Gun control [Archive] - Page 6

Crazed_Insanity

February 23rd, 2018, 12:55 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyirlX3tra8&ab_channel=CNN

The NRA, folks.

Saw one of the suggested videos after the above posted video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AtOU0dDXv8

I think the Sheriff next to the NRA spokeswoman made the most sense.

But to be somewhat fair to that NRA biatch, existing laws are lacking as well. Why is it okay for states or arm services to NOT report convicts and mental folks to the federal database used to do background checks? If States just don't have to budget to input the data, then background checks should include combing thru data from all 50 states rather then relying on incomplete federal data.

Nick Cruz shouldn't be able to legally purchase that gun!

Anyway, NRA should've exercised their lobbying power to get that federal mandate to make sure states and armed forces report these things. It just might have avoided this particular tragedy and get liberals off their asses.

Of course, regardless of what kind of laws are passed, there could still be failures... such as FBI dropping the ball, frozen sheriff waiting outside until the shooting is done... Even with a ban passed, there's no guarantee that we can prevent the next vegas shooter.

But anyway, we should've been able to prevent Nick Cruz or saved more lives... that was just some sort of perfect storm... I bet if his mom survived the flu this tragedy probably won't happen... sigh...

George

February 23rd, 2018, 01:21 PM

If we accept this graph to be a valid representation of The US:

http://amp.businessinsider.com/images/55b273a2371d2211008b9793-960-654.jpg

Have you a link where I can read more about that? I see it came from businessinsider.com but I can't seem to find the accompanying article.

Thanks.

Dicknose

February 23rd, 2018, 01:55 PM

Yes it is a male problem, but other country have males facing very similar issues.
I think it’s a culture problem - and it’s a gun culture. Not just the desire to own guns, but that guns = power and control.
This culture is ingrained and goes very deep.
It was mentioned in the politics thread that teaches are the unsung heroes.
Teachers might be the unsung heroes, but do you know who is held up as the heroes in the USA?
Military personnel.

Go to a ball game, they ask past and present military to stand and everyone applauds. They are offered preferential treatment at many places.
Yes it is a tough job and they run a risk of death or injury. But it is amazing just how much they are applauded in the US vs most other western nations.
I think much of this is to keep a good flow of people coming into a very large military. But it also helps reinforce the “Wild West” notion that guns = power. The USA is powerful because it has the best military. You will be powerful to defend yourself if you have a gun. You will be powerful to make a statement if you have a gun.

There is a huge culture of worship of guns that is pretty much exclusive to USA. Much of it is subtle to those brought up with it, but much more shocking to those from outside.
Is it any wonder when the country as a whole prides itself in “force is power” that individuals respond the same way?

Laws might help. Restrict guns, better checks etc. They can help.
But unless as a country you start a culture change away from worshipping the power of the gun, the problem will remain.
Because it’s an illusion, all these guns are not making the average person more powerful, it’s making them powerless when their friends and family are killed, injured or even just threatened.

Godson

February 23rd, 2018, 02:41 PM

DN nails it.

JoshInKC

February 23rd, 2018, 03:44 PM

Have you a link where I can read more about that? I see it came from businessinsider.com but I can't seem to find the accompanying article.

Thanks.

That's a newer version of the ideas contained in "The Nine Nations of North America. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Nations_of_North_America)" The general idea is that the different regions of the US were settled by and had their cultures invented/imported by different groups of people who adapted to their separate environments and resources in different ways. It's a concept that a lot of human geographers and other social scientists find to be pretty valid in a lot of scenarios.

Freude am Fahren

February 23rd, 2018, 04:00 PM

Well said, DN.

Somewhat surprisingly, Our governor here in Florida, Rick Scott, one of the more conservative (as in gung-ho guns and bible pandering, more so than real conservatism) governors announced some thing today, including changing gun laws such as the age to buy a gun from 18 to 21, and preventing people with mental issues from getting guns. It includes something about anyone can provide a sworn statement saying this person is dangerous, and then they would be barred from buying guns (of course with penalties for lying).

I have to give credit to a man to whom I never have. It is a big step in the right direction considering who he is, and the state I live in. But there is a long way to go.

That said, I don't think his words mean anything legal, and it will be up to legislature to enact these laws. So we'll see. Maybe he can enact executive powers or something.

He has had an A+ rating with the NRA. We'll see if that stays.

neanderthal

February 23rd, 2018, 05:43 PM

FaultyMario

February 23rd, 2018, 07:05 PM

Aquí está (http://www.businessinsider.com/regional-differences-united-states-2018-1), Jorge.

Crazed_Insanity

February 23rd, 2018, 07:43 PM

DN definitely nailed it. Culture change will take some time...

Thumbs up to Gov Rick Scott.

Will the current gun culture embrace him or shred him to pieces remains to be seen, but it's certainly a step in the right direction, fingers crossed.

SkylineObsession

February 24th, 2018, 12:48 PM

Have been trying to avoid this topic as i know my opinions may rub people the wrong way.

As an outsider i honestly see similarities between the USA and all the middle eastern/European countries that are always at war/bombing each other etc. The only difference really being that the USA is a much more advanced country that still manages to have a government and law enforcement etc that can keep relative control of things, so that cities aren't being bombarded every few days.

It's the fact that people like me in the USA can walk around with (state dependant)/have all sorts of guns in our houses and it's deemed as 'normal'. To an outsider, in a country with really strict gun control laws like NZ, it's really bewildering and shocking that many Americans consider it 'normal/necessary'. Like it honestly makes me compare it to the war torn countries. USA just looks a lot nicer and still has a decent law enforcement/less trigger happy government.

Don't bash me for saying this, as it's just how things seem from over this side of the world.

Admittedly when we were in the USA last year the only people we saw with guns were police officers, and only in the airport at Houston (?) and the officers in Times Square. But because that's not what we see every day, the media gives us the impression that things are pretty mental (even though we've been there and remember it differently). Personally i'm pretty sure i've never even picked up a real gun.

I don't think it'll change much, but i'm pleased to see so many big companies like Chubb, Hertz, United, Delta etc drop support for the NRA and hope it continues to a point where something civilised starts to happen - like better restrictions/checks/requirements etc to purchase/own a gun. Assault rifles though should be goneburger to the public, because there is no fvcking need at all to have them in a civilised country! It's bloody absurd! :smh:

And don't get me started on the 'amendment right' to own a gun (or whatever it is). That was probably fine back in the day when guns took a good minute or so to load and there were civil wars all over the place, but in a first world civilised country it just seems backwards and bizzare. In my (and other New Zealanders i know) opinion.

tigeraid

February 24th, 2018, 04:52 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Fer9ql7itc

Jason

February 24th, 2018, 05:06 PM

❤❤

neanderthal

February 24th, 2018, 06:21 PM

Rare White Ape

February 24th, 2018, 08:52 PM

It's a hobby

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2IOZ-5Nk5k

Freude am Fahren

February 24th, 2018, 09:13 PM

In my (and other New Zealanders i know) opinion.

And in plenty of Americans'.

There's a large portion in the middle that would love to get rid of guns, but think we shouldn't because there are already too many, so criminals will always have them, so they need them too. You'll find a lot of liberals in this mindset. Kind of a catch-22, I guess.

drew

February 25th, 2018, 01:16 AM

I've always been baffled by the "there are too many guns now, making them illegal will only allow criminals to have them" point of view. While that may, or may not be the case, the result is the same, they just don't even attempt anything.

The fact that they announce a given senator/congressman as "so and so 'who has a [letter] NRA rating'", is fucking appalling. That should have NO factor in anything, but yet, it's THE factor.

Get money and lobbying out of this shit.

Fogelhund

February 25th, 2018, 04:54 AM

Jason

February 25th, 2018, 05:05 AM

drew

February 25th, 2018, 08:02 AM

I bet AR style rifles are probably still flying off racks right now. It happens every time there's a shooting, and they start the "we need to do something" shit.

21Kid

February 25th, 2018, 06:48 PM

If we ban manufacturing and sale within the US, those illegal guns will slowly trickle away too, as they are confiscated over time. We'll just have to make sure that there isn't a mass of importing.

It'd be a real challenge to ban manufacturing of them here though.

This is what we should do, IMO.
They can still manufacture them for the military. Just don't allow citizens to have them.

Godson

February 25th, 2018, 07:56 PM

Jason

February 26th, 2018, 06:03 AM

Jason

February 26th, 2018, 06:53 AM

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/?utm_source=vxfb

Separately, I wonder if simply banning AR-15 rifles and the like would help out. Simply from a damage standpoint during these mass shootings. That being said, pistol homicides far outpace rifle homicides in the US.

SportWagon

February 26th, 2018, 07:51 AM

I wonder how much research is being done into the development of self-shooting guns. Self-shooting guns would always follow all the appropriate rules and protocols and never panic. Furthermore, more use could be made of non-lethal ammunition and/or shooting techniques, since the self-shooting gun would not be an actual human life which would be in danger. The gun could instantly calculate the appropriate amount of various tranquilizers needed for the subject encountered, and select and load and shoot the appropriate cartridge with an appropriate shot to an appropriate target. This could allow apprehension by a human (or non-human, possibly inanimate) assistant. And even if the attempted tranquilization failed, the gun would not be a human life at risk. The SSG could have other weapons in its arsenal, too, such as gases to temporarily incapacitate in various ways.

Crazed_Insanity

February 26th, 2018, 08:39 AM

Why not have armored hugging robots? Whenever gunshots detected, the robot would move toward the gunman and give him a hug until swat team shows up.

Jason

February 26th, 2018, 09:10 AM

I do often wonder why non lethal weapons aren't good enough for home protection, but I guess they wouldn't be useful in protecting from a "tyrranical government"

Freude am Fahren

February 26th, 2018, 09:29 AM

An ex-coworker posted a link to a school mass stabbing on facebook with the comment "should we ban knives too?"

20 people stabbed, no one dead, about a third serious injuries.

So it was actually a perfect example of why we SHOULD ban high powered automatic weapons. Two people attempting basically the same thing, one doing much more damage simply because of an assault rifle.

Godson

February 26th, 2018, 11:27 AM

Can you expand on your statement, and why you think it relates to what we should do in the US? Also, is Brazil an outlier, or do you believe that gun laws like Brazil's also cause the same problems in other developed countries? Aren't there other developed countries with strict gun laws similar to Brazil, and don't those countries have far fewer gun homicides than the US? Why is Brazil the "proof" yet those other countries aren't? (I see Brazil used as an argument by many right wingers on the subject, so I'm genuinely curious)

Also, for what it's worth, manufacturing has not been banned in Brazil, even though private ownership largely has. From what I can see on the interwebs, they have a huge export market, and some of that gets re-imported back into their country.

Clearly if we do similar in the US (ban ownership, but still have all sorts of guns just laying around), nothing will really change. But if manufacturing and import are curtailed, then gun availability will change. Assuming we actually do a decent job of stopping illegal imports.

I'll try to get to this tonight, I'm at work right now and need to get the appropriate information to you on why.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/?utm_source=vxfb

Separately, I wonder if simply banning AR-15 rifles and the like would help out. Simply from a damage standpoint during these mass shootings. That being said, pistol homicides far outpace rifle homicides in the US.

That's the thing pro gun people keep going on about. Pistols kill way more people than rifles. Most of them are in gangbangers hands. The amounts killed by rifles, hunting or otherwise is miniscule in comparison. A lot of the shootings that happen with rifles are reported on because of the ease on which they can make the story appear more gruesome and scary.

Let's think about it. Does a Glock or a revolver look nearly as intimidating as an AR15? Nope.

Does a hunting rifle look as bad as an AR15? Nope.

Many hunting rifle can be had in semi auto form. They are also larger caliber bullets which can do more damage. "High capacity" mags can be had with many different designs of rifle.

I come to you with this as to inform. Not to belittle. We are currently going through a knee jerk reaction period. Airguns are currently receiving some pretty serious backlash right now and for ZERO reason.

I'll type up more after I get off work.

Jason

February 26th, 2018, 11:56 AM

Respectfully, the damage from an AR-15 is more gruesome and scary than the damage done with a pistol, at least according to the article linked. I get that you can still murder a lot of people with a smaller firearm, but is it as easy? Should ease of mass murder be a factor in deciding if a weapon is legal or not? We already have a "red line" in that regard. Is an AR-15 (or equivalent) a good home protection weapon? Is it a good hunting rifle? If neither, then why are they legal other than "freedom"?

I do want to be clear, in the ideal world, I'd love to see guns banned for private ownership in the US, as well as manufacturing, and import/sale for private use. So I know I'm in the minority in the US. I'm just trying to figure out a "middle ground".

Politicians talk a lot about it being a "mental healthcare" issue, while removing restrictions from ownership, and making healthcare harder/more expensive to maintain. So I'm not really sure exactly what that solution is. Not to mention, the mentally disabled are more likely to be a victim of violence, than they are to be someone who shoots up a school. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if a history of abusive behavior does correlate.

Tom Servo

February 26th, 2018, 01:04 PM

I'm definitely of the opinion that it seems like something like an AR-15 is better suited to killing a lot of people very quickly in a single incident. More people are killed by handguns obviously, but it seems (and I do not have data to back this up, and if it's incorrect I'm happy to know that) like shootings with handguns generally kill significantly fewer people per incident than incidents like the Las Vegas or Parkland shootings. In other terms, a single person can do way more damage with an AR-15 than they can do with a handgun, and if all those people killing people with handguns had AR-15s instead, we'd be in a significantly worse situation than we already find ourselves.

I got into it with someone on a friend's FB post, though I wasn't really arguing anything gun related. The original poster reposted some image showing two guns, one that looked like an older hunting rifle, the other was an AR-15. It said that both were semi-automatic, both could hold 30 rounds, both fired the same size ammunition, but that one nobody worries about while they all want to ban the AR-15 because "it's scary looking." (Not going to go out and try to find it again, but I think the phrasing was similar to "Totally fine to own" vs. "OMG ITS SCARY BAN IT!") My only point was that that's a really bad argument because it can be turned around really quickly - if the only difference is how they look, then why would you worry if the AR-15 gets banned? You can still get the exact same gun, only less scary looking.

