Obama's gun proposals / executive orders

[JustSkye]

Originally Posted by vetteman

If the President really wanted to address the tragedy in NewTown he would have mentioned violent video games and it's effects on our young people. He would have mentioned the wave of violent movies produced in Hollywood and their effect on the young and the violence prone. Instead of having agencies studying the law abiding against the wishes of Congress he might study these other things instead. He might study how absolute gun control in Chicago is working for the idiot Mayor running that town

He might start talking to Americans in their own language and mentioned more armed teachers and cops in school zones instead of using goofy left-speak terms like "resource Officers."

So you're for censorship? You want to take a choice of what the US watches or the games they play, but you bitch and whine about guns? Kind of hypocritical. And as far and what we should be showing our children, the movies they watch and games they play? That should land the lap of the damned parents. Just like eating and obesity. Not the government's place to step in and fix. It's called accountability and putting it where it belongs. Edited... studies have been done to death on both.

Were you against that wicked old rock music, too?

And just what language do Americans speak that the President doesn't? Do we need to dumb things down even more?

[Sean Renaud]

Originally Posted by vetteman

Being a law abiding citizen I'm a bit incensed at having to listen to a demagogic harangue about how we're all responsible when somebody goes off his rocker and starts killing people; so much so that we have to surrender rights and suffer restrictions on our liberty, which by extension has no relationship with any solution for, or prevention against, the tragedy being addressed.

Not a single thing he advanced would have stopped what happened in Newtown. All he did was exploit the tragedy to drag up debunked liberal gun control schemes that have no effect on crime. The aim of course is not to do anything about crime or violence. The aim is to deprive law abiding citizens of their rights to self defense, as the only people affected by the orders are people who do not violate the law.

If the President really wanted to address the tragedy in NewTown he would have mentioned violent video games and it's effects on our young people. He would have mentioned the wave of violent movies produced in Hollywood and their effect on the young and the violence prone. Instead of having agencies studying the law abiding against the wishes of Congress he might study these other things instead. He might study how absolute gun control in Chicago is working for the idiot Mayor running that town

He might start talking to Americans in their own language and mentioned more armed teachers and cops in school zones instead of using goofy left-speak terms like "resource Officers."

First, Sandy Hook is still the big one and several of the proposals might have helped there. Second, how do you figure more cops would have had no chance of preventing New Town?

[eyer]

Originally Posted by LiFeNdEaTh

go ahead eyer... become a hero, turn back into hands of time!! hahah

I realize you really dig her for her unfaithful and dishonest harlotry...

...but I believe her when she says your little weenie makes her giggle.

[Liar]

Originally Posted by vetteman

If the President really wanted to address the tragedy in NewTown he would have mentioned violent video games and it's effects on our young people. He would have mentioned the wave of violent movies produced in Hollywood and their effect on the young and the violence prone.

You want him to make up hack science?

Instead of having agencies studying the law abiding against the wishes of Congress he might study these other things instead.

I suppose they'll, among other things, include law abiding producers and consumers of video games and movies in such studies. There is so far no empiric data showing a connection between violent entertainment and violent action. Just that unscientific hunch that there should be.

He might study how absolute gun control in Chicago is working for the idiot Mayor running that town

That too.

He might start talking to Americans in their own language and mentioned more armed teachers and cops in school zones instead of using goofy left-speak terms like "resource Officers."

So you support the policy, but get whiny about the choice of words. Got it.

[vetteman]

Originally Posted by JustSkye

So you're for censorship? You want to take a choice of what the US watches or the games they play, but you bitch and whine about guns? Kind of hypocritical. And as far and what we should be showing our children, the movies they watch and games they play? That should land the lap of the damned parents. Just like eating and obesity. Not the government's place to step in and fix. It's called accountability and putting it where it belongs. Edited... studies have been done to death on both.

Were you against that wicked old rock music, too?

And just what language do Americans speak that the President doesn't? Do we need to dumb things down even more?

Obviously you're IQ is too small to engage this conversation, so give it up now.

[KRCummings]

Originally Posted by KyleW

he made no executive order to take your gun away

I didn't say he did. Obama has done next to nothing.

[KyleW]

Originally Posted by vetteman

Obviously you're IQ is too small to engage this conversation, so give it up now.

"your" not "you're"

[JustSkye]

Originally Posted by vetteman

Obviously you're IQ is too small to engage this conversation, so give it up now.

too funny.

[Disgustipated]

He has no idea he's losing his god damned mind.

[islandman]

Originally Posted by KRCummings

I didn't say he did. Obama has done next to nothing.

Not so.

He's managed to do absolutely nothing about criminals' access to guns as well as those currently in their possession.

[JinXed]

Originally Posted by KyleW

"your" not "you're"

Never fails to crack me up.







Plus vette calling anyone, especially rain, to be less than intelligent than himself almost makes one giddy.

[JinXed]

Oh crap, I almost forgot his signature :rollyeyesemotelameness:

[CHNOPS]

My answers, take them or leave them:

1) Get rid of any gun in civilian hands that can be logically defined as a weapon of mass destruction. No brainer, stop arguing with this one.

2) Keep the rest, but tax the living shit out of them. Scale the tax by the magazine capacity and power/lethality. You want greater capacity/firepower, you pay more tax on it. We get your money to do other things with.

3) Fingerprint every single person who buys one, anywhere, any time. Yes, I know people steal them. People steal cars too, we still make you take a test and register yours.

4) Dispense bullets like pharmaceutical drugs or unstable chemicals. Ones you can use without too much danger of "overdosing" on, you can buy OTC. Ones that have potential to do maximum damage to bodies, yours or someone else's, you have to have get a license to buy, and you have to keep renewing it.

You're welcome, America. Now stop bitching and get back to growing obese, as God intended.

[KRCummings]

Originally Posted by islandman

Not so.

He's managed to do absolutely nothing about criminals' access to guns as well as those currently in their possession.

An almost impossible task and one that doesn't stop mass shootings anyway so I personally don't give a shit. Bad guys got guns, big surprise. I have no interest in guns themselves or in stupid ass laws that don't solve any problems.
If some tiny cocked little fuckwit wants a rifle or sidearm then let him have it. Makes no difference to me. He's not a threat. The crazy guy who's not a criminal, that's the threat I care about. Not video games or movies or penis extensions. Crazy motherfuckers.

[Disgustipated]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZrF...e_gdata_player

[marshalt]

The 10 round magazine thing is such crap. Not to be a conspiracy nut here, but I wonder if it's not that manufacturers that are pushing that one. Right now, every mag maker in the world is going to start ramping up the production of 20 and 30 round mags, just like they did in the days before the '94 AWB. Up until the day the AWB sunset, you could still buy brand new"pre-ban" 30 round mags because they were made before the ban went into effect. (and they were not cheap.) If this goes into effect, you'll see the same thing.

[KRCummings]

Originally Posted by marshalt

The 10 round magazine thing is such crap. Not to be a conspiracy nut here, but I wonder if it's not that manufacturers that are pushing that one. Right now, every mag maker in the world is going to start ramping up the production of 20 and 30 round mags, just like they did in the days before the '94 AWB. Up until the day the AWB sunset, you could still buy brand new"pre-ban" 30 round mags because they were made before the ban went into effect. (and they were not cheap.) If this goes into effect, you'll see the same thing.

Anyone who's ever been in the military in any capacity knows that reloading that takes around 3 seconds. Less if you're good. Magazine capacity is meaningless unless the shooter doesn't have thumbs.

[islandman]

Originally Posted by KRCummings

An almost impossible task and one that doesn't stop mass shootings anyway so I personally don't give a shit. Bad guys got guns, big surprise. I have no interest in guns themselves or in stupid ass laws that don't solve any problems.
If some tiny cocked little fuckwit wants a rifle or sidearm then let him have it. Makes no difference to me. He's not a threat. The crazy guy who's not a criminal, that's the threat I care about. Not video games or movies or penis extensions. Crazy motherfuckers.

I don't think you can gameplan for crazy. It's random. Nothing short of destroying all guns everywhere removes that uncertainty.


Criminals, on the other hand, you can do something about:

1) Get caught with an unregistered weapon? Was that weapon used in any acts of violence, but not by you? Sorry, tough luck. Here's some more jail time for you.

2) Are you a gun dealer and did you just get caught not performing background checks on all your clients or concluding a sale without proper paperwork? Tough luck, cause you're going to jail. Were one of the weapons you sold used in a crime? Lucky you, you get to share in that too.


Just my thoughts on what would put a dent in gun violence in this country. Not sure if its legal to do the above, but if politicians are contemplating tinkering with an Amendment, I imagine the legality of the above could be made so much more easily.

[eyer]

Originally Posted by islandman

I don't think you can gameplan for crazy. It's random. Nothing short of destroying all guns everywhere removes that uncertainty.


