Matt Damon on Australia's gun confiscation...I wish that could happen in my country

Also apropos,

"Eat the apple, dear, it's good for you. Don't mind the snake, he's harmless." - Eve

 

Yes sir. Someday it will happen, but I won't be able to tell you, "I told you so". It happened with the women's right to vote. It happened with the repeal of prohibition.

 

Nope. Won't.

 

Maybe you missed the point of my statement. I was speaking of a double-felony. i.e. Hold up a liquor store with an illegal firearm. Conviction - automatic death penalty. A more moderate approach would limit the death penalty to homicides with an illegal firearm.

But hey, this is my pseudo-Utopian world viewpoint. You are living in yours now, and look where it's gotten us.

 

You are 100% in your right to call for change in laws. We all do it. However, with the new SCOTUS pick, the Hillary anti-gun lobby took the biggest blow imaginable.

 

These expanded rights. You're looking to restrict them.

 

Uh....it brings the court back to where it was.....maybe

 

The 2nd Amendment to the US constitution will remain in place, unaltered, until the fall of the United States.
At that point, no one will give up any of their guns, except after they die.

 

Perhaps, but that should be enough to decide against the infringing decisions from the 2nd, 4th, 7th and 9th Circuit Courts.

 

We shall see. Gorsuch has never ruled on a gun case. We shall see

 

that's why I am hoping that Trump gets to replace a couple more BM justices

 

I believe Kennedy will retire soon. RBG is two knees in the grave.
Breyer is getting up there, but from what I read, healthy.
The dingbats Obama appointed will be around for far too long.

 

I would cling to that too if I were you. Now, the SC can knock out any stupid gun control bills- they will not get passed.

 

Can you name the case that Gorsuch showed his clear second amendment leanings?

 

No. There's speculation for both sides. He was appointed for a reason- agenda. If you believe he's going to be your key to gun control, I seriously wouldn't hold me breath. However, you are correct that he's not a 2A lover

 

And so we shall see what happens.

 

What's the next bill to be proposed?

 

Probably national CCW reciporcity. But it may never make it to SCOTUS. We will see

 

The NRA provided exactly ZERO "misinformation"; but the gun banners have resorted to nothing but. It is, in fact, their stock in trade. If I ever need a good laugh, I just go and look at the latest press release from the Violence Policy Center. Interestingly enough, a recent Gallup poll found more Americans agreed with the NRA than the Republican and Democratic parties COMBINED.

The moment such a "firm directive" was issued there would be a Civil War in this country.

 

People like you always say "someday it will happen".... and then it doesn't. The belief in an inalienable right to bear arms is actually growing in this country, and more and more people have come to believe gun control is a bad idea and bad public policy. End result? Simply not going to happen without totalitarian action by the government, which will be met harshly by an armed populace.

 

The circumstances of Sandy Hook guarantee that an armed response by properly equipped school personnel would have saved lives. Period.

 

Exactly what the other "Big Government" posters said. You want armed, trained, security personnel at every elementary school, junior high school, and high school in the US. Might as well include kindergartens and pre-schools as well. One of your comrades even went so far to say the this wouldn't cost any more.

 

Perhaps that is what was intended, but that was not what actually presented. Beyond such, simply continuing to possess a firearm after they are outlawed would have to qualify as a felony offense, rather than a misdemeanor offense. This would be necessary since current illegal possession is already a felony offense. So once we return to the previous point that simply possessing a firearm would constitute a death penalty offense, and thus begging the question of what motivation the public would have to refrain from killing every government agent and police officer on sight, since they have nothing left to lose?

Which may sound good on paper, but in the real world it is significantly more difficult to implement such an approach.

Why single out homicides committed with firearms for death penalty eligibility, while excluding homicides committed with all other manner of implements?

Discussing the practicalities and unintended consequences of various proposals, which leads to discovery of what may actually make the currently existing situation worse rather than better. That is how intelligent policies are crafted and ultimately enacted.

Beyond such, data released by the FBI continues to point out that crime rates in the united states are decreasing, as are firearm-related accidents and injuries regardless of age groups. Firearm-related injuries are one of the statistically lowest causes of death in the united states according to available data, despite them being so widely owned. Whatever it currently being done, even in states without strict regulation, it is apparently working. Perhaps not as well as everyone may wish, but no one was promised happiness with the state of their union.

 

How would removing the prohibition on the legal carrying of concealed firearms on school property lead to an increase in costs? Under such a proposal teachers would be able to safeguard students in the event an active shooter sets foot on school grounds and gains access to the inside of the building. Once news of the active shooter situation is known, said teachers can simply take up a defensive position to the side of the door, and engage against unauthorized access.

 

Thus meaning what precisely?