said_aouita
Posts: 8,532
Jul 22, 2012 10:55pm
It would make it harder for them to get guns.WebFire;1231245 wrote:Making guns illegal wouldn't keep guns out of the hands of bad guys.
TedSheckler
Posts: 3,974
Jul 22, 2012 11:37pm
said_aouita;1231248 wrote:It would make it harder for them to get guns.
And it would infringe on the 2nd amendment for law abiding citizens to own guns.
tk421
Posts: 8,500
Jul 22, 2012 11:43pm
how do you figure that? I don't understand the logic, just because the federal government infringes on our Constitutional rights and bans firearms, the hundreds of millions of guns already in the country are going to magically disappear? Is Obama going to wave a magic wand and make all the terrible evil deadly weapons go bye bye?said_aouita;1231248 wrote:It would make it harder for them to get guns.
You think that if firearms were completely outlawed and people were banned from having them, they would meakly hand them over? How's that going in places like Chicago? How many gang bangers have come and voluntarily turned in their weapons? :laugh:
M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Jul 22, 2012 11:45pm
I'm pretty sure guns aren't illegal in Hawaii.
End of Line
Posts: 6,867
Jul 23, 2012 12:03am
Reps. Also if they outlaw guns, only outlaws have guns.ccrunner609;1231251 wrote:guns dont kill people, people kill people.
tk421
Posts: 8,500
Jul 23, 2012 1:28am
I'm pretty sure more than 12 people died because of a car that very same day, why no outrage and calls to ban vehicles? After all, 1 ton of steel moving at 60+ mph is a hell of a deadly weapon, and we all know it's the tool that is the problem, not the person.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
Jul 23, 2012 8:41am
Is it hard for drug users to get drugs?said_aouita;1231248 wrote:It would make it harder for them to get guns.
OSH
Posts: 4,145
Jul 23, 2012 10:00am
I don't like to get into big political discussions over a message board, but this is an argument I've always had.tk421;1231334 wrote:I'm pretty sure more than 12 people died because of a car that very same day, why no outrage and calls to ban vehicles? After all, 1 ton of steel moving at 60+ mph is a hell of a deadly weapon, and we all know it's the tool that is the problem, not the person.
There are so many more "deadly" things than a gun (no matter what type of gun). There's vehicles, swimming pools, tobacco, alcohol, falling out of beds (450 people a year) and vending machines (13 people a year). Why not address those issues?
If you take away EVERY gun, even from the criminals who use them, there would still be violence. Taking away guns won't curb the violence, those that want to do damage will just figure out a way to hurt more and more people by other means. Figure out a way to ban criminals and we'll see less gun violence.
cruiser_96
Posts: 7,536
Jul 23, 2012 10:04am
This dude is destroying my stereotypes.TedSheckler;1229980 wrote:Hey! Nice detective work. You got the "white guy" part right.
hasbeen
Posts: 6,504
Jul 23, 2012 10:12am
http://honolulupd.org/info/gunlaw.htmsaid_aouita;1231225 wrote:What countries have a higher murder rate than the USA and are guns legal there? Do you believe if guns were harder to get their would be less gun related deaths?
A few years old but I also found this-
Highest gun related death per capita: DC, where guns are legal
Lowest gun related death per capita: Hawaii, where guns are illegal
(link)
http://archives.starbulletin.com/2008/04/26/editorial/editorial01.html
guns aren't illegal in hawaii. may be stricter, but not illegal.
BigAppleBuckeye
Posts: 2,935
Jul 23, 2012 10:57am
Apologies if this was already posted ... but thoughts on this post by Jason Alexander? http://www.twitlonger.com/show/if2nht
I'd like to preface this long tweet by saying that my passion comes from my deepest sympathy and shared sorrow with yesterday's victims and with the utmost respect for the people and the police/fire/medical/political forces of Aurora and all who seek to comfort and aid these victims.
This morning, I made a comment about how I do not understand people who support public ownership of assault style weapons like the AR-15 used in the Colorado massacre. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15
That comment, has of course, inspired a lot of feedback. There have been many tweets of agreement and sympathy but many, many more that have been challenging at the least, hostile and vitriolic at the worst.
Clearly, the angry, threatened and threatening, hostile comments are coming from gun owners and gun advocates. Despite these massacres recurring and despite the 100,000 Americans that die every year due to domestic gun violence - these people see no value to even considering some kind of control as to what kinds of weapons are put in civilian hands.
Many of them cite patriotism as their reason - true patriots support the Constitution adamantly and wholly. Constitution says citizens have the right to bear arms in order to maintain organized militias. I'm no constitutional scholar so here it is from the document itself:
As passed by the Congress:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
So the patriots are correct, gun ownership is in the constitution - if you're in a well-regulated militia. Let's see what no less a statesman than Alexander Hamilton had to say about a militia:
"A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss."
Or from Merriam-Webster dictionary:
Definition of MILITIA
1
a : a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency
b : a body of citizens organized for military service
2
: the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service
The advocates of guns who claim patriotism and the rights of the 2nd Amendment - are they in well-regulated militias? For the vast majority - the answer is no. ....
Jason Alexander
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Jul 23, 2012 11:08am
"...The advocates of guns who claim patriotism and the rights of the 2nd Amendment - are they in well-regulated militias? ..."
It's the ability and right to be in one as opposed to being in one that's protected.
It's the ability and right to be in one as opposed to being in one that's protected.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
Jul 23, 2012 11:09am
The Constitution is not saying you have to be a member of a militia. Derp.
Also, I laugh at people who think outlawing these guns would do anything.
Also, I laugh at people who think outlawing these guns would do anything.
Rotinaj
Posts: 7,699
Jul 23, 2012 11:12am
It would most certainly do something. Not much though I'm guessing.WebFire;1231595 wrote:The Constitution is not saying you have to be a member of a militia. Derp.
Also, I laugh at people who think outlawing these guns would do anything.
TedSheckler
Posts: 3,974
Jul 23, 2012 11:13am
Out of touch and clueless. He needs to stick to what Larry David writes for him.
Devils Advocate
Posts: 4,539
Jul 23, 2012 1:11pm
The Westboro Baptist church is at it again......
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/22/westboro-baptist-church-aurora-shooting-vigil_n_1693375.html
#godsenttheshooter
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/22/westboro-baptist-church-aurora-shooting-vigil_n_1693375.html
#godsenttheshooter
Fly4Fun
Posts: 7,730
Jul 23, 2012 1:17pm
I wish people wouldn't even link articles about them. I wish the news would stop giving them coverage.
They are the equivalent of internet trolls.
Some people are just terrible individuals who prey on the tragedies of others to push their own agenda.
They are the equivalent of internet trolls.
Some people are just terrible individuals who prey on the tragedies of others to push their own agenda.
Devils Advocate
Posts: 4,539
Jul 23, 2012 2:00pm
Oh... I think they might be a little Worse than internet trolls.Fly4Fun;1231687 wrote:I wish people wouldn't even link articles about them. I wish the news would stop giving them coverage.
They are the equivalent of internet trolls.
Some people are just terrible individuals who prey on the tragedies of others to push their own agenda.
And if I had known that you were giong to QQ about it, I would have given it it's own thread.
Fly4Fun
Posts: 7,730
Jul 23, 2012 2:04pm
Ya, I can agree that they are worse than internet trolls as they are hurting real people who are grieving. My comparison was to say that they behave in the same way, making ridiculous statements in an attempt to receive attention to their point of view.Devils Advocate;1231713 wrote:Oh... I think they might be a little Worse than internet trolls.
And if I had known that you were giong to QQ about it, I would have given it it's own thread.
And I was just responding to your post with my thoughts on it. Is that not the point?
Mulva
Posts: 13,650
Jul 23, 2012 2:11pm
A vending machine is more deadly than a gun, huh?OSH;1231520 wrote: and vending machines (13 people a year).
Devils Advocate
Posts: 4,539
Jul 23, 2012 2:32pm
If your point was that you wished I wouldn't post a link, I was going to blow this effin thread up. but if it wasn't, consider it a passive agressive post.Fly4Fun;1231720 wrote:.
And I was just responding to your post with my thoughts on it. Is that not the point?
Fly4Fun
Posts: 7,730
Jul 23, 2012 2:45pm
It wasn't targeted specifically at you. It was more to the overall theme of my post that they are like trolls in effect that they want the attention. The more they receive, the more they will act in the way that is getting them attention.Devils Advocate;1231750 wrote:If your point was that you wished I wouldn't post a link, I was going to blow this effin thread up. but if it wasn't, consider it a passive agressive post.
While you not posting the link probably wouldn't have any kind of noticeable impact on the amount of attention they receive. It was more of just an illustration.
tk421
Posts: 8,500
Jul 23, 2012 2:50pm
For those of you who think an "assault" weapons ban will do anything, how did the other ban from 94-04 do? I bet not much. I hate that term, "assault" weapon. It was coined by the media before the ban in 94, and now it's stuck. Semi auto is not assault weapon, assault weapons MUST include full auto. Those are class 3 and include tons of paperwork, a background check, and a tax stamp. You can't just stroll into a gun shop and by an "assault" weapon. Wish the stupid media would quit misleading the gullible American public.
hasbeen
Posts: 6,504
Jul 23, 2012 3:14pm
I wish the American public wasn't so damn gullible.tk421;1231761 wrote:For those of you who think an "assault" weapons ban will do anything, how did the other ban from 94-04 do? I bet not much. I hate that term, "assault" weapon. It was coined by the media before the ban in 94, and now it's stuck. Semi auto is not assault weapon, assault weapons MUST include full auto. Those are class 3 and include tons of paperwork, a background check, and a tax stamp. You can't just stroll into a gun shop and by an "assault" weapon. Wish the stupid media would quit misleading the gullible American public.
tk421
Posts: 8,500
Jul 23, 2012 3:56pm
I think we've got a better chance of Richard Simmons marrying a woman and having kids than that ever happening. Maybe we should have elections like American Idol, that seems to be the only way to keep anyone's attention. Can have the candidates go up and sing a number, do a little dance and you can call in and pick which one you like best. Probably would be about the same result.hasbeen;1231780 wrote:I wish the American public wasn't so damn gullible.