LOCKED: George Floyd

posted by BR1986FB

I agree with what you're saying about regulations, check up's, etc but the NRA and other organizations vehemently won't see it that way.

Of course they won’t. Doesn’t mean they will win the argument though. The amendment is just an amendment, it can always be changed again and again — or repealed (it won’t ). But I don’t think it’s out of the question Congress/senate/democrat president get something pushed through getting back more to the roots of the right. Whether you agree or not, that’s a very real possibility.

posted by justincredible

I own one gun that isn't semi-automatic. 

Yeah, that’s my bad. I fully meant the automatic. No issues with the semi ones that reload automatically, but I think pulling a trigger should release a single bullet, not 20.

Are you aware of the restrictions on automatic weapons? I have no qualms with or fears of anyone that legally owns an automatic weapon.

New York Mayor doesnt realize that he is part of the problem. 

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said several incidents caught on video with police including an officer who drew his gun during protests, a NYPD vehicle moving into a crowd, an officer pushing a woman and more are under investigation.

With regards to the police officer with the gun, he describes the officer in the “middle of a situation that admittedly looked chaotic” but as protesters were in front of the police officer, he drew his gun yesterday. Seeing that video “was absolutely unacceptable.” There will be an “immediate” full investigation of that incident. He noted a superior officer immediately stepped in and moved that officer away from the crowd. “That officer should have his gun and badge taken away from him today. There will be an investigation immediately to determine larger consequences.” 

The video of the vehicle moving through a crowd is under investigation internally within the NYPD, and by the independent review the NYC Mayor set up with the corporation council and department of investigation commissioner. “That was so troubling to the people of this city," de Blasio said about this incident.

He added: “There is no situations where a police vehicle should drive into a crowd of protesters or new Yorkers of any kind. It is dangerous it is unacceptable.”

De Blasio said that videos of an officer pushing a woman to the ground and officers opening a police car door and hitting a protesters are "under review right now.”

“Discipline must be meted out in any situation it is merited," the mayor said.

De Blasio added, “there are some" police officers "who do not belong in this job, and there are some that use violence when they shouldn’t, there are some that are disrespectful to people they serve, there are some that harbor racism in their hearts, these people should not be in the police force and its our job to get them out.”

posted by like_that

Actually, the constitution and specifically the 2nd amendment protects our god given birth right (if you don't believe in god take away "god" and it still applies) to own arms.  There is nothing about purchasing a gun out of necessity.  Also not to nit pick, but you also said you learn toward the original language of the amendment, but then contradict yourself by saying "someone actually regulating all the guns in your state/county that are owned. Yearly check-ups, etc."  That's the exact opposite point of the 2A.  The militia isn't regulated by the government.  The militia is made out of individuals.  

posted by justincredible

Indeed. Regulated in that time did not mean the govt got to tell you what you could or couldn't own. Private citizens owned warships when the 2A was written.

I want it to be regulated by a private citizen, appointed by the “militia”. Not the government. Regulating themselves, so to speak. Not to make it sound like a club...but like a club lol.

posted by like_that

Bones Jones is one of the few guys who doesn’t need a gun lmao.
 

https://twitter.com/chisanga_malata/status/1267398536322338816?s=21

JR held his own, too.

I don't care who it is.  If it's a professional athlete, you run.  They're probably able to stomp your ass.

(Or don't damage property in the first place.)
 

posted by justincredible

I like this guy.

https://twitter.com/MoneyTeamAlpha/status/1267331151699554304

Unfortunately, the part about seeing people inciting violence is probably necessary.
 

posted by SportsAndLady

A gun will never be a necessity for me. So your comment about it being a necessity is maybe accurate for some but not all. 

By extension, are you also confident that you'll never need assistance from anyone with a gun?  I mean, I know the police aren't really high on anyone's trust radar these days, but you just don't think that'll ever be necessary?

Nobody will ever want to beat you within an inch of your life?

Nobody will ever break into your house armed?  If you see their face, telling them they can take whatever they want might not be enough.  Or maybe they get antsy and start shooting once they know you see them, and you don't have a chance to start a dialogue about how they can have whatever they want.

Nobody with some cognitive impairment will go on an assault or murder spree while you're out and about?

