2013-04-20, 14:49 | Link #761 | |
Love Yourself
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 38
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2013-04-20, 15:40 | Link #762 | ||||||
Cross Game - I need more
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: I've moved around the American West. I've lived in Oregon, Washington, Utah, and Oklahoma
Age: 44
|
Quote:
2: Why is it so important to have a gun registry? The only reason I see for it is so that later the government can confiscate our guns. Oh that's just paranoid black helicopter fantasy? Really? Why are they doing it right now in New York? They're going around confiscating people's guns because 10 years ago they took an anti-anxiety medicine. It was in the newspaper. In my home state of Washington the Democrats tried to introduce a bill that would require you to register your guns, and then once a year the sheriff would be entitled to inspect your home without warning or warrant. Don't believe me? It was reported by the Seattle Times, hardly a conservative newspaper, and their informant was a liberal Democrat whose comment was that it's really hard to convince people that they aren't out to get people's guns when they do stupid stuff like this. When confronted about the bill, the sponsor claimed that a staffer had made a mistake, and withdrew the bill. Something similar happened down south in Oregon. I mean who am I supposed to believe? The people who keep telling me that it will never happen? Or my eyes? Quote:
Quote:
I have no idea how Senators voting against the gun control bill results in Chechnya terrorists blowing up the Boston Marathon, but I'd be interested in your theory. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The cause of deadlock is the moderates. They don't want to make a choice. They want the leaders to make the decision for them, but right now the leaders are divided and disagree about what is right for the country. Instead of supporting one side or the other, moderates are wishy washy, and go back and forth, and so nothing gets done.
__________________
|
||||||
2013-04-20, 16:14 | Link #763 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
Watching the recent movie "Lincoln" puts an interesting spotlight on US politics. Specifically the House of Representatives and the back and forth that can be needed between the various parties, wing of said parties, and the President.
The movie was more or less about the adoption of the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution and the amount of just everything needed politcally to get it done before the end of that particular Congress and before the end of the Civil War. An effort made to make sure the Amendment would not only pass the House but also the States following the war. The film is of course not entirely historically accurate, but the results are on record because that is what happens in the halls of Congress.
__________________
|
2013-04-20, 16:35 | Link #764 | |
=^^=
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 42° 10' N (Latitude) 87° 33' W (Longitude)
Age: 45
|
Let's bring up Guantanamo Bay:
Quote:
Just an excuse to keep the place open.
__________________
|
|
2013-04-20, 17:00 | Link #765 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
They might one day close the detention parts, but there is no indication that anyone wants to shut down the base. At least not until relations with Cuba return to something resembling normal (which hasn't bee that way since before Castro in the 1950s).
__________________
|
2013-04-20, 18:28 | Link #766 |
Cross Game - I need more
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: I've moved around the American West. I've lived in Oregon, Washington, Utah, and Oklahoma
Age: 44
|
Tsarnaev is an American citizen committing violent acts here in America. He should be dealt with the court system. If it can be proven in court that he was acting on behalf of Al Qaeda (who we are still at war with since Congress never bothered to put a restraint on it's authorization of force), then he should be treated as an enemy combatant- specifically a spy, and subject to execution.
I'm not opposed to Guantanamo, or treating those captured on the battlefield as unlawful enemy combatants, as that's obviously what they are. But those not caught on the battle field cannot be suddenly whisked off to be imprisoned without court involvement.
__________________
|
2013-04-20, 18:34 | Link #767 | |
Love Yourself
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 38
|
Quote:
Here's an interesting comparison for you. In the health field we're trained that if we see any hint of child abuse we are to detain the child, separate them from their parents, and get child services involved immediately, no questions asked. This has resulted in a situation where roughly every other report of child abuse has no real abuse taking place. Yet this is what we want - the law is set up such that a physician who doesn't report child abuse can get slammed with civil and criminal charges, yet they are shielded by law if they make a report that turns out to have no true abuse behind it. We would prefer to be overly cautious and to catch as many cases of child abuse as we can, because despite these efforts child abuse is still occurring in rather large numbers today. That was child abuse. Now let's get back to guns and killing or seriously injuring people. You're telling me that you would prefer not to take the cautious approach, that we should allow deaths to occur and after the fact blame some aspect of the system for not stopping it? Or that we should just accept that the deaths will happen and can't be prevented? I'm not going to say that I agree with the way that this guy's case was handled. It seems a bit overly sensitive, that taking anti-anxiety medications years ago should result in having all firearms taken until you're given another mental health exam. Yet this is a step in the right direction. In the state of Pennsylvania, at least, physicians are mandated to report patients who are no longer fit to drive to the Department of Motor Vehicles, thus nullifying their licenses unless the patient re-tests and confirms that they are still fit to drive. It's obvious why this is done, isn't it? We're trying to remove the possibility of an accident from occurring, even though this is greatly restrictive and debilitating to a patient. Cars may not be in the Constitution, but we're talking about changing someone's life and taking away a lot of their freedom, their ability to live on their own. Would you seriously argue that guns should be handled differently?
__________________
|
|
2013-04-20, 23:06 | Link #772 | |||||
Cross Game - I need more
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: I've moved around the American West. I've lived in Oregon, Washington, Utah, and Oklahoma
Age: 44
|
Quote:
We want to stop crazies like James Holmes and Adam Lanza. Not the woman who once suffered from baby blues, or a man who became depressed because a child died. Quote:
You call that "abundance of caution", but your caution only runs one way. What about the caution of not stealing children from loving parents for no good reason? You self appointed crusaders for children act like no harm is done when you grab children and keep them away from their parents, all with no proof of any wrong doing and then demand the parents prove they aren't bad parents before you return their kids. Our entire system of law is based on the idea that it is better to let the guilty go free then to wrongly punish the innocent, yet that is simply ignored in child abuse cases. Which is bad for both parents and children. Quote:
Emotional appeals to justify real harm right now to innocents in order to protect against some greater future possible harm just doesn't pull much weight with me. Being free is dangerous. I prefer freedom and danger to tyranny and safety. Quote:
Quote:
EDIT: And yet another fine example of how students are encouraged to be politically active, but only for the right causes.
__________________
Last edited by Sackett; 2013-04-21 at 09:33. |
|||||
2013-04-21, 11:44 | Link #773 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
|
Quote:
Your speech on vigilante justice is just a crock! That may have been the case back say 20-30 years ago, but not today. They did as directed and stayed indoors for the most part. As for the "gun rant" nevermind it's over your head. You might figure it out after your first GSW at a trauma ward. My point was, that despite these 2 terrorists and their bombings, there are those who are still clamorin for gun control and bannin of "assault weapons", most if who don't know what a real assault weapon is and have the I.Q. of a raindrop, and are just goin along with the crowd. |
|
2013-04-21, 11:54 | Link #774 | |||||
Love Yourself
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 38
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
|||||
2013-04-21, 21:26 | Link #775 | |||
=^^=
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 42° 10' N (Latitude) 87° 33' W (Longitude)
Age: 45
|
Some nice, good outside perspective here:
Quote:
Quote:
I, along with many Americans, actually saw little to no problem about the lockdown of Boston. After all, I am an American (by legal status). However, this is a bit of a good read. If TL;DR, here's my summary: Because of 9/11, America has gone off its rocker. Quote:
I'd have to say. Culturally, America is numb when it comes to guns and gun incidents. It doesn't matter how many die. That's just the culture of it. That is attributed to the NRA lobby, the Wild West stories, movies, etc. Just yesterday, I was re-watching Terminator 2 on TV; and I was thinking: "Wow, look at all those guns; but in order to fight the threat in the movie, those kinds of guns are actually needed." That includes a gatling gun. Even someone like me, who is clamoring for greater gun safety measures, cannot help but be induced into this gun culture. For many, guns are all simply fun and games, right? I haven't played an FPS seriously (against human opponents) in over 10 years; but I had plenty of fun doing it.
__________________
Last edited by Kyuu; 2013-04-21 at 21:42. |
|||
2013-04-21, 21:57 | Link #776 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
|
Simply put its people control right?
