07-14-2014 07:46 AM
4,617 ... 9899100101102 ...
tools
  1. ItnStln's Avatar
    Why does this always need to be spelled out? Criminals and crazies don't buy guns legally, they don't even necessarily buy them at all (probably steal them). If they do buy them, they buy it on the black market.
    Background checks have little to do with the equation.


    Correct, they buy them out of the back of some guys car on a street corner. Or they just steal them. Either way background checks don't affect criminals.
    05-28-2013 06:35 PM
  2. ItnStln's Avatar
    Yes, they don't buy them legally, because they CAN'T. Take off all the background checks and watch what happens. Chaos.

    It's amazing to me that people understand the need for driver's test for licenses, and checks to make sure you are eligible to get a passport, but when it comes to using a deadly weapon, some think there shouldn't be any hoops to jump through at all. That's just insane.
    Where does the Second Amendment require a background check? Did George Washington and Thomas Jefferson have to have a background check done? All I'm saying is why should the criminals be the only ones who don't have to wait to purchase a gun?
    05-28-2013 06:37 PM
  3. Aquila's Avatar
    Where does the Second Amendment require a background check? Did George Washington a d Thomas Jefferson have to have a background check done? All I'm saying is why should the criminals be the only ones who don't have to wait to purchase a gun?
    I'd say the process they went through was a little more rigorous than a questionnaire
    GadgetGator likes this.
    05-28-2013 06:41 PM
  4. ItnStln's Avatar
    O

    So let's see...you complain about needing guns to fight off criminals, but then want to drop background checks so criminals can get guns even easier. And let all the crazies get them too. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. What a great idea.

    Why does everyone always ignore the "well regulated" part of the second amendment?
    But is well regulated defined? It could pertain to the training aspect...just saying.
    I never said there shouldn't be any hoops to jump through, of course that's imperative. But crazies and criminals specialize in avoiding hoops, so don't put so much emphasis on them that you forget all the other angles.

    And you say they don't buy them legally because "they can't".
    NO. They don't buy them legally because THEY DON'T WANT A PAPER TRAIL.


    Pretty much!
    05-28-2013 06:41 PM
  5. gollum18's Avatar
    The sad thing about the second amendment is that it is so broad, it can be interpreted in many different types ways, and both major parties have made their own examples of it.

    For all we know it could have meant the right to mount bear arms above your fireplace.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
    05-28-2013 06:43 PM
  6. GadgetGator's Avatar
    So normal kids aren't at risk of being kidnapped?
    I think a sick ******* that wants to kidnap or harm a child would more likely do it to "average Joe's" children than say, a child who has an armed guard.
    And I have a concealed carry permit, so there's the protection on the way home.
    And if Columbine didn't have armed security probably more people would've died.
    And still, the average person has a right to defend themself, their property, and their family. Why should that security stop as soon as my sons go to school?

    And the money is there, it's just being used for BS that doesn't matter.

    Sent from my wireless telephonic device.
    Seriously? If you see no threat difference between a worldwide well-known leader of the free world and yourself whom no one knows then I can't help you. The two are not even remotely the same. You are not a political target.

    And just what are these things that schools are spending their money on that you think would be better suited to militarizing our schools?
    05-28-2013 06:45 PM
  7. gollum18's Avatar
    Militarizing our schools should be the least of our concerns. Considering we are 37th in the world for math and science, we should be focusing on improving that ranking instead lest we lose our superpower status because currently it's a joke what Americans learn in school for math and science.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
    05-28-2013 06:48 PM
  8. Aquila's Avatar
    But is well regulated defined? It could pertain to the training aspect...just saying.
    Militia is defined somewhat in Article 1 Section 8. Off the top of my head, basically it says organized and trained by the State governments, supplies/munitions supplied by the Federal government. The purpose of the militia is to suppress insurrections and repel invasions. This was necessary because other than a Navy, but they did not want an Army.
    05-28-2013 06:49 PM
  9. Aquila's Avatar
    If schools can't afford textbooks or teachers....
    GadgetGator and msndrstood like this.
    05-28-2013 06:51 PM
  10. GadgetGator's Avatar
    Edit: and another point I wanted to bring up, that 90% of Americans want stricter background checks was BS. I found the origin of the survey, Quinnipiac University. The question was, "Do you support background checks at gun shows?"
    Well, I support that. I don't know anyone who would be against that. Who are the 10% that don't support that idea? The problem is, they already do background checks at all gun shows. Go to a gun show and try to purchase a gun without a background check. The only type of gun sales that don't require a background check are private sales. If I wanted to sell my buddy, Billy Bob, a gun, no background check is required. If Billy Bob is a felon, and I sell him a gun, then guess what, I'm going to jail. So even private sales that don't require a background check, usually people don't sell to someone they don't know. And the type of person who would knowingly sell a gun to a felon, do you think they are going to obey the law and perform a background check on the guy?
    So that bill that got knocked down in the Senate had little to do with background checks. We already have those. And 90% of Americans did not support it.

