You were badgering people with your comments. Challenging them to produce evidence to support and underpin their opinions. And when they did and they certainly did, you chose to ignore the reality and then produced the above nonsensical drivel that you just posted ten minutes ago.
Consider yourself schooled.
And your biometric idea is not your idea. It was already tried with police weapons years ago. It won't work because when a people need their weapons to defend their lives the last thing in the world they want to happen is for their weapon to fail. If a weapon is required to be wound up like a camping flashlight or required to take power from a battery then that weapon will fail and people will die. Nice idea you had there buddy.
Your idea of as "little pain" as possible is laughable because you only want the gun owners to give up something. How about this. I would happy to trade my large capacity magazines and have universal background checks if non-gun owners would be willing to pay a 50% income tax to fund the needed extra security to keep every American safe. As well as fully funding a Victims Medical Insurance Program. How is that for a painless idea?
Brother you need to go read some books. The answers you're seeking are in the Federalist Papers which outline the reasoning for each amendment in the US Constitutions - Bill of Rights.
I'll give you an example. The First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Some folks (leftists, progressives and idiots in general) think this means that the US Federal government cannot engage in acts of prayer or religious service. When in fact within days of the signing of the US Constitution, the Congress established the Office of the Chaplain for the House and the Senate. The reason why is explained in the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation and the Federalist Papers. All of which are the basis and reasoning for the US Constitution.
The Second Amendment is even more straight forward. It was enacted so that every able man that was not prohibited by physical condition or religious beliefs could be ready to fight if a need to form a militia was present. The second part of the amendment affirms that the "states" are free and that they have the right to defend themselves. For those who believe that the 2nd Amendment has something to do with hunting and fishing. That's just stupid because back then if you did not hunt and fish then you did not eat. Notice carefully that it does not say the right of the militia or the government or the church. It says the "PEOPLE" have a right to bear arms and that this right shall not be infringed. This is basic 6th grade civics and American History.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
If you're serious about learning about the why and what's of the founders intent. Then I recommend the aforementioned which talk in great detail about how and why America came to be these United States.
Let me predicate by saying that I am American. I am against all forms of slavery including Marxism. I am trained marksman, a vet as well as a family man.
First question I have is: If a criminal broke the law to obtain possession of a firearm(s.) And then subsequently used that firearm to commit murder(s) like in the Sandy Hook, Columbine, Aurora and V-Tech then why are some of you talking about totalitarian measures and the infliction of criminal consequences on law abiding citizens that have done nothing wrong?
Second question is: Would it be more logical and effective to first look at the failures in the enforcement of the current laws before we discuss the implementation of new laws?
The USA is a free country. We are not subjects or slaves. We do not bow to any monarchy nor do we adorn our currency with the images of royalty or dictators. Our freedom is only predicated on our ability and willingness to defend ourselves. Our Constitution, like every other constitution means nothing if the people have no way to defend their rights.
People who are against guns often forget that criminals by nature don't care about laws and consequences. And they also forget that 99.9% of the time when a crime is committed the police show after the crime. So if you disarm people or limit their ability to defend themselves. Doesn't that put you in the same spectrum of evil as the people that commit murders and rape women? An unwitting accomplice?
Some of the ideas about gun control in the USA are forged in ignorance by people that don't even own a weapon or have never used one. It's like taking driving tips from someone that neither drives nor owns a car.
TEDCred score: +0.40 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A reply on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
You were badgering people with your comments. Challenging them to produce evidence to support and underpin their opinions. And when they did and they certainly did, you chose to ignore the reality and then produced the above nonsensical drivel that you just posted ten minutes ago.
Consider yourself schooled.
And your biometric idea is not your idea. It was already tried with police weapons years ago. It won't work because when a people need their weapons to defend their lives the last thing in the world they want to happen is for their weapon to fail. If a weapon is required to be wound up like a camping flashlight or required to take power from a battery then that weapon will fail and people will die. Nice idea you had there buddy.
Your idea of as "little pain" as possible is laughable because you only want the gun owners to give up something. How about this. I would happy to trade my large capacity magazines and have universal background checks if non-gun owners would be willing to pay a 50% income tax to fund the needed extra security to keep every American safe. As well as fully funding a Victims Medical Insurance Program. How is that for a painless idea?
A comment on Conversation: If you could warn your past self about anything only using two words, what would you say?
A reply on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
Brother you need to go read some books. The answers you're seeking are in the Federalist Papers which outline the reasoning for each amendment in the US Constitutions - Bill of Rights.
I'll give you an example. The First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Some folks (leftists, progressives and idiots in general) think this means that the US Federal government cannot engage in acts of prayer or religious service. When in fact within days of the signing of the US Constitution, the Congress established the Office of the Chaplain for the House and the Senate. The reason why is explained in the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation and the Federalist Papers. All of which are the basis and reasoning for the US Constitution.
The Second Amendment is even more straight forward. It was enacted so that every able man that was not prohibited by physical condition or religious beliefs could be ready to fight if a need to form a militia was present. The second part of the amendment affirms that the "states" are free and that they have the right to defend themselves. For those who believe that the 2nd Amendment has something to do with hunting and fishing. That's just stupid because back then if you did not hunt and fish then you did not eat. Notice carefully that it does not say the right of the militia or the government or the church. It says the "PEOPLE" have a right to bear arms and that this right shall not be infringed. This is basic 6th grade civics and American History.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
If you're serious about learning about the why and what's of the founders intent. Then I recommend the aforementioned which talk in great detail about how and why America came to be these United States.
A comment on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
Let me predicate by saying that I am American. I am against all forms of slavery including Marxism. I am trained marksman, a vet as well as a family man.
First question I have is: If a criminal broke the law to obtain possession of a firearm(s.) And then subsequently used that firearm to commit murder(s) like in the Sandy Hook, Columbine, Aurora and V-Tech then why are some of you talking about totalitarian measures and the infliction of criminal consequences on law abiding citizens that have done nothing wrong?
Second question is: Would it be more logical and effective to first look at the failures in the enforcement of the current laws before we discuss the implementation of new laws?
The USA is a free country. We are not subjects or slaves. We do not bow to any monarchy nor do we adorn our currency with the images of royalty or dictators. Our freedom is only predicated on our ability and willingness to defend ourselves. Our Constitution, like every other constitution means nothing if the people have no way to defend their rights.
People who are against guns often forget that criminals by nature don't care about laws and consequences. And they also forget that 99.9% of the time when a crime is committed the police show after the crime. So if you disarm people or limit their ability to defend themselves. Doesn't that put you in the same spectrum of evil as the people that commit murders and rape women? An unwitting accomplice?
Some of the ideas about gun control in the USA are forged in ignorance by people that don't even own a weapon or have never used one. It's like taking driving tips from someone that neither drives nor owns a car.