Fullsizexj
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Milton WV
what cost to selling a car, it does not cost us anything to sell a car, buyer pays for it and you keep the money. Better check your aurguments for accuracy before you spout this bs drivel
-
Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.
Another shooting....
- Thread starter cracker
- Start date
garr
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Nassau County NY
Stop being so naive, the only reason the Govt. cares about the sale of cars is to ensure they get the Maximum Tax revenue from the sale, otherwise they could not give a rats ass who to or how you sell your car!
Cost of selling a vehicle is a terrible comparison!
NYS passed an AWB in 2000 that allowed private citizens to possess ONLY pre-ban (Pre-1994) firearms & magazines.
So Honest Law Abiding citizen's, in a GOOD FAITH effort to comply with the LAW purchased @ a considerable price premium above Non PRE BAN firearms & magazines, For example in NYS a pre-ban used AR15 carbine cost $3K & UP Vs. the price of a NON NYS brand new carbine's $1K price, used 30 rd pre ban Mags cost $30++ (New in the wrapper pre-ban mags sold for as much as $60 in NYS) Vs $12 NON NY state; So state law caused the price of LEGAL guns & mags to artificially double in NY.
On Tuesday the State of NY made illegal "WITH NO GRACE PERIOD" the resale of the legally purchased guns & mags in the state, devaluing everything by at Least Half!
So on Monday if a law abiding NYS resident owned 10 firearms with 10 magazines valued @ approx. $33,000 , on Tuesday due to the 2013 AWB they now must be sold out of state @ a value of approx. $11,200 (Actually less because they are in used condition)
How is that for unfair govt. intervention in the free market?
I know one collector who lost approx $250,000 on tuesday due to the new NYS AWB!
Last edited:
- Location
- Rainy side of Washington
the only thing selling a car costs me is time, effort, and hassle dealing with craigslist users. It might cost them taxes to buy it but all I get is a fistful of cash and hand over the keys/car/title.
sardo_67
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- western CT
Yes that's true but I believe if it's over a certian $$$ you're supposed to tell the gov so u can pay them taxes. But if anyone does you're an idiot.
sardo_67
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- western CT
urban yan;245835544 Wait what? First is says there's a "nominal fee" so it's not free said:
Eddie the eagle was a gun safety thing for kids back in the 90s. Pretty much just a "don't touch it and call an adult" thing but not a bad idea.
Uhh you don't need gun research, the FBI crime stats. Black and white, just numbers... Xxx people killed with zzz gun, xxx people killed with yyy gun ...... And so on.
DrMoab
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- The Utah Backwater
You are totally right. Our minds will never be changed. At least not by someone like you. So you might as well give up. Leave. Never come back and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. Unless it hits you hard enough to knock you in front of that fast moving bus.
DrMoab
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- The Utah Backwater
There is one major difference. This lady knew her kid was in trouble. She had blogged about it. She worried that he was unstable and could possibly hurt someone. Knowing that she should have taken the responsibility to make sure he didn't have access to her guns.
My kids are both very well adjusted, normal little kids. If I ever felt like they had it in them to do something like that or for that matter just hurt themselves I would go out of my way to make sure they didn't have access to any firearm.
That is a long way from a street thug breaking into my house.
- Location
- Wasatch Range
We don't need federally funded or NRA funded programs for our Utah schools:
Utah law allows licensed teachers and schools administrators to carry their own weapons on campus. According to the relevant statute, any authorized person can legally carry their weapon on a school campus. This means that any teacher or school staff can get a concealed weapon permit and take their gun with them to work.
While no one expects teachers and staff to be responsible for defensively shooting an intruder, having guns in the hands of trusted people on campus can provide a significant layer of protection that is currently missing. Further, it would reduce the need for an extra paid police officer to be posted on each campus. And five, ten, or fifty armed school employees would be much more able to defend students from an attack than would a single officer who may not be able to deter a threat on every part of the campus.
Bottom line, we want our kids and our families to be safe. Having our teachers and staff able to protect our children with a gun is a protection we want for our kids. We want to know that if an attacker approaches, the teacher standing at the door protecting her children can deter that threat.
Our kids deserve to be safe. Our teachers deserve the right to be able to protect their students and protect themselves.
The gun laws of Utah provide for this opportunity, and for that, Utah legislators should be applauded. Now it’s up to the rest of us to assume this responsibility and become better prepared to protect one another.
Utah law allows licensed teachers and schools administrators to carry their own weapons on campus. According to the relevant statute, any authorized person can legally carry their weapon on a school campus. This means that any teacher or school staff can get a concealed weapon permit and take their gun with them to work.
While no one expects teachers and staff to be responsible for defensively shooting an intruder, having guns in the hands of trusted people on campus can provide a significant layer of protection that is currently missing. Further, it would reduce the need for an extra paid police officer to be posted on each campus. And five, ten, or fifty armed school employees would be much more able to defend students from an attack than would a single officer who may not be able to deter a threat on every part of the campus.
Bottom line, we want our kids and our families to be safe. Having our teachers and staff able to protect our children with a gun is a protection we want for our kids. We want to know that if an attacker approaches, the teacher standing at the door protecting her children can deter that threat.
Our kids deserve to be safe. Our teachers deserve the right to be able to protect their students and protect themselves.
The gun laws of Utah provide for this opportunity, and for that, Utah legislators should be applauded. Now it’s up to the rest of us to assume this responsibility and become better prepared to protect one another.
- Location
- Wasatch Range
Here's some free light reading to help educate the ignorant........of which the cure is knowledge.
http://www.gunfacts.info/
There is no cure for stupid.
Here's a few facts to wet your appetite for knowledge:
94% of law enforcement officials believe that citizens should be able to purchase firearms for self-defense and sporting purposes.
97.9% of officers believe, that through illegal means, criminals are able to obtain any type of firearm.
95% of the time police arrive too late to prevent a crime or arrest a suspect.
75% of protective/restraining orders are violated and police often won't enforce them unless they witness the violation.
Despite prompt law enforcement responses, most armed and violent attacks at schools were stopped by means other than law enforcement intervention.
http://www.gunfacts.info/
There is no cure for stupid.
Here's a few facts to wet your appetite for knowledge:
94% of law enforcement officials believe that citizens should be able to purchase firearms for self-defense and sporting purposes.
97.9% of officers believe, that through illegal means, criminals are able to obtain any type of firearm.
95% of the time police arrive too late to prevent a crime or arrest a suspect.
75% of protective/restraining orders are violated and police often won't enforce them unless they witness the violation.
Despite prompt law enforcement responses, most armed and violent attacks at schools were stopped by means other than law enforcement intervention.
Often these interventions were by administrators, teachers, or other students who were licensed to carry firearms.
In 2000, 20% of U.S. homicides occur in four cities with just six percent of the population – New York, Chicago, Detroit, and Washington, D.C. – most of which have/had a virtual prohibition on private handguns.
In 2000, 20% of U.S. homicides occur in four cities with just six percent of the population – New York, Chicago, Detroit, and Washington, D.C. – most of which have/had a virtual prohibition on private handguns.
Last edited:
420BlackXJ
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- St. Paul, MN
Just for you, never.:firedevil
420BlackXJ
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- St. Paul, MN
420BlackXJ
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- St. Paul, MN
I just wanted to show who is ruining the image of gun owners for the responsible gun owners.:wave1:
Because, these people are out there.
Because, these people are out there.
So it's too hard and we should just submit? That's the argument right?
that's cowardly. I will die a free man before I ever submit to being a slave of the government (and by proxy the mob rule that we are descending too).
Let's not forget the history of the 20th century that showed insurgents with man portable weapons and improvised explosives bring super powers to a stalemate or bankruptcy fighting them.
Vietnam?
Afghanistan (US and the USSR)
Iraq (Billions and nothing accomplished, twice)
Syria?
Libya?
all examples of a superior force being beaten or stalemated.
and let's have this reasoning as well. If the government is so powerful that the citizens cannot oppose them, haven't we already entered an age of tyranny? I'd bet the founding fathers would think so.
I love that your own statement is contradictory, you don't count defense against the government as "personal defense"?
Last edited:
- Location
- Indiana-Missouri
40 reasons to ban guns
1. Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, & Chicago cops need guns.
2. Washington DC’s low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Indianapolis’ high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.
3. Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are “just statistics.”
4. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates, which have been declining since 1991.
5. We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.
6. The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.
7. An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.
8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.
9. When confronted by violent criminals, you should “put up no defense – give them what they want, or run” (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don’t Die – People Do, 1981, p. 125).
10. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns & Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.
11. One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seat belts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for internal medicine, a computer programmer for hard drive problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.
12. The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later, in 1917.
13. The National Guard, federally funded, with bases on federal land, using federally-owned weapons, vehicles, buildings and uniforms, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a “state” militia.
14.These phrases: “right of the people peaceably to assemble,” “right of the people to be secure in their homes,” “enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people,” and “The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people” all refer to individuals, but “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” refers to the state.
