What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Again, if people were using cars to kill dozens at a time, or cranes...then yes, regulate them.

You're confusing things killing people and people using things to kill people for the purpose of killing.
Click to expand...

Not really. In the heat of the moment, they're essentially the same thing.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

FlagDUDE08 said:
The things used to kill people, regardless of their original intent or purpose.
Click to expand...

Agreed. A car is just different kinds of metal, plastics, rubber, and the like, similar to a crane or a gun. However, people aren't using cars or cranes to kill dozens of people at a time. They are using guns. FWIW, the government also regulates cars and cranes...nobody seems to get too bent out of shape about that.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Agreed. A car is just different kinds of metal, plastics, rubber, and the like, similar to a crane or a gun. However, people aren't using cars or cranes to kill dozens of people at a time. They are using guns. FWIW, the government also regulates cars and cranes...nobody seems to get too bent out of shape about that.
Click to expand...

You haven't been to New Hampshire lately, have you?
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Agreed. A car is just different kinds of metal, plastics, rubber, and the like, similar to a crane or a gun. However, people aren't using cars or cranes to kill dozens of people at a time. They are using guns. FWIW, the government also regulates cars and cranes...nobody seems to get too bent out of shape about that.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean. The thing is, guns are already probably the most highly regulated consumer good in the country (outside nuclear bombs,etc) and some people will not be satisfied until they're completely illegal.
I went to buy a simple .22 rifle the other week for my son and I had to get a federal background check just to buy the thing. A little plinking gun.
 
FreshFish said:
you have a remarkable talent for ignoring the obvious when it conflicts with your preferred narrative. News Flash: Many of the votes against Oblamer's proposals will be from D-MT, D-AR, D-WV, D-MO, D-LA, and so on.
Click to expand...

As usual you miss a big point. Those Dems can vote against it...AFTER they agree to squelch a filibuster. Therefore they get the best of both worlds - appeasing the O on a priority of his while also not going on record with a difficult vote! Not ideal of course, but this is DC we're talking about...

Beyond the political shenanigans though, I do wonder why some of you bother to get out of bed in the morning. The defeatist attitude of many a poster, usually but not always righties, smacks of people used to losing. What I will tell you is that for any seemingly difficult problem, there have always been those who are quickly willing to throw up their hands and say "nothing can be done". There's a word for those people, and it is "wimps". For example, those old enough to remember the Cold War might recall the thought of a never ending struggle, or again for those old enough to remember the Mafia was supposed to be some all powerful organization that could never be touched.

Gun violence can be reduced, which is the goal. Background checks and more robust enforcement of existing law especially in terms of tracking down people who are banned from buying guns when they try to do so. Could people still acquire guns via theft? Sure, but here's the irony. The same people who tell us the only way to be safe is to arm yourselves to the teeth to deter crime are also the ones saying people will be robbing guns if they can't get them through other means. Wait a minute: why would criminals rob people who they know are armed? I thought that never happened?
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

geezer said:
I know what you mean. The thing is, guns are already probably the most highly regulated consumer good in the country (outside nuclear bombs,etc) and some people will not be satisfied until they're completely illegal.
I went to buy a simple .22 rifle the other week for my son and I had to get a federal background check just to buy the thing. A little plinking gun.
Click to expand...

I certainly don't wish guns to be illegal (I'm from North Dakota keep in mind...I'm not an uber-liberal, and certainly not far left of center (if at all)). However, people have been using certain types of guns to mass murder people. Will taking away those guns eliminate mass murder? Probably not. It may not even eliminate people using those same types of guns to mass murder people. However, to do nothing about it, and sit and watch people get mass murdered by these types of guns...I most certainly want my government to do whatever they can within reason to try to eliminate that. Personally, I feel that regulating these types of guns (along with limiting the amount of rounds in a magazine) is potentially the most effective way to address the situation.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

geezer said:
Speaking of NPR and the "to each according to his need" principle, an interviewer actually had the blind stupidity to ask the NRA President why would anyone "need" an assault rifle. His respnse very polite, said only basically that it's not a good path to go down. Never asked the interviewer if he "needs" his pet ferret or his Birkenstocks. But this is where we're headed if we don't resist. Everything you own or might want to buy is up for grabs. SUVs and assault rifles will only be the beginning.
Click to expand...

and big sodas
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
I certainly don't wish guns to be illegal (I'm from North Dakota keep in mind...I'm not an uber-liberal, and certainly not far left of center (if at all)). However, people have been using certain types of guns to mass murder people. Will taking away those guns eliminate mass murder? Probably not. It may not even eliminate people using those same types of guns to mass murder people. However, to do nothing about it, and sit and watch people get mass murdered by these types of guns...I most certainly want my government to do whatever they can within reason to try to eliminate that. Personally, I feel that regulating these types of guns (along with limiting the amount of rounds in a magazine) is potentially the most effective way to address the situation.
Click to expand...

You don't want to see guns be illegal, yet you're perfectly fine with the government making them illegal. Sure, you can put these stipulations on it, but how long do you think it's going to be until the government says that every citizen is excluded by those stipulations? You're letting Hitler do his thing once again.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
I certainly don't wish guns to be illegal (I'm from North Dakota keep in mind...I'm not an uber-liberal, and certainly not far left of center (if at all)). However, people have been using certain types of guns to mass murder people. Will taking away those guns eliminate mass murder? Probably not. It may not even eliminate people using those same types of guns to mass murder people. However, to do nothing about it, and sit and watch people get mass murdered by these types of guns...I most certainly want my government to do whatever they can within reason to try to eliminate that. Personally, I feel that regulating these types of guns (along with limiting the amount of rounds in a magazine) is potentially the most effective way to address the situation.
Click to expand...
I see your point.
FlagDUDE08 said:
You don't want to see guns be illegal, yet you're perfectly fine with the government making them illegal. Sure, you can put these stipulations on it, but how long do you think it's going to be until the government says that every citizen is excluded by those stipulations? You're letting Hitler do his thing once again.
Click to expand...
I see your point.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

FlagDUDE08 said:
You don't want to see guns be illegal, yet you're perfectly fine with the government making them illegal. Sure, you can put these stipulations on it, but how long do you think it's going to be until the government says that every citizen is excluded by those stipulations? You're letting Hitler do his thing once again.
Click to expand...

You completely missed my point.

Certain types of guns should be illegal. The Government cannot take away guns completely (not without wiping out the 2nd Amendment), but they are certainly allowed to regulate what kinds of guns people can have.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
I certainly don't wish guns to be illegal (I'm from North Dakota keep in mind...I'm not an uber-liberal, and certainly not far left of center (if at all)). However, people have been using certain types of guns to mass murder people. Will taking away those guns eliminate mass murder? Probably not. It may not even eliminate people using those same types of guns to mass murder people. However, to do nothing about it, and sit and watch people get mass murdered by these types of guns...I most certainly want my government to do whatever they can within reason to try to eliminate that. Personally, I feel that regulating these types of guns (along with limiting the amount of rounds in a magazine) is potentially the most effective way to address the situation.
Click to expand...
Doing something just for the sake of doing something is completely pointless. I would much rather have the government figuring out a balanced budget or actually trying to improve the economy than wasting time pushing some bull**** gun bill that is at the bare minimum misguided, and surely will have zero effect on anything except to further limit the rights of law-abiding citizens.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top