How does “Common sense gun control” prevent mass shootings?

Your position is untenable.

 

You yourself stated you did not think the other seller would have accepted a credit card as payment. That is a theory, because you are stating you do not know for certain what would have happened, and cannot verify it one way or another. It is nothing more than supposition and speculation on the part of yourself.

 

If a waiting period truly makes sense, it could be explained on the part of yourself precisely why and how it makes sense, rather than merely claiming such.

Demonstrate the legitimacy of the case on the part of yourself. Show how arbitrary and mandatory waiting periods on all firearm purchases make sense.

 

Hasn't he told you yet? He knew the Menendez brothers and one of them confided in him he didn't want to do it but there was no waiting period to stop them!!!

 

You think that a gun purchased on the streets can be paid for with a credit card? Besides, my daughter gave me that info.

 

A picture is worth a thousand words.

 

If the firearm was truly purchased "on the streets" as is being claimed by yourself, such would ultimately mean the transaction in question was an illegal purchase, and thus a waiting period would not have applied at all.

 

If there were any legitimacy to the notion of waiting periods on firearm purchases, to demonstrate such a proposal is truly common sense in nature, such would have been explain by yourself by now, rather than investing the far greater amount of time to try and attack the question.

When one is a tool being told what to say by others, they are not demonstrating a position of their own. They are being nothing but a mouthpiece for someone else.

Is divorce a constitutionally recognized and protected right?

The key word in the above sentence is the word "Maybe." Meaning the above sentence is nothing but more speculation and unfounded guesswork on the part of yourself, devoid of anything resembling actual evidence.

 

Including the portion of the picture that shows the number of deaths in the nation of Australia that can be attributed to mass shootings is actually increasing. Meaning their firearm-related restrictions are not working.

 

I didn't say that they purchased their shotguns on the street. You suggested that they could have done it that way and I responded by saying that the credit card would not work on the street. They purchased them from a store that sold guns and a 2 week waiting period was required to purchase handguns.

 

Divorce is a right. So?
Owning a gun is a questionable right according to Constitutional interpretation. The constitution talks about Militia along with the right to bear arms since we were at war and it was a necessary evil.
You have no evidence either to support your theory. Also, that silly expression makes you sound like someone who is trying to sound
like he knows how to speak proper English, and doesn't. My opinions are my own and are also someone elses i'm sure.

 

Because cash advances on credit cards simply do not occur and do not actually exist, correct?

And there is no evidence that a waiting period would have done anything to change their minds, or otherwise make them reconsider the actions they were determined to undertake. They had already made the conscious decision to commit murder, and no amount of time would have dissuaded them from doing such. There is simply no evidence, read absolutely none whatsoever, that waiting periods on legal firearm purchases do anything to discourage the criminal use of a firearm.

 

If divorce were truly a right, one would not need to go through the courts to engage in such. Therefore divorce is not a right.

The second amendment speaks of the right to keep and bear arms, not merely bear arms in a military sense.

It is not the theory of myself. It is merely being pointed out the theory on the part of yourself does not actually qualify as being common sense, since you have not made any effort at demonstrating the supposed common sense aspect of it all.

Of what relevance is the above? Does the above do anything to demonstrate the supposed "common sense" behind requiring waiting periods on all firearm purchases, based entirely on the notion that such might do some measure of good in a handful of isolated cases?

Then cease the babbling, cease the opposition, and actually get to work in demonstrating precisely how mandatory waiting periods on all firearm purchases amount to being "common sense." Do not keep claiming that such is common sense, actually go about investing the work necessary to build your case and prove it as being valid. Only one who is presenting their own opinion is capable of doing such, while a shill cannot.

 

I believe it was 198or 1984, may not have available at that time and they didn't know enough to do that for sure. You just don't walk into a store and ask for a cash advance on your American Express credit card. Of course, there is no evidence that a waiting period would have changed their minds, duh. There is no evidence that a waiting period would not have changed their minds. The younger brother had reservations about the action, but Lyle wanted to forge ahead.
There is indeed evidence that waiting periods may have an effect on any original decision, as in divorce. We won't know until it is tried, and even then we won't know whether the wait dissuaded the person for obvious reasons. Why are you opposed to any effort to alleviate gun violence? A waiting period should be the one thing that you could certainly live with. Don't worry. Mommy isn't going to take away your blankie.

 

Division of property in a "just and right" (the standard) fashion is a bit different from me buying a simple tool in a store.

The court gets involved in the one because 2 adverse parties are involved and they are bickering over who is owed what.
It does not get involved in the other because there is no need, no case or controversy.

Please. For the love of GOD. Educate yourself.

 

That is exactly what I said. Learn to read. I have been divorced and have been to court.

 

And yet, despite supposedly having reservations, the younger brother still decided to go ahead and commit the act, rather than telling his brother he was on his own, or simply leaving so that he did not have to take part in the murders.

Then show the supposed evidence you claim exists, or otherwise be silent on the matter.

Then there is no legitimate reason in attempting such a course of action if there is no way of knowing whether or not such will actually yield a return on the investment. Doing something for the sake of doing something is worse than doing absolutely nothing.

For the simple reason that these efforts fail to address the actual underlying problem, and instead ignore its existence. Until such time the true problem is addressed rather than ignored in favor of blaming an inanimate object, no meaning change can ever be had.

Why?

Since the start of discussion, there has been absolutely no effort on the part of yourself to show that the proposals being supported by yourself do indeed qualify as being common sense. Instead every effort has been made to try and avoid having to explain such. Demonstrating there is neither legitimacy nor common sense to be had on waiting periods on legal firearm purchases. Thus meaning the proposal is not actually your own, but rather it is the proposal of someone else who is telling you what message to present on their behalf.

The above has been reported for being a violation of forum rules.

 

Comparing divorce to purchasing a product is erroneous

 

By by

 

I am talking about a waiting period, not the action itself. A waiting period can be effective in forestalling an action that you may regret later, whether it is about guns or divorce or other decisions.

 

Except, AGAIN, you're comparing 2 unlike things. Divorce and purchasing a tool are not comparable. Stop attempting to do so.

Waiting periods are unconstitutional infringements.

 

That "tool" is a weapon of destruction and where is it an unconstitutional infringement? If you have to wait to get a divorce?

 

I'm not sure if you're aware of this but most tools double as weapons rather effectively. You're surrounded by weapons, all day. Perhaps you should take to heart what Freud had to say about fear of such objects?
A waiting period by design stops you from KEEPING AND BEARING the ARMS you've purchased for an arbitrary period after said purchase. As such it constitutes an infringement on the right to keep and bear arms, which is explicitly barred by its plain language.

Again: Divorce and buying a tool are not comparable, we are not talking about divorce.

 

That "tool" is purchased for one purpose. The idea of a waiting period is certainly compatible be it a divorce or buying a weapon, and
it does not prevent you from divorcing or buying a gun. I won't be responding again. It is a silly conversation.