Page 23 of 33 FirstFirst ... 132122232425 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 330

Thread: Mother of Sandy Hook Victim Delivers White House Weekly Address.....[W322]

  1. #221
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,569

    re: Mother of Sandy Hook Victim Delivers White House Weekly Address.....[W322]

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Texas? Surely you jest. Texas is the armpit of America.
    see, that sort of bigotry proves my point. I live in Ohio, Texas at least is not going bankrupt like Kalifornia

    what bothers you most-a lack of an income tax or the fact they voted GOP the last few elections? or is it that they actually execute convicted murderers



  2. #222
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    re: Mother of Sandy Hook Victim Delivers White House Weekly Address.....[W322]

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    see, that sort of bigotry proves my point. I live in Ohio, Texas at least is not going bankrupt like Kalifornia

    what bothers you most-a lack of an income tax or the fact they voted GOP the last few elections? or is it that they actually execute convicted murderers
    The Golden State has become the Pyrite State.

  3. #223
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,569

    re: Mother of Sandy Hook Victim Delivers White House Weekly Address.....[W322]

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    The Golden State has become the Pyrite State.
    the land of fruits and nuts



  4. #224
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    re: Mother of Sandy Hook Victim Delivers White House Weekly Address.....[W322]

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    the land of fruits and nuts



  5. #225
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,076

    re: Mother of Sandy Hook Victim Delivers White House Weekly Address.....[W322]

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    First of all, that's not at all what I said. What I said is these measures protect your reputation as a responsible gun owner, as well as make the logical sense of reducing gun related crime.
    that is not at all what you said. What you said was:

    ...Those who truly want a gun for responsible purposes should have no problem with background checks. They should have no problem with required training to obtain a gun. They should have no problem with their guns being registered....

    As a gun-owner I have a helluva lot of problems with the notion of the government registering my guns. I wouldn't mind weapons handling courses in High Schools the same as we do with Drivers' Ed - and I wouldn't mind a State making it a requirement for CC. But a national gun registry? No thanks.

    Great red herring. Could you please come back to THIS discussion and what I said please?
    It is precisely the same logic - simply applied to the first amendment instead of the second. The idea that we require permission from the government to exercise one of our most basic human rights of self-defense is an an incredible perversion of the principles of our form of government as the idea that we should require permission from the government to have and express a political opinion or religious belief.

    You're missing the point. Illegal gun owners are less likely to get the gun. That's the point.
    No, I get that you think that. You are simply missing the point that "illegal" gun owners are ILLEGAL gun owners, and therefore do not give a rats patootie what the legal restrictions are.

    So? They can care and they can get them. My dad's wife carries concealed, it didn't seem to bother her to go through the "hassles" of getting her permit.
    and I'm glad for her that nothing happened in the mean-time. The fact remains that criminals are not going to be hampered by any of the restrictions you have suggested.

    The fact you think that is what I'm saying shows you're obviously not "listening" to me.
    On the contrary, that is precisely your argument.

    Let me ask you, where do you think the criminals get their guns? Do they just snap their fingers and guns appear? Are there drive-thru gun shops, where a criminal can obtain a gun the same way I obtain a 32 oz soda? Do you think every potential criminal has a cartel connection in Colombia?
    Mostly from other criminals, friends, and family members - the kind of people who are not covered under this legislation, whom it is impossible to effectively regulate, and who are least likely to voluntarily cooperate with gun laws.

    If you strengthen the laws in obtaining guns, many of those so-called straw buyers tend to lose interest much faster. Register the gun and it's used in a crime, then suddenly the straw buyer becomes legally responsible.

    If the straw buyer makes a habit of having guns "stolen", then the straw buyer is denied his next firearm. And if a legal gun owner really does have a gun stolen multiple times, then they are not a responsible gun owner.

    As a responsible gun owner, you should be pushing for measures which only allows legitimate gun owners to purchase guns. Will these laws prevent all gun related crimes? Of course not. But there is no doubt in my mind it will lower the gun related crime, while at the same time, not prohibit those who wish to legally and responsibly own a gun from doing so. Will you be more inconvenienced? Absolutely. But I think that's a small price to pay.
    Marijuana is outright banned - it is a federal crime to possess or sell or grow it (some small state level gaps apply for select individuals). Can you name me a single county in America where I cannot walk into any high school and get it? There is no doubt in my mind that you will increase violent crime by making it harder and less likely for good people to be armed.
    Last edited by cpwill; 04-16-13 at 07:00 PM.

  6. #226
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,719

    re: Mother of Sandy Hook Victim Delivers White House Weekly Address.....[W322]

    I think you missed my point.
    Your point was that you have no problem with open carry. My example was one where someone was engaging in open carry and was arrested without cause, and his weapon confiscated without receipt. So open carry is fine so long as an anti gun bureaucrat can make it policy to stop anyone doing so, confiscate their weapons, and then charge them with obstruction when they refuse to give up their rights.

    The problem is incrementalism, no matter how much anti-gun crusaders get on the books on gun control, they always want more.

  7. #227
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 03:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    1,321

    re: Mother of Sandy Hook Victim Delivers White House Weekly Address.....[W322]

    Quote Originally Posted by Erod View Post
    It is the most obvious thing in there is to judge. Some just don't want to look it in the face.
    Texas citizens have just as many demons as California citizens. Believe me I know because I lived in both states. As a Christian I would hope that you would know that just because you go to church and sing that ole time religion doesn't make you a more righteous man over another.

  8. #228
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 03:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    1,321

    re: Mother of Sandy Hook Victim Delivers White House Weekly Address.....[W322]

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    see, that sort of bigotry proves my point. I live in Ohio, Texas at least is not going bankrupt like Kalifornia

    what bothers you most-a lack of an income tax or the fact they voted GOP the last few elections? or is it that they actually execute convicted murderers
    1) The whole tax thing in Texas is extremely overrated. Granted Texas doesn't have state tax, but their property tax in this state is ridiculous. It is only beneficial for corporations.

    2) True they do execute convicted murderers.......They lead the country in the execution of innocent people.

  9. #229
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 03:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    1,321

    re: Mother of Sandy Hook Victim Delivers White House Weekly Address.....[W322]

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    the land of fruits and nuts

    Wait, were you just getting on Disneydude about bigotry ???

  10. #230
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,966

    re: Mother of Sandy Hook Victim Delivers White House Weekly Address.....[W322]

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    that is not at all what you said. What you said was:

    ...Those who truly want a gun for responsible purposes should have no problem with background checks. They should have no problem with required training to obtain a gun. They should have no problem with their guns being registered....
    Yes, as part of my bigger point of....

    "Responsible and law abiding gun owners SHOULD support these type of measures. "Crazies", as you have called them, make the rest of you look bad. I would think you'd work for a way to try and stamp down the crazies from reflecting poorly on you, rather than doing everything you can to make sure they can keep getting guns and keep harming people."

    Please quote the whole thing. But even that had nothing to do with your red herring argument about government reading your mail.

    As a gun-owner I have a helluva lot of problems with the notion of the government registering my guns.
    Your car is registered. You are registered as a person, whether it be to vote or as part of Social Security or something else. And yet, your concern is if a gun you'll never use illegally is registered?

    I don't understand this mentality.

    But a national gun registry? No thanks.
    Because...? And don't say gun confiscation, that's just a made up boogie man. Please provide a different reason for no national gun registry, a reason I can actually take seriously. Please note, that is not intended as disrespectful rhetoric. I would genuinely like to see a legitimate argument against a gun registry that does not include the word "confiscation".

    It is precisely the same logic - simply applied to the first amendment instead of the second.
    No, it isn't. The government isn't tracking when and where you take your gun. They are not tracking when you fire off some practice rounds. All I'm suggesting is that we know who is buying them. That's it. There's a big difference. If you want to compare it to something, compare it to voting (as I've seen many pro gun people do). You have to provide proof of identification to vote, to make sure you are who you say you are. That's a far better example.

    The idea that we require permission from the government to exercise one of our most basic human rights of self-defense
    I'm sorry, I have to stop you here. Owning a gun is not a "basic human right of self-defense". Human beings defended themselves for centuries upon centuries without guns. Guns in the hands of private citizens is a fairly new development in relation to the history of the world. It's not a basic human right. It's a right granted to you by the founders of our government.

    No, I get that you think that. You are simply missing the point that "illegal" gun owners are ILLEGAL gun owners, and therefore do not give a rats patootie what the legal restrictions are.
    I have already explained this. Again, do you think illegal gun owners just will guns into existence? Do they snap their fingers and a gun appears? Do they rub a magic lamp and a genie grants them their wish of a gun?

    There's a serious disconnect with your thinking. Mostly the part about HOW do they get the gun.

    and I'm glad for her that nothing happened in the mean-time. The fact remains that criminals are not going to be hampered by any of the restrictions you have suggested.
    Sure they will. To suggest otherwise is short-sighted.

    On the contrary, that is precisely your argument.
    No, it is not. Do not tell me what my argument is, especially since you don't seem to understand it.

    Mostly from other criminals, friends, and family members
    And how do they get the guns? You're not following your line of thinking through. Keep going. Who gets the guns in the first place?

    the kind of people who are not covered under this legislation
    Ah, but we're not talking about THIS legislation right now, are we? Because this legislation does not include a gun registry or required training. Just because the legislation being debated is weak, that doesn't mean we shouldn't push for legislation with no loopholes.

    whom it is impossible to effectively regulate
    No it's not, it'd actually be quite simple. If I own a gun and I want to give/sell it to you, it would be no different than if I would give/sell you a car. The title to the gun would have to change hands, and in this case, we'd have to background check the recipient. If a gun is stolen, the gun should be reported stolen. If the gun is used in a crime (and not reported stolen), then the person the gun is registered to should be prosecuted for some type of crime for recklessness.

    It'd be very easy to regulate and would be of great service to legal and responsible gun owners.

    Marijuana is outright banned - it is a federal crime to possess or sell or grow it (some small state level gaps apply for select individuals). Can you name me a single county in America where I cannot walk into any high school and get it? There is no doubt in my mind that you will increase violent crime by making it harder and less likely for good people to be armed.
    I find this logic to be completely lacking.

    Please do me a favor. Let's assume, for our argument's sake, there are universal background checks, required training (let's say 10 hours, for a good round number) and a gun registry for all guns. Now, take me through the path of a gun, from the manufacturer to the criminal act. Then explain how it is likely MORE guns will be in the hands of those with illegitimate intentions. Let's assume I don't have connections with a cartel in South America.


    See, from where I sit, the NRA's lobbying has completely brainwashed gun owners, either directly or indirectly. Responsible gun owners SHOULD be pushing for legislation which protects their reputation. People like you see guns as a positive, a benefit to society. But thanks to the criminals, guns are seen not for their beneficial properties, but for their negative effects. You should be actively working to find ways to keep guns out of the hands of those who would do harm, in an effort to better your life and your reputation as a gun owner, as opposed to fighting for the criminals ability to continue obtaining guns.

    But the NRA doesn't want that. The NRA is basically a lobbying group for gun manufacturers, and people who feel safe don't buy guns. So the NRA scares people into thinking Obama is going to take your guns or that a criminal is sitting outside of your house just waiting for the moment to come rape your family. They want to make you scared so people will buy more guns. Look at how gun sales spiked when Obama was elected. Look how gun sales spiked when Newtown happened. The NRA pushes this monster around every corner mentality, because they want more money.

    The truth of the matter is things like gun registries and background checks and competency training are POSITIVES for responsible gun owners. Yes, it will be a little more inconvenient, just like taking my driving test before getting my license was for me. But at the end of the day, you'll still be able to get your gun, but you'll have a little less to fear from other people just giving away guns to anyone with a hand out. Not to mention, legislation like this would PROTECT responsible gun owners, not deny them. But too many gun supporters don't understand this. They aren't willing to look at the big picture. They just want to see what's immediately in front of them, whether it exists or not.
    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    Your point was that you have no problem with open carry.
    No, it wasn't. My point was there is nothing in the Constitution protecting your right to carry a firearm in your clothes, thus making the $200+ fine entirely his choice and not prohibiting him from exercising his right. I was responded to with a statement about how open carry is illegal, at which point I noted that the other poster should be upset with the law prohibiting, not the law restricting.

    Does that make sense now?
    Last edited by Slyfox696; 04-16-13 at 08:04 PM.

Page 23 of 33 FirstFirst ... 132122232425 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •