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.
Five people dead qualifies as a mass shooting, right?
In all of the furor over school shootings, it sometimes gets missed that this sort of domestic situation is also a major issue.
In short, the police were called for domestic violence, and when they arrived the man involved shot one of the officers and took four children, two of whom were his, hostage. By the end of the day, he and all four of the children were dead at his hands.
Blaming the NRA for anyone dead from a gun. Go team gun control! You demonize those citizens! Take their rights away!
See: Reason #597 for why the needle doesn’t move. Deaths are just an excuse to rally the rhetoric.
Yes, the NRA is completely innocent. All they're doing is pushing legislations and rhetoric to get more guns into more people's hands while painting a bleak and dystopian image of the current status of the US.
ffs stop excusing the behaviour of the biggest player in the gun industry. This isn't any better than excusing tobacco companies for pushing "cigarettes are good for you" ads. There should be zero doubt that NRA has the most blood on their hands from the civilian population in the US right now.
The movie you cited to prove your point makes me think your real gripe is gun rights lobbyist groups should just surrender in the face of calls to radically restrict the sale, ownership, and carry of guns. It remains only a political position that answers to gun crime must be dealt with by restricting gun rights just a little bit more. Then, emotionally charged demagogic rhetoric follows to put blood on the hands of the defenders of the second amendment. And you wonder why they put out ads painting a dim view of the future? It is pretty dim for civil rights when gun control advocates barely conceal their ultimate goal to ban guns.
This isn’t backed up by the reality of the gun safety advocates pushing for better background checks and updated laws. The demands for an outright ban of all guns is the overwhelming minority of gun control advocates in the US. There is no legitimate effort to ban all fire arms or even some fire arms in the US. It is a fiction one chooses to believe in despite overwhelming evidence it is not true.
From op-eds in the NYT to hysteria in the wake of AR-15/bump stocks, majorities of gun control advocates sincerely believe all guns should be banned or scary looking guns should be banned. Thought leaders, celebrities, politicians are all included. The big deal right now is convincing Americans that the people who wish for all guns to be banned, but will compromise for different background checks and minor laws right now, actually will uphold the rights of law-abiding Americans to own a gun. I absolutely disagree with you. It’s in the rhetoric, it’s in the demonization of the NRA (who the fuck even pretends to respect their defense of the second amendment? It’s all terrorism and blood on their hands talk), and it’s all over social media and TV news media and print media. I’m entirely not reassured that you represent them as an absolute minority ... only the dumb ones right now are actually voicing their support for gun bans. The rest disguise it.
“Only the minority want gay marriage, the majority are fine with legally eqivalent civil unions! We don’t care what it’s called just give us all the legal benefits!” - People wanting the opposition to be as stupid as their caricatures of the opposition are. No dice. I’ve been listening. Hell, this very forum is absolutely unapologetic for no defensible reason to own a gun and outright bans if only the second amendment could be repealed or reimagined to mean something different.
If you assume bad faith on the entirety of your opposition before you even sit down to the discussion, don't be surprised if nothing happens and nobody listens to you. In fact, the very same "they're all disguising it, only the dumb ones are voicing it out loud" could be leveraged against people on your side of the aisle when it comes to racism, homophobia, and women's rights, even other segments of the gun conversation. I would hate for that to be a projection on your part, that results in refusing to even have the discussion.
That’s a natural rejoinder. I happen to ground my disdain for “we’re not coming for your guns” in how often and quickly calls to come after guns occur in the wake of tragedy shootings. And then everybody acts like they never happened! The AR-15 proposed bans and stupid “high-capacity” ammo bans after Newtown were 24/7 talked about for weeks on end, and now banning certain guns is of course a minority view somehow. The pace of mass shootings (or the visibility, they’ve trended down) is highlighted before hordes of voices clamor for “enough is enough” gun bans, and then I’m expected to forget. Meanwhile, gun control advocates find themselves (this thread IS a good example) arguing that there isn’t even a good reason to defend owning one. Hmm. I still think the main problem is overreach from gun control advocates and the primary reason why it’s a good thing to keep the process slow and at the state level.
I think your first problem is not choosing to understand why people might have a problem with how accessible weapons like that are when a bunch of people get shot and killed with no chance to defend themselves.
In all of the furor over school shootings, it sometimes gets missed that this sort of domestic situation is also a major issue.
In short, the police were called for domestic violence, and when they arrived the man involved shot one of the officers and took four children, two of whom were his, hostage. By the end of the day, he and all four of the children were dead at his hands.
Yes, the NRA is completely innocent. All they're doing is pushing legislations and rhetoric to get more guns into more people's hands while painting a bleak and dystopian image of the current status of the US.
ffs stop excusing the behaviour of the biggest player in the gun industry. This isn't any better than excusing tobacco companies for pushing "cigarettes are good for you" ads. There should be zero doubt that NRA has the most blood on their hands from the civilian population in the US right now.
