Originally posted by lilpixieofterror
View Post
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.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Gun Control - moved from E-cig thread
Collapse
X
-
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:
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostActually 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:
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostLil, 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.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).
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostBecause 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:
-
Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostI'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.
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:
-
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:
-
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:
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostAnd 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.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostThey 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:
-
Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View PostAn 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:
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostJim, 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.Last edited by JimL; 09-15-2019, 05:16 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostAnd 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?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostAnd 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?
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:
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostBeto 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!!!Last edited by JimL; 09-15-2019, 10:04 AM.
Leave a comment:
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Today, 04:03 AM
|
23 responses
93 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Diogenes
Today, 12:19 PM
|
||
Started by carpedm9587, Yesterday, 12:51 PM
|
79 responses
374 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
Today, 01:00 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 06:47 AM
|
5 responses
44 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by mossrose
Yesterday, 12:18 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 06:36 AM
|
5 responses
25 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 07:37 AM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 05-11-2024, 07:25 AM
|
56 responses
244 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 11:35 AM
|
Leave a comment: