Gun politics thread

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
19,908
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
A lot of crazy seem to have guns and the willingness to use them.
Unless you favor full ban and door to door search with confiscation there is not much that can be done about that. That of course assuming they wouldn't use other things for carrying out their particular brand of crazy
 

GRtak

Forum Addict
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
18,284
Location
Michigan USA
I don't know what the answer is. Nether side is being very constructive in any proposed action. I doubt that very many really think that such actions would work anyway (confiscations). I will also admit that I am split in many ways in what to do. I see some things that are a really good idea, but I also see other actions that the side propose being cut off at the knees by other actions meant "To limit the size of the Government" that they say they both love and hate(maybe fear is a better description).
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,416
Although the pro-gun side offers few solutions, at least they support enforcement of current laws (e.g. keep violent offenders locked up) and they're open to a discussion regarding mental health. All that the antis can come up with is "we know absolutely nothing about guns but let's ban the black ones" or some agonizingly stupid crap like "hurr durr the 2A only protects muskets". The rest of the time these idiots that have never bought a gun just make stuff up, like buying guns freely online or the gun show loophole - both completely imaginary.

I've personally suggested a number of solutions many times and I've backed them up with reason and logic, as well as factual data. Yet we still keep going back to "omg we need moar lawz!".
 

GRtak

Forum Addict
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
18,284
Location
Michigan USA
Your solutions are cut off at the knee when you insist on cutting down the size of the government. When it is small, it is ineffective.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,416
Repealing Johnson's and Clinton?s racist laws isn't in line with downsizing government? How so? And besides, you can still agree with some of my ideas but support a large government.
 

GRtak

Forum Addict
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
18,284
Location
Michigan USA
Making a government smaller is not the same thing as repealing some laws. You have openly advocated for a smaller government.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,416
Yet again, smaller government does not mean the absence of government. Also this is a different topic altogether - we can discuss the pros and cons of small government and big government in another thread - right now let's focus on the issue of crime and homicide. I maintain that this needs to be addressed but not through gun control - instead we should repeal Johnson's war on poverty and Clinton?s incarceration tactics, end the war on drugs, and focus on community development, thus targeting the social, economic, and cultural factors that are the underlying causes of crime, rather than stupidly fixating on the methods of crime.
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
19,908
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
Your solutions are cut off at the knee when you insist on cutting down the size of the government. When it is small, it is ineffective.
Small and large are relative terms though. Also it is generally understood as smaller *federal* government, where certain things can be cut. For example why do we have DHS, FBI, TSA, BATFE and Park Police (the latter look like a god damn SWAT team where I work because they are in charge of security for Statue of Liberty and the like). Also now just about every gov't agency has their own police force and shit, what is the point of that? Additionally smaller feds would give more local control to state, city, county, etc... gov't, which might actually be more efficient.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,416
Concealed Carrier Prevents Mass Shooting At SC Nightclub

A man with a concealed carry license stopped a shooter after the latter opened fire on a crowd of people at a nightclub in South Carolina early Sunday morning, according to WISTV.com.

After getting into a fight with another person, the 32-year-old suspect pulled out a gun and began to fire at a crowd of people gathered outside of the club, hitting and injuring four, WISTV reports. One of the victims, who holds a concealed-carry permit, shot back in self-defense, hitting the suspect in the leg.

The suspect has been charged with four counts of attempted murder. He was also charged for unlawfully carrying a weapon and for carrying one while committing a violent crime.

The concealed carrier who shot back won?t be facing any charges, as his permit to carry was valid.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,416
Crowder drops some serious knowledge in just four minutes. Win!


Another quote for all y'all:
Tench Coxe said:
Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American? The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,416
Apparently California just passed these:

Here are the measures that Gov. Jerry Brown announced Friday that he has signed:

Senate Bill 1446, authored by Sen. Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley, bans possession of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

SB 1235, authored by Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de Le?n, D-Los Angeles, regulates the sale of ammunition by requiring background checks.

SB 880, authored by Sen. Isadore Hall, D-South Bay, and AB1135, authored by Assemblyman Marc Levine, D-San Rafael, ban "bullet buttons" that make it easy to detach magazines.

Assembly Bill 1511, authored by Miguel Santiago, D-Los Angeles, limits the lending of guns to family members who have not completed background checks.

AB 1695, authored by Assemblyman Rob Bonta, D-Oakland, blocks people who have knowingly made false reports on the loss or theft of a gun from possessing firearms for 10 years.
Bullet buttons were a compromise measure pushed by the Democrats. Now they're taking them away. Great example of the slippery slope.
 

Eunos_Cosmo

Forum Addict
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
6,968
Location
Oakland
Car(s)
'84 Mazda RX7, '12 Mazda 2, '99 Porsche Boxster
Apparently California just passed these:


Bullet buttons were a compromise measure pushed by the Democrats. Now they're taking them away. Great example of the slippery slope.
 

_HighVoltage_

Captain Volvo
Joined
Aug 5, 2006
Messages
9,961
Car(s)
1998 Volvo S70 T5M
Another quote for all y'all:
Originally Posted by Tench Coxe
Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American? The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
I won't fight you about what the constitution says, or the practicality/importance of owning weapons. But the heavy religious overtones in the language of that quote concern me. When God created men he intended for them to own weapons? I haven't read the bible in a long time, but I somewhat doubt there is anything in there about the unlimited freedom or power of the people to own/use a sword.

The language is also highly militaristic - swords, militia, soldiers, arms, power...creating a sense that we are in a constant state of war.

I think it is accurate to say that the drafters of the U.S. constitution gave people the legal right to own weapons. But saying that it is also God's/nature's plan for men to have weapons seems like an overreach.
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
19,908
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
I won't fight you about what the constitution says, or the practicality/importance of owning weapons. But the heavy religious overtones in the language of that quote concern me. When God created men he intended for them to own weapons? I haven't read the bible in a long time, but I somewhat doubt there is anything in there about the unlimited freedom or power of the people to own/use a sword.

The language is also highly militaristic - swords, militia, soldiers, arms, power...creating a sense that we are in a constant state of war.

I think it is accurate to say that the drafters of the U.S. constitution gave people the legal right to own weapons. But saying that it is also God's/nature's plan for men to have weapons seems like an overreach.
Your reading is very different from mine... He only invokes god in the same sense as you or I would say "god willing" he isn't saying that bible gives you the right to own machine guns. What language concerning weapons and ability to fight your own battles wouldn't be? Make no mistake we are talking about weapons of war, not fluffy pillows.
 

Blind_Io

"Be The Match" Registered
DONOR
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
21,386
Location
Utah, USA
Car(s)
06 Nissan XTerra Off Road, 00 VFR800, 07 ST1300
So far it looks like the cop fucked up in a major way. From what I have read, the victim had no warrants out and no criminal history, he also did exactly what the officer told him to do and was shot for it.
 

narf

Sgt. Maj. Buzzkill
DONOR
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
18,070
Location
Kiel/Wherever, Germany
Car(s)
'16 VW The Beetle Cabrio
I dont quite see the relevance to gun politics here, no laws are proposed to take cop's guns away.
The abundance of weapons in stopped cars contributes to a stressful and therefore potentially shooty situation.

That being said, the main factor probably is racism :(
 
Top