Another newby DU-er soon to be toast...

[dutch508]

Jackson1999 (40 posts)      Thu Apr-09-09 01:33 AM
Original message http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x213515
What gun laws would have prevented the recent mass murders?
 Every time there is a tragedy like those in New York, Pa. or Calif., people start calling for more gun control laws. If you are pro gun control, please tell me what specific laws you think would have prevented these crimes.

Poor Jackson. Do you really think anyone at DU will listen?

coyotespaw  (776 posts)      Thu Apr-09-09 01:37 AM
Response to Original message
1. While I can't think of any gun laws that would prevent these things from happening
 increased spending on mental health care would help; especially if we could find a way to remove the stigma from reaching out for psychological assistance.

Locking underground panther up for good would be a good start.

rrneck  (976 posts)        Thu Apr-09-09 01:48 AM
Response to Original message
2. None that I can think of 
 short of an outright ban and confiscation. Then that would have only stopped mass murder by firearm. 

At least one says what is on their minds.

baldguy  (1000+ posts)      Thu Apr-09-09 01:55 AM
Response to Original message
3. Eliminate the myth of the cowboy, the lie of individual gun rights & fear of our fellow citizens.
 Edited on Thu Apr-09-09 01:57 AM by baldguy
The gun industry spends billions to promote these myths, lies & fears and so many more - only to maintain their market & subvert existing laws that no more laws won't help. No amount of blood will make them change.

But as a start, license all gun owners, register all guns & require liability & accident insurance all around. FORCE responsibility on all the gun fanatics who seek to avoid it.

and that would stop criminals....how?

Hugabear (1000+ posts)      Thu Apr-09-09 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #55
64. NOT the same thing.
 You have a constitutional right to vote.

You do not have a constitutional right to a gun. You have the right to OWN a gun. You still have to purchase the gun yourself. If merely having a gun was a constitutional right, then everybody would be entitled to a free gun. And you're wrong about requiring an ID - try buying a gun from a licensed dealer without showing ID.

Again, if you can afford to shell out hundreds of dollars for a gun and ammo, then you can afford to get a license.

Again, the leftist explain what their plan is...

Statistical  (1000+ posts)      Thu Apr-09-09 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #37
43. So are the left leaning justices on the Supreme Court corrupt or stupid.
 All 9 justices believe the 2nd amendment protects an existing right of individual ownership.

The "collective right" theory has been so debunked that anyone claiming to it has about as much legitimacy as a Holocaust denier does in Middle East negotiations.

“A well-crafted pepperoni pizza, being necessary to the preservation of a diverse menu, the right of the people to keep and cook tomatoes, shall not be infringed.”
If this were in the BoR would you also argue that only "pizzas" and not the people have right to keep & cook tomatoes?


As far as "the people" not indicating an individual right. Can you at least no accept how DANGEROUS that concept is:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of THE PEOPLE peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The right of THE PEOPLE to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

So you have no individual right to assemble?
You have no individual right to be protected against warrantless seizure?

baldguy  (1000+ posts)      Thu Apr-09-09 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. How can one person "assemble" all by himself? Its logically absurd.
 An "assembly" by definition requires more than one person.

And the 4th says "persons" explicitly: "The right of the people (collectively) to be secure in their persons (individually)...".

Its astonishing how the gun worships' religious beliefs can totally override their knowledge of English. There are 13 families in Binghamton who can tell you haw dangerous that is.

 

[USA4ME]

baldguy

45. How can one person "assemble" all by himself? Its logically absurd.

An "assembly" by definition requires more than one person.

"... the right of THE PEOPLE peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances..."

According to this primitive, one person who alone petitions the gov't for a redress of grievances is violating the Constitution.  What a quack!

.

