thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,371
|
Post by thyme4change on Sept 5, 2019 19:17:51 GMT -5
For some....no big deal.
For gun nutters....an anti-Constitutional gun grab(even though it's not). I wonder if they would think differently if it was an Islamic terrorist who bought a military assault rifle out of the trunk of someone's car, no background check, and then murdered 21 people during a church service.
Those church people should have had guns.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 5, 2019 19:33:08 GMT -5
My point is I have failed the "Instant" background check for the last three guns I have bought. Early reports said there was nothing that would have kept him from buying a gun,, his arrest was a misdemeanor. Then out of the blue comes media report that he failed, ,, Failed the instant, or complete check. If it was a complete, what did he do it? If a cop says it it really does not make it true.
If we're talking about the Odessa shooter (and if we're not, my apologies - there are far too many shooters to keep up with these days) he was prevented from buying a weapon because he had been diagnosed with a mental illness. So he bought one from a private person, because Texas does not require background checks in private sales.
www.texastribune.org/2019/09/03/odessa-texas-shooter-bought-gun-private-sale-without-background-check/
Kind of makes sense to require background checks on ALL sales, doesn't it? Close the gun show loophole? Doesn't seem too much to ask.
A DPS spokesperson said Tuesday that the failed purchase happened in 2014, but didn't disclose a reason.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 5, 2019 19:53:32 GMT -5
My point is I have failed the "Instant" background check for the last three guns I have bought. Early reports said there was nothing that would have kept him from buying a gun,, his arrest was a misdemeanor. Then out of the blue comes media report that he failed, ,, Failed the instant, or complete check. If it was a complete, what did he do it? If a cop says it it really does not make it true.
If we're talking about the Odessa shooter (and if we're not, my apologies - there are far too many shooters to keep up with these days) he was prevented from buying a weapon because he had been diagnosed with a mental illness. So he bought one from a private person, because Texas does not require background checks in private sales.
www.texastribune.org/2019/09/03/odessa-texas-shooter-bought-gun-private-sale-without-background-check/
Kind of makes sense to require background checks on ALL sales, doesn't it? Close the gun show loophole? Doesn't seem too much to ask.
We have already had all kinds of mass shooting with the shooter passed the background checks. It is pretty certain that background checks alone don't work. Lets do a whole bunch more background because the background checks we are doing don't work.. That's great!!
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 5, 2019 19:55:33 GMT -5
I will put this out, let you blow it out of the water. Of recent mass shooters,, how many did not play violent video games?
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 5, 2019 19:56:50 GMT -5
You mean like where I think police should be held accountable for their actions?? Like the police shooting of completely unarmed Andrew Finch Wichita KS,
where he was shot in under ten seconds after stepping out on his porch, from over 50yrds away. He did absolutely nothing wrong,, but he is dead, and the officer that shot him,, no charges,, none. So what has the police or even the city done to help the family of Andrew Finch,, for the death they caused?? Nothing that is it nothing,,
There that should make you happy, a well oiled government system,, kills their citizens ,, lets the family rot!!! Now lets hear from the great defenders of the police and the city government!!! how great this is,,
Next up Leslie Merritt jr.
No, it's when you say things like "I often break the law, but the the trick is not to get caught!" That's the trick,, don't get caught!
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,371
|
Post by thyme4change on Sept 5, 2019 20:53:44 GMT -5
If we're talking about the Odessa shooter (and if we're not, my apologies - there are far too many shooters to keep up with these days) he was prevented from buying a weapon because he had been diagnosed with a mental illness. So he bought one from a private person, because Texas does not require background checks in private sales.
www.texastribune.org/2019/09/03/odessa-texas-shooter-bought-gun-private-sale-without-background-check/
Kind of makes sense to require background checks on ALL sales, doesn't it? Close the gun show loophole? Doesn't seem too much to ask.
We have already had all kinds of mass shooting with the shooter passed the background checks. It is pretty certain that background checks alone don't work. Lets do a whole bunch more background because the background checks we are doing don't work.. That's great!! But they do work in domestic violence, which is a much larger number of people. And that is what I care about most.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,371
|
Post by thyme4change on Sept 5, 2019 21:14:18 GMT -5
I will put this out, let you blow it out of the water. Of recent mass shooters,, how many did not play violent video games?
