Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

A firearm question for you LeftiesFollow

#77 Dec 25 2012 at 5:10 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,883 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
dark lord.


Racist.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#78 Dec 25 2012 at 5:16 PM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
TirithRR wrote:
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
dark lord.


Racist.
You just wait till Obama starts wearing some ridiculous gothic armor and wielding a giant mace. It's going to happen any day now I tell you.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#79 Dec 25 2012 at 6:32 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,286 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
cidbahamut wrote:
I seem to recall there being phrasing about a regulated militia in that document.

That's where I always get stuck, as a non-US citizen. Surely the fact you now have actual Armed Forces negates the need for Militia. So, why again would your average Joe need military grade firearms?
Nonono, Obama could promote himself to dictator any minute and then the army will serve him and the guns people have in their homes will be needed for the militia so they can fight back against the dark lord.

To be fair that is how it actually goes down in a lot of countries. It's part of why I don't support a wholesale ban on firearms, but that doesn't stop me from recognizing the fact that the vast majority of people in this nation have no need for firearms and/or should not be trusted with firearms.
____________________________
Server: Midgardsormr
Occupation: Reckless Red Mage

IcookPizza wrote:

I think RDM's neurotic omniscience is sooooooo worth including in any alliance.
#80 Dec 25 2012 at 7:37 PM Rating: Excellent
******
27,272 posts
cidbahamut wrote:
Quote:
Nonono, Obama could promote himself to dictator any minute and then the army will serve him and the guns people have in their homes will be needed for the militia so they can fight back against the dark lord.
To be fair that is how it actually goes down in a lot of countries.
Not in first world countries and if you honestly think the chance of that happening in America is at all realistic you're just bloody stupid.

Edited, Dec 26th 2012 2:38am by Aethien
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#81 Dec 25 2012 at 8:16 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
cidbahamut wrote:
Quote:
Nonono, Obama could promote himself to dictator any minute and then the army will serve him and the guns people have in their homes will be needed for the militia so they can fight back against the dark lord.
To be fair that is how it actually goes down in a lot of countries.
Not in first world countries and if you honestly think the chance of that happening in America is at all realistic you're just bloody stupid.

Edited, Dec 26th 2012 2:38am by Aethien


Ditto.. Look at much problem he's having with the "fiscal cliff", you think not having guns would change that? Besides, that contradicts the "any item is a weapon" counter.
#82 Dec 25 2012 at 11:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Totem wrote:
So the US Constitution is a document worthy of derision? Because as of right now, the 2nd Amendment is has codified exactly that-- the acquisition and ownership of objects that can under certain conditions dispense lethal force. But to judge from your answer, I'll go out on a limb and say that you believe it is a "living document" and suseceptable to revisions and adjustments that change with the cultural winds of the moment. Is that an accurate assessment of your position?


The 2nd Amendment starts "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state...". It was written at a time when a Militia was more than a laughable way to secure a state. That no longer being the case, private ownership of guns should be regulated.

I'm fine with handgun's for defense. Handguns, Rifles, & Shotguns for hunting. I think all gun owners need to pass a safety test (including a mental health screening), get a license, & be retested every 5-10 tears in order to maintain ownership of said guns. I think one stipulation of owning a gun should be a check to ensure proper storage of the gun(s), I don't think its ok that 6 states don't even have laws on the books regarding mental health & gun ownership. I REALLY don't think its ok that 23 States (plus Washington, D.C.) have submitted fewer than 100 mental health records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System since it was created in 1999. Outside of a gun range, I'm really not ok with high capacity clips as all they do, outside of a gun range, is allow for more people to be killed in a shorter amount of time.

While I don't think anyone on either side of this debate is for mass shootings, as I said in another thread, things like Sandy Hook, Aurora, & Columbine are what we as Americans exchange for our right to own guns. The big difference between the two sides though, is that one wants to make it harder for things like Mass shootings to happen while the otherside seems to be ok with this exchange.

I think the more important question, Totem, is what you would do if you had the power in order to try & avoid another Sandy Hook?

____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#83 Dec 28 2012 at 8:12 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
Totem wrote:
Is there any situation or circumstance where you unequivocally would agree that the private ownership, sale, or use of a firearm is warranted?

