Prime Minister for Canyons
Gold Member
![*](http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Templates/Forum/default/stargold.gif) ![*](http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Templates/Forum/default/stargold.gif) ![*](http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Templates/Forum/default/stargold.gif) ![*](http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Templates/Forum/default/stargold.gif)
Offline
![](http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/avatars/blank.gif)
Australian Politics
Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender:
|
Panther wrote on Jun 21 st, 2016 at 11:57am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 21 st, 2016 at 11:45am: Panther wrote on Jun 21 st, 2016 at 11:41am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 21 st, 2016 at 10:13am: Panther wrote on Jun 21 st, 2016 at 9:54am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 21 st, 2016 at 9:42am: Panther wrote on Jun 21 st, 2016 at 9:40am: John Smith wrote on Jun 20 th, 2016 at 11:07pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20 th, 2016 at 9:26pm: And I think thats the key issuevoter, no ones really suggesting ban all guns but surely reasonable limitations are fine. Keep your handguns but get rid of more powerful stuff and have stroing background checks and enforce them you're kidding? they can't even accept a one hour waiting period without crying about the 2nd amendment ... they have no idea what reasonable is Here Are The 4 Gun Proposals The Senate Is Voting On (Again) June 20, 201610:43 AM ET Source: NPR Quote:Just over a week after the deadly nightclub rampage in Orlando, the Senate will take up four amendments Monday related to guns and terror two from Democrats and two from Republicans. Such a quick vote after a tragedy is not remarkable. Proposals were put forth and rejected right after the murders of children and teachers in Sandy Hook Elementary School 2 1/2 years ago. Bills very similar to those coming up for a vote now were actually taken up just one day after the mass killing in San Bernardino in December. They too failed. So there's little reason for optimism on the part of advocates of tougher gun laws this time around, when defeat is once again the most likely outcome for these latest proposals...... continued And yet those seem at least minor reasonable steps, but look at LaPierre popping his head up again. https://i.imgsafe.org/cc53b28.gif . https://i.imgsafe.org/aca6f67.gifGod Bless the NRA! https://i.imgsafe.org/f29b32b.gif SO why are you against the legislation? I'm against any proposed legislation that will not solve the problem, will further erode the freedom & liberty of law abiding citizens, & only open the door for further gun-grabbing legislation, because as we know, the left will never stop short of total bans & or confiscations, which is totally unacceptable.
Arrest & jail every felon/criminal (which includes the certified mental defectives) that attempts to purchase a firearm.......15 year mandatory minimum at hard labor for starters. Anyone who sells firearms to those people too.....20 years mandatory minimum at hard labor for starters for them.
I'd consider supporting that kind of proposal, which won't stop mass murders, but it's a responsible start, one that leaves the freedoms & rights of law abiding gun owners completely free from restriction. ![Wink Wink](http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Templates/Forum/default/wink.gif)
1st issue I'd have with that is what would you classify as mental defective IMHO.....Someone who is Certified mentally defective, one who displays a strong tendency towards violence, one certified as a danger to themselves, & most importantly a danger to society.
They can go about their lives under treatment, but without legal access to firearms.
If they ever get certified as cured, & have displayed no regression for a specific length of time, say 10 years, they could then apply to have their sanity reinstated (legally). Until then they can't have firearms.
That's my personal opinion. Its not a bad definition, how do you plan to stop accidental shootings?
|