Politics Oregon assault weapons ban petitioners turn in signatures

[Natebishop3]

our capacity for destruction is way beyond any period in history...we have weapons that can destroy the planet now...we're not safer by a long stretch

We had two world wars in the span of 20 years in the early 1900s. Millions upon millions of people died as a result of those wars. Cities were destroyed. Countries were left in ruins.

How many world wars have we had since then?

And to counter your point, violence is down across the board. Murders are down.

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/09/29/canada-election-security-safe_n_8039394.html

 

[barfo]

Their is not one man in this forum that can write an amendment that would appease the liberals, an at the same time, expect it to pass successfully through the amendment process. After repeated times of being asked to offer an amendment, none have do so.
So what is your point except to ignore the Constitutions? And advocate for what you want in spite of the 2nd amendment?

The fact that amending or repealing the 2nd amendment isn't currently politically feasible doesn't mean it will always be that way.

barfo

 

[MarAzul]

it doesn't have anything to do with him taking an oath..

Sure it does! If you can't take that oath and mean it, then you can not be trusted in any agreement.

 

[Mote]

And there we differ. Not only do I think he is ill informed, I think he let his mouth run uncontrolled, unconnected to the brain.
But, he can clarify.

It is much worse than ill informed. He has obviously been indoctrinated by the screeching bobble heads on tv who have chanted incessantly since last Saturday the lie "Our Democracy".

 

[Natebishop3]

I had that idea....actually first hand experience....and for the record....I know what I posted...move on if my post doesn't interest you or prop up your take on the topic

If anything, your opinion helps my case because any gun can kill, and the mere fact that AR-15s look scarier does not make them more lethal.

 

[riverman]

Sure it does! If you can't take that oath and mean it, then you can not be trusted in any agreement.

who says Eric doesn't mean it if he takes an oath?...that's a dangerous assumption to make and a shallow trigger for distrusting someone...I trust him

 

[MarAzul]

The fact that amending or repealing the 2nd amendment isn't currently politically feasible doesn't mean it will always be that way.

barfo

True!
I would also expect that counting on more people to become stupid enough to improve the chances is also poor.

 

[MarAzul]

I trust him

Carry on.

 

[MarAzul]

It is much worse than ill informed. He has obviously been indoctrinated by the screeching bobble heads on tv who have chanted incessantly since last Saturday the lie "Our Democracy".

Ok. I stand corrected.
I have not seen much TV.

 

[Lanny]

Which kind of damage are you talking about? If you're talking about strictly how much damage each caliber of bullet can do, the AR-15 is not very high on the list. The 5.56 round (also known as .223) is rather small compared to larger hunting rounds and does not hit with as much force.

If you're talking about overall damage inflicted in terms of number of people killed, hand guns have done vastly more killing than assault rifles. It's not even close. By and large, the AR-15 has killed very few people every year.

Rather obviously I'm talking about the damage done by a single user or a group of users at a single event. I can't believe I have to define damage but it would be the number killed or wounded and the severity of the wounds.. In other words, the casualty count and the severity of the wounds inflicted. You know, damage.

 

[barfo]

who says Eric doesn't mean it if he takes an oath?...that's a dangerous assumption to make and a shallow trigger for distrusting someone...I trust him

Also, why are we hypothesizing Eric taking an oath? As far as I know he's not enlisting or running for office.

Citizens are allowed to have opinions about the constitution, that's ...in the constitution.

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

Rather obviously I'm talking about the damage done by a single user or a group of users at a single event. I can't believe I have to define damage but it would be the number killed or wounded and the severity of the wounds.. In other words, the casualty count and the severity of the wounds inflicted. You know, damage.

So do you think that a handful of mass shootings that produce a few hundred casualties is worse than thousands of people who are killed by handguns every year?

 

[MarAzul]

Also, why are we hypothesizing Eric taking an oath? As far as I know he's not enlisting or running for office.

Citizens are allowed to have opinions about the constitution, that's ...in the constitution.

barfo

Brilliant! Ha! and there you have it, the huge flaw in our system! We allow everyone to vote without buying into the foundation of the system. If you don't buy the foundation, why bother respecting the out come of an election?

Now this is grounds for an amendment in my view.

 

[barfo]

Now there are grounds for an amendment in my view.

Doesn't that make you unamerican? The constitution is perfect in every way, right?

barfo

 

[MarAzul]

The constitution is perfect in every way, right

Of course not! But you must respect the foundation and the system. Be willing to defend it. Changing it within the system is perfect, more than acceptable, it's ideal.

 

[Mote]

Ok. I stand corrected.
I have not seen much TV.

No need for correction. I agree with your position though I believe his intent, along with a few others, is a bit more subversive.

 

[MarAzul]

No need for correction. I agree with your position though I believe his intent, along with a few others, is a bit more subversive.

I do too. So I am corrected.

 

[barfo]

Of course not! But you must respect the foundation and the system. Be willing to defend it. Changing it within the system is perfect, more than acceptable, it's ideal.

So what's your beef? Eric said the constitution should be changed, not ignored.

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

So what's your beef? Eric said the constitution should be changed, not ignored.

barfo

You are amazing at translating Eric's hyperbole and rambling posts.

Have you ever considered a new line of work as a professional translator?

 

[barfo]

You are amazing at translating Eric's hyperbole and rambling posts.

Have you ever considered a new line of work as a professional translator?

What translation is necessary? He literally said:

The Constitution can be CHANGED.

barfo

 

[Lanny]

We had two world wars in the span of 20 years in the early 1900s. Millions upon millions of people died as a result of those wars. Cities were destroyed. Countries were left in ruins.

How many world wars have we had since then?

And to counter your point, violence is down across the board. Murders are down.

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/09/29/canada-election-security-safe_n_8039394.html

I attribute a lot of that to the Rand Corp. and it's brilliant researchers such as Johnny Von Neuman and Jacob Bronowski.

 

[CupWizier]

Brilliant! Ha! and there you have it, the huge flaw in our system! We allow everyone to vote without buying into the foundation of the system. If you don't buy the foundation, why bother respecting the out come of an election?

Now this is grounds for an amendment in my view.

You don't buy into the foundation unless it fits your view. You have already claimed you would break the law if assault rifles were banned in Oregon. Very unpatriotic of you.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

He has every right to express this sentiment...it doesn't have anything to do with him taking an oath...the Constitution is a document...people make it work...not the piece of paper it's written on......it's also been upgraded as time has gone on...that process is now being addressed again..as it should. I feel the same about religion and the Bible.

It is his right to hate our founding fathers or show any amount of disrespect he feels towards them. However it is like owning a house and saying FUCK THE DEED TO THIS HOUSE.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

You don't buy into the foundation unless it fits your view. You have already claimed you would break the law if assault rifles were banned in Oregon. Very unpatriotic of you.

Derp

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

You don't buy into the foundation unless it fits your view. You have already claimed you would break the law if assault rifles were banned in Oregon. Very unpatriotic of you.

Maybe Oregon should pass an unconstitutional limit on free speech, specifically against talking out of one's ass.

MarAzul would choose to ignore the gun law, you couldn't help but ignore the other.

 

[Lanny]

Derp

Denver Employees Retirement Plan?

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

Denver Employees Retirement Plan?

No, that is

W
E
E
D

 

[Lanny]

No, that is

W
E
E
D

Now you're confusing an already confusing situation even more. I think I'll just smoke this joint and forget about it.

 

[MARIS61]

Looks like we need to add catholics to the list of people that Maris hates.

So where are we at now?

1. None white immigrants
2. Lesbians
3. Catholics

That’s an obvious personal insult.

So much for your hypocritical lecture to Cippy.

I don’t hate anyone, and don’t recall ever feeling hate for anyone at any time in my life.

I hate dishonesty, hypocrisy, and cruelty, wherever they exist.

You’re a dog so bite me.

 

[MARIS61]

I don't even understand why people have to "protect their home" with guns. I live in New York Fucking City and I don't own a gun and I'm fucking fine.

Wow King, you sound just like John Lennon. How’s he doing?