Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-02-2015, 06:10 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,824,055 times
Reputation: 6509

Advertisements

Often in the gun control debate boils down those who are willing to trade the freedom and rights of others for hope of safety. Horrific events are often used to push the gun control agenda, often times pushing for new laws and regulation that would actually have no impact on preventing the horrific event in the first place, a perfect example is the most recent shooting of the reporter and gun control proponents pushing for universal background checks when the person who did the shooting passed a background check.

Ever since columbine these mass killers have had the spotlight in the traditional and more recently social media. They have become an anti hero of sort, the media gobbles up any detail to feed the masses to keep the ratings train moving forward.

This is the lead up to restricting another civil right (first amendment) that would be more likely to prevent future mass shootings than the usual anti gun talking points. An example of this restriction would be to ban any for of traditional and social media to share any specific details of an event. The most that could be shared was "their was a mass killing in X city and Y number of people are dead". No other details about the event are allowed to be shared, nothing about how or where it happened, nothing about the killer or their various grievances they want shared, etc.

This practice would be similar to the self restriction sports broadcasts have done with streakers. Once they stopped mentioning them or showing them on TV, what used to be common occurs cd are now rare.


Ultimately, those who want to ban/regulate guns are you willing to truly sacrifice liberty for the hope of safety?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-02-2015, 06:48 PM
 
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
5,404 posts, read 15,997,633 times
Reputation: 8095
There is NEVER complete safety anywhere, at anytime. We should NEVER willingly give up ANY right for "supposed" safety. You might not be killed by a terrorist or violent person, but a tornado can do you in just as fast.

You cannot stop a madman from committing mayhem....and for us to give up our rights in the HOPES of preventing that is lunacy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2015, 11:32 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,824,055 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb at sea View Post
There is NEVER complete safety anywhere, at anytime. We should NEVER willingly give up ANY right for "supposed" safety. You might not be killed by a terrorist or violent person, but a tornado can do you in just as fast.

You cannot stop a madman from committing mayhem....and for us to give up our rights in the HOPES of preventing that is lunacy.
I'm not saying I agree with the premise I posted. But it is a course that is more likely to prevent mass killings that the standard fare of background checks, etc that always get pushed after these events.

Are anti gun people really willing to give up liberty to attain some safety or do they just use these events as an excuse to punish lawful gun owners?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2015, 11:34 AM
 
20,462 posts, read 12,384,859 times
Reputation: 10259
This right here is a group of great Americans in control of a school district that decided Freedom IS Safty
Love me some Argyle TX ISD !

Google Image Result for http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Screen-Shot-2014-08-25-at-8.25.20-PM.png
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2015, 04:40 PM
 
Location: Richmond
1,645 posts, read 1,214,461 times
Reputation: 1777
Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life View Post
I'm not saying I agree with the premise I posted. But it is a course that is more likely to prevent mass killings that the standard fare of background checks, etc that always get pushed after these events.

Are anti gun people really willing to give up liberty to attain some safety or do they just use these events as an excuse to punish lawful gun owners?

I think that most anti-gun people are so ingrained that the police will be able to protect everyone, that they see Law Enforcement as the only means of protecting the populous; and that people being able to protect themselves is just stupid and a waste of time. Despite the fact that under the best of conditions the police cannot get anywhere in under 3 minutes.

Our society has evolved that most people can just go to a store to get what they need, there is no need to grow your own food, there is no need to have your own livestock, everything that a person could need to use or would what; is provided for us and manufactured by someone. They have extended this to also include a person's safety, that it is someone else’s responsibility to protect society, and that an individual has no responsibility in protecting themselves. The problem with this line of thinking is it could not be further from reality. The best person who can protect you is you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2015, 08:40 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,824,055 times
Reputation: 6509
I think this thread is worth a bump, it has become more and more apparent that one of the driving factors is the killers want for fame, to have their story and grievances all over the media.

Some media outlets are choosing to not report on the shooter, others are posting every picture and detail they can because they are whores to ratings.

The president wants to limit one constitutional right to reduce mass shootings. (Which would not make a difference). Why not limit another constitutional right (press) that might actually reduces the chances of future mass shootings?

Here is an alleged quote from the shooter in orgeon
I have noticed that so many people like [Flanagan] are alone and unknown, yet when they spill a little blood, the whole world knows who they are. A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems like the more people you kill, the more you’re in the limelight.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2015, 08:53 AM
 
Location: Free From The Oppressive State
30,253 posts, read 23,742,275 times
Reputation: 38639
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

~Benjamin Franklin
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2015, 09:03 AM
 
33,387 posts, read 34,847,766 times
Reputation: 20030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow View Post
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

~Benjamin Franklin
ole ben was quite wise wasnt he?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2015, 09:13 AM
 
3,216 posts, read 2,231,567 times
Reputation: 1224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow View Post
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

~Benjamin Franklin
I wonder how many Americans know who Benjamin Franklin was let alone his many accomplishments. How many if asked would dismiss him as some old, fat white guy who flew a kite?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2015, 09:15 AM
 
34,619 posts, read 21,621,539 times
Reputation: 22232
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
ole ben was quite wise wasnt he?
We were lucky enough to have a bunch of wise men when this country was founded.

Not only were many of them brilliant, especially Franklin, but they also experienced what a powerful government was capable of doing if given too much power.

Quote:
Originally Posted by toryturner View Post
I wonder how many Americans know who Benjamin Franklin was let alone his many accomplishments. How many if asked would dismiss him as some old, fat white guy who flew a kite?
Franklin was not only brilliant but also quite the tom cat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:19 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top