Guns do not represent American values[W:212]

Re: Guns do not represent American values

TurtleDude said:

Glen doesn't understand how an auction works. those amounts are NOT the selling price

Click to expand...

My oldest boy does a lot of selling on B-Bay and Amazon and see's that stuff all the time. Not firearms but things that can't possibly sell for $1-5.00s. Starting bids.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

TurtleDude said:

one in poor shape probably

Click to expand...

Hear that. A while back I picked up a NERF gun patterned after a P90 paid $1.99 for it and it sold on E-bay for $90.00,go figure.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

TurtleDude said:

how many states are going to agree to get rid of the second amendment? lets stick to reality

Click to expand...

who said anything about getting rid of the 2A? That's just you blowing things out of proportion. Again.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Glen Contrarian said:

1. It does. not. matter. that a felon is not allowed to have a gun - it's still easy for him to purchase or acquire a firearm by means that would otherwise be legal...and that goes back to precisely what I said about poverty and ease of access to firearms. THAT, sir, is the point. All complaining by you and TurtleDude that "they're not legally allowed to buy a gun!" means nothing when it's simply so easy for them to do so in the ways that I've shown you.

2. What did Obama mean by internet sales? You DO know that like almost anything else, firearms can and are sold over the internet, right? Is that really so difficult to grasp? I even provided you one such site: gunbroker.com.

Click to expand...

So you actually think that any of those guns on gunbroker can be sold without an FFL? They can't just ship the gun to the buyer's home.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Glen Contrarian said:

who said anything about getting rid of the 2A? That's just you blowing things out of proportion. Again.

Click to expand...

well when you talk about amending the constitution in a GUN thread wtf else could you be talking about?

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Rucker61 said:

So you actually think that any of those guns on gunbroker can be sold without an FFL? They can't just ship the gun to the buyer's home.

Click to expand...

I'd bet big bucks he thinks that=we see this all the time from anti gunners.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Glen Contrarian said:

who said anything about getting rid of the 2A? That's just you blowing things out of proportion. Again.

Click to expand...

Regarding amending the 2A - find a recent red/blue map of the US. Start counting red states. Stop when you get to 13.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

TurtleDude said:

that sort of silliness cannot be topped. all you gun banners can do is harass honest citizens. and yes they do have firearms DESPITE THE LAWS. so what is your solution?

Click to expand...

Nope. I said one thing - that the biggest factor in our homicide rate is a combination of poverty and ease of access to firearms. That "ease of access" has nothing to do with legality, because the same principle applies anywhere on the planet where the poor have relatively easy access to firearms - again, legality doesn't matter.

And as I said to Rucker, you have a choice: you can either let things stand as they are and resign America - and our children - to continued violence and unsafe streets...OR you can either do what's necessary to minimize the poverty (by paying enough taxes to provide a Scandinavian-style social safety net) or decrease the ease of access to firearms by those in poverty (by passing laws which would be in your opinion in violation of the 2A).

Those two measures really are the only practical and pragmatic ways to greatly decrease the gun violence in America. The matter of current law or the constitution makes no difference at all in this question.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Glen Contrarian said:

Nope. I said one thing - that the biggest factor in our homicide rate is a combination of poverty and ease of access to firearms. That "ease of access" has nothing to do with legality, because the same principle applies anywhere on the planet where the poor have relatively easy access to firearms - again, legality doesn't matter.

And as I said to Rucker, you have a choice: you can either let things stand as they are and resign America - and our children - to continued violence and unsafe streets...OR you can either do what's necessary to minimize the poverty (by paying enough taxes to provide a Scandinavian-style social safety net) or decrease the ease of access to firearms by those in poverty (by passing laws which would be in your opinion in violation of the 2A).

Those two measures really are the only practical and pragmatic ways to greatly decrease the gun violence in America. The matter of current law or the constitution makes no difference at all in this question.

Click to expand...

Taxing gun ownership is not the only thing we can do, and Constitutionality is all important when you seek to restrict rights.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Glen Contrarian said:

Nope. I said one thing - that the biggest factor in our homicide rate is a combination of poverty and ease of access to firearms. That "ease of access" has nothing to do with legality, because the same principle applies anywhere on the planet where the poor have relatively easy access to firearms - again, legality doesn't matter.

And as I said to Rucker, you have a choice: you can either let things stand as they are and resign America - and our children - to continued violence and unsafe streets...OR you can either do what's necessary to minimize the poverty (by paying enough taxes to provide a Scandinavian-style social safety net) or decrease the ease of access to firearms by those in poverty (by passing laws which would be in your opinion in violation of the 2A).

