Why do liberals hate guns?

Ct for one never disbanded Clinton's assault weapons ban. So it has been in effect but obviously useless.
Pretty friggin ironic ha.

 

I'll drink to that

- - - Updated - - -

stormfront?

 

I understand that there are folks with such a strong emotional attachment to a gun that is clouds their cognitive faculties. They are clearly smitten. The heart has its reasons which reasons know not of.

Despite the adage that Love is blind, I shall inquire, in measured and modulated tonality, why the overwhelming majority of Americans - in every national poll I've seen - should have their democratic will thwarted regarding the sentiment expressed by Washington lobbyist LaPierre: “We think it’s reasonable to provide mandatory instant background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes anywhere, for anyone.”

Presumably, the applicable Constitutional provisions have not changed since 1999, nor has the admirable concept of representative self-governance.

Given America's unacceptable level of carnage by firearms, how else does one impede the facility with which a homicidal maniac or violent criminal can access his weapons of mass destruction whilst allowing relatively normal folks fancy-free license to amass their personal arsenals to their heart's content?

 

Liberals blame guns because they refuse to blame themselves for corrupting minorities. And they don't want to lose power or influence.

 

Concerning Lapierre. You'll note he designated gun shows. Can you see that? Good moving on for our europeon friends. The gunshow loophole was very contentious at the time. Now I may be wrong having never purchased a gun at a show much less in all 57 states. I could swear that particular loophole had been closed and all firearm dealers are now required to run instant background checks on firearms. The new loophole is private citizens at gun shows cannot be required to run background checks. I'm not a lawyer but it has something to do with the constitution and government interference in private property.

So Lapierre was speaking of just one aspect of background checks, at gun shows, he later recanted all background check provisions when it was learned the government was not prosecuting felons for attempting to purchase firearms illegally. And the federal government was illegally storing all gun purchase information. What we essentially had was felons running around in states with background check laws attempting to by guns, being prevented by private business owners and absolutely no backup or follow through by the Feds. So we have private citizens being forced to doing policing including defense against possible retaliations with zero government help.

It was at that point Wayne realized the system was broken, would not be repaired and possibly was designed specifically to create harm to store owners.

No one has attempted to fix it yet. There's no reason private store owners should be painted as targets for gang members. The government has proven reducing crime was never its intention and continues to prove that today.

 

Yes, why don't you try it

 

The alleged loophole is State law v. Federal law. Federal law is concerned with interstate commerce whereas State law is intra-State. DC already requires background checks for interstate commerce so it is up to each individual State to institute background checks (separate from NICS which is Federal), though many do not want to spend the money on something that does not really affect crime at all since most criminals get their guns by stealing them or taking them from family members like Adam Lanza did.

Some of the law proposed around State backgound checks would make your spouse a felon if you left your gun in the closet (like everyone used to do) and left for 7 days. I am sure most gun stores would love State background checks because it would force everyone to go to their store and pay them to do it.

 

Your opinion is clear. Thank you.

Would you recommend that the backgrounds of every potential gun purchaser be checked to determine whether he is a violent criminal and/or homicidal maniac, and what system would you advocate for all the stolen firearms recovered by law enforcement so that they might be identified, traced, and restored to their rightful owners?



.

 

Go ahead, keep the guns away from the unlawful guy, just leave the lawful gun owners alone in the process. Now that is the second definition of good gun control. The first is the control of keeping the sights steady at the head of a criminal.

- - - Updated - - -

Since when is law enforcement interested in returning stolen guns to the lawful owner?

 

Crap I'm not redoing that

 

...and grandfather the rest? Or are all pre-ban gun owners going to trot themselves into the holding pen? ya see, if you start registration then how far back do you go or do you just start today?

 

Not just minorities tho. Liberal ideology corrupts any and all ethnicity. I'm not saying all liberals are corrupt. I'm not saying all conservatives are pure driven snow. Compared side to side I see modern liberalism as a much more corrosive element. You can pour sugar in battery acid, it's still battery acid, just sweeter for what little worth that is.

