Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Hotplant

Random Thoughts v.3

Recommended Posts

• 65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws
• 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified
• 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – gun violence
• 3% are accidental discharge deaths

Emotion will always trump facts in many minds.

I don't want to be a pussy so I'll try this instead and be a real man.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve, that whole diatribe you wrote is just ridiculous. First off, gun regulations do not work on a town by town, state by state basis. The reason being is if you live in a place which does not allow guns (City of Chicago), you just drive 7 miles south on I-55, exit La Grange Rd west and drive less than 2 miles to the nearest gun store selling legal firearms of all shapes and sizes. Second, Noah Webster could not envision a modern military force. I will take 40,000 trained soldiers over a million untrained, uncoordinated rabble any day and that is excluding the use of tanks, aircraft, artillery, etc. If we armed, quite literally, every human old enough to wield an AR-15 in the US, the military would still kick the ever loving shit out of us and the US would become Afghanistan with an armed insurgency at best.

Also, by your claim, that would mean all of those European countries would be fascist states controlling its citizenry when the opposite is true. Plus, what about your beloved Japan Steve??? Are you being oppressed by a wicked, fascist government over there? According to you you sure as hell should be.

Every argument you present is a straw man at best, a balloon with no air. Not to worry though as the now quite ironic biblical statement, "...and a child shall lead them" is indeed the case. These kids are fucking screaming mad and they are not going to take it anymore. Let's see how these bought and paid for by the NRA politicians are going to stand up to millions of kids and young adults who are sick and tired of wondering if they will make it home from school, church, or a concert alive. 

These kids, with perseverance, tenacity, strength, and courage are on the cusp of curb-stomping the NRA and any politician who refuses comprehensive gun regulation and legislation.

Maybe with luck Steve we can have gun laws just like your beautiful Japan, then we too can reap the benefits you so callously enjoy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, IpMan said:

I was referring to countries other than the US where gun regulation works astonishingly well. As there are pretty much no gun regulations in most states and cities, you cannot claim the non-existent regulations are not working. 

No,I don't claim that.I understood your post to be referring to the U.S.

I comprehended it incorrectly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IpMan said:

These kids, with perseverance, tenacity, strength, and courage are on the cusp of curb-stomping the NRA and any politician who refuses comprehensive gun regulation and legislation.

By God,I hope so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IpMan said:

Steve, that whole diatribe you wrote is just ridiculous. First off, gun regulations do not work on a town by town, state by state basis. The reason being is if you live in a place which does not allow guns (City of Chicago), you just drive 7 miles south on I-55, exit La Grange Rd west and drive less than 2 miles to the nearest gun store selling legal firearms of all shapes and sizes. Second, Noah Webster could not envision a modern military force. I will take 40,000 trained soldiers over a million untrained, uncoordinated rabble any day and that is excluding the use of tanks, aircraft, artillery, etc. If we armed, quite literally, every human old enough to wield an AR-15 in the US, the military would still kick the ever loving shit out of us and the US would become Afghanistan with an armed insurgency at best.

Also, by your claim, that would mean all of those European countries would be fascist states controlling its citizenry when the opposite is true. Plus, what about your beloved Japan Steve??? Are you being oppressed by a wicked, fascist government over there? According to you you sure as hell should be.

Every argument you present is a straw man at best, a balloon with no air. Not to worry though as the now quite ironic biblical statement, "...and a child shall lead them" is indeed the case. These kids are fucking screaming mad and they are not going to take it anymore. Let's see how these bought and paid for by the NRA politicians are going to stand up to millions of kids and young adults who are sick and tired of wondering if they will make it home from school, church, or a concert alive. 

These kids, with perseverance, tenacity, strength, and courage are on the cusp of curb-stomping the NRA and any politician who refuses comprehensive gun regulation and legislation.

Maybe with luck Steve we can have gun laws just like your beautiful Japan, then we too can reap the benefits you so callously enjoy.

The Founding Fathers didn't necessarily envision, but they did codify doctrine predicated upon basic principles like inalienable rights.

Dig a little bit and you'll soon see the European Union construct does not promote freedom rather government control of every aspect of daily life.

The Millennials may be the future, indeed this is true, but they are also hands down the most useless, self-absorbed monsters on the face of the planet. A child will lead them? I should think it will be awfully difficult for them to lead anything from Mom's basement, unsure which bathroom to use and possessing pigeon level social and communication skills. Perseverance? Tenacity? Strength? Courage? The Millennials?! Ipman, you must be fucking joking!

On this particular issue, you will never enjoy the serenity of Japan. For one thing, you already have about 350 million fire arms in circulation. For another, you have neither the homogenous, honor-based society nor the geographical advantage of being an island unto yourselves. I could go on ad infinitum, but we'll just agree to disagree out of respect for the boundaries of this discussion forum.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, SteveAJones said:

The Founding Fathers didn't necessarily envision, but they did codify doctrine predicated upon basic principles like inalienable rights.

Dig a little bit and you'll soon see the European Union construct does not promote freedom rather government control of every aspect of daily life.

The Millennials may be the future, indeed this is true, but they are also hands down the most useless, self-absorbed monsters on the face of the planet. A child will lead them? I should think it will be awfully difficult for them to lead anything from Mom's basement, unsure which bathroom to use and possessing pigeon level social and communication skills. Perseverance? Tenacity? Strength? Courage? The Millennials?! Ipman, you must be fucking joking!

On this particular issue, you will never enjoy the serenity of Japan. For one thing, you already have about 350 million fire arms in circulation. For another, you have neither the homogenous, honor-based society nor the geographical advantage of being an island unto yourselves. I could go on ad infinitum, but we'll just agree to disagree out of respect for the boundaries of this discussion forum.

 

 

Obviously you are not very well versed regarding James Madison's own explanation and definition of the 2nd Amendment...which he himself wrote. I suggest you look that up buddy (Federalist Papers) because the 2nd Amendment, according to Madison himself, was specifically referencing a well regulated militia, and, to counter potential slave revolts. Also, if you really want to be nitpicky, it was only referencing muskets, swords, knives, and any other "arm" which existed in 1789.

Regarding Millennials, they said the same shit about the Baby Boom Generation (degenerate, lazy, hippy scum), the Gen X'rs (whiny, disillusioned dopes). Every generation slams the succeeding generations and every time it is complete and utter bullshit. 

BTW, I like how you avoided my post regarding Japan NOT being a dictatorial fascist state despite it's extremely strict gun regulations. Regarding the EU, you are showing signs of being a "stable genius" there Steve. I have been to Europe many, many times and the very last phrase I would use to describe the counties within the EU would be "lack of freedom and government control." That is the statement of a ...what is that word again? Oh yes, Dotard. The citizens within the EU enjoy just as much, if not more freedom than the US, that is except for gun rights and the rights of religious nut jobs to seize control of the government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, IpMan said:

Obviously you are not very well versed regarding James Madison's own explanation and definition of the 2nd Amendment...which he himself wrote. I suggest you look that up buddy (Federalist Papers) because the 2nd Amendment, according to Madison himself, was specifically referencing a well regulated militia, and, to counter potential slave revolts. Also, if you really want to be nitpicky, it was only referencing muskets, swords, knives, and any other "arm" which existed in 1789.

Regarding Millennials, they said the same shit about the Baby Boom Generation (degenerate, lazy, hippy scum), the Gen X'rs (whiny, disillusioned dopes). Every generation slams the succeeding generations and every time it is complete and utter bullshit. 

