How to ban guns without firing a single shot!

[Feynman Lives!]

Then why did you bring up the DMV and drivers licenses?

Ah! That's a WONDERFUL opportunity for you to follow a conversation back to the post that initiates it. Which you should do EVERY time you jump into a debate.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Bs. If a person is assessed as a danger to themselves or others they can be removed for some time ( usually a 48 hour) hold and ...

Wrong! Red flag laws only exist in a handful of states.

Another failed attempt to rebut the OP! And you only tried it because you didn't read my sig!

 

[Feynman Lives!]

You just told a BALD FACED LIE that your gun licensing would be “ just like getting a drivers license.

I don't know what you're talking about but it should definitely NOT be like getting a drivers license! It should be more difficult. Demanding to demonstrate knowledge, and mental and physical abilities. Not being confident that they would pass is the reason why people here oppose it.

 

[RF667799]

Ah! That's a WONDERFUL opportunity for you to follow a conversation back to the post that initiates it. Which you should do EVERY time you jump into a debate.

I guess the topic MUST be motor vehicles. I mean...with that big ol' Dodge parked right there.

 

[RF667799]

I don't know what you're talking about but it should definitely NOT be like getting a drivers license! It should be more difficult. Demanding to demonstrate knowledge, and mental and physical abilities. Not being confident that they would pass is the reason why people here oppose it.

There is no license required to purchase a motor vehicle.

 

[CLAX1911]

100,000 people killed or injured from fireworks, propane or natural gas explosions yearly?
Given the frequent use of those devices and the relatively rare use of firearms, they are far more dangerous and a greater threat to public health.

Firearms are not a threat to public health.

 

[CLAX1911]

I don't know what you're talking about but it should definitely NOT be like getting a drivers license! It should be more difficult. Demanding to demonstrate knowledge, and mental and physical abilities. Not being confident that they would pass is the reason why people here oppose it.

We're licensed by the second amendment it's granted universally. The point of the amendment is to stop people like you specifically from making hoops that people have to jump through.

See the framers of the Constitution just got done killing a bunch of people that thought like you.

If you don't have to do any of this to be part of a religion or to not be searched without a warrant then it shouldn't be the case for owning arms.

 

[rahl]

Cool! So in your fantasy world, there is no need to worry about judicial activism because. you don't believe know it exists. And senators who question nominees

I’m sorry on failed basic 6th grade civics and post hilariously retarded stupidity. But I will happily point it out when you do, as many times as you need me to.

 

[jaeger19]

Ok. All this has been explained and I will attempt for one final time to explain it again to you.

You have refused to recognize that teaching children not to handle guns is different from hunter safety course.
You conflate two programs that have entirely different purposes. Hunter safety involves, as you know, discussion of firearms (care and feeding), regulations, hunting culture, funding of conservation programs... which essentially promotes the hobby of hunting. Since hunting is primarily with firearms, essentially this hobby promotes firearm ownership and use. Hunter safety is not equivalent to teaching Eddie Eagle caution about guns. Essentially, hunting promotion is firearm promotion and promoting firearms increases the prevalence of firearms in America. As an example, firearm death and injury increases during hunting season.



As concerns "gun safety" for both children AND adults. There is no evidence that these programs impact significantly the storage of and risks to children of firearms. I have posted multiple studies in support of my position. You have posted claims that short term impact exists for some education, but no evidence that there is an impact on overall reduction of problems from firearm storage. You have danced around the importance of these programs which you know very well will not allow adults to reliably trust unsupervised young children around loaded firearms. Handguns remain hypnotically attractive to young children (especially boys) and NO amount of safety training has long term and reliable impact on children in a fashion that prevents the threat from firearms to children. Rationally, the American Academy of Pediatrics acknowledges that fact and states that NO firearms is the safest home. I believe is useless to waste school time on extended "gun safety" (which you might call "hunter safety") because it is futile and as firearms become a part of school education, that prominence becomes a firearm promotion campaign.

Even training for adults, as currently structured, is likely useless to impact habits about secure storage of firearms (RAND

Hmmm. Hunter safety doesn’t work?

According to the 2019 Texas Hunting Incident Analysis, Texas has seen a substantial decrease in hunting-related accidents and fatalities since Hunter Education became mandatory in 1988. That year, over 18,000 Texans received their Hunter Education certification, but 12 fatalities and 70 accidents were still reported throughout the state. As more Texans have taken to the field and obtained their Hunter Education certification, these numbers have improved, with over 56,000 certifications in 2019 and only 1 fatality, and 21 accidents, reported statewide.

News Release: Nov. 13, 2020: Recent Data Shows that Hunter Education Improves Hunting and Shooting Sports Safety

tpwd.texas.gov

So let’s get this straight .

NOW the eddy eagle program that teaches children to “ STOP, Don’t TOUCH , TELL an adult. “
Isn’t like “ promoting rape”.
Even though done by the NRA.

However , your argument is that we should do away with HUNTER SAFETY , and Firearm safety training because it’s like “ promoting rape?

So what happens when remove Hunter safety and remove all safe firearms courses .?

Do you think society becomes safer because you are “now not promoting”.



What happens when you remove all firearms safety courses for adults ?
Is society safer?

I mean you just argued that safety courses were likely “ futile and useless “
And that firearm safety courses were like “ promoting rape”.
And certainly no one would want courses that “ promoted rape”



You know Canada, , uk and New Zealand require mandatory safety courses

So again I thank you Spock for again exposing the the agenda and lies of the gun control crowd.

You don’t care about saving lives and reducing accidents.

You’ve managed to flip flop between firearms take specialized skill to use safely , to they take 15 minutes to do , to firearms safety courses make society LESS SAFE .

You’ve made it clear that the gun control crowd lies when it says “ we just want reasonable restrictions “ and lies when it says “ nobody wants to take your guns”

What you want is to take away all firearms from civilian hands . Period.
And in such time you don’t want things like firearm safety courses because if kids and adults have accidents with firearms ? You believe it furthers your agenda.

 

[jaeger19]

Wrong! Red flag laws only exist in a handful of states.

Another failed attempt to rebut the OP! And you only tried it because you didn't read my sig!

That’s the point Feynman the laws to remove firearms if a person is a danger to themselves and others already exists in the states.

 

[Spock]

Hmmm. Hunter safety doesn’t work?

According to the 2019 Texas Hunting Incident Analysis, Texas has seen a substantial decrease in hunting-related accidents and fatalities since Hunter Education became mandatory in 1988. That year, over 18,000 Texans received their Hunter Education certification, but 12 fatalities and 70 accidents were still reported throughout the state. As more Texans have taken to the field and obtained their Hunter Education certification, these numbers have improved, with over 56,000 certifications in 2019 and only 1 fatality, and 21 accidents, reported statewide.

News Release: Nov. 13, 2020: Recent Data Shows that Hunter Education Improves Hunting and Shooting Sports Safety

tpwd.texas.gov

So let’s get this straight .

NOW the eddy eagle program that teaches children to “ STOP, Don’t TOUCH , TELL an adult. “
Isn’t like “ promoting rape”.
Even though done by the NRA.

However , your argument is that we should do away with HUNTER SAFETY , and Firearm safety training because it’s like “ promoting rape?

So what happens when remove Hunter safety and remove all safe firearms courses .?

Do you think society becomes safer because you are “now not promoting”.



What happens when you remove all firearms safety courses for adults ?
Is society safer?

I mean you just argued that safety courses were likely “ futile and useless “
And that firearm safety courses were like “ promoting rape”.
And certainly no one would want courses that “ promoted rape”



You know Canada, , uk and New Zealand require mandatory safety courses

So again I thank you Spock for again exposing the the agenda and lies of the gun control crowd.

You don’t care about saving lives and reducing accidents.

You’ve managed to flip flop between firearms take specialized skill to use safely , to they take 15 minutes to do , to firearms safety courses make society LESS SAFE .

You’ve made it clear that the gun control crowd lies when it says “ we just want reasonable restrictions “ and lies when it says “ nobody wants to take your guns”

What you want is to take away all firearms from civilian hands . Period.
And in such time you don’t want things like firearm safety courses because if kids and adults have accidents with firearms ? You believe it furthers your agenda.

Reiterated demonstration of complete failure to read and understand prior posts.

 

[jaeger19]

I don't know what you're talking about but it should definitely NOT be like getting a drivers license! It should be more difficult. Demanding to demonstrate knowledge, and mental and physical abilities. Not being confident that they would pass is the reason why people here oppose it.

Well then you lied .
You said your licensing would be as simple as getting your license from the dmv.

Now you are admitting you lied about that.

You know why people oppose it?
Because you gun banners lie. Look at what Spock just posted.

He basically states all this mandatory gun training etc is futile and useless.

Gun control advocates like Spock and you don’t want reasonable restrictions .

What you want is “ Jim Crow” like restrictions that make a responsible and safe citizen have a difficult time buying and owning a firearm.
Because your goal is to make firearm ownership so difficult that only the and white can afford the requirements and get the necessary approval by the authorities.

And so. I one should listen to you hun control advocates. Because you lie.

 

[jaeger19]

Reiterated demonstration of complete failure to read and understand prior posts.

No. I understand your posts just fine.
You likened firearm safety education ( like hunters education) to “ promoting rape”

Clearly you would want to get rid of programs that promoted rape right?
So clearly you want to get rid of gun safety programs like hunters education.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

We're licensed by the second amendment it's granted universally.

2nd A has NOTHING to do with any of my proposals. As has been shown again, and again, and again, and again...

However, the fact that this is the one thing they keep coming back to DEMONSTRATES that they have nothing to rebut my proposals with.