Those two measures really are the only practical and pragmatic ways to greatly decrease the gun violence in America. The matter of current law or the constitution makes no difference at all in this question.

Click to expand...

or we can do this without engaging in the idiotic socialist welfare nonsense that has completely failed in the USA and has led to generations of teat suckers

1) we can severely discourage irresponsible people having multiple children

2) we can encourage and train honest people to defend themselves against violent criminals so more violent criminals are slain

3) we can quit wasting billions on the war on drugs-that turns lots of young men into felons and thus essentially unemployable but rather severely punish violent criminals with incarceration that basically ends their careers as criminals

4) how do you decrease access by those in poverty to guns?

Re: Guns do not represent American values

TurtleDude said:

or we can do this without engaging in the idiotic socialist welfare nonsense that has completely failed in the USA and has led to generations of teat suckers

1) we can severely discourage irresponsible people having multiple children

2) we can encourage and train honest people to defend themselves against violent criminals so more violent criminals are slain

3) we can quit wasting billions on the war on drugs-that turns lots of young men into felons and thus essentially unemployable but rather severely punish violent criminals with incarceration that basically ends their careers as criminals

4) how do you decrease access by those in poverty to guns?

Click to expand...

aren't the bolded items the same kind of social engineering that you accuse LIberals of doing?

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Rucker61 said:

Regarding amending the 2A - find a recent red/blue map of the US. Start counting red states. Stop when you get to 13.

Click to expand...

So? I told you the only real ways to decrease gun violence in America. The fact that you're opposed to those ways makes no difference as to whether or not I'm right. To be sure, I know very well that what I say will work best stands zero chance of passing...but that doesn't mean I'm wrong about how best to decrease gun violence...and I'm not wrong. It's just that the Right is so politically hidebound that there is no way they would allow what needs to be done in order to bring down the level of gun violence in America...and thousands of innocent people will continue to die every single year, year in and year out, because the Right has deluded itself into thinking that making it easier for everyone to have firearms is somehow patriotic and will somehow make America safer even though most available evidence shows just the opposite.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

TurtleDude said:

or we can do this without engaging in the idiotic socialist welfare nonsense that has completely failed in the USA and has led to generations of teat suckers

1) we can severely discourage irresponsible people having multiple children

2) we can encourage and train honest people to defend themselves against violent criminals so more violent criminals are slain

3) we can quit wasting billions on the war on drugs-that turns lots of young men into felons and thus essentially unemployable but rather severely punish violent criminals with incarceration that basically ends their careers as criminals

4) how do you decrease access by those in poverty to guns?

Click to expand...

1. You do realize that it's RED states that generally have the highest rates of divorce, teenage pregnancy, bankruptcy, and poverty, don't you? So your suggestion would apply mostly to those who live in RED states.

2. While that will make the occasional difference between life and death, on the MACRO scale, it will make very little difference overall. Why? You can be armed to the teeth, but if the other guy's got the drop on you - as is what normally happens in robberies and assaults - you're done. What's more, there's many tens of millions of Americans who DON'T want a gun in the household - some because they don't want their children to wind up being on the evening news, some because they can't trust their spouse, some because their 15 year-old son is getting picked on at school and he might think that firearm would solve all his problems...and with many - like myself - we simply don't need a firearm in the household. It's simply not necessary, a waste of time and money. Don't get me wrong - if you'll think back, I've ALWAYS advocated that every firearm owner should receive training for the class of firearm that he or she owns, partly for the same reason that you just listed. But the percentage of households with firearms has dropped by about one-third since the early 1970's...because most of us are seeing that they're simply just not necessary. Full disclosure - if I lived out in the country (as I was raised), I'd most certainly have a firearm in the household since there's wild animals and human varmints, and it would take police a half hour to get there at best. But in most cities, firearms simply aren't necessary...and most of America lives in cities now.

3. I strongly agree with you on that! I'd dearly love to see that "war on drugs" go away! And if you'll think about it, which side is fighting most strongly to MAINTAIN the war on drugs? Have you checked on what Trump's boy Jeff Sessions is trying to do? But I'm just a stupid liberal - what do I know?

4. How to decrease access to firearms by those in poverty? It would quickly be declared unconstitutional, but the best and most effective way would be to tax the hell out of them.

