Page 8 of 12 [ 191 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,754
Location: Australia

07 Jun 2022, 9:31 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
Mental health initiatives! Obvious!


Mental health issues that are often caused by psychological and physical trauma.

Bullying seems to be a major contributing factor in these mass shootings.
Ramos was said to have been bullied due to his speech impediment by his peers, and he also had a poor upbringing at home.

It seems that he was made into a sociopath by his general environment in addition to electronic harassment, imo.
The perfect "patsy" for the war against gun ownership in AAmuria.

The puppets get vilified, but the puppet masters are rewarded for their inhumanity.
A charming system, you humans have. 8)


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,



Also, as George Carlin said, "I have no stake in the outcome." I'll stick around for the comedy.

"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet."
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)
Read my lips:-I am not a fan of the orange man.-I would never vote for the Republican party given the chance.-I am interested in being objective and rational.


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,754
Location: Australia

07 Jun 2022, 9:35 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
We have to do SOMETHING.....don't you think?


Perhaps focusing on mental health is a better "something/k".


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,



Also, as George Carlin said, "I have no stake in the outcome." I'll stick around for the comedy.

"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet."
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)
Read my lips:-I am not a fan of the orange man.-I would never vote for the Republican party given the chance.-I am interested in being objective and rational.


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,754
Location: Australia

07 Jun 2022, 9:42 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
Yep.....PEOPLE are the problem; obviously, you can't blame the gun....guns are carried by PEOPLE.


"Soylent Green" is PEOPLE!, btw.
I couldn't resist, sorry. :mrgreen:



"Laughter is the best medicine." 8)

Also:
"The people, the people."



Once again, mental illness must have priority, imo. 8)


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,



Also, as George Carlin said, "I have no stake in the outcome." I'll stick around for the comedy.

"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet."
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)
Read my lips:-I am not a fan of the orange man.-I would never vote for the Republican party given the chance.-I am interested in being objective and rational.


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,754
Location: Australia

07 Jun 2022, 9:46 pm

Twilightprincess wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
Yep.....PEOPLE are the problem; obviously, you can't blame the gun....guns are carried by PEOPLE.


People are the problem but people aren’t going to change - not any time soon. Also, a gun in the hands of just a few can cause a lot of harm. Many are incapable of handling that responsibility appropriately.

There’s no practical reason why owning a gun is a good idea. Studies have indicated that they are more dangerous than helpful even when they are owned for protection.

This is just basic common sense.


Owning/driving a car is a health hazard.
Getting out of bed is a health hazard.
"Living" is a health hazard, period.

We should have been told before we were drafted into Stalag Earth. 8)


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,



Also, as George Carlin said, "I have no stake in the outcome." I'll stick around for the comedy.

"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet."
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)
Read my lips:-I am not a fan of the orange man.-I would never vote for the Republican party given the chance.-I am interested in being objective and rational.


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,754
Location: Australia

07 Jun 2022, 9:56 pm

Off Topic
aghogday wrote:
r00tb33r wrote:
The daily dose
Of verbal
Mushroom
Is upon us.

I'll be honest,
I don't bother reading
Too painful to look at.


That’s Really Sweet of You to Note;
Sadly in Terms of Empirical Data
That Comes From Views of
Registered Members Your
Admission Puts You

In A Small
Minority
On This
Website; So
Let’s Get Back

On Topic As It
Won’t Be The
First Time

Someone

Made it
All About me, Hehe.


I am dyslexic and have bad executive dysfunction, so I find your style too hard to read.
I have a simple solution that I recommend to anyone.
Skip over posts you aren't interested in or are too difficult to read.
Walls of type are a problem for people like me, also. I recommend shorter paragraphs.


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,



Also, as George Carlin said, "I have no stake in the outcome." I'll stick around for the comedy.

"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet."
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)
Read my lips:-I am not a fan of the orange man.-I would never vote for the Republican party given the chance.-I am interested in being objective and rational.


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,018
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Jun 2022, 10:29 pm

Pepe wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
I wonder if the Founding Fathers (i.e., those who formulated the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights) would have believed that everybody had the right to own assault weapons that fire more than 10 rounds at a time before reloading. Of course, this is purely speculation because, in 1790, there were no such thing as guns which could fire even multiple rounds at a time. But I would hazard a guess that they wouldn't have been happy with a general populace who owned such weapons.


I am not that sure about it.
Remember, the only reason Amurriia was able to become an independent nation was to bear arms against a tyrannical English government.

To think that the Amurriiann forefathers didn't have the idea of overthrowing a despotic government, if necessary sometime in the future, is a little naive, imo.
The constitution is "for the people", not the government. ;)

kraftiekortie wrote:
The "Right to Bear Arms" (the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights) was something that was essential in 1790, but is really not so essential nowadays. Context of the Times.
I'm certainly not advocating taking away ALL guns from people----I'm advocating banning guns which have the capability to fire more than 10 rounds at a time before reloading.


As I have said a number of times, I agree with Biden.
Or rather, Biden agrees with me.
There needs to be a change in the gun laws to mitigate the human tragedy caused by these "Black Operations" designed to disarm the Amuriiian citizenty.

kraftiekortie wrote:
Obviously, the availability of a gun makes attempts at suicide more likely to be "successful."


As I have said, this is beyond the scope of the context of my thread, but I appreciate any input in this discussion. :wink:


While there had been independent militias made up of armed citizens, most of the fighting had been done by the Continental Army, which was in fact a professional fighting force, armed and equipped by the Continental Congress. There had in fact been armed uprisings against the early American government on the charge that it had become tyrannical, but the founding fathers had put them down with the government's military might.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


r00tb33r
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2016
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,433
Location: Virginia

07 Jun 2022, 10:41 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
So we're supposed to do nothing because the weasels and rats who run the gun companies find their sh*tty ways of sneaking around regulations and laws?

Isn't that what all businesses do?

Okay, so what's the corrective action? Keep it constructive.


_________________
I've reached the end.


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,754
Location: Australia

07 Jun 2022, 10:43 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Pepe wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
I wonder if the Founding Fathers (i.e., those who formulated the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights) would have believed that everybody had the right to own assault weapons that fire more than 10 rounds at a time before reloading. Of course, this is purely speculation because, in 1790, there were no such thing as guns which could fire even multiple rounds at a time. But I would hazard a guess that they wouldn't have been happy with a general populace who owned such weapons.


I am not that sure about it.
Remember, the only reason Amurriia was able to become an independent nation was to bear arms against a tyrannical English government.

To think that the Amurriiann forefathers didn't have the idea of overthrowing a despotic government, if necessary sometime in the future, is a little naive, imo.
The constitution is "for the people", not the government. ;)

kraftiekortie wrote:
The "Right to Bear Arms" (the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights) was something that was essential in 1790, but is really not so essential nowadays. Context of the Times.
I'm certainly not advocating taking away ALL guns from people----I'm advocating banning guns which have the capability to fire more than 10 rounds at a time before reloading.


As I have said a number of times, I agree with Biden.
Or rather, Biden agrees with me.
There needs to be a change in the gun laws to mitigate the human tragedy caused by these "Black Operations" designed to disarm the Amuriiian citizenty.

kraftiekortie wrote:
Obviously, the availability of a gun makes attempts at suicide more likely to be "successful."


As I have said, this is beyond the scope of the context of my thread, but I appreciate any input in this discussion. :wink:


While there had been independent militias made up of armed citizens, most of the fighting had been done by the Continental Army, which was in fact a professional fighting force, armed and equipped by the Continental Congress. There had in fact been armed uprisings against the early American government on the charge that it had become tyrannical, but the founding fathers had put them down with the government's military might.


Presumably, after the revolution had started.


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,



Also, as George Carlin said, "I have no stake in the outcome." I'll stick around for the comedy.

"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet."
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)
Read my lips:-I am not a fan of the orange man.-I would never vote for the Republican party given the chance.-I am interested in being objective and rational.


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,018
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Jun 2022, 11:34 pm

Pepe wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Pepe wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
I wonder if the Founding Fathers (i.e., those who formulated the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights) would have believed that everybody had the right to own assault weapons that fire more than 10 rounds at a time before reloading. Of course, this is purely speculation because, in 1790, there were no such thing as guns which could fire even multiple rounds at a time. But I would hazard a guess that they wouldn't have been happy with a general populace who owned such weapons.


I am not that sure about it.
Remember, the only reason Amurriia was able to become an independent nation was to bear arms against a tyrannical English government.

To think that the Amurriiann forefathers didn't have the idea of overthrowing a despotic government, if necessary sometime in the future, is a little naive, imo.
The constitution is "for the people", not the government. ;)

kraftiekortie wrote:
The "Right to Bear Arms" (the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights) was something that was essential in 1790, but is really not so essential nowadays. Context of the Times.
I'm certainly not advocating taking away ALL guns from people----I'm advocating banning guns which have the capability to fire more than 10 rounds at a time before reloading.


As I have said a number of times, I agree with Biden.
Or rather, Biden agrees with me.
There needs to be a change in the gun laws to mitigate the human tragedy caused by these "Black Operations" designed to disarm the Amuriiian citizenty.

kraftiekortie wrote:
Obviously, the availability of a gun makes attempts at suicide more likely to be "successful."


As I have said, this is beyond the scope of the context of my thread, but I appreciate any input in this discussion. :wink:


While there had been independent militias made up of armed citizens, most of the fighting had been done by the Continental Army, which was in fact a professional fighting force, armed and equipped by the Continental Congress. There had in fact been armed uprisings against the early American government on the charge that it had become tyrannical, but the founding fathers had put them down with the government's military might.


Presumably, after the revolution had started.


Yes, after the Revolution.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,018
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Jun 2022, 11:38 pm

r00tb33r wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
So we're supposed to do nothing because the weasels and rats who run the gun companies find their sh*tty ways of sneaking around regulations and laws?

Isn't that what all businesses do?

Okay, so what's the corrective action? Keep it constructive.


Coming from a union household I tend to see business as a necessary evil, so I'm not willing to let business off the hook because it's something they just do.
How have other countries banned assault riffles? Let's emulate their legislation.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,822

08 Jun 2022, 9:36 am

Pepe wrote:
Off Topic
....




i Understand the Dyslexia issue; Yet on the Other Hand, Grade
School Kids Have no Difficulty With my Style of Writing; in Fact,

i Often Receive Poems Dedicated To the Value of the Unique Style AND Deeper Than usual Substance;
Almost Always by Women; Yet That's the Way my life goes, hehe, FOR REAL. There Are Different Ways

in Viewing/Feeling the World, Indeed.

Obviously, A Weak Attempt
at A Personal Attack
in this case; of Course
Quelled
By
Empirical Data;

Some Folks Are Afraid
of Different, Others Are Not; i For one am not.

Now Back to the Topic At Hand and Specifically as that Relates
To Cognitive Executive Functioning For What it Takes to get the General
Public's Attention Span Long Enough to Get Enough Support, Even at Highest Levels for Effective Change:

"That pair of green Converse sneakers, being held on her knees by Matthew McConaughey’s wife
Camila as he spoke with searing passion at the White House about the Uvalde school massacre.

The simple hand-drawn black heart above the big toe on the right foot shoe.

They belonged to Maite Rodriquez, a 9-year-old girl who was annihilated so
horrendously in her classroom that the distinctive sneakers were the only way

anyone could identify her afterward."

Obviously Not Everyone Is Moved Through Heart Strings; Yet Commonly Humans
Are. And Interestingly, Science Shows That the Failure of Cognitive Executive Functioning

At Core is A Failure of Emotional Intelligence in Terms of Regulating Emotions And Integrating
Senses; And Indeed, Generally Speaking That Takes Males Longer Than Females As an 18 Year-
Old Boy is More Likely to Go off Unhinged And Do Something FOOLISH Unless There is Some Barrier

to What May Destroy
His Life or Someone
Else's Life or Lives;

Ranging From Vehicular
Manslaughter, Driving Recklessly,
Through The Extreme of Slaughtering

20 or So Elementary Kids for Sport By
Impulsively Purchasing a Weapon of Mass Death,
Easy As Candy to Buy for A Child at the 'Five and Dime.'

