BEHIND THE BLOODSHED: AMERICA’S MASS KILLINGS:

Are you going to start up again?

 

Seems like I just did

 

Enacting certain proposed legislation into law is certainly a possibility. However making the legislation actually work in the real world, and achieving the stated goals, are both physical impossibilities. The already existing legislation pertaining to firearms is not being enforced, meaning any new restrictions codified into law will not be enforced either. The people of the state of Nevada for example, have refused to comply with the universal background check requirement, the FBI has refused to expend its finite resources in performing such background checks, and those tasked with actually enforcing the requirement are powerless to do anything about it when faced with noncompliance on the part of the people.

 

It works quite well in Europe. It can work here too. All this stuff is constitutional, effective and enforceable

 

So is a dictatorship.

 

Is the united states in Europe?

Except for the fact that it does not.

The united state supreme court has said that it is not. Their restrictions would never pass constitutional muster if they were to be attempted in the united states.

Criminals openly brag about how easy it is to gain access to a firearm right after being released from prison.

Then explain why the restrictions currently in place are not being enforced. Explain why firearm-related charges are routinely dropped by the prosecution when the matter goes before the court.

 

I don't want that though. Lol

 

Here are some wonderful gun control laws I think you would approve of:

--- ban all military type guns and calibers.

----have only one gun store in the entire nation that is ran by the federal police, and they control who can have a gun

----ban anyone with mental health issues from having a gun, then force people to get an extra license to carry them.

How could all the wonderful gun control fail???

https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...gun-control-has-not-slowed-violence-in-mexico

Well, the idiots running Mexico can't stop the extreme violence and drug cartels that own so much territory, and make our "mass shootings" pale to insignificance.



Liberal gun grabbers are as clueless and impotent in taking down these gangs in Mexico as they are in every large Democrat urban hellhole like Chicago and Detroit.

 

I would not support any of that. And Mexico ranks as one of the most corrupt nations on earth so laws are pretty meaningless there

 

When the NRA lost it:

 

The EU has more mass shootings than we do.

 

That violates due process.

 

Nope!

Like all individual rights that can be regulated for the safety of others. Your right to own a firearm does not extend to allowing you to be a danger to others.

 

You would be free to bring your case before the court. Due process would be served

 

the alarm about 'mass killings' may be justified , but the leap to blaming the NRA and gun culture is just hysteria..actually look at the numbers..of 328 incidents , 172 are domestic/ family and 36 are part of a robbery or burglary...and if you look at the lethality of different methods, arson, knives , blunt weapons etc , they are all efficient and deadly.The problem is THE KILLERS not their methods , any other approach wastes time and resources

 

Simply owning a firearm does not make one a danger to others.

Beyond such, the burden of proof is on government to demonstrate that such is indeed the case. It is for government to prove that these individuals are a danger to others, rather than on the accused to prove that they are not a danger to others.

 

We need prove nothing. Proof is not required for the creation of new laws

 

Indeed proof is required for the creation of new laws. Government does not enact legislation for the sake of enacting legislation. Government does not enact legislation simply because it is bored and has nothing better to do with its time, it must be in response to something that is legitimately in need of being addressed. And to demonstrate such, proof is indeed required.

 

many are suicidal, but can't kill themselves, so they do this hoping for death by cop, maybe we should relax death with dignity laws for these mass murderers if they really want to die so bad, at the very least offer better mental health options

 

Indeed proof is not required to pass a law. Where do you get such nonsense?

 

From observation. The united states government does not enact legislation simply to be enacting legislation. New laws are not implemented because government has nothing better to do with its time. It cannot draft new legislation on the mere basis of it being Wednesday. All legislation must be justified by having a legitimate reason to exist.

 

Legislation is passed because people want it to pass. Proof is never ever required. That is a fact

 

You're rights are only violated by proof beyond reasonable doubt. Meaning, if you want to take away someone's rights, it has to be proven in court.

 

which I'm for. As long as it's proof beyond reasonable doubt.