The All Things Political Topic - Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

[Gromnir]

1 hour ago, KP wants Blue Velvet said:

Buying guns here is very easy if you have the money, when I bought my .44 it was no questions asked at all.

...

regardless, as usual, is more than a few who is gonna do their best captain obvious impression (though these moments o' lack o' self awareness is amusing) but is all theatre. with every dramatic mass shooting there will be the predictable fifteen minutes o' outrage followed by inaction. Congress couldn't even rouse itself to ban bump stocks following the vegas shooting and when legislators do shake off their torpor, they fail to address real problems. as mentioned already, the assault weapon ban were highly effective in stopping the use o' scary ar-15 like weapons in crimes, but gun violence and deaths decreased not at all. 

the US has the second amendment, and bad history from scotus justices says as o' 2008 modern handguns is exact the kinda weapon with which a 1787 (or 1868... 'cause incorporation doctrine) "well regulated militia" is gonna reasonable arm itself. serious. therefore the solution to the problem o' too many guns is to address the second amendment. good luck with that. is why @Guard Dog don't need to respond or worry, 'cause for all the sound and fury echoing from internet crusaders here and abroad, he should have no fear anything is actual gonna change. nevertheless, 'cause he is one o' the no compromisers, he does see libs lurking in every shadow, conspiring to take from him his firearms. is a position which makes little sense given how he current has more gun rights than americans has had at any other point in history post 1787. 

however, 

now whether you think harris' ideas is good or bad, the President can't do what she proposed... or at least they couldn't before obama and trump. gd's fears is not reasonable, but politicians such as harris give the no compromise people justification to continue their crusade. oh sure, kamela wants background checks today, but if she can do by executive order, then why not more serious limits? why not an outright ban on certain classes o' weapons or ammo?

HA! Good Fun!

Edited May 29, 2022 by Gromnir

[Malcador]

22 minutes ago, Hurlsnot said:

I know I've said it before, but we need an entire culture shift around guns. They don't need to outlaw them to make that happen, although reasonable restrictions and limitations would help. The NRA should be leading the way towards responsible gun ownership, but instead they are hyperfocused on the politics of victimhood. Guns should be treated like dangerous tools. Instead they are glorified and worshiped.

For my next TED talk, I will be discussing how our obsession with cars is dumb too.

Well, if it hasn't changed by now, doubt it's going to. Part and parcel of life in America, I guess.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

33 minutes ago, Hurlsnot said:

I know I've said it before, but we need an entire culture shift around guns. They don't need to outlaw them to make that happen, although reasonable restrictions and limitations would help. The NRA should be leading the way towards responsible gun ownership, but instead they are hyperfocused on the politics of victimhood. Guns should be treated like dangerous tools. Instead they are glorified and worshiped.

For my next TED talk, I will be discussing how our obsession with cars is dumb too.

I doubt that's going to happen. For a lot of people, guns are a social signifier in the same way that F-150s are. They don't need that horsepower to drive to their office job anymore than they need their 5 guns to defend their home in a gated community from invaders. This is who forms the bulk of support for the NRA, and they will not leave their vanity objects they use to take family pictures go. Guns are toys to these people, and we are paying the price for their frivolous attitude to deadly tools.

Don't get me started on cars. Houston had to be bulldozed to make cars necessary and it absolutely sucks.

[Gfted1]

1 hour ago, Hurlsnot said:

I know I've said it before, but we need an entire culture shift around guns. They don't need to outlaw them to make that happen, although reasonable restrictions and limitations would help. The NRA should be leading the way towards responsible gun ownership, but instead they are hyperfocused on the politics of victimhood. Guns should be treated like dangerous tools. Instead they are glorified and worshiped.

For my next TED talk, I will be discussing how our obsession with cars is dumb too.

I think theres been a small cultural shift just in my lifetime. We used to play "cowboys and indians" and run around the blocks with cap guns literally having play gunfights. Now you never see kids playing like that (including mine) and I dont know if you can even buy a cap gun nowadays. Meaning, the culture of "playing guns" has changed from my perspective.

