Support NeoGAF

[HyperionX]

Fine. So if we are going to talk about policy then we can have different points of view about policy.

A difference of view would imply disagreements over a particular gun law or reform idea, not multitudes of angry posts that demand nothing should be done. I've made the analogy of a person who goes into police reform threads and repeated posts #AllLivesMatter and dismiss all arguments against reform. That's basically what is going on in these threads all the time.

As for the moral judgment as to when oppression has reached the level that armed revolt is necessary and morally justified, I am sure philosophers have discussed that. I would assume that decision must be made by the oppressed as to when it is time to fight. I don't presume to tell black people or anyone else when that point is.

You're still dodging the question. How many murders of police officers by black youths do you feel is necessary here? If you honestly have no clue what the line is, then there's no argument to be made here. This becomes another deflection tactic to ignore the reality of the problem we're facing right now.

 

[PBY]

I'm an advocate of really strict gun control, but I also advocate that black people, and all people of color, own a firearm (preferably a long gun) and are proficient with its use. There has been, and continues to be, a scourge of racial violence perpetrated by whites against blacks. From the massacre in Tulsa, Oklahoma in 1927 to the bombing of black churches in the 60's to the execution of black church goers this year.

This nation was built on racist violence, and it has become a part of this country's soul. Whenever black Americans are known to be disarmed, the result has been catastrophic. On the contrary, armed blacks have led to a reduction in overall violence. The Deacons for Defense and Justice deterred white mobs and police attacks at protests by providing an armed presence - and they didn't fire a shot. The Black Panthers armed patrols also led to a change in police policy a municipalities hiring more black officers.

White citizens have the privilege in believing the police will protect them from violent attack. People of color do not have that privilege. In this country, and all over the world, unarmed minority groups expose themselves to great danger - sometimes even genocide.

I would very much enjoy living in a world without guns. And I understand that we will never live in that world without mass disarmament. But it would be the height of inhumanity to ask the most vulnerable populations to disarm first.

Yeah, I disagree wholeheartedly with this in the abstract, just because I think lethal force just isn't justfied.

I do love the idea in practice in the sense that its one fast way to get people talking about a total ban.

 

[Piggus]

Except - swimming pools have a utility that can be beneficial, health, etc. and more importantly, their created purpose isn't destruction. Even more importantly - you aren't going to accidentally harm my family with your swimming pool, nor will your swimming pool accidentally fall into the wrong hands that can do harm with it.

Guns aren't just another "dangerous hobby".

You can go to a public pool for all that. I said HOME swimming pools.

From the CDC:

Children ages 1 to 4 have the highest drowning rates. In 2009, among children 1 to 4 years old who died from an unintentional injury, more than 30% died from drowning.1,2 Among children ages 1 to 4, most drownings occur in home swimming pools.2 Drowning is responsible for more deaths among children 1-4 than any other cause except congenital anomalies (birth defects).1 Among those 1-14, fatal drowning remains the second-leading cause of unintentional injury-related death behind motor vehicle crashes.1

So what's the net benefit of a home swimming pool? Are they worth the lives of those children when one could just as easily go to a public pool? I'm not trying to deflect from the topic, I'm trying to show you the flaw in such an argument. Owning a gun or participating in any activity that's potentially dangerous relies entirely on the responsibility of the person participating in that activity. I'm not about bitch at swimming pool owners for valuing their pool over the lives of children who needlessly drown in them each year in the same way that I'm not going to bitch at a gun owner who keeps guns securely locked up and only uses them in a safe manner far away from other people. I don't care what you think the purpose of a gun is. That has nothing to do with the "net benefit to society" argument.

 

[PBY]

You can go to a public pool for all that. I said HOME swimming pools.

From the CDC:



So what's the net benefit of a home swimming pool? Are they worth the lives of those children when one could just as easily go to a public pool? I'm not trying to deflect from the topic, I'm trying to show you the flaw in such an argument. Owning a gun or participating in any activity that's potentially dangerous relies entirely on the responsibility of the person participating in that activity. I'm not about bitch at swimming pool owners for valuing their pool over the lives of children who needlessly drown in them each year in the same way that I'm not going to bitch at a gun owner who keeps guns securely locked up and only uses them in a safe manner far away from other people. I don't care what you think the purpose of a gun is. That has nothing to do with the "net benefit to society" argument.

What I'm saying is that my home pool will never kill your kids without some form of social contract whereby you understand the risk and accept it.

Not all gun owners keep their guns locked away, and there's no way to guarantee that.

I also can't believe I have to explain the relative differences in danger between a gun and a pool, and the calculations that happen whereby people undertake to accept the risks/rewards of such activities.

 

[appaws]

A difference of view would imply disagreements over a particular gun law or reform idea, not multitudes of angry posts that demand nothing should be done. I've made the analogy of a person who goes into police reform threads and repeated posts #AllLivesMatter and dismiss all arguments against reform. That's basically what is going on in these threads all the time.



You're still dodging the question. How many murders of police officers by black youths do you feel is necessary here? If you honestly have no clue what the line is, then there's no argument to be made here. This becomes another deflection tactic to ignore the reality of the problem we're facing right now.

I'm not making angry posts. I am not angry about anything. I disagree and I express my disagreement. Sorry I don't agree with you.

I am not dodging anything. I don't think any "murders" of police officers is necessary. There is a line over which a people or community can be driven and at which point armed resistance becomes morally justified. I don't determine where that line is for other people or communities besides myself and my own.

 

[HyperionX]

You can go to a public pool for all that. I said HOME swimming pools.

From the CDC:



So what's the net benefit of a home swimming pool? Are they worth the lives of those children when one could just as easily go to a public pool? I'm not trying to deflect from the topic, I'm trying to show you the flaw in such an argument. Owning a gun or participating in any activity that's potentially dangerous relies entirely on the responsibility of the person participating in that activity. I'm not about bitch at swimming pool owners for valuing their pool over the lives of children who needlessly drown in them each year in the same way that I'm not going to bitch at a gun owner who keeps guns securely locked up and only uses them in a safe manner far away from other people. I don't care what you think the purpose of a gun is. That has nothing to do with the "net benefit to society" argument.

This is another deflection tactic. Par for the course for you unfortunately.

Believe it or not, we actually are capable of tackling multiple issues at the same time, and just because we care more about one particular issue at the moment, does not mean nothing is being about another. Furthermore, literally everyone of your "X kills more than guns" argument is disproven with the same set of counterarguments:

1) X is something we can't anything about (cancer, heart diseases, etc.)
2) X is something we already are doing a lot about (car accidents, etc.)
3) X is something else we've failed to address properly (don't know what this actually is. Guns are the only thing I know that we've completely failed to address).

Seriously, this line of argument is incredibly tired.

 

[nynt9]

This is another deflection tactic. Par for the course for you unfortunately.

Believe it or not, we actually are capable of tackling multiple issues at the same time, and just because we care more about one particular issue at the moment, does not mean nothing is being about another. Furthermore, literally everyone of your "X kills more than guns" argument is disproven with the same set of counterarguments:

1) X is something we can't anything about (cancer, heart diseases, etc.)
2) X is something we already are doing a lot about (car accidents, etc.)
3) X is something else we've failed to address properly (don't know what this actually is. Guns are the only thing I know that we've completely failed to address).

Seriously, this line of argument is incredibly tired.

It isn't just tired, it's hilariously stupid and disingenuous, so we should probably stop engaging with him lest the thread will get locked for derailment.

We have this update on the shooting:

http://gazette.com/colorado-springs...-2-days-before-shooting-spree/article/1562379

here's the shooter's vlog: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAxdcjtS3dY&feature=youtu.be

and his blog: http://sunwatermovementfoodandsleep.com/

 

[Piggus]

What I'm saying is that my home pool will never kill your kids without some form of social contract whereby you understand the risk and accept it.

Not all gun owners keep their guns locked away, and there's no way to guarantee that.

I also can't believe I have to explain the relative differences in danger between a gun and a pool, and the calculations that happen whereby people undertake to accept the risks/rewards of such activities.

So basically what you're saying is guns would be totally fine if they only killed people via accidents rather than homicides.

You don't have to explain the difference to me. Their relative danger was not the point I was making. The point I was making is that both kill people needless and don't have any real benefit to society, yet we as a society accept that risk. The difference is you accept the deaths caused by one but not the other, even though deaths from both are preventable.

This is another deflection tactic. Par for the course for you unfortunately.

Believe it or not, we actually are capable of tackling multiple issues at the same time, and just because we care more about one particular issue at the moment, does not mean nothing is being about another. Furthermore, literally everyone of your "X kills more than guns" argument is disproven with the same set of counterarguments:

1) X is something we can't anything about (cancer, heart diseases, etc.)
2) X is something we already are doing a lot about (car accidents, etc.)
3) X is something else we've failed to address properly (don't know what this actually is. Guns are the only thing I know that we've completely failed to address).

Seriously, this line of argument is incredibly tired.

And you miss the point again. Shocking!

 

[PBY]

So basically what you're saying is guns would be totally fine if they only killed people via accidents rather than homicides.

You don't have to explain the difference to me. Their relative danger was not the point I was making. The point I was making is that both kill people needless and don't have any real benefit to society, yet we as a society accept that risk. The difference is you accept the deaths caused by one but not the other, even though deaths from both are preventable.

Its not an accident vs. homicide thing - its an personal agency and undertaking of the risk issue. IE - a pool will never cause random tragedy in the way that a mass shooter does to bystanders who haven't made that calculus/accepted the risk of going into/being near/bringing your kids to a pool. Thats a massive difference.

 

[HyperionX]

I'm not making angry posts. I am not angry about anything. I disagree and I express my disagreement. Sorry I don't agree with you.

I am not dodging anything. I don't think any "murders" of police officers is necessary. There is a line over which a people or community can be driven and at which point armed resistance becomes morally justified. I don't determine where that line is for other people or communities besides myself and my own.

If you don't think murder of police officers is necessary, than your argument falls apart. Armed resistance literally implies killing at least some group of people in an authority position. If you cannot define what that point it, then it is simply too poorly defined to be worthwhile. And your last point, that you can define it for yourself or your own community, is a total copout. Virtually, every act of politically motivated violence is justified by that claim.

 

[Piggus]

Its not an accident vs. homicide thing - its an personal agency and undertaking of the risk issue. IE - a pool will never cause random tragedy in the way that a mass shooter does to bystanders who haven't made that calculus/accepted the risk of going into/being near/bringing your kids to a pool. Thats a massive difference.

Again, not my point. You still haven't told me why a home pool is necessary enough to outweigh the deaths they cause each year. I get that guns are a lot more dangerous, but you and a lot of others imply that ANY death related to guns should result in them being banned. And then you go about telling people they're responsible for those deaths if they own guns. Yet when you yourself participate in something needless that kills a lot of kids, it's "but it's about my personal responsibility." You change your story depending on what you're attacking/defending when both are completely useless to society.

 

[PBY]

Again, not my point. You still haven't told me why a home pool is necessary enough to outweigh the deaths they cause each year.

It may or may not be necessary - but at least it allows the persons close to the dangerous item to make that decision, which is why it shifts the need to legislate that? (Also we do legislate pool safety btw)

 

[Mammoth Jones]

I'm an advocate of really strict gun control, but I also advocate that black people, and all people of color, own a firearm (preferably a long gun) and are proficient with its use. There has been, and continues to be, a scourge of racial violence perpetrated by whites against blacks. From the massacre in Tulsa, Oklahoma in 1927 to the bombing of black churches in the 60's to the execution of black church goers this year.

This nation was built on racist violence, and it has become a part of this country's soul. Whenever black Americans are known to be disarmed, the result has been catastrophic. On the contrary, armed blacks have led to a reduction in overall violence. The Deacons for Defense and Justice deterred white mobs and police attacks at protests by providing an armed presence - and they didn't fire a shot. The Black Panthers armed patrols also led to a change in police policy a municipalities hiring more black officers.

White citizens have the privilege in believing the police will protect them from violent attack. People of color do not have that privilege. In this country, and all over the world, unarmed minority groups expose themselves to great danger - sometimes even genocide.

The types of tragedies discussed in the OP horrify me. I would very much enjoy living in a world without guns. And I understand that we will never live in that world without mass disarmament. But it would be the height of inhumanity to ask the most vulnerable populations to disarm first.

Like I said, take away the guns from the police, military, criminals, rapists..etc and I'll gladly throw my gun in the pile to get melted. But until then? Fuck that noise.

 

[PBY]

Like I said, take away the guns from the police, military, criminals, rapists..etc and I'll gladly throw my gun in the pile to get melted. But until then? Fuck that noise.

So never then, cool.

 

[Piggus]

It may or may not be necessary - but at least it allows the persons close to the dangerous item to make that decision, which is why it shifts the need to legislate that? (Also we do legislate pool safety btw)

So how am I danger to other people if I'm literally the only person within miles near a gun?

