- Joined
- Apr 28, 2017
- Messages
- 10,875
- Reaction score
- 4,415
- Location
- The late great Oregon
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Every time they want to pass another gun law be it fed or state that is pretty much what they say "just give us this one little improvement" and it never ends.There is room for improvement.
Large majorities are lied to and fed the same BS over and over and where are these polls taken? Who tabulates the numbersLarge majorities of Americans are in favor of various gun control measures that would tighten up the laws, get rid of loopholes etc.
Naturally. A child that is educated about firearms is far less likely to accidentally harm themselves or others, which is exactly the opposite of what the anti-gun crowd want. The anti-gun crowd WANT as many children to die as possible through firearms. Which is why they created these massacre magnets they call "Gun Free School Zones."I agree. Gun safety should start early.
But anti gunners don't want children to be taught how to be safe .
I don't know what fantasy world you are living in, but the vast majority of Americans already know that Universal Background Checks violate the US Constitution since the Supreme Court said so in 1997. Get a clue.No, not really.
Which gun control advocates opinion is not?
You don't seem to know what their opinions are, you were wrong about their opinions in your previous post.
No, actually most Americans are for it.
Polling is clear: Americans want gun control
Polling is clear: Americans want gun control
Politicians diverge from voters when it comes to preventing gun deaths.www.vox.com
That is the nuance I was talking about. Why your 'all or nothing' stance is nonsense.
The details can be worked out.
No the vast majority of Americans want universal background checks with no exceptions.
Yes our laws are constantly being adjusted. Added to, sometimes removed. It's been that way from day one. By design. That is what the constitution designed the legislative branch to do.Every time they want to pass another gun law be it fed or state that is pretty much what they say "just give us this one little improvement" and it never ends.
Yeah it's all a big deep state conspiracy.Large majorities are lied to and fed the same BS over and over and where are these polls taken? Who tabulates the numbers
I wish he would explain it. But what the anti gun "people" never seem to talk about or bring up is the fact that the ParklandThe science does show that.
Again..the Uvalde shooter..the parkland shooter..heck many of the mass shooters passed a background check or got around it.
Explain to me your logic of how they work then.
1. Yes actually really.No, not really.
Which gun control advocates opinion is not?
You don't seem to know what their opinions are, you were wrong about their opinions in your previous post.
No, actually most Americans are for it.
Polling is clear: Americans want gun control
Polling is clear: Americans want gun control
Politicians diverge from voters when it comes to preventing gun deaths.www.vox.com
That is the nuance I was talking about. Why your 'all or nothing' stance is nonsense.
The details can be worked out.
No the vast majority of Americans want universal background checks with no exceptions.
Let there be a drive by in Chicago or some other [D] held city and a little kid is shot well eight out 10 times the media is all over it. However let a defensive gun use (DGU) and it's kind of oh well some one else will cover it. As in local news even if it's on the block over from mentioned drive by. Keep your hat it goes good with those rose colored glasses you got.Yes our laws are constantly being adjusted. Added to, sometimes removed. It's been that way from day one. By design. That is what the constitution designed the legislative branch to do.
Yeah it's all a big deep state conspiracy.
Here's your hat.
There are a couple of issues, not constitutional problems, just issues. Such as, they would be identifying themselves as convicted felons whenever they were required to present an ID. Personally, I don't have a problem with that. If they didn't want to be outted as a convicted felon every time they are carded, they shouldn't have committed the crime.Sure. And it would make it easy for law abiding gun owners to identify them so we know who we can sell to etc.
Why should all law abiding citizens have to be kept in a database and tracked.
Rather than simply identify those ineligible. ?
Yes our laws are constantly being adjusted. Added to, sometimes removed. It's been that way from day one. By design. That is what the constitution designed the legislative branch to do.
Yeah it's all a big deep state conspiracy.
Here's your hat.
Now you are just lying.2. Well..the gun control opinions expressed here on this board..by you and others.
Well not just felons are ineligible to own firearms.There are a couple of issues, not constitutional problems, just issues. Such as, they would be identifying themselves as convicted felons whenever they were required to present an ID. Personally, I don't have a problem with that. If they didn't want to be outted as a convicted felon every time they are carded, they shouldn't have committed the crime.
There would need to be a uniform standard for all State-issued drivers licenses, which Congress has the authority to establish under Article IV, Section 1 of the US Constitution. States would need to require proof of identity before a driver's license is issued. A birth certificate must be a requirement at the minimum in order to obtain a State-issued driver's license.
Nope. No lie. You asked about gun control people not just specifically yourself. I answered.Now you are just lying.
i stopped there. Didnt read the rest.
I already told you that you got my position wrong.
Now here you are saying you know my position and I don't.
If you are going to make up things for me to say, you don't need me, you are arguing with a srwaw man.
Keep lying and we are done.
True, but bars and liquor stores are just verifying someone's age, not their criminal background. But, like I said, I don't really consider that a problem. It may be embarrassing for the convicted felon, but I don't care. It is the product of their stupid life choices.Well not just felons are ineligible to own firearms.
And anyone who would be looking at I'd for purposes like employment etc..would be doing a background check anyway.
I know of at least two, New York and California. Both States issue drivers licenses to illegal aliens, requiring no identification, and then they also register them to vote through their State Motor Voter law.As as proof of identity. I don't know a state that doesn't require proof of identity.
Nope. No lie.
NY requires proof of identity.True, but bars and liquor stores are just verifying someone's age, not their criminal background. But, like I said, I don't really consider that a problem. It may be embarrassing for the convicted felon, but I don't care. It is the product of their stupid life choices.
On the other hand, it would also stop convicted felons from voting illegally if IDs were required and they included an indication that the individual was a convicted felon.
I know of at least two, New York and California. Both States issue drivers licenses to illegal aliens, requiring no identification, and then they also register them to vote through their State Motor Voter law.
No, they do not. Which is why they cannot be used to board interstate flights. Neither State complies with the REAL ID requirements established by Congress. The New York DMV even states this fact right up front: Standard licenses and permits are not federally compliant and will be marked "NOT FOR FEDERAL PURPOSES."NY requires proof of identity.
Standard License and Permit Document Guide
Standard License and Permit Document Guide.nysdmv.standard-license-and-permit-document-guide.sgizmo.com
So does California.
Obtaining a Driver License - California DMV
When you apply for an original California DL, you must present acceptable documents establishing your identity/birthdate, residency, and provide your Social Security Number (SSN), if eligible. When a document is required, with the exception of proof of residency, adhere to the following...www.dmv.ca.gov
Nope ..not telling you what you think.Yeah. A lie.
You keep telling me what I think, and claiming to speak for all the other people whose positions you disagree with.
Text book straw man. Suggests you can't handle people's real positions and can't refute them.
See you. Since you know everyone's positions better than they do, just continue fighting your straw men.
Get back to me if you ever think you can handle it.
Yes they do require proof if identity.No, they do not. Which is why they cannot be used to board interstate flights. Neither State complies with the REAL ID requirements established by Congress. The New York DMV even states this fact right up front: Standard licenses and permits are not federally compliant and will be marked "NOT FOR FEDERAL PURPOSES."
We are not talking about the same thing.Yes they do require proof if identity.
And most states don't fully comply with real id..they often have a state driver's license to drive..and then issue an enhanced one that meets the federal requirements.
Both require proof of identity. It's simply that real id requirements are much more stringent..
How would you know since you didn't read it?Now you are just lying.
Now it's becoming clear why you seem to be off topic. You read one or two sentences and call it good and reply.I stopped there. Didnt read the rest.
Says he that answers without reading.I already told you that you got my position wrong.
Shit I bet you don't even read my reply. I would say your position is you're against private firearm ownership and want to ramp up gun laws since they aren't going away. Is that your position? Or did I read somewhere you had a .357 or something?Now here you are saying you know my position and I don't.
You said you didn't read it so how would you know? Quite frankly if I wrote/typed that piece I'd be pissed.If you are going to make up things for me to say, you don't need me, you are arguing with a srwaw man.
See above.Keep lying and we are done.
Proof of your name is proof of your name.We are not talking about the same thing.
Alaska's DMV: "You must bring documents to verify your name, lawful status, and physical address."
California DMV: "What's your name?"
Asking someone their name is not proof of identity no matter how you try to spin it.
Lol.How would you know since you didn't read it?
Now it's becoming clear why you seem to be off topic. You read one or two sentences and call it good and reply.
Says he that answers without reading.
Shit I bet you don't even read my reply. I would say your position is you're against private firearm ownership and want to ramp up gun laws since they aren't going away. Is that your position? Or did I read somewhere you had a .357 or something?
You said you didn't read it so how would you know? Quite frankly if I wrote/typed that piece I'd be pissed.
See above.
I am ready any time you are..Lol.
You jumped in too late. The exchange didn't start with that post.
If you are going to jump in at least familiarize toyrself with the conversation first.....you know.....so you don't make a fool of yourself.
But i amm sure he appreciates your big brother backing though.
Sounds like OR. I get reams of paperwork and the illegal is basically asked just that. Gotta get them voters registered.We are not talking about the same thing.
Alaska's DMV: "You must bring documents to verify your name, lawful status, and physical address."
California DMV: "What's your name?"
Asking someone their name is not proof of identity no matter how you try to spin it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?