- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 5/14/14 at 10:52 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
Ever stop to think that there is a long, long line between a few reasonable gun laws and total outlaw of all weapons? Cause... there most certainly is... and there are a lot of people in various spots along that line.
Ever stop to think what would be the result if those "few reasonable gun laws" were enacted and failed to produce the touted effect? IF those laws were effective would they be satisfied or ask for more? You obviously have a very shallow understanding of the parties involved in this subject and their ideologies. Do you understand the definition of "compromise"? Do you understand that the current "gun safety" frame is not new but a rehash of the tactic used in the 1980's? Why can't you actually substantiate the reasoning behind those laws and explain exactly the mechanism through which they would be effective?
Posted on 5/14/14 at 11:08 pm to Clames
quote:
Ever stop to think what would be the result if those "few reasonable gun laws" were enacted and failed to produce the touted effect? IF those laws were effective would they be satisfied or ask for more? You obviously have a very shallow understanding of the parties involved in this subject and their ideologies.
I speak for me, but, if they were ineffective, I would support repeal, and if they were effective, I would see no need for additional laws. My understanding is quite fine... I understand that there are some people in this country who would rather have no guns at all. I also understand that it is a minority. I also understand that the number of people who believe in no guns at all is about the same as the number of people who are in support of unlimited, unchecked, unregulated, guns all the time for everyone policies. Both of these groups are quite small, BTW. Most of us are in the middle.
quote:
Do you understand the definition of "compromise"?
Yes... and too many of our politicians do not... which is why we have some problems in our country today. There are plenty of solutions to illegal immgration, gun crimes, and the deficit... but all those solutions require compromise. Neither side wants to compromise, so here we are.
quote:
Do you understand that the current "gun safety" frame is not new but a rehash of the tactic used in the 1980's? Why can't you actually substantiate the reasoning behind those laws and explain exactly the mechanism through which they would be effective?
Yes, I understand there are some similarities. Again... I'm discussing my beliefs here, what I would support and not support. I certainly recognize that some people would use that as "the camel nose inside the tent" when it comes to guns. That does not mean that everything they suggest should be ignored. It is possible for one to support some of their ideas, and not all of them.
We'd be a much better off nation if we actually took the time to figure out where our common ground is... instead of just throwing about our differences.
Posted on 5/14/14 at 11:08 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Does the converse hold true? Would repealing any type of restrictions on the type of weapons available make us more safe?
You know you could easily change this question around to legalizing drugs and we share the same opinion on the WOD I suspect.
Posted on 5/14/14 at 11:13 pm to Sentrius
I didn't ask about drugs. I asked about weapons and their availability in society.
Posted on 5/14/14 at 11:13 pm to Sentrius
quote:
expanding concealed carry and doing away with gun free zones
For responsible gun owners with a clear criminal history, that pass a background check, and have no history of mental illness... I would absolutely support this. My only hesitation would be when alcohol is involved.
Posted on 5/14/14 at 11:33 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
I speak for me, but, if they were ineffective, I would support repeal, and if they were effective, I would see no need for additional laws. My understanding is quite fine... I understand that there are some people in this country who would rather have no guns at all. I also understand that it is a minority. I also understand that the number of people who believe in no guns at all is about the same as the number of people who are in support of unlimited, unchecked, unregulated, guns all the time for everyone policies. Both of these groups are quite small, BTW. Most of us are in the middle.
I respect your opinions and can certainly believe in your sincerity, but there is a portion on the left in this country that is rabidly anti-gun and they are not as miniscule as you seem to characterize them. There is also a portion that is perhaps not so rabid but also won't stand in the way and fight against their compatriots on the issue as they are more apathetic on gun rights. Aside from the fact that I generally disagree that their gun control ideas will even have any meaningful affect on decreasing crime to begin with, I as well don't trust the left in this day and age on the issue of guns. Once a restriction gets passed, it will be hell to ever try and get those freedoms back. It will become precedent. And they will push to expand them.
Let's not pretend like major Democrat hubs like Chicago, DC, and New York City have not already absolutely banned firearms. Or that leftists in culturally similar Western nations haven't done the same on a national level. That takes a little more than a non-threatening minority to achieve that. Not to mention their dirty tactics of sensationalizing and capitalizing on mass shooting incidents to attempt to ram legislation through when emotions are high. For gun rights advocates they are completely rational to fear the motives of the opposition in this country. For those who may be like you and wish for minor changes, I can respectfully agree or disagree on some of these questions, but to dismiss the true threat of incremental gun restrictions in this country from the left is naive.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 12:51 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
We'd be a much better off nation if we actually took the time to figure out where our common ground is... instead of just throwing about our differences.
How does finding the common ground go beyond the current status quo? Gun control advocates got their "assault weapons ban" in 1994. It had 10 years to prove effective and it failed. Bans, registration, universal background checks, etc. have all been applied in various localities with little to no effect on crime. In fact the only gun-related law that has proven to have a studied and useful impact on all forms of violent crime is the expansion of permissive CCW laws.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 7:43 am to Antonio Moss
quote:You should realize that this is the exact argument being made by many posters on this thread.quote:Some of you guys are terrible with logic.
