Why many gun owners shouldn't be allowed to have guns

I'm not really bothered either way. I'm all for criminals using illegal means to obtain weapons if legal means are exhausted - unlicensed manufacture, black market acquisition, etc.

I don't care for your combative rhetoric. I had assumed we all graduated kindergarten here. I don't pick a team and blindly follow it, I suggest you don't either.

I have always conceded that gun ownership increases the presence of illegal weapons in society - because theft of legal guns is a prime source of illegal guns.

 

That is a big 10-4 on that comment!!!

 

If they have felony convictions, then legally they are not. Why is that fact so difficult to grasp?

If someone is in possession of large quantities of marijuana or heroin, do we assume that they procured it through legal channels?

 

At least because many of them are just cowards, or stupid, incompetent bigots who will kill their families...
It sounds absurd, but you can easily find articles like "Drunk Dad\Son killed family" or like that and the number of articles increases every day!

 

Reporters went looking for a fight... And they found one.

 

Lol

Source your facts.

A half a million hunters shoot their wives every year? Good Lord.

 

what do a few videos have to do with reality

the most important issue is why should American citizens care about the positions of someone who isn't even living here?

- - - Updated - - -

That appears to be a POE post-someone who is pro gun adopting the extreme silliness of the anti gun left to make them look bad

 

no,sir, that was over 575,000
but this is my favorite line:

wft??????
HEY, [MENTION=61429]Lou DiCruos[/MENTION] ........ you eat hamburger or chicken?

 

Well, these videos show people who are clearly unfit to have firearms, but own them anyway.
I would love someone to explain why it's in any way reasonable for these people to own them.

Of course, no one will because there isn't a single reason past stupidly following the ideal because you believe everyone should own a gun, even the gobsmackingly stupid.

 

can you suggest a law that disarms all those who don't meet your learned concept of who should own weapons without disarming a single person who should be able to own guns

no one says everyone should own a gun so your silly straw man argument has no validity

Maybe I should determine who should post or express an opinion?

 

There are currently tens of millions of individuals who are clearly unfit to engage in operating a motor vehicle. Yet for reasons that defy basic logic, these individuals are still given licenses declaring them capable of operating a motor vehicle on a city street.

Where is the line drawn in determining who is unfit, and what they should be denied access to?

 

Clearly there are people that should not own a firearm. What is your proposal the distinguish between who should own and who shouldn't? What law should be put in place?

 

Cherry picking videos that agree with your position does not mean that you are right.

I happen to feel that a prerequisite to owning a gun should be training in its use. But is stupid to attempt to ban guns just because you don't like them.

 

What people ARE worthy to have the protection of a firearm in your opinion?

1) Political leaders and royal heads of state?

2) Wealthy people and celebrities that can hire bodyguards?

3) Poor and other unimportant citizens who aren't the police or military?

 

And those licences are taken away again when it is proven they are incapable of obeying road rules

- - - Updated - - -

Why does no firearm = undefended? Lots and lots and lots of people in other countries have no firearms and they are not "undefended"

 

To address an obvious gap in logic---

What military or police force on the planet do NOT have firearms---at least on standby?

Moving on, I live in a neighborhood, probably safer than yours. I could probably even leave my doors unlocked if I wished. But guns are not always just for self protection or for military and police roles. Mine are for sport, collection, prepping, hunting and defense.

Just because you and yours may only face attacks by koala bears in your paticular area---does not mean that the people who live in bad areas, where their chances of being a victim of crime is as high as 1 in 4 each year---do not deserve the very best, virtually, unbeatable protection of a modern repeating firearm.

Ivory tower liberals never seem to have a clue.

 

British Bobbies
A few others in civilised areas of the world. Although our police are armed (more for feral dogs than humans) most of our private security officers are NOT - unless they are specific armed guards for money transfers etc

Surprisingly I have no issue with that - even the Australian government has no issue with that

Don't forget the drop bears
http://australianmuseum.net.au/drop-bear

 

People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf

George Orwell

 

I see you have proven my last line correct.
You can't justify the reasons such morons have guns.

- - - Updated - - -

I see you have proven my last line correct.
You can't justify the reasons such morons have guns.

- - - Updated - - -

I see you have proven my last line correct.
You can't justify the reasons such morons have guns.

- - - Updated - - -

I see you have proven my last line correct.
You can't justify the reasons such morons have guns.

- - - Updated - - -

I see you have proven my last line correct.
You can't justify the reasons such morons have guns.

 

I have posted video evidence showing people who are clearly dangerous, and links to newspaper articles showing death caused by stupidity with firearms.
I said these people should have their right to own weapons revoked as they have proven themselves unfit to hold one.

So far no one has managed a single reason why these people should be allowed a weapon.

THAT'S BECAUSE THE GUN NUTS CAN'T MANAGE ONE.

 

I see you are afraid to actually tell us what sort of law "Disarms morons" without interfering with the rights of people who meet your silly test of intelligence.

given your silly response to four tough questions, I would suggest you chill on who you call morons

- - - Updated - - -

the law already bans certain people from having weapons. I would suggest your posts suggest that you cannot manage a good argument why you should continue to post here.

your views as to who should be able to own weapons has non merit. we asked you -a foreigner-what sort of law would you propose and you completely ignored that issue. that suggests to me you really have no clue

 

I see you are avoiding everyone's question, what is your method of identifying and legally disarming the people that you call morons?

 

It is not necessary for anyone to justify to you why individuals you deem to be morons have access to firearms. Not being convicted of a felony, they have a constitutional right to own firearms, regardless of your opinion. It is necessary for you to justify why they should not have firearms, when a court has not subjected them to due process for the purpose of stripping them of their constitutional rights in an arbitrary fashion.

 

And you have conveniently left out the various articles about the deaths attributed to firearms assigned to police officers, who left them laying about in an unsecured manner.

Proven that you are either unfamiliar, or uninterested, in the concept of constitutional rights, such as due process.

And you have presented nothing of genuine significance to make your case. You amount to less than a blip on the radar of discussions on the subject. You are outclassed.

And you cannot present a case for why due process should be discarded, and replaced with the privilege system.

 

identical responses calling everyone names...wow, such a level of maturity. Why aren't you the head of something important?
Only a moron would dream of telling others how best to protect themselves...........such god-like authority..
bah...gun cowards abound