A very sad day for establishments that ban concealed carry

I have intentionally refrained from owning any guns. Why? Legalities...people wouldn't like my shooting flies in the house, or "turning off" the neighbor's porch light. Plus, it seems some bullets don't know when to stop after hitting their target.

 

You're exactly the type of person who shouldn't own a gun. But, if you did own one and "turned off the neighbor's porch light" with it, I certainly wouldn't blame the gun!

 

I've owned lots of guns growing up. Hunted a lot and target shot for fun. Yet I still recognize when something is a problem. Guns create far more problems than they ever solve and asking people not to blame the guns is about as stupid a rationale as I can think of. Somehow, if we separate the person from the gun, then guns are OK. The problem is that in the real world guns and people are the problem. We can't eliminate people so the only choice left is to eliminate guns. Why is that so difficult for some people?

 

Sorry Joe, I know you have solid reasons for hating guns...but I can't agree with you that all handguns be banned, though I do consider assault rifles, the kind that can be modified to become fully automatic, have no real purpose besides the mass killing of men, women, & children. They have no real use in hunting ("I got me a rabbit! Fetch ma shovel!") or any other civilian situation.

I've stated the impossibility of your goal before, so I won't go over 'em all again, but I will restate that the idea of locating and retrieving the guns alone would be an impossible act. At best, it would leave guns in the hands of people most likely to use them to kill other people.

 

I suppose you would also lay blame on the truck bomb in Oklahoma City instead of Timothy McVeigh. Or the planes on 9/11 instead of KSM. Or you would blame the gas chambers instead of the Nazis themselves.

I have a hard time believing you can even walk and chew gum at the same time.

 

The simple truth is that you can not ban guns, there are way too many of them in circulation and not all in the proper hands and lets be honest here the crims are simply not going to obey a law that says hand in your arms are they?
So what do you do? stiffer sentences is one thing, 20 years hard labour for carrying a unlicenced weapon, life in prison with no parole and served in solitery for carrying a gun during a crime! Automatic death penalty if convicted of using a gun with solid evidence (reduce the time period for appeals to be heard) you are very limited in what actions you can carry out though.

 

As usual, you intentionally miss the point. So what else is new? In McVeigh's case, I'd restrict access to the fertilizers he used to make the bomb. In the case of 9/11 terror attacks, I'd make sure that no one gets their hands on the controls of an airplane. I don't even see the similarities to Nazi's here but we are on the second page I guess and it was just time to bring the Nazis up.
The point is and always has been access not blame. Why are guns so plentiful? Why can anyone get access to assault rifles, 100 round clips, handguns designed for one purpose, to kill people? Shift your internal tape recorder from playing the blame mantra to realizing it is a matter of access to guns.

 

That is precisely where you are fundamentally wrong. The point has NEVER been access, but has ALWAYS been blame. If a killer doesn't choose a firearm, he'll choose a truck bomb. Or an airplane. Or a gas chamber. Or a knife. Or a baseball bat. Or a table lamp. Or a tire iron.... the list goes on. If a person has homicidal intent there is really little you can do to stop him at that point. Unfortunately, human beings sometimes commit cruel acts with whatever weapon of choice they choose. Blaming the weapon is like blaming the sun if you stay outside too long and get sunburned.

 

I'll believe you when they start having truck bomb shows. Guns are too available to anyone and the gun crowd, a tiny minority, is unwilling to support any restrictions of any kind of weapons. And those that make a profit off of selling guns win again.

 

You make me laugh. You really do. Using your logic, do you also blame obesity on the access to food?

 

I won't go into what happens to farmers with restricted access to fertilizer, let alone illegal alien yard workers

The last I heard, cars kill about 45,000 (plus many more injuries) per year. Maybe we should restrict access to cars also? And how about this one. Could not find how many are killed falling down stairs, but a Google search for "killed stairs fall" brought 36,300,000 hits. Maybe we need to restrict access to all buildings second stories and above? But, I guess that might cramp your style in your penthouse.

 

While people die for all kinds of reasons in every society, gun deaths are preventable just like any other danger we face. Cars have seatbelts, stairs have hand railings but assault rifles, handguns, and 100 bullet clips only have one purpose. To kill as many people as possible. The old west is gone. Let it go. More guns equals more shootings and the fact that we have more shootings than the next two country's with citizen owned guns combined proves exactly that point. When will the Right-wing stop arming mass murderers and supporting their twisted causes in the name of the 2nd Amendment?

 

Yep! You hit the nail on its head. The Constitution. We have not right to cars. We have no right to stairs. But our founding fathers felt it necessary to give us the right to bear arms. But then a little piece of paper like that never stood in the way of a good liberal, did it?

 

One problem with that is space, our prisons are packed full of non-violent drug offenders since Reagan stepped-up the war on drugs. Another is funding. Republican efforts over the last few decades has left government funding in tatters for just about everything, including prisons.

 

Actually, the 2nd Amendment is part of the bill of rights and wasn't passed until 1791. Just like the 18th Amendment, it can also be repealed just like any other Amendment. It has outlived its usefulness in our society but as long as there is a buck to be made off of human misery, the Cons in this country will defend it. Money is a funny god.

 

What does it being "part of the Bill of Rights" have to do with the price of tea in China? Are you asserting that the Bill of Rights is not a valid part of the Constitution?

 

No! He is admitting that he and other liberals really do not care what our rules say. We are just supposed to do what they think is best for us.

 

I'll give up my Second Amendment Right if any liberal will give up their First Amendment Right.

 

Are you saying that you only keep guns to protect yourself from loudmouthed liberals?

 

No, I keep guns to protect myself from loudmouthed, VIOLENT liberals. On second thought, perhaps I'd better keep my Second Amendment Right.