SCOTUS

[Peter Brown]

I doubt Petey has thought through those questions, just as his dismissal of paying attention to the "Billy Bob" trailer dweller may mean that "urban" is just code for racial presumption...

And where does he think those meth dealers cook? "urban" ?

That said, it is indeed true that # of murders committed with guns (33% of all firearm fatalities) are quite concentrated in definable neighborhood areas. However, murder rates (percentage of population) though are not nearly as concentrated. That follows poverty wherever it's found, especially in regions with high gun ownership and low income, both in rural and dense pop centers.

I'm all for targeting highest gun murder areas for the most resources (assuming we could figure out the 4th A issues!), but that's going to quite surprisingly not simply mean "urban" or "inner city", much less the other presumption of "Democrat"...rather, it's concentrated in very specific neighborhoods, though that's neither racial nor Dem driven...rather, it's poverty. Red or Blue....but given the racial disparities in poverty, yup, we're gonna see a quite likely overreach by those who like Petey's suggestion of a "sweep" in "urban" or "inner city" areas.

On the other hand, suicides are nearly twice the # of firearm deaths as murders...

It's important to note that both murder rates with guns and suicide rates with guns are highest in states with highest gun ownership rates...legal gun ownership...

https://www.countyhealthrankings.org/ex ... fatalities

So, reducing gun ownership, legal or illegal, certainly makes sense...but is the issue of concentrated murders in poverty-stricken areas (rural or dense pop) really gonna be solved by gun "sweeps" with all of the attendant 4th A issues of abuse of the residents of those areas, who are predominantly the victims of gun crime, not the perpetrators?

I’m talking about sweeping up ILLEGAL guns, not simply guns for guns sake. Why would I want to confiscate your gun if you own it legally?

Do you think most guns in Baltimore city are legally owned? If not, let’s go get them. Or are you concerned with optics over substance?

I hear a lot of sturm und drang about guns and violence, but when your bluff is called, you retreat behind the woke curtains. I’m giving you the tools to clean up society. So go do it. What’s holding you back? I don’t care if the gun is illegally owned by a black guy, white guy, yellow guy, or purple guy; if you don’t have a permit, cough it up. Broken windows policing for the inner city. Let’s go. You say you want a revolution when it comes to gun confiscation, I say good, let’s go.


While we are at it, no handguns or semi automatics until you’re 21. No voting either.

[MDlaxfan76]

I doubt Petey has thought through those questions, just as his dismissal of paying attention to the "Billy Bob" trailer dweller may mean that "urban" is just code for racial presumption...

And where does he think those meth dealers cook? "urban" ?

That said, it is indeed true that # of murders committed with guns (33% of all firearm fatalities) are quite concentrated in definable neighborhood areas. However, murder rates (percentage of population) though are not nearly as concentrated. That follows poverty wherever it's found, especially in regions with high gun ownership and low income, both in rural and dense pop centers.

I'm all for targeting highest gun murder areas for the most resources (assuming we could figure out the 4th A issues!), but that's going to quite surprisingly not simply mean "urban" or "inner city", much less the other presumption of "Democrat"...rather, it's concentrated in very specific neighborhoods, though that's neither racial nor Dem driven...rather, it's poverty. Red or Blue....but given the racial disparities in poverty, yup, we're gonna see a quite likely overreach by those who like Petey's suggestion of a "sweep" in "urban" or "inner city" areas.

On the other hand, suicides are nearly twice the # of firearm deaths as murders...

It's important to note that both murder rates with guns and suicide rates with guns are highest in states with highest gun ownership rates...legal gun ownership...

https://www.countyhealthrankings.org/ex ... fatalities

So, reducing gun ownership, legal or illegal, certainly makes sense...but is the issue of concentrated murders in poverty-stricken areas (rural or dense pop) really gonna be solved by gun "sweeps" with all of the attendant 4th A issues of abuse of the residents of those areas, who are predominantly the victims of gun crime, not the perpetrators?

I’m talking about sweeping up ILLEGAL guns, not simply guns for guns sake. Why would I want to confiscate your gun if you own it legally?

