Gun control is coming

Rob Roy said:
If that's your point of view (bold above) and if it's true, you've just made a compelling argument not to allow at least some police and soldiers to have guns.

Haven't many police and soldiers blindly obeyed orders under color of law to take part in mass shootings of people or threats of mass shootings?
If they haven't taken active part, they've agreed to, if circumstances develop that they "just have to do their job".

Why would you want THOSE people to have guns? Are you going to advocate to disarm them too?





View attachment 5242231
Click to expand...
Please provide answers to the questions I asked on post 373 and 377 where I asked about this directly. I'm sure you innocently missed them instead of just ignoring them, convenient as that is.
 
bam0813 said:
It was said loud and clear during the election that large magazines already owned are grandfathered in.
right so what does your non ignorant self think your law accomplishes lmao. I already owned mine so im totally safe to have this hahaha. Oh and how do you think the cop knows i bought this 30 rounder yesterday or last yr….
Click to expand...
that's exactly the attitude that's causing problems...
why do you need this shit? because your neighbor needs it, and you may one day have to fight it out with him after the zombie apocalypse?
because the deer are now carrying their own rifles, wearing body armor, and firing back?
or is it because it makes you feel like superman just a little bit more...
 
xtsho said:
The magazine capacity provision of Oregon Ballot Measure 114 is DOA.

www.thechronicleonline.com

Most Viewed / Ballot Measure 114: New ruling issued

There is now another pause on Oregon's controversial Ballot Measure 114.
www.thechronicleonline.com www.thechronicleonline.com

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the money for these ballot measures comes from gun manufacturers. Nothing increases sales more than the possibility of not being able to purchase something in the future.

"Usually people were purchasing one firearm, but now we are seeing people buy 12 to 24 firearms at a time," Lincoln City Electronic Super Store Operator Bruce Polvi told Country Media, Inc. earlier. "A lot of them are thinking that this is shutting it off and so it is a panic situation."

Gun Control is great for gun sales.
Click to expand...
again...the same fucking stupid people who buy all the toilet paper, bottled water, bread and eggs in the entire store every time the weather man says snow...you can't fix stupid, just neuter it so it can't breed...
 
CANON_Grow said:
In the 700+ mass shootings in the U.S. for 2022, how many of them involved the government against citizens? How many of the 800+ in 2021, or the almost 700 in 2020? Let's be totally transparent and even include events like January 6th, where the government would be most likely to shoot more than 4 citizens.
Click to expand...

Democide is a word you should become more familiar with. There are far too many mass shootings or threats of them in that realm.

CANON_Grow said:
Maybe I'm being too narrow minded, so maybe we should expand and look at including any of the G7 countries. Some of those countries have really strict gun laws for citizens, and that's the concern, right?
Click to expand...

Consent violations using guns are my concern. Those are my concerns regardless of whether the person(s) doing it are free lance criminals or uniformed criminals "just following orders".

Why isn't that your concern ?
 
Last edited:
cannabineer said:
central government is inherently evil.
Click to expand...

Consent violations against otherwise peaceful people backed by threats of force are what THIS libertarian finds inherently evil.

You ignore it, when SOME people violate consent while focusing on the others, isn't that a bit odd and sort of a trained bias that makes little sense?

Why do you make exceptions ? Who tricked you into dismissing readily apparent evidence so swiftly ?
 
PadawanWarrior said:
Are they PMags?
Click to expand...
Haha some mags are dated lots aren’t if thats where your going. Floorplates can be changed etc.
Grandfather laws usually well atleast here allow for the maintenance and repair of such grandfathered items including the firearm itself so parts are legal if you own something in that category
 
bam0813 said:
Haha some mags are dated lots aren’t if thats where your going. Floorplates can be changed etc.
Grandfather laws usually well atleast here allow for the maintenance and repair of such grandfathered items including the firearm itself so parts are legal if you own something in that category
Click to expand...
I was just asking because I've got a bunch of them. There's no dates on them.
 
bam0813 said:
I guess I’m m failing in seeing how it saves lives. If me owning one last week was ok and legal and today I just can’t sell it to you because you must be more dangerous than me? Exactly the new law or any other law does not stop criminal intent ,actions,behavior or attitudes. Trust me i know the law well. Its only new to oregonians. Its a cut and paste of the law I’ve followed for decades. Again my point. You guys go and pass a law to “save lives “ and put a slap on the wrist whore charge on it. Fuckin brilliant
Click to expand...
It's just a simple fact that these measures have been shown to save lives where these measures have been enacted.

Regarding high capacity magazines, it's not a matter of if but when some kid does a Uvalde in Oregon. So, consider banning that kind of weapon a down payment on future lives.
 
CANON_Grow said:
Lets go through what you posted and I'll answer in bold:
-What do you think should be included in bg checks ? Criminal records? Ok sure. Medical records? All or just mental health records if any? Thought it should be obvious that it would be mental health records.

-What a neighbor thinks of me? Wether its an opinion or feeling? Maybe what an employer who you walked out on thinks?Maybe something you’ve said in the past? Acted on or not? Yep, if both my neighbour and former employer say I have shown uncontrollable rage and threatened people, maybe I shouldn't have access to certain firearms. If I have acted on threats I have made in the past, I shouldn't have access to certain firearms for sure.

-What are the virtuous standards/qualifications to own a single shot.22 that i cant find or afford bullets for in your proposed paradise. What are the disqualifiers? Mental illness? Violence? Spoken or actual? Seems to me everyone could be found to be unqualified for something. If you don't believe that someone with a history of mental illness and threatens and/or actually commits acts of violence against others should not be able to posses certain firearms, what would be reasonable in your opinion?

-Why do it slow over time? Why keep alienating and stripping half the country of what they own until people lose their shit and commit horrible acts? So your answer is to just let anyone do anything because they may throw a temper tantrum?

-How long will it take? As long as it takes, have to start somewhere.
-How many people in the meantime? Why don’t they just do it big and get it over once and for all? Roger explained that pretty well
-Dems got the ball right? Proves your not interested in discussion, trying to prevent mass shootings shouldn't be a partisan issue.

Go ahead and play the victim now, the fact that I will need to argue that someone convicted of a mass shooting should not have access to certain firearms reflects more on the person I am debating with.
Click to expand...
I’ll answer numerically
#1- Of course a mentally ill person shouldn’t have access but its not obvious at all it will only be mental health records or stay that way
#2- i think leaving it up to a neighbor or boss or both should have the ability to make a claim without proving it in a courtroom. I still believe in innocent until proven guilty . So a neighbor and you dont get along idk property line dispute. Just has to say i have anger issues? Sorry i need more than that. A boss that you didn’t get along with gets a call a has a chance for the last fuck you? Just like that? People never hold grudges or are just DHs
Of course someone who acted and convicted shouldn’t. Any in my opinion not just certain. I never said they shouldn’t be barred.
#3- i do believe those people shouldn’t be allowed to own or possess any. However I believe threats need to be proven. Thats not usually that hard if it’s legit. Maybe they need to improve acting on threats . No definitely.
#4- not sure hiw you derived that? I asked why wait to ban this, stop making that etc over decades instead of not just going for the goal now in major federal and state action
#5-agree gotta start somewhere but it was started along time ago and here we are. Sorta like the war on drugs. I’ll go back and read rogs post , I actually like them.
Why does that prove im not interested in discussion? Isn’t that what we’re doing?
#6- I don’t play victim. It’s a little odd to me actually
that you consider this an argument while accusing me of playing the victim. Also could you quote the post where I said something even remotely close to having a personal belief that a person who committed a mass shooting should have access to guns? Thanks
Oh I apologize that some many of my answers contain questions but holy shit
 
xtsho said:
The magazine capacity provision of Oregon Ballot Measure 114 is DOA.

www.thechronicleonline.com

Most Viewed / Ballot Measure 114: New ruling issued

There is now another pause on Oregon's controversial Ballot Measure 114.
www.thechronicleonline.com www.thechronicleonline.com

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the money for these ballot measures comes from gun manufacturers. Nothing increases sales more than the possibility of not being able to purchase something in the future.

"Usually people were purchasing one firearm, but now we are seeing people buy 12 to 24 firearms at a time," Lincoln City Electronic Super Store Operator Bruce Polvi told Country Media, Inc. earlier. "A lot of them are thinking that this is shutting it off and so it is a panic situation."

Gun Control is great for gun sales.
Click to expand...
It was a circuit court judge's ruling in Harney County. His reasoning was about as free from reality as what Judge Cannon said when she ruled in Trump's favor over the Mar a Lago documents case.

Harney County Circuit Court Judge Robert S. Raschio ruled that the measure's prohibition of the purchase and carrying of magazines holding 10-rounds or more of ammunition “unduly frustrate the right to bear arms” under Oregon’s Constitution. It will be appealed. The people who crafted measure 114 had lawyers when they crafted the measure. They knew it would be tested in the courts. The state of Oregon is defending the measure. They argued before the Harney circuit court that the measure does not do what Raschio said. So, we'll see what happens now that Rashio has made his final ruling on the matter and the State of Oregon appeals his decision. But one thing is certain. Measure 114 is not dead yet.

It happens every time, just as you said. People panic and do all sorts of dumb shit. Can't fix dumb. It's also predictable that a few of those dumb asses are going to go out and justify enacting Measure 114.
 
Fogdog said:
It was a circuit court judge's ruling in Harney County. His reasoning was about as free from reality as what Judge Cannon said when she ruled in Trump's favor over the Mar a Lago documents case.

Harney County Circuit Court Judge Robert S. Raschio ruled that the measure's prohibition of the purchase and carrying of magazines holding 10-rounds or more of ammunition “unduly frustrate the right to bear arms” under Oregon’s Constitution. It will be appealed. The people who crafted measure 114 had lawyers when they crafted the measure. They knew it would be tested in the courts. The state of Oregon is defending the measure. They argued before the Harney circuit court that the measure does not do what Raschio said. So, we'll see what happens now that Rashio has made his final ruling on the matter and the State of Oregon appeals his decision. But one thing is certain. Measure 114 is not dead yet.

It happens every time, just as you said. People panic and do all sorts of dumb shit. Can't fix dumb. It's also predictable that a few of those dumb asses are going to go out and justify enacting Measure 114.
Click to expand...

The Oregon Supreme Court chose not to intervene.
 
Fogdog said:
It's just a simple fact that these measures have been shown to save lives where these measures have been enacted.

Regarding high capacity magazines, it's not a matter of if but when some kid does a Uvalde in Oregon. So, consider banning that kind of weapon a down payment on future lives.
Click to expand...
I unfortunately understand but im not necessarily your opposition in this. However its fact in some cases that these mags were previously owned by them or a parent etc. I do think you should have an license so again I don’t think they should be able to buy them any easier than ammo or gun . Kids obviously shouldn’t be able too at all. Maybe kid and young adult is too intertwined a term nowadays. I still stand on my statement that we have to put more not only into treating mental health but also what’s causing it. I think a point I’ve been trying to make is that no laws for any crime does anything for it. The punishment does.
 
xtsho said:
The Oregon Supreme Court chose not to intervene.
Click to expand...
That was not in the article you linked to. The judge just made his final ruling. You are saying the Oregon Supreme Court has already denied the possibility of appeal without a hearing? That's not how the appeals process works.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top