Most people in America probably go through life without ever needing one (by most, I just mean over 50%, not some overwhelming majority), but if you count the people who possibly stopped any assault or aggression against themselves by wielding one, the number is probably higher than you or I think.

And I'd bet that anyone who has needed one will/would have been glad to have one in that moment.
 

posted by SportsAndLady

I skimmed through this. You’re really trying super hard to be Otrap aren’t you?

HEY!

/lol

posted by justincredible

George Floyd's brother speaks.

https://twitter.com/jason_howerton/status/1267466257344933888

I get why people are angry.  I get why people are demonstrating, protesting, rioting, and maybe even looting.  Doesn't make it all okay, but even in the midst of anger, I hope people have enough of a moment of clarity to consider this.

I'm a militia of one and have regulated myself. I can get on board with that.

posted by like_that

Those numbers are a bit exaggerated, but sure.  Are you implying the media is overplaying the riots?  Big possibility considering theri track record.  I am no longer in DC, so I can't personally speak to it, but a lot of my friends don't seem to think it's being overplayed and a lot of them are pretty scared the rioting is going to work its way to their homes.  You do bring a good point that there are bad apples in this protest just like there are bad apples in our law enforcement.  I don't think anyone is being fair if they only apply the bad apple argument to one side.

Overall Justin's post above yours said it better than me.  I can't get behind the "it will never happen to me" attitude, especially with the shit going on now. I always thought it was a good idea to arm yourself and this situation makes that argument stronger.   I will agree to disagree with you personally that if you don't want to own a gun you are free to do so.  I will take the insurance policy.  I am willing to bet the people living in the riot cities wish they had that insurance policy right now. 

Maybe “it will never happen to me” was poorly worded on my part—but I made my comment because I live in a heavily guarded high rise on the 30th floor. I am extremely confident that no one is going to even get to my door, let alone get in the door. I mean look at the videos of magnificent mile on Saturday, if I was in any danger, that would have been it! 

And of course the media is overplaying the riots lol that’s what they do. There were so many peaceful protests all across the country but they kept showing people getting pulled from their vehicles, cops being dicks and having shit flung at them. It was such a small % of the protesting but that’s what it all became about. Do I think the riots were serious? Of course. Do I think the media fed the fire and spread fear? Of course. 
 

You ever notice when something comes up now a days, be it covid or these protests, that it’s THE WORLD IS ENDING! And then some time passes and all is good. That’s because of the media—they do that on purpose so people will start watching the news again. In a few weeks, this will all blow over and we’ll look back and say wow that was blown way out of proportion. (Just like we probably will with covid)

posted by SportsAndLady

Maybe “it will never happen to me” was poorly worded on my part—but I made my comment because I live in a heavily guarded high rise on the 30th floor.

:)

Otrap—you really gotta stop with the multi quote lol makes it hard for me to quote what you responded to me. In regards to your response to my quote:

That’s extremely unfair to make the argument of will I ever need someone with a gun. Especially if it’s the police. Of course I’ll Maybe need an armed police officer one day. Hell I had two gang members break into my house in 2014 and steal all our electronics. Thankfully my door was locked but my two roommates doors were not locked and they woke up to dudes standing by their beds. My roommates complied and gave them what they asked for and they left. We called cops, they said there were multiple break ins similar to this so they concluded gang initiation of “whoever can bring back the most electronics gets in” type thing. Cops showed up right away and we were glad they did. I’m NOT anti-gun. I’m just saying I don’t think I’ll ever own a gun because I can’t see a reason why I’d need one in a high rise. If I ever move, maybe that’ll change. But even then, I don’t think I’d have the ability to shoot someone. 

posted by justincredible

:)

Lol. 
 

I got a good deal on it. One of my clients sold it to me for practically nothing because he has “fuck you money”. I’m not a baller

posted by Laley23

 

posted by justincredible

Indeed. Regulated in that time did not mean the govt got to tell you what you could or couldn't own. Private citizens owned warships when the 2A was written.

I want it to be regulated by a private citizen, appointed by the “militia”. Not the government. Regulating themselves, so to speak. Not to make it sound like a club...but like a club lol.

 

lol gotcha.  I misread your post then.  I can't and will never get behind anyone other than myself regulating my own property, but this is much better than the Government regulating it.  I am with Justin, I am currently a militia of 1, but it can turn into a larger militia is needed (note: pretend I am not in Italy right now lol). 

posted by SportsAndLady

Maybe “it will never happen to me” was poorly worded on my part—but I made my comment because I live in a heavily guarded high rise on the 30th floor. I am extremely confident that no one is going to even get to my door, let alone get in the door. I mean look at the videos of magnificent mile on Saturday, if I was in any danger, that would have been it! 

And of course the media is overplaying the riots lol that’s what they do. There were so many peaceful protests all across the country but they kept showing people getting pulled from their vehicles, cops being dicks and having shit flung at them. It was such a small % of the protesting but that’s what it all became about. Do I think the riots were serious? Of course. Do I think the media fed the fire and spread fear? Of course. 
 

You ever notice when something comes up now a days, be it covid or these protests, that it’s THE WORLD IS ENDING! And then some time passes and all is good. That’s because of the media—they do that on purpose so people will start watching the news again. In a few weeks, this will all blow over and we’ll look back and say wow that was blown way out of proportion. (Just like we probably will with covid)

Not everyone has the luxury of your position though.  For instance DC there aren't many high rise apartments.  Whether you are extremely rich, average, or poor, most people are living in row houses.  The security isn't there for them outside of owning a gun.  Even before riots, I don't think I would ever bank on the cops protecting me 24/7.

I agree on the media though.  Both sides for the last 20+ years have been chipping away and dividing the country day by day.  They deserve a lot of credit for what is going on today.  I always say cable news and now social media is one of the worst additions to our country. 

posted by like_that

lol gotcha.  I misread your post then.  I can't and will never get behind anyone other than myself regulating my own property, but this is much better than the Government regulating it.  I am with Justin, I am currently a militia of 1, but it can turn into a larger militia is needed (note: pretend I am not in Italy right now lol). 

posted by SportsAndLady

Maybe “it will never happen to me” was poorly worded on my part—but I made my comment because I live in a heavily guarded high rise on the 30th floor. I am extremely confident that no one is going to even get to my door, let alone get in the door. I mean look at the videos of magnificent mile on Saturday, if I was in any danger, that would have been it! 

And of course the media is overplaying the riots lol that’s what they do. There were so many peaceful protests all across the country but they kept showing people getting pulled from their vehicles, cops being dicks and having shit flung at them. It was such a small % of the protesting but that’s what it all became about. Do I think the riots were serious? Of course. Do I think the media fed the fire and spread fear? Of course. 
 

You ever notice when something comes up now a days, be it covid or these protests, that it’s THE WORLD IS ENDING! And then some time passes and all is good. That’s because of the media—they do that on purpose so people will start watching the news again. In a few weeks, this will all blow over and we’ll look back and say wow that was blown way out of proportion. (Just like we probably will with covid)

Not everyone has the luxury of your position though.  For instance DC there aren't many high rise apartments.  Whether you are extremely rich, average, or poor, most people are living in row houses.  The security isn't there for them outside of owning a gun.  Even before riots, I don't think I would ever bank on the cops protecting me 24/7.

I agree on the media though.  Both sides for the last 20+ years have been chipping away and dividing the country day by day.  They deserve a lot of credit for what is going on today.  I always say cable news and now social media is one of the worst additions to our country. 

 

Yes, my comment isn’t for everyone. It’s just for me personally because someone asked if I’d ever need a gun to protect myself. Obviously other people need them and that’s perfectly fine I’m not against that at all. 

posted by SportsAndLady

Otrap—you really gotta stop with the multi quote lol makes it hard for me to quote what you responded to me. In regards to your response to my quote:

That’s extremely unfair to make the argument of will I ever need someone with a gun. Especially if it’s the police. Of course I’ll Maybe need an armed police officer one day. Hell I had two gang members break into my house in 2014 and steal all our electronics. Thankfully my door was locked but my two roommates doors were not locked and they woke up to dudes standing by their beds. My roommates complied and gave them what they asked for and they left. We called cops, they said there were multiple break ins similar to this so they concluded gang initiation of “whoever can bring back the most electronics gets in” type thing. Cops showed up right away and we were glad they did. I’m NOT anti-gun. I’m just saying I don’t think I’ll ever own a gun because I can’t see a reason why I’d need one in a high rise. If I ever move, maybe that’ll change. But even then, I don’t think I’d have the ability to shoot someone. 

