Andrew Gillum rips Rick Santorum over claim guns aren't problem

[Madmallard]

Former Tallahassee, Fla., Mayor Andrew Gillum slammed former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum's stance on gun control as “ridiculous” for saying guns are not the “problem” in mass shootings.

“The Republican Party is going to focus on what the problem is, and the problem is not the gun; the problem is the people who are using those guns,” Santorum said when pressed whether the GOP needs to “give a little” on measures like expanding background checks. “The problem is not trying to ban guns or trying to put more gun laws in place, because the people committing these crimes are breaking the law, and they don’t really care whether they violate gun crimes or not.”

“That is ridiculous,” retorted Gillum, who campaigned in favor of expanded gun-control legislation when he ran for governor of Florida last year.

“It’s not the opioids that’s the problem; it’s the people taking the opioids,” he said, presumably equating Santorum’s comments to the opioid crisis..

'That is ridiculous': Andrew Gillum rips Rick Santorum for claim guns aren't 'problem' in shootings

 

[Podmonkey]

We have to get rid of the democrats or we will have no peace.

 

[FS1040]

Let me flip the question and rephrase it. Should using illegal drugs disqualify someone from owning guns?

 

[togmaster]

We have laws against opioids yet the criminals still have them.

 

[Bigfoot]

And the drum beat for disarmament goes on and on... And on, and on, and on.

 

[Darth]

“It’s not the opioids that’s the problem; it’s the people taking the opioids,” he said, presumably equating Santorum’s comments to the opioid crisis..

...? That's exactly correct.

 

[Target]

Let me flip the question and rephrase it. Should using illegal drugs disqualify someone from owning guns?

It does , assuming that a YES is an automatic disqualifier.

Question 11 (3) on form 4473 "Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance? Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside"

 

[FS1040]

It does , assuming that a YES is an automatic disqualifier.

Question 11 (3) on form 4473 "Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance? Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside"

I agree with you. If by using drugs you voluntarily abdicate your 2A rights, what other rights can we also assume are negotiable?

How about the right to your children? Yup, the state will remove them from your care.

How about a driver’s license? Yup. You get that yanked with a conviction for DUI or DWI.

How about voting? Well, why shouldn’t that also be on the table? If we can’t trust you with guns or kids, why should we allow your choice of a representative to dictate government policy? Sounds like a recipe for disaster if you ask me. (FYI—We already do it. If you are a felon, you can’t vote.)

 

[spat]

This is very simple to prove. Just get them to answer 2 questions.

If we get rid of guns, but we still have people out there with murderous intent, will the problem go away ?

No, there are plenty of methods they can use, even more effective ones for mass killing, like bombs.​

If we get rid of people with murderous intent, but keep the guns, will the problem go away ?

Yep, all the guns will sit there in safes, and be used legally by honest gun owners. No problems.​