Let's say we closed this so called gun show loophole.
Hell, let's say we closed gun shows.
What would it actually stop?
Hell, let's say we closed gun shows.
What would it actually stop?
Gun Control
- Thread starter ThunderCat98
- Start date
IMHO gun ownership in this country should be a privilege, not a right. To drive a car legally you have to get a license. In my opinion, if you want to own a gun in this country, you must take a gun ownership course and be licensed similar to the process of how we get licensed to drive. We have to pass a test to drive a car. Why not the same requirement for a deadly weapon?
Read the Constitution. 2nd Amendment
That makes it a right and not a privilege like driving a car.
Damn, do people even go to school anymore?
Did you even read what I said? Did you not go to school? I said, and read carefully genius... In My Opinion. I know it's a right. It should be a privilege.
The liberal elites in DC(and other areas) do not like people having guns except for them.
Nancy Pelosi is an example. Their stance is grounded in elitism not always concern for their constituents.
The gun laws many of us are supporting are about as restrictive as seat belts.
Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.
Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, (1787)
Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, (1787)
The worst school massacre...wait not a shooting and was from 1937
The Bath School disaster was a series of violent attacks perpetrated by Andrew Kehoe on May 18, 1927, in Bath Township, Michigan, that killed 38 elementary school children and six adults and injured at least 58 other people.[Note 1] Kehoe killed his wife and firebombed his farm, then detonated a major explosion in the Bath Consolidated School, before committing suicide by detonating a final explosion in his truck. It is the deadliest mass murder to take place at a school in United States history.[1][2]
The Bath School disaster was a series of violent attacks perpetrated by Andrew Kehoe on May 18, 1927, in Bath Township, Michigan, that killed 38 elementary school children and six adults and injured at least 58 other people.[Note 1] Kehoe killed his wife and firebombed his farm, then detonated a major explosion in the Bath Consolidated School, before committing suicide by detonating a final explosion in his truck. It is the deadliest mass murder to take place at a school in United States history.[1][2]
LOL Extra - guns , explosive's , drugs , women are all available , if you know the person to contact or know the guy who knows a guy. Don't be so naive.
Last edited:
Here's some for you, Greed.
https://www.thefederalistpapers.org/history/the-founding-fathers-on-the-second-amendment
https://www.thefederalistpapers.org/history/the-founding-fathers-on-the-second-amendment
Yeah, 'cause you can't make explosives from other materials . . . Oh. Wait.
Dynamite and fertilizer don't kill people, people do.
Often such words as " properly formed" and "well trained" are included in those articles.
The fact that you don't see the irony in making that statement really says it all.
The irony was much intended. Since guns don't kill people, nor dynamite, fertilizer, or nuclear warheads, let's make them all readily available to every one.
Leave it to Greed to intentionally change the premise of the discussion. Who exactly has made the argument that guns should be permitted to "everyone"? He is as disingenuous as anyone can be.
I just don't get you guys. Are you not angered at all the mass shootings? Do you not want to make America a better, safer place for our children?
If you are not part of the solution... you are part of the problem.
What do you suggest we do??
There is no easy solution to these problems, but taking guns from law-abiding citizens is not the answer. It doesn't even make sense.
I'm not trying to take guns away from law abiding citizens. But there needs to be some sort of check and balance. I have no problem whenever I purchase a gun with an extensive background check. I have no problem if I have to take a gun ownership course. And if you are a law abiding citizen you shouldn't either.
Uh, you already have to have a background check if you buy a gun from an FFL. And who has said you shouldn't?
So ah..your solution would be??? Just asking and would like to see how you answer the question.
Not at gunshows though. Only a handful of states require background checks at gunshows. That needs to change.
Again, read the original link. That's EXACTLY what the libs in San Fran want to do. You cannot be this stupid.
My solution? Make gun ownership a privilege, not a right. Just like having a license to drive a car is a privilege, not a right.
Extensive Background checks.
Required gun ownership course
Required license for gun
No more gun shows
Those are just some thoughts. Obviously I can't solve this on my own.
Last edited:
