The Left is Rallying to Take Your Guns Again

[rjs330]

I wasn't interested in banning them anyway.

You may not be but others are and so are many I'm the democratic party.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Some folks think the level of child death is acceptable when the trade is owning guns.

Who thinks that?

 

[civilwarbuff]

But it’s n that specific example you would have responsibility, yes or no?

No.

 

[Aldebaran]

But it’s n that specific example you would have responsibility, yes or no?

Did the kid break into the house, or was he there as an invited visitor?
And yes, that matters.

 

[rambot]

Do you "Minority Report" much?

I have no idea how you "verbed" that noun.

But it is noted you didn't address the point.

 

[rambot]

Apparently red flag laws don't work either. The shooter had been flagged and still bought guns and shot kids. He was evaluated psychologically and wasn't found to be a danger. So this is evidence that so many of these suggested regulations don't work.

No.

This means the current laws are DESIGNED to be INEFFECTIVE and were undoubtedly undermined by a certain group that is interested in not putting impediments on gun ownership.

Design a law that will actually do what it is intended to do and then you can say whether the regulation works. If the regulation does NOT keep guns away from those deemed dangerous, then the problem is the wording of regulation.

There's plenty of regulations around the world that limit mentally unstable people from owning guns it just seems that other countries are able to craft laws that WORK and not laws that are meant to give the perception of working when they are passed but don't actually do anything. And it works for American politicians; gun control advocates manage to say "look what we passed" and gun advocates say "look, it's okay you can still get it".

As unprincipled as almost every politician around the globe is, it does seem at times like American ones are particularly aggregious.


Lastly, I'm REALLY REALLY REALLY confused:
I have some apologists saying "the govt. needs to apply the laws already on the books" and then I see posts like this that say "the laws on the books are being applied and they didn't stop the tragedy so what's the point of the laws?"
I'm not really sure which way to focus for this argument.

 

[ottawak]

You may not be but others are and so are many I'm the democratic party.

Thank you. At least you will acknowledge that I have expressed that opinion--which is more than I can say for some of the rest of the pro-gun crowd here. Even if you think I'm lying about it (which you probably do) ar least you heard me say it.

 

[rambot]

Read the rest of my posts. Australia did not then, and does not now have our homicide rate. They were already safer than us. So people could see giving up their weapons easily.

Ahhh....but you are talking about the FEELING of safety.
Not ACTUALLY being safe...just the feeling of it.
Those two are VERY VERY different beasts.

We have more NON-firearm homicides than most developed nations have total homicides. We have a violence problem, not just a gun problem. The reason our homicides way outstrip other developed nations is that we have too much in common with non-developed nations. We are not fixing the factors that drive violence.

I agree with that 100% though.
100%.

What do you think is keeping Americans from accepting that and pushing for change? Do you think they are so focussed on some kind of "sexual spiritual degradation" that they don't bother at looking at the degradation of empathy?

 

[civilwarbuff]

Ahhh....but you are talking about the FEELING of safety.
Not ACTUALLY being safe...just the feeling of it.
Those two are VERY VERY different beasts.

Yes they are......can you tell the difference between the 2?

What do you think is keeping Americans from accepting that and pushing for change? Do you think they are so focussed on some kind of "sexual spiritual degradation" that they don't bother at looking at the degradation of empathy?

Are you watching a inappropriate content site at the same time?......pay attention to where you are......

 

[rambot]

Convince people to not shoot each other, or to commit crimes where they end up deservedly getting shot.

This may be, honestly one of the most insane suggestions to solve gun violence I've heard.

Or were you also suggesting, maybe that we could give them a nice chocolate sundae to sweeten the deal.

 

[Aldebaran]

No.

This means the current laws are DESIGNED to be INEFFECTIVE and were undoubtedly undermined by a certain group that is interested in not putting impediments on gun ownership.

Design a law that will actually do what it is intended to do and then you can say whether the regulation works. If the regulation does NOT keep guns away from those deemed dangerous, then the problem is the wording of regulation.

There's plenty of regulations around the world that limit mentally unstable people from owning guns it just seems that other countries are able to craft laws that WORK and not laws that are meant to give the perception of working when they are passed but don't actually do anything. And it works for American politicians; gun control advocates manage to say "look what we passed" and gun advocates say "look, it's okay you can still get it".

As unprincipled as almost every politician around the globe is, it does seem at times like American ones are particularly aggregious.


Lastly, I'm REALLY REALLY REALLY confused:
I have some apologists saying "the govt. needs to apply the laws already on the books" and then I see posts like this that say "the laws on the books are being applied and they didn't stop the tragedy so what's the point of the laws?"
I'm not really sure which way to focus for this argument.

How do you deem someone as "dangerous" if they don't even have a criminal record? Sure, you could say "require a mental evaluation as a prerequisite to a gun purchase", but Salvador Ramos was deemed to not be a threat:

"State police have said that they've found no apparent motive or warning signs for the attack. They noted that Ramos had no documented history of mental illness or a criminal record, according to a New York Times report."
Salvador Ramos' expulsion allowed 'isolation and disconnection' to fester

 

[Aldebaran]

This may be, honestly one of the most insane suggestions to solve gun violence I've heard.

Or were you also suggesting, maybe that we could give them a nice chocolate sundae to sweeten the deal.

Then should I take it that you don't believe that it's the person holding the gun that decides whether or not to shoot someone else?

 

[civilwarbuff]

This may be, honestly one of the most insane suggestions to solve gun violence I've heard.

Or were you also suggesting, maybe that we could give them a nice chocolate sundae to sweeten the deal.

WOW.....never heard that convincing people to not shoot each other was an 'insane suggestion(s)'. That is probably the most insane comment I have heard uttered on this thread......

 

[Aldebaran]

WOW.....never heard that convincing people to not shoot each other was an 'insane suggestion(s)'. That is probably the most insane comment I have heard uttered on this thread......

Sometimes people talk about "mental health" care as being a solution to violence, but then they forget that a person's mental health influences the decisions they make. Also, it takes the attention off the main narrative: "Guns are bad!"

 

[rambot]

Yes they are......can you tell the difference between the 2?

Yes I can.
Can someone who owns more than 3 guns for protection?
Absolutely not.
Can these two?

Absolutely not. If you support them and their response: Can you? Absolutely not.

Are you watching a inappropriate content site at the same time?

Is the word "sexual" really scarey for you? Are you upset that I typed that word? How do you come to the conclusion I'm watching inappropriate content?

......pay attention to where you are......

 

[rambot]

Then should I take it that you don't believe that it's the person holding the gun that decides whether or not to shoot someone else?

Nope. You missed my point. I recognize the person with the gun ..."decides". My point is that "decides" is often to consist of a reasonable and rational consideration of facts and context.

You believe a person pointing a gun threatenningly at someone is acting rationally. You have already indicated they are GOING to kill someone; so you believe that when someone is going to kill someone with a gun if we just started yelling at them to "stop" and "please don't shoot us" then they'd stop.

 

[rambot]

Sometimes people talk about "mental health" care as being a solution to violence, but then they forget that a person's mental health influences the decisions they make. Also, it takes the attention off the main narrative: "Guns are bad!"

You have not demonstrated a sufficient background knowledge in mental health to purport to be an expert. Also if what you say is true (which it is), pray, what is the use in telling people not to kill other people?

 

[cow451]

Sometimes people talk about "mental health" care as being a solution to violence, but then they forget that a person's mental health influences the decisions they make. Also, it takes the attention off the main narrative: "Guns are bad!"

I’ll gladly stipulate that mental health is an important part of the equation. Can you stipulate that rapid firing deadly weapons are part of the equation?

 

[rambot]

WOW.....never heard that convincing people to not shoot each other was an 'insane suggestion(s)'. That is probably the most insane comment I have heard uttered on this thread......

You....."hear" internet comments? That may be disconcerting.

It is an insane suggestion if you think it'd have a meaningful impact, yes. I'm pretty sure victims are often screaming "please don't shoot" and then they get shot.


So....what makes that suggestion good?

 

[Oompa Loompa]

I have no idea how you "verbed" that noun.

But it is noted you didn't address the point.

"Minority Report" is a movie starred by Tom Cruise who played a character who arrested people for future crimes...before they were actually committed.