Obama urges tighter background checks on gun buyers after Aurora massacre

[Ezerharden]

Ok, you all have convinced me. Lets allow the 20 year old who has been judged mentally incompetent and has the mentality of a 10 year old own a gun also or the guy that is classified as a sociopath, I mean why should they loose their rights too? After all "shall not be infringed" doesn't say "only if mentally capable" either. /sarcasm

I do agree that the laws need to allow for people to defend themselves against the bad people out there, such as elimination of PFZ's, protection against prosecution for justifiable killings, and national reciprocity of carrying in all states either OC or CC for example. But I am not in favor of a person convicted of using a gun in a violent crime being allowed to legally go and buy one just so they can do it again. Will they get one anyway? Yes, but why make it any easier for them?

 

[griffin]

If you have a Michigan CPL, you are exempt. Right now I can walk into a gun store and buy everything as long as I have the credit or cash without a background check.

You don't need a permit to purchase with a CPL, but an FFL still does a NICS check. That's federal.

 

[stainless1911]

Ok, you all have convinced me. Lets allow the 20 year old who has been judged mentally incompetent and has the mentality of a 10 year old own a gun also or the guy that is classified as a sociopath, I mean why should they loose their rights too? After all "shall not be infringed" doesn't say "only if mentally capable" either. /sarcasm

flip the coin then. How are you going to keep them from getting one anyhow?

Acknowledge their right to bear arms, and if they become a problem, the law is not so weak they cannot deal with them as it is now. If they kill someone who is unarmed, that person got what they deserved by not taking the responsibility to defend themselves and their rights. If that person with a weapon comes against a citizen who has taken the initiative to do what is necessary in this world to survive, then they will be equipped to deal with the ones who become a threat to the others.

 

[Ezerharden]

flip the coin then. How are you going to keep them from getting one anyhow?

Acknowledge their right to bear arms, and if they become a problem, the law is not so weak they cannot deal with them as it is now. If they kill someone who is unarmed, that person got what they deserved by not taking the responsibility to defend themselves and their rights. If that person with a weapon comes against a citizen who has taken the initiative to do what is necessary in this world to survive, then they will be equipped to deal with the ones who become a threat to the others.

The problem is that by the time "they become a problem" someone has already been assaulted and/or killed. As to the bolded part, that has to be the most retarded thing I think I have heard anyone say. That falls right in there with the woman who was raped and was "asking for it" because of the way she was dressed. You are openly condoning murder. I am seriously begging to wonder if YOU should be carrying. I also think we are seeing positive proof that MJ kills braincells.

 

[WalkingWolf]

The problem is that by the time "they become a problem" someone has already been assaulted and/or killed. As to the bolded part, that has to be the most retarded thing I think I have heard anyone say. That falls right in there with the woman who was raped and was "asking for it" because of the way she was dressed. I am seriously begging to wonder if YOU should be carrying.

Ya know Britain has no second amendment~Just Sayin`

 

[Ezerharden]

Ya know even in Britain murder is murder. Just sayin.

Also, comments like felons should be able to own guns, and people deserve to get killed if they don't arm themselves is the stuff that the Anti's love to hear. They just use it as more fodder that gun owners are crazy.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Ya know even in Britain murder is murder. Just sayin.

Also, comments like felons should be able to own guns, and people deserve to get killed if they don't arm themselves is the stuff that the Anti's love to hear. They just use it as more fodder that gun owners are crazy.

Ohhh please! I know what he meant~everybody is responsible for their own safety. Not you or I or the government, the SCOTUS has said so. And felons can own guns in most states, if you do your research you would know. All law abiding citizens should not be infringed, and that includes felons. How the heck can we expect anybody to reform when we do not accept them into society after releasing them. I know many felons that are finer citizens than many people not arrested. I have seen many nut jobs that are accidents waiting to happen and they can own guns. The whole idea of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals is extremely stupid, because they are not a criminal if they served their time. And if they want a gun they will do it by breaking the law thereby increasing crime. We or I jump through the hoops because it is the law, but to be honest, a felon just finds a gun if he wants to commit a crime, and it is way easier than buying one from a FFL. Not to mention the cities with the most gun laws have the most crime. What more evidence is needed than that.

Britain had unarmed police for decades, and citizens had guns. Now crime has gotten so bad that the police are armed, and they are the only ones who are allowed to defend themselves. People are sent to prison in England for defending themselves in their own home from thugs. Is that really what you want for us.

 

[Ezerharden]

So again I ask, how many times do felons get to buy firearms in your world? Every time they are released from prison? And if they buy said firearm, commit a crime, and go back to prison, are they allowed to buy one again after they are released the second time? Then the third time it happens, the get life without parole. Downside is you have one dead victim, then you have two more that you allowed to become victims by rearming a violent criminal. I know a few ex cons also, and some are fine people, but they are the non violent ones. And could you please cite where felons can buy guns WITHOUT having their records expunged by a court? Just an average felon who gets out on Monday and buys a gun on Tuesday?

 

[Bikenut]

So again I ask, how many times do felons get to buy firearms in your world? Every time they are released from prison? And if they buy said firearm, commit a crime, and go back to prison, are they allowed to buy one again after they are released the second time? Then the third time it happens, the get life without parole. Downside is you have one dead victim, then you have two more that you allowed to become victims by rearming a violent criminal. I know a few ex cons also, and some are fine people, but they are the non violent ones. And could you please cite where felons can buy guns WITHOUT having their records expunged by a court? Just an average felon who gets out on Monday and buys a gun on Tuesday?

Since the multitude of gun laws already on the books do not prevent a violent criminal from arming themselves.....

The concern shouldn't be whether the violent criminal bought a gun.... the concern needs to be...why was a violent criminal released in the first place?

If the violent criminal isn't released on Monday he can't victimize someone with, or without!, a gun on Tuesday.

And even your post contains the true problem with mention of the violent criminal being released several times.... perhaps the real problem isn't the gun... but is the criminal is being released?

 

[WalkingWolf]

Since the multitude of gun laws already on the books do not prevent a violent criminal from arming themselves.....

The concern shouldn't be whether the violent criminal bought a gun.... the concern needs to be...why was a violent criminal released in the first place?

If the violent criminal isn't released on Monday he can't victimize someone with, or without!, a gun on Tuesday.

And even your post contains the true problem with mention of the violent criminal being released several times.... perhaps the real problem isn't the gun... but is the criminal is being released?

+1

 

[Shadow Bear]

We weren't able to get rid of alcohol by outlawing it.

We aren't able to get rid of drugs by outlawing them.

Why would anyone think we can get rid of guns by outlawing them?

The only logical argument FOR gun control is to create a growing black market FOR guns.

No law makes it difficult for a felon or whacko to get a gun. It makes it illegal, but not difficult.

Shoot, there are folks who will 'rent' you a handgun to rob a bank, all for a portion of the proceeds. I know this for a fact- sat on the jury, listened to the renter and the robber talk about it.

Sure, its a touch more difficult for the middle class suburban whacko, but its a walk in the park for a felon with connections.

The whacko, for all his terror grabbing headlines, does not concern me at all. The gangsta mugging people in my neighborhood does concern me. And, he can get a gun anytime he wants.....even 'rent' it.

 

[Ezerharden]

I was not advocating more gun laws, nor that gun laws keep guns from criminals. I was questioning the sanity of the idea that felons should be able to LEGALLY buy guns once they are released from prison because it is "their" right, despite the fact that they deprived someone of their rights by performing a criminal attack against them. Plus I have to SERIOUSLY question the statement that Stainless made that the unarmed person who is killed got what they deserved. That line of thinking is idiotic and depraved.

