Politics Trump’s support for background check bill shows gun politics ‘shifting rapidly’

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Jade Falcon said:
Thank you for your response.

When it comes to Gun Control, I blame Democrats and Liberals because they support it based on emotion and the belief that it works, or the idea that it is truly necessary. They do so without ever consulting with a single Joe Average person who is pro-gun, the NRA, or a scholar in the subject of Firearms. And they won't consult with them because they know they'll never win an argument based on facts and rational reasoning.

Then they forward whatever cherry-picked information to their gullible house-wife and Liberal voters; the same people who can tell me who Rachael Ray had as a cooking guest on her show, or who Paris Hilton is fucking at the moment, or whom wore what to an awards show.......yet they can't tell me who Massad Ayoob, Dave Kopel, Alan Korwin, or even Colion Noir are (Colion happens to be an accomplished Lawyer, as well as being a commentator with his own talk show). All people whom are far more intelligent on the subject of guns than any Democrat I have yet to meet or hear of.

The Republicans who are supporting gun control right now are doing it because they're weak, and only care about votes instead of sticking to their convictions. But the Democrats are supporting gun control out of willful ignorance, arrogance, and as an appeasement to their base.

I can forgive (to a point) one, but not the other. Democrats have ALWAYS been the losers on the issue of Gun Control for a reason, and this time is no different.

I appreciate what you're saying about labeling one side vs the other. I get that, and I agree with it for the most part. But not when it comes to the issue of Gun Control.

Gun Control doesn't work. And when it comes to this issue, the simple fact is that Conservatives and Republicans have the benefit of the doubt. Democrats don't, and for good reason.
Click to expand...

See it goes both ways.
When someone posts a video showing them destroying their gun.
(Not because they hate guns, not because they're scared of guns. I imagine the guy who destroyed his AR is very pro-gun.)
But simply because he didn't want it on his conscious that his gun, if sold or when he passes. Would end up in the hands of a non-responsible gun owner and the barrel could end up pointing at someone.
People call him a cuck. They say he's ignorant, misinformed and should've just sold it if he doesn't want it.
They don't want to have a conversation, they want to be the loudest in the room in hopes it will rile up the other side.
People like this, on either side are just not worth the time and effort. It's one of the reasons why I responded to you, and ignored others... Because you're generally not that guy.

I vaguely know who Rachael Ray is, the name at least sounds familiar.
I know who Paris Hilton is because when I was 12 I had a giant crush on her.
But I have no idea who she is now, nor do I really even want to see a 30 something crack whore.
(My gf is plenty for me.)
I don't know who any of the other people are you listed.
There is nothing any celeb, or news caster could say who could get me to change my vote for x.
Whenever either side shows x celeb I always laugh my ass off, they really think celebrities can sway independent voters.
The issue here is how do we stop mass shootings in schools.
Apparently the answer is not banning x gun.
The answer is not having (grand)parents roam the halls with guns to protect their (grand)children.
As someone whos around kids every day, I will tell you. The answer is not having children who become emotional at the drop of a hat able to bring guns to schools protect themselves.(Parents be like, oh my kids not emotional. Yes, yes they are. You're in denial)
Is the answer turning schools into a prison with security at every door, in every class? What if the shooter just shoots the security at the door, or is let in by a friend?

My aunt has been a teacher for shit... 30 years, damn just realized how old she is... My cousin's wife is a teacher.
They know how to shoot. My uncle has a huge case of guns he's legally bought. He keeps under lock and key. My cousin has guns as well.
I've had conversations and got their opinion on if they would like to be armed as teachers to protect school children.
They have two reasons which give them pause.
1. What if a kid goes for your weapon,(because you can't touch kids as an adult in school) and in the worse case. What if the child actually gets a hold of said weapon?
2. How do the authorities tell a teacher trying to protect their school apart from an active shooter?

I own a handgun, it used to be kept 24/7 in a lock box which I kept in my truck.
I take it out every day when I go to an elementary school to be around children.
I never would want to be armed at school, due to the 'what if'
Anyone whos seen me in person or in picture/video knows I'm not a small guy and don't get overpowered easily. Still would never want to take the risk.
I'm not anti-gun, I'm not pro-gun.
I'm pro-children. I want to stop the shootings going on in schools.
However I will immediately dismiss you if you're trying to be divisive, or draw political lines.
I don't care if you're a democrat, a republican, or wtfever you identify as.

Evil people will figure out a way to do harm no matter what.
But we as individuals are at fault if we don't do everything in our power to prevent it.
Right now, we as individuals & a society must figure out how to stop children from getting shot in school.



Cippy91 said:
As for gathering up the guns in this country, I just don't know how you do it and even if you were semi capable of doing it, how many more will be sold on the streets illegally?
Click to expand...
Japan gathered up all samari??? swords as a condition of their surrender in ww2.
It can be done.
 
As violent, divisive, and ineffective as the decades-long "war on drugs" has been in this country, I can only imagine what a "war on guns" would look like if the US government were to try to gather up a significant volume of the hundreds of millions of (presently) legally-owned firearms.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
As violent, divisive, and ineffective as the decades-long "war on drugs" has been in this country, I can only imagine what a "war on guns" would look like if the US government were to try to gather up a significant volume of the hundreds of millions of (presently) legally-owned firearms.
Click to expand...

Good point.
Though this is one major difference.
Illegal growers don't register their plants before they purchase them.
 
honkicracker said:
Good point.
Though this is one major difference.
Illegal growers don't register their plants before they purchase them.
Click to expand...
Another major difference: growers can't kill DEA agents with their pot.

Not at all saying that the two are a perfect corollary, just that lessons from one can probably inform predictions about the other.
 
dviss1 said:
No one has ever suggested "rounding up the guns".

No liberal.

Background checks are low hanging fruit. We've wanted this for decades.
Click to expand...

Facts?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/us/gun-background-checks-florida-school-shooting/index.html

How background checks are conducted

All federally licensed gun dealers must run checks on every buyer, whether a purchase is made in a store or at a gun show.

The checks work like this: A buyer presents his or her ID to the seller and fills out ATF Form 4473 with personal information such as age, address, race, and criminal history, if any.

The seller then submits the information to the FBI via a toll-free phone line or over the internet, and the agency checks the applicant's info against databases. The process can take as little as a few minutes.

Required information includes name, address, place of birth, race, and citizenship. A Social Security number is optional, though it's recommended. The form also asks questions such as:

-- Have you ever been convicted of a felony?

-- Have you ever been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence?

-- Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any other depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?

-- Are you a fugitive from justice?

-- Have you ever been committed to a mental institution?

Of course, many guns are bought and sold illegally; others are sold legally, but without any background check, since the system is only used by gun sellers with a federal license.

The federal government does not track nationwide gun sales, so reliable data on how many are sold is scarce.

Background checks: By the numbers

The FBI processed 25,235,215 background checks in 2017.
 
Jade Falcon said:
You're not understanding simple math here.

320 million guns.

180 million gun owners.

According to the FBI, less than 1% of the total number of deaths in this country per year is as a result of firearms.
Click to expand...

Looks like facts to me.
 
dviss1 said:
Can you slander someone without being sued?

Can you yell "fire" in s crowded theater if there is no fire?

Your speech is regulated.
Click to expand...

Again, you can say whatever you want whenever you want. It's not regulated.

Speech can be a crime, but only after you say something, though some people seem to be able to read the accuseds' minds.

Only after you say something.

These "regulations" you claim do not prevent the person from yelling "fire."

By your logic, I repeat, you would cut out everyone's tongue to prevent them from yelling "fire" in the first place.

Your argument is a major fail. You should maybe try something different.
 
Further said:
14,700,000 people in America die from cancer in a year while only 10,000 die from drunk driving - perspective, drunk driving isn't really a problem compared to caner, so fuck it. However, drunk driving is something that is preventable. Also, cancer has nothing to do with drunk driving, two separate topics. It's a bullshit argument. Unless you want to say these teenagers lives don't matter, then finding a way to stem mass shootings and gun violence is a problem that needs to be tackled. It's getting worse, and it's going to take decades of work to get significantly better. So, lets get off the schneid and see if we can actually make things better. By the logic of "perspective" there is only one thing, "heart disease" that ranks #1 in deaths in America so all other things don't really matter and shouldn't be worked on?

I think we are a nation of 317,000,000 folks who can work on solving more than one problem. Weren't you posting stuff about shootings in Chicago a while back? Only 615 people were murdered in Chicago while 13,000 were killed by guns in America and another 26,000 injured. Murders in Chicago are a real problem that need attention but if the "perspective" argument is applied then we bypass that topic and let the situation worsen since it's not heart disease.
Click to expand...

It's a crime to drive drunk. We don't ban alcohol to prevent people from doing so.

I'm not seeing these parallels the way you guys present it.
 
How do we know that gun control works?

Because mass shooting don't happen in countries where guns aren't easily available, including, yes, Australia.

Now, here, the genie may be out of the bottle with so many guns already out there. But gun control? It clearly works.
 
Stevenson said:
How do we know that gun control works?

Because mass shooting don't happen in countries where guns aren't easily available, including, yes, Australia.

Now, here, the genie may be out of the bottle with so many guns already out there. But gun control? It clearly works.
Click to expand...
Lol.

Let me know when Australia has Mexican cartels traveling across their borders everyday with guns and drugs.

Get real buddy.
 
Nate said:
Lol.

Let me know when Australia has Mexican cartels traveling across their borders everyday with guns and drugs.

Get real buddy.
Click to expand...
So, Trump got his wall, then you'd be in favor of gun control?
 
I wonder if russia is medling again. Would make sense they want us to get rid of guns so they can invade.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
I don't think anyone is claiming that gun control would eliminate all mass shootings, but that it would likely make them less common.
Click to expand...

They're not that common.

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/the-truth-about-mass-shootings-and-gun-control/

The mass-murder rate, after declining in the 1930s, increased steadily in the late 1960s along with the overall homicide rate. Yet the media framed mass murder as a new type of crime in the 1960s, just as they would later do with workplace massacres in the 1980s. But in reality, neither was new. Duwe relates the story of the failed real-estate developer Monroe Phillips, of Brunswick, Georgia, who went to an office building with an automatic shotgun and opened fire, wounding 32 and killing six, including the town mayor, over the course of a 30-minute standoff. The year: 1915.

James Alan Fox, a criminologist at Northeastern University in Boston, is one of the most prominent critics of the media’s mythology of increased mass murder. His own research shows that the numbers of mass shootings and mass-shooting victims in America have been remarkably consistent: roughly 20 shootings a year, with an average of 100 deaths. The number of shootings fluctuates annually, in spikes, which Fox credits to copycatting or sheer coincidence, but the average has held for 30 years. As awful and horrible as mass murder is, in this period these villains have never killed even 1 percent of the total homicide victims in the country.

Duwe blames media irresponsibility for creating a false impression of rising mass murder: “Because claims makers have relied almost exclusively on national news coverage as a source of data, they have made a number of questionable claims about the prevalence and nature of mass murder since the high-profile cases represent the most sensational and least representative mass killings. And the news media have completed the circle of distortion by disseminating the bulk of the claims that have been made, leading to policies that have targeted the rarest aspects about mass murder.”

And Duwe is not alone in this critique. Criminology studies are filled with criticism of the media for playing up mass murder beyond what the facts justify and ignoring the true causes of death in the United States. Christopher Uggen, a professor at the University of Minnesota, compares mass murder to diseases that attract attention for their horror but kill few, writing that “rare and terrible crimes are like rare and terrible diseases—and a strategy to address them is best considered within the context of more common and deadlier threats to population health.”
 
PtldPlatypus said:
I don't think anyone is claiming that gun control would eliminate all mass shootings, but that it would likely make them less common.
Click to expand...
Just like outlawing alcohol cause everyone to stop making alcohol. Just like marijuana laws keep people for smoking weed. Just like speed limits keep people from speeding. Just like laws against drinking and driving have kept people from driving drunk. Just like laws against rape have taken the rate of rape to 0. Just like outlawing murder has kept people from commiting murder. Just like making the drinking age 21 has kept high school kids from partying.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
I don't think anyone is claiming that gun control would eliminate all mass shootings, but that it would likely make them less common.
Click to expand...

Someone in this thread just posted that "mass shooting don't happen in countries where guns aren't easily available, including, yes, Australia."
 
No country has mass shootings like this one. Even Fox News acknowledges that. And no, I didn't say gun control would eliminate them.

Ready, set, copy and paste!!
 
rasheedfan2005 said:
Just like outlawing alcohol cause everyone to stop making alcohol. Just like marijuana laws keep people for smoking weed. Just like speed limits keep people from speeding. Just like laws against drinking and driving have kept people from driving drunk. Just like laws against rape have taken the rate of rape to 0. Just like outlawing murder has kept people from commiting murder. Just like making the drinking age 21 has kept high school kids from partying.
Click to expand...
Hell why do we have a police force? All we have to do is make laws and people follow them!
 
Nate said:
Hell motherfuckin no.

I don’t think signs work.
Click to expand...
So, gun control works in Australia because they don't have Mexican cartels crossing their border, but if we no longer had Mexican cartels crossing our border, gun control wouldn't work here? Or it might work, but you're just not in favor of it regardless?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top