TexasCHLforum.com

DEB wrote: ↑Thu Sep 05, 2019 12:57 pm

mrvmax wrote: ↑Thu Sep 05, 2019 11:25 am

anygunanywhere wrote: ↑Thu Sep 05, 2019 8:08 am

mrvmax wrote: ↑Thu Sep 05, 2019 5:20 am When the constitution is changed then we can go with your suggestions, until then it violates our rights (and common sense). Your suggestions seem to show that you don’t fully understand the underlying issue and I don’t think it will make a dent in lowering gun crime. More laws will not stop the problem, we can remove every gun in our country and people will still use cutlery, vehicles, chemicals, airplanes etc.

Even if the Constitution is changed I will still have the right to keep and bear arms. God gave me that right, not man.

Well that depends on your definition of God and what God you are referring to. If you are Christian and adhere to the Bible you would be contradicting God’s law by disobeying our countries laws concerning firearms. Paul covered that in the book of Romans, I cannot speak for other religions.

That statement would sure be fun to debate, but unfortunately on this Forum we cannot, as we would have to really go in depth within the Bible and the thread would then qualify as purely religious. So, disagree with your take on that one statement within Romans, as it needs to counterbalanced with statements in other areas within the Bible. Otherwise the American Revolution would have been argued in the Pulpits as being sinful and it simply would not have occurred.

ghostrider wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 11:23 pm one only has to look around on this small planet to see the effect of 'compromise' in foreign countries, with little (or opposite) effect on crime:

England, Australia, Canada, California, etc.

and of course, when it does not reduce crime, its followed by more calls for yet more restrictions.

Firearms ownership in Canada is strictly regulated (though they recently gave up on long gun registration as overly expensive & effectively useless) and yet Toronto now has a homicide rate higher then NYC:

https://www.blogto.com/city/2018/06/tor ... -new-york/

oljames3 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 10:10 pm

SQLGeek wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 8:55 pm Sad to see so many gun grabbing talking points coming from our side.

TreyHouston wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:43 pm This ends with everyone in the country having to see government phycologists yearly and being told what they can and cannot do. If you are deemed a threat, you are shipped off to a wood chipper!
Book- brave new world

Grayling813 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:00 pm

philip964 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 2:51 pm

thatguyoverthere wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 2:06 pm Interesting.

Your suggestion is interesting, but I was more referring to my response to your question.

I had typed out a long well stated (IMHO) response and reasoning and my feelings about several related subjects. But after reflecting on what I had written, and considering today's climate, let me considerably edit my response to your question.

Here is my response: no.

But it did solicit a better idea. Give private gun sellers access to the database.

Not mandatory but allow access.

I like that.

I will make that my suggestion to the politicians.

Thanks all!!

So out of all the answers of “no” you found a couple of gun control infringements you can live with and would offer to your elected officials as proof of your willingness to further compromise our rights?

For the record my answer is absolutely no. Compromising one thing after another is how we have ended up on the door step of losing our rights completely.