 

[autosurgeon]

Take a look at how many thing s are now Felonies... things that are not violent and that in most cases were done in youth. All it takes is 2 such convictions and a person is banned for life. They cannot Vote or own a firearm. I personally think only violent crimes should warrant such but then I also think they shouldn't be released from prison either.

 

[Ezerharden]

Take a look at how many thing s are now Felonies... things that are not violent and that in most cases were done in youth. All it takes is 2 such convictions and a person is banned for life. They cannot Vote or own a firearm. I personally think only violent crimes should warrant such but then I also think they shouldn't be released from prison either.

Agreed. Violent criminals should not be released but they are so I don't see the logic in allowing them to legally buy a firearm. They should also stop making prisons country clubs. Take the money spent on "humanitarian things" such as cable TV and spend it to keep them in longer. Bring back the death penalty for murderers. Make prison so miserable that no one in thier right mind would ever want to go back. Quit coddling the criminals.

 

[griffin]

Violent criminals should not be released but they are

Heard a story on NPR this morning (one of the StoryCorps from 2010) about a guy who was stalking women. I didn't hear the entire thing (missed the beginning) but from what I gather the guy shot one woman in the neck (maybe paralyzing her), and then when he was released from prison shot another woman in the back.

 

[Bikenut]

Agreed. Violent criminals should not be released but they are so I don't see the logic in allowing them to legally buy a firearm. They should also stop making prisons country clubs. Take the money spent on "humanitarian things" such as cable TV and spend it to keep them in longer. Bring back the death penalty for murderers. Make prison so miserable that no one in thier right mind would ever want to go back. Quit coddling the criminals.

Yes! Let us stop coddling criminals!

And.. to my way of thinking... Just like the death penalty for the most heinous of violent offenders... keeping violent criminals in prison also has the benefit of preventing an attack on another victim.

Saying that we need gun laws because the violent criminals are being released is ignoring the real problem is the criminal is being released.

But I still get stuck on what benefit is there to laws that make it illegal for a felon, violent or not, to buy a gun legally when those laws don't stop felons from buying guns illegally. To me such laws are "feel good" laws that give the illusion that there is some measure of safety imparted by that law....

And... if we are to be honest... then "shall not be infringed" means exactly what it says.... not what we might want it to say.

 

[Ezerharden]

But I still get stuck on what benefit is there to laws that make it illegal for a felon, violent or not, to buy a gun legally when those laws don't stop felons from buying guns illegally. To me such laws are "feel good" laws that give the illusion that there is some measure of safety imparted by that law....

And... if we are to be honest... then "shall not be infringed" means exactly what it says.... not what we might want it to say.

For same reason a person declared mentally incompetent can't buy a gun. Criminals will get guns but there is no reason to make it any easier for them, face it, street guns cost a lot more. But if you want felons to be able to legally buy guns, fine, let the mentally incompetent buy them too, as you said "And... if we are to be honest... then "shall not be infringed" means exactly what it says.... not what we might want it to say." right?

 

[twoskinsonemanns]

Saying that we need gun laws because the violent criminals are being released is ignoring the real problem

DING DING DING!

If you can't be trusted with a gun, IMHO you don't belong in society. It's silly to say a man is too dangerous to have a gun but not to dangerous to have a knife, bat, golf club, cans of gasoline and walk among us.

 

[griffin]

cans of gasoline and walk among us.

Molotov cocktails are incredibly easy to make. So is napalm. (So are pipe bombs, but they aren't gasoline related). Just imagine if the Aurora shooter would have used any of those.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Molotov cocktails are incredibly easy to make. So is napalm. (So are pipe bombs, but they aren't gasoline related). Just imagine if the Aurora shooter would have used any of those.

Or just drove up his vehicle with fertilizer set it and walked away. I would have preferred if he just kept his violence to himself, but banning AK 47s is not the answer. And he did not even use one. Obama if he wants to talk guns should at least know what he is talking about. Of course it is all GWB's fault.