Why do you NEED your gun there?

[Jerry]

And I heard you the first time and now the second because you have not stated what you are going to negotiate with and all we have is our rights.

After the machinegun ban is repealed, we'll still have to register any modern machinegun we buy, and pay the tax stamp, too. I would like to do something to change that.

Now let me say this about a few laws you think important and they are but once the repeal of those is achieved what then?

Now the hardest question to answer how are you going to organise opposition to those laws sufficient to remove them. What is going to be your motivation, that is going to get people off their bum? Let's be honest here firearm organisations have never done this before in any serious manner. Removing a law is going to take massive public objection and gun control as well as government will be working to oppose it all the way.

And thirdly once you have reached your objective the movement falls apart. Now what?

Best you take a long hard look at gun control and see how professionals organise to win. I can answer every one of these questions when it comes to gun control. I cannot answer one of them for firearm owners.

The public will only reach for gun rights when we feel threatened. Sadly it will take the same propaganda as anti-gun uses, exploiting tragedies.

We already do that. Just look at our most recent threads on gun'violence and count the posts until someone says something like "this couldn't have happened because it was a gun-free zone". We're already playing that game, we just need to get serious about it.

 

[American]

And you again failed to step to the plate and deliver what you claim you can. Instead you merely engage in attack.



Since we have no nation wide system of registration for firearms, how does anyone know if it is useful or not?

In Canada In a Canada Firearms Centre (CAFC) survey, 74% of general duty police officers stated that the registry "query results have proven beneficial during major operations." That pretty much destroys your claim that police have no use for registration.

And you say you "demonstrated" this but where is it?

Where is your factual refutation of what I presented yesterday in 327? You rejected the findings for the very reason that I said you reject all firearms information like this and it proves the intellectual fraud in asking for the data in the first place.

http://everytown.org/documents/2014/10/background-checks-reduce-crimes-and-save-lives.pdf



YOu kep demanding proof that gun laws do some good - well there it is.

And in spite of that, someone highly determined went into Parliament shooting. And the shooting was stopped by a man with a gun.

 

[Jerry]

The second amendment should be repealed.

That's an honest and clear position. Heymarket should take notes.

 

[TurtleDude]

None.

of course not, as a trial attorney I know that when the opposition leads with insufficient or deficient proof, it means they don't have any sufficient or compelling proof. when the best the canadian worshippers of their expensive and worthless registration can come up with is 74% of government minions like a system because it makes their job easier that means they don't have any evidence that the system MAKES THE CITIZENRY safer which of course is all that matters

its like the supporters of the expensive brady bill who used to bray that the BB stopped ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND (lol) FELONS FROM BUYING GUNS. it did not make crime go down at all so it was a waste of money (and given less than one tenth of one percent of all those "felons" who committed federal perjury were ever prosecuted, most were people who had minor busts years ago that they didn't even think were felonies like weed possession back in the dark ages)

 

[American]

The second amendment should be repealed.

Write a Constitutional amendment and get it ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatures.

 

[haymarket]

the issue is what is best for the country, not what is best for government bureaucrats who are beholden to the politicians who foisted that expensive idiocy on the public and want their lackeys to make that failure look better

It would be prudent and wise to take the opinion of trained professionals who are in the field and use the system when they tell me it is useful to them over the opinion of someone who has nothing to do with it other than defend the gun lobby position from an ideological or political point of view and has their own axe to grind.

 

[haymarket]

of course not, as a trial attorney I know that when the opposition leads with insufficient or deficient proof, it means they don't have any sufficient or compelling proof.

So follow through on your boast and step up and provide verifiable proof that the study and its data is indeed insufficient or deficient. Lets see that from you or anyone else here.

 

[TurtleDude]

It would be prudent and wise to take the opinion of trained professionals who are in the field and use the system when they tell me it is useful to them over the opinion of someone who has nothing to do with it other than defend the gun lobby position from an ideological or political point of view and has their own axe to grind.

LOL that is a non-answer. you seem to think that cops are "trained professionals" when it comes to gun control and its effectiveness. that is like saying a mail carrier is an expert on how the automatic sorting machines technology works

 

[TurtleDude]

So follow through on your boast and step up and provide verifiable proof that the study and its data is indeed insufficient or deficient. Lets see that from you or anyone else here.

I couldn't care less since its conclusion has no relevance to whether public safety is improved

its like the brady thugs claiming their law stopped "ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND FELONS" from buying guns (from retail dealers)

that matters not-what matters is if the law actually decreased gun crime and it did not

proving something that doesn't ultimately matter DOES NOT MATTER

 

[American]

I couldn't care less since its conclusion has no relevance to whether public safety is improved

its like the brady thugs claiming their law stopped "ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND FELONS" from buying guns (from retail dealers)

that matters not-what matters is if the law actually decreased gun crime and it did not

proving something that doesn't ultimately matter DOES NOT MATTER

He can't prove his study is credible.

 

[TurtleDude]

He can't prove his study is credible.

they cannot prove causation at all. and the massive studies of the Brady bill established subjecting 65-75% of sales to a BGC did nothing to decrease crime

 

[American]

It would be prudent and wise to take the opinion of trained professionals who are in the field and use the system when they tell me it is useful to them over the opinion of someone who has nothing to do with it other than defend the gun lobby position from an ideological or political point of view and has their own axe to grind.

Law Enforcement has no axe to grind when it comes to registrations? :lamo

 

[TurtleDude]

Law Enforcement has no axe to grind when it comes to registrations? :lamo

I always laugh when the argument for restrictions or harassment of citizens is "it makes the job of the government easier"

 

[American]

I always laugh when the argument for restrictions or harassment of citizens is "it makes the job of the government easier"

I'm sure law enforcement's job would be easier if all 310,000,000 of us were in jail, but I don't see haymarket fighting for that. The perpetuation of erroneous arguments by gun-banners is astounding.

 

[TurtleDude]

I'm sure law enforcement's job would be easier if all 310,000,000 of us were in jail, but I don't see haymarket fighting for that. The perpetuation of erroneous arguments by gun-banners is astounding.

its like his argument that police should have superior weapons to honest citizens so when an oppressive government comes t power, the citizens' ability to resist will be diminished

 

[American]

its like his argument that police should have superior weapons to honest citizens so when an oppressive government comes t power, the citizens' ability to resist will be diminished

He thinks police aren't civilians.

 

[TurtleDude]

He thinks police aren't civilians.

yeah, one of the funniest things ever posted on DP in the 9 years I have been on this board.

 

[American]

yeah, one of the funniest things ever posted on DP in the 9 years I have been on this board.

I don't give a **** what dictionary or colloquialism you try, there are officially only two designations......civilian and military. Police aren't military.

 

[TurtleDude]

I don't give a **** what dictionary or colloquialism you try, there are officially only two designations......civilian and military. Police aren't military.

I love the parlance trumping US code, international law, and the Federal Office of Personnel designations

 

[Crimefree]

It would be prudent and wise to take the opinion of trained professionals who are in the field and use the system when they tell me it is useful to them over the opinion of someone who has nothing to do with it other than defend the gun lobby position from an ideological or political point of view and has their own axe to grind.

Political speak I go with the flow and currently I think gun control is in a winning position. On that you are probably right which so far would be the only thing you have got right.

Lets hope firearm owners can find some decent thinking leadership with enough balls to take on gun control instead of trying to collaborate and appease, to see you out of a job.

 

[Crimefree]

He thinks police aren't civilians.

Oh that's because they are controlled by a political process and will do the bidding of political instructions. Same as citizen once they have no guns. Then the world will be at peace.....

 

[haymarket]

yeah, one of the funniest things ever posted on DP in the 9 years I have been on this board.

yeah - I sent to a dictionary convention last week and they had me read the definition of CIVILIAN from 24 different dictionaries. It slayed them and left them in the aisles. James Brown doing his cape routine at his peak at the Apollo could not have killed the way I did that night.

 

[TurtleDude]

yeah - I sent to a dictionary convention last week and they had me read the definition of CIVILIAN from 24 different dictionaries. It slayed them and left them in the aisles. James Brown doing his cape routine at his peak at the Apollo could not have killed the way I did that night.

there is an old poster I remember seeing many years ago that went something like this

a 45 beats a royal flush every time (its about someone using a gun to deal with a poker cheater)

here-one legal definition beats 24 colloquial parlances

 

[American]

yeah - I sent to a dictionary convention last week and they had me read the definition of CIVILIAN from 24 different dictionaries. It slayed them and left them in the aisles. James Brown doing his cape routine at his peak at the Apollo could not have killed the way I did that night.

A dictionary convention? Please provide proof that you went, and a link to your reading.

 

[TurtleDude]

A dictionary convention? Please provide proof that you went, and a link to your reading.

dictionaries reflect colloquial terms and parlance

some would have you believe that those who decide what to include actually engage in a rigorous academic examination of a term. that is not so. and using colloquial definitions that are based on cop parlance to prove a legal term of art is worthless. It would be like HP or Samsung claiming that they can call their photocopying process "XEROXING" a document because in colloquial term "xerox" means photocopying rather than the specific brand of copier-xerox