The gun thread

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.
DCB
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3265
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby DCB » Fri Apr 12, 2013 4:56 pm

Stebben84 wrote:
Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) and 40 Republicans are passing around a Dear Colleague letter asking Republicans in the House to pressure Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) not to take up a bill expanding background checks for gun purchases “without the support of a majority of the conference.”


So even when you don't have a majority, your going to kill any bill you don't like. Kicking and screaming like a little kid who doesn't get their way. How delightfully childish. And, I won't be surprised when Boehner caves to their demands.

Huh? Wonder if these folks are in the pocket of the NRA.

Stockman is channeling his inner child. And he literally wants every inner 'child' to have a gun:
“Our campaign bumper sticker: If babies had guns, they wouldn’t be aborted.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/12/r ... e-aborted/

DCB
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3265
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby DCB » Fri Apr 12, 2013 5:03 pm

BSH wrote:I have another question to throw out. I don't see any rational, objective basis to support an "assault weapons" ban..

You should really go to Newtown, CT, and chat up the locals.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21670
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: The gun thread

Postby Henry Vilas » Sat Apr 13, 2013 9:21 am

BSH wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:The result of the Civil War tells another story.


Touche. I guess the South had greater need of small arms among the populace...

If the rebels had been better armed, would that have been a good thing?

BSH wrote:Besides which, it wasn't an insurgency at all, it was a regular, full-scale war.

The Civil War started as an insurrection and wasn't put down until after it became a full-scale war. You are quibbling here.

BSH
Senior Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:32 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby BSH » Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:50 am

DCB wrote:
BSH wrote:I have another question to throw out. I don't see any rational, objective basis to support an "assault weapons" ban..

You should really go to Newtown, CT, and chat up the locals.


Thanks for proving my point. An emotional appeal, but no rational reason.

bdog
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3428
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:26 am

Re: The gun thread

Postby bdog » Sat Apr 13, 2013 11:20 am

What if Spartacus had a Piper Cub?

Discuss.

Detritus
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2664
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:42 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby Detritus » Sat Apr 13, 2013 11:27 am

bdog wrote:What if Spartacus had a Piper Cub?

Discuss.

I seem to remember having arguments like this when I was in middle school. Usually they involved Gandalf versus Hitler, though.

DCB
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3265
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby DCB » Sat Apr 13, 2013 4:37 pm

BSH wrote:
DCB wrote:
BSH wrote:I have another question to throw out. I don't see any rational, objective basis to support an "assault weapons" ban..

You should really go to Newtown, CT, and chat up the locals.


Thanks for proving my point. An emotional appeal, but no rational reason.

So, you're cool with psychopaths shooting up schools. No need to get emotional!

BSH
Senior Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:32 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby BSH » Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:57 am

DCB wrote:So, you're cool with psychopaths shooting up schools. No need to get emotional!


Can you show that any proposed law would do anything to prevent the problem? I'm asking for rational arguments, and you don't seem to have any.

wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3223
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm
Contact:

Re: The gun thread

Postby wack wack » Mon Apr 15, 2013 8:36 am

BSH wrote:
DCB wrote:So, you're cool with psychopaths shooting up schools. No need to get emotional!


Can you show that any proposed law would do anything to prevent the problem? I'm asking for rational arguments, and you don't seem to have any.


There are no proposed laws, because there's not a single lawmaker with the balls to do the right thing.

Guns should be titled, users should be licensed. Liability insurance should be required, and gun deaths, each and every one, should be charged to the owner of the gun. Auto-loading firearms should be banned... yes, that means every fucking semi-auto you can think of. Nothing you can do with one of those that you can't do with a six-shooter and a lever gun... nothing legitimate, anyway. I imagine cowboy guns won't make your wiener feel any bigger, but hey, we're talking about lives here. Get over it. Buy a corvette.

These are things that would make a difference, but none of them are being proposed in a real way because you're nutless heroes in Congress are too concerned about the padding the NRA gives them. They don't govern, they market.

And what is your rational argument for anything? Black helicopters? Roving bands of street thugs? North Korean assassins everywhere?

DCB
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3265
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby DCB » Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:37 am

BSH wrote:
DCB wrote:So, you're cool with psychopaths shooting up schools. No need to get emotional!


Can you show that any proposed law would do anything to prevent the problem? I'm asking for rational arguments, and you don't seem to have any.

If AR-15s were banned, or if they were kept out of reach of the mentally ill, it would have been much more difficult for Adam Lanza to kill 27 people. Try to keep up.

BSH
Senior Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:32 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby BSH » Mon Apr 15, 2013 6:06 pm

DCB wrote:If AR-15s were banned, or if they were kept out of reach of the mentally ill, it would have been much more difficult for Adam Lanza to kill 27 people. Try to keep up.


Your appeal is still emotional, not rational. The news reports I read said he had two handguns, and it took 20 minutes for the police to arrive. The absence of the AR would have made no difference. The VA Tech shooter killed more people with ban-compliant 10 round magazines. The NIJ studied the 1994 ban and found no measurable effect.

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The gun thread

Postby Dangerousman » Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:18 am

snoqueen wrote:So we are to believe the reason you're hoping more people will arm up is to balance the power of wingnuts who are already armed up?


Why don't you kindly indicate where I've ever said that I hope "more people will arm up?" Or are you like Henry and Jonny and just making stuff up?

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The gun thread

Postby Dangerousman » Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:25 am

snoqueen wrote:"Hey, where are our damn regulations? What part of regulated don't you understand?"


What part don't you understand? Apparently the 18th Century meaning of the term...

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The gun thread

Postby Dangerousman » Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:41 am

Henry Vilas wrote: As I said before, the purpose of the Second was never to overthrow our constitutional government. You can dream about treason all you want, but I don't desire to join in on your nightmare.


I'm still laughing at your response Henry. Spoken like a good Tory.

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The gun thread

Postby Dangerousman » Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:45 am

Detritus wrote:
Detritus wrote:Assume that the Second Amendment didn't exist and we were debating adding it now. The burden of the argument would rest on those who think the ownership of guns rises to a constitutional standard to justify that idea. We own cars, houses, pets, computers, and cell phones without that ownership being specifically named in the constitution. Yet we have legal ownership of those things and that ownership (and use) appears to enjoy considerable protection. Guns are simply another form of private property. Why aren't the regular protections of ownership and use of private property sufficient for guns as well?

Since d-man has apparently thrown in the towel after failing to actually read the post, I open the floor.

Anyone?


Oh, I read your stupid post. It's still stupid, and still circular reasoning.


Return to “Headlines”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests