"Disarm the people. ONce done, they can not rebel."

Wait a minute, I thought gun laws were ineffective. So what's this hand wringing about disarmament? See you gunslingers can't make up your mind. You'll just say anything. Anyway, NSDAP Germany liberalized Weimar gun laws.

If you want to ban guns, Putin33, then you have to amend the Constitution.

Not really. The 2nd amendment is as irrelevant as the 3rd. Very few states have state "militias" which are not under the control of the Army National Guard.

District of Columbia v. Heller, McDonald v. Chicago. You can regulate, you cannot outright ban. Not unless you amend.

The 2nd Amendment is irrelevant? Yeah, it's so irrelevant that there is an organized and determined conspiracy to undermine it -- see "Operation Fast & Furious" which is ADMITTEDLY a staged effort to demonize the 2nd Amendment. So, Putin, a pontificating douche bag on an internet message board, might think it's irrelevant, while those in power think it's HIGHLY relevant and threatening to their agenda. Putin, your bleeding heart liberalism would be laughable if not so dangerous to our Republic.

"The 2nd Amendament is irrelevant..." and at this point you realize that the asshole you are talking to is basing his views on something imaginary, something only he himself belives in. CLEARLY he does not believe in laws....either written or "common"....so why waste your time with such an asshole.

Putin...your coward....COME GET MY GUN....I DARE YOU, BITCH.

pUTIN...Dickhead....for the VAST majority of the poeple i KNOW...guns are for SHOOTING TARGETS......you know....just like Olympic athletes do!!!! Fucking moron! By the way....in track and field....why do they throw a javelin????

For a small minority of gun owners...it is alos to hunt...for food....which, being a meat-eater yourself, you should have no problem with, you stupud asshle fucking hypoctrite.

@Putin "The point is guns are dangerous. I fail to see why guns killing people by accident or suicide makes any difference. Dead is dead."

CARS and ALCOHOL are *very* common on society...and kill just as many as guins, of not more, when combined. It is mostly accidental...but does that make a differnce, you stupid fucking commie bastard?

"Putin...your coward....COME GET MY GUN....I DARE YOU, BITCH."

Do you think it's likely that maybe it is not the government but your fellow citizens who are afraid of you? As I pointed out, earlier, there might be fewer looking for tighter restrictions on guns if the general perception of gun owners was, say, the cool, calm whitehat in old westerns. Consider what perception you build when you argue the matter.

"District of Columbia v. Heller, McDonald v. Chicago. "

Anomalous decisions by activist judges who legislated from the bench and invented rights where none existed, ignoring centuries of precedent. It is not settled law.

"CARS and ALCOHOL are *very* common on society...and kill just as many as guins, of not more, when combined."

Within the next few decades, there will be a related discussion about cars. Specifically, the question will arise as to whether humans ought to be allowed to drive. And the reason will be for increased safety, since computers will be able to drive so much better than humans can.

Regarding the current topic, what regulations would you advocate that you think would reduce the amount of gun related violence and death (deliberate and/or accidental)?

"while those in power think it's HIGHLY relevant and threatening to their agenda."

ROFL, which is why Obama praised the two decisions Invictus just mentioned. Apparently you can't be an NRA member without being a conspiracy theorizing loon. Your gun nuts are adored by the government. You can pretend the government is out to get you, but any time the government actually goes after political activists, usually peaceniks, you're sitting there applauding.

"It is mostly accidental...but does that make a differnce, you stupid fucking commie bastard?"

As I said, I'd be fine with a ban on cars or liquor. But guns do nothing but injure or kill. It's like saying we have car accidents, so let's pass out matches and lawn darts to 2 year olds.

Activist judges who legislated from the bench and invented rights where none existed, ignoring centuries of precedent? Sounds a lot like Roe v. Wade, which is the law of the land. Focus your efforts where they would make a difference, Putin33, and push for an anti-gun amendment. It's the only way.

