gun registration

OK stumbler, you really stumbled this time.

Virginia reguires a state registration and the federal government requires the resistration of ALL firearms sold through dealers. Va. has a 2 gun per month purchase limitation, and a seven day waiting period before picking up your paid for pistol..

In Maryland when you purchase a pistol, you must surrender a casing fired from that firearm for the State Police registry.

I used to live just outside of the District of Cloumbia. D.C. has some of the most draconian gun laws in America. It also has one of the highest crime rates.

In my town the Chief of Police has to give a person PERMISSION to buy a handgun. The person has to JUSTIFY why he or she NEEDS the handgun. I want it is not considered justification. The chief is a real bas***d and routinely denies permits. I qualified for, and was issued a concealed carry permit by the State. With that piece of plastic, I don't need no stinkin' permission. In the past 4 years I have not carried a pistol yet. But, it is one more layer that the government intrudes into our lives.

I believe it was Thomas Jefferson who said "that government is best, that governs the least" or something to that effect. Mr Jefferson would be horrified by todays governments.

In California, don't even ask unless you are a political hack, a movie star, or Dianne Fienstein. Yes, she has a concealled carry permit, in case someone wants to harm her, because she is famous. By the way she is one of the most rabid gun grabbers in America.

The legislation that created the Federal background check "requires" that once the check has been completed the information cannot be kept on file. Guess what folks, it has become the single most extensive firearm registry ever created in the American history. So much for the "police" following the law.

I could go on and on, but with some people it falls on deaf ears.

osakisbl

 

Of course you are right, I now see the error of my ways and will stop posting anti-gun rubbish. I will embrace the gun and buy one at the first opportunity. I will religiously polish it and keep it under my pillow at night to prevent me and my family being raped by home invaders!

Only kidding the real reason I'm gonna keep a gun is to protect me from the emerging terrorist threat in the Middle East. Some of those fuckers have got donkeys for Christ's sake!

*not_secure_link*media.lonelyplanet.com/lpi/23198/23198-80/681x454.jpg​

I know Sweetheart, and it is such people that give me faith in the human race. :rose::rose::rose:

 

"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”~Thomas Jefferson

"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." ~ Thomas Jefferson

 

I am not going to lie, I have neither the time nor patience to go through this whole thread to read all of the posts. Can someone let me know if someone has talked about the strain theory as a logical response as to why getting rid of weapons would be a bad idea? As well if anyone has talked about Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs as another logical response as to why getting rid of weapons would be a bad idea as well? Thanks

 

I have heard of Maslow's Hierarchy of needs, but I have never read an explanation of it, nor do I have any idea what it has to with gun control. I have never heard of strain theory.

To save me a trip to the internet, why don't you just tell us what this has to do with gun control.

I know you can. You are the most intelligent poster here. So, please stop teasing us like a stripper dressed in a mink coat. Show us what you have.

 

Tennessee 3-year-old shoots self with handgun left out

*not_secure_link*www.rawstory.com/r...3-year-old-shoots-self-with-handgun-left-out/

 

Coulter: “If you compare white populations, we have the same murder rate as Belgium”

“If you compare white populations, we have the same murder rate as Belgium” – Ann Coulter.

In a nutshell: Coulter is right, about Belgium — and only Belgium – but wrong about the rest of western Europe, which has a lot lower murder rate than even our “white” murder rate (see figures below). So if Ann Coulter wants to play the race-baiting game, perhaps she can explain to us why white Americans are so much more murderous than western Europeans, who are also mostly white. Hint: It’s their guns.
*not_secure_link*americablog.com/2013/01/ann-coulter-murder-america-belgium.html

---------

Because I dislike guns and the American gun culture I want to agree with this. Unfortunately, I am unable to follow his reasoning. I do know that in the United States blacks have a much higher murder rate than whites. This is sometimes difficult to demonstrate, because Hispanics are often included with whites of European ancestry.

For data on matters like this I like statistics compiled by the U.S. government, governments in Europe, Asia, and the United Nations.

Nevertheless, it is plausible to me that in most European countries whites have lower murder rates than whites in the United States.

Napoleon A Chagnon has made a lifetime study of the Yanomamo. This is a tribe of American Indians which well into the twentieth century maintained a neolithic way of life in the jungles of South America. By neolithic, I mean that they combined hunting with primitive agriculture. They lived, and to a considerable extent still live, in villages that are often at war with each other.

Chagnon has maintained that Yanomamo men who have killed enemies in combat average three times as many children as men who have not. This is because they usually have more than one wife.

Other studies of primitive peoples, both historic and prehistoric, indicate that a much higher percentage of men were killed in warfare between hunting bands and tribes, then the number killed in modern wars.

This is relevant to a discussion of white murder rates because internationally Orientals average lower murder rates than whites, who average lower murder rates than Hispanics, who have lower murder rates than blacks.

I am not quite sure why Orientals have lower averages than whites, because agriculture and civilization began among whites earlier than among Orientals.

Nevertheless, Orientals and whites have practiced urban civilization for several thousand years. Hispanics have a high percentage of American Indian ancestry. Criminal justice systems of civilized countries remove physically aggressive men from the population.

In addition, in civilized countries warfare became a specialty, rather than something that was expected of all men. Physically aggressive men who did not become criminals were attracted to the military, where it was usually difficult to have families and raise children.

While American Indian and African Negro male killers had lots of sons who inherited their lethal talents and inclinations, white and Oriental male killers were more likely to be executed, and to have no children at all, or they were more likely to die on battlefields, and again to have no children.

European white men who were more physically aggressive than average, but not enough so to become murders were probably more likely to immigrate to the United States. This would explain why American males often love guns, and more frequently kill people than European males.

In other words, it is not their guns. It is their genes.

Much of what I have written is hypothetical. Nevertheless, we do know that blacks and Hispanics have higher murder rates than whites and Orientals. It is reasonably certain that life in a paleolithic or neolithic environment is considerably more violent than life in an urban civilization. It makes sense that races that are closer in number of generations to a paleolithic and neolithic environment are inherently more violent than races that have practiced civilization for several thousands of years.

 

Alright, well to begin explaining gun control using Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. There are 5 levels of needs that everyone must meet to be able to live happy and function properly in life. If one of the lower levels is not reached, then the person is stuck at the lower level until he or she fulfills the needs that are required to raise to the next level. The levels are the following in ascending order: physiological needs, security needs, social needs, esteem needs, and self-actualizing needs. For the topic of gun control it is essential that the security need is formed and established. Once a person does not feel their security needs are met, they will revert back to that level, to be able to continue to keep growing as a person. So in this instance, once weapons are taken away from regular citizens, to be able to properly feel secured, then they will revert to anything they have to do to feel safe again. In this instance, that would be to attain a weapon by illegal means. Now this rolls into the next theory I talked about.

The Strain Theory in criminology is just that, it states that people who feel a strain in their lives, will do anything to attain that need. Now there are individual strains and structural strains, but because it would be a law, it would be considered to be a structural strain. So because the law would cause a strain on the structure of how someone is used to living and having their needs met by taking away their weapons for protection, the normal law abiding citizen will feel the strain to need to get protection another way, so they commit crime by acquiring a weapon illegally so they can be protected again. This theory is great at explaining almost any crime that occurs currently in the world, due to crime is usually based upon a strain of some kind. And as I said, almost any crime, because there are crimes that just cannot be explained using the Strain theory.

I was also thinking, and I have a feeling that the reason that this gun control issue is such a heated battle, is due to the psychological term of cognitive dissonance. Now cognitive dissonance is a term that describes when one belief that is held by a person and another belief occurs which creates some type of conflict against the original belief. So when this occurs, for the person to not have conflicting beliefs which creates a discrepancy in the mind, one of the two beliefs must change or be ignored. Now to use this term in current gun rights debates, would be the following most common example: a person believes that they have the right to live in a secured, protected, and ordered life; but then tragedy hits like mass killings that are senseless and should never happen. So the person now wants to feel protected with their guns, but they also want the mass killings to stop which would mean their guns would be taken away. So now the person has to decide to which belief they need to hold onto, so that there is no conflicting beliefs or discrepancies; be it that they should hold onto their weapons, or that weapons should be taken away to protect the lives of innocent people. This is the same reason why many wars have the same issues as well.

Well, hope that helps in the elaboration of those terms, and now you know what I have.

 

Best 7 minutes on gun control that you will ever see.

[YOUTUBE]B5ELyG9V1SY&feature=player_embedded[/YOUTUBE]

 

Guns, Murder, and Race

Those of us who do not like guns do not feel secure in a country with so many guns and so much gun violence.

Most of these people - and here I part with them - choose to ignore the relationship between race and crime. Although in South Africa it is nearly illegal to own a gun, and although in Mexico there are stricter gun control laws than in the United States, the murder rate per 100,000 inhabitants in South Africa is 31.8, in Mexico it is 22.7, in the United States it is 4.2, and in Canada, with a higher percentage of whites than the US it is 1.6.

These statistics are provided by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, so they are probably the most accurate statistics available.

It is interesting to note that in Argentina the murder rate per 100,000 inhabitants is 3.4. In Chile it is 3.2.

*not_secure_link*en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

These are countries where the population is predominately of European origins.

In El Salvador the murder rate per 100,000 people is 69.2. In Honduras it is 91.6. In these countries the populations of American Indians and those of mixes race is much higher. The high murder rate that exists in most Latin American countries is more a matter of race than it is of culture. In Spain the murder rate per 100,000 inhabitants is 0.8. In Portugal it is 1.2.

In my comment #1170 I presented a biological explanation of low murder rates among whites and Orientals, and high murder rates among blacks and Hispanics.

I acknowledge that other factors influence the murder rate. In North Korea the rate per 100,000 people is 15.2. In South Korea it is 2.6. Nevertheless, race seems to be the most important factor.

 

Hence gun control isn't going to make much difference other than turn otherwise good citizens into criminals.

 

I think the most important factor in being a boring broken record is being called Distant Lover

 

[SIZE=+1](A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=+1](B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=+1](C) Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1](Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept. of Health Human Services)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=+1]Guns[/SIZE]


[SIZE=+1](A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000.[/SIZE][SIZE=+1]Yes, that is 80 million.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=+1](B) The number of accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups, is 1,500.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=+1](C) The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is 0.000188.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=+1]Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]Remember, "Guns don't kill people, doctors do."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=+1]FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=+1]Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand![/SIZE]

 

RK, if that post isn't ironic, you are one dumb motherfucker

 

If it is...


Hahahahahaha.....sweet

 

That depends on the nature of the gun control laws. I am in favor of some gun control laws. I think few of us want a fifteen year old boy to be able to buy a hand gun as easily as he can buy a bicycle.

Nevertheless, unlike most liberals I do not see gun control laws as a panacea. I think the emphasis needs to be on catching criminals, executing a lot of them, and forcing the rest to perform hard labor until they are too old for crime. Rehabilitation is unreliable. The only factor that reliably reduces recidivism is age.

 

The truth only sounds like a broken record for those who refuse to accept it.

 

Once again, you postulate, you extemporise, you don't spout truth. You repeat the same thing over and over again, hence the analogous broken record.

It's really painful explaining things to you. You're more stupid than any other poster on here.

 

A 15 year old can not legally buy a handgun DL. Perhaps it's time to start enforcing the laws on the books right now before we decide to make more.....

 

i understand why some want to remove all firearms from the people and to some degree it is an intelligent proposal until you add in the number of people that would break any law to keep them
and then add in those that arent supposed to have them but do
criminals dont give a rats ass about laws and the more laws that are made the more the courts are clogged with bullshit suits and cause an un-needing strain on police forces to enforce new laws that will not reduce the level of homicides
full and complete registration of all firearms will not make a dent in the issue either because the criminals will lie and otherwise responsible owners will hide their weapons as well
laws cannot be enacted retroactively so those currently owning or possesing guns would be "grandfathered" against forced registrations and even with that there would still remain the use of private sales
private sales do not require proper checks

you cannot remove the guns from the people without tipping off a new civil war

but i will offer a few minor changes
end all private sales
keep a record of the serial numbers on an easily accessed database for lawenforcement
require permits and safety training for all possible shooters
limit the number of guns or rounds of ammunition that any 1 person is allowed to purchase in short order
extend all background checks
add a weapons tax to the purchase that is paid into a victems support fund for crimes commited by legal owners against innocent people(a fund that would remain mostly intact for decades)all funds to be maintained in an interest yeilding account that is not invested by the government and only gains by the new deposits and cannot be used for anyother reason