Who puts that restriction on and why? You really want people to not go to the doctor when needed because they are worried that thier medical records are going straight to the DMV and local LEO? Epilepsy does not make one violent, but takes special medications. At some point the case will be made that if you cant drive, you cant own a gun. Dangerous with one, dangerous with the other. Same with PTSD. Our soldiers are being demonized by military doctors saying they are a threat if they own a gun. The can of worms you are proposing is a clear violation of the 4th amendment. You really want to be pulled over for a traffic violation and have some cop start questioning your medical records on the side of the road? Big brother needs not be in my bedroom, my gun safe, or my doctors office.
Gun ownership is a right, actually. It entails responsibility, but if someone has completed their time, then punishing them further defeats a lot of the purpose of releasing them. It's not about sympathy, it's about logic.
Hmmm, still dont care. 'splain some of that there logic about giving felons back the right to bear arms? If you are not responcible enough to stay out of jail, you lack the responcibilty to own a gun. Never going to change my mind about that. Had this discussion on 1911forum.com awhile back. I still havent changed my mind. Felons: Prey on the innocent, think they are above the law, take advantage of others and worse. If they are worried about thier rights, they should think about that before commiting criminal activity that rises to the level of felony.
So you or some scumbag friends or family a felon? Why do you care about giving rights back to felons? While the same rights are being threatened for non felon law abiding citizens.
Uhm...The only time we are required to report to DMV is for seizures. I do not know if psychiatrists are under a seperate set of rules, but I can write scripts for many different psych meds and nobody but my patient and I would ever know. If you are going to argue on my side of this, I just want you to be properly informed.
And in other news... the Titantic just sunk. Put armed guards in all public schools - problem solved. More guns = less violence. Only reason the maniac targeted the school is because he knew none of the victims would be armed - that's why schools are such popular targets for these loons. You never see them walking into a gun shop.
At least two distinctive different mindsets. Would be better to divide peacefully now if we cannot find some middle ground soon.
I gotta agree. The DMV is quite possibly the most inept, inefficient moronic bunch of goons congregated into a group since congress. You REALLY are telling me you want them having ANY more influence in your life. For ANY reason. Come on! Do you OWN a car???
This entire thread, and debate in general, is an appeal to emotion. There aren't reasoned arguments it's just "We have to do something now so no more innocent children are slaughtered." Little do people care that their ideas are just an emotional response and would just add more onerous burdens on those who follow the laws. But we can't think of that because it gets in the way of stopping the genocide/holocaust/massacre/slaughter, what ever todays "buzz word" is. There hasn't been a single idea that I've heard that has since been put forth by anyone that would have prevented this tragedy. Sure some things may have possibly, perchance, maybe, sort of changed the outcome but any individual who is committed enough will find a way. Background checks wouldn't have done (*)(*)(*)(*) in preventing it as has been said ad infinitum. Smaller magazines wouldn't really matter since anyone practicing for a day or so can become decently quick at changing them or just carry another weapon and drop it when it's empty. Lanza had weapons in his car that were untouched, he could have brought them with if he was unsure of the amount of ammunition he carried. New York even piggy backed on the law they passed an increased sentencing stipulation if you kill a first responder it's life without parole Called the "Webster Provision". This wouldn't have done anything and also creates another group of people that is better and more worthier of protection than us lowly plebeians. Can you please come back when you think of something that would have actually prevented this tragedy, it's for the children.
If you address this in gun law, you understand it most likely will carry through to include child/sexual predators as well.
Ah. So my knowledge of how poorly and corrupt government is and not wanting to allow it to expand its "responsibilities" makes me an anarchist. If that is your thought process then that makes you a liberal moron.
I've already stated nothing the government does will effectively keep somebody from killling somebody if they want too, or have their mind set on it. Are having a problem reading black and white? But if we just have to have some kind of legislation that gives the dingbats the feeling that something is at least being done, I would prefer it be directed at the felons/criminals who have guns and the keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally disturbed and unstable. As of yet nothing I have heard from congress even addresses the actual culprits and only goes after the law abiding, to make them criminals if they choose not to comply.
No SerenityJH77, I do not believe the government is capable of doing most anything right. But if we just have to have a law, and I am not demanding anything just suggesting possibilities, make it something that actually attacks the problem not one that insists "everybody" is a potential threat that needs to be harnessed.
What's next on your list? The 1st Amendment and free speech? Libs could argue that allowing people to say politically incorrect ideas harms the country more than guns do.
How will "upset" totalitarian gun-grabber types alleviate their angst when their oh so caring and compassionate elite statist heroes successfully ram through this current round of little people herding legislation... only to have another... then another...then another massacre occur? What, pray tell, will they demand of them then? I think we all know.
Its OK to have full background checks and IDs to own a gun, but its NOT OK for people to do the same in order to vote. Those ID/checks laws are already on the books, but who cares about preexisting laws=) Hmmmm. And in the grand scheme of things which has a bigger impact on our society? ANYONE being able to vote any number of times, since there is no system to track it or stop it, or people legally trying to buy a gun without an ID. Remember, people who don't want to show an ID when buying a gun or do a background check aren't actually buying a gun legally in the first place. Its not all that different from DRM software for music/movies/games. It doesn't do anything to stop those who want to steal. It only makes it a pain in the A$$ for everyone who just wants to do it the right way. As usual politicians are going after the WRONG thing and are ignorant or simply ignoring the facts.
It is the corrupt leftwing democrats that are trying to take away our 2nd amendment rights pure and simple.
The image I get in my mind on this issue of gun control, hearing a former Republican invoking Reagan, when they obviously voted for Obama, something that would cause any honest Republican who voted for Reagan to physically vomit, is the picture of Warren Burger sitting there with a worthless for defense of liberty shotgun claiming they are not out to get our guns (when I just got through watching a Death Wish movie where having a gun suitable for defense was illegal). Hello, page one: Please tell me one thing that Obama proposed that would have prevented that shooting. (Consmike) Ignored for a reason, and Biden and his shotgun just brings back up Burger and his. I have no need for an assault weapon with thirty rounds, but I see no honesty from the Democratic Party of traitors.
I honestly do not know how to respond to such ignorance. Is reading comprehension that difficult a task for you? Obviously simple sentences elude you. And this is why we are going down the tubes in ball of flame, blatant retardation, from both ends of the extremest gene pool. Just keep arguing with idiocy and ignorance and there will be no constitution to worry about, and it will be your fault as much as the equally irrational gun grabbers.
Not that it actually matters (or is your business), but I did not vote for Obama. And if anything, Obama has lessened gun restrictions. Like most people it seems he needed a kick in the A$$ to flip flop, or even bother.
Well, like I said, if someone has committed a crime involving a gun (or a violent crime in general), then I understand the restrictions on gun rights after completing a sentence. The thing is, not all felonies are the same. Some guy who commits tax fraud isn't a threat with a gun. You can make the argument that someone who's been to jail for molesting kids could be a threat with a gun. Sex crimes could fall under the same restrictions as violent crimes. All I'm getting at is that most white collar felonies don't justify gun ownership restrictions. There are property crime felonies that wouldn't fall under it either.
The disclaimer covers any flip flops: I first met Democratic presidential hopeful Senator Barack Obama almost ten years ago when, as my representative in the Illinois state senate, he came to speak at the University of Chicago. He impressed me as progressive, intelligent and charismatic. I distinctly remember thinking 'if only a man of this calibre could become president one day.' He is merely doing what he thinks is necessary to get elected and he will continue doing it as long as it keeps him in power. (How Barack Obama learned to love Israel, Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada, 4 March 2007) Those who want too much are just shooting reasonable in the foot, thirty times; it is just really hard to forget no death penalty, nuts turned loose too soon (multiple times) making some of us pallbearers, and law abiding people could not keep and bear a suitable for the occasion weapon. Please tell me one thing that Obama proposed that would have prevented that shooting. (Consmike)
