|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On March 01 2018 03:33 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 03:20 brian wrote:On March 01 2018 02:48 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 01 2018 02:32 brian wrote:
it’s not a compelling enough argument when it comes to the drinking age, i can’t see why it should be more compelling here. Not sure what you mean, but again, drinking is something you don't have to be 21 to do and in several states your parent can buy you a drink at a restaurant/give it to you on private property or in Texas you can just buy it yourself if they can see your parent/gaurdian. The only reason the drinking age was moved to 21 in many states in the first place was for access to federal money for interstates anyway. On March 01 2018 02:37 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 02:32 brian wrote:
it’s not a compelling enough argument when it comes to the drinking age, i can’t see why it should be more compelling here. Or licencing for commercial trucks. My brother could drive 20 ton heavy equipment truck at AIT training at age 19, but still had to get his commercial driver’s license like every other person with no special expectations. The test was just easier for him to pass. Commercial truck licensing would be more akin to a CCW or something, not simply buying a gun. With that you're getting into all sorts of union and other stuff though so it falls apart in more than one way. yes, so in both instances the minor would not be able to buy something they typically would be able to while deployed//irrespective of their ability to enlist. depending on which side of the argument you’d prefer. in neither instance is the argument compelling. and your argument in this last post about arbitrary age limits is similarly not compelling for all the same reasons it’s not compelling for every other life experience that comes with an arbitrary age delineation. I think you guys might have a compelling argument for possessing a gun in public but the arguments are compelling enough to render the federal drinking age more of a guideline in many states and allow kids under 16 to drive. My point is if I was selling my last gun and had to be responsible for what happened with it and I had a choice between a 19yo service member or any idiot over 21 I'd probably pick the service member (provided we gave them adequate mental healthcare) As it stands you guys would sell it to any idiot over 21, that strikes me as more ridiculous than not raising the age and requiring competency. Also another crazy idea, don't send armed people under 21 into warzones in the first place.
I don't think that's what people are saying.
You're going to need some kind of arbitrary line wether you want it or not. Yes, a 19year old who served for the military is probably more responsible than a random 21 year old guy but sucks to be him. You have to have the line somewhere. Wether that's 18, 21 or whatever else really is just a matter for discussion.
I'll agree that obviously just raising the age limit won't be what you need but you shouldn't abandon that idea just because it's senseless by itself. Yes some kind of proper check would be amazing and that would return that the 19year old is okay with a gun but that's a rather complex thing to do that a lot of people don't want to do because "omg, if you do that that leads to having to be registered. Having people with guns registered leads to the government raiding those people places at night to get rid of guns and we're in hell by monday because we're in some kind of dicatorship with everyone who once had a gun being targeted by the government!"
The agelimit should be the last check in line, perhaps the least important one but it should be a check nontheless imo because it's still better than not checking at all
|
I have no problems with gun safety classes before the issuance of concealed carry and open carry licenses. And like in past incidents, credible threats of physical violence/domestic violence is sufficient to abridge your right to purchase a gun for a period. If existing laws were followed and enforced by relevant agencies, a slough of recent tragedies would have been prevented. The latest news about the Sheriff’s department willing to pass on violent youth offenders to improve their stats really troubles me.
|
Shitty state police and sheriff’s departments should surprise no one, TBH. Especially in states where they are chronically underfunded. This is why communities and citizens need several options to report people that they think will commit violent acts.
|
Why would you then have problems with gun safety classes, in the military or otherwise, before the issuance of a hypothetical gun license?
|
I'm never sure if people are disagreeing with me out of reflex or what anymore, but what I'm saying is:
If you're picking a fight to reduce the guns in hands of people that shouldn't have them, rather than doing something somewhat silly like raising the age to buy long guns (which will provoke arguments like I suggested among others, particularly in hunting/military families), how about raising the frequency of responsible gun ownership that could actually prevent a significant number of gun deaths?