Levels of Human Emotional Intelligence As that Applies to
The Resource of Human Empathy have Fallen Substantially Among
Younger Generations, Since the Advent of the Mechanical Cognition of

Electric Devices
Replacing

Human

Kind;

What this Means is That Realistically
Humans Are Less 'Human' Than They
Were Before, When Face to Face Contact
Was the Way they interacted And Increased
Human Emotional Intelligence With Empathy for Others of Course.

For Instance, A Human With Empathy Does't Personally Attack Someone
Who is Different Just For the Sport of it; as i've often Seen that Happen on
This Internet Site by those Who Show Little Empathy for Other Human Beings Who Are Different.

Yet Location Counts; That's A Major Scientific Reality of Difficulty For Folks on the Autism Spectrum to Be
Expected of Course; So it Doesn't Phase me as i always consider the Source as i for one am Neither Deficient

in Emotional Intelligence or Human Empathy, Stronger Than Ever This Way; And in Fact, With GREATER Cognitive
Executive Functioning in Terms of Laser Focus, Short Term Working Memory, And Long Term Memory as Well;

Sadly, Folks Who Don't Work On Their Emotional Intelligence And Human Empathy Have more Problems with
Cognitive Executive Functioning As That Applies to All Areas of Human Potential in living A Successful Happy

Life with or
Without a
Whole Lot
of Material Goods
and Monetary Resources.

We LiVE iN a Different World
Than When These Weapons of
Mass Death Were First Available For Sell to the General Public.

And what This Means is We Must Make Adjustments to Insure
Greater Safety With the Fewest Limitations on Human freedoms too.

The FACT OF THE MATTER IS HUMANS OVERALL WHO HAVE LOWER LEVELS
OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE ARE MORE LIKELY TO HARM OTHERS IN EVERY WAY.

THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS SINCE THE ADVENT OF THE SO-CALLED COMPUTER AGE;
HUMANS HAVE LOWER LEVELS OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE INCLUDING EMPATHY FOR OTHERS;

WHEN HUMANS
ARE LESS HUMAN
THIS WAY; it's like a 'Mental

Institution Overall'; You take away the
Pointy objects And You Sure As Hell Don't

Provide Weapons of Mass Death at the 'Local Five and Dime'...

Particularly for Young Males Who have always Had more Problems
With Emotional Intelligence And Empathy for others, Only Compounded
With Interest in Killing Games Every Day And Loss of Human Connection

For What
it even
Means
to Be A Human Being;

Indeed, it takes a Perfect
Storm of 'Real Evil' For Something
As Horrid in Humanity of this Nature to Occur;

And Indeed, it takes Practically An 'Academy Award'
Performance by A Life-Long Paid Actor to Frigging Get

The Attention Span of Human Beings Lost From Emotional
Intelligence Where Science Shows the Average Human Attention
Span now is less that A Gold Fish; Yep Less Than 3 Seconds; Not

Everyone

has this issue,'

in Fact Some Folks
on the Autism Spectrum
And Obviously Some of the
Hundreds of Thousands of Views

Who Read me Have Laser Focus And
Attention Spans for Complexity that make

Them Every Bit as Neuro-Diverse in A World
Dulling

Less
Human
in Every
Way of Human Potential.

Raising the Age to 21, for
the Purchase of Weapons of
Mass Death is Indeed A 'No-Brainer'

For Anyone Left With Any Human 'Common Feel'...

And For Those Who Are Against it, 'A Common Thread' is often 'Cold'...

And Even Among The General Public, it Takes An Academy Award Winning

Performance to Even Get Their Attention of the Blood and Guts Spilled on 'The Big or Small Tube'....

Science Shows That Most All
Our Rational Decisions Are
Moved By A Synergy of
Feelings And Senses
By Emotions We Feel First;

Overall, A Human Species
Without Emotional Intelligence
And Empathy is on the Highway
to Real Hell in Every Way; Trump
As President and the Support That He
And His Ilk Still Receive; All These Mass
Shootings With Domestic Terrorism, Far Exceeding

Any Threat Outside our Borders

Is Surely Even More Evidence

For What Science Already

Suggests is Watering
Down the Human
Condition and
Potential for
Survival And Thriving
With Human Happiness Even More...

Look Around And See the Gnashing of Teeth
And Wailing As Folks Strike Out in Addictions
to Anger and Hate of Different Just to Attempt to
Fill the 'Empty Feel' Within That YES the Adrenaline
And Dopamine That REAL ADDICTIONS TO ANGER AND HATE BRING,

Ranging from an Anonymous Avatar on the Internet Attacking someone
Who Communicates Differently to A Mass Shooting That Kills Little Kids for no

Reason Other
Now Than An

Addiction

To Anger and Hate

Anger And Hate

Anger And Hate

All The Vengeance THAT
Brings So Cold So Very Far Away From Victory

With Every Heaven Associated With Love Real And True
Giving, Sharing, Caring, And Healing For All Concerned With Least Harm.



_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,009
Location: Over there

08 Jun 2022, 9:47 am

r00tb33r wrote:
It offers no explanation of what changed about the society for the shootings to become a problem it is today. Guns have been around as long as our country has.
I wasn't aware I was (1) expected to produce a solution or (2) accept another "yeah, but" justification from yourself but hey, that's part of the joy of online forums. Or something.
Quote:
You've been asked before demonstrate a constructive proposition on how a ban can be implemented. You have not produced anything.
So? Does that mean we all pack up and go home, accepting that the slaughter must continue because: no proposition?

I said earlier that I have no solution and from what I've seen, neither do you - but as someone far more involved than I ever would be I'd guess that should put you in a more knowledgeable position?
So what's your solution?

r00tb33r wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
We have to do SOMETHING.....don't you think?

So you'd feel good knowing you did SOMETHING, even though you could have done SOMETHING else, and better?

You're not focusing on the root of the problem -- people.
Ah, back to the "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument.

It hardly seems necessary to acknowledge it but here ya go anyway: I concede the obvious and irrelevant point - people do kill people. And so do nukes, machetes, grenades, knives and fists.
The fact that, like guns, all of those tools require some sort of human action to function isn’t an argument against restrictions on their use. This is especially so for guns which, unlike fists and knives, enable one person to slaughter others with a brutal efficiency that the second amendment couldn't possibly be expected to cover.

The "guns don’t kill people" argument is flawed because it sidesteps the debate. The issue is not whether guns can spontaneously kill people on their own - it involves how incredibly easy a modern weapon makes killing.

Unlike knives, guns allow untrained individuals to inflict damage quickly and from a distance. Imagine the level of damage Stephen Paddock would have inflicted in Las Vegas if he’d only had access to knives. That massacre simply wouldn’t have been possible. And Adam Lanza’s 2013 rampage would have ended with a rate of survival more like other knife-related incidents instead of the slaughter it was.

People kill people, and guns make that killing easier. While knives often wound and sometimes kill, guns often kill. Efficiently. It's way past the time to end inane word games.


Tell this guy why it's important for 18-year old kids, untrained, unregulated, to go out and buy an AR-15 -

[BBC] Matthew McConaughey brings dead girl's shoes to White House
Yes, it's an appeal to emotion - I don't care.
(full video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kr5sOakr9l0)

I'm not anti-gun, I'm pro-kindergartner.

A complete ban on guns would be unconstitutional and excessive.
But there should be basic, rational gun control laws that limit the amount of bullets in a clip, constrict access to semi-automatic rifles, require effective but fair psychological screening, and so on.

No, I'm not going to get drawn into distracting rabbit-holes about specifications - there are people who know far more about these weapons than I ever will and it's up to them to construct some way of reducing this killing.
At the moment it all seems to be "thoughts and prayers".


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,009
Location: Over there

08 Jun 2022, 9:59 am

Pepe wrote:
As I said, if someone is serious about suicide, not having a gun isn't going to stop them.
But it would have likely gone a long way in reducing the 45,222 total gun deaths as in 2020 (see earlier), don't you think?

