Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting [W:977, 1014]

[Nap]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

He was "one" of the writers...He also didn't believe America should have a standing Army or Navy (To avoid being embroiled in foreign conflicts)...Wanted a citizen "well regulated" Militia to be called to arms to defend America.If need be...He also thought Negroes were mentally inferior and could never be free men...Jeffrerson wasn't all some make him out to be

I never said they were perfect, I only agree with them that people have a natural right to change or overthrow a government that infringes on the rights of its people and that the 1st and 2nd amendment are paramount to preserving that right.

 

[Moderate Right]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

Democrats Demand Gun Control After Vegas | The Daily Caller

That didn't take long.

I'd be interested to hear their exact ideas, although I'm sure they don't have any other than their hollow rallying cry of gun control. If they are serious then they can come up with some specifics and explain to us how those specifics would have avoided this tragedy. As in most cases, I highly doubt any of their "gun control" ideas would have avoided this tragedy unless their gun control ideas are taking law abiding people's guns away. "Gun control" always sounds like it will stop gun violence but I have yet to see a realistic proposal of gun control that would actually stop or even cut back gun violence.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

Gun owners consider having to do anything as punishment and will fight everything so there is nothing. That is why I support repealing the 2nd amendment.

It is punishment to try and restrict or remove something (Constitutionally guaranteed) that helps someone protect themselves or their families, yet since it will be ignored by criminals, actually giving them the advantage.

It is punishment when you restrict my choice of recreation. Not only that, I compete. I win $, I travel and camp and have a blast with a community of like-minded people. None of whom are criminals because convicted felons arent allowed to own firearms.

 

[Josie]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

That's why I support repealing the 2nd amendment because anything less just won't cut it. Yep, your rights will be safe; and the body count will continue to climb.

So ---- no citizens allowed to have guns?

 

[MTAtech]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

You know what's "the swamp?" When the NRA dictates gun policy because they donate to politicians.

 

[Nilly]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

there is a difference between a privilege and a right. if you don't know the difference i will gladly help you with it.

And how does the difference impact whether an associated inconvenience is a 'punishment' or not. Is it a 'punishment' that one cannot buy a gun between 2am-4am because the shops closed? Or a 'punishment' because no-ones invented a teleportation machine between you and the gun store?

There are always going to be things that inconvenience you. And it may sometimes be 'inconvenient' to exercise your rights. That doesn't mean that you're being punished. That's a ridiculous narrative.

Btw, I'm on record in this thread as saying that I've come to realize many prospective gun laws wouldn't make much of a different to criminal activity.

 

[JasperL]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

Actually, the founding fathers believed it was the right of the people to overthrow the government in the event it became tyrannical.

There is really nothing I've seen from the era to indicate their purpose was to facilitate the overthrow of the government they were establishing.

 

[Nilly]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

Taking it from the point of view I believe this is being discussed...

The use of public roads is a privledge, and thus speed limits are an instance of "To be allowed to do X, you must agree to adhere to Y". This is viewed as acceptable because it is a privledge being provided via the government and thus a level of control is found as more reasonable.

As opposed to keeping and bearing arms, which is viewed as a right rather than a privledge and one naturally invested in a person NOT one bestowed upon them by government. Rather, government is the entity limited in this regard. So in this instance, such laws isn't the government saying "we'll give you/allow you X IF you follow Y", it's "we'll deny you X if you don't follow Y".

To put another way....

It's the difference between a business making a rule for you to follow if you want to eat in their establishment (for example, no smoking), compared to someone putting a rule in place on how you may eat in your own home (say a law stating you may not smoke and eat in your residence). There's a level of acceptability in following someone else's rule to use THEIR facilities compared to being told how to act/function in the place you own and control.

Use of roads is a privledge PROVIDED BY the government. The right to bear arms is a right WE as citizens inherently own that restricts the government. Thus laws relating to each are naturally going to be viewed as differently as regulations on how one can eat in their home compared to a business.

That's actually a pretty fair argument as to laws pertaining to both.

Although I still think it's wrong to refer to things that may inconvenience gun owners as a 'punishment'.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

And how does the difference impact whether an associated inconvenience is a 'punishment' or not. Is it a 'punishment' that one cannot buy a gun between 2am-4am because the shops closed? Or a 'punishment because no-ones invented a teleportation machine between you and the gun store?

There are always going to be things that inconvenience you. And it may sometimes be 'inconvenient' to exercise your rights. That doesn't mean that you're being punished. That's a ridiculous narrative.

I'm on record in this thread as saying that I've come to realize many prospective gun laws wouldn't make much of a different to criminal activity - but that doesn't mean I won't call out such ridiculous narrative.

More than an inconvenience is a law that says my guns must be locked up anytime I am home....until the home invasion.

More than an inconvenience is a law that says I dont need more than 10 bullets in a magazine...until there are 3 home invaders. When even police miss frequently and unlike the movies, one shot rarely "stops" an attacker. And everybody's moving and under enormous stress.

Just a couple of examples.

 

[Nap]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

That's why I support repealing the 2nd amendment because anything less just won't cut it. Yep, your rights will be safe; and the body count will continue to climb.

I don't know which statement I find more humorous between him thinking that our rights are safe under Trump or that with yours thinking that the 2nd would ever have enough support to be repealed in our lifetimes.

 

[Nap]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

There is really nothing I've seen from the era to indicate their purpose was to facilitate the overthrow of the government they were establishing.

The declaration of independence is a good start.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

Taking it from the point of view I believe this is being discussed...

The use of public roads is a privledge, and thus speed limits are an instance of "To be allowed to do X, you must agree to adhere to Y". This is viewed as acceptable because it is a privledge being provided via the government and thus a level of control is found as more reasonable.

As opposed to keeping and bearing arms, which is viewed as a right rather than a privledge and one naturally invested in a person NOT one bestowed upon them by government. Rather, government is the entity limited in this regard. So in this instance, such laws isn't the government saying "we'll give you/allow you X IF you follow Y", it's "we'll deny you X if you don't follow Y".

To put another way....

It's the difference between a business making a rule for you to follow if you want to eat in their establishment (for example, no smoking), compared to someone putting a rule in place on how you may eat in your own home (say a law stating you may not smoke and eat in your residence). There's a level of acceptability in following someone else's rule to use THEIR facilities compared to being told how to act/function in the place you own and control.

Use of roads is a privledge PROVIDED BY the government. The right to bear arms is a right WE as citizens inherently own that restricts the government. Thus laws relating to each are naturally going to be viewed as differently as regulations on how one can eat in their home compared to a business.

I esp. like the bold.

 

[ataraxia]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

How many other countries have the same amount of diverse population?

It shouldn't matter. That's why racism needs to go. You can do it. Racism can go the same way of slavery and misogyny. It's not an inevitable part of human nature. It's just a social construct-in this case, a very dysfunctional one.

 

[Saladin4]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

I never said they were perfect, I only agree with them that people have a natural right to change or overthrow a government that infringes on the rights of its people and that the 1st and 2nd amendment are paramount to preserving that right.

This seems to be some kind of reoccurring fantasy of the Libertarian types...Over throwing the government it appears

 

[MTAtech]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

When someone can assure me that criminals will not have guns, I'd be more likely to think about it. As it is now, all that would do is reduce the number of legally owned guns from legal gun owners, leaving us defenseless.

By that logic, unless we can reduce any particular crime 100%, we should take no measures to reduce it at all.

Tougher gun laws won't reduce gun violence 100%, but no doubt it will reduce it some amount. They may also reduce the instances of suicides.

 

[Verax]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

It is punishment to try and restrict or remove something (Constitutionally guaranteed) that helps someone protect themselves or their families, yet since it will be ignored by criminals, actually giving them the advantage.

It is punishment when you restrict my choice of recreation. Not only that, I compete. I win $, I travel and camp and have a blast with a community of like-minded people. None of whom are criminals because convicted felons arent allowed to own firearms.

It's not constitutionally guaranteed if it's repealed. Criminals can ignore the law but if they can't get a hold of a firearm then it doesn't matter.

Your recreation is somebody else's nightmare.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

By that logic, unless we can reduce any particular crime 100%, we should take no measures to reduce it at all.

Tougher gun laws won't reduce gun violence 100%, but no doubt it will reduce it some amount. They may also reduce the instances of suicides.

Yes but then they put the criminals...who we know wont obey the laws...at a greater advantage over the law-abiding. That's not the rule with most laws. Because in this case, really, the only people that will obey these types of laws are the law-abiding...in order to stay out of trouble.

ANd it may reduce suicides. But I shouldnt be punished for someone else's problems or mental illness. They are not (generally) a public safety danger, but why should I lose my opportunity to defend myself just because it might save someone who has other avenues for suicide anyway?

 

[Verax]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

So ---- no citizens allowed to have guns?

Yup. No more of this gun madness. Make them all disappear and things would get a lot better.

 

[calamity]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

By that logic, unless we can reduce any particular crime 100%, we should take no measures to reduce it at all.

Tougher gun laws won't reduce gun violence 100%, but no doubt it will reduce it some amount. They may also reduce the instances of suicides.

lol...tell me about it. Maybe we should eliminate traffic lights and stop signs since people still seem to have accidents and run lights or stop signs. The lack of logic from the "don't you dare touch our guns" crowd is staggering.

 

[Josie]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

Yup. No more of this gun madness. Make them all disappear and things would get a lot better.

How do you accomplish that?

 

[Verax]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

I don't know which statement I find more humorous between him thinking that our rights are safe under Trump or that with yours thinking that the 2nd would ever have enough support to be repealed in our lifetimes.

People probably said the same thing about there ever being a black president. The only way for it to happen is to start talking about it.

 

[Verax]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

How do you accomplish that?

Discuss the incredible toll guns take on American society. Rally support for repeal of the 2nd amendment. Once enough people are on board do it, give people time to turn in their weapons. Transition towards a gun free America.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

It's not constitutionally guaranteed if it's repealed. Criminals can ignore the law but if they can't get a hold of a firearm then it doesn't matter.

Your recreation is somebody else's nightmare.

There is no way to keep guns out of criminal's hands. You cant get rid of all the guns. That's a joke. Guns arent going anywhere, you'd just shift the balance to the guns ONLY being in their hands. Super!

And those somebodies can kiss my ass. It's fun and a family sport, with kids involved in a highly overseen manner too.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

Discuss the incredible toll guns take on American society. Rally support for repeal of the 2nd amendment. Once enough people are on board do it, give people time to turn in their weapons. Transition towards a gun free America.

Deaths and mass injuries on American roads take a much higher toll. THe numbers are clear...just not the biases.

 

[Verax]

Re: Democrats Immediately Call For Gun Control After Las Vegas Shooting

There is no way to keep guns out of criminal's hands. You cant get rid of all the guns. That's a joke. Guns arent going anywhere, you'd just shift the balance to the guns ONLY being in their hands. Super!

And those somebodies can kiss my ass. It's fun and a family sport, with kids involved in a highly overseen manner too.

Mandatory minimum 5 years in prison for possession of a firearm. After 25 years of that I guarantee it will be quite difficult to get one.

Yep, the 10's of thousands of people murdered with guns every year can kiss your ass cuz ya like ur gunz!