another day, another shooting

[JSt0rm]

Yes, they absolutely do. I don't dispute the numbers regarding knife violence vs gun violence. I dispute the notion that anyone should be subject to 'might makes right' because someone else does something illegal. 'God made man, Colt made them equal' as it were.

guns make you less safe

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

guns make you less safe

The world is unsafe. I accept less safety for more freedom.

 

[TheVrolok]

The world is unsafe. I accept less safety for more freedom.

See this is a reasonable point. I just wish the "pro-gun" constituency would say the same.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

See this is a reasonable point. I just wish the "pro-gun" constituency would say the same.

As do I, if we were all a lot more honest with ourselves I think there'd be a lot less animosity between people that could be exploited by power hungry wastes of oxygen.

 

[TheVrolok]

As do I, if we were all a lot more honest with ourselves I think there'd be a lot less animosity between people that could be exploited by power hungry wastes of oxygen.

Totally agreed.

 

[darkswordsman17]

See this is a reasonable point. I just wish the "pro-gun" constituency would say the same.

The problem is, it simply isn't as far as they're concerned. Plus, where in the fuck are people getting that having personal safety isn't a freedom? By that I mean, not having to stress about assholes with guns murdering them. Because last I checked, getting gunned down is pretty goddamn serious infringement of a person's rights/freedom, regardless of it being government or a private citizen. But when people admit that they value their right to a surrogate penis, er I mean gun, over other people's safety but then insist that everyone accept their logic, well it should be obvious that no actual discussion can be had as one side is literally using the argument "I'll fucking kill you if you even try" but claiming they're being rational. Its frankly as dumb as Turmp at his dumbest (another tipoff should be that if Turmp and Jr are spouting off about something, which they have repeatedly done with regards to guns, that if you hold the same view, you might should maybe reconsider how rational that actually is).

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

The problem is, it simply isn't as far as they're concerned. Plus, where in the fuck are people getting that having personal safety isn't a freedom? By that I mean, not having to stress about assholes with guns murdering them. Because last I checked, getting gunned down is pretty goddamn serious infringement of a person's rights/freedom, regardless of it being government or a private citizen.

But this is an illogical argument. I deny nobody the right to life or any other freedom by owning a gun. Anyone that does is a criminal, performing a criminal act. The same right to life is denied by a myriad of other things, all of which constitute an illegal act. You're conflating the actions of criminals with the existence of the object.

Yes, yes, I know this leads down the 'no true gun owner' path, and I'm not trying to walk down that road as it's well worn by now. Just trying to make sure there's an understanding that you cannot deny something from someone because of something someone else did unless you're willing to say 'you don't get that freedom anymore'.

 

[JSt0rm]

The world is unsafe. I accept less safety for more freedom.

You accept the death of children so you can feel a fake sense of safety. How presidential of you!

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

You accept the death of children so you can feel a fake sense of safety.

Crass, but yes. I don't see it as fake however.

How presidential of you!

Not really even sure what this is meant to mean.

 

[JSt0rm]

Crass, but yes. I don't see it as fake however.

Not really even sure what this is meant to mean.

Its fake because statistically owning a gun makes you less safe. You are only doing it for your feels.

 

[JSt0rm]

so basically the death of children are worth your feels.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Its fake because statistically owning a gun makes you less safe. You are only doing it for your feels.

Statistically, doing a lot of things makes us less safe. I never said that I own a gun for purely personal safety reasons.

 

[JSt0rm]

Statistically, doing a lot of things makes us less safe. I never said that I own a gun for purely personal safety reasons.

You just said you dont see how a sense of safety from guns is fake. Now you say a lot of things arent safe and you own guns for other reasons. Are those other reasons worth the death and injury to thousands and thousands of people every year? That seems like a horrible position to take.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

You just said you dont see how a sense of safety from guns is fake. Now you say a lot of things arent safe and you own guns for other reasons. Are those other reasons worth the death and injury to thousands and thousands of people every year? That seems like a horrible position to take.

So, I'm going to explain this again as I have a few times. A firearm does nothing on its own, it's an inert piece of wood and steel that sits in a corner, silently absorbing and radiating heat and cold. People do evil things with firearms, but the actions of others do NOT have a bearing on my own actions, in this context. Furthermore, the actions of others should not predicate my levels of freedoms, in any form. Finally, my decision to own a firearm or defend those who do does not make me a 'child killer', nor does it mean I support such people.

If you wish to conflate this as 'I support the death of innocents in exchange for my freedoms', feel free to if it makes you feel better. I honestly think the whole 'Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants' was incorrect, it should have been 'Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of innocents'.

