GIVE AN AWARD
Use your CatCoins™ to grant this post a special award and grant the author bonus CatCoins™!


YOUR BALANCE
monetization_on
I support the second amendment, but
General Boards - Politics
add New Topic
Replies: 51  

I support the second amendment, but

emoji_events [5]
May 25, 2022, 9:05 PM
Reply

I don’t understand why anyone needs assault-style weapons or high capacity magazines.

I also don’t understand why more thorough background checks can’t be required to purchase a gun.

And while we are at it, I also don’t understand why we aren’t doing more for mental health in our country. Blaming guns for these mass shootings is failing to consider the true root of the problem, which is mental illness and a lack of respect for others.

I believe part of the problem is that we’ve painted the traditional family structure as outdated, and we’ve also raised a generation of people who don’t respect rules and authority. That, plus environments like social media and cable news which blur the lines between truth and reality, leaves us confused as a society.

We have to do better.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


We need high powered rifles because people like you don't

[2]
May 25, 2022, 9:17 PM
Reply

understand why we need high powered rifles.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link

Let me guess, to protect ourselves from the gummint?***

[2]
May 25, 2022, 9:17 PM
Reply



2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


Your high powered rifle is 100% worthless if the

[2]
May 25, 2022, 10:58 PM
Reply

US government ever decided to off you. What a bunch of misplaced machismo.

2022 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-19b.jpg flag link

I used to agree

[2]
May 26, 2022, 7:02 AM
Reply

But the Ukrainian citizens are doing pretty well against the Russian military with high-powered rifles.

Sure they have some help in the form of Stingers, etc, but you’d have to assume that in the event of a total US Govt crackup, one in which the citizenry was totally getting screwed, there would be breakaway factions of the military who would join the civilians with similar weaponry to what we are providing the Ukrainians.

Bottom line, they’re doing better as a well armed citizenry than they would be otherwise, so I just don’t completely buy that argument that it makes no difference.

2022 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-obed.jpg flag link


Excellent point. A citizenry armed like the U.S. would make

[1]
May 26, 2022, 8:17 AM
Reply

urban warfare hell for an occupying force.

2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


While there is likely some element of truth in this,


May 26, 2022, 8:26 AM
Reply

I'm pretty confident the bulk of Ukraine's success against Russia can be attributed to US intel--Ukraine knowing exactly where, when, and what is going to show up from Russia's forces, and being ready to counter it rather than being surprised, is likely the key reason Kyev isn't flying a Putin flag right now.

2022 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-19b.jpg flag link

Also what appears to be poor leadership


May 26, 2022, 9:00 AM
Reply

We don't have that in our military and the guys in the Pentagon have plans for dealing with something like this. In fact, probably have something drawn up specifically for us.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

[Catahoula] used to be almost solely a PnR rascal, but now has adopted shidpoasting with a passion. -bengaline


Not quite his point, or at least not the one I think should


May 26, 2022, 9:10 AM
Reply

be made. The rapid arming of Kyiv citizens was to ensure occupational forces would suffer hell. Fortunately it did not come to that, but if it had, sustained casualties from an armed local population could have potentially forced Russia to abandon the city, or at least tied it down with resources it could not afford.

2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


Re: I used to agree


May 26, 2022, 8:58 AM
Reply

I kind of agree but we (our military) have some #### that the Russians don't have that would make it pretty nasty if it came to that.

But I also get your point. However, I expect (not talking about you) every person who believes they need weapons to protect themselves from our government to not be a foaming-at-the-mouth "Back the Blue!" or blindly supporting all things military along with spending.

Because that's who they're sending to take you out.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

[Catahoula] used to be almost solely a PnR rascal, but now has adopted shidpoasting with a passion. -bengaline


Re: I support the second amendment, but

[2]
May 25, 2022, 9:26 PM
Reply

I think the age requirement should go up to buy certain kinds of rifles and accessories to go with them. You can't even rent a car at 18, but you can buy an assault rifle?

I also believe thorough background checks should be required to purchase certain types of guns. I know most states require background checks, and I'm not sure how much more thorough you could get.

I think these are common sense regulations especially considering how many kids are mentally ill now. The problem is not the gun. It's these mentally ill kids, and unfortunately it's only increasing.

That said, I plan on buying an AR-15 soon. This world is seriously going to sh!t.

flag link

Re: I support the second amendment, but

[3]
May 25, 2022, 10:06 PM
Reply

You can join the military and get shot up or even be a cop in some places at 18. The rental car thing is more to protect the rental company lol. Same with hotel rooms. A person is considered an adult at 18 so really you can’t deny a Constitutional right. There are plenty of morans much older and plenty of very mature teens who handle guns well.

I agree 100 percent with the last part lol.

2022 orange level member flag link

The age limitation is a quagmire.

[1]
May 25, 2022, 11:39 PM
Reply

Legally we have decided an 18-year-old is fully emancipated. I think the argument can be made that over the decades kids are emotionally/mentally developing later where this is no longer as true as it was back in the day. But you're 100% right that we can't start cherry-picking rights without adjusting the system as a whole.

The area where Democrats really get lost is the push for 16-year-olds to vote. We spent four years under Trump hearing about how dangerous he was, which essentially is suggesting the consequences of voting are dangerous. So, if an 18-year-old is too underdeveloped to possess a dangerous weapon, why is a 16-year-old developed enough to have such enormous power with dangerous consequences?

2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


Was going to edit to add this in but think it can stand on

[1]
May 25, 2022, 11:47 PM
Reply

its own.

I struggle with the idea of guns and knowing how prone to irrationality 18-year-olds still are. And, the ones "drawn" to guns are typically even less emotionally developed. But I don't think the answer is age restrictions on sporting rifles. I don't think it will fix anything.

For starters, in confined, indoor spaces, a shotgun is just as deadly or more deadly than a sporting rifle. If a kid is intent on killing, it will happen with a shotgun the same as it would with a sporting rifle. Some will claim the capacity makes a difference, but only in high pressure situations. Most mass shootings, especially at schools, are not high pressure situations because of response times. I'm seeing reports come out today where the Texas shooter had an hour before finally being confronted. Even with a five round tube, a shotgun is going to have a tragically high body count.

To me, this says the solution is in interdiction; specifically, red flag laws. I have been on the fence with them, but their value as a tool in this scenario far outweighs the potential for abuse (which is real). I really hope the NRA comes around on this, and I suspect they will in the not too distant future. The Heritage Foundation -- THE think tank of the right -- is pro-ERPO. That's a good sign.

That, and the Right has to change the toxic gun culture going on right now. Guns are not toys or fashion accessories for selfies.

2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


Agree. Adult age in one area is not adult age in another.

[1]
May 25, 2022, 11:52 PM
Reply

Auto insurance rates change at age 25 for statistical reasons, but we now know that those statistics are caused by a measurable physical thing: the brain doesn't fully develop its capacity to assess risk until age 25. Sadly, that makes for better soldiers at age 19, but unacceptable rental car risks. The 'if you're old enough to fight you're old enough to rent a car' idea doesn't fly.

And no one argued much about raising the drinking age to 21. Using the 'If you're...' idea, if you're not old enough to rent a car or buy a drink at 18, you're not old enough to own a deadly weapon. I could support 25 has a gun buying age.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link


You could probably get my vote on 21 if push came to shove.


May 26, 2022, 12:01 AM
Reply

I do think we could solve much of the issue culturally in order to keep the age at 18, but it'll never happen, so 21 seems like a good compromise, and it's already the age for handguns and like the drinking age, the public doesn't seem to have an issue with that.

2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


Why do we allow body armor sales?

[1]
May 25, 2022, 9:42 PM
Reply

Gives them the protection and the courage to kill more kids.

Where do we draw the line? Bazookas for 18 year olds?

2022 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

Good questions, and I don’t know the answer.


May 25, 2022, 10:03 PM
Reply

But I do know that what we are doing now isn’t working.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


Re: Good questions, and I don’t know the answer.

[2]
May 25, 2022, 10:13 PM
Reply

start with enforcing existing law and go from there

"Out of 8.6 million firearm-related checks in Fiscal Year 2017, they denied 112,090, the report showed. Then, only 12,710 of those cases were investigated and 12 actually prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office."

twelve prosecuted



https://www.guns.com/news/2018/09/10/feds-investigate-few-nics-denials-prosecute-even-less


military_donation.jpg flag link

This touches on a comment I made elsewhere about trust.

[1]
May 26, 2022, 12:11 AM
Reply

The ATF is part of the Justice Dept. We have an AG calling angry parents at school board meetings 'domestic terrorists'. We know what the FBI did with a FISA court, in collusion with a political party. We know about the comments the Justice Dept has made about 'white supremacists'. Each of those is a separate deal, and I don't know what resources are being expended in those areas. But some. Maybe a lot.

Conversely, we see that the ATF is providing almost no oversight on gun purchases - if your link provides an accurate assessment - though school shootings is an issue. One would be forgiven for thinking they want this to be an issue. And the proposed solution is to place more trust in, give more power to, that Justice Dept. I'm not inclined. But I dont see other solutions either.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link


Re: I support the second amendment, but

[1]
May 25, 2022, 10:20 PM
Reply

“And while we are at it, I also don’t understand why we aren’t doing more for mental health in our country. Blaming guns for these mass shootings is failing to consider the true root of the problem, which is mental illness and a lack of respect for others.

I believe part of the problem is that we’ve painted the traditional family structure as outdated, and we’ve also raised a generation of people who don’t respect rules and authority. That, plus environments like social media and cable news which blur the lines between truth and reality, leaves us confused as a society.”

Thats the problem. Not the weapons. I heard this on TV earlier and checked it out. It’s actually true. More people are killed by blunt objects such as hammers than any type of rifle. Roughly twice as many. Same for hands and feet. Three times as many. Those stories aren’t sensational though and can’t be turned into a political issue.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls

2022 orange level member flag link

That, plus you don’t hear about someone walking into a school or church

[2]
May 25, 2022, 10:44 PM
Reply

and killing dozens of innocent people using a hammer or their bare hands.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


But they do with shotguns, rifles, and handguns.***


May 25, 2022, 10:57 PM
Reply



2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


Re: I support the second amendment, but


May 27, 2022, 12:02 AM
Reply

Anything that makes it more difficult to commit murder reduces the likelihood that a murder will take place.

Anything that broadens the possession of dangerous 'tools' in the overall population increases the risk that a dangerous 'tool' will be used in a murder.

Instead of looking for the perfect and all-encompassing solution in one whack, we should focus first on 'moving the ball forward' via something that can be accomplished quickly.

Start the program to address the 'harder to accomplish' safety related goals next.

Here's a start that requires compromise from the Dems and the Repubs; if both sides have to 'take some bad tasting medicine' then it would be good for the USA.

Start with Constitutional Rights:

There are 'age thresholds' to Constitutional Rights such as the right to bear arms and the right to vote. In other words, these rights are not necessarily universal.

Children cannot buy firearms, but teenagers can.
Children cannot vote, but teenagers can.

Link the right to vote with the right to buy firearms. Make it 21 years of age for each.

Democrats hate this because they depend upon young emotional voters as a key voting block.
Republicans hate this because there are less gun sales (got to be 21 instead of a teenager).

The right kind of PR campaign (and bypassing the crooked MSM) would help to 'move the ball forward.'

flag link

It doesn't matter if you don't understand it.***


May 25, 2022, 10:58 PM
Reply



2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


It matters to me if I don't understand it.


May 26, 2022, 3:44 PM
Reply

A lot of other people in our country don't understand it either.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


I believe in the right of the people to bear arms, but that

[3]
May 25, 2022, 11:09 PM
Reply

doesn't mean that every person has the right to own a weapon, nor does it mean that any person has the right to own any weapon. There have to be restrictions and limitations. For example, a schizophrenic mass murderer has no business possessing a weapon of any kind. Also, even sane, law abiding citizens have no business owning nuclear weapons of mass destruction. So, the "people" in America will always own guns, but there must be restrictions on who can own them and what kinds they can own. That much must be fully accepted by all parties involved before any real, productive conversation can begin. Otherwise, we're just spewing jibberish right past each other in an endless cycle of insanity.

Mental health is a huge part of the issue. All mass murderers are mentally ill, and they did not become mentally ill the day of the murders. We need to be more aware of the signs of mental illness and anti-social behavior, and the neccessity of early, strong intervention. I think that you have hit on a big part of the causes.

2022 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


So, based on your first paragraph, where do you suggest

[2]
May 25, 2022, 11:31 PM
Reply

drawing the line, keeping in mind Class III weapons (e.g. full auto) are already insanely regulated. And, also keeping in mind that modifying semi-auto firearms to be fully auto is also insanely illegal to which the ATF has no sense of humor over.

2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


I don't, necessarily.

[3]
May 26, 2022, 10:35 AM
Reply

Personally, I think we have pretty good, reasonable restrictions as far as types of guns that are "legal". I don't think that's the problem so much as who gets their hands on the guns (mentally ill, violent criminals, etc.). We have to find ways to keep the guns out of those people's hands. The problem in America, in my view, when it comes to gun violence, isn't guns, it's the violence, and that comes from disrespect for authority and fellow citizens, and specifically in the cases of mass shootings, mental illness.

It would be easy to blame guns, make them illegal or much harder to get, and therefore reduce gun violence to some degree. We could pass laws to that effect today and that would satisfy a lot of people. I think there is a much better way which respects gun rights and responsible, legal gun ownership, while more effectively punishing and discouraging violent criminal behavior, and much more aggressively acknowledging and addressing the mental health aspect of mass shootings. I think that is a better, more effective long term solution that would save more lives.

2022 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


One aspect of the Obama admin's gun policy that gets missed


May 26, 2022, 1:16 PM
Reply

is that gun prosecutions dropped under him. Instead of focusing on individual offenses (like straw sales), the DOJ changed their strategy to focus on larger operations.

I don't think this was a particularly effective solution. Straw sales are a huge problem with the illegal gun trade, and I don't think either side would push back on making punishments for them much more harsh.

2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


Agree with your basics. My first sense is that the

[3]
May 25, 2022, 11:38 PM
Reply

restrictions should be more about who than what (automatic weapons are and should be illegal). The 'who' can be problematic also, as we have a politicized FBI and Justice dept in whom I, and many, have decreasing trust. Judgements about 'who' in several arenas have already been perverted for political ends, and all that is, to me, more destructive than even school shooters. So, the waters have been poisoned in the minds of many for that kind of oversight.

I'm not saying something shouldn't be done. I'm pointing out that the group identity politics many have used to manufacture accusations against the other 'side' now makes it difficult to get both sides to entrust anyone with the job of administering something as basic as the 2nd Amendment. When you know the other side hates you, you don't agree to anything. We may have reached that point, I'm afraid.

What is the answer to that?

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link


Re: Agree with your basics. My first sense is that the


May 26, 2022, 8:03 AM
Reply

I keep hearing the narrative that the FBI is politicized and controlled by the democrats. How did the democrats manage to take over and keep control over this branch of law enforcement? I thought law enforcement generally trended on the conservative side and I see that the current FBI director was appointed by Trump.

2022 orange level member flag link

Re: I support the second amendment, but

[1]
May 26, 2022, 6:59 AM
Reply

Maybe the Ukranians can help you understand.

military_donation.jpg flag link

We need to be ready in case Canada invades us?

[1]
May 26, 2022, 9:47 AM
Reply

Or are you concerned about Mexico?

2022 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link


^^^ clearly has never watched Red Dawn.***


May 26, 2022, 9:48 AM
Reply



2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


I'll prove you wrong.... Wolverines!!!!***

[1]
May 26, 2022, 10:07 AM
Reply



2022 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link


Re: I support the second amendment, but

[4]
May 26, 2022, 7:09 AM
Reply

I’ve been hunting and around guns since I can remember. I own several ARs, all bought through PSA. Owning ARs really wasn’t a thing until sometime around 2010 or so, at least in the part of SC culture I’m in. Are they cool? Yes. Are they fun to shoot? Definitely. Do I need them, or would my right to own guns be infringed if I couldn’t have them? Not really. I’d like to throw a hand grenade, but I can’t get those.

We need to open our eyes that these weapons are made to kill humans, and many (most?) of these mass shooting are being carried out with these firearms. The little freak in Texas bought two in two days just after his 18th birthday, and a week didn’t pass before he murdered a 4th grade classroom.

So, as someone who owns and enjoys them, I think we should at least consider that these weapons shouldn’t be available for the public to buy, and maybe try some sort of buyback program. I don’t think that makes me some sort of anti 2nd amendment person, far from it actually.

flag link

It's not up to the government (or anyone else) to decide


May 26, 2022, 8:29 AM
Reply

what firearms are "appropriate" for self-defense. I guarantee if you were someone caught in the middle of a riot or social unrest (George Floyd, or Katrina), you would want an AR platform. If you live in areas that are prone to feral hogs, you NEED an AR platform.

But, at the end of the day, "need" is irrelevant. The Second Amendment is not some minimalist right that government, by their benevolence, expands with laws to provide citizens access to more firearms. Quite the opposite. It starts with the maximum, and then government restricts it. Therefore, if government wants to pass greater restrictions on what citizens can and cannot own, they have to demonstrate clear, definitive proof of the public good it would present, that overcomes scrutiny of the impact on 2A.

Often this comes up after mass shootings, but mass shootings are the worst cases for these restrictions.

If we look at what happened in Texas, the killer had up to an hour in the classroom before he was neutralized. He could have had a bolt-action .22 rifle, and still managed the carnage that he did. Other mass shootings have been incredibly lethal with shotguns, and handguns. AR platforms do not not make shootings any more or less deadly than they could be with other firearms. Even the argument over extended cap mags only works for high pressure situations make reloading more difficult. However, the nature of mass shootings typically are low pressure. You hear of shooters casually walking through their environment until finally confronted. Very rarely are they immediately confronted, and when they are, usually they are neutralized.

If you want to make a case for gun control for specific firearms off of a mass shooting, the only one you can make is a ban on all guns.

2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


Re: It's not up to the government (or anyone else) to decide


May 26, 2022, 8:48 AM
Reply

Ok so… no, you don’t need an AR to kill pigs. And yes, it’s a nice idea to have some sort of semiautomatic accurate rifle in far-fetched fantasies about societal collapse and having to fight my way with my family to our rallying point, but these ideas aren’t really grounded. Again, I own several, and this sort of use is just imaginative. ARs are also very poor home defense weapons. I wouldn’t suggest that be your choice if you need to confront an intruder in close quarters.

To your other paragraph, I’m sorry but you’re just wrong. You’re telling me a .22 does the same ballistic damage as a .223? This is what someone who doesn’t own or shoot guns would think. Ballistic energy from different weapons is apparent when you take care of shooting victims as well. I have personally attended to and operated on numerous gunshot victims, and a .38 doesn’t do the same degree of damage as a 9mm or a .45, or a .22, or a .357. A bolt action .22, to use your example, is far, far less lethal than a .223 semiauto rifle. Which would you rather try to subdue? I know which I’d choose.

Your last point is just off, it’s a slippery slope argument and I don’t think anyone but the most far left nut jobs would try to suggest all guns be banned.

flag link

Re: It's not up to the government (or anyone else) to decide


May 26, 2022, 8:54 AM
Reply

"need" is not in the second amendment

military_donation.jpg flag link

Re: It's not up to the government (or anyone else) to decide

[2]
May 26, 2022, 9:03 AM
Reply

Did I say differently? Thanks for reminding me why I don’t like to do this on P&R though, it’s just reductive arguments from people who are too mad to think straight. You’re not going to find a bigger supporter of gun ownership, gun safety education, and hunting than me.

flag link

Reading comprehension helps in this discussion.***


May 26, 2022, 12:17 PM
Reply



2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

[Catahoula] used to be almost solely a PnR rascal, but now has adopted shidpoasting with a passion. -bengaline


Re: It's not up to the government (or anyone else) to decide


May 26, 2022, 5:18 PM
Reply

Neither is "guns"

2022 orange level member flag link

That is the preferred firearm for people who have those

[2]
May 26, 2022, 9:06 AM
Reply

issues. It is their right to decide.

Secondly, it's not a far-fetched issue. One always hopes it is a far-fetched issue, but several examples of isolated societal collapse over the last few decades suggest they're rare, but not far-fetched. The Second Amendment ensures when those times come, people have the ability to defend themselves.

Ballistically, no. My point was that when shooters have time, like the one in Texas, he could have killed as many people with a .22 as with a .223. He could have killed as many people with a 9mm as with a .223. He could have killed as many people with a pump 12ga as a .223. And I know ballistics are a common focus with physicians groups for very understandable reasons, but often the debate centers around the lethality of AR ammo, when the advances in 9mm rounds (hydroshock, etc.) make those rounds far more devastating that that of .223 ball ammo. I don't think you're making that argument specifically (more to the difference between much smaller rounds), but wanted to throw that out there because it is common among provider advocacy groups.

To my last point. Not arguing the slippery slope. I'm arguing a complete gun ban is the only logically consistent argument when it comes to regulating which guns people can/can't own. Handguns are still far and away the most prevalent in violent crimes (and those stolen which fuels the illegal gun trade), and are just as capable of killing in close-quarter combat as a long rifle (and are arguably more effective). So, why not focus on those before ARs?

2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


Re: That is the preferred firearm for people who have those

[1]
May 26, 2022, 9:12 AM
Reply

There has to be some sort of approachable middle ground between all or nothing, and a thoughtful discussion doesn’t harm anyone. That’s all I’m saying. Only the Sith deal in absolutes.

flag link

There definitely is, but it's not related to the firearm


May 26, 2022, 9:30 AM
Reply

itself. Mass shootings are a cultural problem, not a gun problem. The gun itself is only the how, not the why. And, there just frankly is no evidence that survives the slightest scrutiny that mass shootings would be made less deadly if sport rifles were banned.

2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


Re: There definitely is, but it's not related to the firearm


May 26, 2022, 9:33 AM
Reply

I guess that’s where we disagree

flag link

I'm not prodding this in bad faith. Genuinely curious as to


May 26, 2022, 9:39 AM
Reply

why.

Shotguns and handguns are, objectively, better suited for close-quarter combat (e.g. inside buildings).

Handguns are also more easily concealed, making them less likely to be detected and the shooter confronted before the act begins.

A clawed, hollow point-jacked 9mm round is as much or more lethal than a sporting rifle round.

Mag capacity is a distraction and not a true issue (especially since handguns can accept extended mags).

And, there are (unfortunately) several examples of high-body count mass shootings were handguns/shotguns were used instead of sporting rifles. Is there a reason you believe those mass shootings would not occur were it not for the sporting rifle?

2022 white level member flag link

hey, jimmy.


Re: It's not up to the government (or anyone else) to decide


May 26, 2022, 11:20 AM
Reply

“And yes, it’s a nice idea to have some sort of semiautomatic accurate rifle in far-fetched fantasies about societal collapse and having to fight my way with my family to our rallying point, but these ideas aren’t really grounded.”

We don’t know that. We never thought we’d see scenes like 2020 or 1/6. Look at gas and food prices and looming food shortages. The economy hasn’t actually turned bad yet. When it does, you don’t know what people are capable of. We’ve got crazies shooting up schools, grocery stores, subways, etc. now.

I used to laugh at Lindsey Graham owning an AR. I get it now though. After seeing the way he was harassed in the airport and the way these people are acting towards the SCOTUS justices, I’d want the max defense possible. I guarantee you Rittenhouse is glad he had one.

2022 orange level member flag link

Re: I support the second amendment, but

[2]
May 26, 2022, 11:43 AM
Reply

100% right on I believe part of the problem is that we’ve painted the traditional family structure as outdated, and we’ve also raised a generation of people who don’t respect rules and authority. That, plus environments like social media and cable news which blur the lines between truth and reality, leaves us confused as a society.

This is the Fundamental Transform voted for by the left. Dems run the education system. Their woke ideology is ruining schools.

Blaming everyone and anyone except themselves will never cause respect for rules and authority to come back into style. Thus, parents will never be held accountable to raise their kids.

This is the new normal the left has created.

Without the ability to change what is happening with kids, ain't nothing gonna change.

flag link

Re: I support the second amendment, but


May 27, 2022, 12:22 AM
Reply

Well Judge, it is simpler than that. Declining living standards and anxiety about our futures have a lot of people on edge.. In the case of this kid, it happened too quickly for there to be any sort of intervention, he just up and snapped. Lack of respect for authority does not cause you to shoot your grandmother in the face, then shoot up a school., A psychotic break will do this, which appears to be the case, this kid was not well.

And as far as guns not being a problem, that is utter nonsense The vast majority of gun deaths are suicides and by a large margin, followed by accidents and crimes of passion. People killing strangers is extremely rare, the shooter usually knows the victim(s) and drugs and alcohol are involved most of the time.

And I look at guns like rattle snakes, they are dangerous to have around, and the more of you have, the more likely you will get bit. They serve one purpose, and one purpose only, and that is to take life. I find it rather distasteful that people cling to these things like they are an extension of their genitalia.

If you guys want them, have at it, but quite honestly I find it embarrassing for men that lack the cojones to leave the house without one.. And statistically speaking, you are 3x more likely to get shot by owning one, presumably by your own gun. These are facts.

2022 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link

Re: Support 2nd amendm't; start fix with the easy fast stuff


May 27, 2022, 12:27 AM
Reply

You make great points that society / societal behaviors / 'acceptable' norms are the biggest problem with murders.

But in the angst to fix everything (in which case nothing gets done), it would help if Americans would dissect the big problem, look into fixes for the 'little' and readily solvable problems, and fix those 'little' problems first.

Get something done / move the ball forward. Not a touchdown on the first few plays, but positive movement.

Start with school safety; take steps which (a) make it hard to commit the violence by the most 'committed' murderers -and- (b) create a deterrent factor to discourage the 'lazy / impulsive' wanna-be murders from going through with the effort.

(1) Limited school entry points with metal detectors / lock-out mechanisms. Plentiful school exit points with multiple 'exit chambers' ... i.e., first part of the exit, after leaving the door locks behind you (i.e., you cannot go back through the first part of the exit); second part of the exit, door locks behind you. You're now in the school yard, and cannot return through the first exit. Adult supervision at the outside of the 'second exit door' to lessen the risk of a bad person sneaking in via the exit points. Schools known to be difficult to enter will be less likely targets for 'murderers' and other such people with bad intentions.

(2) Volunteer teachers / coaches / administrators who are willing to obtain CWP (concealed weapons permits) after going through a state supervised background check, psychological evaluation, and special training in use of pistols). Schools known to have such CWP people (not easily identifiable to outsiders) will be less likely to be targeted by 'murderers' or those who intend to hurt kids or school employees.

flag link

Replies: 51  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: 4 season tickets for sale North Stands UM W seats 2,4,6,8 Aisle seats, Under overhang , Stay dry...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

General Boards - Politics
add New Topic
748 people have read this post