Lets take your drivers license for example: At say 16-17 you are required to take a Driver's Ed. course in high school, then you take the written test at the DMV, then a road test with a state certified instructor or whatever they call em these days. You either pass or fail, but can take the test again if necessary. Here in Illinois you are required to take a Hunter's Safety course before you can get your first huntin license. In said course you will be tested on your knowledge of game animals, the seasons in which you can hunt them, magazine limitations (3 rounds in your shotgun) the limits on how many game animals you may take, and a general knowledge of firearms safety, plus firin said weapon or weapons on a range with police and conservation officers present. Also we have the FOID card, Firearm Owner Identification card. It's mandatory in my state if you want to possess a firearm, ammunition, and buy said items. Every ten years, you reapply fit it and are submitted to a STATE background check by the ISP. Also every time you purchase a weapon you are checked again by the instant check system also run by the ISP. Now with all that, why the hell do we need medical professionals asking questions about wether or not I own a weapon? What if the said doctor has a very anti-gun attitude? Or an agenda? Once again it's the same old thing of meddlein in somebody else's private life! Physicians may be required to report signs of abuse but only to the police, who will investigate it from there if they think its warranted! I talked with enough local Sheriff deputies and city police officers who were on the DCFS and they have told me its s nightmare of a detail. So why not let the states mandate a weapon education system, take care of the so called registration issue. It is rather Convenient that those in favor of more gun regulations, control, bans have forgotten that every time you purchase a weapon you MUST fill out a Federal Form 4473, that the dealer must keep for inspection by the local office of the BATFE upon their askin! I've seen em do audits on gunshops, and it weren't pretty! But there are those who'd rather have the gov't take charge and make all the decesions for them, so they don't have to be troubled. The Utopian wet dream! Unfortunately we humans hate bein in a box or under a microscope. As the people in Colorado are now doin, fightin for their FREEDOM from tyrannical, over zealous laws that were brought about by those wishin to only placate a few, and appease the one! Socialism is a disease, and it needs to be erradicated! |
2013-04-21, 22:18 | Link #777 | |
Love Yourself
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 38
|
Quote:
The first is for reminders about safety. Does it seem like common sense to you that your firearm should be locked away safely, with the ammunition removed? Good. Sadly, as you've probably seen in the news at least twice over the past month, those bits of advice don't occur to everyone, and they can and do result in deaths. Those deaths are easily preventable, wouldn't you say? Your physician is also supposed to remind you to wear your seatbelt when you drive for a very similar reason. The second reason can deal with assessing suicide risk. Firearms are the method of choice for many people, particularly men. Statistically speaking, many people who commit suicide visit their physician within a month of committing the act. This makes physicians an obvious prevention point for stopping suicide. Contrary to popular belief, people who are suicidal are unlikely to keep trying to kill themselves if their primary method is removed, and the suicidal impulse is often temporary. Once again, we are talking about preventable deaths. What if your doctor has an anti-gun agenda? What are you worried about? It's a lot of money and effort to become a doctor, and it's all too easy to lose your medical license (read: your job forever) if you act improperly and patients win cases against you. If your doctor is given the responsibility of removing your firearms and they do so without any good reason you can be sure that they'll catch hell for it. Or do you think that there are no such things as doctors who hunt, or doctors who are members of the NRA? Doctors don't cover for each other blindly, and there are plenty of interests and motives within this professional circle. As for "meddling in someone else's private life," I'd like to remind you that this is about making sure that you don't meddle in someone else's private life. Nobody cares if you go hunting or use your guns at a firing range. If you threaten someone else or use your firearm against someone innocent then we have a problem. This isn't about controlling you, it's about keeping you free but not allowing your freedoms to infringe on someone else's (and preventing others from infringing on your freedoms with theirs). As the saying goes, "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins."
__________________
|
|
2013-04-21, 22:34 | Link #778 | |
Juanita/Kiteless
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New England
Age: 40
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2013-04-21, 22:37 | Link #779 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
The thing is, car registration and licensing is by state, not at the federal level. That might be the difference in how to do anything on guns. The US Constitution applies to what the Federal government can or cannot do. Everything else goes to the states.
__________________
|
2013-04-21, 22:48 | Link #780 | |
blinded by blood
Author
|
Quote:
It's about getting elected and re-elected. That's why the proposed "solutions" are brain-dead in the extreme. They're nothing but feel-good legislation, easy to promise, easy to pass, easy to throw away if they don't pass. Our politicians are humoring us. They propose silly, unpopular, unworkable bills that do nothing and then sit on their hands and shrug, saying, "Hey, we tried!" when the bills are inevitably shot down. Banning weapons that "look scary" doesn't do a thing. Banning magazines over 10-round barely affects anything except the reliability of weapons designed to use certain magazine sizes. Looking overly-broadly at peoples' medical history is just a privacy can o' worms waiting to explode. You want to reduce gun violence in the US? Reduce poverty.
__________________
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|