The movie you cited to prove your point makes me think your real gripe is gun rights lobbyist groups should just surrender in the face of calls to radically restrict the sale, ownership, and carry of guns. It remains only a political position that answers to gun crime must be dealt with by restricting gun rights just a little bit more. Then, emotionally charged demagogic rhetoric follows to put blood on the hands of the defenders of the second amendment. And you wonder why they put out ads painting a dim view of the future? It is pretty dim for civil rights when gun control advocates barely conceal their ultimate goal to ban guns.
This isn’t backed up by the reality of the gun safety advocates pushing for better background checks and updated laws. The demands for an outright ban of all guns is the overwhelming minority of gun control advocates in the US. There is no legitimate effort to ban all fire arms or even some fire arms in the US. It is a fiction one chooses to believe in despite overwhelming evidence it is not true.
From op-eds in the NYT to hysteria in the wake of AR-15/bump stocks, majorities of gun control advocates sincerely believe all guns should be banned or scary looking guns should be banned. Thought leaders, celebrities, politicians are all included. The big deal right now is convincing Americans that the people who wish for all guns to be banned, but will compromise for different background checks and minor laws right now, actually will uphold the rights of law-abiding Americans to own a gun. I absolutely disagree with you. It’s in the rhetoric, it’s in the demonization of the NRA (who the fuck even pretends to respect their defense of the second amendment? It’s all terrorism and blood on their hands talk), and it’s all over social media and TV news media and print media. I’m entirely not reassured that you represent them as an absolute minority ... only the dumb ones right now are actually voicing their support for gun bans. The rest disguise it.
“Only the minority want gay marriage, the majority are fine with legally eqivalent civil unions! We don’t care what it’s called just give us all the legal benefits!” - People wanting the opposition to be as stupid as their caricatures of the opposition are. No dice. I’ve been listening. Hell, this very forum is absolutely unapologetic for no defensible reason to own a gun and outright bans if only the second amendment could be repealed or reimagined to mean something different.
If you assume bad faith on the entirety of your opposition before you even sit down to the discussion, don't be surprised if nothing happens and nobody listens to you. In fact, the very same "they're all disguising it, only the dumb ones are voicing it out loud" could be leveraged against people on your side of the aisle when it comes to racism, homophobia, and women's rights, even other segments of the gun conversation. I would hate for that to be a projection on your part, that results in refusing to even have the discussion.
That’s a natural rejoinder. I happen to ground my disdain for “we’re not coming for your guns” in how often and quickly calls to come after guns occur in the wake of tragedy shootings. And then everybody acts like they never happened! The AR-15 proposed bans and stupid “high-capacity” ammo bans after Newtown were 24/7 talked about for weeks on end, and now banning certain guns is of course a minority view somehow. The pace of mass shootings (or the visibility, they’ve trended down) is highlighted before hordes of voices clamor for “enough is enough” gun bans, and then I’m expected to forget. Meanwhile, gun control advocates find themselves (this thread IS a good example) arguing that there isn’t even a good reason to defend owning one. Hmm. I still think the main problem is overreach from gun control advocates and the primary reason why it’s a good thing to keep the process slow and at the state level.
I think your first problem is not choosing to understand why people might have a problem with how accessible weapons like that are when a bunch of people get shot and killed with no chance to defend themselves.
And that those shootings have been happening for +20 years with zero legislative action on the issue in any form. Not even a debate in congress. Congress has basically ignored the issue for 20 years.
In all of the furor over school shootings, it sometimes gets missed that this sort of domestic situation is also a major issue.
In short, the police were called for domestic violence, and when they arrived the man involved shot one of the officers and took four children, two of whom were his, hostage. By the end of the day, he and all four of the children were dead at his hands.
Yes, the NRA is completely innocent. All they're doing is pushing legislations and rhetoric to get more guns into more people's hands while painting a bleak and dystopian image of the current status of the US.
ffs stop excusing the behaviour of the biggest player in the gun industry. This isn't any better than excusing tobacco companies for pushing "cigarettes are good for you" ads. There should be zero doubt that NRA has the most blood on their hands from the civilian population in the US right now.
The movie you cited to prove your point makes me think your real gripe is gun rights lobbyist groups should just surrender in the face of calls to radically restrict the sale, ownership, and carry of guns. It remains only a political position that answers to gun crime must be dealt with by restricting gun rights just a little bit more. Then, emotionally charged demagogic rhetoric follows to put blood on the hands of the defenders of the second amendment. And you wonder why they put out ads painting a dim view of the future? It is pretty dim for civil rights when gun control advocates barely conceal their ultimate goal to ban guns.
This isn’t backed up by the reality of the gun safety advocates pushing for better background checks and updated laws. The demands for an outright ban of all guns is the overwhelming minority of gun control advocates in the US. There is no legitimate effort to ban all fire arms or even some fire arms in the US. It is a fiction one chooses to believe in despite overwhelming evidence it is not true.
From op-eds in the NYT to hysteria in the wake of AR-15/bump stocks, majorities of gun control advocates sincerely believe all guns should be banned or scary looking guns should be banned. Thought leaders, celebrities, politicians are all included. The big deal right now is convincing Americans that the people who wish for all guns to be banned, but will compromise for different background checks and minor laws right now, actually will uphold the rights of law-abiding Americans to own a gun. I absolutely disagree with you. It’s in the rhetoric, it’s in the demonization of the NRA (who the fuck even pretends to respect their defense of the second amendment? It’s all terrorism and blood on their hands talk), and it’s all over social media and TV news media and print media. I’m entirely not reassured that you represent them as an absolute minority ... only the dumb ones right now are actually voicing their support for gun bans. The rest disguise it.
“Only the minority want gay marriage, the majority are fine with legally eqivalent civil unions! We don’t care what it’s called just give us all the legal benefits!” - People wanting the opposition to be as stupid as their caricatures of the opposition are. No dice. I’ve been listening. Hell, this very forum is absolutely unapologetic for no defensible reason to own a gun and outright bans if only the second amendment could be repealed or reimagined to mean something different.
If you assume bad faith on the entirety of your opposition before you even sit down to the discussion, don't be surprised if nothing happens and nobody listens to you. In fact, the very same "they're all disguising it, only the dumb ones are voicing it out loud" could be leveraged against people on your side of the aisle when it comes to racism, homophobia, and women's rights, even other segments of the gun conversation. I would hate for that to be a projection on your part, that results in refusing to even have the discussion.
That’s a natural rejoinder. I happen to ground my disdain for “we’re not coming for your guns” in how often and quickly calls to come after guns occur in the wake of tragedy shootings. And then everybody acts like they never happened! The AR-15 proposed bans and stupid “high-capacity” ammo bans after Newtown were 24/7 talked about for weeks on end, and now banning certain guns is of course a minority view somehow. The pace of mass shootings (or the visibility, they’ve trended down) is highlighted before hordes of voices clamor for “enough is enough” gun bans, and then I’m expected to forget. Meanwhile, gun control advocates find themselves (this thread IS a good example) arguing that there isn’t even a good reason to defend owning one. Hmm. I still think the main problem is overreach from gun control advocates and the primary reason why it’s a good thing to keep the process slow and at the state level.
I think your first problem is not choosing to understand why people might have a problem with how accessible weapons like that are when a bunch of people get shot and killed with no chance to defend themselves.
I'd propose the first problem is that he doesn't care if they get shot and killed. As I said in my inaugural post in the thread, the lives of people are irrelevant in the debate. It's all about higher-level discussions over the constitutional rights and freedom and whatnot.
In all of the furor over school shootings, it sometimes gets missed that this sort of domestic situation is also a major issue.
In short, the police were called for domestic violence, and when they arrived the man involved shot one of the officers and took four children, two of whom were his, hostage. By the end of the day, he and all four of the children were dead at his hands.
I'd say deaths are people that can no longer do ANYTHING, because someone forcefully took everything they had and ever will have... forever. That's what real "taking rights away" is.
And the reason the needle doesn't move is because congress (is bought out by the gun lobby) doesn't enact laws limiting assholes from carrying guns. Why don't you go back to the last post I quoted you and answer any of the questions you dodged... there were plenty of statistics there spelling out how the vast majority of this county is in favor of gun control and despite that, a republican controlled government won't do anything about it.
Not to mention you, I've never seen you even hint at a solution.
Can you tell me why when I literally just told you that 30 people were shot over nothing, the first thing that came to your mind wasn't "Holy shit, I hope their ok?! How do we prevent this from ever happening again?"... Instead it was, "I hope they don't take my guns away :'("
?
The only reason you don't give a shit about 30 people getting shot is because it doesn't in anyway affect your small world, past the fact that your terrified of living in the world without a gun.
It's New Jersey and a huge festival, there were definitely people there with guns (including police)... nobody stopped shit from happening by having a gun. They never do... and they never will.
Honestly, more than anything, I really do think you're a russian toll. All your posts I've read are heartless vomiting up of fox news BS about gun rights in America. Talking about "demonizing citizens" and "taking away rights" because I'm tired of innocent people getting killed for nothing... Who talks like that?
Blaming Team NRA after deaths only serves to show you’re after political axes to grind. I wouldn’t accuse others of “vomiting up” BS when you vomit out these lines blaming NRA after a tragedy.
If you sell guns and make lobbying for the sale of guns their entire business... Then it's their fucking responsibility to do so in a way that doesn't end up with sooooo many people shot and killed. Because that's the way our country works. You can't own a chemical factory and not give a shit about the waste you create while you poison the population around the factory, because your worried it cuts into your bottom line. That's actually against the law, it's called negligence.
The same thing is true for guns.
Your good buddies (NRA), don't really care if you get shot or your family gets shot or your neighbor... etc... as long as you buy guns and ammo from the people who give them money to lobby for them.
