Gun Legislation, Crime, and Events

[Archie]

There was a lot more said and the video shows some of it.  As long as there are firearms, and there always will be deaths associated with them.  He compared it to the 40000 vehicle deaths each year.  Do we stop driving?  Do we give up the second amendment.  The majority of people are not giving up either.

[Archie]

I also realize that Charlie Kirk isn't someone posters here would listen to.  I didn't pay much attention to him either.  However, he did a great job of creating dialog with people and especially people with different views.  That was the whole point of his organization.  We need more people talking and less political violence in this country.

[chasfh]

15 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

 

Deepfake at work here, Bunker? Not really him?

[gehringer_2]

The human species initially developed skills at co-operation that have allowed it to become the dominant life-form on the planet. But this ability to cooperate began around only the smallest groupings. Cooperation was based on trust, which initially was primarily a matter shared genetics - literally, if you smelled like I did, I worked with you. The history of civilization has pretty much been one long struggle for mankind to learn to enlarge the circles of cooperation needed to accomplish ever greater quality of life for itself, vs the constant tendency to withdraw back into the clan or tribe or sect. The objective value of truth ultimately doesn't matter when it comes to tribal members from outside the tribe, and tribal members will never seek truth objectively as long as they are bound to the tribe. The only, but hard answer, is that when we create a society whose members begin to identify with the larger society around them. When they begin to accept the value of every other person, to see their destiny as tied to every other soul on the planet, then will they start to seek truth objectively instead of through their tribal filter.

Edited September 28 by gehringer_2

[gehringer_2]

12 minutes ago, Archie said:

There was a lot more said and the video shows some of it.  As long as there are firearms, and there always will be deaths associated with them.  He compared it to the 40000 vehicle deaths each year.  Do we stop driving?  Do we give up the second amendment.  The majority of people are not giving up either.

Sure that is the argument, and it is specious. Transportation is necessary to economic, and thus physical survival. Handguns are not. There is no analogy

But nice try to move the goalposts. 

Edited September 28 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

8 minutes ago, Archie said:

There was a lot more said and the video shows some of it.  As long as there are firearms, and there always will be deaths associated with them.  He compared it to the 40000 vehicle deaths each year.  Do we stop driving?  Do we give up the second amendment.  The majority of people are not giving up either.

A morally bankrupt individual making an intellectually bankrupt comparison between guns and cars? Must be another day in America.

And this whole idea of "Charlie was a Christian gentleman just trying to create honest dialogue" crap that people (not just you) have been trying to snow the rest of us with is just eye-rolling nonsense. His whole "prove me wrong" format was designed not to genuinely engage with differing viewpoints, but to create gotcha moments that would resonate on social media. He was was, after all, a social media influencer first and foremost. I promise you never once did he ever post any video of him getting smoked in a debate by anyone. The whole thing was an intellectually dishonest exercise from the word "go".

 

[oblong]

17 minutes ago, Archie said:

There was a lot more said and the video shows some of it.  As long as there are firearms, and there always will be deaths associated with them.  He compared it to the 40000 vehicle deaths each year.  Do we stop driving?  Do we give up the second amendment.  The majority of people are not giving up either.

Do you believe what he said is true, or not?  Do you believe he thinks (or thought) it true.  Your other points are irrelevant to that understanding.  If one thinks that’s a fair trade then you can’t whine or mourn when one gets popped on the neck from a lunatic who had easy access to it.  Every victim is someone to their family.  We don’t only mourn when it’s someone “famous”. 

[ben9753]

It went from “it’s made up left wing talking point” to “yeah, he’s actually right” on a dime. If he was right, why did you assume it was a left wing talking point until you were proven wrong?

[Archie]

12 minutes ago, ben9753 said:

It went from “it’s made up left wing talking point” to “yeah, he’s actually right” on a dime. If he was right, why did you assume it was a left wing talking point until you were proven wrong?

Because there was a lot more said than the one or two sentences the lefties like to post.  Are people willing to give up the their rights and the constitution?  When the constitution is gone so is the country.  I don't like people being killed with anything but its going to happen with or without guns.  

[Tigermojo]

All Americans should get a musket as the founding fathers intended.

[oblong]

19 minutes ago, Archie said:

Because there was a lot more said than the one or two sentences the lefties like to post.  Are people willing to give up the their rights and the constitution?  When the constitution is gone so is the country.  I don't like people being killed with anything but its going to happen with or without guns.  

So what he’s saying is true and therefore you should have no issue when peoole reaffirm that point?  Charlie just took one for the team. 

[Archie]

31 minutes ago, oblong said:

So what he’s saying is true and therefore you should have no issue when peoole reaffirm that point?  Charlie just took one for the team. 

Nice try...There is a lot more to what he said that puts it in context.  Basically there is a cost to everything and that is the result if we are to keep out constitutional rights.  

[Archie]

38 minutes ago, Tigermojo said:

All Americans should get a musket as the founding fathers intended.

Great idea.  I'll take a few as soon as people get rid of their motorized transportation and go back to horse and mule as their main source of transportation.

[Tigerbomb13]

49 minutes ago, Archie said:

Great idea.  I'll take a few as soon as people get rid of their motorized transportation and go back to horse and mule as their main source of transportation.

Again, why are we comparing something that’s soul purpose is to kill, with something that is for basic economic needs? People own these two things for different reasons, making this an intellectually dishonest argument. 

[oblong]

55 minutes ago, Archie said:

Nice try...There is a lot more to what he said that puts it in context.  Basically there is a cost to everything and that is the result if we are to keep out constitutional rights.  

Which is all contained in the quote of his I posted. It’s just that you are somehow against it but also for it.  Put another way when the real meaning is revealed and understood in its barest it’s embarrasses or shames you so you need to bark something about “context”.
 Nice try.  You are ok with dead kids scattered about in churches and schools as long as you and guys like these shooters can get your guns. 

[pfife]

I love how many times the "we gonna ban cars" has been posted here by different folks over the decades, each one thinking its the hammer of logic

Back in the day they also told me social security would be insolvent by 2017.

Edited September 29 by pfife

[Tigermojo]

14 minutes ago, pfife said:

I love how many times the "we gonna ban cars" has been posted here by different folks over the decades, each one thinking its the hammer of logic

Back in the day they also told me social security would be insolvent by 2017.

I enjoyed the mules for safe travel.

[oblong]

19 minutes ago, pfife said:

I love how many times the "we gonna ban cars" has been posted here by different folks over the decades, each one thinking its the hammer of logic

Back in the day they also told me social security would be insolvent by 2017.

Right up there with “we don’t have global warming. It was 45 degrees today on April 19….”

[chasfh]

3 hours ago, Archie said:

Because there was a lot more said than the one or two sentences the lefties like to post.  Are people willing to give up the their rights and the constitution?  When the constitution is gone so is the country.

At least until Trump himself suspends the Constitution, which is definitely going to happen, at which point the new maga orthodoxy will be that it never was that good an idea anyway.

3 hours ago, Archie said:

I don't like people being killed with anything but its going to happen with or without guns.  

No, it's not. Get rid of guns and a whole lot fewer people will be killed, since 79% of homicides are by gun (17,900 out of 22,800), and 55% of suicides are by gun (27,300 out of 49,300).

Edited September 29 by chasfh

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, pfife said:

I love how many times the "we gonna ban cars" has been posted here by different folks over the decades, each one thinking its the hammer of logic

Back in the day they also told me social security would be insolvent by 2017.

you know what - If the 2A fans want to push that analogy, my answer is  I'd be happy as a clam if we had just as many rules and safety regs on guns, ammo, and gun owners as we have on cars, motor fuel, drivers, and drivers' licenses.

Edited September 29 by gehringer_2

[gehringer_2]

4 minutes ago, chasfh said:

At least until Trump himself suspends the Constitution, which is definitely going to happen, at which point the new maga orthodoxy will be that it never was that good an idea anyway.

and the funny part is that Trump would be on board for gun bans and confiscation in a NY minute as part of any plan his lizard brain could cook up to stay in power.

[pfife]

13 hours ago, Archie said:

I also realize that Charlie Kirk isn't someone posters here would listen to.  I didn't pay much attention to him either.  However, he did a great job of creating dialog with people and especially people with different views.  That was the whole point of his organization.  We need more people talking and less political violence in this country.

You keep telling yourself that.

[Archie]

12 hours ago, chasfh said:

...No, it's not. Get rid of guns and a whole lot fewer people will be killed, since 79% of homicides are by gun (17,900 out of 22,800), and 55% of suicides are by gun (27,300 out of 49,300).

Firearms don't kill people, people kill people.  Taking away firearms (and its something that will never happen) would only cause people to change their method. How many guns did McVeigh use? None and bombs are illegal.  Do you think people will suddenly have a change of heart about killing or violence if their method of causing it changes?  No, they will just change how they do it.

People will no longer be able to defend themselves against aggressors.  I know the lefties think people should not be able to defend themselves and should just laydown and die but that won't happen either.  Eliminating firearms would only cause more problems and the vast majority of gun owners would never give up their guns anyway.   Remember what happened when Germany didn't allow the Jewish people to own firearms in the 1930's.  So far I've not heard any good argument why firearms should be eliminated. 

[ben9753]

holy logical fallacy batman

[CMRivdogs]

42 minutes ago, Archie said:

Firearms don't kill people, people kill people.  Taking away firearms (and its something that will never happen) would only cause people to change their method. How many guns did McVeigh use? None and bombs are illegal.  Do you think people will suddenly have a change of heart about killing or violence if their method of causing it changes?  No, they will just change how they do it.

People will no longer be able to defend themselves against aggressors.  I know the lefties think people should not be able to defend themselves and should just laydown and die but that won't happen either.  Eliminating firearms would only cause more problems and the vast majority of gun owners would never give up their guns anyway.   Remember what happened when Germany didn't allow the Jewish people to own firearms in the 1930's.  So far I've not heard any good argument why firearms should be eliminated. 

To most of us here gun control does not equal gun a ban. You keep harping on cars. Nobody wants to ban cars, and I would guess that 99% of those on this board are not in favor of banning firearms. And I would guess nearly 90% or more of the general population feels the same way.

If you want to drive you need a license and if you get caught there is a price to pay. The same with traffic laws. If you own a car, most states require some sort of licensing and registration. Not to mention vehicle inspections and so on. Why do you oppose the same for firearms. If you want to own a gun you need to pass a stringent test showing 1) you are familiar with the rules and regulations, 2) you are competent enough to use the tool properly. Members of the armed forces, police forces require such training so why just pass out guns to every Tom, **** and Archie?

That's all most of us are talking about RESPONSIBILITY. You're not handing your car keys to a 12 year old or to your 80 something relative who may not be competent any more to drive. So why allow that 12 year old or any relative who shows signs of mental distress to handle a weapon.

All most of us want here is some accountability. And common sense. That said there are too many assholes on the road who ignore speed limits and other auto safety issues who don't deserve to get behind the wheel. I'm all for taking both their guns and vehicles away from them.
 

Edited September 29 by CMRivdogs