 

[JSt0rm]

So, I'm going to explain this again as I have a few times. A firearm does nothing on its own, it's an inert piece of wood and steel that sits in a corner, silently absorbing and radiating heat and cold. People do evil things with firearms, but the actions of others do NOT have a bearing on my own actions, in this context. Furthermore, the actions of others should not predicate my levels of freedoms, in any form. Finally, my decision to own a firearm or defend those who do does not make me a 'child killer', nor does it mean I support such people.

If you wish to conflate this as 'I support the death of innocents in exchange for my freedoms', feel free to if it makes you feel better. I honestly think the whole 'Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants' was incorrect, it should have been 'Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of innocents'.

You value your guns more than the lives of children. You cheat them of living a full life so that you can feel good about having a toy.


We have a big problem in this country with deplorables. When things like this...

mean nothing to a human who would support guns over it we need to view them as a psychopath they are and take that gun from them.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

You value your guns more than the lives of children. You cheat them of living a full life so that you can feel good about having a toy.


We have a big problem in this country with deplorables. When things like this...

mean nothing to a human who would support guns over it we need to view them as a psychopath they are and take that gun from them.

So far on this forum you've accused me of being both a pedophile and a psychopath. You have a bad habit of labeling people you don't like so that you feel your argument has a stronger stance. It makes discussions impossible, and you should refrain from it.

 

[Paladin3]

I don't see where I discounted your opinion, simply pointed out that "fuck your feels" is a thing. Murder does tend to make people emotional, sorry if you have a great adoration for the same items that mass murderers tend to choose to accomplish the task. Yea, emotion and fear of killing machines seems reasonable, emotion and fear of restricting access to killing machines doesn't seem quite as reasonable. I'm not for taking everyone's guns away, I would just prefer that as a society we take ownership more seriously.

Most gun owners do take the responsibility of gun ownership very seriously. We have two city ranges in my small town and they are very well run with two rangemasters on duty at all times. Our local sportsman association has several shooting teams including youth rifle and pistol teams where safety and marksmanship are taught. We have frequent training classes on everything from hunter and gun safety to self-defense, including classes for women and first time shooters. Heck, in my state we allow anyone who can legally own a gun to carry it either open or concealed without even requiring a licence AND IT HASN'T LEAD TO WILD WEST STYLE SHOOTOUTS LIKE MANY ANTI-GUNNERS CLAIMED IT WOULD. So please stop telling us we don't take the responsibility of gun ownership seriously.

It's a tiny minority of gun owners who are irresponsible, and those folks are usually irresponsible and dangerous with alcohol, drugs, cars, tools, pointed sticks and lots of other inanimate objects. Those folks are the ones we need to reach out and take guns away from if their conducts rises to the level of criminal behavior. And, of course, we need to find better ways of disarming the criminal/sick/evil population who directly seek to do harm with weapons.

But, instead, anti-gun efforts are often directed at the people who are NOT the problem exactly because we ARE the ones who obey laws (especially that one prohibiting murder.) We are the low hanging fruit who are having our 2A rights restricted because anti-gun folks think disarming us will have some trickle-down affect and magically disarm criminals of the tools of their trade. All while ignoring how dangerous America would become if they did succeed in disarming the lawful while the lawless thumb their noses at the new gun prohibition and keep their guns.

I don't know what the solution is that will end all gun violence, but we will never find it until the lie that guns = bad is stopped. Or maybe there is no absolute solution to ending the hate and willingness to use violence that lives in the hearts of some men.

Guns have many, many safe and legal uses, and the vast majority are used so. Better mental health care and some form of red flag laws are a good start. After all, red flag laws are just a way for us to show our concern for our loved ones and neighbors should they start exhibiting unsafe behavior. Red flag laws only become evil when anti-gunners use them as end-runs around the constitution and due process.

Trust me, my friend, if the life of you or a loved one is ever directly threatened you will pick up the phone, dial 911 and pray men with guns get there in time to save you. If you can't wait that long you will die at the mercy of your attacker, probably wishing the entire terrifying time that you had taken firearm ownership more seriously and acquired one.

And, only then, will you realize how pointless it was to blame and disarm over 100 million lawful gun owners because it did nothing to stop the criminals.

And your last sentence: "I'm not for taking everyone's guns away, I would just prefer that as a society we take ownership more seriously" really means nothing. You want to control which guns are available when there is no practical way to do so without destroying our free society. Hasn't the failed prohibition on alcohol and our lost war on drugs at least taught us that attempting to prohibit something people want is dangerous at best? How can depriving the lawful of the very best means of self-defense, while unable to disarm the criminal/sick/evil among us, accomplish anything good?

 

[Paladin3]

Back to the original question then.
How did a foreign born national legally acquire a gun. Maybe that process should be modified.

Go ahead if you have the votes to do so. But what other rights should we forbid foreign born nationals living legally in this country? Due process under the law? Miranda rights? Free speech? Freedom of religion, association or maybe property rights?

It sounds like you don't understand that most foreign born nationals legally living in the country are doing so lawfully and are very much deserving of constitutional rights and protections. Otherwise, we run the risk of suspending rights and destroying freedom in the hopes that we can somehow prevent future crime along the way.

It's not worth it, otherwise why have we fought and shed blood to create what is arguably the most free and democratic country in the world?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Go ahead if you have the votes to do so. But what other rights should we forbid foreign born nationals living legally in this country? Due process under the law? Miranda rights? Free speech? Freedom of religion, association or maybe property rights?

It sounds like you don't understand that most foreign born nationals legally living in the country are doing so lawfully and are very much deserving of constitutional rights and protections. Otherwise, we run the risk of suspending rights and destroying freedom in the hopes that we can somehow prevent future crime along the way.

It's not worth it, otherwise why have we fought and shed blood to create what is arguably the most free and democratic country in the world?

So should a foreign guy who is here on a temporary basis be allowed to buy a gun?

 

[Paladin3]

... irrelevant nonsense. Stick to the Pensacola case.

Exactly what about the Pensacola case? So far we've discussed both that and the Pearl Harbor shooting here, as well as gun control in general. Not to mention that my excessive keyboard clacking seems to be too much for some to read. And that somehow showing anything beyond Vulcan level emotions automatically invalidates any argument.

But, I'm going to stop and insult you directly here: IMHO, it is the act of a lazy idiot when someone tries to invalidate another's thoughts and ideas on a technicality. "You typed too much!" "Irrevelant!" "Strawman!" "Emotional!" are nothing but cheap shots indicating the inability to form a logical rebuttal. And this particular post of yours is in exactly that vein.

If you've come to a public forum to debate then do so and stop whining.

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

I whole heartedly disagree that more guns equal more safety. How many accidental shootings are there in homes? How many people, even those well versed in gun safety accidentally shoot themselves? A Texas police officer just did it in this past week while in a training facility.

And that doesn't even go into all the kids that have shot each other recently after getting ahold of a gun that was in their home. Then there are the hunting accidents.

 

[Paladin3]

You don't happen to use a Botany related ID on another board, do you?

Or maybe one claiming to be a lawyer with a name related to a type of predatory bird?

Nope, this is the only place I rattle my keyboard to any extent, especially anything politically related. A little bit on /progun of late, but only a handful of posts. Maybe a few photography, muzzleloading firearms, deal sites or game forums here and there, but not much.

As a semi-retired journalist I very much stand behind every word I've ever published. And I have never claimed to be anything I am not. My user names are almost always my first initial and last name if the forums are even remotely professional. Otherwise I post under some form of either Paladin3 or Crom3 depending on what's available when I sign up.

Does my particular brand of crazy remind you of someone else?

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

So should a foreign guy who is here on a temporary basis be allowed to buy a gun?

Why should a foreign guy who is here on a temporary basis be allowed to speak his mind, travel without harassment, have his property protected from unlawful search and seizure?

 

[Paladin3]

We should also start investigating all Saudi nationals for extremist ties and sending them back to the KSA as needed. People that are here as asylum seekers from the KSA have already passed a background check so they are exempt.

A well controlled border with heavy vetting is a good thing, but only when combined with the compassion of allowing as many immigrants in as our country can manage. Most of those immigrants should be ready to become productive members of society pretty much right away, but we must still take in those seeking legitimate refuge even if they will end up needing our temporary support.

But the problem often occurs in the second generation after immigration. And, really, there is no way to know what evil lurks in the hearts of some men. And, unless we are ready to end our "free" society and put everyone under government surveillance, how will we know unless their actions rise to criminal levels? We can look for warning signs, but we absolutely should not sacrifice due process and the concept of innocent until proven guilty along the way.

Otherwise we end up justifying past horrors like this one that happened to our very own citizens in our very own country not too long ago:

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Why should a foreign guy who is here on a temporary basis be allowed to speak his mind, travel without harassment, have his property protected from unlawful search and seizure?

Should a foreign guy who is here on a temporary basis be allowed to buy a gun?