First person to be convicted under Florida’s 'Red Flag’ firearms law faces up to 5 years in prison.

[Ghostman]

Nope, right thread.

Nope. DUI's are not guns. So thanks for trying.

 

[VictorB]

I'm not USanian, so I have no dog in the fight. However, I recommend you get off your high horse and do some research. It would pay back a lot more to invest in and address other issues that cause death in the US (on which firearms don't even make the top 15): https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm

• Heart disease: 647,457
• Cancer: 599,108
• Accidents (unintentional injuries): 169,936
• Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 160,201
• Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 146,383
• Alzheimer’s disease: 121,404
• Diabetes: 83,564
• Influenza and Pneumonia: 55,672
• Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis: 50,633
• Intentional self-harm (suicide): 47,173

 

[Ghostman]

LtDave has been pretty clear about that.

nope. He hasn't suggested one thing. The Anti-gun have been bringing suggestion after suggestion after suggestion and passing laws left and right all to the dismay of the pro-gun. They have brought NOTHING. even in this thread. Just "What are you willing to do?"

That's a question. Not a statement.

 

[Ghostman]

Then why have gun free zones?

Here is the mental health aspect.

I don't now why there are gun free zones. I didn't make them, I didn't vote for them, so ask those who did. See my "pissing in the pool" example for the reason.

And giving out trophies are NOT making gun violence rise. It's a tired speculation with zero proof.

 

[Ghostman]

Ghostman doesn't even understand what I want back, or that the two protections I suggested will never be accepted by anti-gun politicians because they negate the very reasons the antis are pushing for the laws in the first place.

Yes I do. But thanks.

 

[Ghostman]

So, what are YOU willing to do about it that doesn't require us to do it for you?

you really don't like my question: What do you suggest is done about gun violence?

I'm tired of asking. You're not answering so I'm moving on.

 

[Chango Malo]

nope. He hasn't suggested one thing. The Anti-gun have been bringing suggestion after suggestion after suggestion and passing laws left and right all to the dismay of the pro-gun. They have brought NOTHING. even in this thread. Just "What are you willing to do?"

That's a question. Not a statement.

so you're asking "which of your rights are you willing to give up"?

here's the thing that's going to be hard for you to accept: People aren't willing to give up a single one of their rights. Period. Full stop.
Especially the right of due process, which if you recall is actually the theme of the OP.

 

[Ghostman]

I'm afraid that people who reaction "emotionally" are normally incapable of having a discussion that includes treating each side fairly.

I'm asking a simple question: The Pro-gun side does not want to give up any more. Granted. I got that. So what can be done? What change are they willing to propose to fix the gun violence?

**Crickets**

 

[Ghostman]

He doesn't get that he was supposed to offer things like the ones I suggested when he was asking for something. I also think he doesn't really get what my suggestions entail, doesn't get that no anti-gun politician would seriously entertain them, and doesn't understand why no anti-gun politician would consider them.

stop suggesting I'm stupid. I got it. I understand it and replied that it's a starting point. Valid starting points.

But enough with the "he's an idiot" talk.

 

[TheX]

It is, and you never ran it off the rails. This is true.

Yet when the same piece of taffy gets pulled over and over and over and over and over..

I start to consider hanging it up.

So if this moves in some, any direction except a bad one, fine.

Most everyone is tired of pulling on the same piece of taffy. That's what I think.

I could be wrong, and I've been wrong before many many times.

But I'm counting on folks getting so sick of the rewind, they'll let the movie play.

People tend to talk, and only pause when they're thinking of the next thing to say. Sometimes it looks like they're listening, but they aren't.

 

[LtDave32]

stop suggesting I'm stupid. I got it. I understand it and replied that it's a starting point. Valid starting points.

But enough with the "he's an idiot" talk.

And it was going so well.

Nobody suggested anything. Nobody called you a name.

 

[LtDave32]

I'm asking a simple question: The Pro-gun side does not want to give up any more. Granted. I got that. So what can be done? What change are they willing to propose to fix the gun violence?

**Crickets**

Crickets indeed.

"what change are they willing to propose"..

Again, it's your turn to suggest a compromise. What are you willing to concede? We've been doing nothing but conceding for years.

 

[LtDave32]

you really don't like my question: What do you suggest is done about gun violence?

I'm tired of asking. You're not answering so I'm moving on.

I'm tired of repeating myself, with no movement from you.

It's your team's turn, and it has been for years.

Bring something to bargain with, or bring yourself out of the game.

And that what this discussion is at this point, a silly little tit-for-tat game with no substance.

So it will stay the status-quo. I'll keep my firearms. We will keep our firearms. All across the country.

You guys can keep squawking about our possessions, which you have no entitlement to take away.

If that bothers you, then you do what you need to do, and we will do what we need to do.

Thus endeth civil discourse. It ended when you got rather sour.

 

[VictorB]

Good Lord.

 

[Ghostman]

I'm tired of repeating myself, with no movement from you.

It's your team's turn, and it has been for years.

Bring something to bargain with, or bring yourself out of the game.

And that what this discussion is at this point, a silly little tit-for-tat game with no substance.

So it will stay the status-quo. I'll keep my firearms. We will keep our firearms. All across the country.

You guys can keep squawking about our possessions, which you have no entitlement to take away.

If that bothers you, then you do what you need to do, and we will do what we need to do.

Thus endeth civil discourse. It ended when you got rather sour.

Sorry man, but I'm not sour. Just tired of repeating myself like you say we both are.

The truth of the matter is I'm dead square in the middle of this debate. I recognize and understand fully the intention and prudence of the 2nd Amendment Rights.

However, I get into the same position with every gun discussion because I'm seen as the extreme hard side of anti-gun. Which I'm not. If any of my responses have been read, I never once said that more laws are needed, less rights are required, and guns need to be banned. Not once. I asked what solutions can be proposed and was swiftly and uncompromisingly judged as the anti-gun asshole of the conversation.

However, it's been my experience with every conversation about guns from the pro-gun side of things, that any opposition is seen as a hard stop to gun ownership and the conversation ends with "You're not taking my guns!"

Only 45 suggested anything, and then he ran with implying I'm an idiot in so many words because I said, "Hey, those are some good suggestions to start with." Obviously anyone seen as an opposition to the hard Pro-gun group agreeing with them must be stupid and not fully understand the ask. People may believe that I don't understand the debate, but I believe that those who argue with the simple ask of "what CAN be done" don't understand anything outside of "They are coming for my guns!"

And that concludes my participation. Thank you, and good night.

 

[blackat]

There are no simple solutions to complex problems.
It's all I got.....

 

[Gary]

I'm asking a simple question: The Pro-gun side does not want to give up any more. Granted. I got that. So what can be done? What change are they willing to propose to fix the gun violence?

**Crickets**

1. Arm qualified school staff. It worked in Israel to end school shootings. (I’m a former school employee and NRA trained. My wife was at school when a shooting occurred and suffers PTSD as a result.) With armed & qualifed staff, a criminal Wouldn’t dare bring a gun on campus because he would be taken out in 60 seconds or less.

2. Ban gun free zones. They are killing fields. A killer would think twice before taking a weapon somewhere that someone might shoot back. The Oregon mall shooter stopped when confronted by an armed civilian.

3. End the ban on disarming military personnel on their own base. Pensacola and Ft. a Hood should never have happened.

Thats what can be done. That’s the change I’m willing to propose to fix gun violence. I want criminals to fear their possible victims.

 

[CB91710]

Or ask them

• Why do you need a Porsche or top of the line Mercedes with GOLD hubcabs (I've seen that for real)
• Why do you need a 200 HP motorcycle
• Why do you need a 5000 square foot split level ranch house
• Why do you need a solid gold diamond encrusted BBQ grill
• Why do you need an imported nuclear powered espresso machine
• Why do you need a 70 inch stereo television
• Why do you need a riding mower with airconditioning and stereo and GPS and autopliot
• Why do you need a 75 foot cabin cruiser to fish on a small lake

… Just substitute any ridiculous or not absolutely necessary ANYTHING.

Why do you need 15 guitars when you aren't even a touring musician?
Why does Joe Bonamassa need to own every unclaimed tweed amp in the Western Hemisphere?

 

[VictorB]

 

[CB91710]

Great argument for required training to own a firearm.

California, and a number of other states, have this requirement.
Funny thing that the statistics that you cite, with the exception of Alaska, are generally worse in the states with the toughest gun laws and training requirements.
Take a look at the states that rate an "A" from the Brady groups, and compare their stats to the national average.