I get what you mean about not all people being safe with guns, and that's a major problem that we need to address. But that doesn't mean I have blood on my hands just because I'm out shooting paper targets in the middle of nowhere once every two or three months.

 

[Lord Error]

It's a magazine not clip. And a lot of states are only aloud to own 10 rd magazines for rifles. I happen to live in the South and personally own 4 30 round magazines and a 60 rounder. I like my AR, it's a lot of fun to shoot. Her name is Carly. Not everyone is crazy.

This is such an awesome post, holy shit, lol.

 

[PBY]

So how am I danger to other people if I'm literally the only person within miles near a gun?

I get what you mean about not all people being safe with guns, and that's a major problem that we need to address. But that doesn't mean I have blood on my hands just because I'm out shooting paper targets in the middle of nowhere once every two or three months.

"You" is representative of people in similar circumstances who own guns with similar mindsets. All it takes is one of "you" to have an accident, etc., and then kids are dead. Thats it. You contribute to more guns in society.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

So never then, cool.

Glad you finally figuring that out...

"You" is representative of people in similar circumstances who own guns with similar mindsets. All it takes is one of "you" to have an accident, etc., and then kids are dead. Thats it. You contribute to more guns in society.

The answer is more accountability for negligent use of firearms. Not just preaching from the mountaintop how guns are dangerous and people shouldn't own the dangerous things.

 

[HyperionX]

As another FYI, Mammoth Jones is just like Piggus, a person who regular shows up in mass shooting threads to defend the method used in the murder, and precede to use deflection tactics and dismiss all evidence to the contrary. Don't take them seriously, since you'll probably never get them to change their minds.

 

[Piggus]

"You" is representative of people in similar circumstances who own guns with similar mindsets. All it takes is one of "you" to have an accident, etc., and then kids are dead. Thats it. You contribute to more guns in society.

I contribute to more guns owned by me, locked in a safe and used safely by me and me alone. There would be virtually no accidents if everyone treated gun ownership the way I do (the way most people do, for that matter.) It's a small minority that abuses their right, and we need more laws that help prevent those people from getting guns. But I think you will find that most people in the US are not in favor of punishing all gun owners without trying to pass solutions that work for everyone. Telling the NRA to get fucked would be a good first start...

As another FYI, Mammoth Jones is just like Piggus, a person who regular shows up in mass shooting threads to defend the method used in the murder, and precede to use deflection tactics and dismiss all evidence to the contrary. Don't take them seriously, since you'll probably never get them to change their minds either.

"These people have a different opinion than me, so don't listen to anything they say!"

 

[Kenstar]

As another FYI, Mammoth Jones is just like Piggus, a person who regular shows up in mass shooting threads to defend the method used in the murder, and precede to use deflection tactics and dismiss all evidence to the contrary. Don't take them seriously, since you'll probably never get them to change their minds either.

Mammoth Jones Suppressive Person confirmed?

 

[PBY]

I contribute to more guns owned by me, locked in a safe and used safely by me and me alone. There would be virtually no accidents if everyone treated gun ownership the way I do (the way most people do, for that matter.) It's a small minority that abuses their right, and we need more laws that help prevent those people from getting guns. But I think you will find that most people in the US are not in favor of punishing all gun owners without trying to pass solutions that work for everyone. Telling the NRA to get fucked would be a good first start...

I do appreciate that you and Mammoth are somewhat rational in your view of the NRA. That said, we do have common goals, I just disagree that there's any other way to truly address the bolded outside of a near-ban, and you will never be able to get everyone to treat guns the way you say you do.

 

[appaws]

As another FYI, Mammoth Jones is just like Piggus, a person who regular shows up in mass shooting threads to defend the method used in the murder, and precede to use deflection tactics and dismiss all evidence to the contrary. Don't take them seriously, since you'll probably never get them to change their minds either.

What a gross post. Let's just discount all people who don't agree with us. Mammoth contributes a lot of well-reasoned arguments to these discussions. Piggus is debating in earnest, while all you do is try to pretend to be some sort of ref who disqualifies people from the thread.

 

[Piggus]

I do appreciate that you and Mammoth are somewhat rational in your view of the NRA. That said, we do have common goals, I just disagree that there's any other way to truly address the bolded outside of a near-ban, and you will never be able to get everyone to treat guns the way you say you do.

My somewhat rational view of the NRA is that they're a poison to this country and have no interest in the rights of gun owners or the lives or people killed by guns. Their sole interest is in the success of gun manufacturers.

 

[PBY]

My somewhat rational view of the NRA is that they're a poison to this country and have no interest in the rights of gun owners or the lives or people killed by guns. Their sole interest is in the success of gun manufacturers.

Church

 

[Allard]

I contribute to more guns owned by me, locked in a safe and used safely by me and me alone. There would be virtually no accidents if everyone treated gun ownership the way I do (the way most people do, for that matter.) It's a small minority that abuses their right, and we need more laws that help prevent those people from getting guns. But I think you will find that most people in the US are not in favor of punishing all gun owners without trying to pass solutions that work for everyone. Telling the NRA to get fucked would be a good first start...

Everyone is a safe and reliable gun owners until they aren't. Tell me what kind of law would we be able to pass that suddenly doesn't intrude in your way of gaining guns that somehow keeps guns away from these minority abuses? What would constitute a step foward that you can actually legislate that would bring these incidents down? Because right now a ton of people are sick and tired of the excuse and why we 'need' to have so many open ended up gun rights when statistically just about everyone who has a gun is more likely to get shot by one then if they didn't.

 

[DivineRage002]

Again, not my point. You still haven't told me why a home pool is necessary enough to outweigh the deaths they cause each year. I get that guns are a lot more dangerous, but you and a lot of others imply that ANY death related to guns should result in them being banned. And then you go about telling people they're responsible for those deaths if they own guns. Yet when you yourself participate in something needless that kills a lot of kids, it's "but it's about my personal responsibility." You change your story depending on what you're attacking/defending when both are completely useless to society.

You do know that a test to see if someone is a psychopath is that they can't tell random every day objects appart from a murder weapon? Putting a swimming pool in the same category as an assault rifle, and not understanding why one should be outlawed above the other is disturbing.

I'm not joking, this is extremely disturbing that you would compare a swimming pool to an assault rifle.

 

[HyperionX]

I do appreciate that you and Mammoth are somewhat rational in your view of the NRA. That said, we do have common goals, I just disagree that there's any other way to truly address the bolded outside of a near-ban, and you will never be able to get everyone to treat guns the way you say you do.

Piggus maybe, but definitely not Mammoth. He's literally a member of the NRA and a few other 2nd amendment groups.

What a gross post. Let's just discount all people who don't agree with us. Mammoth contributes a lot of well-reasoned arguments to these discussions. Piggus is debating in earnest, while all you do is try to pretend to be some sort of ref who disqualifies people from the thread.

They're not. They been posting endless numbers of deflection posts in mass shooting threads for years. You can't take a few half-decent posts and dismiss the rest of their behavior.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

As another FYI, Mammoth Jones is just like Piggus, a person who regular shows up in mass shooting threads to defend the method used in the murder, and precede to use deflection tactics and dismiss all evidence to the contrary. Don't take them seriously, since you'll probably never get them to change their minds either.

Fuck outta here with this noise. I've said time and time again the gun laws in this nation need to be revamped. I said look at the gun laws in states where mass shootings don't tend to happen (cough...NYS...cough) Common sense changes absolutely need to be implemented. Problem is "common sense gun law changes" get preached the most by people like you that don't know jack, shit, nor piss about guns and how they're actually utilized by law abiding citizens (I know, no such thing as someone that follows the rules. I know everyone follows the rules until they decide not to...yadda yadda)

Listen, I understand that you want to stay on message that guns should be banned. And I mean good for you. But there's no logistical realities that can make that happen in the States. The best you can hope for is in 100 years after we're both dead gun ownership will be so low to make the Second Amendment redundant.

I'm talking about realistic changes that can be made now without violating 2A. But I mean keep bitching about individual posters that have the temerity to have a different worldview than you...

Piggus maybe, but definitely not Mammoth. He's literally a member of the NRA and a few other 2nd amendment groups.



There not. They been posting endless numbers of deflection posts in mass shooting threads and been doing this for years. You can't take a few half-decent posts and dismiss the rest of their behavior.

Dude, if you have an issue with me either message me privately and we can chop it up or cut this silly shit out.

You're basically bitching about me in 3rd person in this thread.

"Mammoth Jones supports civilian gun ownership....waaaaaah!" -This is literally what you're doing. But I mean at least you're not accusing me of lying about myself this time...

 

[DECK'ARD]

I do appreciate that you and Mammoth are somewhat rational in your view of the NRA. That said, we do have common goals, I just disagree that there's any other way to truly address the bolded outside of a near-ban, and you will never be able to get everyone to treat guns the way you say you do.

Mammoth is a member of the NRA, that's why it's hard to take his constant posts of what changes he'd like to see seriously.

 

[PBY]

Mammoth is a member of the NRA, that's why it's hard to take his constant posts of what changes he'd like to see seriously.

Then thats shit, even though I strongly feel that most attempts at "better regulation" are just attempts to deflect from the real problem and are just barriers to real change.

 

[Piggus]

Everyone is a safe and reliable gun owners until they aren't. Tell me what kind of law would we be able to pass that suddenly doesn't intrude in your way of gaining guns that somehow keeps guns away from these minority abuses? What would constitute a step foward that you can actually legislate that would bring these incidents down? Because right now a ton of people are sick and tired of the excuse and why we 'need' to have so many open ended up gun rights when statistically just about everyone who has a gun is more likely to get shot by one then if they didn't.

There are a few, but mainly:

1. Better gun safety education to help prevent accidents
2. Mandatory safety class and incensing/testing for all gun purchases, or at least handguns
3. Mandatory psych evaluation before purchasing a gun, along with a re-evaluation any time the above license is renewed. Failure to do so would result in the same illegal possession of weapons charges we currently have.
4. Better, more thorough background check system
5. National gun registry where all guns are tracked and have a title, similar to cars
6. All guns should be locked up and secure when not in use. Home defense people can buy a quick-access safe/cabinet if they really need it for home defense =
7. Testing for CCWs should be significantly more involving
8. Ban open-carry outright
9. More funding for mental health and a campaign to reduce the stigma surrounding mental health issues
10. Very high penalties for crimes committed by someone who was allowed to use your gun
11. More social programs to help people in poverty (probably the most important of all)

You do know that a test to see if someone is a psychopath is that they can't tell random every day objects appart from a murder weapon? Putting a swimming pool in the same category as an assault rifle, and not understanding why one should be outlawed above the other is disturbing.

I'm not joking, this is extremely disturbing that you would compare a swimming pool to an assault rifle.

lol at questioning my mental state just because you don't understand the point I was making with that comparison.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Mammoth is a member of the NRA, that's why it's hard to take his constant posts of what changes he'd like to see seriously.

Yup. I'm a member of the NRA. I'm not a politician lol. I don't really claim to be this perfection of consistency. Now either I'm lying on my positions in which case it would make more sense for me *not* to reveal my membership as an NRA member to further my sinister plot to block gun control by engaging in discourse here.

..Or I simply joined for gun club/shop/range benefits.

You decide.

 

[PBY]

Yup. I'm a member of the NRA. I'm not a politician lol. I don't really claim to be this perfection of consistency. Now either I'm lying on my positions in which case it would make more sense for me *not* to reveal my membership as an NRA member to further my sinister plot to block gun control by engaging in discourse here.

..Or I simply joined for gun club/shop/range benefits.

You decide.

I mean... that's still shitty in that you're supporting an organization which is DIRECTLY responsible for these gun deaths.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Then thats shit, even though I strongly feel that most attempts at "better regulation" are just attempts to deflect from the real problem and are just barriers to real change.

So basically "Do as I say we should or you're obfuscating my solutions!"?

All I can say is look at NYs gun laws. Not perfect. There are flaws. But it shows gun rights can be respected AND have legislation that helps reduce spree killers.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

I mean... that's still shitty in that you're supporting an organization which is DIRECTLY responsible for these gun deaths.

I mean, ok. I disagree but fair enough. But that's a criticism of ME, not my stance on policy.

My involvement in the former on whatever level you're taking issue with doesn't change my positions on the latter.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Yup. I'm a member of the NRA. I'm not a politician lol. I don't really claim to be this perfection of consistency. Now either I'm lying on my positions in which case it would make more sense for me *not* to reveal my membership as an NRA member to further my sinister plot to block gun control by engaging in discourse here.

..Or I simply joined for gun club/shop/range benefits.

You decide.

By benefits I assume discounts?

So you've prioritised saving money over saving lives, by funding the organisation preventing the implementation of all these common-sense things you'd like to see.

And the blocking of research which would make legislative changes more likely.

That's why I don't take you seriously, or see your continuous efforts on GAF to portray the responsible gun-owner as successful. In denial a bit, maybe.

