The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

[SJHovey]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

While not everyone, many on that side of the spectrum don't believe in practical limits. No serious limits on rates of fire, on ammo, on acquisition. For a hunter, these should be non-issues. We can fulfill the second amendment without increasing the danger to society...but we allow extremists to hold society hostage.

It should be a non-issue for everyone, not just hunters. Your likelihood of getting killed by a gun with a special rate of fire beyond one trigger pull/one shot, or of getting killed by some specialized ammo is probably roughly the same as getting trampled to death by a cow. We can spend a lot of time passing legislation dealing with those issues, but the real impact on people's safety or lives is ZERO.

But, of course, it's good political theater. Politicians get to have their palms greased by various interested parties, and at least claim they've accomplished something, even though they haven't. And that's what people like in this country.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

While not everyone, many on that side of the spectrum don't believe in practical limits. No serious limits on rates of fire, on ammo, on acquisition. For a hunter, these should be non-issues. We can fulfill the second amendment without increasing the danger to society...but we allow extremists to hold society hostage.

Unfortunately it seems to happen. Book rewrites in Texas and cultural studies in Arizona.

This is a large reason I do not understand the mental make up of one side of the political spectrum.

I'm in favor of reasonable limits on ammo, rates of fire, etc. That said, I think gun rights folks have some reasonable concerns about anti-gun people who would put more and more restrictions in place over time.

School books get rewritten regularly by people who have a variety of views. To think it only cuts one directly is to be experiencing extreme tunnel vision.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

It should be a non-issue for everyone, not just hunters. Your likelihood of getting killed by a gun with a special rate of fire beyond one trigger pull/one shot, or of getting killed by some specialized ammo is probably roughly the same as getting trampled to death by a cow. We can spend a lot of time passing legislation dealing with those issues, but the real impact on people's safety or lives is ZERO.

But, of course, it's good political theater. Politicians get to have their palms greased by various interested parties, and at least claim they've accomplished something, even though they haven't. And that's what people like in this country.

Very good point. While I'm ok with controlling some of those sorts of weapons, such weapons represent a very tiny percentage of guns that kill people. But it does excited the uneducated masses.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Very good point. While I'm ok with controlling some of those sorts of weapons, such weapons represent a very tiny percentage of guns that kill people. But it does excited the uneducated masses.

Really? So people who mourn the 26 deaths at Newtown are "the uneducated masses"? Interesting.

It should be a non-issue for everyone, not just hunters. Your likelihood of getting killed by a gun with a special rate of fire beyond one trigger pull/one shot, or of getting killed by some specialized ammo is probably roughly the same as getting trampled to death by a cow. We can spend a lot of time passing legislation dealing with those issues, but the real impact on people's safety or lives is ZERO.

What were the odds it would impact a kid like Jack Pinto?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Really? So people who mourn the 26 deaths at Newtown are "the uneducated masses"? Interesting.

The sad thing is if the Newtown killer had been a terrorist from the Middle East the laws that would have been passed, the personal freedoms that would have been trampled, and the money that would have been spent to prevent another tragedy would be limitless.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Really? So people who mourn the 26 deaths at Newtown are "the uneducated masses"? Interesting.



What were the odds it would impact a kid like Jack Pinto?

Probably something like 1 in 10 million. Sometimes you get hit by lightning. Would legislating us all to stay inside lessen those odds? Sure. But some of us aren't interested in sitting in our barcalounger all day.

 

[Rover]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

No offense, but the problem here isn't the country losing its freedoms or any such nonsense. In fact given technology, social media, and an explosion of news outlets Americans are probably freer than they've ever been given how much previously hidden info is now out in the open.

What I do think the problem is, and fortunately one that will be corrected, is that up until recently the largest co-hort of people were the whinest generation that perhaps this country has ever seen, those Americans born in the 1940's and 1950's.

If you used Bob for example's common lament, it boils down to "things ain't what they used to be". Things are never what they used to be since the dawn on time. Tell someone of my grandparents age (both in their 90's) that things aren't like when they were young and they'll say Thank God, we went through a recession and the worst war mankind has ever seen. Tell their kids that and you'll get nothing but whining about some mythical age in the 50's where everybody had jobs, there was no crime, the sun shone every day, etc.

Fortunately neither Gen X nor the Millennials have this disease in widespread numbers which is good for the country. The less whiniest generation people that are around relative to the rest of the population, the more we as a country can solve the problems in front of us (gun control, immigration, etc) without a significant % of the population taking it as a personal affront to their own self worth. So go ahead and bleat on about losing your freedoms whenever the cable company raises rates or other such nonsense. Less and less people are listening because its always the same story.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Probably something like 1 in 10 million. Sometimes you get hit by lightning. Would legislating us all to stay inside lessen those odds? Sure. But some of us aren't interested in sitting in our barcalounger all day.

...or 1 in 2. Half of mass shooter weapons in the last 30 years have been automatic weapons many of which would have been banned by the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics...h-capacity-magazines-mass-shootings-feinstein

Regardless, your logic is seriously flawed. Regardless of how bad it is...if it's rare, there should be no legislation against it. Seems the country has a different point of view on bombs. And greased palms? Who makes big bucks by having high fire rate guns banned? Frankly, the primary reason that stuff is legal is due to the gun lobby.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

...or 1 in 2. Half of mass shooter weapons in the last 30 years have been automatic weapons many of which would have been banned by the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics...h-capacity-magazines-mass-shootings-feinstein

Regardless, your logic is seriously flawed. Regardless of how bad it is...if it's rare, there should be no legislation against it. Seems the country has a different point of view on bombs. And greased palms? Who makes big bucks by having high fire rate guns banned? Frankly, the primary reason that stuff is legal is due to the gun lobby.

So what's the total number of people killed in mass killings in the last 30 years? That's the data Mother Jones used. According to your link, 549 over 30 years.

I personally see no need for, nor do I have the desire to ever own or shoot an "assault rifle." But I recognize some might, for legitimate reasons.

People trot out statistics like half of all mass killings are committed by assault rifle, a statistic completely meaningless.

549 over 30 years, or less than 19/year. I'm going to tell you it's a meaningless problem. Obviously sad for the families involved, but candidly I don't get too worked up over events that thin the herd by 10-20 people per year. They are statistically meaningless numbers in a country with 300 million people.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

So what's the total number of people killed in mass killings in the last 30 years? That's the data Mother Jones used. According to your link, 549 over 30 years.

I personally see no need for, nor do I have the desire to ever own or shoot an "assault rifle." But I recognize some might, for legitimate reasons.

People trot out statistics like half of all mass killings are committed by assault rifle, a statistic completely meaningless.

549 over 30 years, or less than 19/year. I'm going to tell you it's a meaningless problem. Obviously sad for the families involved, but candidly I don't get too worked up over events that thin the herd by 10-20 people per year. They are statistically meaningless numbers in a country with 300 million people.

Its a very rare thing to find 'thinning the human herd' posters.

What are the 'legitimate reasons' to own automatic weapons that outweigh saving hundreds of lives?

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Really? So people who mourn the 26 deaths at Newtown are "the uneducated masses"? Interesting.



What were the odds it would impact a kid like Jack Pinto?

The first part was of course referring to the huge amount of effort and PR people give to controlling automatic weapons, not realizing that most killings are not by these, but by plain old handguns and such. But, opportunistic politicians can whip up a good bit of fervor by making it seem that automatic weapons play a much bigger role in the rate of killings than is actually true.

As I said before, I'm in favor of some controls on this stuff, but that doesn't mean I don't call BS on people who grossly exagerrate the problem.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Obviously sad for the families involved, but candidly I don't get too worked up over events that thin the herd by 10-20 people per year. They are statistically meaningless numbers in a country with 300 million people.

Thin the herd? Holy Christ.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Its a very rare thing to find 'thinning the human herd' posters.

What are the 'legitimate reasons' to own automatic weapons that outweigh saving hundreds of lives?

Same reason someone might want to own any kind of gun. Maybe they just want to shoot. Maybe they get their kicks, or blow off a little steam by going out and blowing through 500 rounds of ammo machine gun style.

Maybe they want to collect them. Maybe they want them for personal protection of their families and home. Don't know. Never really had the urge to buy one, but those are probably some realistic guesses. When you consider the number of automatic weapons that are actually used in killings, mass or otherwise, and compare that with the number of similar guns sold or already in someone's hands, I think it's pretty safe to surmise that the overwhelming majority of these weapons have been acquired with no intent whatsoever to kill someone, go on a mass killing rampage, or even commit a crime with the gun.

I used the dramatic thinning the herd comment for a point. Of course anyone's death, by mass shooting or otherwise, is unfortunate, and certainly for their friends and loved ones. But to take that and suggest that it rises to the level of a need to spend the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars that we have on this issue seems like kind of a waste to me.

If I heard that 20 people on average were killed by some sort of rare kind of disease, I would view that as unfortunate as well. But I wouldn't advocate spending the time and money we've spent on assault rifle arguments to try to cure that disease.

Take the 30+ kids in Connecticut. Say the shooting doesn't happen. It's way more likely (than a mass shooting) that some of those kids will die of cancer, heart disease, suicide, etc..., at what we might call an early age. Why not take all the money we spend arguing over assault weapons and spend it on something that could really make a difference.

According to Wiki, cops thinned the herd by about 300 people in this year alone. Do we just conclude the "victims" deserved it, unlike the kids in Connecticut, and conclude it's a cost of doing business?

Sorry to pass this message along, but we're all going to end up dead, whether we like it or not. All we can do is enjoy our time here, and unfortunately, dodge the "bullets" (literally and figuratively) that may have our name on them.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Thin the herd? Holy Christ.

O stop with the fake dramatics.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

What are the 'legitimate reasons' to own automatic weapons that outweigh saving hundreds of lives?

If I don't have a violent criminal record, then why would I need to give you or anyone else a reason for owning one? Why am I immediately guilty until I prove myself innocent?

 

[Priceless]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

O stop with the fake dramatics.

Fake?

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Same reason someone might want to own any kind of gun. Maybe they just want to shoot. Maybe they get their kicks, or blow off a little steam by going out and blowing through 500 rounds of ammo machine gun style...

The question: What are the 'legitimate reasons' to own automatic weapons that outweigh saving hundreds of lives?
Hovey answer: Because they want to
FTGB answer: I don't have to answer that

Any others? Bob?

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Fake?

a thing that is not genuine, a forgery or sham

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

The question: What are the 'legitimate reasons' to own automatic weapons that outweigh saving hundreds of lives?
Hovey answer: Because they want to
FTGB answer: I don't have to answer that

Any others? Bob?

The most likely I would guess is that some people like guns and like to go shoot them at a shooting range or wherever and some subset of those would like automatic type weapons. So, basically what Hovey said.

Of course if you make this argument, you then have to make a much stronger argument that all guns should be outlawed, as the non-assaunt weapons kill a boatload more people than automatic ones do. But, I understand automatic weapons are a sexier and easier target.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

The question: What are the 'legitimate reasons' to own automatic weapons that outweigh saving hundreds of lives?
Hovey answer: Because they want to
FTGB answer: I don't have to answer that

Any others? Bob?

Just being devil's advocate. I don't have a reason to own an "assault rifle" or semi-auto pistol, and I would not blow my top if they were restricted again, but I also agree that a ban merely treats a symptom of a larger underlying societal problem. It's like the 'dry drunks' who attend meetings and don't drink, but still haven't directly faced and solved the problems that led to their excessive drinking in the first place.