|
|
Post by No. 1 son on Sept 16, 2019 15:34:27 GMT -5
Dammed if you do dammed if you doesn't. I think the pendulum just might be swinging in the other direction, but who knows? "let me pull my pants up and I get that cracker".
|
|
|
|
Post by minx on Sept 16, 2019 15:45:15 GMT -5
That is absolutely horrible, but I'm not sure I'm getting the point you're trying to make.
There are always going to be people like this (regardless of race) who have absolutely no care or concern for human life, and they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
However, the media has (for lack of a better term) publicized these attacks in such a way that the average person is left with the perception that roving gangs of blacks prowl the cities looking for victims.
And that these gangs are so vicious that the police dare not enter those neighborhoods- BEWARE!
These kids aren't saints - they should be locked up. But it seems that white teens who commit violence are only demonized when it's so over-the-top that it can't be ignored. That narrative needs to stop.
|
|
|
|
Post by No. 1 son on Sept 16, 2019 16:06:35 GMT -5
The point that I'd like to make is that you and you alone is the front line of your defense. Take away your ability to defend yourself, and you are at the mercy of the street, and also, your home. Kids picked a drugged up target, this is their equivalent of high school. You brought up race, I did not. Violent offenders, yes, but they are "kids" in the eyes of the law. We have a cultural dilemma here between correcting juvenile crime and helping the kids. You realize the street gangs know this, right? It's not all as easy as your news would tell you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Sept 16, 2019 17:30:30 GMT -5
I want a stickpile of SAMs to protect myself from Stosh. Govt says no. I don't know what I'm gonna do.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 16, 2019 18:47:55 GMT -5
Where's my MANPATS? I won't be safe without it, and will thus be driven to cower indoors forever, and whine always, like a common republican.
|
|
|
|
Post by No. 1 son on Sept 17, 2019 7:25:56 GMT -5
That's witty, but it might be useful to be able to defend yourself when people start hitting you in the head or strong arming you in the streets. The courts have ruled the police have no responsibility to protect you, no matter what they write on their cars. link If you choose to not defend yourself, that's fine' but it's not fine to extend that to everyone. |
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 17, 2019 8:10:14 GMT -5
Puh-lease. Random gangs are *nothing* compared to government bullies. Where are my defensive weapons for them? My MANPAD, MANPATS, my own nukes, my tanks, my full-auto rifles, my various bombs, etc?
PS Yet again, what well regulated militia are you part of?
PPS If you make that a black guy and a gang of po-po, it still happens (more often than your OP) and defense is not an option. At least we know gunz fix everything.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Sept 17, 2019 8:18:29 GMT -5
I think there should be a program to provide guns to low income people who chose to defend themselves but can't afford firearms.... The only issue is what we determine to be adequate firepower for them to defend themselves. Who wants to bet that determination will be a 22 revolver with a box of 25 rounds, and not AR15s and 10000 rounds of 556? And you know if the poor have AR15s and that much ammo, that's not fair to the middle class who work for their self preservation.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 17, 2019 8:25:18 GMT -5
Rich buy their own AR15s, poor get subsidized AK47s. That way it will look just like our foreign wars.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Sept 17, 2019 8:27:35 GMT -5
Trust me, my scenario is spot on and makes several points quite well.
|
|
|
|
Post by No. 1 son on Sept 17, 2019 8:32:21 GMT -5
If a firearm is necessary for them to pursue their livelihood, it should be provided to them just like tools, supplies, etc. If you are a mugger you should have the tools necessary to succeed in your profession. It can get as silly as we want it to be. Matter of fact, it already is. ( I don't for a minute believe you would put yourself in a position that you were at the mercy of people with bad intentions)
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 17, 2019 9:10:13 GMT -5
It's not about livelihood. It's, per you, about personal safety. Because we live in such a dangerous country.
Shouldn't everyone be safe, or is self defense just for those who can afford it (recall that weapons and gear were once required by government edict, without regard to income or wealth - but that was back when "well regulated militia" was in the Constitution).
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Sept 17, 2019 9:24:55 GMT -5
I'm 100% serious and you have no right to imply I'm being silly especially after your recent fits about others projecting.
