What's your opinion of gun control?

[BADecker]

Cars kill people but we do not treat them the same.

Cars and airplanes kill way more people than guns do... at least in America.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Cars kill people but we do not treat them the same.

Cars and airplanes kill way more people than guns do... at least in America.

Yeah, and teens driving while texting too. But the government doesn't care about that. They would be happy if we kill each other doing stupid stuff like that. However, they do not want people who want freedom to have guns too.

[BADecker]

Cars kill people but we do not treat them the same.

Cars and airplanes kill way more people than guns do... at least in America.

Yeah, and teens driving while texting too. But the government doesn't care about that. They would be happy if we kill each other doing stupid stuff like that. However, they do not want people who want freedom to have guns too.

Actually, government doesn't care about anything. Does government have a brain that it can think? Does government have emotions that it can love or hate or care about anything? No two people in government ever think 100% alike. And even if they are close, there are many others in government who think both the opposite, and in a whole lot of other directions.

Isn't it about time that people quit talking about government, and start talking about the human being(s) who is(are) harming them through supposed governmental action?

Why is it that government human beings seem to have rights above the rest of the people? After all, the government people will still have guns when the rest of the people do not! If they didn't, they couldn't enforce government peoples' agendas onto others.

The 6th, 7th, and 9th Amendments to the Constitution (Articles of the Bill of Rights) limit everything that government humans want to do to any other humans. But people can't begin to use these Amendments to protect themselves properly if they don't even know what these amendments are.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Cars kill people but we do not treat them the same.

Cars and airplanes kill way more people than guns do... at least in America.

Yeah, and teens driving while texting too. But the government doesn't care about that. They would be happy if we kill each other doing stupid stuff like that. However, they do not want people who want freedom to have guns too.

Actually, government doesn't care about anything. Does government have a brain that it can think? Does government have emotions that it can love or hate or care about anything? No two people in government ever think 100% alike. And even if they are close, there are many others in government who think both the opposite, and in a whole lot of other directions.

Isn't it about time that people quit talking about government, and start talking about the human being(s) who is(are) harming them through supposed governmental action?

Why is it that government human beings seem to have rights above the rest of the people? After all, the government people will still have guns when the rest of the people do not! If they didn't, they couldn't enforce government peoples' agendas onto others.

The 6th, 7th, and 9th Amendments to the Constitution (Articles of the Bill of Rights) limit everything that government humans want to do to any other humans. But people can't begin to use these Amendments to protect themselves properly if they don't even know what these amendments are.

Well,  yeah. I meant the powers that be in charge, not government as a whole. I'm still annoyed at the house voting on the Mensato thing today. You Don’t Matter. House Votes for Monsanto’s Right to Deceive Consumers

[BADecker]

Cars kill people but we do not treat them the same.

Cars and airplanes kill way more people than guns do... at least in America.

Yeah, and teens driving while texting too. But the government doesn't care about that. They would be happy if we kill each other doing stupid stuff like that. However, they do not want people who want freedom to have guns too.

Actually, government doesn't care about anything. Does government have a brain that it can think? Does government have emotions that it can love or hate or care about anything? No two people in government ever think 100% alike. And even if they are close, there are many others in government who think both the opposite, and in a whole lot of other directions.

Isn't it about time that people quit talking about government, and start talking about the human being(s) who is(are) harming them through supposed governmental action?

Why is it that government human beings seem to have rights above the rest of the people? After all, the government people will still have guns when the rest of the people do not! If they didn't, they couldn't enforce government peoples' agendas onto others.

The 6th, 7th, and 9th Amendments to the Constitution (Articles of the Bill of Rights) limit everything that government humans want to do to any other humans. But people can't begin to use these Amendments to protect themselves properly if they don't even know what these amendments are.

Well,  yeah. I meant the powers that be in charge, not government as a whole. I'm still annoyed at the house voting on the Mensato thing today. You Don’t Matter. House Votes for Monsanto’s Right to Deceive Consumers

This is true. And I am not so knowledgeable about the way to handle Monsanto so as to do it, yet. But here is the way:

Do a letter-writing campaign to the head of Monsanto in his human capacity (to the man, not the CEO) - after all, the corporation is only paperwork that doesn't do anything at all except that a human does it.

Tell him to cease and desist his Monsanto wrongdoing against you, because he is harming you by putting all that dangerous chemical into your food. Even if it isn't dangerous, it is worrying the heck out of you, and the worry is causing you stress which is harming you. So he is doing wrong to you by harming you. (Use the word "wrongdoing," and "property" when referring to your and your children's bodies.)

Include in your original letter damages to be paid to you in the event that he doesn't cease and desist by the 22nd day after he receives the original letter (certified/registered). Make the payment to be something like a dollar a second for each second that he doesn't cease and desist starting the 22nd day. In any subsequent communication, never change your requirements stated in your first letter.

Serve him personally, in his human capacity. In any event, if he doesn't cease and desist, take him to 7th Amendment common law jury court and get a default judgment against him. It will be up to the jury to decide. And they can decide any which way they want. Make sure it is a 7th Amendment jury, so that it is final.

If you don't like the outcome, get all your friends to do the same as you did. No 7th Amendment ruling precludes other court cases for the exact same thing. It only stops you from doing it again. Sooner or later several of the juries will act in your favor (the favor of your friends who do as you do). The resulting payments will strain the Monsanto coffers until they quit.

[smith coins]

I am pro of the gun control, we see what is happening in many different states, every month we hear that is killed someone

[Spendulus]

I am pro of the gun control, we see what is happening in many different states, every month we hear that is killed someone

I have often thought that it is entirely possible for a person to move from one area where the entire issue of gun control was moot, due to low crime and no roving gangs, to another area with different characteristics, where suddenly he decides he wants a couple guns.

thus it seems "gun control" is really more of a "one shoe fits all" control freak top down policy.  And one shoe does not fit all.  You might want firearms, if you lived in south Dallas, or in certain areas of Chicago.  You would want a number of firearms if you lived in certain areas bordering Mexico.

[prodigy8]

I know many people need to have gun as they are business man, have business or are easy to be attacked by others.
So yes and no

[DaddyMonsi]

no such thing as gun control because you control only those who are registered. in some countries, th number of unregistered firearm is more than those that are registered. i think its its much better government loosen up a little on the requirements and fees to entice everyone to register.

[prodigy8]

no such thing as gun control because you control only those who are registered. in some countries, th number of unregistered firearm is more than those that are registered. i think its its much better government loosen up a little on the requirements and fees to entice everyone to register.

That's the point every country have the list of the registered members (peoeple) but those who are unregistered are dangerous.

[Spendulus]

no such thing as gun control because you control only those who are registered. in some countries, th number of unregistered firearm is more than those that are registered. i think its its much better government loosen up a little on the requirements and fees to entice everyone to register.

That's the point every country have the list of the registered members (people) but those who are unregistered are dangerous.

No, unregistered people are not dangerous in general.  Lots of times, someone winds up with a firearm and does not want to bother to "register it."  Maybe it was passed down in the family, or traded between individuals.  Lots of different circumstances.  Registering involves paying fees, complicated applications, getting in yet one more government database.

The small fraction of unregistered owners who are criminals are never going to register anyway.  So the dangerous fraction you are concerned about you haven't affected in the slightest.  They laugh at you.

Obviously that's NOT a solution, just more oppression for the average guy...

[Schleicher]

Maybe the manufacturers should be required to paint the guns bright pink.
Then only girls buy guns, and we would have no gun crime 

[BitcoinMagician]

I would prefer that nobody have a gun except for specialized law enforcement respond teams. I don't work towards that goal, people have the right to own firearms by law. I would like people to just willingly do away with firearms... but that's not gonna happen.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Maybe the manufacturers should be required to paint the guns bright pink.
Then only girls buy guns, and we would have no gun crime 

I would prefer that nobody have a gun except for specialized law enforcement respond teams. I don't work towards that goal, people have the right to own firearms by law. I would like people to just willingly do away with firearms... but that's not gonna happen.

Many people just like to ignore the fact that people will still have guns. The guns to worry about are the ones that are being held illegally.

I don't believe in killing people. I wouldn't have a gun to protect myself personally, if I'm going to die, I'll die. But people who argue that if there are more laws to the point that citizens cannot buy or have a gun, there will be a lot less gun violence, are ignoring reality.

What happened when they made alcohol illegal? There were speakeasies, so people could still get liquor. The criminals are still getting guns with the laws we have now, the criminals will still be getting guns if there are more laws. That's not going to change, no matter what.

[Spendulus]

I would prefer that nobody have a gun except for specialized law enforcement respond teams. I don't work towards that goal, people have the right to own firearms by law. I would like people to just willingly do away with firearms... but that's not gonna happen.

How about instead of "I would prefer that nobody have a gun except..." everybody gets to say the same thing?

Then wouldn't you have a solution that works in most places most of the time?

Because your solution might work some places some of the time.  Or your place most of the time.

[pinball8]

Gun control generally refers to laws or policies that regulate the manufacture, sale, transfer, possession, modification, or use of firearms. They vary greatly around the world. Some countries, such as the United Kingdom, have very strict limits on gun possession while others, like the United States, have, compared to most industrial democracies, relatively few restrictions (although policies vary from state to state).

Proponents of gun control generally argue that widespread gun ownership increases the danger of gun-related crime, homicide and suicide. Opponents argue that gun control does not reduce gun-related injuries, murder, or suicide, and some argue that certain regulations violate individual liberties. Some opponents of gun control argue that access to firearms enables citizens to defend themselves.

[Sourgummies]

Gun control generally refers to laws or policies that regulate the manufacture, sale, transfer, possession, modification, or use of firearms. They vary greatly around the world. Some countries, such as the United Kingdom, have very strict limits on gun possession while others, like the United States, have, compared to most industrial democracies, relatively few restrictions (although policies vary from state to state).

Proponents of gun control generally argue that widespread gun ownership increases the danger of gun-related crime, homicide and suicide. Opponents argue that gun control does not reduce gun-related injuries, murder, or suicide, and some argue that certain regulations violate individual liberties. Some opponents of gun control argue that access to firearms enables citizens to defend themselves.

2 posts and already got a sig campaign?

*Sorry just found that interesting**

[zenitzz]

How about instead of "I would prefer that nobody have a gun except..." everybody gets to say the same thing?

sometimes you need have a gun because you never know when crime is coming to you maybe when you sleep. when you have a gun in your house. you will feel safe

[Spendulus]

How about instead of "I would prefer that nobody have a gun except..." everybody gets to say the same thing?

sometimes you need have a gun because you never know when crime is coming to you maybe when you sleep. when you have a gun in your house. you will feel safe

Yeah.  I know more than one dude who was in a war, that just can't sleep without a gun by the bed.  Same for a couple women, who had bad things happen to them - and now they have a gun, and get by every day a little bit better.

You just can't ignore these things in peoples' head and in their lives with some abstract "I know better than you about whether you should have a gun."

Well at least that's my point of view.

[BADecker]

How about instead of "I would prefer that nobody have a gun except..." everybody gets to say the same thing?

sometimes you need have a gun because you never know when crime is coming to you maybe when you sleep. when you have a gun in your house. you will feel safe

Yeah.  I know more than one dude who was in a war, that just can't sleep without a gun by the bed.  Same for a couple women, who had bad things happen to them - and now they have a gun, and get by every day a little bit better.

You just can't ignore these things in peoples' head and in their lives with some abstract "I know better than you about whether you should have a gun."

Well at least that's my point of view.

Of course, if everybody had guns and carried them openly, our respect of each other would change.