Republican traitors cross the aisle to pass guncontrol, SB7026 heads to Scott's desk.
- Thread starter EvilWayz
- Start date
I’ve read a brief synopsis, and i didn’t immediately see a problem with it, though I really haven’t the time to read the full txt either.....
eDub, what’s in the bill that you see is a problem?
1) raising the age limit from 18 to 21. If Politicians can send an 18 year to Iraq with a machine gun for the hell of it, an 18 year old should be able to buy a shotgun or a rifle to defend his home and family. Interestingly enough, they didnt tie up the private sales "loophole." Which means an 18 year old can still own a pistol, rifle, or shotgun, he just can't buy one from a dealer.
2) "Mental health" seizures that violate the hell out of the 4th amendment. This will affect roughly 3.5 million people. Why shouldn't i support a bill that says crazy people shouldn't have firearms? Because hte government gets to decide who is crazy.
3) instant criminalization of slide fire stocks. No grandfathering, no grace period. The last time something was instantly banned? Marijuana.
4) Mandatory waiting periods on all firearms purchases. Why do I have a problem with that? None of the weapons used any any of the school shootings were purchased immediately. The average was a year. In the cases of Sandy Hook and Columbine, YEARS had passed. All a waiting period does is inconvenience me, and send a criminal to westside to purchase a weapon of his choice on the black market.
None of this shit will do anything to stop a school shooting. BUT SOMETHING had to be done, because CHILDREN.
2) "Mental health" seizures that violate the hell out of the 4th amendment. This will affect roughly 3.5 million people. Why shouldn't i support a bill that says crazy people shouldn't have firearms? Because hte government gets to decide who is crazy.
3) instant criminalization of slide fire stocks. No grandfathering, no grace period. The last time something was instantly banned? Marijuana.
4) Mandatory waiting periods on all firearms purchases. Why do I have a problem with that? None of the weapons used any any of the school shootings were purchased immediately. The average was a year. In the cases of Sandy Hook and Columbine, YEARS had passed. All a waiting period does is inconvenience me, and send a criminal to westside to purchase a weapon of his choice on the black market.
None of this shit will do anything to stop a school shooting. BUT SOMETHING had to be done, because CHILDREN.
If you think any of this is going to stop a mass shooting, then you're dumber than Bucanole.
No one thinks a little gun control will end mass shootings....or even crime. We're just trying to make it a little more difficult.
None of the law passed today would have stopped Cruz. Or Columbine. Or Sandy Hook. And some smart 20 year old is going to sue the state of Florida and win.
You gun controllers don't fool me a bit. This is a death of a thousand cuts. You come back for a little bit more of the pie each time.
This is not about guns. It's about control.
The people responsible for the shooting at Parkland, in order, are Nicholas Cruz, the FBI, The Broward County Sheriff's office, and SRO Deputy Scot Peterson. Yet, I am the one being inconvenienced.
None of your damn business.
But the 20 year old that just got back home from Iraq or Afghanistan and carried a select-fire M4 for 18 months can't buy a shotgun to defend his home now.
Based on the word of a family member, a person's guns can be confiscated before any legal proceeding takes place. The burden of proof falls upon the gun owner. Because nobody would abuse that law.
The SlideFire stock in my buddy's closet is now illegal. Who is going to compensate him for his 200 dollar purchase?
A three, or seven, or fourteen day waiting period is not going to stop a determined maniac. In Las Vegas, Orlando, Parkland, Sandy Hook, and Columbine, all the weapons had been purchased a minimum of 8 months prior. There isn't even any data on whether waiting periods work because theres no quantifiable metric with which to measure it. Its feel good, bullshit legislation.
There are 55 million children in school this year. If you look at the statistics over the last 20 years, 15 children die from gunshot wounds of any type per year. They have a better chance of drowning, getting bit by a shark, struck by lightning, getting hit by a car, or dying from a doctors mistake in a hospital than getting killed in a school shooting.
Last edited:
I'm not entirely comfortable with the mental illness provision either. I wouldn't be surprised to see gangs take advantage of this to disarm their rivals before taking them out. I'm not sure how it will be implemented, but I don't like the idea of cops just unilaterally taking people's guns away.
I like the age increase, but not for all guns. I'm OK with an 18 year old owning a shotgun or a non-semi-automatic rifle. If it's a military vet or an LEO, I'm OK with that too. But I don't want civilian 19 year olds running around with AR-15s and handguns, which are responsible for most gun homicides.
I like the age increase, but not for all guns. I'm OK with an 18 year old owning a shotgun or a non-semi-automatic rifle. If it's a military vet or an LEO, I'm OK with that too. But I don't want civilian 19 year olds running around with AR-15s and handguns, which are responsible for most gun homicides.
You really think 1) gangs are going to work the legal system or 2) give up their shit? This is a perfect way for cops and family members to f*ck with people they don't like.
So no AR-15's or handguns But you'd be ok with them running around with a Mini-14? You do understand my bolt action .308 will defeat body armor right?
Newsflash, 70% of gun homicides are with handguns. Nothing in this law changed the age of OWNING a pistol or rifle or shotgun. An 18 year old can still own a pistol, he just can't buy one thru an FFL dealer.
3% of gun homicides are committed with rifles of ANY type, and about 20% of THAT is an AR platform rifle.
Where exactly do you get off telling grown ass adults what they can and can't possess. And yes, an 18 year old is grown, since he can vote and get drafted.
If you don't choose to arm yourself, thats fine, but stop telling free men what they can and can't defend house and family with.
This bill literally did nothing but give the sheeple even more of a false sense of security.
Not sure if you misread my post, but I said literally the opposite of these things. I said that I'm OK with 18-21 year olds owning shotguns and rifles, but not semi-automatics and handguns, which I also said are involved in most gun violence. I also said that I have concerns about cops being able to unilaterally take people's guns away.
I misread nothing, YOU did. The law doesn't say that an 18 year old can't own a pistol, rifle, or shotgun. They merely can't purchase one from an FFL dealer. That means they can purchase one privately. So thats one useless part of the law.
You apparently missed my statistic on crime and rifles. 3%.
I'll trot out the statistics for gun violence real quick so you can see how completely pointless this bill was.
Population of the United States - 320000000
population that admits owning at least one firearm 81000000
Estimated number of AR platform rifles - 9000000
Yearly total of deaths involving firearms: 33,000
Yearly total of suicides involving firearms: 22,000
Yearly total of homicides involving firearms: 11,000
70% involved handguns
3% involve non shotgun long guns (semi, lever, bolt)
3% involve shotguns
24% involve firearms whose type was unknown or unrecorded
So using basic arithmetic:
Handguns - 70% of 11000 = 7700
Rifles - 3% of 11000= 33
Shotguns - 3% of 11000= 33
Other - 24% = 2640
The AR platform falls under long guns/ rifles.
33 deaths. There is no data on the age of the perpetrator, but there are statistics on the age of the victims, which is 16 to 24 years old, which rather neatly coincides with the average age of gang members. It is estimated that half of gun homicides are drug related.
And as all statistics have room for error, that would cover more than 3 %.
So even if you were to pass a law that instantly made every "assault weapon" in the hands of anyone regardless of age disappear, you would do exactly diddly shit to stop firearm violence.
I again ask you why you think you should get an opinion of how a free man chooses to arm himself.
More kids die on a July 4th weekend in Chicago than died at Parkland. They just happened to be the wrong color.
Last edited:
Read this article. Then spread it to your friends, so you can understand how little power the NRA actually has vis a vis lobbying money. And it's from a left wing new outlet, CNBC. Not Fox or Breitbart.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/16/nra-money-isnt-why-gun-control-efforts-are-failing-commentary.html
I'm curious as to where in the constitution it says you have the right to bear arms only if you work for the government. The purpose of the 2nd amendment is THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what you are suggesting.
And as a former member of both law enforcement and the military, I have met just as many retards, cowards and reckless idiots, possibly more, than in civilian life.
I will repeat what I said. This time I will use markup tags to help you find the key parts:
First post:
"I don't want civilian 19 year olds running around with AR-15s and handguns, which are responsible for most gun homicides."
Second post:
"I said that I'm OK with 18-21 year olds owning shotguns and rifles, but not semi-automatics and handguns, which I also said are involved in most gun violence."
I don't see how you can have a military or a police force if members between the ages of 18-21 don't have guns.
Once again you don't seem to understand that this law doesn't stop them from owning handguns. They just can't go buy them from a store that has an FFL anymore.
They could legally purchase one from a friend, relative, or from a private sale with a third party.
The law as passed had no effect on handguns whatsoever, because the age to purchase a handgun from a FFL dealer has been 21 for at least 25 years.
Do you get it now?
You still haven't told me why a 18 year old should be allowed to vote, but not own a semiautomatic rifle or a handgun.
If the "gun control advocates" really wanted to stop gun violence, they would try to ban handguns. Most of them aren't interested in tilting at that particular windmill.
Last edited:
A militia consists of all male members between ages 17 and 45 who are NOT members of the Military, Reserves, or National Guard/ Naval militia.
The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with the armed forces of the United States.
The NRA is the face of 'gun nuts' and the gun companies. They're going to catch most of the flak. Just like Paterno was the face of Penn State.
I don't know why you keep raising this point about handguns. I've said in every response to this thread that handguns are at least as much of a problem as assault rifles. The original version of the bill entirely banned the transfer of assault rifles or "high capacity magazines" to people under 21. I assume that they had to dilute the language in order to for it to pass. Personally, I would have kept the original version, and included handguns, while omitting the stuff about the police being to confiscate people's weapons. But we both know that the NRA would have never allowed that to pass, so we have to live with a watered-down bill.
"At least as much of a problem as assault rifles?"
Not even close. According to the FBI, Handguns are 20 times more likely to be used in a homicide that any rifle, assault rifle or not. In fact, baseball bats and/or other kinds of clubs are used to murder people more often then all rifles, much less assault rifles. Hell, there is not even a good definition of what an assault rifle is. I have a bolt action hunting rifle for which I can buy a 30 round magazine.
It doesn't matter if 18-20 year olds have access to assault rifles because assault rifles, as I have pointed out TWICE, aren't used very often in crime.
Uhm no. The gun companies are the face of gun companies.
Most "gun nuts", myself included, think the NRA is pretty soft on the 2nd Amendment. This bill being proof of that.
The fact that having read that article and still thinking that proves my point that the gun grabbers don't care about the truth, only about their narrative.
The only power the NRA has is the ability to get 5 million people to vote exactly how they tell them.
sadgator would love it if we outlawed all guns and formally defined “arms” as hatchets and bows and arrows. sadgator would proudly stand behind Katniss...
That being said, sadgator understands that all you “patriots” out there demand to have your guns, so that ideal will never fly...
But the reality is...kids are being slaughtered...as a society, we just have to publically say “enough.” sadgator applauds the Legislature for at least having the balls to take some small affirmative step against this type of gun violence regardless of whether the legislation passed will have any real world impact.
If you don’t understand the basic societal need to do that, then sadgator doesn’t know what to say...
That being said, sadgator understands that all you “patriots” out there demand to have your guns, so that ideal will never fly...
But the reality is...kids are being slaughtered...as a society, we just have to publically say “enough.” sadgator applauds the Legislature for at least having the balls to take some small affirmative step against this type of gun violence regardless of whether the legislation passed will have any real world impact.
If you don’t understand the basic societal need to do that, then sadgator doesn’t know what to say...
No group is nuttier than gun nuts. They're not dumb people but, when the subject turns to guns, they go into some kind of hypnotic trance. Like Stepford wives for the gun companies.
Opinions like this are how Donald Trump was elected. So, if you liberals want more Trump. Then nominate a candidate that espouses these kinds of opinions and that is how you will get more Trump.
Hillary did a good job of that in the last few days.
First of all, don't call me a "patriot" in quotes. Ive done more for this country than you ever will. But that doesn't surprise me, you statists always start with insults.
There are 55 million children enrolled in school. Over the last 20 years, 15 die of firearm violence every year.
If we were talking about anything but children, that would be statistically insignificant.
More kids will die over the weekend in Chicago than will in school shootings this year. But they are the wrong color and live in the wrong place.
Small affirmative step my ass. Its age discrimination, and three gun rights organizations are already suing.
Read what i wrote. Nothing in that bill will save a single child.
As it is, school shootings are rarer than they were in the 90s. When we had an "assault weapons" ban.
As a society, most people understand that when you live in a country that has more firearms than citizens, stuff like this is going to happen.
And yet, out of a country of 320 million people, only 33k people die of firearms violence per year, and 22K of those people are suicides.
that leaves 11k people a year. Which is less than a thousandth of a percentile of the population.
More kids drown in swimming pools or get into car accidents on their bikes than will die of gun violence. 150k children will die of medical errors at their local hospital.
The US NON firearm homicide rate is larger than the entire homicide rate of the European Union.
We are a violent people even with out guns.
Last edited:
When this is how the side that wants "common sense gun control" act, why would you think we gun enthusiasts would do anything but harden our position?
And given that you think we are stupid and violent, is it wise to annoy the people who have the guns?
If we were what you think we are, you wouldn't be able to walk without stepping over a body.
I even went out of my way to mention I know y'all aren't dumb. I have a couple of longtime friends who are gun nuts. They are not stupid by any stretch of the imagination but, when the topic turns to guns, it's like flipping a switch. They become agitated and paranoid and unable to carry on a logical discussion. It's like they're in a cult and everyone notices it but them.
And that would be because the other side presents blatant lies as truth, blames all of us for the misdeeds of a few, and the all or nothing either you think how we think or you hate children.
Gun rights are like a pie, and you keep coming to get pieces but not putting anything back. Some of the more hardcore of your ilk have stated that the end game is no guns. This is the slippery slope towards that goal
We are tired of giving up our natural right to defense and getting nothing in return. Especially when what we give up doesn't do anything but serve politicians who need to look tough on crime. And are expected to trust a government that fails us on every level for protection that legally, they don't have to provide.
I am a free man with a clean criminal record, and I will be damned if you or anyone else has the temerity to tell me with what I can arm myself in defense of country, family, or property.
Those that would give up essential liberty for the illusion of safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
I wouldn't give up my 1st, 4th, or 5th amendment rights to save just one child. I fail to see why I should give up the right that safeguards the rest.
Weapons are a means to liberty. Your freedoms are not secured by a God, by a document, or by the bravery of our forefathers. They are secured because people fear that should they try to take them from you, you will fight back. With Weapons.
Last edited:
No insult to you intended EW. Just generalizing the gun lobby and the fact that we don’t need militias in today’s era for effect. sadgator appreciates your service and respects your opinion even if he respectfully disagrees with it.
Just because we haven't had a need for militias doesn't mean we won't in the future.
Remember, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, and the militias of the countries we're currently occupying are doing pretty well against the baddest armed force on the planet.
While Im on the soapbox, being in the military is a job, a voluntary one at that. It does not mean my opinion counts more than yours ( unless we are talking about something only military people are familiar with.) It does not make one automatically noble, special, or heroic. During my time in the Corps I met more shitbirds and cowards than I did heroes.
Last edited:
Similar threads