Do you think most guns in Baltimore city are legally owned? If not, let’s go get them. Or are you concerned with optics over substance?

I hear a lot of sturm und drang about guns and violence, but when your bluff is called, you retreat behind the woke curtains. I’m giving you the tools to clean up society. So go do it. What’s holding you back?


While we are at it, no handguns or semi automatics until you’re 21. No voting either.

I like voting at 18. No issue with it, as those who bother to vote at that age tend to be better informed than most 30+ year olds, so good with me. I also think it's unconscionable to ask them to go to war but they can't vote.

But yes, no military style guns nor hand guns until 21, and all guns only with license, including training, and red flag laws.

But I'm also for no military style or hand guns period, except for law enforcement, and as used at licensed,regulated shooting range. No need for them otherwise.

Sure, illegal guns are a serious problem, and as a nation we've made it so easy to be awash in a sea of guns that it's super easy to obtain a weapon illegally...reduce the overall # of guns and it will be harder and harder and harder. Make it illegal to have these particular weapons outside of regulated, licensed situations and it becomes a heck of a lot easier to identify who has a weapon that's legal and who is illegal. Make possession illegally a serious offense, make using one illegally a very serious offense.

Now...how to identify who has such a weapon? Well, any neighbor (the innocents who are often the victims of crime) could report the existence of such a weapon, and with a warrant, a search could be done. But simply searching everyone's home, including those for whom there is nor reasonable basis for specific suspicion, nah, that's not ok.

[a fan]

I’m giving you the tools to clean up society. So go do it. What’s holding you back?

The Constitution. But we've already figured out that you think we're only bound to parts of that document.

But sure, let's start playing your "papers please" in suburban and rural America. I promise you that there are millions of illegally held guns that have been passed down from generation to generation. Start where there are lots of white people. They'll just LOVE your idea.

[Peter Brown]

I’m giving you the tools to clean up society. So go do it. What’s holding you back?

The Constitution. But we've already figured out that you think we're only bound to parts of that document.

But sure, let's start playing your "papers please" in suburban and rural America. I promise you that there are millions of illegally held guns that have been passed down from generation to generation. Start where there are lots of white people. They'll just LOVE your idea.

So you’re a ‘respectful constitutionalist’ when it comes to sweeps for **illegal* guns in inner cities (‘we can’t do that, c’mon, 4th amendment illegal search and seizure!’), but you’re conveniently anti-constitution rolling back #2A for *legal* guns.

‘All you guys with illegal guns, you’re free to go; all you guys with legal guns, hand them over’.

Interesting. Revealing. Predictable.

[Peter Brown]

I doubt Petey has thought through those questions, just as his dismissal of paying attention to the "Billy Bob" trailer dweller may mean that "urban" is just code for racial presumption...

And where does he think those meth dealers cook? "urban" ?

That said, it is indeed true that # of murders committed with guns (33% of all firearm fatalities) are quite concentrated in definable neighborhood areas. However, murder rates (percentage of population) though are not nearly as concentrated. That follows poverty wherever it's found, especially in regions with high gun ownership and low income, both in rural and dense pop centers.

I'm all for targeting highest gun murder areas for the most resources (assuming we could figure out the 4th A issues!), but that's going to quite surprisingly not simply mean "urban" or "inner city", much less the other presumption of "Democrat"...rather, it's concentrated in very specific neighborhoods, though that's neither racial nor Dem driven...rather, it's poverty. Red or Blue....but given the racial disparities in poverty, yup, we're gonna see a quite likely overreach by those who like Petey's suggestion of a "sweep" in "urban" or "inner city" areas.

On the other hand, suicides are nearly twice the # of firearm deaths as murders...

It's important to note that both murder rates with guns and suicide rates with guns are highest in states with highest gun ownership rates...legal gun ownership...

https://www.countyhealthrankings.org/ex ... fatalities

So, reducing gun ownership, legal or illegal, certainly makes sense...but is the issue of concentrated murders in poverty-stricken areas (rural or dense pop) really gonna be solved by gun "sweeps" with all of the attendant 4th A issues of abuse of the residents of those areas, who are predominantly the victims of gun crime, not the perpetrators?

