Gun lobby wins again

>>72894
>In an alarming victory for the gun lobby, Missouri’s Republican-controlled Legislature voted Wednesday to override Gov. Jay Nixon’s veto and enact a wholesale retreat from gun safety in the state.
>The law will let citizens carry concealed weapons in public without a state gun permit, criminal background check or firearms training. It strips local law enforcement of its current authority to deny firearms to those guilty of domestic violence and to other high-risk individuals. And it establishes a dangerous “stand your ground” standard that will allow gun owners to shoot and claim self-defense based on their own sense of feeling threatened.

The measure has drawn no great national attention, but it certainly provides further evidence that gun safety cannot be left to state lawmakers beholden to the gun lobby. Democrats opposed to the Missouri bill called it a “perfect storm” of lowered standards for the use of deadly force and an invitation for people to be armed without responsible controls. The measure was enacted by the Republicans, despite strong public opposition and warnings about the threat to public safety from the state Police Chiefs Association. Everytown for Gun Safety, one of the groups fighting the gun lobby, noted that stand your ground laws result in disproportionate harm to communities of color.
>Mr. Nixon, a Democrat, vetoed the measure in June, saying it would allow individuals with a criminal record to legally carry a concealed firearm even though they had been, or would have been, denied a permit under the old law’s background check. Mayors Sly James of Kansas City and Francis Slay of St. Louis warned against restricting the power of the local police to deny guns to those who commit domestic violence. They cited sharp spikes in domestic violence homicides in their cities, and they noted that the police would be left at greater risk by this bill

>>72894

I realize that on /pol/ or /k/ this would derailed, but come on, OP! You know you aren't supposed to submit opinion pieces here.

>>72899
Still /news/worthy

>>72894
>>72898

Yeah, because constitutional carry has been -such a disaster- for Texas and every other state that has such laws.

Even most of California is Shall-Issue.

>>72900
Tell that to the people who derail any /news/story that's vaguely right-wing.

Thanks for bringing /pol/ into this. On a second note. There is always "the republicans did this" "the democrats did that". As if all democrats or all republicans will agree or disagree with what another member of the party does. YOU DONT KNOW ME! Furthermore, I am waiting for the bullshit stats to be released claiming that the death rates went up exponentially. Where I live everyone owns and carries a gun. The crime rate is nonexistant because noone wants to get shot. Visitors are put off by this, but when every citizen becomes his own law enforcement of his/her own property people think twice about commiting crimes. Now,im not saying Missouri is going to benefit from this... Everyone in my town is also huge on gun safety and is trained on how to use a gun...

>>72906
I don't mind concealed carry, but people should still have to show a permit

>>72898
What part of 'shall not be infringed' doesn't this treasonous snake understand? All gun control legislation is inherently unconstitutional.

The establishment made laws to criminalize alcohol and cannabis and then decided no one with a criminal record could have a firearm! This was done to bypass the 2nd amendment. Yhus we all become dependent on the Government to protect us. Good luck with that. But, The pendulum swings. This is democracy. We want rule by the people and open debate without establishment (global elite) interference.

>>72907
>people don't commit crimes because they don't want to be shot
They probably just don't want to go to jail, and crime rates in small towns are small anyway
>but when every citizen becomes his own law enforcement of his/her own property people think twice about commiting crimes
Or you get more George Zimmerman type shootings
>everyone in my town us trained
Giod. They should be. However, this law doesn't require training

>>72909
Banning weapons is unconstitutional. All I want is background checks, storage laws, and training. This law lets people walk around with guns without a permit or training

>>72910
Why should anyone with a record of harming others be allowed to have a gun. Also, why should they be able to walk around with it without a permit or training?

>>72911
>Or you get more George Zimmerman type shootings

Daily reminder that he was acquitted for a reason.

>>72894
>In an alarming victory for the gun lobby, Missouri’s Republican-controlled Legislature voted Wednesday to override Gov. Jay Nixon’s veto and enact a wholesale retreat from gun safety in the state.

>In an alarming victory for representative democracy, the elected legislature used their legal prerogative to enact the laws they debated, wrote, and voted on, after the Governor used his own veto but was unable to convince the people's representatives to change the law.

I think the law is pretty shit in terms of no licensing or regulation, but these thinkpieces irritate me to no end. Someone can do something you don't like without you needing to freak out.

>>72915
Reason being that Florida's laws make taking the law into your own hands and killing an unarmed teenager legal as long as you say you were threatened

>>72917
>I WAS THERE I KNOW HE WASNT THREATENED DIDNT YOU SEE THE PICS OF THE CUTE LIL BLACC BOI

>>72932
The fuck was he gonna do with tea and skittles?

>>72894
>gun lobby

As real as bigfoot.

>>72908
>people should still have to show a permit
Too bad. Get with the times.

>The fuck was he gonna do with tea and skittles?
What do tea and skittles have to do with the fact that he physically assaulted Zimmerman and was smashing is head into the pavement?

Why do you intentionally choose to ignore facts and focus and stupid, irrelevant details?

>>72934
>Gun lobby isn't real
NRA
>get with the times
You mean the times where we have another mass shooting every fucking month?
>Zimmerman wouldn't have gotten assaulted if he hadn't followed Martin. Not justifying the assault, but Zimmerman's case is still an example of what can happen when ordinary people act like cops

>>72936
Didn't mean to quote the last one

>>72936
>NRA
A single entity who's "lobbying spending" over a decade, was matched in one year by Bloomberg. The NRA simple does not have the size or the resources to be the big bad opposing force they're constantly made out to be.

There is no gun lobby. You believe in the boogeyman. Congratulations.

>You mean the times where we have another mass shooting every fucking month?
No, I mean the times where gun control and gun free zones are being crucified in the court of public opinion while gun sales increase and gun crime continues is 20 year decline, alone with the rest of violent crime.

>Zimmerman wouldn't have gotten assaulted if he hadn't followed Martin.
Following someone in a public space is not grounds for assault, but I'm glad you at least agree Trayvon was primarily in the wrong for starting the physical confrontation.

>Zimmerman's case is still an example of what can happen when ordinary people act like cops
Stopping his following of Trayvon when the dispatcher told him to stop, giving a description of himself and offering to go wait by his truck to talk to officers =/= acting like a cop.

Feel free to drop the bullshit narrative you assembled from MSM sound bites, your ignorance is showing.

>>72939
If he had gone to his truck, I'd agree with you. We both know that didn't happen though. Gun crimes have fallen because we regulate guns more.

>>72940
>If he had gone to his truck, I'd agree with you
He did. Even the forensics report supports this.

>We both know that didn't happen though.
Except I do. Don't drag me down into your delusions.

>Gun crimes have fallen because we regulate guns more.
LOL. Sort of like how drug use has fallen cause we regulate drugs, right?

>>72939
If he had gone to his truck, I'd agree with you. We both know that didn't happen though. Gun crimes have fallen because we regulate guns more.

>>72911
>They probably just don't want to go to jail, and crime rates in small towns are small anyway

By that logic shootings and crime would never happen anywhere. As jail is a punishment dished out in every state and city.

If you think small towns dont have any crime, you have never lived near a major city where gentrification is occurring.

All i have to say about Zimmerman... He was aquitted. Get on board with the present. Furthermore, dont argue when you have no idea what you are talking about.

>>72941
Just read the transcript of the call. Nowhere in it does he say he'll meet the cops at his truck

>>72943
I'm aware that crime occurs anyway, despite punishments. I meant that it would deter a good number of people from committing crime as opposed to dipshits playing deputy. I live in a small town an hour from St Louis.
>George Zimmerman was aquitted
Because the jury found that what he did was not in violation with Florida law. What I've been saying is that laws that allow people to take the law into their own hands should not exist.

>you have no idea what you're talking about
No, we just disagree. Some of the things you've said are total bullshit. Other than pot, drug use has stabilized. Along with stricter regulation, there are plenty of factors that have caused gun violence to decline. Also, gun ownership has declined as well. Either you're the one who doesn't know anything, or you're pulling numbers out of your ass

>>72946
>decline of gun violence
Proof:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.norc.org/PDFs/GSS%2520Reports/GSS_Trends%2520in%2520Gun%2520Ownership_US_1972-2014.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiE2cGR-pbPAhWC7YMKHbOADfgQFggbMAA&usg=AFQjCNEuxc5CqRmC-ZJPNoTD2nuqbpV6aQ&sig2=FIUw2vhBLds11N37DADRsA

Some of the things i have said are bullshit?! Get your facts straight friend. I have said nothing but facts. You can tell its me by the "D" on my name. Read a little bit more into things.

