RE: All things gun control go here

RE: All things gun control go here (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BamaD -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 8:25:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD because even though you don't want to admit it it will undermine the 4th admendment What 4th Amendment? They gutted that, in pursuit of the drug prohibition. and the "inspection part of this would increase the damage

BamaD -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 8:29:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: I'm seeing Tazzy's new legal principle in action. I get my wallet stolen, the thief buys drugs with my money, shares them with his siblings, one dies, I'm on the hook for it? Or the farmer who didn't have a good enough safe for his diesel fuel and the fertilizer for the back 40. Now another Federal building is wasted and he's responsible? Legal priciples are nasty that way, like most things, there are unanticipated consequences. Like someone making a totally logical extension of the principle and turning morality and causation on it's head? And we trust the professional clowns in Congress and the career miscreants who populate many civil service offices to make truly effective and minimally invasive laws on securing guns? Look at the health care system, the War on Drugs or the FDA, how can that level of competence have a real effect on school attacks? No, you arent seeing it. Your wallet example.... how are you on the hook for it? How can they even trace it back to you? In order for your attempt at hooking the two together, you would have to be charged with murder if someone stole your gun and killed someone. Or charged with robbery if they held someone up. That isnt the case. Now, why dont you try again. require people to secure their credit cards so no one can use them to get money to buy drug require chastity belts to fight rape if the card is taken or the belt doesn't do the job they get fined for not doing enough to stop the crime don't tell me about the difference in the crimes the prenciple is exactlythe same

BamaD -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 8:32:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD can you prove beyond doubt that he wouldn't have All these "what ifs" are exactly that..... stick your head in the sand blame anything but the gun. this was in response to sitcking her head in the sand and refusing to see anything but the gun

BamaD -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 8:37:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 Nobody is born with the right to have a gun - right back to before the days of flintlocks and beyond. You were given that right by the 2nd amendment See? This is the communication barrier. Of course we are not born with a right to own a gun. What is inherent is the right to individual self-defense, be it from a nasty-tempered deadly snake in my yard (and educate yourself on Mojave Rattlesnakes, if you choose to challenge the need to do that), an intruder in my home, or defending myself from tyranny, because the government knows the population has the means to rise up. The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not be Infringed. That doesn't give me anything I didn't already have. It denies the government the power to try and take it away. I don't see it as a communication barrier at all. I see it as a willful obstruction of democracy. You don't need a gun to kill or remove a snake - any snake. You don't need a gun to ward off an intruder. In a land where guns are not the norm, your intruder isn't likely to be armed. See where I'm coming from here?? You don't need a gun to defend against tyranny either. Throughout history, reigns and realms have been overthrown without the use of guns. Fact. So now you're only left with the 2nd to defend your pro-gun stance. "The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not be Infringed". And that is set in stone?? I don't think so. It's just this typical asshat backwards thinking that holds a whole country to ransom and sends it backwards. It's just another law that is able to be repealed and abolished by those wishing it. If the majory wanted to ban weapons, then it will happen - regardless of the 2nd. Isn't this how a democracy should work?? If the majority don't get to influence the laws and governance of a country, it is no longer a democracy. And we are witnessing such uprisings against dictatorships all through the middle east. Do you honestly want the US to be viewed by the rest of the world as a dictatorship regime controlled by a few with purse strings? That situation would certainly destroy what is known as "The American Dream". Good luck to you is all I can say. I'm 62 the two intruders are 19 how am I supossed to stop them without a gun

jlf1961 -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 8:39:47 PM)
Immediately after the shootings hit the news, there was a bump in the number of Americans who were in favor of more restrictive gun laws, and that was 50% of Americans. The NRA statement called for armed security in public schools, the reaction was an outcry against the idea. There is one problem with that outcry, 53% of Americans as polled by Gallup, actually thought that school officials should be armed, a smaller percentage agreed with police officers in the schools.

