- 9,253
- 3,007
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2005
No I do agree laws should be changed...if they're flawed. You can look up my criticism of the ACA as proof. What exactly is flawed about the 2nd amendment that you think it should be altered?
Shooting at Columbia Mall in MD. 3 dead
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by keko jones,
- Start date
- 25,255
- 22,229
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
but you are the one to want to compromise on your constitutional RIGHTS. Yeah , you are a genius.
- 5,826
- 9,059
- Joined
- May 20, 2006
I don't know.
Personally I believe that there should be more thorough screening processes, but I don't have any solid answers where that is concerned.
What I do know is that there is a problem with gun violence in this country and it won't improve itself without some sort of change.
- 20,396
- 14,184
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
Which is EXACTLY what I've been saying, but somehow all the strong-stance 2nd amendment folks feel threatened that they won't have the right to bear arms. NO ONE IS SAYING THAT.
- 25,255
- 22,229
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
and they even know it. Lol ... People that Burch about tougher laws but doubt know what kind.
- 9,253
- 3,007
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2005
Which is EXACTLY what I've been saying, but somehow all the strong-stance 2nd amendment folks feel threatened that they won't have the right to bear arms. NO ONE IS SAYING THAT.
Go back a couple pages and I said what the issue was with your screening process.
Feel free to refute them if you can.
This is all based on the assumption that a mental health check would be a black and white process with no grey area and goes against the proposed idea of a thorough screening process.
Last edited:
- 628
- 360
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2013
Flaw in your plan..using this scenario say guns get chips in them...dude comes shoot up the the mall and first person he kills is the armed security...now no one can pick up this gun and potentially use it to stop the bad person trying to kill innocent people
- 20,396
- 14,184
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
Your "law-abiding citizen" argument?
- 9,253
- 3,007
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2005
No it's based on how the military and government agencies rank people on being mentally fit for duty. The examples I gave are all real, and each one of those people would be ineligible to serve in the military or certain government agencies, unless they had some kind of waiver. Which is a whole process in of itself.
The fact that you can't even explain what you want kind of shows how ridiculous the whole premise is. Like I said before people have been getting shot for centuries, that is just one of the prices you pay for freedom. However, if you are scared there are other places you can go.
- 13,529
- 9,454
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2008
More like the "Criminals gonna Criminal" argument.
Stricter regulations will only give more power to people with no regard for the law and create a more profitable black market.
- 9,253
- 3,007
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2005
I didn't make the law abiding citizen argument. I just outlined some ways "thorough" mental health screenings could harm decent Americans by infringing on their rights.
What makes you think that the screening process for civilians to own a firearm for the purpose of self defense would be the same as someone being screened in preparation for combat?
What do you think about the idea of putting chips in guns?
- 20,396
- 14,184
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
RustyShackleford
Supporter
- 63,015
- 189,179
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
Ahhhh the ole "if you don't like it you can leave" argument.
Now Ninja as left you good, you been really picking up the slack brah.
Last edited:
- 9,253
- 3,007
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2005
Because it is the same to work for Government agencies as well. I just gave two examples. So I don't think that it would be to much of a jump to think that similar parameters would be layed out for citizens to get guns.
Not a fan of chips. The implementation would be damn near impossible. There are far too many firearms out there to be able to get a chip in them all. Marrying firearms with a new technology would make them more expensive (I'm assuming) and if the purpose of these chips is to make sure they don't work unless the owner holds it leads me to believe that some kind of central DNA or fingerprint database would exist. Nope.
Not a fan of chips. The implementation would be damn near impossible. There are far too many firearms out there to be able to get a chip in them all. Marrying firearms with a new technology would make them more expensive (I'm assuming) and if the purpose of these chips is to make sure they don't work unless the owner holds it leads me to believe that some kind of central DNA or fingerprint database would exist. Nope.
- 9,253
- 3,007
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2005
Ahhhh the ole "if you don't like it you can leave" argument.
Now Ninja as left you good, you been really picking up the slack brah.
Taking a sentence out of context in order to make an unknown point. Check.
Attacking me instead of my argument. Check.
Now all I need is some grand emotional appeal and we'll have the trifecta on how to make a baseless argument that just muddies the waters.
- 20,396
- 14,184
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
When did we get this notion that people in favor of stricter gun laws are "scared?"
- 9,253
- 3,007
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2005
Well it's an assumption I made. You guys cite these stories of gun violence as reason to have stricter laws. So I just assumed fear of someone you know or yourselves being a victim of gun violence factored in to your views. If I'm incorrect I apologize.
- 2,825
- 206
- Joined
- May 20, 2008
apparently the female victim lived half a mile from the gunman but there is no apparent relationship.
I just don't agree with equating civilians to soldiers and law enforcement officials. The mental strain they're under is entirely different from a civilian's.
The implementation of chips would be near impossible, but only if you're thinking that they'd be placed on ALL guns. It's my understanding that the idea is for them to be placed in new firearms. The fact that they'll be more expensive is a non-issue and the DNA or fingerprint database you're suggesting seems like a scare tactic. I'm sorry for making the comparison between cars and guns again, but is there a DNA or fingerprint database for key fobs for cars? I imagine a chip on a gun would work the same way via a bracelet or something to that effect.
- 9,253
- 3,007
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2005
People that work for the DoT or nurses for the FBI are hardly what I would call law enforcement individuals. But they go through a mental assessment before being offered employment. This is fact.
An how is guns becoming more expensive a non issue? You think people like paying more for things if they don't have to? You shrug off price point as if it's some insignificant thing. There are whole industries created that are there to figure out how much people are willing to pay for certain things.
So in order to fire my gun, I'll just need to wear my bracelet? That's you guys grand plan? The only way that Whole chip idea would work is if there was DNA or fingerprints. Which would require a database, and no one wants that.
An how is guns becoming more expensive a non issue? You think people like paying more for things if they don't have to? You shrug off price point as if it's some insignificant thing. There are whole industries created that are there to figure out how much people are willing to pay for certain things.
So in order to fire my gun, I'll just need to wear my bracelet? That's you guys grand plan? The only way that Whole chip idea would work is if there was DNA or fingerprints. Which would require a database, and no one wants that.