POTUS plea to respectable gun owners to support "common sense" gun laws

[seedubs1]

The people who are giving their opinion are also uninformed. I can't believe the number of people who read the news and believe that you can go to a gun show and buy firearms from FFL's with no background check.

Fear monger, keep the populace ignorant of the actual law through misinformation, and then poll those people with misleading questions that seem "common sense," and the polls end up skewed to the writers prerogative.

That's the main point with the polls being cited: they are push polls, with intentionally misleading questions - the results of which are used to make claims contrary to what the poll respondents actually believed they were saying.

 

[seedubs1]

Legitimate question to all of you. I'm sure someone here knows the answer.

1) Has any single one of these mass murderers been a person that attained their weapon through one of the "loop holes" aka through a personal transaction (say through armslist, etc...)? To my knowledge, they all attained their weapons by either stealing them, through the black market, or legally bought them through FFL's and passed NICS checks.

2) If any of them acquired their weapon through a personal transaction that was not run through NICS (through armslist, etc...), would they have been turned down if they had purchased their weapon at a FFL and had a NICS check done?

I'm really just trying to figure out if any of these mass shootings would have been possibly effected by closing this "loop hole" at all. To my knowledge, none would have been effected.

 

[MCgrease08]

Tully: We need leaders, not quitters, on gun violence

One of the Indy Star columnists is back banging his drum for gun control. If you have a FB account I encourage you to leave a comment.

I created one recently just so I could comment on stories like these. I'm tired of staying quiet on mainstream sites about being a gun owner, out of fear of being shamed by loud-mouthed idiots who want to see us disarmed.

Keep it civil and let's make sure our voices are being heard.

 

[churchmouse]

Legitimate question to all of you. I'm sure someone here knows the answer.

1) Has any single one of these mass murderers been a person that attained their weapon through one of the "loop holes" aka through a personal transaction (say through armslist, etc...)? To my knowledge, they all attained their weapons by either stealing them, through the black market, or legally bought them through FFL's and passed NICS checks.

2) If any of them acquired their weapon through a personal transaction that was not run through NICS (through armslist, etc...), would they have been turned down if they had purchased their weapon at a FFL and had a NICS check done?

I'm really just trying to figure out if any of these mass shootings would have been possibly effected by closing this "loop hole" at all. To my knowledge, none would have been effected.

Did the whack job Movie theater (Orange Hair) nut sack get his under the table....?????

 

[Cameramonkey]

The reason I consider the restriction by law important... though... is because it's pertinent to mass shooters and the argument against more laws. It needs to be a law (to me) before we can say "The law didn't work" or "More laws wouldn't have helped"

If it's just a policy that absolutely anyone could violate without real repercussions... we can't keep making that argument. Logically we all know it makes no difference if it's a law or not... but if we're going to yell back at the "Left" about the absurd laws they want... the killer had to have broken real laws. His entry of that college, or theater, etc... didn't break any laws. If we're going to argue with the "Left" about gun laws, I want to make sure we're accurate about it, and 100% right. (instead of assuming we're 100% right)

But hey, if the "Right" media can get away with the GFZ argument and the have the "Left" mostly give up on it... more power to them. I'm not fighting against them, I'll remain silent on what I consider a bit of an ethical stretch.

Edit: I noticed I'm seeing this from the angle of the shooter bringing guns onto the premises, and not the victims having a reliable means of self-defense on their person. I can understand, in that light, how calling it a "GFZ" for the sake of the victims makes sense (even though they could still, legally, carry and protect themselves there. Repercussions aren't important to me. Life > Expulsion)

How about this scenario: So if I enroll at IUPUI and EDC Concealed under a shirt. 3 years and $50,000 in student loans later, Im standing in class talking with the loony liberal professor. I turn to leave and drop my papers. Without thinking I bend over at the waist to pick them up and the professor sees my gun.

She reports me to the school, who kicks me out not because I broke a law, but because I broke student code of conduct for violating the weapons policy.

So you are saying that the following is "no REAL repercussions"?
-$50,000 in loans and no degree to show for it
-I cant transfer to IU or Purdue to continue my studies because its a joint campus and both would ban me.
-I lose 1/3 of my credits because other schools wont recognize them
- If I had to switch to a private school like U of I to finish that would triple my tuition


Seems pretty real to me. I'm not in jail, but its sure as hell gonna be painful for the next 30 years.

 

[jamil]

Looks like the OP made it to 50 and left.

 

[seedubs1]

I'm not sure. But if so, I'd like to know what type of "under the table." In my question, there is a large distinction between buying from a legal gun owner/seller through something like Armslist and buying from the black market.

Did the whack job Movie theater (Orange Hair) nut sack get his under the table....?????

 

[seedubs1]

But he did it with quality posts. Thems the rules.

And he's at 52.....Maybe he'll stick around and contribute.

Looks like the OP made it to 50 and left.

 

[1775usmarine]

Looks like the OP made it to 50 and left.

I would agree 100%.

 

[451_Detonics]

The gun control the Government wants to employ has absolutely nothing to do with crime prevention, it is a way to control people...all people.

 

[churchmouse]

I'm not sure. But if so, I'd like to know what type of "under the table." In my question, there is a large distinction between buying from a legal gun owner/seller through something like Armslist and buying from the black market.

What the POTUS and his cronies would call under the table.

To me, seeing that whack job I would never sell him a base ball bat let alone a gun.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

How about this scenario: So if I enroll at IUPUI and EDC Concealed under a shirt. 3 years and $50,000 in student loans later, Im standing in class talking with the loony liberal professor. I turn to leave and drop my papers. Without thinking I bend over at the waist to pick them up and the professor sees my gun.

She reports me to the school, who kicks me out not because I broke a law, but because I broke student code of conduct for violating the weapons policy.

So you are saying that the following is "no REAL repercussions"?
-$50,000 in loans and no degree to show for it
-I cant transfer to IU or Purdue to continue my studies because its a joint campus and both would ban me.
-I lose 1/3 of my credits because other schools wont recognize them
- If I had to switch to a private school like U of I to finish that would triple my tuition


Seems pretty real to me. I'm not in jail, but its sure as hell gonna be painful for the next 30 years.

But this is 100% unrelated to your safety, or guns. It's a choice to protect yourself.

I certainly don't like the policy, but you have the option to carry (without letting your shirt lift up) without repercussions.

 

[bwframe]

Tully: We need leaders, not quitters, on gun violence

One of the Indy Star columnists is back banging his drum for gun control. If you have a FB account I encourage you to leave a comment.

I created one recently just so I could comment on stories like these. I'm tired of staying quiet on mainstream sites about being a gun owner, out of fear of being shamed by loud-mouthed idiots who want to see us disarmed.

Keep it civil and let's make sure our voices are being heard.

With much respect to you sir, I'll play devil's advocate on this specific issue at this specific time.
Feeding this narrative is exactly what the other side wants right now. They want us fighting about gun control vs talking about foreign policy failures and felony classified document handling.

At this time the faster we quit arguing with the libs on gun control, the faster the discussion goes away.

 

[chipbennett]

But this is 100% unrelated to your safety, or guns. It's a choice to protect yourself.

Let's not be obtuse.

Your workplace prohibits firearms, under threat of termination. Do you carry, or do you observe your workplace's firearms prohibition? All you risk is being fired, which is arguably less of a repercussion than being expelled from college in your fourth year (typically the only school year someone is old enough to carry a concealed weapon).

If you're not willing to assume the risk of carrying in your workplace, how is a college student who is unwilling to assume the risk of carrying on campus any different?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Let's not be obtuse.

Your workplace prohibits firearms, under threat of termination. Do you carry, or do you observe your workplace's firearms prohibition? All you risk is being fired, which is arguably less of a repercussion than being expelled from college in your fourth year (typically the only school year someone is old enough to carry a concealed weapon).

If you're not willing to assume the risk of carrying in your workplace, how is a college student who is unwilling to assume the risk of carrying on campus any different?

That's a choice they made. They, legally, can carry there. I know it's unreasonable, I know it's a bad policy... but they aren't breaking laws, and they come out of it alive.

Hell, might even get a petition going afterward pressuring the college to not expel them, due to the lives they may have saved. Everyone loves a hero, even if it's all hypothetical.

If I still went to college, I'd absolutely have a gun on me. I'm absolutely willing to assume those risks, because I'm not a bad CC'er.

We shouldn't make this a black/white issue when it comes down to judgement calls a person has to make for themselves.

 

[Cameramonkey]

But this is 100% unrelated to your safety, or guns. It's a choice to protect yourself.

I certainly don't like the policy, but you have the option to carry (without letting your shirt lift up) without repercussions.

By your logic I also have the option of driving 100mph on public roads, so long as I do so in a way that I am never observed by the police... because it only counts if they catch me.

Obtuse is right. I'm tapping out because Im starting to feel like Im wrestling with a pig.

Have fun with the minutia boys and girls. I'd expect this kind of nitpicking from liberal antis on Facebook, not here.

 

[JollyMon]

..

If I still went to college, I'd absolutely have a gun on me. I'm absolutely willing to assume those risks, because I'm not a bad CC'er.

...

back to the original question, would you in your office at the risk of getting fired?

 

[actaeon277]

Exactly right.

Last night on Twitter, I asked just one such person how they would forcibly disarm law-abiding firearm owners who refused to comply with illegitimate disarmament laws. He stated, matter of fact, that the police and FBI would forcibly disarm them.

Did you point out how many LEOs would be needed? And how they'd have to go door to door, cause they don't know where all the gun owners and weapons are. And how weapons would be moved anticipating those searches. And how searches would have to continue for years, on EVERYBODY.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

back to the original question, would you in your office at the risk of getting fired?

I don't discuss my current workplace situations on a public forum.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

By your logic I also have the option of driving 100mph on public roads, so long as I do so in a way that I am never observed by the police... because it only counts if they catch me.

Obtuse is right. I'm tapping out because Im starting to feel like Im wrestling with a pig.

Have fun with the minutia boys and girls. I'd expect this kind of nitpicking from liberal antis on Facebook, not here.

Not my logic: Going 100mph on public roads is illegal. Carrying a gun at IUPUI is legal. False equiv