Another Parkland shooting survivor commits suicide

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

7 minutes ago, jehurey said:

Gun control laws that place much higher requirements and continuing requirements for purchasing and continuing to own semi-automatic rifles.

 

Grandfather those who already have them, but add contuing requirements for gun training and renewing registration. And ban the sale of semi-automatic rifles to everybody else.

 

Let the remaining semi-automatic rifles on the market be sold between private owners, however impose strict regulations on how they can be sold (hence the renewing registration, you have to tell the government that you either still have possession of it or have sold it, like a car).

 

Completely ban high-capacity magazines, limit them to no more than 8 rounds.

 

And pass single-payer healthcare across the nation, because mental health checkups should be mandatory beginning at a young age. School districts should require mental health examinations like they require vaccinations, beginning when they are young.

 

Create a database in which mental health professionals can access people's mental health records over a long period of time. And make that mental health database a factor in determine whether a person can apply for a gun license, and people who live at the registered household also have their mental health record checked. So, you could be perfectly fine and healthy, but if there is a family member who had a red flag, then your gun purchase may be rejected, or you may have more restrictions placed on you for buying the gun (mandatory gun safe is required, or gun lock).

 

And make gun training mandatory for all gun owners. If anything I'd say that if you have to pass a driving test to get a drivers license, you have to pass a gun training course for ANY gun purchase. Make those be low-cost and offered by local police departments.

• Gun control laws are already very strict and the NICS system is extremely effective. I have no problem with some pre-requisites but there should never be anything in place that needs to be done to maintain ownership.
•  
• I do not support gun registration, half of the point in owning firearms is no one including the government is supposed to know what you have. In the event of a coup or tyrannical government shift it makes it easy to track down and target people who not only have specific guns but also those who are unarmed. Gun registration also poses the risk of becoming a hacked database which could compromise not only those with but those without firearms.
•  
• See the former.
•  
• High capacity magazine bans pose almost zero benefit, to anyone with practice a magazine can be changed in less than a second. 
•  
• I do not support socialized healthcare whatsoever however I see no issue in objective third party evaluation of mental health. The physician you attend cannot be part of any selection system or government approved list.
•  
• I don't support this at all, the state of someone else's mental health should have no bearing on your ability to retain or purchase a firearm. The only thing I would agree with is that it be a requirement that you purchase a certified safe said person could not access.
•  
• I see no issue with making gun safety and training courses mandatory as long as they are within reason.

[jehurey 3,238]

Just now, DynamiteCop! said:

• Gun control laws are already very strict and the NICS system is extremely effective. I have no problem with some pre-requisites but there should never be anything in place that needs to be done to maintain ownership.
•  
• I do not support gun registration, half of the point in owning firearms is no one including the government is supposed to know what you have. In the event of a coup or tyrannical government shift it makes it easy to track down and target people who not only have specific guns but also those who are unarmed. Gun registration also poses the risk of becoming a hacked database which could compromise not only those with but those without firearms.
•  
• See the former.
•  
• High capacity magazine bans pose almost zero benefit, to anyone with practice a magazine can be changed in less than a second. 
•  
• I do not support socialized healthcare whatsoever however I see no issue in objective third party evaluation of mental health. The physician you attend cannot be part of any selection system or government approved list.
•  
• I don't support this at all, the state of someone else's mental health should have no bearing on your ability to retain or purchase a firearm. The only thing I would agree with is that it be a requirement that you purchase a certified safe said person could not access.
•  
• I see no issue with making gun safety and training courses mandatory as long as they are within reason.

Nope, almost none of those points are remotely good, or justifiable.

 

The whole "don't want to give the government a way to take down the people" is ridiculous...............its not up for debate.

 

If the government wanted to eradicate people with guns...........they would win...............don't open your mouth on this subject, you're not going to win.

 

We have registration databases for automobiles, don't see the government stopping you from driving in all 48 continental states.  You already have gun registration, it just isn't nationaized.

 

Let the killers practice fast-changing............its purely a statistic issue, and you're not going to beat me on that one. Lesser mags are lesser bullets, lesser bullets are lesser deaths.  Not up for debate.

 

Its in the PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION that gives the government the right to provide security and "general welfare" to the people. Mental health is a real problem, and that's a healthcare issue.

 

The rest of the civilized world has figured out that healthcare is a BASIC SOCIETAL NEED and should not be in the hands of a FOR-PROFIT INDUSTRY.  Healthcare is on the same level as Military security and Infrastructure and Education. It is REQUIRED for society to function.

 

If you have a person in your household that has a huge red flag on mental health........its no different than having somebody in your household with an extensive criminal record. It would be investigated by the FBI prior to approving your gun purchase. The restriction could come in the form of limiting the TYPE of gun (no semi-automatics) limit the quantity of guns you are allowed to purchase at any one time or over the course of time. Or impose safety and maintenance regulation (buying gun safe, or gun lock).

 

If we have regulations on the FIRST AMENDMENT for the purposes of security (Clear and Prsent Danger doctrine, for example) then we can clearly have regulations on the SECOND AMENDMENT for the purposes of security.

 

But don't give me that Paul Revere "in case we need to overthrow the government" bullshit.........its simply not believable coming from weak-ass men who can't do a pushup telling us about they're being vigilant heores who will protect us "someday." Get that shit outta here.

 

I'm with Jim Jeffries. Be HONEST about why you want guns, I will not tolerate bullshit arguments that you don't actually believe.

 

[kaz 2,439]

I don't know anyone who owns a gun. We don't need that shit. And I live with 8+ neighbours in apartment complex and I'm sure nobody else owns a gun. 

 

Gun laws in america are fucked up and are to blame that people die for no reason frequently. 

 

America is the biggest shooting range on earth.   

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

8 minutes ago, jehurey said:

Nope, almost none of those points are remotely good, or justifiable.

 

The whole "don't want to give the government a way to take down the people" is ridiculous...............its not up for debate.

 

If the government wanted to eradicate people with guns...........they would win...............don't open your mouth on this subject, you're not going to win.

 

We have registration databases for automobiles, don't see the government stopping you from driving in all 48 continental states.  You already have gun registration, it just isn't nationaized.

 

Let the killers practice fast-changing............its purely a statistic issue, and you're not going to beat me on that one. Lesser mags are lesser bullets, lesser bullets are lesser deaths.  Not up for debate.

 

Its in the PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION that gives the government the right to provide security and "general welfare" to the people. Mental health is a real problem, and that's a healthcare issue.

 

The rest of the civilized world has figured out that healthcare is a BASIC SOCIETAL NEED and should not be in the hands of a FOR-PROFIT INDUSTRY.  Healthcare is on the same level as Military security and Infrastructure and Education. It is REQUIRED for society to function.

 

If you have a person in your household that has a huge red flag on mental health........its no different than having somebody in your household with an extensive criminal record. It would be investigated by the FBI prior to approving your gun purchase. The restriction could come in the form of limiting the TYPE of gun (no semi-automatics) limit the quantity of guns you are allowed to purchase at any one time or over the course of time. Or impose safety and maintenance regulation (buying gun safe, or gun lock).

 

If we have regulations on the FIRST AMENDMENT for the purposes of security (Clear and Prsent Danger doctrine, for example) then we can clearly have regulations on the SECOND AMENDMENT for the purposes of security.

 

But don't give me that Paul Revere "in case we need to overthrow the government" bullshit.........its simply not believable coming from weak-ass men who can't do a pushup telling us about they're being vigilant heores who will protect us "someday." Get that shit outta here.

 

I'm with Jim Jeffries. Be HONEST about why you want guns, I will not tolerate bullshit arguments that you don't actually believe.=

 

Leftist mindset on gun control is a non-starter. This is why you guys don't get anywhere, you're crazy and ask for the moon. 

Edited March 25, 2019 by DynamiteCop!

[kaz 2,439]

"i sleep wit da nife and gun bc peple try kill me in sleep" - dumericans accepting their backwards thinking gun control laws. 

[jehurey 3,238]

1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Leftist mindset on gun control is a non-starter. This is why you guys don't get anywhere, you're crazy and ask for the moon. 

And you just ran away from the argument. Thanks for playing.

Come back when you have good points that you can defend.

 

Me literally explaining the Preamble of the US Constitution to you = leftist mindset (according to you)

Me literally saying that we've placed regulations on the 1st Amendments, therefore we can do the same for the 2nd Amendment = leftist mindset (according to you).

 

You got nothing, and you know it. One of us is trying to solve real-world problems realistically............the other one has nothing but tired catch-phrases for an argument.

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

1 minute ago, jehurey said:

And you just ran away from the argument. Thanks for playing.

Come back when you have good points that you can defend.

 

Me literally explaining the Preamble of the US Constitution to you = leftist mindset (according to you)

Me literally saying that we've placed regulations on the 1st Amendments, therefore we can do the same for the 2nd Amendment = leftist mindset (according to you).

 

You got nothing, and you know it. One of us is trying to solve real-world problems realistically............the other one has nothing but tired catch-phrases for an argument.

There's no point in arguing with crazy and unrealistic expectations, you'll do the damage to yourself; I don't have to do anything.

[jehurey 3,238]

1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said:

There's no point in arguing with crazy and unrealistic expectations, you'll do the damage to yourself; I don't have to do anything.

You got nothing, and you know it.

 

There's no point in you trying to act confident when I know you have nothing. Its not working.

 

"Unrealistic expectations"............coming from the guy who says that him and his neighbor Jim-Bob's AR-15 are gonna fight back the US Government when the day comes. LOL

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

Just now, jehurey said:

You got nothing, and you know it.

 

There's no point in you trying to act confident when I know you have nothing. Its not working.

 

"Unrealistic expectations"............coming from the guy who says that him and his neighbor Jim-Bob's AR-15 are gonna fight back the US Government when the day comes. LOL

I have plenty and it will be directed in votes, you're a nut who has no experience with firearms (clearly) and have extremely unrealistic expectations and demands. 

 

[jehurey 3,238]

1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said:

I have plenty and it will be directed in votes, you're a nut who has no experience with firearms (clearly) and have extremely unrealistic expectations and demands. 

 

LOL, sorry you pretending to be a gun expert isn't going to help you.

 

Especially when speaking to somebody from Texas. LOL

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

1 minute ago, jehurey said:

LOL, sorry you pretending to be a gun expert isn't going to help you.

 

Especially when speaking to somebody from Texas. LOL

Yeah, let's all take credence from an incel living with his brother at 40. You actually fit the profile of a mass shooter. 

 

Edited March 25, 2019 by DynamiteCop!

[jehurey 3,238]

Just now, DynamiteCop! said:

Yeah, let's all take credence from an incel living with his brother at 40. You actually fit the profile of a mass shooter. 

 

And he ran away from the argument. Thanks for playing.

 

Come back when you discuss things like an actual adult.

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

1 minute ago, jehurey said:

And he ran away from the argument. Thanks for playing.

 

Come back when you discuss things like an actual adult.

Reported to ICE, the ATF and the FBI.

[jehurey 3,238]

3 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Reported to ICE, the ATF and the FBI.

Oh, you mean the same government that you want to fight against should they turn tyrannical.

 

How ironic.

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

1 minute ago, jehurey said:

Oh, you mean the same government that you want to fight against should they turn tyrannical.

 

How ironic.

But they're not.... yet

[jehurey 3,238]

1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said:

But they're not.... yet

Which means you don't have a good reason for defending the 2nd amendment......yet

 

Thanks for just admitting that.

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

Just now, jehurey said:

Which means you don't have a good reason for defending the 2nd amendment......yet

 

Thanks for just admitting that.

This is a paradox you moron. 

[jehurey 3,238]

1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said:

This is a paradox you moron. 

If the best reason for you defending the status quo of guns in America is something that has not occurred in the 240 years that America has been existing...........then looks like we can update the law for modern times.

 

This should be fairly simple to understand, yet in your mind, you think its a complicated paradox.

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

1 minute ago, jehurey said:

If the best reason for you defending the status quo of guns in America is something that has not occurred in the 240 years that America has been existing...........then looks like we can update the law for modern times.

 

This should be fairly simple to understand, yet in your mind, you think its a complicated paradox.

One could argue the chance hasn't presented itself because the populous has been continually armed.

 

You have a brain, use it.

[jehurey 3,238]

5 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

One could argue the chance hasn't presented itself because the populous has been continually armed.

 

You have a brain, use it.

No.

 

The population had its best chance to overthrow the government when they were EQUALLY ARMED with the same type of weapons.

 

Which would've been about over 100 years ago.

 

Sorry............another bullshit myth from the gun lobby got debunked.

 

Its basically the same argument anti-vaxxers use.