US freedom fighters exercise 2nd amendment rights, kill 6 tyrants trying to take away freedom

[regexcellent]

How many times do you have to say "Ragheags must die" and how many racist blogs, videos, tattoos etc. before you are jailed?

You can say it as many times as you like and you will never be jailed, nor should you be.

[regexcellent]

Would you say it's entirely reasonable to ban somebody with "red flags" from purchasing handguns?

No. Who decides what the "red flags" are? If this were the case, the government could arbitrarily stop people from buying guns, therefore completely defeating the 2nd amendment.

[regexcellent]

Err...isn't this already a law? Do you not need a license to sell a firearm?

You need a federal firearms license, generally. Many states require state licenses as well. There are mandatory federal and state record-keeping laws, although there's no strong reason to believe that these records are of much use in solving or preventing crimes. Private sales between individuals are for the most part not regulated as that would be ridiculous. In some states, however, you are required to sell through a federally licensed firearms dealer. It is illegal nationwide to purchase a gun with the intent to then sell it to someone else (i.e. make a straw purchase).

[Felch]

FFLs are for people who go into business selling firearms. Private sales by individuals living in the same state are still legal, they're often referred to as the "gun show loophole." When I sold a friend of mine a 30-06 bolt action, we didn't need the hassle of an FFL, we just swapped a rifle, ammunition, and accessories for some cash and gasoline. If it were a handgun, Maryland law would have required it be done through a licensed dealer, but the feds don't have jurisdiction over intrastate commerce.

[Uncle Sparky]

Can I run into an American theatre or church and yell "FIRE", or would some horrible law restrict my 1st amendment right? Can I wave a legally purchased firearm in the air while yelling?

Can non-white non-Christian American citizens have a casual internet exchange with their Iranian relatives without being hassled by the police? Same freedom?

[Lonestar]

I'm wondering why people are up in arms about Asher using a mass murder to make a point about gun control, when nobody seemed to care when Slowwhand did the same thing just a few days ago. Some possibilities I've thought of:
1. Nobody read Slowwhand's thread because they assumed it was yet another birthday thread
2. The victims in Slowwhand's thread were Chinese, so who cares
3. Slowwhand's thread was anti gun control while Asher's is pro gun control, so Asher's attracted more criticism
4. Eveybody figured that it would be a lost cause to explain to Slowwhand why he is a terrible person, but thought that Asher might be more amenable to criticism
5. MrFun didn't **** on Slowwhand's thread in the second post, so it attracted less attention
6. ???

I didn't even open up Slowwhands thread because I knew what he was trying to run with just from the title.

Look, you can be a gun owner and be for some kind of responsible gun control. In the American gunowners thread Sloww was kinda dancing around the whole registration issue, which says to me that his idea of gun control only means "hold with both hands".

I also scroll over anything MrFun posts. Seriously. I've met him in person, and he took off after about 10 minutes because he's a Aspie that can't interact with people in real life, so he posts long screeds whenever possible in the OT.

[SlowwHand]

Can I run into an American theatre or church and yell "FIRE", or would some horrible law restrict my 1st amendment right?

As a matter of fact, that is against the law.

[Wezil]

Not if there is a fire...

[kentonio]

No. Who decides what the "red flags" are? If this were the case, the government could arbitrarily stop people from buying guns, therefore completely defeating the 2nd amendment.

It's amazing how ****ing stupid you are. Society sets limits on all kinds of behaviour based on previous experiences and history and sometimes just good old fashioned common sense. You don't let felons own guns because the ****ers are likely to commit crimes with them. You don't allow people to make death threats because people tend to kill people they are threatening to kill. You can quite easily put limits on gun sales to stop people with dangerous mental problems from buying guns, and to try and fight against that makes you either a ****wit or a sociopath.

[Hauldren Collider]

Felons have gone through the justice system, dufus. He's talking about restricting guns simply because someone said something unseemly or hangs out with people we aren't super fond of.

[kentonio]

Felons have gone through the justice system, dufus. He's talking about restricting guns simply because someone said something unseemly or hangs out with people we aren't super fond of.

No he isn't, he's saying that flagging people based on beliefs or behavior isn't acceptable. The fact that this could be carried out largely via the law enforcement/medical communities and with recourse to the legal system seems to be irrelevant to him.

You just brought out the same ridiculous American strawman argument, whereby any kind of regulation must inevitably lead to freedom being stifled on a whim. It's that kind of childishness that leads to America suffering under the same problems the rest of the western world largely dealt with years ago.

[Hauldren Collider]

So what are we going to do, take every creepy person to court and say "NO GUNS FOR YOU!" or something? What's your plan for enacting this national registry of unseemly folk?

[kentonio]

So what are we going to do, take every creepy person to court and say "NO GUNS FOR YOU!" or something? What's your plan for enacting this national registry of unseemly folk?

You mean like the file the FBI already had on this guy? This isn't about starting some massive surveillance operation (you've had that for decades anyway), it's about dealing with the people who law enforcement know to be dangerous to stop them hurting other people. As long as anyone can appeal those decisions to a court, I don't see what the problem is.

[regexcellent]

You mean like the file the FBI already had on this guy? This isn't about starting some massive surveillance operation (you've had that for decades anyway), it's about dealing with the people who law enforcement know to be dangerous to stop them hurting other people. As long as anyone can appeal those decisions to a court, I don't see what the problem is.

The FBI had a file on Martin Luther King, Jr. He was under constant surveillance and had these so called "red flags." Ted Kennedy iirc was on the no fly list.

You are an idiot.

[Hauldren Collider]

Letting the FBI decide who's sketchy would be like letting Jerry Sandusky pick your nanny.