I’m talking about sweeping up ILLEGAL guns, not simply guns for guns sake. Why would I want to confiscate your gun if you own it legally?

Do you think most guns in Baltimore city are legally owned? If not, let’s go get them. Or are you concerned with optics over substance?

I hear a lot of sturm und drang about guns and violence, but when your bluff is called, you retreat behind the woke curtains. I’m giving you the tools to clean up society. So go do it. What’s holding you back?


While we are at it, no handguns or semi automatics until you’re 21. No voting either.

I like voting at 18. No issue with it, as those who bother to vote at that age tend to be better informed than most 30+ year olds, so good with me. I also think it's unconscionable to ask them to go to war but they can't vote.

But yes, no military style guns nor hand guns until 21, and all guns only with license, including training, and red flag laws.

But I'm also for no military style or hand guns period, except for law enforcement, and as used at licensed,regulated shooting range. No need for them otherwise.

Sure, illegal guns are a serious problem, and as a nation we've made it so easy to be awash in a sea of guns that it's super easy to obtain a weapon illegally...reduce the overall # of guns and it will be harder and harder and harder. Make it illegal to have these particular weapons outside of regulated, licensed situations and it becomes a heck of a lot easier to identify who has a weapon that's legal and who is illegal. Make possession illegally a serious offense, make using one illegally a very serious offense.

Now...how to identify who has such a weapon? Well, any neighbor (the innocents who are often the victims of crime) could report the existence of such a weapon, and with a warrant, a search could be done. But simply searching everyone's home, including those for whom there is nor reasonable basis for specific suspicion, nah, that's not ok.

It’s all politics. And your newest besties, the Democratic Party, is solely responsible for increased murders.

https://thenationaldesk.com/news/americ ... iladelphia

[a fan]

So you’re a ‘respectful constitutionalist’ when it comes to sweeps for **illegal* guns in inner cities (‘we can’t do that, c’mon, 4th amendment illegal search and seizure!’), but you’re conveniently anti-constitution rolling back #2A for *legal* guns.

Nope and nope. You asked what was "what's holding you back" from making "gun sweeps".

YOU are the one who suggested we do sweeps for illegally owned guns.

Hilariously, you don't want to do it where white people live. As if they don't have any (snicker) illegal guns anywhere but cities.

I'm pro-gun ownership. Hunted as a kid. Still love shooting trap. But as always, you just walk in with assumptions you bring in from consuming Conservative media, who tell you what to believe.

And you, like a dutiful soldier, you believe every word you're told, Pete.

YOU are the guy who suggested Unconstitutional gun sweeps without probable cause, Petey. No one else on the forum. YOU.

[a fan]

It’s all politics. And your newest besties, the Democratic Party, is solely responsible for increased murders.

Did you know that there has never been a gun death in a Republican controlled State, Petey?

Little known fact, but it's true.

[cradleandshoot]

So you’re a ‘respectful constitutionalist’ when it comes to sweeps for **illegal* guns in inner cities (‘we can’t do that, c’mon, 4th amendment illegal search and seizure!’), but you’re conveniently anti-constitution rolling back #2A for *legal* guns.

Nope and nope. You asked what was "what's holding you back" from making "gun sweeps".

YOU are the one who suggested we do sweeps for illegally owned guns.

Hilariously, you don't want to do it where white people live. As if they don't have any (snicker) illegal guns anywhere but cities.

I'm pro-gun ownership. Hunted as a kid. Still love shooting trap. But as always, you just walk in with assumptions you bring in from consuming Conservative media, who tell you what to believe.

And you, like a dutiful soldier, you believe every word you're told, Pete.

YOU are the guy who suggested Unconstitutional gun sweeps without probable cause, Petey. No one else on the forum. YOU.