[MrsSmith]

baldguy  (1000+ posts)      Thu Apr-09-09 01:55 AM
Response to Original message
3. Eliminate the myth of the cowboy, the lie of individual gun rights & fear of our fellow citizens.
 Edited on Thu Apr-09-09 01:57 AM by baldguy
The gun industry spends billions to promote these myths, lies & fears and so many more - only to maintain their market & subvert existing laws that no more laws won't help. No amount of blood will make them change.

But as a start, license all gun owners, register all guns & require liability & accident insurance all around. FORCE responsibility on all the gun fanatics who seek to avoid it.

and that would stop criminals....how?

Why, the same way these requirements have stopped traffic accidents and road rage incidents.  The left has forced responsibility on all car fanatics, and it's work so well!! 

 

[Servonaut]

baldguy  (1000+ posts)      Thu Apr-09-09 01:55 AM
Response to Original message
3. Eliminate the myth of the cowboy, the lie of individual gun rights & fear of our fellow citizens.
 Edited on Thu Apr-09-09 01:57 AM by baldguy
The gun industry spends billions to promote these myths, lies & fears and so many more - only to maintain their market & subvert existing laws that no more laws won't help. No amount of blood will make them change.

But as a start, license all gun owners, register all guns & require liability & accident insurance all around. FORCE responsibility on all the gun fanatics who seek to avoid it.

Wrong DUmbass

From opensecrets

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A

Top All-Time Donors 1989-2008 Summary

1 AT&T Inc $40,838,395 44% 55%   
2 American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees $40,690,630 98% 1%     
3 National Assn of Realtors $34,635,003 48% 51%   
4 Goldman Sachs $30,878,682 63% 35%   
5 American Assn for Justice $30,103,429 90% 9%     
6 Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $29,684,341 97% 2%     
7 National Education Assn $29,624,876 93% 6%     
8 Laborers Union $27,797,489 91% 7%     
9 Service Employees International Union $27,363,922 95% 3%     
10 Carpenters & Joiners Union $26,789,808 89% 9%   
11 Teamsters Union $26,752,020 92% 6%     
12 Communications Workers of America $26,239,906 99% 0%     
13 American Medical Assn $26,042,199 39% 60%   
14 American Federation of Teachers $25,977,603 98% 0%     
15 Citigroup Inc $25,757,226 50% 49%   
16 United Auto Workers $25,410,200 98% 0%     
17 Machinists & Aerospace Workers Union $24,013,336 98% 0%     
18 National Auto Dealers Assn $23,754,608 31% 68%   
19 Altria Group $23,518,792 27% 72%   
20 United Food & Commercial Workers Union $23,315,626 98% 1%     
21 United Parcel Service $23,076,644 36% 63%   
22 National Assn of Home Builders $21,266,305 35% 64%   
23 American Bankers Assn $21,013,116 40% 59%   
24 EMILY's List $20,862,650 99% 0%     
25 JPMorgan Chase & Co $20,036,458 51% 48%   
26 National Beer Wholesalers Assn $19,581,854 30% 69%   
27 Time Warner $19,285,686 70% 28%   
28 Microsoft Corp $19,251,173 52% 46%   
29 National Assn of Letter Carriers $18,985,934 88% 11%   
30 Morgan Stanley $17,874,597 45% 53%   
31 AFL-CIO $17,771,782 95% 4%     
32 Verizon Communications $17,632,453 39% 60%   
33 FedEx Corp $17,468,354 40% 59%   
34 Lockheed Martin $17,144,128 42% 57%   
35 National Rifle Assn $17,012,286 17% 82%   
36 General Electric $16,615,356 49% 50%   
37 Sheet Metal Workers Union $16,534,188 97% 2%     
38 Ernst & Young $16,507,294 44% 55%   
39 Credit Union National Assn $16,259,561 47% 52%   
40 Bank of America $15,869,997 47% 52%   
41 American Hospital Assn $15,660,524 52% 47%   
42 American Dental Assn $15,596,779 45% 54%   
43 Plumbers & Pipefitters Union $15,386,266 94% 5%     
44 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu $15,004,178 34% 65%   
45 International Assn of Fire Fighters $14,986,593 81% 17%   
46 Air Line Pilots Assn $14,872,347 83% 15%   
47 Natl Assn/Insurance & Financial Advisors $14,625,905 42% 57%   
48 PricewaterhouseCoopers $14,536,181 36% 63%   
49 Blue Cross/Blue Shield $14,417,390 38% 61%   

The NRA has nothing when comes to donations that support Democrats, Unions, and liberal issues.

[JohnnyReb]

I HAS the solution........all anti-gun DUmmies will in the future be required to wear a big yellow "X" on their front and back. Then there can be no confusion as to who the intended victim  easy mark should be.

[LC EFA]

rrneck  (976 posts)        Thu Apr-09-09 01:48 AM
Response to Original message
2. None that I can think of
 short of an outright ban and confiscation. Then that would have only stopped mass murder by firearm. 

There's a lotta people from Europe and Germany post 1938 who'd disagree with you if they could.

Three guesses why they can't.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Since sophisticated arguments and supporting documents like the Federalist Papers are lost on idiots like those, I usually stick to asking why they think the 2nd Amendment would be collective while the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th would be individual rights.  Isn't there something just kind of dissonant about that, DUmmies?

[diesel driver]

Where to start with this one....

Hugabear (1000+ posts)      Thu Apr-09-09 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #55
64. NOT the same thing.
 You have a constitutional right to vote.

WRONG!  Voting is a PRIVILEGE, not a RIGHT....

You do not have a constitutional right to a gun.  You have the right to OWN a gun.

WRONG!  You have the right "TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS!"

You still have to purchase the gun yourself.

So, guns you inherit or are gifts are not constitutional?

If merely having a gun was a constitutional right, then everybody would be entitled to a free gun.

I guess this is where these morons get the idea about "free health care being a right"....

And you're wrong about requiring an ID - try buying a gun from a licensed dealer without showing ID.

And this means WHAT?  Try buying a car, purchasing alcohol, and (as it should be) VOTING without ID....

Again, if you can afford to shell out hundreds of dollars for a gun and ammo, then you can afford to get a license.

And after shelling out thousands of dollars for an education, you're still a moron....

[djones520]

Where to start with this one....
WRONG!  Voting is a PRIVILEGE, not a RIGHT....

Read the 15th Amendment lately?

1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Edit:  Check the 14th Amendment as well...

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Read the 15th Amendment lately?

1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Edit:  Check the 14th Amendment as well...

I would add as reinforcement to your point that both gun ownership rights and voting rights can be forfeited upon a felony conviction. Hence, showing that the distinction of gun ownership vs voting seems to hold the same level in the eyes of the law.

[Rebel]

Read the 15th Amendment lately?

1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Edit:  Check the 14th Amendment as well...

Voting in local elections maybe, but there is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election. It was never entered into the Constitution and it was upheld in a challenge in 2000 by the USSC.

So, I think we need to place requirements on those that can vote for President. Veterans and active duty? Automatic. People on government assistance? No ****in' way.

[Rebel]

Statistical  (1000+ posts)      Thu Apr-09-09 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #37
43. So are the left leaning justices on the Supreme Court corrupt or stupid.
 All 9 justices believe the 2nd amendment protects an existing right of individual ownership.

You're a f'n idiot who doesn't follow politics, therefore, who shouldn't vote.

We retained our RIGHT to bear arms by 1 Damn vote. It was 5-4, moonbat.

[djones520]

Voting in local elections maybe, but there is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election. It was never entered into the Constitution and it was upheld in a challenge in 2000 by the USSC.

So, I think we need to place requirements on those that can vote for President. Veterans and active duty? Automatic. People on government assistance? No ****in' way.

Rebel, the 14th Amendment specifically references the Federal Elections.

Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868. Note History

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.