If they cared they would lobby for ANY legislation to make gun ownership safer for all the public, but they don't. They just take money from large gun companies and lobby for no laws. Like any large corporation they have an unquenchable thirst for greed, money and power.
Bump stocks are perfect example. Useless for anything but killing people, but after Vegas they said no to banning them. Money... I'll say it again slowly. M O N E Y. I know you think they love you, but it's really about the money.
Let me translate that into something that makes more sense for you though, "LIBERALS WANT TO TAKE ALL MY GUNS!!!! SUPRESSING CITIZENSSSSS, HOW DARE YOU! 2ND AMENDMENT DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING... ALEX JONES... SANDY HOOK WAS FAKED."
Your welcome... Took me hours reading through google translate under "snowflake" BUT I GOT THERE EVENTUALLY :D
Here's to you reading this post while your mind slowly goes blank... and you pick back up at the end of it, right here... and then read back to me fox news headlines in your response post.
In all of the furor over school shootings, it sometimes gets missed that this sort of domestic situation is also a major issue.
In short, the police were called for domestic violence, and when they arrived the man involved shot one of the officers and took four children, two of whom were his, hostage. By the end of the day, he and all four of the children were dead at his hands.
I'd say deaths are people that can no longer do ANYTHING, because someone forcefully took everything they had and ever will have... forever. That's what real "taking rights away" is.
And the reason the needle doesn't move is because congress (is bought out by the gun lobby) doesn't enact laws limiting assholes from carrying guns. Why don't you go back to the last post I quoted you and answer any of the questions you dodged... there were plenty of statistics there spelling out how the vast majority of this county is in favor of gun control and despite that, a republican controlled government won't do anything about it.
Not to mention you, I've never seen you even hint at a solution.
Can you tell me why when I literally just told you that 30 people were shot over nothing, the first thing that came to your mind wasn't "Holy shit, I hope their ok?! How do we prevent this from ever happening again?"... Instead it was, "I hope they don't take my guns away :'("
?
The only reason you don't give a shit about 30 people getting shot is because it doesn't in anyway affect your small world, past the fact that your terrified of living in the world without a gun.
It's New Jersey and a huge festival, there were definitely people there with guns (including police)... nobody stopped shit from happening by having a gun. They never do... and they never will.
Honestly, more than anything, I really do think you're a russian toll. All your posts I've read are heartless vomiting up of fox news BS about gun rights in America. Talking about "demonizing citizens" and "taking away rights" because I'm tired of innocent people getting killed for nothing... Who talks like that?
Blaming Team NRA after deaths only serves to show you’re after political axes to grind. I wouldn’t accuse others of “vomiting up” BS when you vomit out these lines blaming NRA after a tragedy.
If you sell guns and make lobbying for the sale of guns their entire business... Then it's their fucking responsibility to do so in a way that doesn't end up with sooooo many people shot and killed. Because that's the way our country works. You can't own a chemical factory and not give a shit about the waste you create while you poison the population around the factory, because your worried it cuts into your bottom line. That's actually against the law, it's called negligence.
false equivalence. unless you're saying, for example, that a chemical factory is responsible because someone used one of their chemicals to make a bomb
In all of the furor over school shootings, it sometimes gets missed that this sort of domestic situation is also a major issue.
In short, the police were called for domestic violence, and when they arrived the man involved shot one of the officers and took four children, two of whom were his, hostage. By the end of the day, he and all four of the children were dead at his hands.
I'd say deaths are people that can no longer do ANYTHING, because someone forcefully took everything they had and ever will have... forever. That's what real "taking rights away" is.
And the reason the needle doesn't move is because congress (is bought out by the gun lobby) doesn't enact laws limiting assholes from carrying guns. Why don't you go back to the last post I quoted you and answer any of the questions you dodged... there were plenty of statistics there spelling out how the vast majority of this county is in favor of gun control and despite that, a republican controlled government won't do anything about it.
Not to mention you, I've never seen you even hint at a solution.
Can you tell me why when I literally just told you that 30 people were shot over nothing, the first thing that came to your mind wasn't "Holy shit, I hope their ok?! How do we prevent this from ever happening again?"... Instead it was, "I hope they don't take my guns away :'("
?
The only reason you don't give a shit about 30 people getting shot is because it doesn't in anyway affect your small world, past the fact that your terrified of living in the world without a gun.
It's New Jersey and a huge festival, there were definitely people there with guns (including police)... nobody stopped shit from happening by having a gun. They never do... and they never will.
Honestly, more than anything, I really do think you're a russian toll. All your posts I've read are heartless vomiting up of fox news BS about gun rights in America. Talking about "demonizing citizens" and "taking away rights" because I'm tired of innocent people getting killed for nothing... Who talks like that?
Blaming Team NRA after deaths only serves to show you’re after political axes to grind. I wouldn’t accuse others of “vomiting up” BS when you vomit out these lines blaming NRA after a tragedy.
