luvsJack
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2007
Yes.
And we don't have school shootings on a regular basis.
And this boy used a shotgun didn’t he? So maybe we need to take a much wider look at this.
Yes.
And we don't have school shootings on a regular basis.
It's easier for people to focus on the type of gun used..until an incident occurs that didn't use that type of gun.And this boy used a shotgun didn’t he? So maybe we need to take a much wider look at this.
Canada has no restrictions on Hunting rifles, that will comply with our constitution
Its my right to blow smoke in your face, if you do not like it move to the USSR, yea that lasted
That was my point..one of the guns used in the Texas shooting was a shotgun.
Well.......
Since I've lived that life, and you apparently haven't, I'll just have to trust my personal experiences and not follow your advice to "Trust me".
BTW.
During my career I suffered broken bones, back injuries, dislocated joints, and was stabbed once, all in hand to hand altercations with individuals in varying states of intoxication and mental impairment from illicit drugs.
No one ever tried to shoot me.
However I still go about armed because there are a couple of nut cases locally who stated that they would kill me one day.
I spoke with one of those people in Epcot at the outdoor China pavilion some years ago.
He still doesn't like me.............
It was put in place to ensure that Americans would always be able to defend themselves from "All enemies Foreign and Domestic." (The quote is from my Oath Of Office that I swore to uphold.)
Other countries and the US are fundamentally different. It would be in people's best interests to stop comparing country to country. It's also a vicious circle and is tiresome.Correct and countries like Canada have found a way of putting reasonable restrictions on guns without taking them away from everyone. There seems to be many who feel that this can't happen in the USA.
Your knowledge of the reasoning for our Second Amendment s totally non existent if you believe that Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Franklin and the other Founding Fathers wanted to ensure that Americans could hunt rabbits and squirrels under the auspices of the Constitution.Canada has no restrictions on Hunting rifles, that will comply with our constitution
Not the current Monarch, but at least one in the 1700's and early 1800's.So the Queen of England?
Hand guns have more restrictions than long rifles because they are more dangerous, so they would require more training and back ground checks. Oh what a concept. Its called being smart. I can guarantee you a sawed offf shot gun would be illegal because their laws do not treat guns like toys.Other countries and the US are fundamentally different. It would be in people's best interests to stop comparing country to country. It's also a vicious circle and is tiresome.
What's the point in your argument in this case since the suspect used a shotgun and a .38 revolver? I already know now a shotgun is legal in Canada is a .38 revolver legal too?
Other countries and the US are fundamentally different. It would be in people's best interests to stop comparing country to country. It's also a vicious circle and is tiresome.
What's the point in your argument in this case since the suspect used a shotgun and a .38 revolver? I already know now a shotgun is legal in Canada is a .38 revolver legal too?
My point..was if both are legal why call for more restrictions in this particular case. The suspect got the guns from his father, he wasn't legally allowed to purchase it at age 17 anyways.Hand guns have more restrictions than long rifles because they are more dangerous, so they would require more training and back ground checks. Oh what a concept. Its called being smart. I can guarantee you a sawed offf shot gun would be illegal because their laws do not treat guns like toys.
The Second Amendment was specifically put in place to keep future "leaders" from disarming the Populace and to allow private Citizens, (The Militia), to have the ability to defend the nation in times of strife.
They knew, because they were well read and learned men, that an unarmed Citizenry was open to exploitation by corrupt officials, (See my post on Stalin el al) and subject to hostile takeover by foreign entities.
Hand guns have more restrictions than long rifles because they are more dangerous, so they would require more training and back ground checks. Oh what a concept. Its called being smart. I can guarantee you a sawed offf shot gun would be illegal because their laws do not treat guns like toys.
When was the last time private citizens legally had to rise up defend the USA in times of strife?
Thanks for the information about handguns.Comparisons between countries is perfectly fine; there is no reason one country cannot learn from others. To say otherwise simply means you are not open to having a discussion about the use of firearms in the USA.
Handguns are restricted weapons in Canada. Not just anyone can buy a handgun.
Not the current Monarch, but at least one in the 1700's and early 1800's.
And you don’t think it’s at all possible to happen because it’s been awhile?
Thanks for the information about handguns.
You missed my point on the country talk. Our constitution is different than other countries, how we came to be and our history is different than other countries. If you say well X country can do it why can't the US it's simply futile to do that. It's different if you're discussing things like "is mental health resources suffering in the US" "are there enough community outreach programs to try and lesson gang violence in the US" "is domestic violence treated seriously enough and is there enough resources out there in the US" "do we have enough open talk about suicide and resources to try and help someone before it gets to that point in the US"
But to phrase the conversation of "well X country has restrictions on guns why can't the US" is by far missing the actual issues. That is a large reason conversations become circular because it's narrow focused on one thing without caring about the whys.
Battle of Athens
View attachment 323762
I wasn't implying you were saying changing the consitution just stating a fact.I never said you would need to change your constitution but to say discussions about gun control cannot be part of the overall discussion because of the constitution is simply a cop-out.