Common sense question regarding gun control

christiefan915 said:
People don't have free, unfettered speech and everyone accepts that even if they don't like it.
Click to expand...


People DO have unfettered speech rights.....just because the gov. has over stepped its bounds lately don't change that fact....this bullshit about "hate speech" is just that, bullshit....
but that doesn't stop the lefties from trying to limit our 'right of free speech'.....just about everything the lefties do limits your rights in some form....

If your unfettered public speech gets in trouble thats your problem and you suffer the consequences.....

Like telling a judge to 'fuck off' in a courtroom....you can say it, but you've broken the rule of showing contempt for the court.....thats what you will be punished for, not saying "fuck off"...
 
Hulagu Khan said:
I can't threaten to kill you. I cannot randomly shoot you. That is the limitation, and the equal standard.
Click to expand...


To threaten someone is against the law.....not how you did the threatening.....you can pull a gun or run your car at them or use words,...its all the same law that is broken...
 
Rune said:
Actually it is. You have a right to travel.
I guess you missed that in your libertarian handbook.
Click to expand...

Since when does the word "travel" mean the same as "drive"....you may post in English but you certainly don't understand it.
 
Taichiliberal said:
But driving without a license is a crime. Now that we've settled that, care to answer the OP question?
Click to expand...

People have been driving without a valid license forever on private land....farmers kids drive some from the ripe old age of 8 or 10......
The law concerns WHERE you can drive.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Agents of the state are citizens, you know. And since the GUN is an inanimate object subject to use by it's holder, the STATE (that's you and I) requires that it's law enforcement folk go through background checks before given license to enforce the law with it.

Now you claim no citizen has "power".....that is patently WRONG, as we have the power to elect and guide our gov't. Also, as you gunners so ardently point out, since having a gun is a "right" as is the "right" to self defense, then it should behoove our fellow citizens that have these weapons to pass a background check....helps to lower criminal and abhorrent behavior, as our law enforcement people figured out LONG time ago...and subsequently YOU agree with (directly or indirectly).
Click to expand...

While acting as such an agent of the state is absolutely NOT a citizen. Your premise is fundamentally flawed.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Here's what I don't get about all the rabid rhetoric by "gunners" (folk who are against ANY type of Federal regulations regarding weapons in the USA).....whether it be local police, federal marshalls, secret service, FBI, etc., ALL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS GO THROUGH BACKGROUND CHECKS BEFORE BEING GIVEN LICENSE TO CARRY A WEAPON. These people have the power of life & death in given situations, and ALL USA citizens convey that power to them.

So if America is okay with that, then why on God's green Earth is it so abhorrent to have the same or similar background check for the average citizen to own/carry a weapon?

Just asking.
Click to expand...

You question has been answered in various places throughout the thread.....

ALL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS GO THROUGH BACKGROUND CHECKS....to get the job of being a law enforcement officer, not specifically to carry a weapon.....
No law says all cops have to be armed and some are not armed at all times...but its safe to assume that here in the US, they are armed, for their protection, no yours.....

There are BG checks for all sorts of jobs none for other jobs....carrying a gun is irrelevant....but being a cop REQUIRES your carrying a gun under certain circumstances and that
requirement means you will be taught gun operation, gun safety, and learn when you are allowed to use it....and if you have the temperament to deal with stress of law enforcement.
Walmart may require a BG check on people to see if they might steal, or have the wrong personally to deal with customers.....
 
NOVA said:
The 2nd Amend. does not GIVE anyone the right to bear arms....what it does do is recognize that that right is inalienable.....and more importantly, it FORBIDS the gov. from

trying to take or infringe upon that inalienable right.......
Click to expand...

I'm glad you mentioned this post, .... understand it and hopefully agree with it....
 
Rune said:
LMAO.
When was the last gun show you went to?
There is no gun show loop hole.
Go to a gun show and try to buy a gun.
Click to expand...

Thats how it is where come from......you want to buy a gun at a gun show, the dealer will deliver that gun to a local gun dealer that will follow the appropriate procedures and you
will pick up that gun at the gun dealer after the waiting period if their is one.....
That gun will be registered to you and recorded and reported to the appropriate places....
Incidentally, I've never been to a gun show...

I've purchased guns a sporting goods shops with less trouble...
 
Taichiliberal said:
Catch what you just said.....the people you want to enforce the law are LESS QUALIFIED than some schmoe off the corner! So a background check and training is necessary to enforce the law with a gun and to make sure that the officer isn't mentally unhinged or has a criminal background/associates....but any joker off the streets with NO training or vetting is MORE trusted to carry a gun.... a gun that they may want to use in some vigilante style...by YOU?

Man, your convoluted logic knows no bounds!
Click to expand...

I see you are incapable of the concept that free citizens are more capable than agents of the state. Why do you hate your fellow citizens?
 
NOVA said:
Driving in you back yard is your right....driving on public roadways is a courtesy allowed to the people that have a valid drivers license, insurance, and that obey all traffic laws....if they don't and lose that valid drivers license, you can still in your back yard without it....
Click to expand...

I've posted numerous court cases in other threads that say you are incorrect.
 
NOVA said:
Since when does the word "travel" mean the same as "drive"....you may post in English but you certainly don't understand it.
Click to expand...

Using this logic would mean that the government could limit our choice of arms to slingshot and bows and arrows and still be in compliance with the 2nd Amendment
 
Taichiliberal said:
You're dodging the question and the FACTS put forth in the OP but putting forth this absurd and ignorant question. Please give an answer to the question and spare us all the smoke screen.
Click to expand...

Liberal: Can government require classes to exercise your second amendment rights? yes, of course

Kaz: Can government require classes to exercise your first amendment rights then?

You: WTF does that have to do with it? Duh, dar, drool
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top