If you sell guns and make lobbying for the sale of guns their entire business... Then it's their fucking responsibility to do so in a way that doesn't end up with sooooo many people shot and killed. Because that's the way our country works. You can't own a chemical factory and not give a shit about the waste you create while you poison the population around the factory, because your worried it cuts into your bottom line. That's actually against the law, it's called negligence.
false equivalence. unless you're saying, for example, that a chemical factory is responsible because someone used one of their chemicals to make a bomb
I guess that depends on whether the chemical factory is called "Chemicalz 4 bombz" i suppose
In all of the furor over school shootings, it sometimes gets missed that this sort of domestic situation is also a major issue.
In short, the police were called for domestic violence, and when they arrived the man involved shot one of the officers and took four children, two of whom were his, hostage. By the end of the day, he and all four of the children were dead at his hands.
I'd say deaths are people that can no longer do ANYTHING, because someone forcefully took everything they had and ever will have... forever. That's what real "taking rights away" is.
And the reason the needle doesn't move is because congress (is bought out by the gun lobby) doesn't enact laws limiting assholes from carrying guns. Why don't you go back to the last post I quoted you and answer any of the questions you dodged... there were plenty of statistics there spelling out how the vast majority of this county is in favor of gun control and despite that, a republican controlled government won't do anything about it.
Not to mention you, I've never seen you even hint at a solution.
Can you tell me why when I literally just told you that 30 people were shot over nothing, the first thing that came to your mind wasn't "Holy shit, I hope their ok?! How do we prevent this from ever happening again?"... Instead it was, "I hope they don't take my guns away :'("
?
The only reason you don't give a shit about 30 people getting shot is because it doesn't in anyway affect your small world, past the fact that your terrified of living in the world without a gun.
It's New Jersey and a huge festival, there were definitely people there with guns (including police)... nobody stopped shit from happening by having a gun. They never do... and they never will.
Honestly, more than anything, I really do think you're a russian toll. All your posts I've read are heartless vomiting up of fox news BS about gun rights in America. Talking about "demonizing citizens" and "taking away rights" because I'm tired of innocent people getting killed for nothing... Who talks like that?
Blaming Team NRA after deaths only serves to show you’re after political axes to grind. I wouldn’t accuse others of “vomiting up” BS when you vomit out these lines blaming NRA after a tragedy.
If you sell guns and make lobbying for the sale of guns their entire business... Then it's their fucking responsibility to do so in a way that doesn't end up with sooooo many people shot and killed. Because that's the way our country works. You can't own a chemical factory and not give a shit about the waste you create while you poison the population around the factory, because your worried it cuts into your bottom line. That's actually against the law, it's called negligence.
false equivalence. unless you're saying, for example, that a chemical factory is responsible because someone used one of their chemicals to make a bomb
It really isn't. Cigarette companies went through the same thing. Throwing their hands back and yelling "Ain't our fault people are getting sick!" didn't work for them. You're responsible for the product you're pushing, especially when people are dying.
In all of the furor over school shootings, it sometimes gets missed that this sort of domestic situation is also a major issue.
In short, the police were called for domestic violence, and when they arrived the man involved shot one of the officers and took four children, two of whom were his, hostage. By the end of the day, he and all four of the children were dead at his hands.
I'd say deaths are people that can no longer do ANYTHING, because someone forcefully took everything they had and ever will have... forever. That's what real "taking rights away" is.
And the reason the needle doesn't move is because congress (is bought out by the gun lobby) doesn't enact laws limiting assholes from carrying guns. Why don't you go back to the last post I quoted you and answer any of the questions you dodged... there were plenty of statistics there spelling out how the vast majority of this county is in favor of gun control and despite that, a republican controlled government won't do anything about it.
Not to mention you, I've never seen you even hint at a solution.
Can you tell me why when I literally just told you that 30 people were shot over nothing, the first thing that came to your mind wasn't "Holy shit, I hope their ok?! How do we prevent this from ever happening again?"... Instead it was, "I hope they don't take my guns away :'("
?
The only reason you don't give a shit about 30 people getting shot is because it doesn't in anyway affect your small world, past the fact that your terrified of living in the world without a gun.
It's New Jersey and a huge festival, there were definitely people there with guns (including police)... nobody stopped shit from happening by having a gun. They never do... and they never will.
Honestly, more than anything, I really do think you're a russian toll. All your posts I've read are heartless vomiting up of fox news BS about gun rights in America. Talking about "demonizing citizens" and "taking away rights" because I'm tired of innocent people getting killed for nothing... Who talks like that?
Blaming Team NRA after deaths only serves to show you’re after political axes to grind. I wouldn’t accuse others of “vomiting up” BS when you vomit out these lines blaming NRA after a tragedy.
If you sell guns and make lobbying for the sale of guns their entire business... Then it's their fucking responsibility to do so in a way that doesn't end up with sooooo many people shot and killed. Because that's the way our country works. You can't own a chemical factory and not give a shit about the waste you create while you poison the population around the factory, because your worried it cuts into your bottom line. That's actually against the law, it's called negligence.
false equivalence. unless you're saying, for example, that a chemical factory is responsible because someone used one of their chemicals to make a bomb
It really isn't. Cigarette companies went through the same thing. Throwing their hands back and yelling "Ain't our fault people are getting sick!" didn't work for them. You're responsible for the product you're pushing, especially when people are dying.
Thats not the same. Tobacco companies were saying their products were healthy and selling to kids. Gun companies have the parents getting to their kids and not even hideing that their products are dangerous.
You can't even argue that gun control advocates campaigns against the ar15 platform has driven sales of it for years. Why would they even open their mouths about it when their enemies give it the stamp of credibility.
In all of the furor over school shootings, it sometimes gets missed that this sort of domestic situation is also a major issue.
In short, the police were called for domestic violence, and when they arrived the man involved shot one of the officers and took four children, two of whom were his, hostage. By the end of the day, he and all four of the children were dead at his hands.
I'd say deaths are people that can no longer do ANYTHING, because someone forcefully took everything they had and ever will have... forever. That's what real "taking rights away" is.
And the reason the needle doesn't move is because congress (is bought out by the gun lobby) doesn't enact laws limiting assholes from carrying guns. Why don't you go back to the last post I quoted you and answer any of the questions you dodged... there were plenty of statistics there spelling out how the vast majority of this county is in favor of gun control and despite that, a republican controlled government won't do anything about it.
Not to mention you, I've never seen you even hint at a solution.
Can you tell me why when I literally just told you that 30 people were shot over nothing, the first thing that came to your mind wasn't "Holy shit, I hope their ok?! How do we prevent this from ever happening again?"... Instead it was, "I hope they don't take my guns away :'("
?
The only reason you don't give a shit about 30 people getting shot is because it doesn't in anyway affect your small world, past the fact that your terrified of living in the world without a gun.
It's New Jersey and a huge festival, there were definitely people there with guns (including police)... nobody stopped shit from happening by having a gun. They never do... and they never will.
Honestly, more than anything, I really do think you're a russian toll. All your posts I've read are heartless vomiting up of fox news BS about gun rights in America. Talking about "demonizing citizens" and "taking away rights" because I'm tired of innocent people getting killed for nothing... Who talks like that?
Blaming Team NRA after deaths only serves to show you’re after political axes to grind. I wouldn’t accuse others of “vomiting up” BS when you vomit out these lines blaming NRA after a tragedy.
If you sell guns and make lobbying for the sale of guns their entire business... Then it's their fucking responsibility to do so in a way that doesn't end up with sooooo many people shot and killed. Because that's the way our country works. You can't own a chemical factory and not give a shit about the waste you create while you poison the population around the factory, because your worried it cuts into your bottom line. That's actually against the law, it's called negligence.
false equivalence. unless you're saying, for example, that a chemical factory is responsible because someone used one of their chemicals to make a bomb
It really isn't. Cigarette companies went through the same thing. Throwing their hands back and yelling "Ain't our fault people are getting sick!" didn't work for them. You're responsible for the product you're pushing, especially when people are dying.
Thats not the same. Tobacco companies were saying their products were healthy and selling to kids. Gun companies have the parents getting to their kids and not even hideing that their products are dangerous.
You can't even argue that gun control advocates campaigns against the ar15 platform has driven sales of it for years. Why would they even open their mouths about it when their enemies give it the stamp of credibility.
The problem is that they're selling it as a "solution to to all your problems!". Hunting? Gun. Self defense? Gun. Fridge stuck? Gun. Democrats? Guns! Too few guns? More guns! Immigrants? You don't have enough guns!
Pushing guns as a solution to all problems and something that is inherently good is as bad as telling people that smoking makes you healthier in my opinion.
On June 21 2018 05:32 Excludos wrote: Fridge stuck? Gun. Democrats? Guns! Immigrants? You don't have enough guns!
Pushing guns as a solution to all problems and something that is inherently good is as bad as telling people that smoking makes you healthier in my opinion.
Yes, people for gun rights need to not be hysterical because we can come together ...
They're pushing guns for immigrants, Democrats, and stuck fridges!
Sigh. Of course, this is exactly the kind of dialogue that this debate has been missing. Keep it up.
On June 21 2018 05:32 Excludos wrote: Fridge stuck? Gun. Democrats? Guns! Immigrants? You don't have enough guns!
Pushing guns as a solution to all problems and something that is inherently good is as bad as telling people that smoking makes you healthier in my opinion.
Yes, people for gun rights need to not be hysterical because we can come together ...
They're pushing guns for immigrants, Democrats, and stuck fridges!
Sigh. Of course, this is exactly the kind of dialogue that this debate has been missing. Keep it up.
You don't know what a hyperbole is do you..?
Also, if you take a quick look at the ads from NRA you'll see that immigrants and democrats are not the hyperbole here, only the fridge is. I posted one earlier if you want to take a look.
In all of the furor over school shootings, it sometimes gets missed that this sort of domestic situation is also a major issue.
