5 Facts Proving ‘They Are Coming For Your Guns’ Is Not A Conspiracy Theory

[LightRoasted]

If I may ...

View attachment 123071

Well it started it. Did not. Did to. Did not. Did to. Did not. Did to ...................

 

[Ken King]

Okay. A hypothetical.

You have a close (friend, nephew, niece, relative, whatever) and he (she) wants to buy one of your semi-auto guns. He (she) is a good kid. He (she) has paid their debt to society for that unforeseen murder and gotten out of prison and psychology ward. They still use heroine & crystal, but they've promised they'll go to rehab and get off it soon. He (she) still complains about hearing voices telling him (her) what to do. While you might be concerned with his (her) rants about her old boss, her old school or the judge who 'sent him (her) up' and making death threats against them, you decide to sell (or give them) the gun anyway. I'll let you finish the story. A background would have stopped your superior judgement.

While your point is well taken, I suspect KK would not let that stop him. I hope he will respond. He has already indicated it doesn't matter where the criminal got the gun from.

How bout it, KK? Would the law preventing private transfer to a convicted felon be an infringement of rights in your mind?

Would you just ignore the law in your transfer? If the recipient of your gun mass murdered, how would you feel? Would you feel any remorse or responsibility? Would you go out and buy another gun to replace the one the police are keeping as evidence? Would you send condolences to the victims?

Yeah, sure. That might be enough... as long as YOUR rights haven't been infringed,

First, any delay in my response was due to the proximity of thunderstorms, not seeking a reply. I logged off for the night.

Now to your hypothetical and the problem I have with it is that it is my belief that any form of gun control is an infringement of the 2nd amendment. Persons not incarcerated should be able to exercise the right to afford themselves, their family, their friends, and their property protection, that is the essence of why the people demanded it be included as a restriction upon what the government may do in order for them to agree to the Constitution as proposed.

So that you might better understand my position I will add that along with that right comes the consequence that if one uses an arm for a nefarious purpose that they be subjected to swift and meaningful punishment for such infractions. But after said punishment is complete the right is fully restored. If the act is severe or repetitive the actor should be confined forever or removed from society thus they pose no further threat.

 

[GURPS]

Please stomp on me gently for my opinion. I'm sensitive.

If the original gun owner/purchaser were made partially responsible for any crime committed with their stolen gun (and suffered some legal consequence),

The HitChicken

so it is the FAULT of the OWNER something was stolen from his / her home

 

[GURPS]

Simple answer. "Yes."

...... should require private sale background checks as well and in the same way.

why, YOU admitted most firearms are STOLEN ... how is this going to stop criminals from getting guns

Chicago has some of the most restrictive hand gun laws in the country - and the highest murder rates

 

[hitchicken]

so it is the FAULT of the OWNER something was stolen from his / her home

If the buyer/owner makes in EXTREMELY easy for the gun to be stolen by a criminal, they should have some small measure of culpability and legal consequence... yes.

 

[Kyle]

If the buyer/owner makes in EXTREMELY easy for the gun to be stolen by a criminal, they should have some small measure of culpability and legal consequence... yes.

If you have narcotic prescriptions that are stolen from your medicine cabinet should you be culpable for their misuse?

 

[hitchicken]

why, YOU admitted most firearms are STOLEN ... how is this going to stop criminals from getting guns

Chicago has some of the most restrictive hand gun laws in the country - and the highest murder rates

Violent criminals will steal and use guns whenever they get the opportunity. Making it harder for them to steal your guns would reduce SOME accessibility. No all. It's just my idea for reducing (somewhat) the murder rate that's all.

Right now, the gun issue is at a stalemate. We're going nowhere. I was just trying to get off dead center without impacting anyone's right own and bear as many arms of as many types as they want. It doesn't change the overall picture. Gun control advocates gain little. Gun enthusiasts lose little (if fact, they gain by opening up the markets for automatic weapons, silencers, etc...)

 

[hitchicken]

If you have narcotic prescriptions that are stolen from your medicine cabinet should you be culpable for their misuse?

Of course not. Narcotic prescriptions don't kill. MISUSE of narcotic prescriptions do. Guns don't kill. MISUSE of guns do. I'm just trying to limit accessibility of guns to those who would likely MISUSE them.

 

[LightRoasted]

If I may ...

Gun enthusiasts lose little (if fact, they gain by opening up the markets for automatic weapons, silencers, etc...)

Enthusiasts? Really? Since when is a person that supports and defends the 2nd an enthusiast? Lose little? We have already lost so much ground it'll be an amazing feat to ever hope to regain what's been lost.

