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. Estebonrober

    Estebonrober Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Messages:
    2,069
    Gender:
    Male
    Yea and my point is that being sanctimonious, condescending, arrogant, repugnant, trite, contrarian, and so on is all okay. Drawing lines in the sand and saying you are my enemy is not. All three of us are Americans and we are not each other's enemies. As much as I loath Trump he is not my existential enemy. Republicans won and have outplay democrats politically for quite some time, I am working to help end that cycle because I believe it has lead the nation down a dangerous path. I do not believe we've reached the point where they are my enemies though. It has become common for right wingers to frame their narrative in this way and that is probably why they commit so much terrorism. @Commodore 's wording indicates he is ready to be violent.
     
  2. Colonel

    Colonel Sandbox

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    4,151
    Location:
    Back in the Good Ole USA
    Why must we ban guns or limit guns beyond normal common sense means. Background checks good, mental health checks good, person to person sales go through FFL dealers good. Why the constant insistence that we ban this gun or that type of gun etc? Instead of focusing on taking this or that simply reform the manner in which they are procured. The left and the right could find alot more common ground if the conversation were approached in this manner as opposed to the we need to ban this or that frame. Also noting that the current method for gun control always falls back to some level of confiscation or banning, frame the conversation better and you might get somewhere.
     
  3. Cutlass

    Cutlass The Man Who Wasn't There.

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Messages:
    45,355
    Location:
    US of A

    There is no common sense approach that the gun nuts will aggree to. It's all or nothing for them,
     
    hobbsyoyo likes this.
  4. Colonel

    Colonel Sandbox

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    4,151
    Location:
    Back in the Good Ole USA
    Sure there is, but it will take a consistent effort by the democratic party as a whole to stop any members from demanding banning or confiscation. As long as you have lone democrats in California or New York demanding a full ban on weapons the right will always fall back to paint the entire party as anti-gun. When democrats can say with one voice, you can keep your guns but we want mental health checks and more intense background checks you will finally see change. Until that is achieved you will not see any meaningful reform.
     
  5. Cutlass

    Cutlass The Man Who Wasn't There.

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Messages:
    45,355
    Location:
    US of A

    Not going to see any anyways. Not all Democrats want any meaningful gun control measures. But all Republicans reject even the most sensible ones.
     
  6. Estebonrober

    Estebonrober Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Messages:
    2,069
    Gender:
    Male
    Yea I want the background checks and ban on high capacity high velocity rounds.

    7 rounds per clip, limits on actual velocity of rounds sold otc or online. Then you can have whatever rifle you want and can rig them if civil war actually does break out.
     
  7. Arwon

    Arwon

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    17,368
    Location:
    Canberra
    Gotta say I'm a pretty big fan of the juxtaposition of dark "the country is divided and everyone must pick a side" muttering and the rankest "trying to take our guns" paranoia. Very healthy. Normal people. Stable country. Exactly the mindset one wants from people with deadly weapons.
     
    hobbsyoyo and Lexicus like this.
  8. Estebonrober

    Estebonrober Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Messages:
    2,069
    Gender:
    Male
    30 years of media whipping them up into a frenzy has accomplished much! Social media sped this up quite a bit too. Nothing can be done about that part of this though, like nuclear weapons this is a reality humans have to learn to live with and adjust to rationally. Here is to hoping it doesn't lead to using nuclear weapons on each other.
     
  9. Lexicus

    Lexicus Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Messages:
    21,657
    Location:
    Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
    Incidentally, this is why I think "take all the guns and kill anyone who resists" would be a rather useful way to get rid of a lot of dangerous fascists.

    I have certainly never tried to conceal the fact that I regard your views on guns as those of a bloodthirsty maniac.
     
    MaryKB likes this.
  10. Arakhor

    Arakhor Dremora Courtier Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Messages:
    32,286
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Don't you need to be a US citizen to exercise your 2nd Amendment rights? It's manifestly not a human right if what it says on your passport actually determines your rights.
     
  11. Commodore

    Commodore Technology of Peace

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2005
    Messages:
    10,621
    Location:
    The Tiberium Future
    No. Any legal resident of the US, whether they are a citizen or not, is afforded all the protections and rights of the Constitution. The only exception to that being the right to vote, which is not extended to legal residents that are not citizens.

    Well we can't exactly force other countries to abide by our Constitution, now can we? And while the US Constitution only applies to legal residents of the US, the Bill of Rights contained within it is just the codification of the general philosophy that drove our war for independence. Part of that philosophy being that every human being has a natural (or God-given if you are the religious type) right to defend themselves and their property in any way they see fit. That philosophy is also why a lot of Americans, even ones that support gun control, look down on "duty to retreat" laws that exist in some states and Europe. The idea that one has a legal obligation to retreat from an attacker just seems outright ridiculous to a lot of Americans.
     
  12. Cutlass

    Cutlass The Man Who Wasn't There.

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Messages:
    45,355
    Location:
    US of A

    Any legal resident.
     
  13. Berzerker

    Berzerker Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    17,008
    Location:
    the golf course
    Its like telling a pedestrian who gets hit by a drunk driver they had a legal obligation to get out of the way

    in the same post, no less
     
  14. cardgame

    cardgame Sensual Kitten

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    12,599
    Location:
    Southern Idaho
    That's kind of... maniacally bloodthirsty.
     
    Manfred Belheim likes this.
  15. Arwon

    Arwon

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    17,368
    Location:
    Canberra
    Hmm nah that ain't it
     
  16. Ziggy Stardust

    Ziggy Stardust New Englander

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Messages:
    24,103
    Location:
    High above the ice
    Yeah, that's exactly the same situation. You got me there.


    It's called democracy. You campaign, gain support to overthrow laws you disagree with.

    It's the price of living in society. At the moment a lot of people don't agree with the way you can buy assault rifles. So what's their play according to you? Get armed to the teeth to overthrow people being able to get armed to the teeth? But then those who want to buy assault rifles would oppose that how? Oh yeah. Arm themselves to the teeth. You can see where this is going right?

    In a democracy civilised discourse is the means to campaign for change, not the threat of weapons. Weapons don't state logical arguments, they only project force when someone is willing to use it. It has no reasoning behind it. And by the way, that is also where your Tienanmen Square strawman fails.
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2019
    hobbsyoyo likes this.
  17. metatron

    metatron unperson

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    Messages:
    3,754
    And there we have it again:
    Laws change. Justice is eternal.

    Edited: See Below.
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2019
  18. Ziggy Stardust

    Ziggy Stardust New Englander

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Messages:
    24,103
    Location:
    High above the ice
    I agree. Which is why I removed it.

    Buddy :)
     
  19. Estebonrober

    Estebonrober Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Messages:
    2,069
    Gender:
    Male
    The pedestrian is actually required by law to do his best to get out of the way. This prevents absurdities like intentionally allowing people to hit you so you can make claims.

    So see above. This in practice fails to provide justice in any real sense of the term and stand your ground laws have already caused multiple incidents where an aggressor has used those laws to try and defend their shooting of what is basically innocent civilians (See recent Florida man case).

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/23/us/florida-stand-your-ground-fatal-shooting/index.html

    So you are legally wrong, judicially wrong, and morally wrong on this count. Congratulations.
     
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2019
  20. Commodore

    Commodore Technology of Peace

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2005
    Messages:
    10,621
    Location:
    The Tiberium Future
    There is not a single person in the US right now outside of the military and law enforcement that legally owns or can legally purchase an assault rifle. When you want to start using the correct terms for things instead terms that help you demonize the thing you want to get rid of, then we can have a serious conversation.
     

Share This Page