Should gun control supportres pay extra tax

Re: Should gun control supporters pay extra tax?

Crimefree said:

You claimed profiteering was a problem. Do you not read your own posts. Is the law that allows profiteering the problem or are gun shows the problem. Really simply question. You claim it is the gun shows. Why only you know.

Why are gun shows a problem even if criminals used them which they do not?

You incredibly foolishly believe gun controls lies that criminal can be denied by removing one source or all legal sources?

How intelligent does one have to be to recognise that drugs are banned, there are no legal sources for criminals, everything is closed off. Can you find illegal drugs?
1) Impossible to get
2) Very difficult
3) Can be done but needs lots of time and connections
4) These idiotic laws have not worked at all, it is about as easy as getting candy.

How many guns do you think it takes to satisfy the criminal demand?

How many illegal guns are there at present?

Do you still believe it is possible to deny criminals anything they want with a law?
Yes? There is nothing more to say. Lies impress you.
No? Good you have learnt something today

Learn that anything gun control claims is a lie. All you have to is find the lie, guaranteed it is there.

Click to expand...

You ramble and you misconstrued what ive said and frankly im not inclined to explain it again.

Re: Should gun control supporters pay extra tax?

lpast said:

I dont know what you are arguing about we fundamentally agree, except private sales are the problem

Click to expand...

Sigh!!!

Did you write this

Im for guns and own them and shoot them regularly, but truth is the truth guns bought in private transactions are resold up north for HUGE profits.
A 9mm you can buy used at a gun show for 200 bucks can be worth 2,000 or more to someone who wants one bad enough.

Click to expand...

And I asked a really simple question.

Are you suggesting that a stupid law which allows people to profit legally or not is not the problem, gun shows are?

I am still trying to figure what you have a problem with or not. Nor have you explained it the first time.

You claimed private sales are a problem. YES.

I tried desperately to explain to you that it is foolish in the extreme to think one can stop criminals from getting anything by making something illegal. If fact based on past experience which everyone should know it is idiotic.

Hence

You incredibly foolishly believe gun controls lies that criminal can be denied by removing one source or all legal sources?

How intelligent does one have to be to recognise that drugs are banned, there are no legal sources for criminals, everything is closed off. Can you find illegal drugs?
1) Impossible to get
2) Very difficult
3) Can be done but needs lots of time and connections
4) These idiotic laws have not worked at all, it is about as easy as getting candy.

How many guns do you think it takes to satisfy the criminal demand?

How many illegal guns are there at present?

Do you still believe it is possible to deny criminals anything they want with a law?

Yes? There is nothing more to say. Lies impress you.
No? Good you have learnt something today

It's deductive reasoning and easy to follow as I have made it as simple as I can. If drugs are freely available even with a ban WTF will stopping private sales do? Who will it impact ONLY?

Re: Should gun control supporters pay extra tax?

Crimefree said:

Sigh!!!

Did you write this



And I asked a really simple question.

Are you suggesting that a stupid law which allows people to profit legally or not is not the problem, gun shows are?

I am still trying to figure what you have a problem with or not. Nor have you explained it the first time.

You claimed private sales are a problem. YES.

I tried desperately to explain to you that it is foolish in the extreme to think one can stop criminals from getting anything by making something illegal. If fact based on past experience which everyone should know it is idiotic.

Hence

You incredibly foolishly believe gun controls lies that criminal can be denied by removing one source or all legal sources?

How intelligent does one have to be to recognise that drugs are banned, there are no legal sources for criminals, everything is closed off. Can you find illegal drugs?
1) Impossible to get
2) Very difficult
3) Can be done but needs lots of time and connections
4) These idiotic laws have not worked at all, it is about as easy as getting candy.

How many guns do you think it takes to satisfy the criminal demand?

How many illegal guns are there at present?

Do you still believe it is possible to deny criminals anything they want with a law?

Yes? There is nothing more to say. Lies impress you.
No? Good you have learnt something today

It's deductive reasoning and easy to follow as I have made it as simple as I can. If drugs are freely available even with a ban WTF will stopping private sales do? Who will it impact ONLY?

Click to expand...

Last response im going to make it as simple as possible. I believe sales between individuals with no paperwork whatsoever puts many illegal guns on the street. Personal sales should be registered though a dealer.

Illegal guns get on the street through personal sales and thefts for the most part.

Re: Should gun control supporters pay extra tax?

lpast said:

Last response im going to make it as simple as possible. I believe sales between individuals with no paperwork whatsoever puts many illegal guns on the street. Personal sales should be registered though a dealer.

Illegal guns get on the street through personal sales and thefts for the most part.

Click to expand...

why? if the people engaging in a transaction are criminals or if one is and the other knows he is, do you think they will engage in "registration through a dealer? all this does is turns people who are too lazy or too far from a dealer become "criminals" when they have not done anything objectively wrong. Why do you people want to make more people into criminals rather than punishing those who really are bad asses? why don't you spend your time demanding current laws that penalize OBJECTIVELY harmful activity are enforced more vigorously.

Re: Should gun control supporters pay extra tax?

TurtleDude said:

why? if the people engaging in a transaction are criminals or if one is and the other knows he is, do you think they will engage in "registration through a dealer? all this does is turns people who are too lazy or too far from a dealer become "criminals" when they have not done anything objectively wrong. Why do you people want to make more people into criminals rather than punishing those who really are bad asses? why don't you spend your time demanding current laws that penalize OBJECTIVELY harmful activity are enforced more vigorously.

Click to expand...

Its the buyer that has nefarious intent not the seller at gunshows and it stops bad guys from buying guns if they have to do it legitimately through a dealer

Re: Should gun control supporters pay extra tax?

lpast said:

Its the buyer that has nefarious intent not the seller at gunshows and it stops bad guys from buying guns if they have to do it legitimately through a dealer

Click to expand...

You have a crystal ball and can see a buyers intent? So what?

You use the word stop like it is imprinted and cannot even remember reading this.

You incredibly foolishly believe gun controls lies that criminals can be denied by removing one source or all legal sources?

How intelligent does one have to be to recognise that drugs are banned, there are no legal sources for criminals, everything is closed off. Can you find illegal drugs?
1) Impossible to get
2) Very difficult
3) Can be done but needs lots of time and connections
4) These idiotic laws have not worked at all, it is about as easy as getting candy.

Do you still believe it is possible to deny criminals anything they want with a law?

Yes? There is nothing more to say. Lies impress you.
No? Good you have learnt something today

Yet you have not revisited your belief or changed it even when you know it is impossible to prevent criminals obtaining arms. You instead prefer to subject hundreds of million buyers to idiotic laws that cannot hope to "stop" criminals getting arms. Why is that? Are you not approaching this logically?

Re: Should gun control supporters pay extra tax?

lpast said:

Its the buyer that has nefarious intent not the seller at gunshows and it stops bad guys from buying guns if they have to do it legitimately through a dealer

Click to expand...

doesn't work like you think it does. felons almost always get guns from people who know they are felons.

Re: Should gun control supporters pay extra tax?

lpast said:

Its the buyer that has nefarious intent not the seller at gunshows and it stops bad guys from buying guns if they have to do it legitimately through a dealer

Click to expand...

Were you not shown irrefutable evidence it is not possible to stop criminals getting what they want? Do you not agree with that? If that is so where is your evidence? If you have no evidence why are you repeating what you know to be wrong?

What difference will it make if bad guys get guns? Specifically what influence or changes will occur if they get a gun?

Re: Should gun control supporters pay extra tax?

It seems there is absolutely no sound reason why those who want gun control laws should not have to pay for them. That seems fair and why should those who don't see any use or sense of such laws be made to pay?

The Brady Act showed that even the latest demands will fail. Background checks and waiting periods do absolutely nothing as can be expected.

Apparently simple deduction is not possible given today's education system.

No causal relationship means absolutely no impact under any circumstances. First principles are deemed by gun control advocates to not exist. There are a number of them that are ignored.
Result
No causal relationship between guns and crime. Gun control laws cannot work
Not possible to deny criminals access to any desired object Criminals can get what they need or want
Not possible to increase safety by removal of defence People cannot be safer by giving up means of defence
Not possible to reduce crime by reducing deterrence and risks Crime often increases

Is this then a case of pay for education or pay for stupidity? Is that not a fitting reward for such demands on public money?