|
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. |
United States44056 Posts
Guns are a constitutional right, it should not be easy to strip people of them. I don't think they should be a constitutional right but for now they are. I've previously been pretty vocal on state laws infringing upon constitutional rights (such as the South not letting black people vote) being a bad thing. It's probably something that needs to be fixed with a constitutional amendment.
|
On May 19 2018 09:42 KwarK wrote:
Guns are a constitutional right, it should not be easy to strip people of them. I don't think they should be a constitutional right but for now they are. I've previously been pretty vocal on state laws infringing upon constitutional rights (such as the South not letting black people vote) being a bad thing. It's probably something that needs to be fixed with a constitutional amendment.
You don't even need to do that, you'd just need to do something like having a federal law that punishes states that doesn't follow certain federal protocols when it comes to firearm regulations. You can still have your firearms, and you can even not follow federal laws if you don't want to, but you'll just face stiff repercussions when it comes to funding. That would require both sides to come to an agreement though, which obviously isn't going to happen if neither side will concede some ground to the other.
|
On May 19 2018 09:41 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 09:31 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. I don’t need to, they already support robust background checks, empowering judges to remove guns from high risk people and ending gun show loopholes. Why do I need to win people over on policies that are already popular and proven reduce gun related deaths? My real opponent is the pro gun sale NRA. I don’t need to win them over. I just need to help build a national lobby of equal size and influence. Like Moms who demand action, who have passed laws like the ones above in several states. This isn’t a debate, it’s about organizing a better lobby than the NRA. Except the funny part is that the NRA is seemingly always able to amass a plethora of votes in key swing elections while the opposition is not able to do so. And I'm not definitely saying that the other side doesn't care, but they seemingly only care when a mass shooting occurs, not looking at the overall high number of firearm related homicides that stem from gang violence and handguns.
Mostly they primary republicans who vote for gun control measures and scare the shit out of people by lying that gun control advocates are going to take away their guns. After sandy hook congress couldn’t even have a debate about gun laws. Just talk about it. But the NRA argues the guns are going to be taken away or banned every time. Also drives up gun sales too.
But you are right that gun control groups have been a poor lobby for a while. That needs to change and this foolish idea that it’s about “changing minds” needs to be euthanized.
|
On May 19 2018 09:50 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 09:41 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:31 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. I don’t need to, they already support robust background checks, empowering judges to remove guns from high risk people and ending gun show loopholes. Why do I need to win people over on policies that are already popular and proven reduce gun related deaths? My real opponent is the pro gun sale NRA. I don’t need to win them over. I just need to help build a national lobby of equal size and influence. Like Moms who demand action, who have passed laws like the ones above in several states. This isn’t a debate, it’s about organizing a better lobby than the NRA. Except the funny part is that the NRA is seemingly always able to amass a plethora of votes in key swing elections while the opposition is not able to do so. And I'm not definitely saying that the other side doesn't care, but they seemingly only care when a mass shooting occurs, not looking at the overall high number of firearm related homicides that stem from gang violence and handguns. Mostly they primary republicans who vote for gun control measures and scare the shit out of people by lying that gun control advocates are going to take away their guns. After sandy hook congress couldn’t even have a debate about gun laws. Just talk about it. But the NRA argues the guns are going to be taken away or banned every time. Also drives up gun sales too. But you are right that gun control groups have been a poor lobby for a while. That needs to change and this foolish idea that it’s about “changing minds” needs to be euthanized.
This point I vehemently disagree with.
That statement works because there are politicians and agenda driven organizations that lie and misrepresent many things about firearms in general in order to drive home their political agenda. It makes it look like they are trying to just get rid of guns rather than find some common ground on sensible legislation and regulation.
The reason why MADD was successful (Mothers against Drunk Driving) was because they had sensible, moderate suggestions that no one could really argue against. If a movement started with sensible gun regulations, the NRA wouldn't have a foot to stand on. The problem is that the gun control lobbies can never come up with a sensible platform, they just misrepresent facts and just try to push agendas rather than actual come up with real solutions half the time.
|
On May 19 2018 09:59 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 09:50 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:41 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:31 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. I don’t need to, they already support robust background checks, empowering judges to remove guns from high risk people and ending gun show loopholes. Why do I need to win people over on policies that are already popular and proven reduce gun related deaths? My real opponent is the pro gun sale NRA. I don’t need to win them over. I just need to help build a national lobby of equal size and influence. Like Moms who demand action, who have passed laws like the ones above in several states. This isn’t a debate, it’s about organizing a better lobby than the NRA. Except the funny part is that the NRA is seemingly always able to amass a plethora of votes in key swing elections while the opposition is not able to do so. And I'm not definitely saying that the other side doesn't care, but they seemingly only care when a mass shooting occurs, not looking at the overall high number of firearm related homicides that stem from gang violence and handguns. Mostly they primary republicans who vote for gun control measures and scare the shit out of people by lying that gun control advocates are going to take away their guns. After sandy hook congress couldn’t even have a debate about gun laws. Just talk about it. But the NRA argues the guns are going to be taken away or banned every time. Also drives up gun sales too. But you are right that gun control groups have been a poor lobby for a while. That needs to change and this foolish idea that it’s about “changing minds” needs to be euthanized. This point I vehemently disagree with. That statement works because there are politicians and agenda driven organizations that lie and misrepresent many things about firearms in general in order to drive home their political agenda. It makes it look like they are trying to just get rid of guns rather than find some common ground on sensible legislation and regulation. The reason why MADD was successful (Mothers against Drunk Driving) was because they had sensible, moderate suggestions that no one could really argue against. If a movement started with sensible gun regulations, the NRA wouldn't have a foot to stand on. The problem is that the gun control lobbies can never come up with a sensible platform, they just misrepresent facts and just try to push agendas rather than actual come up with real solutions half the time.
Have you watched any of the NRA's ads? The NRA 100% tries to scare people into doing what the NRA wants them to do.
And we've had suggestions for reasonable gun regulations. They get shot down as too oppressive, leaving things like trying to ban bump stocks, which then gets attacked as merely symbolic.
Let's get a national gun registry and start tracking where guns used in gun violence come from so we can start having an informed discussion about the best ways to reduce gun violence while minimally impacting gun ownership and use.
|
That pragmatism was also used to paint people who opposed raising the drinking age as endangering people. And they didn’t the NRA and batshit leadership painting MADD as trying to ban all booze. But the NRA is run by a bunch of fear mongers and has been since the 1970s.
And again, Mothers who Demand action has been a successful, low key gun control advocate. They only go after state legislatures, don’t bother to try to regulate assault rifles and are not interested in changing minds. They know people support the laws already. Polling shows that. The mythical reasonable gun laws already exist, it is just a matter of getting through the fear mongering to have them implemented.
|
On May 19 2018 10:09 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 09:59 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:50 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:41 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:31 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. I don’t need to, they already support robust background checks, empowering judges to remove guns from high risk people and ending gun show loopholes. Why do I need to win people over on policies that are already popular and proven reduce gun related deaths? My real opponent is the pro gun sale NRA. I don’t need to win them over. I just need to help build a national lobby of equal size and influence. Like Moms who demand action, who have passed laws like the ones above in several states. This isn’t a debate, it’s about organizing a better lobby than the NRA. Except the funny part is that the NRA is seemingly always able to amass a plethora of votes in key swing elections while the opposition is not able to do so. And I'm not definitely saying that the other side doesn't care, but they seemingly only care when a mass shooting occurs, not looking at the overall high number of firearm related homicides that stem from gang violence and handguns. Mostly they primary republicans who vote for gun control measures and scare the shit out of people by lying that gun control advocates are going to take away their guns. After sandy hook congress couldn’t even have a debate about gun laws. Just talk about it. But the NRA argues the guns are going to be taken away or banned every time. Also drives up gun sales too. But you are right that gun control groups have been a poor lobby for a while. That needs to change and this foolish idea that it’s about “changing minds” needs to be euthanized. This point I vehemently disagree with. That statement works because there are politicians and agenda driven organizations that lie and misrepresent many things about firearms in general in order to drive home their political agenda. It makes it look like they are trying to just get rid of guns rather than find some common ground on sensible legislation and regulation. The reason why MADD was successful (Mothers against Drunk Driving) was because they had sensible, moderate suggestions that no one could really argue against. If a movement started with sensible gun regulations, the NRA wouldn't have a foot to stand on. The problem is that the gun control lobbies can never come up with a sensible platform, they just misrepresent facts and just try to push agendas rather than actual come up with real solutions half the time. Have you watched any of the NRA's ads? The NRA 100% tries to scare people into doing what the NRA wants them to do. And we've had suggestions for reasonable gun regulations. They get shot down as too oppressive, leaving things like trying to ban bump stocks, which then gets attacked as merely symbolic. Let's get a national gun registry and start tracking where guns used in gun violence come from so we can start having an informed discussion about the best ways to reduce gun violence while minimally impacting gun ownership and use.
'Suggestions for reasonable gun regulations'
You mean like banning of all 'assault/military style' weapons? Come on now. Don't play innocent and try and say that gun control advocates have never suggested anything absolutely asinine. You alone in this thread didn't know that Texas had penal codes for negligent storage/access of firearms to children.
On May 19 2018 10:16 Plansix wrote:
That pragmatism was also used to paint people who opposed raising the drinking age as endangering people. And they didn’t the NRA and batshit leadership painting MADD as trying to ban all booze. But the NRA is run by a bunch of fear mongers and has been since the 1970s.
And again, Mothers who Demand action has been a successful, low key gun control advocate. They only go after state legislatures, don’t bother to try to regulate assault rifles and are not interested in changing minds. They know people support the laws already. Polling shows that. The mythical reasonable gun laws already exist, it is just a matter of getting through the fear mongering to have them implemented.
And the NRA wasn't successful were they? MADD was successful because they reached across both sides of the aisle. Let's be clear, the NMDAA (National Minimum Drinking Age Act) passed the Senate by 81-16
If you get the moderates on board, you will find that it's hard to stop a movement. The problem is when you alienate those who are likely to support you from the other side of the aisle.
|
On May 19 2018 10:16 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 10:09 Kyadytim wrote:On May 19 2018 09:59 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:50 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:41 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:31 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. I don’t need to, they already support robust background checks, empowering judges to remove guns from high risk people and ending gun show loopholes. Why do I need to win people over on policies that are already popular and proven reduce gun related deaths? My real opponent is the pro gun sale NRA. I don’t need to win them over. I just need to help build a national lobby of equal size and influence. Like Moms who demand action, who have passed laws like the ones above in several states. This isn’t a debate, it’s about organizing a better lobby than the NRA. Except the funny part is that the NRA is seemingly always able to amass a plethora of votes in key swing elections while the opposition is not able to do so. And I'm not definitely saying that the other side doesn't care, but they seemingly only care when a mass shooting occurs, not looking at the overall high number of firearm related homicides that stem from gang violence and handguns. Mostly they primary republicans who vote for gun control measures and scare the shit out of people by lying that gun control advocates are going to take away their guns. After sandy hook congress couldn’t even have a debate about gun laws. Just talk about it. But the NRA argues the guns are going to be taken away or banned every time. Also drives up gun sales too. But you are right that gun control groups have been a poor lobby for a while. That needs to change and this foolish idea that it’s about “changing minds” needs to be euthanized. This point I vehemently disagree with. That statement works because there are politicians and agenda driven organizations that lie and misrepresent many things about firearms in general in order to drive home their political agenda. It makes it look like they are trying to just get rid of guns rather than find some common ground on sensible legislation and regulation. The reason why MADD was successful (Mothers against Drunk Driving) was because they had sensible, moderate suggestions that no one could really argue against. If a movement started with sensible gun regulations, the NRA wouldn't have a foot to stand on. The problem is that the gun control lobbies can never come up with a sensible platform, they just misrepresent facts and just try to push agendas rather than actual come up with real solutions half the time. Have you watched any of the NRA's ads? The NRA 100% tries to scare people into doing what the NRA wants them to do. And we've had suggestions for reasonable gun regulations. They get shot down as too oppressive, leaving things like trying to ban bump stocks, which then gets attacked as merely symbolic. Let's get a national gun registry and start tracking where guns used in gun violence come from so we can start having an informed discussion about the best ways to reduce gun violence while minimally impacting gun ownership and use. 'Suggestions for reasonable gun regulations' You mean like banning of all 'assault/military style' weapons? Come on now. Don't play innocent and try and say that gun control advocates have never suggested anything absolutely asinine.
