifle have to reloaded after every shot.

[Timmyb]

AR means Assault Rifle. It is for use clearing urban areas where you just want to kill the people nearby. The hunting rifle is usually a 30.6 better for distance. Why anyone would need a 30 round clip to bring down a deer is not clear. Maybe hunting should be done by Bow not firearms. Or make the rifle have to reloaded after every shot.


Seriously? Do your homework. Armalite Rifle, Model #15. And you have 30-round clips, because you can.

This is very simple. If you don't like guns, don't have one. In the mean time, I will exercise my Second Amendment right as an American citizen. This does not require either your approval or permission.

[Mike White]

Seriously? Do your homework. Armalite Rifle, Model #15. And you have 30-round clips, because you can.

This is very simple. If you don't like guns, don't have one. In the mean time, I will exercise my Second Amendment right as an American citizen. This does not require either your approval or permission.

Do you exercise ALL of the Second Amendment, or just pick and choose the portion you prefer?

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.

[fordman1]

Maybe if the founders would have had the strongest military in the world, FBI, State police, County Sheriff and a local police force they would have worded the 2nd amendment differently.

[Timmyb]

Do you exercise ALL of the Second Amendment, or just pick and choose the portion you prefer?

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.


You read it your way, I'll read it mine. Once again, I do not need your approval or permission. At no point in time am I trying to convince you that you need a gun, but you and Fordman are telling me I don't. Seems a bit high-handed to me......

[Amyers]

Do you exercise ALL of the Second Amendment, or just pick and choose the portion you prefer?

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.

If you really want to understand the 2nd Amendment and the thoughts on the country's founders on it you should read some of the Federalist Papers. You will see the reason for a well armed citizen militia wasn't just to protect as an armed service from invasion but to protect the citizenry from despotism and out of control government. The armed citizenry were the check against a tyrannical government ruling against the wishes of the people.

Now if you would like to make a valid point you could argue that in this age it's useless as the military has access to weapons that makes any kind of armed resistance moot no matter how well armed. You could argue the second amendment is useless as intended but not that the only reason for the second amendment was for an adjunct army because that was never the intention.

Regardless of weapons bans bad and crazy people will still find ways of killing people it's always been that way and always will. It really doesn't matter if your shot, stabbed, blown up in a bombing, or set afire you're just as dead and the items to commit those acts will always be available to someone looking for a way to do it.

[fordman1]

Isn't the national guard a well armed militia?

[Aslan]

1) Almost all data on the subject shows that murder rates are tied to population density and poverty level far more than anything else. Therefore, the only real, valid way to lower crime is to create opportunity in dense population areas or to move into sparsely populated areas.

2) The problem with gun control theory is actually quite simple. There is no study anywhere...that can make a connection between a gun control law and a reduction in terms of access of criminals to firearms. It's fairly simple, criminals...as a sort of rule...don't follow laws. You can make laws stricter...you can make penalties higher...but at the end of the day, law abiding citizens follow gun laws...criminals do not.

3) The current stunt by the Democratic house members is absurd. They are making the same mistake the Republicans did that allowed Trump to gain the nomination. Republicans assumed that most of the country are tea party, gun toting, muslim hating, and most of all "Obama/progressivism" haters. It turns out...only about 12% of the country are truly hard core conservatives. So the party left out way too many people. Roughly 30% of voters are registered Republicans......which means their own party was telling 18% of registered voters that they aren't "Republican enough". They kicked out John Boehner...one of the most conservative men in Congress. They are a party run amuck...being ran by ultra-right-wingers...to try and get the tea party in control. And their penalty was losing not only any shot of a Ted Cruz/Fiorina debacle....but they took down the establishment candidates as well.

The Democrats have similar assumptions. They assume the country is not only liberal-leaning...which it is...and populist-leaning...which it is...but the Democrats are making some other assumptions:
1) That most people in the country approve of Obama's policies. Most people (53%) do approve 'overall' with the Presidents agenda. The problem is, his 2nd term has been a disaster. Nearly all of his unpopular decisions (Bo Berghdahl, ISIS, Iraq, Afghanastan, Amnesty, transgender bathrooms, criminal justice reform, affirmative action, etc...)...pretty much all of the things the majority of people do NOT support...Obama did in his final term.

2) That the country has leaped to the left...and the reason Bernie Sanders did so well is because Americans are ready for socialism and radical leftist ideas. Completely wrong. Bernie did well for three reasons. First, he wasn't Hillary Clinton. That's important. Second, he sided with the middle class on free trade policies and gun policies. Third, he is the only option for left-leaning white men. Bernie thinks he did well because he was further to the left than Hillary...but that's not true...he did well because he's not Hillary Clinton and he was viewed as a sort of outsider who would go after the sacred cow of free trade the same way Trump would go after the sacred cow of immigration.

The summary is, the Democrats had a winning issue...a conservative block that is so petty and deadlocked...that they can't approve budgets, or judges, or really do anything to help govern. That was a winning issue in the general election. The problem is, the house Democrats have now not only stolen that tactic...but executed it in a silly 1960s era protest...that makes them look crazy. And for what?

The bill put forth by Republicans would have helped ensure people on the terrorist watch list didn't get weapons. But it required judicial oversight to protect the rights of the masses. The Democratic version, actually would be attacked by the left (like the ACLU) AND the right (the NRA)...because it allows the FBI and Homeland Security to simply "decide" that someone can't own guns. No due process. It's destined to fail in the courts...it's a stupid concept...and it makes the Democrats look like extremists....just before a general election when the audience no longer are hardcore socialists...now it's Reagan Democrats and moderates.

[JasonNJ]

Isn't the national guard a well armed militia?


The National Guard is controlled by the government. Amyers has it exactly right, the constitution and specifically the Bill of Rights portion aren't just legal rights, but they were meant as protection from government and tyranny. The founding fathers had the foresight to understand that any government can become corrupt and unjust and that the only recourse would be arming it's own citizens. Now you can argue with modern weaponry, having all the guns in the world isn't going to do much against fighter jets. attack helicopters and tanks but the principle is still valid.

Now I'm not a gun person, not interested in getting one but I do believe all gun control does is prevent lawful citizens from getting guns. Criminals will still find a way to get guns and all it'll do is make the black market for guns more lucrative and I know this from experience. I'm Chinese and I grew up in NYC Chinatown during the 80s and Chinese Triad gangs were rampant. There were shootings constantly that never made it into the paper. I was 12 and was walking home one night and I got caught in a shootout, I felt bullets whiz by me, when they hit the sidewalk the bullets caused sparks. I knew a guy who was maybe 16 or 17 at the time, buy a full automatic Uzi off the black market and you have to remember NYC has one of the toughest gun laws in the country but guns were everywhere.

Gun control or no gun control, crazies will always find a way to carry out their evil deeds. Timothy McVeigh used fertilizer in the Oklahoma bombing, the 9/11 terrorist used box cutters and planes, not one gun used in either incident.

If you really want mass shootings to stop, pass a law to require every family and business to own a gun. I would imagine mass shootings would get cut down dramatically. Too much risk for the shooter to run into armed victims. I would imagine break ins would go down significantly as well.

[fordman1]

One question . Who kills more people each year criminals or family members and friends? Don't forget kids.

[JasonNJ]

One question . Who kills more people each year criminals or family members and friends? Don't forget kids.

And how is this relevant? Are you trying to say we ban guns, people won't be killing their friends or family?

That didn't stop a Susan Smith from driving her car into the lake and killing her sons. Or the Florida dad who throw his child off the bridge. Or a mom from stabbing and killing her 2 kids.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Smith

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/08/us/florida-child-tossed-into-water/index.html



http://wreg.com/2013/07/31/mother-stabs-two-children/

[fordman1]

Every journey starts with one small step.

[Timmyb]

If you really want to understand the 2nd Amendment and the thoughts on the country's founders on it you should read some of the Federalist Papers. You will see the reason for a well armed citizen militia wasn't just to protect as an armed service from invasion but to protect the citizenry from despotism and out of control government. The armed citizenry were the check against a tyrannical government ruling against the wishes of the people.

Now if you would like to make a valid point you could argue that in this age it's useless as the military has access to weapons that makes any kind of armed resistance moot no matter how well armed. You could argue the second amendment is useless as intended but not that the only reason for the second amendment was for an adjunct army because that was never the intention.

Regardless of weapons bans bad and crazy people will still find ways of killing people it's always been that way and always will. It really doesn't matter if your shot, stabbed, blown up in a bombing, or set afire you're just as dead and the items to commit those acts will always be available to someone looking for a way to do it.

Very well said!

[Briantime]

According to the Pew Research Center, most gun deaths are suicides so the answer to your question is: None of the above.

I just started reading this thread today as I normally don't read any of the political stuff, but it is apparent to me that you are very dedicated to your position despite having shown a striking lack of knowledge on the topic...

[LOUVIT]

mentally ill can mean a lot of things not just violent

[Timmyb]

Every journey starts with one small step.


Again, you're implying that your judgement is better than those of us who choose to be armed. I don't have any issues if you choose to be a victim. As a matter of fact, if I were put in a position to be near you, and you needed that service, I don't feel I'd hesitate to provide it. What you can't do is tell me that my position is wrong. Not without an argument.

I am tired of bleeding hearts trying to tell me what's best for me. I don't come into their homes and bless them with my feelings. I'd appreciate if you more liberal folk would grant me the same courtesy.

[1VegasBowler]

I'm certainly in favor of gun control. I want to have good control of the gun I have in my hands, whether it's my .44 magnum, 38 special or my 12ga shotgun.

And if anybody would like to take any of them away from me, you will have to pry them from my cold, dead hands.

Thank God I live in an open carry state!

[jimgilmore]

The real issue of changing the second amendment is just a moot point . The actual underlying issue is that if the can change oe amendment. How long till the chage the rest and take away the basic rights we have no? Due process and unreasonable search and seizure

[Mike White]

The real issue of changing the second amendment is just a moot point . The actual underlying issue is that if the can change oe amendment. How long till the chage the rest and take away the basic rights we have no? Due process and unreasonable search and seizure

This is the one area where who is elected president is very important.

You don't need to change an amendment if enough of the 9 monkeys on the supreme court will interpret the current amendment in the way you want.

Thats why the Repubs are holding off their "advise and consent" with a current replacement monkey.

Their hope is that we elect their guy as president, who will then select a monkey of their liking.

[Timmyb]

This is the one area where who is elected president is very important.

You don't need to change an amendment if enough of the 9 monkeys on the supreme court will interpret the current amendment in the way you want.

Thats why the Repubs are holding off their "advise and consent" with a current replacement monkey.

Their hope is that we elect their guy as president, who will then select a monkey of their liking.


Legislating through the courts was never how the Founding Fathers intended this to work. The courts are supposed to enforce the laws, not rewrite or reinterpret them. Unfortunately, that's what seems to happen today.

[billf]

All I know for a fact is this: you want to take my weapons then you better have more fire power and better accuracy.

Whiile I wouldn't want to force my ideas on anybody I personally wouldn't have a problem with a national database containing ballistics for all firearms. If I don't commit a crime then it can only be used to clear me. If I do commit a crime it will be a spree and I won't make it out alive anyway.

Many believe PTSD to be a mental illness. Yet it isn't enough to take our weapons because incompetency can not be established which is required to prevent registering a firearm.

Learn from history. Alcohol was illegal yet it was still readily available. The only people gun control laws will protect are criminals as they won't have to worry as much about a well armed and ready advesary protecting their family and/or home. That's why gun free zones have been targeted so heavily the past ten years.

[fordman1]

Would you object to every gun being registered?
How about every gun having a ballistic test on file so the cops could know which gun killed someone?

[Timmyb]

Would you object to every gun being registered?
How about every gun having a ballistic test on file so the cops could know which gun killed someone?


When the government started NICS in 1993, it was supposed to be used only for background checks only, and then that record was supposed to be illiminated. Every gun bought was registered at that time. I don't believe for a minute that those records were actually gotten rid of. As far as registering guns bought before then, good luck. Are you saying that people who's parents gave them shotguns and rifles when they were children should go and register those guns? And then have them ballistics tested? Who pays for that? Surely you're not suggesting that I should have to pay for that, right?

[fordman1]

Of course not shot guns. Rifles and hand guns. Just bring them in record the ser. number and fire a couple of shots into a water tank and take your gun home.

[Timmyb]

Of course not shot guns. Rifles and hand guns. Just bring them in record the ser. number and fire a couple of shots into a water tank and take your gun home.


Naive at best. Orwellian at worst.

[Jessiewoodard57]

I hear all this discussion on registering every gun and it takes me to a scene in the (first) Red Dawn where the first thing the invader did was head straight for the gun ownership records. Fiction has a way of becoming fact. I wonder what will be next, knives, hammers and rocks. Our liberties have been slowing eroding away. Seems lately they have switched from undermining the constitution with spoons to steam shovels. Just my opinion.

[billf]

Would you object to every gun being registered?
How about every gun having a ballistic test on file so the cops could know which gun killed someone?

I don't plan on murdering anybody so I wouldn't have an issue with it. I also understand people's mistrust of the government and why they would be against it.

[fordman1]

This all started with the question in a survey that asked should mentally unstable people should be allowed to purchase fire arms. 21% thought it was OK. Justifying that % was all I was looking for. I am not comfortable with unstable people buying guns. Does the constitution say that?

[JasonNJ]

I hear all this discussion on registering every gun and it takes me to a scene in the (first) Red Dawn where the first thing the invader did was head straight for the gun ownership records. Fiction has a way of becoming fact. I wonder what will be next, knives, hammers and rocks. Our liberties have been slowing eroding away. Seems lately they have switched from undermining the constitution with spoons to steam shovels. Just my opinion.

Actually Red Dawn probably got it from Hitler. One of the first things he did was enact gun control, and do weapon's registration. He then removed all the weapon's from people who were not sympathetic to his cause.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/365103/how-nazis-used-gun-control-stephen-p-halbrook

[Briantime]

This all started with the question in a survey that asked should mentally unstable people should be allowed to purchase fire arms. 21% thought it was OK. Justifying that % was all I was looking for. I am not comfortable with unstable people buying guns. Does the constitution say that?

I am guessing a large percentage of those "in favor" of "mentally ill" people buying guns are those that realize this is a trick question. It is so broad and incomplete as to be meaningless.

Define mentally ill. Does mental illness equal being "nuts" as you asserted? Until 1973, homosexuality was in the DSM as a recognized and treatable mental illness.

Should mentally ill people be allowed to vote?

Who decides who is mentally ill?

How is this information shared with the government?

Ever heard of HIPPA?

It's simply a way of phrasing a question designed to illicit a specific response from non-thinking people to use a debate fodder...

[jimgilmore]

I would think that any registry of guns would defeat the very reason We are given the right to have guns. Nothing would prevent the overbearing government from coming to your home in force if they knew every guns size and location.

[Jessiewoodard57]

I would think that any registry of guns would defeat the very reason We are given the right to have guns. Nothing would prevent the overbearing government from coming to your home in force if they knew every guns size and location.

Agreed ...no matter how tight the laws bottom line we will be out gunned by the criminal who could care less about gun laws

[fordman1]

Where do you guys live that you feel so scared that you need an arsenal to protect you home and family when you leave you home? My house was broken in back in 1987 I called the police and they came out and looked around the house. They found a broken window in the basement. The went out side and followed the foot prints in the snow to the next street and arrested the two 14 year olds. The parents gave me $60 dollars for a new window and a few dollars in coins that were taken. I still have night mares over those kids.

[JasonNJ]

Where do you guys live that you feel so scared that you need an arsenal to protect you home and family when you leave you home? My house was broken in back in 1987 I called the police and they came out and looked around the house. They found a broken window in the basement. The went out side and followed the foot prints in the snow to the next street and arrested the two 14 year olds. The parents gave me $60 dollars for a new window and a few dollars in coins that were taken. I still have night mares over those kids.

As I mentioned earlier, I lived in NYC during the 80s and got caught in the middle of a gun fight. I personally know 3 people from my teen years who were executed mob style, I've also been jumped by 10+ guys and been mugged on the subway before. Even with all that, I have no desire to own a gun but I understand that gun control isn't about getting guns off the street, its about control over the people.

What do all these mass shootings have in common besides the nut job doing the shooting? It is that there was no one armed that could fight back. If you want the mass shootings to stop, make it mandatory for every business to have at least one gun onsite.

And if you think gun control works, there was a shooting and bombing last night in Turkey and they have bans on assault weapons.

[fordman1]

Religious nuts are even more dangerous than normal nuts.

[Jessiewoodard57]

Religious nuts are even more dangerous than normal nuts.

you have a lot of dangerous ones in your neighborhood ..at least from what the news is saying ...shaira law here it comes

[Briantime]

you have a lot of dangerous ones in your neighborhood ..at least from what the news is saying ...shaira law here it comes

Above all, beware the most pernicious of all nuts....the liberal nut.

[manke]

No matter what laws they pass the criminals are still going to get guns. It hurts the regular person, not the unstable.

[Timmyb]

Where do you guys live that you feel so scared that you need an arsenal to protect you home and family when you leave you home? My house was broken in back in 1987 I called the police and they came out and looked around the house. They found a broken window in the basement. The went out side and followed the foot prints in the snow to the next street and arrested the two 14 year olds. The parents gave me $60 dollars for a new window and a few dollars in coins that were taken. I still have night mares over those kids.


I live in Milwaukee, which, thanks to our wonderful liberal mayor, has turned into Chicago North. We're only half way through the year, and well over the murder rate for last year. I don't feel safe driving anywhere north of I-94, which is why I carry if I'm heading that direction. Yesterday, we had a broad-day carjacking in one of the supposedly "safe" neighborhoods here, and the only reason they got caught was they tried to jack a car the had a manual transmission (kind of funny, actually). I have never had to pull my weapon, fortunately, but you can be damn straight I won't be a victim. As far as in my home, if you enter uninvited, and show the slightest inclination to do me or mine harm, and you'll be a red mist.

[billf]

Where do you guys live that you feel so scared that you need an arsenal to protect you home and family when you leave you home? My house was broken in back in 1987 I called the police and they came out and looked around the house. They found a broken window in the basement. The went out side and followed the foot prints in the snow to the next street and arrested the two 14 year olds. The parents gave me $60 dollars for a new window and a few dollars in coins that were taken. I still have night mares over those kids.

1987 was a different time. I was 18 and on my way of getting out of the projects I lived in Brockton, MA (just south of Boston). Before I graduated high school I was stabbed once, hit on the face with a lead pipe once, hit in the head with a brick and the back with a baseball bat plus had a gun pulled on me three seperate occasions. Since then the bats, pipes and bricks are left alone and every wanna be thug has a gun.
Same neighborhood in 1994 I was working at an automotive retail service center in a strip mall when a punk came in to try and rob us after doing the same to 5 other places in the strip mall. With an office full of people I yanked him over the counter and beat the snot out of him. From then until I moved to Ohio in 2002 I didn't have a problem out of anybody there. Oh and you would be correct, corporate wasn't happy with me at all for that incident.

[Tony]

Keep in mind that the people who organized and fought in the revolutionary war would almost certainly have been considered "nuts" by the British. When we put too much trust
in the government it leads to abuse, all you have to do is look at some of the anti-gun legislation proposed by the current president, did you know he has proposed that elderly people on social security
that have someone appointed to manage their affairs would be stripped of their right to own guns.
Are those people really a threat ? Of course not, but that's the issue, taking guns away from law abiding citizens doesn't reduce crime.
So in a nut shell allowing the government to keep the mentally Ill from owning guns and at the same time allowing the government to determine who is mentally ill leads to abuse.

[Jessiewoodard57]

So in a nut shell allowing the government to keep the mentally Ill from owning guns and at the same time allowing the government to determine who is mentally ill leads to abuse.


That's what I said about the "no fly no gun" the Dems wanted to pass. then all the government needs to do is add a bunch of us to the no fly list and there goes your guns! We have a government that is becoming far too controlling of it citizens.

[JasonNJ]

Hey Fordman1, did you hear about a mass shooting in South Carolina this weekend? You didn't because a concealed carrier fired back and stopped the shooting before anyone was killed.

http://conservativetribune.com/another-mass-shooting-at-club/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Huckabee&utm_content=2016-06-30&utm_campaign=manualpost

[fordman1]

Tony if a person isn't competent to handle their affairs maybe they don't need a gun.

Jesse The court should review and approve who is on the no fly list. Like some one who is wanted for a felony or a escapee from jail or prison. Someone suspected to be a terrorist.

Jason was the dead person a 14 year old Black kid?

[JasonNJ]

Jason was the dead person a 14 year old Black kid?

What are you talking about? I'm trying to have an intelligent debate and all you do is spout random thoughts that have no relevance to anything.

[Jessiewoodard57]

Jesse The court should review and approve who is on the no fly list. Like some one who is wanted for a felony or a escapee from jail or prison. Someone suspected to be a terrorist.



but we both know that's not how it works

[Briantime]

What are you talking about? I'm trying to have an intelligent debate and all you do is spout random thoughts that have no relevance to anything.

He does not want to have a debate. He is just seeking an opportunity to throw out some talking points from Huffington Post...

[Timmyb]

He does not want to have a debate. He is just seeking an opportunity to throw out some talking points from Huffington Post...


Or Vox.......

[billf]

Tony if a person isn't competent to handle their affairs maybe they don't need a gun.

Jesse The court should review and approve who is on the no fly list. Like some one who is wanted for a felony or a escapee from jail or prison. Someone suspected to be a terrorist.

Jason was the dead person a 14 year old Black kid?


Several points became clear with this post
1. You have no clue how the "no fly list" is compiled unless you mean how it SHOULD work which still would be an issue
2. You commented on the article without ever reading it. There was zero mention of race or of any death.

[Timmyb]

I see now Tennessee is bringing up a law that, if you are harmed in a "gun free zone", you will be able to sue the creator of said zone for not being able to carry. Sounds like one of the first "common sense" guns laws I've ever heard of!

[fordman1]

Ok I give up we should all go out and get a bunch of guns and carry them everywhere we go. My only hope is that none of you ever accidentally shoot and kill someone by accident. Or you grand kids never get the guns and hurt themselves of anyone else. Remember when your teenage son comes home drunk at 4 A.M. and stumbles into your bedroom by accident and you shoot him I will feel bad for you.

[JaxBowlingGuy]

Wow this has been the most active thread in a while. When I get to my hotel I want to read the whole thread and see if I can add anything. I actually own a gun store so if anyone has any questions about the behind the scenes process feel free to ask. I can 100% tell you that what the media says is hardly ever completely true. The laws/process will vary some by state but here in FLORIDA we can own anything we want and they are treated very similar until you get into NFA items (which we can also own all of unlike some states)

[JaxBowlingGuy]

There's some mis information in here as well.

First, "AR" is Armalite Rifle not assault rifle. No mass shootings of recent years have used "assault rifles"

If you want to see how well gun control works, look at Chicago murder rates. They have some of, if not the strictest gun laws in the country

Take a look at the FBI statistics on deaths and you'll see that more people are killed by knives, personal weapons (fists, hands, feet) and blunt objects (hammers, clubs) than rifles.

The issue with the no fly list is that someone can be added without due process and therefor stripped of their rights to firearms. Now if there was due process before being added and therefore losing your rights then I'm ok with that. But to be added without even knowing isn't fair to the citizens if you are going to strip their rights .

[Briantime]

Ok I give up we should all go out and get a bunch of guns and carry them everywhere we go. My only hope is that none of you ever accidentally shoot and kill someone by accident. Or you grand kids never get the guns and hurt themselves of anyone else. Remember when your teenage son comes home drunk at 4 A.M. and stumbles into your bedroom by accident and you shoot him I will feel bad for you.

My only hope is that when you are carjacked and your wife and son are shot dead in front of you while you are powerless to do anything but watch and call 911 as they lie dead at your feet you can reconcile that with your conscience. Why anyone would not do everything they can to protect the ones they care about is beyond me...

[fordman1]

I live in a suburb of Detroit and listen to the news on TV. Every single day there are shootings 99% are in the inner city black neighborhoods. No judgement just a fact. My neighborhood is quiet and we haven't had a shooting there on the west side in I don't know when. To my west is Inkster always shootings there. Again black on black. I don't go there at night so I don't get mugged or carjacked or shot at. What we need is jobs for the kids who are killing each other over stupid stuff. They can't get a job and they all are armed and angry. I am not going to judge them they got dealt a bad hand.
There are not any jobs for these young people to get. Education would help but if they all went to school and got associate degrees they still couldn't get a job. There just aren't enough jobs that pay well to go around.
You can keep your guns and you still won't be safe if everyone looking for a job can't find one.
I feel sorry for them and for anyone who lives in so much fear that they can't leave home without carrying a gun.

[Timmyb]

Ok I give up we should all go out and get a bunch of guns and carry them everywhere we go. My only hope is that none of you ever accidentally shoot and kill someone by accident. Or you grand kids never get the guns and hurt themselves of anyone else. Remember when your teenage son comes home drunk at 4 A.M. and stumbles into your bedroom by accident and you shoot him I will feel bad for you.


What planet do you live on that this s**t happens? Both of my daughters grew up in a house that had guns. Neither of them touch them without permission. If you have guns in the house, you have to teach your children right from wrong. There was never anything "special" made about guns in my house. It was part of life for my girls growing up. My grandson is being raised the same way. When they had a sick raccoon near the house, mommy went out and dispatched it.

Neither of my kids ever came strolling in drunk at 4 a.m. Must have raised them to know better.

[Timmyb]

I live in a suburb of Detroit and listen to the news on TV. Every single day there are shootings 99% are in the inner city black neighborhoods. No judgement just a fact. My neighborhood is quiet and we haven't had a shooting there on the west side in I don't know when. To my west is Inkster always shootings there. Again black on black. I don't go there at night so I don't get mugged or carjacked or shot at. What we need is jobs for the kids who are killing each other over stupid stuff. They can't get a job and they all are armed and angry. I am not going to judge them they got dealt a bad hand.
There are not any jobs for these young people to get. Education would help but if they all went to school and got associate degrees they still couldn't get a job. There just aren't enough jobs that pay well to go around.
You can keep your guns and you still won't be safe if everyone looking for a job can't find one.
I feel sorry for them and for anyone who lives in so much fear that they can't leave home without carrying a gun.


Biggest bunch of liberal horses**t I've heard in this string so far. "We need jobs for the kids". Nobody handed me a frickin' job when I got out of school. Can't find a job that pays well enough? It's called starting out at the bottom. That's how you're supposed to do it. Want to make $15 an hour? Better plan on actually learning a skill. God forbid anyone get their hands dirty. There's plenty of demand for ground level jobs that can take you places, but you have to put the work in. It doesn't happen over night. I've been a machinist for over 30 years, but I started learning that at 17. I'm not buying that there aren't jobs out there.

[JaxBowlingGuy]

Now now, let's keep things civil. I know this is a very emotional topic for some but I just ask to stay adults about it, we do have youth bowlers on here.

[Jessiewoodard57]

There's some mis information in here as well.

First, "AR" is Armalite Rifle not assault rifle. No mass shootings of recent years have used "assault rifles"

If you want to see how well gun control works, look at Chicago murder rates. They have some of, if not the strictest gun laws in the country

Take a look at the FBI statistics on deaths and you'll see that more people are killed by knives, personal weapons (fists, hands, feet) and blunt objects (hammers, clubs) than rifles.

The issue with the no fly list is that someone can be added without due process and therefor stripped of their rights to firearms. Now if there was due process before being added and therefore losing your rights then I'm ok with that. But to be added without even knowing isn't fair to the citizens if you are going to strip their rights .

I agree on the no fly list why they could even decide a gun shop owner belongs on the list then where are they. it's suppose to be innocent until proven guilty ..unfortunately the criminal will always have guns they follow no laws. I'm thinking I need to buy a gun while I still can

[billf]

I feel sorry for them and for anyone who lives in so much fear that they can't leave home without carrying a gun.

It's not fear. I'm just not stupid enough to bring a knife to a gun fight.

The majority of the public honestly doesn't know how they will react when faced with a situation in which they would have to shoot to kill. Heck, even the average gang banger can't hit the broad side of a barn. Even if you don't freeze and actually do take a life, you truly don't know how that will affect the rest of your life. Everyone knows how they THINK they will react. Sadly, I know how I have.

[fordman1]

Happy 4th of July bowlers!
Bang, Bang, Bang. Have fund shooting your guns off today.

[Timmyb]

Happy 4th of July bowlers!
Bang, Bang, Bang. Have fund shooting your guns off today.


I think you're talking about the Detroit gang-bangers, not the rest of us responsible gun owners.

[fordman1]

Florida dad accidentally shoots and kills son at gun range.

[billf]

And hundreds were shot today on purpose by criminals. What's your point?

[Briantime]

And hundreds were shot today on purpose by criminals. What's your point?

The only point he makes that I can ascertain is that he is happy being a sheep and we all should be as well...

[Aslan]

Every journey starts with one small step.
The #1 reason gun control efforts have failed and will fail.

Responsible gun owners were willing to listen to control measures in the 80s/90s until the gun control and Brady Bill advocates let it slip that their attempts would be the "first step towards getting rid of guns altogether". At which point, 85% of the country said, "Oh...then nevermind."


mentally ill can mean a lot of things not just violent
This.

And the list of how you can get your gun taken away, lose your rights, etc... that list grows every year. Can you buy a gun if you and your wife got in an argument and the police were called? Some states yes...some states no. Can the wife get a gun? Yes. What about a person who is committed into an institution by their family but the courts release the person because they find that the person is not crazy? Can they get a gun? Or does it matter less that they are crazy and more that a few people think they might be?

Taking away people's rights can be a difficult endeavor. Most of the time, it's done with the best of intentions. Should homeless be forced into shelters or allowed to live on the street? What rights do they have? What rights do the mentally ill have? What rights do criminals have? Should rights vary based on the person's mental illness or criminal history? Very difficult topic. But one that will probably have a better outcome (in terms of violence in our society) than telling law abiding citizens they need to fill out more forms. IMO

[Timmyb]

The #1 reason gun control efforts have failed and will fail.

Responsible gun owners were willing to listen to control measures in the 80s/90s until the gun control and Brady Bill advocates let it slip that their attempts would be the "first step towards getting rid of guns altogether". At which point, 85% of the country said, "Oh...then nevermind."


This.

And the list of how you can get your gun taken away, lose your rights, etc... that list grows every year. Can you buy a gun if you and your wife got in an argument and the police were called? Some states yes...some states no. Can the wife get a gun? Yes. What about a person who is committed into an institution by their family but the courts release the person because they find that the person is not crazy? Can they get a gun? Or does it matter less that they are crazy and more that a few people think they might be?

Taking away people's rights can be a difficult endeavor. Most of the time, it's done with the best of intentions. Should homeless be forced into shelters or allowed to live on the street? What rights do they have? What rights do the mentally ill have? What rights do criminals have? Should rights vary based on the person's mental illness or criminal history? Very difficult topic. But one that will probably have a better outcome (in terms of violence in our society) than telling law abiding citizens they need to fill out more forms. IMO


Again, well said. There is a slippery slope to taking away people's rights just because it makes you feel better. You may feel that others shouldn't have a certain right because it makes you feel less safe. But how do you feel when they come after one of your cherished rights? Don't say it can't happen, because it does.

[Jessiewoodard57]

Guns have been in the hands of citizens for over 240 years. They were and always will be just a tool. The hand ( or in most cases the heart) of the person using the tool either makes it useful or destructive. The problem with gun laws are they are designed to control those who live out side of the law which is a nearly impossible task. In my opinion you want to fix the problems look to training and arming as many people as possible. the Mass killing just down the road from me in Orlando could have been entirely different had there not been a law in place saying guns where not allowed in a place that's main business is selling booze. just one person with a CCW permit could have ended the shooting and saved many. It's not the tool but the heart of man that creates the problem. Let's face it the ONLY way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Do we really want to take that protection away??

