1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

The Thread Where We Discuss Guns and Gun Control

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Lemon Merchant, Apr 2, 2018.

  1. rah

    rah Deity Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    9,625
    Location:
    Chicago
    Banning all guns and eliminating all guns are two totally different things. One may happen but the other is very unlikely.
     
  2. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Virago

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    4,127
    Location:
    Gingerbread Cottage
    But those don't show what you are claiming they show. The Washington Examiner claims its survey shows most Democrats want to ban all guns but even on handguns slightly more Democrats opposed banning them than supported it.
     
  3. cardgame

    cardgame Sensual Kitten

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    13,160
    Location:
    Misery
    Weak argument when your source also claims that Republicans are within margin of error to a 50-50 split on the issue - and weaker still when the majority of democrats opposed a handgun ban.
     
  4. Estebonrober

    Estebonrober Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Messages:
    3,165
    Gender:
    Male

    Ok so Feinstein almost 30 years ago. Biden without citation. The only two you can find. That's not very bloody threatening. Maybe you are right in fifty years the dial moves on this topic, but that's bloody natural for topics to change over time. You don't get to dictate your morals forever and ever amen.

    So realize that the only people talking about banning guns right now are right wing talking point places (talk radio, fox news, right wing social media) and they are doing it to get their base angry. You are being manipulated like a pawn.
     
  5. Commodore

    Commodore Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2005
    Messages:
    11,367
    There are literally bills being introduced at both the state and city levels all over the the US that seek to ban certain types of firearms. And some of those bills have even passed already. That is disarmament.

    Then you don't have your ear as close to the ground as you think you do.

    It only weakens his argument if he is trying to claim that only Democrats oppose gun ownership. However, the fact that even Republicans are becoming more and more split on the issue highlights his point of the demographic shift that is turning against gun owners. And this shift is starting to have real results in elections already. In the midterms, something like 15 Republicans that had an A+ rating from the NRA were replaced by 15 Republicans that have an F rating from the NRA. In other words, pro-2nd Amendment Republicans are starting to get replaced by anti-gun Republicans.
     
  6. Estebonrober

    Estebonrober Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Messages:
    3,165
    Gender:
    Male
    Banning certain types of firearms is not banning all guns. . . words matter. This is like talking to a wall your brains are so twisted.

    NRA has a radical agenda that's why they are being voted out. The population doesn't support semi automatic high velocity rifles for every person interested in them. Its not popular.
     
    hobbsyoyo and Birdjaguar like this.
  7. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    36,431
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    Gun people don't care and the NRA is quite happy to take Russian money.
     
    hobbsyoyo likes this.
  8. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd I never yielded

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    16,790
    Location:
    Wakanda Forever
    That's not a fair interpretation of what he said. You're strawmanning.
    Bundy? Jeez man you need a new hero/posterboy for the cause. I mean you somewhat admit that he's a flawed example... but you should probably just abandon him and get a better example entirely... And if you can't find one, think about what that means.
    The Coal Wars aren't "recent" You're stretching now... see my above point about that.
    If that's true, then think about why that is and whose fault that is. I think it would mostly be the fault of 2nd Amendment fanatics, and grievance -warriors who refuse to take personal responsibility for the failings of their own lives and delusional racists/white nationalists who think that America becoming less whatever-the-hell-they-see-themselves-as is some kind of existential threat to them personally.
     
    hobbsyoyo and MaryKB like this.
  9. Ziggy Stardust

    Ziggy Stardust New Englander

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Messages:
    24,103
    Location:
    High above the ice
    Bundy is actually a good example for those arguing in favour of gun control.

    Some guy is breaking the law, but the government hesitates to turn the situation into a bloodbath when they want to uphold the law, because the guy breaking the law is armed to the teeth. Alternatively: The government should not hesitate and use all the means at their disposal to bring these people to justice. Including tanks and fighter jets. Bundy doesn't want to surrender? Make his little ranch a nice hot crater.

    But then people would go: look at the evil gubbermint! They be bombing our own people.
     
    hobbsyoyo likes this.
  10. Commodore

    Commodore Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2005
    Messages:
    11,367
    So because a certain right may no longer be "popular" that justifies either taking that right away or severely curtailing that right?

    I didn't say they were recent. I said the incident with Bundy was recent, but there are other examples, such as the Coal Wars, scattered throughout US history. Reading comprehension is your friend.

    That's actually a good thing though. While the situation with Bundy was a clear case of him violating a just law, having an armed citizenry that makes the government hesitant to enforce their laws can act as a defense against unjust laws. Sure, reducing the government's ability to enforce laws overall can make society more dangerous, but I subscribe to Thomas Jefferson's way of thinking on the matter:

    So were you in favor of the Chinese using their military to quell the Tienanmen Square protests? After all, those protesters were violating Chinese law and according to you the government "should not hesitate and use all the means at their disposal to bring these people to justice."

    Are you starting to see why "law" does not always equal "justice" and why the government absolutely should not have a monopoly on lethal force?
     
    Old Hippy likes this.
  11. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd I never yielded

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    16,790
    Location:
    Wakanda Forever
    Meh... I'd say that my "reading comprehension" has been checked, tested, certified, etc., by several learned institutions and government entities... so I'm all good, thanks.

    The point is that you seem to have no good, recent examples of how your position is relevant/valid/meaningful/useful, etc, which greatly undermines your position, making it appear obsolete. Questioning/insulting my "reading comprehension" does nothing to address the flaws in your argument.

    Your argument is poor and weak. Deflecting to my "reading comprehension" doesn't change that. You need a better example than Bundy and something more recent than the Coal Wars. Either you have it or you don't.
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2018
    hobbsyoyo and MaryKB like this.
  12. Commodore

    Commodore Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2005
    Messages:
    11,367
    Implying that said institutions are actually qualified to make such a judgement...

    So rights should only remain intact if there is a recent example of them being needed? Keep in mind here, the right in question and the right the 2nd Amendment seeks to preserve is not the right to own a gun, but rather the inherent right that every human being has from birth to be able to defend themselves and their property in anyway they see fit. Hence why recently the nunchuck ban in New York was struck down as a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

    Which, by the way, is a significant ruling. More significant than either the anti-gun crowd or the pro-2nd Amendment advocates seem to realize. It sets a legal precedent that bans on specific types of weapons are indeed unconstitutional. So if the right people really wanted to push the issue, they could use that ruling to get the ban on certain types of firearms and firearm accessories declared unconstitutional. Especially since the ruling stated that banning a type of weapon simply "because it's dangerous" is not a good enough reason to justify an abridgement of one's 2nd Amendment rights. And that's big because the "because they are dangerous" is literally the only reasoning the anti-gun crowd has for justifying any type of gun legislation.

    Funny that a case involving a non-firearm weapon may be the thing that saves gun ownership in the US.
     
  13. Estebonrober

    Estebonrober Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Messages:
    3,165
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, because in this case it isn't taking away or severely curtailing the fundamental right. Furthermore if two thirds of the states decided to revoke the second amendment through a constitutional process that is also completely fine. I don;t support that I'm a fan of you crazy bastards out in the woods, I'd just like to see high capacity, high velocity, rounds disappear.
     
    hobbsyoyo likes this.
  14. hobbsyoyo

    hobbsyoyo Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2012
    Messages:
    22,954
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The pale blue dot.
    I read at the time that Trump's bump stock ban edict was engineered specifically to make it easy pickings for NRA lawyers to get shot down. I wouldn't put it past this President to collude with the NRA to set up this situation. Now he can claim he acted on gun violence and the NRA can have the ban reversed in short order. Of course it helps that the far right has heavily tilted the entire federal judiciary to the extreme right in the last two years thanks to stolen appointments at all levels. They won't have problems finding sympathetic courts to toss out the executive order and they will decline to appeal it when they lose.
     
  15. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd I never yielded

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    16,790
    Location:
    Wakanda Forever
    Implying that the Deans of Universities and Boards of Law Examiners aren't qualified but you are.. lols:lol:

    Commodore, I like you man... you're from Ohio, and that makes you peeps to me... Go Buckeyes!... (I just finished defending the Big 10's honor against a bunch of SEC bootlickers a minute ago)... but this whole line of argument you're making... its just... let it go man... its pointless.

    Also... I love nunchucks... I can go behind the back and under the legs and around the belly with them and everything... but if they are banned... no problem I'll learn a new weapon;)
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2018
  16. Commodore

    Commodore Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2005
    Messages:
    11,367
    Just stop. I find it much more insulting when people who attack everything I stand for turn around and pretend to be friendly with me. The country is dividing and you and I are not on the same side of that divide. Best if we both remain honest with each other about that fact.

    That's just it, they aren't banned anymore as the ban was declared to be a violation of the 2nd Amendment. The only state that is defiantly keeping their nunchuck ban in place is Maryland, but with the ruling that such a ban is unconstitutional, all it will take is one legal challenge and that ban goes bye-bye. Hopefully this ruling can also be used to start chipping away at gun laws that ban certain types of firearms as well.
     
  17. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd I never yielded

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    16,790
    Location:
    Wakanda Forever
    I've said sooooo many times that I see value in the 2nd and why. "The country is dividing"? SMFH :shake: If you need me to be a bogeyman for you... fine whateves I was born a bogeyman, I've gotten used to it. And I'm glad nunchucks arent banned cause I have them... if that wasn't already clear.

    Regardless of what you say... Ohio State should have been in the playoff, as evidenced by these fiasco playoff games.
     
    hobbsyoyo likes this.
  18. Estebonrober

    Estebonrober Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Messages:
    3,165
    Gender:
    Male

    No its not. You and your fellow zealots have convinced yourselves through social media that the nation is headed to this civil war you want so badly. Frankly 60% couldn't even be bothered. You need to snap out of your anger, its completely unjustified. Furthermore whenever someone across a political spectrum tries to find common ground and interests, to immediately dehumanize him by insisting that your common interests mean nothing is about the ugliest thing I've seen on this forum.


    No one is trying to ban your guns except a few really liberal cities who are being over ruled at almost every turn.
     
    hobbsyoyo and cardgame like this.
  19. Cutlass

    Cutlass The Man Who Wasn't There.

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Messages:
    45,335
    Location:
    US of A


    If the problem is that the country is divided, then the simple solution is for the gun nuts to stop dividing it. Basically your argument boils down to "we have to have guns to protect ourselves from the consequences of our insisting that we have guns!"
     
    hobbsyoyo likes this.
  20. Dekker

    Dekker Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2018
    Messages:
    450
    To be fair Sommerswerd kinda came across as patronizing with the ''I like you BUT' in the midst of a heated discussion that was becoming personal on both ends so I wouldn't peg it as trying to find common ground, rather than using it to take some high ground. Of course Commodore entrenching in the right v left ''battleground' and firmly taking a side is no more productive either.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2018

Share This Page