Anyway, as another person said:
I have not seen a regulation that would stop me or anybody I personally know, or even any responsible gun owner I have ever observed, from procuring game, from practicing gun sportsman and marksmanship, or from use on the family farm or in the family home.
None.
Not one liberal gun control law would harm any of those people or their second amendment rights.
On the flip side, I can think of women I know, women I will never meet, women I’ve known and women I love dearly who are now and will be further impacted by the 694 new proposed laws infringing on our 14th amendment right to health and privacy which include a right to an abortion and other private health choices.
In listening to the sound bites of today, one would think there was a War on Guns instead of a War on Women.Of course, criminals will always get abortions.
Why bother with laws?
Gee, maybe it's because a criminal can go to a gun runner and still get a gun, regardless of background check laws, but a person wanting to vote multiple times can't go to an off the books place and cast a vote that will count in the election.
ReplyDeleteYa know, when you question our intelligence and miss a difference that simple, it doesn't reflect well on your own wits.
Laci, if you would read my comments, instead of just taking your prejudices against me, you'd see that I don't support voter ID laws, I'm pro-choice, and oppose gun control. In one important respect, I take these stands for the same reason.
ReplyDeleteBut hey, why not keep being biased and dismissive? It's good for my side when you are.
Laci - when you are able to vote by going down the street to a dark parking lot whenever you feel like it then I will agree that voter ID laws will not be effective in stopping voter fraud.
ReplyDeleteOn the abortion front, I would agree that there are thousands of women affected by abortion laws everyday. Unfortunately, these women never get a say in what medical treatment they would choose for themselves while they are being legally killed by a doctor at the request of their mothers.
Laci logic: make a case for why A and B are similar. Call people "stupid" for saying we should do A and not B. Then claim we should do B and not A. By your own logic, what does that make you?
ReplyDeleteAnd I can say this because I don't want gun control, or voter suppression laws. It's hard arguing with consistent people, isn't it?
No law in and of itself has ever stopped a crime. People still steal and murder and even find new ways to do it. This is obviously a failure of Government. Therefore we must do away with Government.
ReplyDeleteNo, Gene, as we've explained here many times, laws should only be against those things that are actual harms. I believe that government can also promote good, but only in ways that doesn't restrict the freedom of citizens.
DeleteGreg, sellin one of your guns to someone without a background check who happens to be a disqualified person is actual harm.
DeleteIf people were as widely dangerous as you seem to fear, how can you possibly trust them to vote, to hold responsible jobs, in fact to do anything of their own choice?
DeleteAh, and what if they weren't an actual prohibited person? You guys want to make that a crime too, and there was no harm.
DeleteMike B: Greg, sellin one of your guns to someone without a background check who happens to be a disqualified person is actual harm.
DeleteNo it's not. It is what is referred to in legal theory as mala prohibida - an act which is wrong by law. It is different than mala in se, an act which is wrong in and of itself, like murder, assault, theft or rape.
Unless, of course, you think that that ownership of a gun is a criminal act in the first place.
The voter ID and firearm sales background check comparison is utterly silly. The only reason that voter ID laws would eliminate some types of voter fraud is because there is no alternate way to vote other than going to your local polling place. Note that voter ID laws would only stop aliens or anonymous people voting or voting multiple times. They would not stop people from illegally acquiring fake IDs and using those to vote multiple times. Incidentally criminals who acquire fake IDs also circumvent the background check system. For that matter voter ID laws would also be powerless if the polling inspectors knowingly allowed a person to vote multiple times.
ReplyDeleteThe reason that background checks will not stop criminals from acquiring firearms is because criminals can acquire firearms illegally (without background checks) or even make their own.
There is always a way to circumvent something. Whether it is exploiting a technical weakness or a human weakness, there is always a way.
- TruthBeTold
"Not one liberal gun control law would harm any of those people or their second amendment rights."
ReplyDeleteYou mean like the laws in Chicago and Washington D.C. that banned the legal ownership of handguns -- a very popular choice for self-defense in the home? Hmm. Forcing people to face home invaders without a firearm is about as clear-cut a case of harm as I can imagine.
Oh, and how about liberty? Let's say that a new law prohibits Laci from eating anything other than nutritious gruel. No harm there, right? After all, Laci doesn't need to eat chicken, fish, pork, steak, bread, fruits, or vegetables. Eating nutritious gruel would be for his own good and prevent that heart attack while he was driving which would kill someone.
- TruthBeTold
"Why bother with laws?"
ReplyDeleteLaws enable society to dispense justice. Laws do not prevent criminals from doing anything. (Proof: there were more than 1 million violent crimes in the U.S. last year.)
Furthermore, laws that harm people in their attempt to protect people are a perversion. And you claim that you are an attorney?
Oh, they can shoot on the family farm, but if they let someone else shoot they go to prison. Would it impact women's health if they go to prison for letting a friend handle their perscription birth control? Would that be an infringement?
ReplyDelete"No law in and of itself has ever stopped a crime."
ReplyDeleteHogwash. Many do not commit an act because it is against the law and punishment of jail and losing their freedom.
That's right. The gun-rights fanatics usually tell us they're mainly law-abiding people, but when it suits their argument they tell us the opposite. No matter how strict or inconvenient gun control becomes, most gun owners will obey.
DeleteGood people obey the law when it's reasonable. When it's tyranny, a good person stands up and resists.
DeleteWho here would hire Pooch to be your lawyer to defend you against even a parking ticket?
ReplyDeleteYou may include me out.
orlin sellers
It's often not the person with the best reasoning who wins a case, but the lawyer with the best connections. I'd have to see Pooch's Rolodex.
DeleteSadly true, but I think I'd still snub him on general principle of not wanting an idiot for a lawyer, no matter how much pull he has.
DeleteTrue--given his typical behavior, I don't want to be in his presence.
Delete