How could you ever do "gun sweeps" ? Stop and frisk was already thrown into the trash bin trying to accomplish the same thing. If we are willing to move heaven and earth to prevent law abiding citizens from owning a particular type of weapon why is it no one seems to give a chit about ILLEGAL WEAPONS?? That involves pro active policing and FLP America is not in favor of that. Not nohow and not noway... So the police do what they are doing now. Respond to the murder scene. You ask if anyone saw anything. The answer there is hell no. No snitch you know... The fire department flushes the blood from the street and everybody goes about their business. The same scenario plays out night after night after night in the streets of America. The only time anyone pays attention is when there are 10 victims at a Tops store in Buffalo or 20 kids at a school in Texas.... Then God damn it we have to do something. I think as a nation we can walk and chew gum at the same time. It is possible to monitor who is buying AR-15 type weapons and we probably can find a way to stop the influx of illegal weapons. Why is one a top priority for DC politicians and the other is swept under the rug???

[a fan]

How could you ever do "gun sweeps" ? Stop and frisk was already thrown into the trash bin trying to accomplish the same thing.

You're gonna have to ask Petey. This stroke of genius is HIS idea, not mine.

[Typical Lax Dad]

So you’re a ‘respectful constitutionalist’ when it comes to sweeps for **illegal* guns in inner cities (‘we can’t do that, c’mon, 4th amendment illegal search and seizure!’), but you’re conveniently anti-constitution rolling back #2A for *legal* guns.

Nope and nope. You asked what was "what's holding you back" from making "gun sweeps".

YOU are the one who suggested we do sweeps for illegally owned guns.

Hilariously, you don't want to do it where white people live. As if they don't have any (snicker) illegal guns anywhere but cities.

I'm pro-gun ownership. Hunted as a kid. Still love shooting trap. But as always, you just walk in with assumptions you bring in from consuming Conservative media, who tell you what to believe.

And you, like a dutiful soldier, you believe every word you're told, Pete.

YOU are the guy who suggested Unconstitutional gun sweeps without probable cause, Petey. No one else on the forum. YOU.

How could you ever do "gun sweeps" ? Stop and frisk was already thrown into the trash bin trying to accomplish the same thing. If we are willing to move heaven and earth to prevent law abiding citizens from owning a particular type of weapon why is it no one seems to give a chit about ILLEGAL WEAPONS?? That involves pro active policing and FLP America is not in favor of that. Not nohow and not noway... So the police do what they are doing now. Respond to the murder scene. You ask if anyone saw anything. The answer there is hell no. No snitch you know... The fire department flushes the blood from the street and everybody goes about their business. The same scenario plays out night after night after night in the streets of America. The only time anyone pays attention is when there are 10 victims at a Tops store in Buffalo or 20 kids at a school in Texas.... Then God damn it we have to do something. I think as a nation we can walk and chew gum at the same time. It is possible to monitor who is buying AR-15 type weapons and we probably can find a way to stop the influx of illegal weapons. Why is one a top priority for DC politicians and the other is swept under the rug???

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/it ... e-gun/amp/

Thrown in the trash bin in part because it has next to nothing to do with finding illegal weapons, Clint.

[MDlaxfan76]

I’m giving you the tools to clean up society. So go do it. What’s holding you back?

The Constitution. But we've already figured out that you think we're only bound to parts of that document.

But sure, let's start playing your "papers please" in suburban and rural America. I promise you that there are millions of illegally held guns that have been passed down from generation to generation. Start where there are lots of white people. They'll just LOVE your idea.

So you’re a ‘respectful constitutionalist’ when it comes to sweeps for **illegal* guns in inner cities (‘we can’t do that, c’mon, 4th amendment illegal search and seizure!’), but you’re conveniently anti-constitution rolling back #2A for *legal* guns.

‘All you guys with illegal guns, you’re free to go; all you guys with legal guns, hand them over’.

Interesting. Revealing. Predictable.

Petey,
The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that the 2nd amendment does NOT guarantee the right of every citizen to own any weapon/gun they want. Including originalists like Scalia.

So, consistent with the Constitution and the 2nd amendment, I want common sense restrictions on gun ownership and usage. I'm a lifelong hunter, legally own numerous shotguns, but see no rationale to own a weapon purely to kill other people. If I wished to use such other weapons for sport, and I recognize that some people desire to do so, I'm fine with them doing so at a licensed gun range. I'm also fine with a "well regulated militia" preparation with an "armory" for such gun storage, with proper training of the owners of those weapons.

All good with me....and with the Constitution.

But yeah, I'm also a fan of the 4th Amendment and the prior Constitutional rulings on unreasonable search and seizure. I want restraints on the government's powers, but also recognize that there are circumstances in which a search is indeed reasonable. So I want due process to keep that balance.

Why anyone would think someone like me would be fine with illegal weapons is what is "Interesting. Revealing. Predictable."

And Ridiculous.

[cradleandshoot]

So you’re a ‘respectful constitutionalist’ when it comes to sweeps for **illegal* guns in inner cities (‘we can’t do that, c’mon, 4th amendment illegal search and seizure!’), but you’re conveniently anti-constitution rolling back #2A for *legal* guns.

Nope and nope. You asked what was "what's holding you back" from making "gun sweeps".

YOU are the one who suggested we do sweeps for illegally owned guns.

Hilariously, you don't want to do it where white people live. As if they don't have any (snicker) illegal guns anywhere but cities.

I'm pro-gun ownership. Hunted as a kid. Still love shooting trap. But as always, you just walk in with assumptions you bring in from consuming Conservative media, who tell you what to believe.

And you, like a dutiful soldier, you believe every word you're told, Pete.

YOU are the guy who suggested Unconstitutional gun sweeps without probable cause, Petey. No one else on the forum. YOU.

How could you ever do "gun sweeps" ? Stop and frisk was already thrown into the trash bin trying to accomplish the same thing. If we are willing to move heaven and earth to prevent law abiding citizens from owning a particular type of weapon why is it no one seems to give a chit about ILLEGAL WEAPONS?? That involves pro active policing and FLP America is not in favor of that. Not nohow and not noway... So the police do what they are doing now. Respond to the murder scene. You ask if anyone saw anything. The answer there is hell no. No snitch you know... The fire department flushes the blood from the street and everybody goes about their business. The same scenario plays out night after night after night in the streets of America. The only time anyone pays attention is when there are 10 victims at a Tops store in Buffalo or 20 kids at a school in Texas.... Then God damn it we have to do something. I think as a nation we can walk and chew gum at the same time. It is possible to monitor who is buying AR-15 type weapons and we probably can find a way to stop the influx of illegal weapons. Why is one a top priority for DC politicians and the other is swept under the rug???

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/it ... e-gun/amp/

Thrown in the trash bin in part because it has next to nothing to do with finding illegal weapons, Clint.

It was a tool for the police to use. If skippy is standing on the corner with a big bulge in his pants that looks to the cop like a handgun the cop should ignore what he is seeing and proceed to the donut shop . When skippy blows someones brains out later that night with the bulge in his pants at least nobody violated his rights...
Damned if you do.. damned if you don't... Got it....

[Typical Lax Dad]

So you’re a ‘respectful constitutionalist’ when it comes to sweeps for **illegal* guns in inner cities (‘we can’t do that, c’mon, 4th amendment illegal search and seizure!’), but you’re conveniently anti-constitution rolling back #2A for *legal* guns.

Nope and nope. You asked what was "what's holding you back" from making "gun sweeps".

YOU are the one who suggested we do sweeps for illegally owned guns.

Hilariously, you don't want to do it where white people live. As if they don't have any (snicker) illegal guns anywhere but cities.

I'm pro-gun ownership. Hunted as a kid. Still love shooting trap. But as always, you just walk in with assumptions you bring in from consuming Conservative media, who tell you what to believe.

And you, like a dutiful soldier, you believe every word you're told, Pete.

YOU are the guy who suggested Unconstitutional gun sweeps without probable cause, Petey. No one else on the forum. YOU.

