Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: johnsmom
C'mon FReepers, use your heads.

Trump kicked it back to Congress to write legislation. The Democrats don't have the will nor the votes to pass gun control legislation, because they need the issue to keep their kook fringe base activated.

Even if it does passes and gets signed by POTUS, it'll get tied up in the courts anyway.

Not saying that I support Red Flag laws, but what is Trump supposed to say after back-to-back horrific mass shootings?

17 posted on 08/07/2019 4:51:18 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Isn't it funny that the very people who scream "My body, my choice" wants a say in your healthcare?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

I agree.


80 posted on 08/07/2019 5:29:55 PM PDT by Rusty0604 (2020 four more years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
The Democrats don't have the will nor the votes to pass gun control legislation, because they need the issue to keep their kook fringe base activated.

Anything that is passed will just be a jumping off point to the next thing they will want passed on their journey towards total confiscation.

98 posted on 08/07/2019 5:46:50 PM PDT by voicereason (The RNC is like the "One-night stand" you wish you could forget.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

What do you mean what is he supposed to say? How about FACTS!?

The shooter was a law abiding citizen as an adult with no criminal record and is afforded all rights as a law abiding citizen; one of which is the ability to purchase and own a firearm. Reports state that when he was a minor he showed troubling signs of either immature or abnormal mental health behaviors.

Should his family, police or community intervened? Quite possibly. However good luck on any of the above having any impact. Laws quite sometime ago have prevented those suffering from mental illness being committed. Those same laws shut down mental health institutions country wide. Today one must inflict harm to themselves or another to be committed. Unfortunately the results of committing harm to another is too late as is evidenced here.

So how do we therefore refuse someone a law abiding citizen a constitutional right? Further to that how to we ban the very tool we are allowed to purchase to utilize that same constitutional right?

In 2018, 387 people died due to mass shootings. In 2017 from FBI statistics (no numbers for 2018 yet) the total deaths from guns was 10,982. Of these numbers 7,032 was from a handgun (HANDGUNS), 403 a rifle, 264 a shotgun and 3,000+ not stated. Rifles aren’t the boogey men we were led to believe. 4,000+ were murdered with any other weapon other than a gun.

In 2017 10,874 died due to drunk driving almost the same exact number as those from gun violence. Why are these deaths any less violent or unimportant? The person using a gun makes the conscious decision to perform the act. Is it because the person that is drunk doesn’t “intend” to hurt or kill anyone? Does the person driving not know he/she could kill someone due to their decision? Aren’t there already laws that cover both crimes? So which is it? Is it the tool that committed the act (a car/a gun)? Why aren’t there calls for both to be banned? Or is it the decision and choice by the person to commit the act? I mean a gun can’t fire itself no more than can a car drive itself. Yet even with laws both kill people.

Mental health is a shaky topic when discussing the stripping of another’s rights. Who is the arbiter of a mental health condition? That decision would strip the rights of another. What classification of mental health is the decision point for stripping someone of a constitutional right? Someone that has gone through counseling for trouble in their life? During childhood? Suicidal thoughts at one time? What if someone has fully recovered from suicidal thoughts? A cutter? It isn’t as black and white as some would lead you to believe. A very slippery slope wouldn’t you say?

It truly would not have mattered if it were an AR, a semi auto shotgun or a semi auto pistol. According to FBI statistics more deaths are caused by handguns than rifles and by a lot. The bottom line is one must be able to point, aim and effectively shoot in order to hit a target or in this tragic case a human being. He could have had a pistol and inflicted the same amount of death at the same rate of fire.

The terms AR, AK, are played by the media to drive fear, sensationalism and with some an agenda. There are literally millions of firearms owned by millions within this country so why aren’t there millions of deaths? Because the vast majority who own guns are law abiding citizens practicing their constitutional right. Criminals will be criminals and will always find a way to kill no matter the tool and even if illegal will break the law.

Mass shootings are tragic, disgusting and a sad event everyone in the community mourns over. However they make up a little over 1% of murders annually. Rifles make up roughly 5%. The media driven term “assault rifle” isn’t the problem. Criminals, broken families, mental illness and a disregard for human life is the problem.

The President can make a simple argument. It is his CHOICE how he proceeds


100 posted on 08/07/2019 5:52:07 PM PDT by Jarhead9297
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
but what is Trump supposed to say after back-to-back horrific mass shootings?

Saying you support bad legislation just to appear that you are "doing something" is never the right answer.
204 posted on 08/07/2019 8:53:04 PM PDT by Antoninus ("In Washington, swamp drain you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson