Another shooting today!!

[Bink]

Donald Trump is disgraceful. His latest tweet--he doesn't have one percent of what Obama had. He's subhuman trash. Don't ever talk about politizing a tragedy again. Don't forget to look at his twitter banner. 

 

 

 

[heyitsmeallen]

59 minutes ago, Stan said:

No other weapons could kill this easily unless he literally had a bomb strapped to himself. Try stabbing over 50 plus people and thinking you’ll kill 17 plus. Pretty sure if someone has a knife or machete you’re not gonna chase after someone running away easily. 

So you want all guns banned from the United states? I didn’t say that a shooter would just use a knife or machete... I said they would just buy a different gun if ARs are banned because the only way to end gun violence is to ban all guns, which will never happen. Not in my lifetime at least. 

[heyitsmeallen]

32 minutes ago, Bink said:

Donald Trump is disgraceful. His latest tweet--he doesn't have one percent of what Obama had. He's subhuman trash. Don't ever talk about politizing a tragedy again. Don't forget to look at his twitter banner. 

 

 

 

He just has to make everything about himself. How about he answers why he rolled back an Obama era rule that made it harder for the mentally ill to buy a gun. 

 

 

[IsntLifeFunny]

1 hour ago, Bink said:

Donald Trump is disgraceful. His latest tweet--he doesn't have one percent of what Obama had. He's subhuman trash. Don't ever talk about politizing a tragedy again. Don't forget to look at his twitter banner. 

 

 

 

Jesus. 

[IrishTitansFan]

This should be the absolute minimum regulations put in place:

 

"The requirements the applicant must meet are set forth in section 4 of the Firearms Act and include, amongst others:

-A good reason for wanting the firearm. Hunting and target shooting qualify as do certain other activities like humane dispatch of large animals. Personal protection does not qualify as a good reason.

-A safe location in which to use the firearm (for target shooting, this must be an authorised shooting range which you must be a member of and which must maintain attendance records for the applicant and which must inform the Gardaí should the applicant's membership end).

-The details of the secure storage arrangements for the firearm (which must be inspected by the local Crime Prevention Officer. Minimum standards for secure storage are set out in the Firearms (Secure Accommodation) Regulations 2009 [2] and increase according to the number and type of firearms being stored, but higher standards can be demanded by the Gardaí before issuing a licence.

-That granting the certificate would not result in a danger to the public or to the peace.

-Proof of competency with the firearm or the arrangements to achieve that competency, which are met by prior experience with the firearm, membership of a club where training will be provided, or completion of a training course (however no standard for such a training course has been set and so applicants are strongly advised to check with their local Garda Superintendent or Chief Superintendent (depending on which is being applied to) as to what courses they will accept).

-Permission for the Gardaí to access the applicants medical records.

-Two character references.

-If the firearm is a restricted firearm, the applicant must demonstrate that the firearm is the only type of firearm that is appropriate for the purpose for which it is required.

-Practical and dynamic shooting (defined as "any form of activity in which firearms are used to simulate combat or combat training" under the law but applying in practice to IPSC and IDPA shooting) is banned in Ireland under section 4C of the Firearms Act[3] except for when carried out with airsoft replicas."

[Justafan]

59 minutes ago, IrishTitansFan said:

This should be the absolute minimum regulations put in place:

 

"The requirements the applicant must meet are set forth in section 4 of the Firearms Act and include, amongst others:

-A good reason for wanting the firearm. Hunting and target shooting qualify as do certain other activities like humane dispatch of large animals. Personal protection does not qualify as a good reason.

-A safe location in which to use the firearm (for target shooting, this must be an authorised shooting range which you must be a member of and which must maintain attendance records for the applicant and which must inform the Gardaí should the applicant's membership end).

-The details of the secure storage arrangements for the firearm (which must be inspected by the local Crime Prevention Officer. Minimum standards for secure storage are set out in the Firearms (Secure Accommodation) Regulations 2009 [2] and increase according to the number and type of firearms being stored, but higher standards can be demanded by the Gardaí before issuing a licence.

-That granting the certificate would not result in a danger to the public or to the peace.

