Another start to the school year, another shooting; nothing will change

[CobbVol]

More insurance and more attorneys to draw up the contracts.

Yeah, that will fix it!

You forgot the unelected government official who will increase the $600 to $1600 in short order.

 

[lawgator1]

In this quote he's pretty much unambiguously asserting financial burden is an allowable onus to directly discourage participation in the 2A.

That's true. It's an incidental effect of requiring insurance. Yes.

And a good one.

 

[C-south]

Nope, the people problem can not be fixed.
Never has been, never will be........in the history of mankind.

Maybe we should hang people who make threats.

 

[C-south]

You forgot the unelected government official who will increase the $600 to $1600 in short order.

Wonder what will drive premiums? LG is already advocating a 300% premium from the value of the gun. I bet if you live in areas with high crime rates your premium goes up, therefore making it more difficult for you to afford to defend yourself.

 

[luthervol]

Maybe we should hang people who make threats.

That would wipe out loads of trumpers.

 

[Zues1]

That would wipe out loads of trumpers.

That sounds like a threat.

 

[C-south]

That would wipe out loads of trumpers.

Go for it

 

[hog88]

A little AI for you:

The first gun law in the (yet to be created) United States was enacted in 1619 by the Jamestown colony's general assembly. The law prohibited the sale or gift of arms, powder, shot, or any other offensive or defensive weapons to Indians. Violators were to be considered traitors to the colony and hanged without redemption.

Yep no constitution so not applicable

 

[luthervol]

That sounds like a threat.

??????? huh??

 

[luthervol]

Go for it

??????? huh ???

 

[hndog609]

That's true. It's an incidental effect of requiring insurance. Yes.

And a good one.

It's BS and should have it's little head crushed every time it slithers from under the little pile of feces that spawned it.

 

[luthervol]

Yep no constitution so not applicable

Go back and read the question to which I was responding.

Perfectly valid and applicable.

 

[C-south]

Go back and read the question to which I was responding.

Perfectly valid and applicable.

??huh????

 

[KB5252]

Maybe we should hang people who make threats.

Why stop there, we could trample basic constitutional rights and execute everyone the offender loved, mother, father, family etc.

 

[KB5252]

That would wipe out loads of trumpers.

And Antifa, those who opposed Christian prayer groups, Christians, Muslims. Errbody hang errbody!

 

[C-south]

Why stop there, we could trample basic constitutional rights and execute everyone the offender loved, mother, father, family etc.

It was luther’s idea.

 

[KB5252]

It was luther’s idea.

I'm being sarcastic.

 

[KB5252]

For what it's worth I think Luther is a genuine guy, I think he means well but doesn't think about long term consequences and worst case scenarios. Either that or he would sacrifice our means to defend from tyrannical government to stop some isolated violence. I'm not willing to make that trade.

The only way I would even think about giving up guns as a basic right afforded in the Constitution is if the the police, military and therefore the world also banned/stopped using those weapons. The very reason the Constitution affords the right is to that end.

 

[luthervol]

It was luther’s idea.

Well no, it wasn't. It was actually your idea.

Maybe we should hang people who make threats.

You may have some deep rooted issues.

 

[luthervol]

For what it's worth I think Luther is a genuine guy, I think he means well but doesn't think about long term consequences and worst case scenarios. Either that or he would sacrifice our means to defend from tyrannical government to stop some isolated violence. I'm not willing to make that trade.

The only way I would even think about giving up guns as a basic right afforded in the Constitution is if the the police, military and therefore the world also banned/stopped using those weapons. The very reason the Constitution affords the right is to that end.

Thanks,
I am a genuine guy. I have never once held the position that people should give up their right to keep and bear arms.
I also know that it is completely unreasonable to claim that the general populace can/should be equally armed with the police and military.

 

[C-south]

Well no, it wasn't. It was actually your idea.

You may have some deep rooted issues.

You brought up an irrelevant law regarding hanging people.

 

[volfanhill]

Thanks,
I am a genuine guy. I have never once held the position that people should give up their right to keep and bear arms.
I also know that it is completely unreasonable to claim that the general populace can/should be equally armed with the police and military.

Yes, you are anti 2A. Per your own post. Just say that. Every evidence about the opinions of the writers suggests they wanted the populace to be able to go toe to toe with the gov.

 

[C-south]

Yes, you are anti 2A. Per your own post. Just say that. Every evidence about the opinions of the writers suggests they wanted the populace to be able to go toe to toe with the gov.

He knows so much about firearms he wanted to regulate the fire rate of semiautomatic weapons by taking 9 random people and using their average fire rate to somehow restrict how fast someone can pull the trigger.

 

[C-south]

Thanks,
I am a genuine guy. I have never once held the position that people should give up their right to keep and bear arms.
I also know that it is completely unreasonable to claim that the general populace can/should be equally armed with the police and military.

 

[luthervol]

Yes, you are anti 2A. Per your own post. Just say that. Every evidence about the opinions of the writers suggests they wanted the populace to be able to go toe to toe with the gov.

The concept of the general populace being armed equally with today's military is beyond insane.

Anyone arguing otherwise is a lunatic.

The founding fathers would be in complete agreement.