GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

going4roses said:

---

Civil war 2

---

Bring it on.

---

This is the second stupidest idea on this board. You're better than this. We'll chalk it up to an off night for you.

---

Assuming the government actually passes laws to end gun ownership and enforces them, most of the gun nuts will fold like a cheap suit. They are cowards at heart, that's why they need so many guns.1

---

LOL you can try to put lipstick on the pig which is your proposition by playing the "they're all fake tough guys" rhetoric, but it's still no less stupid and ignorant. It's an emotional issue for you, or else you'd surely think wiser about it.

---

It's an emotional issue for people who freak out at the suggestion they shouldn't have an arsenal of deadly weapons.

---

Stop lying. You want a gun ban.

---

I think I've been pretty clear about that.

But I will also accept any proposals to reduce the number of guns in circulation, if I can't have a full ban.

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

going4roses said:

---

Civil war 2

---

Bring it on.

---

This is the second stupidest idea on this board. You're better than this. We'll chalk it up to an off night for you.

---

Assuming the government actually passes laws to end gun ownership and enforces them, most of the gun nuts will fold like a cheap suit. They are cowards at heart, that's why they need so many guns.1

---

LOL you can try to put lipstick on the pig which is your proposition by playing the "they're all fake tough guys" rhetoric, but it's still no less stupid and ignorant. It's an emotional issue for you, or else you'd surely think wiser about it.

---

Yeah, those Bundys up in Oregon sure showed the feds.

CNN: "Multiple victims have been injured in a shooting at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas."

Thought there was something missing in the United States this weekend. Ok, now we're back to normal.

When can we expect the price of freedom to hit this spot?

Take away all the guns.

Any ideas on the method

Take away all the guns.
That's actually not a bad idea. Will slim down the number of gun takeaway advocates.

going4roses said:

---

Any ideas on the method

---

Pass laws. Enforce them.

Not gonna happen. Most law enforcement are pro gun because they see how soft California is on crime and how much damage can be done to a family in the 5-7 minutes it takes for police to respond. Take guns from mentally ill and felons, absolutely. From law abiding citizens, not peacefully.

sycasey said:

---

Bear70 said:

---

Take away all the guns.
That's actually not a bad idea. Will slim down the number of gun takeaway advocates.

---

One side wants to pass new laws. The other side wants to shoot those who seek to pass laws.

These kinds of threats do not convince me that my position is wrong. It may be impractical, but it's not wrong.

---

Is this a twenty sided dice?

I thought one of the NRA's anti gun control arguments is that states with liberal gun laws like Texas are less likely to have a mass shooting because everyone is a gun toting pistolero.

Bear70 said:

---

Not gonna happen. Most law enforcement are pro gun because they see how soft California is on crime and how much damage can be done to a family in the 5-7 minutes it takes for police to respond. Take guns from mentally ill and felons, absolutely. From law abiding citizens, not peacefully.

---

"Not peacefully." Another not so veiled threat.

Also, define "most." From what I can find the opinions of police officers on gun control are mixed at best.

https://www.npr.org/2015/10/09/446866939/gun-debate-divides-nations-police-officers-too

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/19/gun-control-police-open-carry-law

Typical. Not so veiled threat. Lmao.
You think trying to take guns from Americans will be a peaceful operation then you don't understand and you never will.

bearister said:

---

I thought one of the NRA's anti gun control arguments is that states with liberal gun laws like Texas are less likely to have a mass shooting because everyone is a gun toting pistolero.

---

Now that the NRA has been openly infiltrated by Russian money I don't expect them to be pro-american on anything that makes us safer.

Minus the typical part. No need in making a personal judgement call.

That would get so ugly. I could see 100k if not more lives lost in that war.

The cited articles basically support mental health checks and enforcing laws already on the books. I'm in complete agreement with that. From what I read, law enforcement is mostly in agreement with that as well.
To say that law enforcement is split on confiscating weapons across the board though...not likely.
A trained individual in that Walmart with a handgun wouldn't have much of a chance against a rifle but at least they could engage the bad guy and attempt to suppress and possibly cause the shooter to lose their nerve.

Bear70 said:

---

The cited articles basically support mental health checks and enforcing laws already on the books. I'm in complete agreement with that. From what I read, law enforcement is mostly in agreement with that as well.
To say that law enforcement is split on confiscating weapons across the board though...not likely.
A trained individual in that Walmart with a handgun wouldn't have much of a chance against a rifle but at least they could engage the bad guy and attempt to suppress and possibly cause the shooter to lose their nerve.

---

Or like most law enforcement believe will complicate an already chaotic situation raising the body count as they won't be able to tell who is who. The citizen with the gun is likely to be shot as officers arrive on the scene.

It's unreasonable to expect good guys with guns to meaningfully change outcomes in mass shootings. In most instances they take cover and don't engage unless necessary and that's a perfectly reasonable approach. It guarantees they won't shoot another innocent person and provides them with the most personal safety.

We have had mass shootings with exceptional responses from law enforcement. In Gilroy, police were on scene immediately and the gunman was quickly put down. But not before shooting more than a dozen people and killing children. That was quite literally the best case scenario for police response.

Putting more guns in civilian hands just guarantees more whackos will have guns and their opportunity to commit acts of inhumanity increase. That's why we have more than any other peer country. Actually probably more than all peer countries combined.

As a society what we continue to demonstrate over and over is that we are not able to handle access to firearms. Whether it's gang violence, domestic violence, suicides or nutjob mass shootings one thing is loud and clear - guns are a danger to society and their proliferation is not good for personal safety.

And without getting too political, does anyone find it hollow when the federal government says it is pledging "total support" in the aftermath of a mass shooting. That's even less helpful than good guys with guns.

Agree with your opinion too. Look, there's no ideal response to an active shooter. Good guys may get shot...blue on blue is common when they train these scenarios too.
Universal background checks
Close gun show loopholes
Mental health checks
Felons can't possess firearms
Enforce the laws already on the books
Aggressively pursue violators and prosecute

Love all of these ideas. Taking firearms from law abiding citizens is not the answer.

Bear70 said:

---

Agree with your opinion too. Look, there's no ideal response to an active shooter. Good guys may get shot...blue on blue is common when they train these scenarios too.
Universal background checks
Close gun show loopholes
Mental health checks
Felons can't possess firearms
Enforce the laws already on the books
Aggressively pursue violators and prosecute

Love all of these ideas. Taking firearms from law abiding citizens is not the answer.

---

Though my stated position is to take away all the guns, I would also support any of these compromises. Whatever gets fewer guns on the street.

Wish our elected officials could come together and make it happen. It's not hard. We don't agree on all points but keeping guns out of the wrong hands is something everyone should be on board with.

"Wrong hands" varies from who is looking and whom is being looked upon...

Lol truth.

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

CNN: "Multiple victims have been injured in a shooting at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas."

Thought there was something missing in the United States this weekend. Ok, now we're back to normal.

When can we expect the price of freedom to hit this spot?

---

The biggest threat to public safety is white people.

Bear70 said:

---

Not gonna happen. Most law enforcement are pro gun because they see how soft California is on crime and how much damage can be done to a family in the 5-7 minutes it takes for police to respond. Take guns from mentally ill and felons, absolutely. From law abiding citizens, not peacefully.

---

Thank goodness Texas is so tough on crime. Sure saved those people at Walmart.

going4roses said:

---

That would get so ugly. I could see 100k if not more lives lost in that war.

---

But but but this is the "price of progress"....

Wow... to the first part.

Blacks? Not Black people or Black folks but Blacks? You are telling on yourself

GBear4Life said:

---

going4roses said:

---

That would get so ugly. I could see 100k if not more lives lost in that war.

---

But but but this is the "price of progress"....

---

Are you suggesting gun control advocates would be to blame if gun owners decided to go out and kill people because of gun control legislation?

I'd be more inclined to blame the ones who did the killing.