Maybe the Republicans should be working on shutting down or regulating the video game industry. In fact, let's try that for a few years. Storm people's houses, seize their video games, shut down manufacturing of new games, raid development companies, and regulate the shit out of the video game industry. And if it doesn't make a dent in gun violence before 2025, then Republicans (a) can't ever blame video games again and (b) agree to new gun legislation.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 5, 2019 21:20:21 GMT -5
I will put this out, let you blow it out of the water. Of recent mass shooters,, how many did not play violent video games?
Maybe the Republicans should be working on shutting down or regulating the video game industry. In fact, let's try that for a few years. Storm people's houses, seize their video games, shut down manufacturing of new games, raid development companies, and regulate the shit out of the video game industry. And if it doesn't make a dent in gun violence before 2025, then Republicans (a) can't ever blame video games again and (b) agree to new gun legislation. So is this no none of them ever played, or they were still playing when they did shot a bunch of people?
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,371
|
Post by thyme4change on Sept 5, 2019 21:26:05 GMT -5
Maybe the Republicans should be working on shutting down or regulating the video game industry. In fact, let's try that for a few years. Storm people's houses, seize their video games, shut down manufacturing of new games, raid development companies, and regulate the shit out of the video game industry. And if it doesn't make a dent in gun violence before 2025, then Republicans (a) can't ever blame video games again and (b) agree to new gun legislation. So is this no none of them ever played, or they were still playing when they did shot a bunch of people? I don't have that information and do not wish to speculate on the gaming habits of specific violent people. I prefer to work in data based facts and analysis. I would be in support of a ban on video games to see what kind of impact that would have gun violence, and would be interested in a scientific statistical analysis of the results. I am not opposing you on this statement, so you challenging me is puzzling.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Sept 5, 2019 21:27:20 GMT -5
I will put this out, let you blow it out of the water. Of recent mass shooters,, how many did not play violent video games?
Of recent mass shooters... how many did not use Charmin toilet paper? Of recent mass shooters.... how many did not ingest lactose? Of recent mass shooters... how many did not drink coffee?
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Sept 5, 2019 21:29:35 GMT -5
For the 176th time....other first world countries have the same, exact, identical video games. Why is there a dearth of mass shootings?
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 5, 2019 21:32:43 GMT -5
So is this no none of them ever played, or they were still playing when they did shot a bunch of people? I don't have that information and do not wish to speculate on the gaming habits of specific violent people. I prefer to work in data based facts and analysis. I would be in support of a ban on video games to see what kind of impact that would have gun violence, and would be interested in a scientific statistical analysis of the results. I am not opposing you on this statement, so you challenging me is puzzling. Sorry, I didn't mean to. I think it may be a piece in the big puzzle of why so do this.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 5, 2019 21:34:42 GMT -5
I will put this out, let you blow it out of the water. Of recent mass shooters,, how many did not play violent video games?
Of recent mass shooters... how many did not use Charmin toilet paper? Of recent mass shooters.... how many did not ingest lactose? Of recent mass shooters... how many did not drink coffee? Yea, not using toilet paper would make a lot of people mean!!
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,337
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 5, 2019 22:02:28 GMT -5
I will put this out, let you blow it out of the water. Of recent mass shooters,, how many did not play violent video games?
I don't know. You seem ton know. How many?
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,856
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 6, 2019 7:16:04 GMT -5
If we're talking about the Odessa shooter (and if we're not, my apologies - there are far too many shooters to keep up with these days) he was prevented from buying a weapon because he had been diagnosed with a mental illness. So he bought one from a private person, because Texas does not require background checks in private sales.
www.texastribune.org/2019/09/03/odessa-texas-shooter-bought-gun-private-sale-without-background-check/
Kind of makes sense to require background checks on ALL sales, doesn't it? Close the gun show loophole? Doesn't seem too much to ask.
We have already had all kinds of mass shooting with the shooter passed the background checks. It is pretty certain that background checks alone don't work. Lets do a whole bunch more background because the background checks we are doing don't work.. That's great!! Current background checks are too weak. Doesn't mean they aren't useful, just means they need improvement.
And the Odessa guy got his gun from a private sale, which, in Texas, doesn't require a background check at all.
