If you don't think a 7 line post is cool - learn...

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

...to accept that most of the gun laws originating in NY reveal cognitive dissonance.
...that after trying 10 round limits and figuring 7 is the magic number, to just admit you're making it all up.
...to admit housewives that are ambidextrous, multitaskers can change mags faster than mass murderers -
- unless someone else is shooting at them!
...to get over the idea that GUN "control" actually CONTROLS any of the folks who really need any control.
...to realize that some of the folks that make up some of the lies you're buying are less honest than the NRA.
...to write a law that bans guns which doesn't need to incorporate a list.
...to think of an 8th line.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

1. How many sacred cows can you gore at one time?

[Permanut]

2. I'll give it a shot..

Most of the gun laws originating int NY reveal cognitive dissonance, in your opinion.

After trying 10 round limits, common sense led a majority to conclude that less rounds equals a higher safety level.

Housewives that are ambidextrous, etc. - how many are there?

It's not "folks control", it's GUN control.

Some of the lies, etc., straw man; citations please.

The 23 executive orders most recently issued don't include a provision to ban guns.

Okay and here's my eighth line: 85% of the US population favors increased controls of some kind, e.g., background checks.

How'm I doing?

[Eleanors38]

4. As for me, I favor criminal control. They are the ones causing havoc. nt

[Permanut]

5. So, following that logic..

The "guns don't kill people, people kill people" principle, we should have no control on guns at all. The guns aren't responsible. As a matter of fact, since RPGs and nukes are not specifically prohibited in the Constitution, I want some.

[gejohnston]

6. the people who have a monopoly on those

are not going to sell them to you. You can have RPGs, as long as you register them and pay the transference tax under NFA. Before the NFA was amended in the 1960s, there were no federals against owning mortars and RPGs. As for nukes, ask the NRC. Maybe you can if you have the millions.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

10. You been farmin' long?

Where else would you be gittin' all that straw for make'in straw men.

[Eleanors38]

15. Correction. That is YOUR logic...

I said we need to control criminals. Any dispute with that? No?

BTW, I have never known a gun to be tried, convicted and jailed for a crime. For some reason people are convicted. Why is that?

For your information, you CAN own many weapons like tanks, fighter planes, cannon, but they are highly restricted. "Arms," understood in the context of the Second when it was written, are firearms designed to be held and operated in one or both arms, and suitable for infantry (militia, if you are so called up). There are some pro-2A folks who say sub-machine guns and true assault rifles (capable of full-auto) ARE indeed the kinds of weapons suitable for infantry, and that semi-autos are virtually obsolete as military weapons. So be thankful that most 2A defenders are reasonable folks who put up with the restrictions placed on full-auto guns during the 1930s.



You may want to keep a tight grip on your computer. It doesn't fit the definition of "press."

[oneshooter]

32. "tanks, fighter planes, cannon"

TANKS

http://www.armyjeeps.net/armor1.htm


FIGHTER PLANES

http://www.globalplanesearch.com/warbirds/combat/

CANNON

http://www.cannonsuperstore.com/wwtwo.htm

All it takes is MONEY!!!

[Eleanors38]

33. And highly regulated; not 2A protected. nt

[pennylane100]

7. And they can cause so much more with the assistance of an AK47.

Of course it is the criminals that cause the problems but it does not take a rocket scientist to understand that any meaningful control over them is impossible if we refuse to restrict their easy access to firearms.

[gejohnston]

9. they don't actually use them

other the full auto AKs used in Hollywood shoot out several years ago.

[Eleanors38]

18. What did the VT murderer use? How would you control those weapons?

The best control over ANY weapon at this juncture is to institute a universal NICS test, as advocated by President Obama. I support this, and hopefully it won't run afoul of the Commerce Clause.

Frankly, if you want to increase safety of schools, then treat the problem directly and improve armed security at those schools. I don't go along with the quite liberal Sen. Barbara Boxer's bill to allow the call-up of the national guard to do this (sorta like an "NRA talking point" on steroids), but there is merit in improving security. This goes to a specific problem with specific actions, not ponderous general prohibitions. Which reminds me: 4:20 CST is fast approaching!

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

8. In reply...

"in your opinion" - Yeah, I'm unusual that way. I actually trust my opinion more than... maybe... Yours

"led a majority to conclude" - A majority of........ WHO???

"how many are there?" - You're new at this aren't you???

"it's GUN control" - Sure it is. Keep telling yourself that.

"citations please" - No thanks, it's an opinion. If you don't like it, stop reading.

"The 23 executive orders" - Never mentioned them, OH, HOLY CRAP... I found that straw man you were looking for.

"85% of the US population" - You won't mind if I wait for the actual votes from those 265,000,000 people, right??

Compared to most pro-control folks, maybe a bit better than average and thanks for taking the time.
Welcome to the group.

[Permanut]

25. Okay, so I should learn to accept your opinion..

Got it.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

29. Accept my opinion???

Sure, accept that it's mine. But feel free to share reasons for your own. Just because my opinion differs from yours, doesn't mean I don't respect yours. I'm willing to discuss any differences.

[99th_Monkey]

3. ...the more guns the better!! It's the American way (for #8)

that seems to sum up your other 7 lines pretty well.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

11. re: "the more guns the better"

No but we'll go with that.

[pennylane100]

12. The number of lines in a post is not the deciding factor on if the post is "cool"

and it definitely helps if the content is coherent. Otherwise, "not cool"

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

13. But, but, but...

...I really, really, really, really wannabe cool...

[jpak]

14. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!`11111

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

16. Hi....

How's it goin' dude?