LOL Noted.  I use the multi-quote feature mostly for expedience, since I'm not on all the time.  Helps me catch up.

I know you're not anti-gun.  I assure you I'm not accusing you of being anti-gun.

Suppose those robbers (burglars sounds wrong, since it involved a planned confrontation?) had killed your roommates after they got the stuff, so they couldn't be identified.  I can appreciate a good response time from the cops, but I daresay that, with the thieves already in the place, their response time probably isn't THAT good.

And what about when you're out of your place?  I can understand the security of a place like yours being robust enough for peace of mind, but I'd wager you're not an agoraphobic hermit.  I'm sure you go out.  Work, dinners, bars, coffee shops, etc. are probably more vulnerable than your home, not to speak of the transit to and from such places.

I'm not saying you should feel any true obligation to have one, but the confidence with which you said you'd (probably) never need one caught my attention.

I brought up the extension of need of people who have guns to mostly just illustrate that if you think you might ever need a person with a gun, it'd likely be faster to be that person with a gun.  As such, if time is ever an element, you might indeed find yourself in a position of needing a gun, whether or not you have one.

But the beauty of liberty is not just the freedom to exercise a right, but the freedom to refrain from exercising a right, so I assure you I'm not here to push you into changing your mind about whether or not to own one.  Do your thing.

posted by Laley23

Yeah, that’s my bad. I fully meant the automatic. No issues with the semi ones that reload automatically, but I think pulling a trigger should release a single bullet, not 20.

Same here with semi-auto's. Was more referring to auto's until I realized it would be near to impossible to get one unless you modified a semi.

Also agree on the "self regulating" when it comes to the government. Those a-holes are already up in our business enough. Pisses me off that we pay as much taxes as we do. Don't want anyone telling me what I can/can't own if it were to come to guns.

posted by Laley23

I’m not sure how you can say you are Pro-2A, and then say this isn’t the time to need a gun. 

I am pro the entire constitution/amendments, but lean more towards the actual language of 2A — someone actually regulating all the guns in your state/county that are owned. Yearly check-ups, etc.

Don’t need to take all the guns, but no need for an auto or semi-auto. I understand it wouldn’t happen overnight, but over time (a long time, like a generation) I think you could eliminate a majority of them from the country.

This is the worst I have ever seen our country. Granted I’m only 34, but it’s a really sad and scary time. I would own a shotgun/handgun if I could, but there is not much of a chance to stay married if I did lol. 

If you believe the original language of the 2A allows for someone to “regulate” with “years checkups” on our guns then I don’t think you have read it and/or the commentary around it’s wording by the founding fathers that wrote it. 
 

The “shall not be infringed” part comes to mind. 

posted by Laley23

As it stands, yes. But no rights are being infringed on if the law changes. People forget the first part of that amendment. That the right to bear arms, as written, coincides with a well regulated militia. My point is, I think we need to have that part of it be much more, well, regulated. 

No, read again the “well regulated militia” was given as an EXAMPLE” of why we can bear arms. It was not the only reason. It was just one reason given. 

posted by Laley23

Yeah, that’s my bad. I fully meant the automatic. No issues with the semi ones that reload automatically, but I think pulling a trigger should release a single bullet, not 20.

And no civilian gun that you can buy is automatic. No gun shoots 20 rounds with one pull of the trigger. All civilian guns (well, basically all but that is a whole story) are semi-auto. 1 pull equals 1 bullet. 

posted by jmog

No, read again the “well regulated militia” was given as an EXAMPLE” of why we can bear arms. It was not the only reason. It was just one reason given. 

More or less.  It was sort of set up as a foundational reason the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.  In effect, it'd be like saying, "Because a well-regulated militia is necessary for a free state, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed."

So you're right; it doesn't make the latter contingent on the former.  The former is why, in their view, it is necessarily a right they were going to protect explicitly in the Bill of Rights.

Frankly, though, even if you wanted to make the claim that a well-regulated militia was necessary for any right to bear arms, how does one form a well-regulated militia without arms?  Arms are, in effect, necessary for any such militia.  Otherwise, it's basically an outdoors club.