Or call me crazy for thinking informed/effective reforms (that already have republican/gun owner buy-in) are better than superficially driven age restrictions.
|
The question was asked broadly, not specifically directed at you. I don't know what you are talking about picking a fight.
Good regulation is better than bad regulation; a hypothetical gun license contigent on gun safety and competence, is better than complex age restrictions with exemptions for training, is better than superficially driven age restrictions, is better than none at all.
Would you disagree with that?
|
On March 01 2018 04:30 Plansix wrote:
Shitty state police and sheriff’s departments should surprise no one, TBH. Especially in states where they are chronically underfunded. This is why communities and citizens need several options to report people that they think will commit violent acts.
More people need to know that the stupid rules they want enacted are going to be enforced/filtered down by the same failures that could’ve used last years gun laws to stop recent mass shooting events.
Millions of gun owners wonder why the mob is coming for their rifles. Frankly, the GTFO response is becoming saner and saner with every new iteration ... the CNN town hall with a howling arena shouting at Rubio to ban all semiautomatic rifles as a perfect example.
|
My state requires fire arms training before buying a long arm and further licensing to buy a hand gun. None of it is that burdensome. It much hard to get a driver’s license.
|
You know danglars, if you have an argument to make, perhaps you shouldn't go on your US pol style rant, and make an argument instead?
|
On March 01 2018 05:16 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 04:30 Plansix wrote:
Shitty state police and sheriff’s departments should surprise no one, TBH. Especially in states where they are chronically underfunded. This is why communities and citizens need several options to report people that they think will commit violent acts. More people need to know that the stupid rules they want enacted are going to be enforced/filtered down by the same failures that could’ve used last years gun laws to stop recent mass shooting events. Millions of gun owners wonder why the mob is coming for their rifles. Frankly, the GTFO response is becoming saner and saner with every new iteration ... the CNN town hall with a howling arena shouting at Rubio to ban all semiautomatic rifles as a perfect example.
As former educator, right back at you. Gun owners should stay in their lane and not talk about arming teachers or other things they have no idea about. It makes ya’ll look stupid And from someone who is licensed to own a gun, I am not frustrated at all by the debates on CNN or anyplace else. This issue has been left festering for 20+ years and both gun owners and gun control advocates are feed up with the inaction.
|
On March 01 2018 05:18 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
You know danglars, if you have an argument to make, perhaps you shouldn't go on your US pol style rant, and make an argument instead?
Leave the in-thread moderating for zlefin or website feedback.
|
On March 01 2018 05:27 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 05:16 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 04:30 Plansix wrote:
Shitty state police and sheriff’s departments should surprise no one, TBH. Especially in states where they are chronically underfunded. This is why communities and citizens need several options to report people that they think will commit violent acts. More people need to know that the stupid rules they want enacted are going to be enforced/filtered down by the same failures that could’ve used last years gun laws to stop recent mass shooting events. Millions of gun owners wonder why the mob is coming for their rifles. Frankly, the GTFO response is becoming saner and saner with every new iteration ... the CNN town hall with a howling arena shouting at Rubio to ban all semiautomatic rifles as a perfect example. As former educator, right back at you. Gun owners should stay in their lane and not talk about arming teachers or other things they have no idea about. It makes ya’ll look stupid And from someone who is licensed to own a gun, I am not frustrated at all by the debates on CNN or anyplace else. This issue has been left festering for 20+ years and both gun owners and gun control advocates are feed up with the inaction.
If you’re fed up with inaction, make sure you’re clear that you’re really fed up with lack of action that qualifies according to your definitions. Hardening up the soft targets of gun-free zones are absolutely part of the discussion. If this is sheriff/police or volunteer teachers ... concealed carry or gun lockers ... or simply training for existing SRO’s ... that is action.
|
On March 01 2018 05:51 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 05:18 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
You know danglars, if you have an argument to make, perhaps you shouldn't go on your US pol style rant, and make an argument instead? Leave the in-thread moderating for zlefin or website feedback.