Look at what I said in the last part of #2 - I'm no "gun banner" - if one lives out in the boonies like I did, firearms are almost a *need* for a responsible man to be able to protect his wife and kids. But the Right's crusade to make it so doggone easy for people to acquire firearms has ALSO made it much easier for felons to acquire firearms...and you yourself pointed out that those who can't legally own firearms are responsible for most firearm deaths. In other words, someday y'all really need to talk among yourselves as to whether easy access for everyone to firearms is really worth the thousands of innocents who are killed every year.

Personally, I'd say the best way to start that conversation is to realize that the gun manufacturers have co-opted the NRA and made it something it was never meant to be. Why would the gun manufacturers do so? Because the number of households with firearms has dropped by a third since the early 1970's. It's all about money...and they're using you to protect their revenue stream.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

TurtleDude said:

I'd bet big bucks he thinks that=we see this all the time from anti gunners.

Click to expand...

1. Rifles and shotguns can be shipped through the US mail - I used to work at the Post Office and processed them myself.

2. Background checks are not required for personal sales...which account for up to 40% of all firearm sales.

3. Concerning background checks for online purchases:

If the seller is an FFL, or if the winner of the auction lives in a different state (this applies whether the seller is a licensed dealer or a private one), the gun must be received at an FFL, where the buyer will go through a background check before taking it home. But if a private party sells a gun on an auction site to a buyer in the same state, they can sometimes ship it directly to the purchaser without performing a background check. The United States Postal Service will mail rifles and shotguns (but not handguns) between individuals inside state lines, so long as the shipper certifies the guns are unloaded. FedEx and UPS both prohibit the shipping of guns between individuals.

Here a second caveat comes in: Such sales can only occur in one of the 32 states where gun transfers between unlicensed individuals are not subject to a background check. The remaining 18 states and the District of Columbia place restrictions on private gun sales, and must have an FFL run a background check before a transfer is completed.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Glen Contrarian said:

So? I told you the only real ways to decrease gun violence in America.

Click to expand...

You made an unsupported claim. It's interesting that the Left keeps proposing lots of different things, but taxing poor people out of a Constitutionally protected right doesn't seem to be anything that they've proposed.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/gun-violence-prevention/ nope, not there.

"Preventing Gun Violence
With 33,000 Americans dying every year, Democrats believe that we must finally take sensible action to address gun violence. While responsible gun ownership is part of the fabric of many communities, too many families in America have suffered from gun violence. We can respect the rights of responsible gun owners while keeping our communities safe. To build on the success of the lifesaving Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, we will expand and strengthen background checks and close dangerous loopholes in our current laws; repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) to revoke the dangerous legal immunity protections gun makers and sellers now enjoy; and keep weapons of war—such as assault weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines (LCAM's)—off our streets. We will fight back against attempts to make it harder for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to revoke federal licenses from law breaking gun dealers, and ensure guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists, intimate partner abusers, other violent criminals, and those with severe mental health issues. There is insufficient research on effective gun prevention policies, which is why the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention must have the resources it needs to study gun violence as a public health issue."

https://www.democrats.org/party-platform#gun-violence

Nope, not there. In fact, you can look at every pro and anti-gun person on this forum and you'd see that you're the only person who supports the claim that these are the "only real ways to decrease gun violence in America".

The fact that you're opposed to those ways makes no difference as to whether or not I'm right.

Click to expand...

The fact that in post #280 I said "Yes, we should attack poverty" seems to have escaped you completely, and just because you make a statement without any supporting evidence at all doesn't make a difference as to whether you're right.

To be sure, I know very well that what I say will work best stands zero chance of passing...but that doesn't mean I'm wrong about how best to decrease gun violence...and I'm not wrong.

Click to expand...

Well, you're certainly welcome to show us how that work work, perhaps with some white papers on the elasticity of demand of firearms for poor people, and how a decrease in access of x% would result in a decrease of y% in the homicide rate. I'm also curious how you rate as "best" something that you admit would not pass muster by the Right or that would not pass by the Left, either. How much more effective do you think that incarcerating all males from age 15 to 29 in re-education camps would work in decreasing gun violence in America? This too is a solution that has zero chance of passing, but with all of these youthful offenders and would be offenders off the streets, that wouldn't leave many of the demographic most likely to commit a gun crime with the means to do so.

I await the links to the white papers, by the way.

It's just that the Right is so politically hidebound that there is no way they would allow what needs to be done in order to bring down the level of gun violence in America...and thousands of innocent people will continue to die every single year, year in and year out, because the Right has deluded itself into thinking that making it easier for everyone to have firearms is somehow patriotic and will somehow make America safer even though most available evidence shows just the opposite.

Click to expand...

Again, any "solution" that violates the Constitution is not a solution. No, we won't allow "what needs to be done" just because someone believes it to be the case. Remember who is in charge of the government - do you want them to ignore Constitutional protects to get what they think needs to be done?

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Unitedwestand13 said:

aren't the bolded items the same kind of social engineering that you accuse LIberals of doing?

Click to expand...

uh no-I don't believe society should subsidize irresponsible breeding. Liberals do

2) honest people shooting violent criminals is called the nature right of self defense

3) the war on drugs is idiotic

Re: Guns do not represent American values

TurtleDude said:

well when you talk about amending the constitution in a GUN thread wtf else could you be talking about?

Click to expand...

That's really sad, that you can't tell the difference between "repeal" and "amendment". Come to think of it, all that's really needed is to have a majority of like-minded people on SCOTUS - that would be the simplest way to reinterpret the 2A to make life in America MUCH safer.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Glen Contrarian said:

1. Rifles and shotguns can be shipped through the US mail - I used to work at the Post Office and processed them myself.

2. Background checks are not required for personal sales...which account for up to 40% of all firearm sales.

3. Concerning background checks for online purchases:

If the seller is an FFL, or if the winner of the auction lives in a different state (this applies whether the seller is a licensed dealer or a private one), the gun must be received at an FFL, where the buyer will go through a background check before taking it home. But if a private party sells a gun on an auction site to a buyer in the same state, they can sometimes ship it directly to the purchaser without performing a background check. The United States Postal Service will mail rifles and shotguns (but not handguns) between individuals inside state lines, so long as the shipper certifies the guns are unloaded. FedEx and UPS both prohibit the shipping of guns between individuals.

Here a second caveat comes in: Such sales can only occur in one of the 32 states where gun transfers between unlicensed individuals are not subject to a background check. The remaining 18 states and the District of Columbia place restrictions on private gun sales, and must have an FFL run a background check before a transfer is completed.

Click to expand...

you cannot sell or transfer a rifle to a private citizen who does not live in your own state if you are a private citizen. Dealers cannot ship rifles to anyone who is not a license holder through the mail Only exception-a gunsmith MAY return a repaired firearm to its owner. the OCMP may mail a government surplus rifle to a citizen after the citizen has submitted an affidavit, proof of membership in a firearms activity etc. background checks are done

SO YOU ARE WRONG YET AGAIN

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Glen Contrarian said:

That's really sad, that you can't tell the difference between "repeal" and "amendment". Come to think of it, all that's really needed is to have a majority of like-minded people on SCOTUS - that would be the simplest way to reinterpret the 2A to make life in America MUCH safer.

Click to expand...

you mean judges who piss all over their oath and pretend the second amendment doesn't say what we all know it does?

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Glen Contrarian said:

1. Rifles and shotguns can be shipped through the US mail - I used to work at the Post Office and processed them myself.

Click to expand...

Yes, they can, but they cannot be shipped to someone in another state, nor can any handgun be sold without an FFL involved. Shotguns and rifles account for a small percentage of homicides each year, less than knives or blunt instruments.

2. Background checks are not required for personal sales...which account for up to 40% of all firearm sales.

Click to expand...

Correct, they are not, and that's due to a plethora of reasons. One is that the Brady Act, a law written by the Democrats, signed by a Democrat and reviewed by a Liberal majority SCOTUS did not require background checks for private sales. Two, they are unenforceable without comprehensive registration. Three, criminals selling to criminals would ignore any such requirement in the same way that they ignore the law on possession of a firearm by a prohibited person. Fourth, UBCs would do nothing to stop straw purchases, FFL diversions, theft or the aforementioned street sales. That "40%" figure is from a survey conducted prior to the Brady Act being law, so it's really not that accurate. We have a UBC here in Colorado, and since its inception date the CBI has noted that about 4.5% of all background checks are for private sales. Either private sales account for significantly less than 40% of all sales or 90% of private sales are ignoring the background check requirement.

Would you support direct access to NICS by private sellers so that they can vet their buyers?

3. Concerning background checks for online purchases:

If the seller is an FFL, or if the winner of the auction lives in a different state (this applies whether the seller is a licensed dealer or a private one), the gun must be received at an FFL, where the buyer will go through a background check before taking it home. But if a private party sells a gun on an auction site to a buyer in the same state, they can sometimes ship it directly to the purchaser without performing a background check. The United States Postal Service will mail rifles and shotguns (but not handguns) between individuals inside state lines, so long as the shipper certifies the guns are unloaded. FedEx and UPS both prohibit the shipping of guns between individuals.

Here a second caveat comes in: Such sales can only occur in one of the 32 states where gun transfers between unlicensed individuals are not subject to a background check. The remaining 18 states and the District of Columbia place restrictions on private gun sales, and must have an FFL run a background check before a transfer is completed.

Click to expand...

So "sometimes" the shipment can go directly to a buyer in the same state. How often does that actually happen where the buyer doesn't want to examine the merchandise prior to giving the seller the money for the gun? How many long guns are bought through the internet and are used in homicides? Without this data you have no idea if "internet sales" are actually a material source of criminal guns. \

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Glen Contrarian said:

That's really sad, that you can't tell the difference between "repeal" and "amendment".

Click to expand...

The aforementioned "count the red states, stop when you get to 13" still applies.

Come to think of it, all that's really needed is to have a majority of like-minded people on SCOTUS - that would be the simplest way to reinterpret the 2A to make life in America MUCH safer.

Click to expand...

Not familiar with stare decisis, are you? Has the Supreme Court ever decided a case that gave more power to the federal government over a right enumerated in the Bill of Rights?

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Glen Contrarian said:

So? I told you the only real ways to decrease gun violence in America. The fact that you're opposed to those ways makes no difference as to whether or not I'm right. To be sure, I know very well that what I say will work best stands zero chance of passing...but that doesn't mean I'm wrong about how best to decrease gun violence...and I'm not wrong. It's just that the Right is so politically hidebound that there is no way they would allow what needs to be done in order to bring down the level of gun violence in America...and thousands of innocent people will continue to die every single year, year in and year out, because the Right has deluded itself into thinking that making it easier for everyone to have firearms is somehow patriotic and will somehow make America safer even though most available evidence shows just the opposite.

Click to expand...

And I/we just know how right you are. Glen Contrarian can't possibly be wrong.And I should hope they wouldn't allow a harebrained plan like that. How is this brilliant plan gonna keep the rich guy from blowing(suicide is the leading cause) his brains out? Or the rich kid? You know with your taxing guns to death. Bet you fancy yourself in the U.S. Congress huh.

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Rucker61 said:

The aforementioned "count the red states, stop when you get to 13" still applies.



Not familiar with stare decisis, are you? Has the Supreme Court ever decided a case that gave more power to the federal government over a right enumerated in the Bill of Rights?

Click to expand...

Miller v USA

Re: Guns do not represent American values

Rucker61 said:

Yes, they can, but they cannot be shipped to someone in another state, nor can any handgun be sold without an FFL involved. Shotguns and rifles account for a small percentage of homicides each year, less than knives or blunt instruments.



Correct, they are not, and that's due to a plethora of reasons. One is that the Brady Act, a law written by the Democrats, signed by a Democrat and reviewed by a Liberal majority SCOTUS did not require background checks for private sales. Two, they are unenforceable without comprehensive registration. Three, criminals selling to criminals would ignore any such requirement in the same way that they ignore the law on possession of a firearm by a prohibited person. Fourth, UBCs would do nothing to stop straw purchases, FFL diversions, theft or the aforementioned street sales. That "40%" figure is from a survey conducted prior to the Brady Act being law, so it's really not that accurate. We have a UBC here in Colorado, and since its inception date the CBI has noted that about 4.5% of all background checks are for private sales. Either private sales account for significantly less than 40% of all sales or 90% of private sales are ignoring the background check requirement.

Would you support direct access to NICS by private sellers so that they can vet their buyers?



So "sometimes" the shipment can go directly to a buyer in the same state. How often does that actually happen where the buyer doesn't want to examine the merchandise prior to giving the seller the money for the gun? How many long guns are bought through the internet and are used in homicides? Without this data you have no idea if "internet sales" are actually a material source of criminal guns. \

Click to expand...

I want to see proof from GC that a private seller can send through the mail a firearm to a private buyer

Re: Guns do not represent American values

zsu2357 said:

And I/we just know how right you are. Glen Contrarian can't possibly be wrong.And I should hope they wouldn't allow a harebrained plan like that. How is this brilliant plan gonna keep the rich guy from blowing(suicide is the leading cause) his brains out? Or the rich kid? You know with your taxing guns to death. Bet you fancy yourself in the U.S. Congress huh.

Click to expand...

No solution is perfect...which means the key is to decrease the problem, which is what my solution does.