|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On December 08 2018 04:38 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2018 04:22 JimmiC wrote:
I don't think he is saying anyone who disagree's is a dick, I read him saying that you are being a dick. Show nested quote +And I'd be willing to hear more in a thread called "The Big Gun Control Debate". Guess what, this isn't named that. You are making it into "The Big Gun Control Debate", but it's actually named something completely different. That's why I'm saying you're being a dick. Watch out if you disagree on what to do, because that might not fall under “and people disagree about what to do” and rather it’s “The Big Gun Control Debate.” I thought he agreed with me on bump stocks and red flag laws, but funny enough those things disappear when you’re on a roll. Tell me where your big red line is on how much more gun control you have to be in favor of to qualify for debating additional measures. Shade it in “not a dick” and “absolutely a dick” above and below the line if you please.
You agree there should be bump stock bans and red flag laws?
This link is an addition to my last post you didn't address.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/07/us/ron-helus-california-highway-patrol-thousand-oaks-shooting/index.html
|
On December 08 2018 04:55 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2018 04:38 Danglars wrote:On December 08 2018 04:22 JimmiC wrote:
I don't think he is saying anyone who disagree's is a dick, I read him saying that you are being a dick. And I'd be willing to hear more in a thread called "The Big Gun Control Debate". Guess what, this isn't named that. You are making it into "The Big Gun Control Debate", but it's actually named something completely different. That's why I'm saying you're being a dick. Watch out if you disagree on what to do, because that might not fall under “and people disagree about what to do” and rather it’s “The Big Gun Control Debate.” I thought he agreed with me on bump stocks and red flag laws, but funny enough those things disappear when you’re on a roll. Tell me where your big red line is on how much more gun control you have to be in favor of to qualify for debating additional measures. Shade it in “not a dick” and “absolutely a dick” above and below the line if you please. Do you really need lessons on how not to be a dick? Actually this makes a lot of sense. I'd be happy to help. You basically disagree with people without being condescending towards their point. You also don't argue only part of their point while ignoring others. If you find an article that you think helps your cause (after 1000's the other way) you don't post it with a "I got you". And you add some balance to your point and concede if others make sense. Hope that helps!
I get that you have your own standards for dick-ness, I’m asking how much gun control you have to agree on to avoid the charge that someone with different standards made. He explicitly said it was a function of what additional measures I supported to respond to mass shootings (the comprehension part is very key here, and I suggest you re-read if necessary. I don’t need a quick response... take your time). Now maybe if I supported increased waiting periods and gun registries, I could qualify, but it could also mean mandatory gun training classes.
|
|
|
On December 08 2018 06:38 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2018 06:21 Danglars wrote:On December 08 2018 04:55 JimmiC wrote:On December 08 2018 04:38 Danglars wrote:On December 08 2018 04:22 JimmiC wrote:
I don't think he is saying anyone who disagree's is a dick, I read him saying that you are being a dick. And I'd be willing to hear more in a thread called "The Big Gun Control Debate". Guess what, this isn't named that. You are making it into "The Big Gun Control Debate", but it's actually named something completely different. That's why I'm saying you're being a dick. Watch out if you disagree on what to do, because that might not fall under “and people disagree about what to do” and rather it’s “The Big Gun Control Debate.” I thought he agreed with me on bump stocks and red flag laws, but funny enough those things disappear when you’re on a roll. Tell me where your big red line is on how much more gun control you have to be in favor of to qualify for debating additional measures. Shade it in “not a dick” and “absolutely a dick” above and below the line if you please. Do you really need lessons on how not to be a dick? Actually this makes a lot of sense. I'd be happy to help. You basically disagree with people without being condescending towards their point. You also don't argue only part of their point while ignoring others. If you find an article that you think helps your cause (after 1000's the other way) you don't post it with a "I got you". And you add some balance to your point and concede if others make sense. Hope that helps! I get that you have your own standards for dick-ness, I’m asking how much gun control you have to agree on to avoid the charge that someone with different standards made. He explicitly said it was a function of what additional measures I supported to respond to mass shootings (the comprehension part is very key here, and I suggest you re-read if necessary. I don’t need a quick response... take your time). Now maybe if I supported increased waiting periods and gun registries, I could qualify, but it could also mean mandatory gun training classes. A lot of people you think are on the same side have different opinions on what should be done and get along. It is not what you say, it is how you say it. But I think you are aware of this and like the fight but who knows.
