"I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it."I don't recall saying anybody hates America.That's the kneejerk hissyfitting by those who don't like having their biased opinions challenged by common sense.
My whole point is asking the trolls who post, "this is why we need more gun control" what exactly gun control has done to address the issues of black market trafficking? What has it done to keep guns out of the hands of criminals? How does making it more difficult for non-criminals to purchase them accomplish this? And so far, all I've seen is mindless dribble up to and including calling me a Tea Party member despite the fact that I'm an independent.
Quicker, easier, and cheaper. Not to mention no traceable paperwork. If people really wanted to kill others, they don't need guns to do it. There's far worse ways to accomplish this.
I don't recall saying anybody hates America.
My whole point is asking the trolls who post, "this is why we need more gun control" what exactly gun control has done to address the issues of black market trafficking? What has it done to keep guns out of the hands of criminals? How does making it more difficult for non-criminals to purchase them accomplish this? And so far, all I've seen is mindless dribble up to and including calling me a Tea Party member despite the fact that I'm an independent.
Read back then... Hoodonit claimed that Neil's posts if read, would lead someone to believe he was "against america".
And your comment is a kneejerk crybaby reaction to having your version of common sense come into contact with another version that you don't agree with.
Gun control doesn't mean taking away all guns. It has to do with limiting what can get bought and what can't. Limiting clip sizes and making the process of getting a gun more in depth a process, as well as prosecuting illegal gun sales more severely... Yes, mobsters and gangsters will still get guns. And no, law abiding citizens who use the process to arm themselves will not be unable to protect themselves or be able to have guns.
But perhaps, just maybe... people like this guy wouldn't have been able to get the guns he did in such a short window... maybe he would have had to reload sooner and more people would have been able to escape with their lives. These are rational ways to think about improving gun laws, not liberal nonsense that should be ignored. Nobody wants to take away your damn guns, we just want to make our country safer for the people who live in it.
And calling yourself an independent is the new way Conservatives can NOT be connected to the Republicans or the Tea Party, yet still hold almost all the same views. I'm not calling you a Tea Partier, but almost every single Conservative I have argued with locally... call themselves independents.
And calling yourself an independent is the new way Conservatives can NOT be connected to the Republicans or the Tea Party, yet still hold almost all the same views. I'm not calling you a Tea Partier, but almost every single Conservative I have argued with locally... call themselves independents.
Kibishii said:
Yea so what. i stand by what I said. And with what you believe by what you posted, I fear what you will do to this country more than 99 percent of gun owners. Free ____ for everyone no matter what the cost. Yea that won't turn out bad.Read back then... Hoodonit claimed that Neil's posts if read, would lead someone to believe he was "against america".
And your comment is a kneejerk crybaby reaction to having your version of common sense come into contact with another version that you don't agree with.
Gun control doesn't mean taking away all guns. It has to do with limiting what can get bought and what can't. Limiting clip sizes and making the process of getting a gun more in depth a process, as well as prosecuting illegal gun sales more severely... Yes, mobsters and gangsters will still get guns. And no, law abiding citizens who use the process to arm themselves will not be unable to protect themselves or be able to have guns.
But perhaps, just maybe... people like this guy wouldn't have been able to get the guns he did in such a short window... maybe he would have had to reload sooner and more people would have been able to escape with their lives. These are rational ways to think about improving gun laws, not liberal nonsense that should be ignored. Nobody wants to take away your damn guns, we just want to make our country safer for the people who live in it.
And calling yourself an independent is the new way Conservatives can NOT be connected to the Republicans or the Tea Party, yet still hold almost all the same views. I'm not calling you a Tea Partier, but almost every single Conservative I have argued with locally... call themselves independents.
I'm on the fence with the whole gun issue. I don't own one and probably never will - and I have no desire to have those people who legally own guns, have that right stripped from them.
What I am on the fence about is some stricter policies on getting guns. I get the argument that stricter gun laws are not going to impact criminals who get their guns from the black market.
But this shooter - was just a regular citizen before all this happened. He had no record. And he obtained his guns legally. I have no problem with citizens owning a handgun/revolver or a rifle/shotgun...but I do have an issue with semi-automatic weapons. I just don't see the point of owing guns with such huge ammo clips or one that can shoot off 50-60 rounds per minute. If you in the military - yes, that is needed. If there is a zombie apocalypse, then ok I can see the point of having something like that. But for general personal safety or hunting...I just don't get it.
And I'm not looking for a debate here for all of you who enjoy having these types of guns....I'll say now that we will just have to agree to disagree.