Operation Fast & Furious, Putin. Read about it -- it's the one where the US Attorney General Holder got impeached by Congress for shipping guns and grenades to Mexico in a admitted effort to "demonize the 2nd Amendment."

You can call me names, paint me with political broad strokes, but that doesn't make you correct. You're so misinformed it's really pathetic.

"Sounds a lot like Roe v. Wade, which is the law of the land."

Do you believe that it was correct to "legislate" from the bench in one case, but not the other? Is there a general rule for when it is right and when it is wrong?

"The point is guns are dangerous."

Let me tell you something that you seemingly don't know. Life has a zero percent survival rate. Something at some point will kill you. Cancer, alcohol, drunk driver, old age, freak accident. Anything could kill you. Playing too much Diplomacy could kill you. Holding your bladder for too long could poison your kidneys and kill you.

Why go after guns? I guarantee you that legal guns have saved five times as many lives as they have ended.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1566715.stm

See Switzerland. They REQUIRE every qualified military-aged male to own and maintain an automatic rifle. Look at their crime rate. It's hard to commit a crime in a country where everyone has SIG SG 550 in their closet and knows how to use it.

You don't seem to accept the obvious inverse correlation between gun control and crime. I can no longer accept you as a coherent person to argue with when you continue to ignore facts.

@ Willtor

Did Invictus say he supported Roe v. Wade? Don't call him a hypocrite when he hasn't proven himself to be one.

"Sounds a lot like Roe v. Wade, which is the law of the land."

That's news to the women under assault in every state in this country with anti-abortion laws and degrading regulations.

Holder wasn't impeached. And pretty much any Democrat runs the risk of censure or impeachment with the barking mad Republican Party in power. Name a single Democratic office holder in the past 30 years who they haven't tried to destroy. The gunwalking 'scandal' was an attempt to gun after Mexican cartels, which apparently the gun lobby is now defending, all in the name of protecting their toys.

"See Switzerland"

Indeed, see Switzerland - the country with one of the highest rates of firearm violence in Europe. Good example.

"knows how to use it."

Which is different than America, where the population is armed to the teeth and trained.

"Life has a zero percent survival rate. Something at some point will kill you."

Good attitude. So let's not have any public safety regulations whatsoever. Guns are just a trojan horse used by you anti-public safety people to gut every regulation in existence.

*untrained

"I can no longer accept you as a coherent person to argue with when you continue to ignore facts."

They're only facts in your brain. America is flooded with guns, has ridiculously lax gun laws, and has a massively high firearm violence rate. 100,000 people get shot every year. Apparently this is tolerable to you. The price of being alive is living in constant terror.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country

Wikipedia, of course, is not the greatest arbiter of facts, but assume, for the sake of argument, that its statistics are correct and the U.S. has higher per-capita private ownership of firearms than Switzerland. It makes me skeptical that the widespread ownership of guns is the safeguard against gun-related violence. Do you think that widespread ownership of automatic weapons (as in Switzerland) would lower the gun-related crime rate in the U.S.? If so, why has widespread ownership of existing firearms not done so?

On a related matter, would you support new government regulations and requirements for training (on the level of Switzerland) in the use of firearms before people are allowed to own them?

@Gunfighter06 + Invictus

I apologize for assuming. Please correct me if I was wrong.

Whoops, I totally misunderstood. No, I assumed Invictus opposed Roe v. Wade.

My apology still stands, of course. Please correct me if I was wrong.

"The price of being alive is living in constant terror."

Only for pussies like you. The worst part about your argument is that the people that live in the most fear, in the most threat from gun violence, live in those places with fewest guns in law abiding private hands. In your unrelenting zeal to protect people you seem to think it's appropriate for people to not be able to protect themselves. How many lives are SAVED by guns every year? Do you care?

How many?

A trivial number compared to those killed in attempted 'self-defense'. Also, self-defense would be far less necessarily if guns were eliminated to begin with. The self-defense argument is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

"The worst part about your argument is that the people that live in the most fear, in the most threat from gun violence, live in those places with fewest guns in law abiding private hands. "

Where do you come up with this stuff?