I'm not sure if 'warranted' is the right word. We are basically a free country. If you want to own a gun to play with go for it.

If your gun is stolen and used for bad things (ie when your right to own a gun, infringes on someone else's rights not to suffer a hole in their chest), you should be held accountable.

If a community doesn't want guns around their kids, they also have that right to disallow guns in schools, or libraries or whatever public buildings they want - just like smoking.

If a community wants to arm their teachers, kids, bus drivers and PTA with guns they can do that too.

So why have gun laws/regulations?

1. 'Gun' needs to be well defined and separated out from armament.
2. People need a minimum level of understanding of how a gun works and the responsibilities they take on when they become a gun owner.

Personally, I see no need to have guns. More guns = more people shot - it's that simple. I enjoy plastering trees with my paint ball marker from time to time. When the crazed killer shows up at my door to steal my things and rape my man, I'll do the same - or I'll hit um with a frying pan.

I'd like to see simple, hand gun/shot guns become the weapon of choice for the paranoid masses that feel like they need a bullet to protect themselves and the more complex automatics and semi automatics basically become redefined as something more than a 'gun' and regulated as WMD's, or maybe as Weapons of Moderate Destruction.

I'd really like to see the gun show loophole in the current law closed up. It's pathetic and one of the little things that shames me as an american.



____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#84 Dec 28 2012 at 4:39 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,883 posts
Elinda wrote:
If your gun is stolen and used for bad things (ie when your right to own a gun, infringes on someone else's rights not to suffer a hole in their chest), you should be held accountable.


Really? Accountable how? Like it was you who did the 'bad' thing, accountable? Do any other laws hold you accountable for what criminals do with your stolen property? (Serious question, I am too lazy to even bother looking that up because it's such a stupid concept).

Gun owners shouldn't be held accountable for what criminals may or may not do with their stolen weapons. I just think the guns in circulation need to be better tracked and the individual gun's destructive power limited. I have no problems with something like a stricter ammunition limit and better, more encompassing gun registration regulations.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#85 Dec 28 2012 at 4:47 PM Rating: Good
****
6,471 posts
TirithRR wrote:
Elinda wrote:
If your gun is stolen and used for bad things (ie when your right to own a gun, infringes on someone else's rights not to suffer a hole in their chest), you should be held accountable.


Do any other laws hold you accountable for what criminals do with your stolen property? (Serious question, I am too lazy to even bother looking that up because it's such a stupid concept).


I'm under the assumption that Elinda is advocating codified specifications for gun storage. Presumably, if said restrictions were violated, and the gun was thereby stolen and used in a crime, then the owner would be guilty of some form of negligence, I think.
#86 Dec 28 2012 at 5:21 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,883 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Elinda wrote:
If your gun is stolen and used for bad things (ie when your right to own a gun, infringes on someone else's rights not to suffer a hole in their chest), you should be held accountable.


Do any other laws hold you accountable for what criminals do with your stolen property? (Serious question, I am too lazy to even bother looking that up because it's such a stupid concept).


I'm under the assumption that Elinda is advocating codified specifications for gun storage. Presumably, if said restrictions were violated, and the gun was thereby stolen and used in a crime, then the owner would be guilty of some form of negligence, I think.


I see what Elinda meant now, but it still punishes a victim of a crime. The person is being punished for being the victim of theft. Sure, the crime committed after the theft may have been worse, but the original crime still had a victim. It was a poorly thought out statement, don't punish people for being stolen from, punish ALL people who fail to keep up with a regulated safety standard (which should be well defined in both what the standard of safety is, and how it should be proven). The punishment being a fine or something similar, like driving a car without proof of insurance. This would mean that even people who were stolen from, and whose weapons were used in possible crimes, would not necessarily be punished if they met these defined standards. And people who were not stolen from, but was discovered they didn't meet the standards, would be.

Edited, Dec 28th 2012 6:22pm by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#87 Dec 28 2012 at 6:50 PM Rating: Excellent
If the theft is reported & found to be genuine, with proper storage regulations followed, then it'll be hard to find a gun owner's who's weapon was stolen negligent.

If your child gets into your guns & shoots someone, well then I doubt it was properly stored. The lady whom bought the guns for the fire fighter killer (or whom had them stolen from her car) is negligent in either case.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#88 Dec 28 2012 at 8:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,237 posts
The lady who, not whom.

Whom denotes an object.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#89 Dec 28 2012 at 9:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Yes Omega, do not treat ladies as objects.
____________________________
Love,
PunkFloyd
#90 Dec 28 2012 at 9:28 PM Rating: Decent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,883 posts
Samira wrote:
The lady who, not whom.

Whom denotes an object.


Well now you are just confusing people, cause women are objects, right?
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#91 Dec 28 2012 at 11:30 PM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,567 posts
Olorinus wrote:
I'd rather have the right to live in peace and good health, thank you.

Good health is a right where you live?

Socialism!
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#92 Dec 28 2012 at 11:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
PunkFloyd, King of Bards wrote:
Yes Omega, do not treat ladies as objects.

____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#93 Dec 29 2012 at 9:08 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
TirithRR wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Elinda wrote:
If your gun is stolen and used for bad things (ie when your right to own a gun, infringes on someone else's rights not to suffer a hole in their chest), you should be held accountable.


Do any other laws hold you accountable for what criminals do with your stolen property? (Serious question, I am too lazy to even bother looking that up because it's such a stupid concept).


I'm under the assumption that Elinda is advocating codified specifications for gun storage. Presumably, if said restrictions were violated, and the gun was thereby stolen and used in a crime, then the owner would be guilty of some form of negligence, I think.


I see what Elinda meant now, but it still punishes a victim of a crime. The person is being punished for being the victim of theft. Sure, the crime committed after the theft may have been worse, but the original crime still had a victim. It was a poorly thought out statement, don't punish people for being stolen from, punish ALL people who fail to keep up with a regulated safety standard (which should be well defined in both what the standard of safety is, and how it should be proven). The punishment being a fine or something similar, like driving a car without proof of insurance. This would mean that even people who were stolen from, and whose weapons were used in possible crimes, would not necessarily be punished if they met these defined standards. And people who were not stolen from, but was discovered they didn't meet the standards, would be.

Edited, Dec 28th 2012 6:22pm by TirithRR

A suppose the difference is that owning a gun is a right under the 2nd amendment, at least that's how it's most commonly defined. You aren't given an explicit right within the constitution to own a chain saw or a lawnmower (Jophs wmd of choice), or a car. But more generally speaking, it's a matter of negligence. There's all sorts of ways you can get in trouble with the law for being irresponsible with your stuff. It just seems that the nature of guns, would make them high up on the responsibility list.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#94 Dec 29 2012 at 7:52 PM Rating: Good
Screenshot
.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#95 Dec 30 2012 at 7:10 AM Rating: Default
Sacrificial Lamb
*****
16,160 posts
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/29/16241484-92-shorebirds-killed-by-vehicle-on-washington-state-beach-authorities-say?lite

Birds today, people tomorrow. Better fire up the rhetoric on banning assault vehicles based on esoteric criteria of such things as how much black plastic is on the car, if the vehicle has a high capacity interior designed to convey more than two people at once (after all, who needs more than two people in a car? Reasonable folk-- if they needed to drive at all --would make multiple trips in their vehicle), horsepower, and gear selections. No one needs more than two gears: Slow and Park. Anything more is an outrageously dangerous condition that kills more than 32,000 lives each year and countless birds.

I demand legislation condemning and outlawing the flagrent and profligate use of fast, high capacity vehicles whose only design and purpose is to kill! Ban 'em!

Totem
____________________________
Born-on date: 2076

Zombo.com

Obama

Winner of Last(tm) VIII!

