PDA

View Full Version : PLEASE MAKE LAWS AGAINST CRIMINALS NOT GUNS


LikeAllGuns
05-21-2012, 10:49 PM
I think it is very simple to stop all these foolish gun laws.

New Law ''If a person of any age uses a GUN of any kind in a CRIME of any kind'' = LIFE IN PRISON NO RELEASE EVER PERIOD !

I know it is to simple but I wish it could be done !

If people think that criminals don't think of the sentence before they do a crime your wrong. Criminals do think of the sentences, why do you think they get minors to do the crimes for them.

I feel if a law of this kind was passed it's possible to see a decline in crimes using guns. Therefore no need for more gun laws that only hurt the legal gun owners who abide by the law.

I am tired of laws being passed against GUNS. Pass tougher laws against the people who use the guns in crimes.

If you don't like my idea thats fine tear it up if you want, let me hear some better ideas, but please don't rip on my grammar I know it's not the best, Help the post out with better grammar I don't mind the help. it's just not the issue.

TheBest
05-21-2012, 10:53 PM
What's your response to this?

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=8618249&postcount=265

LikeAllGuns
05-21-2012, 11:01 PM
What's your response to this?

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=8618249&postcount=265

That is a tough one but if he hunts a few times a week he should be responsible for the guns. That's a big mistake to bring a gun to an airport.

We must take responsiblity for our actions.

I know my idea is harsh but I just want tougher laws against criminals not guns.

GOEX FFF
05-21-2012, 11:23 PM
I think it is very simple to stop all these foolish gun laws.

New Law ''If a person of any age uses a GUN of any kind in a CRIME of any kind'' = LIFE IN PRISON NO RELEASE EVER PERIOD !


Your proposal would do more harm to legal gun-owners than not.

You did say a crime of ANY kind.........So say one is driving with a properly transported handgun in their car, and there is a detour that MAKES them go down another street causing them to drive less than 1000 feet from a GFSZ...... then that person should be stripped of their rights and jailed indefinatly??? :chris:

I agree with you that it should be about crime control, not gun control, but jailing someone for the rest of their lives even for something non-violent and petty is over the edge. I feel your proposal would hold a little more weight if the crime committed with a firearm was intended to be used in a malicious and violent manor wanting to cause death and/or injury to another person other than self-defense.

POINTMANDDT
05-22-2012, 5:06 AM
Although I agree with you about punishing for stricter gun laws against criminals. It could possibly take a situation where a criminal was just going to rob you at gun point (with no immediate intentions of hurting you) to now he can't afford to have any witnesses.

I'm not sure what state it was, but they did something similar for rape victims and the murder rate of these victims went way up.

Untamed1972
05-22-2012, 7:31 AM
I think you need to alter your statement to be more narrowly defined to: "Any violent crime against another person (ie assault, rape, robber, murder, attempted murder etc.)"

Victimless "crimes" like transport and posession laws for non-prohibited persons need be sticken from the books.

EvolutionGSR
05-22-2012, 7:34 AM
They wont do this because they will be putting their voters in jail.

SanPedroShooter
05-22-2012, 7:42 AM
What happened to 'Project Exile'? Do the feds still run that?

Commit a violent crime with a firearm, go to prison. Felony/murder rule works good too. I dont know about about mandatory sentenceing though, reminds me of 'zero tolerance'...

That woman that fired a warning shot at her abusive ex husband in Florida did wrong, but not twenty years worth of wrong. She was more sinned against than sinning, but the judges hands are tied. What happened to trusting a man like a judge, or any man for that matter, to make the right the call according to the evidence?

You can make all the laws in the world, but the way freedom works, you cant do much but hold someone accountable after the fact. We do far to much to pretend to prevent crime by banning things or making them illegal than actually making sure society gets justice when it has been abused or wronged.

Less laws, harsher punishments. You should be treated like a man untill you prove you arent one. Then the state will run your life for you, preferably from custody.

Personmans
05-22-2012, 8:04 AM
That is a tough one but if he hunts a few times a week he should be responsible for the guns. That's a big mistake to bring a gun to an airport.

We must take responsiblity for our actions.

I know my idea is harsh but I just want tougher laws against criminals not guns.

What you are proposing is not the same as taking responsibility for our actions, it is just avoiding having a legal system. There are plenty of situations a broad statement like that doesn't take into account:

If I J-walk with a gun I'm going to jail for life?
What if I'm speeding in my car with a gun in the back? Jail for life?

Would this law also include AOW?

CBruce
05-22-2012, 8:33 AM
I think it is very simple to stop all these foolish gun laws.

New Law ''If a person of any age uses a GUN of any kind in a CRIME of any kind'' = LIFE IN PRISON NO RELEASE EVER PERIOD !

I know it is to simple but I wish it could be done !

If people think that criminals don't think of the sentence before they do a crime your wrong. Criminals do think of the sentences, why do you think they get minors to do the crimes for them.

I feel if a law of this kind was passed it's possible to see a decline in crimes using guns. Therefore no need for more gun laws that only hurt the legal gun owners who abide by the law.

I am tired of laws being passed against GUNS. Pass tougher laws against the people who use the guns in crimes.

If you don't like my idea thats fine tear it up if you want, let me hear some better ideas, but please don't rip on my grammar I know it's not the best, Help the post out with better grammar I don't mind the help. it's just not the issue.

This idea is ludicrous for a couple of reasons. The most obvious is there's no point in throwing people into jail for life because they get caught speeding or jaywalking while in possession of a firearm. There's really only a very small subset of criminal activity that's in made worse by the involvement of a firearm.

More importantly, it equates 'guns' with some kind of ultra-dangerous thing that society must be protected from at all costs. Robbery is bad. Armed robbery is much worse. The mere addition of a firearm to a criminal activity can not and should not overshadow the crime itself. It's, at best, a minor multiplier to the crime. Punish the criminal for their crime.

I have similiar issues with this mentality as I do with any legislation looking to 'protect kids from violent video games'. It's a demonization of a thing as the main cuplrit for an individual's actions.

FalconLair
05-22-2012, 9:36 AM
so instead of mandating a bunch of laws which will only tie the hands of our judges, when sentencing, how about if we just make it pretty simple and clear cut..."Let the punishment fit the crime"...basically allowing judges leeway in who and how they sentence...discretion cannot be lost in our sentencing laws because as already pointed out, when you tie the hands of our judges, in sentencing guidelines, you may well also be tying the hands of the very criminals we are aiming them at

i would much rather be robbed by a robber versus killed by a robber, because he cant afford the risk of being caught and a mandatory sentencing...i remember when Ben Stein was robbed at his home in Beverly Hills and when news reporters asked if he had anything to say about it he actually thanked the intruders for not harming him...i kinda get it...sad it has to be that way sometimes but i understand what he meant

so, yeah, lets be hard on the ones we need to be hard on, yet, smart enough to know the difference between the two

TheBest
05-22-2012, 9:45 AM
How would defensible shooting homicide be classified by you? It's a crime with a gun!

FalconLair
05-22-2012, 9:54 AM
How would defensible shooting homicide be classified by you? It's a crime with a gun!

i think you mean "self defense" homicide also known as "justifiable homicide" and that is not a crime

LikeAllGuns
05-22-2012, 1:42 PM
Thank you for the better ideas.

I understand it was a very broad statement and agree it was too broad.

I just am so tired of laws being passed against GUNS not CRIMINALS who use the guns in a crime. Guns do not commit crimes people do.

I know I can not compete with the intelligence of some Calguns and I want to hear from those smart folk.

I take owning firearms very serious I follow all the laws and I think criminals do not.

When I leave the house heading to a range or private property to target shoot I double and triple check to make sure my truck is loaded properly with my firearms. The reason I do this is so I do not loose my firearm rights. A mistake with a gun can cause a person to loose there gun rights or even worse a mistake could cause an injury or death. Point being a mistake with a gun is no joking matter.

I would love to see a new bill introduced that goes after the criminal and not the gun.

Instead of being on the defensive we should be on the offensive and try to bring tougher laws against criminals.

Merovign
05-22-2012, 6:07 PM
LAG - consider carefully that you may be misunderstanding the goals of The Controllers.

Coming at them this way makes sense to *you*, but would be seen as almost entirely irrelevant to them.

It was never about crime, it was always about power and control.

EM2
05-22-2012, 7:59 PM
I think it is very simple to stop all these foolish gun laws.

New Law ''If a person of any age uses a GUN of any kind in a CRIME of any kind'' = LIFE IN PRISON NO RELEASE EVER PERIOD !

I know it is to simple but I wish it could be done !

If people think that criminals don't think of the sentence before they do a crime your wrong. Criminals do think of the sentences, why do you think they get minors to do the crimes for them.

I feel if a law of this kind was passed it's possible to see a decline in crimes using guns. Therefore no need for more gun laws that only hurt the legal gun owners who abide by the law.

I am tired of laws being passed against GUNS. Pass tougher laws against the people who use the guns in crimes.

If you don't like my idea thats fine tear it up if you want, let me hear some better ideas, but please don't rip on my grammar I know it's not the best, Help the post out with better grammar I don't mind the help. it's just not the issue.


Is this not another "foolish gun law"?

You are targeting the guns and not the crime.
The fact that a gun is or is not involved does not make the rape, murder, robbery, etc. more or less criminal, violent or traumatic to the victim.







That is a tough one but if he hunts a few times a week he should be responsible for the guns. That's a big mistake to bring a gun to an airport.
We must take responsiblity for our actions.

I know my idea is harsh but I just want tougher laws against criminals not guns.



No it is not a mistake to take a gun to an airport.

Every time I travel by air I take a firearm.




I think you need to alter your statement to be more narrowly defined to: "Any violent crime against another person (ie assault, rape, robber, murder, attempted murder etc.)"

Victimless "crimes" like transport and posession laws for non-prohibited persons need be sticken from the books.



Bingo!!

All victimless crimes are anti-liberty.




LAG - consider carefully that you may be misunderstanding the goals of The Controllers.

Coming at them this way makes sense to *you*, but would be seen as almost entirely irrelevant to them.

It was never about crime, it was always about power and control.


And another one.
Bingo!!

It is always about control.
Most laws are about forcing control over other human beings.
We cannot successfully fight the anti-liberty people if we do not understand them.
They see the world differently.
A world that needs order and they are the ones to give it to us whether we like it or.

LikeAllGuns
05-22-2012, 11:21 PM
No I do not think it is a foolish law against guns it's a law against the person who commits a crime. Not another law banning this or banning that.

I feel some are missing my point of ''stop making laws against the gun and go after the criminal'' We can't agree on that really?

I really did expect the idea to be too broad. But the idea behind it is so crimes with guns goes down so the law makers will have a tough time or maybe not even want to pass another anti gun law without a lot of gun crimes.

EM2 ''No it is not a mistake to take a gun to an airport.

Every time I travel by air I take a firearm.'' Then you apparently are legal to do so.

EM2 ''You are targeting the guns and not the crime'' really are you kidding thats exactly what I am not doing. I am attacking the person who uses the gun in a crime.

I do feel using a gun in a crime is more serious then not using a gun in a crime. And I do believe the current laws reflect that. I want them tougher.

Untamed1972 ''I think you need to alter your statement to be more narrowly defined to: "Any violent crime against another person (ie assault, rape, robber, murder, attempted murder etc.)"

^^ I agree thank you the good advice^^

Like I have stated I like all good advice from calgunners for a better way to mention this as a new idea for a bill..

I am surprised some dislike the idea so much do they want another ban on this or that.

I thought we did not want more laws against guns. Am I wrong :confused:

CANTHAVETHISCANTHAVETHATAFORNIA

Thank you for the constructive advice

kimber_ss
05-22-2012, 11:47 PM
California is $16,000,000,000 in debt. The availability of tax paid incarceration facilities is under a substantial strain(overcrowding). Until there is enough money in the coffers to keep convicted individuals incarcerated, they will continue to get early release.

On goes the revolving door effect of letting lower risk prisoners go. So ideally it is a great idea to keep them locked up for violent offenses. Realistically however, they will be back on the street to commit another offense.

mbt
05-23-2012, 4:35 AM
So, you still think passing guncontrol laws is about stopping crime? Wow.

It's about disarming the citizens, dismantling the Constitution, and preparing for martial law when the economy crashes.

It has always been like this throughout history. Learn history.

Begging politicians to pass more laws makes no sense. There laws against robbery, burglary, assault, murder. U want politicians to have another opportunity to screw ur rights and burn ur tax dollars???

At this day and age and in these trying economic times and with the internet age (so u can do ur own research), I find it troubling that there are those who still don't understand population control by disarmament. Learn history. Quit asking for more laws.

LikeAllGuns
05-23-2012, 11:15 AM
California is $16,000,000,000 in debt. The availability of tax paid incarceration facilities is under a substantial strain(overcrowding). Until there is enough money in the coffers to keep convicted individuals incarcerated, they will continue to get early release.

On goes the revolving door effect of letting lower risk prisoners go. So ideally it is a great idea to keep them locked up for violent offenses. Realistically however, they will be back on the street to commit another offense.

Thats a whole other topic..

HBrebel
05-23-2012, 11:18 AM
How about We the People make common sense gun laws, and not allow legislators to write up bills that are based on their own agendas and personal fear of weapons.

LikeAllGuns
05-23-2012, 11:29 AM
So, you still think passing guncontrol laws is about stopping crime? Wow.

It's about disarming the citizens, dismantling the Constitution, and preparing for martial law when the economy crashes.

It has always been like this throughout history. Learn history.

Begging politicians to pass more laws makes no sense. There laws against robbery, burglary, assault, murder. U want politicians to have another opportunity to screw ur rights and burn ur tax dollars???

At this day and age and in these trying economic times and with the internet age (so u can do ur own research), I find it troubling that there are those who still don't understand population control by disarmament. Learn history. Quit asking for more laws.

I am not begging for anything this is a "hypothetical"

Laws are coming whether you want them or not. Wait :twoweeks:

So we should sit back and let them Ban this and Ban that...

I do believe we elect the the people who make the bills and pass them into law.

Thanks for the attack on me thats cool :(

LikeAllGuns
05-23-2012, 11:30 AM
How about We the People make common sense gun laws, and not allow legislators to write up bills that are based on their own agendas and personal fear of weapons.

I Agree ^^^^

SilverTauron
05-23-2012, 11:44 AM
There's a saying which begins as thus:"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".

So it is with government and crime.With Moral Relativism being the creed of modern life in America,what is one citizen's criminal is another citizen's misguided youth.There are a shockingly high number of misguided voters who think that crime as defined in the Old Testament is an outdated concept.

Theft? But the victim of the burglary makes $70,000 a year! Its not a crime for young Pookie to break into a wealthy home so he can feed his 6 illegitimate kids in the 'hood.

Assault? A white guy went into the hood. Its payback for 'oppression'.

Car theft? Come on, its insured. The latin king was just 'borrowing' it after all.

When laws are made against criminal activity, it means there's a fixed moral standard to live by. This is a problem when the majority of the Democrat electorate benefit financially from crime and "wealth redistribution."

Ergo, criminalizing actions becomes unpopular. That leaves the lawmakers in a picke:how can they regulate a society which refuses to subscribe to fixed standards of conduct?

Enter laws against property and material. A proposed law which mandates life in prison for those who commit assault with a firearm will result in every relative of a gang member marching on the State Capitol.Considering the nature of Urban California, that's going to be a lot of people who will vote against the politician-and their party-who offers such a discriminatory piece of legislation.

But a law which restricts and regulates civilian gun ownership-well hey, that looks good for everyone. The politican can look "tough on crime", Pookie's momma will still vote Democrat next election cycle, and Pookie can ply his felonious trade free of the risk of getting shot for his trouble.

gunsmith
05-23-2012, 12:09 PM
Lets pass a law against using all caps, its for the children.

Curtis
05-23-2012, 3:10 PM
The term "any crime" opens up Pandora's box. This can be expanded into so many other areas. Look at the examples already provided (I only read the first couple of examples).

It is my opinion that laws should be based on the action/crime, not the tool or method used (with a few exceptions). If I kill you with a spoon, should I get a different sentence than if I kill you with a gun? I could argue that the use of a gun is more humane than killing you with a spoon.

Look at the sentencing laws that add a minimum 10 years when a gun is used in a crime. Look up the Boarder Patrol agents' case.

FalconLair
05-23-2012, 7:31 PM
I am not begging for anything this is a "hypothetical"

Laws are coming whether you want them or not. Wait :twoweeks:

So we should sit back and let them Ban this and Ban that...
I do believe we elect the the people who make the bills and pass them into law.
Thanks for the attack on me thats cool :(
i wont attack you, brother, i understand where you are coming from and the point you're trying to convey...what needs to be understood is this:

we already have enough laws in place that should be able to take care of the criminals, plenty of sentencing guidelines and mandatory this and mandatory that...what we are lacking is the "backbone", the courts and the penal system to do right by the people in keeping violent offenders behind bars...we don't need more laws, just a better enforcement of the ones we already have

i think all of us are in agreement, more ban laws are just absurd, mainly because it will only affect the law abiding citizen anyway

FalconLair
05-23-2012, 7:39 PM
There's a saying which begins as thus:"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".

So it is with government and crime.With Moral Relativism being the creed of modern life in America,what is one citizen's criminal is another citizen's misguided youth.There are a shockingly high number of misguided voters who think that crime as defined in the Old Testament is an outdated concept.

Theft? But the victim of the burglary makes $70,000 a year! Its not a crime for young Pookie to break into a wealthy home so he can feed his 6 illegitimate kids in the 'hood.

Assault? A white guy went into the hood. Its payback for 'oppression'.

