• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Yet another attempt to disarm lawful citizens

Henrin said:
Same thing with the surrounding states too. It sucks, but apparently Californians can't fix their own state, so they leave and take their dumb beliefs with them.
Click to expand...

It works like this they look for a low crime area becasue they live in what has now become a high crime area after they lobbied incessantly for gun control.

They move and nowhere has no crime so the first thing they do is start lobbying for gun control.... Nobody ever accused the public of being intelligent however they can be educated. Why let gun control do it for us?
 
Once again I see some people just do not want poor people to have guns, well not legally. My God People are stupid sometimes, unfortunately it is becoming more and more common is certain areas, makes me what is in their water.
 
ludin said:
Critics blast Massachusetts city's new 'essay' rule for gun-carry applicants | Fox News

I hope this city gets their butt sued off by the residence there.

this is a total violation of the 2nd amendment and all it attempts to do is disarm
lawful citizens and make it so cost prohibitive to owning a gun.
Click to expand...
I think this might get shut-down by the courts (particularly if an 'essay' is truly required).

But I have possible problems with the article.

Initially, the article states thusly:

"The new laws take effect this week in Lowell, a city of 110,000 that lies 35 miles north of Boston. Pushed by Police Superintendent William Taylor and passed by the City Council, they require applicants for unrestricted handgun licenses to state in writing why they should receive such a license."

Then immediately after, they quote a pro-gun group CEO stating this:

"“It is absurd that people should have to write an essay to the town to explain why they should be able to exercise their constitutional rights,” said Jim Wallace, executive director of Gun Owners Action League of Massachusetts."

And FOX ran with the "essay" story & headline supplied by the gun group.

So which is it? An essay? Or some place on the form where one fills in "self-defense" or "to exercise my constitutional rights"? There seems to be quite a bit of difference there, and I wonder if the Chief's opposition have mischaracterized the law by hanging the moniker "essay" on it, similar to the way the ACA was mischaracterized by it's opponents as having "death panels"?

But that being said, I still think it may get shot-down in the courts, regardless of it's form. I also don't see gun regulations on the state or local levels as being effective at all; no sense in more severely regulating guns in a city, when the same gun is more easily available just over the city-line. That just encourages smuggling & black market activity, bringing-in the very criminal element the law was supposed to reduce! We saw this in Chicago.
 
Chomsky said:
I think this might get shut-down by the courts (particularly if an 'essay' is truly required).

But I have possible problems with the article.

Initially, the article states thusly:

"The new laws take effect this week in Lowell, a city of 110,000 that lies 35 miles north of Boston. Pushed by Police Superintendent William Taylor and passed by the City Council, they require applicants for unrestricted handgun licenses to state in writing why they should receive such a license."

Then immediately after, they quote a pro-gun group CEO stating this:

"“It is absurd that people should have to write an essay to the town to explain why they should be able to exercise their constitutional rights,” said Jim Wallace, executive director of Gun Owners Action League of Massachusetts."

And FOX ran with the "essay" story & headline supplied by the gun group.

So which is it? An essay? Or some place on the form where one fills in "self-defense" or "to exercise my constitutional rights"? There seems to be quite a bit of difference there, and I wonder if the Chief's opposition have mischaracterized the law by hanging the moniker "essay" on it, similar to the way the ACA was mischaracterized by it's opponents as having "death panels"?

But that being said, I still think it may get shot-down in the courts, regardless of it's form. I also don't see gun regulations on the state or local levels as being effective at all; no sense in more severely regulating guns in a city, when the same gun is more easily available just over the city-line. That just encourages smuggling & black market activity, bringing-in the very criminal element the law was supposed to reduce! We saw this in Chicago.
Click to expand...

but but but more guns laws make people safer.

the less access that people have to guns the less crime there is.
what do you mean that the criminal element doesn't care what the city says.

that is why the city did it was to stop those people that wouldn't care?

/sarcasim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom