“Republicans don’t care how many Americans are killed by guns”

Rarely.

 

Only if their gun rights have been restored. As long as they have access to the gun in the house they live in, they can be found guilty of being in possession of a gun without touching it.

Not sure why you mentioned visiting a house since I am not talking about that.

 

Incorrect.

And the reason that I mentioned it is to discourage exactly what you just said. With your logic if a felon even visits a house with a gun then they could be arrested for possession. But that's not how the law works. The law straight out says that a felon cannot buy or possess a gun. It does not say ANYTHING about being in the same household.

I will give one caveat. All though we were talking about federal law I suppose that there could be a State law saying that a felon can't live in a household that has a gun registered to someone else. I'd expect such from a place like California.

 

They seem to work just fine in other countries.

 

The Boulder theater mass murderer of a few years ago specifically scoped out the only large movie theater in Boulder that absolutely prohibited guns.

 

School,shootings. Defenseless little kids, unarmed teachers. Easy targets. Put in armed security or arm as many qualified teachers as possible......... greatly reduce, perhaps even end school shootings.


P

 

My brother in law is a school Guardian, down in FL.
He has one job: Shoot anyone trying to shoot up the school.

 

Violent video games. Violent movies. Violent TV shows. Violent music. Make laws against them first. Give it 20 years.
Also, public hangings of all who commit mass murders. Give to 20 years.

after 20 years if these crimes haven’t greatly decreased or stopped. Then you can come and get my guns. Hell I’ll even give you the non assault weapons.

 

The numbers reported on the Washington Post??

Potshttps://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/03/24/admit-it-republicans-you-dont-care-how-many-americans-are-killed-by-guns/


The numbers sighted came from https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/ This group includes Accidental, Malicious, Willful and DGU, in their numbers, they do separate suicides, which is 60% of gun deaths in most years.

Gun violence archive: says that People defending themselves Killed 1,462

Officer involved shooting killed 1,292.

Unintentional shootings Killed 2,291


Just those 3 categories reduce the fake number by 5,000 and looking at their chart I don’t see where they get 19K.


Ina any case that you want to look at the face remains the rifles kill way fewer people that handguns do and to control them the police would have to stop and frisk a lot of people.

 

Seriously?

The high cost of illegal drugs in this country is what drives the cartels in Mexico and Central America. If we decriminalize drugs:

- Demand gradually drops because there is no longer a titilation effect.

- The cartels would virtually be out of business. The money would dry up, and so would their violence.

- The political will to reform local governments in the region would be stimulated, and with safety comes less desire to get the **** out and come up here.

If we do that one thing, we would eventually cut illegal immigration down to just those coming up here to pick produce or cut and pack meat, two jobs that very few Americans want to do. No more asylum seekers, no more drug mules, no more coyotes to prey on the innocent.

 

And if it doesn't apply to private sellers, including those at gun shows, we basically have no way to prevent anyone from buying guns.

 

True. People in general having arms diverts criminal armed activity. CDC studies have shown that the number of defensive uses of a gun far exceeds the number of successful attacks. How about letting qualified 18-year old students carry concealed weapons? (Shoot [no pun intended], you can find 12-year olds in the rural and hinterlands that are very proficient and qualified to handle a gun......) I dunno, but it is an interesting thought.

 

Just as an aside, what guns might you have that are not assault weapons? The only ones I'm aware of are plastic and shoot water.

 

I'd suggest reading the following: LINK: Do I Need A License To Buy and Sell Firearms? (atf.gov)

Note the following key point they make:

Those that conduct Gun Shows are very meticulous about things like this. Often having rules that all guns sales that go through them go through a background check. They do this to prevent being an accomplice to the illegal sale of a gun. They are not near the free willy nilly things that Democrats love to portray them as.

As for private sales outside of a gun show, you can legally sale a gun intrastate to someone without using a background check, if its person to person. But that is the ONLY time a background check is not required.

If the person selling the gun uses the internet a background check must be conducted. Additionally they cannot transfer a gun to a person that lives in another state unless a background check is conducted. (another reason why the "gun show loophole" is really a bogus thing since all sales at a gun show are considered interstate, not intrastate)

LINK: Most Frequently Asked Firearms Questions and Answers

 

https://www.legalmatch.com/law-libr...he next word to define,gun kept at your house).

You are right that some states may explicitly restore gun rights to felons, or prohibit ownership and not possession. However most felons are prohibited from possessing a gun, which means they can't have one in the house.

 

The key words there are "control" and "access". If the spouse keeps their gun in a biometric safe with a key that they keep on their persons at all times then the felon has no access to it and cannot control it.

 

In some states that may be allowable. Most likely not. I would assume a judge would have to approve, and most judges would be highly skeptical that a wife could keep that key away from the husband, or vice versa.

 

While black males compose 6% of our population- the are 50% of the victims, and by far, most are shot by other black men with handguns. Rifle are rarely used, and the "assault rifle ban" in the Clinton era proved that they were not the weapon of choice for the vast majority of murderers. The public is swayed by emotions and fear, and what they call "assault weapons" are similar in appearance to rifle carried by the military. However, it's cosmetic similarity. The US military has never purchased or used AR-15's, and they are semi-automatics- whereas the military service rifle is able to fire as fully automatic. So they have been barking up the wrong tree in the type of guns they focus on, as well as the fact that guns do not kill people- People kill people. NO gun ever became a murder weapon on it's own- it had to be in the hands of a person who intended to commit murder.

Today- the current administration is focused on decimating things like personal pride and responsibility, the very characteristics that make people regulate themselves and consistently act responsibly.
They tell us that everything that is wrong is somebody else's fault- and they will fix it by abusing or taxing the somebody else, so trust them. Terrible situation; they are creating the kind of frustration, anger and justification that is almost always present when a person commits murder. At the same time they coddle rioters, looters and arsonists, they undermine and cut funding to police- and the result is a rapid increase in violent crime. Must be somebody else's fault, of course.

They treat people like mushrooms- keep them in the dark and feed them manure.

 

Well, that's a wake up call if there ever was any doubt. I remember having tornado drills in school as a kid. I feel bad for kids of today. They are inundated with horrible news 24/7 from all directions. It's no wonder some of them just snap.

P.S. IIRC, you are in Australia? How does your government handle guns and gun rights?

 

Americans have the wrong idea about Australia - yes it is waaaay more difficult to get guns here but not impossible as witnessed by the fact that there are currently more guns in Australia now in private hands than there was before the gun buy back in 1996.

Since 1996 we have had four mass shootings - three family/ suicides and one rampage. The highest death toll was seven ( and that sadly was one of the family suicides)

The real teeth in the 1996 gun reform was NOT the gun buyback but the mandating of gun responsibility. You HAVE to keep them locked in a secure safe - if they go missing Yu have to report it to the police and heaven forfend if YOUR gun is used in a felony. The upshot of this is that the average age of guns in the hands of criminals is over 20 years old.

Oh! And we have has less than a handful of children accidentally shot since 1996

 

it’s a bad look to play emotional games to try and strip people who did not vote fraudulently of their civil rights because you are upset.

We have plenty of laws on the books against voter fraud. Focus your efforts on the perpetrators of voter fraud not on the 99 percent who vote legally.

 

I’m pretty sure they are focusing their efforts on people who commit voter fraud.

 

What the law requires, and what gun sellers do, are not always in sync. The way gun sales are regulated differs too much from state to state, which is a state's rights issue. What common sense dictates is that, for the sake of public safety, background checks and a three day waiting period should be federal law.

 

Isn't that the case with pretty much any law/regulation?

As for background checks, I'm assuming you mean "universal"? There's a reason that such wasn't done before. The federal government has no power to regulate intrastate sales.

And waiting periods are useless.

 

It depends on the country and the US is the only country in the world with anything like a 2nd Amendment.

Meanwhile, there are 55 countries around the world with far stricter gun laws / bans and far higher homicide rates(1)

Please don't fall for the popular false comparisons inherent in the "developed countries" ruse(2).

Thanks,



(1) "Intentional homicides (per 100,000 people) - Country Ranking"
https://www.indexmundi.com/facts/indicators/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5/rankings


(2) "The Mistake of Only Comparing US Murder Rates to "Developed" Countries"
https://mises.org/wire/mistake-only-...oped-countries

EXCERPT " Note, however, that these comparisons always employ a carefully selected list of countries, most of which are very unlike the United States. They are countries that were settled long ago by the dominant ethnic group, they are ethnically non-diverse today, they are frequently very small countries (such as Norway, with a population of 5 million) with very locally based democracies (again, unlike the US with an immense population and far fewer representatives in government per voter). Politically, historically, and demographically, the US has little in common with Europe or Japan.

The US has the highest murder rate in the "developed world" — presumably because of its lax guns laws —we are told again and again.

Few people who repeat this mantra have any standard in their heads of what exactly is the "developed" world. They just repeat the phrase because they have learned to do so. They never acknowledge that when factors beyond per capita GDP are considered, it makes little sense to claim Sweden should be compared to the US, but not Argentina. Such assertions ignore immense differences in culture, size, politics, history, demographics, or ethnic diversity. Comparisons with mono-ethnic Asian countries like Japan and Korea make even less sense"CONTINUED