> > In 1865 a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United
> > States.
> >
> > In 1881 a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the
> > United States who later died from the wound.
> >
> > In 1963 a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy,
> > President of the United States.
> >
> > In 1975 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President
> > of the United States.
> >
> > In 1983 a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of
> > the United States.
> >
> > In 1984 James Hubert, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 22 people in a
> > McDonalds restaurant.
> >
> > In 1986 Patrick Sherrill, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 15 people
> > in an Oklahoma post office.
> >
> > In 1990 James Pough, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 10 people at a
> > GMAC office.
> >
> > In 1991 George Hennard, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 23 people in
> > a Luby's cafeteria.
> >
> > In 1995 James Daniel Simpson, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 5
> > coworkers in a Texas laboratory.
> >
> > In 1999 Larry Asbrook, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 8 people at a
> > church service.
> >
> > In 2001 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at the White House in a
> > failed attempt to kill George W. Bush, President of the US.
> >
> > In 2003 Douglas Williams, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people
> > at a Lockheed Martin plant.
> >
> > In 2007 a registered Democrat named Seung - Hui Cho, shot and killed 32
> > people in Virginia Tech.
> >
> > In 2010 a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner, shot
> > Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.
> >
> > In 2011 a registered Democrat named James Holmes, went into a movie theater
> > and shot and killed 12 people.
> >
> > In 2012 Andrew Engeldinger, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people
> > in Minneapolis.
> >
> > In 2013 a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza, shot and killed 26 people in
> > a school in Newtown, CT.
> >
> > As recently as Sept 2013, an angry Democrat shot 12 at a Navy ship yard.
> >
> > One could go on, but you get the point, even if the media does not.
> >
> > Clearly, there is a problem with Democrats and guns.
> >
> > Not one NRA member, Tea Party member, or Republican conservative was
> > involved in any of these shootings and murders (except as a target!).
> >
> > SOLUTION: It should be illegal for Democrats to own guns.
> >
> > Best idea I've heard to date!
> >

HERP DERP LIBTARDS KILL PEOPLE HERP TRIFE

ah, looks like a forwarded chain letter from grandpa

> > Not one NRA member, Tea Party member, or Republican conservative was
> > involved in any of these shootings and murders (except as a target!).

when you're picking and choosing your data you can create any story you wish

Just off the top of my head, Timothy McVeigh, David Koresh

-----------

OR, i can just target an atom bomb on your chain letter and say:

they're all men.

SOLUTION: it should be illegal for men to own guns

nope, brought logic and reason to this thread this time.

like this about JLL:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/...loughner-was-a-regis.html

i agree

now i don't wanna pile things on

but most of these people purchased and owned their firearms legally - the few that didn't have the guns legally had easy access to unsecured legally owned guns

SOLUTION:

ban guns!

I've got, what I believe, is a good idea...

100% responsibility.

Every gun must be registered to a specific person. If that gun is ever used in any crime, that person is found guilty of the offense, just the same as the person who actually used the gun.

1 exception. If the gun is reported as stolen or missing, the owner has to turn in all his guns for one year and not allowed to purchase new guns during this time. If this person ever reports a second gun missing or stolen, they are never allowed to own another gun for the rest of their life.

If you are willing to take this responsibility, I'm willing to support your "right" to own a gun.

I also believe that each gun owner, and everyone who lives in the house should be required to take gun safety course each year and that they must openly announce (to the childs guardians) that they have guns in their home before allowing any child to enter their home (as some parents should be given the choice to allow, or not allow, their child to enter a home where they know guns are present).

I'm not against guns. I'm against people who don't take responsibility for their own actions, which includes poor gun management.

Ban trife.
Ban suicidal.
Ban juice.
Ban ford
Ban heston

Gay.
Simple minded fluff.

Think of this...if I allow kids to come in my home and drink alcohol, I can be arrested. But if I allow them to play with my guns, no harm done...and if they shoot someone "by accident" then maybe there might be some charges filed, possibly.

Again, it all boils down to poor gun management / ownership. And current gun laws, in most states are not defined well enough.

+ 100 all day. LOL

I'm guessing your a simple minded conservative who is unable to give any good debate, so you just shoot down a good idea, because it goes against what your party has told you to say.

You people are getting more stupid every day. Can't you see the kind of brain damage that your liberal agenda is causing?

Not one of you liberal morons has ever come up with anything even close to a reasonable solution, which is to allow the vast majority of law-abiding, decent citizens to own guns to protect themselves from the mentally unstable, etc.

Oh, that's right, isn't it. The mentally unstable class that is growing is mostly liberals.

No every idea you listed is unenforceable garbage.

juice, you're a moron, you have successfully argued both sides of the equation, dumbass.

You have gotten a clue from somwhere though. It all boils down to responsibility. Which the democrats and liberals want to remove from everyone and place in the hands ot the government. Think about all the government's fluff ups, do you want them in charge of all responsibility?

When was the last time you went to a federal office to get something (anything) done?

If this is pointed at me:

I'm not a liberal. also, I never said we need to get rid of guns. I just believe that people should be responsible for their decisions. If I drink a beer and kill someone with my car, I go to jail. If I throw a party and let someone leave, who is obviously drunk, then they kill someone with their car, I could face some jail time, or other fines.

I believe that if I decide to buy a gun, and I'm not responsible enough to keep watch over it, and it falls into the wrong hands and someone suffers or dies from it, than I should own up to my faults and take responsibility for the harm caused.

Those people who obtained their guns illegally got them from somewhere. Sometimes its from family or friends who bought the gun legally. Sometimes it is borrowed and sometimes it is stolen from these family and friends.

Maybe a more drastic measure is to simply shoot those who are found with an illegally possessed gun. (this statement is just wild ramblings and not to be taken seriously).

The reason I am able to argue both sides is because I see that both sides have their faults. Conservatives are too lenient toward gun control and liberals are too restrictive. My solution is one of compromise, where any true law abiding citizen should not have a problem with.

I'm not sure where any of that makes me a moron.

Also, the fed doesn't have to be the only governing force on this to enforce it. The state and local gov can step up.

I'm not saying that it'll be easy, but better than just letting everyone have a gun and not try to enforce anything.

The government of the US is not trying to enforce any laws right now. They might have to enforce laws restricting the invasion of undocumented democrats from Central America and Mexico.

The laws we already have on the books are fine, they just need to be enforced and they're not being enforced, thus, those who shouldn't have guns, do, and those who should are made to not have them by forcing them to deal with an obnoxious government that wants to make owning a gun MORE difficult because they don't want the people to have guns, they might oppose the government forcefully when they do something boneheaded.

Get caught up in current events.

Oh and fluff this thread .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEfhbFZeJyE

You say to get caught up, but you say nothing about what is wrong with what I stated. Don't beat around the bush. Either say exactly what you mean, or I must assume that you don't know what you are talking about and decided instead to just post your own fluff.

You prolly dont know fluff about your own states gun laws, or how they differ from state to state. You dont understand what is enforced federally. Why in christs name would i spend any of my time debating fluff with someone who doesnt know wtf they are talking about. Just some stupid kindergarten ideas like having to tell people entering your home that there are weapons there. Or mandatory annual training or qualifying to own firearms. I respectfully call your ideas and opinions fluff but i wont try to change them for you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKHeXC7L85s

Heston, when you have a child die in his friends house because his friend had a gun and didn't know how to use it properly, I think you'll change your mind. Until then, keep living in the dark, thinking that everyone who owns a gun legally actually knows how to use it properly and keeps it under proper control. fluff that.

Simple.
If your for banning guns, go fluff yourself, and dont buy a gun.

Leave the rest of us alone, pansy hippies.

How exactly are you a libertarian and for gun control.

oh, I'm definitely not for banning guns. I just want people to be more responsible for their guns. It may not completely solve the problems we have, but I believe it will cut it down and anyone who is against being responsible for their gun, shouldn't own one.

omg you americans are so retarded.

You need to follow NZ's law on gun control.

We never have any gun issues here apart from idiot hunters not identifying there targets...

Juice you spoke about keeping track of who owns what gun. That's not very libertarian

yeah, I may not reside 100% within any predefined group, but that is the one I most closely identify with.

conservatives don't want the government to track guns because they fear that when the government does fall, the government will know where to go to get the guns. Until that day happens, I think it's more important to be able to track down the owner of a gun that was used in a crime.

All about checks and balances. If they tried that they would get too much resistance from the people. I know I would never register my guns.

Why???

There are millions of good gun owners out there and you may be one of them.

However, there are also millions of bad gun owners out there. these are the people you hear about in the news when a child dies because he was playing with a gun. Also, criminals get their guns from somewhere. How many came from legal gun owners who sold or gave away their gun to that criminal?

If you are one of the good gun owners, then the bad ones are giving you a bad name too. You should be upset with them for causing these issues in the first place.

I understand your stance on the issue of gun control. Here's my question:

Liberals want to remove guns because they think it will reduce or eliminate crime and accidental deaths.
Conservatives want to keep guns because the constitution says so.

Do gun owners have any suggestions on how to reduce or eliminate crimes with guns and accidental deaths? Instead of just saying "I'm against gun control." Can gun owners come up with a reasonable suggestion to reduce or eliminate these problems.

I believe my ideas, though against your beliefs, are a reasonable way to reduce these problems. I don't believe there is any way to totally eliminate them.

If someone drives drunk and kills someone, I dont lose my car. Watching the game.btw

The reason there is gun control is countries like mexico, the entire middle east, the baltics or any war torn countries in good stance with the usa. It was and still is a great place to buy arms in the civilian world to arm your cause. Our freedom indirectly harms our partners interests so our freedoms are infringed upon for a greater good. Finding guns on enemy combatants that were bought in US civilian gun shops helped also.
Unfortunately there are alot of folks that wish to take it a step further and use instances of cold blood killings or the rare mass shooting to abolish guns all together. That is fine, but will never happen without alot of bloodshed. Which makes me relax, because the one that advocates outlawing guns altogether, would have to rise up to the level of a bigot. Take ahold of what they dont believe in and come ready to use deadly force.

There's a difference between gun control and taking away all your guns.

I'd like to see better gun control. 1 shot, 1 kill. No more fluffting bullets out of the barrel of an uzi or mac 10 in a vague attempt to fart in their general direction.

Hitler said the same thing when the Jews needed to register & wear a yellow star. Ergo, gun control of any kind is as bad as the holocaust!

bah, if you want to highlight that there has always been a minority of the population who thinks that they have to right to tell the majority of the population about how to live their lives properly, take it back to divine right and the Jewish creation of Yahweh the One True God who speaks best while he's smoking a bush that happens to be a narcotic hallucinogenic to humans.

3000 BC - A disgruntled caveman chucked spears, killing all 19 cave dwellers.

In other words, people have always and will always kill other people no matter what weapon they use, and there is nothing you can do about it.

That's the spirit!

You can't stop all of it, so why bother trying to stop any of it?! :D

whilst no-one here could be expected to know Charles J. Guiteau (preacher, writer, lawyer) who killed President Garfield, one of this very community WAS on that list responsible for multiple murders, a fella called Jared Lee Loughner

We do not need more gun control laws right now. Why? One very simple reason...because we're not fully enforcing the laws that are already on the books. We need to examine places where common standards across state lines can enable each state to better enforce their gun control laws. For instance, a common database of individuals deemed psychologically disabled from gun ownership. Actually, I think having a common database setup and allowing the states to maintain their own interconnected databases, so that they can determine if an individual remains on the list or comes off, but if a gun store in one state does a background check and the person is barred from gun ownership in another, it pops up.

Encouraging people to own guns intelligently isn't a bad idea.

I DO have loaded firearms in the house, and I do make sure that anyone who isnt a regular knows that, and that they are loaded, and that theyre not toys to be played with. With parents permission, I have taken my niece's to shoot and taught them how to handle a firearm safely. My favorite niece even brought it to her parents attention when one of her friends was doing something stupid with a gun.

I happen to believe in personal responsibility, though. Which... isnt typically very high on the liberal agenda.

I commend you. This is how a gun owner should be. I just wish all gun owners were like you.

https://www.youtube.com/...ture=youtube_gdata_player

The root of the liberal s problem is they still think they can legislate morality, and you cannot. You can't have people going crazy doing all manner of immoral things without consequence, then suddenly expect them to behave morally in all situations. It's never going to work.

Consider this, random gun violence is a lot like a very, very late term abotrion. Will that make it more palatable to the liberals then?

Haven't read the whole thread yet, but some of those earlier references are pretty hilarious. Yes, Lincoln was a Republican, but the Republican party of his time has NOTHING in common with the modern day republican party....Ideologically speaking, it doesn't fit with the rest...