jlf1961 -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 8:53:34 PM)
quote: Scholarship on the effectiveness of the 1994 assault weapons ban — which expired in 2004 — has suggested that the law may have reduced gun-related homicides in the immediate aftermath of the law’s passage, but gun market forces (particularly the increase in manufacturing just prior to the ban) complicate this picture. Researchers believe that the failure to curb the use of large capacity magazines, also technically banned by the new law, muted the law’s intended effects. As noted in a 2004 study from the University of Pennsylvania’s Jerry Lee Center for Criminology, the use of assault weapons — primarily assault pistols — in gun crimes after the 1994 ban was implemented dropped by 17% to 72% across cities such as Baltimore, Miami, Milwaukee, Boston, St. Louis and Anchorage. However, assault weapons were used in only 2% to 8% of gun crimes before the ban; by far the most pressing issue was the use of large capacity magazines, which were used in 14% to 26% of gun crimes before the ban. source As I said before, mass shootings are not the norm, they are the exception to gun violence.

Marini -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 9:01:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Marini as always you are a breath of fresh air. Your common sense and gentle yet effective way of stating positions has often changed my mind in an instant. Thanks for saying what I was trying to say but in a much better way. I don't ever mean to be confrontational but I sometimes inadvertently come off sounding that way... you have the knack to get a point across and make people feel good about being wrong…lol Butch Thank you Butch, you are too kind. I am softening as I get older, and I try to live my motto, "live and let live" as much as possible. Gun control is one of the most important "issues" facing us, and it is going to be an important front and center "issue/topic of debate/legislative issue" for the next few years. We are going to need to be able to discuss it from time to time, without people starting 1000 threads on it in one week. Why do we really need more than 4 or 5 new threads on the same topic, on a daily basis? Peace and Blessings to you

slvemike4u -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 9:50:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u gun carnage must be slowed down,which means tightening up access to guns. That is plain and simple to anyone who is not guilty of bias in this discussion. I'm afraid what's "plain and simple" to those "not guilty of bias" isn't what you think. The United States has the highest rate of gun ownership in the world - by far. And it has the highest rate of homicides among advanced countries. And yet, gun crime has been declining in the U.S. Firearm murders are down, as is overall gun violence - even as gun ownership increases... the rate of gun murder is at its lowest point since at least 1981 ~Source K. And yet great numbers keep dying of "gun violence",some times in large numbers(at one time,in one incident...I scrolled thru this page and wasn't sure,from the reading what I meant here...didn't want anyone to be as perplexed as I) The other day 20 little children were gunned down. Go figure ,eh ?

slvemike4u -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 9:54:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I have seen people spot some really dumb shit on these boards, but comparing a chocolate candy with a toy inside (choking risk) with a gun takes the cake. Yeah it sure the fuck does ! You really shouldn't come here and point out that we will protect our children from dangerous confectionery...but will not protect them from guns.

LizDeluxe -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 10:48:17 PM)
Evidently the NRA aren't the only ones who think armed security in schools is a good idea: "Clinton also unveiled the $60-million fifth round of funding for "COPS in School," a Justice Department program that helps pay the costs of placing police officers in schools to help make them safer for students and teachers. The money will be used to provide 452 officers in schools in more than 220 communities." Clinton Pledges Funds to Add Police to Schools

tazzygirl -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 11:05:53 PM)
5.4 Billion is the estimate I saw recently... and on the conservative side... for placing a Cop into every school.

Marini -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 11:26:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl 5.4 Billion is the estimate I saw recently... and on the conservative side... for placing a Cop into every school. We are facing deep cuts to any and everything, do you think states or feds are going to spend over 5 billion for ONE cop in every school? Why not spend more on camera's, monitoring equipment and making it more difficult for intruders to ENTER schools, with or without a police officer there? ONE policeman per school, might help, but how much of a deterrent is it? Do many here, realize how massive many schools are these days?

tazzygirl -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 11:47:25 PM)
Ours here can spread out over the whole city.. some with as many as 7 buildings miles apart.

Marini -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 11:50:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Ours here can spread out over the whole city.. some with as many as 7 buildings miles apart. How much can that ONE police officer do in that case? [8\|] I would rather see 5 billion go towards creating single payer health care or increases in mental health care.

tazzygirl -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/22/2012 11:52:50 PM)
Then we are back to unsecure schools. Honestly, while the idea of Cops in schools.. and I do mean police officers, not trained mall cops, isnt a bad one, I simply dont see where the money is going to come from.

epiphiny43 -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/23/2012 2:07:40 AM)
Knowledge isn't dated like fresh fruit. The studies commissioned by the Secret Service were basically repeated and almost identical conclusions reached this year. This one didn't even mention access to guns as a factor, assessing threats the most important, just as the SS conducts all it's past and present efforts. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121219152705.htm Both studies reach the same end, it's the PEOPLE who do the violence we have to identify early and manage or treat. Once the fully formed conception to do mass violence is present, they still have to be identified first and intercepted. What tools they use are factors of ease of access and what's in mind, largely from media publicity. The latter is more important in forming the original intention, something the calls for yet more gun controls ignores completely. The key fact that has to be changed is people deciding to commit mass murder. Attempting to change that fact by controlling One of the many options for mass murder doesn't address the base issue and distracts what resources are available to a pointless gain. Ask Any LEO if he thinks enough guns and magazines can be removed from American society to make a difference. The one I discussed this with today agreed that ship has sailed! His point that any craftsman can fabricate functional large magazines alone invalidates much of the current hysteria. The isolated urban theorists simply don't understand the numbers or the attitudes and considerations of the people who do have what the media has chosen to label 'assault weapons'. Nor how little difference they have with conventional prior firearms in real scenarios. I'm not that impressed by the NRA and others proposals for armed security people in schools. The armed guard simply becomes the necessary first target in the school attack. Without teams at each school, it's just a simple initial tactical step in the attack plan. The cost was roughly estimated earlier in one of the gun control threads and is likely indigestible in today's restricted financial reality for local governments. Unfortunately, realistic threat assessment is probably even more costly, but has the clear advantage of a good likelihood of actually Working.

meatcleaver -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/23/2012 2:14:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Liar. This was thoroughly discussed in the UK House of Commons... and also by the UK Department of Trade and Industry which said, "The child’s tragic death was caused by the ingestion of a small part of the egg’s contents. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Surprise The UK has a gun ban which doesn't make questioning the Kinder Surprise ridiculous as specifically dangerous to children when guns cause huge numbers of child deaths. I also note the UK didn't ban them and saw it as the responsibilty of the parents because if you ban Kinder Surprise, there are huge numbers of other small things that should be banned for consistency's sake.

blacksword404 -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/23/2012 3:47:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: blacksword404 As far as police coming into homes go. Not in this country. We don't much like uninvited strangers with guns coming into our houses. Less so government sent armed strangers. They cant do that here either, with or without a gun unless they have a valid court order. I suspect the same is true in the US or are you suggesting cops with a warrant cant enter private premises ? Again you miss the point re the police inspection. If I need a gun and can justify the need, I apply for a license. Getting that is dependent on satisfying the fact I have a need, and allowing the police to see I have a secure place to keep it. No if they have a warrant they can enter.

Politesub53 -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/23/2012 4:25:32 AM)
So thats the same as here then. Cops either need a warrant or the householders permission.

Politesub53 -> RE: All things gun control go here (12/23/2012 4:29:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 All what massacres of children aged 1 to 5? Ignoring is what you've done to every single post offering up rational, scientific, and useful proposals for discussion. quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Every five days, a child in the United States chokes to death while eating. Even more children die after swallowing items like balloons and small toys. So thats okay then..........lets just ignore all these massacres instead of doing something about it. [8\|] Massacres with an "s" plural........ You mentioned age, not me. Oh wait, older dead people dont count, right ?

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625