[billf]

Last spring we had a city council woman propose an ordinance that would prohibit veterans with PTSD from using the city pool. I stood up and asked if she remembered me. This is how the conversation went.
"Yes, you're the gentleman that pulled that family out of the house fire on Orbison Hill."

"Actually it was the mother, one daughter and two dogs. The rest of the family made it out on their own. I'm also the guy that stopped the robbery at the Marathon station off the highway last month. What I would like to know now is why you think I shouldn't be allowed at the city pool? A pool my tax dollars help to support. Afterall, I have shown I don't freeze but react when the situation calls for it so who else would you rather be at the pool when a pedophile gropes a child or God forbid tries to abduct one? A person who won't even be able to tell you what the abductor looked like, get a license plate number or any kind of description or a combat veteran who has proved that they are willing to risk their own life to save others? What gives you the right to forbid me from using that pool and potentially putting the safety of our city's youth at greater risk?"

"I didn't know you had PTSD."

"And I didn't know we had someone on the city council that felt it was their duty to remove the rights of those who chose to defend all our rights in our great nation. Given the fact that you think you're superior to those you were elected to serve I believe you should resign." I then turned around and left. The measure was voted on a defeated 6-1. Amid the pressure she felt she resigned two weeks later. You can take away my rights, over my dead body!

[fordman1]

Jesse they had an off duty police officer working security at the club that night and he exchanged gun fire with the killer.

Would more guns did any good in Chicago last week? 50 people shot there also over the weekend.



Guns have been in the hands of citizens for over 240 years. They were and always will be just a tool. The hand ( or in most cases the heart) of the person using the tool either makes it useful or destructive. The problem with gun laws are they are designed to control those who live out side of the law which is a nearly impossible task. In my opinion you want to fix the problems look to training and arming as many people as possible. the Mass killing just down the road from me in Orlando could have been entirely different had there not been a law in place saying guns where not allowed in a place that's main business is selling booze. just one person with a CCW permit could have ended the shooting and saved many. It's not the tool but the heart of man that creates the problem. Let's face it the ONLY way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Do we really want to take that protection away??

[Briantime]

Jesse they had an off duty police officer working security at the club that night and he exchanged gun fire with the killer.

Would more guns did any good in Chicago last week? 50 people shot there also over the weekend.

Why do you insist on holding an inanimate object as responsible for a crime?

Oh, sorry, I forgot. These shootings are being perpetrated by out of work youths who have no choice but to run wild in the streets...

[Jessiewoodard57]

What I said is logical. Some people will never agree with it. If it ever comes down to where I am facing an intruder with a gun I don't want to wait for someone to come and bury me. I want them burying the intruder. If you ever face that day you will be praying the police get there quick (provided you had time to call them) . The FIRST line of defense is always you. I find it fascinating that people always point to Chicago and NY City about murders the both do not allow hand guns. If they did many of those killed would not be the victim but the intruder. when home invasion has the possibility that you will be killed its less likely you will even try. ...as I said there will be those that thing it hogwash.

[Aslan]

Again, well said. There is a slippery slope to taking away people's rights just because it makes you feel better. You may feel that others shouldn't have a certain right because it makes you feel less safe. But how do you feel when they come after one of your cherished rights? Don't say it can't happen, because it does.

I'll use an extreme example just to further the point: Child molesters.

Just typing it, makes people uncomfortable....makes people mad. There is NO group...anywhere...even ISIS...that is AS HATED as child harming deviants.

So, what rights should they have? Because I've heard many, many people say that "those people" shouldn't have rights. They shouldn't be able to ever get out of prison...regardless of their sentence. They shouldn't be allowed to move into housing that is anywhere near a kid...so, they need to live in some cave somewhere. They have to go door to door where they do move and risk their own safety by telling their neighbors their crime. If they are beaten or killed...in jail or out...we pretty much look the other way and claim they probably had it coming.

The irony is, we had the same opinion of women, blacks, and gays...as recently as 20 years ago. It's very easy to take away people's rights. And most of the time, some event or crime or catastrophe is used as the reasoning and it seems like a perfectly good idea. Until it's not. Permiscuous women used to be sent to insane asylums. Gays were treated like animals. Blacks...well, yeah...they had less rights than pets 150 years ago. And AT THE TIME...most people didn't have a problem with it. Because it's easy. It's easy to just marginalize society's outliers...and claim they aren't human. It makes us sleep better at night knowing that we're human and "those people" aren't.

But, as Timmy said...be careful when taking away rights...eventually it comes back to haunt us. Pretty soon you're drunk after leagues one night, meet a gal who claims to be 19, and the cops show up while she is in your car and you are taking a leak in a bush...and suddenly you went from "a person with rights" to a registered sex offender guilty of one count of public indecency, one count of exposing yourself to a minor, and one count of devious acts in the presence of a minor. Turns out she lied...she was 16. Ooops. Oh well...yesterday you were a human being...today you are a sociopath. Bad break I guess.

And NO...I'm not telling a personal story. As far as I know...I'm not on any lists. And 16-19 year olds generally find me repulsive...so it's a non-issue. I'm just saying...be careful what rights you want to give away....society has a tendency to change it's mind about behaviors over time.

