Sensible Gun Safety

[kramerica.inc]

More calibration:

JHU and his family was very fortunate. In college I was mugged at gunpoint on corner of Glenmore and Bel Air Rd. My friend and teammate was mugged at gunpoint in Waverly. Another friend mugged in Fed Hill, albeit, one block too far West. Then there's the fun in Mt Royal/Druid Hill. My father was jumped and held at gunpoint on the corner of Park Ave and Chase. My senior citizen Grandfather jumped, pistol whipped and mugged on Howard.

This in addition to not being able to leave any damn thing outside, the regular theft/destruction of items, trash deposits, urination in publiuc places, multiple car robberies and window smashes etc.

So no. No more glamorous "City Life" for us.

[kramerica.inc]

If you want common sense:

No new laws for law abiding owners. But plenty for known criminals, yes.

Keep those background checks.
No gun purchasing, use or ownership for anyone convicted of a violent crime above misdemeanor.
Spouse abuse? Gov confiscates any regiustered firearms to your name. You're no longer allowed to own/use/posess.
Ban those bump stocks.
Raise minimum gun ownership age to 21, unless in the military.

But impose no-nonsense laws for those charged with a crime and using an illegally possessed firearm.

IF you commit a crime aged 18-20 with an illegal gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with a stolen gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with an unregisterd gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with an illegal/modified gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with a gun after you've been previously banned for a previous violent crime? 20 years in prison, no parole.

Let the criminals know using a gun to commit a crime means if you get caught, you're done.

https://www.politifact.com/new-york/sta ... me-rep-fa/

[Typical Lax Dad]

If you want common sense:

No new laws for law abiding owners. But plenty for known criminals, yes.

Keep those background checks.
No gun purchasing, use or ownership for anyone convicted of a violent crime above misdemeanor.
Spouse abuse? Gov confiscates any regiustered firearms to your name. You're no longer allowed to own/use/posess.
Ban those bump stocks.
Raise minimum gun ownership age to 21, unless in the military.

But impose no-nonsense laws for those charged with a crime and using an illegally possessed firearm.

IF you commit a crime aged 18-20 with an illegal gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with a stolen gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with an unregisterd gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with an illegal/modified gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with a gun after you've been previously banned for a previous violent crime? 20 years in prison, no parole.

Let the criminals know using a gun to commit a crime means if you get caught, you're done.

https://www.politifact.com/new-york/sta ... me-rep-fa/

I am all for tougher sentencing. Do you think that will lead to more guns or fewer guns in Baltimore?

[jhu72]

If you want common sense:

No new laws for law abiding owners. But plenty for known criminals, yes.

Keep those background checks.
No gun purchasing, use or ownership for anyone convicted of a violent crime above misdemeanor.
Spouse abuse? Gov confiscates any regiustered firearms to your name. You're no longer allowed to own/use/posess.
Ban those bump stocks.
Raise minimum gun ownership age to 21, unless in the military.

But impose no-nonsense laws for those charged with a crime and using an illegally possessed firearm.

IF you commit a crime aged 18-20 with an illegal gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with a stolen gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with an unregisterd gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with an illegal/modified gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with a gun after you've been previously banned for a previous violent crime? 20 years in prison, no parole.

Let the criminals know using a gun to commit a crime means if you get caught, you're done.

https://www.politifact.com/new-york/sta ... me-rep-fa/

I am all for tougher sentencing. Do you think that will lead to more guns or fewer guns in Baltimore?

Won't make a damn bit of difference. Just like the death penalty for murder. Doesn't have an impact.

[Typical Lax Dad]

If you want common sense:

No new laws for law abiding owners. But plenty for known criminals, yes.

Keep those background checks.
No gun purchasing, use or ownership for anyone convicted of a violent crime above misdemeanor.
Spouse abuse? Gov confiscates any regiustered firearms to your name. You're no longer allowed to own/use/posess.
Ban those bump stocks.
Raise minimum gun ownership age to 21, unless in the military.

But impose no-nonsense laws for those charged with a crime and using an illegally possessed firearm.

IF you commit a crime aged 18-20 with an illegal gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with a stolen gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with an unregisterd gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with an illegal/modified gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with a gun after you've been previously banned for a previous violent crime? 20 years in prison, no parole.

Let the criminals know using a gun to commit a crime means if you get caught, you're done.

https://www.politifact.com/new-york/sta ... me-rep-fa/

I am all for tougher sentencing. Do you think that will lead to more guns or fewer guns in Baltimore?

Won't make a damn bit of difference. Just like the death penalty for murder. Doesn't have an impact.

We are in good company here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/u ... 2page1.stm

[Bandito]

The media told us law abiding gun owners would shoot and kill everyone at the Virginia rally. Where’s their apology? How come they didn’t report on how peaceful the event was

[kramerica.inc]

If you want common sense:

No new laws for law abiding owners. But plenty for known criminals, yes.