BTW, I like how you avoided my post regarding Japan NOT being a dictatorial fascist state despite it's extremely strict gun regulations. Regarding the EU, you are showing signs of being a "stable genius" there Steve. I have been to Europe many, many times and the very last phrase I would use to describe the counties within the EU would be "lack of freedom and government control." That is the statement of a ...what is that word again? Oh yes, Dotard. The citizens within the EU enjoy just as much, if not more freedom than the US, that is except for gun rights and the rights of religious nut jobs to seize control of the government.

Your James Madison argument is rubbish. It's been presented and rebutted so many times here and elsewhere it's not even worth addressing.

When I critique a generation, as I have, I am not referring to the superficial cultural bullshit that doesn't matter. I am referring to the capacity for critical thinking in addition to possessing essential life skills. I submit for consideration that the average truck driver circa 1976 had greater critical thinking capacity and essential life skills than today's college graduates.

I didn't avoid your post regarding Japan not being a dictatorial fascist state, I simply chose not to reply to it given I fail to see how it is of interest to the majority of the forum. One of the principle points of the Second Amendment isn't that it prevents a fascist state from coming to power, it's that it equips the citizens with the wherewithal to overthrow a tyrannical government.

I don't think you should debate the pros and cons of the European Union with me, for a number of reasons, not least of them being the fact that I lived in Europe for nearly 15 years. For you as an American tourist to try to educate me on this topic is as absurd as me trying to educate you on whatever goes on in your home.

Edited by SteveAJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SteveAJones said:

Your James Madison argument is rubbish. It's been presented and rebutted so many times here and elsewhere it's not even worth addressing.

When I critique a generation, as I have, I am not referring to the superficial cultural bullshit that doesn't matter. I am referring to the capacity for critical thinking in addition to possessing essential life skills. I submit for consideration that the average truck driver circa 1976 had greater critical thinking capacity and essential life skills than today's college graduates.

I didn't avoid your post regarding Japan not being a dictatorial fascist state, I simply chose not to reply to it given I fail to see how it is of interest to the majority of the forum. One of the principle points of the Second Amendment isn't that it prevents a fascist state from coming to power, it's that it equips the citizens with the wherewithal to overthrow a tyrannical government.

I don't think you should debate the pros and cons of the European Union with me, for a number of reasons, not least of them being the fact that I lived in Europe for nearly 15 years. For you as an American tourist to try to educate me on this topic is as absurd as me trying to educate you on whatever goes on in your home.

The note regarding Japan is of great interest because your comment regarding the lack of, or control over guns by the government results in a repressive  state is absurd as that has never happened in modern history...case in point: Japan & Australia to name just two. Your argument was unsupported and wrong yet you fail to admit it. Further, your statement about a citizenry with guns having the wherewithal to overthrow the US government is plain ridiculous and you know it. An unorganized rabble of middle aged, overweight white guys against a well trained, well equipped fighting force is laughable. The fact is, in the US currently gun ownership is at a 40 year low. Less Americans own guns however the people that do typically have a bunch of them. The overwhelming demographic of ownership is...overweight, middle aged white guys.

Regarding Europe, I lived there as well for a time, not 15 years but about a year so I do know. Plus...I can actually converse with people, people who have lived in these countries all of their lives.

Funny, for a guy who has every opinion under the sky regarding the US and how we should be handling our affairs, it seems like you are typically anyplace BUT here. Your very absence proves your true intent.

Edited by IpMan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IpMan said:

The note regarding Japan is of great interest because your comment regarding the lack of, or control over guns by the government results in a repressive  state is absurd as that has never happened in modern history...case in point: Japan & Australia to name just two. Your argument was unsupported and wrong yet you fail to admit it. Further, your statement about a citizenry with guns having the wherewithal to overthrow the US government is plain ridiculous and you know it. An unorganized rabble of middle aged, overweight white guys against a well trained, well equipped fighting force is laughable. The fact is, in the US currently gun ownership is at a 40 year low. Less Americans own guns however the people that do typically have a bunch of them. The overwhelming demographic of ownership is...overweight, middle aged white guys.