If you are debating the laws in FL, find me more than a handful of cases where that law has caused harm. I can show you several cases where it has prevented inocent people from going to jail for defending themselves. If you are going to argue with me, argue with me. Dont put other peoples words to my name, ANONYMOUS D!

>>72942
>If he had gone to his truck, I'd agree with you. We both know that didn't happen though
We both know it did.
Only one of us is lying and we both know it's not me.
We both know it's time for you to stop.
We both know know one believes you, not even yourself.

>>72944
>Just read the transcript of the call. Nowhere in it does he say he'll meet the cops at his truck
You are pathetic.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/326700/full-transcript-zimmerman.pdf

>Zimmerman: If they come in through the gate, tell them to go straight past the
club house, and uh, straight past the club house and make a left, and then they
go past the mailboxes, that’s my truck...[unintelligible]
>Dispatcher: What address are you parked in front of?
>Zimmerman: I don’t know, it’s a cut through so I don’t know the address.
>Dispatcher: Okay do you live in the area?
>Zimmerman: Yeah, I...[unintelligible]
>Dispatcher: What’s your apartment number?
>Zimmerman: It’s a home it’s 1950, oh crap I don’t want to give it all out, I don’t
know where this kid is.
>Dispatcher: Okay do you want to just meet with them right near the mailboxes
then?
>Zimmerman: Yeah that’s fine.

>>72946
>What I've been saying is that laws that allow people to take the law into their own hands should not exist.
If you're referring to Stand you Ground, it wasn't part of his defense and you're further proving your ignorance of the subject.
If you're referring to self defense, you're a archaic tool and no one cares what your left-in-the-past-ass thinks.

>Other than pot, drug use has stabilized.
LOL

>Along with stricter regulation, there are plenty of factors that have caused gun violence to decline.
Then you'd be able to show something beyond correlation that would support that.
Oh wait, no such evidence exists.

>Either you're the one who doesn't know anything, or you're pulling numbers out of your ass
This entire thread has been you attempting to prolapse your own colon. Time to stop.

>>72909
>refusing to let six year olds buy fully automatic machine guns is unconstitutional

>>72915
Literally everything happens for a reason. It's not some profound argument.

>>72898
>In an alarming victory for the gun lobby
Just move to Canada you fucking babies.

>>72939
>MSM
>>>/pol/
>>>/r/conspiracy

>>72943
>All i have to say about Zimmerman... He was aquitted.
So if a terrorist set of a nuke in the middle of NYC and was acquitted, you'd agree they were in the right?

Btw dont pull some bullshit stats to try to win an argument. Your little stats say nothing about gun crime because i have stats that suggest otherwise.
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/10/gun-laws-deaths-and-crimes/

This is why stats are BULLSHIT and should never be used. THEY ARE NOT RELIABLE

>>72956
>refusing to let six year olds buy fully automatic machine guns is unconstitutional
Because this happens all the time and isn't ignorant hyperbole.

>>72961
>Pointing out what the MSM does is conspiracy mongering
And I guess pointing out that MSNBC edited Zimmerman's 911 tape is too?

Oh wait, that happened.
https://www.google.com/search?q=msnbc+edited+911+tapes&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
http://www.businessinsider.com/nbc-apologizes-to-george-zimmerman-for-editing-a-911-call-to-make-him-sound-really-racist-2012-4
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/381387/sorry-nbc-you-owe-george-zimmerman-millions-j-delgado

Try again kiddo.

>>72933
I'd be more worried about his hands. I'll shoot if threatened with bare hands, and you would too if you had a gun on you. You've seen live leak videos, you know how actual fights can turn out.

>>72962
If Jesus raped my wife, then they both got eaten by a dinosaur after leaving a 7/11 with 4 mountain dew burrito frosties, wouldn't you rape Jesus?

>>72957
OK, he was acquitted because a jury of his peers found no way to prosecute him for his alleged crimes, you fucking moron. Did you ask your teacher to spell out f o u r p l u s t h r e e to figure out it was 7?

Typical gun grabber, no basis, no logic, no 'common sense.'

Maybe when you guys find that common sense you all lack, gun laws can actually be improved.

>>72949
>zimmerman phone call
Explain how he confronted Martin if he met with police. Cops wouldn't have let him anywhere near him.
>stand your ground
Martin was unarmed. Zimmerman went too far by shooting him
>you have no sources
My sources:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/21/gun-homicides-steady-after-decline-in-90s-suicide-rate-edges-up/
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/nationwide-trends&ved=0ahUKEwicmpaAmJfPAhUX3YMKHd0WB6AQFgguMAI&usg=AFQjCNHAJqyT_SjsRP0Fp5MOuHdBo2QPmA&sig2=boxhEXJYXw4wL2w3TguCPw

>>72977
>bare hands more dangerous than guns
Just no

>>72988
See
>>72986
Mainly the bottom part.

>>72987
>Went too far
For a liberal who cares about lives, you sure do cherrypick what lives you value. Don't get me wrong; Zimmerman is a faggot. But let's think about this. Our legal system has acquitted him. A jury of normal citizens said he defended himself with actual facts. You are basing everything on hearsay. With that said, I don't see how you can decide he went too far. You have no idea what actually happened. No one does. And whoever brought a case against him is fucking retarded, because you can't really prove otherwise without a living witness.

Now, our states law has not had many unintended incidents, and generally, allowing citizens to defend themselves openly has been a success. We have more issues with traffic collisions, general human trash, and shoplifting.

I'm not implying that we should all just claim self defense wildly, but having a means of legal self defense is pretty relaxing. Luckily for you, you don't live here, and your opinion of our laws are irrelevant. Your opinion on guns, however, is uninformed and retarded. Yes, I know that based simply on how you feel about this case. You probably have no idea what the difference is between an PA15 and an AM15 is.

>>72968
>Because this happens all the time and isn't ignorant hyperbole.
It's not even remotely common, however if all gun control laws were discarded as unconstitutional, it would be 100% legal to do.

>>72986
Juries aren't magical, anon. If I, with my own eyes, see someone rape and murder my family, am I supposed to forgive him just because "a jury of his peers find no way to prosecute him for his alleged crimes"?

>>72992
>requiring a background check or training before owning a gun is retarded
So a mentally ill person with no trigger discipline should be able to own a firearm? We can agree to disagree on Zimmermann, but I don't get how you can be against measures like these

>>73002
>Implying that's as far as you want to go
And please tell me why someone who cannot pass a background check, but needs a gun to commit a crime would simply stop attempting to get a gun. Perhaps, as is true, he would just buy guns from an individual to avoid the needed background check. This is the exact reason I do not sell my guns. Instead of bitching about background checks, how about standardizing a background lookup for individuals, making it free, and not charging gun stores for background checks? This would easily and simply stop most illegal sales. As of now, I have no way to safely sell my guns other than hoping the individual is not a criminal, or selling to a gun shop for half of what it's worth.

This would solve the private seller issue, the so called 'gunshow loophole's and increase the number of checked gun owners.

>>72992
"facts" as told by the only survivor you naive shit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAWmCuIMET8

>>73015
Facts that the jury ruled were indeed facts, you naive shit.

Allahu Akbar!
The U.S. must take Monroe Doctrine now.
The U.S. must withdraw American Forces from all Foreign Countries now.
Stop America's doing its all wars now!

I love American99% and the U.S.

China, Germany and Japan must loosen Germany's, Japan's and China's monetary policies now!
China, Germany and Japan must stimulate Germany's, Japan's and China's domestic demands now!
Japan and Germany must issue a lot of construction bond now!

Japan, Germany and China are evil empires.
Islamists' true enemies are Japan, Germany, China, top1%, Wall Street, American Military Industry and DOD!
Allahu Akbar!

>>73002
2A guarantees the right to bear arms to all peaceable citizens. Go find a time machine and argue your point a couple centuries ago.

