Michale

Everything that is wrong about Obama and the Democrat Party's response to the Orlando massacre...

Michale

This is what passes for "journalism" these days..

The precise motivation was CRYSTAL clear..

"ARE WE CLEAR!!!??"
"Crystal"
-A FEW GOOD MEN

The scumbag pledged allegiance to the Daesch...

How could the motivation NOT be clear??

A perfect example of pushing a Left Wingery agenda that is at odds with the reality of islamic terrorism...

Michale

And I say that, tongue in cheek, because Chicago has a gun ban.. New York has a gun ban.. California has a de-facto gun ban...

In and of themselves, guns are not the problem..

Michale

I am all for solutions..

But I want solutions that actually ADDRESS the problem...

NONE of the proposed "solutions" will address the problems that precipitated these "solutions"...

You say you want to have mental health determination as part and parcel to gun ownership. Fine.. I like that. Makes sense..

But you have to convince the Democrat Party to give up their PERSONAL PRIVACY crusade...

But even with a mental health proviso, it wouldn't have prevented Sandy Hook... The scumbag there murdered his mom and STOLE her guns...

We need REAL WORLD solutions..

I am in complete agreement with you.. :D heh

Sorry, just couldn't resist.. :D

But all we seem to have right now is Democrats just wanting to check a box on a partisan unpopular and USELESS agenda...

The ONLY effective gun control is a gun ban...

Michale

Until you can address this fact, a gun registry simply will not happen..

Nor will gun insurance prevent or help prevent crowd-based mass shootings or terrorist attacks..

If it won't help, it's not needed...

Michale

Good luck with that. Let me know how it works out.. :D

That smart-ass tone was directed more towards the Left Wingery in general rather than you specifically..

My apologies that it did not come off that way...

Michale

How will a gun registry prevent or help prevent crowd-based mass shootings or terrorist attacks??

Answer: It won't...

Until you can address this fact, a gun registry simply will not happen..

Michale

And you are right, a registry wouldn't have prevented this most recent shooting spree;

It won't prevent or help prevent ANY shooting spree or terrorist attack..

but it was not intended to prevent it.

And yet, that is EXACTLY what it is being billed as..

We ONLY hear about gun registry in the immediate aftermath of a crowd-based mass shooting or, more recently, a terrorist attack..

Let's face the facts...

The *ONLY* gun control action that would have ANY effect is a complete gun ban...

And to do that, the Left Wingery would have to get rid of the 2nd Amendment and gut the 4th and 5th amendments..

Good luck with that. Let me know how it works out.. :D

Michale

The free market approach is perfectly constitutional since nobody will be refused the right to own a gun, only the need to qualify for insurance for the gun.

Objections will include:

1. Poor people will not be able to afford the insurance - rebuttal: a low cost gun plus insurance will cost little more than they are already paying

2. If guns are registered then the Government will be able to confiscate guns and overturn the constitution - rebuttal: apart from being extremely paranoid, this argument fails the common sense test - the Government has a military who pledge to uphold the constitution (despite that Trump thinks it will be his own personal security service), and even if the military did go rogue, they have tanks, Apache Gunships, etc., so even the heaviest armed gun nut would last five minutes.

3. Who will pay for the registry - rebuttal: a small ammunition tax would easily cover the costs

4. "shall not be infringed" - rebuttal: we already have gun control laws - no fully automatic weapons, felons, etc.

I think I was pretty specific with what I believe will be the biggest benefit the registry would provide: allowing authorities to know when someone with mental issues needs to have the guns removed from their homes until they are medically cleared to be in possession of a firearm. And it is foolish to think that two different and unique rights must have the same exact set of rules for how they are exercised -- we already have different rules that are specific to each that do not apply to other rights.

So, you are saying if you weren't part of a "well regulated" militia back then, you couldn't own a gun??

No, I am saying that the right only extends to guns owned for the purpose of maintaining a well regulated militia. Guns don't need to be outlawed entirely, but we definitely need to go back to banning assault rifles and clips that hold over 15 bullets. When that ban was in effect, we didn't have mass shootings like we have experienced since the ban was lifted. It's really not asking too much if it can make mass killings a rare event again instead of a common occurrence!

And you are right, a registry wouldn't have prevented this most recent shooting spree; but it was not intended to prevent it. What it will prevent are possible future shootings by letting the authorities know when a person they encounter that has mental issues has access to fire arms. There are no perfect solutions. Nothing can cover every possibility, but we have to do something. We did nothing after Newtown. Doing the same thing (doing nothing) repeatedly and expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity.

I see the value of gun registration.. And drone registration and all sorts of other registrations..

It will help LEOs solve crimes AFTER the fact..

And that's great... Peachy keen wonderful..

But don't bullshit the American people and try and claim it will PREVENT crowd-based mass shootings...

Because it won't...

Bashi's phantom "I SOLVED THIS A WHILE AGO/I HAVE A LOT OF SUPPORT IN EMAIL"-type comments notwithstanding...

Gun registration WILL NOT prevent or help prevent crowd-based mass shootings and it SURE AS HELL won't stop any terrorist attacks...

Dinner time.. :D

Michale

Or lazy as the case may be...

You got nuttin'...

The simple fact is, any form of registration or insurance WON'T prevent or help prevent crowd-based mass shootings...

Unless someone has ACTUAL data and not a lame non-existent referral...

This stands as factual...

Michale

How would it be part of the solution??

[30]...

It can be part of the solution.

How??

How would it be part of the solution??

Michale

Gun registration or gun insurance WON'T prevent or help prevent crowd-based mass shootings..

The ONLY purpose it would serve is to make gun ownership onerous for law-abiding Americans...

Anyone who is psycho enough or committed enough will jump thru ALL the hoops to get their weapons..

Or they will just steal them...

Either way, gun registration or gun insurance or any other hair-brained scheme cooked up by the Hysterical Left Wingery won't do DIDDLEY SQUAT to prevent or help prevent crowd-based mass shootings..

These hare-brained ideas are NOTHING but Wouldn't It Be Nice laws... Nothing more...

Michale

It can be part of the solution.

If you do, then how exactly would it do that??

See [30]...

It won't KILL you to agree with me... :D

Michale

But you were "offering' a method of registration that would likely pass constitutional muster..

Do you think that such a registration would prevent or help prevent crowd-based mass shootings??

If you do, then how exactly would it do that??

Michale

I was not the one currently advocating therefore do not see the need to answer beyond what I posted in [30]...

I know it's going to be useless to ask, but what the hell...

Exactly what ARE you saying...???

And you forgot to address how having a gun registration will prevent crowd-based mass shootings..

Michale

Nope, did not say that either.

No, I am not.

OK, so you agree that a well regulated militia has NOTHING to do with gun ownership..

It seems you forgot to address this:

I was offering a method of registering guns that would likely pass constitutional muster.

But what PURPOSE would it serve???

How???

Michale

No, I am not.

But what PURPOSE would it serve???

Would it stop or prevent crowd-based mass shootings??

How???

Generally speaking, militias were organized into regiments ready to be called up from long before the revolutionary war. What you describe is closer to a posse. Hence the "well regulated" part.

So, you are saying if you weren't part of a "well regulated" militia back then, you couldn't own a gun??

How would that work, exactly??

Michale

Back at the time that it was written, you were part of a militia when you showed up at a group gathering with your gun..

Generally speaking, militias were organized into regiments ready to be called up from long before the revolutionary war. What you describe is closer to a posse. Hence the "well regulated" part.

"Sorry, bub... You're heading out into dangerous territory... You won't be part of an organized militia... Turn over your guns, bub...."

Yea. THAT is how it must have been.. :^/

Michale

The gun beget the militia.. The militia didn't beget the gun...

Think about it..

Do you HONESTLY believe that, back in those days, if you weren't part of an organized militia, you couldn't own a gun!??

Michale

How is GUN REGISTRATION going to PREVENT Crowd-Based Mass Shootings????

Michale

Mountainous amounts of ambiguity there...

Only to someone with an agenda...

Back at the time that it was written, you were part of a militia when you showed up at a group gathering with your gun..

In other words, anyone with a gun was part of a militia...

The gun beget the militia.. The militia didn't beget the gun...

Michale

Ahhhh But if you have a car that is stored in a garage or a show room, you don't HAVE to register it..

Besides..

How is REGISTRATION going to PREVENT Crowd-Based Mass Shootings????

Michale

It does.

Because they are different amendments, one is a LESSER amendment??

That would be the 9th amendment...

You can argue what the definition of IS is til the cows come home..

And you do often, but this is a reading issue, and like most of the gun rights advocates, you like to leave out half the amendment.

But The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed is pretty cut and dried with no ambiguity whatsoever..

It would be if that was how the amendment was written, but it's not, so it doesn't.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Mountainous amounts of ambiguity there...

So??? That makes a difference???

Because they are different amendments, one is a LESSER amendment??

One is absolute and one is "eh, whatever"..???

If one is going to argue the text of the Constitution, one doesn't get to pick and choose which parts supports their agenda and ignore the rest...

Personal privacy is either absolute or it is not...

If you want to own guns, register with a local/state/national militia.

The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

It doesn't say The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed unless citizen doesn't register with a militia

You can argue what the definition of IS is til the cows come home..

But The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed is pretty cut and dried with no ambiguity whatsoever..

Michale

Different amendments. Privacy is the 4th...

All kinds of things are registered with the government. Cars, houses, property, businesses. Not only are guns not different, a register system is even mentioned in the amendment: A well regulated militia. If you want to own guns, register with a local/state/national militia. List all your guns. I don't see how a militia could be "well regulated" without some idea what weapons it's members have access to...

What about privacy laws?? You know that Democrats are really REALLY big on personal privacy..

How do you reconcile these two diametrically opposed issues??

Personally, I think the solution is simple...

Gun ownership is a constitutionally protected right...

So is voting...

Constitutionally speaking, owning a gun is the same as the right to vote..

I suggest we mirror ALL gun-ownership requirements with voting requirements...

Any hoop that an American has to jump thru to own a gun, they must jump thru an exact same hoop to vote...

If you have to disclose medical history to own a gun.. Then you have to disclose medical history to vote...

If you have to have insurance to own a gun.. Then you have to have insurance to vote...

Who's game???

Michale

heh :D

Michale

I fully support a national gun registry in this country. No one believes that people with mental illnesses should have access to guns. But as it stands right now, we have no idea who owns what guns in order to make sure those that shouldn't have access to guns have them removed. A gun registry allows police and medics to know whether there are guns at an emergency they are responding to, and it allows them to remove guns from homes of individuals being taken in for psychological evals until they are cleared to have their guns returned to them. If we ever hope to prevent guns from being accessed by people with mental disorders, this registry is a must. Last winter, a man with dementia was killed by police because he was firing his rifle at his caretakers. This man should never have had access to guns, but his children didn't know he had purchased one.

I fully support a national gun registry in this country. No one believes that people with mental illnesses should have access to guns. But as it stands right now, we have no idea who owns what guns in order to make sure those that shouldn't have access to guns have them removed. A gun registry allows police and medics to know whether there are guns at an emergency they are responding to, and it allows them to remove guns from homes of individuals being taken in for psychological evals until they are cleared to have their guns returned to them. If we ever hope to prevent guns from being accessed by people with mental disorders, this registry is a must. Last winter, a man with dementia was killed by police because he was firing his rifle at his caretakers. This man should never have had access to guns, but his children didn't know he had purchased one.

I fully support a national gun registry in this country. No one believes that people with mental illnesses should have access to guns. But as it stands right now, we have no idea who owns what guns in order to make sure those that shouldn't have access to guns have them removed. A gun registry allows police and medics to know whether there are guns at an emergency they are responding to, and it allows them to remove guns from homes of individuals being taken in for psychological evals until they are cleared to have their guns returned to them. If we ever hope to prevent guns from being accessed by people with mental disorders, this registry is a must. Last winter, a man with dementia was killed by police because he was firing his rifle at his caretakers. This man should never have had access to guns, but his children didn't know he had purchased one.

:D

Michale

I was extrapolating..

Are you saying that it's IMPOSSIBLE that NONE of those hundreds of thousands of Japanese interred were spies or saboteurs??

Whatever happened to: THE END DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS? that you yourself so recently used to criticize someone else's statement recently.

I think you have me confused with someone else..

I am a BIG fan of The Ends Justifies The Means...

It's funny you should bring that up... I am on a gun control debate on HuffPoo...

One of the people said with regards to creating gun owner lists...

And I quote "I know it's a breach of privacy, but so what?"

You see?? The Left Wingery are BIG fans of TEJTM.....

When it suits their agenda...

Michale

"It's entirely possible, even LIKELY, that interning hundreds of thousands of Americans of Japanese descent DID prevent a massive sabotage campaign..

Maybe Joe McCarthy's anti-communist campaign DID prevent communism from taking hold here in this country..

Has anyone ever considered that??"

YES, and I will use one of your own favorite lines Michale: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. Also: Whatever happened to: THE END DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS? that you yourself so recently used to criticize someone else's statement recently.

Good!!! I was having withdrawal pains...

My whole routine was disrupted!! :D heh

But I DID get a lot of work done, so.... :D

Michale

What IS it about SecStates that the are brain dead morons of late???

Michale

Why not acknowledge that there WAS an up side??

It's entirely possible, even LIKELY, that interning hundreds of thousands of Americans of Japanese descent DID prevent a massive sabotage campaign..

Maybe Joe McCarthy's anti-communist campaign DID prevent communism from taking hold here in this country..

Has anyone ever considered that??

It's exactly this point that is my biggest beef with Captain America-Civil War..

Don't worry.. No spoilers...

The SecState goes on and on about all the bad things that happened in New York, Washington DC and Sokovia...

But what the moron DOESN'T realize if that the Avengers HADN'T been there to "cause" all that destruction, then the ENTIRE planet would have been destroyed (in the case of Sokovia) or subjugated (in the case of New York and DC)..

In the areas we are talking about, the ends *DO* justify the means...

A concept that the entirety of the Democrat Party has taken to heart since 2008...

Michale

-CW

-cw