[jpak]

17. Good - just got back from ice fishing

no fish though...

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

19. I can sympathize.

My fishing skills are only underwhelmed by my golfing abilities. My handicap is expressed in scientific notation.

[Puha Ekapi]

21. Did you manage to bag some ice?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

20. heh

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

23. wink

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

22. Here's an 8th line

go back and amend the law to exempt police from obeying the law.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

24. Watch out...

...with that wet blanket you're throwing around.

[samsingh]

27. 9th law - stop making shit up to defend gun proliferation

already this weekend we've heard of a 5 person massacre in NM
5 people being shot at different gun events

it's truly heartless to attack suggestions to reduce the violence without succinctly offerings ones that do.

[samsingh]

26. do you have any suggestions to reduce deaths caused by guns?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

28. Sure

I have ideas that would reduce deaths caused by violence, accidents and carelessness. Guns do NOT cause death.
I can share a bit if you accept that.

[samsingh]

30. whether i accept that guns cause death or not is irrelevant

if there ideas to reduce death in a situation where a bullet kills someone, that would be appreciated by the nation.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

31. We have issues here in the US

A major issue is the drug problem/war. As the 20th century progressed we adopted the thinking that the solution for many problems was to start a war to obliterate the offending problem. This type of thinking gave rise to Vietnam, Iraq and numerous conflicts, the most costly of which is the war on drugs. When the US, in the late 19th century, began involving itself too much in foreign affairs, we more and more accepted that the answer to international discord was the buildup of arms. If you start deciding that owning more and more weapons, finally having enough to destroy all human life many times over, gains you respect, then you're painting yourself into a corner. Realizing that the weapons, which consume the biggest slice of your budget, sit idle would clue lots of folks into the fact that they aren't needed. At some point we should have cut the budget based on not needing all that. Instead we invented uses (wars) so we use those weapons.

War and weapons buildup diverts tax dollars better spent on social programs to great fiascoes. I believe more than half of those in prison today are there directly or indirectly due to drug related issues. Much of the indiscriminate violence (a lot involving firearms) is drug related. Legalize drugs and much of the violence will go away.

Until now our healthcare system was behind a lot of other nations. Ensuring that mental health treatment options are expanded beyond where they are today will help.

Adopt universal background checks for firearm transfers outside immediate family members.

Develop ad campaigns popularizing firearm safety. Fund firearm safety workshops through county level law enforcement.

Instead of buying back firearms, some of which are non-functioning, give away trigger locks.

Offer tax credits on the purchase of a gun safe for those who register their weapons.

People have been lead by example that the answer to conflict is violence. Domestic counseling should be a priority.

That's for starters.

[samsingh]

37. in any given population, there are always going to be exceptions

So if we did all the things you suggest, i still think there will be criminals/morons/lunatics that will use the weapons at hand to inflict the greatest damage. I would suggest:

- for the self-defense argument: people should be able to buy certain types of guns and cartridges. This would include handguns, shotguns, rifles with limited cartridge sizes
- full background checks on everyone buying a gun. time should not be a factor in completing the check. It must be reasonable and complete
- all laws should be rigorously enforced (especially gun laws)
- there must be a requirement to purchase liability insurance for anyone carrying a gun
- weapons and bullets that can inflict damage above a threshold should be banned from civilian use

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

38. What kind of exceptions?

- for the self-defense argument: people should be able to buy certain types of guns and cartridges. This would include handguns, shotguns, rifles with limited cartridge sizes

Reply> Handguns, shotguns, rifles are currently allowed for civilian sale with limits on ammo of .50 cal or less. Full auto and select fire are highly restricted with background checks and approval process that takes 6 - 9 months.

- full background checks on everyone buying a gun. time should not be a factor in completing the check. It must be reasonable and complete

Reply> The NICS works just fine. Improvements are needed for better reporting. It is reasonable complete. What cannot be done in three days, doesn't need doing.

- all laws should be rigorously enforced (especially gun laws)

Reply> That's why we make them laws.

- there must be a requirement to purchase liability insurance for anyone carrying a gun

Reply> Why? What would be covered?

- weapons and bullets that can inflict damage above a threshold should be banned from civilian use

Reply> They are or are highly restricted. It's easier to get TS/SCI than it is to get a full auto stamp.

[samsingh]

39. by exceptions i mean that there will always be people who

use weapons to kill innocent people.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

40. True enough

We'd have less of that if drugs were legal.

[samsingh]

42. agreed

another point - i'm reading that the shooter in NM had a clean record. How could he have been stopped ?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

44. He was stopped.

Do you mean how else?
Do you mean stopped before he committed a crime? If so, please see the Minority Report.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

46. I'm still trying...

...to determine what you mean by, "How could he have been stopped ?"

[Eleanors38]

34. If I may add another...

Many controllers advocate strict penalties for those who commit crimes with guns. I support this. But keep in mind President Obama does not support mandatory minimums. What do you think?

As with others, I support the legalization (regulation) of now-illegal drugs. What do you think?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

35. Just interjecting...

I believe in some mandatory minimums in that I think using a weapon in the course of a premeditated assault gets you life in prison.

Bag those moronic ideas like letting the rapist out after 9 years with good behavior.

[samsingh]

36. mandatory minimums on the surface appear to be sound

but i think they end up being unfair. Unique circumstances should be considered. An alternative would be to have mandatory minimums that can be overridden with a reason.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

41. I rather like that idea

I would implement that as an avenue for appeal.

[samsingh]

43. agreed

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

45. However...

...if you appeal the sentence, you must first accept the conviction.