America - Gun Control

General Social Discussion
MG1962
Member
Member
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu 06 Apr, 2017 12:44 pm
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 14 times

Re: America - Gun Control

Unread post by MG1962 » Fri 13 Oct, 2017 2:02 pm

Abraham wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 12:38 pm
I am a gun proponent, and i don't think i am guilty of any of the above. So not sure why a post full of generalisations was directed at me.
What generalization are you talking about? All four of the examples I gave were stopped at the legislative stage by the pro gun lobby over the last 10 years.


Abraham
Member
Member
Posts: 1044
Joined: Mon 25 Mar, 2013 1:09 pm
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 23 times

Unread post by Abraham » Fri 13 Oct, 2017 2:38 pm

MG1962 wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 2:02 pm
Abraham wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 12:38 pm
I am a gun proponent, and i don't think i am guilty of any of the above. So not sure why a post full of generalisations was directed at me.
What generalization are you talking about? All four of the examples I gave were stopped at the legislative stage by the pro gun lobby over the last 10 years.
These generalisations:
MG1962 wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 2:02 pm
Gun proponents are all about what wont work without ever offering solutions.

Gun proponents agree mental stability can be a major factor in many of these mass shootings, yet fought any legislation to stop access by mental disturbed people to guns

Gun proponents agree that criminal access to guns is an issue but successfully fought against electronic chip identification for weapons.

Gun proponents agree that criminal access to guns is an issue but successfully fought against banning guns made from materials that resist leaving finger prints.

MG1962
Member
Member
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu 06 Apr, 2017 12:44 pm
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 14 times

Unread post by MG1962 » Fri 13 Oct, 2017 3:08 pm

Abraham wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 2:38 pm
These generalisations:
MG1962 wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 2:02 pm
Gun proponents are all about what wont work without ever offering solutions.

Gun proponents agree mental stability can be a major factor in many of these mass shootings, yet fought any legislation to stop access by mental disturbed people to guns

Gun proponents agree that criminal access to guns is an issue but successfully fought against electronic chip identification for weapons.

Gun proponents agree that criminal access to guns is an issue but successfully fought against banning guns made from materials that resist leaving finger prints.
Those are not generalizations. They are historical facts

For example:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02 ... lized.html

The National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action says it is not opposed to the development of so-called "smart guns," but rejects government mandates that require the use of grips with fingerprint-reading technology, according to a post on its website.

"[The] NRA recognizes that the "smart guns" issue clearly has the potential to mesh with the anti-gunner's agenda, opening the door to a ban on all guns that do not possess the government-required technology," the group said.

Or this

https://www.federalregister.gov/documen ... ct-of-2007

Repealed by Congress

https://apnews.com/553ff88b430a4334868105f7a943b912

voice of reason
Member
Member
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat 09 Aug, 2014 10:35 pm
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 32 times

Unread post by voice of reason » Fri 13 Oct, 2017 6:34 pm

tsjonathan wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 10:29 am
how are the corn flakes?
I lied, I don't eat corn flakes - but see how easy it is to mislead people? ;)
Suffering supporter since 1967

voice of reason
Member
Member
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat 09 Aug, 2014 10:35 pm
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 32 times

Unread post by voice of reason » Fri 13 Oct, 2017 6:53 pm

tsjonathan wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 10:15 am
VOR, took a snippet of my comment and concluded that i said there was truth on the internet. Reread what i wrote.
I took snippets to be concise - it's good manners. For the sake of clarity, here's what you said in full:

"That's a big call? Its a non issue lol. there's no two ways about it. Facts and information are openly available to all now.

Dude, you can search anything online in 2017, there's a reason why professions like journalism; tourist agencies and these archaic proffesions are dying. Information is free flowing. Yes, in SOME instances government control mainstream media i agree and ironically at the same time mainstream media is dying because people can find contradictory information which supports truth and integrity. You realise citizen journalism is rising right? You go on youtube to BBC; CNN; Fox news and these 'news' organisations have to disable their comment section. Why do you think Reddit; 4chan are so popular? That elitist Jay Rockefeller once said internet "is the number one national hazard". It's a hazard because people can't be easily manipulated with lies anymore. A lot of people do fail and follow media lies, but the the majority of people have the capacity now to see truth. There's no two ways about it. Sorry."

