RE: Another poitless gun death.

RE: Another poitless gun death. (Full Version)

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

Message

thompsonx -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 5:50:18 PM)
ORIGINAL: subrosaDom The original EPA regulations were small. How about now? Which one do you want to repeal? Regulations, being a product of the Leviathan, i.e., government, almost always trend toward more control, not less. Someone has a firm grasp on the obvious. Whether it's guns, taxes, abortion, Last I checked govt reduced regulation in this area so why did you pick it? fishing, having kids run lemonade stands, etc. Why are you in favor of alowing tainted food into he public food chain? The secular trend is more regulations, less freedom. I am pretty sure the secularist no longer require your pressence in church so I would say the opposite is true. The domino is that first regulation. Just like viet nam.[8\|][8\|] There is a fundamental difference between something unregulated (how you choose to cut your hair, for example) and something even mildly regulated. Regulations beget more and before you know it you are reading the Old Testament except that instead of John begat Jacob it's Regulation 29A.E.24.111b begat 29A.E.24.111c. Perhaps you might find someone to parse out the logical falacy in that.

BamaD -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 5:53:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub You didn't say anything stupid... I think you should realize that political action needs to be taken to protect children... not just Arizona but the hundreds that are killed and maimed each year. How else except through legislation can responsibilities be forced on careless gun owners? Butch The problem is that it ignores all of the kids harmed by careless parents without firearms. The problem isn't firearms it is carelessness. Make the law to cover the whole problem and it will cover firearms make the law to cover firearms and it won't cover anything else. The problem is far more expansive than firearms and pretending otherwise is ignoring the real problem.

thompsonx -> RE: Another pointless gun death. (8/28/2014 5:55:00 PM)
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 I don't care about colour issues or the imbalance - I take the figures as a whole, not by colour of skin. If you choose not to look at the organic causes of violence in my country how do you expect to make any sense of a solution. You have agreed that simple possession of large numbers of guns does not ipso facto make for a violent society. quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Slice the cake any way you like, that's a whole lot more than anywhere else in the world and all down to the liberal gun policy that the US have. No it ain't Care to show anywhere else in the first-world countries where gun deaths are any higher than the US??? What ain't true is your supposed cause not the end result.

Kirata -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 6:02:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I sure wish you could tell me what it is then.... I don't mean this question to be smart ass I am just curious what you think...in a few words. The culture of violence that exists in our inner-cities. The racial skew for cities is more extreme than the national data because of concentration effects, but overall these violent predominantly minority sub-cultures, while numerically small, account for half of our entire national homicide rate. K.

kdsub -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 6:12:33 PM)
Bama... we are talking about guns...I am all for any other responsible legislation that protects children... name a need for me. There is no such thing as a law that covers everything... you must take one law to cover each issue. Because you don't address all issues at once does not mean you don't address one. Butch

subrosaDom -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 6:14:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: subrosaDom The original EPA regulations were small. How about now? Which one do you want to repeal? All of them. Property rights are sufficient if implemented properly. I don't support the EPA. Thank you, Richard Nixon. Regulations, being a product of the Leviathan, i.e., government, almost always trend toward more control, not less. Someone has a firm grasp on the obvious. I don't believe that is self-evident or else everyone would acknowledge it. Whether it's guns, taxes, abortion, Last I checked govt reduced regulation in this area so why did you pick it? Abortions are more regulated than before. Taxes are more complicated than before. Some states have lessened gun regs but Federal requirements over time have increased. fishing, having kids run lemonade stands, etc. Why are you in favor of alowing tainted food into he public food chain? Most kids don't sell tainted lemonade. But many have been put out of "business" by ridiculous regulations. I meant the fish you can catch, not levels of parasites, etc. The secular trend is more regulations, less freedom. I am pretty sure the secularist no longer require your pressence in church so I would say the opposite is true. I used secular in the economic sense, meaning the long-term trend. Not in the contra religious sense. The domino is that first regulation. Just like viet nam.[8\|][8\|] We didn't get out for a long time, did we? The domino wasn't the spread of communism, it was our involvement without any damned purpose except in most cases the self-aggrandizement of LBJ. There is a fundamental difference between something unregulated (how you choose to cut your hair, for example) and something even mildly regulated. Regulations beget more and before you know it you are reading the Old Testament except that instead of John begat Jacob it's Regulation 29A.E.24.111b begat 29A.E.24.111c. Perhaps you might find someone to parse out the logical falacy in that. I'm pretty good at parsing. The Biblical reference is sarcastic, of course, although the point is serious :)

BamaD -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 6:18:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Bama... we are talking about guns...I am all for any other responsible legislation that protects children... name a need for me. There is no such thing as a law that covers everything... you must take one law to cover each issue. Because you don't address all issues at once does not mean you don't address one. Butch You need to think outside the box. Why fight for gun legislation and only deal with part of it when you can have an easier fight and attack the whole problem. You mean they can't write a law controlling exposing children to unreasonable levels of danger unless they mirco manage each possible way this can happen? In that case you are right in that there will never be a solution.