[Gromnir]

depending on where you live in the USA, your perspective on what is american gun culture is gonna change and not by a little. as a kid we were given lessons regarding safety, maintenance and usage o' a .22 before we had a bicycle. our experience, while not common, is hardly gonna be eyebrow worthy even today in much o' the nation where hunting is viewed as the real national pastime by the locals. 

edit: 

avoiding the double-post

*sigh*

HA! Good Fun!

Edited May 30, 2022 by Gromnir

[BruceVC]

https://news.sky.com/story/mona-lisa-attacked-with-cake-by-man-dressed-as-old-lady-in-wheelchair-12624074

A truly deplorable and cowardly attack on the Mona Lisa ....it looks like the  work of the radical left?

The guy must be jailed in the longest terms possible 

[Gorth]

29 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

https://news.sky.com/story/mona-lisa-attacked-with-cake-by-man-dressed-as-old-lady-in-wheelchair-12624074

A truly deplorable and cowardly attack on the Mona Lisa ....it looks like the  work of the radical left?

The guy must be jailed in the longest terms possible 

I refuse to read any of Murdochs outlets, but from a more trust worthy site (Wales Online), it was an environmental activist that smeared the glass in front of the painting with cream... (didn't say if the cream was from free range cow milk)

Sorry, your holy crusade against the radical left needs to be postponed a bit. Wouldn't want to waste all that zealotry....

[Chilloutman]

environmentalists are radical lefties so....

[BruceVC]

28 minutes ago, Gorth said:

I refuse to read any of Murdochs outlets, but from a more trust worthy site (Wales Online), it was an environmental activist that smeared the glass in front of the painting with cream... (didn't say if the cream was from free range cow milk)

Sorry, your holy crusade against the radical left needs to be postponed a bit. Wouldn't want to waste all that zealotry....

Its not a crusade but an awareness and  concern because the radical left\socialists are real and want to undermine the progress we have made in our societies in several ways

You dont have to be concerned about it but lets not say it doesnt exist 

 

[Gorth]

35 minutes ago, Chilloutman said:

environmentalists are radical lefties so....

That's a bit like saying all conservatives are religious nut cases and vice versa... too much generalization and mixing of ideologies.

I was surprised the Mona Lisa thing didn't get attributed to BLM

[Chilloutman]

3 minutes ago, Gorth said:

That's a bit like saying all conservatives are religious nut cases and vice versa... too much generalization and mixing of ideologies.

I was surprised the Mona Lisa thing didn't get attributed to BLM

I mean how can you be environmentalist and support free market at same time?

[Gorth]

1 minute ago, Chilloutman said:

I mean how can you be environmentalist and support free market at same time?

You should visit Scandinavia some day

[Chilloutman]

3 minutes ago, Gorth said:

You should visit Scandinavia some day

I actually did

[Gorth]

26 minutes ago, Chilloutman said:

I actually did

Way to go!

Curiosity reflex triggered... whereabouts???

 

[Chilloutman]

Malmo, Stockholm (Solentuna area mostly) and northern Sweden.

[BruceVC]

8 minutes ago, Chilloutman said:

Malmo, Stockholm (Solentuna area mostly) and northern Sweden.

Nice people in Sweden and hot women, every time I meet people from the Nordic countries they generally very friendly and love socializing and chatting 

 

[Guard Dog]

20 hours ago, Gromnir said:

 

 gd's fears is not reasonable, but politicians such as harris give the no compromise people justification to continue their crusade. 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Exactly correct. But not just Harris. Feinstein, Schumer, Leahey, Beta O'Rourke, Barack Obama, Rahm Emanuel,  Howard Metzenbaum, John Chafee, Bobby Rush, John Paul Stevens, and yes, kindly old grandpa himself Joe Biden, have all publicly stated support for prohibition and (forced) confiscation. Now, granted, none of them ever tried to actually DO that. And like you have correctly said they can't. But when people tell you outright who they are and what they want then you should believe them. And those names are just off the top of my head. Give a little google time and I can come up with a lot more. When the countering argument is prohibition and confiscation, incremental of course, where is there space to compromise? The argument is in bad faith from the beginning. Each "reasonable restriction" leads to another and another and another until you DO get to prohibition. Remember in the Heller case the Washington DC position was "thou shalt not have firearms in thy home... period". THAT is not reasonable. 

Hey I am all for reasonable restrictions  on types, actions, calibers even, and magazine size if those restrictions are targeted and intelligent and would actually accomplish something. Not a nebulous and catch-all vaguery of terms that have no real definition like "assault weapon bans". EVERY gun is a f---g assault weapon in the hands of someone bent on doing harm. These laws are not written to do any good, just as segue into something more draconian "well we tried banning assault weapons and it didn't help so no we are going to ban X". That is how you boil the frog. 

The first step should be taken by the pro-gun control crowd. They want to change the status quo then offer the first olive branch. Come out publicly and repeatedly stating that they agree the 2nd Amendment does in fact enshrine an individual and incorporated right and that prohibition is unreasonable AND undesirable. There can be agreement on certain restrictions and background checks. Another olive branch would be to "grandfather in" any legally owned firearms at the time any such laws that might affect them is enacted. Many gun owners EXPECT the government to kick down their door, shoot all their pets and beat the holy f--k out of their families while confiscating every firearm in sight. They think that because numerous politicians have said that is what they want (not in those exact terms obviously). Take that fear off the table and you'll get enough people to meet you in the middle to actually accomplish something. 

The scenario I just described (the kicking down the door part) will never happen as long as the Constitution stays as it is. It's not a reasonable fear to have. But it is a VERY prevalent one that many people have. And the anti-gun democrats fan those flames literally every time they open their mouths. If that doesn't stop nothing will change. You are a trained negotiator as part of your chosen profession. Would you agree someone has to compromise and it usually should be the party asking for the status quo to change. 

[Malcador]

3 hours ago, BruceVC said:

https://news.sky.com/story/mona-lisa-attacked-with-cake-by-man-dressed-as-old-lady-in-wheelchair-12624074

A truly deplorable and cowardly attack on the Mona Lisa ....it looks like the  work of the radical left?

The guy must be jailed in the longest terms possible 

So Tucker Carlson posts here, neat.

[Raithe]

For the cheap laugh track:

 

[BruceVC]

54 minutes ago, Malcador said:

So Tucker Carlson posts here, neat.

This forum is serious business 

[Malcador]

23 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

This forum is serious business 

There's a radical leftist behind you.

[Gromnir]

5 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

 

Exactly correct. But not just Harris. Feinstein, Schumer, Leahey, Beta O'Rourke, Barack Obama, Rahm Emanuel,  Howard Metzenbaum, John Chafee, Bobby Rush, John Paul Stevens, and yes, kindly old grandpa himself Joe Biden, have all publicly stated support for prohibition and (forced) confiscation. (blah, blah, blah) Remember in the Heller case the Washington DC position was "thou shalt not have firearms in thy home... period". THAT is not reasonable. 

got this far and stopped.

joe biden's support for forced gun confiscation is as follows: 

https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/

"Buy back the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already in our communities. Biden will also institute a program to buy back weapons of war currently on our streets. This will give individuals who now possess assault weapons or high-capacity magazines two options: sell the weapons to the government, or register them under the National Firearms Act."

...

gosh.

however, like any sane person, including many republicans, those persons who is prohibited by law from gun ownership is necessarily gonna be subject to confiscations.

18 U.S. Code § 922 - Unlawful acts

scroll down to g

would be beyond ridiculous to have a law which reasonable prevents gun ownership but have no way for the state to confiscate the firearms in question, no?  support o' such common sense legislation and other innocuous comments taken outta context is frequent conflated with the asinine gun confiscation claims o' no compromisers.  

am thinking the rest o' your list o' democrat infidels is having a few folks most certain not in favour o' gun confiscation as you describe. Justice Stevens were in favour o' second amendment repeal, and voted 'gainst heller. am s'posing you see as justifying placing him in your rogue's gallery, but am only guessing. got more? if not...

no doubt gd riled himself up something awful past paragraph 1, but we couldn't be bothered to read past your declaration re: heller

"District of Columbia law bans handgun possession by making it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm and prohibiting the registration of handguns; provides separately that no person may carry an unlicensed handgun, but authorizes the police chief to issue 1-year licenses; and requires residents to keep lawfully owned firearms unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device. Respondent Heller, a D. C. special policeman, applied to register a handgun he wished to keep at home, but the District refused. He filed this suit seeking, on Second Amendment grounds, to enjoin the city from enforcing the bar on handgun registration, the licensing requirement insofar as it prohibits carrying an unlicensed firearm in the home, and the trigger-lock requirement insofar as it prohibits the use of functional firearms in the home. The District Court dismissed the suit, but the D. C. Circuit reversed, holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess firearms and that the city’s total ban on handguns, as well as its requirement that firearms in the home be kept nonfunctional even when necessary for self-defense, violated that right."

not a prohibition on all firearms but rather handguns. bizarre bass ackwards history from SCOTUS led to mirror-universe decision where we is told modern handguns is precise the kinda weapons a 1787/1868 a well regulated militia would arm itself as 'posed to something like an ar-15.

serious.

regardless, not a blanket prohibition on firearms... "period."

as we said, we couldn't bring our self to read further this time. you are so certain o' what you know and claim you are willing to fight to the death for such, but you never bother to check to see if you is actual correct in your beliefs.

HA! Good Fun!

ps am more than a little annoyed (albeit akin to stepping in somebody's discarded bubblegum) gd keeps demanding from us to defend joe biden. we don't like joe biden as President. joe is the ordinary kinda incompetent we expected when he announced his candidacy, but most o' gd complaints has been based on fabricated rage as 'posed to wrongs done by biden. nevertheless, am not able to accept manifest unfairness and gd makes unjust complaints 'bout biden with some frequency. 

Edited May 30, 2022 by Gromnir
added "a well regulated," 'cause is forgotten too often

[HoonDing]

i loves mah gun

[Gromnir]

to his credit am gonna suggest @Guard Dog would not agree with the sentiment regarding love o' guns but rather he doesn't trust the government (of, by and for the people,) and when they come to take your freedoms, you should be able to defend yourself from tyranny.

other folks who has homes in neighborhoods such as where we lived during high school (south chicago) don't necessarily love guns, but they fear the criminals who have 'em. the cops ain't gonna protect you, so if you wanna defend your family...

the thing is, gd has also stated he thinks the bestest ww2 weapon is the springfield 1903, as 'posed to the m-1 garrand or other semi-auto weapons. mainstream democrats ain't suggesting taking gd's springfield 1903 away from him. the springfield and simillar weapons wouldn't even be subject to the "voluntary" buy back proposed as part o' reinstating the assault weapons ban. 

'course the terrible stoopid o' the response to school shootings is the refelxive urge to ban assault weapons, as if doing so fixes the problem o' tens o' thousands o' yearly firearm related deaths. the 1994 assault weapon ban worked, but firearm deaths did not decrease and is no good evidence the assault weapon ban decreased mass shootings... however you choose to define a mass shooting. for fifteen minutes following a mass shooting, americans rage 'bout firearms and focus on the kinda firearms (long rifles) which literal account for the fewest deaths o' any firearm category tracked by the fbi. what a waste.

regardless, am gonna suggest the majority o' folks who misappropriated this

don't claim to love their guns, and the many americans who believe they need to protect themselves from everybody else who has guns don't particular love weapons neither.

regardless, Constitution says "well regulated militia." when gd were in the marines, he had to check handguns outta the armory and requalify periodic to show he knew how to handle firearms. is weird is fewer restrictions for the "well regulated militia," which is the basis for his current firearms ownership.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[rjshae]

 

n/m

Edited May 30, 2022 by rjshae