Winner of the 2008 Allakhazam March Madness tourny

"Totem is the personification of whiskey soaked evil" --Annabelle

"You're special, pumpkin, but not speshuler than the 'Bama Black Snake" --AtomicFlea
#96 Dec 30 2012 at 7:24 AM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
ITT: Birds are people too, yo.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#97 Dec 30 2012 at 7:25 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,883 posts
Pretty sure there are more, and better enforced, regulations on vehicles than guns in the States. In order to legally operate my vehicle I have to renew vehicle registration every year, renew my operating license every four years at which time I prove that I can safely operate it, and carry insurance on the vehicle to cover my liability in case it's involved in an accident. Maybe we should bring gun laws up to the level of vehicle laws?
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#98 Dec 30 2012 at 7:27 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
Many locales already have some sort of legislation against driving on beaches. Totem you should start a campaign to bring back Jarts.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#99 Dec 30 2012 at 7:31 AM Rating: Good
Sacrificial Lamb
*****
16,160 posts
Ok, in a more serious tone, if it were up to me to reduce the opportunity for Sandy Hooks to occur, I would begin with mental health. Crazy people are the ones responsible for these travesties and should be identified early and... neutralized. How so, you may ask? Well, certainly not in the manner they are today where a doctor prescribes a cocktail of drugs and send them on their merry way with no wayto ensure they take their meds or are a larger risk to the general population at large.

We have an assortment of methods at our disposal: institutionalization, forced medication, lobotomies, electric shock therapy, Nurse Rachette, and thousands of people whose job title ends with the suffix ____-ologist/trist.

There has been a lowering of standards when it comes to defining crazy people. Allow me to highlight just one which is likely to draw a response from this board: Transgendered people. Yep, they're crazy as a loon, but the trend is to accept them as mentally healthy within a broader definition of what is "normal."

Because to reduce the killing of people in groups you have to identify who is likely to go off the rails and commit such an act. And crazy doesn't necessarily mean stupid. And if the voices in their head tell them to wipe a bunch of people out, then they are going to find a way to do just that-- be that by firearm or, as evidenced by my previous post, a vehicle. Proof of that is seen here in Afghanistan. The people are largely crazy in general (after all, they are willfully Muslim and live in this sh1th0le) and have discovered that the AK-47 they own isn't very effective as a rule. So what is their weapon of choice against the Great Satan and His Coalition Cronies? The car laden with explosives. Again, crazy isn't necessarily stupid. And to achieve their goals they'll use whatever means are at their disposal and provides the biggest bang for their dinar or dollar in our case.

Totem
____________________________
Born-on date: 2076

Zombo.com

Obama

Winner of Last(tm) VIII!

Winner of the 2008 Allakhazam March Madness tourny

"Totem is the personification of whiskey soaked evil" --Annabelle

"You're special, pumpkin, but not speshuler than the 'Bama Black Snake" --AtomicFlea
#100 Dec 30 2012 at 7:40 AM Rating: Good
Sacrificial Lamb
*****
16,160 posts
I love Jarts! Nothings says summer like a warm July 4th evening after the fireworks than getting hopped up on Coca-Cola, cotton candy while throwing firecrackers with short fuses, laying lit metal wanded sparklers in dry grass next to the lawn mower's gas can, and deflecting your brother's Jart throw to make him miss the circle.

<big nostalgic sigh>

Kids are such babies today.

Totem
____________________________
Born-on date: 2076

Zombo.com

Obama

Winner of Last(tm) VIII!

Winner of the 2008 Allakhazam March Madness tourny

"Totem is the personification of whiskey soaked evil" --Annabelle

"You're special, pumpkin, but not speshuler than the 'Bama Black Snake" --AtomicFlea
#101 Dec 30 2012 at 7:49 AM Rating: Default
Sacrificial Lamb
*****
16,160 posts
Concerning regulations and laws governing vehicles, most infractions, if not all, with the exception of grand theft auto, are merely misdemeanors by-and-large. And in many states, including where I live, California, licenses are a veritable God-given human right as opposed to being a privilege bestowed upon the driver by the state for demonstrating competancy behind the wheel and an encyclopedic knowlwdge of the rules of the road.

I suppose we could provide the same cover for gun owners: no-fault insurance, minimal background checks, no requirement for English language skills or citizenship, and a willingness by the police to ignore a 10 round magazine being replaced by a 30 round clip as long as it only carries, say, 12 or 13 rounds inside. You know, just like the posted speed limit signs are only recommended speeds up to about 5 mph over the posted limit.

Totem

Edited, Dec 30th 2012 8:51am by Totem
____________________________
Born-on date: 2076

Zombo.com

Obama

Winner of Last(tm) VIII!

Winner of the 2008 Allakhazam March Madness tourny

"Totem is the personification of whiskey soaked evil" --Annabelle

"You're special, pumpkin, but not speshuler than the 'Bama Black Snake" --AtomicFlea
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 77 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (77)