How could you ever do "gun sweeps" ? Stop and frisk was already thrown into the trash bin trying to accomplish the same thing. If we are willing to move heaven and earth to prevent law abiding citizens from owning a particular type of weapon why is it no one seems to give a chit about ILLEGAL WEAPONS?? That involves pro active policing and FLP America is not in favor of that. Not nohow and not noway... So the police do what they are doing now. Respond to the murder scene. You ask if anyone saw anything. The answer there is hell no. No snitch you know... The fire department flushes the blood from the street and everybody goes about their business. The same scenario plays out night after night after night in the streets of America. The only time anyone pays attention is when there are 10 victims at a Tops store in Buffalo or 20 kids at a school in Texas.... Then God damn it we have to do something. I think as a nation we can walk and chew gum at the same time. It is possible to monitor who is buying AR-15 type weapons and we probably can find a way to stop the influx of illegal weapons. Why is one a top priority for DC politicians and the other is swept under the rug???

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/it ... e-gun/amp/

Thrown in the trash bin in part because it has next to nothing to do with finding illegal weapons, Clint.

It was a tool for the police to use. If skippy is standing on the corner with a big bulge in his pants that looks to the cop like a handgun the cop should ignore what he is seeing and proceed to the donut shop . When skippy blows someones brains out later that night with the bulge in his pants at least nobody violated his rights...
Damned if you do.. damned if you don't... Got it....

That explains all the stops….

[Peter Brown]

I’m giving you the tools to clean up society. So go do it. What’s holding you back?

The Constitution. But we've already figured out that you think we're only bound to parts of that document.

But sure, let's start playing your "papers please" in suburban and rural America. I promise you that there are millions of illegally held guns that have been passed down from generation to generation. Start where there are lots of white people. They'll just LOVE your idea.

So you’re a ‘respectful constitutionalist’ when it comes to sweeps for **illegal* guns in inner cities (‘we can’t do that, c’mon, 4th amendment illegal search and seizure!’), but you’re conveniently anti-constitution rolling back #2A for *legal* guns.

‘All you guys with illegal guns, you’re free to go; all you guys with legal guns, hand them over’.

Interesting. Revealing. Predictable.

Petey,
The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that the 2nd amendment does NOT guarantee the right of every citizen to own any weapon/gun they want. Including originalists like Scalia.

So, consistent with the Constitution and the 2nd amendment, I want common sense restrictions on gun ownership and usage. I'm a lifelong hunter, legally own numerous shotguns, but see no rationale to own a weapon purely to kill other people. If I wished to use such other weapons for sport, and I recognize that some people desire to do so, I'm fine with them doing so at a licensed gun range. I'm also fine with a "well regulated militia" preparation with an "armory" for such gun storage, with proper training of the owners of those weapons.

All good with me....and with the Constitution.

But yeah, I'm also a fan of the 4th Amendment and the prior Constitutional rulings on unreasonable search and seizure. I want restraints on the government's powers, but also recognize that there are circumstances in which a search is indeed reasonable. So I want due process to keep that balance.

Why anyone would think someone like me would be fine with illegal weapons is what is "Interesting. Revealing. Predictable."

And Ridiculous.

It’s not ridiculous. As Cradle points out, the FLP erupt with anti 2A screeds when there’s a Uvalde, but they never say peep when 20 Chicagoans die of gunshots on a weekend. Baltimore is averaging 350 murders every year. That’s a lot of Uvalde’s.

If you guys are sincere in your desire to limit murders by gun, why not go after where the illegal guns are? It’s illegal guns doing 99% of the murders. If this was such a crisis, why even bother with niceties like the constitution’s 4th amendment? In times of crisis, we act.

So far as suicides go, if no one else dies, I’m not sure this is the overriding moral dilemma you want. It’s when an innocent persons life is taken that we feel greatest empathy.

So I’m offering you that chance; get the illegal guns. The question remains: will you accept that offer? If not, why not? Is this a crisis or not?

