A serious analysis of "Guns don't kill people... people kill people"

I know the legislation the Supreme Court has passed.

If that's the problem, the OP proposes calling them "ice cream cones" so they're not as scare.

I could not care less what you call them.

 

that fails civics 101. the supreme court passed no legislation though some would say the nonsense of the 1930s and 1940s came close

 

Apparently not, if you think that bill is Constitutional.

The problem is a broken society, that leaves people behind, ignores the mentally ill and, helps the wealthy but not the poor. Putting labels on firearms doesn't solve our fundamental societal problems.

 

If the impediment to save lives is that we don't want to hurt the feelings of gun collectors, we can get them stamps. Not many people will die from a stamped being used on them. So if the choice is either saving lives or... something else you can think of. Human lives win!

 

we know that josh sugarmann-a marxist scumbag so radical that the Brady bunch gave him the boot (probably for demanding complete gun bans and making them look bad) told the MSM to start using the term assault weapon to confuse people into associating them with the scenes from Rambo like this

(yeah I saw this referenced during discussion of the clinton gun ban by some leftwing operative)

 

just get off the diversionary silliness of "saving lives". Nothing you propose is about that no matter how much you claim it is

 

I agree 100%. Thank you for speaking for 48,830 people who were killed by guns in USA 2021 alone -- homicide victims and suicide perpetrators. Here.

Human Life is a precious gift from G-d!

 

No, no you can't. Apparently you've never seed a real quality gun collection. To many it's a thing of beauty, a record of history and a source of real satisfaction; there is no excuse to ban that. What you're doing is proving your ignorance of firearms.

Absolutely, so we should do something that WILL save lives. Banning guns isn't going to save a life.

 

Here is what you posted.

You are the only one who has said anything about stopping car accidents and dumb stuff like that. So you are the only one who has made dumb arguments.

You are the one who first mentioned automobiles though contrary to your claim. But we know your posting history is very disingenuous so it’s no surprise.

Unfortunately none of your posts so far are serious. You have claimed once an object is purposed for one use it can’t have legitimate uses later. It’s only REAL purpose is it’s original purpose.

You claimed this:

And that claim is patently false.

So by your definition you are the only one who posted the dumb argument about banning manufacture of cars. And you made unsubstantiated claims that are contrary to actual evidence.

You claimed people killing people doesn’t require anyone being killed, just the killer and the person who sold the murder weapon.

As usual your posts in this thread are a mess of false premises, verifiably incorrect information and fallacy.

 

What is an assault weapon?

 

There

And we all know that congress has no legislative authority to ban any weapons. Right?

 

But that generator could sit in your garage and never be used. Just like my guns, except my guns are even less likely to be used except for a bit of target practice and punching holes in burn barrels.

No matter what you think something is designed for or not designed for, the ultimate use will always be up to the person who has control of it.

By the way, those generators stored in your garage are pretty much useless for the long run. They are fine for keeping your refrigerator cold for a few hours. In the long run, you need a standby generator which is connected to your house power through a switch which can only provide power when your commercial power is off. Ours keeps everything going including AC and heat. We have enough fuel to keep them going for a couple of weeks depending on the load. Kicks on by itself when commercial power goes out and turns itself off when commercial power comes back on.

 

A DEFINITION is unconstitutional? That sounds like an automatic knee-jerk response.

I don't think you quite got the point. That link contains the DEFINITION of what an Assault Weapon IS. For some reason some people thought that you can't analyze a philosophical proposal like "Guns don't kill people... etc" unless you can define the term "Assaulst Weapon". So I gave them the definition!

I'm pretty sure banning guns might save lives. But I only advocate for banning the SALE of SOME weapons.

 

No, I did not....

 

It didn't "come close" in Heller. Different topic, though.

 

Looks like he succeeded.

 

Nice try.

"THE BILL"
H.R.1808 - Assault Weapons Ban of 2022
is unconstitutional.

Which weapons. In that Un-Constitutional bill, you linked to, there were many "weapons" defined. Which "weapons" do you advocate banning?

 

Apparently you've never seen a real quality human being that was torn apart by bullets from an assault weapon.

I'll take the life of ANY human being before the most wonderful gun collection you can think of.

 

The constitution doesn’t give congress any legislative power to ban weapons

 

Yep! I was the one who said it would be dumb to bring up cars in a discussion about guns. Leave it to you to do exactly that!

 

Uhh…no. You did it. It’s in the OP.

SMH.

 

I find that to be unbelievable

 

Unfortunately that's false. But, gun collections and human being's are not the same thing, not even apples to oranges the same.

Of course, and who wouldn't. But, destroying any or all gun collections won't save or even affect one life, except for the owner of the collection. It would probably devastate that/those owner/collector.

 

neither have you since "assault weapon" is a fictional device. I will take freedom over the dishonest claims of gun banners who pretend they want to save innocent life

 

Oh! It's a new cocktail. One part each of Vodka, Rum, Bourbon and Gin... Mix it with no ice. Drink with a straw. Try it! Have somebody near you so they can call 911 if necessary