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)
 
Old 02-21-2018, 08:35 AM
 
7,921 posts, read 5,037,155 times
Reputation: 13571

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rambler123 View Post
...I don't see any (sane) people demanding we get rid of traffic laws - or much of any other laws - but we're to pretend that guns are "special"...
By cultural conventions, guns in America are very special indeed. Compare for example speed-limits on German highways. Though their highways are seeing increasing encroachment of speed limits, the cultural narrative remains, that speed-unlimited driving is venerable and desirable. But in America, nearly everyone agrees that speed limits - however high - should be in place on all roads, at all times. The issue isn't one of logic, of economics or of personal or societal needs. The issue is one of cultural postulates.

That guns are safe or dangerous, promote crime or forestall it, is beside the point. They're a cultural pillar of American life, even for people who don't own guns, don't shoot them and don't associate with people who do. It is because of the cultural special-ness of guns, that private firearm ownership in America is quote safe from encroachment by "progressive" schemes at significantly changing the existing laws.

 
Old 02-21-2018, 08:39 AM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
8,106 posts, read 2,778,320 times
Reputation: 4362
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEPLimey View Post
Want to substitute sorrow for outrage? Sure. The point of your post was to dismiss the value in reducing (rather than the eradication) of school shooting deaths.

"If someone kills 10% less kids next time because they used a shotgun instead of an AR15, are you going to be 10% less sorrowful?"

Does that sound better to you? You are not acknowledging that saving the 10% has value, you are dismissing it to suit your political agenda. Soulless.



I'm not dismissing anything.

I'm telling you what you all seem to refuse to believe.....

That banning the AR15 is not going to stop or even significantly effect the number of school shootings.

Sure....saving 10% has value but you cannot prove in any way that this would be the result.

It's wishful thinking on your part at best.
 
Old 02-21-2018, 08:40 AM
 
Location: Formerly Pleasanton Ca, now in Marietta Ga
5,461 posts, read 4,091,346 times
Reputation: 7267
Favorite liberal tactic-try to dehumanize the other person when they can't discuss logically. Oh, that's a favorite term they brought in. Heard it many times over the subject of illegal aliens. The other person refused to discuss the situation because the term illegal aliens was used and said it dehumanized them and would discusss until the term was retracted.

a:2+2 =4.

b:No it's not, it's 8

a:No it's 4

b:you are disgusting and care more about 4 than childrens lives

a: huh?
 
Old 02-21-2018, 08:40 AM
 
5,214 posts, read 1,564,639 times
Reputation: 3042
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
I didn't "dismiss" anything.

That's simply you're lame excuse for not being able to provide a logical argument.
I was responding to your premise. You asked, "[i]f someone kills 10% less kids next time because they used a shotgun instead of an AR15...are you going to be 10% less outraged?"

Personally, yes, if given the binary choice, I would be happier if a gunman killed 45 kids instead of 50. I wouldn't be happy about it, but in a binary world, yes, I would choose having 10% fewer children die. If you don't see the logic in the response "if regulating types of weapons / capacities results in fewer deaths, then that is better than not regulating types of weapons / capacities resulting in more deaths" then I can't help you. Probably there is no one who can.
 
Old 02-21-2018, 08:43 AM
 
5,214 posts, read 1,564,639 times
Reputation: 3042
Quote:
Originally Posted by aslowdodge View Post
Favorite liberal tactic-try to dehumanize the other person when they can't discuss logically. Oh, that's a favorite term they brought in

a:2+2 =4.

b:No it's not, it's 8

a:No it's 4

b:you are disgusting and care more about 4 than childrens lives

a: huh?
Again, he simply dismissed the value of his claimed 10% of children's lives and got called out on it. It has nothing to do with 4 or 8 in that regard. But keep projecting... maybe eventually it will work for you.

