Gun control is coming
- Thread starter UncleBuck
- Start date
CANON_Grow
Well-Known Member
Trying to find common ground and understand people that have a differing viewpoint is the entire point of these political discussions, is it not? Nobody wins when discussion stops and we just attack each other. My own political ideology has changed over the years because of having civil discussions and I have never seen anyone change viewpoints when they are ignored and only mocked.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Having been here for a while, it has been to my benefit to identify the sealions and simply click on by. (Though I do engage at times, and there is usually post-debauch guilt.)
I’m all for civil discussion with those of other viewpoints. As in your case, it has at times pushed me to revise my ideology. That requires an honest interlocutor however.
But the sealions are here to sealion, and then “the only way to win is not to play”.
UncleJesse
Well-Known Member
If the government of the United States outlaws firearms, I believe it should be ALL firearms, including all private security for the politicians, government officials, EVERYONE. Nobody is any more special than anyone else and fuck the cocksucker who thinks they are. No guns for a single person. Fuck the political rich assholes. If the general public can't shoot some assaulting or home invading piece of shit, then nobody in government gets that right either. Let's see the Hollywood and elite fucks enjoy that. Until that time, you do you, I do me, I will never ever give up my firearms, EVER!
While we are in the business of tellingnother people what to do, while we do whatever we want and justify it with some enlightened greater good, why dont you give up your fast expensive cars, loose some weight you fat ass, you make all our insurance rates go up, start eating correctly. Get rid of your cellphone, all you do is text, talk and drive, i see thousands of people on the road doing that. Don't take risks, let government determine what you can and cannot do and what you can or cannot have. Why should these rich elites talk about carbon bullshit and then own multiple huge homes, jet all over the place, attend wasteful dinners, purchase $5000 shoes, etc. All a waste. Could give that money to others.
MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS!!!
Normal people don't go on rampages and shoot people. Deranged fuckheads who deserve to be hung from the bridge are the ones who do that. Try and figure out why and maybe then I will believe that someone actually gives a shit.
Ban guns.....a coward solution that doesn't fix the problems, but then again NOBODY in my government wants to actually fix the problems, otherwise they don't have a platform.
While we are in the business of tellingnother people what to do, while we do whatever we want and justify it with some enlightened greater good, why dont you give up your fast expensive cars, loose some weight you fat ass, you make all our insurance rates go up, start eating correctly. Get rid of your cellphone, all you do is text, talk and drive, i see thousands of people on the road doing that. Don't take risks, let government determine what you can and cannot do and what you can or cannot have. Why should these rich elites talk about carbon bullshit and then own multiple huge homes, jet all over the place, attend wasteful dinners, purchase $5000 shoes, etc. All a waste. Could give that money to others.
MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS!!!
Normal people don't go on rampages and shoot people. Deranged fuckheads who deserve to be hung from the bridge are the ones who do that. Try and figure out why and maybe then I will believe that someone actually gives a shit.
Ban guns.....a coward solution that doesn't fix the problems, but then again NOBODY in my government wants to actually fix the problems, otherwise they don't have a platform.
CANON_Grow
Well-Known Member
I am not sure if you have ever heard of Daryl Davis, but I can't think of a better example. A black man wanted to have conversations with members of the KKK to be able to change their position and give up on hate, doubt there was an honest interlocutor at the beginning.
side note: I have had to google more words to understand their meaning from your posts than ever before. Never would I have guessed I would be learning more about the english language on a cannabis forum. I appreciate it.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I agree that there are times and places where it can be transformative. Best however to identify those who wield their opinion rather than submit it. I’ve not found many who (are sane and) actually enjoy the game of mutual abrasion.
CANON_Grow
Well-Known Member
So do you believe that it would be reasonable to have either a background check or mental health evaluation before someone is able to purchase an assault weapon? Instead of ranting about the wealthy and all the other stuff, convince me why you couldn't stop an assault or home invasion with less than five pieces of ammunition before needing to reload. With mass shooting events on the rise, the discussion on gun control is minding our own business, and the problems governments face is not a "To Do List" that can just be completed, there will always be new problems that arise.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
The home invasion scenario is a toughie. Stipulate four assailants and a messy firefight around corners. The shot/hit ratio is gonna suck. Granted, it’s a minority scenario, but it is one that calls for several detachable ten-shot magazines.
CANON_Grow
Well-Known Member
Both Commando and John Wick were good movies, but if anyone is up against four armed individuals in a home invasion and doesn't thwart them with 5 rounds, being able to squeeze off 20 or 30 shots is not going to be much help. Having grenades would be better for around corners, but no reasonable person is arguing we should all be able to carry grenades around.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I disagree about hit ratio. If I’m facing four armed and determined adults in Kevlar (realistically, I’m already fucked.) I need to assign several rounds per individual to make sure one or two connect per opponent. It’s a consequence of having to perform while scared somewhere well past shitless.
That said, I am unprepared for that scenario, and disinclined to become so. My lifestyle makes the possibility one in a billion.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
UncleJesse
Well-Known Member
I see no issue with high cap magazines. I agree with background checks. I agree with doing whatever we can to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and mentally insane up to the point that you strip me of my freedoms.
Also, remington 870 shotgun for home defense for me. It won't reach the neighbor's house if I miss and regardless of which shell i throw in there, a 7/8 oz trap load or a 3 1/2" steel BB goose load, i have pretty good odds.
Also, remington 870 shotgun for home defense for me. It won't reach the neighbor's house if I miss and regardless of which shell i throw in there, a 7/8 oz trap load or a 3 1/2" steel BB goose load, i have pretty good odds.
UncleJesse
Well-Known Member
I see no issue with high cap magazines. I agree with background checks. I agree with doing whatever we can to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and mentally insane up to the point that you strip me of my freedom. In Chicago one weekend I remember over 100 shootings. Every weekend we have double digit shootings. Almost exclusively gang related criminal violence. Until that stuff is fixed, the only thing liberals will say is get rid of the guns. The PEOPLE and their BELIEFS are the problem.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Nationwide, domestic shootings are the leading cause of (nonsuicide) gun death. So there is real merit in reducing the number of guns in public.
There is no need to take guns from the living. Simply stop their sale and bequest.
My one strong opinion on this matter is that the rules apply to all civilians, especially the uniformed ones. Armed police should be within FBI.
CANON_Grow
Well-Known Member
Good to see we have some common ground on the background checks, and I would also agree that a shotgun with any kind of shot would be the most useful for home defense for the vast majority. We'll have to agree to disagree about the high capacity magazines though, the amount of harm they have contributed to vs legitimate reasons for civilians to have them is not justified in my opinion.
Strongly disagree with "the only thing liberals will say is to get rid of the guns", but it strays from gun control. I believe people adapt to their communities environment.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
You seem to have stopped checking to see your beliefs are true.
Almost exclusively gang related criminal violence.
13% of all gun homicides are gang related. source What about the 87% that are not? What about all those people who were not murdered by gangsters? Your post contains dog whistle language, jsyk.
the only thing liberals will say is get rid of the guns.
No elected members of US Congress or the President advocate taking away all guns. Not one. What you just said was told to you by promoters of right wing propaganda.
I agree that the problem with gun homicides lies with the people who are doing them and their beliefs.
It would make you seem less ignorant if you fact check yourself before pressing send.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
It could be that the he was saying he had no problem with banning high capacity magazines.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
The bill of rights says regarding guns. "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Those who are offering legislation or advocating voting for legislation which runs contrary to that are rights violaters, treasonous and should be held accountable. Think Trump, Biden, and many others who have suggested or implemented laws which violate rights. Also any that already enforce those kinds of laws. like police, or agencies like the ATF etc.
What is deprivation of rights under color of law?
Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of Law. Summary: Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
Should those traitors be hanged, shot or imprisoned is the question? At a minimum they should be held without bail and face trial like those "insurrectionists" that "attacked" on January 6th right?
Who supports equal justice, "under the law" ? Anybody? How does the constitution protect people who want to enforce their rights?
Those who are offering legislation or advocating voting for legislation which runs contrary to that are rights violaters, treasonous and should be held accountable. Think Trump, Biden, and many others who have suggested or implemented laws which violate rights. Also any that already enforce those kinds of laws. like police, or agencies like the ATF etc.
What is deprivation of rights under color of law?
Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of Law. Summary: Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
Should those traitors be hanged, shot or imprisoned is the question? At a minimum they should be held without bail and face trial like those "insurrectionists" that "attacked" on January 6th right?
Who supports equal justice, "under the law" ? Anybody? How does the constitution protect people who want to enforce their rights?