RIPS Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walid Jumblat Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 the real problem, the origin of all problems is the eradication of all moral values. Who's moral values though? Morals are a subjective concept and nothing stays the same forever. People always fall in to the easy state of saying 'back in the day...', however usually when you look back things aren't as rosy we tend to believe. Moral values have not been eradicated at all, they've simply changed with the times. I mean how is society, technology, demographics, economics, etc. all supposed to develop while societal values remaining static? It obviously can't and won't happen. And again, nothing stays the same anyway. Existence is change, everything moves, everything ages. Nothing stays the same. Well, except for the Bill of Rights, I guess. Everything changes with the time and the BoR stays stuck in the times it was penned, and people who don't understand or accept change want to conserve some of its principles in a sort of aspirational nostalgia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realism Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 He's just going to answer your point with some wingnut Youtube link or meme. Thread's a mess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPS Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 no moral values at all, just some continues liberal conditioning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Incognito Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 yeah, i get it. it's a complex issue in which guns do play a part, which is why I've said im not really against "universal" background checks, stricter penalties for offenders and higher mental health checks for firearm purchasing. so what about my state limiting magazines to 7 rounds from 10? outright banning the sale of AR15 rifles, or similar caliber rifles with certain cosmetic features such as a pistol grip? which does NOTHING to alter the weapon itself besides aesthetically. or having to renew my pistol permit every 5 years, which will require no more than a typical background check, i assume the same used now for when we buy ammunition, but with a large added fee really just used as a revenue maker? are these solutions to the ever so complex problem of people committing mass murder? i doubt it, and apparently vice pres. Biden isn't too sure either: http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/31/16794835-biden-new-gun-controls-likely-wont-end-shootings?lite a complex issue with everyone really only going after one thing... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walid Jumblat Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 Yeah, mag reductions are pointless. I think there will be a lot of examples where the govt takes aim at easy targets. That way they can be seen taking action without taking serious political risks...., and maybe raise some revenue on the side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 I completely agree on the mag issue, it solves zero problems. I think the working definition of "assault rifle" is pretty much bullshit. guns are the easy target, they might also be the easiest target to make a difference in. reinventing our society to give a shit about mental health is going to be insane (pun!) monetarily, culturally, and functionally. There is no quick fix, no change that can happen within one presidential term, no culture shift that can happen quick enough to stop the next bunch of outrageous shootings to happen. politicians will say there is, and will act shocked when a someone who can shoot knocks out a high number with a bunch of low cap mags and a handgun. the NRA will say "told ya so," the media will glorify the shooter and we as a nation will be just as fucked. i dunno, its loaded and i don't claim to have a solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILOTSMYBRAIN Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 "Governer Cuomo and Mayor Bloomberg said assault weapons are weapons of war and don't belong on the streets of America, if that's true why do the police need them? And who are they at war with?" Checkmate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 They are at war with criminals, pretty straight forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILOTSMYBRAIN Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 So you are now comparing day to day policing to combat in war? Haven't seen anything like that my entire life. Have you ever been to NY? And to your points, if a random gun fight were to break out at let's just say...the Ferry, on either side, Staten Island or Manhattan. How would Police walking around with MP-5's and other high powered assault rifles be any different from a regular citizen acting on his own with a hand gun in a high traffic area? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 no, not day to day policing. though as more and more mass murders happen it becomes more day to day. cops don't carry m4s or mp5s on their backs during routine patrols, they keep them in their trunks or armories for use in extreme situations. i don't want to fall into some line of defending cops, because thats just not my stance, but there are frequently situations that merit them being armed with more than a glock 22. (i've been to NY, but not spent enough time to feel like i could possibly speak to local norms). the ferry scenario is set up for their to be no proper response. if its a crowded, high traffic area then guns aren't the answer period, not for cops or civilians. less than lethal tools come into play in those scenarios. (which i've argued in pretty much all the cop threads are under used). i don't have a solid stance on this. I feel that SWAT/special teams are needed and justified in having the arms they do. Just like NRA arguments for arming yourself because police are too slow, sometimes SWAT is equally far behind from regular police arrival. those arms in extreme situations can make the difference. which goes back to my continuing concern of police stress shooting standards being way too low and wholly unacceptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UPS! Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 All im saying is personally id rather have a gun knowing alot of other people have guns, than not having a gun and knowing some people have guns, a majority of which would be up to no good. We all have some fantasy island shit of how this issue could be solved. Lets look at the facts: There are already millions of registered guns in the US. There are already millions of untraceable guns in the US. So do you let the cops go door to door and round up the millions of guns that (most) law abiding citizens(hate this term) registered and had for hunting, or self defense of their home and in the wake of that leave a fairly large window of time open for goons already armed to be the only ones other than the Jakes with guns? To me, a fair compromise would be just making it harder for psychos & idiots to get guns, and anyone who passes the criteria has to have some sort of training, certification, register the fucking thing and ill even throw the gun control persuasion a bone and agree that we don't need fucking M16's and such on the streets. But again I also truly believe that if you give em an inch...the mother fuckers will take a mile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 we agree. where i get concerned is the classification of 'psychos and idiots' and how we treat mental illness. i made heavy handed jokes about registering all offenders of depression, mpd, bipolar, add, etc when the NRA first said that was the answer. I'm surprised that idea is continuing to gain momentum. I fear the government registering every troubled kid, combat vet, and every-sort-of-victim who seeks counseling for an extended period of time with a permanent record that limits his rights more than I fear the encroachment of my rights by making me register and jump through more hoops to obtain my weapons and rounds. i'm also worried about hipaa going to the wind because of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILOTSMYBRAIN Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 You should actually watch this, as opposed to most of the other things I post which clearly are clicked and dismissed. I could careless about Luke and his intro, but listen to Joe Lozito's story. Here's another one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 I click most links posted here, and only dismiss after a couple of things happen: its clear that its dumb or it has alex jones in it. Both of those were good videos. What that does for the assault rifle concern I don't know, it does show that NY is fucked up and reinforces that I want nothing to do with big-city-living. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Armed teachers... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~KRYLON2~ Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Armed teachers is a kids worst nightmare Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 9 dead in axe attack this goes against a bit of the rhetoric I post in this thread, but its applicable. people intent on doing harm will find a way, regardless of laws in place. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprotester Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 $450. Wow. Incomprehensible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPS Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 also this goes against most of what I post, but no one got killed which wouldn't have been the case had the dude had a gun. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/10/us-usa-stabbing-texas-idUSBRE9380Y420130410 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPS Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPS Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPS Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Only in America, a proposal that has the majority of public backing and the majority in the senate and the bill doesn't pass. Fucking retarded. Background checks was all that was asking for. Look at Australia, gun control actually works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPS Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 RIPS I swear to god you are either a retard or just a very good troll. You trying to say gun control doesn't work because a real life example of australia clearly shows it does. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 RIPS, I highly doubt mr chupacabra gave you permission to use that gif. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprotester Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walid Jumblat Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Australians are clearly becoming worse shots over time. Secondly, the significant dip of homicides during and post-WWII makes a strong argument for tighter controls on Japanese immigrants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.