In response to other threads thinking it's too fast to talk about anything

[Jack Hays]

Not really meant to be temporary in any real way, but Obama acted as far as was necessary. So, no, taking things to illogical and irrelevant extremes simply isn't the same.

It was to be for 90 days. That's temporary. Look, I'll not spend any energy defending Trump, but the point here is that his policy was just an extension of Obama's, not a new departure. I won't spend any energy defending Obama either.

 

[Boo Radley]

Religion is and has always been the biggest and bloodiest factor of the "us vs. them" mentality.

Perhaps, but it shuoldn't be.

 

[Boo Radley]

It was to be for 90 days. That's temporary. Look, I'll not spend any energy defending Trump, but the point here is that his policy was just an extension of Obama's, not a new departure. I won't spend any energy defending Obama either.

No, it's more than an extension, it's taking it where it would never have gone. It serves no real purpose and attacks the wrong people. It's not about defending either. it's about logical thought versus illogical thought.

 

[Jack Hays]

No, it's more than an extension, it's taking it where it would never have gone. It serves no real purpose and attacks the wrong people. It's not about defending either. it's about logical thought versus illogical thought.

I respect your opinion. I disagree.

 

[Boo Radley]

I respect your opinion. I disagree.

OK, thanks for the laugh.

 

[Jack Hays]

OK, thanks for the laugh.

You'll need to explain the joke to me.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Nope, you're propagating the lie that is used to prevent real discussion. You can still have a gun, and still protect yourself. There are all kinds of things you can't have and not having them isn't taking your guns.

Stop being timid.

If i have one, Let me ask you this. Can I keep my Noveske ar with the collapsable stock, flash hider, and 30 round magazine? yes or no.

 

[Boo Radley]

Stop being timid.

If i have one, Let me ask you this. Can I keep my Noveske ar with the collapsable stock, flash hider, and 30 round magazine? yes or no.

Is that the only thing you can protect yourself with? No one is taking your guns. Many restricting type, but not taking your guns.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Is that the only thing you can protect yourself with? No one is taking your guns. Many restricting type, but not taking your guns.

The question is none of you buisness, that's your problem. REstricting is banning, pretending otherwise is dishonest.

 

[Boo Radley]

The question is none of you buisness, that's your problem. REstricting is banning, pretending otherwise is dishonest.

If we have a bowl of skittles (people with assault weapons), and we know some are poison, shouldn't we throw out the entire bowl? It's a bad analogy, just as it is when used with immigrants, but we do know that some weapons cause more damage than they do protection. As it is with cars, food, animals, or any other things we can think of, reasonable restrictions have always been part of the deal.

 

[Jack Hays]

If we have a bowl of skittles (people with assault weapons), and we know some are poison, shouldn't we throw out the entire bowl? It's a bad analogy, just as it is when used with immigrants, but we do know that some weapons cause more damage than they do protection. As it is with cars, food, animals, or any other things we can think of, reasonable restrictions have always been part of the deal.

Your problem remains the Second Amendment, and until you address that directly you're wasting your time. Skittles, cars, food and animals are not explicitly protected by the Constitution. Firearms are.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

If we have a bowl of skittles (people with assault weapons), and we know some are poison, shouldn't we throw out the entire bowl? It's a bad analogy, just as it is when used with immigrants, but we do know that some weapons cause more damage than they do protection. As it is with cars, food, animals, or any other things we can think of, reasonable restrictions have always been part of the deal.

I believe in looking at actual statistics instead of propaganda and feelings. AS you have shown you are for banning, which was the point of the argument.


Thanks for the concession.

 

[Boo Radley]

Your problem remains the Second Amendment, and until you address that directly you're wasting your time. Skittles, cars, food and animals are not explicitly protected by the Constitution. Firearms are.

Personally, I'd like it re-written. It no longer applies with the original intent.

 

[Boo Radley]

I believe in looking at actual statistics instead of propaganda and feelings. AS you have shown you are for banning, which was the point of the argument.


Thanks for the concession.

I agree, so How about this: Accept all the things most agree on: Raising age limit to 21, increase and improve background checks and reporting, have a 14 day waiting period, improve funding to mental health, AND most importantly, allow study on gun violence as well as how to best identify and reach those who are mentally ill. Can we agree to this?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

I agree, so How about this: Accept all the things most agree on: Raising age limit to 21, increase and improve background checks and reporting, have a 14 day waiting period, improve funding to mental health, AND most importantly, allow study on gun violence as well as how to best identify and reach those who are mentally ill. Can we agree to this?

How do you improve background checks and reporting?
What statistical evidence do you have that a 14 day waiting period would save lives?
What statistcal evidence do you have that changing the age to 21 would save lives?
Gun violence is studied and the root cause for the vast majority of gun crimes isn't PC to address. fact, most gun crimes are committed by criminals shooting other criminals to the tune of 86+ percent, why aren't we starting there? in fact your last president commutted and pardoned sentence of some of these such criminals, how does that help the issue?


I will agree that if you are on medications that has "homicidal ideations" and or "suicidal thoughts" as a side effect, that that person is barred from buying or owning guns during the time they are on this type of medication, that I would agree with.


on the others, you would have to show me the statistics, and explain how it would curtail these tragedies.

 

[Jack Hays]

Personally, I'd like it re-written. It no longer applies with the original intent.

If the energy now wasted on feckless gestures were instead invested in a serious good faith revision, we might get somewhere.