A strange turn of phrase to say i am in-thread moderating. I don't see how your crazy rant about mobs coming for your rifles and CNN is related to plansix's post at all, except that appears to be your general modus operandi.
|
On March 01 2018 06:06 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 05:51 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 05:18 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
You know danglars, if you have an argument to make, perhaps you shouldn't go on your US pol style rant, and make an argument instead? Leave the in-thread moderating for zlefin or website feedback. A strange turn of phrase to say i am in-thread moderating. I don't see how your crazy rant about mobs coming for your rifles and CNN is related to plansix's post at all, except that appears to be your general modus operandi.
Then report or PM me. I’m discussing how rational the current reaction from gun owners is to these mob-style emotional demands and political inventive. If you missed the CNN town hall or simply turn a blind eye to certain elements of your own side, or course it will sound ranty. Just be prepared to miss the boat on discussion topics: such as why it’s unlikely any major legislation will succeed on this issue in the coming months.
|
On March 01 2018 06:03 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 05:27 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 05:16 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 04:30 Plansix wrote:
Shitty state police and sheriff’s departments should surprise no one, TBH. Especially in states where they are chronically underfunded. This is why communities and citizens need several options to report people that they think will commit violent acts. More people need to know that the stupid rules they want enacted are going to be enforced/filtered down by the same failures that could’ve used last years gun laws to stop recent mass shooting events. Millions of gun owners wonder why the mob is coming for their rifles. Frankly, the GTFO response is becoming saner and saner with every new iteration ... the CNN town hall with a howling arena shouting at Rubio to ban all semiautomatic rifles as a perfect example. As former educator, right back at you. Gun owners should stay in their lane and not talk about arming teachers or other things they have no idea about. It makes ya’ll look stupid And from someone who is licensed to own a gun, I am not frustrated at all by the debates on CNN or anyplace else. This issue has been left festering for 20+ years and both gun owners and gun control advocates are feed up with the inaction. If you’re fed up with inaction, make sure you’re clear that you’re really fed up with lack of action that qualifies according to your definitions. Hardening up the soft targets of gun-free zones are absolutely part of the discussion. If this is sheriff/police or volunteer teachers ... concealed carry or gun lockers ... or simply training for existing SRO’s ... that is action.
My guy, stay in your lane. You don’t know anything about schools and if it is safe to have a gun there. Educators have told you it isn’t. So if you want your expertise as gun owner respected, you need to respect the expertise of professional educators. If you can’t do that, you need to follow your own advice and GTFO.
|
On March 01 2018 06:14 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 06:03 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 05:27 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 05:16 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 04:30 Plansix wrote:
Shitty state police and sheriff’s departments should surprise no one, TBH. Especially in states where they are chronically underfunded. This is why communities and citizens need several options to report people that they think will commit violent acts. More people need to know that the stupid rules they want enacted are going to be enforced/filtered down by the same failures that could’ve used last years gun laws to stop recent mass shooting events. Millions of gun owners wonder why the mob is coming for their rifles. Frankly, the GTFO response is becoming saner and saner with every new iteration ... the CNN town hall with a howling arena shouting at Rubio to ban all semiautomatic rifles as a perfect example. As former educator, right back at you. Gun owners should stay in their lane and not talk about arming teachers or other things they have no idea about. It makes ya’ll look stupid And from someone who is licensed to own a gun, I am not frustrated at all by the debates on CNN or anyplace else. This issue has been left festering for 20+ years and both gun owners and gun control advocates are feed up with the inaction. If you’re fed up with inaction, make sure you’re clear that you’re really fed up with lack of action that qualifies according to your definitions. Hardening up the soft targets of gun-free zones are absolutely part of the discussion. If this is sheriff/police or volunteer teachers ... concealed carry or gun lockers ... or simply training for existing SRO’s ... that is action. My guy, stay in your lane. You don’t know anything about schools and if it is safe to have a gun there. Educators have told you it isn’t. So if you want your expertise as gun owner respected, you need to respect the expertise of professional educators. If you can’t do that, you need to follow your own advice and GTFO.
I wasn’t aware we had any deep polls and hearings on this very recent topic. Let things settle and fund polls from a couple reputable organizations on everything from light-touch to heavy ask. Are you opposed to volunteer training for willing teachers? Are you opposed to accessible gun lockers for trained personnel? Do you support or oppose teachers with concealed carry permits from carrying on campus (in shifts or in combination with school security) if they are willing?
Life isn’t Trump or another radical saying they should force educators to do this thing. And it’s stupid to lie about not doing anything while setting the rules for what constitutes something. That’s one of the things that poisons the debate. One school district has already moved in favor of the issue. At least one more had heavy participation in gun training classes put on by a local law enforcement office. Respect gun rights and respect debate.
|
On March 01 2018 06:26 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 06:14 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 06:03 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 05:27 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 05:16 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 04:30 Plansix wrote:
Shitty state police and sheriff’s departments should surprise no one, TBH. Especially in states where they are chronically underfunded. This is why communities and citizens need several options to report people that they think will commit violent acts. More people need to know that the stupid rules they want enacted are going to be enforced/filtered down by the same failures that could’ve used last years gun laws to stop recent mass shooting events. Millions of gun owners wonder why the mob is coming for their rifles. Frankly, the GTFO response is becoming saner and saner with every new iteration ... the CNN town hall with a howling arena shouting at Rubio to ban all semiautomatic rifles as a perfect example. As former educator, right back at you. Gun owners should stay in their lane and not talk about arming teachers or other things they have no idea about. It makes ya’ll look stupid And from someone who is licensed to own a gun, I am not frustrated at all by the debates on CNN or anyplace else. This issue has been left festering for 20+ years and both gun owners and gun control advocates are feed up with the inaction. If you’re fed up with inaction, make sure you’re clear that you’re really fed up with lack of action that qualifies according to your definitions. Hardening up the soft targets of gun-free zones are absolutely part of the discussion. If this is sheriff/police or volunteer teachers ... concealed carry or gun lockers ... or simply training for existing SRO’s ... that is action. My guy, stay in your lane. You don’t know anything about schools and if it is safe to have a gun there. Educators have told you it isn’t. So if you want your expertise as gun owner respected, you need to respect the expertise of professional educators. If you can’t do that, you need to follow your own advice and GTFO. I wasn’t aware we had any deep polls and hearings on this very recent topic. Let things settle and fund polls from a couple reputable organizations on everything from light-touch to heavy ask. Are you opposed to volunteer training for willing teachers? Are you opposed to accessible gun lockers for trained personnel? Do you support or oppose teachers with concealed carry permits from carrying on campus (in shifts or in combination with school security) if they are willing? Life isn’t Trump or another radical saying they should force educators to do this thing. And it’s stupid to lie about not doing anything while setting the rules for what constitutes something. That’s one of the things that poisons the debate. One school district has already moved in favor of the issue. At least one more had heavy participation in gun training classes put on by a local law enforcement office. Respect gun rights and respect debate.
Do not lean on a need for polling for public hearings before we can settle this argument. Schools are not safe environments for guns, regardless of teacher training. Do not lean on a need for polling for public hearings before we can settle this argument. You have educators in this thread and in public forums speaking out against this plan. Our schools have existed in much more violent times than without the need for armed teachers. We do not need this and it is a foolish attempt to prove that more guns means more safety. Personally, I not meet a single gun owner that believes it is a good idea and I question the responsibility of any gun owner advocating for it.
|
|
|
Remember, this doesn't count as a "shooting" so its okay.
|
Just one church in the US, but it gives you an idea of how guns are viewed in some sections of our country. Not a culture up for healthy debate on restrictions to firearms access.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
