Oklahoma House democrats introduce SAVE Act to curb gun violence

[Chuckie]

Which laws are you referring to? And explain how any of the laws would stop someone who has no criminal history, no mental health history from purchasing a firearm and causing a mass shooting? The last two we had the POS's bought their firearms legally.

The biggest problem is that people don't want to look at the root cause of all these shootings. For one, as a country, we have cut almost all mental health funding and reduced places that people with mental health can get the help they need. Several of the mass shooters in the last decade have shown signs of mental health issues but nowhere for them to seek help. Most firearm violence is due to gang and criminal activity in impoverished communities, so that is a social-economical issue. If these politicians spent half as much time advocating for solutions to those problems we could wipe out most of the firearm violence that is out there.

Its just like with school shootings. Instead of banning firearms and turning current law-abiding citizens into criminals overnight, we should be looking at ways to secure schools instead.

But that is not what these gun grabbers want. They want an excuse to start the path of total firearm ban like they have in other countries. They have main stream politicians now calling for a total repeal of the 2nd amendment, something that would not have even dared been mention just a few years ago.

"Most firearm violence is due to gang and criminal activity in impoverished communities, so that is a social-economical issue."

Precisely, and that issue has had absolutely nothing to do with virtually every 'mass' shooter that has ever shot up a school, because every one of them has come from a middle-class (or higher) social setting.

Banning weapons is NOT going to solve either of the completely different and unrelated problems about gun violence in our Nation, nor is continuing to throw money into inner-city areas to fight 'poverty' (which we've been doing for decades with very little positive results).

What anti-2nd Amendment advocates fail to see is that even without guns, someone intent on committing 'mass' murder will find another way to do so. Personally, I'm not ready for IED's, suicide vests, nor [the Middle Easter favorite] car bombs.

 

[Chuckie]

I agree. I just completely disagree that we lawful gun owners need to turn over our constitutional rights FIRST. How about we make that the very LAST resort?

Every one of these nutbags was “on the radar” of some government agency. Whether it be a school, town, county, state or federal. We always find out that someone knew and if they didn’t do nothing, they damned sure didn’t do enough!

Contrary to what the media and Democrats are trying to fool is intl believing, there are already laws on the books to deal with this. The FBI can literally round up every last person who was present at the Capitol, but they can’t stop known threats to children (and yes I’m including Epstein and Nasser with the school shooters). Why is that?

But OK, let’s pretend that all the authority figures AREN’T cowering behind their badges, titles and desks (news flash, they are) every time the **** hits the fan. So let’s pretend that it’s the “easy access to guns by 18-21 year olds?

Fine, but lets stop being hypocrites about it. If they can’t be trusted with their constitutional rights, then they can’t be trusted with responsibilities either. So make it 21 if you will, but make it 21 for EVERYTHING. Voting, driving, the draft, volunteering for military service, legally binding contracts, the works.

You don’t get to pick and choose what to give and what to take away, and then take away the one that just happens to be a constitutional right. And if you’re gonna do exactly that, I’d prefer you to pre-qualify your nonsensical statement with “Now I know I’m a hypocrite, but hear me out…

The nutbags on this forum calling for restrictions on our 2nd Amendment rights remind me of every appeasement peddler in history, losers. Well do us all a favor and go lose somewhere else. We don’t need you. I’m not giving up on 18-21 gun owners just because I’m older than 21. Doing that would be hypocritical to the guy who bought a Mini-14 when he was 19 and serving in the Marines back in 1984.

Actually it is probably closer to the truth that MOST of the people that have committed 'mass' shootings were unknown to any law enforcement agency, but every one of those agencies, especially the FBI will immediately jump up and claim that they were on top of it from day one. It is more likely that these agencies only start investigating AFTER THE FACT.

 

[DavidMcmillan]

Nice gaslighting there fella. So does that mean us sane adults need to be restricted because someone used <insert type of gun here> illegally? OR should we increase security measures at school, allow those teachers who want to train and carry a firearm to do so, and increase spending on mental health? That is the problem. A person uses a firearm to commit murder and somehow its the gun's fault and all of us must now give up that gun. If we allow them to follow that path we will be stripped of our right to keep and bare arms as the laws won't stop the shootings.

Gun owners have allowed some much infraction on the 2nd amendment and the gun grabbers constantly want more.

As for any gun owner who supports ANY of this legislation, they are blind to where that road leads. If allowed, they will be lead straight to a land where they will be serfs instead of citizens.

I think we may be missing the point a bit. More laws is not the answer, but that is what we are going to get. Our typical response is the line "what part of Shall Not Infringe" and our normal "libturds", Demoncrats, etc. That doesnt seem to be helping us in the realm of public opinion. We really need to improve our game. We tend to come across as "well it's too bad those students died, or those doctors died, but at least the rights of the shooter were not infringed". That attitude doesn't help us one bit.

We don't know what state of agitation the guy in Tulsa was in as he bought his AR, just hours before shooting up the doctor office, but wouldn't have been great if the seller had seen a potential problem and denied the sale or even just delayed it. There are indeed people and/or times when a firearm should not be available.

 

[Kent Stephenson]

Democrats are full of crap. Keep chipping away. Give them nothing!

 

[Tanis143]

I think we may be missing the point a bit. More laws is not the answer, but that is what we are going to get. Our typical response is the line "what part of Shall Not Infringe" and our normal "libturds", Demoncrats, etc. That doesnt seem to be helping us in the realm of public opinion. We really need to improve our game. We tend to come across as "well it's too bad those students died, or those doctors died, but at least the rights of the shooter were not infringed". That attitude doesn't help us one bit.

We don't know what state of agitation the guy in Tulsa was in as he bought his AR, just hours before shooting up the doctor office, but wouldn't have been great if the seller had seen a potential problem and denied the sale or even just delayed it. There are indeed people and/or times when a firearm should not be available.

First off, absolutely no one said "at least the rights of shooter were not infringed". And I hate to say it this way, because its quite crass, but yes, people have died. **** happens. Doesn't mean I'm responsible and should pay the price. I like to drive. I also like the occasional wobble pop. Does that mean I drink and drive? No. Does that mean I should have an interlock in my car? No. How about my car restricted to only 50 MPH? How about if someone sees me shake my fist at someone that cut me off I lose my license? These are all anagrams for what they want to do to the second amendment. The funny part is that no one suggests those for every day drivers yet auto related deaths outpace criminal homicide by firearm every single year.

As for your second point, how would a store clerk accurately know how a person is feeling? Yes, if the person comes in and said they were purchasing a firearm to go kill someone, well duh. But if someone is that upset but hides it, smiles, makes small talk etc how is that sales clerk supposed to know? That line of thinking right there was the very reason we have the PLCA. People were suing gun retailers because they somehow should have known the state of mind of the person they sold the gun to. So that line of thinking needs to be nixed.

 

[DavidMcmillan]

Again you missed the point. We are losing the game. Just like you have demonstrated, we are giving the same arguments time and time again, ant that is not working. Every time one of these incidents happen, we trot out the same, worn out, non starters as our defense. We need to improve. The comment “#$&$#@ happens” doesn’t win a single point when students are being killed, and we give the impression “so what”

We are on the same side here, but we continue to reinforce public opinion. No one here has a good answer, but we had better be trying to think of one instead of throwing rocks at each other.

 

[kirk1978]

Again you missed the point. We are losing the game. Just like you have demonstrated, we are giving the same arguments time and time again, ant that is not working. Every time one of these incidents happen, we trot out the same, worn out, non starters as our defense. We need to improve. The comment “#$&$#@ happens” doesn’t win a single point when students are being killed, and we give the impression “so what”

We are on the same side here, but we continue to reinforce public opinion. No one here has a good answer, but we had better be trying to think of one instead of throwing rocks at each other.

The answer is...you cant stop evil. The planet as we all knew it is coming to a quick end, nothing you or I can do to stop it. A one world government is coming, they just have to break the US down first as we are the only thing stopping it...but its going to happen.

 

[DavidMcmillan]

We all agree with that. Now, again, what can we do to improve our position in this effort to retain what we believe are Constitutional rights?

We have effectively been ignoring the ever increasing anti sentiment in public opinion, and that is not a winning strategy.

 

[Snattlerake]

Sorry this got you so triggered. I know it is frustrating that the twice impeached one term loser got booted.

On pure lies by the demonratic party as a hole. And I did not misspell hole! It was all political theater and you know it. It was designed to thwart Trump and his agenda at every crossroad and the media was compliciant in the effort which by the way did not work. He was NOT impeached because the senate dismissed the articles and acquitted him, twice.

 

[Tanis143]

Again you missed the point. We are losing the game. Just like you have demonstrated, we are giving the same arguments time and time again, ant that is not working. Every time one of these incidents happen, we trot out the same, worn out, non starters as our defense. We need to improve. The comment “#$&$#@ happens” doesn’t win a single point when students are being killed, and we give the impression “so what”

We are on the same side here, but we continue to reinforce public opinion. No one here has a good answer, but we had better be trying to think of one instead of throwing rocks at each other.

The point you are missing (and partially my fault as I didn't expand on this) is that the main stream media is pushing public opinion, and there is not a damn thing we can do about it except dig in our heals and hold our heads high. When people using firearms lawfully to protect themselves garner just as much media attention as some POS who lawfully purchased a firearm then used it to murder, then and only then might we be able to sway public opinion. Other than that it will be a grassroots effort against many goliaths of media. Sure, Fox does some positive reporting on firearms, but even they are starting to lean center. Hell, they had an opinion piece written by the one and only Hogg himself. You, I and everyone else in here could stand up tell people the truth, they won't believe it. And the more supposedly pro-2A people that cave to their demands, regardless of how small, lets the gun grabbers move one more step to their ultimate goal.

I'm sorry you disagree with this, but its about damn time the 2A community draws a line in the sand and says no. And we need to remind them what happened the last time an overreaching government tried to disarm us. That may sound extremist, but its about to that point.