Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Gun Control - moved from E-cig thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    Most people are stupid. Name one military that uses the AR-15, the scary thing is people like you believe these lies and vote for people that flat out lie to you.
    The only one that brought up the AR-15 in particular was you, Lipix.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    If you shoot a deer with a .22, you’re going to have a pretty angry deer after you. Even the .223 round common in AR-15 is often considered too small and people that use them in deer hunting don’t use standard .223 rounds. AR-15’s and their style are used, but only relatively small animals in the standard chamber. Second, there’s no easy way to keep the crazies away from guns. Most people suffering from a mental illness are not dangerous and punishing people who have done no crime causes legal issues. The best we can manage is the statical reality that we have a better chance of dying in a car wreck or from medic malpractice, yet do we worry about that, despite the greater chances that the next one can be our last car ride or doctor visit.



    Jim is talking about things he doesn’t understand.
    And you're talking BS. You don't need a military style semiautomatic weapon to shoot at deer, and when shot the deer isn't coming after you, if he's still able he's running for his life. You're obviously the one with no clue.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    Actually you are wrong, the great majority of Americans including republicans gun enthusiats are in favor of gun control including the banning of military style weapons that were meant for war. It's true that there is a large contingent of Trumpsters and the NRA lobbyist who care more about owning and profiteering from such weapons than they do about the slaughter of innocent people, including children, but the great majority of people, again, including gun owners, want those weapons of mass destruction off the market and off the streets.
    Most people are stupid. Name one military that uses the AR-15, the scary thing is people like you believe these lies and vote for people that flat out lie to you.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
    Lil, I grant I don't know a lot, but I'm pretty sure a semi-auto anything is more of a force multiplier than a .22 deer rifle. Also, 'tiny statistical reality' isn't a good defense for letting crazies have semi-automatic weapons.
    If you shoot a deer with a .22, you’re going to have a pretty angry deer after you. Even the .223 round common in AR-15 is often considered too small and people that use them in deer hunting don’t use standard .223 rounds. AR-15’s and their style are used, but only relatively small animals in the standard chamber. Second, there’s no easy way to keep the crazies away from guns. Most people suffering from a mental illness are not dangerous and punishing people who have done no crime causes legal issues. The best we can manage is the statical reality that we have a better chance of dying in a car wreck or from medic malpractice, yet do we worry about that, despite the greater chances that the next one can be our last car ride or doctor visit.

    Incidentally, I'm not in favor of the ban - these are just preaching to the choir arguments (well, and you missed Jim's point on the first one).
    Jim is talking about things he doesn’t understand.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
    Because they outnumber the 'Constitution be darned, steal their stuff' lunatics - and gun control advocates. Riling them up only guarantees they will win.
    Actually you are wrong, the great majority of Americans including republicans gun enthusiats are in favor of gun control including the banning of military style weapons that were meant for war. It's true that there is a large contingent of Trumpsters and the NRA lobbyist who care more about owning and profiteering from such weapons than they do about the slaughter of innocent people, including children, but the great majority of people, again, including gun owners, want those weapons of mass destruction off the market and off the streets.

    Leave a comment:


  • Terraceth
    replied
    Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
    I'm not a fan of the general tactic of requiring anybody proposing any solutions in the gun violence debate to have an encyclopedic knowledge of guns. It's gatekeeping, pure and simple. I'm pro-life even though I couldn't describe how abortions occur in any sort of detail and don't see a problem with that.
    I don't think this is a very valid analogy. In the abortion debate, the methodology of abortions is not particularly important, because those opposed to it are opposed to it--period. If the abortion debate were centered around the methods of abortion, with groups arguing certain methods are wrong but others are okay, the analogy might hold, but that is hardly the case for abortion (except, perhaps, for partial birth abortions).

    In the gun debate, knowledge about guns is kind of important to know because it gives you the knowledge as to how dangerous different guns are so you can have your suggestions for gun restrictions make sense and be consistent. I've seen a good number of people comment that the proposals for gun control seem to frequently be not based on how dangerous guns are but on how scary they happen to look, for example. Knowledge about gun specifics would therefore avoid that problem.

    Leave a comment:


  • KingsGambit
    replied
    I'm not a fan of the general tactic of requiring anybody proposing any solutions in the gun violence debate to have an encyclopedic knowledge of guns. It's gatekeeping, pure and simple. I'm pro-life even though I couldn't describe how abortions occur in any sort of detail and don't see a problem with that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Teallaura
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    No they can’t. This is your ignorance speaking. The features of the AR-15 (semi auto, accurate, magazine fed) are used in modern sporting rifles and have been for decades. You have no clue what you’re talking about and your dad attempts at emotionalism, without facts, shows you have no clue. Murders are lower today than they were 30 years ago and odds of being involved in a mass shooting remains a tiny statical reality.
    Lil, I grant I don't know a lot, but I'm pretty sure a semi-auto anything is more of a force multiplier than a .22 deer rifle. Also, 'tiny statistical reality' isn't a good defense for letting crazies have semi-automatic weapons.