Quote:
The overwhelming concern about guns in Amurrriia is due to mass shootings.
If it wasn't for these tragedies, there wouldn't be a gun debate. ;)
Duh, yes. What's your point here?

Pepe wrote:
Owning/driving a car is a health hazard.
Potentially, yes: in the wrong hands it's undoubtedly a mobile death machine.

And yet consider all the legislation designed to help mitigate this: someone must be trained and examined to prove they are capable of handling it responsibly. There are probably thousands of restrictions on car usage: speed controls, unsafe mechanical condition (the UK subjects cars over a certain age to a mandatory fitness exam every three years - Australia has something similar), restrictions on the type of vehicle that may be driven according to the license, restrictions on the use to which the car is put, seatbelts, drunk/drug driving, and so on.

Yes, to state the obvious - all that isn't going to stop someone with a murderous intent yada, yada.
But why is this legislation acceptable, with much of it common-sense and governing a contraption considerably slower and less destructive than high powered, rapid firing guns operating at a distance - but anything similar for guns is not?


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


r00tb33r
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2016
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,433
Location: Virginia

08 Jun 2022, 12:07 pm

Cornflake wrote:
slower and less destructive than high powered, rapid firing

What's "rapid firing"?
And what's "slower"?

Please explain.


_________________
I've reached the end.


Persephone29
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,879
Location: Everville

08 Jun 2022, 8:29 pm

magz wrote:
Persephone29 wrote:
The people who want to own assault rifles feel they are at a better advantage should the government decide to overstep their bounds.
Can you give me a possibly recent example of governments overstepping people's bonds in a way in which a private assault rifle would help?
My current observations on governments overstepping people's bonds - apart from foreign ones, in form of invasion - is that they use tight grip on media and mess up with judicary system and other mechanisms up on the top of the state, way away from regular citizens.
Starting a civil war is not a way to adress it, it's a way to make things SHTF worse.


The Revolutionary War. The British government passed the Quartering Act and soldiers routinely took over the homes of the American Colonists, took their food, made them cook for them, stole their livestock, and so on. It's not 'last year' but it's still relatively recent in terms of History. Only naive individuals will forget that not only is this possible, but it's a fairly common war practice as recent as WWII, when German soldiers did the same thing in Europe.

I do not trust my government, I do not trust any government. I trust ME and that's it.

* added aside: We are preppers and I have had members ON THIS SITE smugly remind me that the government would take all of our supplies should the need arise. We don't keep them with us, we store them where they will not be associated with us. So, there are people on the Left who fully understand that this is a possibility. THAT is why 'A-murrica' will never give up her guns.


_________________
Disagreeing with you doesn't mean I hate you, it just means we disagree.


Last edited by Persephone29 on 08 Jun 2022, 8:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ShaggyPlays
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

Joined: 16 Jun 2017
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 26

08 Jun 2022, 8:44 pm

Logic feels lost these days, politicians think less doors is a solution for example. People don't wanna ban guns, but they also don't want to take responsibility either. They don't want to have to train, or have any restrictions on what guns they can use. They claim gun laws won't work because criminals exist as if that is justification when, by that logic why have laws at all, why not just go full on anarchy? They claim gun laws don't work because shootings happen where strict gun laws are in place, completely ignoring the fact that if laws aren't at a federal level you can just buy guns elsewhere. People don't want the government to affect their rights, but are fine with affecting the rights of their children. They don't want to feel like the government is controlling them while supporting "solutions" that just change who is the one being controlled.

No solution will be perfect, and any real solution will probably have people from both sides complaining. If a solution arises that works and both sides still have issues with it, then maybe that solution is what we need. I am by no means an expert in law, or statistical analysis, or anything that would give me insight into what a solution might be. I will say that maybe we should look at other countries like Sweden, Switzerland, New Zealand, Australia, and all the other countries that have had similar issues drastically reduced and see if we can learn something from them. There must be compromise, whether that means mandatory training/licensing laws, or heavy restrictions on what you can buy. If we are going to have a 2nd amendment we can't be as irresponsible as we have been.