So the English should be in fear for their lives? Australians?
To summarize their position: Any gun control will inevitably lead to the complete disarming of citizens. That will then put the entire population at greater risk of a totalitarian government taking away more of their rights or some sort of genocide.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:06 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
1) If we have any additional gun control laws, it will cascade until all of our guns are taken away.
I don't see this as an unreasonable position given what certain prominent politicians have gone on record stating.
quote:
2) Once all of our guns are taken away, our government - including our military and police - will turn on us.
The likelihood increases. It's obviously not guaranteed. However, I doubt you will find any examples of genocide or ethnic cleansing ever being perpetrated against an armed populace.
And, as I stated long ago in this thread, gun control doesn't make strides towards solving the problem it was aimed to solve. It's regulation for the sake of regulation.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:08 am to mmcgrath
quote:
You should realize that this is the exact argument being made by many posters on this thread.
No it isn't.
quote:
To summarize their position: Any gun control will inevitably lead to the complete disarming of citizens. That will then put the entire population at greater risk of a totalitarian government taking away more of their rights or some sort of genocide.
No one has argued that both are inevitable. It's about risk percentages and weighing the effectiveness of regulation against the potential risk of harm.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 10:43 am to ChewyDante
quote:
but there is a portion on the left in this country that is rabidly anti-gun and they are not as miniscule as you seem to characterize them.
As I've stated before, I would agree with this. I don't think it's a huge number, though. If it were a number of significance (combined with the passive others), we'd have a lot more gun laws than we currently have.
quote:
Let's not pretend like major Democrat hubs like Chicago, DC, and New York City have not already absolutely banned firearms.
The problem with the bans in these cities is the one shown by pro-gun activists (and I agree with them) that criminals don't follow gun laws. The laws on the books in those cities aren't stemming the flow of guns into the streets. Any reasonable gun regulations have to deal with that issue.
I think the way you deal with that issue is you prevent the guns from getting in their hands in the first place. They get the guns by theft, strawman purchase, and illegal trade. That's where you need to focus the laws.
quote:
but to dismiss the true threat of incremental gun restrictions in this country from the left is naive.
I don't dismiss it... but I also don't think it will ever happen.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 10:45 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
I think the way you deal with that issue is you prevent the guns from getting in their hands in the first place. They get the guns by theft, strawman purchase, and illegal trade. That's where you need to focus the laws.
When has prohibition ever worked?
Posted on 5/15/14 at 11:23 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
When has prohibition ever worked?
So you think allowing criminals access to guns is a GOOD idea?
Posted on 5/15/14 at 1:15 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
The problem with the bans in these cities is the one shown by pro-gun activists (and I agree with them) that criminals don't follow gun laws. The laws on the books in those cities aren't stemming the flow of guns into the streets. Any reasonable gun regulations have to deal with that issue.
I think the way you deal with that issue is you prevent the guns from getting in their hands in the first place. They get the guns by theft, strawman purchase, and illegal trade. That's where you need to focus the laws.
I think you missed my point. I wasn't arguing the wisdom or effectiveness of those laws. I was highlighting that since 3 major cities in the United States actually have implemented gun bans, your argument that the amount of people on the left willing to support such broad sweeping bans is an insignificant number is directly contradicted. And it also highlights that pro-gun advocates are not delusional or having irrational fears to believe that leftists in power will be willing to strip them of their liberties if the opportunity presents itself.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 1:18 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Would repealing any type of restrictions on the type of weapons available make us more safe?
I don't really see what being more safe has to do with it.
Posted on 5/17/14 at 1:58 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
I don't dismiss it... but I also don't think it will ever happen.
If it doesn't ever happen on a national level (because it certainly has happened on local levels already) it's not because of the left in this country, that's for damn sure. It's because of the rabid defense of these freedoms put on by a pro-gun base that knows the cleverness and ambitions of their political opposition.
Posted on 5/17/14 at 6:13 pm to ChewyDante
To get this back on thread as opposed to arguing over the philosophy of pro/anti gun control, The Rise & Fall of The Third Reich is widely accepted by historians as one of the most definitive documentaries about Nazi Germany. And there is not one reference to gun control being a factor leading to the Holocaust. As well, being a huge WWII nut, I have read 1000's of books on that whole period. And I have never seen one reference in any of those books about this author's premise. And I own 4 guns & am a supporter of the Second Amendment. I just get frustrated with those that are this far out there being presented as representative of all of us who are sane & realistic about all the issues.
Posted on 5/17/14 at 8:59 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
So you think allowing criminals access to guns is a GOOD idea?
I think gun control doesn't actually prevent criminals from getting guns. Criminals, as their name would suggest, don't follow the law.
Posted on 5/17/14 at 9:05 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
I think gun control doesn't actually prevent criminals from getting guns. Criminals, as their name would suggest, don't follow the law.
Said no criminal ever.
This post was edited on 5/17/14 at 9:23 pm
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News