Well, I register your disagreement with how he just characterized it. I also empathize with his frustration when he perceives one side stands for something approximating “do nothing.” I feel the same way on other political issues all the time and it’s somwtimes tough to not call them dicks or worse.
|
|
|
The NYT recently ran a story about armed blacks called "I am the 'Good Guy With a Gun' ": Black Gun Owners Reject Stereotypes, Demand Respect. It quotes interviews word for word. I bring the call for greater understanding for gun owners seeking to defend themselves and their families against those who would say their self defense rights must yield to statistical efficiency and larger impact on society. The article is rather long, but the rest of the stories are worthwhile to read as well.
I moved to Pocatello, Idaho, (a place where guns are very popular) from St. Louis, Mo., about eight years ago.
I decided to purchase a firearm so that my 2-year-old son can learn to treat firearms with respect and know that they aren’t a toy.
The older white gentleman behind the counter folded his arms when I approached and asked about purchasing a rifle. He asked what I was using it for. I told him target practice and as a learning tool to teach my son to respect firearms.
It kind of caught him by surprise and he visibly relaxed a bit. He explained that sometimes they get folks who are angry at their spouses, and he was required to make sure I wasn’t.
I am a black male in my 30s, I love wearing hoodies and am slightly overweight. There are still occasionally people who think “thug” when they see me, of course.
But since purchasing the gun, I’ve experienced a sense of camaraderie with a lot of conservatives who are deep in gun culture.
— Andrew Casey, 32, Pocatello, Idaho. Gun owner for two years.
At times, I’ve felt out of place when I’m one of the few people of color at shooting events or gun shows, but I’ve also been heartened to see other Americans of African descent and people of color there.
People have been welcoming and willing to share information. But sometimes I get questions.
“Why do you need a gun?” “You’re ready to vote for Trump now, aren’t you?”
The Second Amendment is for everyone. I am the “good guy with a gun.” I’m just like you.
— L. Kenton Dunn, 40, Charlotte, N.C. Gun owner for two years.
I am black and transgender. Being black (or any minority) and a gun owner can be described thus: On one hand, you’re told that you’re oppressed and that the country does not look after your interests. On the other, it’s said that if you decide to defend yourself, it will backfire.
I tend to not discuss guns with fellow liberals anymore. They have shown they lack the capacity to discuss the issue with integrity, maturity and nuance.
— Naomi Daniels, 33, Houston. Gun owner for two years.
Despite being a lawyer, I am routinely mistaken for a criminal.
Police officers who I have revealed my gun to have displayed great trepidation despite my handing them my concealed-carry permit along with my driver’s license.
Law-abiding black people are just as motivated to defend themselves, their families and their homes as any other racial group. The right to bear arms has played a vital role in the lives of blacks for generations, and it will continue to do so.
— Damon D. Colbert, 42, Alexandria, Va. Gun owner for 18 years.
A man broke into our house when I was a child, and my father, a sheriff’s deputy, chased him out with his firearm. My father then sat outside in his car all night to protect us.
Later, the police were looking for a black man who did not resemble my father in any way. The officer saw my father sitting in his car by our house and figured he had his man.
My father ended up with a concealed weapons charge. and he could no longer get a job in his field.
Despite this, my father instilled the importance of the Second Amendment. It may cause issues for black men, but at least we have the right to protect ourselves from America.
— Darian Jabari Flowers, 28, Fresno, Calif. Gun owner for 10 years.
NYT
|
On December 14 2018 02:00 Danglars wrote:The NYT recently ran a story about armed blacks called "I am the 'Good Guy With a Gun' ": Black Gun Owners Reject Stereotypes, Demand Respect. It quotes interviews word for word. I bring the call for greater understanding for gun owners seeking to defend themselves and their families against those who would say their self defense rights must yield to statistical efficiency and larger impact on society. The article is rather long, but the rest of the stories are worthwhile to read as well. Show nested quote +I moved to Pocatello, Idaho, (a place where guns are very popular) from St. Louis, Mo., about eight years ago.
I decided to purchase a firearm so that my 2-year-old son can learn to treat firearms with respect and know that they aren’t a toy.
The older white gentleman behind the counter folded his arms when I approached and asked about purchasing a rifle. He asked what I was using it for. I told him target practice and as a learning tool to teach my son to respect firearms.
It kind of caught him by surprise and he visibly relaxed a bit. He explained that sometimes they get folks who are angry at their spouses, and he was required to make sure I wasn’t.
I am a black male in my 30s, I love wearing hoodies and am slightly overweight. There are still occasionally people who think “thug” when they see me, of course.
But since purchasing the gun, I’ve experienced a sense of camaraderie with a lot of conservatives who are deep in gun culture.
— Andrew Casey, 32, Pocatello, Idaho. Gun owner for two years. Show nested quote +At times, I’ve felt out of place when I’m one of the few people of color at shooting events or gun shows, but I’ve also been heartened to see other Americans of African descent and people of color there.
People have been welcoming and willing to share information. But sometimes I get questions.
“Why do you need a gun?” “You’re ready to vote for Trump now, aren’t you?”
The Second Amendment is for everyone. I am the “good guy with a gun.” I’m just like you.
— L. Kenton Dunn, 40, Charlotte, N.C. Gun owner for two years. Show nested quote +I am black and transgender. Being black (or any minority) and a gun owner can be described thus: On one hand, you’re told that you’re oppressed and that the country does not look after your interests. On the other, it’s said that if you decide to defend yourself, it will backfire.
I tend to not discuss guns with fellow liberals anymore. They have shown they lack the capacity to discuss the issue with integrity, maturity and nuance.
— Naomi Daniels, 33, Houston. Gun owner for two years. Show nested quote +Despite being a lawyer, I am routinely mistaken for a criminal.
Police officers who I have revealed my gun to have displayed great trepidation despite my handing them my concealed-carry permit along with my driver’s license.
Law-abiding black people are just as motivated to defend themselves, their families and their homes as any other racial group. The right to bear arms has played a vital role in the lives of blacks for generations, and it will continue to do so.
— Damon D. Colbert, 42, Alexandria, Va. Gun owner for 18 years. Show nested quote +A man broke into our house when I was a child, and my father, a sheriff’s deputy, chased him out with his firearm. My father then sat outside in his car all night to protect us.
Later, the police were looking for a black man who did not resemble my father in any way. The officer saw my father sitting in his car by our house and figured he had his man.
My father ended up with a concealed weapons charge. and he could no longer get a job in his field.
Despite this, my father instilled the importance of the Second Amendment. It may cause issues for black men, but at least we have the right to protect ourselves from America.
— Darian Jabari Flowers, 28, Fresno, Calif. Gun owner for 10 years. NYT
What are you trying to say this:
I bring the call for greater understanding for gun owners seeking to defend themselves and their families against those who would say their self defense rights must yield to statistical efficiency and larger impact on society.
has to do with the article you posted with it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On December 14 2018 02:30 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2018 02:00 Danglars wrote:The NYT recently ran a story about armed blacks called "I am the 'Good Guy With a Gun' ": Black Gun Owners Reject Stereotypes, Demand Respect. It quotes interviews word for word. I bring the call for greater understanding for gun owners seeking to defend themselves and their families against those who would say their self defense rights must yield to statistical efficiency and larger impact on society. The article is rather long, but the rest of the stories are worthwhile to read as well. I moved to Pocatello, Idaho, (a place where guns are very popular) from St. Louis, Mo., about eight years ago.
I decided to purchase a firearm so that my 2-year-old son can learn to treat firearms with respect and know that they aren’t a toy.
The older white gentleman behind the counter folded his arms when I approached and asked about purchasing a rifle. He asked what I was using it for. I told him target practice and as a learning tool to teach my son to respect firearms.
It kind of caught him by surprise and he visibly relaxed a bit. He explained that sometimes they get folks who are angry at their spouses, and he was required to make sure I wasn’t.
I am a black male in my 30s, I love wearing hoodies and am slightly overweight. There are still occasionally people who think “thug” when they see me, of course.
But since purchasing the gun, I’ve experienced a sense of camaraderie with a lot of conservatives who are deep in gun culture.
— Andrew Casey, 32, Pocatello, Idaho. Gun owner for two years. At times, I’ve felt out of place when I’m one of the few people of color at shooting events or gun shows, but I’ve also been heartened to see other Americans of African descent and people of color there.
People have been welcoming and willing to share information. But sometimes I get questions.
“Why do you need a gun?” “You’re ready to vote for Trump now, aren’t you?”
The Second Amendment is for everyone. I am the “good guy with a gun.” I’m just like you.
— L. Kenton Dunn, 40, Charlotte, N.C. Gun owner for two years. I am black and transgender. Being black (or any minority) and a gun owner can be described thus: On one hand, you’re told that you’re oppressed and that the country does not look after your interests. On the other, it’s said that if you decide to defend yourself, it will backfire.
I tend to not discuss guns with fellow liberals anymore. They have shown they lack the capacity to discuss the issue with integrity, maturity and nuance.
— Naomi Daniels, 33, Houston. Gun owner for two years. Despite being a lawyer, I am routinely mistaken for a criminal.
Police officers who I have revealed my gun to have displayed great trepidation despite my handing them my concealed-carry permit along with my driver’s license.
Law-abiding black people are just as motivated to defend themselves, their families and their homes as any other racial group. The right to bear arms has played a vital role in the lives of blacks for generations, and it will continue to do so.
— Damon D. Colbert, 42, Alexandria, Va. Gun owner for 18 years. A man broke into our house when I was a child, and my father, a sheriff’s deputy, chased him out with his firearm. My father then sat outside in his car all night to protect us.
Later, the police were looking for a black man who did not resemble my father in any way. The officer saw my father sitting in his car by our house and figured he had his man.
My father ended up with a concealed weapons charge. and he could no longer get a job in his field.
Despite this, my father instilled the importance of the Second Amendment. It may cause issues for black men, but at least we have the right to protect ourselves from America.
— Darian Jabari Flowers, 28, Fresno, Calif. Gun owner for 10 years. NYT What are you trying to say this: Show nested quote +I bring the call for greater understanding for gun owners seeking to defend themselves and their families against those who would say their self defense rights must yield to statistical efficiency and larger impact on society. has to do with the article you posted with it?
It is meant to show the rationale for why one might want to own a gun, and why they might potentially disagree with the idea of surrendering them to societal pressures
Danglers let me know if I have this wrong
|
On December 14 2018 03:33 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2018 02:30 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 14 2018 02:00 Danglars wrote:The NYT recently ran a story about armed blacks called "I am the 'Good Guy With a Gun' ": Black Gun Owners Reject Stereotypes, Demand Respect. It quotes interviews word for word. I bring the call for greater understanding for gun owners seeking to defend themselves and their families against those who would say their self defense rights must yield to statistical efficiency and larger impact on society. The article is rather long, but the rest of the stories are worthwhile to read as well. I moved to Pocatello, Idaho, (a place where guns are very popular) from St. Louis, Mo., about eight years ago.
I decided to purchase a firearm so that my 2-year-old son can learn to treat firearms with respect and know that they aren’t a toy.
The older white gentleman behind the counter folded his arms when I approached and asked about purchasing a rifle. He asked what I was using it for. I told him target practice and as a learning tool to teach my son to respect firearms.
It kind of caught him by surprise and he visibly relaxed a bit. He explained that sometimes they get folks who are angry at their spouses, and he was required to make sure I wasn’t.
I am a black male in my 30s, I love wearing hoodies and am slightly overweight. There are still occasionally people who think “thug” when they see me, of course.
But since purchasing the gun, I’ve experienced a sense of camaraderie with a lot of conservatives who are deep in gun culture.
— Andrew Casey, 32, Pocatello, Idaho. Gun owner for two years. At times, I’ve felt out of place when I’m one of the few people of color at shooting events or gun shows, but I’ve also been heartened to see other Americans of African descent and people of color there.
People have been welcoming and willing to share information. But sometimes I get questions.
“Why do you need a gun?” “You’re ready to vote for Trump now, aren’t you?”
The Second Amendment is for everyone. I am the “good guy with a gun.” I’m just like you.
— L. Kenton Dunn, 40, Charlotte, N.C. Gun owner for two years. I am black and transgender. Being black (or any minority) and a gun owner can be described thus: On one hand, you’re told that you’re oppressed and that the country does not look after your interests. On the other, it’s said that if you decide to defend yourself, it will backfire.
I tend to not discuss guns with fellow liberals anymore. They have shown they lack the capacity to discuss the issue with integrity, maturity and nuance.
— Naomi Daniels, 33, Houston. Gun owner for two years. Despite being a lawyer, I am routinely mistaken for a criminal.
Police officers who I have revealed my gun to have displayed great trepidation despite my handing them my concealed-carry permit along with my driver’s license.
Law-abiding black people are just as motivated to defend themselves, their families and their homes as any other racial group. The right to bear arms has played a vital role in the lives of blacks for generations, and it will continue to do so.
— Damon D. Colbert, 42, Alexandria, Va. Gun owner for 18 years. A man broke into our house when I was a child, and my father, a sheriff’s deputy, chased him out with his firearm. My father then sat outside in his car all night to protect us.
Later, the police were looking for a black man who did not resemble my father in any way. The officer saw my father sitting in his car by our house and figured he had his man.
My father ended up with a concealed weapons charge. and he could no longer get a job in his field.
Despite this, my father instilled the importance of the Second Amendment. It may cause issues for black men, but at least we have the right to protect ourselves from America.
— Darian Jabari Flowers, 28, Fresno, Calif. Gun owner for 10 years. NYT What are you trying to say this: I bring the call for greater understanding for gun owners seeking to defend themselves and their families against those who would say their self defense rights must yield to statistical efficiency and larger impact on society. has to do with the article you posted with it? It is meant to show the rationale for why one might want to own a gun, and why they might potentially disagree with the idea of surrendering them to societal pressures Danglers let me know if I have this wrong
I feel like that's it but it seems to miss the thrust of the article in the first place and is superimposing an unrelated argument onto it. I don't want to bother explaining if that's not what he was trying to do though.
|
Bump-fire stocks are now reclassified as machine guns under the NFA. It's an extremely ham-fisted way to execute a bump-fire stock ban; just read the links and twitter thread above. They're now banned. The issue still needs Congressional legislation to work out the problems with the DoJ rule.
|
On December 19 2018 04:29 Danglars wrote:https://twitter.com/StephenGutowski/status/1075078560036065280Bump-fire stocks are now reclassified as machine guns under the NFA. It's an extremely ham-fisted way to execute a bump-fire stock ban; just read the links and twitter thread above. They're now banned. The issue still needs Congressional legislation to work out the problems with the DoJ rule.
What is the difference compared to the many previous bans in states and smaller areas?
|
On December 19 2018 05:46 Yurie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2018 04:29 Danglars wrote:https://twitter.com/StephenGutowski/status/1075078560036065280Bump-fire stocks are now reclassified as machine guns under the NFA. It's an extremely ham-fisted way to execute a bump-fire stock ban; just read the links and twitter thread above. They're now banned. The issue still needs Congressional legislation to work out the problems with the DoJ rule. What is the difference compared to the many previous bans in states and smaller areas?
There's a variety of nuances, for instance Washington was supposed to have a buyback program with it but didn't fund it and the State Patrol wont do it out of their own budget (on a promise of repayment from the gov).
This is also depending on retroactively (despite previous determinations by the government) calling a bumpstock in it's packaging a "machine gun" which will take a remarkably ignorant person to accept.
Just to be clear bump firing is a technique. Any semi-automatic weapon can potentially be bump fired, bump stocks just make it easier. If people accept the reasoning for bump stocks then any President can ban any semi-automatic the same way Trump is banning bump stocks.
Which would basically mean that if a Democrat was elected they could use this to make anyone who doesn't give their gun to the police for free, a felon.
|
|
|
On December 19 2018 09:36 JimmiC wrote:
I don't know how I feel about it. Getting rid of bump stocks is obviously good IMO but if it is just going to be challenged in the courts and defeated anyway what is the point.
I'm not sure why they just don't look at what has been successful in other countries and do that instead of these end arounds.
That's what everyone else is scratching their heads about too while a minority of Americans screams "Freedom!" and "Second amendment!".
|
On December 19 2018 09:40 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2018 09:36 JimmiC wrote:
I don't know how I feel about it. Getting rid of bump stocks is obviously good IMO but if it is just going to be challenged in the courts and defeated anyway what is the point.
I'm not sure why they just don't look at what has been successful in other countries and do that instead of these end arounds.
That's what everyone else is scratching their heads about too while a minority of Americans screams "Freedom!" and "Second amendment!".
Granted the "but muh freedums" crowd carries the bulk of the responsibility for inaction, it's not like Democrats fixed it when they had all three branches or that them writing bad laws isn't part of the problem.
|
On December 19 2018 15:33 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2018 09:40 Excludos wrote:On December 19 2018 09:36 JimmiC wrote:
I don't know how I feel about it. Getting rid of bump stocks is obviously good IMO but if it is just going to be challenged in the courts and defeated anyway what is the point.
I'm not sure why they just don't look at what has been successful in other countries and do that instead of these end arounds.
That's what everyone else is scratching their heads about too while a minority of Americans screams "Freedom!" and "Second amendment!". Granted the "but muh freedums" crowd carries the bulk of the responsibility for inaction, it's not like Democrats fixed it when they had all three branches or that them writing bad laws isn't part of the problem.
Democrats didn’t address the problem because they didn’t have a majority to do so, and they didn’t have a majority to do so because some of their congressmen did not want to anger the nutcases at the NRA and lose their sits. No one wants to frontally oppose the nra, which is one of the most combative, well organized, politicized and militant lobby of its kind. And on the left people like Sanders apparently believe it’s fine to compromise on guns not to lose the demographics to whom they give a hard-on.
Glad to see you found another thread to say it’s all because of the Dems though
|
On December 19 2018 20:37 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2018 15:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 19 2018 09:40 Excludos wrote:On December 19 2018 09:36 JimmiC wrote:
I don't know how I feel about it. Getting rid of bump stocks is obviously good IMO but if it is just going to be challenged in the courts and defeated anyway what is the point.
I'm not sure why they just don't look at what has been successful in other countries and do that instead of these end arounds.
That's what everyone else is scratching their heads about too while a minority of Americans screams "Freedom!" and "Second amendment!". Granted the "but muh freedums" crowd carries the bulk of the responsibility for inaction, it's not like Democrats fixed it when they had all three branches or that them writing bad laws isn't part of the problem. Democrats didn’t address the problem because they didn’t have a majority to do so, and they didn’t have a majority to do so because some of their congressmen did not want to anger the nutcases at the NRA and lose their sits. No one wants to frontally oppose the nra, which is one of the most combative, well organized, politicized and militant lobby of its kind. And on the left people like Sanders apparently believe it’s fine to compromise on guns not to lose the demographics to whom they give a hard-on. Glad to see you found another thread to say it’s all because of the Dems though
When you quote something that starts with ""but muh freedums" crowd carries the bulk of the responsibility" and then say I'm making it "all because of the Dems" it's pretty clear you're not sincerely engaging.
Blaming this all on the NRA and 2A folks is a sure way to get nowhere though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