[Peter Brown]

So you’re a ‘respectful constitutionalist’ when it comes to sweeps for **illegal* guns in inner cities (‘we can’t do that, c’mon, 4th amendment illegal search and seizure!’), but you’re conveniently anti-constitution rolling back #2A for *legal* guns.

Nope and nope. You asked what was "what's holding you back" from making "gun sweeps".

YOU are the one who suggested we do sweeps for illegally owned guns.

Hilariously, you don't want to do it where white people live. As if they don't have any (snicker) illegal guns anywhere but cities.

I'm pro-gun ownership. Hunted as a kid. Still love shooting trap. But as always, you just walk in with assumptions you bring in from consuming Conservative media, who tell you what to believe.

And you, like a dutiful soldier, you believe every word you're told, Pete.

YOU are the guy who suggested Unconstitutional gun sweeps without probable cause, Petey. No one else on the forum. YOU.

How could you ever do "gun sweeps" ? Stop and frisk was already thrown into the trash bin trying to accomplish the same thing. If we are willing to move heaven and earth to prevent law abiding citizens from owning a particular type of weapon why is it no one seems to give a chit about ILLEGAL WEAPONS?? That involves pro active policing and FLP America is not in favor of that. Not nohow and not noway... So the police do what they are doing now. Respond to the murder scene. You ask if anyone saw anything. The answer there is hell no. No snitch you know... The fire department flushes the blood from the street and everybody goes about their business. The same scenario plays out night after night after night in the streets of America. The only time anyone pays attention is when there are 10 victims at a Tops store in Buffalo or 20 kids at a school in Texas.... Then God damn it we have to do something. I think as a nation we can walk and chew gum at the same time. It is possible to monitor who is buying AR-15 type weapons and we probably can find a way to stop the influx of illegal weapons. Why is one a top priority for DC politicians and the other is swept under the rug???

+1

[jhu72]

What do the "full sweeps" look like? How are they carried out? Local law enforcement or FBI?

Some people won’t like it.

But it is what I say it is. A sweep of the inner city. The residents will be safer in the end. But there is gonna be howling and crying about how abusive it is.

If you don’t want to do it, don’t go complaining on Twitter or Fanlax about how you want strict gun laws but won’t actually go after the problem. I’m giving you the primary tool to enact real change.

You want fewer murders? Or is that just a huge front?

Why the inner city and not Billy Bob’s trailer for n Kentucky? Same reason Clyde went to banks to rob money: that’s where they keep the cash.

... Your own party basically dares law enforcement to come and take their guns, and your dumb ass thinks the result would be any different in the inner city. What you are asking for is a war, lots of innocent people killed. But you don't care, the residents can die - YOUR REAL GOAL, and you don't care if police die as well carrying out your mission of ethnic cleansing. You are a piece of sh*t as well as a troll!

[Peter Brown]

So you’re a ‘respectful constitutionalist’ when it comes to sweeps for **illegal* guns in inner cities (‘we can’t do that, c’mon, 4th amendment illegal search and seizure!’), but you’re conveniently anti-constitution rolling back #2A for *legal* guns.

Nope and nope. You asked what was "what's holding you back" from making "gun sweeps".

YOU are the one who suggested we do sweeps for illegally owned guns.

Hilariously, you don't want to do it where white people live. As if they don't have any (snicker) illegal guns anywhere but cities.

I'm pro-gun ownership. Hunted as a kid. Still love shooting trap. But as always, you just walk in with assumptions you bring in from consuming Conservative media, who tell you what to believe.

And you, like a dutiful soldier, you believe every word you're told, Pete.

YOU are the guy who suggested Unconstitutional gun sweeps without probable cause, Petey. No one else on the forum. YOU.

“Most gun-related crimes are carried out with illegally owned firearms—as much as 80 percent according to some estimates.”

“Murders in the United States are very concentrated. According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, over 50 percent of murders occur in 2 percent of the nation’s 3,142 counties. Moreover, gun-related homicides are heavily concentrated in certain neighborhoods within those counties: 54 percent of U.S. counties had zero murders in 2014.”

“Are you in a gang? According to the Department of Justice’s National Gang Center, particularly in urban areas, significant percentages of gun-related homicides (15 percent to 33 percent) are linked with gang and drug activity.”

“Are you a male between 15 and 34? The majority of standard gun murder victims are men between the ages of 15 and 34. Although black men make up roughly 7 percent of the population, they account for almost two-thirds of gun murder victims every year.”


https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-just ... ce-america

[Seacoaster(1)]

I’m giving you the tools to clean up society. So go do it. What’s holding you back?

The Constitution. But we've already figured out that you think we're only bound to parts of that document.

But sure, let's start playing your "papers please" in suburban and rural America. I promise you that there are millions of illegally held guns that have been passed down from generation to generation. Start where there are lots of white people. They'll just LOVE your idea.

So you’re a ‘respectful constitutionalist’ when it comes to sweeps for **illegal* guns in inner cities (‘we can’t do that, c’mon, 4th amendment illegal search and seizure!’), but you’re conveniently anti-constitution rolling back #2A for *legal* guns.

‘All you guys with illegal guns, you’re free to go; all you guys with legal guns, hand them over’.

Interesting. Revealing. Predictable.

For the record, I was asking a serious question. A fan is right: the Constitution impedes the “sweep” you seem to envision. So you haven’t given me a single tool, yet. I know you are deeply wedded to the narrative you need, but almost all of us as Americans and virtually everyone I know who identifies as “left” are only liking for balance in respect to gun ownership and regulation. No one has said “you guys with illegals firearms are free to go. The rest of you, we want your guns.” That’s just a stupid thing to say; you must see that. So again, how do you propose to “sweep” up the illegals firearms — in a way that is consistent with the Constitution you pretend to revere?

[MDlaxfan76]

What do the "full sweeps" look like? How are they carried out? Local law enforcement or FBI?

Some people won’t like it.

But it is what I say it is. A sweep of the inner city. The residents will be safer in the end. But there is gonna be howling and crying about how abusive it is.

If you don’t want to do it, don’t go complaining on Twitter or Fanlax about how you want strict gun laws but won’t actually go after the problem. I’m giving you the primary tool to enact real change.

You want fewer murders? Or is that just a huge front?

Why the inner city and not Billy Bob’s trailer for n Kentucky? Same reason Clyde went to banks to rob money: that’s where they keep the cash.

... Your own party basically dares law enforcement to come and take their guns, and your dumb ass thinks the result would be any different in the inner city. What you are asking for is a war, lots of innocent people killed. But you don't care, the residents can die - YOUR REAL GOAL, and you don't care if police die as well carrying out your mission of ethnic cleansing. You are a piece of sh*t as well as a troll!

+1

[MDlaxfan76]

I’m giving you the tools to clean up society. So go do it. What’s holding you back?

The Constitution. But we've already figured out that you think we're only bound to parts of that document.

But sure, let's start playing your "papers please" in suburban and rural America. I promise you that there are millions of illegally held guns that have been passed down from generation to generation. Start where there are lots of white people. They'll just LOVE your idea.

So you’re a ‘respectful constitutionalist’ when it comes to sweeps for **illegal* guns in inner cities (‘we can’t do that, c’mon, 4th amendment illegal search and seizure!’), but you’re conveniently anti-constitution rolling back #2A for *legal* guns.

‘All you guys with illegal guns, you’re free to go; all you guys with legal guns, hand them over’.

Interesting. Revealing. Predictable.

For the record, I was asking a serious question. A fan is right: the Constitution impedes the “sweep” you seem to envision. So you haven’t given me a single tool, yet. I know you are deeply wedded to the narrative you need, but almost all of us as Americans and virtually everyone I know who identifies as “left” are only liking for balance in respect to gun ownership and regulation. No one has said “you guys with illegals firearms are free to go. The rest of you, we want your guns.” That’s just a stupid thing to say; you must see that. So again, how do you propose to “sweep” up the illegals firearms — in a way that is consistent with the Constitution you pretend to revere?

You were asking a serious question, and that's appropriate, however, you're not asking that of a "serious", much less honest, person.