Trying to get some consensus on the gun debate

[kinggovernor]

First off, I think it would be fair to say that almost everyone here on the board is against illegal firearms being used by criminals. If you don't, I don't know what to say.

If I was President for a day, I would end the war on drugs. I would shift resources from going after drugs to going after illegal firearms or firearms that are used in the commission of a crime. And I apply the Rockefeller drug laws against these illegal firearms or firearms that are used in a commission of a crime.

I do mean the stupid trigger laws like those that got ballz in trouble, I mean people caught with stolen guns, sawed off shotguns or converted automatic weapons. Also those caught selling drugs with firearms, they should go to prison for much longer for the gun than the drugs.

What do you guys think?

[Thorgrim]

someone want to quote me the "great compromise" suggested to...i guess end the entire gun debate?

[A_C_E]

I don't know how extensively I would try to end the "war on drugs".....I think weed, X, LSD, and MAYBE cocaine should be legalized. Not so sure about everything else.

But yea, for the most part I agree.

[kinggovernor]

Originally Posted by A_C_E

I don't know how extensively I would try to end the "war on drugs".....I think weed, X, LSD, and MAYBE cocaine should be legalized. Not so sure about everything else.

But yea, for the most part I agree.

decriminalize most of them, but get rid of the lengthy prison sentences for most. Focus on the real problems that comes from drug trafficking, the violence that comes from criminals using illegals weapons.

[Thorgrim]

legalization...either just weed...or everything...or nothing....anything else would never work out

[A_C_E]

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

decriminalize most of them, but get rid of the lengthy prison sentences for most. Focus on the real problems that comes from drug trafficking, the violence that comes from criminals using illegals weapons.

I'm in agreement with this ONLY on the assumption that if you commit a crime (particularly a violent one) under the influence of any previously-criminalized substance, you can expect a lengthy jail sentence--fair more punitive than, say, the additional time heaped on to an auto accident via DUI.

[A_C_E]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

legalization...either just weed...or everything...or nothing....anything else would never work out

You're probably right.

Doesn't stop us from using hypotheticals, however.

[kinggovernor]

Originally Posted by A_C_E

I'm in agreement with this ONLY on the assumption that if you commit a crime (particularly a violent one) under the influence of any previously-criminalized substance, you can expect a lengthy jail sentence--fair more punitive than, say, the additional time heaped on to an auto accident via DUI.

I have no problem with that.

[Tessy]

If I were president for a day? I would additionally legalize machine guns and issue
licenser rights for RPGs and etc. AP rounds would be legal as well. But before any
of that I would shut down the fed kill the income tax and arrest a bunch of folks for
insurrection including the Rockefellers and all the other CFR members... I'd kill HS
and most of the CIA and all of the NSA. The dept. of education would be gone and
so would 99% of these social serves - no more Nazi/Marxist social workers. I would
additionally reestablish property rights to the point were shooting a cop for breaking
in or trespassing would be legal and acceptable. It still is in some parts of the USA.

Put the rights to a public militia back in the hands of the people and reestablish the
citizen deputization system that we used so much in the past. I'd close down the
FEMA camps and release most or all of the drug users in for victimless crimes, and
all tax criminals.

Guns? Guns in concept are an equalizer. In this day and age we need them against
an out of control government and law enforcement agencies composed of too many
criminals themselves and dedicated to the oppression of true liberty. Seat belt laws
and fines for malfunctioning signal lamps? WTH is that? We need them to insure our
rights to life-independence, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We need them to
defend ourselves against those people who have already been victimized by some of
the social systems I mentioned above - and until we stop producing such sociopaths.

Let's see how many rapists, child molesters, ruthless robbers, house burglars, and
other dirt-bags survive long enough to strike twice then. Let's see Bush try to make
use of his dictatorial powers then. The police brutality and property confiscation would
vanish real fast.

[Thorgrim]

Re-establish property rights? The 5th amendment makes it clear you have none, and we never had a history of strong property rights

[Tessy]

Not really tho right? Heh... Why did Jed Clampet carry around a musket in
Beverly Hills in the TV show "Beverly Hillbillies"? Our property rights have
been very strong in the past. I stood and watched in Ceritos California as
a cop tried some sh1t on private property and was shot and killed for it.
The court proceedings lated just 3 days and the shooter went home a free
man. Do a search on line and see how many cops have been shot in Texas
for pushing open a front door.

When I was a kid it wasn't uncommon to see signs that said:

No Trespassing
Violators Will Be Shot!

Then they started just saying "No Trespassing". Private property rights have
been under attack for a long time and have gotten pretty bad in recent times.

[kinggovernor]

plz don't not de-rail my thread, if you want to make a property rights thread feel free

[Tessy]

Yoshihiro Hattori - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and etc.

[Tessy]

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

plz don't not de-rail my thread, if you want to make a property rights thread feel free

Umm you're asking about guns and additionally requesting that we don't
discuss some of the reasons for them? Even the supreme court case in
question is examining this. I don't get it...

[kinggovernor]

Originally Posted by Tessy

Umm you're asking about guns and additionally requesting that we don't
discuss some of the reasons for them? Even the supreme court case in
question is examining this. I don't get it...

then post about that in here: D.C.'s Gun Ban Gets Day in Court

in this thread I was discussing a solution for all parties.

[Thorgrim]

some government pencil pusher has the right to take your property, its in the constitution...not much of a right

[JaJae]

The thread starter has respectfully asked users to target their posts to the discussion of the original post. Please do so.

As always this is always an option:

[Tessy]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

some government pencil pusher has the right to take your property, its in the constitution...not much of a right

Oh, that. Ok well, as long as we're doing President For A Day... Muahahahaa.

Originally Posted by JaJae

The thread starter has respectfully asked users to target their posts to the discussion of the original post. Please do so.

As always this is always an option:

But this IS part of the discussion defined in the original post. It looks like it's finished
now but could you explain to me how it is not? I'm not being difficult on purpose. What
else are guns for? Protection of self and extensions of self. The misuse of them also
includes offensive actions. What??

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

First off, I think it would be fair to say that almost everyone here on the board is against illegal firearms being used by criminals. If you don't, I don't know what to say.

If I was President for a day, I would end the war on drugs. I would shift resources from going after drugs to going after illegal firearms or firearms that are used in the commission of a crime. And I apply the Rockefeller drug laws against these illegal firearms or firearms that are used in a commission of a crime.

I do mean the stupid trigger laws like those that got ballz in trouble, I mean people caught with stolen guns, sawed off shotguns or converted automatic weapons. Also those caught selling drugs with firearms, they should go to prison for much longer for the gun than the drugs.

What do you guys think?

I can see where you're linking drug laws and gun laws, but I don't think the public would view them as linked issues. I'm on the fence about legalizing drugs personally, but even if we keep it illegal the punishment for use needs to be seriously toned down. That said, I think gun laws are necessary and we should have some.

A little background on where my views come from.
I went to Eastern State Prison and met the Lifer's Group, I would say 90% of them (about a dozen or so) were in prison with life sentences (some multiple) for crimes involving drugs. Almost all of them shot someone trying to obtain drugs or obtain the money for drugs. Drug deals gone bad, robberies gone back, etc. People end up shot and killed so someone can get a fix or make some easy money. I would in almost every instance the weapon used wasn't registered.

The only thing I can say is the severity of the punishment may not correlate to the amount of illegal activity. States with capital punishment typically don't have less murders. States that do away with capital punishment don't see an increase in murders. States with strict drug laws typically don't see less drug use. And I'm willing to bet states with stricter gun regulation won't see less criminals with illegal weapons. I think it's a touchy issue and I'm not entirely sure a national law or rule is what would work best for each state.

In the end though, I agree that gun law violations should come with a more severe punishment than drug law violations.

[Tessy]

Originally Posted by JaJae

I can see where you're linking drug laws and gun laws, but I don't think the public would view them as linked issues.

So wait... you're saying that a thread named "Trying to get some consensus on
the gun debate" is about drug laws?

OK, now I'm confused... Hehehe nothing new there...


But ok... Drug laws... Ummm there should be none. They are a direct
violation of human liberty. The federal government doesn't have the right
to regulate what I choose to put in my body. I think that if street drugs
were legalized it wouldn't be too long before quality and standards would
be established by private business interests and related groups. But I put
put drug regulation in the same category as food. I guess allot of folks do
and thus we have "The Food & Drug Administration". No?

I mean would you buy a wadded up candy-bar from some raggedy unbathed
guy standing on a street corner saying: "Pssst, hey man..."? If I couldn't
read what was in it and look up those things on the internet or at the library
I wouldn't wanna take the chance.