 

Let's see, the Thompson machine gun came out in 1918. And your going to tell me that no one was killed by them until 1934??? And your going to sit there and tell me that the Gatling gun wasn't around during the 1860's??? It was used by the Union forces during the American Civil War in the 1860's, which was the first time it was employed in combat. Later it was used in the Boshin War, the Anglo-Zulu War and still later in the assault on San Juan Hill during the Spanish-American War. Then we have the family of the Browning machine guns;
* M1895 Colt-Browning machine gun, based on a design dating to 1889, was the first successful gas-operated machine gun to enter service.
* M1917 Browning machine gun, a family of water-cooled machine guns in .30-'06
* M1919 Browning machine gun, a family of air-cooled machine guns in .30-'06
* M1921 Browning machine gun, a family of water-cooled machine guns in .50 BMG
* M2 Browning machine gun, a family of air-cooled machine guns in .50 BMG
* M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle, or its variants.

The M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle better known as a BAR was widely used by the military, police , and civilians alike.

Now, please tell us just who was killing who with machine guns for the most part back in the 20's and 30's??? GANGSTERS!!! So the Government takes away fully automatic weapons from the law abiding sector and left them in the hands of the GANGSTERS!!! Oh, WOW, now that made all kinds of sense didn't it because we all know how much the Mob obeyed the law, right??? Get real!!

 

But it DID ban certain weapons, not because of the way they functioned but because of how they looked. And California along with 6 other States have reinstated said banned on the same weapons for the same reason. You said to point out where the Democrats have ban weapons, it has been done and you still want to argue???

 

Once more, GANGSTERS were killing GANGSTERS so law abiding citizens can't own full automatic weapons???
On top of that the Government was saying in 1994 that the street gangs weapon of choice was an ASSAULT WEAPON, such as the AK-47!!! Lies, nothing but lies. Less than 1% of all the murders in the U.S. had an ASSAULT WEAPON used in the commotion of it.

 

In answer to the question posed in the OP: Because they think that guns are responsible for a great many tragedies, and that the world will be a less lethal and tragic place with fewer weapons designed with nothing but deadly intent.

I disagree with the conclusion, but I think their heart is in the right place (sort of like libertarians and industrial regulation).

 

As long as there isn't a national registry. What's so hard to understand about that???? History is on my side of the argument on this point.

 

They MIGHT start thinking with their heads instead of their hearts. You know where the paved road of good intentions leads to.

 

Is that your way of saying that you believe stolen guns should be untraceable?

Do you believe that folks whose guns are stolen should report the theft?

Do you believe there should be criteria for identifying stolen property so that it can be returned if found?


.

 

Just to be clear, I agree with the vast majority of Americans that the backgrounds of every potential gun purchaser be checked to determine whether he is a violent criminal and/or homicidal maniac, and that there be a means of identifying stolen firearms that are recovered by law enforcement so that they might be restored to their rightful owners.

- - - Updated - - -

Better late than never.

 

this is just another cheap ploy at crating a national registration base.
What is it you don't get about the Bill of Rights?
every one is equal, but some are more equal than others.......

 

If you have an alternate method of identifying and tracing guns used in crimes you'll need to explain what it is.

History - that you like to claim is "on your side" is replete with gun wielding criminals and maniacs shooting innocent people. Understandably, law enforcement would like to trace them.

 

You should probably read it again.

 

Every item in the Bill of Rights is circumscribed; none is absolute.

Please explain how you would help law enforcement identify weapons used in crime - or would you wish to impede any such efforts?


/

 

well, very few guns that are ever recovered really make it back to the rightful owners even if they are stolen and recovered. Most are held as evidence for futher trying, but they are destroyed after that. so much for your theory of re-installment.

Why should I register myself if I've never committed a crime? Should you not be required to exercise your 1st A right? your false testimony can get a man killed who might otherwise be innocent.