School Shooting - Coral Springs
- Thread starter UCFWayne
- Start date
So you'd be OK with businesses refusing to serve the elderly, or black people, or Muslims? I'm just curious where the line is drawn for discrimination.
Sure it is.
It also applies to gun makers. There is so little in private gun sales -- and even small arms is the least profitable enterprise for federal (much less state and local) -- that it's very easy to sue a gun maker out of business.
Unless it's some sort of necessity, like medical care and, as long as they're a private business, I think they should be able to do what they want.
That being said, they're douches for doing it (IMO) and I have no issue with people being upset about it either.
It was a YouGov poll and the question was “Should there be a ban on firearms, also including all handguns?”
And what’s funny is that Ninja saw this in the other thread yet ignorantly acts like he has no idea. Such a clown with a tired act
Given your complete and utter ignorance I can totally understand how you would think asking for sources and even something as incredibly basic as the question to a poll is a tired act.
For those of you who don't enjoy reading only poll results without even the original question--posted by a known partisan hack with an obvious agenda, you can read some results here:
https://today.yougov.com/news/2018/03/01/support-rises-strict-gun-laws/
https://today.yougov.com/news/2018/03/01/support-rises-strict-gun-laws/
Gracias for the info.
Needless to say, if that's what people want to believe, that's their choice. I've heard you and Bob what I'm about to say before, it's never going to happen, so stop being all doom and gloom about it.
Whether certain people like it or not - it's in the constitution. I don't think there will ever be a full on ban of guns - and I think you know that too. The "they're coming for our guns" thing is a scare tactic - there may be restrictions on types but people will always be allowed to own guns in this country. The vast majority of people still believe that people should be allowed to, regardless of party affiliation.
Maybe you're right. However, the constant narrative on the left has ALWAYS been "no one is coming for your guns!". Well, they WOULD if they could. That is the issue here. That alone is a giant threat to people like me that value the 2nd Amendment.
I understand that literally amending the Constitution is likely not going to happen. It doesn't mean that a Democratic administration with a D Congress that is pandering hard to their far left base, as is what's going on now, couldn't put in place such excessive restrictions and regulation that it makes legal gun ownership extremely difficult. And that is their aim and long term goal IMO.
except its not a scare tactic when senators/reps constantly introduce legislation to do bans. i think the current bill has 150 of 190 democrats on board.
You're speaking on hypotheticals. Not only that, you're speaking on hypotheticals about a party that you pretty openly hate/disagree with.
You told me to not worry about a thing that WAS illegal in this country (and a thing that a lot of people would still like to see illegal in this country) - yet you're freaking out over something that can pretty much never happen and doesn't have the support to even get close to happening. Only 26% of people support it (according to that poll) and half of those only support it "somewhat". Meanwhile, 34% of people still think gay marriage should be illegal.
You're being hypocritical again.
No- you simply keep moving the goalposts. I thought you were better than this.
You, and many lefties, have claimed that NO ONE wants to take "our guns". Polls like this show that is patently false- nearly half of lefties would support "taking your guns". Whether or not it's realistic is irrelevant- the sentiment and support is there amongst the left.
85, honey - darling, don't "I thought you were better than this." me. I'm not moving any goal posts at all. Of course there are some people who want to take away all guns, there have always been and there will always be. I have never denied that. I'm merely stating that if you want to tell me to stop being all doom and gloom about something, maybe you should take a word of your own advice?
I've said that before about you too ( the your better than this ). Annoying or not it's a compliment . You are the preferred choice from the other side of the aisle for intelligent debate here and it's mostly because it never turns into insults with you and you are generally never hypocritical ( everyone is at some point including myself )
Parkland shooter was turned away from buying an AR at a pawn shop due to the pawn shop's policy of not selling to under 21, according to local news.
Just a few months before the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, 19-year-old gunman Nikolas Cruz tried to buy an AR-15 rifle at a Coconut Creek pawn and gun shop, but he was turned away because of his age, the owner told Local 10 News in an exclusive interview
https://amp.local10.com/news/parkla...pped-from-buying-ar-15-rifle-store-owner-says
Just a few months before the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, 19-year-old gunman Nikolas Cruz tried to buy an AR-15 rifle at a Coconut Creek pawn and gun shop, but he was turned away because of his age, the owner told Local 10 News in an exclusive interview
https://amp.local10.com/news/parkla...pped-from-buying-ar-15-rifle-store-owner-says
So, if he was 21, what would the knee jerk reaction be?
Just saw a protestor in Tallahassee who wants " high powered magazines " banned. Is that like Hustler ?
Probably the same person that said the NRA profits too much from manufacturing guns.
Define "stricter gun control"?
That's always the problem. Most of the bills being pushed will not only outlaw semi-automatics, and take us back to the civil war, but can be applied to bolt action, repeaters and even revolvers, some things even pre-civil war.
This is why the bump stock bill failed.
That's always the problem. Most of the bills being pushed will not only outlaw semi-automatics, and take us back to the civil war, but can be applied to bolt action, repeaters and even revolvers, some things even pre-civil war.
This is why the bump stock bill failed.
funny becuase cruz didnt use a single mag that had more than 10 rounds
umm didn't he then go to Dicks and buy it? This proves a potential to prevent if there are more hurdles for these people to get the gun at least when it comes to HS mass shootings. The whole point of State and Federal Law going to 21 is that maybe it could have prevented this guy from getting the weapon to kill if there was nowhere to get it legally. All signs point to this guy being an anti social shut in, not the type of guy I think that has the guts to go meet some gang member or cartel guy on the black market to get an AR 15.
gun violence restraining order, 21 up only, universal background checks, and AW ban. Only 2 of those are realistic in the short term with Rs in Power but I think all 4 of these getting done on a Federal and State level would have the issue go away as a partisan issue.
All of those points have been debated in this thread or the dungeon thread. I’m not going to go back through them, but to list them like that implies that you don’t understand the laws in place, what an assault weapon is or is not, nor the constitutional arguments. I highly suggest that you go back through the threads.
lol
Do people currently go to "gang members or the cartel" to buy weed and other drugs? No. They usually are buying from the deadbeat loser down the street who sells drugs from his mom's basement.
Firearms would be no different.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say most deadbeat losers aren't selling guns out of their basement.
That being said, mass killings v. gang crime are two totally different monsters that have to be dealt with in totally different ways. I don't think the gun laws that are being discussed right now do anything to effect gang crime.
fl just passed a bill that would move the legal age to buy a gun to 21. scott still has to sign it.
that said, the fl law, or a national law for the age of 21 will likely be struck down in court as fast as a lawsuit against it is brought up. now stores like dicks and walmart can do that all they want, i dont care. but the government cant deny a citizen the right to buy the gun once they become 18. that is not how it works.
if they want to do that, they need to legally change the age in which a juvenile becomes an adult.
that said, the fl law, or a national law for the age of 21 will likely be struck down in court as fast as a lawsuit against it is brought up. now stores like dicks and walmart can do that all they want, i dont care. but the government cant deny a citizen the right to buy the gun once they become 18. that is not how it works.
if they want to do that, they need to legally change the age in which a juvenile becomes an adult.
Why can't 18 year olds buy alcohol then?
You're right in saying that's what the argument will be - however - it's not as cut and dry as you're making it.
there is a difference between a right, something granted in the constitution, and a privilege. drinking is considered a privilege vs while self defense is a right.
i think removing civics from our education system was a major mistake.
Was that some shade at the end there...?
I'm well aware of rights v. privileges - however - as I've tried to state a few times recently, not everything is as cut and dry as you make it. People can interpret things in many different ways - that's why we have our legal system - to determine if those interpretations are correct or not. If they raised the age limit to 21 - I'm sure it would be challenged and have a pretty good chance of getting struck down - but there will be an argument to keep it as well. It's not as black/white as you make it sound.
Would you be okay with prohibiting the SALES of firearms to people under 21 but still allow them to own one?
if you were aware of rights vs privilege why are you asking that question? some things are not open to interpretation and are very much black and white.
if the founding fathers thought it was important to include alcohol in the constitution, they wouldve put it there. thus its a privilege. hell we did change it along time ago and realized it wasnt a good idea and changed it back.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...own-a-rife-or-shotgun/?utm_term=.0e676e8df73f
i assume that map is still correct today, could be wrong but you get the idea. you can own a firearm under 18, you might not be able to purchase one though. ie a family member can give you one.
i believe you arent allowed to own a handgun before 18 with exceptions. you cant purchase a handgun before 21. i personally believe it should be 18, but that is me and i understand why its 21.
What the hell is shade?
The amendments are pretty cut and dry. They were made that way for a reason. I don't believe raising the age to be able to purchase any gun would do much of anything. There are other changes that most everyone agrees with that would be much more effective.
If it was so cut and dry - there would be no debate. Once again, you're letting your own personal feelings dictate the discussion. Sorry Wayne - but in all of these threads about the gun debate - you're completely ignoring what people are trying to say and rebutting with what you think as fact. When it's not.
People still argue the Earth is flat and that we never landed on the moon. The second amendment is very clear. You can argue that it should be repealed but you can't argue what it says.
Gay slang. When you throw shade at someone, you're dissing them.
I don't necessarily disagree with you though, I think there are other things that are more important. However - it's a political game, like you know. Remember, this is a Republican state congress that passed this. Meanwhile, they didn't ban the sales of assault rifles. They also probably think that part of the bill will be struck down in court anyway, so why not include it now?
If the media covered daily organized crime activity the way they covered mass shootings, this would be a hugely different discussion.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
INTERVIEW: UCF Knights TE Randy Pittman: "I'm out there playing free."- Latest: mattropolis
-