[fordman1]

So does that mean that anyone who wants to can buy a gun? No restrictions no age limit, no ID. Just walk in lay down the money and walk out with a semi automatic and 1,000 rounds? Somehow I don't feel safer.
This started when I read a survey that said 21% of the people surveyed said mentally ill people should have the right to buy guns.

[Aslan]

This started when I read a survey that said 21% of the people surveyed said mentally ill people should have the right to buy guns.

Have you ever read the "restrictions" in Michigan's CCW law? I used to have a CCW in Michigan. You should read the 2 pages of restrictions. By the time you get done reading it, you'll be amazed that anyone can actually carry a gun legally.

The problem with the mental health side of the argument, is defining "mentally Ill"? Are Gays and Lesbians "mentally ill"? The overwhelming answer 60 years ago, even in the psychiatric world...was "yes". Nowadays...the mere question will get me uninvited to most social functions outside of Texas.

That means, people have to sit down and look at each of the 10s of thousands of diagnosis...potential diagnosis...and figure out which ones "present" with a violent or suicidal track...then try to determine how mild/severe the diagnosis would have to be to take away the person's rights to own a firearm.

The reason that will never happen in our lifetime...is RIGHT NOW...in most states...if you have a guy you know, that is ODD....WEIRD...depressed...SAD....a LONER...has made random threats....talks to invisible people...and is generally a psycho....you would have trouble getting that person committed. The country has shifted the burden of proof to the doctors to PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that a person is crazy. Most of the time, they simply can't PROVE it...and those people are let loose onto the streets and become drugged out homeless people that eventually die of disease or some type of violence. And when these people act crazy, we all say, "Why aren't they locked up? They're NUTS!"

Yup. They are. But what about the suicidal? Are they "too depressed" to own a gun? What if they are treated and taking Prozac and feeling perfectly fine? Do they get that right back? What if it's not a gun? What if it's a car? Should crazy people be allowed to drive? I'm more scared of a crazy person plowing into a crowd of people than I am a crazy person going on a shooting spree.

It's a very, very complicated mess. And the path towards fixing it is to have some experts really look at the mentally ill in this country and how we can clean up the mess. Instead...liberals claim we can cure all death by making it harder to legally buy a gun....because that worked SO well with alcohol and drugs. And Conservatives refuse to even admit a person doesn't need a rocket launcher...because as soon as they give an inch...some Bernie Sanders nut will use that as a slippery slope to gather up everyone's hunting rifles and handguns...and give them to the black community...so they can seek "reparations". :eek: :confused:

[fordman1]

Were you living when the republicans closed all of the mental facilities and they ended up on the streets? Now you have to carry a gun to walk under a bridge.

[Timmyb]

Okay, stop. No one here is going to convince this small man (and I do NOT mean stature) that he is anything less than the moral authority on this. Liberals like him are the reason for conservatives like me. You try to change the word to be more like your far-flung utopia, and you can't see the damn forest for the trees. You only end up creating more like me. I'm out on this one. I know a lost cause when I see it. And you, fordman1, are waaaaaay lost on this subject.

[Briantime]

Were you living when the republicans closed all of the mental facilities and they ended up on the streets? Now you have to carry a gun to walk under a bridge.

Actually, per the National Crime Victimization Survey, the rate of violent crime has dropped 67% since 1993 but please don't let facts dissuade you from your viewpoint.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/17/upshot/perceptions-havent-caught-up-to-decline-in-crime.html?_r=0

[fordman1]

Okay, stop. No one here is going to convince this small man (and I do NOT mean stature) that he is anything less than the moral authority on this. Liberals like him are the reason for conservatives like me. You try to change the word to be more like your far-flung utopia, and you can't see the damn forest for the trees. You only end up creating more like me. I'm out on this one. I know a lost cause when I see it. And you, fordman1, are waaaaaay lost on this subject.

Have you watched the news lately?

[Jessiewoodard57]

wow think it might be time to lock this thread up ....lets just agree to disagree

[jimgilmore]

The problem remains the same cars kill more people every year but Nobody is asking to eliminate them.
One group wants to blame the tool and not the reason people misuse the tool.
Banning guns will never be the answer, but one group will never understand why anybody would would want a gun nor acknowledge that the underlying problem has nothing to do with guns.
More laws will never make the people whom abuse guns follow the laws in the first place.
If they want to harm somebody or tale their own life there are many other ways to do it.

[fordman1]

What other country in the whole world has as many guns as we do? The murder rate is higher in Chicago than most countries in the world. We will never know if it works unless we try it. I know most of the opposition is from those who are hunters and are afraid to give an inch.

Would it surprise you to know that most of the people shooting others are cowards? They would never go attack someone without a buffer called a gun.

OK I am done, those of you who disagree will never change. I won't either. Lets talk bowling.....

[Briantime]

OK I am done, those of you who disagree will never change. I won't either. Lets talk bowling.....

If you really wanted to talk bowling you would have just posted the above without the preceding two paragraphs of drivel.

You may want to do some more homework on this topic before starting a debate on it. You have come across as pretty ignorant on the subject with little else other than ad hominem attacks on honest, law abiding citizens of this great country.

[fordman1]

Now I see why you need a gun..

[Briantime]

Now I see why you do...

[bowl1820]

wow think it might be time to lock this thread up ....lets just agree to disagree

Yeah I think the gun debate needs to end now, this isn't going to be solved here and the discussion is beginning to devolve.