Since you are apparently not aware, "suggestions for reasonable gun regulations have happened" is not the same statement as "all suggestions for gun regulations are reasonable".
|
On May 19 2018 10:16 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 10:09 Kyadytim wrote:On May 19 2018 09:59 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:50 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:41 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:31 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. I don’t need to, they already support robust background checks, empowering judges to remove guns from high risk people and ending gun show loopholes. Why do I need to win people over on policies that are already popular and proven reduce gun related deaths? My real opponent is the pro gun sale NRA. I don’t need to win them over. I just need to help build a national lobby of equal size and influence. Like Moms who demand action, who have passed laws like the ones above in several states. This isn’t a debate, it’s about organizing a better lobby than the NRA. Except the funny part is that the NRA is seemingly always able to amass a plethora of votes in key swing elections while the opposition is not able to do so. And I'm not definitely saying that the other side doesn't care, but they seemingly only care when a mass shooting occurs, not looking at the overall high number of firearm related homicides that stem from gang violence and handguns. Mostly they primary republicans who vote for gun control measures and scare the shit out of people by lying that gun control advocates are going to take away their guns. After sandy hook congress couldn’t even have a debate about gun laws. Just talk about it. But the NRA argues the guns are going to be taken away or banned every time. Also drives up gun sales too. But you are right that gun control groups have been a poor lobby for a while. That needs to change and this foolish idea that it’s about “changing minds” needs to be euthanized. This point I vehemently disagree with. That statement works because there are politicians and agenda driven organizations that lie and misrepresent many things about firearms in general in order to drive home their political agenda. It makes it look like they are trying to just get rid of guns rather than find some common ground on sensible legislation and regulation. The reason why MADD was successful (Mothers against Drunk Driving) was because they had sensible, moderate suggestions that no one could really argue against. If a movement started with sensible gun regulations, the NRA wouldn't have a foot to stand on. The problem is that the gun control lobbies can never come up with a sensible platform, they just misrepresent facts and just try to push agendas rather than actual come up with real solutions half the time. Have you watched any of the NRA's ads? The NRA 100% tries to scare people into doing what the NRA wants them to do. And we've had suggestions for reasonable gun regulations. They get shot down as too oppressive, leaving things like trying to ban bump stocks, which then gets attacked as merely symbolic. Let's get a national gun registry and start tracking where guns used in gun violence come from so we can start having an informed discussion about the best ways to reduce gun violence while minimally impacting gun ownership and use. 'Suggestions for reasonable gun regulations' You mean like banning of all 'assault/military style' weapons? Come on now. Don't play innocent and try and say that gun control advocates have never suggested anything absolutely asinine.
There is no serious legislative push for this on a national level. And it is considered a low gain law by most experts. This topic is used to under cut discussion of effective laws that are being pushed. It is the well the NRA returns to every time the debate arises.
|
Blazinghand
United States25560 Posts
On May 19 2018 10:16 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 10:09 Kyadytim wrote:On May 19 2018 09:59 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:50 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:41 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:31 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. I don’t need to, they already support robust background checks, empowering judges to remove guns from high risk people and ending gun show loopholes. Why do I need to win people over on policies that are already popular and proven reduce gun related deaths? My real opponent is the pro gun sale NRA. I don’t need to win them over. I just need to help build a national lobby of equal size and influence. Like Moms who demand action, who have passed laws like the ones above in several states. This isn’t a debate, it’s about organizing a better lobby than the NRA. Except the funny part is that the NRA is seemingly always able to amass a plethora of votes in key swing elections while the opposition is not able to do so. And I'm not definitely saying that the other side doesn't care, but they seemingly only care when a mass shooting occurs, not looking at the overall high number of firearm related homicides that stem from gang violence and handguns. Mostly they primary republicans who vote for gun control measures and scare the shit out of people by lying that gun control advocates are going to take away their guns. After sandy hook congress couldn’t even have a debate about gun laws. Just talk about it. But the NRA argues the guns are going to be taken away or banned every time. Also drives up gun sales too. But you are right that gun control groups have been a poor lobby for a while. That needs to change and this foolish idea that it’s about “changing minds” needs to be euthanized. This point I vehemently disagree with. That statement works because there are politicians and agenda driven organizations that lie and misrepresent many things about firearms in general in order to drive home their political agenda. It makes it look like they are trying to just get rid of guns rather than find some common ground on sensible legislation and regulation. The reason why MADD was successful (Mothers against Drunk Driving) was because they had sensible, moderate suggestions that no one could really argue against. If a movement started with sensible gun regulations, the NRA wouldn't have a foot to stand on. The problem is that the gun control lobbies can never come up with a sensible platform, they just misrepresent facts and just try to push agendas rather than actual come up with real solutions half the time. Have you watched any of the NRA's ads? The NRA 100% tries to scare people into doing what the NRA wants them to do. And we've had suggestions for reasonable gun regulations. They get shot down as too oppressive, leaving things like trying to ban bump stocks, which then gets attacked as merely symbolic. Let's get a national gun registry and start tracking where guns used in gun violence come from so we can start having an informed discussion about the best ways to reduce gun violence while minimally impacting gun ownership and use. 'Suggestions for reasonable gun regulations' You mean like banning of all 'assault/military style' weapons? Come on now. Don't play innocent and try and say that gun control advocates have never suggested anything absolutely asinine.
I am pro-gun-control and I find that in practice these "assault weapon" bans are pretty darn useless. By banning ergonomic features instead of writing good gun control laws, we've spent a ton of political capital and will here in California without actually getting at the issue. Most gun crime is done with handguns, not long guns; most gun deaths are suicides, and most gun homicides are done with illegal guns that left the system somehow. Better registration, mental health evaluation requirements for gun ownership, gun buybacks to get illegal guns off the street, etc would all be way more effective at reducing gun deaths than banning front-grips on long guns. Sadly, few people are educated on the pro-gun-control side about which measures would be most effective and the actual statistics of gun violence, and few gun owners and pro-gun-ownership-people are inclined to help out in drafting legislation like this. As a result, when we do get political victories, they're spent on useless laws that don't get at the core of illegal guns, handguns that fell out of the system, suicidal people who own guns, etc. Very frustrating. I don't have high hopes of this changing; if in 2020 we get a Democrat in the presidency again and pass a new gun control bill, it'll probably do something dumb like ban bayonet lugs and ergonomic stocks like all the "assault weapon" bans do without appreciably reducing gun deaths, because this is what people demand even though it's useless.
This is what happened in California, where we control everything, and it's pretty darned annoying because we SHOULD be able to pass an actual gun law that's useful, instead we ban things that LOOK scary and people are still dying!
Sigh.
|
On May 19 2018 10:22 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 10:16 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 10:09 Kyadytim wrote:On May 19 2018 09:59 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:50 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:41 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:31 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. I don’t need to, they already support robust background checks, empowering judges to remove guns from high risk people and ending gun show loopholes. Why do I need to win people over on policies that are already popular and proven reduce gun related deaths? My real opponent is the pro gun sale NRA. I don’t need to win them over. I just need to help build a national lobby of equal size and influence. Like Moms who demand action, who have passed laws like the ones above in several states. This isn’t a debate, it’s about organizing a better lobby than the NRA. Except the funny part is that the NRA is seemingly always able to amass a plethora of votes in key swing elections while the opposition is not able to do so. And I'm not definitely saying that the other side doesn't care, but they seemingly only care when a mass shooting occurs, not looking at the overall high number of firearm related homicides that stem from gang violence and handguns. Mostly they primary republicans who vote for gun control measures and scare the shit out of people by lying that gun control advocates are going to take away their guns. After sandy hook congress couldn’t even have a debate about gun laws. Just talk about it. But the NRA argues the guns are going to be taken away or banned every time. Also drives up gun sales too. But you are right that gun control groups have been a poor lobby for a while. That needs to change and this foolish idea that it’s about “changing minds” needs to be euthanized. This point I vehemently disagree with. That statement works because there are politicians and agenda driven organizations that lie and misrepresent many things about firearms in general in order to drive home their political agenda. It makes it look like they are trying to just get rid of guns rather than find some common ground on sensible legislation and regulation. The reason why MADD was successful (Mothers against Drunk Driving) was because they had sensible, moderate suggestions that no one could really argue against. If a movement started with sensible gun regulations, the NRA wouldn't have a foot to stand on. The problem is that the gun control lobbies can never come up with a sensible platform, they just misrepresent facts and just try to push agendas rather than actual come up with real solutions half the time. Have you watched any of the NRA's ads? The NRA 100% tries to scare people into doing what the NRA wants them to do. And we've had suggestions for reasonable gun regulations. They get shot down as too oppressive, leaving things like trying to ban bump stocks, which then gets attacked as merely symbolic. Let's get a national gun registry and start tracking where guns used in gun violence come from so we can start having an informed discussion about the best ways to reduce gun violence while minimally impacting gun ownership and use. 'Suggestions for reasonable gun regulations' You mean like banning of all 'assault/military style' weapons? Come on now. Don't play innocent and try and say that gun control advocates have never suggested anything absolutely asinine. Since you are apparently not aware, "suggestions for reasonable gun regulations have happened" is not the same statement as "all suggestions for gun regulations are reasonable".
List said suggestions for reasonable gun regulations. Because there's very few. Most congressional members who have legislative power from the gun control side have already gone on record stating they support things like assault weapon bans.
On May 19 2018 10:22 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 10:16 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 10:09 Kyadytim wrote:On May 19 2018 09:59 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:50 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:41 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:31 Plansix wrote:On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. I don’t need to, they already support robust background checks, empowering judges to remove guns from high risk people and ending gun show loopholes. Why do I need to win people over on policies that are already popular and proven reduce gun related deaths? My real opponent is the pro gun sale NRA. I don’t need to win them over. I just need to help build a national lobby of equal size and influence. Like Moms who demand action, who have passed laws like the ones above in several states. This isn’t a debate, it’s about organizing a better lobby than the NRA. Except the funny part is that the NRA is seemingly always able to amass a plethora of votes in key swing elections while the opposition is not able to do so. And I'm not definitely saying that the other side doesn't care, but they seemingly only care when a mass shooting occurs, not looking at the overall high number of firearm related homicides that stem from gang violence and handguns. Mostly they primary republicans who vote for gun control measures and scare the shit out of people by lying that gun control advocates are going to take away their guns. After sandy hook congress couldn’t even have a debate about gun laws. Just talk about it. But the NRA argues the guns are going to be taken away or banned every time. Also drives up gun sales too. But you are right that gun control