What's your opinion of gun control?

[HardyGoodsLtd]

sorry to say but I beleive that the elite run and rule the planet, they want to dissarm the public to make it easyer for them to control, so I want people to be able to obtain a gun for this reason only.

But not everyone should have one!, there has to be some filtering of possession.

it's not easy having that point of view from the UK as I have never seen a real gun, and most of the population here have not, and would prefer it that way, not me.

[helloeverybody]

sorry to say but I beleive that the elite run and rule the planet, they want to dissarm the public to make it easyer for them to control, so I want people to be able to obtain a gun for this reason only.

But not everyone should have one!, there has to be some filtering of possession.

it's not easy having that point of view from the UK as I have never seen a real gun, and most of the population here have not, and would prefer it that way, not me.

So you are on the side of legislation then, Your right in that not everybody should be able to get a gun. There should be legislation in place to prevent people who should not have access to guns from getting them. Much like what the uk has, although the uks is very strict they have some of the lowest gun crime in the world.

[mOgliE]

I might be wrong but... I'd say this debate is pure nonsense when you think about it.
EU has no gun. USA is full of guns. Both country can't really change their positions... A gun repression in USA would just create a timeframe with normal citizens having no guns and all criminals having huge reserve of guns, so nothing can really be done here...
While it would be completely dumb to insert guns in EU! There is much less crime and violence than in gun countries... Why wanting to change things but copying methods giving less results?

[criptix]

I might be wrong but... I'd say this debate is pure nonsense when you think about it.
EU has no gun. USA is full of guns. Both country can't really change their positions... A gun repression in USA would just create a timeframe with normal citizens having no guns and all criminals having huge reserve of guns, so nothing can really be done here...
While it would be completely dumb to insert guns in EU! There is much less crime and violence than in gun countries... Why wanting to change things but copying methods giving less results?

I talked 3 days ago with someone who went 2 years to school in texas, like 40-50 km from the mexican boarder.

He told me that usually once in a week there was a massacre of some kind just some kilometres away on the mexican side caused by drugcartels with US weapons.

The problems gets serious when US weapons are invading all anreiner states and more.

And yes you can buy weapons anonymously in the US - it is a fact. Gunshow loop hole exist and is widely used!

Also the US background checks are rather questionable. The orlando shooter was on the fbi terrorist list but still could legally buy weapons even through a background check.

[Spendulus]

sorry to say but I beleive that the elite run and rule the planet, they want to dissarm the public to make it easyer for them to control, so I want people to be able to obtain a gun for this reason only.

But not everyone should have one!, there has to be some filtering of possession.

it's not easy having that point of view from the UK as I have never seen a real gun, and most of the population here have not, and would prefer it that way, not me.

OKay, but if not everyone should have one, shouldn't you be allowed to have two?

[BADecker]

sorry to say but I beleive that the elite run and rule the planet, they want to dissarm the public to make it easyer for them to control, so I want people to be able to obtain a gun for this reason only.

But not everyone should have one!, there has to be some filtering of possession.

it's not easy having that point of view from the UK as I have never seen a real gun, and most of the population here have not, and would prefer it that way, not me.

Almost nobody goes to court in the UK at Queens Bench. If you did this, you could have your guns in the UK, along with almost no regulation. See http://www.unkommonlaw.co.uk/.

UK Column Karl Lentz meets Brian Gerrish December 17 2013

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgfBszEKsfw

[mOgliE]

I might be wrong but... I'd say this debate is pure nonsense when you think about it.
EU has no gun. USA is full of guns. Both country can't really change their positions... A gun repression in USA would just create a timeframe with normal citizens having no guns and all criminals having huge reserve of guns, so nothing can really be done here...
While it would be completely dumb to insert guns in EU! There is much less crime and violence than in gun countries... Why wanting to change things but copying methods giving less results?

I talked 3 days ago with someone who went 2 years to school in texas, like 40-50 km from the mexican boarder.

He told me that usually once in a week there was a massacre of some kind just some kilometres away on the mexican side caused by drugcartels with US weapons.

The problems gets serious when US weapons are invading all anreiner states and more.

And yes you can buy weapons anonymously in the US - it is a fact. Gunshow loop hole exist and is widely used!

Also the US background checks are rather questionable. The orlando shooter was on the fbi terrorist list but still could legally buy weapons even through a background check.

It doesn't matter, it's too late. The day they announce a law preventing citizens to buy ak47 whenever they want, criminal organisation will just buy thousands of weapons for after...

Too many weapons are already on the ground, it's too late...

[xht]

House Democrats’ Gun-Control Sit-In Turns Into Chaotic Showdown With Republicans


WASHINGTON — A Democratic protest demanding votes on gun-control legislation led to pandemonium in the House chamber that did not end until early Thursday, when Speaker Paul D. Ryan and his fellow Republicans reclaimed control long enough to force through a major spending bill. They then abruptly adjourned and left the Capitol.

