Gun Violence Reduction Executive Action-Your Thoughts

Two Peas is Closing
Click here to visit our final product sale. Click here to visit our FAQ page regarding the closing of Two Peas.

Posted 1/16/2013 by FLCindy in NSBR Board
< 1 2 3
 

LBrock44
Equality for ALL

PeaNut 40,268
June 2002
Posts: 11,849
Layouts: 57
Loc: Southern California

Posted: 1/18/2013 11:14:53 PM

It's time to stop punishing the legal gun owners for the actions of the criminals.


Nancy Lanza was a legal gun owner. Her son killed 20 first graders, 6 educators, and her.

James Holmes was a legal gun owner. He gunned down 13 in a theater in Aurora.

Jared Lee Loughner was a legal gun owner. He tried to kill a Congressman and killed 8 others.

Seung-Hu Cho obtained his guns legally. He killed 33 at Georgia Tech.

They all obtained their assault weapons (or whatever technical name you want to give to them) legally, and they used them to kill. Don't tell me that all gun owners are responsible, and don't tell me that weapons with extended clips that can shoot as fast as someone can pull the trigger are necessary. They are made to kill, and if you need to shoot that many shots that quickly to kill a deer than you need to take up another hobby, because you can't shoot for shit.

There has to be compromise here. The NRA and gun shop owners will do and say anything to keep their business, but the average American?


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------





We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools. - Martin Luther King, Jr.

leftturnonly
Will trade mosquitoes for cookies.

PeaNut 416,788
March 2009
Posts: 22,257
Layouts: 0
Loc: Living in Kim's Perfect World, again.

Posted: 1/18/2013 11:20:16 PM

As for the automatic weapons--just yesterday locally, two men were arrested--supposed responsible gun owners --who got drunk went to their back yard and started shooting I think I read like 600 rounds and they were landing in the houses that were located behind them --it was not rural! Luckily no one was killed, and the police were pulling bullets out of the houses that wee hit, bullets that entered homes, lodged in drywall and even in one appliance!


If these two bozos were out in their yard with an automatic weapon, they're facing a lot of serious time.

There are already laws on the books for that. Automatic weapons have been effectively banned for 80 years now.





6. "Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers."
"Congratulations, Mr. Joe Smith. Your background check came back 'proceed' and you may now purchase your gun. I can't sell you this gun if I think you're just buying it to resell it, because that's against the law. It's called a 'Straw purchase.' But, the president wants me to tell you how to resell your gun."

Or.... "Welcome to my store, Jane Doe. Can I help you with anything today? Maybe I can take my time and resources needed to run my business and run a free background check for someone you want to resell your weapon to?"


Or.... "Class on how to run a background check so you too can sell firearms will begin on Monday."


I'm still struggling to come up with any sensible meaning to 6.









If PC is the way to get to Heaven, I'm going straight to Hell.



sunny 5
PeaFixture

PeaNut 472,024
June 2010
Posts: 3,280
Layouts: 0

Posted: 1/18/2013 11:45:24 PM
background checks required and reported to federal firearms authority...and the local gun dealers can charge $25 or 50 or whatever...to make it happen for private sales. everyone holds a receipt...if you don't follow the law, you get charged for it.

maddiesmum
BucketHead

PeaNut 574,034
December 2012
Posts: 975
Layouts: 0
Loc: Obamaland

Posted: 1/18/2013 11:46:34 PM

Nancy Lanza was a legal gun owner. Her son killed 20 first graders, 6 educators, and her.

James Holmes was a legal gun owner. He gunned down 13 in a theater in Aurora.

Jared Lee Loughner was a legal gun owner. He tried to kill a Congressman and killed 8 others.

Seung-Hu Cho obtained his guns legally. He killed 33 at Georgia Tech.

They all obtained their assault weapons (or whatever technical name you want to give to them) legally, and they used them to kill. Don't tell me that all gun owners are responsible, and don't tell me that weapons with extended clips that can shoot as fast as someone can pull the trigger are necessary. They are made to kill, and if you need to shoot that many shots that quickly to kill a deer than you need to take up another hobby, because you can't shoot for shit.

There has to be compromise here. The NRA and gun shop owners will do and say anything to keep their business, but the average American?



I agree completely and thank you for saying it so well!

leftturnonly
Will trade mosquitoes for cookies.

PeaNut 416,788
March 2009
Posts: 22,257
Layouts: 0
Loc: Living in Kim's Perfect World, again.

Posted: 1/18/2013 11:46:48 PM

You do realize that the AR-15 shoots one bullet at a time just like any other gun don't you?


No, I don't think many people do realize this. Nor do they realize the actual small size of the bullets used.

The caliber of the firearms that are most typically thought of for hunting are monsters compared to these.

These AR-15's look the part, and that's what really matters in politics.






Which of those Executive Actions will do anything to stop the bloodbath in Chicago? We have a Newtown a month here in Chicago... but nobody seems to care. I think it's mostly because what the violence in Chciago proves is that gun control has failed. Terribly, terribly failed.

Chicago doesn't seem to matter here, for some reason. This whole thing reminds me of the local black toddler that went missing the same time a blonde little toddler went missing elsewhere. There was a national hue and cry for the sweet little blonde girl, while there was barely local mention of the sweet little black girl that was finally found tossed in a ditch.






Actually the NRA is dangerous because of the power they have over common sense gun control. The leadership is a bunch of paranoid individuals who believe if they give an inch the government is going to take away their guns.

Let me tell you what is happening today in my neck of the woods. Every few minutes, all day, every day, firearm/ammo dealers are receiving phone calls and customers in person asking for ammo. ANY ammo, because the shelves are bare. As soon as any comes in, it is sold immediately before it can even get to the shelves.

It's hunting season. Shotgun shells are available, but if you have a rifle, you're out of luck.

You're taking a concealed handgun class, so you can best learn how to safely handle your weapon? You need 50 rounds of ammo for your weapon for the class. You're out of luck.

You want to go target shooting? You're out of luck.

You might be able to sell this paranoia schtick to people who don't know anything about guns, but that ain't gonna fly around here. Here, the people considered paranoid are the politicians in government. The NRA is gaining membership because of the changes in government and how that affects people in their personal lives.











If PC is the way to get to Heaven, I'm going straight to Hell.



leftturnonly
Will trade mosquitoes for cookies.

PeaNut 416,788
March 2009
Posts: 22,257
Layouts: 0
Loc: Living in Kim's Perfect World, again.

Posted: 1/18/2013 11:59:04 PM

Listen I'm not the one who thinks that if there is a national data base listing all the guns it will become a vehicle for the government to come and take away my guns. There is nothing in the history of this country to even suggest that would happen so I really find that anyone thinks that way a bit strange.


Wait. What?

The history of this country is no national data base listing personal weapons.

The history of the world with data bases of personal weapons is one that has led to confiscation time and time again.

I don't understand what point you were trying to make.


ETA -

Look nothing is absolute. Nothing. But for a lot of the 2nd amendment supporters they don't want any limitations. None at all. And that is the problem. And for those who don't see this is a problem there is nothing more to be said.


They might not want it, but almost every American alive today has had to live with regulations and limitations their entire lives. There is no national call to make automatic weapons legal, for example.

Your arguments are losing me altogether.






If PC is the way to get to Heaven, I'm going straight to Hell.



leftturnonly
Will trade mosquitoes for cookies.

PeaNut 416,788
March 2009
Posts: 22,257
Layouts: 0
Loc: Living in Kim's Perfect World, again.

Posted: 1/19/2013 12:55:26 AM

Part of the problem the Federal Govt. has in dealing with these issue, is every State has different laws. Nobody in Florida cares if you drive down from Illinois and take home a truck load of guns...which may have all been purchased legally,


Yes, people do care about this.

It isn't legal for residents of Illinois to purchase long guns (shotguns and rifles) in Florida.

Residents of IL can purchase long guns in Iowa, Missouri, Indiana,
Wisconsin or Kentucky provided they posses a valid IL
FOID Firearms Owners Identification Card) and observe
the 24 hour waiting period as is mandated by IL law.



