How to ban guns without firing a single shot!

[RF667799]

And confiscation of legally owned property under dubious justification.

But remember, @Feynman Lives! said that none of his proposals would take away anyone’s guns. Well expect for this one of course.

And his de facto ban of "assault weapons".

Maybe that doesn't count because he can't explain what they are.

 

[JMB1911A1]

And his de facto ban of "assault weapons".

Maybe that doesn't count because he can't explain what they are.

Like his OP. My favorite is this part:

• Irrelevant argument 6: This xxxx [bump stock, cop killer bullets, assault rifles, ...] don't exist: MORE Bullshit! They do!

You can’t show him that there is no such thing as “cop killer” bullets and he basically sticks his fingers in his ears and goes nah, nah, nah. Like a little kid.

 

[RF667799]

Like his OP. My favorite is this part:

• Irrelevant argument 6: This xxxx [bump stock, cop killer bullets, assault rifles, ...] don't exist: MORE Bullshit! They do!

You can’t show him that there is no such thing as “cop killer” bullets and he basically sticks his fingers in his ears and goes nah, nah, nah. Like a little kid.

He thinks if there are things he calls "cop killer bullets" then that has some meaning to his political arguments. It's not much different than if we hated Ford trucks and decided to call them "New Orleans Massacre Machines" while we pressed for a ban. Sheer agitprop.

 

[Maidenrules29]

WTF? You asked what authorized the federal government to ENACT red flag laws. Article 1 does! The law will be enforced by whoever has the job of enforcing laws. Local police, most likely.

Do you even know how the federal government WORKS?


No kidding!

This is looking more and more like a waste of time!

Dude I really hope you dont write e-mails the same way you write posts on this forum. Your overuse of exclamation is maddening.

 

[CLAX1911]

And confiscation of legally owned property under dubious justification.

Authorities I don't know why this one right is the one you can tread on but you can't just search anybody willy-nilly and violate the Fourth amendment rights or their fifth amendment rides or the First amendment rights to prevent crimes that would probably go a lot farther than confiscating their firearms

But remember, @Feynman Lives! said that none of his proposals would take away anyone’s guns. Well expect for this one of course.

And he's trying to classify rifles as assault weapons to attempt to restrict and take those away.

It's like someone's punching you in the face over and over and sick I'm not trying to make your nose bleed.

 

[CLAX1911]

To be clear, I don't think banning all guns is possible in this country in any of our lifetimes. So relax. But we might be able to reduce the number of mass shootings by banning some. I also don't mean "banning" in the sense that cops are going to walk into homes and grab guns.

Be sure to read at the end of this post some silly and irrelevant arguments that some have made in the past, so you don't repeat them. But if you do, I'll just refer you to the proper "Irrelevant argument" number.

Remember: there is likely NO way to stop ALL mass shootings. But the idea here is to make them more difficult. So that there are less shootings. And when shootings are unavoidable, that less people get killed.

The whole process will take years... maybe decades. But we need to start now!

All we want to do is make mass shooting more difficult.

The following might help:

1. Ban the sale to the public of "assault weapons". As well as parts and ammunition. Reinstate the Assault Weapon sales ban.
2. No confiscation (except what is already in the law). But adopt a voluntary buy-back program with strong compensation, for guns and ammunition.
3. Ban so-called "cop-killing" bullets.
4. Ban the sale of high-capacity magazines.
5. Ban ghost guns.
6. Require a license to buy any firearm and ammunition.
7. Require a "graduation process" to obtain and maintain a gun license.
8. Mandatory buy back program for weapons acquired with a license for anybody who fails to renew their license.
9. Implement a federal mandatory background check for all gun sales. No loopholes. And hold private sellers accountable if the gun sold without a check or to an unlicensed buyer is used in a crime.
10. Give courts the authority to confiscate guns from people who they consider a threat to themselves and others. (Red Flag Law)
11. Raise the age limit for buying any kind of guns to 21 (at least)
12. Implement strong nationwide cash-for-guns programs focusing primarily on assault weapons.
13. Repeal the PLCAA and investigate gun manufacturers and gun lobbyists' role in passing it.
14. Require manufacturers to alter design of guns sold to public to make them as difficult to be modified as possible.
15. Declare gun violence a preventable public health problem. Give the CDC funding an resources to study the relation between certain mental illnesses and gun violence.
16. Repeal DoC v Heller given that the decision is based on factual historical and linguistic inaccuracies.

Feel free to skip the following absurd or irrelevant arguments

Sorry I'm not going to engage with this until you can define terms.
Just so you know you should have done this in the first place it should be the first sentence in your post.

Just a word to the white so I know you're a novice debater and skipped very basic stuff.

What the hell is an assault weapon? Don't tell me I should know it's your duty to define it if you want to talk about this if you don't know you're opening your mouth without education.

What the hell is a cop killer bullet can't all bullets kill cops what about cops make them impervious to the billets that can just kill anybody else?

See why you have to define terms? That's like I'm talking to someone who's never heard of a gun.

What the hell is a high capacity magazine magazine's house standard capacity? What's the right amount and what do you base it on?

What the hell is gun violence that doesn't mean anything it's just propaganda speak by imbeciles that don't know anything about the topic.

Boy I'm so glad I went through this proposal you are as ignorant about guns as a flat earther is about the astrophysics.

I suppose this is why you're saying that legitimate arguments that destroy your position are irrelevant.

Guns don't kill people people kill people that's not irrelevant it's 100% absolutely true. You hear it because it's a fist pounding you into the ground that's why you think it's irrelevant because you can't argue against it.

So before you even enter an argument you should define terms. This is to prevent people from talking past each other unless that's your goal

 

[CLAX1911]

Dude I really hope you dont write e-mails the same way you write posts on this forum. Your overuse of exclamation is maddening.

Read his op he's using loaded terms that he refused to define. Hold his feet to the fire mage him define the following:
Assault weapon
Assault rifle
High capacity magazine
Gun violence
Cop killer bullets
Ghost guns
Buy backs
Red flag laws.

The op is dishonest. Make him define his terms

 

[JMB1911A1]

Read his op he's using loaded terms that he refused to define. Hold his feet to the fire mage him define the following:
Assault weapon
Assault rifle
High capacity magazine
Gun violence
Cop killer bullets
Ghost guns
Buy backs
Red flag laws.

The op is dishonest. Make him define his terms

The real reason they want gun control.

 

[CLAX1911]

And his de facto ban of "assault weapons".

What is that? What does he mean?

Am assault weapon as I understand it is a weapon used in an assault it can be a gun or it can be an improvised like a brick or a baseball bat.

Hold his feet to the fire.

Maybe that doesn't count because he can't explain what they are.

He's dishonest.

 

[CLAX1911]

The real reason they want gun control.

View attachment 67579209

No it's because they want to dominate you.

 

[JMB1911A1]

No it's because they want to dominate you.

 

[Maidenrules29]

All we want to do is make mass shooting more difficult.

The following might help:

1. Ban the sale to the public of "assault weapons". As well as parts and ammunition. Reinstate the Assault Weapon sales ban.
2. No confiscation (except what is already in the law). But adopt a voluntary buy-back program with strong compensation, for guns and ammunition.
3. Ban so-called "cop-killing" bullets.
4. Ban the sale of high-capacity magazines.
5. Ban ghost guns.
6. Require a license to buy any firearm and ammunition.
7. Require a "graduation process" to obtain and maintain a gun license.
8. Mandatory buy back program for weapons acquired with a license for anybody who fails to renew their license.
9. Implement a federal mandatory background check for all gun sales. No loopholes. And hold private sellers accountable if the gun sold without a check or to an unlicensed buyer is used in a crime.
10. Give courts the authority to confiscate guns from people who they consider a threat to themselves and others. (Red Flag Law)
11. Raise the age limit for buying any kind of guns to 21 (at least)
12. Implement strong nationwide cash-for-guns programs focusing primarily on assault weapons.
13. Repeal the PLCAA and investigate gun manufacturers and gun lobbyists' role in passing it.
14. Require manufacturers to alter design of guns sold to public to make them as difficult to be modified as possible.
15. Declare gun violence a preventable public health problem. Give the CDC funding an resources to study the relation between certain mental illnesses and gun violence.
16. Repeal DoC v Heller given that the decision is based on factual historical and linguistic inaccuracies.

Assault weapon- Stupid term created by the antis.
Assault rifle- Politically-motivated term used by antis to demonize MSR's, which are involved in a tiny percentage of deaths, especially compared to murders by hands and feet each year.
High capacity magazine- Made up term by the antis. My 30 round magazines for my AR-s and 17+ rounders for my handguns are defined by the manufacturers as standard capacity. A drum magazine (I don't own one ) is called....a drum magazine.
Gun violence- made up nonsensical term. Guns
don't commit violence.
Cop killer bullets....
Ghost guns- Stupid term used by antis to say "BOO!, SCARY HOME-MANUFACTURED GUN!
Criminals aren't buying kits and putting them together. Grabbing one off the street is much easier and cheaper. Isn't that why criminals rob and steal, cause they're broke?

Buy backs- Useless. Most guns turned in are useless or broken relics. Waste of taxpayer's money.
Red flag laws. The way some are set up now, an unconstitutional way to strip someone of their 2A rights, based on someone's feeling. If someone is acting that nutty, send their ass to the funny farm like we used to do. Taking their gun away won't keep them from killing someone.

And where on your list of how to make mass shootings more difficult is "raise your damn kids right"? That should be number 1 and it's not even on your list.

I'm not going to indulge you in discussing any of your other infringement drivel. Because it's just that, drivel. This is the United States Of America. The RTKABA shall not be infringed.

 

[Spock]

Assault weapon- Stupid term created by the antis.
Assault rifle- Politically-motivated term used by antis to demonize MSR's, which are involved in a tiny percentage of deaths, especially compared to murders by hands and feet each year.
High capacity magazine- Made up term by the antis. My 30 round magazines for my AR-s and 17+ rounders for my handguns are defined by the manufacturers as standard capacity. A drum magazine (I don't own one ) is called....a drum magazine.
Gun violence- made up nonsensical term. Guns
don't commit violence.
Cop killer bullets....
Ghost guns- Stupid term used by antis to say "BOO!, SCARY HOME-MANUFACTURED GUN!
Criminals aren't buying kits and putting them together. Grabbing one off the street is much easier and cheaper. Isn't that why criminals rob and steal, cause they're broke?

Buy backs- Useless. Most guns turned in are useless or broken relics. Waste of taxpayer's money.
Red flag laws. The way some are set up now, an unconstitutional way to strip someone of their 2A rights, based on someone's feeling. If someone is acting that nutty, send their ass to the funny farm like we used to do. Taking their gun away won't keep them from killing someone.

And where on your list of how to make mass shootings more difficult is "raise your damn kids right"? That should be number 1 and it's not even on your list.

I'm not going to indulge you in discussing any of your other infringement drivel. Because it's just that, drivel. This is the United States Of America. The RTKABA shall not be infringed.

What does "infringed" actually mean to SCOTUS?

 

[jaeger19]

I don't know what you're talking about. If you have something to comment about what I said, use the forum's QUOTE function. Unless the only way you can make a point is to take something out of context.

I quoted you exactly. Not out of context .
You lied

Post 2580:
“BTW, no! I have NEVER had to stand in line 2 hours at the DMV. Even when I didn't get an appointment, I have never had to wait even an hour. But usually 10 to 15 minutes including the waiting time... Once at the desk, it's pretty quick: they check my record, my eye-sight, a few questions... .in and out...”

Then later we hear how getting a gun license would NOT BE anywhere near easy as you describe.

Forget driving licenses and the DMV. That was just a side comment to respond to a specific question by a specific poster. If you have anything to REBUT the point made in the OP, go ahead! If not then, yet again, my point is made!

That’s right. I was that poster and the fact that you were caught lying rebuts your point about how “ easy” it would be to get a gun license “ if you qualify”.

Clearly your intention is to create “ Jim Crow” regulations whose sole purpose is to prevent and discourage knowledgeable and responsible gun owners from exercising their constitutional rights.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Sorry I'm not going to engage with this until you can define terms.

So, there you have it, folks: It depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

I guess that's a good an excuse as any, when you don't have any counter-arguments.

Thanks for your efforts. They have not gone to waste as they prove once again the lack of counter-arguments to rebut mine.

What the hell is an assault weapon?

THAT term? THAT is what's keeping you from rebutting my proposals? I have sent the definition no less than 20 times.

Sigh! Ok... here you go. You know... when you're right, you don't MIND re-sending the same thing over and over.

Don't tell me I should know i...

At this point it's clear that nobody can assume you know ANYTHING....

But now you have no more excuses: QUOTE any one proposal... the one you believe you can do best with... and REBUT it!

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Assault weapon- Stupid term created by the antis.

Who gives a CRAP who created it! If you have something to say about my proposals, quote the proposal you think you can rebut and REBUT IT!

Or simply admit that you have no rebuttal. Anything else is a waste of time... And we already have enough posters posting useless inanities.

 

[RF667799]

So, there you have it, folks: It depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

I guess that's a good an excuse as any, when you don't have any counter-arguments.

Thanks for your efforts. They have not gone to waste as they prove once again the lack of counter-arguments to rebut mine.



THAT term? THAT is what's keeping you from rebutting my proposals? I have sent the definition no less than 20 times.

Sigh! Ok... here you go. You know... when you're right, you don't MIND re-sending the same thing over and over.



At this point it's clear that nobody can assume you know ANYTHING....

But now you have no more excuses: QUOTE any one proposal... the one you believe you can do best with... and REBUT it!

Your proposal to ban all centerfire and rimfire ammunition is nonsense. It amounts to a de facto gun ban, and would be palatable to neither the Supreme Court nor the American people. Even trying to make sense of it as far as practicality is futile, as it seems it is little more than a whim relayed to you by magic wand of the Good Idea Fairy.

 

[RF667799]

Who gives a CRAP who created it! If you have something to say about my proposals, quote the proposal you think you can rebut and REBUT IT!

Or simply admit that you have no rebuttal. Anything else is a waste of time... And we already have enough posters posting useless inanities.

Maybe he just likes seeing if you give a crap about supporting your proposals. They seem to rely on undefined terms and you seem unprepared to discuss your own proposals.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

I quoted you exactly. Not out of context .

I didn't say you did or didn't quote me out of context. I'm only asking that you use the quote function when you are referencing something I say so we can all see the context.

In any case.... you just appear obsessed with the DMV. I have ZERO interest in debating driver's licenses. If you have an argument.... ANY argument... to rebut my proposal about a "graduation process" for a license in order to buy a gun... I'd be happy to listen (BTW, it wasn't mine.... I borrowed it from pro-gun advocates). Or, if you prefer to babble about the DMV, feel free to open your own thread.

 

[RF667799]

I didn't say you did or didn't quote me out of context. I'm only asking that you use the quote function when you are referencing something I say so we can all see the context.

In any case.... you just appear obsessed with the DMV. I have ZERO interest in debating driver's licenses. If you have an argument.... ANY argument... to rebut my proposal about a "graduation process" for a license in order to buy a gun... I'd be happy to listen (BTW, it wasn't mine.... I borrowed it from pro-gun advocates). Or, if you prefer to babble about the DMV, feel free to open your own thread.

Maybe none of your proposals are your own, and that's why you're woefully unprepared to discuss them.

At this point, your display of inability to discuss the topic in your OP is an asset to the "gun nuts" side.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

It amounts to a de facto gun ban...

A "de facto ban" is not a ban.

Personally, I would HOPE all this ends with no assault weapons EVER being on the streets again. But I don't think that will happen within any of our lifetimes. This is why it's not in my proposals. My proposals are REALISTIC! Which doesn't mean they will be implemented.... but it does mean that they have a realistic chance of being enacted.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Maybe he just likes seeing if you give a crap about supporting your proposals....

Oh! You can be SURE he gives a crap. NOBODY posts in a thread they don't give a crap about.

 

[RF667799]

A "de facto ban" is not a ban.

Yes it is.

Personally, I would HOPE all this ends with no assault weapons EVER being on the streets again.

Of course. That's why the de facto ban you propose. Thanks for not being duplicitous. Or at least for being clumsy about it.

But I don't think that will happen within any of our lifetimes. This is why it's not in my proposals. My proposals are REALISTIC! Which doesn't mean they will be implemented.... but it does mean that they have a realistic chance of being enacted.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Of course. That's why the de facto ban you propose.

That would be the ideal end result of my proposals. But not a realistic expectation that that would happen in the next four or five decades even WITH my proposals. . Feel free to comment if you think that getting ALL assault weapons off the streets, without confiscating them or banning possession to anybody who already owns one, is somehow a "bad" thing, though. I might even comment, if it's an even moderately INTELLIGENT argument. Not holding my breath, though.

 

[RF667799]

That would be the ideal end result of my proposals. But not a realistic expectation that that would happen in the next four or five decades even WITH my proposals. . Feel free to comment if you think that getting ALL assault weapons off the streets, without confiscating them or banning possession to anybody who already owns one, is somehow a "bad" thing, though. I might even comment, if it's an even moderately INTELLIGENT argument. Not holding my breath, though.

What do you mean by "off the streets"?

It looks like your proposals would affect the fields, the ranges, the private property as well.