U.S. Gun Violence

Page 26 of 34 [ 530 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 ... 34 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

27 Jan 2014, 6:05 am

Biscuitman wrote:

CBA to read 27 pages of this thread so just going to say that imo America over the years seems to have gone from a country that tolerated guns to a country that celebrates guns.

Spoken as only someone who doesn't live here could.

Guns were a much more commonplace and unremarkable sight in the past, what we're seeing now is a concerted effort to push back years of stigmatization by anti gun forces attempting to portray firearms as inherently dangerous and their owners as social pariahs. Open carry is a way of making people realize that armed citizens are all around at all times, are perfectly normal, and are no threat to anyone but criminals in a way that concealed carry fails to convey.

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

27 Jan 2014, 7:50 am

Raptor wrote:

If you have anger and control issues that serious maybe it's just you that needs these extra layers of gun control that you propose for all of us.

So you think that I am the only gun owner out there with anger issues? At least I am responsible enough to know when and where I should and should not have a loaded weapon.

Raptor wrote:

And don't forget constitutionality, base and passé as it may seem to you.

The SCOTUS has made decisions that make firearm regulation quite possible and sound (from a Conctitutional standpoint).

Raptor wrote:

Like most other gun control advocates, you continue to labor under the illusion that there are no gun laws. I don't have the time or the inclination to find all of the applicable federal laws and the laws for your state and post them here. You should at least know that it is illegal to sell a 9mm or any other firearm to a six year old. And even jokingly implying otherwise says indicates you have little grasp of the law. The very small minority of people that would sell a gun, any gun, to a six year old even if there were no governing laws is too small to consider in the overall scheme of things. Most people have at least that much of a moral compass.

I do not labor under the illusions that there are no laws in place. I have said before (and I'll say again) that existing legislation (as well as all currently proprosed legislation) is poorly written and poorly thought out. My main point is that there needs to be some regulation; there need to be clearly defined lines. I just feel that there should be some sort of civilized discussion on the issue between sides rather than two extremes who refuse to acknowledge the possibility of compromise. I know that my example was extreme, but you seem to ignore anything that is not.

Raptor wrote:

In closing (for now) I note that you and your partners in crime like to accuse me of condescension. Admittedly, I do have a built in condescension dispenser that was a dealer installed option back when my parents ordered me. Having said that, I personally find people screeching and chanting MORE GUN CONTROL! CATCH UP WITH THE CIVILIZED WORLD! BE MORE PROGRESSIVE! DO IT FOR THE CHILDREN! ECT, ETC, ad nauseam, to be more than just merely condescending.

And yet again, you have come to the conclusion that I am anti-gun. I am not. I am in favor of well written, practicle legislation. Not the BS feel good crap that is put out there right now. I know that you have said in the past that you are against any regulation of firearms, which I feel is unsafe for any society.

_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche

sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

27 Jan 2014, 7:53 am

sliqua-jcooter wrote:

sonofghandi wrote:

Those who are most knowledgeable and would provide the most valuable perspective on legislation refuse to acknowledge any possible benefit of any regulation.

I don't think this is necessarily true, I just think that the current solutions on the table are unworkable.

For example, I don't think Dox, Raptor, or anyone else in this thread would make the argument that laws against drinking and carrying wouldn't be beneficial. But no one is talking about that, and there are several states that don't actually have that codified - or have it codified in a really strange way that doesn't make it apply. It seems like pretty low-hanging fruit for the gun control crowd - but nobody is interested in it.

I think there are tons of gun owners that don't disagree with the *principle* of universal background checks (especially if it can be worked in trade for other concessions. Off the top of my head I think I would ask for the barrel length criteria to be removed from the NFA) - but the problem is none of the suggested implementations of such a check would actually work.

This sentiment is quite close to my own. My arguments with Raptor tend to be over rather trivial crap. I have on several occasions said that current proposed legislation is crap. The ideas behind some of it are not, though. If both sides would work together, something might actually get done, but at this point it is has become a line in the sand; you are on one side or the other.

_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

27 Jan 2014, 12:19 pm

Stannis wrote:

Raptor wrote:

/\
I saw no one being threatened.
Depending on that state's carry laws, no laws may have even been broken.

The purpose of that clip was to demonstrate a well known case of people taking guns to a public event in order to intimidate democratic politicians, and all those in attendance there.

The purpose of that clip was a weak attempt at best. I, for one, am not intimidated by the mere presence of a gun. I have carried anything from a BB gun to an automatic (machinegun) weapon and am perfectly comfortable with any of them. It’s your problem if you suffer from hoplophobia.

01001011 wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Sardines are eaten by bigger fish because they are small and edible and cannot improve their lot.
People who are prey very often can but won't protect themselves because they:
-Believe that by responding to to an attacker with violence makes them equally at fault
-Believe that they are not and can never be a match against their assailant (apathy)
-Believe that the means of self defense is icky
-Believe that the government should ban all guns and then, of course, all guns would magically vanish and we'd all live long and prosper

Of course, they want us all to adopt their mindset.

You mean defending yourself against an adversary throwing nerve gas into your house? Or setting you up with a road side bomb? C'mon even at some point you said you see the value of drawing a line and denying your adversary deadly weapons.

I believe I said that it would be more likely to draw attention to oneself with the possession of a bomb or words to that effect. Also that NBC weapons are a hazard by their very composition, weaponized or not.
You apparently are better versed than I on what I said and where I said it. Go fetch it up and quote me.

Quote:

Nobody says guns will magically vanish. It takes REAL law enforcement efforts and an effective law is just the beginning. Again, where have those criminals with destructive devices gone, so that we 'only' need to worry about criminals with guns?

They won’t vanish by any effort. What’s REAL law enforcement in your mind?
Your whole post here is less than grasping at straws.

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

27 Jan 2014, 1:07 pm

sonofghandi wrote:

Raptor wrote:

If you have anger and control issues that serious maybe it's just you that needs these extra layers of gun control that you propose for all of us.

So you think that I am the only gun owner out there with anger issues?

No, and I’m not willing to do a witch hunt to attempt to smoke them all out.

Quote:

At least I am responsible enough to know when and where I should and should not have a loaded weapon.

Here’s a lollipop for being so responsible and brave.

sonofghandi wrote:

Raptor wrote:

And don't forget constitutionality, base and passé as it may seem to you.

The SCOTUS has made decisions that make firearm regulation quite possible and sound (from a Conctitutional standpoint).

We've had firearm regulation at some level and in some form for over a hundred years. That doesn’t mean it’s effective, just that governments seem to like to impose it.

sonofghandi wrote:

Raptor wrote:

1. You've clearly advocated national gun registration.
2. You’re fixated on the device and not the deed.

sonofghandi wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Here are a few of your opionons expressed in another thread.
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5434714.html

sonofghandi wrote:

Personally, I don't think we should outlaw guns, but at the same time I have difficulty understanding why the average person should be able to buy a semi-automatic assault rifle at a gun show with no required background check.

“Semi-automatic Assault rifle”. There it is and you said it, not me. Then you go on to, in effect, vilify them as a special class and throw gun shows under the bus at the same time.
So here you’ve followed the gun grabber party line to the letter three (3) times in one (1) sentence.

But wait, it gets better!

sonofghandi wrote:

I also feel that there SHOULD be a national gun registry. If you personally bought the weapon, maybe you should be personally responsible for what happens to it.

National gun registry? Anyone wanting this is a dyed in the wool anti-gunner. Period.

And yet one more.

sonofghandi wrote:

I just don't think that the answer to an increase in violent shootings is to put more guns into more people's hands.

Well of course you don’t. That might hinder the work of the bad guy. Besides, only the police have the expertise and intense training to even know which end of the gun to stick the boolits in.

So there you have it. You are a relay device for the classic rhetoric of the anti-gun camp yet claim not to be anti-gun.
I rest my case.

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

Last edited by Raptor on 27 Jan 2014, 4:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA

27 Jan 2014, 1:11 pm

Raptor wrote:

Your whole post here is less than grasping at straws.

http://www.wrongplanet.net/forumssearch ... 01011.html

Literally everything that they post is exactly that. You could write a book on logical fallacies containing nothing but posts from "b". I wanted to run a database search to figure out how many posts have references to nukes, nerve gas, or chemical weapons - but the query was too complicated and would have killed the database.

Obvious troll is obvious. Just ignore.

_________________
Nothing posted here should be construed as the opinion or position of my company, or an official position of WrongPlanet in any way, unless specifically mentioned.

AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

27 Jan 2014, 1:18 pm

Stannis wrote:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZBE783_jb0[/youtube]

Yeah ok so you dismiss any accusation of "liberal media" while using such a deliberately cropped video meant to hide the fact that the man with the AR-15 is black so they could spin it into a racial story about Obama :roll:

. Not to mention that your source happens to be MSNBC. There's also an interview with the guy somewhere which shows how "violent" the rally really was. I've seen this stupid video years ago so you're really bringing nothing new to the table. Go to 2:35
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvBQDHqdCck[/youtube]

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

27 Jan 2014, 1:51 pm

sliqua-jcooter wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Your whole post here is less than grasping at straws.

You took the bait this one offered before I did and you have taken the bait of several others before as well. Just because your done with him doesnt mean that everyone else is.

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA

27 Jan 2014, 2:03 pm

Raptor wrote:

You took the bait this one offered before I did and you have taken the bait of several others before as well. Just because your done with him doesnt mean that everyone else is.

You misunderstand - what I mean is literally every post that account has ever made has been on gun control threads - and they're all very close to a copy pasta.