15. “The Constitution is strong and will never change.” But we should ban and seize all guns thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments to that Constitution.
16. Rifles and handguns aren’t necessary to national defense! Of course, the army has hundreds of thousands of them.
17. Private citizens shouldn’t have handguns, because they aren’t “military weapons”, but private citizens shouldn’t have “assault rifles”, because they are military weapons.
18. In spite of waiting periods, background checks, fingerprinting, government forms, etc., guns today are too readily available, which is responsible for recent school shootings. In the 1940′s, 1950′s and 1960′s, anyone could buy guns at hardware stores, army surplus stores, gas stations, variety stores, Sears mail order, no waiting, no background check, no fingerprints, no government forms and there were no school shootings.
19. The NRA’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, but the anti-gun lobby’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign is responsible social activity.
20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.
21. A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.
22. Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is “an accident waiting to happen” and gun makers’ advertisements aimed at women are “preying on their fears.”
23. Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.
24. Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.
25. A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.
26. Any self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a “weapon of mass destruction” or an “assault weapon.”
27. Most people can’t be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.
28. The right of Internet pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.
29. Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self- defense only justifies bare hands.
30. The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it defends other parts of the Constitution.
31. Charlton Heston, a movie actor as president of the NRA is a cheap lunatic who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas, a movie actor as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.
32. Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do “civilians” who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.
33. We should ban “Saturday Night Specials” and other inexpensive guns because it’s not fair that poor people have access to guns too.
34. Police officers have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.
35. Private citizens don’t need a gun for self- protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.
36. Citizens don’t need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators who work in a building filled with cops, need a gun.
37. “Assault weapons” have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people. The police need assault weapons. You do not.
38. When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that’s bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that’s good.
39. Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you see police officers with one on their duty weapon.
40. Handgun Control, Inc., says they want to “keep guns out of the wrong hands.” Guess what? You have the wrong hands.
1. Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, & Chicago cops need guns.
2. Washington DC’s low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Indianapolis’ high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.
3. Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are “just statistics.”
4. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates, which have been declining since 1991.
5. We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.
6. The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.
7. An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.
8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.
9. When confronted by violent criminals, you should “put up no defense – give them what they want, or run” (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don’t Die – People Do, 1981, p. 125).
10. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns & Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.
11. One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seat belts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for internal medicine, a computer programmer for hard drive problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.
12. The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later, in 1917.
13. The National Guard, federally funded, with bases on federal land, using federally-owned weapons, vehicles, buildings and uniforms, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a “state” militia.
14.These phrases: “right of the people peaceably to assemble,” “right of the people to be secure in their homes,” “enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people,” and “The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people” all refer to individuals, but “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” refers to the state.
15. “The Constitution is strong and will never change.” But we should ban and seize all guns thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments to that Constitution.
16. Rifles and handguns aren’t necessary to national defense! Of course, the army has hundreds of thousands of them.
17. Private citizens shouldn’t have handguns, because they aren’t “military weapons”, but private citizens shouldn’t have “assault rifles”, because they are military weapons.
18. In spite of waiting periods, background checks, fingerprinting, government forms, etc., guns today are too readily available, which is responsible for recent school shootings. In the 1940′s, 1950′s and 1960′s, anyone could buy guns at hardware stores, army surplus stores, gas stations, variety stores, Sears mail order, no waiting, no background check, no fingerprints, no government forms and there were no school shootings.
19. The NRA’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, but the anti-gun lobby’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign is responsible social activity.
20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.
21. A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.
22. Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is “an accident waiting to happen” and gun makers’ advertisements aimed at women are “preying on their fears.”
23. Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.
24. Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.
25. A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.
26. Any self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a “weapon of mass destruction” or an “assault weapon.”
27. Most people can’t be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.
28. The right of Internet pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.
29. Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self- defense only justifies bare hands.
30. The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it defends other parts of the Constitution.
31. Charlton Heston, a movie actor as president of the NRA is a cheap lunatic who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas, a movie actor as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.
32. Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do “civilians” who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.
33. We should ban “Saturday Night Specials” and other inexpensive guns because it’s not fair that poor people have access to guns too.
34. Police officers have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.
35. Private citizens don’t need a gun for self- protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.
36. Citizens don’t need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators who work in a building filled with cops, need a gun.
37. “Assault weapons” have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people. The police need assault weapons. You do not.
38. When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that’s bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that’s good.
39. Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you see police officers with one on their duty weapon.
40. Handgun Control, Inc., says they want to “keep guns out of the wrong hands.” Guess what? You have the wrong hands.
lol, but I thought you guys loved comparing guns to cars (inaccurately).... sorry it suddenly doesn’t suit you.
Fine than, put the onus of the additional costs associated with private gun sale on the owner. You want to play, you have to pay. Problem solved.
Booze is regulated.
Why not. That's your take towards reasonable guns laws. It's too hard to get it right so why even bother. that's cowardly.
One of those things is not like the others so let’s play the guessing game.
My understanding's that your founding fathers crafted the second amendment to have a militia with firepower proportionate to that of an invading army (no nevermind they only had muskets - couldn't possibly envision modern weapons), but I guess, by that token, your ARs are weak and pathetic. It's time for the NRA to petition everyone to have their own tactical nuke, drone, etc..
My personal defense against my government is the ballet box.
- Location
- Wasatch Range
For those who weren't already convinced that Diane Feinstein is a Socialist and would like the use the Constitution to line her birdcage (cuckoo) , here is her gun ban proposal:
*** Ban the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of 120 specifically named rifles, shotguns and handguns!
*** Ban the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of ALL firearms with a detachable magazine and at least one "military characteristic" -- which could mean just about anything that makes a gun "look scary;"
*** Ban the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of magazines holding more than 10 rounds;
*** Force owners of ALL "grandfathered" weapons to undergo an intrusive background check and fingerprinting -- treating law-abiding citizens like criminals;
*** Force owners of ALL "grandfathered" weapons to federally register their guns after obtaining a permission slip from local law enforcement showing their guns are not in violation of state or local law.
That’s right. If you own a $10 magazine that’s holds more than 10 rounds, you’ll have to register it with the BATFE in their National Firearms Registry.
And you folks wonder why we don't trust the federal government.......just like our Founding Fathers.
*** Ban the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of 120 specifically named rifles, shotguns and handguns!
*** Ban the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of ALL firearms with a detachable magazine and at least one "military characteristic" -- which could mean just about anything that makes a gun "look scary;"
*** Ban the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of magazines holding more than 10 rounds;
*** Force owners of ALL "grandfathered" weapons to undergo an intrusive background check and fingerprinting -- treating law-abiding citizens like criminals;
*** Force owners of ALL "grandfathered" weapons to federally register their guns after obtaining a permission slip from local law enforcement showing their guns are not in violation of state or local law.
That’s right. If you own a $10 magazine that’s holds more than 10 rounds, you’ll have to register it with the BATFE in their National Firearms Registry.
And you folks wonder why we don't trust the federal government.......just like our Founding Fathers.
DrMoab
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- The Utah Backwater
One of my friends wrote this today. Pretty interesting.
If King Obama's orders from on high require anyone purchasing a gun to disclose medical, prescription and mental health history...
Doesn't anyone realize that will make many people refuse counseling, medication and treatment for fear of their rights being infringed? For fear of being labeled and deemed unworthy to have 2nd amendment rights? Unworthy to protect their families or even to hunt? Some people that his holy excellencyness would deem unworthy to buy a gun, use one to feed their families.
Will this lead to more people in a good frame of mind or less people in a good frame of mind?
If more people are in a good frame of mind, less people get hurt.
If more are in a poor frame of mind, more will hurt and suffer around them.
And I'm not just talking about mass shootings, I'm talking about every day life for tens of millions of people and their families.
We will have vets returning from war refusing treatment or acknowledgement of their symptoms in fear of our forced nationwide healthcare system labeling them for life, stripping them of their 2nd amendment rights.
Isn't anyone listening to the doctors and care professionals already saying they will stop documenting certain things if it requires them to breach their patient/client's privacy and force them to report it to the government?
And who will be appointed to make the distinction of who is worthy and who is not? Which medications will label you for life and which will not? This is the most unfathomable violation of human rights I've ever heard of in our country.
This is a very bad idea and we'll see people who need treatment most, avoiding it like the plague. People who would have otherwise been stable, healthy and working through any situations they have will now go untreated in fear of being marked.
The stigma associated with mental health that people have worked so hard to overcome? It will be undone in short order as individuals are labeled unworthy and stripped of rights.
Some measures of security that at a glance seem simple, and a very good idea, have very far reaching implications that can be worse than what the measure was trying to avoid in the first place.
This is not tinfoil hat conspiracy talk, this is simple logic.
This entire movement is not about safety, it's about control. If anyone feels differently, I feel sorry for you.
If King Obama's orders from on high require anyone purchasing a gun to disclose medical, prescription and mental health history...
Doesn't anyone realize that will make many people refuse counseling, medication and treatment for fear of their rights being infringed? For fear of being labeled and deemed unworthy to have 2nd amendment rights? Unworthy to protect their families or even to hunt? Some people that his holy excellencyness would deem unworthy to buy a gun, use one to feed their families.
Will this lead to more people in a good frame of mind or less people in a good frame of mind?
If more people are in a good frame of mind, less people get hurt.
If more are in a poor frame of mind, more will hurt and suffer around them.
And I'm not just talking about mass shootings, I'm talking about every day life for tens of millions of people and their families.
We will have vets returning from war refusing treatment or acknowledgement of their symptoms in fear of our forced nationwide healthcare system labeling them for life, stripping them of their 2nd amendment rights.
Isn't anyone listening to the doctors and care professionals already saying they will stop documenting certain things if it requires them to breach their patient/client's privacy and force them to report it to the government?
And who will be appointed to make the distinction of who is worthy and who is not? Which medications will label you for life and which will not? This is the most unfathomable violation of human rights I've ever heard of in our country.
This is a very bad idea and we'll see people who need treatment most, avoiding it like the plague. People who would have otherwise been stable, healthy and working through any situations they have will now go untreated in fear of being marked.
The stigma associated with mental health that people have worked so hard to overcome? It will be undone in short order as individuals are labeled unworthy and stripped of rights.
Some measures of security that at a glance seem simple, and a very good idea, have very far reaching implications that can be worse than what the measure was trying to avoid in the first place.
This is not tinfoil hat conspiracy talk, this is simple logic.
This entire movement is not about safety, it's about control. If anyone feels differently, I feel sorry for you.
sardo_67
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- western CT
Yon, guns are regulated just like booze you say but there are waaaaaaaaaaay too many deaths because of it. why not regulate it more like you want to do with guns?
like i've said before, just look at the black & white numbers.... guns don't account for that many deaths in the USA each year compared to many many other things. they just make headlines and grab attention, similar to how weed was made illegal in the 1920s with movies like "reefer madness".
not to mention the "AW" type guns, that's even smaller and i would guess 100 at most last year. Can't say 100% though as the FBI only has a rifle class, everything from bolt action 22lr to AR-15 counts.
also the Newtown shooting was the FIRST TIME this has ever happened, stranger with an AR-15 walked into a school for some unknown reason and started shooting. this happened about 25/30 min from where i live and grew up, i don't feel in danger, i don't carry a gun now because of it, i am pissed off though. now we have all these laws and other douchebaggery that people are talking about doing to "save the children" or what ever. this is a god damn hobby, just like wheeling or building an XJ into a stupid and impractical vehicle that no one really needs but is fun as hell to use.
aaaaaaaand, still the best gun salesman EVER..... OBAMA!!!!!!! ok well the Lanza guy started this latest panic but Obama is really the one sealing it in.
like i've said before, just look at the black & white numbers.... guns don't account for that many deaths in the USA each year compared to many many other things. they just make headlines and grab attention, similar to how weed was made illegal in the 1920s with movies like "reefer madness".
not to mention the "AW" type guns, that's even smaller and i would guess 100 at most last year. Can't say 100% though as the FBI only has a rifle class, everything from bolt action 22lr to AR-15 counts.
also the Newtown shooting was the FIRST TIME this has ever happened, stranger with an AR-15 walked into a school for some unknown reason and started shooting. this happened about 25/30 min from where i live and grew up, i don't feel in danger, i don't carry a gun now because of it, i am pissed off though. now we have all these laws and other douchebaggery that people are talking about doing to "save the children" or what ever. this is a god damn hobby, just like wheeling or building an XJ into a stupid and impractical vehicle that no one really needs but is fun as hell to use.
aaaaaaaand, still the best gun salesman EVER..... OBAMA!!!!!!! ok well the Lanza guy started this latest panic but Obama is really the one sealing it in.
Last edited:
- Location
- Wasatch Range
I've heard Washington insiders claim that Obama's stance on guns is grandstanding, as he knows that too many in the Senate are up for re-election next year and it would be political suicide for them to advance legislation that placed restrictions on guns and infringed on the 2nd Amendment, as they know that supporting Obama would be going against the will of their constituents. This also shoots the claim that Americans want more gun control right in the bulls-eye.
He can once again claim that he did something, but Congress didn't do their job........
He can once again claim that he did something, but Congress didn't do their job........
Similar threads