Furious Democrats remained on the House floor, where they huddled around their leader, Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, who praised their stand as a “discussion heard around the world.”

Ms. Pelosi expressed bewilderment at the Republican position. “What could they be thinking?” she asked. “Whatever it is, they don’t want to tell anybody about it. That’s why they left in the dead of night.”

The standoff, which began with a Democratic sit-in on the House floor just before noon on Wednesday, did not end until about 3 a.m. Thursday when Mr. Ryan — barreling over Democrats’ objections — took the rare and provocative step of calling a vote on a major appropriations bill in the wee hours and without any debate. He then adjourned the House, with no legislative votes scheduled until July 5.

The House approved the bill, which includes $1.1 billion in emergency financing to fight the mosquito-borne Zika virus — and more than $80 billion in other government spending — by a vote of 239 to 171 shortly after 3 a.m.

Republicans dashed from the chamber into the sticky heat gripping Washington and were met by protesters who jeered, with some shouting, “Do your job!”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/23/us/politics/house-democrats-stage-sit-in-to-push-for-action-on-gun-control.html

[Wilikon]

[mOgliE]

Wahou... Let's take an information from Fox News (very reliable) about a quote out its context (very professional) of a hasty answer of ONE guy and let us transform this in a broadwide argument... 

[Spendulus]

Wahou... Let's take an information from Fox News (very reliable) about a quote out its context (very professional) of a hasty answer of ONE guy and let us transform this in a broadwide argument... 

You obviously don't know Rangel.

[mOgliE]

Wahou... Let's take an information from Fox News (very reliable) about a quote out its context (very professional) of a hasty answer of ONE guy and let us transform this in a broadwide argument... 

You obviously don't know Rangel.

Nope. But it doesn't matter. It's still important to underline that it is not an argument.
And anyway, what he says is true. You don't think the representant of the state actually deserve to be protected more than normal citizens?
Why all the means put for POTUS and VP protection then?

[Spendulus]

Wahou... Let's take an information from Fox News (very reliable) about a quote out its context (very professional) of a hasty answer of ONE guy and let us transform this in a broadwide argument... 

You obviously don't know Rangel.

Nope. But it doesn't matter. It's still important to underline that it is not an argument.
And anyway, what he says is true. You don't think the representant of the state actually deserve to be protected more than normal citizens?
Why all the means put for POTUS and VP protection then?

Absolutely not.

[mOgliE]

Wahou... Let's take an information from Fox News (very reliable) about a quote out its context (very professional) of a hasty answer of ONE guy and let us transform this in a broadwide argument... 

You obviously don't know Rangel.

Nope. But it doesn't matter. It's still important to underline that it is not an argument.
And anyway, what he says is true. You don't think the representant of the state actually deserve to be protected more than normal citizens?
Why all the means put for POTUS and VP protection then?

Absolutely not.

Ok that's your opinion. That means no longer protection for any of your government member why not. That's a concept, that would oblige USA to some decent international policies so you don't get your president killed every two weeks xD

[TheButterZone]

Wahou... Let's take an information from Fox News (very reliable) about a quote out its context (very professional) of a hasty answer of ONE guy and let us transform this in a broadwide argument...  

You obviously don't know Rangel.

Nope. But it doesn't matter. It's still important to underline that it is not an argument.
And anyway, what he says is true. You don't think the representant of the state actually deserve to be protected more than normal citizens?
Why all the means put for POTUS and VP protection then?

Absolutely not.

Especially since those like Rangel who represent the International Criminals Union at the absolute expense of public safety/We The People have zero legitimate fear about their sole beneficiaries committing any violence whatsoever against them, nor We The People suddenly becoming We The Criminals Unionists.

[C10H15N]

[Spendulus]

Guns are like vaccines.


You don't need them.


Unless you need them.


And when you need them, it's too late to go get them.

[mOgliE]

Wahou... Let's take an information from Fox News (very reliable) about a quote out its context (very professional) of a hasty answer of ONE guy and let us transform this in a broadwide argument...  

You obviously don't know Rangel.

Nope. But it doesn't matter. It's still important to underline that it is not an argument.
And anyway, what he says is true. You don't think the representant of the state actually deserve to be protected more than normal citizens?
Why all the means put for POTUS and VP protection then?

Absolutely not.

Especially since those like Rangel who represent the International Criminals Union at the absolute expense of public safety/We The People have zero legitimate fear about their sole beneficiaries committing any violence whatsoever against them, nor We The People suddenly becoming We The Criminals Unionists.

I like how you talk about "We The People" like you actually represent anyone but you xD

[Wilikon]

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/06/25/26-democrats-who-participated-gun-control-sit-are-gun-owners

[mOgliE]

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/06/25/26-democrats-who-participated-gun-control-sit-are-gun-owners

Does you even understand that gun control doesn't mean guns will be forbidden?  That maybe it just means for forbiding shotguns for example (which are a well known self defense weapons of course xD)