I've highlighted the areas where you suggest there is truth on the Internet. I'm not sure why but you now seem to want to back down from the claim. The 'truth' is there is a lot of good information and a lot of total tripe on the web. A fair bit of both is provided by both media companies and nobody 'citizen journalists' in their bedrooms. Smart people will take what they read with a grain of salt and do due diligence to ensure the accuracy of information which is important to them. Journalists have a code of ethics they are required to follow - no such thing exists for citizen J. One side is backed by multi billion dollar companies who rely on reasonable accuracy to maintain their business model where most citizen journalists are doing nothing more then trying to satisfy their desire for 15 minutes of fame.
I'm the first person to criticise the media (there have been some shocking abuses over the years) but if it's comparing CBS and a spotty teenager tweeting about conspiracy theories I think a degree of caution is warranted if believing citizen journalism is the holy grail of truth and justice.
Suffering supporter since 1967


tsjonathan
Member
Member
Posts: 1649
Joined: Sun 21 Mar, 2010 6:04 pm
Has liked: 6 times
Been liked: 10 times

Unread post by tsjonathan » Fri 13 Oct, 2017 7:42 pm

voice of reason wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 6:53 pm
tsjonathan wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 10:15 am
VOR, took a snippet of my comment and concluded that i said there was truth on the internet. Reread what i wrote.
I took snippets to be concise - it's good manners. For the sake of clarity, here's what you said in full:

"That's a big call? Its a non issue lol. there's no two ways about it. Facts and information are openly available to all now.

Dude, you can search anything online in 2017, there's a reason why professions like journalism; tourist agencies and these archaic proffesions are dying. Information is free flowing. Yes, in SOME instances government control mainstream media i agree and ironically at the same time mainstream media is dying because people can find contradictory information which supports truth and integrity. You realise citizen journalism is rising right? You go on youtube to BBC; CNN; Fox news and these 'news' organisations have to disable their comment section. Why do you think Reddit; 4chan are so popular? That elitist Jay Rockefeller once said internet "is the number one national hazard". It's a hazard because people can't be easily manipulated with lies anymore. A lot of people do fail and follow media lies, but the the majority of people have the capacity now to see truth. There's no two ways about it. Sorry."

I've highlighted the areas where you suggest there is truth on the Internet. I'm not sure why but you now seem to want to back down from the claim. The 'truth' is there is a lot of good information and a lot of total tripe on the web. A fair bit of both is provided by both media companies and nobody 'citizen journalists' in their bedrooms. Smart people will take what they read with a grain of salt and do due diligence to ensure the accuracy of information which is important to them. Journalists have a code of ethics they are required to follow - no such thing exists for citizen J. One side is backed by multi billion dollar companies who rely on reasonable accuracy to maintain their business model where most citizen journalists are doing nothing more then trying to satisfy their desire for 15 minutes of fame.
I'm the first person to criticise the media (there have been some shocking abuses over the years) but if it's comparing CBS and a spotty teenager tweeting about conspiracy theories I think a degree of caution is warranted if believing citizen journalism is the holy grail of truth and justice.
Common man, you took one piece of what i said and blew it out of the water with your corn flakes comment bro.Who is going to say "The internet only has truthful information and nothing else"? Common bro. Like you said there is inherently a lot of truth online and information is so much easier to be passed from people to people which makes discovering truth a lot easier than it ever was


I don't get what you disagree with me about the comments you bolder above. Like its not only my thoughts it's what's happening in the world now. Like its not even controversial. I mean, you know what Google is right? You know what yahoo, reddit, 4chan etc are right? And you know why they're worth so much as well right?

Like, i'm not making this stuff up, call Fairfax media on Monday and ask them how many writers they've laid off in the past 24 months.

I also like how you neglected to mention anything I mentioned about SEO; rankings; Google Panda etc and its improvement to content quality in the internet world yet went on a tangent about how because a company earns billions will intrinsically have more integrity than someone who is independent.And how just because someone is independent he'll be some kid in his parent's basement trying to get 15 minutes of fame LOL . This information isn't even from me. It is what is happening in the world right now whether you like it or not. Google; Yahoo; Baidu etc are extremely rigid in their organising of the information in the world now.

/facepalm

formerguest
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 3201
Joined: Fri 07 Jun, 2013 7:33 pm
Has liked: 234 times
Been liked: 76 times

Unread post by formerguest » Fri 13 Oct, 2017 9:07 pm

Abraham wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 12:55 pm
willow wrote:
Thu 12 Oct, 2017 7:09 pm
I occasionally go hunting, a semi-auto is simply overkill.
Sometimes its overkill, and sometimes its the right tool for the job.

If your trophy hunting, or popping off rabbits for fun, its definitely not necessary.

However if your trying to eradicate pests at a rapid rate, its a better option than a bolt action for simple efficiency. You can jump on Youtube and see guys driving through their fields in Texas killing dozens of hogs in the space of 5 or 10 minutes at close range. That's just not possible with a bolt action. And if your livelihood depends on getting these pigs off your farm, then you will reach for the semi every time.

I'm a pretty avid hunter, and i have never felt the need to have a semi auto for any hunting i have personally done. But different tools for different jobs.
Hunting and eradicating feral animals are very different and many would not object to large land owners or professional shooters being armed with a semi auto. Open slather ownership is another issue.

voice of reason
Member
Member
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat 09 Aug, 2014 10:35 pm
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 32 times

Unread post by voice of reason » Fri 13 Oct, 2017 9:14 pm

tsjonathan wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 7:42 pm
Common man, you took one piece of what i said and blew it out of the water with your corn flakes comment bro.Who is going to say "The internet only has truthful information and nothing else"? Common bro. Like you said there is inherently a lot of truth online and information is so much easier to be passed from people to people which makes discovering truth a lot easier than it ever was
First off, I'm not your 'bro' - I'm probably old enough to be your grandfather. I get that being disrespectful is an attempt to obfuscate the debate but I prefer civility.
My previous post was because you didn't want me to clip anything - I simply posted your full comment and now you seem unhappy I pointed out your contradictions in full context.
At least we agree that the internet is not just truthful information - which then defeats your premise that it's 'easier than it ever was' to find the truth. On the contrary, it actually makes it more difficult. We have people on this thread convinced there's a conspiracy and multiple shooters and there's zero evidence of either other than tin-hats speculating.

And finally, don't believe you can educate me on Fairfax and the media - you'll just have to trust me that I know far, far more about both than you'll ever know.
Suffering supporter since 1967

Earl
Member
Member
Posts: 1680
Joined: Sat 18 Feb, 2017 9:21 am
Has liked: 141 times
Been liked: 91 times

Unread post by Earl » Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:25 am

voice of reason wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 9:14 pm
We have people on this thread convinced there's a conspiracy and multiple shooters and there's zero evidence of either other than tin-hats speculating.
This is something that amazes me. I have no idea how people make stuff up but they do it all the time. It's like logic just leaves the building.

If there were no guns in America it would be a much safer place. If there was less guns it would be more safer. There will be outcries about how wrong this comment is but it's reality.

magpiecol
Member
Member
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 3:02 pm
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 26 times

Unread post by magpiecol » Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:50 am

Earl wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:25 am
voice of reason wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 9:14 pm
We have people on this thread convinced there's a conspiracy and multiple shooters and there's zero evidence of either other than tin-hats speculating.
This is something that amazes me. I have no idea how people make stuff up but they do it all the time. It's like logic just leaves the building.

If there were no guns in America it would be a much safer place. If there was less guns it would be more safer. There will be outcries about how wrong this comment is but it's reality.
Your reality maybe.

"More safer". :roll

Earl
Member
Member
Posts: 1680
Joined: Sat 18 Feb, 2017 9:21 am
Has liked: 141 times
Been liked: 91 times

Unread post by Earl » Sat 14 Oct, 2017 12:09 pm

magpiecol wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:50 am
Earl wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:25 am
voice of reason wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 9:14 pm
We have people on this thread convinced there's a conspiracy and multiple shooters and there's zero evidence of either other than tin-hats speculating.
This is something that amazes me. I have no idea how people make stuff up but they do it all the time. It's like logic just leaves the building.

If there were no guns in America it would be a much safer place. If there was less guns it would be more safer. There will be outcries about how wrong this comment is but it's reality.
Your reality maybe.

"More safer". :roll
It's not my reality. The US is inherently unsafe compared to other developed countries and the primary reason is access to guns. If you can't face that fact that is your call.

magpiecol
Member
Member
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 3:02 pm
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 26 times

Unread post by magpiecol » Sat 14 Oct, 2017 5:30 pm

Earl wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 12:09 pm
magpiecol wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:50 am
Earl wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:25 am
voice of reason wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 9:14 pm
We have people on this thread convinced there's a conspiracy and multiple shooters and there's zero evidence of either other than tin-hats speculating.
This is something that amazes me. I have no idea how people make stuff up but they do it all the time. It's like logic just leaves the building.

If there were no guns in America it would be a much safer place. If there was less guns it would be more safer. There will be outcries about how wrong this comment is but it's reality.
Your reality maybe.

"More safer". :roll
It's not my reality. The US is inherently unsafe compared to other developed countries and the primary reason is access to guns. If you can't face that fact that is your call.
You can talk and criticise till the cows come home, it will change nothing. Gun ownership is in their constitution.

