Politics And Current Events

Morkle
Posts: 23025
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Politics And Current Events

Postby Morkle » Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:35 am

All these illegal guns spread across the country is definitely a strong argument against gun control laws.

Yes, they are. Because they demonstrate that the hundreds of laws already on the books didn't do jack squat to prevent that convicted felon from still having a gun in that motel room.

This argument is ironic given the numerous tweets I've seen over the weekend where people angry at the Dobbs decision are saying that back-alley abortions will still take place. Huh, yeah, passing a law against something doesn't stop that thing from happening... I have a feeling that I've heard that before.
Not that I'm not with you on some of this stuff - but removing guns from public would help reduce this situation from happening? It wouldn't stop immediately, but the more guns come out of circulation - the harder they are to get.

There are millions of them right now, sure - but generations from now, we'd be in a better state to prevent things like above from happening with kids/felons.

count2infinity
Posts: 35612
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:06 pm
Location: All things must pass. With six you get eggroll. No matter how thin you slice it, it's still baloney.
Contact:

Politics And Current Events

Postby count2infinity » Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:43 am

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... emic-chart

I'm going to ignore the mislabeling of the x-axis (how can Switzerland have just over 40 guns per hundred Americans? I'm sure they mean per 100 citizens), but the trend is pretty clear: more guns = more gun deaths. Less guns = less gun deaths.

It clearly does not completely eliminate gun deaths, but it brings that number down.

Again, if your argument for no further gun restrictions is "F*ck you... I like guns and want to keep them". Cool. That's a valid argument. Any other argument should be thrown in the trash along with your guns.

faftorial
Posts: 14816
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:35 pm
Location: Lengeschder

Politics And Current Events

Postby faftorial » Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:45 am


So is the Sergeant of Arms dead, or no? He was somehow magically shot and killed last night, if he's really dead.

Hadn't heard anything about that but I'm sure it will serve as conspiracy fodder.

Morkle
Posts: 23025
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Politics And Current Events

Postby Morkle » Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:47 am

Oh it's already being used seemingly by both sides as an indication that the insurrection was either real, or fake.

Troy Loney
Posts: 27513
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 3:03 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Troy Loney » Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:47 am

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... emic-chart

I'm going to ignore the mislabeling of the x-axis (how can Switzerland have just over 40 guns per hundred Americans? I'm sure they mean per 100 citizens), but the trend is pretty clear: more guns = more gun deaths. Less guns = less gun deaths.

It clearly does not completely eliminate gun deaths, but it brings that number down.

Again, if your argument for no further gun restrictions is "F*ck you... I like guns and want to keep them". Cool. That's a valid argument. Any other argument should be thrown in the trash along with your guns.
Honest argument, not valid.

count2infinity
Posts: 35612
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:06 pm
Location: All things must pass. With six you get eggroll. No matter how thin you slice it, it's still baloney.
Contact:

Politics And Current Events

Postby count2infinity » Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:51 am

It's valid. "I like it, I enjoy it, I'm responsible and can handle it, I'm far more likely to hurt myself than someone else, I should be allowed to have it." Could make that argument with any number of things.

CBear3
Posts: 7663
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:02 pm
Location: KC, MO

Politics And Current Events

Postby CBear3 » Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:52 am

Pot

King Colby
Posts: 17843
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:35 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby King Colby » Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:53 am

Motorcycles

Troy Loney
Posts: 27513
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 3:03 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Troy Loney » Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:57 am

It's valid. "I like it, I enjoy it, I'm responsible and can handle it, I'm far more likely to hurt myself than someone else, I should be allowed to have it." Could make that argument with any number of things.
That's just narcissistic nonsense. Just because you are comfortable handling a weapon does not translate to those weapons being made to available to every 18+ person that doesn't have a criminal record or been institutionalized.

It's not valid, this argument should not persuade right-minded people that recognize the aggregate harm caused by the proliferation of gun ownership / fetishization of a dangerous consumer product.

CBear3
Posts: 7663
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:02 pm
Location: KC, MO

Politics And Current Events

Postby CBear3 » Tue Jun 28, 2022 9:03 am

Just overturning precedent wherever you look. Stare decisis my assis.
A state employee should have the right to pray, but they shouldn't be doing it on the public's dime. It's not like you're holding games and pausing for the Maghrib so you "have" to pray right then. Under this ruling, I could start every hour of class by standing in front of the room and praying the rosary.
No, you could not. As explained by the Court, "The contested exercise before us does not involve leading prayers with the team or before any other captive audience." "Mr. Kennedy did not seek to direct any prayers to students or require anyone else to participate."
Plenty of documented proof he did, which leads to the hack argument.
But seriously, 20 years ago the court decided a student couldn't lead a prayer on the PA at that game. For people who paid to attend (not captive) largely because he/she was using the school backed facilities to do so.

faftorial
Posts: 14816
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:35 pm
Location: Lengeschder

Politics And Current Events

Postby faftorial » Tue Jun 28, 2022 9:09 am

Oh it's already being used seemingly by both sides as an indication that the insurrection was either real, or fake.
All I can find is this was reported by someone as FOX News last evening w/o any confirmation from elsewhere. I'll guess we'll see.

MR25
Posts: 18475
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 2:58 pm
Location: Gamehendge

Politics And Current Events

Postby MR25 » Tue Jun 28, 2022 9:22 am

Just overturning precedent wherever you look. Stare decisis my assis.
A state employee should have the right to pray, but they shouldn't be doing it on the public's dime. It's not like you're holding games and pausing for the Maghrib so you "have" to pray right then. Under this ruling, I could start every hour of class by standing in front of the room and praying the rosary.
No, you could not. As explained by the Court, "The contested exercise before us does not involve leading prayers with the team or before any other captive audience." "Mr. Kennedy did not seek to direct any prayers to students or require anyone else to participate."
Plenty of documented proof he did, which leads to the hack argument.
But seriously, 20 years ago the court decided a student couldn't lead a prayer on the PA at that game. For people who paid to attend (not captive) largely because he/she was using the school backed facilities to do so.

So where does the appeal for a SCOTUS case that was completely misrepresented by the judge go?

Morkle
Posts: 23025
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Politics And Current Events

Postby Morkle » Tue Jun 28, 2022 9:36 am

It's valid. "I like it, I enjoy it, I'm responsible and can handle it, I'm far more likely to hurt myself than someone else, I should be allowed to have it." Could make that argument with any number of things.
That's just narcissistic nonsense. Just because you are comfortable handling a weapon does not translate to those weapons being made to available to every 18+ person that doesn't have a criminal record or been institutionalized.

It's not valid, this argument should not persuade right-minded people that recognize the aggregate harm caused by the proliferation of gun ownership / fetishization of a dangerous consumer product.
I recognize your position here - but I think it classifies under the "alcohol, weed, motorcycles, etc." A lot of people shouldn't have those either, and yes, there are laws around them.

But that's pretty short-sighted when other things exist that we're ok with saying that, but apparently not something else?

I fall in that camp, you could also add laws tomorrow and I'd follow them, but certainly that's the angle I come from.

Troy Loney
Posts: 27513
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 3:03 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Troy Loney » Tue Jun 28, 2022 9:56 am

It's valid. "I like it, I enjoy it, I'm responsible and can handle it, I'm far more likely to hurt myself than someone else, I should be allowed to have it." Could make that argument with any number of things.
That's just narcissistic nonsense. Just because you are comfortable handling a weapon does not translate to those weapons being made to available to every 18+ person that doesn't have a criminal record or been institutionalized.

It's not valid, this argument should not persuade right-minded people that recognize the aggregate harm caused by the proliferation of gun ownership / fetishization of a dangerous consumer product.
I recognize your position here - but I think it classifies under the "alcohol, weed, motorcycles, etc." A lot of people shouldn't have those either, and yes, there are laws around them.

But that's pretty short-sighted when other things exist that we're ok with saying that, but apparently not something else?

I fall in that camp, you could also add laws tomorrow and I'd follow them, but certainly that's the angle I come from.
Not sure how motorcycles fall into this category, for one you have to demonstrate competency and get a license to operate, so that's like the least we could do with guns, but gun freaks will revolt or whatever.

Alcohol? The only thing that maybe relates is drunk driving, and we do a lot of things to try and combat drunk driving and punish based on the act, not only were you to cause damage.

Guns are the only thing here that I see with a massive negative externality that we refuse to address

count2infinity
Posts: 35612
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:06 pm
Location: All things must pass. With six you get eggroll. No matter how thin you slice it, it's still baloney.
Contact:

Politics And Current Events

Postby count2infinity » Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:01 am

People aren't punished for being dangerous with guns, especially when they cause dangers to others?

mikey
Posts: 42243
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:58 pm
Location: More of a before-rehab friend...
Contact:

Politics And Current Events

Postby mikey » Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:07 am

Yeah, you can be punished just for having a gun sometimes...much less inflicting damage...

You can fill a motorcycle full of weed and alcohol and not be punished...

I'm not Mr. Gun or anything, but I don't get where this is coming from, other than trying to bulldoze to your desired result...

DigitalGypsy66
Posts: 19676
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 7:33 pm
Location: Iodine State

Politics And Current Events

Postby DigitalGypsy66 » Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:18 am

I was reading some bizarre takes on Twitter last night about how all of these corporations that are paying for their employees to travel for abortions are only doing so to get out of higher insurance premiums for maternal care, family insurance costs, and loss of production while new parents are on maternity/paternity leave.

Imagine living one's life thinking like that. Ugh.

Pavel Bure
Posts: 7545
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:57 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Pavel Bure » Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:34 am

I think using comparisons such as motorcycles or weed aren’t applicable. On the surface it seems apples to apples but IMO it’s not even close.

I don’t think comparing guns with anything else can be equal. At the core, we’re talking about weapons capable of mass damage and death. Comparisons should not be made because they only muddy the water and the true issue. The longer these things are legal and looked at as a right the more people are allowed to continue killing multiple children, wives, husbands, and loved ones. While others hide behind something that was created hundreds of years ago because they want to keep their toys. It’s disgusting.

mikey
Posts: 42243
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:58 pm
Location: More of a before-rehab friend...
Contact:

Politics And Current Events

Postby mikey » Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:40 am

No one is "comparing guns with anything else", it's a contextualized, micro-concept that's being discussed...

Troy Loney
Posts: 27513
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 3:03 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Troy Loney » Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:43 am

No one is "comparing guns with anything else", it's a contextualized, micro-concept that's being discussed...
This is gibberish

CBear3
Posts: 7663
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:02 pm
Location: KC, MO

Politics And Current Events

Postby CBear3 » Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:45 am

I think a large number of them see them as being necessary to protect their children, wife, and loved ones.
I do believe in a right to self defense. I do believe in a narrow scope of Castle Doctrine. I don't believe that they have to be unfettered however.

Gaucho
Posts: 49563
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 5:31 pm
Location: shootzepucklefraude

Politics And Current Events

Postby Gaucho » Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:52 am

Imagine thinking "laws are useless because they will be broken" is a useful argument.

Troy Loney
Posts: 27513
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 3:03 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Troy Loney » Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:56 am

I think a large number of them see them as being necessary to protect their children, wife, and loved ones.
I do believe in a right to self defense. I do believe in a narrow scope of Castle Doctrine. I don't believe that they have to be unfettered however.
Which all makes sense, and guns should be available for home security, the sense of comfort/security I imagine that provides to people is valuable. And, clearly the sense of home security and self-defense is sort of embedded there, in that you are using the gun at home to protect from someone that has intruded. As soon as you are in Kyle Rittenhouse territory, the idea of self-defense has become completely unraveled and we are free to go be both the one creating threats and the victim.

The whole idea of what a gun should be used for has been defined by people who are in no sense able to make those distinctions. So now, our only buffer between what we consider normal life and a walking dead type hellscape, are that enough people aren't full internet brain delusional

Morkle
Posts: 23025
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Politics And Current Events

Postby Morkle » Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:57 am

No one is "comparing guns with anything else", it's a contextualized, micro-concept that's being discussed...
Right, I was comparing the "I like them argument" to other things we like. Nothing more.

I even stated that if you wanted to apply more laws tomorrow, do it. I'll follow them, because while I like it, I understand it. But calling one "like" Narcissistic, but there are plenty of likes out there that are dangerous to the person and others, seems out of place.

People love booze, and kill a bunch of people a year while drunk on booze. I like it, am responsible with it, does that make me narcissistic as well?

Morkle
Posts: 23025
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Politics And Current Events

Postby Morkle » Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:59 am

I think a large number of them see them as being necessary to protect their children, wife, and loved ones.
I do believe in a right to self defense. I do believe in a narrow scope of Castle Doctrine. I don't believe that they have to be unfettered however.
Which all makes sense, and guns should be available for home security, the sense of comfort/security I imagine that provides to people is valuable. And, clearly the sense of home security and self-defense is sort of embedded there, in that you are using the gun at home to protect from someone that has intruded. As soon as you are in Kyle Rittenhouse territory, the idea of self-defense has become completely unraveled and we are free to go be both the one creating threats and the victim.

The whole idea of what a gun should be used for has been defined by people who are in no sense able to make those distinctions. So now, our only buffer between what we consider normal life and a walking dead type hellscape, are that enough people aren't full internet brain delusional
I mean very much both sides of the fence on this one. A lot of sensible people with no understanding of guns, etc. Are more than willing to make insane demands not knowing how things work.

Certainly people should come to the table to meet somewhere in the middle.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dickie Dunn, dodint, Google [Bot], LeopardLetang, skullman80 and 109 guests