Keep those background checks.
No gun purchasing, use or ownership for anyone convicted of a violent crime above misdemeanor.
Spouse abuse? Gov confiscates any regiustered firearms to your name. You're no longer allowed to own/use/posess.
Ban those bump stocks.
Raise minimum gun ownership age to 21, unless in the military.

But impose no-nonsense laws for those charged with a crime and using an illegally possessed firearm.

IF you commit a crime aged 18-20 with an illegal gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with a stolen gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with an unregisterd gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with an illegal/modified gun- 20 years in prison. No parole.
If you commit a crime with a gun after you've been previously banned for a previous violent crime? 20 years in prison, no parole.

Let the criminals know using a gun to commit a crime means if you get caught, you're done.

https://www.politifact.com/new-york/sta ... me-rep-fa/

I am all for tougher sentencing. Do you think that will lead to more guns or fewer guns in Baltimore?

Won't make a damn bit of difference. Just like the death penalty for murder. Doesn't have an impact.

We are in good company here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/u ... 2page1.stm

Non sequitor.

[ardilla secreta]

Another mass shooting in Milwaukee. Time to offer prayers and condolences and just move on.

[Matnum PI]

[CU88]

Thoughts and Prayers...

Secret Recording Reveals NRA's Legal Troubles Have Cost The Organization $100 Million

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/21/83999917 ... n-100-mill

[holmes435]

What's the saying about a fool and his money?



You can get a regular G19 for half that price. It's also ironic that Trump said he "doesn't like silencers" and is cool with banning them, yet it's got a threaded barrel. Also... an Austrian gun??? Kudos to whoever is printing money with that thing.

[njbill]

So the Trumpkin is now licensing his name to gun manufacturers. He really has no bottom. What’s next? Trump coffins?

[Peter Brown]

Canada, as most leftists are wont to do by doing the complete opposite of what a situation demands, will now make it even more impossible for citizens to protect their families (and Canada was fairly far along in denying Canadians that right anyway).

It's way easier to go rogue fascist when the citizenry are disarmed. orange Man Bad or something.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/em ... ova-scotia

In Canada, gun owners must have a license and most guns have to be registered. To receive a license, a gun owner must pass an extensive background check and complete gun safety training. Additionally, handguns cannot be carried outside of the home and guns must be stored unloaded in a locked container.

Not sure what the next step is other than making guns entirely illegal.

Ironically, murderers are never outlawed:

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/he ... s-set-free

[MDlaxfan76]

The horror...gun owners need to be licensed and pass safety tests, guns must be registered and stored safely...oh the horror!

[Peter Brown]

The horror...gun owners need to be licensed and pass safety tests, guns must be registered and stored safely...oh the horror!

Aren't you the same guy who says 'no one reads links'? Did you read the links?

Justin wants to make it even harder to have a gun in Canada. The italicized quote is the current law, not the proposed law. Justin is gonna disarm the population.

Now when you live in a sparsely populated area like Nova Scotia and some murderer dressed up in a fake Mountie outfit tries to gun your family down, I guess MD just thinks you ought to get on your knees and die...

[MDlaxfan76]

The horror...gun owners need to be licensed and pass safety tests, guns must be registered and stored safely...oh the horror!

Aren't you the same guy who says 'no one reads links'? Did you read the links?

Justin wants to make it even harder to have a gun in Canada. The italicized quote is the current law, not the proposed law. Justin is gonna disarm the population.

Now when you live in a sparsely populated area like Nova Scotia and some murderer dressed up in a fake Mountie outfit tries to gun your family down, I guess MD just thinks you ought to get on your knees and die...

No I said you should actually read the articles you post. Same for me, obviously if I link an article.

Sure, Trudeau wants to outlaw assault weapons. Just like New Zealand recently did. They've had a heck of a shock, just as did NZ, and Trudeau sees public opinion as being open to that change in its wake. He could be correct.

I agree, assault weapons should be privately used only in regulated gun ranges. No problem with that.

I'm a gun owner, a hunter, and like most gun owners I see no valid benefit in having assault weapons in every Tom, Dick, Harry, and Sally's home. I also see no issue with having gun owners pass safety tests and be certified as not whack jobs or criminals dangerous to themselves and others. Most of us will have no problem with that hurdle. I do worry about those who can't.

[Peter Brown]

The horror...gun owners need to be licensed and pass safety tests, guns must be registered and stored safely...oh the horror!

Aren't you the same guy who says 'no one reads links'? Did you read the links?

Justin wants to make it even harder to have a gun in Canada. The italicized quote is the current law, not the proposed law. Justin is gonna disarm the population.

Now when you live in a sparsely populated area like Nova Scotia and some murderer dressed up in a fake Mountie outfit tries to gun your family down, I guess MD just thinks you ought to get on your knees and die...

No I said you should actually read the articles you post. Same for me, obviously if I link an article.

Sure, Trudeau wants to outlaw assault weapons. Just like New Zealand recently did. They've had a heck of a shock, just as did NZ, and Trudeau sees public opinion as being open to that change in its wake. He could be correct.

I agree, assault weapons should be privately used only in regulated gun ranges. No problem with that.

I'm a gun owner, a hunter, and like most gun owners I see no valid benefit in having assault weapons in every Tom, Dick, Harry, and Sally's home. I also see no issue with having gun owners pass safety tests and be certified as not whack jobs or criminals dangerous to themselves and others. Most of us will have no problem with that hurdle. I do worry about those who can't.

I am actually quite a big supporter of common sense gun regulation, but my radar is always tuned high when Democrats start getting in on the action. Mostly because a majority of Democrats now want to repeal the #2A. That's a story for another day though.

What is probably more relevant here for Canada is this: No law could have stopped a madman with that level of determination and resources.
It appears so far as if he used the deceased Mountie's gun for most of the gunshot killing.

[MDlaxfan76]

The horror...gun owners need to be licensed and pass safety tests, guns must be registered and stored safely...oh the horror!

Aren't you the same guy who says 'no one reads links'? Did you read the links?

Justin wants to make it even harder to have a gun in Canada. The italicized quote is the current law, not the proposed law. Justin is gonna disarm the population.

Now when you live in a sparsely populated area like Nova Scotia and some murderer dressed up in a fake Mountie outfit tries to gun your family down, I guess MD just thinks you ought to get on your knees and die...

No I said you should actually read the articles you post. Same for me, obviously if I link an article.

Sure, Trudeau wants to outlaw assault weapons. Just like New Zealand recently did. They've had a heck of a shock, just as did NZ, and Trudeau sees public opinion as being open to that change in its wake. He could be correct.

I agree, assault weapons should be privately used only in regulated gun ranges. No problem with that.

I'm a gun owner, a hunter, and like most gun owners I see no valid benefit in having assault weapons in every Tom, Dick, Harry, and Sally's home. I also see no issue with having gun owners pass safety tests and be certified as not whack jobs or criminals dangerous to themselves and others. Most of us will have no problem with that hurdle. I do worry about those who can't.

I am actually quite a big supporter of common sense gun regulation, but my radar is always tuned high when Democrats start getting in on the action. Mostly because a majority of Democrats now want to repeal the #2A. That's a story for another day though.

What is probably more relevant here for Canada is this: No law could have stopped a madman with that level of determination and resources.
It appears so far as if he used the deceased Mountie's gun for most of the gunshot killing.

A majority of Dems want to repeal the 2nd Amendment???
Citation on that whopper of a troll?

Are there Democrats in Canada now?

[RedFromMI]

The horror...gun owners need to be licensed and pass safety tests, guns must be registered and stored safely...oh the horror!

Aren't you the same guy who says 'no one reads links'? Did you read the links?

Justin wants to make it even harder to have a gun in Canada. The italicized quote is the current law, not the proposed law. Justin is gonna disarm the population.

Now when you live in a sparsely populated area like Nova Scotia and some murderer dressed up in a fake Mountie outfit tries to gun your family down, I guess MD just thinks you ought to get on your knees and die...

No I said you should actually read the articles you post. Same for me, obviously if I link an article.

Sure, Trudeau wants to outlaw assault weapons. Just like New Zealand recently did. They've had a heck of a shock, just as did NZ, and Trudeau sees public opinion as being open to that change in its wake. He could be correct.

I agree, assault weapons should be privately used only in regulated gun ranges. No problem with that.

I'm a gun owner, a hunter, and like most gun owners I see no valid benefit in having assault weapons in every Tom, Dick, Harry, and Sally's home. I also see no issue with having gun owners pass safety tests and be certified as not whack jobs or criminals dangerous to themselves and others. Most of us will have no problem with that hurdle. I do worry about those who can't.

I am actually quite a big supporter of common sense gun regulation, but my radar is always tuned high when Democrats start getting in on the action. Mostly because a majority of Democrats now want to repeal the #2A. That's a story for another day though.

What is probably more relevant here for Canada is this: No law could have stopped a madman with that level of determination and resources.
It appears so far as if he used the deceased Mountie's gun for most of the gunshot killing.

A majority of Dems want to repeal the 2nd Amendment???
Citation on that whopper of a troll?

Are there Democrats in Canada now?

Latest poll I could quickly find was from early this year (Rasmussen) that said 34% of Democrats wanted repeal. Highest numbers in the last couple of years seems to be close to 40%. Don't think there has ever been a majority.

[njbill]

Repeal isn’t necessary. Just overrule Heller, which was wrongly decided.