There's been legislation proposed that would increase the background check to include cross checking domestic abuse arrests, terrorist watch lists and other lists of potentially violent/mentally imbalanced people - and to require them when purchasing ANY weapon, not just guns purchased in stores. Sounds like common sense, right? McConnell didn't think so - he's been killing any proposed background check improvement laws that hit his desk.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Sept 6, 2019 7:40:32 GMT -5
I will put this out, let you blow it out of the water. Of recent mass shooters,, how many did not play violent video games?
Of recent mass shooters... how many did not use Charmin toilet paper? Of recent mass shooters.... how many did not ingest lactose? Of recent mass shooters... how many did not drink coffee? Ok, I admit I do not know whether this issue is part of mass shootings. I will tell you I believe these games do desensitize our youths to reality of violence. My kids grew up on Pac Man, Space Invaders and Super Mario. I guess we could say there was some inherent violence in these games too....... My grandkids grew up with Grand theft auto and mass shootings and massive destruction. There is at least some loss of rationality that goes with this, through some loss of humanity for some (not all) of the participants. Spend a day in an arcade watching the player's eyes and their verbal excitement and you will see it. It is more than just child's play.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Sept 6, 2019 7:44:28 GMT -5
For the 176th time....other first world countries have the same, exact, identical video games. Why is there a dearth of mass shootings?
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 6,965
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Sept 6, 2019 7:52:40 GMT -5
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,371
|
Post by thyme4change on Sept 6, 2019 8:12:20 GMT -5
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 6, 2019 8:32:09 GMT -5
We have already had all kinds of mass shooting with the shooter passed the background checks. It is pretty certain that background checks alone don't work. Lets do a whole bunch more background because the background checks we are doing don't work.. That's great!! Current background checks are too weak. Doesn't mean they aren't useful, just means they need improvement.
And the Odessa guy got his gun from a private sale, which, in Texas, doesn't require a background check at all.
There's been legislation proposed that would increase the background check to include cross checking domestic abuse arrests, terrorist watch lists and other lists of potentially violent/mentally imbalanced people - and to require them when purchasing ANY weapon, not just guns purchased in stores. Sounds like common sense, right? McConnell didn't think so - he's been killing any proposed background check improvement laws that hit his desk.
Ok we are doing private gun sales, background checks on them,
Remember where as an experiment, I went out looking for a gun to buy, just causally asking strangers if they knew anyone that had a gun for sale,
it took me 42 minutes. So what law are you going to pass that stops, someone that has failed all background checks, goes out and does the same thing I did?? So ,, we are going to pass a law that is so severe to make sure they don't buy guns like that?? Like a law stronger than say,,, murder one?? that a pretty strong law,, it does not stop people from killing each other,, Let's pass a bunch of laws that only effect the law biding citizen,, there you go ,, you have accomplished nothing,,
So when those don't work,, let's pass more that don't work?? Oh by the way the rifle I bought came with a cleaning kit, ammo, a red dot optics sight, and a case. which leads me to believe the gun was not stolen,, the thief would have only gabbed the gun, in their hast to get out, before they were caught!
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 6, 2019 8:39:41 GMT -5
Of the Countries listed, aren't those Countries that the government allows no guns for the general population? No guns = no gun deaths, , OK what's is next total confiscation of 300-400 million guns in the hands of the Crazy Americans?
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 6,965
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Sept 6, 2019 9:41:50 GMT -5
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,371
|
Post by thyme4change on Sept 6, 2019 10:21:36 GMT -5
Current background checks are too weak. Doesn't mean they aren't useful, just means they need improvement.
And the Odessa guy got his gun from a private sale, which, in Texas, doesn't require a background check at all.
There's been legislation proposed that would increase the background check to include cross checking domestic abuse arrests, terrorist watch lists and other lists of potentially violent/mentally imbalanced people - and to require them when purchasing ANY weapon, not just guns purchased in stores. Sounds like common sense, right? McConnell didn't think so - he's been killing any proposed background check improvement laws that hit his desk.
