How?

 

See England now and Nazi Germany then.

Gun control laws do nothing to make citizens safer. Instead, gun control laws serve to disarm law-abiding citizens. You think the crooks are going to follow these registration laws? You think this kind of open registration would have somehow prevented the kid that shot Blair Holt from getting his hands on a gun?

Gun control laws do nothing to make citizens safer. Instead, gun control laws serve to disarm law-abiding citizens. You think the crooks are going to follow these registration laws? You think this kind of open registration would have somehow prevented the kid that shot Blair Holt from getting his hands on a gun?

 

My thoughts exactly.

Mr. Rush is also a former Black Panther leader.....................................

How?

 

Yes, I thought the point of making gun ownership a Constitutional right was so that the government couldn't take it away. And I don't mean that in a legal/court sense.

 

Gun control laws do nothing to make citizens safer. Instead, gun control laws serve to disarm law-abiding citizens. You think the crooks are going to follow these registration laws? You think this kind of open registration would have somehow prevented the kid that shot Blair Holt from getting his hands on a gun?

 

:thumb:

Gun control laws do nothing to make citizens safer. Instead, gun control laws serve to disarm law-abiding citizens. You think the crooks are going to follow these registration laws? You think this kind of open registration would have somehow prevented the kid that shot Blair Holt from getting his hands on a gun?

 

 

Apparently, the lack of such regulation does nothing to make citizens safer either. That's not a very solid argument, IMO.

Gun control laws do nothing to make citizens safer. Instead, gun control laws serve to disarm law-abiding citizens. You think the crooks are going to follow these registration laws? You think this kind of open registration would have somehow prevented the kid that shot Blair Holt from getting his hands on a gun?

 

While I agree that the illegal flow of guns is a serious issue, I don't believe that criminals are deterred by the thought of someone on the other side of the door having a gun. I don't think that enters their mind. So, any disarming of the citizenry will have no real impact on crimes involving guns IMO.

I agree with RM I think that this is a perfectly logical bill and I hope it passes . :ylsuper:

Then you're willing to just give up your rights. Foolish if you ask me.

The bill sounds reasonable to me, too.

 

If we want to talk about itchy trigger fingers, let's talk about the decision to go to Iraq.

Start your own thread if you want to talk about that.

While I agree that the illegal flow of guns is a serious issue, I don't believe that criminals are deterred by the thought of someone on the other side of the door having a gun. I don't think that enters their mind. So, any disarming of the citizenry will have no real impact on crimes involving guns IMO.

It will severely impact the individual. You would have no way to protect your family or your home.

While I agree that the illegal flow of guns is a serious issue, I don't believe that criminals are deterred by the thought of someone on the other side of the door having a gun. I don't think that enters their mind. So, any disarming of the citizenry will have no real impact on crimes involving guns IMO.

 

So it's okay then for such a law to impact only law-abiding citizens and not the very people that the law is (allegedly) intended to protect us from?

Apparently, the lack of such regulation does nothing to make citizens safer either. That's not a very solid argument, IMO.

How so? The fact that the numerous laws on the books now aren't enforced is what keeps citizens "unsafe".

Apparently, the lack of such regulation does nothing to make citizens safer either. That's not a very solid argument, IMO.

 

So the Brady Law is not effective?

So it's okay then for such a law to impact only law-abiding citizens and not the very people that the law is (allegedly) intended to protect us from?

BINGO! That's what people who think this is a good idea can't seem to get through their head. Their main reason for agreement with an idiotic bill like this is simply because they dislike guns and think no one should own one.

So the Brady Law is not effective?

 

You got her there.

 

 

When the Dims want something they start with baby steps, then move up until they get something completely banned.