Gun control debate (merged)

#27,876
#27,876
luthervol said:
First, people are going to have their individual rights infringed upon for the good of society. It simply must be that way. Just as society will make sacrifices for the sake of individual rights. It's a balancing act.

Second, there is no way of identifying would be shooters without miss-identifying even more. But that may be a price we simply must be willing to pay. I do believe their should be certain online content that is immediately flagged. Just like many people are legally mandatory reporters, companies offering online content should be mandatory reporters.
Click to expand...
our nation absolutely jails (pre conviction) more people incorrectly than are killed by guns. I would have to find the numbers again but I am pretty sure that holds up for prison too (post conviction)

if you believe we have a criminal justice problem that needs reforming, jailing more people should not be an option for anything you push.

lets go ahead and jail all the muslims, they might be terrorists, and its better to go ahead and jail them than risk a terror attack.
lets go ahead and jail all the latinos, they might be in cartel's, and its better to go ahead and jail them than risk drugs and human trafficking.
lets go ahead and jail all white people, they might be KKK/Nazis, and its better to go ahead and jail them than risk hate crimes and lynching.
lets go ahead and jail all asians, they might be Chinese police arresting people on US soil, and its better to go ahead and jail them than risk our safety to a foreign nation.

Its always fascinating to me how you are willing to flip what you are comfortable with based purely on if you agree with it or not.

what should be reported? A picture of you and a gun out in the woods? Maybe a picture of you and a target you shot? Maybe a post about having a good time at the gun range? Maybe you like a picture of someone else with a gun? Maybe you follow someone who posts gun related content? What happens if you subscribe to someone, watch one of their videos, years later they post something that triggers Big Brother behind the painting? given your, and the politicians, struggles with understanding the basic functioning of a gun, I shudder what will happen when you throw in the completely subjective world of online posting.

as I keep saying this isn't a 2A issue. you are now throwing the 1A and 6A under the bus. this is after you have gotten rid of the 4th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and the 14th. keep goose stepping your way towards those windmills.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#27,877
#27,877
luthervol said:
I'm not sure what you're getting at. What are you saying about Japan and sarin gas?
Click to expand...
His statement was “Japan had a sarin gas attack 20 years ago”. The implication being that was the only time Japan has had issues with horrific mass attacks.

That’s not even the last time gas was used. But that’s not really the point.

The point was that other areas of the world struggle with mass attack as well. The methods certainly differ though. Everyone knows the preferred method here.
 
#27,880
#27,880
C-south said:
It’s designed to fire a round. That could be shooting paper, steel, a can, hunting, or your self defense or the defense of others. No gun sold to the public is built with the intent to be used to kill anyone.
Click to expand...
That's what I used to always say but all the gun nuts on here went ape sh!t over the fact that guns were specifically designed to kill people. I guess you can make an argument that their intended use does not align with their specific design.
 
#27,881
#27,881
LouderVol said:
Yes they were, in just the same way a gun is. as designed, and if working properly all of them, including guns, will kill someone.

you point an SUV at a person and drive at them you will kill them. it was designed to be big/fast/strong enough where it will kill people. there are absolutely no built in safety features to protect someone the SUV is hitting.
you stab someone with a knife, it will kill them. they were designed to be able to cut/pierce/slice things. there are absolutely no built in safety features to protect someone being stabbed.
a book of matches were designed to be an easily portable source of fire. you point that fire at someone, and yes you will kill them. there is absolutely no built in safety feature to protect someone from being burned.

As designed they are all designed to kill. the only difference is the marketing and media portrayal.
Click to expand...
Please.

That doesn't even warrant a response.
 
#27,882
#27,882
loggervol said:
This is where we come to an impasse. I cannot in good faith rely on law enforcement to be at the right place at the right time, every time. And, I cannot rely on government to make the right decisions for me and my family when I may have to protect my family from someone that would do us harm.

When government start taking away rights, where do they stop. A surveillance state is not the right way. I don’t want to live in a communist government and l would think no matter how corrupted someone’s mind is, they should feel the same.
Click to expand...
That's precisely why I have ALWAYS advocated for a person's right to own a gun for self defense.
 
#27,883
#27,883
LouderVol said:
our nation absolutely jails (pre conviction) more people incorrectly than are killed by guns. I would have to find the numbers again but I am pretty sure that holds up for prison too (post conviction)

if you believe we have a criminal justice problem that needs reforming, jailing more people should not be an option for anything you push.

lets go ahead and jail all the muslims, they might be terrorists, and its better to go ahead and jail them than risk a terror attack.
lets go ahead and jail all the latinos, they might be in cartel's, and its better to go ahead and jail them than risk drugs and human trafficking.
lets go ahead and jail all white people, they might be KKK/Nazis, and its better to go ahead and jail them than risk hate crimes and lynching.
lets go ahead and jail all asians, they might be Chinese police arresting people on US soil, and its better to go ahead and jail them than risk our safety to a foreign nation.

Its always fascinating to me how you are willing to flip what you are comfortable with based purely on if you agree with it or not.

what should be reported? A picture of you and a gun out in the woods? Maybe a picture of you and a target you shot? Maybe a post about having a good time at the gun range? Maybe you like a picture of someone else with a gun? Maybe you follow someone who posts gun related content? What happens if you subscribe to someone, watch one of their videos, years later they post something that triggers Big Brother behind the painting? given your, and the politicians, struggles with understanding the basic functioning of a gun, I shudder what will happen when you throw in the completely subjective world of online posting.

as I keep saying this isn't a 2A issue. you are now throwing the 1A and 6A under the bus. this is after you have gotten rid of the 4th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and the 14th. keep goose stepping your way towards those windmills.
Click to expand...
I guess you must have completed misunderstood my post. I didn't say anything about jailing anyone.
 
#27,884
#27,884
85SugarVol said:
His statement was “Japan had a sarin gas attack 20 years ago”. The implication being that was the only time Japan has had issues with horrific mass attacks.

That’s not even the last time gas was used. But that’s not really the point.

The point was that other areas of the world struggle with mass attack as well. The methods certainly differ though. Everyone knows the preferred method here.
Click to expand...
I think his point was that Japan's struggles with mass attacks are not even in the same universe as are the US's struggles.
 
#27,885
#27,885
luthervol said:
That's what I used to always say but all the gun nuts on here went ape sh!t over the fact that guns were specifically designed to kill people. I guess you can make an argument that their intended use does not align with their specific design.
Click to expand...

Of all the gun owners on this board I’m going to go out on a limb and say none of them have ever used a firearm to kill anyone yet I bet they have probably fired every gun they own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83 and InVOLuntary
#27,886
#27,886
C-south said:
Of all the gun owners on this board I’m going to go out on a limb and say none of them have ever used a firearm to kill anyone yet I bet they have probably fired every gun they own.
Click to expand...
I would make the same assumption. What's your point? That has nothing to do with what a gun was specifically designed for.
 
#27,887
#27,887
luthervol said:
That's precisely why I have ALWAYS advocated for a person's right to own a gun for self defense.
Click to expand...
But, you think there should be a limit to what gun I think is the most sufficient way to protect myself and family. And, I’m sure you think there should be a limit on where I use my firearm for protection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#27,894
#27,894
C-south said:
To fire a round at a target?
Click to expand...
C-south said:
All guns are designed to kill people. The 2A was founded on the premise to kill people whether it be in self defense, the defense of others, or fighting the government. Owning a pool or a car isn’t a fundamental right guaranteed by the constitution hence they should be much easier to ban.
Click to expand...

Maybe your own words will "trigger" your memory.
 
#27,895
#27,895
LouderVol said:
what happens when people don't turn over their guns?
Click to expand...
That's one of the many problems. What does happen? Warn their employers? Put them on a high risk watch list? Monitor their movements and communications? There is no easy answer for what to do when someone is identified as a potential mass shooter.
Any suggestions on your end?
 
#27,896
#27,896
luthervol said:
That's one of the many problems. What does happen? Warn their employers? Put them on a high risk watch list? Monitor their movements and communications? There is no easy answer for what to do when someone is identified as a potential mass shooter.
Any suggestions on your end?
Click to expand...

So you’re willing to make criminals out of law abiding citizens. SMH
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#27,898
#27,898
luthervol said:
That's one of the many problems. What does happen? Warn their employers? Put them on a high risk watch list? Monitor their movements and communications? There is no easy answer for what to do when someone is identified as a potential mass shooter.
Any suggestions on your end?
Click to expand...
Luther, the next time you're on the phone, say the words "dirty bomb" to see if anyone is listening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol and InVOLuntary
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top