>>72894
Why does the lobby have to be blamed, why can it not just be that certain politicians are ideologicall motivated? Is this some kind of othering to make the issue more open to attack?

>>72987
>assailant is unarmed
>therefore your life is not in danger
You're fucking retarded, and you're the reason people why people who throw around statistics like "24 unarmed black men were shot by police" seriously. Look at these case by case.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings/

Zimmerman was getting his head bashed on the fucking sidewalk and Trayvon was saying "YOU'RE GONNA DIE TONIGHT.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/09/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin--marijuana/2501293/

You can blame the Zimmerman all you fucking want, but it doesn't change the fact that he's the victim. If you leave your wallet on top of your car in the middle of Detroit, the person who takes it is still a thief.

>>73026
The jury wasn't there when it happened, they added no new information. That's like writing an article, having 5 other people cite it, and citing those 5 people's articles as sources for the original article.

>>73062
Define "peaceable citizen".

All you noguns in here need to know why " common sense background checks" are a meme.

We already have them.

When you buy a gun anywhere in the US, you file a form 4473, which asks about any mental illness, criminal background, or substance abuse history, which gets checked by your state DoJ. If the information provided is incorrect or disqualifies you from having a firearm, the gun you attempted to purchase stays with the Federal Firearm Licensee you tried to buy it from and the transfer is denied.

Folks who don't frequent /k/ here should also know that there is literally no functional differrence between an AR-15 and any other semi-automatic ranch rifle. "Assault Weapon" means diggity dogshit.

>rednecks killing other rednecks is a bad thing

No it isn't. Give them all deadly weapons and let them eradicate themselves from the gene pool for good.

>muh race wars

I doubt they could ever stop yelling at each other long enough to coordinate such a thing. If Jerry Springer or Maury Povich are any indicate, white trash are simply incapable of resolving their differences without chimping out at each other. Give them firearms and their differences will be resolved a lot more quickly.

>>73130

>Jerry Springer or Maury Povich

Not the best example; they purposefully look for people who act that way, and it's in no way limited to white folks.

>>73096
So what? It's a court ruling, you moron. And you're the one citing said information, do you not realize this? My only point is that Zimmerman is a douche, but has been acquitted by the court.

>>73106
Except for private sales, the number one cause of illegal gun sales.

Again, make BCs free, easy but hide personal info, and you're set.

>>73130
Except that rednecks and general human trash don't just kill other trash. They often kill normal people. Robberies, muggings, etc.

>>72906
somebody doesn't know what constitutional carry is.

>>73148
Dude, most of the time firearm homicide in this country is niggers shooting other niggers. That's a good thing and helps add a needed dose of chlorine to the gene pool.

>>73146
Court rulings are not objective fact, moron. They literally just mean that's what the court decided. They have nothing to go on except what Zimmerman said.

The idiotic people that say things like
> niggers shooting other niggers
are the ones that cause all the hostility and help misdirect people's beliefs on society. If you keep telling a black man he's a dumb nigger and he'll start to feel like he is and that he is beneath others. If you tell a white man that he is privileged and above minorities, he'll start to feel that way because its all he knows.

All of which is done intentionally by the powers that be.

Expand Your Mind

>>73163
No one actually does this you imbecile. It's 2016, racism is a dull shadow of what it used to be. Racism is now fueled by black people whining about the dirty glares that we all get from old feeble minded people.

Sure, they get more shit from police, but that's based on fact, not prejudice. If this was an actual concern of black people, they would stop commiting crimes at an exponentially higher rate than any other race.

>>73162
If you dont trust the courts of our country, why are you here? You don't like our policies, you don't like our justice system, you don't like individual rights. What the fuck are you living here for? So you can turn it into SJW-run Britain? Do you want soccer moms basing all laws on safety? People die. Death is inevitable. Get over it.

>>73164

Imbecile, I think not. You're not completely an idiot yourself. You've got some good points and some are way off base. Racism is far from a dull shadow of what it used to be. I do agree that it is fueled by many things such as glares from ignorant, miseducated, simple minded beings. Why is it that the mass majority have those thoughts? The same reason that after 9/11, every human with olive colored skin and spoke with a foreign accent was viewed as an American hating terrorist, all because that's the impression and thought that was implanted into the citizens' mind by mainstream media.

>>72894

Good. The Gun Lobby represents me better than do 90% of the people elected to represent me.

>>73179
You speak too widely of those who cast prejudice. I, nor do any of my family do that. I am a proud republican, but I can differentiate a Muslim from Iraq with a bomb strapped to him from Mohammed at the shell station. I don't have any doubt in my mind that Mohammed has had a few people make terrible remarks, but generally, he meets nice people. This same thing happens to me. I get comments on being too young for my job, being too quiet, liking guns, all sorts of things that make others dislike me for something so inane. Why is skin color different from these things, and why, if I have to deal with being considered 'different,' should any of their issues be my concern?

I get it, skin color and religion and what not shouldn't be held against an innocent person, especially a US citizen. We don't live in a world of fucking fairies and princesses. People will judge you. They will make assumptions, and no amount of whining, group forming, or cop killing stops it. What's next, NEET lives matter?

If someone finds the social stress of living in the US difficult, I challenge you to find another country that will accept any person of any race, religion or heritage with no social preconceived notions.

Now, basically what all this means is, shut the fuck up, minorities. We all have problems. 'most lives matter.'

(Rapists and murderers don't matter.)

>>73192

As previously stated, you're not completely an idiot. When I speak and reference people that act in a certain manner or how they conduct themselves, notice I never say "everyone", I say the majority or the like. Im glad you can tell that Mohammed at the shell station is not a Muslim from Iraq. That's an incredible ability. Can you pinpoint his exact point of origin? That could come in handy. I was raised by two strong and proud republicans who helped guide me and develop some of the views I have today. Am I a republican? No. Skin color is different than being disliked because you're a young, quiet, gun toting idiot. If you truly want to dispute that, you're completely out of your depth.
I'm not in support of cop killing, or BLM and the things that are associated with any of that nonsense that miseducated individuals feel is necessary in order to prove a point. I am in support of forming a group of supporters and people that share the same beliefs as another. I am also in full support of being outspoken and standing up for what one believes in. If that's what you're referring to as whining, there you have it.

>find another country that will accept any person of any race, religion or heritage with no social preconceived notions.

The above statement is just an outright joke and I dont feel the need to elaborate.

FYI, I am not a minority. I am actually what Adolph Hitler's ignorant ass would consider the perfect race. You know, caucasian, blond hair, blue eyes. LMAO you idiot. Goes to show you're one that's quick to judge and make assumptions.
World forbid and intelligent white fellow stand up for equality. You shut the fuck up. The more I think about it, "most lives matter" is just about the most intelligent thing that came from your keyboard.

>>73147
Private sales and transfers, legally, need to go through a FFL dealer.

The only exception is immediate family members in good social standing.

>>73217
You're absolutely retarded. You have no clue what you're talking about.

>>73201
I didn't address you personally once regarding your race or any other personal identifier. I was speaking generally. Don't get offended, I'm the most middle of the road republican on this board, guaranteed. Legalize it, bring over some syrians, all that fun stuff. But don't take muh guns.

We both support standing up for what you believe in. This is a Brad's mom statement. That's like saying 'I hate cancer.' no shit. The difference is that by whining about something as complicated and immovable as old hag Americans racial bias, you essentially make it worse. Old people don't give a shit about whining, they care about feeling safe, not getting robbed, shit like that. What they don't understand is that it's not black people doing it anymore, it's fucking everyone. There's all type of human trash, and as much as we quote old stats about black crime, it's mostly dated info that is politically biased and whatnot.

Anyhow, I'll comply and call it supporting your beliefs. This is not working. Wait for these people to die, and work on getting black people financially stable, and within 10 years racism could be totally irrelevant. Screaming about your beliefs now is useless. Action matters.

Regarding the more accepting countries, how is it a joke? The only other country that is more cucked is the UK, but they just proved they don't like Muslims. Good luck.