The immediate response from all of his friends was that they aren't identical, most pointing out that the AR-15 was a newer gun and was therefore "better." (I use quotes there as literal quotes, not paraphrase quotes). I couldn't get anyone to answer me about what made it better, and I'm not knowledgable about firearms. My immediate guesses would be that it's lighter, less prone to malfunctioning, maybe better balance, or less recoil, easier to aim? However, nobody would stand behind the idea that the AR-15 was a "lesser" or even equal weapon than the other one that they attempted to equate in all ways other than appearance.

drew

February 26th, 2018, 02:17 PM

Trying to compare the bodily damage of a 9mm/45 to that of a .223 is a bit silly. They're nowhere near the same level. Having personally seen the difference on two ground hogs that were unfortunate enough to get in my sights: 9mm (even with hollow points), dead, but looked "normal"; .223 equally dead, and disemboweled.

While one could certainly wreak havoc with a Beretta/pick your pistol of choice, the same situation replacing it with an AR style rifle will yield far more carnage. Not to mention, most pistols have 18-20 shot "mags" (yes, there are some extended varieties) but you can get 40-50-fucking-lot mags for a rifle. Add a drum mag, and you can just spray all over.

Not to mention a .223 will go through more materials than a 9mm, due to it's small caliber and high velocity. You could very easily wound/kill a couple people with the same shot, as it'd pass through the first person.

My thoughts:
There's no purpose for these things to exist. But, given there are literally MILLIONS of them out there, short of a ban/buy back, fuck all will make a difference. Again, I'm not in any way advocating that NOTHING should at least be attempted, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

The whole "why don't they ban knives" argument/horseshit makes me want to punch the person in the throat that uses it.

Freude am Fahren

February 26th, 2018, 02:24 PM

I saw that too on facebook. My response is that they should both be banned, and most everyone that wants to ban an "AR-15" wants to ban both as well. It has nothing to do with how they look.

It's amazing how pedantic/semantic/whatever gun nuts get.

I don't give a shit what you call a gun that can fire 30 rounds in a few seconds with great force and accuracy. Nor do I care if it looks like a military rifle, hunting rifle, or a fucking great big cock. Get rid of it.

My proposed US guns laws:

Anything other than revolvers, and single action (or whatever it's called when you have to manually load the next bullet via pump action, bolt action, whatever) rifles/shotguns banned for civilian ownership. No semi-automatic, or automatic. Limit number of bullets any gun to a reasonable amount (7-10 shots maybe?). Probably limit caliber too. I don't know a lot about this, but basically citizens don't need Desert Eagles or .50 BMG rifles.

Written and practical test for any kind of ownership/operation. All guns must be registered and insured. Basically a copy of the automotive world. Very serious penalties for mishandling/not reporting theft, etc.

Maybe add having a mental fitness test as well, kinda like you have to have an annual medical to be a pilot, etc.

Maybe licensed ranges may have their own "fun guns" for people to get their kicks.

People can still hunt and protect their lives/loved ones/property just fine.

If you're worried about overthrowing the tyrannical government, good luck. All the AR-15's in the world aren't going to protect you from a hellfire missile fired from a drone at 20,000 ft.

neanderthal

February 26th, 2018, 08:11 PM

Many of the people talmbout gun violence in Chicago the same folks trying to keep their guns in case of a tyrannical gubmint. SMDH
Many of the people who want an AR 15 for home defense are also keeping them in case that tyrranical government comes after them; with tanks, stun grenades, armor piercing rounds, water cannons and sonic/ subsonic shit we haven't even thought of.

drew

February 27th, 2018, 01:31 AM

Tom Servo

February 27th, 2018, 05:48 AM

AR vs Predator Drone.

The comic was good, but the movie sucked.

Crazed_Insanity

February 27th, 2018, 08:48 AM

If it takes a tyrannical dicktator to bomb the shit out of his own territory in order to take over control, that sort of defeats the purpose...

US military is unstoppable. Other than mutual assured destruction of nukes, no nation on earth will be able stop a Trump like dicktator.

It will definitely take American citizen's own guns to cause enough trouble at home in order to save the rest of the world.

If Germany had similar gun culture, it'll probably be more difficult for Nazi and Hitler... but then again, maybe all the gun owners will be very proud to see Germany becoming great again thanks to Hitler?

Anyway, luckily US was around to fight the Nazis and the Japanese. I'm just not sure what nations on earth will be able to take on USA if we were to turn bad. We are already turning...

Of course I'm not advocating for AR rifles just because of that. I think citizens with handguns should be able to cause enough troubles for the government. Considering how many freaking guns we have!

Fogelhund

February 28th, 2018, 05:59 AM

I'm not sure whether I find it amusing, or disturbing, or equal parts of both, that there is a (not so small) percentage of the US population, who steadfastly believes, that they have to protect themselves from this theoretical Tyrannical government, and that somehow, a few guns will get the job done. Like these people are hook, line and sinker deep in this belief, to the point where if you don't agree, you are a naive idiot, waiting to be taken out by the government.

I've even asked... if you think the government is tyrannical... are you going to march onto the white house with your gun, to over throw the government? How do you think that will go?

They also claim that they are willing to "fight" for maintaining their full second amendment rights. Scary fuckers.

MR2 Fan

February 28th, 2018, 06:12 AM

Fogelhund

February 28th, 2018, 06:17 AM

QFT, their "logic" never holds up.

The problem is that owning a gun to them isn't about the gun itself, it's overcoming their own inadequacy, or them liking to play with dangerous toys and want certain authorities and their own local groups to tell them it's ok to do that.

I'm not sure I'd agree. I think it's basically the equivalent of a religion. They've been raised on this fear, perhaps from their parents, the paranoia, plus they've bought into what is effectively a propaganda campaign... fear of your fellow citizens, fear of the government, fear of the Russians, fear of the Muslims.... there is a very real culture of fear, and distrust within this undercurrent. It's why the "Fake News" campaign and conspiracy theories have been so successful in this demographic, as they've been raised not to trust anything.

Crazed_Insanity

February 28th, 2018, 06:49 AM

Fear isn't always bad though..., of course bible teaches perfect love can cast out all fear, but who is perfect like that in this world?

Why we have 3 branches of govt? Why check and balance each other? Why not trust each other. Why free speeches? Why freedom of religion?

Constitution is basically addressing all these fears.

I'm not a gun owner, but I can understand these fears.

With such fears, naturally straight bans won't help get rid of their fears...

But I'm pretty sure most gun owners don't own guns out of fear for govt, but just out of our own inadequacies..., just like owning fancy cars and other toys. Mostly emotionally driven...

tigeraid

February 28th, 2018, 09:33 AM

It's bothersome that the same folks who talk about defending themselves from an oppressive government will spout until they're blue in the face about how the Constitution is a perfect, un-alterable document and there is no greater form of government on the planet. Where's the confidence?

Crazed_Insanity

February 28th, 2018, 10:06 AM

US constitution has been amended a few times. It's not quite as unalterable as the Bible or anything like that...

But essentially it's written to address people's fears so that no single powerful entity could walk all over other folks who are less powerful...

Right now, I don't have a fear of Trump becoming a dictator. However, if somebody Trump-like does become the dictator by altering or just ignoring the constitution, I'd be glad there are gazillion guns available in our society to fight that dick's government.

Of course, the off chance of some dick taking over in the future vs having regular mass shootings at our schools? Some thing has to give here... founding fathers were wise, but surely they didn't intend for us to have regular school shootings. Our choices are not just between ban all guns or allowing us to own nuclear weapons. Both sides can come toward the fucking middle a little. Find a solution that can address everyone's fears. Especially our children's fears!

Tom Servo

February 28th, 2018, 10:16 AM

Georgia teacher now in custody after reports of shots fired at a school.

Clearly, the only solution now is to arm the students.

G'day Mate

February 28th, 2018, 12:40 PM

MR2 Fan

February 28th, 2018, 01:06 PM

they should all get a quiz on what they think "well-regulated" refers to

Crazed_Insanity

February 28th, 2018, 01:08 PM

We can probably have infinite interpretations of the 2nd amendment.

https://www.npr.org/2013/01/07/168834462/the-2nd-amendment-27-words-endless-interpretations

From the above article, pertaining to dealing with a oppressive govt or even just for self protection, 2nd amend is like condom. "It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it."

But of course when our kids are regularly using this 'condom' not only to have sex but to kill each other, maybe it's time to deny them such rights.

To combat lone wolves, maybe they should have some kind of system for gun owners to vouch for each other? If you can't find 2 registered gun owning friends to vouch for you, you'll not be able to enjoy 2nd amendment rights. If the friend you personally vouched for commits a mass murder, then you lose your 2nd amendment rights or pay for all the damages caused! Cheap way of regulating this militia!

Anyway, I do sense the wind is beginning to change. NRA is beginning to lose its grip. Thanks to those kids from Florida.

drew

February 28th, 2018, 01:35 PM

They know what the last word of "second amendment" means, right?

Amendment, not commandment.

Freude am Fahren

February 28th, 2018, 03:33 PM

So that kid that claims CNN woudln't let him ask his own question, only what they wanted him to ask, and had emails to prove it? Yeah, his father admitted to altering the emails "unintentionally".

You know, because when you forward a CNN email to Fox News, it's normal to "accidentally" take out out a phrase right in the middle of the text, that perfect changes the entire context of the email.

And CNN's response was after the dad emailed a 700 page essay he wanted his son to read. They said only to stick to the questions they discussed, that the boy submitted, so everyone would get a chance to partake. The bolded part was the part taken out.

Who's the fake news again?

Also a Georgia lawmaker (forget what exactly he is, Senator, maybe) is basically trying to extort Delta by saying he'll take away any kind of tax relief if they don't go back on dropping NRA discounts.

What a country we live in.

Fogelhund

February 28th, 2018, 05:06 PM

https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/xw5k4z/people-are-super-excited-about-dicks?utm_source=vicenewstwitter

People are super excited about Dick’s

VICE News
‏
Verified account

@vicenews
7h7 hours ago
More
Dick’s went hard on gun control

Freude am Fahren

February 28th, 2018, 06:35 PM

It should be noted (as DICK's pointed out themselves) that they haven't sold them in stores since Sandy Hook. They've now expanded that to 35 Field and Stream stores (as compared to 610 DICK's in the US that already didn't sell assault style rifles). Everyone seems to be completely glossing over this.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they are re-affirming their stance, in addition to the added policy on age and magazines. But the dialogue seems to be completely missing this point.

Tom Servo

February 28th, 2018, 08:07 PM

In fairness, I think Dick's is doing that intentionally, they want the good press for the entire company, not just their F&S stores. I'm sure in no small part due to the backlash they will get for that stance.

Disclosure - I worked with them on their Sports Matter campaign and am inclined to think that the people who work there are good people.

tigeraid

March 1st, 2018, 05:38 AM

Ya'll are fucked up.

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--1e-Tbcfb--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/lzkex6u5rtq8xgwnuunl.jpg

On Wednesday—two weeks after a gunman killed 17 students and teachers at a school in Parkland, FL—a church in Newfoundland, PA, held a “commitment ceremony” where worshippers brought their guns to be blessed.

Parishioners at the World Peace and Unification Sanctuary brought their (unloaded) handguns and semi-automatic weapons to the ceremony. A nearby elementary school canceled classes ahead of the event.

Some of the attendees wore crowns and tiaras “representing the sovereignty of Kings and Queens.” Some of those crowns were made of bullets.

The church encouraged couples to bring AR-15 semi-automatic weapons to the ceremony to represent “both the intent and the ability to defend one’s family, community and ‘nation of Cheon Il Guk.’” The church’s leader believes AR-15s are the “rod of iron” mentioned in the Book of Revelations.

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--TTzHhTEU--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/cctvgaouixs9vubrxh55.jpg

You know what? I'll put a positive spin on this: at least there's a black dude and a few Asians. These gun nuts aren't racist!

novicius

March 1st, 2018, 06:00 AM

Melting Pot in action.

Fogelhund

March 1st, 2018, 07:57 AM

https://secondnexus.com/news/watch-donald-trump-assault-weapons-ban/?utm_content=inf_677_1164_2&tse_id=INF_5847abe01d6311e8a7df235443c1f917

President Donald Trump’s freewheeling style during a bipartisan meeting with lawmakers frustrated many Republicans after he expressed support for a “comprehensive” gun bill that would include strengthening background checks and temporarily taking guns away from individuals deemed a “high-risk” to public safety. the outlawing of “bump stock” devices and tighter age limits for buying rifles

“We want to pass something great, and to me the something great has to be where we prevent it from happening again,” Trump said, referring to the Valentine Day’s shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, which resulted in 17 deaths.

The president also appeared to support the outlawing of “bump stock” devices and tighter age limits for buying rifles similar to the one used in the Parkland shooting.

Trump then appeared to break from the NRA––which has tried to reel him in on gun control legislation––by accusing lawmakers of being so “petrified” by the NRA that they have not been willing to pass even rudimentary legislation.

“They have great power over you people,” Trump said. “They have less power over me.”

-----------------------------------------

For once, he doesn't look like a complete idiot.

MR2 Fan

March 1st, 2018, 08:06 AM

give it a day or so when he's off his meds

Crazed_Insanity

March 1st, 2018, 08:25 AM

Even if he is not on meds and stayed that way..., it's not up to the president to pass new laws.

It's probably more like he said he's so brave and fearless unlike those sheriffs... that he would run toward the gun man even without any weapons!

Anyway, I suppose I'd probably be just as fearless if I were him... because I know before I'm able to run inside that school, secret service would've neutralized the target already.

If he can really twist the arms of enough republican lawmakers to go against the will of NRA..., good for him! But let's wait and see.

Crazed_Insanity

March 1st, 2018, 08:35 AM

Ya'll are fucked up.

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--1e-Tbcfb--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/lzkex6u5rtq8xgwnuunl.jpg

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--TTzHhTEU--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/cctvgaouixs9vubrxh55.jpg

You know what? I'll put a positive spin on this: at least there's a black dude and a few Asians. These gun nuts aren't racist!

Did you know that they are only holding onto unloaded weapons and zip tied to prevent being actually used?

How stupid can they be? What if a mad man comes in with a loaded weapon? They'd still be all dead!

They might as well just be holding a literal rod of iron.

Hope they don't become the next westboro baptists. Holding these unloaded crap just to piss their neighbors off... :smh:

George

March 1st, 2018, 09:01 AM

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--1e-Tbcfb--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/lzkex6u5rtq8xgwnuunl.jpg

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--TTzHhTEU--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/cctvgaouixs9vubrxh55.jpg

Hmm. Where have we seen this before?

http://thedonaldstreetcollective.weebly.com/uploads/2/3/8/4/23849300/3780296.jpg?651

speedpimp

March 1st, 2018, 03:06 PM

While the AR-15 is a poor choice for home defense(the whole potential for over-penetration and all), it isn't the worst choice. The worst choice for a home defense weapon would be Drew's Ass Cannon.

Drew's Ass Cannon. The very best there is. When you absolutely, positively got to crop dust every motherfucker in the room, accept no substitutes.

KillerB

March 1st, 2018, 05:30 PM

If they want to ban AR-15s, they can buy them from me for what I paid for them. I’ve barely shot them and I’m not wedded to them. I don’t think they should be illegal, and despite what makes headlines, a vanishingly tiny minority of gun deaths involve AR-15s, but I really don’t care that much. But if you want to cause real change, you need to remove the guns already out there. I’m willing to give them up, but only if my property rights are respected.

JoshInKC

March 1st, 2018, 05:31 PM

Hmm. Where have we seen this before?

http://thedonaldstreetcollective.weebly.com/uploads/2/3/8/4/23849300/3780296.jpg?651

:up: upvoted for Apes-based content

Rare White Ape

March 1st, 2018, 10:23 PM

a vanishingly tiny minority of gun deaths involve AR-15s

Wasn't the main problem with the the ability for it to cause so much damage in a short amount of time, thus making it the weapon of choice for mass murderers?

Another way to look at it is that shooting victims have a fighting chance of surviving if their wounds don't involve spreading large parts of their internal organs throughout the room, and banning AR-15s would help survivability in a mass shooting scenario.

G'day Mate

March 1st, 2018, 10:32 PM

Let's face it, if you guys stopped the mass killings you could relax and just sweep the rest of the gun issues under the rug

KillerB

March 2nd, 2018, 06:49 AM

Let's face it, if you guys stopped the mass killings you could relax and just sweep the rest of the gun issues under the rug

Yep, this is really astute. No one in this country seems to care about the vast majority of shootings that involve handguns. That's probably because they mostly fall into two categories - gang violence (in other words, black or brown people killing black or brown people - fair or unfair, the media doesn't give a shit), and suicides (still a taboo subject, and again, the media doesn't give a shit).

That's why I'm fine with them buying back my AR-15s. I literally bought them because my mother, who has a lot of physical issues with her back and legs, wanted to learn to shoot. Handguns and higher-powered rifles and shotguns would be challenging for her, but she insisted she wanted something "useful," AKA not a .22. Her (and my) real use for them would be in the case of massive unrest following a really large earthquake or other disaster, which is certainly possible given our geology here in the LA basin. Super unlikely in the short run, but actually very likely in the 50 or so years I expect to remain on this planet.

I'd happily sacrifice the AR-15s for the opportunity to liberalize concealed carry laws in California (getting a CC license in the urban parts of this state is like going to a combination of the DMV and the dentist), but as G'day suggests, I'll even give them up just to stop hearing about them in the news. Without my mother's limitations, I'd have been perfectly satisfied with a few handguns and shotguns - semiautomatic in both cases.

All that said, I still am a firm believer in science and statistics, which point to AR-15s (and long guns in general - rifles and shotguns) - being a very small percentage of the gun violence problem in this country. Unfortunately, they've become a very VISIBLE part of the problem, because they're being used by white people to kill white people, especially children.

If you really want to affect change on gun violence in this country, you'd work to overturn the Heller case, and ban handguns. Of course, you'd have to round them all up. Good luck with that. Even normally law-abiding, reasonable folks that I know, when pressed on that issue, talk about how they'd just hide them in their attic/basement/safe.

KillerB

March 2nd, 2018, 07:08 AM

Wasn't the main problem with the the ability for it to cause so much damage in a short amount of time, thus making it the weapon of choice for mass murderers?

Another way to look at it is that shooting victims have a fighting chance of surviving if their wounds don't involve spreading large parts of their internal organs throughout the room, and banning AR-15s would help survivability in a mass shooting scenario.

Here are statistics, right from the state that is most in opposition to semiautomatic rifles: California.

https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/publications/firearms-report-16.pdf

Right from page 6 - "California assault weapon use has remained at a relatively low proportion of total firearm use since this annual report commenced in 1998."

IMO, discussion about their effectiveness or lack thereof is irrelevant in the face of statistics that state that only 9% of all gun crimes involve the use of rifles OF ANY KIND, while 86.5% involve the use of handguns. Anyone who is being intellectually honest, and reacting as if gun deaths that involve black or brown people are as great a tragedy as gun deaths that involve white people, should be working furiously to overturn the Heller decision, and to ban and buy back handguns, not semiautomatic rifles.

Crazed_Insanity

March 2nd, 2018, 08:48 AM

I'm not entirely sure that handgun violence's being swept under the rug due to racial reasons alone. Even if all hand gun deaths were all white folks, the psychological impact is just not as severe as mass shootings.

Just as when a jumbo jet crashes, it's a huge deal psychologically. Statistically, commercial aviation crash deaths is just super low compared to auto crash deaths. Yet we tend to have more folks afraid to fly rather than afraid to ride. Human brains cannot really fully appreciate statistics sometimes... When more folks die in a single event, it is more traumatic to our brains...

KillerB

March 2nd, 2018, 09:13 AM

Compare to the opioid epidemic sweeping rural white America. It's got all kinds of attention, IMO, solely because the people are white, working and middle class folks. Drug addiction was an issue in black and brown communities for years (remember the crack epidemic), and we fought it with mandatory jail time. This time around, it's all about gentler, treatment based solutions.

It's totally about race.

tigeraid

March 2nd, 2018, 09:23 AM

^QFT.

Crazed_Insanity

March 2nd, 2018, 09:48 AM

Clearly racism still exists..., statistically white lives matter more..., not trying to pretend that's not one of the reasons. But I think we can obviously overcome racial problems at times... (see Obama). However, not sure if we can overcome our gun problems...

Psychologically or in terms of newsworthiness, you'd get more attention when commercial airplane crashes vs a car crash. Wanting MORE regulations to ensure safer commercial airliners is not a bad thing especially if we see multi crashes within since beginning of the year! Similarly asking for more stringent requirements for buying those rifles also shouldn't be a bad thing.

Statistically we have less of these bigger fishes than small fishes, but we might as well fry the bigger fishes first!

I just think involving 'race' in this issue is not necessary. Just like the drug problems you mentioned. Eventually... we'll deal with the problem one way or another by focusing on solving problems rather than focusing on our racial problems. We need to eventually solve our racial problems too of course... but even in that drug problem example, root cause of drug problem isn't really about race, right?

I can agree that mass shooting of a black church/school probably for sure will cause even less reaction in congress, but it'll probably still be more newsworthy than some white dude being gunned down? That's my point. # of victims/incident makes more of a difference than race... eventhough total # of gun deaths greatly exceeds automatic rifle deaths.

March 2nd, 2018, 09:55 AM

Isn't it obvious that from the beginning the drug thing was a race thing.

Crazed_Insanity

March 2nd, 2018, 10:01 AM

How is the drug thing a race thing?

Anyway, this may require a separate thread since this thread is really about gun things.

KillerB

March 3rd, 2018, 09:56 AM

Billi, your question displays a staggering ignorance of American history. Unless you’re willing to pay me, I’m not going to teach it to you. Google “American drug policy and race,” or pick up a fucking book.

Crazed_Insanity

March 3rd, 2018, 02:35 PM

So have we finished the gun issue?

Do you still believe only white mass shooting get attention and if we have only black victims in a mass shooting, it would just get brushed under the rug?

Race or mass? Which one is the main reason that catches our collective attention?

MR2 Fan

March 5th, 2018, 09:41 PM

https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/ayXxvEW_460s.jpg

Cam

March 6th, 2018, 04:45 AM

:lol:

balki

March 6th, 2018, 05:56 AM

average American =/= "A well regulated Militia"
Plus, I don't think the four ruffians would have got past all the founding father's slaves to break into the house

Cam

March 6th, 2018, 11:49 AM

FB just suggested a Glock owners group to me. :erm: Must be because of those Dick's joke headlines I made up. :rolleyes:

Freude am Fahren

March 6th, 2018, 04:09 PM

I was monitoring the FL house proceedings on gun control today at work, and one Rep. used some of his time to point out that pretty much all talk about the 2nd back when was centered on the militia part (or something like that) and that in the Militia Act (of 1792) states that "every citizen, so enrolled and notified" (emphasis his) "shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch with a box therein to contain not less than twenty‐four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball: or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot‐pouch and powder‐horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle and a quarter of a pound of powder" (He read straight from the act you can read here: https://deadguyquotes.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/militia-act-of-1792.pdf )

He went on suggest we carry out the founding fathers' words exactly, basically, and make sure everyone gets bayonets, or something. It was good satire, for a state politician anyway.

tigeraid

March 7th, 2018, 05:07 AM

https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2018/03/an-army-officer-says-regulate-weapons-just-like-we-do-in-the-military/554816/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=atlantic-daily-newsletter&utm_content=20180306&silverid=NDI0MzA0NTA1NTc2S0

I’m a Regular Army officer and have served in frontline positions in Iraq (this only to mean that I’ve got a very small slice of experience with the practical application of what military grade weapons were designed to do).

I’m a southerner who grew up shooting .22s in the field behind the house from the time I could hold the rifle. I own several “classic” firearms like the M-1 Garand and a Martini-Henry, though not an AR-platform, which I shoot enough at work, to be honest (something half-submerged in my mind makes me think that in my house I don’t need a weapon designed exclusively for combat, either for sport or home defense—my German Shepherd is a much better platform for both).

All that to say that for the first time ever, I find myself more strongly on the side of gun control than of unrestricted gun circulation...

My niche perspective is this: in the Army, firearms are much more heavily regulated than in civil society. How can so many enthusiastic gun owners say that they hold the military as a model, and yet not accept the strict regulations that go with the military’s use of firearms?

Probably with the same logic that they use when they buy military tactical kit and shoot GoPro videos on their homemade urban range, but would never carry a hundred pounds on their back for 20 miles or sit freezing in a foxhole for days on end. This is another facet of rights without responsibility, or privilege without duty, in our present “liquid society.”

In the Army, firearms are stored under lock, key, and sometimes guard, and god help you if one goes missing—the post shuts down and a frenzied search bordering on a religious quest begins. After basic training, soldiers are required to go through a few hours of refresher training with practical drills before they are even allowed on a range for individual shooting qualification. These are ranges that are heavily monitored, with a monumental emphasis on safety.

What might be shocking to people who have not been around the military is that if a soldier cannot qualify with his weapon, he is not allowed to carry or shoot it on live-fire exercises or downrange. ... Can many of the gun-rights advocates be heard seriously advocating for hours and hours of training and qualification by competent authorities before a civilian is allowed to own the same weapon soldiers carry? Perhaps, but I am not aware of it….

After those individual qualification ranges, soldiers spend hours upon hours day after day drilling to conduct more complex operations like a squad live-fire. And perhaps the most complex of all—clearing a room or building in a live fire scenario… It is very difficult for trained military units to deal with lone shooters on a battlefield, yet something in the American psyche—let’s call it the Lone Ranger archetype—is being convinced that one armed teacher can make a stand and take down an evil menace, then receive his hero’s laurels. Perhaps we ought to consider regulating John Wayne movies as well.

***

What is to be done? Clearly, with several hundred million firearms in circulation, mass confiscation is not practical, politically toxic, and as a sporting man myself, I would say culturally undesirable. But simple steps such as limiting high-capacity magazines, stringent background checks (lets’s not pretend they hold water now), and a licensing process are all good starts. After a certain list of tangible steps is exhausted though, the question becomes a nebulous one of cultural norms. Is there going to be a shift toward seeing firearm ownership as innately bound up in social responsibility? One can hope.

As a very small child I was taught, with fear and wonder approaching holy revelation, that safety with firearms was paramount, and I intend to teach that to my children when they are old enough. But until more Americans interact with structures like the military where safety and social responsibility are innate to firearms, I don’t see how that sentiment can grow organically so that people will accept it, as opposed to seeing it as imposed from above.

Will most Americans grow up and out of the fairy tale that their right to bear arms is without nuance or burden of responsibility? Will they realize they are probably not Lone Rangers waiting for their moment to save the day in their home or school? That the intent of the second amendment is to ensure that any armed, but unorganized and untrained citizenry, is able to overthrow a tyrannical government (a ludicrous proposition, in any case)? I am not sure, but our history and our geography—unlike that, say, of the Swiss, who have long seen firearms as a means to defend their country collectively from invasion—do not bode well for it….

To put a final twist on Oscar Wilde, even in the niche of American gun culture we are living with both extreme barbarism and extreme decadence, with only a precarious sliver of civilization in between.

Crazed_Insanity

March 7th, 2018, 10:40 AM

Nicely written!

Need to seek help from more folks like him to get guns under control.

balki

March 7th, 2018, 12:25 PM

(something half-submerged in my mind makes me think that in my house I don’t need a weapon designed exclusively for combat, either for sport or home defense—my German Shepherd is a much better platform for both)...
This is another facet of rights without responsibility, or privilege without duty
solid :up:

Crazed_Insanity

March 7th, 2018, 05:27 PM

To be fair to the German shepherd, I'd hate to see one being adopted by the same irresponsible privilege abusing owner....

It's probably not just our gun culture, but culture in general that's messed up. Otherwise we would not have Trump...

Tom Servo

March 9th, 2018, 06:36 PM

Dana Loesch, NRA spokesperson: "Any gun control measures should be left to the states."

The state of Florida passes gun control measures.

NRA sues Florida.

drew

March 10th, 2018, 04:01 AM

Fuck the NRA. They're not a legislative body. Their opinions and "ratings" shouldn't mean a goddamn thing.

That's the issue.

I hope more companies pull from them. Take their money away, and they can't lobby shit, and hopefully wither away and disappear.

speedpimp

March 11th, 2018, 11:47 AM

Dana Loesch, NRA spokesperson: "Any gun control measures should be left to the states."

The state of Florida passes gun control measures.

NRA sues Florida.

States rights but only if it's the right rights.

tigeraid

March 14th, 2018, 08:05 AM

Boy this, uuuuh, this stuff just writes itself, don't it.

https://splinternews.com/teacher-injures-student-after-accidentally-firing-gun-i-1823762480

A California teacher accidentally discharged a gun while doing a firearms demonstration in front of a high school class on Tuesday, leaving one student with non-life-threatening injuries.

According to a statement from police, the teacher, identified as Dennis Alexander, was providing instruction on public safety at Seaside High School in Seaside, CA. Alexander, who is also a reserve police officer with the nearby Sand City police department and a Seaside city councilman, was pointing the loaded gun at the ceiling when it went off. The injured 17-year-old student’s father, Fermin Gonzales, told KSBW that his son was hurt when fragments from the bullet ricocheted off the ceiling and lodged in his neck.

“It’s the craziest thing. It could have been very bad,” Gonzales told the station. He said he found out about the incident when his son came home from school with blood on his shirt and bullet fragments in his neck.

Freude am Fahren

March 14th, 2018, 08:40 AM

Jesus :rolleyes:

That last bit blows my mind.

Crazed_Insanity

March 14th, 2018, 09:00 AM

CA is reacting pretty swiftly... I used to be able to walk my kindergarten daughter to her class room before, but starting this week, the campus is now closed to all outsiders. I do believe I see an armed guard at the school's front door now. Just hope they won't have to demonstrate any guns at her school...

If there were some sort of attacker with automatic rifle, surely this guard will be no match...

Sigh..., can only do prayers for my daughter before anything happens...

drew

March 15th, 2018, 01:36 AM

The only logical answer.

2997

Alan P

March 15th, 2018, 06:20 PM

The only logical answer.

2997

Did the dog really eat your Homework? You have ten seconds to tell the truth!

Rare White Ape

April 3rd, 2018, 03:01 PM

I just came here to say, what the fuck America?

G'day Mate

April 3rd, 2018, 03:34 PM

Oh dear, what now?

Freude am Fahren

April 3rd, 2018, 03:46 PM

Shooting at YouTube HQ.

I think 3 wounded victims, 1 dead shooter (self-inflicted female).

This is the first shooting of it's kind I can think of where a female acted alone. However, given only 3 victims and suicide, I'm thinking not necessarily your usual mass-shooting, but perhaps a personal thing with specific targets.

ETA: Can't believe I just typed "usual mass shooting."

Godson

April 3rd, 2018, 05:43 PM

Word is, it was a woman and she was trying to kill her BF. I'd wager he was boinkin some others at work.

Also, I'm splitting hairs here, but by definition, this isn't a mass shooting.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting

Not much different than a gangbangers shooting up the block a few streets over from where I live.

*shrug*

Tom Servo

April 3rd, 2018, 06:10 PM

Well, at least two of the four definitions mentioned in the first paragraph would apply to this one. At least 3 victims excluding the perpetrator, and the "sometimes 4" definition of having that many people "involved" in the shooting.

Rare White Ape

April 3rd, 2018, 06:20 PM

Well it was a shooting and it led today’s news. Still comes under ‘gun control’ ludicracy.

G'day Mate

April 3rd, 2018, 06:23 PM

Handgun or rifle?

Tom Servo

April 3rd, 2018, 06:57 PM

Blunderbuss.

G'day Mate

April 3rd, 2018, 09:06 PM

Turns out it was a hand gun. I ask because the focus on gun control usually centres around semi automatic rifles.

Rare White Ape

April 4th, 2018, 12:05 AM

Something about the choice of weapon will surely give aggressively pro-gun peeps a reason to argue against gun control.

Drachen596

April 4th, 2018, 01:20 AM

AP story is saying the woman hated Youtube because they demonetized her channel.

She'd been reported missing by her family after not answering her phone for two days. found by cops sleeping in a car in Mountain View and her father states he told police she was probably going to youtube since she hated the company. Police did not respond when asked about that part of the fathers statement.

balki

April 4th, 2018, 05:39 AM

Don't follow the details all that much: how many of these shootings involve shotguns and hunting rifles? (i.e.; firearms that aren't almost solely designed to kill humans)

tigeraid

April 4th, 2018, 08:30 AM

Coincidental, but a well-written story by a long-time gun enthusiast worth a read.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/02/magazine/gun-culture-is-my-culture-and-i-fear-for-what-it-has-become.html?emc=edit_ck_20180404&nl=cooking&nlid=8526790820180404&te=1

here were floor displays of AR-15s, and probably a hundred or more other rifles and shotguns for anyone to walk up and hold. I watched a kid about 8 or 9 pick up one of those ARs and shoulder it to the center of his chest. He held the gun awkwardly, cocked his head hard to the side, squeezed one eye closed to aim and dry-fired the weapon. I watched two men, presumably his father and grandfather, smile and laugh, then break out their cellphones to snap a few pictures.

...Maybe it’s how I was raised and the types of firearms my family kept, but the idea of owning a rifle designed for engaging human targets out to 600 meters just never interested me.

...A few days after the school shooting in Parkland, Fla., in February, I sat down with a buddy over coffee at the firehouse where he works. The news was on in the background. I told him I’d be fine with an assault-weapons ban. He cut a look in my direction as if I’d absolutely lost my mind. I asked him why anyone needs to own an AR, an AK, an SKS. He said that the question is irrelevant, that the reason doesn’t supersede the right. I could feel my blood pressure rising and my face getting warm. I could see in his eyes that he was equally agitated. Despite everything we have in common, despite the fact that he’s my best friend and we were going squirrel hunting in a few days, the two of us fundamentally disagree. Someone came into the room and changed the subject, and I could sense that he was as thankful as I was. As sad as it is to say, the silence is easier. While the two of us sat there sipping coffee, there were kids on the television in the background, high school survivors who were willing to say what we are not, and I was ashamed.

...We were at the back of the store looking in the glass case at 1911s. All of a sudden, her eyes got big and she raised her hands then ducked behind me and grabbed onto my arm. I turned and stared down the aisle where a kid who looked about 18 was aiming an AR-15 the salesman had handed him. The muzzle was pointed in our direction. Ashley was terrified. I’ve been at the counter enough to know the predicament — wanting to shoulder a rifle to test the feel but having nowhere sensible to aim. The kid lowered the rifle and went back to talking to the salesman, neither seeming to notice us standing there, Ashley frozen behind me.

On the way out, she just kept saying: “He was a kid. He looked like he should’ve been in high school. What does a kid need a rifle like that for? What does anybody need a rifle like that for?” And the truth was, I didn’t have an answer. The truth is, there are guns I feel justified in owning and guns I feel belong on battlefields. I know the reasons my friends give for owning these weapons, and I know that their answers feel inadequate to me. I know that part of what they’re missing or refusing to acknowledge is how fear ushered in this shift in gun culture over the past two decades.

tigeraid

April 4th, 2018, 08:36 AM

Don't follow the details all that much: how many of these shootings involve shotguns and hunting rifles? (i.e.; firearms that aren't almost solely designed to kill humans)

I could be wrong, but it seems like very, very few. That's the vast majority of firearms in Canada, too, where very little gun violence happens.

Crazed_Insanity

April 4th, 2018, 09:00 AM

Cooler weather helped cool down angers perhaps. I'm sure if assault weapons are available up there, doesn't necessarily mean more Canadians will end up shooting up fellow Canadians more. Likewise, if Trump were to run for office there, that doesn't mean he will be elected.

You guys also have universal healthcare that'd take care of the mentally sick, right?

tigeraid

April 4th, 2018, 09:07 AM

Depends where you access the mental health services. If they're referred by your family physician or within their "group" then yes, healthcare covers it. If you just walk into a psychiatrist's office out of the blue, no.

Crazed_Insanity

April 4th, 2018, 09:29 AM

That's fine. I'm sure nobody just walks into a psychiatrist's office directly because the voices in his head is telling him to do so.

Most likely these types of folks do not wish to seek help. It'd be nice for the family doctors to make sure that he seeks the needed help.

For us, no money means no doctors. One just has to wait until ER admits him with medical emergency. If your sickness is not life threatening, nobody cares. We'll just have to wait until he hurts somebody, then we can once again put ER to work.

Anyway, besides relying on a national healthcare, we really need to pay more attention to our own families and friends too.

balki

April 4th, 2018, 11:15 AM

I know that part of what they’re missing or refusing to acknowledge is how fear ushered in this shift in gun culture over the past two decades.
I hear AR sales are down significantly because Trump is president and there's little fear over losing access to them

drew

April 4th, 2018, 02:32 PM

uUt when the NRA (haha, the NRA!) "suggests" that maybe they should ban "bump-stocks" (after Vegas), retailers sell out in a couple days.

tigeraid

April 12th, 2018, 08:07 AM

Once again: you can't make this shit up.

https://splinternews.com/stoneman-douglas-teacher-who-pushed-for-guns-in-schools-1825206724

A Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School teacher who said he’d be willing to arm himself while in the classroom has been arrested for reportedly forgetting his loaded Glock 9mm in a public restroom.

Sean Simpson, 43, left his loaded firearm in a bathroom stall at the Deerfield Beach Pier on Sunday, according to the Broward County Sheriff’s Office.

Simpson realized he had forgotten his gun “less than five minutes later,” according to the police report. When he went back to grab the gun he found that a homeless man had already taken the gun and fired it into a wall.

Dunno whether to laugh or cry.

Crazed_Insanity

April 12th, 2018, 12:26 PM

He probably remembered after hearing gun shots in the bathroom 5 minutes later?

Anyway, just laugh. Good thing we don't really have anything to cry about with regard to his guns.

Tom Servo

April 22nd, 2018, 03:56 PM

Would you look at that, another mass shooting with an AR-15 variant. Waffle House in Tennessee shot up by a naked guy, 4 dead. Read that he was a white nationalist, but only saw that once so far, so that's far from confirmed. James Shaw Jr. saw an opportunity while the shooter reloaded to tackle him and throw his rifle behind the counter of the Waffle House, shooter fled the scene and, last I read, is still on the run and may have two more firearms with him.

I'm pretty sure the rule is that it's too soon to talk about this one, but now it's probably safe to talk about the Marjory Stoneman Douglas one now, right?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/22/us/tennessee-waffle-house-shooting/index.html

Crazed_Insanity

April 23rd, 2018, 09:18 AM

This white nationalist isn't that happy with Trump either. Secret service had arrested him before and has lost his state right to own guns. Guns were supposedly transferred to his dad but apparently dad gave it back to the crazy son... which resulted 4 deaths.

Moral of the story?

We can have laws that ban all guns.

Crazies will still shoot up people for a while.

Of course this doesn't mean we should just pray and do nothing, just saying gun laws alone won't solve our mass shooting problem.

2nd amendment for sure further contributed to the problem, but deleting it won't really solve our problems anymore... sigh...

For this particular case, I do believe they also need to hold the gunman's father responsible.

21Kid

April 24th, 2018, 09:00 AM

MR2 Fan

April 24th, 2018, 10:45 AM

Is that the new rule? We have to wait (a few days) until the next tragedy, to talk about the last one?

that isn't a new rule, every time there's a shooting, politicians are like "it's not the time to talk about this, thoughts and prayers for the families" blah blah bullshit

Crazed_Insanity

April 24th, 2018, 10:57 AM

How about them non-gun related mass killings?

What is up with people nowadays?
Canada has no guns and presumably better mental healthcare, yet some folks still has the urge to just fuck up innocent people's lives. Why?

21Kid

April 25th, 2018, 08:07 PM

I know MR2... Never mind.

Crazed_Insanity

April 26th, 2018, 12:35 PM

Okay, so INCEL was the culprit in Toronto.

Empowering the women more, these poor inbeciles get upset.

Just like when we empower minorities more, some poor white folks get upset...

Good thing Canada has no guns, better mental healthcare... and even legalized prostitution! But this "inbecile" still has the means and justifications to unleash his frustration...

INCELs would've had better luck practicing Doc Love's System. Mowing them down with a truck still won't get you laid!

Okay, I'll return this thread back to the regular gun program already in progress...

balki

April 26th, 2018, 12:40 PM

Found this interesting, from Wikipedia:
During the confrontation, Minassian repeatedly drew his hand from his back pocket and pointed a cell phone toward the police officer as if it were a pistol. Officer Lam ordered Minassian to drop to the ground, while Minassian tried repeatedly to provoke the officer to kill him, saying "shoot me in the head!" when the officer warned him he may be shot. Lam then went to his cruiser and turned off its siren. As Minassian and Lam advanced towards each other, the officer recognized that the object in Minassian's hand was not a gun, holstered his pistol, and took out his baton. Minassian then dropped the object from his hand, went to the ground and surrendered to Lam. Minassian was arrested uninjured at 1:32 p.m

Crazed_Insanity

April 26th, 2018, 01:12 PM

Canadian cops either have nerves of steel and very well trained or just very stupid.

Very low chance of this guy surviving in the US. Either the cops shoot him dead or he'll shoot himself dead or some bystander gun owner will shoot him dead.

Wonder what it's like in Canadian prison. In the US, surely he'll end up having some involuntary sex in there, but who knows, maybe Canadian prisoners are all very civil as well. What a difference a border makes...

MR2 Fan

April 26th, 2018, 02:02 PM

George

April 26th, 2018, 02:19 PM

...but who knows, maybe Canadian prisoners are all very civil as well.

I've heard aboot lots of fights on the ice during prison hockey matches, eh?

Tom Servo

April 26th, 2018, 03:14 PM

https://i2.wp.com/www.columbusunderground.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Strange-Brew.jpg?w=1280&ssl=1

speedpimp

April 26th, 2018, 04:17 PM

INCEL? A person can go over a decade without sex and not turn into a homicidal maniac. Fucking pathetic.

Godson

April 26th, 2018, 06:45 PM

I saw a video of it. The interaction was impressive on the cops part to say the very least.

Crazed_Insanity

April 30th, 2018, 08:28 AM

How funny, NRA banned guns in one of its own event due to Pence's visit. Why? With all the guns around and their love for Pence, shouldn't that make the secret service's job much easier?

So conservative gun loving politicians need to be protected by banning guns, but fuck the kids at school, huh?

Unbelievably hypocritical assholes.

speedpimp

May 5th, 2018, 01:55 PM

Billy/i has finally seen the fucking light.

Crazed_Insanity

May 6th, 2018, 12:37 PM

Never owned any guns nor a lover of guns, but I see the wisdom of 2nd amendment.

If our future politicians get progressively worst than Trump, I think I'd consider buying some...

Rare White Ape

May 6th, 2018, 01:03 PM

Billi vs the US Army.

Hmmm.

On the subject of the 2nd amendment, has anyone else noticed that 2nd amendment supporters are also usually blindly proud patriots who love the President and are extremely unlikely to raise arms against the government anyway?

Crazed_Insanity

May 6th, 2018, 01:31 PM

In the event that a nazi-like-regime should rise to power within the US, it is crucial that billis start a civil war, otherwise the world would be screwed. Nazi-like regime would not allow folks to own guns...

Even if the Billis eventually get wiped out, this evil America would at least be weakened so the rest of the world can have a better chance at destroying this evil America.

Dicknose

May 6th, 2018, 04:30 PM

And you think having a gun will help against an oppressive government?
If they control the military then you are not going to stop them with a few guns.

If it’s a civil war, then there will be people on both sides using their 2nd amendment weapons.

Guns are a bad way to solve political issues.
But hey you guys have had several wars in your country as a means to solve issues. Looks great when you look back from 100 years and more. But it’s a pretty devastating way to solve issues. Would only be worse with the massive change to weaponary of the last 50 years.

I live in a place that has effectively bans guns, has never had a war based on our soil and is a safer place to live (arguably better by most reported measures of living standard)
But go for it - buy your gun to defend against an out of control govt. heck just shoot enough Trump supporters and win the next election.

JoshInKC

May 6th, 2018, 06:13 PM

Godson

May 6th, 2018, 06:28 PM

I was going to mention the same thing. The conservatives hated Obama were talking about doing the exact same thing.

However, if the Second Amendment rights are going to be overthrown, a lot of the Armed Forces will stand up against that.

Rare White Ape

May 6th, 2018, 06:57 PM

The 2nd amendment is not for shooting Trump supporters. It’s for defending against an attack from the army.

But we are talking about probably the most technologically advanced military force on the planet, versus a bunch of gun nuts. If anything, gun nuts and local militia groups should arm themselves even more and train up to use all of the equipment properly. Become an equal force to the army. Go all the way.

If people love the 2nd as much as they say they do, then this is what they should be doing, to instill proper fear in the government and save themselves from being subject to bad decisions. Anything less than that is totally pointless and causes the 2nd to be essentially redundant.

Crazed_Insanity

May 6th, 2018, 07:42 PM

Look at all the other civil wars, all relying on the Russians and/or Americans covertly supporting them with weapons.

American citizens have probably stocked up enough to become self reliant. ;)

Sure the evil federal govt could bomb the shit out of itself to destroy all the Billis, perhaps even nuke itself! I'd call that mission accomplished.

Imagine if Hitler was an American president and sold us the nazi party in order to make America great again, which country on earth would be able to defeat this American nazi party?

It'll have to be up to the American citizens themselves to fight against such evil. Without the 2nd amendment, the world would be doomed in that scenario.

Of course ideally the arm forces need to split to have a chance of winning over evil, but even if the evil emperor has completely military control, the # of existing guns in America will cause this evil regime some headaches.

Godson

May 6th, 2018, 07:58 PM

drew

May 7th, 2018, 01:29 AM

If, and I mean if the government/military went off the rails, good luck. I'm not sure a Javelin or a Tomahawk care if you have an AR-15.

So, to use the GOP's own logic, if it's pointless in that regard, why have it (referencing the Mueller Protection bill "it's highly unlikely he'll be fired, so there's no reason to protect from it")

Rare White Ape

May 7th, 2018, 03:04 AM

This is one of your issues.

Many of the gun nuts are also the military. Let that sink in.

It's hard balancing subtlety when I post for the demographics I am typing for. For some it goes way over their head*, but for others it flies way under.

Do I shoot higher and challenge myself to try and meet you, or do I aim waaaaaaayyyyyyyy lower and draw pictures with crayons?

*As far as I can tell; I might be being out-subtled by a wittier foe than I

Dicknose

May 7th, 2018, 03:20 AM

Looking at other countries the answer to a govt gone wild is usually a military coup.
That’s the only way, civilian uprising is very hard, certainly a civilian armed uprising won’t cut it.

And as much as Billi keeps saying Nazi, they got to power with overwhelming public support. Then managed to hide most of their evil acts. Having a gun doesn’t help if most other people think the govt is doing a good job (even if it because they lie and use propaganda)

A gun to defend against a corrupt govt is an outdated concept. Possibly 100 or more years out of date.

Rare White Ape

May 7th, 2018, 03:46 AM

I honestly can't think of a military coup in a stable wealthy western 1st world country in my lifetime.

There was one in Turkey in 2016, probably the largest coup in a long time, the leaders were caught and arrested. All it led to was more totalitarianism by the leader. But is Turkey stable? There was a coup there *checks Wikipedia* in 1997.

In a country like the USA, even if the president seems like a total nutjob, there are too many checks and balances for things to get out of hand. Democracy says that it has to be so. Any tiny little change has to be agreed to by so many people that dumb legislation is almost impossible. And even if things do get rammed through then there is the high court to test it, and that test usually means the end of any crazy laws from the oval. Unfortunately it would also limit the extent to which the 2nd amendment can be changed, because the votes rule and no politician wants to lose their job.

Bearing in mind that there were just 14 states in the USA at the time the 2nd was ratified, and it was part of the Bill of Rights, which included ten (yes, ten!) amendments in total, so there surely would have been some wheeling and dealing between states to agree on such measures. Nowadays trying to get a change past fifty states and their constituents seems like a political quagmire. Democracy is so different in 2018 compared to what it was in the 1790s.

MR2 Fan

May 7th, 2018, 06:52 AM

dodint

May 7th, 2018, 07:18 AM

IMO the 2nd Amendment doesn't need to be changed, it's interpretation needs to be better defined.....the whole "well-regulated militia" part has to MEAN something, not any nutjob with a bone to pick (and I mean that literally, since the Trump administration removed restrictions for people with mental health issues to buy guns)

Not trying to pick on you or anything, but consider reading the decision in Heller. It goes into great, great detail (almost painfully so) about that exact thing. And it's current SCOTUS law on 2A interpretation. It is exactly what you're asking for:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZO.html

The most simplistic form of the holding is that 'anyone can be in a militia, so everyone is protected by the 2A.'
I tried to post section II in a spoiler tag, but it was 8x as long allowed. :lol:

The Wiki summary looks like this:

The Supreme Court held:

(1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.
(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.
(b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court’s interpretation of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved. Pp. 22–28.
(c) The Court’s interpretation is confirmed by analogous arms-bearing rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately followed the Second Amendment. Pp. 28–30.
(d) The Second Amendment’s drafting history, while of dubious interpretive worth, reveals three state Second Amendment proposals that unequivocally referred to an individual right to bear arms. Pp. 30–32.
(e) Interpretation of the Second Amendment by scholars, courts and legislators, from immediately after its ratification through the late 19th century also supports the Court’s conclusion. Pp. 32–47.
(f) None of the Court’s precedents forecloses the Court’s interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, refutes the individual-rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes.

The Second Amendment has two clauses which read: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Operative clause: "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The operative clause is the actual protected right.
Prefatory clause: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State." The prefatory clause is the lead-in that announces a purpose for the operative clause. The court stated: "The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms".

The court also stated: "The Amendment could be rephrased, 'Because a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.'”.

The court states: "It was clearly an individual right, having nothing whatever to do with service in a militia", adding "Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people”.

It's clear from the court's ruling regarding the relationship between the prefatory and operative clause that the militia meant that all of the people were armed.

“The 'militia' comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Anti-federalists feared that the federal government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved”.

Anyway, that's about as small as I can distill it down to and it's probably somewhat confusing out of context. I urge you to read the full opinion, particularly Section II. If you are disheartened by it, Section III will be uplifting as it talks about how the right isn't 'unlimited' so it gives something for the anti-gun crowd to hang their hat on. The takeaway from this post is that the SCOTUS doesn't acknowledge militia membership as a requirement to own guns and until that changes complaining about the word 'militia' doesn't carry any legal weight as it's decided law already.

Crazed_Insanity

May 7th, 2018, 08:58 AM

Rwa, I agree there are lots of chk and balances here in the US, that's why I'm not signing up to become a rebel yet! However, election of Somebody like Trump is a concern. Who'd thought he'd be president?

So anything can happen. Right to bear arm to fight the govt is just a last ditch effort when all other chk and balances failed. When my wife and kid murdered..., then I will be glad that we have lots of guns in America for me to fight this evil empire.

For now, having this many guns is for sure problematic, even with perfect gun control laws! I can readily admit to that.

DN, do you really believe an evil corrupt regime would actually surrender power without a fight?

Do you also believe all Germans supported Hitler all the way thru WWII? If Germans had that many guns in their basement as Americans, surely WWII wouldn't last as long as it had... sure, most want to make Germany great again, but once they realized they were duped, there's no way to fight back other than hiding a few Jews in their basement. If they had more guns in their basement, Hitler would not be able to concentrate on attacking its neighbors.

I do agree it's seemingly impossible to overthrow the US govt with just guns at this point in time, but it's important for us crazy American freedom fighters to make the job of our next hitler as difficult as possible. Can't do that without 2nd Amendment.

Dicknose

May 7th, 2018, 11:13 AM

DN, do you really believe an evil corrupt regime would actually surrender power without a fight?

Do you also believe all Germans supported Hitler all the way thru WWII? If Germans had that many guns in their basement as Americans, surely WWII wouldn't last as long as it had... sure, most want to make Germany great again, but once they realized they were duped, there's no way to fight back other than hiding a few Jews in their basement. If they had more guns in their basement, Hitler would not be able to concentrate on attacking its neighbors.

I do agree it's seemingly impossible to overthrow the US govt with just guns at this point in time, but it's important for us crazy American freedom fighters to make the job of our next hitler as difficult as possible. Can't do that without 2nd Amendment.
How would having a gun have helped the Germans?
Anyone who could fight was armed and fighting already!
I’d guess the average person was more worried about winning or just surviving the war rather than attempting to over throw their own leader.

I just can’t see a situation we’re individuals having a gun is going to help.
Who is this “govt” that you will aim at and shoot? The police and military under govt control? So what about their friends and family who support them and also have guns?
What if only 25% support the govt, they have guns and would use them as well.
Either it ends in an ugly civil war or the guns are of no use and or you use other means to topple them.

The more likely event is a small percentage don’t like something the govt does and you have an armed uprising that gets crushed. Putting guns in their hands makes them feel powerful but just ends in a lot of deaths. Eg the Waco incident.

Individual gun ownership is not a solution to issues of democracy.
With a standing military it’s not a solution to national defense.

MR2 Fan

May 7th, 2018, 11:17 AM

Yeah, having a gun works really well if the government:

1.) Turns off your electricity
2.) Turns off your water
3.) drives tanks up to your house and prevents you from leaving

Even the almighty (sarcasm) AR-15 wouldn't be able to fight that

Crazed_Insanity

May 7th, 2018, 11:19 AM

May I ask what is the solution then? Peace talks?

When the entire mighty us military became storm troopers, what else can you fight them with? Rocks and light sabers?

Did nazi Germany remained a democracy?

Remember I'm talking worst case scenario here. I'm not advocating we use guns to overthrow Trump right now. Only when other check and balances failed and voting/gun rights taken away.

Only then I'd be very happy with the shit load of weapons in the hands of ordinary Americans.

Dicknose

May 7th, 2018, 04:56 PM

It’s such a crazy unlikely scenario that you don’t need to worry about. Certainly not arm yourself because it might happen - the US turns into North Korea.

In the early days of the country there was no permanent military. So it made sense to have armed civilians who could double as a militia to protect the country from outside forces.
But the same logic doesn’t apply to internal issues. That why you have a system of govt with different sets of people with different powers.
Even if all those people collude to turn it into a dictorship, unless they have at least a decent percentage of the public on their side it won’t work. If they do have people on their side we now have two armed groups - how is that going to end?

Public uprisings to overthrow govts do happen. Rarely are the public armed, unless it’s already been an ongoing civil war.
Otherwise public rallies have worked. The fact is usually some high placed military people realising it’s the time to swap teams! Yes the power is often ultimately with weapons, but these day military power is way more than civilians could have. But get the military to follow the public not the politicians and it ends quickly.

Being president (elected or dictator) only gives you power if people go along with it.
Places like North Korea stay that way because it’s been that system for a long while. People higher up are happy with the status quo, certainly don’t want to risk their life to start a change. The average person probably doesn’t know much better. Those that do are probably afraid.
I can’t think of any dictatorships/one-party systems that have come about as the result of a stable democracy disintegrating. They tend to be a popular driven revolution from some other system (absolute monarchy, control by foreign power) that was no better.
Some have been democracies that were not stable and collapsed eg Uganda. But that already had very serious internal problems before control was passed from the British.

One democracy that did fall into a civil war was ... the USA
But hard to argue that was repressed people who needed to be armed to overthrow a bad govt - because the “govt” won the war and history paints them as not just the victorious side but the morally correct side.

Godson

May 7th, 2018, 07:50 PM

Again. You guys ignore a key point about the US military.

I'm done trying to explain it.

dodint

May 7th, 2018, 07:53 PM

This thread is dedicated to ignoring just about all facets of our political process; no reason to stop now.

Crazed_Insanity

May 7th, 2018, 11:16 PM

DN, I'm not that worried about it, that's why I don't own guns yet. However, I appreciate having this option just in case. We don't used to have to worry about electing somebody like Donald Trump with the electoral college system, but the unthinkable happened!

Trust me, things will usually get worse over time.

Regarding civil war, not sure had Lincoln lost, would he be painted as Hitler type? I kinda doubt it. His main thing was to preserve the union, how can that be construed as evil? History will have to be seriously twisted to make Lincoln look evil.

But anyway, I do believe civil wars need to be fought without meddlers from the outside.

It's quite possible 2A might end up causing another civil war, but I won't pick up arms to fight for 2A, my only condition for picking up arms to fight would be to fight the next evil hitler...

The difficulty would be that will I be able to 'see' him in time... or hopefully I won't mistaken somebody to be hitler when he's not...

Anyway, I think evil should be pretty clear... I will only act when it's clear to me I guess...

drew

May 8th, 2018, 02:08 AM

Again. You guys ignore a key point about the US military.

I'm done trying to explain it.

:up:

balki

May 8th, 2018, 05:25 AM

and you guys are ignoring that women weren't allowed to have firearms, blacks weren't considered men, ...
...if it was written 100 years later they would have excluded Catholics as well, another 100 years after that Muslims wouldn't have been allowed either.

morale of the story is that it's a right protected by law and the Supreme Court has upheld and clarified the parts that people are calling BS on.
Fin

Crazed_Insanity

May 8th, 2018, 06:48 AM

For a nation that not only lasted few hundred years, but also became a global superpower, you gave the founders far too little credit. You also assumed that they didn't know the existence of Catholics and Muslims...