In short, the police were called for domestic violence, and when they arrived the man involved shot one of the officers and took four children, two of whom were his, hostage. By the end of the day, he and all four of the children were dead at his hands.
I'd say deaths are people that can no longer do ANYTHING, because someone forcefully took everything they had and ever will have... forever. That's what real "taking rights away" is.
And the reason the needle doesn't move is because congress (is bought out by the gun lobby) doesn't enact laws limiting assholes from carrying guns. Why don't you go back to the last post I quoted you and answer any of the questions you dodged... there were plenty of statistics there spelling out how the vast majority of this county is in favor of gun control and despite that, a republican controlled government won't do anything about it.
Not to mention you, I've never seen you even hint at a solution.
Can you tell me why when I literally just told you that 30 people were shot over nothing, the first thing that came to your mind wasn't "Holy shit, I hope their ok?! How do we prevent this from ever happening again?"... Instead it was, "I hope they don't take my guns away :'("
?
The only reason you don't give a shit about 30 people getting shot is because it doesn't in anyway affect your small world, past the fact that your terrified of living in the world without a gun.
It's New Jersey and a huge festival, there were definitely people there with guns (including police)... nobody stopped shit from happening by having a gun. They never do... and they never will.
Honestly, more than anything, I really do think you're a russian toll. All your posts I've read are heartless vomiting up of fox news BS about gun rights in America. Talking about "demonizing citizens" and "taking away rights" because I'm tired of innocent people getting killed for nothing... Who talks like that?
Blaming Team NRA after deaths only serves to show you’re after political axes to grind. I wouldn’t accuse others of “vomiting up” BS when you vomit out these lines blaming NRA after a tragedy.
If you sell guns and make lobbying for the sale of guns their entire business... Then it's their fucking responsibility to do so in a way that doesn't end up with sooooo many people shot and killed. Because that's the way our country works. You can't own a chemical factory and not give a shit about the waste you create while you poison the population around the factory, because your worried it cuts into your bottom line. That's actually against the law, it's called negligence.
false equivalence. unless you're saying, for example, that a chemical factory is responsible because someone used one of their chemicals to make a bomb
If a nuclear power plant didn't care at all where the wasted uranium went the could easily sell it to the highest bidder, which might be Iran or North Korea.
They of course could make an argument that they had no idea how people would use it or that it isn't their responsibility to police everyone that uses their product, but societies do regulate these things for many reasons.
If I make a product and put it out into the world I can't claim complete ignorance of the effects of the product, even if I haven't tested it. And if I do test it, at that point it just becomes willful negligence. Take for example Exon or Monsanto, both had researched and discovered that their products damaged the environment and the future of humanity, yet once they found this out they did worse by suppressing the research.
You can claim ignorance for the impact of a product or your actions on the world, and up to a point it is a legitimate claim. But past a certain point you become liable even if ignorant.
In the case of gun companies, nothing is hidden, if the country wasn't flooded with guns, less people would get shot.
If they really cared about anything but money there are safety features they could be pushing for with guns which would make them less likely to be used by someone other than the owner (smart grips that recognized the owner, not positive but I'm pretty sure this exists), or just common sense gun laws, as apposed to recently lobbying for a law in which people with mental health issues that weren't allowed to buy guns are now able to buy them (recently changed in the US).
In my opinion, they probably are liable or hiding behind the liability of others for the deaths of many people in America, they just need someone to build a class action suite against them. Problem is, the amount of money they command.
It's like Alex Jones saying Sandy Hook was fake, and not caring about how that affected the mothers and families of all those kids. Not only did they lose their children to a gun nut, but now they get death threats from fucked up right wing fringe nuts because Alex Jones made a show and made money pushing bullshit conspiracies.
Now he is being deservedly sued, because his actions hurt a lot of people.
On June 21 2018 05:32 Excludos wrote: Fridge stuck? Gun. Democrats? Guns! Immigrants? You don't have enough guns!
Pushing guns as a solution to all problems and something that is inherently good is as bad as telling people that smoking makes you healthier in my opinion.
Yes, people for gun rights need to not be hysterical because we can come together ...
They're pushing guns for immigrants, Democrats, and stuck fridges!
Sigh. Of course, this is exactly the kind of dialogue that this debate has been missing. Keep it up.
You just need to stop pretending you are for coming together and finding a common cause to make the US safer for us all.
All I've heard you say is, "don't take all our guns."
Nobody is saying that.
So until you say something else, your not saying anything new. In others words, your not saying let's come together and find a solution.
People discussing or advocating for guns come from all places on the spectrum from "ban all civilian gun ownership" to "no rules whatsoever about gun ownership." The commonly repeated claim that nobody is advocating for a complete ban on civilian gun ownership is false. I'll say that people from all parts of the spectrum are making false claims about what people in other parts of the spectrum are asking for.