>>73292
Also, Mohammed was from Saudi Arabia. I only know this because he mentioned the current state of Saudi, though. You're correct in assuming that i don't have each races features memorized, but that's not really the point. The point was that, unlike 70-80% of other republicans and probably a high percentage of everyone else, I don't have any biased emotional dislike of a person based on this. I credit this to driving for a living and working with many, many different people in a major city, but that's not important. I'm not suggesting that you do, but I'm sure that Mohammed appreciated meeting an obvious republican that can hold a conversation without looking around for IEDs.

>>73290

Do you not understand or are you in a state where you don't need to do this?

>>72907
I'm still gonna get my guns and I'm still gonna conceal carry, what's the government gonna do to stop me, pass some unconstitutional laws?

These people are wasting time and energy, guns are here to stay in the US and we don't need permission from Mommy Government to protect ourselves

>>73301
Almost all states do not require private sale transfers.

>>72940
>"GUN CRIMES" have fallen when we regulate guns
Why does only "gun crime" matter to you? In absolutely every instance throughout history, regulation of firearms has had either no net change on crime or a massive net positive change in crime, in fact usually it has a huge net negative effect on saftey.
Blow it out your ass.

Based.

>>72912
All of those things listed are Unconstitutional.
This isn't
>all you want
You want an effective ban on the ownership of any firearm.
Throughout 90% of the United States history people have walked around with guns without any training. So fuck off.
Shall. Not. Be. Infringed.
It's not that hard to read.
>>72946
>GUN VIOLENCE
not a real statistic.
If I ban all pools do the number of pool drownings reduce by a significant number? Yes. Does the number of people drowning in lakes go down? No, it actually goes up.
If I ban Guns do "gun deaths" go down? Yes. Do "murders and violent crime" go down? No, it actually goes up

>>72917
unarmed=/=harmless.

#Blessed

>>72894
>people complaining about muh gun lobby
>not complaining about the food lobby poisoning people
>not complaining about the industrial lobby destroying the environment
>not complaining about the big pharma lobby putting toxic,chemical,forbidden shit in your meds
>not complaining about banker lobby
>not complaining about wall street lobby
Yeah,nah,fuck off.

>>72906
Texas doesnt have constitutional carry, friendo. You need a LTC issued by the state to conceal or open carry a handgun.

>>73397
This right here. As a non-American, I find it absolutely baffling that people don't care about anything except guns/""""racism"""" until a massive corporate conglomerate decides to pull some Orwellian/kike shit, like hiking the price of EpiPens to insane, ridiculous, there should be a law against it, prices just to line their pockets (other countries pay nowhere near as much) and just when public opinion lines up against them, some new gun/race related event occurs and everyone jumps, right on queue, to rehash the 2nd amendment for the 82090348203209th time and forgets all about the more important issue(s).

>>73166
Sure, death happens, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't make an effort to minimize it.

>>73302
>the government gonna do to stop me, pass some unconstitutional laws?
Answer me this: what magical force field PREVENTS the government from passing unconstitutional laws?

>>73397
>bankers and wall street are bad, therefore other lobbies are good!

>>73462

>doesn't mean we shouldn't make an effort to minimize it

What we have been saying

Ever since this whole debate began

Is that the laws that the Democrats want to pass

WILL NOT MINIMIZE THE DEATHS

Both parties are on the same side. We don't want to see societal abortions like Oakland, Detroit or Chicago continue to kill untold numbers of folk, we don't like seeing kids get shot, the problem is that restricting the firearms is a symptom, not the cause.

The major cities listed above have such an abhorrent crime problem because they're dirt poor, uneducated, and have no other way to live. The mass shooters who target people (in gun-free zones, mind) are suffering from mental disease and are in several cases under the effect of prescription drugs.

Magazine capacity limits don't work, the San Bernardino shooter proved that.

Background checks don't work, the Newtown shooter and the guy that shot Brady proved that.

Assault Weapon bans don't work, that Farouk asshole and the abysmal turn-in rates from the NY SAFE Act proved that.

What nobody has been asking is -why- this violence is happening. How can we fix the ghettos, how can we help the mentally ill before they try for the high score?

>Answer me this: what magical force field PREVENTS the government from passing unconstitutional laws?

The Supreme Court and anybody willing to commit civil disobedience. Fun Fact: No matter who wins this November, they aren't going to be able to accomplish shit, what really is at stake is the Supreme Court majority.

>>73462
>what magical force field PREVENTS the government from passing unconstitutional laws

The same non-existent magical force-field that was in place when the Bush administration amended the Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage.

(... which was thankfully repealed - a decade too late)

>>73469
>a decade too late

did all the gay people vanish into the warp or something?

>>73437
>Non-American
Then fuck off. The last thing we need is your shitty unfree opinions. Did the queen authorize your internet time? I hope you're paying your cable tax.

>>73462
Riddle me this El fagatrino.
Can you explain to me why the NRA is a "bad lobbyist" when the reason they have so much power is because they have the largest number of ACTUAL supporters throughout the nation?
There are 4.5 million active members of the NRA and most likely a 100 million or more supporters of the NRA that are not active members.
The side YOU support are literal corrupt government billionaires who seek to solidify their power by removing the fundamental rights of the average citizen.
Fuck off with your demonization of the NRA. They do a good job, but don't go far enough.
What they should do is hammer down and push for a repealment of the NFA AND huges amendment, as well as the disintegration of the ATF for they are an unconstitutional government organization.

>>73489
>Remove the ATF
This is impossible.

>>73797
>This is impossible.
You could do it in a month and save millions of dollars

Alcohol & Tobacco gets folded into the FDA.
Firearms get folded into the FBI, since they already do NICS checks anyway.

>>73801
This. ATF is an outdated and unnecessary agency.

>>73797
The BATFE already doesn't do their fucking job concerning AT, it's basically done by the FDA for them. FDA imposes that you can't order tobacco online if you're under 21 and so on.
And they impose arbitrary bullshit rules on the FE side. And they hand off their NICS responsibility to the FBI.
Both sides get folded into their respected subsidiaries and their bullshit backdoor laws all get blown out of the fucking water.

file:///C:/Users/Jason/Desktop/13626992_1249130088430626_2601812199398245312_n.jpg

>>73806
Oh, Jason...

Yeah basically if someone carries a gun nuclear war is the next step.

>>72912
I bet you want to just bend over and get rammed up the ass too, cuck.

>>73308
>gun control never works
Australia. Not saying I want to ban guns. All I fucking want is background checks, storage laws, and permits. Mentally ill people shouldn't be able to get guns. Felons should be blocked from wing guns by background checks. Guns should be kept from children, or mentally unstable members of the household by locking them up. Cops should be able to tell if someone with a concealed firearm is mentally ill, or a felon by whether or not they have a permit

>>73336
None of those things are remotely unconstitutional you dumb cunt. People can still own guns. They just have to pass a background check, have a way to keep it from their children, and a way to show cops that they're sane, and only carrying a firearm for protection
>you want a full ban
No I fucking don't. Stop putting words in my mouth. The people need a way to keep the government in check

>>73336
>gun violence is not a real statistic
It is in the world of logic and reason, anon
>take away guns and violent crimes go up
No they fucking don't. How would they? You're going to have far fewer victims because guns are the most efficient way to kill

>>73467
I agree with you. We need to address poverty and mental illness as the causes of gun violence. One point where I still disagree though.
>Background checks don't work because Newtown
If it'd been mandatory that the guns he used had been locked up, I doubt he would've been able to do what he did. Storage laws have to come with background checks, or background checks are useless

>>74068

His mother owned the guns and he lived in the same home, stands to reason he would find the key for them. If not, wait to be home alone and work the lock open with basic hand tools.

Storage laws in general, imo, are too hard to enforce and too expensive to bother with. Microstamping is dumb and totally ineffective against people smarter than the lowest common denominator of criminal, and smart guns are decades away from becoming reliable enough to earn the trust of most gun owners.

I think the best approach to the gun theft side of things would be subsidizing Gun Safe manufacturers (encouraging but not mandating their use, and making them less expensive to buy) and up the enforcement and sentencing for firearm theft and illegal firearm sales.

>>74057
>Australia
The gun control in Australia has had no negative effect on crime and has left law abiding citizens completely defenseless.
Even before port author gun control was atrocious.
>Not saying I want to ban guns. All I fucking want is background checks
We allready have those. They are actually in a broken system right now.
>storage laws
These do nothing put prevent people from using their firearms and are wholly unenforceable and unconstitutional.
Storage laws existed in Australia before Port Arthur and caused the death of one of the individuals who could have stopped the massacer.
>and permits.
Entirley unconstitutional. No doubt no question never going to happen. It's overly redundant to want a permit AND a background check. My permit is my God given right to defend myself. As defined by the second amendment.
>Mentally ill people shouldn't be able to get guns.
The problem with this is people can BECOME mentally ill. You cannot control everyone else, you can only allow people to protect themselves.
>Felons should be blocked from wing guns by background checks.
They allready are.
>Guns should be kept from children, or mentally unstable members of the household by locking them up.
Again unenforceable and completely uncontrollable.
>Cops should be able to tell if someone with a concealed firearm is mentally ill, or a felon by whether or not they have a permit
M8, you want a fantasy make believe world where everything is perfect and magical and enforceable and that if you just super heavily restrict everything all of the problems will go away.
It doesn't work like that.
If you look at the history of gun control, every time gun control is enacted, crime and murder are either unaffected or rise drastically.
>>74060
Read the words
>shall
>not
>be
>infringed
You "dumb cunt". Background checks already exist.
Any limit on my ability to purchase a firearm and use it in all legal and lawful manner is an infringement.

>>74062
>it is
No it isn't. It's a scare statistic. Why are "GUN deaths" so special when it's a tiny insignificant fraction of deaths in the United States?
Can you tell me what your chance of getting shot right now is?
0.03% give or take.
That's with more guns than people in the country.
>You have far fewer victims
You have far MORE victims. Jesus Christ how can you be so dumb?
If you DISARM LAW ABIDING CITIZENS, FIREARMS ARE CONCENTRATED IN THE HANDS OF CRIMINALS. YOU'VE LEFT THE POPULATION TO BE SITTING DUCKS IN THE HANDS OF VIOLENT CRIMINALS.
Jesus Christ, what are you a Europoor?

>>74109
you're average /pol/ poster
MAYBE IF I TYPE IN CAPS PEOPLE WILL BUY INTO MY BULLSHIT

>>74057
Australian here.
The compliance rate for our gun laws is less than 20%. If you check import records vs surrender records of SKSs from China alone you see only about a quarter of them surrendered.

>>74111
Statistics and facts are against you.
Guns don't magically disappear when you ban them.
All you do is force guns into the hands of criminals, or turn perfectly law abiding citizens into criminals themselves.

Take drugs for an example, the state has totally and completely failed at fighting the war on drugs.
Go ahead and try to fight "the war on guns" because you'll find a whole lot of led flying back at you.

>>74113
I dont know why you think i want to ban all guns but okay you paranoid /pol/ack you
>stronger background checks and record keeping means taking away guns from law abiding citizens
literally what

>>74114
>"stronger" background checks
background checks already exist, actually if you knew anything about guns (you obviously dont) you'd know that the background check system is broken because it doesn't have an appeal system anymore.
>record keeping
Illegal and blatantly unconstitutional.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_Owners_Protection_Act

>>74114
>I don't know why you think I want to ban all guns
Because you do.
You're just trying to middle ground away the right to own firearms rather than just saying you're going to ban them outright.

>>74118
stronger means making sure they arent on a terrorist watch list protip: you can be a terrorist that hasnt gotten a felony
also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole
I love the unconstitutional approach. You realize it was written over 200 years ago and was written by hillbilly slaveowners whom 80% of were complete peices of shit right?
>muh constitution

>>74122
>Because you do
No, I dont. I think law abiding citizens should be able to own handguns. Thats not banning all guns. All I said was "your average /pol/ poster" and you guys think i want to ban guns? Either you think I'm some other anon from a previous conversation or you guys really are just that paranoid.
>Everyone tryin ta take away muh gunz

>>74123
>terrorist watch list
You want a way to deprive people of their rights without due process. You're in violation of the 5th and 2nd amendment.
>gun show loophole
It isn't a loophole.
The private exchange of firearms is not the buisness of the government.
>You realize it was written a hundred years ago
This is not an argument. If you think it's outdated lead a movement to amend the constitution away rather than being in blatant violation of it. Are we going to have a system of government based on laws and reason, or listen to some idiotic twat like you who has no idea what they are talking about.
>slave owners
less than 5% of the US population. Owning slaves does not discount the founding of our Republic. Another non argument.
>hillbilly
They were classically educated men who founded the world's most successful government. You're so fucking full of yourself it hurts.
>>74124
>only what I want is relevant and everyone should abide by ME
This is just getting comical

>>74124
>that's not banning guns
>only wanting people to own handguns
That's quite literally the definition of banning guns.

>>74125
>terrorist watch list
Yea youre right we should let anyone suspected of terrorism have a gun
>isnt a loophole
Never said it was a loophole, thats how its referred to, hence the wiki page.
>Isnt an argument
Yes it is, thats like saying we should still use the steam engine.
>Idiotic twat like you
Nice ad hominem, all that means is I'm winning.
>less than 5% of population
Of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 49% owned slaves. And it means half of them were a bunch of racist bigots who didn't know shit about equality and were in violation of their own constitution(all men are created equal) which means even they didnt agree with it.
>Classically educated men
No, they took ideas from classically educated men like Locke and Paine. You probably dont know who they are, though.
>everyone should abide by me
Didnt say that, just stated my views on gun laws.
You know, honestly i feel bad for you. All you can do is attack me personally or say that I said things I didnt even say(strawman). Hopefully one day youll take your head out of your ass. Good luck, anon.

>>74128
>not banning ALL guns
>ALL
READ, PLEASE, JUST READ, ALL I ASK

>>74128
you purposely took out of context the one part where i said "banning guns" but you knew i meant ban all guns, because i said it in the previous sentence. Your brain works like Cartman's from south park

>>74132
Wait, actually you didnt. You purposely ommited the part that said "all"
me: Thats not banning all guns
you quoting me: thats not banning guns

>>74124
>>74114

The reason for widespread opposition to registration or digitized background checks is the fact that since 1934 "compromises" like this have been steadily leading to more and more restrictive laws and regulations.
The hardcore democrats know that going incrementally is the way to go to eventually get the big bans in, and the republicans know that if any kind of confiscation is going to happen, the authorities would need a comprehensive list of who owns what.

Registration would create such a list. Who owns what, where they live, and you could tie that information into fuck-knows-what the NSA could dig up to formulate a selective confiscation program.

Now fuck off. We aren't the problem.

>>74130
>Yea youre right we should let anyone suspected ...
Incorrect. I would only agree with this if their rights were taken by due process of law.
>Never said it was a loophole, thats how its referred to, hence the wiki page.
>Yes it is, thats like saying we should still use the steam engi
We still do use steam engines, they are just better, faster, and more efficient. You think the founders didn't see innovation in technology down into the future?
>>Idiotic twat like you
>Nice ad hominem, all that means is I'm winning.
I called you idiotic because you don't want a system of government, you want a dictatorship of your ideals.
>>less than 5% of population
>Of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 49% owned slaves. And it means half of them were a bunch of racist bigots who didn't know shit about equality and were in violation of their own constitution(all men are created equal) which means even they didnt agree with it.
Slaves were not men during this time period. They were explicitly property. They did not have the same rights as real men.
Them owning slaves was perfectly constitutional, however it isn't today.
>>Classically educated men
>No, they took ideas from classically educated men like Locke and Paine. You probably dont know who they are, though.
Jesus Christ how daft are you?
>>everyone should abide by me
>Didnt say that, just stated my views on gun laws.
Gun laws that are in violation of the constitution.
And then you proceed to claim we should toss out our system of government to fit your ideals.
>You know, honestly i feel bad for you. All you can do is attack me personally or say that I said things I didnt even say(strawman). Hopefully one day youll take your head out of your ass. Good luck, anon.
Go ahead little moron, run away screaming "racist bigot with an old piece of paper said mean things to me!" I'm sure /somebody/ will listen.
You've made zero effective arguments.You want to change gun laws? Get a constitutional amendment passed.