Let it go.

User avatar
innsaneink
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 25346
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:49 pm
Location: ...ahead of you....
Has liked: 280 times
Been liked: 225 times

Unread post by innsaneink » Sat 14 Oct, 2017 5:36 pm

Col has spoken

[/endthread]

Earl
Member
Member
Posts: 1680
Joined: Sat 18 Feb, 2017 9:21 am
Has liked: 141 times
Been liked: 91 times

Unread post by Earl » Sat 14 Oct, 2017 6:41 pm

magpiecol wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 5:30 pm
Earl wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 12:09 pm
magpiecol wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:50 am
Earl wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:25 am


This is something that amazes me. I have no idea how people make stuff up but they do it all the time. It's like logic just leaves the building.

If there were no guns in America it would be a much safer place. If there was less guns it would be more safer. There will be outcries about how wrong this comment is but it's reality.
Your reality maybe.

"More safer". :roll
It's not my reality. The US is inherently unsafe compared to other developed countries and the primary reason is access to guns. If you can't face that fact that is your call.
You can talk and criticise till the cows come home, it will change nothing. Gun ownership is in their constitution.

Let it go.
It will change absolutely nothing. It's like telling a heroin addict that they are ruining their life. They can't see how destructive their behavior is. Still the facts are that exactly like the heroin addict American's dumb gun culture is making them less safe and causing events like the Las Vegas massacre.

I honestly thought though that you were another one on this thread trying to state that there was more than one shooter or it was a conspiracy or that the gun culture makes America safer. Hopefully you are sane enough not to state something as stupid as that.

Munk
Member
Member
Posts: 314
Joined: Fri 06 Oct, 2017 4:20 pm
Has liked: 9 times
Been liked: 22 times

Unread post by Munk » Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:25 pm

Earl wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:25 am
voice of reason wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 9:14 pm
We have people on this thread convinced there's a conspiracy and multiple shooters and there's zero evidence of either other than tin-hats speculating.
This is something that amazes me. I have no idea how people make stuff up but they do it all the time. It's like logic just leaves the building.

If there were no guns in America it would be a much safer place. If there was less guns it would be more safer. There will be outcries about how wrong this comment is but it's reality.
How can this be a reality when you have zero evidence that it will be the case? What facts are you basing your statement upon?

User avatar
innsaneink
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 25346
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:49 pm
Location: ...ahead of you....
Has liked: 280 times
Been liked: 225 times

Unread post by innsaneink » Sat 14 Oct, 2017 11:14 pm

Facts/opinions... What it's come down to eh?
Pretty sound opinion if you ask me... Cant see the U.S. being more dangerous than it already is without guns, unless the population goes totally berko without their semi - autos

Earl
Member
Member
Posts: 1680
Joined: Sat 18 Feb, 2017 9:21 am
Has liked: 141 times
Been liked: 91 times

Unread post by Earl » Sun 15 Oct, 2017 12:27 am

Munk wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:25 pm
Earl wrote:
Sat 14 Oct, 2017 10:25 am
voice of reason wrote:
Fri 13 Oct, 2017 9:14 pm
We have people on this thread convinced there's a conspiracy and multiple shooters and there's zero evidence of either other than tin-hats speculating.
This is something that amazes me. I have no idea how people make stuff up but they do it all the time. It's like logic just leaves the building.

If there were no guns in America it would be a much safer place. If there was less guns it would be more safer. There will be outcries about how wrong this comment is but it's reality.
How can this be a reality when you have zero evidence that it will be the case? What facts are you basing your statement upon?
So if America was disarmed then the Las Vegas shooting would have been worse ? I mean at some point I think that you have to be rational. Of course you are entitled not to be and it sounds like you have chosen that option.

MG1962
Member
Member
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu 06 Apr, 2017 12:44 pm
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 14 times

Unread post by MG1962 » Sun 15 Oct, 2017 1:26 am

Earl wrote:
Sun 15 Oct, 2017 12:27 am
So if America was disarmed then the Las Vegas shooting would have been worse ? I mean at some point I think that you have to be rational. Of course you are entitled not to be and it sounds like you have chosen that option.
It would have certainly been less deadly. He needed multiple weapons because the fire rate was so high the barrels were over heating.

If semi automatics alone had been been banned his rate of fire would have been significantly lower. Depending how much practice he had as low as 3 or 4 shots per minute.

Having tighter gun registration would have helped police identify some one possibly slipping over the edge. 33 purchases of semi automatic weapons in a 12 month period is extraordinary by any standard.

Locked

Return to “General Discussion”