Gun violence, the real red flags that no one talks about

[AlexBailey]

A whole slew of "Gun Control" laws are about to fall into the dust bin of history and America is 'arming up.'

I suspect there will soon be a need to roundup a bunch more insurrectionist deplorables - people who are so convinced their voting minority is being sidelined...

Lock HIM up! Lock THEM up!

 

[NotAFool]

Those arguments are just all worn out. Continuing to offer them just perpetuates the problem and worsens it. I don’t have any interest in answering them once again….and again…and again. A responsible gun owner would offer a responsible solution to the problem. But all anyone who wants to solve the problem ever gets is “no” or some off the wall idea that makes the problem worse.

One thing: The vast majority people (minors especially) who shoot other people don’t do it because they are mentally ill. They don’t even do it because they are scared. They do it because they are angry about something.. And everyone is capable of anger although the vast majority are men or boys. Maybe we should drug all the guys to calm them down And they can manage their anger. It is a stupid idea but I am tired of having all the reasonable ones shot down.

Maybe, we should bring back good public education and fathers in the home and quit lying to women about being able to raise a child alone, maybe we should bring back being a parent instead of being your kid's friend, maybe we should bring back giving kids a good smack when they act up, maybe we should allow school principals to use paddles on our kids ass when they fuck up in school, maybe we should bring back making kids have respect and manners for adults and the same for adults start expecting manners and respect from other adults and act like adults, maybe parents need to accept responsibility when their kids fuck up and act up and hurt people or destroy things or steal, hold parents accountable for their problem children. How about actually checking in on kids that show signs of anti social behavior and find out why and help them get out of that mentality, how about checking on parents to make sure they are doing enough for their kids, how about fixing our public education system so that it isn't a Liberal indoctrination system and find out where all the money is really going from our taxes and the state lottery which is supposed to keep our schools safe up to date, pay our teachers better and make the environment safer and better for teachers and have incentives so more people would want to teach and I mean really teach lessons for life that will help make kids think for themselves and be aware of the troubles life may bring and how to, read, write, do math, how to be cooperative, and have manners and respect for themselves and others no matter who they are until that person doesn't deserve respect because they don't give respect. How about teaching kids and adults, hands on about firearms, show them how to shoot, teach them the rules of owning and using guns safely and what they are used for, how to take them apart and clean them, do some target shooting and skeet shooting to show how fun they can be, all that so there is no curiosity about firearms. If kids are exposed to things they don't need to sneak around to learn and learn the wrong things. Same with adults. Everyone should have a one day class at a gun range to learn laws in a classroom and safety and then to the range to shoot different guns. Too many people argue about guns and have no idea what as gun is or how it works

 

[ll74]

Maybe, we should bring back good public education and fathers in the home and quit lying to women about being able to raise a child alone, maybe we should bring back being a parent instead of being your kid's friend, maybe we should bring back giving kids a good smack when they act up, maybe we should allow school principals to use paddles on our kids ass when they fuck up in school, maybe we should bring back making kids have respect and manners for adults and the same for adults start expecting manners and respect from other adults and act like adults, maybe parents need to accept responsibility when their kids fuck up and act up and hurt people or destroy things or steal, hold parents accountable for their problem children. How about actually checking in on kids that show signs of anti social behavior and find out why and help them get out of that mentality, how about checking on parents to make sure they are doing enough for their kids, how about fixing our public education system so that it isn't a Liberal indoctrination system and find out where all the money is really going from our taxes and the state lottery which is supposed to keep our schools safe up to date, pay our teachers better and make the environment safer and better for teachers and have incentives so more people would want to teach and I mean really teach lessons for life that will help make kids think for themselves and be aware of the troubles life may bring and how to, read, write, do math, how to be cooperative, and have manners and respect for themselves and others no matter who they are until that person doesn't deserve respect because they don't give respect. How about teaching kids and adults, hands on about firearms, show them how to shoot, teach them the rules of owning and using guns safely and what they are used for, how to take them apart and clean them, do some target shooting and skeet shooting to show how fun they can be, all that so there is no curiosity about firearms. If kids are exposed to things they don't need to sneak around to learn and learn the wrong things. Same with adults. Everyone should have a one day class at a gun range to learn laws in a classroom and safety and then to the range to shoot different guns. Too many people argue about guns and have no idea what as gun is or how it works

Women can raise children alone...that's not a lie.

What's a lie is that that statement implies all men can be capable fathers or that all women are required to leave that choice up to the men.

 

[NotAFool]

Inability or unwillingness to recognize that we have a serious and violent social problem that they did not have in 1783. So how do you propose to solve it? Solve the problem. I am tired of trying. More guns just gives more people the opportunity to resolve their differences violently So that won’t work. More money for mental health? People say that but then they balk at higher taxes. Do they want more services for free? Another problem because life does not work that way in a capitalist society. And anyway, mental health is not the problem, anger is. A start on that problem is to dispense with social media that fosters anger and division. But nobody wants to do that or learn to discuss problems instead of dissolving into anger and insults and character assassination and even revenge when someone dares to disagree. oh well.

I agree that people don't know how to have discussions in an informed and educated way. Everyone seems to be too wound up with their feelings to have a sensible conversation /debate. The people who live in some fantasy world that don't use logic and available information from both sides of a subject are the ones who realize they haven't been using their brain and having realized they've been lied to and believing it for all these years, don't like hearing the truth but won't admit to being wrong so they automatically start name calling, shaming and getting personal attacks going on the person who is just telling the truth and facts. That is an immature way to deal with not liking reality. And so many people do it and it is in my own experience that Left leaning and supporting people use that tactic way more often than anyone else. That's my opinion from experience

 

[NotAFool]

Women can raise children alone...that's not a lie.

What's a lie is that that statement implies all men can be capable fathers or that all women are required to leave that choice up to the men.

No, statics and fact show that kids raised by only a mother are 80% percent more likely to fail and or drop out of school, get in trouble with the law and go to prison than a kid who has both a father and a mother raising the kid. Single fathers aren't always better, especially if they aren't around.
Even your President Obama stated those exact facts I just wrote about single mothers and their kids.

 

[ll74]

No, statics and fact show that kids raised by only a mother are 80% percent more likely to fail and or drop out of school, get in trouble with the law and go to prison than a kid who has both a father and a mother raising the kid. Single fathers aren't always better, especially if they aren't around.
Even your President Obama stated those exact facts I just wrote about single mothers and their kids.

That doesn't mean they can't raise kids alone...it means that it's more complex than just doing it alone and reveals that single parents require more support/resources than non-single parents.

 

[NotAFool]

Women can raise children alone...that's not a lie.

What's a lie is that that statement implies all men can be capable fathers or that all women are required to leave that choice up to the men.

Is that all you were able to argue about out of all the things I wrote about fixing society and kids?
You respond with some feminist rhetoric about moms can raise kids. Of course they can, but can they do it well? Yes, I,m sure there are plenty who can. My mom did with 4 kids, my dad was barely around but he was working and mom was stay at home mom. We weren't angels but we knew right from wrong, how to have manners, be polite, be respectful of others and have self worth and self respect.
Parents don't teach kids that anymore.
My parents knew we weren't angels but they also knew that when we were at someone's home or out in public we were respectful and polite. It made up for when we were brats at home. Lol

 

[ll74]

Is that all you were able to argue about out of all the things I wrote about fixing society and kids?
You respond with some feminist rhetoric about moms can raise kids. Of course they can, but can they do it well? Yes, I,m sure there are plenty who can. My mom did with 4 kids, my dad was barely around but he was working and mom was stay at home mom. We weren't angels but we knew right from wrong, how to have manners, be polite, be respectful of others and have self worth and self respect.
Parents don't teach kids that anymore.
My parents knew we weren't angels but they also knew that when we were at someone's home or out in public we were respectful and polite. It made up for when we were brats at home. Lol

I'm not required to respond to all your unrelated horseshit. .sorry Kitten

Just because you oversimplify the topic and conflate all your other grievances, doesn't mean that I care to follow you into the shit.

Relationships are difficult. Marriages are difficult.parenting is harder. If you need to blame women for it, that's your bullshit.

Bottom line, we don't tell anyone they can't raise a child alone.....we tell people that it's more difficult and we work to get them more resources so that the kids are the focus

 

[AlexBailey]

Maybe, we should bring back good public education and fathers in the home and quit lying to women about being able to raise a child alone, maybe we should bring back being a parent instead of being your kid's friend, maybe we should bring back giving kids a good smack when they act up, maybe we should allow school principals to use paddles on our kids ass when they fuck up in school, maybe we should bring back making kids have respect and manners for adults and the same for adults start expecting manners and respect from other adults and act like adults, maybe parents need to accept responsibility when their kids fuck up and act up and hurt people or destroy things or steal, hold parents accountable for their problem children. How about actually checking in on kids that show signs of anti social behavior and find out why and help them get out of that mentality, how about checking on parents to make sure they are doing enough for their kids, how about fixing our public education system so that it isn't a Liberal indoctrination system and find out where all the money is really going from our taxes and the state lottery which is supposed to keep our schools safe up to date, pay our teachers better and make the environment safer and better for teachers and have incentives so more people would want to teach and I mean really teach lessons for life that will help make kids think for themselves and be aware of the troubles life may bring and how to, read, write, do math, how to be cooperative, and have manners and respect for themselves and others no matter who they are until that person doesn't deserve respect because they don't give respect. How about teaching kids and adults, hands on about firearms, show them how to shoot, teach them the rules of owning and using guns safely and what they are used for, how to take them apart and clean them, do some target shooting and skeet shooting to show how fun they can be, all that so there is no curiosity about firearms. If kids are exposed to things they don't need to sneak around to learn and learn the wrong things. Same with adults. Everyone should have a one day class at a gun range to learn laws in a classroom and safety and then to the range to shoot different guns. Too many people argue about guns and have no idea what as gun is or how it works

My three sons grew up this way. My youngest was in fifth-grade doing independent study when he got interested in guns. He ordered and built two pistols from kits: a .50 cal Kentucky rifled muzzle loader pistol and a .44 cal Navy Colt Revolver. He got school credit for history, for science when he mathematically demonstrated how though his BB gun has a higher muzzle velocity, the slower powder fired pistols had more energy, and credit for PE for practicing his target shooting.

We went shooting with a friend who had lots of other guns and put a lot of lead down field. It was a lot of fun and we have gone shooting many times sense. My sons also learned an important lesson when that friend and his father were murdered by his meth-head brother-in-law with an AR-15.

 

[phrodeau]

No, statics and fact show that kids raised by only a mother are 80% percent more likely to fail and or drop out of school, get in trouble with the law and go to prison than a kid who has both a father and a mother raising the kid. Single fathers aren't always better, especially if they aren't around.
Even your President Obama stated those exact facts I just wrote about single mothers and their kids.

