|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
02-16-2018, 10:29 PM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,718
|
The answer is to make it more difficult to get firearms. Stop making stupid rules that do nothing,10 rounds,bumpstock....Just make the process to acquire the firearm more selective. Right now in MA it takes about 20 minutes to buy a firearm,this is in a state considered to have strict gun laws. It must be time to pay more attention. If I had to wait a day,week,or month in order to make an impulse or nutjob think twice about his urge to kill it would be worth it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
02-16-2018, 10:56 PM
|
#2
|
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 35,289
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by zimmy
To equate any attempt to alter gun laws with the intent to save lives as an attempt at taking away all gun rights is not the solution. But it is great for votes.
Also, in almost every recent mass murderer, the person was a law abiding person up until the guy gunned down kids, teachers, concert goes, club dancers, etc. There are certainly ridiculous components of gun laws, but gun laws are not inherently ridiculous.
I like guns. I tagged along on hunting trips from as young as 5 or 6 and love to shoot. I am now convinced the founders "messed' up.
Supreme Court decision in US v. Miller 1939 2nd amendment intent and implication was for weapons related to a "well regulated militia" only. Based on everything I have read about the lead up to the second I am convinced that is what the founders intendedband as such is antiquated. The concern of the founders was the shift of security from State militias to federal forces. Leads to the question, in modern times, do well regulated state militias that provide protection against the federal army exist and should the intent to protect them dictate modern gun policy?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
I disagree. The founding fathers knew what they were doing. But they did put in a mechanism to repeal the 2A. Get 34 states to repeal it in a Constitutional Convention. But then you will see the breakup of the USA.
What we need? Better background checks. And a system of restraining order for those suffering from mental health issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Dangles
The answer is to make it more difficult to get firearms. Stop making stupid rules that do nothing,10 rounds,bumpstock....Just make the process to acquire the firearm more selective. Right now in MA it takes about 20 minutes to buy a firearm,this is in a state considered to have strict gun laws. It must be time to pay more attention. If I had to wait a day,week,or month in order to make an impulse or nutjob think twice about his urge to kill it would be worth it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
You have to have a FID car in Mass first, THEN you get to some of the most restrictive gun rules in the nation.
|
~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~
Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers
Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.
Apocalypse is Coming:
|
|
|
02-17-2018, 10:44 AM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,481
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Dangles
The answer is to make it more difficult to get firearms. Stop making stupid rules that do nothing,10 rounds,bumpstock....Just make the process to acquire the firearm more selective. Right now in MA it takes about 20 minutes to buy a firearm,this is in a state considered to have strict gun laws. It must be time to pay more attention. If I had to wait a day,week,or month in order to make an impulse or nutjob think twice about his urge to kill it would be worth it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
That certainly is part of the solution. Unfortunately *any* measures to restrict *any* part of the process is viewed as an instant ride down the slippery slope to a dystopian militarized state devoid of liberty.
We're better than that.
Why would we have a federal registry for automatic weapons and not for some semi-auto which have proven in Vegas to be able to hit over 500 people in the span of a few minutes? Why can someone with the extreme track record of illness and violence be able to just walk in and purchase an assault weapon in a few minutes?
Why don't other Western countries have the same issues we do?
|
|
|
|
02-17-2018, 11:50 AM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
That certainly is part of the solution. Unfortunately *any* measures to restrict *any* part of the process is viewed as an instant ride down the slippery slope to a dystopian militarized state devoid of liberty.
We're better than that.
Why would we have a federal registry for automatic weapons and not for some semi-auto which have proven in Vegas to be able to hit over 500 people in the span of a few minutes? Why can someone with the extreme track record of illness and violence be able to just walk in and purchase an assault weapon in a few minutes?
Why don't other Western countries have the same issues we do?
|
"Unfortunately *any* measures to restrict *any* part of the process is viewed as an instant ride down the slippery slope to a dystopian militarized state devoid of liberty"
It's the inly issue I know of, on which it's almost impossible to have a rational conversation with staunch conservatives.
"Why don't other Western countries have the same issues we do?"
In terms of the mass killings? Great question. We have a very small number of very sick folks who are way more violent than the sickest folks in other countries, I guess. It's not an indictment of most Americans, just the sickest.
|
|
|
|
02-17-2018, 12:11 PM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,406
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
"Unfortunately *any* measures to restrict *any* part of the process is viewed as an instant ride down the slippery slope to a dystopian militarized state devoid of liberty"
It's the inly issue I know of, on which it's almost impossible to have a rational conversation with staunch conservatives.
"Why don't other Western countries have the same issues we do?"
In terms of the mass killings? Great question. We have a very small number of very sick folks who are way more violent than the sickest folks in other countries, I guess. It's not an indictment of most Americans, just the sickest.
|
Jim .. Fear sells guns and ammo the NRA is a Fear broker ..(look at the sales under Obama..) The NRA and Fox news promotes the Mutually Assured Destruction theory (only a good guy with a gun mantra) ,there will be a rush to buy and ammo if there is any gun control talk... its sad of all the things that go into mass shooting that the right loves to throw into the conversation( and manny are correct ) the one thing always absent in their analysis is mention of the gun and and the ease to get one and the availability of guns in America
|
|
|
|
02-17-2018, 12:45 PM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
Jim .. Fear sells guns and ammo the NRA is a Fear broker ..(look at the sales under Obama..) The NRA and Fox news promotes the Mutually Assured Destruction theory (only a good guy with a gun mantra) ,there will be a rush to buy and ammo if there is any gun control talk... its sad of all the things that go into mass shooting that the right loves to throw into the conversation( and manny are correct ) the one thing always absent in their analysis is mention of the gun and and the ease to get one and the availability of guns in America
|
"Fear sells guns"
You can say that again.
"Its sad of all the things that go into mass shooting that the right loves to throw into the conversation( and manny are correct ) the one thing always absent in their analysis is mention of the gun and and the ease to get one and the availability of guns in America"
Agreed.
And the left intentionally leaves out the violence that the entertainment industry bombards our kids with, and the horrific effect that the breakdown of the nuclear family has.
Everyone in the Dakotas has guns, but there is no crime. Because they care about each other. THERE'S THE ANSWER, to care about each other like they do. But Obama calls them bitter clingers, and Hilary calls them deplorable. And no one on the left (including the media except Foxnews) questions Obama and Hilary when they say these things.
That impedes progress, just as much as when the right says we need more guns. Both sides are thoughtlessly rigid in their ideology, both sides are close minded as can be. Both sides prevent solutions. Because we elect people based on how pretty and popular they are, or how much money they promise us, instead of electing people who care.
"
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:34 PM.
|
| |