On June 24 2018 00:45 micronesia wrote: People discussing or advocating for guns come from all places on the spectrum from "ban all civilian gun ownership" to "no rules whatsoever about gun ownership." The commonly repeated claim that nobody is advocating for a complete ban on civilian gun ownership is false. I'll say that people from all parts of the spectrum are making false claims about what people in other parts of the spectrum are asking for.
We can at least make the claim that only a minority supports an outright ban of all guns. Especially considering something like 80% of the US population are pro some kind of regulation, while half of the population are also conservatives.
Therefore, attempting to deafen all discussion with "They gon' take mah guns!" is counterproductive and straw man at best.
On June 24 2018 00:45 micronesia wrote: People discussing or advocating for guns come from all places on the spectrum from "ban all civilian gun ownership" to "no rules whatsoever about gun ownership." The commonly repeated claim that nobody is advocating for a complete ban on civilian gun ownership is false. I'll say that people from all parts of the spectrum are making false claims about what people in other parts of the spectrum are asking for.
I'm not talking about other people, just him and what he is or isn't advocating for based on what I've read him say in these forum posts.
On June 24 2018 00:45 micronesia wrote: People discussing or advocating for guns come from all places on the spectrum from "ban all civilian gun ownership" to "no rules whatsoever about gun ownership." The commonly repeated claim that nobody is advocating for a complete ban on civilian gun ownership is false. I'll say that people from all parts of the spectrum are making false claims about what people in other parts of the spectrum are asking for.
We can at least make the claim that only a minority supports an outright ban of all guns.
Agreed.
Especially considering something like 80% of the US population are pro some kind of regulation, while half of the population are also conservatives.
This does not really support your claim, but it's not a big deal.
Therefore, attempting to deafen all discussion with "They gon' take mah guns!" is counterproductive and straw man at best.
You aren't really making a good point here. You are basically saying people further towards the "no gun regulation" end of the spectrum shouldn't try to deafen the discussion by mischaracterizing people in other parts of the spectrum, even though people in other parts of the spectrum are equally guilty of deafening discussion. For example:
"They gon' take mah guns!" You are making out the people you disagree with to be idiots incapable of even speaking properly. Good luck with the next few pages of discussion.
On June 24 2018 00:45 micronesia wrote: People discussing or advocating for guns come from all places on the spectrum from "ban all civilian gun ownership" to "no rules whatsoever about gun ownership." The commonly repeated claim that nobody is advocating for a complete ban on civilian gun ownership is false. I'll say that people from all parts of the spectrum are making false claims about what people in other parts of the spectrum are asking for.
I'm not talking about other people, just him and what he is or isn't advocating for based on what I've read him say in these forum posts.
You said something false, and it's still false regardless of who you were talking to.
On June 24 2018 00:58 micronesia wrote: You aren't really making a good point here. You are basically saying people further towards the "no gun regulation" end of the spectrum shouldn't try to deafen the discussion by mischaracterizing people in other parts of the spectrum, even though people in other parts of the spectrum are equally guilty of deafening discussion. For example:
"They gon' take mah guns!" You are making out the people you disagree with to me idiots incapable of even speaking properly. Good luck with the next few pages of discussion..
Oh, you misunderstand. Swap out "people" with "Danglars" and you'll find I have a legit point in there.
On June 24 2018 00:58 micronesia wrote: You aren't really making a good point here. You are basically saying people further towards the "no gun regulation" end of the spectrum shouldn't try to deafen the discussion by mischaracterizing people in other parts of the spectrum, even though people in other parts of the spectrum are equally guilty of deafening discussion. For example:
"They gon' take mah guns!" You are making out the people you disagree with to me idiots incapable of even speaking properly. Good luck with the next few pages of discussion..
Oh, you misunderstand. Swap out "people" with "Danglars" and you'll find I have a legit point in there.
Well no beacuse that means your point is about the person and not the issue. That makes it an attack and not real discussion.
And you have other people in the thread that agree with danglars so you'd be wrong regardless.
On June 24 2018 00:58 micronesia wrote: You aren't really making a good point here. You are basically saying people further towards the "no gun regulation" end of the spectrum shouldn't try to deafen the discussion by mischaracterizing people in other parts of the spectrum, even though people in other parts of the spectrum are equally guilty of deafening discussion. For example:
"They gon' take mah guns!" You are making out the people you disagree with to me idiots incapable of even speaking properly. Good luck with the next few pages of discussion..
Oh, you misunderstand. Swap out "people" with "Danglars" and you'll find I have a legit point in there.
Well no beacuse that means your point is about the person and not the issue. That makes it an attack and not real discussion.
And you have other people in the thread that agree with danglars so you'd be wrong regardless.
1. I'm attacking the person's argument, not the person. I don't think it's very fair I can't deconstruct his arguments without being considering as "attacking". 2. My entire point was that his arguments are nonconstructive. Calling me out for pointing it out and calling it "not a real discussion" is moot at this point. It was never a real discussion in the first place. 3.. Other people agreeing with him does not make my point in any way wrong.
EPT
