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)
 
Old 10-05-2017, 12:03 PM
 
29,464 posts, read 14,635,166 times
Reputation: 14432

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruithne View Post
You messed up the quote feature, if you can go back and correct, and not mess with my quote, thanks.


The root cause of the problem is violence exacerbated by guns AND a mentality that guns are not part of the problem.

Look at Australia and the UK.
Guns are not illegal in Australia or the UK, they are just strictly regulated, both after gun massacres.

In the UK at least the push for strict regulation came from the British people themselves! In a similar way Australians saw that gun regulation was a sensible thing to do. No gun massacres in either country since. THIS is the problem here. The people aren't behind it because they just flatly refuse to see that there is another way. If gun regulation was tightened and mass shootings dropped, people would see the sense in it. It's not going to happen the other way around.
There are more guns in this country than people and guess what? - it's not working.
We've tried your way. Time to try another way.


Sorry, didn't mess anything up. I didn't use the quote feature.
Time to try another way ? Like I've said before. Debating with those that don't agree with you isn't going to get things done, start calling up your politicians. As of now the 2A is our right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-05-2017, 12:04 PM
 
Location: Vancouver
18,504 posts, read 15,545,978 times
Reputation: 11937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
No, liberal states and cities will pass another batch of new gun laws which will have ZERO affect on gun crimes, just like the Clinton so-called '"assault" weapons ban had.

Do you remember all those shootings that occurred in "Gun Free Zones"?

Just an other gun law joke.

Anti-gunners believe that if a rifle is black, it is MORE dangerous then if it were brown.

If it "looks like a military weapon" it MUST be more dangerous then 1 that doesn't.
Gun free zones don't mean a thing when you can carry a gun without checks into that zone. A federal law is needed so that the laws are exactly the same state to state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 12:04 PM
 
Location: San Diego
18,724 posts, read 7,602,949 times
Reputation: 14996
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
Use whatever opportunity to support those in Congress willing to ban such weapons,
Anything Congress does along those lines, is flatly illegal, as you well know. Not that illegality stops them. I suggested ways of making it legal, which you would HAVE to do before bothering to petition Congress.

You can, of course, try to get your Congressmen to propose an amendment to change or repeal the 2nd. Or get them to set up a Constitutional Convention for that purpose. Either way, whatever gets proposed must be ratified by 3/4 of the states, or else it goes in the trash can. There's a reason for that.

Once that amendment is proposed by 2/3 of Congress (or a CC) and ratified by 3/4 of the states, then you can start petitioning Congress to make a law banning guns.

Good luck.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 12:07 PM
 
Location: San Diego
18,724 posts, read 7,602,949 times
Reputation: 14996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot1 View Post
Yes, because we all know that the NRA supports, and promotes illegally buying, and illegally using firearms.
When a gun-rights-hater comes up with a blatant lie like this, you know he's completely lost the debate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 12:07 PM
 
29,544 posts, read 9,710,839 times
Reputation: 3469
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboteer View Post
Some people do that. When they can't refute what the Founding Fathers decided, they don't learn from that (as you said you wouldn't). They spit it out instead.

And despite their utter refusal to learn, they still have a vote.
Please...

Our founding fathers decided to make the black vote 3/5ths the white vote. Comes a point already, what we can and should learn about what our founding fathers decided back in their day and time and the reasons they decided what they did. There is much to learn about what made sense then and/or today in light of those lessons.

As I think Jefferson was also trying to teach by way of that quote, we also need to think for ourselves like they did, to address the issues of our times, like they did. Ideally with sound reason and logic, like they did...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 12:08 PM
 
Location: Morrison, CO
34,230 posts, read 18,569,634 times
Reputation: 25799
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenFresno View Post
Its far easier to put restrictions on an inanimate object then to try and reform human behavior. There are plenty of crazy, violent, and criminally people in Europe just like here. What makes our situation 10 times worse is that "those people" have easy access to very dangerous weapons. There is a reason you can't buy military hardware like tanks and howitzers, or industrial grade acids or explosives. We know that if those items fall into the wrong hands it can be used to kill lots of people. This line of thinking needs to extend to include assault rifles and various semi-autos.
So the gun bans in France stopped the terrorist massacre in Paris, where illegally obtained, full auto AK-47's were used? All gun bans do is keep firearms away from the law abiding, and puts them more at risk.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 12:13 PM
 
Location: Florida
23,795 posts, read 13,255,806 times
Reputation: 19952
Well, it is certainly too late for those killed in Vegas. But we have to start somewhere, or there will be many more for whom it is too late.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 12:17 PM
 
Location: San Jose
2,594 posts, read 1,240,536 times
Reputation: 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post
April 19, 1995 - 168 people killed, more than 650 injured in Oklahoma City by truck bomb made of ammonium nitrate fertilizer, nitromethane, and diesel fuel mixture.
Yet he didn't use dynamite which would have been much more convenient. Probably because he couldn't get a hold of any. Which is my point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 12:21 PM
 
Location: San Diego
18,724 posts, read 7,602,949 times
Reputation: 14996
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
Our founding fathers decided to make the black vote 3/5ths the white vote.
And that travesty (adopted as a compromise to get recalcitrant southern Democrats to accept the Constitution at all) was since changed to give blacks the full vote as they deserved, using the exact amendment process I recommended. After we fought the bloodiest war our country's soil has ever seen, against those same southern Democrats mostly over the same topic (black slavery), to beat the common sense and humanity into them that they had previously lacked.

The Founding Fathers weren't perfect, and they knew it. That's why they included the amendment process into what they wrote, giving later people a way to change it with the least chance of a few fanatics making unwanted changes. The FF's believed (and were correct) that the Const should only be changed by a supermajority of a very large and diverse group of population. And this has kept one of the most important and relevant parts of the document - the 2nd amendment - from being changed by a relatively small number of hysterical demagogues pushing an agenda that has failed time and again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 12:23 PM
 
3,841 posts, read 1,978,144 times
Reputation: 1906
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenFresno View Post
Yet he didn't use dynamite which would have been much more convenient. Probably because he couldn't get a hold of any. Which is my point.
I thought he had explosives in his car and home? No?
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.

© 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