Criminals, on the other hand, you can do something about:

1) Get caught with an unregistered weapon? Was that weapon used in any acts of violence, but not by you? Sorry, tough luck. Here's some more jail time for you.

2) Are you a gun dealer and did you just get caught not performing background checks on all your clients or concluding a sale without proper paperwork? Tough luck, cause you're going to jail. Were one of the weapons you sold used in a crime? Lucky you, you get to share in that too.


Just my thoughts on what would put a dent in gun violence in this country. Not sure if its legal to do the above, but if politicians are contemplating tinkering with an Amendment, I imagine the legality of the above could be made so much more easily.

Sandy Hook was "gun violence in this country" to the 27th degree...

...how would either of your proposals "put a dent" in the murders committed there?

[richard_daily]

Originally Posted by Disgustipated

Does your therapist know you're nuts?

Come on, be fair... he didn't even mention Ozzie Ozborne records...

[KRCummings]

Originally Posted by islandman

I don't think you can gameplan for crazy. It's random. Nothing short of destroying all guns everywhere removes that uncertainty.


Criminals, on the other hand, you can do something about:

1) Get caught with an unregistered weapon? Was that weapon used in any acts of violence, but not by you? Sorry, tough luck. Here's some more jail time for you.

2) Are you a gun dealer and did you just get caught not performing background checks on all your clients or concluding a sale without proper paperwork? Tough luck, cause you're going to jail. Were one of the weapons you sold used in a crime? Lucky you, you get to share in that too.


Just my thoughts on what would put a dent in gun violence in this country. Not sure if its legal to do the above, but if politicians are contemplating tinkering with an Amendment, I imagine the legality of the above could be made so much more easily.

I know there's nothing you can do about crazy, that's why any "response" is bullshit and politically motivated. They know these laws don't prevent mass shootings. Only an idiot would think that they do. Just like only an idiot would think that video games and movies make people crazy.

[KyleW]

I'm annoyed he did virtually nothing to impact gun control. I'm further annoyed by the lies about what he did to take everyone's guns. He didn't do shit. And the things that sound like him taking steps, were just proposals.

[islandman]

Originally Posted by eyer

Sandy Hook was "gun violence in this country" to the 27th degree...

...how would either of your proposals "put a dent" in the murders committed there?

The "27th degree" is an emotional quotient assigned by you/others given the horrific nature of the event. But to designate as "gun violence in this country" is akin to sticking one's head in the sand and coming up for air only when a mass shooting occurs. It's selective analysis and reaction at it's finest, but it's fatally flawed.

As for "a dent", it doesn't. As I said, you can't gameplay for crazy any more than you can ensure that a bird will never shit on you on the walk to work.

[richard_daily]

Originally Posted by KyleW

I'm annoyed he did virtually nothing to impact gun control. I'm further annoyed by the lies about what he did to take everyone's guns. He didn't do shit. And the things that sound like him taking steps, were just proposals.

The problem is that you can't really increase the punishment for someone who's willing to kill themselves in a shooting spree.

Want to ban 30 round magazines? I'm sure that will stop a mentally unstable person from using them.

ban "assault weapons"? I guess the mentally unstable shooters will have to go with more damaging 12 gauges and hunting rifles.

Looking at gun control is a feel good answer to the problem of isolated, mentally damaged individuals.

Increasing the strength of background checks is fine, as long as you pass a universal concealed carry that is reciprocated across state lines, and make it easier and cheaper for people who are legit to get FFL licenses and access to NFA items.

[eyer]

Again...

...a 28th Amendment (to repeal/modify the 2nd) is the only practical approach available to attempt any significant change in the traditional "gun culture" of this country.

I, personally, would champion heavily against such an effort...

...but it's the only legal chance gun control advocates have.

I've already read some staunch pro-gunners say if the 2nd was repealed/modified, they'd obey its constitutional law...

...but if that legal avenue isn't honored and the individual right to bear arms is oppressed by unconstitutional edict(s), then those same pro-gunners will die fighting before they give 'em up - and they'd be in the legal right doing so.

As the wacked-out lady from Indiana has stated, there is no solution to "crazy" - no matter what laws are enacted...

...but I sense a deep progressive desire afoot to change American cultural thinking re: the individual right to bear arms.

All I'm saying, warning, is that progressives better reverently obey the law as they go forward with their drive for social change...

...or they will be the ones responsible for the illegal consequences.