groups have been a poor lobby for a while. That needs to change and this foolish idea that it’s about “changing minds” needs to be euthanized. This point I vehemently disagree with. That statement works because there are politicians and agenda driven organizations that lie and misrepresent many things about firearms in general in order to drive home their political agenda. It makes it look like they are trying to just get rid of guns rather than find some common ground on sensible legislation and regulation. The reason why MADD was successful (Mothers against Drunk Driving) was because they had sensible, moderate suggestions that no one could really argue against. If a movement started with sensible gun regulations, the NRA wouldn't have a foot to stand on. The problem is that the gun control lobbies can never come up with a sensible platform, they just misrepresent facts and just try to push agendas rather than actual come up with real solutions half the time. Have you watched any of the NRA's ads? The NRA 100% tries to scare people into doing what the NRA wants them to do. And we've had suggestions for reasonable gun regulations. They get shot down as too oppressive, leaving things like trying to ban bump stocks, which then gets attacked as merely symbolic. Let's get a national gun registry and start tracking where guns used in gun violence come from so we can start having an informed discussion about the best ways to reduce gun violence while minimally impacting gun ownership and use. 'Suggestions for reasonable gun regulations' You mean like banning of all 'assault/military style' weapons? Come on now. Don't play innocent and try and say that gun control advocates have never suggested anything absolutely asinine. There is no serious legislative push for this on a national level. And it is considered a low gain law by most experts. This topic is used to under cut discussion of effective laws that are being pushed. It is the well the NRA returns to every time the debate arises.
Bull, fucking, shit.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/5087/cosponsors
Or are you saying that 176 cosponsors of a bill that are all Democratic isn't enough to show you that there's not a 'strong legislative push'?
This isn't some 'hey there's only a few extreme elements of your party that support this' 176 members of the current 193 democratic seats support an Assault Weapons ban. So please don't give me this nonsense that the liberal left somehow doesn't have an agenda.
|
That is not a majority of the House and would not pass the senate. I taught civics, that bill is about as serious as one to fund anding a man on mars. Stupid bills kicking around the House is how congress works. It’s easy to sponsor a bill that the senate will murder for you if it ever passed.
|
On May 19 2018 10:31 Plansix wrote:
That is not a majority of the House and would not pass the senate. I taught civics, that bill is about as serious as one to fund anding a man on mars.
Are you saying that 176 of the 193 current Democrat seats doesn't show that there is a strong push from the liberal left to ban assault weapons? Because the crux of the issue here is that the NRA is able to swing lots of moderate voters in their favor because of the fact that they are able to EASILY prove that the liberal left does have an agenda. That bill alone proves it.
|
On May 19 2018 10:33 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 10:31 Plansix wrote:
That is not a majority of the House and would not pass the senate. I taught civics, that bill is about as serious as one to fund anding a man on mars. Are you saying that 176 of the 193 current Democrat seats doesn't show that there is a strong push from the liberal left to ban assault weapons?
Yes. Just like the Republican push to legalize concealed carry licenses nation wide in the House was not a serious push for concealed carry permits nation wide.
Edit: lol you do know there are two chambers of Congress right?
|
On May 19 2018 10:33 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 10:31 Plansix wrote:
That is not a majority of the House and would not pass the senate. I taught civics, that bill is about as serious as one to fund anding a man on mars. Are you saying that 176 of the 193 current Democrat seats doesn't show that there is a strong push from the liberal left to ban assault weapons? Because the crux of the issue here is that the NRA is able to swing lots of moderate voters in their favor because of the fact that they are able to EASILY prove that the liberal left does have an agenda. That bill alone proves it.
Yes. Those democrats don't have the power to do anything so they lose nothing by advocating for this. This is the same type of theater that republicans pulled time and time again to "repeal obamacare".
|
On May 19 2018 10:36 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 10:33 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 10:31 Plansix wrote:
That is not a majority of the House and would not pass the senate. I taught civics, that bill is about as serious as one to fund anding a man on mars. Are you saying that 176 of the 193 current Democrat seats doesn't show that there is a strong push from the liberal left to ban assault weapons? Because the crux of the issue here is that the NRA is able to swing lots of moderate voters in their favor because of the fact that they are able to EASILY prove that the liberal left does have an agenda. That bill alone proves it. Yes. Those democrats don't have the power to do anything so they lose nothing by advocating for this. This is the same type of theater that republicans pulled time and time again to "repeal obamacare".
Except by advocating for a ridiculous and stupid bill that will have low gains (Plainsix's words, not mine), they only prove that they are not trying to pass sensible gun regulation, but are attempting to just grand stand and drive home an emotional agenda.
It also leaves a massive foot print for the NRA to just basically say "Hey see, these guys all cosponsored for a dumb bill meant to take away your firearms, showing massive ignorance, blah blah blah." If neither of you can see why that's a huge problem when it comes to coming to terms on sensible gun control, then you are the exact reason why so many moderate republicans will still vote NRA despite not actually seeing eye to eye with them all the time.
On May 19 2018 10:35 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 10:33 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 10:31 Plansix wrote:
That is not a majority of the House and would not pass the senate. I taught civics, that bill is about as serious as one to fund anding a man on mars. Are you saying that 176 of the 193 current Democrat seats doesn't show that there is a strong push from the liberal left to ban assault weapons? Yes. Just like the Republican push to legalize concealed carry licenses nation wide in the House was not a serious push for concealed carry permits nation wide. Edit: lol you do know there are two chambers of Congress right?
Yes, just like I'm fully aware that you clearly have an agenda and don't like to argue with facts. Let's keep personal insults out of this.
|
You can’t blame democrats for throwing the political football back to the NRA. They made guns a wedge issue for a core part of the Republican base. A cultural issue even. The Democrats are going to respond in kind.
And the national license to carry law was a pile of trash that would have been thrown out by the federal courts. States do not need to respect the right to carry laws of other states. The democrats do not have a monopoly of shitty gun bills.
|
On May 19 2018 10:45 Plansix wrote:
You can’t blame democrats for throwing the political football back to the NRA. They made guns a wedge issue for a core part of the Republican base. A cultural issue even. The Democrats are going to respond in kind.
And the national license to carry law was a pile of trash that would have been thrown out by the federal courts. States do not need to respect the right to carry laws of other states. The democrats do not have a monopoly of shitty gun bills.
'Can't blame the democrats for throwing the political football'
'Made guns a wedge issue for a core part of the republican base'
And then you wonder why no sensible federal regulation is ever passed. Textbook gun control advocate.
|
On May 19 2018 10:45 Plansix wrote:
You can’t blame democrats for throwing the political football back to the NRA. They made guns a wedge issue for a core part of the Republican base. A cultural issue even. The Democrats are going to respond in kind.
And the national license to carry law was a pile of trash that would have been thrown out by the federal courts. States do not need to respect the right to carry laws of other states. The democrats do not have a monopoly of shitty gun bills.
We can blame the democrats for acting in the same way as the NRA and then trying to pass themselves off as the party trying to do something. You can't play in the mud on an issue and then try to act high and mighty about the same issue. Handguns are the guns that kill people yet get no attention from the people who pretend that they're trying to same these peoples lives.
|
On May 19 2018 10:50 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 10:45 Plansix wrote:
You can’t blame democrats for throwing the political football back to the NRA. They made guns a wedge issue for a core part of the Republican base. A cultural issue even. The Democrats are going to respond in kind.
And the national license to carry law was a pile of trash that would have been thrown out by the federal courts. States do not need to respect the right to carry laws of other states. The democrats do not have a monopoly of shitty gun bills. We can blame the democrats for acting in the same way as the NRA and then trying to pass themselves off as the party trying to do something. You can't play in the mud on an issue and then try to act high and mighty about the same issue. Handguns are the guns that kill people yet get no attention from the people who pretend that they're trying to same these peoples lives.
This I agree with. But this started with me refuting the claim that there is national push for an assault rifle ban. There is not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