Regarding Europe, I lived there as well for a time, not 15 years but about a year so I do know. Plus...I can actually converse with people, people who have lived in these countries all of their lives.

Funny, for a guy who has every opinion under the sky regarding the US and how we should be handling our affairs, it seems like you are typically anyplace BUT here. Your very absence proves your true intent.

(sigh) I never said gun control leads to repressive or fascist states, I said the inalienable right to bear arms provides citizens the wherewithal to overthrow an oppressive government, a point certainly not lost on the Founding Fathers. If citizen militias are as impotent as you insist then you have nothing to worry about. 350+ million firearms. Your move, Citizens of the World, but choose carefully because if you come for ours you best bring yours. 

About a whole year in Europe? Well, then you've seen about all four seasons so I do suppose that makes you an expert. Good grief, man, really?

My absence proves I walk the walk. Why would I ever want to hang around there and circle the drain with you self-loathing lot when I've got IU.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, SteveAJones said:

the geographical advantage of being an island unto yourselves.

there is something to this. I have no explanation, and maybe wrong, but having to share no land border with another certainly can offer some unique opportunities for a society to truly work shit out for itself. Obviously many other factors, and many more important ones, shape national identity, but being an Island nation seems adds something quite significant and different imho. I know this has nothing to do with the gun debate raging here, but it stood out to me, so thought I'd comment.

And since I have commented, and it is an interesting debate, a sometimes interesting read here, sometimes amusing and sometimes just sad, I'll offer my 2 cents worth.

I recently again saw the John Oliver piece on gun control when he worked at the Daily Show. It is still just as relevant. As usual a funny and enlightening piece. (when is Last Week Tonight returning?!?!?!)

We had a gun problem (Australia). We no longer do as our former VERY conservative Prime Minister John Howard decided after the Port Arthur massacre that we needed a change. There was little backlash. Not none. The farmers and some others were pissed as it made their legitimate need more of a pain in the ass, but they got over it. And Howard was The Coalition Prime Minister. Thats the conservative Liberal Party and the National (conservative rural party).

It simply cannot be argued Australia is not better for it.

But that is us, not the US. And we are fairly different societies even though we share the fundamental core western value systems.

There is an overblown argument that all hell would break loose in the US if ANY gun reform was attempted. That people would openly defy authority and there would be a legal and political nightmare/earthquake that makes the effort not worth it. The threat of "from my cold dead hands" pffft, please. No one is going to overnight ban any/all guns. So calm down.

I think this is the result of a really well funded and effective campaign the NRA and other vested interests are able to sew into the narrative. I don't believe it for a second.

Reasonable gun law reform in the majority of the United States - if done in a reasonable, firm, and well explained way, would cause minimal backlash save for some extreme communities. And frankly, they'll learn to live with it. They're tough, they'll get over it.

You cannot own a nuke, or Howitzer, or fully loaded and operational Apache Gunship or M1 Abrams tank can you? (or can you???)

So you can own a gun, sure.

But maybe not own military grade weapons designed specifically for the military with the design purpose of the taking of opposing armies soldiers lives in the most efficient way possible. Not hunting, not defense, but winning war. No, you don't get to play with those toys outside of clubs and ranges that are specific to having a bit of fun in that environment. NOT have one in your cupboard/safe/whatever at home unless you have a specific license to based on a process that shows why you would "need" to.

Oh, but you are on a terrorist no fly watch list? sorry, no guns for you. (that was recently proposed and voted down - WTF???)

You have domestic violence convictions? You used to rob banks? You have been on anti-schizophrenic meds for 10 years? You follow Islamic State online and contribute your sympathetic views? You have recently threatened to "take out" your neighbour because his dog pissed on your post? Well sorry, you won't be able to purchase or own firearms - or have to give them up until you calm the fuck down and resolve your shit. No going to gun shows and buying up whatever you want. Sorry, you just don't get guns - OBVIOUSLY for everyone's safety. Obviously, right?

None of that is extreme - but is is viewed as extreme by those on the extreme right of the debate. And there lies the real issue. The more liberal leaning are far less effective at defining what the middle actually is. Where the "centre" is. That being where the reasonable majority sit. You know, majority, like democracy.

So good luck you guys. I don't see any reform movement gaining enough traction to be honest. Your unique situation in regards to mass shootings/gun violence that has no other comparable modern western society equivalency (not even close) will continue to be ignored or dismissed as you continue to fail to get to a place where even the most basic common sense reforms can even be debated reasonably and logically by your so called "leaders".

Sad and tragic that you are unable to do so. And I do mean just the informed and reasonable/logical debate. Not any reform itself. That would be the next step.

The US is a gun culture. That won't change, and maybe that's ok if it was not the free for all shitshow it currently is. But there obviously (at least to the rest of the world) needs to be some reform.

I can't do shit without being registered/licensed/tested/accredited/approved/certified. Can't drive, can't fly (even a hobby drone in some cases), can't serve alcohol, ride a jetski, run a store, sell lemonade out the front for $1 a cup, race a car or bike.. Why not to own guns? Why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, rm2551 said:

Why not to own guns? Why not?

Because a legal citizen, not convicted of a felony, the right to self-defense (the right to bear arms) is an inalienable right as codified in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SteveAJones said:

Because a legal citizen, not convicted of a felony, the right to self-defense (the right to bear arms) is an inalienable right as codified in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Yeah, like I said, it's a gun nation, and fair enough. The regulation part of my blurb I believe falls under that amendment. "Well regulated militia" - doesn't sound like the "free for all" it currently is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, rm2551 said:

Yeah, like I said, it's a gun nation, and fair enough. The regulation part of my blurb I believe falls under that amendment. "Well regulated militia" - doesn't sound like the "free for all" it currently is.

It's not a gun nation, it's a constitutional republic, and it isn't a free for all just because you believe or insist that it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SteveAJones said:

It's not a gun nation, it's a constitutional republic, and it isn't a free for all just because you believe or insist that it is.

No Steve, hundreds of dead children are testament that it is indeed a free for all.

BTW, what was with the quip about taking "our guns?" You do live in Japan right so what are you talking about? This has nothing to do with you on the one hand and second, if you indeed do live in Japan, you have no gun as non-citizens are prohibited for owning or even touching a gun. You make no sense Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/17/2018 at 10:11 PM, SteveAJones said:

Ad hominem much?

Ted Nugent explained it best. You want to live in a gun free zone? We have those. You want to live in a concealed carry state? We have those.

 

 

It's called satire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Reasonable gun law reform in the majority of the United States - if done in a reasonable, firm, and well explained way, would cause minimal backlash save for some extreme communities."

'Reasonable'

Once they get their nose in the tent it sure as hell won't stop with reasonable. Same thing happened with smoking laws. Once they got a foothold it's never ended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, IpMan said:

No Steve, hundreds of dead children are testament that it is indeed a free for all.

BTW, what was with the quip about taking "our guns?" You do live in Japan right so what are you talking about? This has nothing to do with you on the one hand and second, if you indeed do live in Japan, you have no gun as non-citizens are prohibited for owning or even touching a gun. You make no sense Steve.

The predictable emotional appeal. Never mind the irrefutable fact that violent crime in the US has been steadily declining for more than 20 years.

I do live in Japan, but travel the world. Being born and raised in America an infringement on my inalienable rights has everything to do with me.

http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Foreign/Japan-Gun-Control-and-People-Control.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, redrum said:

"Reasonable gun law reform in the majority of the United States - if done in a reasonable, firm, and well explained way, would cause minimal backlash save for some extreme communities."

'Reasonable'

Once they get their nose in the tent it sure as hell won't stop with reasonable. Same thing happened with smoking laws. Once they got a foothold it's never ended.

Absolutely correct! They don't want gun control, they want confiscation and people control. Do you know why there should be no limit to the amount of firearms and ammunition a United States citizen can own? Because once a limit - any limit - is imposed it can be reduced further. So perhaps tomorrow the limit is set at 10, then a reason is concocted to reduce it to 5 and so on. That's always their end game: get the # to zero. Defame and disarm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On November 15. 2015, sam_webmaster said:

"Many forums have adapted a "no political / religious topics" rules, as they always quickly result in fighting, insults, etc. So, we'll have to update the rules here too: Discussion of politics, religion or any other contentious social topic is not permitted.

http://forums.ledzeppelin.com/index.php?/guidelines/

Eye thank you!"

 

Again, I respectfully request that members obey the rules here at ledzeppelin.com.  There are literally thousands of sites where you are welcome to express your political views, this is not one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I respectfully request that members obey the rules here at ledzeppelin.com.  There are literally thousands of sites where you are welcome to express your political views, this is not one of them.

 

Aye, aye, Captain! We'll see who breaks the rule first. (I think it will be Walter). ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SteveAJones said:

Absolutely correct! They don't want gun control, they want confiscation and people control. Do you know why there should be no limit to the amount of firearms and ammunition a United States citizen can own? Because once a limit - any limit - is imposed it can be reduced further. So perhaps tomorrow the limit is set at 10, then a reason is concocted to reduce it to 5 and so on. That's always their end game: get the # to zero. Defame and disarm.

"They don't want gun control, they want confiscation and people control." - jeeeez that's paranoid. For what end do the Government want "people control"? Nevermind, I don't want to know as I completely reject the premise.

There is simply no way EVER the US Government will be able to "take away your guns" wholesale. Unless and until an overwhelming majority within the United States actually demand it, and protest and start movements to force that change (and that is NOT going to happen anytime in my lifetime) it simply is not a reality that can be realised even just in a political context. Try it, and it would almost certainly devolve into something like a civil war. So to take the line that even the tiniest reform is dangerous for the zero sum game argument makes no sense. The very deep red states would probably band together and secede FFS...

It's pure paranoia. Not a possible reality unless - like I state - the vast majority wanted it - and even then - we are talking about the US political system. Might take 50 years of rage before shit is done even then!

Surely not letting the dangerously mentally ill have access to unlimited firearms and ammo is not a good idea???

Surely not letting people the FBI or other authorities are really worried about have access to unlimited firearms is not a good idea???

I believe at gun shows you can buy weapons and ammo no questions asked - no background checks as they are exempt, right? So SURELY the above two tweaks to the law are REASONABLE????

And yeah, I get the position inalienable right as some kind of immovable and dogmatic point that can never be visited, I just don't see how some simple reforms based on data/facts/reason/logic/public safety should never be considered because of that idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, redrum said:

Again, I respectfully request that members obey the rules here at ledzeppelin.com.  There are literally thousands of sites where you are welcome to express your political views, this is not one of them.

 

Aye, aye, Captain! We'll see who breaks the rule first. (I think it will be Walter). ^_^

aaaah bugger....
didn't see that.

ok, I'm out. :running:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/02/2018 at 10:58 PM, rm2551 said:

there is something to this. I have no explanation, and maybe wrong, but having to share no land border with another certainly can offer some unique opportunities for a society to truly work shit out for itself. Obviously many other factors, and many more important ones, shape national identity, but being an Island nation seems adds something quite significant and different imho. I know this has nothing to do with the gun debate raging here, but it stood out to me, so thought I'd comment.

And since I have commented, and it is an interesting debate, a sometimes interesting read here, sometimes amusing and sometimes just sad, I'll offer my 2 cents worth.

I recently again saw the John Oliver piece on gun control when he worked at the Daily Show. It is still just as relevant. As usual a funny and enlightening piece. (when is Last Week Tonight returning?!?!?!)

We had a gun problem (Australia). We no longer do as our former VERY conservative Prime Minister John Howard decided after the Port Arthur massacre that we needed a change. There was little backlash. Not none. The farmers and some others were pissed as it made their legitimate need more of a pain in the ass, but they got over it. And Howard was The Coalition Prime Minister. Thats the conservative Liberal Party and the National (conservative rural party).

It simply cannot be argued Australia is not better for it.

But that is us, not the US. And we are fairly different societies even though we share the fundamental core western value systems.

There is an overblown argument that all hell would break loose in the US if ANY gun reform was attempted. That people would openly defy authority and there would be a legal and political nightmare/earthquake that makes the effort not worth it. The threat of "from my cold dead hands" pffft, please. No one is going to overnight ban any/all guns. So calm down.

I think this is the result of a really well funded and effective campaign the NRA and other vested interests are able to sew into the narrative. I don't believe it for a second.

Reasonable gun law reform in the majority of the United States - if done in a reasonable, firm, and well explained way, would cause minimal backlash save for some extreme communities. And frankly, they'll learn to live with it. They're tough, they'll get over it.

You cannot own a nuke, or Howitzer, or fully loaded and operational Apache Gunship or M1 Abrams tank can you? (or can you???)

So you can own a gun, sure.

But maybe not own military grade weapons designed specifically for the military with the design purpose of the taking of opposing armies soldiers lives in the most efficient way possible. Not hunting, not defense, but winning war. No, you don't get to play with those toys outside of clubs and ranges that are specific to having a bit of fun in that environment. NOT have one in your cupboard/safe/whatever at home unless you have a specific license to based on a process that shows why you would "need" to.

Oh, but you are on a terrorist no fly watch list? sorry, no guns for you. (that was recently proposed and voted down - WTF???)

You have domestic violence convictions? You used to rob banks? You have been on anti-schizophrenic meds for 10 years? You follow Islamic State online and contribute your sympathetic views? You have recently threatened to "take out" your neighbour because his dog pissed on your post? Well sorry, you won't be able to purchase or own firearms - or have to give them up until you calm the fuck down and resolve your shit. No going to gun shows and buying up whatever you want. Sorry, you just don't get guns - OBVIOUSLY for everyone's safety. Obviously, right?

None of that is extreme - but is is viewed as extreme by those on the extreme right of the debate. And there lies the real issue. The more liberal leaning are far less effective at defining what the middle actually is. Where the "centre" is. That being where the reasonable majority sit. You know, majority, like democracy.

So good luck you guys. I don't see any reform movement gaining enough traction to be honest. Your unique situation in regards to mass shootings/gun violence that has no other comparable modern western society equivalency (not even close) will continue to be ignored or dismissed as you continue to fail to get to a place where even the most basic common sense reforms can even be debated reasonably and logically by your so called "leaders".

Sad and tragic that you are unable to do so. And I do mean just the informed and reasonable/logical debate. Not any reform itself. That would be the next step.

The US is a gun culture. That won't change, and maybe that's ok if it was not the free for all shitshow it currently is. But there obviously (at least to the rest of the world) needs to be some reform.

I can't do shit without being registered/licensed/tested/accredited/approved/certified. Can't drive, can't fly (even a hobby drone in some cases), can't serve alcohol, ride a jetski, run a store, sell lemonade out the front for $1 a cup, race a car or bike.. Why not to own guns? Why not?

Great post!

It will fall on deaf ears though. 

I can hear them now " but it's my RIGHT to bear arms!!! ..... And I  WILL! " 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/02/2018 at 11:12 PM, SteveAJones said:

 

 

Edited by slave to zep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/02/2018 at 11:12 PM, SteveAJones said:

Because a legal citizen, not convicted of a felony, the right to self-defense (the right to bear arms) is an inalienable right as codified in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.

:beat:

:blahblah:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×