    Edit: You have a 0.0027% chance of being murdered with a firearm of any type in the US.
    .
    There are people in this very forum that are calling for no background checks. As for the notion that background checks are done on all sales at gun shows, that just isn't true. It's been proven in a number of stories, including a piece that CNN did, where it was QUITE easy for them to obtain a gun without any ID or background checks at all. Gun shows definitely need to be cracked down on. It's not a level playing field for the other dealers when they guy at the next table over isn't doing them.
    05-28-2013 06:53 PM
  11. gollum18's Avatar
    If schools can't afford textbooks or teachers....
    Well levies are actually illegal. If it is a public school it is the states job to support that school, you shouldn't have to pass a levy to receive a fovernment handout. They treat our educational system like it's a damn competition or something.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
    05-28-2013 07:17 PM
  12. jova33's Avatar
    There are people in this very forum that are calling for no background checks. As for the notion that background checks are done on all sales at gun shows, that just isn't true. It's been proven in a number of stories, including a piece that CNN did, where it was QUITE easy for them to obtain a gun without any ID or background checks at all. Gun shows definitely need to be cracked down on. It's not a level playing field for the other dealers when they guy at the next table over isn't doing them.
    Every piece I've seen they went in and legally purchased a firearm. I think it's actually illegal for felons to go to gun shows, but I'm not sure.
    And if any FFL seller sells without doing a background check, they'll lose their license and probably be arrested.
    Do you have a link to this story?

    Sent from my wireless telephonic device.
    05-28-2013 07:44 PM
  13. Live2ride883's Avatar
    Yes, they don't buy them legally, because they CAN'T. Take off all the background checks and watch what happens. Chaos.

    It's amazing to me that people understand the need for driver's test for licenses, and checks to make sure you are eligible to get a passport, but when it comes to using a deadly weapon, some think there shouldn't be any hoops to jump through at all. That's just insane.
    A drivers license is a PRIVILEGE, we have a RIGHT to bear arms guaranteed by the Constitution. Honestly I don't think I can explain it any better than that.

    With all the teen accidents and deaths from texting while driving alone I think the driving age should be raised to no less than 21, and the test for a drivers license needs to be a lot harder.
    05-28-2013 07:46 PM
  14. ItnStln's Avatar
    I'd say the process they went through was a little more rigorous than a questionnaire
    Without a doubt.
    The sad thing about the second amendment is that it is so broad, it can be interpreted in many different types ways, and both major parties have made their own examples of it.

    For all we know it could have meant the right to mount bear arms above your fireplace.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
    True. If only they specified lol.
    Militia is defined somewhat in Article 1 Section 8. Off the top of my head, basically it says organized and trained by the State governments, supplies/munitions supplied by the Federal government. The purpose of the militia is to suppress insurrections and repel invasions. This was necessary because other than a Navy, but they did not want an Army.
    I'm going to have to look this up when I get a chance. Now you have me curious!
    A drivers license is a PRIVILEGE, we have a RIGHT to bear arms guaranteed by the Constitution. Honestly I don't think I can explain it any better than that.

    With all the teen accidents and deaths from texting while driving alone I think the driving age should be raised to no less than 21, and the test for a drivers license needs to be a lot harder.
    Well said, Live2ride883! The Constitution doesn't grant me a driver's license, but does grant me a gun. Should i mention the fact that cars kill more people than guns?
    Also, the test should be harder I agree. And make it in English, and only give a license to US citizens and legal immigrants. Not illegal immigrants!
    Live2ride883 likes this.
    05-28-2013 07:50 PM
  15. jova33's Avatar
    Seriously? If you see no threat difference between a worldwide well-known leader of the free world and yourself whom no one knows then I can't help you. The two are not even remotely the same. You are not a political target.

    And just what are these things that schools are spending their money on that you think would be better suited to militarizing our schools?
    Who's child is more likely to be kidnapped or harmed? Snoop Dogg's kid, who goes to a private school, and most likely has armed security, or your kid that goes to a public school with no protection and is a "GUN FREE ZONE"

    I didn't say schools were spending the money on nonsense. But really they are. It costs about, let's say $2000 of your tax dollars to send you kid to school every year. In a classroom of 30 kids, that's $60,000 a year. Teachers get paid, what? $30,000 a year, and that's being generous. In a school with 30 teachers, that's $900,000 after paying the teachers. Where does all that money go? Teachers end up paying for classroom supplies out of their own paycheck.


    But other than the scam of our county's education system, there's money elsewhere that the government could use to pay for guards. Like the 230 million our government gave to the Brotherhood of Islam, a known terrorist organization to most countries except ours, or the hundreds of millions of dollars our government is funneling into Syrian rebels with known links to Al Qaeda. The stockpile of thousands of tanks that continue to be built and aren't needed by our military and that are just collecting dust in the desert.

    Sent from my wireless telephonic device.
    05-28-2013 07:56 PM
  16. dchawk81's Avatar
    If cars existed, the motorheads among the founding fathers would have made an amendment guaranteeing our right to drive.

    If there were gangbangers and nutjobs committing heinous mass-murders of children plus mass media to ensure they heard about it every time it happened, the 2nd wouldn't be so vague.
    GadgetGator likes this.
    05-28-2013 08:04 PM
  17. Live2ride883's Avatar

    Well said, Live2ride883! The Constitution doesn't grant me a driver's license, but does grant me a gun. Should i mention the fact that cars kill more people than guns?
    Thanks, but I think the ratio of gun deaths to automobile deaths has been covered so many times that we all can accept it as fact. There was an article on my FB page a few days ago where a teenage girl was T-boned by a semitrailer on her FIRST solo drive after getting her license, the state patrol found a long unsent text message on the floor of her car. She was only a few blocks from home.

    Now for those who have recently made comments about owning RPG's, tanks, land mines, and or nukes parked in our front yard, none of those items are classified as "arms". I thoroughly enjoy my firearms, as does my family and in all honesty neither I nor anyone that I know has a desire to own these type of weapons. From time to time we will get in a group drink a few beers after shooting and run our mouths off about how "cool" it would be. But other than that if they do really want them then I don't know about it.
    The Hustleman likes this.
    05-28-2013 08:07 PM
  18. Aquila's Avatar
    Thanks, but I think the ratio of gun deaths to automobile deaths has been covered so many times that we all can accept it as fact. There was an article on my FB page a few days ago where a teenage girl was T-boned by a semitrailer on her FIRST solo drive after getting her license, the state patrol found a long unsent text message on the floor of her car. She was only a few blocks from home.

    Now for those who have recently made comments about owning RPG's, tanks, land mines, and or nukes parked in our front yard, none of those items are classified as "arms". I thoroughly enjoy my firearms, as does my family and in all honesty neither I nor anyone that I know has a desire to own these type of weapons. From time to time we will get in a group drink a few beers after shooting and run our mouths off about how "cool" it would be. But other than that if they do really want them then I don't know about it.
    What would you even do with it? If someone were breaking into your home, you're not going to go outside, jump in your Abrams and fire on your home to try to root them out... You're not going to lay mines in hopes that a burglar finds them, but your dog doesn't... these are silly for most people.
    GadgetGator likes this.
    05-28-2013 08:22 PM
  19. ItnStln's Avatar
    Thanks, but I think the ratio of gun deaths to automobile deaths has been covered so many times that we all can accept it as fact. There was an article on my FB page a few days ago where a teenage girl was T-boned by a semitrailer on her FIRST solo drive after getting her license, the state patrol found a long unsent text message on the floor of her car. She was only a few blocks from home.

    Now for those who have recently made comments about owning RPG's, tanks, land mines, and or nukes parked in our front yard, none of those items are classified as "arms". I thoroughly enjoy my firearms, as does my family and in all honesty neither I nor anyone that I know has a desire to own these type of weapons. From time to time we will get in a group drink a few beers after shooting and run our mouths off about how "cool" it would be. But other than that if they do really want them then I don't know about it.
    Yes, but I feel that the anti-gun crowd often times forgets that. And that's sad about the girl.