 

[CLAX1911]

2nd A has NOTHING to do with any of my proposals. As has been shown again, and again, and again, and again...

False. The second amendment stops your proposal.

In your proposals are you talking about any kind of firearm or any part to a firearm? If so that's an arm protected by the Constitution.

However, the fact that this is the one thing they keep coming back to DEMONSTRATES that they have nothing to rebut my proposals with.

Rebutting proposals is illiterate. Proposals are either accepted or rejected.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

That’s the point Feynman the laws to remove firearms if a person is a danger to themselves and others already exists in the states.

Exactly! So my proposal is to make them at a Federal level so they are in ALL the states.

Precisely my point!

 

[RF667799]

2nd A has NOTHING to do with any of my proposals. As has been shown again, and again, and again, and again...

However, the fact that this is the one thing they keep coming back to DEMONSTRATES that they have nothing to rebut my proposals with.

Post 2591.

 

[RF667799]

Exactly! So my proposal is to make them at a Federal level so they are in ALL the states.

Precisely my point!

They ARE in all the states. You want special laws. It's like as if someone had an aversion to red cars, and so they sought to pass a speeding laws specifically directed at red cars.

That's precisely your point.

 

[CLAX1911]

Exactly! So my proposal is to make them at a Federal level so they are in ALL the states.

Why?

Precisely my point!

 

[RF667799]

False. The second amendment stops your proposal.

In your proposals are you talking about any kind of firearm or any part to a firearm? If so that's an arm protected by the Constitution.

Rebutting proposals is illiterate. Proposals are either accepted or rejected.

His proposal is disingenuous bullshit from the get-go.

He wants to ban buying and selling some firearms he refuses to identify. (So they can be anything.)

He wants to ban parts necessary to keep those unspecified firearms operable.

He wants to ban unspecified ammunition that can be used in those unspecified guns.(So any and all ammo)

THEN, he has the audacity to stand there with a straight face and claim he doesn't want to ban guns.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Well then you lied .
You said your licensing would be as simple as getting your license from the dmv.

It would be for anybody who has the knowledge, background record, abilities and mental health to pass it. No more difficult than standing in line at the DMV.

But it would be excruciatingly difficult for anybody who doesn't. Just like it would be difficult for somebody who doesn't know how to drive to get a driver's license. Clearly some of these would need to be monitored more closely. Especially mental health.

Not sure why you're obsessed with this. I assume it's because YOU would find it difficult to pass.

Let me tell you one thing: when I posted this the first time on another forum, I didn't have that point about the license. This was suggested by a pro-gun poster. I thought it was very reasonable.

In any case, whatever you think this "lie" is, is irrelevant to the point that it would work!

 

[RF667799]

It would be for anybody who has the knowledge, background record, abilities and mental health to pass it. No more difficult than standing in line at the DMV.

But it would be excruciatingly difficult for anybody who doesn't. Just like it would be difficult for somebody who doesn't know how to drive to get a driver's license. Clearly some of these would need to be monitored more closely. Especially mental health.

Not sure why you're obsessed with this. I assume it's because YOU would find it difficult to pass.

Let me tell you one thing: when I posted this the first time on another forum, I didn't have that point about the license. This was suggested by a pro-gun poster. I thought it was very reasonable.

In any case, whatever you think this "lie" is, is irrelevant to the point that it would work!

Sure it would work. Nobody in Illinois ever, ever, ever possesses and uses a gun without a FOID.

And nobody across the entire country ever possesses and uses a motor vehicle without a driver's license.

Not only that, the people who do have a driver's license always operate their vehicles in a safe, responsible and law abiding manner.

The only thing this retarded plan would work for, is to put another obstacle in the path of peaceful people exercising their rights.

BTW, there is no license required to own a motor vehicle. You seem to miss that fact.

 

[CLAX1911]

His proposal is disingenuous bullshit from the get-go.

Almost everything he posts is. And he freaks out when people don't take it seriously.

He wants to ban buying and selling some firearms he refuses to identify. (So they can be anything.)

Yeah I would think that would be unconstitutional.

He wants to ban parts necessary to keep those unspecified firearms operable.

That sort of action is exactly what the second amendment was created to prevent.

He wants to ban unspecified ammunition that can be used in those unspecified guns.(So any and all ammo)

THEN, he has the audacity to stand there with a straight face and claim he doesn't want to ban guns.

Why don't you people just lay down and accept dictatorship. That's essentially his position it's been his position for years it's stupid and he's not getting anywhere with it.

 

[jaeger19]

Exactly! So my proposal is to make them at a Federal level so they are in ALL the states.

Precisely my point!

But they ability to take firearms away in case of a person being in dangerous to themselves other others is already in all of the states .
That ability already exists in every state.

 

[JMB1911A1]

Exactly! So my proposal is to make them at a Federal level so they are in ALL the states.

Precisely my point!

There is no constitutional authority for Federal red flag laws.