Car theft? Come on, its insured. The latin king was just 'borrowing' it after all.

When laws are made against criminal activity, it means there's a fixed moral standard to live by. This is a problem when the majority of the Democrat electorate benefit financially from crime and "wealth redistribution."

Ergo, criminalizing actions becomes unpopular. That leaves the lawmakers in a picke:how can they regulate a society which refuses to subscribe to fixed standards of conduct?

Enter laws against property and material. A proposed law which mandates life in prison for those who commit assault with a firearm will result in every relative of a gang member marching on the State Capitol.Considering the nature of Urban California, that's going to be a lot of people who will vote against the politician-and their party-who offers such a discriminatory piece of legislation.

But a law which restricts and regulates civilian gun ownership-well hey, that looks good for everyone. The politican can look "tough on crime", Pookie's momma will still vote Democrat next election cycle, and Pookie can ply his felonious trade free of the risk of getting shot for his trouble.

man, is it me, or does this post reek with racial overtones??? :confused:

OrenG
05-23-2012, 11:49 PM
Thank you for the better ideas.

I understand it was a very broad statement and agree it was too broad.

I just am so tired of laws being passed against GUNS not CRIMINALS who use the guns in a crime. Guns do not commit crimes people do.

I know I can not compete with the intelligence of some Calguns and I want to hear from those smart folk.

I take owning firearms very serious I follow all the laws and I think criminals do not.

When I leave the house heading to a range or private property to target shoot I double and triple check to make sure my truck is loaded properly with my firearms. The reason I do this is so I do not loose my firearm rights. A mistake with a gun can cause a person to loose there gun rights or even worse a mistake could cause an injury or death. Point being a mistake with a gun is no joking matter.

I would love to see a new bill introduced that goes after the criminal and not the gun.

Instead of being on the defensive we should be on the offensive and try to bring tougher laws against criminals.


You're responding out of anger. This is not a good thing. Anti-gunners make laws out of anger, haste, etc. That's how we end up getting shafted.

Keep Calm and think with a clear head, this is how Pro-Gunners should be doing things.

SilverTauron
05-24-2012, 5:28 AM
man, is it me, or does this post reek with racial overtones??? :confused:

I'm biracial, so consider that fact in your next Ad Hominem response. :rolleyes:

A majority of the people incarcerated aren't white, and coincidently there just happens to be a culture of "pro criminal" behavior in the young black areas of society.

Care to dispute these harsh truths?

LikeAllGuns
05-24-2012, 10:30 AM
FalconLair ''i think all of us are in agreement, more ban laws are just absurd, mainly because it will only affect the law abiding citizen anyway''

Thank you FalconLair that is the main point I am trying to get accross.

EM2
05-25-2012, 9:07 AM
The term "any crime" opens up Pandora's box. This can be expanded into so many other areas. Look at the examples already provided (I only read the first couple of examples).

It is my opinion that laws should be based on the action/crime, not the tool or method used (with a few exceptions). If I kill you with a spoon, should I get a different sentence than if I kill you with a gun? I could argue that the use of a gun is more humane than killing you with a spoon.

Look at the sentencing laws that add a minimum 10 years when a gun is used in a crime. Look up the Boarder Patrol agents' case.



+1
this was the point I was trying to make in an earlier post.




man, is it me, or does this post reek with racial overtones??? :confused:


I am sure there will be others along to back you on this one.
I am not one of those.
If we do not look to the truth of human behavior (no matter how ugly or politically incorrect that truth may be) we will not be able to learn and improve.



I'm biracial, so consider that fact in your next Ad Hominem response. :rolleyes:

A majority of the people incarcerated aren't white, and coincidently there just happens to be a culture of "pro criminal" behavior in the young black areas of society.

Care to dispute these harsh truths?


What he said.

ZirconJohn
05-25-2012, 9:36 AM
Passing MORE laws will NOT stop criminals...

Passing MORE gun laws will NOT stop crimes by criminals using guns in same crimes...!

Criminals DO NOT obey laws... and why should they... they are CRIMINALS...!

Law abiding citizens obey laws... thus 'law abiding citizens'

Laws are designed to control law abiding citizens.

And when there are wayyyyyyy too many laws for law abiding citizens to obey...,

When the TOO MANY Laws are built around us, like walls, the average Law abiding citizen becomes guilty by osmosis.

They keep pushing us back, they keep pushing us back, pushing us BACK...!

Pretty soon, our back will be on the wall, we are standing helpless and facing a firing squad... or...,

...or do we fight back...!?!

When DO WE FIGHT BACK...!?!