And then to cross state lines with these firearms?


Nope. Nobody's gonna care at all.


Additionally, the ATF requires an additional form for multiple purchases of certain firearms by the same buyer within a certain period of time. (Oops. That applies to Texas, NM, Cal, and AZ, not FL.)





If PC is the way to get to Heaven, I'm going straight to Hell.



maddiesmum
BucketHead

PeaNut 574,034
December 2012
Posts: 975
Layouts: 0
Loc: Obamaland

Posted: 1/19/2013 1:00:44 AM
You seem a little too over-invested in this topic, Leftturnonly. It's making you look a little crazy.

maddiesmum
BucketHead

PeaNut 574,034
December 2012
Posts: 975
Layouts: 0
Loc: Obamaland

Posted: 1/19/2013 1:13:19 AM

The NRA is defending the 2nd amendment. The only entities circumventing democracy are the emotion driven, common sense eschewing, constitution hating liberal power and gun grabbers who cheer Obama and his "right" to regulate our rights by executive order.


For your information Lynlam, George W. Bush issued twice as many executive orders as Obama:

Number of executive orders by President

I guess GWB regulated our "rights" too. Did you complain about him then?

I like how you're handslapping me for calling names while you're calling me and other Democrats names at the same time. How ridiculous you are!

Calm down for god's sake.

leftturnonly
Will trade mosquitoes for cookies.

PeaNut 416,788
March 2009
Posts: 22,257
Layouts: 0
Loc: Living in Kim's Perfect World, again.

Posted: 1/19/2013 1:50:49 AM

You seem a little too over-invested in this topic, Leftturnonly. It's making you look a little crazy.


Overinvested for a scrapbooking website? OK.

Overinvested for what I see happening here? Nope.

I'm really concerned about what I'm seeing. I'm a bit scared and a bit angry about it, and I know that what's happening here is playing out in many other places throughout this country.

If we are to move forward with new regulations, the reality of what is happening needs to be taken into account, or there could be serious violence.

There are laws on the books that are being enforced already that are being completely disregarded by people calling for change. So what changes are going to be made and when? It doesn't take much imagination for people to come up with their own ideas of what is going to happen.


I'd like to see the politicians quiet the rhetoric for a time, WHILE they work on items that really mean something regarding this issue. Let things normalize a bit. Let emotions settle so people will be able to think things through on both sides of this.

You want to make laws on guns? You need to know about guns. You want to make effective laws? You need to learn what laws have been completely ineffective. Politicians are always in the spotlight. They make a lot of noise and don't do their homework, and sometimes the consequences of that are completely different from what they thought they would be. That's what's happening, and that has me deeply concerned.


It's the circumstance of my life right now that puts me in this position. It certainly wasn't my plan, but now that I'm here, I'm speaking up when the subject is opened by someone else.











If PC is the way to get to Heaven, I'm going straight to Hell.



lynlam
Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine?

PeaNut 46,248
August 2002
Posts: 6,800
Layouts: 41
Loc: Ohio

Posted: 1/19/2013 6:43:30 AM
"I guess GWB regulated our "rights" too. Did you complain about him then?

I like how you're handslapping me for calling names while you're calling me and other Democrats names at the same time. How ridiculous you are! "
--------------
Typical. Deflect to "but Bush was worse!"

Give me a break. Bush did not make a dog and pony show using kids as shields, in order to issue a bunch of ridiculous nonsensical proclamations in the middle of a national outrage over a terrible crisis.

And I didn't call anyone here names. I was calling the liberal power grabbers in DC names. So why don't you calm the eff down?





"We demand entire freedom of action and then expect the government in some miraculous way to save us from the consequences of our own acts... Self-government means self-reliance." Calvin Coolidge

Lynlam, the second-tier Pea, paid (except it appears she is not) political shill.
Uploaded with iPhone client

lynlam
Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine?

PeaNut 46,248
August 2002
Posts: 6,800
Layouts: 41
Loc: Ohio

Posted: 1/19/2013 6:54:55 AM
"It seems to me a lot of people are legal gun owners, right before they become criminals. "
---------
But see, you are supposing in your example, that it was the fun that turned your neighbor into a criminal. Do you think that if you had not sold him the gun, he and his wife would not have fought, and he wouldn't have hurt her? Hell no.

It occurs to me that many people just "snap" even before they seek medical treatment. So it is very likely that your neighbor would have still been able to purchase your gun even if he had to undergo a background check.

What if you had sold your car to the same neighbor and two days later he drives drunk and kills a mom and her two kids on their way home from the movies. Would you blame the car? Yourself? Or him?





"We demand entire freedom of action and then expect the government in some miraculous way to save us from the consequences of our own acts... Self-government means self-reliance." Calvin Coolidge

Lynlam, the second-tier Pea, paid (except it appears she is not) political shill.
Uploaded with iPhone client

lynlam
Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine?

PeaNut 46,248
August 2002
Posts: 6,800
Layouts: 41
Loc: Ohio

Posted: 1/19/2013 7:14:14 AM
"Actually Lynlam, I am a gun owner and have complied with all the laws in Illinois to own one. I've submitted to a background check, I have a FOID card that requires renewal every 10 years. I comply with the 3 day waiting period on new purchases. None of those things has infringed on my rights. Never has anyone tried to take away
my gun. Never have I been denied my second amendment right. I think you can comply with reasonable laws and still be handgun owner, it doesn't have to be all or nothing."
-----------

I never said it had to be all or nothing. I have repeatedly said that we already have many many checks and laws in place that restrict the 2nd amendment, as you just stated, and that there is nothing else that is reasonable. All legal gun owners happily go through those checks. I pointed out that when the current NICS system was put into place, we were promised that it would never ever morph into a gun registry, and that it would definately stop all our gun violence problems. Well, it didn't and now the calls for full on registration are growing. And inch is going to turn into a mile. It is time to draw the line and stick to it. Nothing that anyone has proposed in regards to guns would have stopped any of these tragedies.

I think we all would agree that the right to vote is a constitutional right, correct? So what would happen if we started demanding background checks in order to exercise that right, in order to ensure that only legal citizens in their right minds would vote? And the very very liberal AG is the one who sets the criteria for who is "in their right mind". Do you think that would fly? Would you be outraged by that? Yeah. Same thing.





"We demand entire freedom of action and then expect the government in some miraculous way to save us from the consequences of our own acts... Self-government means self-reliance." Calvin Coolidge

Lynlam, the second-tier Pea, paid (except it appears she is not) political shill.
Uploaded with iPhone client

BOO!
Sunny Side Up!

PeaNut 52,709
October 2002
Posts: 20,615
Layouts: 95
Loc: watching Top Chef Canada

Posted: 1/19/2013 7:36:59 AM
I haven't really posted on the guns threads since my country has different laws, but do silently my democratic friends.

That said, I think all the "guns don't kill, people do" rhetoric is batshit crazy and reducing the amount of weapons, and access to weapons, is a good thing.

The Weapons Effect


Lisa D.J.

Canon 7D:70-200mm f/2.8L:85mm f/1.8:60mm macro and PSCS5


I-95
It's all just nonsense anyway!

PeaNut 97,456
July 2003
Posts: 20,385
Layouts: 0
Loc: California, NY & Orlando

Posted: 1/19/2013 10:15:44 AM

But see, you are supposing in your example, that it was the fun that turned your neighbor into a criminal. Do you think that if you had not sold him the gun, he and his wife would not have fought, and he wouldn't have hurt her? Hell no.

It occurs to me that many people just "snap" even before they seek medical treatment. So it is very likely that your neighbor would have still been able to purchase your gun even if he had to undergo a background check.

What if you had sold your car to the same neighbor and two days later he drives drunk and kills a mom and her two kids on their way home from the movies. Would you blame the car? Yourself? Or him?


In my example, I do think it was the gun (I presume you meant gun, not fun?) that turned my fictitious neighbor into a murderer. He may well have been smacking his wife around for years, unbeknownst to anyone (that would make him a criminal, not a murderer) Could he have killed his wife without a gun, absolutely, but he hadn't up to this point, and he may not have unless that gun was right there. Would he have killed the kids without the gun? Possible, but unlikely. In this, and thousands of other DV situations, the presence of a gun made it a fatal argument. And that's the part I rarely see pro-gun people admitting. That the presence of a gun does make a difference in many homicides/suicides/accidental shootings.

Could he have passed a background check etc. yes, maybe he could have, but perhaps it hadn't occurred to him to go buy a gun, until I mentioned I had one that I didn't want, that he could buy without all those tiresome waiting periods and background checks...or, he might have had a criminal record that I didn't know about, but the State of Florida says I don't have to do anything to verify that.

As for the car example, I'd feel terrible about that, however, by selling him my car, I would have had to register the sale with the State, he would have had to transfer the title to his name, the State would run a check on him at that point to see if he has any wants or warrants, to see if he was up to date on his child support, whether he was licensed to drive said vehicle, checked the V.I.N to make sure the vehicle wasn't stolen....but a gun, no, just hand it over the white picket fence and get a few bucks in exchange....no problem.

I'd be happy if the same requirements were in place for guns as there are for cars.

maddiesmum
BucketHead

PeaNut 574,034
December 2012
Posts: 975
Layouts: 0
Loc: Obamaland

Posted: 1/19/2013 11:17:01 AM



Bush did not make a dog and pony show using kids as shields,


Ahem. GWB using kids as a "shield" during a press conference regarding stem cells:

Bush uses children as props


leftturnonly
Will trade mosquitoes for cookies.

PeaNut 416,788
March 2009
Posts: 22,257
Layouts: 0
Loc: Living in Kim's Perfect World, again.

Posted: 1/19/2013 1:07:56 PM

That the presence of a gun does make a difference in many homicides/suicides/accidental shootings.


Not all gun owners are responsible for their weapons at all times. People with evil intent have access to firearms. Having a weapon at hand means that a weapon may be used, even if it may be inappropriate.


We already have laws regulating guns. On this board alone, many peas completely ignore that fact and want laws to protect us when they don't understand the laws already enforced every single day.

I don't believe the (mostly) women on here are silly. I do believe that many of them just are not aware of the true facts, and I think you're right, I-95. There's no reason to not include the downside of gun ownership. Your example with the resale of a car and a gun are good.

Maybe that's an area where lasting and effective changes can be made. IDK.

It's too easy for politicians to create the illusion that they have done something when they have done nothing. Creating yet another ban on guns based on features that aren't the cause of these tragedies, such as a folding or collapsible stock, are ineffective at best and a joke on the population at worst.


In an aside, I was talking with a man yesterday who is involved in training teachers and first responders how to handle a situation involving live weapons. They are using air guns. He told me they were quite effective and much better than being completely defenseless. He was a little more detailed, but his examples were too close to what happened in Sandy Hook for me to add now in good conscience.

First time I've heard of it. It completely changes the idea of what it means to allow teachers to be armed while on campus.







If PC is the way to get to Heaven, I'm going straight to Hell.



Sharna_G
AncestralPea

PeaNut 314,157
May 2007
Posts: 4,438
Layouts: 8
Loc: Delaware

Posted: 1/19/2013 1:19:23 PM

In my example, I do think it was the gun (I presume you meant gun, not fun?) that turned my fictitious neighbor into a murderer. He may well have been smacking his wife around for years, unbeknownst to anyone (that would make him a criminal, not a murderer) Could he have killed his wife without a gun, absolutely, but he hadn't up to this point, and he may not have unless that gun was right there. Would have killed the kids without the gun? Possible, but unlikely. In this, and thousands of other DV situations, the presence of a gun made it a fatal argument. And that's the part I rarely see pro-gun people admitting. That the presence of a gun does make a difference in many homicides/suicides/accidental shootings.


Exactly.


~~Sharna
FLOOR CUPCAKES, 99% PEA APPROVED


"You think they're onto us?"
"Shhh... Let me call my attorney"





< 1 2 3
Show/Hide Icons . Show/Hide Signatures
Hide
{{ title }}
{{ icon }}
{{ body }}
{{ footer }}