Ok we are doing private gun sales, background checks on them,
Remember where as an experiment, I went out looking for a gun to buy, just causally asking strangers if they knew anyone that had a gun for sale,
it took me 42 minutes. So what law are you going to pass that stops, someone that has failed all background checks, goes out and does the same thing I did?? So ,, we are going to pass a law that is so severe to make sure they don't buy guns like that?? Like a law stronger than say,,, murder one?? that a pretty strong law,, it does not stop people from killing each other,, Let's pass a bunch of laws that only effect the law biding citizen,, there you go ,, you have accomplished nothing,,
So when those don't work,, let's pass more that don't work?? Oh by the way the rifle I bought came with a cleaning kit, ammo, a red dot optics sight, and a case. which leads me to believe the gun was not stolen,, the thief would have only gabbed the gun, in their hast to get out, before they were caught! Harsh penalties have had a huge impact on drunk driving. People still do it, but not nearly as much as they did. If we can get regular law abiding citizens to not want to risk an "off the books" gun sale, we will reduce those kinds of sales. I don't know if you found a regular guy who wanted to do a private sale, which is legal, so 42 minutes isn't shocking. It might have taken you longer if private sales had more restrictions.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 18, 2024 21:10:56 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2019 12:03:29 GMT -5
We have already had all kinds of mass shooting with the shooter passed the background checks. It is pretty certain that background checks alone don't work. Lets do a whole bunch more background because the background checks we are doing don't work.. That's great!! Current background checks are too weak. Doesn't mean they aren't useful, just means they need improvement.
And the Odessa guy got his gun from a private sale, which, in Texas, doesn't require a background check at all.
There's been legislation proposed that would increase the background check to include cross checking domestic abuse arrests, terrorist watch lists and other lists of potentially violent/mentally imbalanced people - and to require them when purchasing ANY weapon, not just guns purchased in stores. Sounds like common sense, right? McConnell didn't think so - he's been killing any proposed background check improvement laws that hit his desk.
Doesn't sound like common sense. List makers don't have the authority to override the second amendment. However, that kind of thing does happen in dictatorships. I like your "potential" aspect, for restricting constitutional rights. Think of the cross application for other amendments. Interesting concept for the U.S. Wouldn't you say ?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 18, 2024 21:10:56 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2019 12:16:46 GMT -5
Of the Countries listed, aren't those Countries that the government allows no guns for the general population? No guns = no gun deaths, , OK what's is next total confiscation of 300-400 million guns in the hands of the Crazy Americans?
First thing I saw when looking at the graphs, was the cherry picking of the other countries that were named Quote; Private ownership of guns — whether pistols, rifles or shotguns — is almost unheard of in China. Handgun permits are sometimes (but rarely) given to people living in remote areas for protection against wild animals. rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/china-calls-for-no-delay-on-gun-controls-in-u-s/And... Quote; Apr 27, 2016 · Russia has a short history of private gun ownership — it was rare during the Soviet era — but the country's stillborn civil society has started to push for greater access to firearms.
www.themoscowtimes.com/2016/04/27/russians-their-guns-and-the-state-a52720
And... Quote; Gun ownership can result in many ways in India, in some destructive ways, in some positive ways too : Controlled use of guns might curb the violent crimes against women at all the nook and corners of India. www.quora.com/What-would-happen-if-gun-ownership-was-legalized-in-India
|
|
moon/Laura
Administrator
Forum Owner
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 15:05:36 GMT -5
Posts: 10,033
Mini-Profile Text Color: f8fb10
|
Post by moon/Laura on Sept 6, 2019 12:40:44 GMT -5
So for all of you "it's my right" gun nuts, what would it take for your stance to change? Does someone in your family have to die because of inadequate background checks/ lack of bans on ARs? I mean seriously. Would you just say "well he obtained it legally, so it's ok"?
And if it's not ok for you to lose your spouse/child/parent, why should it be ok for anyone else?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 18, 2024 21:10:56 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2019 13:51:05 GMT -5
So for all of you "it's my right" gun nuts, what would it take for your stance to change? Does someone in your family have to die because of inadequate background checks/ lack of bans on ARs? I mean seriously. Would you just say "well he obtained it legally, so it's ok"? And if it's not ok for you to lose your spouse/child/parent, why should it be ok for anyone else? 43% of households in the US own guns. This has barely changed over the years. They are 99.999% law abiding ? Referring to that situation as "gun nuts" might need some reconsideration. Criminal background checks are enough for me. Banning the tool by looks means nothing. An AR-15 is functionally identical to my 30.06 deer rifle which looks way different, like a traditional old rifle. Although it's caliber is way more powerful than the standard AR caliber. My stance won't change, I accept a much higher risk driving every day. I would not give up my personal transportation because the guy down the road drives drunk and kills 1 or many, or a terrorist used it to mass kill. I will not give up my hunting/personal protection, because a criminal is able to acquire a gun and uses it illegally.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,371
|
Post by thyme4change on Sept 6, 2019 14:38:27 GMT -5
So for all of you "it's my right" gun nuts, what would it take for your stance to change? Does someone in your family have to die because of inadequate background checks/ lack of bans on ARs? I mean seriously. Would you just say "well he obtained it legally, so it's ok"? And if it's not ok for you to lose your spouse/child/parent, why should it be ok for anyone else? 43% of households in the US own guns. This has barely changed over the years. They are 99.999% law abiding ? Referring to that situation as "gun nuts" might need some reconsideration. Criminal background checks are enough for me. Banning the tool by looks means nothing. An AR-15 is functionally identical to my 30.06 deer rifle which looks way different, like a traditional old rifle. Although it's caliber is way more powerful than the standard AR caliber. My stance won't change, I accept a much higher risk driving every day. I would not give up my personal transportation because the guy down the road drives drunk and kills 1 or many, or a terrorist used it to mass kill. I will not give up my hunting/personal protection, because a criminal is able to acquire a gun and uses it illegally. 43%? That is not a number I have ever heard before. At least not in this decade. I've always heard more like 1/3rd. Should we have a source-off?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 18, 2024 21:10:56 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2019 14:44:20 GMT -5
43% of households in the US own guns. This has barely changed over the years. They are 99.999% law abiding ? Referring to that situation as "gun nuts" might need some reconsideration. Criminal background checks are enough for me. Banning the tool by looks means nothing. An AR-15 is functionally identical to my 30.06 deer rifle which looks way different, like a traditional old rifle. Although it's caliber is way more powerful than the standard AR caliber. My stance won't change, I accept a much higher risk driving every day. I would not give up my personal transportation because the guy down the road drives drunk and kills 1 or many, or a terrorist used it to mass kill. I will not give up my hunting/personal protection, because a criminal is able to acquire a gun and uses it illegally. 43%? That is not a number I have ever heard before. At least not in this decade. I've always heard more like 1/3rd. Should we have a source-off? Households. I'm mobile like you, hard for me to get all the ones I have posted in the recent past. It would have to wait till Monday at least, but I'm good with that. It actually hasn't changed much at all, includes this decade. I think PEW says 42% right now if I'm remembering correctly. Either/or, even if it's 30 percent of households, that's a lot of law abiding owners that shouldn't really be referred to as "gun nuts". That was my point. The Second Amendment is a right in this country, and was affirmed as an individual right by the Supreme Court not all that long ago.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,856
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 6, 2019 15:06:50 GMT -5
Current background checks are too weak. Doesn't mean they aren't useful, just means they need improvement.
And the Odessa guy got his gun from a private sale, which, in Texas, doesn't require a background check at all.
There's been legislation proposed that would increase the background check to include cross checking domestic abuse arrests, terrorist watch lists and other lists of potentially violent/mentally imbalanced people - and to require them when purchasing ANY weapon, not just guns purchased in stores. Sounds like common sense, right? McConnell didn't think so - he's been killing any proposed background check improvement laws that hit his desk.
Ok we are doing private gun sales, background checks on them,
Remember where as an experiment, I went out looking for a gun to buy, just causally asking strangers if they knew anyone that had a gun for sale,
it took me 42 minutes. So what law are you going to pass that stops, someone that has failed all background checks, goes out and does the same thing I did?? So ,, we are going to pass a law that is so severe to make sure they don't buy guns like that?? Like a law stronger than say,,, murder one?? that a pretty strong law,, it does not stop people from killing each other,, Let's pass a bunch of laws that only effect the law biding citizen,, there you go ,, you have accomplished nothing,,
So when those don't work,, let's pass more that don't work?? Oh by the way the rifle I bought came with a cleaning kit, ammo, a red dot optics sight, and a case. which leads me to believe the gun was not stolen,, the thief would have only gabbed the gun, in their hast to get out, before they were caught! So based on your argument, since people are still going to murder other people even though killing people is illegal, we should just stop prosecuting murderers?
What's the point, right? Murderers are going to murder, regardless of whether it's legal or illegal, so it's pointless to have laws against it.
Let's not bother to have laws against anything, since people keep breaking the law. Let's have a free range society. Like living in the movie Purge, 24-7 because it's just so annoying to make a law that people will just break.
|
|