Biden Crime wave

[fatman76]

It would be a totally new system so, obviously, everything would not be in place on day one. At one point, car registration was new too.

No one would be a criminal unless they chose to disobey the law. Speed limits don't create criminals, right?

No matter what we do, if we do anything at all, it's going to take many years to significantly improve the problems with gun violence and death. We are flooded with guns and violent criminals.

You keep going back to the car analogy. It doesn't work. No one drives their gun to work, most people don't use their guns for essential life services, guns are not the second most valuable asset most people own, guns don't consume many natural resources once made, the gov't doesn't need to provide infrastructure to support the use of guns, guns are small and easy to hide, there are zero Constitutional provisions regarding car ownership, committing a crime with a gun and speeding w/an expired registration are laughably different in severity, and in most states you can't even have your gun visible in public.

So please stop with the foolish parallels, they don't work.

So again, let's try this from the top.

The state gov't - unless you're going to have everyone report to a post office (closest federal office?) - is going to send out a mandate for everyone to bring every gun they own in for registration and a physical test, with a gov't issued ID to prove who they are?

Explain to me how this makes us safer. How does this deal with being "flooded with guns" and how does it deal with violent criminals?

I'm not asking you about Day 1, I'm asking you what the end goal is and how we go from here to there. You're king Theo in this hypothetical, now explain.

 

[BamaFan1137]

Isn't that what you claimed @BamaFan1137 was doing?

He assumed that I was blaming one side over the other when I defined the debate.

He assumed that because when you clearly define the debate, it looks like your beating up on one side. Why does it look like that? Because, constitutionally, they are absolutely wrong.

That's not my fault and it's not a judgment. Those are just the facts.

 

[BamaFan1137]

I'd make gun ownership a privilege rather than a right (how fast would the gun companies mobilize the NRA for that? 😂 Because they care so deeply for the constitution, of course!).

The gun companies motivations have absolutely nothing to do with Americans wanting to keep their 2nd amendment rights.

Yes, gun companies, and all other private companies, want to make a profit. Yes they will use lobbyists in that effort along with other tools within their reach. So does every other industry.

However, you act like people only want guns because gun companies trick us into wanting them and that's simply not reality.

Keep guns away from criminals. If people like yourself would stay on that track, people like me can find compromises with you.

When you speak of too many guns and continue blaming the tool instead of the criminal, you've lost us. That won't lead to compromise.

 

[BamaFan1137]

So basically, sorry about all the dead people but we have our rights?

Sure. Also, I'm sorry that our current laws are ineffective at keeping guns away from violent criminals.

 

[BamaFan1137]

But, according to you all normally, wouldn't any restriction be unconstitutional?

They absolutely are.

However, if we can compromise on a reasonable restriction, one that most of us believe is feasible and that has a snowballs chance at working, many of us will work with you.

But your ideas so far do not sound reasonable nor will they address the actual issue...which is guns in the hands of violent people, crazy people or those who have been convicted of violent crimes.

Just saying "too many guns" is juvenile and it leads to absolutely no positive change. Asking law abiding citizens to register all of their guns does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to solve the issue either.

 

[fatman76]

When you speak of too many guns and continue blaming the tool instead of the criminal, you've lost us. That won't lead to compromise.

It's the classic "spoons are making people fat" argument.

1) A spoon is an inanimate object. It can't force feed you a complete tub of ice cream at 3am.
2) If someone wanted to eat ice cream at 3am, they'd use a fork, knife or even their hand if they wanted the ice cream badly enough. It would just be messier and less efficient.
3) Semi-related - obesity causes nearly 3MM deaths per year and guns cause 50k deaths (about half are suicide).
Conclusions: Blaming inanimate objects removes agency from the individual, and we should be 60X as worried about silverware, fast food, lack of exercise and sugary drinks as guns if the real goal is less death.

If we want the gov't to stop deaths they should make vegetable, lean meat and fruit consumption mandatory...as well as forced daily exercise.

I'm starting to question motivations here the more logic I apply to the situation.

 

[fatman76]

They absolutely are.

However, if we can compromise on a reasonable restriction, one that most of us believe is feasible and that has a snowballs chance at working, many of us will work with you.

But your ideas so far do not sound reasonable nor will they address the actual issue...which is guns in the hands of violent people, crazy people or those who have been convicted of violent crimes.

Just saying "too many guns" is juvenile and it leads to absolutely no positive change. Asking law abiding citizens to register all of their guns does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to solve the issue either.

Coming from someone that straps up, puts on a badge and puts himself in between criminals and innocent people every day it's indicative of your conviction that you aren't more of a gun confiscation advocate.

I'm sure you see more hairy situations in a month than most of us do in a lifetime. It's really easy for me to argue I should be able to keep a few revolvers under my bed, it's different when people are much more likely to use one to try to escape from you or kill you.

 

[BamaFan1137]

It's the classic "spoons are making people fat" argument.

1) A spoon is an inanimate object. It can't force feed you a complete tub of ice cream at 3am.
2) If someone wanted to eat ice cream at 3am, they'd use a fork, knife or even their hand if they wanted the ice cream badly enough. It would just be messier and less efficient.
3) Semi-related - obesity causes nearly 3MM deaths per year and guns cause 50k deaths (about half are suicide).
Conclusions: Blaming inanimate objects removes agency from the individual, and we should be 60X as worried about silverware, fast food, lack of exercise and sugary drinks as guns if the real goal is less death.

If we want the gov't to stop deaths they should make vegetable, lean meat and fruit consumption mandatory...as well as forced daily exercise.

I'm starting to question motivations here the more logic I apply to the situation.

The motivation is for big government and a nanny state.

The liberals believe that they must be in charge of that for everyone else because they are the smarty-est. In my experience, less intelligent people do not have the ability to recognize their own limitations. Smart people know exactly how stupid they are.

What they don't seem to recognize is that 99%+ of them will be subjects just like the rest of us. They're helping to build their own prisons.

Im ok with certain restrictions on firearms that address issues regarding people who should not have access to guns. As you said, the people are the problem...not the tool.

But yes, those restrictions are also unconstitutional. If given the choice between sacrificing freedoms that will not help as compared to those that will help, guess which one I'm more likely to accept?

 

[BamaFan1137]

Coming from someone that straps up, puts on a badge and puts himself in between criminals and innocent people every day it's indicative of your conviction that you aren't more of a gun confiscation advocate.

I'm sure you see more hairy situations in a month than most of us do in a lifetime. It's really easy for me to argue I should be able to keep a few revolvers under my bed, it's different when people are much more likely to use one to try to escape from you or kill you.

Thank you...and what you just said above is true. My job would be MUCH easier if I could guarantee that I'm the only person with a gun.

However, I won't always make it to you in time despite my best efforts and you have a right to defend yourself, your loved ones and even your property. We are all ultimately responsible for our own well-being...at least until help arrives. You are your own first line of defense.

I take guns off of violent felons, drunks and drug addicts on a regular basis. Establishing law that could help with that issue, of course I'm all for it. Establishing a law where law-abiding citizens don't have guns doesn't help me in the least.

 

[BamaFan1137]

Also, current federal gun laws that prohibit "certain persons" from possessing firearms already helps to some degree. The bad guys know it and they know...

A) they are going to prison EVERY time they get caught with a gun and...

B) that they will serve no less than 80% of their sentence and usually more like 100%.

Strengthening and expanding those laws is the answer. That will cost money because prisons and prosecutions are expensive.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

It's the classic "spoons are making people fat" argument.

1) A spoon is an inanimate object. It can't force feed you a complete tub of ice cream at 3am.
2) If someone wanted to eat ice cream at 3am, they'd use a fork, knife or even their hand if they wanted the ice cream badly enough. It would just be messier and less efficient.
3) Semi-related - obesity causes nearly 3MM deaths per year and guns cause 50k deaths (about half are suicide).
Conclusions: Blaming inanimate objects removes agency from the individual, and we should be 60X as worried about silverware, fast food, lack of exercise and sugary drinks as guns if the real goal is less death.

If we want the gov't to stop deaths they should make vegetable, lean meat and fruit consumption mandatory...as well as forced daily exercise.

I'm starting to question motivations here the more logic I apply to the situation.

Yep. And the hell of it is, focusing on the tool at the end of the day makes the problem WORSE. It would be bad enough if theo's approach simply didn't help, but it actually encourages MORE gun violence.

I sometimes wonder if he knows that and this is just another troll.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

When you speak of too many guns and continue blaming the tool instead of the criminal, you've lost us. That won't lead to compromise.

Right now we are dealing with the law-abiding gun owner having to submit to random gun tests to prove he's not really a criminal.

I will say this: If everyone on the left went after criminals as hard as theo does law-abiding gun owners, the gun violence problem would be solved overnight.

 

[fatman76]

Yep. And the hell of it is, focusing on the tool at the end of the day makes the problem WORSE. It would be bad enough if theo's approach simply didn't help, but it actually encourages MORE gun violence.

I sometimes wonder if he knows that and this is just another troll.

I don't even know what "Theo's approach" is. He won't tell me.

So far it's some ideological pie in the sky dream world, and even asking about details leads to "Nevermind, I worship Trump and guns so leave me alone".

 

[Capt Ron 1]

I take guns off of violent felons, drunks and drug addicts on a regular basis. Establishing law that could help with that issue, of course I'm all for it. Establishing a law where law-abiding citizens don't have guns doesn't help me in the least.

I think all of us agree with this...except the lib troll. There is SERIOUS bandwidth being wasted on him

 

[GatorTheo]

Sure. Also, I'm sorry that our current laws are ineffective at keeping guns away from violent criminals.

That's right. It's FAR too easy for people with bad intents to bear arms.

 

[GatorTheo]

The gun companies motivations have absolutely nothing to do with Americans wanting to keep their 2nd amendment rights.

Yes, gun companies, and all other private companies, want to make a profit. Yes they will use lobbyists in that effort along with other tools within their reach. So does every other industry.

However, you act like people only want guns because gun companies trick us into wanting them and that's simply not reality.

Keep guns away from criminals. If people like yourself would stay on that track, people like me can find compromises with you.

When you speak of too many guns and continue blaming the tool instead of the criminal, you've lost us. That won't lead to compromise.

You all are very, very poor readers. At no point have I ever failed to blame criminals for their crimes.

You simply subscribe to the gun cult logic that, if I don't worship guns, I must be pro-criminal.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

You all are very, very poor readers. At no point have I ever failed to blame criminals for their crimes.

No one here said you did. Now who is the poor reader?

Between criminals and law-abiding gun owners, who do you spend more time here complaining about?

You simply subscribe to the gun cult logic that, if I don't worship guns, I must be pro-criminal.

Do you know how many times a law-abiding gun owner has committed gun violence since the invention of guns?

Zero.

100% of the instances of illegal gun violence are committed by criminals.

If 100% of gun violence is committed by criminals, then 100% of your attention should be focused on the criminals, and 0% of your attention on the people contributing to 0% of the gun violence.

That's just logic and common sense.

 

[nail1988]

@BSC911 where you @ DFW airport today? 😭😭

 

[fatman76]

No one here said you did. Now who is the poor reader?

Between criminals and law-abiding gun owners, who do you spend more time here complaining about?


Do you know how many times a law-abiding gun owner has committed gun violence since the invention of guns?

Zero.

100% of the instances of illegal gun violence are committed by criminals.

If 100% of gun violence is committed by criminals, then 100% of your attention should be focused on the criminals, and 0% of your attention on the people contributing to 0% of the gun violence.

That's just logic and common sense.

So far I’ve seen his focus be 100% on law abiding gun owners.

@GatorTheo - just curious, do law abiding or non-law abiding gun owners voluntarily check all of their guns into the local authorities for a background(?) check to make sure it’s ok they keep them?

 

[BamaFan1137]

That's right. It's FAR too easy for people with bad intents to bear arms.

And yet people like you pretend that the problem can be alleviated by reducing the number and types of guns that law abiding citizens can own.

Let's be clear, you cannot reduce the number of guns...even if doing so would magically remove those guns from people who illegally own them today.

 

[BamaFan1137]

You all are very, very poor readers. At no point have I ever failed to blame criminals for their crimes.

You simply subscribe to the gun cult logic that, if I don't worship guns, I must be pro-criminal.

Theo...you focus on the guns. You want to fundamentally change, or possibly eliminate, the 2nd amendment.

...and yet you can't understand why we believe that you don't blame the criminals? If you blame the criminals, as you claim, then focus on addressing the criminal. Stop blaming the guns, the gun companies or us "gun nuts."

You're being disingenuous. You say you blame criminals but all of your proposals are focused on the gun.

To be clear, it's very easy to understand why we don't believe you when you say that you don't fail to blame criminals.

 

[BamaFan1137]

@BSC911 where you @ DFW airport today? 😭😭

View embedded media

Hard truth...naked men love to fight the police.


Dammit.

 

[GatorTheo]

Theo...you focus on the guns. You want to fundamentally change, or possibly eliminate, the 2nd amendment.

...and yet you can't understand why we believe that you don't blame the criminals? If you blame the criminals, as you claim, then focus on addressing the criminal. Stop blaming the guns, the gun companies or us "gun nuts."

You're being disingenuous. You say you blame criminals but all of your proposals are focused on the gun.

To be clear, it's very easy to understand why we don't believe you when you say that you don't fail to blame criminals.

It's been brought up many times. We agree on cracking down on criminal behavior. It's not going to generate much of a debate.

Find me a post where I've taken any kind of an easy stance on criminal behavior.

You're simply a victim of cult think......they're either for us or they're against us.....nothing in the middle.

It's just like Trump cult thinking. If you don't worship Trump, you're a liberal extremist.

 

[GatorTheo]

And yet people like you pretend that the problem can be alleviated by reducing the number and types of guns that law abiding citizens can own.

Let's be clear, you cannot reduce the number of guns...even if doing so would magically remove those guns from people who illegally own them today.

How do other countries avoid being flooded with guns? Are we the only country unable to stem the flow?

 

[BamaFan1137]

How do other countries avoid being flooded with guns? Are we the only country unable to stem the flow?

We've covered this time and time again.

Many countries with gun laws similar to what you're proposing have murder rates higher than our own.

Are you trying to prevent murder or just murder by gun? Which brings us back to you being focused solely on the gun.

 

[Capt Ron 1]

How do other countries avoid being flooded with guns? Are we the only country unable to stem the flow?

Coincidently, We ARE the GREATEST Country on earth, son. Not because government knows better than the people....but because WE THE PEOPLE know better than the people we elect. If you want gubment control, I suggest you move out of America. You are a lib anyway, and I truly believe America is better off without ONE lib. Libs look out for themselves...not their Country. The disrespect our flag, our history, our Constitution. Guess who's posts I can go quote and show this happening to? YOU. You do not like our Constituion.....end of story. If at all...only conveniently

 

[BamaFan1137]

It's been brought up many times. We agree on cracking down on criminal behavior. It's not going to generate much of a debate.

Find me a post where I've taken any kind of an easy stance on criminal behavior.

You're simply a victim of cult think......they're either for us or they're against us.....nothing in the middle.

It's just like Trump cult thinking. If you don't worship Trump, you're a liberal extremist.

Sure thing. On the cult thingy, buy a mirror. I don't care if you don't own a gun.

 

[fatman76]

Hard truth...naked men love to fight the police.


Dammit.

Wait a second, I didn’t see that listed as a perk on the recruitment brochure.

Are you sure?

 

[fatman76]

How do other countries avoid being flooded with guns? Are we the only country unable to stem the flow?

You mean like Australia who banned guns and did a gun buyback…and now there are more guns than before?

You can’t unring a bell, which is why you won’t answer any of my specific questions. You talk in platitudes and generalities because you know what you’re dreaming up is impossible.

 

[GatorTheo]

We've covered this time and time again.

Many countries with gun laws similar to what you're proposing have murder rates higher than our own.

Are you trying to prevent murder or just murder by gun? Which brings us back to you being focused solely on the gun.

Where are these countries with higher murder rates? Africa? South America?

 

[GatorTheo]

You mean like Australia who banned guns and did a gun buyback…and now there are more guns than before?

You can’t unring a bell, which is why you won’t answer any of my specific questions. You talk in platitudes and generalities because you know what you’re dreaming up is impossible.

Top 10 Countries with Highest Gun Ownership (Civilian guns owned per 100 people):​

1. United States - 120.5
2. Falkland Islands - 62.1
3. Yemen - 52.8
4. New Caledonia - 42.5
5. Serbia - 39.1 (tie)
6. Montenegro - 39.1 (tie)
7. Uruguay - 34.7 (tie)
8. Canada - 34.7 (tie)
9. Cyprus - 34
10. Finland - 32.4

Didn't see Australia. Maybe they're #11.

 

[Capt Ron 1]

Where are these countries with higher murder rates? Africa? South America?

See post 909...then do your research. Theo...you seem like a nice guy...but my God you are so dense. How did you do in school? You come in here to fight and your arms and legs are tied behind your back. You argue on emotion...not substance. PLERASE, PLEASE do some research before coming in here getting the floor wiped up with your ridiculous, unsubstantiated BS

 

[GatorTheo]

Coincidently, We ARE the GREATEST Country on earth, son. Not because government knows better than the people....but because WE THE PEOPLE know better than the people we elect. If you want gubment control, I suggest you move out of America. You are a lib anyway, and I truly believe America is better off without ONE lib. Libs look out for themselves...not their Country. The disrespect our flag, our history, our Constitution. Guess who's posts I can go quote and show this happening to? YOU. You do not like our Constituion.....end of story. If at all...only conveniently

I thought you had me on ignore.

 

[BamaFan1137]

Where are these countries with higher murder rates? Africa? South America?

Many of them are. Others, like Greenland and Russia, are not.

Also, none of the countries with lower murder rates began with nearly 400 million known firearms when they banned or severely restricted them. And let's be honest, the actual number of firearms in this country is north of 400 million.

Of course criminals will be quick to turn theirs in if you get your way...and no way they'll find a way to procure more of them.

 

[GatorTheo]

Many of them are. Others, like Greenland and Russia, are not.

Also, none of the countries with lower murder rates began with nearly 400 million known firearms when they banned or severely restricted them. And let's be honest, the actual number of firearms in this country is north of 400 million.

Of course criminals will be quick to turn theirs in if you get your way...and no way they'll find a way to procure more of them.

We are flooded with guns. Getting control will be neither easy nor quick.

 

[BamaFan1137]

The idiocy...the war on drugs is unwinnable. We need to legalize drugs and regulate (tax) the sale.

OTOH, we need to do the opposite with guns. Because then bad people won't have guns?

One thing is for sure, we didn't ban lead paint soon enough.

 

[BamaFan1137]

We are flooded with guns. Getting control will be neither easy nor quick.

...nor possible.

 

[fatman76]

Top 10 Countries with Highest Gun Ownership (Civilian guns owned per 100 people):​

1. United States - 120.5
2. Falkland Islands - 62.1
3. Yemen - 52.8
4. New Caledonia - 42.5
5. Serbia - 39.1 (tie)
6. Montenegro - 39.1 (tie)
7. Uruguay - 34.7 (tie)
8. Canada - 34.7 (tie)
9. Cyprus - 34
10. Finland - 32.4

Didn't see Australia. Maybe they're #11.

Where did I say Australia was top 10 in gun ownership (either before or after the buyback)?

Again, keep focusing on the spoon. You'll solve obesity in no time!

 

[GatorTheo]

Where did I say Australia was top 10 in gun ownership (either before or after the buyback)?

Again, keep focusing on the spoon. You'll solve obesity in no time!

Following gun company 'logic':

You know the solution to obesity? MORE FOOD!

 

[Capt Ron 1]

Suspected robber who allegedly pistol-whipped store clerk stopped in his tracks by armed good Samaritan: cops

Fort Lauderdale Police arrested Nicolas Richard Lee Deas after he allegedly pistol-whipped a Family Dollar employee and tried to steal cash before an armed witness intervened.

www.foxnews.com