I literally suspect that the account was created specifically for trolling pro-gun people in gun control threads.

_________________
Nothing posted here should be construed as the opinion or position of my company, or an official position of WrongPlanet in any way, unless specifically mentioned.

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

27 Jan 2014, 2:03 pm

sonofghandi wrote:

sliqua-jcooter wrote:

sonofghandi wrote:

Those who are most knowledgeable and would provide the most valuable perspective on legislation refuse to acknowledge any possible benefit of any regulation.

This sentiment is quite close to my own.

Sure doesn’t look like it from your past statements.

Quote:

My arguments with Raptor tend to be over rather trivial crap.

Not really. You openly offer your opinions on a hot subject on a message board like this and expect them not to be challenged. You imply gun owners other than you and yours are generally paranoid hooligans of the black helicopters stripe. The trivial crap I brought up was to qualify my rebuttal.

Quote:

I have on several occasions said that current proposed legislation is crap. The ideas behind some of it are not, though. If both sides would work together, something might actually get done, but at this point it is has become a line in the sand; you are on one side or the other.

Working together to what end? I don’t know of any gun rights advocates worth their salt that will go along with national registration, anything condemning of “semi-automatic assault rifles”, and the notion that people being armed for self-defense is detrimental.

You've clearly demonstrated yourself to be well inside the anti-gun camp, having dug your hole so deep you’d need binoculars to see the sky.
Owning guns does not automatically make you pro-gun by any means.

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

27 Jan 2014, 7:12 pm

I didnt forget about you.

sliqua-jcooter wrote:

Raptor wrote:

You took the bait this one offered before I did and you have taken the bait of several others before as well. Just because your done with him doesnt mean that everyone else is.

You misunderstand - what I mean is literally every post that account has ever made has been on gun control threads - and they're all very close to a copy pasta.
I literally suspect that the account was created specifically for trolling pro-gun people in gun control threads.

And you're probably partially right about that one as far as trolling is concerned.

On a similar note, you’re playing backseat moderator here with me more than once but accuse Jacoby of it in another thread.
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postxf250701-0-15.html

sliqua-jcooter wrote:

Jacoby wrote:

I'm going to have to ask you to stop trying to derail the thread.

Threads go where they go. Stop back-seat moderating.

Or is it okay just because it’s you and you know better than everyone else?
:roll:

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA

27 Jan 2014, 8:48 pm

Raptor wrote:

Or is it okay just because it’s you and you know better than everyone else?
:roll:

Did you perhaps miss the part where he said the exact same words to me earlier in the thread, and I was just turning it around on him?

_________________
Nothing posted here should be construed as the opinion or position of my company, or an official position of WrongPlanet in any way, unless specifically mentioned.

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

27 Jan 2014, 9:59 pm

sliqua-jcooter wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Or is it okay just because it’s you and you know better than everyone else?
:roll:

Did you perhaps miss the part where he said the exact same words to me earlier in the thread, and I was just turning it around on him?

Touché!
However, that still adds to your growing reputation as a backseat moderator. :shameonyou:

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA

27 Jan 2014, 10:17 pm

Raptor wrote:

sliqua-jcooter wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Or is it okay just because it’s you and you know better than everyone else?
:roll:

Did you perhaps miss the part where he said the exact same words to me earlier in the thread, and I was just turning it around on him?

Touché!
However, that still adds to your growing reputation as a backseat moderator. :shameonyou:

Nonsense! When I moderate I do it from the front passenger seat.

_________________
Nothing posted here should be construed as the opinion or position of my company, or an official position of WrongPlanet in any way, unless specifically mentioned.

Stannis
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jan 2014
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,631

28 Jan 2014, 12:00 am

Quote:

AceOfSpades wrote:

First may I say I like your avatar. It makes a nice change from many of the other gun geek avatar's in this thread that look like they are going to shoot me, strangle me, or peck my eyes out.

Anyway, it turns out the black fellow at the presidents speech was there as part of a PR stunt by Ron Paul supporters. looks like certain people are trying hard to make their movement appear less racist, threatening and high-strung for the camera's.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfN7woo2xRY[/youtube]

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

28 Jan 2014, 6:01 am

Stannis wrote:

Anyway, it turns out the black fellow at the presidents speech was there as part of a PR stunt by Ron Paul supporters. looks like certain people are trying hard to make their movement appear less racist, threatening and high-strung for the camera's.

Sooo, first the guy was there to intimidate people, but you got called on that BS, so now he was there as a publicity stunt, which somehow makes you less wrong about the whole thing even if it were true?
Perhaps this isn't your area of the board, hard and brittle don't tend to do well here, and you're not even particularly hard.

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

Page 26 of 34 [ 530 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 ... 34 Next

Jump to:

U.S. Gun Violence Post Reply New Topic

U.S. Gun Violence