kdsub -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 6:25:51 PM)
Thanks for the answer Kirata... but how can you say it is not guns... did they point their fingers and magic bullets killed the children? And yes American gun tradition does contribute to this slaughter... if not only in the fact that any law trying to regulate the easy accessibility to criminals and the insane is fought tooth and nail by that very tradition. My opinion of course but we should all agree the status quo is not working to a very real gun problem in this country. Butch

kdsub -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 6:27:38 PM)
No you can't... the very nature of law is to be specific to a particular crime with very precise conditions... what possible all encompassing law would work in any court room? lol... Just look at the thousands and thousands of pages of law for Obamacare....How is that working for you? Butch

quizzicalkitten -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 6:57:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub No you can't... the very nature of law is to be specific to a particular crime with very precise conditions... what possible all encompassing law would work in any court room? lol... Just look at the thousands and thousands of pages of law for Obamacare....How is that working for you? Butch Simple the child endangerment laws already on the books, the problem with specific laws is they dont cover anything... No state needed a specific texting while driving law because distracted driving was already on the books, you have too specific of a law and you let people who know how to exploit it and you let criminals go free... a great example of this is rape. If there was a simple law like "no distracted driving" Then theres no need for a specific law "no texting while driving" because texting while driving was already illegal under the no distracted driving law. however if we need specific laws, lets start with whats the leading cause of death for children which is poison not guns.

Kirata -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 6:58:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Thanks for the answer Kirata... but how can you say it is not guns... did they point their fingers and magic bullets killed the children? I thought you weren't going to be a smart ass. I can say it's not guns because it's not guns. It's your attitude toward them. I was taught gun safety when I was a kid, how to shoot accurately, and to never even so much as point a weapon at anyone I didn't have a very good reason to shoot, along with the detail that being offended or pissed off was not a good reason, or even a reason at all. Contrast that with people who will open up on you just for looking at them sideways, and kill a kid across the street in the bargain. Same gun, different culture, different attitude. quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub And yes American gun tradition does contribute to this slaughter... if not only in the fact that any law trying to regulate the easy accessibility to criminals and the insane is fought tooth and nail by that very tradition. That's bullshit, but it's also a topic for a different thread. K.

kdsub -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 7:05:52 PM)
quote: That's bullshit, but it's also a topic for a different thread. Agreed but you brought it up... or at least answered to it. Not being a smart ass...lol... But when you say children killed by guns have nothing to do with guns deserves a little sarcasm anyway. Butch

BamaD -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 7:07:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub No you can't... the very nature of law is to be specific to a particular crime with very precise conditions... what possible all encompassing law would work in any court room? lol... Just look at the thousands and thousands of pages of law for Obamacare....How is that working for you? Butch we do not have a law which says specifically that you cannot leave a kid in a hot car in the summer but the laws that prohibit child endangerment apply. The owner of the range said child endangerment laws might apply pointed out that the parents thought their child was in the hands of a good instructor, the kid of coarse wasn't responsible, and so the only one who could be arrested was the instructor, obviously difficult since he is dead. Thus we already have the law to cover it. Obamacare is a perfect example of how not to write a law.

Kirata -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 7:10:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Not being a smart ass...lol... But when you say children killed by guns have nothing to do with guns deserves a little sarcasm anyway. You can call it sarcasm, but I call it stupidity. Apparently in your world, in any discussion of child drownings the intelligent folks would recognize that water is the problem. But when you have one group of people drowning at an alarming rate while another group isn't, I don't think the real problem is water. Call me crazy. K.

kdsub -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 7:17:42 PM)
How about this for a good simple one... If a child is maimed or killed by an unsecured weapon the owner can be held legally responsible... permanently loose the right to own firearms...and will be prosecuted for criminal negligence. This simple law after a few harsh examples will drastically reduce child gun deaths. Butch PS forget the child part... make it person and include if a weapon not secured is stolen and used in a crime.

kdsub -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 7:23:38 PM)
You can call it that but most people would understand it takes BOTH the gun and the negligence... Both must be addressed. If you solved the racial divide or for that matter all social problems in America with the status quo of gun laws in America the slaughter would continue. Butch

Kirata -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 7:25:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub If you solved the racial divide or for that matter all social problems in America with the status quo of gun laws in America the slaughter would continue. You're just making it up as you go along. I'm sorry I even bothered. Enjoy your evening. K.

BamaD -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 7:27:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub You can call it that but most people would understand it takes BOTH the gun and the negligence... Both must be addressed. If you solved the racial divide or for that matter all social problems in America with the status quo of gun laws in America the slaughter would continue. Butch No, you could let Freedom write our gun laws and you would still have the gangs, you would still have the people who place no value on life, and you would still have the killings.

kdsub -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 7:29:18 PM)
I'm making up nothing... just addressing your answers...but have a good evening yourself...[;)] Butch

kdsub -> RE: Another poitless gun death. (8/28/2014 7:35:47 PM)
But you can't say death by guns has nothing to do with death by guns. Remember Politesub's link was not talking about crime and gangs... but accidental death by... what...hmmmmm... guns. And even if, my point, there were no crime...or gangs.. or social inequalities... the accidental death by guns would continue... as things are now. Nothing will ever be prefect because of our rights to own guns... but improvements in law... as my example above... can be made that will save lives. But only if gun owners admit there is a problem. Butch

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625