You must support legal abortion on demand, then. Let single women control whether they have children or not.

 

[NotAFool]

My three sons grew up this way. My youngest was in fifth-grade doing independent study when he got interested in guns. He ordered and built two pistols from kits: a .50 cal Kentucky rifled muzzle loader pistol and a .44 cal Navy Colt Revolver. He got school credit for history, for science when he mathematically demonstrated how though his BB gun has a higher muzzle velocity, the slower powder fired pistols had more energy, and credit for PE for practicing his target shooting.

We went shooting with a friend who had lots of other guns and put a lot of lead down field. It was a lot of fun and we have gone shooting many times sense. My sons also learned an important lesson when that friend and his father were murdered by his meth-head brother-in-law with an AR-15.

People kill people with firearms. Firearms do not kill people.
That is the main lesson that every person needs to understand.
That is the bottom line.
If there were no firearms, people would still kill other people with other tools and objects.
Would we then write laws preventing the ownership of these other tools and objects? For instance, hammers, pliers, knives, rope, any small blunt objects, baseball bats, wood, pipe, electricity, water, poison, prescription drugs, etc....?
Outlawing a tool that 99.99999% of people that own those tools never hurt anyone but use those tools for sport, food, recreation, hobby, and then we have the 0.00001% of people who own or possess firearms legally or not legally that use firearms for illegal activity. Why make laws that take away rights of the vast majority of people who aren't breaking any laws, because of very teeny tiny number of people who choose to be criminals and to use a useful tool for bad activities and hurting and killing. You can't blame the lack of laws, or the firearm manufacturers, or the firearm or the bullets, but you can blame the shooter, the people who are aware of shooter's life and problems and doing nothing to help, but blaming anyone or anything other than the person him/herself that committed the crimes is ridiculous and helps no one.

 

[Chobham]

I wonder how long it's going to take before these folks realize that the Bruen decision has changed everything? Tossed all of their dreams of gun control into the trashcan. More and more assailants of citizens are going to wind up in Potters Field, and they already are damn near daily.

The flurry of legislation post Bruen passed by congress, California, New York, among others as well as the attempted redefinition of words by the ATF are nothing more than political jokes, the legislators know it and if you don't, the jokes on you.

Law enforcement has been defunded, denigrated, and demoralized to the point that they have little interest in responding to any dire need you may have. Locally the avg. 911 response time is 40 min. 40 min. is 39 minutes 45 secs too long in a life or death situation and I'm not all that sure about the 15 secs you MAY have. You best realize that gun control only makes the criminals life safer, not yours and the sooner that sinks in to your conscientiousness, the better.

The only path you "gun controllers" have is to amend or eliminate the second amendment. And that day may come but not within your lifetime, or your children's, or even theirs.

So, the tide is turning. Which way are you going to swim, with it or against it? Are you going to succumb to the growing darkness or fight against it? The choice is yours.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

People kill people with firearms. Firearms do not kill people.

I will agree with you on this, only on the very rare occasion does a previously loaded firearm discharge by itself, and I have yet to see one ever load a round into the chamber by itself ( prior to a immediate previous discharge)

That is the main lesson that every person needs to understand.

Sorry but that is not the main lesson every person needs to understand.

That is the bottom line.

Again as above, that is an argument against regulation, put forward by gun proponents.

If there were no firearms, people would still kill other people with other tools and objects.

People currently kill other people with inanimate objects right now, firearms are just #1 on that list of "tools" used to kill others.

Would we then write laws preventing the ownership of these other tools and objects? For instance, hammers, pliers, knives, rope, any small blunt objects, baseball bats, wood, pipe, electricity, water, poison, prescription drugs, etc....?

This is a bit of a red herring. First off, if you wish to discuss firearms, then you have to understand there is only a minority of people looking to ban ownership. When you pin the defence of unrestricted ownership of a firearm on how other "insert name you chose" are regulated, you seem to show an inability to realise not every "insert name you chose" purpose/ use is the same.
For example, pliers can kill, but the purpose of the pliers is not to kill,it is to grip. A firearm on the other hand is designed to kill. So how can you claim they need to be treated the same, legally?

Outlawing a tool that 99.99999% of people that own those tools never hurt anyone but use those tools for sport, food, recreation, hobby, and then we have the 0.00001% of people who own or possess firearms legally or not legally that use firearms for illegal activity.

So I have coloured in two words I wish to make points about, in how you use them. You have the word outlawing, as the first word in your argument. Why? When I look around the information, I see the main desire is stronger regulations around ownership and use.

Honestly would passing a basic firearm handling course, prior to being able to legally own a handgun be much of a burden to put on a potential firearm owner. Was not the original reason the NRA stated,was to promote firearm training?

Next the co-opted word in blue. Yes you can define a firearm as a tool, it fits the definition of the word "tool".

tool: meaning:
a device or implement, especially one held in the hand, used to carry out a particular function

So yes a firearm is a tool, and it's function is to discharge a projectile, in a very safe manor, and follow an accurate trajectory. We could get into great detail about the design parameters, etc, but at the end of the day, a firearm is not a tool being used to loosen rusted screws, or driving nails.

This begs the question, of what is it's function, why does it "shoot" a projectile? Well only two reasons I can think of, to put holes in targets, or to kill whatever biological animal it is aimed at. Not the same as a screwdriver's design criteria forsure.

Why make laws that take away rights of the vast majority of people who aren't breaking any laws, because of very teeny tiny number of people who choose to be criminals and to use a useful tool for bad activities and hurting and killing.

An interesting statement, let us break it down. Just looking at the first three words "why make laws"? Good question, one that any reasonable person should understand. Laws in general are made to provide levels of protection the citizens of said local that made the rules.

You go on to next say laws around firearms would take away "rights of the vast majority" Well as I said earlier, regulations on ownership would not take away the 2nd amendment right, and doesn't the 2nd apply to ALL, not the majority? The use by people defending the right to own, throw this out a lot too, and it is a red herring (IMHO), just a blanket statement, of fear, with little meat to specify what right is being taken away.

As to the add in of criminality etc, that is just more mud stirred in the water.

You can't blame the lack of laws, or the firearm manufacturers, or the firearm or the bullets,

Blame them for what, making a tool?
Of course you can blame them.
Let's move from firearms for a second to the Automobile manufactures. If what you say about firearm manufactures is true, then it holds true for all other manufactures.

So I guess, according to your logic, we can't hold Ford or GM responsible if they make a car and it breaks down for everyone after three days? Is unsafe to drive, ignites spontaneously in a rear end collision?

When I read the 2nd, I see nothing in it about who makes the "arms" just who may hold them. Which means it should be perfectly legal to regulate firearms makers.

but you can blame the shooter,

Yes you can, and you can hold them to blame, even if they are not criminal before they squeeze the trigger. To me, as soon as you discharge any firearm, you are legally responsible for what that projectile does. Glad we agree, and I am sure you will help promote laws to hold all shooters equally responsible.

the people who are aware of shooter's life and problems and doing nothing to help, \

Again, I can agree to this, provided it also applies to all other people who are aware of the person,including the people who sold the shooter the firearms and bullets etc.

but blaming anyone or anything other than the person him/herself that committed the crimes is ridiculous and helps no one.

So you're saying we should not hold, say, a Bar responsible when they knowingly serve a person alcohol and then watch them stagger to a car and drive away? We should not blame the drug lord who sold the drugs to a person who then drove a car and killed people or overdosed or killed or maimed someone in a drug infused rage?

Myself I own firearms, and I use them. I am well trained in how to use them safely, they are stored securely, and I full accept responsibility for the my use and possession of them.

I also am not scared Government is going to come take them away, or outlaw them. Why? We have sane and sensible laws and regulations about who can or can't own them. What skill sets you need to master before you own them. Best of all, our citizens understand owning them is a privilege, not a right.

Question, are all rights equal? In the USA you have many rights and freedoms granted in the Constitution, but are they all granted as equal? You are granted the right to "bear arms", but also the right to liberty. I don't know about you, but I can see those two rights clashing. If they do, which right comes out on top?

My closing is this, around 80% of the US is in favour of enacting laws regulating the use and possession of firearms in the USA (thank you to Sugardaddy1 https://forum.literotica.com/thread...culture-of-death.1572727/page-4#post-95702702 for this proof https://www.politico.com/newsletter...ws-huge-support-for-gun-restrictions-00035349). As this pressure builds, there could well come a tipping point, where the right to liberty, overrules the right to bear arms. My suggestion is to work to reduce that 80% or so number by doing "something" to lower the number of firearm related "incidents" in the US. Otherwise your fears may just come true.

 

[NotAFool]

I will agree with you on this, only on the very rare occasion does a previously loaded firearm discharge by itself, and I have yet to see one ever load a round into the chamber by itself ( prior to a immediate previous discharge)

Sorry but that is not the main lesson every person needs to understand.

Again as above, that is an argument against regulation, put forward by gun proponents.

People currently kill other people with inanimate objects right now, firearms are just #1 on that list of "tools" used to kill others.

This is a bit of a red herring. First off, if you wish to discuss firearms, then you have to understand there is only a minority of people looking to ban ownership. When you pin the defence of unrestricted ownership of a firearm on how other "insert name you chose" are regulated, you seem to show an inability to realise not every "insert name you chose" purpose/ use is the same.
For example, pliers can kill, but the purpose of the pliers is not to kill,it is to grip. A firearm on the other hand is designed to kill. So how can you claim they need to be treated the same, legally?

So I have coloured in two words I wish to make points about, in how you use them. You have the word outlawing, as the first word in your argument. Why? When I look around the information, I see the main desire is stronger regulations around ownership and use.

Honestly would passing a basic firearm handling course, prior to being able to legally own a handgun be much of a burden to put on a potential firearm owner. Was not the original reason the NRA stated,was to promote firearm training?

Next the co-opted word in blue. Yes you can define a firearm as a tool, it fits the definition of the word "tool".

tool: meaning:
a device or implement, especially one held in the hand, used to carry out a particular function

So yes a firearm is a tool, and it's function is to discharge a projectile, in a very safe manor, and follow an accurate trajectory. We could get into great detail about the design parameters, etc, but at the end of the day, a firearm is not a tool being used to loosen rusted screws, or driving nails.

This begs the question, of what is it's function, why does it "shoot" a projectile? Well only two reasons I can think of, to put holes in targets, or to kill whatever biological animal it is aimed at. Not the same as a screwdriver's design criteria forsure.


An interesting statement, let us break it down. Just looking at the first three words "why make laws"? Good question, one that any reasonable person should understand. Laws in general are made to provide levels of protection the citizens of said local that made the rules.

You go on to next say laws around firearms would take away "rights of the vast majority" Well as I said earlier, regulations on ownership would not take away the 2nd amendment right, and doesn't the 2nd apply to ALL, not the majority? The use by people defending the right to own, throw this out a lot too, and it is a red herring (IMHO), just a blanket statement, of fear, with little meat to specify what right is being taken away.

As to the add in of criminality etc, that is just more mud stirred in the water.



Blame them for what, making a tool?
Of course you can blame them.
Let's move from firearms for a second to the Automobile manufactures. If what you say about firearm manufactures is true, then it holds true for all other manufactures.

So I guess, according to your logic, we can't hold Ford or GM responsible if they make a car and it breaks down for everyone after three days? Is unsafe to drive, ignites spontaneously in a rear end collision?

When I read the 2nd, I see nothing in it about who makes the "arms" just who may hold them. Which means it should be perfectly legal to regulate firearms makers.

Yes you can, and you can hold them to blame, even if they are not criminal before they squeeze the trigger. To me, as soon as you discharge any firearm, you are legally responsible for what that projectile does. Glad we agree, and I am sure you will help promote laws to hold all shooters equally responsible.

Again, I can agree to this, provided it also applies to all other people who are aware of the person,including the people who sold the shooter the firearms and bullets etc.

So you're saying we should not hold, say, a Bar responsible when they knowingly serve a person alcohol and then watch them stagger to a car and drive away? We should not blame the drug lord who sold the drugs to a person who then drove a car and killed people or overdosed or killed or maimed someone in a drug infused rage?

Myself I own firearms, and I use them. I am well trained in how to use them safely, they are stored securely, and I full accept responsibility for the my use and possession of them.

I also am not scared Government is going to come take them away, or outlaw them. Why? We have sane and sensible laws and regulations about who can or can't own them. What skill sets you need to master before you own them. Best of all, our citizens understand owning them is a privilege, not a right.

Question, are all rights equal? In the USA you have many rights and freedoms granted in the Constitution, but are they all granted as equal? You are granted the right to "bear arms", but also the right to liberty. I don't know about you, but I can see those two rights clashing. If they do, which right comes out on top?

My closing is this, around 80% of the US is in favour of enacting laws regulating the use and possession of firearms in the USA (thank you to Sugardaddy1 https://forum.literotica.com/thread...culture-of-death.1572727/page-4#post-95702702 for this proof https://www.politico.com/newsletter...ws-huge-support-for-gun-restrictions-00035349). As this pressure builds, there could well come a tipping point, where the right to liberty, overrules the right to bear arms. My suggestion is to work to reduce that 80% or so number by doing "something" to lower the number of firearm related "incidents" in the US. Otherwise your fears may just come true.

I appreciate you breaking down all that I wrote and agreeing with most of what I wrote shows you aren't just one of the people who know nothing about firearms and yet want to see them abolished.
I'm aware of the time you spent but I'm not able to take the time to reply or debate everything you asked or made a point of. I made my points and you already have your answers and opinions and whatever I may say most likely won't change your thoughts or opinions. I'm not trying to change anyone. I'm just giving my thoughts and opinions from what I know either firsthand or from being as informed as possible by very questionable mainstream media, (which I very rarely watch or listen to) and a more reliable independent news, documentary, and other sources of information that give information that isn't biased and lets people see all sides of a story so we can make an informed decision on what stand to take on any given subject.
That way I have no one to blame if I make a bad choice except myself.
I will say one thing and that is this.... You wrote that no one is trying to eliminate firearms ownership from the people. You are right, they are not, not yet. A lot of laws and restrictions and trying to ban, are just the baby steps that little by little infringe on our rights to own firearms. Every time some story about a shooting, as they want to call "gun violence" which is something that is not possible in reality, the politicians and the non thinking sheeple start yelling and screaming about more laws and more bans and those are steps as they approve those little additions to laws, is just that much closer to outlawing firearms completely. I like you, know that will be difficult to make happen in this country but they will try and the way that so many crazy things keep happening that five, ten, years ago, we said that would never happen. People voluntarily believed and allowed lockdowns over a form of the Flu and believed the lies being told and obeyed when told not to question anything and not to listen to other scientists and healthcare workers. Who would ever think that Americans would let that happen if they were told that five, ten, twenty years ago?
So we can't say it will never happen, because they will try and it will turn into firefight. That's why the government is making it more and more difficult to purchase ammo, and clips that hold more than 3 or 6 rounds. That's why the Dept of Agriculture has been armed with automatic weapons and a million rounds for those rifles, same with IRS, DOT, and other agencies that have and need some security teams, but some take a very stretch of the imagination to justify that much firepower to do their jobs when they are not a military or even para military agency. Look at local police and how they are fortifying themselves as if they are military when they are civil servants of the people, or supposed to be.

That's all. Thanks for your input and thanks for reading what I wrote. And I did read everything you wrote and I hope you and your loved ones stay safe, healthy and free.

 

[AlexBailey]

Police, FBI, IRS, etc... arming themselves like a militia? Of course they do. They have to be able to overpower anyone who takes up arms against them or the public.

Police are trained to treat every traffic stop as though the person they have pulled over is going to try to kill them. It would be foolish for them not to respond that way. Imagine being a cop with a public that is allowed to open-carry - it becomes perfectly okay for people to carry assault rifles in public. No intervention can be justified until a crime has been committed.

Public gatherings are a potential shooting gallery. Enjoy your freedom.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

I appreciate you breaking down all that I wrote and agreeing with most of what I wrote shows you aren't just one of the people who know nothing about firearms and yet want to see them abolished.

Yes those people exist, and they always will, worrying about them though is just fear mongering. The US loves it's fear mongering.

I'm aware of the time you spent but I'm not able to take the time to reply or debate everything you asked or made a point of.

The replys I made are not for debate, simply to show that your points are assailable, and not fact.

I made my points and you already have your answers and opinions and whatever I may say most likely won't change your thoughts or opinions. I'm not trying to change anyone. I'm just giving my thoughts and opinions from what I know either firsthand or from being as informed as possible by very questionable mainstream media, (which I very rarely watch or listen to) and a more reliable independent news, documentary, and other sources of information that give information that isn't biased and lets people see all sides of a story so we can make an informed decision on what stand to take on any given subject.

Yes you gave an opinion, and earlier on asked to be challenged on it. I did challenge it. You of course have no obligation to accept the challenge.

I will say one thing and that is this.... You wrote that no one is trying to eliminate firearms ownership from the people. You are right, they are not, not yet. A lot of laws and restrictions and trying to ban, are just the baby steps that little by little infringe on our rights to own firearms. Every time some story about a shooting, as they want to call "gun violence" which is something that is not possible in reality, the politicians and the non thinking sheeple start yelling and screaming about more laws and more bans and those are steps as they approve those little additions to laws, is just that much closer to outlawing firearms completely. I like you, know that will be difficult to make happen in this country but they will try and the way that so many crazy things keep happening that five, ten, years ago, we said that would never happen. People voluntarily believed and allowed lockdowns over a form of the Flu and believed the lies being told and obeyed when told not to question anything and not to listen to other scientists and healthcare workers. Who would ever think that Americans would let that happen if they were told that five, ten, twenty years ago?

As I ended my post, I made the point that over 80% of Americans want "something" done. I also state if something isn't done, the gun ban you seem to fear, will happen. Think about this, in the past 20 years the number of mass shootings has escalated beyond measure. All those "kids" who lived through this, are now or will soon be of voting age.

Do you think they will ever forget shitting or pissing themselves from fear while someone was hunting them? Hiding in a closet, or in a barricaded classroom, heart racing at every little noise?

The school drills for an active shooter? I still remember the drills in school for Nuclear attacks, the sound of the warning sirens, and those were drills! I can't imagine any of those who went through a mass shooting will ever forget!

No they will not, they will vote, and that vote may well determine the governments of states. Those states may then open up to an amendment to replace the 2nd amendment. There votes may well deliver enough states to ratify it.

Thanks for your input and thanks for reading what I wrote. And I did read everything you wrote and I hope you and your loved ones stay safe, healthy and free.

My family is safe, they don't live in your country, as such they don't fear school, police, or government. Your family is the one in danger, and it's a danger that could be fixed. If you wish it to be fixed, I suggest revising how you view the 2nd amendment. The types of firearms the general public should have access to, and the training and licencing they require before getting a firearm.

Last, clips are not magazines.

 

[NotAFool]

Yes those people exist, and they always will, worrying about them though is just fear mongering. The US loves it's fear mongering.

The replys I made are not for debate, simply to show that your points are assailable, and not fact.

Yes you gave an opinion, and earlier on asked to be challenged on it. I did challenge it. You of course have no obligation to accept the challenge.

As I ended my post, I made the point that over 80% of Americans want "something" done. I also state if something isn't done, the gun ban you seem to fear, will happen. Think about this, in the past 20 years the number of mass shootings has escalated beyond measure. All those "kids" who lived through this, are now or will soon be of voting age.

Do you think they will ever forget shitting or pissing themselves from fear while someone was hunting them? Hiding in a closet, or in a barricaded classroom, heart racing at every little noise?

The school drills for an active shooter? I still remember the drills in school for Nuclear attacks, the sound of the warning sirens, and those were drills! I can't imagine any of those who went through a mass shooting will ever forget!

No they will not, they will vote, and that vote may well determine the governments of states. Those states may then open up to an amendment to replace the 2nd amendment. There votes may well deliver enough states to ratify it.




My family is safe, they don't live in your country, as such they don't fear school, police, or government. Your family is the one in danger, and it's a danger that could be fixed. If you wish it to be fixed, I suggest revising how you view the 2nd amendment. The types of firearms the general public should have access to, and the training and licencing they require before getting a firearm.

Last, clips are not magazines.

You don't even live in the U. S. and you are trying to have a conversation about what goes on here?
You have nothing to say about anything that means anything.
You also brought up mass shootings and how the kids that had to go through those awful situations as if there are thousands or tens of thousands or a million of them. I don't know where you get your news from but there are way more killings of kids and teenagers by other kids and teenagers everyday in the cities that the Democrats run, Mayors, Governors, Senators, Congressmen, that they just ignore. Look up how many people are killed every weekend in places like Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Memphis, etc... and all or 99% of those killings are black on black using handguns mostly and more people are killed over a weekend in just one of thise cities than any mass shooting that has taken place. Also look up the actual number of mass shootings in schools in the U.S. . A mass shooting is four or more people being killed to be technical about it. I think you'd be surprised how few there actually have been. There shouldn't be any and the answer to that problem is have armed security and teachers trained and armed. Most schools in the larger cities with gang violence and other crimes have armed police officers on campus already. My high school when I was in school graduated in 1983, our vice principal was a Los Angeles Police Detective, who carried a gun. And there was almost always a police car and two cops in that car parked in the front of the school or driving around. There has never been a shooting at that school other than some gang related bullshit. No kids angry at the world or mom and dad shooting kids.
Why you think what you believe you know about anything that happens here in the U.S. is like me saying I know what goes on in whatever country you live in. It's completely irrelevant and would be stupid, narcissistic, very ignorant, and full of yourself or myself to feel that you know enough to give your opinion when you only know what propaganda your news and media outlets feed you and even worse if you are getting your information from our mainstream media news because anyone with a brain that thinks for itself pays no attention to the mainstream media.

One last thing, I don't have to worry about being safe because I am armed. I also am single and no kids so I don't have to protect or keep anyone safe except my neighbors and myself and most of my neighbors are also armed. This is The U.S. of A. and there are more armed citizens than there are armed people in our military. The people who are the unfortunate victims are those who don't want to own a gun and those places that have been zoned by the local city councils as gun free zones. Of course shooters are going to go to malls and schools that are "gun free zones" with signs that say that all over the place. That's inviting trouble. That is your anti gun people at work using their brains.
Maybe you should worry more about the problems that whatever country you live in has that needs to be fixed. I promise I won't tell you how things should be done where you live because I don't want to be a schmuck and think I know what goes on where you live.

 

[phrodeau]

I see that you didn’t mention Houston TX.

https://www.fox26houston.com/news/houston-leads-chicago-nyc-and-la-in-homicides-so-far-this-year.amp

 

[Fuzzy1975]

You don't even live in the U. S. and you are trying to have a conversation about what goes on here?

Yes that is exactly what is going on.

You have nothing to say about anything that means anything.

Why not? Since I am not a citizen, you claim I can't be knowledgeable about what is going on in the US?

You also brought up mass shootings and how the kids that had to go through those awful situations as if there are thousands or tens of thousands or a million of them.

Yes I did, since 2018 there have been 121 school shootings. The number of children directly exposed is around 100,000 alone since 2018.

I don't know where you get your news from but there are way more killings of kids and teenagers by other kids and teenagers everyday in the cities that the Democrats run, Mayors, Governors, Senators, Congressmen, that they just ignore.

I receive my news from several sources, obviously from many media source ( Router CBC BBC ABC to name a few), but also from my brother, a resident of the US, his children also residents of the US. I have many friends and work acquaintance from my time spent working in the US, who I still am contact in.

How does other people being "killed"but "guns"take away from my earlier points?

How does a city, state or federal government political affiliation matter to my previous points?

Look up how many people are killed every weekend in places like Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Memphis, etc... and all or 99% of those killings are black on black using handguns mostly and more people are killed over a weekend in just one of thise cities than any mass shooting that has taken place.

Why, all these "killings" are the reason polls show 80% of American citizens are in favour of changes to firearm regulations. Some push for a complete ban, others ( the majority) push for sane and sensible regulations. Which is also where I stand on firearms.

Also look up the actual number of mass shootings in schools in the U.S.

I did, and have. Many times, which numbers do you want? I used in this post, just a synopsis since 2018. The full and total number is available.

. A mass shooting is four or more people being killed to be technical about it. I think you'd be surprised how few there actually have been.

Few? lets put some perspective on this. First, to me one is too many. Do you disagree? ( yes you do, further down)
Second, in Canada we have had a total of 26 in our entire history from the 1600's. That number includes a couple that only involved knives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Canada

There shouldn't be any and the answer to that problem is have armed security and teachers trained and armed.

I agree that zero is the best answer. I disagree 100% that arming schools is the best answer. Several of the recent shootings had an armed presence, and yet "bang" students and teachers were shot and killed.

Most schools in the larger cities with gang violence and other crimes have armed police officers on campus already.

See my point above.

My high school when I was in school graduated in 1983, our vice principal was a Los Angeles Police Detective, who carried a gun. And there was almost always a police car and two cops in that car parked in the front of the school or driving around. There has never been a shooting at that school other than some gang related bullshit. No kids angry at the world or mom and dad shooting kids.

I hate to date when I was in school, so I won't. But my children never had armed guards at school, or violence. Why is that? Could it possibly be a cultural difference?

Maybe access to firearms is a little different between our perspective countries?
Could it be the regulations and training on firearms.
Canada has the 10th most armed populace in the world, and yet historically we have had less mass shootings in out entire history, than the US has had this year alone.

Why you think what you believe you know about anything that happens here in the U.S. is like me saying I know what goes on in whatever country you live in. It's completely irrelevant and would be stupid, narcissistic, very ignorant, and full of yourself or myself to feel that you know enough to give your opinion when you only know what propaganda your news and media outlets feed you and even worse if you are getting your information from our mainstream media news because anyone with a brain that thinks for itself pays no attention to the mainstream media.

So you feel you are not educated enough to comment on what is going on in my country? I could agree with you on that, given how you are currently attacking me,not my argument.

One last thing, I don't have to worry about being safe because I am armed.

Safe? yes, this goes back to my "culture of fear" that is promoted in the US. I have seen it first hand. Lived with it for years.

I also am single and no kids so I don't have to protect or keep anyone safe except my neighbors and myself and most of my neighbors are also armed.

Why would you feel the need to protect "your neighbours"? I have no need to worry about them, we have police, that is their role.

This is The U.S. of A. and there are more armed citizens than there are armed people in our military.

So? It doesn't seem to be helping reduce the rate of shootings at schools etc.

The people who are the unfortunate victims are those who don't want to own a gun and those places that have been zoned by the local city councils as gun free zones. Of course shooters are going to go to malls and schools that are "gun free zones" with signs that say that all over the place. That's inviting trouble.

Yes, and this goes back to my point, if Americans don't begin to address the situation, those gun banning folks may achieve enough support to elect politicians to open up to repealing the 2A.
My point in this "debate" is to try and show you this.
I own firearms, and our Government tried to take them away. They lost. Why, because our citizens showed the current rules work well. Supported politicians who felt that way, and got rid of Rock's dumbass law.

Our current regulations are enough that we have minimum crimes due to firearms. So the Feds only need to be reactive to action items, not all out bans.

That is your anti gun people at work using their brains.

Now why would you claim I am anti gun? your name say's "notafool". However you seem to be a bit foolish saying this particular statement about me.

Maybe you should worry more about the problems that whatever country you live in has that needs to be fixed.

I am worried about problems in my country. Right now 80% of criminal weapons collected by our law enforcement are traced back to YOUR country. The Government here just banned legal imports of handguns, simply because there are so many circulating in the illegal scene, we can't afford to have law abiding peoples handguns stolen and added to this amount, and have them replace them, adding to number.

You think that doesn't piss me off about your attitude and you just support for more firearms in the US, without some control on how they are bought, used and stored? You don't think I should be concerned when stolen American handguns cross the border and are used in crimes here?

I promise I won't tell you how things should be done where you live

Feel free to comment, unless other opinions are aired, it can be difficult to see the full picture, when you are part that picture. Our society is not perfect, and I always welcome a discussion or debate on it ( they are truly fun with suggardaddy...lol).

because I don't want to be a schmuck and think I know what goes on where you live.

So you think I am a schmuck...well you are entitled to that opinion. But I wonder why I became a schmuck in your eyes? Is it because you seem to have run the course on your points, and are now circling back?

Last, a couple points:

I did ask you two question,and you failed to answer in post #38 .

Also could you reply in individual paragraphs, instead of one long block of words. It is so much easier to read, and pick out your thoughts and answers etc when there are spaces between them.

 

[ky81nea]

https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-gun-violence-the-real-red-flags-that-no-one-talks-about

Listen i live in the country and i do understand issues with gun violence that is why i live in the middle of NO where but we have wild dogs, we have wolves, bears, coyotes that we must protect ourselves , our kids and our livestock from so we out here are NOT the problem and we NEED our fire arms so to put us in the same group as city dwellers is not right.

 

[HisArpy]

"Con Law" is mostly people finding ways to pretend things that are not actually IN the Constitution are "in there somewhere if you have the 'education' to find them.

The Constitution was written to be read and understood by 18th century farmers and merchants. There are no mysteries that require a law degree to decipher. His point is a valid one. If something so basic as forfeiture of Constitutional rights is not found specifically laid out in the document itself - it clearly was not intended to happen.

That said, I prefer felons to be limited, but I recognize that without an amendment describing those limits, it's all just arbitrary bullshit designed by those in control to satisfy their own whims or desires to remain in control.

The moment Americans accepted the premise that only "Constitutional Scholars" could understand it, and yielded to, "it's in there even though it's not" arguments... was the point we ceased to be governed by it. Today, the Constitution is whatever any 5 justices say it is, nothing more.

This isn't true. Not one single little bit.

The Constitution is plain, clear, and without controversy until/unless someone decides to muck around with it.

Gun laws are such an attempt to muck around with the Constitution. NO WHERE in our understanding of society is the government allowed to violate the law just because they believe they can. The Constitution is clear in that it is designed to be both the creation of government AND the limits on that Government. When government exceeds those limits it ceases to BE the legit government and becomes a rogue tyranny with the power of the police state to unlawfully support it.

The courts exist to ensure that doesn't happen by taking back the power any rogue government unlawfully seizes. Even when that usurpation of power is agreed to in both principle and action by some of those who sit in high judgment.

This is why the SCOTUS can overrule itself, and has done so, in order to ensure that the Constitution remains clear and without controversy in its language and meaning. The current spate of gun law decisions is where the rubber is finally meeting the road as the unlawful tyranny of the past is finally corrected.

"Shall not be infringed" means something. And that command is an absolute whether you agree with it or not.

 

[AlexBailey]

Listen i live in the country and i do understand issues with gun violence that is why i live in the middle of NO where but we have wild dogs, we have wolves, bears, coyotes that we must protect ourselves , our kids and our livestock from so we out here are NOT the problem and we NEED our fire arms so to put us in the same group as city dwellers is not right.

That is a perfect argument for why gun laws should be local policy rather than federal.

 

[HisArpy]

I think you are so desperate to disagree... that you are seeing differences that don't exist.

When I disagree it's because I view the world differently than most people do and when others make generalizations which are plainly wrong on their face I state my disagreement with those generalizations.

You say that the Constitution means whatever 5 justices say it means. That's plainly not true. Not in fact, not in analogy, and not in hyperbole. The Constitution means what it says. When mankind decides to "interpret" that meaning is when the controversy occurs. The courts exist to straighten that controversy out.

 

[HisArpy]

That is a perfect argument for why gun laws should be local policy rather than federal.

And yet abortion should be under Federal control?

 

[HisArpy]

Yes. You’re very special. You can stop now. I stopped reading after “differently than most people do.”

I decided you have nothing of value to say… so I won’t be indulging you further.

Whatever it is that floats yer boat.

https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIP.CGBX-0cNSUufMltgWR-_hAAAAA?w=179&h=180&c=7&r=0&o=5&dpr=1.1&pid=1.7