    Incidently, I'm not in favor of the ban - these are just preaching to the choir arguments (well, and you missed Jim's point on the first one).

    Leave a comment:


  • Teallaura
    replied
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    And why should anyone care what the gun proponents who support the sale and ownership of military style weapons of mass destruction think when the great majority of Americans, which includes many gun proponents, oppose them? How is that supposed to help Republicans in 2020? It's certainly not going to help Trump if he decides to go that route, though he probably will because the supporters of the sale and ownership of these weapons are a large portion of his wacky base.
    Because they outnumber the 'Constitution be darned, steal their stuff' lunatics - and gun control advocates. Riling them up only guarantees they will win.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    They can kill a lot more people a lot faster than rifles meant for sport, lilpix. I didn't suggest they were the same as nukes, I asked where do you draw the line, and upon what grounds do you do so? How many people have to be killed, how many school children, babies, you know, the ones that live independently, outside of the womb, need a poor mentally ill person or deranged psychopath be able to kill with a weapon before you draw that line?
    No they can’t. This is your ignorance speaking. The features of the AR-15 (semi auto, accurate, magazine fed) are used in modern sporting rifles and have been for decades. You have no clue what you’re talking about and your dad attempts at emotionalism, without facts, shows you have no clue. Murders are lower today than they were 30 years ago and odds of being involved in a mass shooting remains a tiny statical reality.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    An AR-15 is no different than the loads of wood/plastic/composite rifles sold today. They are not in the same league as a nuke, stop fear mongering.
    They can kill a lot more people a lot faster than rifles meant for sport, lilpix. I didn't suggest they were the same as nukes, I asked where do you draw the line, and upon what grounds do you do so? How many people have to be killed, how many school children, babies, you know, the ones that live independently, outside of the womb, need a poor mentally ill person or deranged psychopath be able to kill with a weapon before you draw that line?

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
    Jim, I respect standing on principle - but I admire effectively standing on principle. I don't respect abject stupidity in a presidential candidate.

    What is going to happen is that gun proponents are going to be extremely reactive to any gun legislation. They will become active and go into overdrive to defeat things we might otherwise have agreed on. But now they know there really are abolitionists in the Democrat party - confirming their 'paranoia' as fact.

    And yes, this will probably help the Republicans in 2020. That's a silver lining to me, but it will probably mean we leave open the few loopholes we could have closed.
    And why should anyone care what the gun proponents who support the sale and ownership of military style weapons of mass destruction think when the great majority of Americans, which includes many gun proponents, oppose them? How is that supposed to help Republicans in 2020? It's certainly not going to help Trump if he decides to go that route, though he probably will because the supporters of the sale and ownership of these weapons are a large portion of his wacky base.
    Last edited by JimL; 09-15-2019, 05:16 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    And so are the great majority of Americans,and they're against the sale of military style weapons as well. It's about time someone in the democratic party understands that and takes a moral stand. How can you be pro gun control and be against people owning weapons of mass destruction? Do you think people should have access to nuclear weapons, they are arms as well, or is that going to far?
    An AR-15 is no different than the loads of wood/plastic/composite rifles sold today. They are not in the same league as a nuke, stop fear mongering.

    Leave a comment:


  • Teallaura
    replied
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    And so are the great majority of Americans,and they're against the sale of military style weapons as well. It's about time someone in the democratic party understands that and takes a moral stand. How can you be pro gun control and be against people owning weapons of mass destruction? Do you think people should have access to nuclear weapons, they are arms as well, or is that going to far?
    Jim, I respect standing on principle - but I admire effectively standing on principle. I don't respect abject stupidity in a presidential candidate.

    What is going to happen is that gun proponents are going to be extremely reactive to any gun legislation. They will become active and go into overdrive to defeat things we might otherwise have agreed on. But now they know there really are abolitionists in the Democrat party - confirming their 'paranoia' as fact.

    And yes, this will probably help the Republicans in 2020. That's a silver lining to me, but it will probably mean we leave open the few loopholes we could have closed.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
    Beto has just handed Trump one heck of a campaign issue - and probably a blue state or two.


    I'm pro-gun control - the Dems have set it back 20 years!!!
    And so are the great majority of Americans,and they're against the sale of military style weapons as well. It's about time someone in the democratic party understands that and takes a moral stand. How can you be pro gun control and be against people owning weapons of mass destruction? Do you think people should have access to nuclear weapons, they are arms as well, or is that going to far?
    Last edited by JimL; 09-15-2019, 10:04 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
16 responses
120 views
0 likes
Last Post One Bad Pig  
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
53 responses
321 views
0 likes
Last Post Mountain Man  
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
25 responses
111 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
33 responses
196 views
0 likes
Last Post Roy
by Roy
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
84 responses
360 views
0 likes
Last Post JimL
by JimL
 
Working...
X