And you're right, I wouldn't leave myself or my family unable to defend ourselves as long as we have the means to do so. It just so happens that at one time, I had the means and then some. But because of multiple personal crises, I'm now much more limited in my selection. That being said, in just about any REALISTIC scenario, I'm still quite capable of fending off the poor, who are apparently all muggers, at home and out in public with that limited selection. At no time in my life did I feel any more or less capable because I didn't have assault rifles, grenade launchers, or hellfire missiles in my gun safe.
PS I bet anything you don't support the govt providing poor people with the means to defend themselves, you've already attributed them to being the problem. But for the sake of an argument, shouldn't they have the same right to defend themselves as you and I? Or is that right a luxury?
|
|
|
|
Post by No. 1 son on Sept 17, 2019 10:32:12 GMT -5
I said it can get silly, not you. Sure they have the right, and need to take that up with their mayor. They are only a problem if they attack you. You don't think there are enough guns in circulation in Chicago or Baltimore? I think the cops and mayors would disagree with that. It would be interesting though as a social experiment though to drop 30,000 pistols in one of them and note the results.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 17, 2019 11:00:12 GMT -5
Right that's some boolshit there. A gazillion guns, in the hands of a few, not evenly distributed. That sort of boolshit stand assigns us all the national median income and says nobody needs aid.
IOW, that's a dishonest argument, and dude what brung it knows that. Bad faith.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 17, 2019 12:50:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Sept 17, 2019 14:20:19 GMT -5
I said it can get silly, not you. Sure they have the right, and need to take that up with their mayor. They are only a problem if they attack you. You don't think there are enough guns in circulation in Chicago or Baltimore? I think the cops and mayors would disagree with that. It would be interesting though as a social experiment though to drop 30,000 pistols in one of them and note the results. Why pistols? Serious question. |
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 17, 2019 14:36:29 GMT -5
Notice he has people asking a *local* official about a federal right. He's obfuscating, not having a good faith discussion.
PS Your mayor can't even have a traitor's statue moved.
|
|
|
|
Post by minx on Sept 17, 2019 16:38:56 GMT -5
No offense Bob, but I can't recall the last time you even tried to offer any type of solution to a problem.
While I may not always agree with Larry, he at least is trying to come up with alternatives. It's getting pretty old listening to you insult everyone who disagrees with you when you can't give anything approaching a solution other than to vote against Trump next year.
You don't impress me as a stupid person, so I'm sure you realize that just by booting Trump's ass out our problems won't be magically solved. So let's hear what you would do - an honest answer, and not a sarcastic one for a change. Can you actually do that?
|
|
|
|
Post by No. 1 son on Sept 17, 2019 17:15:19 GMT -5
Why pistols? Serious question. Good question. I think of pistols as defensive weapons, just me. The fby also thinks they are used disproportionately in crimes, I think that because they are easy to conceal, and they seem to be available. maybe. link I myself would not recommend shotguns or rifles for a giveaway, at least at first. I see them (and have seen them) used offensively. |
|
|
|
Post by No. 1 son on Sept 17, 2019 17:41:48 GMT -5
Ted Cruz and Grassley have introduced a bill ( like the other 9000 politicians) on what to do. Here are some of the "talking points" they postulated:
Improve and reauthorize grants for NICS database;
Increase federal prosecution of gun violence by establishing the Nationwide Project Exile Program and establishing a high-level federal taskforce;
Responsibly addresses gun violence by criminalizing straw purchasing of firearms and gun trafficking;
Protect the Second Amendment rights of members of the armed forces;
Require the Department of Justice to explain to Congress why it has or has not been prosecuting gun cases;
Place limitations on operations like Fast and Furious by DOJ;
Allow firearms dealers to utilize the NICS database to for voluntary background checks of employees; and
Allow firearms dealers to access the FBI’s National Crime Information Center stolen-gun database to ensure that a firearm is not stolen prior to acquisition.
It all sounds good, like all movie previews, but when I read through the bill (Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act of 2019) what I saw was another muddying the waters of what was legal and what wouldn't be legal, even worse than now, mixing terrible ideas with good ideas and intent. This is but one of probably 75-100 little bits of legislation that will be chewed up, swallowed and excreted as law some time soon.
I don't think that congress can separate the real day to day violence here with the random " mass shootings" that get 98% of the press.
Quit putting these gun carrying assholes committing crimes back on the street.
The red flag concept, to which I am very concerned about abuse and further dividing us, may have a place here, but if we go down that road we have failed. People in high crime areas see no advantage to working with the police, but maybe that can be changed. I doubt it.
If you try to make laws for 350 million people based on a handful of under 21 year old misfits, those who commit atrocities, they will be bad laws. We have enough of those.
The congress leans heavily towards mental health as something to be examined, but totally ignores the antidepressants and medicines used to address it. Why is that?
Make the penalty for playing with guns serious and fair, bring back the death penalty.
Once I thought the death penalty made a thug more likely to not leave any witnesses, now I don't think that enters into it. You can't believe they have the same values as you, that's a mistake.
What we can't continue doing is making excuses for criminals and enabling them. JMHO
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 17, 2019 18:33:51 GMT -5
I agree with a lot of ideas presented. I disagree that Larry is trying to do anything beyond justify the status quo. If I liked your post/s, you can assume I like the ideas in it/them, I didn't know I have to repeat that explicitly. Top of my head, usual kind of things that like 80% of us want.
Yes:
remove the ban on studying gun violence
background check to get (and periodic update) and maintain ownership
annual proficiency exams
mandatory gun buy back program (fucking Bruce in Australia can do it, and every living thing there is venomous and wants to kill you, don't gimme paranoid bs about how we're soooo different. For military type weapons)
ban all "assault rifles", purists can suck it on definition - long rifle chambered for military round, auto or semi-auto. we can figure it out.
at least ban commercial availability of the ammo
ban on splintering ammo, dum dums, hollow points
liability insurance
train cops to de-escalate (like many things, the toxic if-it-moves, shoot-it culture is too deeply embedded for these sorts of things to work - they will not follow the law if they don't like it. and a lot contributes. rally thinks Jason Bourne is real and inside anyone with a gun, FFS.)
public education about peaceful resolution, see just above
overhaul punitive justice system, an enormous project in itself, but it's racist and violence intensive.
massive antipoverty program, since we know poverty is a huge driver of crime
No:
everyone has a gun
more bs claims that it's for fighting tyrannical gummint, since the very reason the right even exists is so the people could act as an arm of government (we the people), goddamn right pun intended.
I'm sure there's more, but you've probably seen or suggested most of these here.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 17, 2019 18:40:23 GMT -5
rehab, not just punishment in prisons. That's a dead end, yes, pun intended again. We need to be able to release prisoners, which means they need to be prepared for the world. From solitary to productive model citizen, by the magic of even longer prison sentences. That's the opposite of logic.
And oh such hand wringing about Congress and it just. can't. be. done. Best we sit with the status quo, right? puke
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 17, 2019 18:42:50 GMT -5
Also, the mental health canard is a canard. It only gets applied to white mass killers. Off white and beyond are terrorists.
Mentally ill people are way more likely to be a victim than a perp. More proof of the need for an educated populace.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 17, 2019 18:46:06 GMT -5
You know who else doesn't cooperate with the police?
Victims who might be connected to an illegal immigrant. Do you want to shit on immigrants or do you want safer communities everywhere? ICE showing up at courthouses to drag people away is a damned clear message.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 17, 2019 18:48:41 GMT -5
Why pistols? Serious question. Good question. I think of pistols as defensive weapons, just me. The fby also thinks they are used disproportionately in crimes, I think that because they are easy to conceal, and they seem to be available. maybe. link I myself would not recommend shotguns or rifles for a giveaway, at least at first. I see them (and have seen them) used offensively. A gun's purpose is 100% in the eye of whomever holds it. Weren't you JUST telling us nobody can know another's feelings? |
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 18, 2019 8:26:46 GMT -5
Also, all new guns sold in America should be smart guns. But NRA no likey, so we can't have it.
Old gun transfers should always be cleared like a new sale, get rid of the private sales loophole.
If we care about guns in the wrong hands, that is. I don't really see any evidence of that, though. It's all too hard (obligatory whine) and can't be done perfectly (more whining), so best we do nothing some more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Sept 18, 2019 10:28:54 GMT -5
Did I miss the part where you want to take away everyone's right to defend themselves? Asking for a friend.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Sept 18, 2019 10:42:34 GMT -5
No, but that "right" is not in the founding documents. It's a recent invention by activist judges.
|
|