 

[bevel]

Edit- This post came off incredibly rude and wrong. I apologize, to anyone I offended.

Im pretty sure you got yourself on some sort of FBI watchlist.... Good luck in life... Lol

 

[Vilix]

So basically "Do as I say we should or you're obfuscating my solutions!"?

All I can say is look at NYs gun laws. Not perfect. There are flaws. But it shows gun rights can be respected AND have legislation that helps reduce spree killers.

They also show that you can have the strictest gun laws and still have murders caused by guns. I'm talking about the police who was shot and killed the other week.

But like you've said, they're not perfect. As a gun owner with an FFL I follow the strictest of regulations. My problem is when people judge me just for being a gun owner. That proves to be a non starter as far as any type of mature discussion over gun control goes.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

By benefits I assume discounts?

So you've prioritised saving money over saving lives, by funding the organisation preventing the implementation of all these common-sense things you'd like to see.

And the blocking of research which would make legislative changes more likely.

That's why I don't take you seriously, or see your continuous efforts on GAF to portray the responsible gun-owner as successful. In denial a bit, maybe.

To be fair I don't view the NRA as this horrific organization of mustache twirling villains you do. I just view them as having really departed from the type of shit they should be focused on. Marksmanship and gun safety. It's there on the local level. But that's not the national face of the organization.

You say I'm in denial. Fine. I say put up or shut up. What are YOU doing on a micro-level to change things? What pro-gun control organizations do you actively contribute to or participate in? Same with others that wanna dogpile this issue as if it's an Achilles heel to be nibbled on as if it makes me saying "Hey if you own a gun it should be in a gun safe and if your kids go HAM with it you should be legally liable" less true?

You can pound keys on the keyboard and be mental masturbators decrying anyone that offers a different approach to the problem we all readily concede is or you can actually get involved....beyond the Internet. Do that before you chew me out about this though.

 

[PBY]

To be fair I don't view the NRA as this horrific organization of mustache twirling villains you do. I just view them as having really departed from the type of shit they should be focused on. Marksmanship and gun safety. It's there on the local level. But that's not the national face of the organization.

You say I'm in denial. Fine. I say put up or shut up. What are YOU doing on a micro-level to change things? What pro-gun control organizations do you actively contribute to or participate in? Same with others that wanna dogpile this issue as if it's an Achilles heel to be nibbled on as if it makes me saying "Hey if you own a gun it should be in a gun safe and if your kids go HAM with it you should be legally liable" less true?

You can pound keys on the keyboard and be mental masturbators decrying anyone that offers a different approach to the problem we all readily concede is or you can actually get involved....beyond the Internet. Do that before you chew me out about this though.

This is a good post because there is truth here; I forget which mod did this, but in the last gun spree thread there was a list of activist organizations linked.

I don't remember all of the orgs, but Everytown was one that struck me and I've contributed, and I urge people in this thread to do the same.
http://everytown.org/

 

[Mammoth Jones]

This is a good post because there is truth here; I forget which mod did this, but in the last gun spree thread there was a list of activist organizations linked.

I don't remember all of the orgs, but Everytown was one that struck me and I've contributed, and I urge people in this thread to do the same.
http://everytown.org/

Absolutely.

But then again, this might further the issue of improving gun laws and not actually ban guns entirely so why bother, right?

 

[DivineRage002]

There are a few, but mainly:

1. Better gun safety education to help prevent accidents
2. Mandatory safety class and incensing/testing for all gun purchases, or at least handguns
3. Mandatory psych evaluation before purchasing a gun, along with a re-evaluation any time the above license is renewed. Failure to do so would result in the same illegal possession of weapons charges we currently have.
4. Better, more thorough background check system
5. National gun registry where all guns are tracked and have a title, similar to cars
6. All guns should be locked up and secure when not in use. Home defense people can buy a quick-access safe/cabinet if they really need it for home defense =
7. Testing for CCWs should be significantly more involving
8. Ban open-carry outright
9. More funding for mental health and a campaign to reduce the stigma surrounding mental health issues
10. Very high penalties for crimes committed by someone who was allowed to use your gun
11. More social programs to help people in poverty (probably the most important of all)

Might as well make hand grenades and grenade launchers legal if this is foolproof, they have the same purpose.

1. Better gun safety education to help prevent accidents.

All good until one gets drunk, decides to show his cool gun locked away in a safe to his friends, and an accident happens.

This is not a farfetched example at all, it happens many times over and will surely happen again.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Might as well make hand grenades and grenade launchers legal if this is foolproof, they have the same purpose.

1. Better gun safety education to help prevent accidents.

All good until one gets drunk, decides to show his cool gun locked away in a safe to his friends, and an accident happens.

This is not a farfetched example at all, it happens many times over and will surely happen again.

It absolutely will happen. And when it does you charge the fool with criminally negligent homicide and throw the book at him instead of saying "it's an accident...what can ya do, eh?".

Freedom without responsibility is chaos.

 

[DivineRage002]

It absolutely will happen. And when it does you charge the fool with criminally negligent homicide and throw the book at him instead of saying "it's an accident...what can ya do, eh?".

Freedom without responsibility is chaos.

Throwing the book at someone will not bring the victim back, and it will not prevent someone else for being the same kind of idiot. This is reactive instead of preventive.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Throwing the book at someone will not bring the victim back, and it will not prevent someone else for being the same kind of idiot. This is reactive instead of preventive.

The way our system works is you have access to all the rights and responsibilities of a free citizen until such time and you are found guilty in a court of law and have most of those rights revoked.

-Mandated education & awareness
-Mandatee safety
-Strong penalties

This is how literally every rule we have tends to work.

 

[DECK'ARD]

To be fair I don't view the NRA as this horrific organization of mustache twirling villains you do. I just view them as having really departed from the type of shit they should be focused on. Marksmanship and gun safety. It's there on the local level. But that's not the national face of the organization.

You say I'm in denial. Fine. I say put up or shut up. What are YOU doing on a micro-level to change things? What pro-gun control organizations do you actively contribute to or participate in? Same with others that wanna dogpile this issue as if it's an Achilles heel to be nibbled on as if it makes me saying "Hey if you own a gun it should be in a gun safe and if your kids go HAM with it you should be legally liable" less true?

You can pound keys on the keyboard and be mental masturbators decrying anyone that offers a different approach to the problem we all readily concede is or you can actually get involved....beyond the Internet. Do that before you chew me out about this though.

Quite an outburst, not prompted by any internal conflicts about the position you're straddling I'm sure.

I mean you do admit here that the NRA are responsible for stalling change, yet you're giving them money to do so in exchange for cheaper bullets? Unlike your bullets, that doesn't really fly.

And I'm in the UK, thankfully we dealt with this shit when we needed to and these aren't concerns we have now. I'm not part of the efforts to try and fix things over there, but I'm not part of the problem either.

 

[nynt9]

The way our system works is you have access to all the rights and responsibilities of a free citizen until such time and you are found guilty in a court of law and have most of those rights revoked.

-Mandated education & awareness
-Mandatee safety
-Strong penalties

This is how literally every rule we have tends to work.

I don't think this will work. Education and awareness do nothing to prevent a shooter, and penalties are irrelevant to them as well because almost every single active shooter situation ends with the shooter's death. So penalties are no deterrent.

 

[Piggus]

Might as well make hand grenades and grenade launchers legal if this is foolproof, they have the same purpose.

1. Better gun safety education to help prevent accidents.

All good until one gets drunk, decides to show his cool gun locked away in a safe to his friends, and an accident happens.

This is not a farfetched example at all, it happens many times over and will surely happen again.

What sporting purpose do grenades and launchers have? They're classified as destructive devices for that reason. You should actually look up why they're in a separate, restricted class before pulling out the dumb "might as well legalize everything because they're all the same anyway" argument.

Also my suggestions were ways in which we can reduce gun violence and accidents, not completely eliminate them. You can't eliminate all idiots. But the country as a whole also won't stand for the level of government intervention a full ban would entail. You have to start somewhere.

 

[besada]

Absolutely.

But then again, this might further the issue of improving gun laws and not actually ban guns entirely so why bother, right?

I have to admit, given the conversations we've had, that I'm a little surprised and disappointed that you're still funding the NRA. I think you know, at a national level, they don't share the same ideas you have, and that they're functionally an arm of the gun manufacture industry (which is why they won't support the same common sense laws their members do), so it surprises me that you allow them to speak in your name, with your money, against your own interests.

And, as the mod who last time listed some places folks could go to support gun control, I completely agree that folks should be doing more than talking on the internet, but that doesn't really avoid the fact that you're financially supporting a group that you know is only making things worse.