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.
When someone's life is threatened, I mean if we are being
serious here, you leave the threat. Of course it isn't easy, but that's what you
do, at least for those 10 days perhaps to think through your best options.
That's what intelligent people should do, unless they want to die.
How very short sighted of you. Leaving is just not an option for some people, not to mention that people shouldn't have to leave their home and their property.
Quote:
The argument about having to wait when somebody already owns guns and/or the
fact that they can kill someone with one of their guns without having to wait is
even more head-scratching.
For you, apparently. It isn't all that head scratching for me at all. Seems pretty pointless to make someone wait ten days to buy a gun for fear they may do something irrational with it, when they already have 10 at home.
Quote:
I can't smoke in a restaurant anymore. We all know of countless pinches
on our freedom that obviously make good public policy regardless those who don't
see it the same way.
You assume you ever had that freedom to begin with..... you didn't. You never had the right to smoke in a restaurant. You were allowed to smoke there because the owner allowed you to, but they have since lost THAT freedom. And sorry, but I don't see nanny state laws and infringing on property rights as "good public policy"...
Quote:
Where I live, once upon a time you could drive a motor vehicle before you turned
16. Not anymore. Unconstitutional? No.
You're right, it's not. Know why? Because driving is a privilege, not a right.
You seem to forget that these are CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS we're talking about here. That elevates them to a higher status, and does eliminate some options that might otherwise not be a bad idea. For example, I think stop-and-frisk is a good idea, but it's blatantly unconstitutional and a violation of the 4th Amendment.
Quote:
Again, maybe not all that much to gain, but far less to lose by enacting such
laws as far as I am concerned.
Tell that to Carol Bowne from New Jersey.
Quote:
As Bernie Sanders tends to suggest most forcefully, when "people come
together" (aka in large numbers) to sway our government representatives, only
then is the influence of the NRA mitigated,
I don't want the influence of the NRA mitigated. The NRA is me and I am the NRA. I'm proud to be a card carrying member.
Please, just read the above statement and try to match this argument that we should "rely on others for your opinion and thoughts on policy issues" to anything I have written.
Again, when the premise is so badly flawed as presented by these straw man arguments, I just don't have the time or the patience for what follows.
There is far too much that actually makes some sense to address and still far too little time to pay to much attention to these ridiculous misrepresentations of what I have actually written...
here you go....
Quote:
Originally Posted by And D
The words we choose to use makes all the difference when it comes to understanding one another, and clearly I am having trouble being misunderstood, but be fair! I have never written that I "trust" politicians or have "faith" in people any more or any less than we must.
I think what it will take to get "moderate gun owners to listen" involves more than a few things.
.....
3) Without getting into specifics, I also think there needs to be paradigm shift by gun enthusiasts that might forego the concern about gun-control effectiveness. After all, none of us will ever be satisfied along those lines while the violence just keeps coming. But if a gun enthusiast can continue to buy guns, use guns as always in a lawful manner, why not just agree to whatever measures a gun-control advocate might suggest?
4) Leave the Constitutional soundness of any gun control measure to those who are best to decide! This is not just the SCOTUS, we have an entire court system set up to vet our laws as appropriate, with lots of checks and balances. Enough of the fear-mongering to the contrary already.
5) Leave the concerns of effectiveness to the gun control advocates, the legislators and law enforcement. Give any glimmer of an idea at least the chance to be implemented, a chance to see the light of day. Given all the killings, don't we owe it to those killed and their families to say, "sure, we'll give that a try, and we're okay that it might come with some cost, some inconvenience and not really know how well it will work." Let us have our guns, don't impinge on our gun fun, and we'll give just about anything a try! Why not?
I used to be able to smoke in restaurants, in planes, and buy my cigarettes
out of a vending machine just about anywhere...
Now, of course, those freedoms have been seriously curtailed,
I don't agree with the abuse smokers have taken over the past few decades, but buying cigarettes and buying a gun are two different things. Buying a gun is a Constitutional Right.
Quote:
No, guns are not cigarettes, but surely these parallels....
One is a constitutional right, the other is not. There are no parallels from a legal point of view.
When someone's life is threatened, I mean if we are being serious here, you leave the threat. Of course it isn't easy, but that's what you do, at least for those 10 days perhaps to think through your best options. That's what intelligent people should do, unless they want to die.
Are you saying that the people that realize their lives are in danger should leave and just let others die because they were too stupid (not intelligent) to leave? Every single victim in any of these shootings would have liked to have left; but they were not given that opportunity. Cooperation with these nut cases does not work. Fighting aggression, with aggression, does work and has saved lives in the past. Having the proper 'tools' to fight these villains is the issue that most of this thread is about.
If everybody, in one of these classes, was trained and armed; chances are that the outcome would have been different. I always felt that we should at least train students and airline passengers to use Tasers. Then encourage everybody to carry. Nobody is going to take out any school or bring down any aircraft with a single shot Taser. Yes, it is possible that somebody could die of a heart attack if accidently hit - but that is why I said train. Anybody attacking a school would have second thoughts if they knew everybody had the means/capability of stopping their attack. Breaking into a classroom could be met with 30 hits of high voltage. The whole idea is that the 'victims' play an active roll in their own defense so they are not victims.
How very short sighted of you. Leaving is just not an option for some people, not to mention that people shouldn't have to leave their home and their property.
For you, apparently. It isn't all that head scratching for me at all. Seems pretty pointless to make someone wait ten days to buy a gun for fear they may do something irrational with it, when they already have 10 at home.
You assume you ever had that freedom to begin with..... you didn't. You never had the right to smoke in a restaurant. You were allowed to smoke there because the owner allowed you to, but they have since lost THAT freedom. And sorry, but I don't see nanny state laws and infringing on property rights as "good public policy"...
You're right, it's not. Know why? Because driving is a privilege, not a right.
You seem to forget that these are CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS we're talking about here. That elevates them to a higher status, and does eliminate some options that might otherwise not be a bad idea. For example, I think stop-and-frisk is a good idea, but it's blatantly unconstitutional and a violation of the 4th Amendment.
Tell that to Carol Bowne from New Jersey.
I don't want the influence of the NRA mitigated. The NRA is me and I am the NRA. I'm proud to be a card carrying member.
How bout they stop and frisk you for ya guns since you think it's such a great idea ?
Are you saying that the people that realize their lives are in danger should leave and just let others die because they were too stupid (not intelligent) to leave? Every single victim in any of these shootings would have liked to have left; but they were not given that opportunity. Cooperation with these nut cases does not work. Fighting aggression, with aggression, does work and has saved lives in the past. Having the proper 'tools' to fight these villains is the issue that most of this thread is about.
If everybody, in one of these classes, was trained and armed; chances are that the outcome would have been different. I always felt that we should at least train students and airline passengers to use Tasers. Then encourage everybody to carry. Nobody is going to take out any school or bring down any aircraft with a single shot Taser. Yes, it is possible that somebody could die of a heart attack if accidently hit - but that is why I said train. Anybody attacking a school would have second thoughts if they knew everybody had the means/capability of stopping their attack. Breaking into a classroom could be met with 30 hits of high voltage. The whole idea is that the 'victims' play an active roll in their own defense so they are not victims.
Do I think people should be able to carry a weapon for their own self defense if they want to? Yes.
Do I think we need to re-evaluate Gun Free Zones? Absolutely, particularly where there are no metal detectors / armed security to enforce that policy for everyone entering a building....
But am I gonna sit here and say that getting rid of gun free zones is actually a viable solution to the problem of random attacks on schools, churches, movie theaters, etc? Absolutely not! Getting rid of these gun free zones is "a" solution, of many possible solutions, but it certainly isn't "the" solution. If a society has to essentially be militarized to be safe, then they aren't safe at all. Even if everyone were allowed to carry everywhere they went, currently only about 6% +/- of the adult population chooses to have a concealed carry permit, and probably even less actually carry everywhere, everyday.
How bout they stop and frisk you for ya guns since you think it's such a great idea ?
Well #1, I said that it's an unconstitutional policy, and I don't think it should go on for that reason.
#2, I actually live in a civilized area where you don't have to be fearful to walk down the street, not a lawless inner city which is basically a war zone, so stop-and-frisk would not be necessary here because we don't have a penchant for killing each other unlike some places.
#3, I wouldn't have to worry if a cop did stop-and-frisk me, because I have all the proper permits to carry my gun legally.
But am I gonna sit here and say that getting rid of gun free zones is actually a viable solution to the problem of random attacks on schools, churches, movie theaters, etc? Absolutely not! Getting rid of these gun free zones is "a" solution, of many possible solutions, but it certainly isn't "the" solution. If a society has to essentially be militarized to be safe, then they aren't safe at all. Even if everyone were allowed to carry everywhere they went, currently only about 6% +/- of the adult population chooses to have a concealed carry permit, and probably even less actually carry everywhere, everyday.
I am not talking about arming everybody with large capacity assault weapons. I am talking about training and allowing, anybody that is interested, the ability to carry a one shot Taser. They could be colored yellow to quickly identify the Tasers from real weapons. Besides that; allow 'experts' to train classrooms in the art of classroom self defense.
Nobody should have to hide in a closet/corner and wait till the end. Let anybody or any class have the ability to fight back should they ever be placed in one of these situations. I am just trying to empower the potential victims.
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.
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.