 

[Kyle]

Of course not. Narcotic prescriptions don't kill. MISUSE of narcotic prescriptions do. Guns don't kill. MISUSE of guns do. I'm just trying to limit accessibility of guns to those who would likely MISUSE them.

So you want to play word games. Got it.

Misuse of a stolen item, a car, Rx, Knife, Gun, Chain Saw, Propane Torch, Gasoline, Ax..... And Far too many things to mention, is not the responsibility of the owner. If someone breaks into your home and steals something "THEY" committed the criminal act. Not the homeowner.

 

[LightRoasted]

If I may ...

Of course not. Narcotic prescriptions don't kill. MISUSE of narcotic prescriptions do. Guns don't kill. MISUSE of guns do. I'm just trying to limit accessibility of guns to those who would likely MISUSE them.

Well you finally got something right. And who to you, would be a person most likely to "misuse them"? Please enlighten us with your thoughtful and reasoned dissertation. Your metric and method of scoring those deemed to be deprived of their inalienable right.

 

[hitchicken]

Nancy Lanza bought the guns she gave to her son Adam. He even had a gun safe in his room. Adam had been diagnosed with Asperger syndrome and OCD. He exhibited odd behavior like prohibiting his mother from his bedroom and taping the windows. Adam was a poster child for multiple mental problems - and his mother had to have seen that. Yet she bought the guns for Adam. So much for your belief gun owners alone should decide if a buyer is 'fit' enough to purchase/transfer their guns. Ask Nancy Lanza. Adam shot her dead befor the school shooting.

https://sandyhooklighthouse.wordpress.com/2014/09/01/who-really-owned-the-guns-in-the-lanza-home/

If there was a partial culpability law and Nancy was aware of it, isn't it possible she might not given the guns to Adam? Out of fear for her own incarceration. Maybe it wouldn't have happened or as been as deadly.

 

[LightRoasted]

If I may ...

Nancy Lanza bought the guns she gave to her son Adam. He even had a gun safe in his room. Adam had been diagnosed with Asperger syndrome and OCD. He exhibited odd behavior like prohibiting his mother from his bedroom and taping the windows. Adam was a poster child for multiple mental problems - and his mother had to have seen that. Yet she bought the guns for Adam. So much for your belief gun owners alone should decide if a buyer is 'fit' enough to purchase/transfer their guns. Ask Nancy Lanza. Adam shot her dead befor the school shooting. If there was a partial culpability law and Nancy was aware of it, isn't it possible she might not given the guns to Adam? Out of fear for her own incarceration. Maybe it wouldn't have happened or as been as deadly.

So, out of over 300 million people in the Nation, you are going to cherry pick from one dysfunctional family where no law would have prevented what happened? Now we get it.

 

[Kyle]

The law already exists and did so then.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”

 

[hitchicken]

So you want to play word games. Got it.

Misuse of a stolen item, a car, Rx, Knife, Gun, Chain Saw, Propane Torch, Gasoline, Ax..... And Far too many things to mention, is not the responsibility of the owner. If someone breaks into your home and steals something "THEY" committed the criminal act. Not the homeowner.

I'm not playing word games here. If a criminal breaks into your house and guns are laying on the sofa, he will easily steal them. If he encounters a 1000 lb gun safe, he won't steal your guns.

 

[Kyle]

I'm not playing word games here. If a criminal breaks into your house and guns are laying on the sofa, he will easily steal them. If he encounters a 1000 lb gun safe, he won't steal your guns.

So do you keep your prescriptions in a 1000lb safe? What about your knives?

Axes, chainsaws... Your automobile?

I'll wait.

 

[hitchicken]

If I may ...



So, out of over 300 million people in the Nation, you are going to cherry pick from one dysfunctional family where no law would have prevented what happened? Now we get it.

Laws, schmawls... We both agree laws won't stop a criminal who regularly breaks them. Forget laws only honest people abide by and criminals break. They're useless. But making guns harder to steal, you are likely reducing gun crime to some degree.

 

[hitchicken]

So do you keep your prescriptions in a 1000lb safe? What about your knives?

Axes, chainsaws... Your automobile?

I'll wait.

I only keep my automatic, semi-auto knives, chainsaws and axes in my safe. My bolt action knives I leave out.

 

[Kyle]

I only keep my automatic, semi-auto knives, chainsaws and axes in my safe. My bolt action knives I leave out.

So if anyone does something illegal with any of your stolen merchandise you feel you should be culpable?

Or are you just going to play bull#### games again?

Alternately, are you going to logoff and log back on under your original moniker?

 

[GURPS]

If the buyer/owner makes in EXTREMELY easy for the gun to be stolen by a criminal, they should have some small measure of culpability and legal consequence... yes.

I'll have to disagree, I need my weapons handy thanks