(Also, I'm not a liberal, but a moderate conservative)
 
Old 02-21-2018, 08:52 AM
 
15,734 posts, read 9,249,739 times
Reputation: 14217
Quote:
Originally Posted by chitownperson View Post
Actually, I DO have the right to determine that guns should be banned… It's up to the government however to act in the best interest of it's people, which it's not currently doing. I have the right to express my belief that only a total ban will create significant change in gun violence, and that any other half measure, or no measure as it currently stands, will not do a thing to lower gun violence in the short or long term.
Funny - you're exercising your right to free speech to call for the elimination of another right.
 
Old 02-21-2018, 08:55 AM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
8,106 posts, read 2,778,320 times
Reputation: 4362
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEPLimey View Post
I was responding to your premise. You asked, "[i]f someone kills 10% less kids next time because they used a shotgun instead of an AR15...are you going to be 10% less outraged?"

Personally, yes, if given the binary choice, I would be happier if a gunman killed 45 kids instead of 50. I wouldn't be happy about it, but in a binary world, yes, I would choose having 10% fewer children die. If you don't see the logic in the response "if regulating types of weapons / capacities results in fewer deaths, then that is better than not regulating types of weapons / capacities resulting in more deaths" then I can't help you. Probably there is no one who can.



It was a rhetorical question.

Because there is no way of knowing that there would have been 10% less deaths if he used something like a shotgun instead of an AR15 despite the fact that shotguns are incredibly devastating in close quarters like a classroom or hallway.

He might have even killed more had he used a shotgun.... you don't know.

Because every situation is different..... except for one thing they all have in common.

Regardless of what weapon they use, the shooters always pick unarmed and unprotected victims in a gun free zone.
 
Old 02-21-2018, 09:04 AM
 
Location: annandale, va & slidell, la
7,344 posts, read 3,039,094 times
Reputation: 6157
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreeBeard View Post
Wouldn't just be easier to ban the manufacture and sale of bullets?
What a fantastic idea! Do you have enough for yourself before the ban becomes law?
 
Old 02-21-2018, 09:16 AM
 
4,194 posts, read 2,488,898 times
Reputation: 1935
Quote:
Originally Posted by finalmove View Post
What a fantastic idea! Do you have enough for yourself before the ban becomes law?
Its not hard to make your own.
 
Old 02-21-2018, 09:28 AM
 
Location: annandale, va & slidell, la
7,344 posts, read 3,039,094 times
Reputation: 6157
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinm View Post
I am all for the 2nd amendment, but can propose some ideas to make the use of firearms for other than self-defense less likely.

1. USE of a gun for offensive purposes (robbery, brandishing, threatening) will incur a sentence of 5 years in jail. A federal law should be passed that prevents prosecutors from dropping the weapons charge during sentencing to get a guilty plea.

2. FIRING a gun during the commission of a crime either in the air or at a person or object will incur an additional 10 years in jail.

3. Non-reporting of a lost or stolen firearm will incur a $10K fine to the owner if the serial numbers of the weapon are not provided to law enforcement.

4. ALL transfers or sales of any weapon that requires a background check will require the same background check for any subsequent owners. No more straw man purchases. No alleged gun show loophole. You sell a handgun to a friend or want to give it as a gift to your kids they must pass a background check.

5. HIPPA laws should be amended so that mental health records are provided to law enforcement to be part of the background check.

6. Ownership of any firearm is restricted to people over 21 years of age. Anyone under 21 must be supervised by an adult. Parents and/or guardians should be interviewed as part of the background check if the person wants to maintain ownership after 21.
You are proposing these regs at the Federal level. Some States do these things already. A large percentage of their residents don't comply. Big problem.

You mention gifting or selling to an aquaintence. This will never change as there are too many exceptions to this situation. If a criminal gets a weapon this way and uses it, they should be captured and hung at sunrise.

If I have a CCP and want to add to my collection I don't need a waiting period.
If I want to sell one of my pistols to the Navy Captain next door that I've known for 20-years, I can and may sell it without docs.
If I want to give a long gun to my nephew for college graduation, I can and may give it without docs.
My familiarity with the recipient determines their trustworthiness.

The Left as usual is barking up the wrong tree.
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.


Closed Thread

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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top