quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

It is possible the Chicago will be the second city, the death rate is about one killed by a gun per day

http://news.yahoo.com/chicago-takes-leading-role-national-gun-debate-192530717.html

Considering that your stance is quite obviously very pro gun control, I probably wouldn't EVER reference Chicago if I were you... Just a thought.

Heres something else please read....

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/01/16808338-chicago-cops-tips-about-hadiya-pendletons-killer-pouring-in?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=1

Exactly my point: "The city leads the nation in gun seizures, and its murder rate has been edging up while other cities have been trending downward."

And you think this is normal?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

That was not an answer, is a forced buyback in and of it's self good or bad.
And is not the end effect of a forced buyback the same except that you get to feel good about giving the people some cash for what you forceably took from them.
Better than either one is don't take peoples property from them.

Wont have a forced buy back without them being illegal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

That was not an answer, is a forced buyback in and of it's self good or bad.
And is not the end effect of a forced buyback the same except that you get to feel good about giving the people some cash for what you forceably took from them.
Better than either one is don't take peoples property from them.

Wont have a forced buy back without them being illegal.

Don't make peoples property Illegal. What happened to your claim that you didn't want to take peoples guns away from them?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

So if a drug smuggler gets caught with a stash in his SUV, he should keep it? If someone sets up a meth lab in their home (gawd, I wouldnt want it after that smell) the government should just let them keep it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


If you had read the articles...you may have understood the problem better. You may have seen that in 2010 the Supreme Court ruled against Chicago gun ban. Half the gun seized are from out of state, in fact a study showed that in 2008 that some1,300 guns seized came from a store outside the city limits...(There is a saying "The laws of a city extend only to it's walls). another problem pointed out is that most of the city gun laws are penalites are only 6 months in jail
The article are pointing to loopholes in the laws there needs to be change in the laws.

And you can think anything about me you wish...I won't lose and sleep over it...

quote:

ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


If you had read the articles...you may have understood the problem better. You may have seen that in 2010 the Supreme Court ruled against Chicago gun ban. Half the gun seized are from out of state, in fact a study showed that in 2008 that some1,300 guns seized came from a store outside the city limits...(There is a saying "The laws of a city extend only to it's walls). another problem pointed out is that most of the city gun laws are penalites are only 6 months in jail
The article are pointing to loopholes in the laws there needs to be change in the laws.

And you can think anything about me you wish...I won't lose and sleep over it...

Not expecting you to loss sleep, just making an observation.
"If you read the articles"... Yes, I didn't read them but was able to quote from them. I am honestly stunned by the way your mind works. It's almost as if you are intentionally avoiding logic here. Especially when you're arguing that we should adopt Chicago's laws for the rest of the country BECAUSE they are not working.

quote:

ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


If you had read the articles...you may have understood the problem better. You may have seen that in 2010 the Supreme Court ruled against Chicago gun ban. Half the gun seized are from out of state, in fact a study showed that in 2008 that some1,300 guns seized came from a store outside the city limits...(There is a saying "The laws of a city extend only to it's walls). another problem pointed out is that most of the city gun laws are penalites are only 6 months in jail
The article are pointing to loopholes in the laws there needs to be change in the laws.

And you can think anything about me you wish...I won't lose and sleep over it...

Not expecting you to loss sleep, just making an observation.
"If you read the articles"... Yes, I didn't read them but was able to quote from them. I am honestly stunned by the way your mind works. It's almost as if you are intentionally avoiding logic here. Especially when you're arguing that we should adopt Chicago's laws for the rest of the country BECAUSE they are not working.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro
As it occured to you, which I seriously doubt, that a possible reason for the laws not working is that there a loopholes, which I pointed out. Now if gun control laws don't work, please explain Japan. (This I got hear)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro
As it occured to you, which I seriously doubt, that a possible reason for the laws not working is that there a loopholes, which I pointed out. Now if gun control laws don't work, please explain Japan. (This I got hear)

One cannot apply Japanese standards, being a very different mindset due to characteristically Japanese culture, to outside of it. To do so is severe error.

quote:

ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

So if a drug smuggler gets caught with a stash in his SUV, he should keep it? If someone sets up a meth lab in their home (gawd, I wouldnt want it after that smell) the government should just let them keep it?

Yes, actually. Victimless "crimes" that have no business being illegal in the "Land of the Free."

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

That was not an answer, is a forced buyback in and of it's self good or bad.
And is not the end effect of a forced buyback the same except that you get to feel good about giving the people some cash for what you forceably took from them.
Better than either one is don't take peoples property from them.

Wont have a forced buy back without them being illegal.

Don't make peoples property Illegal. What happened to your claim that you didn't want to take peoples guns away from them?

So if a drug smuggler gets caught with a stash in his SUV, he should keep it? If someone sets up a meth lab in their home (gawd, I wouldnt want it after that smell) the government should just let them keep it?

16 U.S.C. §§ 470gg(b) and (c). Forfeitures;
Disposition of Penalties Collected and Items
Forfeited in Cases Involving Archaeological
Resources Excavated or Removed From Indian
Lands (Archaeological Resources Protection Act)

subject to forfeiture to the
United States upon—
(1) such person’s conviction of such violation
under section 470ee of this title,
(2) assessment of a civil penalty against such
person under section 470ff of this title with respect
to such violation, or
(3) a determination by any court that such
archaeological resources, vehicles, or equipment
were involved in such violation.
(c) Disposition of penalties collected and items
forfeited in cases involving archaeological resources
excavated or removed from Indian lands

Shouldnt happen?

If something is illegal, or used in the commission of a crime, it is subject to confiscation. Possessing WMD is a crime in itself... shall we just turn a blind eye and let the people keep them?

All these things are people's property, possession being, what, 99% of the law, as the saying goes. Yet you cant keep anything that is illegal.

Dont do the crime if you cant do the time.

As far as making guns illegal. I have given my position on that quote clearly. And you argued that one too.

But there is a legal recourse in this country for laws we feel are unfair. Breaking that law in no way excuses the crime.

quote:

If we make it illegal for someone to own over 100 acres of land then those people who own more should be willing to give up the land rather than be criminals.

quote:

That does not justify passing the law in the first place.

quote:

And you flat out stated that you did not want to keep people from buying whatever guns they wanted. WMDS and drug are nothing more than strawmen.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

There is no dancing. You refuse to acknowledge that this is something that has been around for a very long time.

quote:

If we make it illegal for someone to own over 100 acres of land then those people who own more should be willing to give up the land rather than be criminals.

Yes.

quote:

That does not justify passing the law in the first place.

You did not ask me to justify the law. You asked me specifically if I thought "a forced buyback in and of it's self good or bad. "

And I gave my answer. I cant help it if it wasnt the answer you expected. There are a lot of laws I dont agree with, yet, if I break those laws, I become a criminal subject to all the repercussions. There is a process to appeal such laws.

quote:

And you flat out stated that you did not want to keep people from buying whatever guns they wanted. WMDS and drug are nothing more than strawmen.

That is still my belief. Can you buy a tommy gun without the proper paperwork and not be a criminal?

You insist this is a strawman... but its not. Just because I dont agree with a law doesnt make it any less a law.

quote:

It is not law and just because you don't agree with a law is a reason to oppose it ever coming into being in the first place.

quote:

Your answer was exactly what I expected.
None of my guns are on the to be banned list so I am arguing strictly on principal.
You have stated that yours would not be banned I wonder how you would feel if you were one of the proposed victims of the gun grab.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

It is not law and just because you don't agree with a law is a reason to oppose it ever coming into being in the first place.

tommy guns being strictly controlled is not a law?

quote:

Your answer was exactly what I expected.
None of my guns are on the to be banned list so I am arguing strictly on principal.
You have stated that yours would not be banned I wonder how you would feel if you were one of the proposed victims of the gun grab.

I would give them up and hope for a buy back. What choice would I have?

quote:

You know full well I was talking about pending legislation.

quote:

And I didn't ask what you would do I asked if you will think it is such a good Idea when it comesto that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

You know full well I was talking about pending legislation.

In the part you quoted from me, I wasnt.

quote:

And I didn't ask what you would do I asked if you will think it is such a good Idea when it comesto that.

I would have no choice but to agree with it.

quote:

When it was coming up? You automatically with everything the government does because it is law?

quote:

You may have to obey it but you don't have to agree with it. And what was the point in your tommygun comment since I never said anything to the contrary?

quote:

Well know and symplistica debating trick of puting the other person on the devensive by acting like they are taking a position which they have not.