Also, during a period when slavery is commonplace globally, inserting the ideal that all men are created equal was an amazing step already.

balki

May 8th, 2018, 07:39 AM

While very progressive back then that mindset is not acceptable any longer. It's as much (if not more) the 1% looking out for themselves and their future generations as much as it is trying to create equality.
Still think the US is the fairest and least dysfunctional major nation.

Crazed_Insanity

May 8th, 2018, 09:16 AM

This is perhaps topic of another thread, but equality cannot and should NOT be created. Yes, we are created equal, and we should make available equal opportunity for all, but we ought not to artificially create equal outcome. That'd be a stupid thing to try to push for. Think certain professional athletes for example. There are just way too many black dudes. Must we force NFL and NBA to hire more asian athletes to properly reflect general population? Likewise why can't women compete directly with men? Why the separate leagues? What, women not good enough for men or something? Why discriminate against them and not allow them to play in the real leagues?

Anyway, I'm exaggerating with my illustration of course, but I think you can see why we should not forcibly create equality.

Like you said, as lousy as the US is, it is still the best we have so far. Founding fathers didn't just got lucky when they designed this government. They were not just bunch of backwards thinking neanderthals..., they actually put a lot of thought into creating the best possible government for future generations.

Yes, it's important to make progress, I'm sure founding fathers were not against progress. Our constitution is amendable, unlike the Word of God or something... Founders weren't that arrogant to think that they got it perfectly right...

Anyway, my point in this thread is essentially this:

Just like I may not like your speech, but I still support free speech.
I may not like your religion, but I still support religious freedom.
I also don't really like guns, but I still support people's right to bear arms.

Yes, violence is very backwards indeed, but utopia is not about to happen anytime soon.

Notice that they never really had the right to own slaves included there even though it's readily apparent that slave owning is happening everywhere. OT Bible taught about it too. So why not include that apparently God given right in our constitution? Could've also saved US from a civil war!

So I'm pretty sure founders didn't just include the right to bear arms for no good reason.

If we have to find some silver lining about our current gun violence problems..., I think that would be to high light our various other social dysfunctions. Our healthcare is insufficient. Our families are falling apart. Our communities are also just way too disconnected. Gun control laws wont' fix those problems. Canada doesn't have the same gun problems we have, but obviously they have similar social problems. Those are the things we ought to focus on fixing, rather than just focus on how to ban guns.

Never mind the reality that the pandora's box has opened and it'll be impossible to ban guns in the US at this point.

Let the nations leaders set good examples by baning nuclear weapons 1st. Then perhaps we can think about asking citizens to drop their guns too. I'm all for USA becoming the 1st nation to destroy all of its nukes. I'd agree nukular missiles are totally useless! But will that happen?

Dicknose

May 8th, 2018, 11:58 AM

Again. You guys ignore a key point about the US military.

I'm done trying to explain it.

You have mentioned that many military are pro 2A.

And what has that got to do with overthrowing a govt you don’t like?

We are not saying it’s “overthrow a govt that is repealing 2A”, just one that is bad and getting rid of democracy.
Hard to say where individuals would land on the topic. Easy to say “I’d be against it”, but if it comes because of terrorism and defending freedom it’s possible to sell it as a temporary (but ongoing) solution.

Scenario - Trump declares that outside powers have corrupted the electoral process, that the next election will be delayed a year while the issues are fixed. The other branches of govt have just enough support that it could happen.
Throw in a war against someone to keep fear up and justify the whole thing.
Now what?

Where would military people fall on this?
Does having a right to a gun help if your govt goes rogue?
How many supporters of the party/people taking control would support it because they don’t want the other side in power?

I don’t see a gun helping in this scenario. You just get labelled terrorist and others with guns would fight you.
The irony is that the most likely scenario people would use a gun against the govt is if they took away the right to have a gun.

Dicknose

May 8th, 2018, 12:07 PM

Still think the US is the fairest and least dysfunctional major nation.
Was that a statement or a question?

Me. No I think it’s one of the least fair and most dysfunctional major nations.
It usually falls down lists of equality and lifestyle compared to other western nations (and especially Scandinavian countries)
Plenty that is great about it. Plenty that is very backward.

Crazed_Insanity

May 8th, 2018, 01:29 PM

I don’t see a gun helping in this scenario. You just get labelled terrorist and others with guns would fight you.
The irony is that the most likely scenario people would use a gun against the govt is if they took away the right to have a gun.

Whatever scenario, if the US military splits and end in a civil war, naturally we don't really need citizens with guns. However, considering what had happened once before, I guess I won't blame that more Southerners now want to stock up more guns in case another war against the federal government breaks out! ;)

In the event that military doesn't split or the bad side won out and become storm troopers, then of course that'd be the time for us to join the rebel alliance and start terrorizing the evil empire... having lots of guns would help.

Of course the other approach is to just play pacifist. Let the evil empire/nazi/cancer spread and win and then patiently wait for it to eventually die. Surely nobody will live forever in this world. So one could just let things play its course. However, in such an unlikely scenario, I'd rather pick up a rifle and shoot down as many storm troopers as possible before I die.

Tom Servo

May 8th, 2018, 01:32 PM

I'm also in the "I saw you mention how many pro 2A people are in the military many times, but I still am unable to grasp the point you're trying to make" camp.

Crazed_Insanity

May 8th, 2018, 01:41 PM

Was that a statement or a question?

Me. No I think it’s one of the least fair and most dysfunctional major nations.
It usually falls down lists of equality and lifestyle compared to other western nations (and especially Scandinavian countries)
Plenty that is great about it. Plenty that is very backward.

You have to be more specific, how much is plenty? Is USA overall moving humanity forward or backwards?

Yeah yeah, I know Trump probably isn't helping my case... ;)

Even considering the Scandinavian countries with their awesome single payer healthcare..., I do believe US contribute more to the progress of medical science than Scandinavian nations. Should one day USA becomes more socialistic, perhaps progress in medicine would slow...

Win some lose some. We just can't have it all.

From 13 colonies, USA became a global leader in couple of hundred years. It'd be interesting to see in couple of hundred more... where US will be compared to the Scandinavian countries. Even with crazies such as Trump leading this nation, I believe there's a good chance US will continue to lead the world. I just don't see other governments setup as well as the US.

Godson

May 8th, 2018, 05:19 PM

You have mentioned that many military are pro 2A.

And what has that got to do with overthrowing a govt you don’t like?

We are not saying it’s “overthrow a govt that is repealing 2A”, just one that is bad and getting rid of democracy.
Hard to say where individuals would land on the topic. Easy to say “I’d be against it”, but if it comes because of terrorism and defending freedom it’s possible to sell it as a temporary (but ongoing) solution.

Scenario - Trump declares that outside powers have corrupted the electoral process, that the next election will be delayed a year while the issues are fixed. The other branches of govt have just enough support that it could happen.
Throw in a war against someone to keep fear up and justify the whole thing.
Now what?

Where would military people fall on this?
Does having a right to a gun help if your govt goes rogue?
How many supporters of the party/people taking control would support it because they don’t want the other side in power?

I don’t see a gun helping in this scenario. You just get labelled terrorist and others with guns would fight you.
The irony is that the most likely scenario people would use a gun against the govt is if they took away the right to have a gun.

Please read up on the 22nd amendment, then get back to me.

Also, the fact Trump was elected is proof the electoral process WORKS. No matter how much it pains me that bumbling baffoon is rapid firing tweets out, he is THE acting president.

MR2 Fan

May 8th, 2018, 10:19 PM

Please read up on the 22nd amendment, then get back to me.

Also, the fact Trump was elected is proof the electoral process WORKS. No matter how much it pains me that bumbling baffoon is rapid firing tweets out, he is THE acting president.

You mean with the tons of gerrymandered districts, voting machines that are a different kind in every area and cause confusion and don't forget the 2000 race....plus a national electoral process where there is no such thing as 1 vote per person?

drew

May 9th, 2018, 01:49 AM

pfft, details.

Crazed_Insanity

May 9th, 2018, 05:43 AM

Please read up on the 22nd amendment, then get back to me.

Also, the fact Trump was elected is proof the electoral process WORKS. No matter how much it pains me that bumbling baffoon is rapid firing tweets out, he is THE acting president.

I don't think DN doesn't know about term limits. He's just saying that in the event that Trump declares some sort of emergency that legally delays elections. After he served 8 year terms, there's still no election taking place to replace him. How would 22A work then? Even if the military forcibly kicks him out, who will the military install as new president?

Anyway, DN's more interested in knowing how will 2A help in that situation. I think in the event some evil dictator corrupts the US government, we can't really count on 22A to continue to function. 2A also probably will be taken away too, but at least guns are already in people's hands.

My take is that should the military continues to assume the evil dictator as "acting" president, then it's time to take matters into our own hands.

balki

May 9th, 2018, 06:47 AM

NYC mayor has similar two 4-year term limits yet Michael Bloomberg served three terms (12 years) using ...
... an amendment /queue dramatic telenovela close-up

Dicknose

May 9th, 2018, 05:52 PM

You have to be more specific, how much is plenty? Is USA overall moving humanity forward or backwards?

Its doing both.
Its a huge economy and moving many things forward due to sheer money and resources.
Its also one of the most backward and least progressive western countries.

From 13 colonies, USA became a global leader in couple of hundred years. It'd be interesting to see in couple of hundred more... where US will be compared to the Scandinavian countries. Even with crazies such as Trump leading this nation, I believe there's a good chance US will continue to lead the world. I just don't see other governments setup as well as the US.
Nothing to do with how well the govt is setup.
The US is a power due to sheer size.
China and India will start to threaten that in the next 50 to 100 years.

Dicknose

May 9th, 2018, 05:54 PM

Please read up on the 22nd amendment, then get back to me.

Also, the fact Trump was elected is proof the electoral process WORKS. No matter how much it pains me that bumbling baffoon is rapid firing tweets out, he is THE acting president.

What Im interested in is... the logic that if someone does break the system that an armed population will fix it.
The logic that 2A is about defending against your own govt gone rogue.

Crazed_Insanity

May 10th, 2018, 05:04 AM

Its doing both.
Its a huge economy and moving many things forward due to sheer money and resources.
Its also one of the most backward and least progressive western countries.
That's possible. Just like financially the rich are getting richer, but the poor are getting poorer. However, I'm talking standard of living here. Is that ticking upwards or downwards over time? It's possible that governments are covering up deflation, but at least personal experience tells me that although raises are small, but I am getting raises! I couldn't drive EVs before, now I can drive one.

I also believe overall, US is leading and pushing humanity slightly in the right direction... eventhough there can be fuckups like financial meltdown... overall, US should still be a positive influence.

US is also one of the most 'conservative' or 'Christian' western nations. I do believe often times liberals tend to like to call that 'backwards'. ;)

Nothing to do with how well the govt is setup.
The US is a power due to sheer size.
China and India will start to threaten that in the next 50 to 100 years.
China and India's have way longer history and way more people to be awesome nations. Yeah, dictator Xi may lead China to an unprecedented prosperity, but unless a nation's king is named Jesus, which king in human history do you know was incorruptible? Even if Xi built China up during his lifetime, there's also no guarantee the next dictator can keep the momentum going.

If we can have a US-like government system in China or India, they don't have to wait 50 to 100 years to beat the US. They would've been way ahead long time ago. Utilizing cheap American labor to build their i-flyingcars or something.

Of course it's not all form of government. Culture surely makes a difference too... since things are 'amendable'. Do a good job of amending it, things will get better. Otherwise, the government slowly gets more and more corrupted. Who knows, after thousands of years of Chinese history, they may end up exactly where they are now I suppose, but I kinda doubt that Chinese and Indians can be that stupid..., but who knows. Founding fathers did also planned for the worst. Things can always go wrong... When it fail to work as intended, what last resort option will people have?

What Im interested in is... the logic that if someone does break the system that an armed population will fix it.
The logic that 2A is about defending against your own govt gone rogue.
To me, 2A just makes having a revolution easier. It'll be extremely difficult to successfully overthrow a corrupt govt without arms.
To you, you just can't believe a bunch of crazy stupid Billis and Roofers could even get the job done.
To Godson, not all possessors of guns are crazy stupid and incompetent like Billi though.

Rare White Ape

May 10th, 2018, 02:13 PM

The idea of needing to overthrow an out of control government in the USA is an outdated one anyway. The reasons for it have moved on from what they were hundreds of years ago when 2A was drawn up. I’m inclined to believe that the logic behind it was flawed from the get-go, but I’ve only a limited understanding of its genesis so I won’t push that argument.

But moving on to my point; the US government gets overthrown all the time. It’s called an election. You get to pick who you want to make the decisions for the next term.

And if you don’t like the person in charge? Well, the majority voted for them, so why do you need guns? You’ll just frame yourself as an outsider to what the rest of the country wanted, and you'll end up on the wrong side of 2A where citizens may use their rightfully held arms in defence of the state.

Crazed_Insanity

May 10th, 2018, 02:56 PM

As long as we have elections, nobody's proposing we shoot up DJT. Definitely need to respect election outcome, even if he won without popular vote. Even with Russian meddling, he still won fair and square. No indication of Russians altering vote counts or anything like that...

As long as he is truly elected into office by the free will of enough # of people, he is by definition not a dictator. Not saying we need to overthrow a government just because I disagree with or don't like the person(s) in charge. That's not the reason for having 2A.

I'm talking about when you know elections are rigged or completely eliminated. When you know the constitution is mutilated and disrespected by those running the government. Then what do you do?

When you know you're dealing with an evil empire, either you just accept and live with that, or you must take up arms to fight it, right? Unless we all know kungfu like Neo, I don't see what other options we have.

You think peaceful demonstration in Tienanmen Square worked out well for the Chinese people?

dodint

May 11th, 2018, 04:51 AM

Is it too soon to talk about Australia's mass shooting (https://amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/may/10/australia-mass-shooting-7-dead-canberra/)?

Rare White Ape

May 11th, 2018, 04:56 AM

I think 22 years is enough time to wait.

dodint

May 11th, 2018, 05:01 AM

Four years.

The facts of this case are obviously different than the mass shootings that happen occasionally in the US. This doesn't appear to have been an active shooter situation, more like a murder-suicide, domestic dispute, or shady business deal gone wrong.

I found this excerpt amusing: “Although the details of this tragedy are yet to come to light, Australia has a tragic history of higher rate of gun deaths in rural areas.” The exact opposite occurs in the US. Almost like they're two completely different cultures that shouldn't be compared 1:1.

balki

May 11th, 2018, 05:58 AM

Gun deaths in NYC are pretty low, guessing much lower (per capita) than rural America (Chicago can ruin my argument, though)

Rare White Ape

May 11th, 2018, 02:02 PM

I found this excerpt amusing: “Although the details of this tragedy are yet to come to light, Australia has a tragic history of higher rate of gun deaths in rural areas.” The exact opposite occurs in the US. Almost like they're two completely different cultures that shouldn't be compared 1:1.

Yeeeeeerrrp. We do consume a lot of US culture and entertainment, and see a lot of US news, etcetera. But overall our country is remarkably different.

The rural skew with gun deaths is the same with drug abuse too. There’s a fairly problematic ice epidemic in those areas, though not a lot of people overdose and die from using it. It can be an issue if someone takes it then drives a long distance (as you would in a sparsely populated area) while affected. When you get back to the city, the drugs of choice (other than cannabis, which is popular everywhere) are MDMA and cocaine, neither of which are likely to turn you into a violent or aggressive beserker like ice does.

Dicknose

May 13th, 2018, 08:06 PM

This seems to be a murder suicide within a family unit.
Not good, but a lot different to what would normally be called a “shooting”

Gun ownership is higher in rural areas, they are still a tool for most farmers with animals.
And it’s mostly suicides, some murder/suicides. It’s not all Wolf Creek out there.

Crazed_Insanity

May 15th, 2018, 01:49 PM

People can always find ways to kill people. Higher gun ownership rate, high gun death rate. Nothing new. So should we just ban guns? Since without guns, for sure we can minimize gun deaths. Mass mowing of people on the side walk with a van is technically not a gun problem. So we know the dangers of allowing guns..., if guns have absolutely no benefit other than for farmers, natural conclusion is that we ought to eventual just ban it as rural farming become less and less needed.

However, there is one singular benefit of having arms... that is when we wage wars. Without arms, for sure you will lose that war.

DN and RWA, back to the scenario when US government becomes so corrupted to the point that we no longer have elections and somebody worse than Trump appoints himself king of the world with full support of US Congress and Supreme court, do you guys still believe US citizens having guns is not a good idea?

Or do you really believe US government is incorruptible?

If you can guarantee US government shall forever remain incorruptible, that world has become utopian that no way in heaven would we ever wage wars on one another, then we can get rid of 2A. Because there'd be absolutely no benefit for having guns around. If you really want to shoot, you can shoot things up in the holodeck.

Dicknose

May 15th, 2018, 04:53 PM

However, there is one singular benefit of having arms... that is when we wage wars. Without arms, for sure you will lose that war.

DN and RWA, back to the scenario when US government becomes so corrupted to the point that we no longer have elections and somebody worse than Trump appoints himself king of the world with full support of US Congress and Supreme court, do you guys still believe US citizens having guns is not a good idea?

I don’t think guns solve that problem. All they do is end up with a lot of people dead. You still might not have the “good guys” win.
Did the Korean War work well? Plenty of people fought for the communist side thinking it was the correct side.
Ditto Vietnam.

The US Civil War was brutal. Was it the best or only way to solve the issues?

Arguing guns will help doesn’t mean much if both sides have the same right to them. It just means more people dead.

So a big no from me. It’s a barbaric solution to problems.

Crazed_Insanity

May 15th, 2018, 05:00 PM

Totally agree that war is a barbaric solution to settle our differences.

However, you have to be realistic.

When was the last time in human history that a new government just peacefully popped into existence? Maybe Australia? UK couldn't care less what happens to the penal colony? ;)

Even if there were one, how long can it survive without barbaric arms?

Humanity abandoning nuclear arms may be possible, but not sure if we can out grow all of our arm services...

When that day happens, then I agree we can do away with 2A.

Tom Servo

May 15th, 2018, 05:05 PM

Wait, when did the goalposts move to "ban all guns for everyone including the military"? I missed that part.

Rare White Ape

May 16th, 2018, 07:27 AM

Let’s go back four or five posts:

“Guns have no benefit other than for farmers”

Farmers here don’t have full-auto AR-15s. They have single-shot bolt action rifles at best. That’s all they need.

All of the following arguments fall apart like flimsy porno storylines.

Rare White Ape

May 16th, 2018, 07:30 AM

Also, I wouldn’t worry about the US government being ‘incorruptible’. I’d be more worried about the population of that country allowing it to happen in the first place.

Crazed_Insanity

May 16th, 2018, 08:13 AM

Swervo, Not trying to move anything.

Just pointng out that it's unlikely that humanity will ever learn to give up arms altogether.

We are pretty barbaric to the core. Emotional stupidity will always trump logic and reason for now and the near future.

Guns are pretty similar to speech and religion, most of time they are full of shit useless and may even be harmful, but that doesn't mean we absolutely need to deny this freedom to people because they are not absolutely totally useless, especially under the reign of some totalitarian regime.

Barbaric problems require barbaric solutions. It is not a preferred solution but people's last line of defense.

Crazed_Insanity

May 16th, 2018, 08:42 AM

Also, I wouldn’t worry about the US government being ‘incorruptible’. I’d be more worried about the population of that country allowing it to happen in the first place.

I understand the stupidity for having guns around, Jesus clearly said those who live by the sword, die by the sword. This is why I don't own guns yet. I'm only ready to own one when I'm ready to fight to the death because my neighborhood is just too fucked up due to whatever reasons.

Anyway, So you're more worried about the American people than Trump? American people having assault rifles really won't harm other nations you know. And if our govt becomes truly a govt of stupid people, I suppose you could be afraid of Americans..., but rest assured that should the day comes when this nation go nuts and becomes a threat to Australia, I'd pick up a rifle to shoot my govt down!

I think there are only 3 nations 'backwards' enough to include owning guns as constitutional right. Mexico and Guatemala have both became more 'forward' thinking by making it harder and harder to exercise such constitutional rights.

For Mexico, yeah, it sure worked out that they now have less bloody revolutions. If that's the solution Mexicans wanted, it's been a great success. For sure Mexico has far fewer crazy mass shooters than US too. However, I can't help but wonder that if Mexicans were armed as heavily as Americans, could the drug cartels be as powerful now...

When govt or law and order cease to function properly, when the surrounding deteriorates and becomes increasingly barbaric, guns will be the only solution left.

You just can't reason with Nazis or drug cartels and expect them to give up their ways. You can only either shoot them or be shot. Living under their rule is not even worth it. When you have no guns, the only choices left are to hope they won't kill you and perhaps to just kill yourself.

The main problem with US is that we are not under a totalitarian regime and we don't have drug cartels... times are relatively good. We really don't have a good reason to have that many guns now... so the only justifications now are just for profit and fun and to prepare for a possible doomsday scenario... During good times, of course having this many guns around can be very problematic. We just need to find a way to reach the right balance between order and chaos I guess... Doomsday will come. Hopefully not within my nor my daughter's generation. But I don't think it's wise to take away future generation's gun rights or making it too restrictive as in Mexico.

I think a lot of mass shootings today in the US is not due to insufficient gun control "laws", but insufficient gun control! We're not even properly 'enforcing' existing laws and a lot of owners are also very irresponsible.

21Kid

May 17th, 2018, 08:07 AM

Also, I wouldn’t worry about the US government being ‘incorruptible’. I’d be more worried about the population of that country allowing it to happen in the first place.

... :twitch:

Rare White Ape

May 17th, 2018, 09:33 PM

Well, I've briefly covered the perfect storm of things that would need to occur before a Nazi-style government would ever again come to power and be able to enact the terrible things that it would want to do (in this post (http://gtxforums.net/showthread.php?1254-Gun-control&p=122592&viewfull=1#post122592) for example). The fact is that the voting public is the first line of protection for tyranny and there are far too many steps along the way before anything really horrible would be let loose without being tested by the judicial system.

So, I'm not worried about the population of the USA, I'd be more worried about the population as a whole letting bad things happen to themselves than I am about Billi's doomsday scenario of the US government being corruptible.

I'm sorry if that wasn't clear :(

MR2 Fan

May 18th, 2018, 08:47 AM

hey, new school shooting in Santa Fe, 8 kids dead so far

tigeraid

May 18th, 2018, 11:33 AM

https://splinternews.com/santa-fe-shooting-survivor-sums-up-americas-gun-crisis-1826143245

It’s been happening everywhere. I’ve always kind of felt like eventually it was going to happen here too. I wasn’t surprised, I was just scared.

Growing up in America. :(

Dicknose

May 18th, 2018, 05:13 PM

But you know you can overthrow a corrupt government - just costs you a hundred or so kids each year for this right.
That’s the price of Freedom!

Rare White Ape

May 18th, 2018, 05:33 PM

Crazed_Insanity

May 18th, 2018, 07:18 PM

When you overthrow a government you get to pick a new one. The government overthrows itself every four years. But the last time they picked a new one they put a tangerine potato in the big office.

Is that really a right that we can trust them with?

Only if one truly believes all men are created equal. Of course we all know southern rednecks are probably worse than the animals Trump was talking about...

Crazed_Insanity

May 18th, 2018, 07:32 PM

But you know you can overthrow a corrupt government - just costs you a hundred or so kids each year for this right.
That’s the price of Freedom!

Just like we experience auto accident deaths after we invented the autos. at least we can agree on benefits of autos, but looks like we just can't agree on gun benefits... so let's just agree to disagree on that.

With that said, gun problems in America is not just caused by this constitutional freedom, but also by our lack of proper control. Gun is a powerful tool. Great power comes with great responsibility. Owners have not all been very responsible and govt also doesn't have enough money or will to enforce existing laws properly.

Lastly, even without guns, weapons of mass destruction could be vans or whatever they can find or make... our society is just sick.

Probably need another thread the discuss possible reasons why more and more folks are going nuts...

Tom Servo

May 24th, 2018, 04:01 PM

I wish there was a working delete.

21Kid

May 24th, 2018, 04:54 PM

hey, new school shooting in Santa Fe, 8 kids dead so far
So sad that this is hardly even a story now. 😢

Crazed_Insanity

May 25th, 2018, 12:25 PM

Unlike the Vegas shooting, the dude didn't die. I wonder why we still don't know what's the motive behind the attack.

Rare White Ape

May 26th, 2018, 01:35 PM

Because it takes years for the judicial process to do its thing.

Crazed_Insanity

May 26th, 2018, 10:11 PM

Judicial process? That is only to find whether if that person is guilty or not guilty, right? Judges and jurors aren't looking for motives...

I can understand investigations of dead mass shooters might take a while to piece together the puzzle, but they captured a live one! But of course judicial process does give him the right to not talk...

But who the duck decides to be a mass shooter and then worry about being convicted later on? If he's really that chicken about serving time, he shouldn't do the crime!

Anyway, a lot of these mass shootings just plain don't make sense.

Rare White Ape

May 27th, 2018, 11:59 AM

Neither do your posts.

But nothing is fact until the entire thing makes it’s way through the courtroom.

Crazed_Insanity

May 27th, 2018, 02:11 PM

You know, I didn't commit suicide nor am I locked up, if there's anything you don't understand about my post, you could ask me to clarify. If you don't care to know because we just fundamentally don't agree, I also have no problems to just leave it at that.

Personally, if theres something I don't understand, unless it's jus super complicated that my little brain just can't figure out anyway..., I'd want somebody explain it to me. The killer is right there, does he have anything to say? Usually these types have a lot to say...

Btw, we can have a hung jury, then what? He could also come out of it presumed innocent if the prosecution screws something up. I'd just like the killer's own words as fact please.

We quickly learned about that Canadian van mass mower's stupid motives, just wondering why it's taking extra long in the US.

George

May 27th, 2018, 02:24 PM

Judicial process? That is only to find whether if that person is guilty or not guilty, right? Judges and jurors aren't looking for motives...

I’m not an attorney, nor do I play one on TV, but don’t juries consider motive (why), means (how/what), and opportunity (when/where) while evaluating the accused for guilt or innocence?

George

May 27th, 2018, 02:32 PM

I wish there was a working delete.

The two-step delete function works fine on a desktop computer here, but since I was practically dragged kicking and screaming onto the smart phone era, I’ve learned that what we see on computers isn’t the same as on phone browsers.

It appears that some website functions such as PM notifications make you go looking for them on phones instead of being immediately visible on a computer monitor.

That’s a long-winded hint for Mr. Servo.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled Gun Control thread, already in progress.

Tom Servo

May 27th, 2018, 02:33 PM

Hahah, yes, I just saw that and have responded.

Crazed_Insanity

May 27th, 2018, 06:49 PM

I’m not an attorney, nor do I play one on TV, but don’t juries consider motive (why), means (how/what), and opportunity (when/where) while evaluating the accused for guilt or innocence?
Yeah. Not an expert on law stuff either, but as far as I know, motive alone can't be used to convict somebody, right?

Prosecutors can certainly use motive to build their case...

Anyway, not interested in law stuff. All I want to know is what that boy was thinking... or perhaps that boy just wasn't think at all when he lost his mind? It'd be nice to gain more psychological understanding...

Dicknose

May 28th, 2018, 12:28 AM

I think the point is that is he does give a motive, it is to the police/public prosecution, not to the media.
Now they may not want to release this info at this stage. It doesnt help them. It might not help the victim or survivors.

Heck Id say we (society/media) should not be giving any airtime to the criminals, giving them fame or attention. It might encourage others.
Id be very happy with a policy of not acknowledging the person at all.

Crazed_Insanity

May 28th, 2018, 09:00 AM

I think they really should just do it one way or another. Forbid mentioning/publicizing his name and photo too. This half ass shroud of mystery doesn't really help anything.

For a crime committed with multiple witnesses and caught during the act, surely pleading the 5th won't help. Defense will have to find cavemen to not heard of this shooting. Families of victim and the media are just left to speculate...

I just think there must be a better way to handle the situation.

Besides more gun control, I'm just not sure what else are we doing to prevent these kind of tragedies. Before arming teachers, is there a way for the school to help prevent this kind of crap before a kid loses his mind? Is this so unpredictable that we are to just expect someday out of the blue, we just might get shot at, blown up, mowed down by some nut who cracked and there nothing society can do to help?

I just like to see lessons learned for each incident, rather than just chalked things up as that guy is a terrorist, crazy or whatever. Our society is sick, this sickness is not just in the poor backwards Middle East, but also in western societies as well. Why and how people become terrorists is something we all need to learn. Also, considering how we are so easily politically polarized, it wouldn't be hard for either side to eventually just commit some sort the act of terrorism to get rid of the other side.

Dicknose

May 29th, 2018, 12:03 PM

This last one the guy used his fathers weapons. Should the father be held responsible?

Gun laws don’t help much if people don’t responsibly store weapons.

Crazed_Insanity

May 29th, 2018, 12:51 PM

I definitely think so. Of course not to a degree of going to jail for his son's sins, but this clearly demonstrated the father's inability to assume responsibility of owning guns. So I believe his gun right should be take away.

We can't maintain gun control if owners are not required to be responsible when their firearms go missing.

If one's demonstrably irresponsible with his use of speech, religion, arms to the extent of causing other's physical harm, I think it's fair for that person to lose these rights.

drew

May 29th, 2018, 04:12 PM

This last one the guy used his fathers weapons. Should the father be held responsible?

Gun laws don’t help much if people don’t responsibly store weapons.

Not only yes. But FUCK yes.

Rare White Ape

May 29th, 2018, 05:17 PM

Australia has laws involving responsible storage of weapons. They’re strictly enforced, down to regular inspections by police at the registered owner’s property.

If the laws are breached the owner can be penalised, even if nobody has been hurt.

Dicknose

May 31st, 2018, 12:27 AM

I think a jail sentence is appropriate - your weapons got used, you need to take some blame.
Easy to say "the sons sins" - some, maybe many or even all, of the victims would be alive if he couldnt easily get these weapons.

Taking away his guns is hardly a punishment and deterrent for others considering lives were lost.
A year sounds a fair amount (it was multiple weapons resulting in multiple deaths)

Crazed_Insanity

May 31st, 2018, 08:36 AM

Okay, I have no issues with an year in jail. But I do believe for some of those gun loving Americans, taking away their gun right would hurt more.

G'day Mate

June 3rd, 2018, 09:49 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3VZupXFjik

Jason

June 4th, 2018, 03:47 AM

So, we need good guys with guns to protect us from backflipping good guys with guns who protect us from bad guys with guns?

balki

June 6th, 2018, 06:25 AM

What happened there? It don't look like he pulled the trigger (the video is blurry) plus the safety got knocked/switched off?

Freude am Fahren

June 6th, 2018, 12:55 PM

Probably no safety, but maybe knocked off.

Looks like when we went to grab it, he hit the trigger.

Weird that it's basically impossible to find the actual raw video online, since everything is a wrapped up news station version. But there is sound on some.

G'day Mate

June 6th, 2018, 09:13 PM

Could the safety have come off as it fell from his pants? I don't know anything about guns so don't know if that's actually possible.

TheBenior

June 7th, 2018, 03:04 AM

Glock pistols only come equipped with manual safeties for large agency purchases. The US Gov 3 letter agencies (and AFAIK, all US police agencies) are not among them. They have internal safeties and a trigger safety that render them drop safe, assuming that they haven't been beat to hell mechanically or tampered with.

Continue your circular discussion.

Crazed_Insanity

June 7th, 2018, 08:36 AM

It's a freak accident. Glad nobody was killed. Victim himself has decided to not press any charges or cause any troubles for the FBI agent. So it's all up to the FBI to figure out for themselves how they can prevent future similar incidents.

Tom Servo

June 7th, 2018, 12:04 PM

Oooh, oooh, I know! By not letting people wander around with firearms all day, including off-duty FBI agents?

Crazed_Insanity

June 7th, 2018, 01:00 PM

Makes sense. If you're off duty and having some fun... put the phone/gun/whatever else work related down and enjoy please! You can probably back flip better without a gun!

Tom Servo

June 28th, 2018, 02:18 PM

At least five dead at the Annapolis Capital Gazette - shooter shot through glass doors and then opened fire into the newsroom. Shooter appears to be in custody.

dodint

June 28th, 2018, 03:07 PM

Used a shotgun. Shall we add them to the list?

Tom Servo

June 28th, 2018, 03:17 PM

At least per NBC news, only information given out by the police so far was it was a "long gun". But, assuming it was a shotgun, sure sounds like we should.

dodint

June 28th, 2018, 03:25 PM

Still no other factors at play, then? Got it.

JoshInKC

June 28th, 2018, 05:25 PM

Used a shotgun. Shall we add them to the list?

Nah. They have plenty of reasonable in most normal configurations, though I wouldn't see any problem with restricting magazine sizes on Saigas and the like.

dodint

June 29th, 2018, 05:26 AM

"He's a f***** nut job" --woman who says she was stalked by suspect in fatal shooting of 5 people at Capital Gazette in Annapolis...says she warned former police official years ago.."he will be your next mass shooter"

https://mobile.twitter.com/jemillerwbal/status/1012497327452499968

Now there is another familiar refrain. Law enforcement not investigating/acting on potential threats and current gun laws being rendered ineffective through the inability or unwillingness to administer them. So, yeah, sure, add more laws and infringe the rights of law abiding citizens further. It will work one of these times.

Tom Servo

June 29th, 2018, 05:53 AM

True. We've done nothing and now we're all out of ideas. Personally, I'd put the right of people not to be gunned down in the middle of their newsroom higher up, but that's me.

dodint

June 29th, 2018, 06:00 AM

https://statelaws.findlaw.com/maryland-law/maryland-first-degree-murder.html

You're in luck, it's already on the books.

Crazed_Insanity

June 29th, 2018, 11:36 AM

2A does not give people the right to gun people down in offices or schools or anywhere else. Just a right to bear arms but not the freedom to use it how ever you want.

Obviously more needs to be done besides adding more unenforceable laws or thoughts and prayers.

Godson

June 29th, 2018, 03:22 PM

As Nate pointed out, It hasn't every been legal to kill a person.

JoshInKC

June 29th, 2018, 04:41 PM

Actually, killing people is legal nearly all the time - It just requires specific circumstances: The death penalty, in war, often if committed by a white male against a minority, and especially by police if not overwhelmingly documented to be wrongful, etc.

Jason

June 29th, 2018, 05:16 PM

Common theme in mass shootings (other than guns) involves men who have a history of abuse towards women it seems.

Crazed_Insanity

June 29th, 2018, 06:15 PM

Or frustrated men who couldn't get laid.

Doc Love's system could actually reduce mass shooting if men practice it.

Godson

June 29th, 2018, 10:37 PM

Common theme in mass shootings (other than guns) involves men who have a history of abuse towards women it seems.

Seems like a logical connection.

speedpimp

July 1st, 2018, 01:30 PM

Or frustrated men who couldn't get laid.

Doc Love's system could actually reduce mass shooting if men practice it.

And the first time somebody follows your "System" and fails and decides to stalk you because "The System" made them "fail"...have fun with that, fella.

Crazed_Insanity

July 1st, 2018, 01:40 PM

It's pretty fail proof dude. Stalkers won't follow the system. Followers of system won't be stalkers. :p

speedpimp

July 1st, 2018, 01:53 PM

They may not follow The System® but they will follow you. Wouldn't want you to come home and find your pet bunny boiling in a pot on the stove.

dodint

July 1st, 2018, 03:37 PM

Hmmmmm.

21Kid

July 3rd, 2018, 10:11 AM

There are thousands of examples of things that were once legal, until they weren't. Certain types of guns and accessories should be on this list IMO. There's no reason that gun laws shouldn't evolve with the times, like everything else.

While self defense and hunting are still (arguably) useful for some people. The damage caused by these weapons should have more restrictions IMO.

I see no problem with having a pistol, shotgun, or rifle. As long as it is all within reason. IMO there is no need for a magazine over 10 rounds, any special "hollow point" or other special damaging ammo, bump stocks, or any other attachments that modify guns to a dangerous level. I honestly don't know everything that is out there, but I'm sure we can put a list together.

Guns need to be registered, and have yearly fees to help cover the cost of administration.

Federal agencies shouldn't be handicapped from trying to keep track of them. It's no wonder so many things fall through the cracks.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/gun-background-check-system-riddled-with-flaws
https://www.thetrace.org/2016/08/atf-non-searchable-databases/
"The physical records, some 20,000 boxes, are then stashed away in the Trace Center building and in the parking lot, filling about 25 shipping containers. They are stored there to keep the floor inside from collapsing.

The good news is that agents usually don’t need to search the boxes by hand. The bad: The computerized system isn’t much better.

The ATF’s record-keeping system lacks certain basic functionalities standard to every other database created in the modern age. Despite its vast size, and importance to crime fighters, it is less sophisticated than an online card catalog maintained by a small town public library."

dodint

July 3rd, 2018, 10:32 AM

There are thousands of examples of things that were once legal, until they weren't.

There are only a handful of enumerated Constitutional rights though which is what makes it difficult.

People talk about gun rights like it's normal legislation and I think that's what leads to a certain amount of frustration. Reframe it in the context of a right that you care about (to vote, for instance, what if you had to pay an annual poll tax to administer the system that enabled you to vote?) you'd feel differently. But the 2A is a right that you don't care for other people to exercise so the failure to regulate it beyond what already has been allowed seems unfair somehow.

Heller was a win for both sides really. It solidified the right to self-defense (that's what hollow points are for, etc) but also said in dicta that there is a line that doesn't need to be crossed (the reason why it's constitutional to ban full auto, etc.). Law abiding gun owners have conceded a ton in the last 50-100 years and the anti-2A crowd keeps taking. This despite the rate of gun crime and mass shootings dropping since about 1992.

I don't personally oppose magazine caps or banning bump stocks, etc. The latter being a subversive way of getting around the ban on full autos.

Compulsory gun registration and maintenance fees are a direct attack on the 2A. It's the same issue as Voter ID; putting up logistical and financial barriers to exercise a Constitutionally protected right. It's a tool of suppression.

My family and I are having a gun shoot tomorrow, first time I'll have fired a weapon since I lived in NC (2015 or so). I'm excited, should be a fun day. Akin to going to a track day together or playing a family football game.

Jason

July 3rd, 2018, 12:51 PM

Sure it's a right, but it was also at one point, a right to own people (as inferred in the original constitution), so "taking away a right" isn't wholly new. Separately an Amendment has been repealed before*. IMO, there's nothing wrong with pursuing a removal of the 2nd Amendment on principle.

* ironically, prohibition

As far as my own opinion on it, I'd love for us to have a gun free society, but at this point it's pretty impractical. We aren't there socially, there's way too many people who still very much love guns here. Supply wise, there's just way too many out there to "find them all". There's just no way to get there right now without it being a bloodbath at the hands of a fascist government, and no reasonable person wants that.

Realistically, we absolutely can do more to improve people's lives so that they don't turn to violence. Better social safety nets, better healthcare, higher minimum wages, more accessible education, etc would do a lot of good. But, again, we're not there socially yet, but I think we will be in the near future. A lot of people are scared of anything remotely considered "socialism", but I do think most people generally wish their neighbors well, we just need to figure out a way to "sell" it to the masses better. I'd also like to see guns treated like cars. I know, I know, cars aren't a right, so it's not the "same", but let's be real... if you operate something that is dangerous, usually you should be licensed and insured in some fashion, it just seems like the responsible thing to do and we, as a society accept that idea in many ways currently.

Tom Servo

July 3rd, 2018, 01:17 PM

the anti-2A crowd keeps taking

That's 'cause lots of innocent people keep being killed.

dodint

July 3rd, 2018, 01:38 PM

I wouldn't oppose a 2A repeal via Constructional Amendment. That's the process at work. Proposing more unconstitutional gun laws while ignoring the ones on the books not being enforced is a waste of time and resources.

That's 'cause lots of innocent people keep being killed.

Lots? Debeatable. Violent gun death is a very rare occurance. As long as we're being disingenuous I will dust off the old 'ban cars' trope if the sanctity of life is your genuine motivator. They're absolute killers.

Tom Servo

July 3rd, 2018, 01:47 PM

It's common enough right now that we don't seem to be able to get past the "it's too soon to politicize this" stage before the next one happens.

What's interesting is that language, that law-abiding gun owners have done all these things but the anti-2A crowd keeps taking. Like it's this contrived plan to just make life difficult for gun owners, and has nothing to do with people wanting to try to stop people from being shot to death. The fact that you think that I'm being disingenuous because I don't want to see schoolkids get shot is troubling. What do you think my real motivation is?

But, to go back to the car thing, I'd like to see it be way harder to get a license, way easier to lose one's license, and for us to take driving and the law a hell of a lot more seriously in this country, and then regulate guns just as much as that. A hell of a lot of people are allowed to drive cars right now that shouldn't be allowed to.

Jason

July 3rd, 2018, 02:24 PM

Not only that, we've regulated the way cars are made and roads are designed over and over and over for the sake of improving safety for the general public, so "we've already regulated enough" isn't really an argument in terms of guns, imo.

As far as failures to uphold current laws, I absolutely agree that needs to be worked on as well.

Jason

July 4th, 2018, 04:48 AM

On that latter point...

http://thehill.com/homenews/395421-man-allegedly-kills-3-after-judge-denies-ex-wifes-request-to-have-his-guns-taken

July 4th, 2018, 09:39 AM

A lot of people are scared of anything remotely considered "socialism"
What it means in practice, starving?

Dicknose

July 4th, 2018, 02:12 PM

Tom Servo

July 4th, 2018, 02:27 PM

It is interesting that on one hand there are propagandists who will happily remind us that the Nazis were socialists, then immediately jump on board with the idea that we really should be letting more Norwegians immigrate here.

TheBenior

July 4th, 2018, 11:04 PM

The USA has a complicated history with socialism, partly due to the scare of communism and a long Cold War, partly due to the ideal of freedom to be a self made rich person.
But first world countries that are relatively socialist often top lists of best places to live.
It can help with things like gun crime by giving most people better support and opportunity. Lots of gun crime is by people who are (or were) living below the poverty line. Oddly this is not true for mass shooters, they tend to be middle class.

China is socialist, but also communist.
But socialist countries include the Scandinavia countries, New Zealand and Canada. As I said - ones that often top lists of best places to live.

All of those countries are barely socialist these days, with minimal if any collective ownership of the means of production. They're capitalist with strong social safety nets (relative to the US), except for China, which is closer to state capitalism.

Mass shooters in the US also only tend to be middle class if you group the vast majority of incidents with multiple people shot into the category of 'gang violence.'