    - - - Updated - - -

    What would you even do with it? If someone were breaking into your home, you're not going to go outside, jump in your Abrams and fire on your home to try to root them out... You're not going to lay mines in hopes that a burglar finds them, but your dog doesn't... these are silly for most people.
    There's always that one person who would do that!
    05-28-2013 08:44 PM
  20. Aquila's Avatar
    There's always that one person who would do that!
    That's the part where I want the mental heath reform to come in....
    05-28-2013 08:46 PM
  21. Live2ride883's Avatar
    What would you even do with it? If someone were breaking into your home, you're not going to go outside, jump in your Abrams and fire on your home to try to root them out... You're not going to lay mines in hopes that a burglar finds them, but your dog doesn't... these are silly for most people.
    For what I am going to call casual use like from someone breaking into my home situation I agree with you.

    But in the defense from a tyrannical government they would certainly come in "handy".

    Don't even tease me about something happening to my dog, I still loose it every time old yeller dies...
    05-28-2013 08:52 PM
  22. Aquila's Avatar
    For what I am going to call casual use like from someone breaking into my home situation I agree with you.

    But in the defense from a tyrannical government they would certainly come in "handy".

    Don't even tease me about something happening to my dog, I still loose it every time old yeller dies...
    By "you" I meant, "one who owns such stuff", not you specifically.
    05-28-2013 09:03 PM
  23. GadgetGator's Avatar
    I never said there shouldn't be any hoops to jump through, of course that's imperative. But crazies and criminals specialize in avoiding hoops, so don't put so much emphasis on THOSE hoops, that everything else gets lost in the shuffle.

    And you say they don't buy them legally because "they can't".
    NO. They don't buy them legally because THEY DON'T WANT A PAPER TRAIL.
    If what you say is true, then you just proved my point. The background checks serve a purpose.
    05-28-2013 09:15 PM
  24. llamabreath's Avatar
    If what you say is true, then you just proved my point. The background checks serve a purpose.
    I usually charge a few dollars to prove other people's points, but i'll let you pass this time.

    Aquila and GadgetGator like this.
    05-28-2013 09:20 PM
  25. GadgetGator's Avatar
    Where does the Second Amendment require a background check? Did George Washington and Thomas Jefferson have to have a background check done? All I'm saying is why should the criminals be the only ones who don't have to wait to purchase a gun?
    Why do people take such exception with a waiting period? If you have THAT urgent of a need for a gun, start sooner! Although if you have other proposals, I am all ears.

    A drivers license is a PRIVILEGE, we have a RIGHT to bear arms guaranteed by the Constitution. Honestly I don't think I can explain it any better than that.

    With all the teen accidents and deaths from texting while driving alone I think the driving age should be raised to no less than 21, and the test for a drivers license needs to be a lot harder.
    Nothing in the Constitution comes without limits. Again, as I made mention, even the 1st amendment has boundaries. Frankly most people need the ability to drive more then they need a gun. Maybe the rights should have been flipped. Or maybe they BOTH should be considered a privilege considering the harm either of them can do to a human being. Strangely we require training for the driving one, but for guns...eh...just grab one and go. Every state should require training, and like cars there should be a certain age limit. I have a BIG problem with guns being marketed to children. Crickett Firearms - My First Rifle - Youth Model 22 Rifles - Proudly Made In The USA

    Now for those who have recently made comments about owning RPG's, tanks, land mines, and or nukes parked in our front yard, none of those items are classified as "arms". I thoroughly enjoy my firearms, as does my family and in all honesty neither I nor anyone that I know has a desire to own these type of weapons. From time to time we will get in a group drink a few beers after shooting and run our mouths off about how "cool" it would be. But other than that if they do really want them then I don't know about it.
    Why are those not classified as arms?
    05-28-2013 09:29 PM
4,617 ... 9899100101102 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Larva Cartoon - FREE and FUNNY Application
    By liontyping in forum Android Apps
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-21-2014, 11:03 AM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-25-2013, 07:33 AM
  3. POI information and Gallery
    By robjulo in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 11:00 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 04:28 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD