I have to get back to work, I will pick this up with you when I get home.

Clarify please because you're comparing apples to oranges with drugs and guns.

But it's fruit to fruit in the sense that both can be dangerous in the wrong hands, and that our society does place restrictions on the availability of both with that in mind.

Yeah! :ylsuper:

 

 

 

 

.

Blaming the gun for what this maniac idiot pulled is like blaming this keyboard for typos or blaming the pencil for mistakes. Absolutely what the liberal media is pushing bc they do not want to deal with the real problems. Easier to blame the gun and say the criminal was "a victim" or "can be helped with rehab" . That is el toro po poo . The only way this scum of the earth and their acts of cowardness can be prevented is what I said in the first place, enforce laws that are already in place, put them in prison with NO chance of paroll or rehab and USE the death penalty on extreme cases along with rape, child abuse - molestation, as well as mass murders. Imo if these were enforced you would see a lot quicker drop in crime rates than "more gun laws". If these pieces of trash know that they are not going to slip through the legal system by a shyster lawyer and weak judge then they woud think much more than twice before they act. Imo this country is "morally bankrupt" and the courts and lawmakers are helping it.

The fact that people misuse something to such an extent shouldn't infringe on the rights of those who are law abiding citizens. We can't safeguard against everything, BF.

But we can apply common sense RTS.

But it's fruit to fruit in the sense that both can be dangerous in the wrong hands, and that our society does place restrictions on the availability of both with that in mind.

:thumb:

 

I think it's okay to allow -- some types of -- guns. But there needs to be some common sense measures taken to safeguard the public. No, not every non-felon should own a gun. Just as not every non-felon should be allowed to fly a plane.

...enforce laws that are already in place, put them in prison with NO chance of paroll or rehab and USE the death penalty on extreme cases along with rape, child abuse - molestation, as well as mass murders.

I agree wholeheartedly with this; but I also know that to NOT look at guns as a factor is simply to close your eyes to a problem for the sake of an idea.

 

The pro-gun lobby likes to wave around The Constitution. But it was written in a much simpler time, with very different circumstances. It provided that a militia be available to the people -- we have that.

 

The framers of The Constitution could have never envisioned the world of today. That's why our laws need to be flexible and able to respond to the realities of the day. One of those realities is the problem of psycho shooters.

 

Total gun control isn't the answer, but a reasonable amount of responsibility in gun distribution -- both in types allowed and qualification -- has to be a part of the solution.

 

An extreme viewpoint in either direction on this issue will get us nowhere...except to more memorial services.

^ I understand what you are saying here BF and respect you opinion but I will have to agree to disagree with you. Imo if you start tearing into the documents/principles that this country was founded on then you just move that much closer to a controlled society (communism). This may sound and be an extreme example but I believe that is what some do not realize where things may be going by changing the constitution of the United States of America. They will say something like "well, we got this by now lets change something else", it will be a never ending trend till' we do not have a constitution left.

This may sound and be an extreme example but I believe that is what some do not realize where things may be going by changing the constitution of the United States of America. They will say something like "well, we got this by now lets change something else", it will be a never ending trend till' we do not have a constitution left.

It need not be a slippery slope. I think The Constitution was intentionally designed to be flexible and to allow for change. If it were not, it would not have so many ammendments. That's what Article V is all about.

 

As it says in the first ten of those ammendmants -- The Bill of Rights: The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution...

^ Like I said, I will just agree to disagree with you and leave it at that. :thumb:

^ Like I said, I will just agree to disagree with you and leave it at that. :thumb:

Probably a good idea. :lol:

But we can apply common sense RTS.

Well BF, that depends on what you are determining to be common sense.

:thumb:

 

I think it's okay to allow -- some types of -- guns. But there needs to be some common sense measures taken to safeguard the public. No, not every non-felon should own a gun. Just as not every non-felon should be allowed to fly a plane.

What about drive a car?

Well BF, that depends on what you are determining to be common sense.

Okay then, "reason."

 

 

...RTS

I agree wholeheartedly with this; but I also know that to NOT look at guns as a factor is simply to close your eyes to a problem for the sake of an idea.

 

The pro-gun lobby likes to wave around The Constitution. But it was written in a much simpler time, with very different circumstances. It provided that a militia be available to the people -- we have that.

 

The framers of The Constitution could have never envisioned the world of today. That's why our laws need to be flexible and able to respond to the realities of the day. One of those realities is the problem of psycho shooters.

 

Total gun control isn't the answer, but a reasonable amount of responsibility in gun distribution -- both in types allowed and qualification -- has to be a part of the solution.

 

An extreme viewpoint in either direction on this issue will get us nowhere...except to more memorial services.

Now you're entering that VERY slippery slope area.

What about drive a car?

I thought of that too. I was just going for the more dramatic example.