How do we prevent these mass shootings?

Such technology has been proven as unreliable.

 

If this is truly the case, then let each individual member of that ninety three percent to donate a mere five dollars, and pool their resources to generate one and a third billion dollars to lobby for the laws they wish to see enacted.

The fact that they are not suggests they either believe it is not worth their efforts, or there is no ninety three percent of the united states public that supports the position you claim they do.

 

I support what 9 out of 10 Americans support to make it more difficult for homicidal maniacs and criminals to obtain the firearms they use to kill people.

If you think that you have a more effective method of keeping homicidal maniacs and criminals from obtaining the firearms they use to kill people, you should stop whining about what is so widely supported and explain how you would accomplish that.

Meanwhile, until you convince Americans that you have a better solution, law enforcement professionals would like your help in getting our elected representatives to represent the public, and not powerful Washington lobbyists and their dupes:

 

Wow, it's up to 93% now. If you're going to lie you might as well make a 100%. No one believes you.

 

Bidding for politicians should not be necessary if Americans vote based upon whether a politician represents the public or special interests.

 

If you can't handle the truth, you can't handle the truth.

Quinnipiac's poll found 93% supported background checks for all attempting to purchase firearms, but we can go with the more conservative survey if you'd like:

Ninety-two percent of Americans favor background checks for all potential gun buyers, according to a new CBS News/New York Times poll.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/9-in-10-back-universal-gun-background-checks/​

 

No one believes it. Not for a minute. Otherwise it would change. Total BS liberal propaganda. And CBS a conservative poll? Laughable.

 

Yes lets get those background checks rolling! I mean Canada successfully implemented it's UBC backgrou..... oh wait no that failed and cost the taxpayers millions.

Rewrite HIPPA and get back to us on the implementation. I hear support is now at 94%.

 

There is ample reason to hope that the NRA's stranglehold on politicians is weakening, and that the permissiveness that allows homicidal maniacs' and criminals' easy access to firearms will be redressed a a consequence of the American public's commitment to reduce the carnage.

The People have the power to effect progress. All they need to do is exercise it.

​

.

Intimidation on the Wayne?
The high-powered political lobbyist ay be disarmed by sensible Americans.​

 

You can't stop evil. We will always have psycho's and mild violence.

 

We shall always have crime, but it doesn't follow that we repeal all laws to eliminate crime.

Society need not surrender to the inevitability of innocent people being constantly shot to death. The widespread support for closing background check loopholes that is backed by law enforcement needs to be reflected in elected representatives' acting in the public interest, despite the powerful Washington lobby opposing it.

 

It is not the gun. If somebody wants to kill someone, there are millions of ways. Does the gun make it easier? The only way to find out would be to get rid of them. However it would be pretty easy to hit someone with a car, or baseball bat. Personally if someone was out to kill me, I would rather the gun than a baseball bat.

 

Whatever some poll found there's better data, that data is actual votes cause this has been voted on, and that data doesn't support your claim.

Washington State recently voted on a UBC law. Washington is VERY liberal and yes the UBC passed but with only 59% not the 93% you claim.

 

Effective mental health care can get someone to change their mind when it is not in their best interest according to natural law.

Should we have that kind of mental health care if it's possible?

 

I guess my education is a little to low to understand this. I would imagine that when a person decides to kill someone, that they are so inflamed with rage, that it does not matter the teaching's of which they was given.
The sword to this day has far more blood on it, than the gun. This is the human element not the gun.

 

Its amusing that you attack one poster's "agenda driven poll" by citing another "agenda driven poll". lol

 

Some people are stupid. How many people in the middle east has died in the past two months, that you have not said one word about. This is your government and military at work, you care not of others but rather your own. That in itself totally disregards your comment. You want laws against your own people to defend themselves against a tyrannical government. But you care not of the guns right now, being distributed with your money to isis and the regime against Assad. And of those innocent people being killed you care not.
For a law abiding citizen to put his name on a list as a gun owner, is to tell Hitler "I'm over here". Creating any law that stand's in the way of defending liberty, is to go back in time.

 

Your being a hypocrite. Do you care of the innocent people being killed by guns and bombs in the middle east. What are you suggestions for that. After all they are using your money.

Please answer this: How are background checks going to keep criminal's from getting guns from the black market? And if a person wanted to kill someone, how is taking a gun away going to achieve that? Let's just say there is no such thing as guns, oh wait that already happened. Nobody was ever killed before the gun, that is my fault I didn't think of that.

Hypothetically, if someone was going to kill you, would you prefer a gun or baseball bat?

And if a Hitler like person ever did gain power of America, are you going to want your name on a list that shows you have a gun?

 

You can pretend that Dylann Roof, had not the background check loophole allowed him to purchase his weapon (The FBI Director affirmed that he was able to purchase the gun used in his killing spree because of lapses in the FBI's background-check system) would have entered the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church and beat nine people to death with a Louisville Slugger, or that suicides by firearms would be as much a spontaneous act of opportunity for the mentally ill if frozen squirrels were as handy to pummel oneself to death, but the vast majority of Americans and law enforcement professionals do not share your resignation.

 

You can entertain that erroneous notion, if you need to. You can rage that nine-out-of-ten Americans and police chiefs who agree with me must be hypocrites, as well, but you'll appear an irrational zealot when you do so.

Yes.

It's a very different issue, and your desperate attempt to derail this thread is not going to work.

Would Dylann Roof have as easily bought his lethal weapon from an illegal source if a background check had been allowed to be completed and his attempt to buy one from a dealer with his birthday money been denied?

I have no idea.

You can mewl that drivers' licensing is futile because a criminal might drive a motor vehicle without one, but Americans are not about to surrender as readily.


.

 

I cited the bogus poll being assigned three turkeys by a reputable source that delineated its flaws.

Rabid gunsters have yet to discredit the polls that confirm overwhelming public support for background checks on all would-be firearm purchasers.

 

There is a reason for voting, to find the majority. Just because you disagree with the majority does not make you a zealot, but rather someone who is willing to stand up for what they believe. If this is something that the majority wants, I will always stand behind my country.
Personally, I believe that owning a gun, is primarily for the purpose of defending ourselves against a tyrannical government. Because of this, I find it ignorant to put your name on a list that says you own a gun. It's kind of like telling Hitler "Hey I'm over here".

 

To me a person would have to be a fool to think guns kill people. Take all the guns away, and you are telling me there will be no more murder of innocent people. I hardly doubt the numbers would even drop. To be killed from a baseball bat, would be far more horrific than a gun.

 

Only when they're in the hands of killers, suicides, and folks, including children who are victims of fatal accidents.

Keeping them out of the hands of high-risk individuals is a very good idea, shared by 9 of 10 Americans.

Progress is difficult, but we shouldn't give up.

 

If they do not kill people then what to they do - lie around looking macho? Wave in the air and magically make naughty people behave?