“Republicans don’t care how many Americans are killed by guns”

Yep! Just this morning I went to to a local FFL dealer to complete the legal transfer of a firearm I purchased online a week ago. The only "firearms" that can be bought online and shipped directly to the purchaser are "black powder guns", muzzle loaders, cap and ball revolvers, etc., that are not deemed "firearms" under Federal law....but states can, and some do prohibit it. The notion that anyone can go online to 'Guns dot squat" and have an AK-47 delivered to their door is simply anti-gun propaganda aimed at the "no information" voters!

 

Where are you getting that? In the less hyperbolic media that I prefer, he's been described as bitter about being targeted by fellow Coloradans for being a muslim, but a jihadist? Are you equating the two?

I don't think this shooting was prompted by religion, and I don't think the Atlanta shootings were about Asians so much as they were about an angry young incel who was enraged by not getting any lovin' even from places that make you pay for it. I strongly suspect the the young shooter in Colorado was similar, but we don't know that yet.

If he went strait to the pharmacy area where vaccinations were taking place, maybe he was just extremely anti-vax. Or maybe a young woman who turned him down was there. Heck, we still don't know why he chose that supermarket when there are at least a half dozen closer to where he lives.

Let's all get outdoors and get some exercise that doesn't involve jumping to conclusions.

 

And yet nowhere outside of America do kids have to do active shooter drills



Think about that

 

Neither do the democrats. Perhaps I should say mass killings instead of mass shootings. Something happened to our society where these mass killings have become common place. Mass shootings that is. Prior to any gun control with the exception of having to have a federal permit to own a machine gun, they were few mass shootings. Here by decades.
1900's 0
1910's 2
1920's 2
1930's 9
1940's 8
1950's 1
1960's 6

note the 1930's and 40''s were the Al Capone gangster era. Then something happened to our society which made mass shootings and killings common place. They have been over 200 since 1970. 1960's and prior, the mass shooting were mainly familicides and felonies. The shooter knew the victims, either he held a grudge or the shootings were in a commission of a crime.

After 1970 most mass shootings have been in public places against innocent bystanders. The shooter didn't know his victims or who he was shooting. Our society has become sick and no one cares. No one cares about the root cause/s opting instead for the band aide approach. the easy target while letting the sickness in our society thrive and grow. Folks are afraid to delve deep into our society to find out what went wrong, perhaps they know they won't like what they find out. So more gun control while letting the causes fester and grow.

Ban all guns, then the means, the tools change since the reasons, the causes are still there. Instead of guns, then we'll have bombs, arson, fire, chemicals, and other means and tools utilized. 45 were killed in a school bombing and 58 injured in Detroit. 87 died in arson with 6 more injured in a night club fire in the Bronx set on fire purposely. Mark my word, until we become willing to delve deep into our society to find the causes for all these mass killings and do something about it, they'll continue. Only the tools, the means will change.

 

Didn't the Colorado shooter pass a background check?

 

The thread title is a false statement. No one in any political party condones murder. Attacking the rights of good people does nothing to prevent murder. While good people are fighting among each other, murderers have an advantage.

Your sweeping generalization fallacy is part of the problem. Looking at this last tragedy, the killer had a history of violence and was on the FBIs radar, yet no red flags on the purchase. Existing laws did nothing to stop him, now you want more laws that only affect those of us that are no threat to anyone.

Before I go on, where do you draw the line? Would you ban firearms for armored car guards?

 

By "illegal" person to person sales, I am referring to someone selling a gun privately to someone who is not legally able to purchase a gun. Thought that was obvious.

We are all governed by rules that concern criminals, as we are all subject to the laws of the land. If you don't intend to kill someone, then they really aren't a burden. Heaven forbid a "burden" to you could save lives.

 

How many more laws are required, to support laws that don't work? You would then also have to criminalize person to person sales, or require that a licensed dealer be involved with every transaction.

What would be your resolution for the guns provided by the government to foreign nations, that seem to make their way back here? The guns that come across the Southern borders, in the possession of criminals?

It's not 'tiny' issues, and your attempt to discard reasonable arguments as such pretty much say that you don't care about other people's points of view at all.

You have a lovely day.

No flailing, facts.

 

And who instituted that? The same bunch that honestly thought labeling schools as 'gun free zones' would somehow magically stop a nut job?

 

Many states are requiring background checks on private sales....in Virginia private sales must conducted through a FFL holder and the purchaser must go through the same background check as they would if buying from a licensed dealer.

 

And how many burdens could save lives when it comes to drug or alcohol use?

Adding more rules to useless rules, doesn't make any of them suddenly effective.

 

Same could be said about cars and the people who drive them, if someone were to completely ignore the benefits of driving. This is the same 'logic' that will be used to ban private ownership of and self driving of automobiles once driverless transport becomes widely available to hire. 'You don't need a car, and wanting one makes you a dangerous, uncaring person.' Give it about 20 years.

 

We should make murder illegal..

 

Colorado actually has that second part, that a licensed dealer has be involved with a person to person sale, for the purposes of doing a background check on the buyer. However, as I indicated, it's extremely difficult to enforce because the initial purchase wasn't registered in anyway. So if I illegally sell a lawfully purchased gun to someone on Craigslist, without going through a licensed dealer for the background check, and that person commits a crime, the chances of that getting back to me are virtually zero. The gun laws in this country are a patchwork of half-measures that make it difficult for any one state to effectively prevent crimes from being committed with legally and illegally acquired weapons.

Stop providing weapons to foreign nations who can't be responsible with them, or hold them accountable when they aren't responsible with them.

You have no suggestions for solutions, it appears. It's just complaints about one idea after another being imperfect. In other words, any excuse not to implement (or even investigate) any proposed idea. You're moving wildly back and forth, from one excuse to another: the literal definition of flailing.

 

That is not a solution and has been proven to fail before it is tried.

We require similar meaasures for drugs and narcotics and it stops no black market.

 

Guns coming back into the US from other countries is hardly a problem. In the Western hemisphere the US is the origin for most illegal guns.

 

Drugs can't be tracked back to the original buyer. Guns can.

 

You know how we used to have fire drills in school? Now they are having active shooter drills to prepare faculty and kids on what to do in an emergency. I wonder if something like this can be done within companies that are customer facing. If everyone is trained on what to do, it could possibly help before the police arrive. It won't prevent shootings but it could lessen the casualties.

 

We aren't talking about drugs or alcohol. There are obvious differences between those and firearms.

 

There currently is very little demand for illegal weapons imports to the US because we can get them legally. The more we restrict weapons, the more lucrative will become supplying them illegally. The only real question is who will make the most money- foreign criminal importers or local criminal manufacturers. If you thought it was hard to stop people from growing weed, you aint seen nothin compared to how many guns can be made in a tiny home shop...

There is no difference between a war on drugs and a war on guns. Everyone who understands why the war on drugs is a disaster but supports the same restrictions for guns is a disingenuous hypocrite of the highest order.

 

And what might those differences be? They're pretty similar in ease of manufacture and transport...

 

So you are more concerned with the <200 murders by AR-15 because they are used in the "vast majority of mass shootings" rather than the 14,000 murders by other means. That's not semantics, it's focus. You don't care that media hype over one mass shooting causes 3 more. Keep the focus on the killy looking AR because it's scary. oooooh

Read this and then complain that it's Republican's fault for not caring.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/05/18/us/chicago-murder-problem.html

 

Yes they can.

 

Are you aware that the most rapidly growing group of legal gun owners is black women? Do they tell you that in the Washington Post?

 

I have explained multiple time the difference between tracking illegal drugs vs illegal guns. Guns can be tracked to the original owner, drugs can't once they are out of packaging.

Of course we have searchable databases to track drugs from manufacturer to pharmacy to patient. Gun sales are kept private and are accessible through paper copies only. Seems like that should be a quick fix.