-Proof of competency with the firearm or the arrangements to achieve that competency, which are met by prior experience with the firearm, membership of a club where training will be provided, or completion of a training course (however no standard for such a training course has been set and so applicants are strongly advised to check with their local Garda Superintendent or Chief Superintendent (depending on which is being applied to) as to what courses they will accept).

-Permission for the Gardaí to access the applicants medical records.

-Two character references.

-If the firearm is a restricted firearm, the applicant must demonstrate that the firearm is the only type of firearm that is appropriate for the purpose for which it is required.

-Practical and dynamic shooting (defined as "any form of activity in which firearms are used to simulate combat or combat training" under the law but applying in practice to IPSC and IDPA shooting) is banned in Ireland under section 4C of the Firearms Act[3] except for when carried out with airsoft replicas."

No offense but this is the stuff that makes me want to dig my heels in against gun control advocates.

 

Two character witnesses?  Personal protection doesn't qualify as a reason to own a weapon?  Details of storage?  

 

The red tape that would go along with ensuring all of this was done would essentially strip all but the most ardent gun supporters of their rights.

 

What about guys like me that move every three years are so?  Am I supposed to start over with this process with the guns I already own every time I move so that you feel safe from me?

 

This is the stuff that gets ridiculous.

 

It is an incredibly small percentage of the population that gets their hands on weapons with intent to harm.  

 

I have no problem putting SOME of these restrictions on something like an AR-15 because they are a popular weapon that have been used in a lot of these shootings but I think you will find that I'm more moderate than most.

 

If you guys want actual solutions and want to fix the problems then you have to learn to compromise and not expect people to just give in and give you what you want because it's what you think is right.  The majority of the public is not going to go along with something like this.  Ever.  The courts have already ruled a lot of this type of stuff unconstitutional.

 

 

[IrishTitansFan]

2 minutes ago, Justafan said:

No offense but this is the stuff that makes me want to dig my heels in against gun control advocates.

 

Two character witnesses?  Personal protection doesn't qualify as a reason to own a weapon?  Details of storage?  

 

The red tape that would go along with ensuring all of this was done would essentially strip all but the most ardent gun supporters of their rights.

 

What about guys like me that move every three years are so?  Am I supposed to start over with this process with the guns I already own every time I move so that you feel safe from me?

 

This is the stuff that gets ridiculous.

 

It is an incredibly small percentage of the population that gets their hands on weapons with intent to harm.  

 

I have no problem putting SOME of these restrictions on something like an AR-15 because they are a popular weapon that have been used in a lot of these shootings but I think you will find that I'm more moderate than most.

 

If you guys want actual solutions and want to fix the problems then you have to learn to compromise and not expect people to just give in and give you what you want because it's what you think is right.  The majority of the public is not going to go along with something like this.  Ever.  The courts have already ruled a lot of this type of stuff unconstitutional.

 

 

No offense, but if I was in the US I would care much more about a child's life than the hassle of licensing a gun every 3 years. There should be no reason to hold a gun for personal protection unless you're a complete pussy or a criminal. These are laws in civilised countries that don't have 19 year olds expelled from school for erratic behaviour mowing down 17 kids with a semi auto war gun. I agree that the public isn't going to go along with it, and that is completely fucked up.

[OILERMAN]

Prominent Republican Donor Issues Ultimatum on Assault Weapons

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/prominent-republican-donor-issues-ultimatum-on-assault-weapons/ar-BBJg5E7

 

A prominent Republican political donor demanded on Saturday that the party pass legislation to restrict access to guns, and vowed not to contribute to any candidates or electioneering groups that did not support a ban on the sale of military-style firearms to civilians.

 

Al Hoffman Jr., a Florida-based real estate developer who was a leading fund-raiser for George W. Bush’s campaigns, said he would seek to marshal support among other Republican political donors for a renewed assault weapons ban.

 

“For how many years now have we been doing this — having these experiences of terrorism, mass killings — and how many years has it been that nothing’s been done?” Mr. Hoffman said in an interview. “It’s the end of the road for me.”

