Conversation
Notices
-
Because owning guns is a god-given right and not a responsibility.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:11:21 UTC from web-
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:13:51 UTC from web
-
@m14brony please point how. Because the way I see it not everyone can defend themselves to the capacity against a maniac no matter well-armed or provisioned they are. Furthermore irresponsible people with firearms can easily cause more harm than good despite whatever intention.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:16:55 UTC from web-
@awl Simply taking a look at existing legislation on firearms proves firearm ownership is a responsibility and not purely a "God-given" right. Convicted felons are not given a "God-given" right; they are legally prohibited from owning firearms. The same with those with a history of domestic violence or being mentally defective. In Minnesota, you can't get a concealed carry permit unless you can prove basic marksmanship with a handgun.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:22:43 UTC from web-
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:26:40 UTC from web
-
@awl First of all, a background check in itself indicates that we are not dealing with a purely "God given" right. Additionally, a criminal who wants to obtain something badly enough will find a way to obtain it illegally, whether we are talking about firearms, explosives, or drugs.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:28:55 UTC from web-
@m14brony Is the hypothetical "bad guy who wants badness badly enough" not also made at least in part of straw?
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:31:21 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
@awl I'm all for making sure someone is of sound mind and without a history of violent criminal behavior before giving a gun sale the green light. I am all for making sure someone has proven basic handgun proficiency before he/she is legally allowed to carry one around for self-defense. I am NOT in favor of punishing responsible gun owners because of the actions of a violent lunatic.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:26:46 UTC from web-
@m14brony and who said it would be a ban on all weapons. Who says you need assault rifles for selfe-defense.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:31:53 UTC from web-
@awl Also there are already enough things out there that are illegal... on top of my head, surface-to-anything missiles
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:35:03 UTC from web-
@critialcloudkicker if you want it enough you'll get it; might as well allow sell them too on a private level.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:37:16 UTC from web-
@awl Yes but only if you are willing to operate only where the long arm of the law does not reach. And as long as you are on that level, I'll have a T-95 please.
Right now there are some really awkward and weird laws regarding firearms. You are not able to sell flintlock pistols for example, but if there is ivory on them you can sell them as ivory-paraphernalia or something.
It has to be REALLY hard to sell active tanks or missiles, even as part of private collections ( given you are on US soil ), unless decommissioned.Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:43:42 UTC from web-
@critialcloudkicker this is what happens when you amend laws due to ever-changing circumstance, and lobbying for trade on certain parts of laws before they're passed. I think something comprehensive would help if only for a little while. I mean if you're having the sort of problem wherein mass shootings are so common, something has to change somehow.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:48:56 UTC from web-
@awl Agreed, but the conservative side of things seems dead-set on not changing anything. Maybe because when I think of a conservative american politician I always think of something in a suit with a tie and mid 50's. I wonder howmuch problems in the political system you would solve much quicker if the representatives were forced to represent their supporters by means of age group.
Note that I am not talking about the presidency here.Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 23:11:06 UTC from web-
@critialcloudkicker alas this is the way issues like this still stand.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 23:18:18 UTC from web-
@awl Well, we on RDN are not able to solve the issue at hand no matter how you look at it anyway. The only thing we can actually do is sling spaghetti at the monster to see what sticks ( < somewhat of a proverb. In the old times they would throw spaghetti at tile walls to see if the spaghetti was good / well done. ). And I kinda happen to like such antics.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 23:29:51 UTC from web-
@critialcloudkicker never heard of that actually. I like learning things via conversations.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 23:31:34 UTC from web-
@awl I too like to learn things wherever I can. Serious question though, how would you phrase it instead of that proverb ?
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 23:32:30 UTC from web-
@critialcloudkicker well the act itself would be a tradition or ritual. Addage, perhaps, as to say 'throw spaghetti at the wall and see what sticks' and not be literal.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 23:33:57 UTC from web-
@awl Nono, I meant, how would you phrase "I like to sling spaghetti at the monster to see what sticks" by either using a proper American proverb, or without a proverb at all ?
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 23:37:31 UTC from web-
@critialcloudkicker i'm not as familiar with idioms or proverbs in English still but see no reason why that can't be one.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 23:41:08 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@awl The registry for assault rifles, machine guns, etc. was closed by Reagan in 1986. Most people are effectively barred access to assault rifles due to price tags ranging from thousands of dollars to tens of thousands of dollars per gun.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:37:56 UTC from web-
@m14brony Which is another way of saying that only the rich have access to a so-called right.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:39:27 UTC from web-
@scribus That's true, but I am also pointing out that assault rifles are not nearly as common as some would have us believe.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:43:24 UTC from web -
@scribus Ok, hang on, I'm trying not to get involved but I'm gonna have to call BS on this argument. First of all, they never said owning an assault rifle was a human right. Second of all, you're arguing against people being able to get them, right? If that's the case, why are you complaining that only the wealthy can get them? That's still less people who are able to get them. I believe assault rifles should be outright banned but this just seemed more like a deliberate attack than an attempt to have a constructive argument.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:45:14 UTC from web
-
-
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:43:16 UTC from web
-
@awl We're still dealing with positions being distorted here. An assault rifle wasn't even used in this shooting; a good deal of the people in the media clamoring for more stringent gun control don't even know what they are talking about. The problem is that their arguments are more predicated on emotion than fact. There isn't even clear-cut, conclusive evidence linking more relaxed gun control with violent crime and such; the problems we see in the USA are not as prevalent in the Czech Republic or Switzerland, which are on the more lenient side of gun control legislation compared to say, Japan. Japan has very strict gun control and low violent crime, but France's strict gun control didn't prevent an even more lethal shooting than Orlando from happening. Nor did Norway's prevent Anders Behring Breivik from killing and injuring more than Omar Marteen.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 22:41:39 UTC from web-
@m14brony that's the thing; what works for one doesn't work for all. However if this is happening to any extent nigh every day then what we have doesn't seem to be working near as it should. As for assault rifles, suppose I was using as example for a point of contention between the two sides.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 22:51:23 UTC from web-
@awl We have politicians who have a history of backing and financing Islamists when these people are fighting one of their enemies.The current and previous administrations on Capitol Hill threw away the lives of thousands of GI's and far more Arab lives destabilizing an entire geographic region; the rise of ISIS and the spread of terrorism being the result. We live under a broken, for profit healthcare system that makes it more difficult for people to get the help we need. It is considered acceptable to judge entire religious and ethnic groups by the actions of an individual lunatic. Anti-intellectualism is a popular pastime. A college degree has become the new high school diploma. A billionaire oligarchy calls the shots. No serious efforts are made to tackle income inequality, poverty, or the lack of prospects of the youth. What we have is not working, indeed!
Wednesday, 15-Jun-16 01:51:45 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
-
-
@m14brony I agree fully with that. However, the only way that you can assure the mental and criminal fitness of everyone that owns a gun right now and 6 months from now would be periodic evaluations, Also a proper sanction system. And at that point you might be better off with a pseudo-military style regime. And the name "United States of Banana Republics" does not sit right with me.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:32:56 UTC from web-
@critialcloudkicker I don't think a "pseudo-military regime" automatically goes hand-in-hand with more relaxed gun control vis-à-vis other Western nations. While I don't agree with every aspect of Swiss gun regulations, I do greatly admire many aspects of their gun culture over there, and I think there is quite a bit the US can learn from them. I need to research more specifics of whatever criminal and mental health evaluations they do, but they don't have nearly as many shooting-related problems as the US does. Furthermore, I don't think their combination of conscription with a non-belligerent foreign policy constitutes a "pseudo-military style regime."
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 22:22:51 UTC from web-
@m14brony That is not what I was saying at all. I was saying that the only way to ensure that only people who pass a mental and criminal test are able to have guns is to give those tests periodically. That has to cost a lot of resources, so that is probably not going to happen. And if you were to implement just that then you have the pitfall problem that many banana republics fell into, and that is to reserve the right to call up anyone who owns a gun to defend your country from [agressors/criminals/ufo's/nazi's/zombies/ or pick your own from the history books ]. It however was an ad-absurdum reference to history seen as how paranoid actual gun owning conservatives seem to be about even the possibility of a governmental owned database of people who own firearms
And, you are correct, the Swiss army is not a pseudo-military style regime. They operate more on a level akin to conscription and those who have done service have earned their perks ( if my memory serves me well enough )Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 23:25:58 UTC from web-
@critialcloudkicker As far as I know (correct me if I am wrong), places like Switzerland and the Czech Republic don't have screenings that occur so frequently, yet their more relaxed gun control laws don't result in widespread violent crime. I doubt that such frequent screenings are necessary.
Wednesday, 15-Jun-16 04:53:26 UTC from web-
@m14brony Yes, but they have a system where near everyone has gotten military training and where they have a proper health system. Meanwhile in the USA you have a system where everyone is allowed to have guns regardless of training ( possible beehive, this issue is actually adressed in some state law ). And if you wanted to see how good and proper the health system works for people who have served in the USA just compare the amount of military deaths versus the amount of veterans who commit suicide. BTW I am convinced that those numbers would be lower if more people went through at least basic training so that there would be more relate able empathy from everyone ( the common man & the health professional, and everyone in between )... In essence, over in Switzerland, they have essentially turned "the band of brotherhood" into a self-serving part of their society. You can not use that in the USA because there are so many different flocks of life. You'd need a bigger&broader system
Wednesday, 15-Jun-16 08:24:28 UTC from web-
@critialcloudkicker I have been calling for a better healthcare system and more universal firearm training in the US for years. And even in spite of such problems in the US, violent crime was at a peak in...the early 1990's. The violent crime rate actually continued to drop after the ban on "assault weapons" expired in 2004. Other factors are at play here, and the various anti-gun politicians do not have a solution. They are simply applying Donald Trump's flawed logic to a different target.
Wednesday, 15-Jun-16 12:02:00 UTC from web-
@m14brony Which is why I think it is important to never stop shouting at what the government should do. "clean drinking water !" "actual healthcare !" "we have a problem with immigrants". Loudest voices will usually 'win'. Things that are not a problem ( anymore ) or get lessened due to what the government is currently doing should not take focus away from the 'voice' in question. And if anything has actually proven itself it is that the media has way too much political influenced power over this 'voice'. So yeah, you're awesome for keeping up with your beliefs if you actually have been shouting pro healthcare and firearm training things for years.
Wednesday, 15-Jun-16 21:40:03 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
@critialcloudkicker EDIT: I forgot to mention that a description of a firearm purchase is entered on the NICS background check paperwork here in the United States. What we have is a de facto registry.
Wednesday, 15-Jun-16 04:55:29 UTC from web-
@m14brony That might be, but then you have politicians ( usually republicans ) trying to muddy up the issue by claiming that there is no paperwork if you buy a used gun, from a gun show, or through the black market since criminals by definition do not follow the law. In essence turning the whole idea of a background check or a gun-database toxic. Toxic to the point where I would not be too surprised if there are wikihow-themed articles out there that show people just how to get around the current system, for they are convinced that the current system is bad.
And then you have people like Omar Mateen, who was in contact with the FBI at least 3 times and still managed to obtain an AR-15. Only more cause for the people who want a gun to shout things like "the current system does not work, I want no part of it !"Wednesday, 15-Jun-16 08:34:47 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