>>74131
Banning guns is unconstitutional.
>>74132
>>74134
see above.
You're infringing upon my God given right to self defense of myself, my family, and my country.
Like I said, you don't want to ADMIT that you want to ban all Guns, but you do want to do so by middle grounding them away.

The ATF should be dismantled for its illegal and unconstitutional operations, the NFA AND hughes amendment should be repealed, and the USFG should enforce the 14th amendment and sue states not abiding by the 2nd and 5th amendment.

>>74138
> due process of law for suspected enemy combatants
> me having my own political beliefs means I want a dictatorship of my ideals, and thats why I called you idiotic i swear!!!
> slaves were not men
> How daft are you, another ad hominem with no refutation
> Saying the constitution is outdated means I'm saying we should make a new one and base it off of my ideals
> Gun laws are in violation of the constitution even though the second amendment is a gun law
> Little moron
> run away screaming
> zero affective arguements
You're projecting again

>>74139
>god given right to self defense of myself, my family, and my country
hahahaha gods a fag and not real you live in a fantasy world my friend

>>74141
None of this was a response to any of my argumentation.
>enemy combatants
If you allow the government to arbitrarily take away gun rights then all they have to do is put any person they want on a terrorist watch list and take away their guns in a no knock raid.
You don't believe in the due process of law?>>74142
None of those statements are true.
Go tip your fedora somewhere else ŕeddit

>>74141
>> due process of law for suspected enemy combatants
people on the terrorist watch list are usually citizens with rights anon. I love to hear that you like to trample on the rights of citizens anon.
>> me having my own political beliefs means I want a dictatorship of my ideals, and thats why I called you idiotic i swear!!!
You want to ban all Guns that are not handguns.
>> slaves were not men
If you don't even understand the basic concept of why Slaves were NOT considered men, there's no point even discussing history with you.
>> How daft are you, another ad hominem with no refutation
You implied that the founding fathers did not have a classical/neoclassical education, and you implied a liberty minded anon defending his right to own guns didn't know who they were.
You must not know who they were because you're trampling all over everything they stood for.
>> Saying the constitution is outdated means I'm saying we should make a new one and base it off of my ideals
You literally said the constitution was "old". That isn't an argument.
>> Gun laws are in violation of the constitution even though the second amendment is a gun law
The second amendment is not a regulation on guns, it's a regulation on the government
>> Little moron
>> run away screaming
making fun of you for being stupid doesn't make his argument wrong, it makes you look more like an idiot.
>> zero affective arguements
Ignoring arguments because he called you stupid doesn't make his arguments ineffective.
Listing off fallacies like they formulate a response isn't an argument.
>You're projecting again
You're being stupid again.

>>74149
GUVMENT GONNA PUT US AWL ONNA WATCHLIST
GUVMENT DUN GON TAKE AWR GUNZ

im sorry you have such a small penis, but adults are talking. go take your government conpiracy paranoia back over to you hugbox
>>>/pol/

>Doesnt believe in magical man in the sky, must be a fedora tipper.
No one cares about your imaginary friend

>>74150
More /pol/ ad hominem, keep it coming
You've never had an actual conversation in your life where you didnt end up red faced and screaming, huh?

>>74151
>>74152
Neither of these are an argument.
>sorry you have such a small penis
I don't have a penis.
I showed the logical concerns of why your positions are either unconstitutional or can lead to massive abuse by the government.
Why do you trust the government so much? Remember last time we gave them unlimited power?
Or are you a bit to young to know what the Tonkin resolution is?
How about the war powers resolution?
or the Patriot act?
You don't see these as examples of why the government should not be trusted with unlimited power?
>complains about being "strawmanned"
>calls people who have legitimate arguments and concerns "crazy tinfoil hat /pol/tards"

>>74151
>cries about ad hominem
>YOU HAB SMALL BENIS XDDDD
>YOU IS DINFOIL XDDDD
You don't know how a discussion works do you?

>>74155
I didnt say anything about small penis or tinfoil?
>anyone who argues with you is the person you previously argued with

>>74154
>I dont have a small penis
yea thats why you had to say something about it on an anonymous imageboard ahahahah

>>74154
> I dont have a small penis
yea thats why you had to say it on an anonymous imageboard ahahaha

>>74157
>>74159
You lack complete reading comprehension?
I said I don't have a penis.

>>74156
Uh oh, looks like someone got caught same fagging.
The jigs up.

>>74161
Oh so its your penis envy that causes you to love guns so much, thanks for clearing that up

>>74107
Read the words.
>We'll regulated
Letting people buy guns without proof that they're sane, law abiding citizens is not well reguated. Also, people don't need to go through a background check in my state anymore.

>>74109
Murders in which a gun was used is a statistic. Yes. More people die from heart attacks. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to mimic those deaths

>>74174
>well regulated
meaning well maintained or to be kept in proper working order.
http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm
>>74175
The number of death by firearms each year are around 11,000. That number drops drastically when you exclude gang violence.
However, the middle ground number of defensive gun uses each ear exceeds one million.
and many more go unreported, and doesn't include the initial deterrence of having an armed population.
Each of those defensive gun uses is a possible death to a law abiding citizen.

Your statistic is nothing but a scare tactic that has no basis in reality.

The editorial board of the Jewyorktimes is not news

>>72894
>>72898
>the New York Times is upset
Sounds like he made the right decision.

>>72942
>Gun crimes have fallen because we regulate guns more.
Are you fucking high? Our gun laws have gotten much more lax in the past 20 years. The people are realizing gun control does nothing.

>>74060
It's unconstitutional to prevent citizens from accessing firearms. The right to bear arms is the right for ALL citizens (barring prisoners who've lost their rights), not for just the citizens that go along with whatever you like. That's no different from saying "only the rich can have guns" or "only whites can have guns." It's exclusionary, and exclusion is unconstitutional because all citizens have the right to equal protection under the law.

>>74107
>Any limit on my ability to purchase a firearm and use it in all legal and lawful manner is an infringement.
So then you think the background check requirement should be repealed?

>>74122
I don't think people should be allowed to drive cars unless they have a driver's license. According to you, that means I want to ban automobiles.

>>74125
>The private exchange of firearms is not the buisness of the government.
Then we might as well abolish background checks completely. "muh sacred private transactions" just enables straw purchases.

>>74138
>Slaves were not men during this time period.
Then "all men are created equal" is utterly meaningless. We could just redefine "men" to mean "people with brown eyes over the age of 50 whose net worth is a prime number" and deprive 99% of the population of their rights without violating the Constitution.

>>74139
>You're infringing upon my God given right to self defense of myself, my family, and my country.
Your God must be laughably weak if some random anon on the internet can be a threat to the rights he granted you.

>>74154
The Patriot Act wasn't an executive order. It was approved by elected representatives. If anything, it's an argument against democracy, and how voting rights should be limited to an educated class that won't be swayed by appeals to fear. Same with the Tonkin resolution or the war powers act.

>>74177
>meaning well maintained or to be kept in proper working order.
Which implies that the mentally ill or otherwise chronically misbehaving shouldn't be allowed to own guns. "Well-regulated" refers to the militia, not the guns themselves - if you can't function as a disciplined member of the militia, you shouldn't be allowed to own guns.

>>74444
If they cause significant hiderance to acquiring a firearm, yes.
Currently they are slow to pass through the database and there is no appeals process.
Background checks should be handled by the state.
>>74445
Sorry, where does it say that owning a car
>shall not be infringed upon
also, cars are driven upon federally owned roadways, the government has a technical ability to test your ability to use it.
It's good that the states handle licensing.
>>74448
Oh boy here comes the hotshot.
>abolish background checks
Hand them off to state governments who are less likely to compile lists of owners. The ATF is currently in direct violation of the Firearms Owner Protection act by databaseing firearms ownership.
>some irrelevant point
During the time of the writing of the constitution, slaves, no matter what color, race, or creed were considered property; and not men. They therfore did not have rights.
They now do.
>Your God must be laughably weak if some anon on the Internet can threaten the rights he granted you
You don't understand even the basis of natural rights argumentation, if anything you're just going fedora mode.
>they were not executive orders
When did I say they were?
They all gave the presidency unlimited extra-constitutional powers and ended in complete disaster.
>Mentally ill
I allready addressed this. There is no proper way to enforce this without massively trampling on civil rights. Same thing with the Terror watch list ban or the ban on Transfags using the wrong bathroom.
>If you can't function as a well disciplined member of a militia you shouldn't own firearms
The milita has been expanded to include all citizens of the United States, and in nowhere does it say the vague qualifier of "disciplined".

>>74448
also
>straw purchase
Refers to the illegal act of purchasing a firearm from a FFL dealer with the express intent of reselling it to someone who cannot legally own the firearm.
It does NOT cover reselling them to Law-abiding citizens.
The vast majority of guns used in crime are stolen firearms or unregistered firearms sold on the technical "black market". Gun shows have little to no connection to any crime.

Holy shit. Actual gun owners arguing with retarded liberals. Gun owners, nothing will come of this. These are Reddit tier faggots who support hillary. You're wasting your time.

>>74459
It distracts me from having to write a 16 page paper over the pre-socratics, Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle.
>tfw my college has a multimillion dollar shooting facility with the countries largest collection of firearms owned by a college and we can't even fucking use it
COME ON.

>>74452
>>shall not be infringed upon
The 2nd amendment wasn't even brought up in that part of the discussion. You claimed that placing restrictions on gun ownership is a cover-up for a full-on gun ban. So logically, you must also think that placing restriction on who can drive is a cover-up for banning cars.

Whether gun restrictions are a 2nd amendment violation is another matter.

>Hand them off to state governments who are less likely to compile lists of owners.
Which means if you have a criminal record, you can just go to another state to buy a gun, and nothing is likely to show up on your background check.

>You don't understand even the basis of natural rights argumentation, if anything you're just going fedora mode.
Natural rights don't "exist" in any meaningful sense. A right is meaningless unless someone is able to enforce it. And "natural rights" are no more enforceable than any other arbitrary made-up right.

>They all gave the presidency unlimited extra-constitutional powers and ended in complete disaster.
And that happened because it's what the people wanted. Surely you don't think guns should be blamed for causing murder? Yet the government is merely a tool, wielded by the people - why do you blame the tool, and not its user?

>The milita has been expanded to include all citizens of the United States, and in nowhere does it say the vague qualifier of "disciplined".
"Well-regulated" implies disciplined, or at least showing good behavior.

>>74455
Irrelevant. If a law-abiding citizen can buy a gun through legal channels (passing a background check, which a violent offender would have failed) and then knowingly transfer ownership to a violent criminal, that's still making the background checks pretty much pointless.

>>73162
>they have nothing to go on except what Zimmerman said
Except for, you know, the forensic pathologist, Zimmerman's head injuries, Trayvon's text messages and most of Zimmerman's story in general lining up with actual facts rather than Trayvon's "dindu nuffin" witnesses.

>>74466
>So logically, you must also think that placing restriction on who can drive is a cover-up for banning cars.

Sure is a lot of straw you're burning there, Farmer Anon.

>>72908
SHALL

>>74057

Check out this link:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-28/fact-check-gun-homicides-and-suicides-john-howard-port-arthur/7254880

The evidence that the fall in gun crime rates was due to the gun law changes isn't strong as it can't be separated from the trend that had started years before the laws were introduced.

Over the same time the US has had a trend that follows the same pattern as Australia.

But I'd agree, background checks are a good idea to stop people who have abused the right in the past from doing it again. I just don't like when people use Australia as an example (Australian here)

>>74513
We already have background checks.

When you buy a gun you fill out a history form and it gets checked by whatever state you live in.

>>74504
No, it's equivalent.

Your argument is "restricting gun ownership implies you want to ban guns". Why does this apply only to guns?

>>74107
Serious question, should citizens be able to purchase all weapons to include explosives? Surface to air missiles? MANPADS? Nuclear weapons?

>>74531
Read the fucking article. Missouri no longer requires background checks

>>74531
Along w/ ten other states

>>74125
>due process
The way in which people are put on this watch list, and the fact that we can't see who's on it should definitely be amended. There should be an appeals system, and a trial. However, that doesn't mean that we should leave things the way they are, and let potential terrorists own guns. Orlando was preventable
>private exchange of guns isn't the government's business
Background checks are useless if the exchange of guns isn't regulated. Read, Well regulated militia."

>>74138
>steam power is more efficient
What fucking world do you live in?
>the founding fathers knew better
Is this the justification you use to shower three times a year?

>>74205
It isn't exclusionary to prohibit mentally ill people from owning guns. It's common sense
>he said 'common sense'. He must want to ban guns.
No I don't

>>74452
You can wait a few days for ur gunz. If it keeps the mentally ill, felons, or potential terrorists from owning a firearm, deal with it
>let states handle background checks
Fine, but the federal government should make them mandatory across the board
>banning mentally ill people from owning guns is unconstitutional
Yeah, let's have a "well regulated" militia of mentally ill people. That's great for national defense and won't cause any problems like Newtown
>military
When did every citizen become a member of the militia? That's the way it was back then, but I'm not in the national guard, anon

>>74569
They mean they're better faster and more efficient than the ones that existed in 1850.

>>74572
>You can wait a few days for ur gunz.
You don't get to determine that.
>If it keeps the mentally ill,
Entirley unenforceable without massively trampling on civil rights.
>felons
This shouldn't take more than a hour to check
>potential terrorists
Entirley unconstitutional, without due process you shall not strip a citizen of their rights.
>from owning a firearm, deal with it
I'll deal with it by shooting you if you try to trample upon my rights (^:
>Fine, but the federal government should make them mandatory across the board
Only for transfers between FFL dealers and private citizens. Otherwise you cause an unnecessary due burden on a private sale.
>Yeah, let's have a "well regulated" militia of mentally ill people.
See above, you cannot effectively determine and define what qualifies as "mentally ill" or not. Some doctors would find bias and deem you mentally ill for wanting to own a firearm.
>That's great for national defense and won't cause any problems like Newtown
Newtown was caused by the lack of protection of the school. And it's an entirley statistical outlier. Most "gun deaths" are gangbaners killing gangbangers.
>When did every citizen become a member of the militia? That's the way it was back then, but I'm not in the national guard, anon
Pick up a book. The militia has been officially defines as
>every able bodied male from 17 to 45
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311
Besides, it is the right of the people to own firearms, not the millitaman.

>>74567
>and let potential terrorists own guns
You're reaching a moral dellima; trample upon the civil rights of all individuals put upon a watch list, including those with similar names. And prevent them from owning firearms. Or let the small chance of Orlando happen.
There is no simple solution besides let people arm themselves rather than being sitting ducks.
>background checks are useless
Background checks are not useless when dealing with a FFL. Private exchange of firearms have yet to have proven to be used excessively in crimes. If any significant number at all.
The ones that are used are a black market of stolen firearms.
>well regulated militia
Properly maintained or to be kept in proper working order.
That has nothing to do with the federal government preventing the private transaction of firearms.
>>74569
You don't read very well do you?
also
>HURR DURR THE FOUNDING FATHERS WERE STOOPID
and so on and so fourth. Your comments are very easily discarded.
Revolutions in hygienic technology have nothing to do with the world's most powerful countries system of law and order.

>>72940
Actually Chicago got progressively worse.
As did new york.

Turns out people use knives and bats more than guns. But as long as you have your false sense of security right?

>>72988
More people are beaten to death a year than shot. So not "more" dangerous but a corpse is a corpse.

This just in; Common Sense Background Checks™ in one of the states not blessed with a constitution-minded leadership fail to prevent a turkroach immigrant from stealing his mother's guns and killing 5 people in a Washington Mall.

>Cetin allegedly killed four women and one man at the Cascade Mall on Friday evening. Local NBC News affiliate KING-5 reports that he used three guns in the attack, all of which had been legally purchased by Cetin’s father, and which he stole.

"But they didn't have an assault weapon ban, can we exploit that?"

>He used a long gun similar to a hunting rifle.

"Sheeeeit"

>>72988
My life is more important than others, if they threaten me and are about to attack, I will kill them with my handgun.

>>74560

>Missouri no longer requires background checks

For CARRYING, you still file a form when you BUY it.

>Read the fucking biased hit-piece.

FTFY and No.

>>74586
>mentally ill
It is enforcable. When running a background check, state agencies should fond whether or not you've been diagnosed with a mental illness. If it's something like anxiety, you can own a gun. Schizophrenics can't. Psychopaths can't. Etc. Th a t fucking simple
>felons
>shouldn't take more than an hour to check
So what's the big deal then?
>due process
As I said in an earlier post, the system needs to be reformed. Reform the system, then ban potential terrorists from owning guns
>patients wanting to own guns would create bias
Who says the doctor is going to know they're buying a gun? The doctor is evaluating then so they can buy a gun. They're being evaluated because they're family, or local law enforcement wants them to seek treatment

>>74632
This was the mother's fault, not the state's. Same as with Newtown. If you share the house with a nutjob, you're obligated to keep your guns secure.

>>74633
>My life is more important than others
You don't get to determine that.

>>72933
Bash Zimmerman's head against the curb and scream "YOU'RE GONNA DIE TONIGHT" while he's doing it.

>>74689
>You don't get to determine that.
What the fuck do you expect him to do?

>I'm being threatened and could possibly die
>but is this guy's life more important then mine?
>shit he could have kids and a wife
>do I have kids and a wife?

If you're in a life threatening situation, you have to consider your safety before the safety of the guy attacking you.
If a guy throws you to the ground and beats the shit out of you, you're betting your life on that guy choosing not to beat you to death, choke you out, etc.

>>74689
>If you share the house with a nutjob

It was his mother, how would she know?

If he had evidence to believe that were true before now, she would have been in denial.

>>72912
>All I want is background checks
Okay, as long as it is a shall-issue system and there is no way of possibly denying anyone for political reasons.
>Storage laws
Why? Anyone that owns a gun who has a brain realizes that what they have is a significant investment and worth locking up. As far as having children around, treat guns the same way you would any other dangerous object, top shelf and/or locked.
>training
It takes literally 5 minutes to learn everything there is to know about safely handling a firearm, Read instructions
1. ALWAYS Treat the weapon as if it were loaded. ie dont fuck around with it and when picking up a gun, never assume it is unloaded. So, always handle it safely and ALWAYS check if its loaded before handling it for purposes other than shooting it (cleaning, servicing, cuddling, et al)
2. NEVER point the weapon at ANYTHING you dont intent to fucking obliterate. Keeping the weapon pointed in a safe direction at all times ensures that in the event of accidental discharge, it doesn;t impact anything of value. Its also REALLY impolite and stupid to point a weapon at someone unless you're shooting them in self defense/detering them. BIG No-no.
3 KEEP YOUR FINGER OFFF THE TRIGGER UNTIL YOURE READY TO FIRE
This will ensure that, barrring some odd malfunction, the gun will NEVER go off until you intend it to. This is also a biggie in gun etiquette, for the reasons above.
4. Be sure of your target and what is behind it. In case you didnt realize, bullets are supersonic pieces of metal that don't like to come to a complete stop. So always make sure what you are shooting at will catch the bullet, or it could fly hundreds of yards downrange and hit little Susie enjoying an ice cream (this is why you don;t shoot a gun into the air, what goes up WILL come down, and that journey could be up to a few miles
5. Keep the safety on until ready to fire, if applicable. This keeps the weapon from going off if you drop it, not to forget above rules.

fucking republicans

>>73075
It's to make the NRA look like some sort of all powerful boogyman, when in reality they're pretty impotent. As a gun owner in the US, I honestly feel like they're next to useless most of the time. The whole "guns dont kill people, people kill people" thing is just not going to cut it, esp when there are shitloads of special interests groups coming out with horribly skewed statistics purely to fit their agenda. Look at the official FBI statistics and their definition of a "mass shooting" compared to those used by interest groups.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjap9L-razPAhUE0oMKHbOdBdIQFggiMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fbi.gov%2Ffile-repository%2Factive-shooter-study-2000-2013-1.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGeZ-z-W1DIBCrFizVuoxH0LRnu9g&sig2=aGKcu-i77HeCCwa4d5RYUw

The NRA hasn't to my knowledge embraced the above information. Also, if the NRA were so powerful, how can Massachusetts, California, and New Jersey, to name a few have such restrictive gun laws pushed through by so few? The "gun lobby" and the NRA are impotent, relative to their reputation by the uninformed.

when does the gun lobby lose?

>>73467
THIS THIS SO HARD. Increased social spending is the answer, which is actually what happened in Australia as well a bit after their NFA act of 1996. Australia had some serious budget problems in the 70s and put some programs into austerity in the 80s, which caused more public anguish and resulted in increased crime and mass shootings. The NFA was a small part of the government cleaning up their act, and attributing the stellar decline in crime rates to the NFA is a real disservice to the other actions put into place. This isn't to say that the NFA in Australia was totally useless, just not the real driving force behind change. Also, Australian-style gun control would NEVER work nation-wide. Gun ownership holds not only a special legal place in America, but a cultural one as well. Maybe not so much in the big cities anymore, but that in itself is changing, many stats show gun ownership is increasing or at worst, staying the same, while state laws are getting increasingly pro-gun.

>>74123
Ignoring your rant about the cores values of my country, and how they were based entirely on progressives in Europe a generation ago (Locke, Rousseau, Montesquieu, et al)
less than 1% of firearms used in homicides are aquired at gunshows. Also, the vast majority of vendors at a gun show are FEDERALLY-LICENSED DEALERS (FFL), the others are venders of beef jerky, delicious fudge, odd trinkets (flea market stuff mostly), overpriced "tactical" gear, edgy t-shirts, patches, and then of course you have the occasional old hunter trying to sell his sporterized WW2 rifle to someone without a background check, for double the proper price. To add, when you make a private sale of a firearm YOU ASSUME ALL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE SHIT THEY DO!, ie if I sell a gun to a dude, and he goes and shoots 5 people, I am also held legally liable, and that shit isn't a simple slap on the wrist, its a major felony that WILL result in the loss of my 2nd Ammendment rights.

>>74164
9/10 good bait thread, you really have these guys going, although I must say its rather disappointing that we couldn't have a nice gun control debate thanks to your efforts.

>>74464
LOL, same. I have an online quiz and assignment to do. That sucks that you can't use the range man, maybe try an on-campus petition to change that.

>>74586
>Most "gun deaths" are gangbaners killing gangbangers.

Actually most gun deaths are suicides.

Adding to that, the US doesn't have a significantly greater number of suicides per capita compared to other first world nations.

Here's hoping we can get the nfa stuck down, and the hilariously absurd background check and waiting period laws

Unlikely but I can always hope

>>74819
Also all the retarded import laws. But let's be honest, American companies would fight tooth and nail to stop more competition from coming in.

>>74820
You know what I'm fine with tariffs, it's just that very few companies make good stuff at a low price.

>>74820
>>74825
Fuck import bans dude, the Frogs are getting rid of the FAMAS and I would LOVE to get one, along with a Beretta AR-70, a Valmet, and every other modern rifle being forbidden by import laws, when rifles of equivalent specs which are produced in the states are perfectly fine. As much as I love ARs, their massive popularity is in part due to a lack of foreign made competitors.

>>72909
Your rights end where mine begin. I have the right to buy milk without being shot in the ass by some retarded cowboy with delusions of grandeur.

>>72933
Eat them in front of him and make the other guy hungry.

>>74891
(Not that anon)
You have the right to defend yourself from people who attack you, no matter whose fee fees get hurt.

Your not taking advantage of that is your fault.

>>74829
>implying the frogs will sell it to you in the first place

They're gonna destroy all their FAMAS rifles, just like they did their MAS 49s.

>>74891
This has to be bait.

>>74897
Absolutely retarded. Sell them to an importer for like 50 a gun. Fuck over those MAS owners that think their guns are worth 10 k, lel.

>>74689
Yeah I do

>>74920
I see that post is a day old, but just want to reiterate how correct you are. My family is more important than anyone else to me. So yes, you are correct, you do.

Fingers crossed the hpa will pass

>>72894
Missouri is usually a no-nonsense state. One of the first states to have a "castle doctrine" gun law, where you can shoot anyone on your property if you claim you feel threatened.
After all the zoo riots in St.Louis and now the zoo animals starting to hoot in Columbia, the TRUE citizens of Missouri know it is time to prepare to fight back.