[OILERMAN]

6 hours ago, heyitsmeallen said:

He just has to make everything about himself. How about he answers why he rolled back an Obama era rule that made it harder for the mentally ill to buy a gun. 

He's also trying to make the FBI look bad since they are all over his commy ass

[Justafan]

40 minutes ago, IrishTitansFan said:

No offense, but if I was in the US I would care much more about a child's life than the hassle of licensing a gun every 3 years. There should be no reason to hold a gun for personal protection unless you're a complete pussy or a criminal. These are laws in civilised countries that don't have 19 year olds expelled from school for erratic behaviour mowing down 17 kids with a semi auto war gun. I agree that the public isn't going to go along with it, and that is completely fucked up.

5

If you were in the US.  But you aren't.  

 

I know that where you live this is the perception but that doesn't mean it's the only POV.  

 

Being closed minded and refusing to see the other side of the argument is a poor way to work towards any real or lasting solution.  All you do is piss people off and get them to dig their heels in.  

 

Switzerland has the most guns in Europe.  And they have the lowest crime rates.

 

There is a problem here, but breaking sacred ideals and taking freedom from people is not the only way to address that problem and if you alienate a full 60% of the population, maybe more I don't have exact stats, people will just write you off and refuse to hear anything you have to say.  

[WG53]

1 hour ago, Justafan said:

If you were in the US.  But you aren't.  

 

I know that where you live this is the perception but that doesn't mean it's the only POV.  

 

Being closed minded and refusing to see the other side of the argument is a poor way to work towards any real or lasting solution.  All you do is piss people off and get them to dig their heels in.  

 

Switzerland has the most guns in Europe.  And they have the lowest crime rates.

 

There is a problem here, but breaking sacred ideals and taking freedom from people is not the only way to address that problem and if you alienate a full 60% of the population, maybe more I don't have exact stats, people will just write you off and refuse to hear anything you have to say.  

Swizterland has the most guns because they are required to for military service iirc.

[pat]

License and registration.

 

Keep it simple.

 

[Starkiller]

3 hours ago, Justafan said:

If you guys want actual solutions and want to fix the problems then you have to learn to compromise and not expect people to just give in and give you what you want because it's what you think is right.

Compromise? Is that a joke? Compromise with who? 

 

Democrats have been trying to find a compromise on gun control for years. It’s the NRA Party that refuses to compromise on anything. 

[Bink]

3 hours ago, Justafan said:

If you were in the US.  But you aren't.  

 

I know that where you live this is the perception but that doesn't mean it's the only POV.  

 

Being closed minded and refusing to see the other side of the argument is a poor way to work towards any real or lasting solution.  All you do is piss people off and get them to dig their heels in.  

 

Switzerland has the most guns in Europe.  And they have the lowest crime rates.

 

There is a problem here, but breaking sacred ideals and taking freedom from people is not the only way to address that problem and if you alienate a full 60% of the population, maybe more I don't have exact stats, people will just write you off and refuse to hear anything you have to say.  

Are these kinds of events bad enough that we are even capable of talking about our so called sacred ideals? Is some of what irish proposed even reasonable? I can't believe you even used the word compromise. You talk about people getting pissed off--why is that? 

 

I'm tired of gun owners refusing to be adults in the room who will not talk about guns. I've said over and over again that my position is that people like you should be leading the charge in determining what kind of gun laws will work to prevent this crime--but thinking about guns is not on the table. Researching them is not on the table. That's insanity. 

 

Freedom and sacred ideals. The laws of this land used to let us own people. Laws change as our society faces and addresses new problems. Can we all admit the constitution was drafted by men trying to solve the problems of their time? Can we now be men and try to solve the problem of ours? 

 

If asked many gun owners--can you draw a line between the weapons you need for self defense and hunting? Does that line ever stop at military grade weapons? Can you describe a situation where someone actually needs this specific type of gun? 

 

Notice here how I haven't called for banning anything. All I'm asking here is for gun owners to be open minded and join the conversation. I've yet to meet very view who will. 

 

[ctm]

No other country has a problem with gun violence near this bad.