Poll: Does the United States have a problem with guns?
Yes. Guns are signficant source of social ill in the US
No. Guns are not a contributing factor to the social problems of the US
Both. Guns are an issue in the US but are both a part of the problem and part of the solution
Unsure.
[Show Results]
 
Debate the merits of guns in America (poll added)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-08-2013, 02:57 PM
RE: Debate the merits of guns in America (poll added)
(21-08-2013 02:27 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013...wn-weapons

Don't need guns to protect people either.

That worked that time with that person. I admire that woman's courage, insight, and skills, but the Connecticut asshole would have likely just shot her.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2013, 03:00 PM
RE: Debate the merits of guns in America (poll added)
(21-08-2013 02:03 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Is this it? Is this really the best reason people can come up with for not changing gun laws in the US? Because the government might* enact martial law at some point in the future for some reason and then your guns would be good for killing the cops and soldiers that don't defect?

I think this is an somewhat off-topic rat hole. It is arguably a basis for the Second Amendment, it is definitely part of many people's rationale, it is an attitude and opinion that factors in to the discussion and approaches. Let's move on.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
21-08-2013, 03:10 PM
Re: RE: Debate the merits of guns in America (poll added)
(21-08-2013 11:57 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(21-08-2013 11:03 AM)TheBlackKnight Wrote:  LOL the OP has failed before this thread left the 1st page.

Most cops in the US, who bust in your house mistakingly and shoot your dog, don't even GET an initial pysch exam, nor do they get bi-yearly one after that.

Then he wants to limit magazine capacity and ability to buy ammo but want's people trained on safe and effective gun handling?

Your proposed solution is ... ? Or you don't think there is a problem ?

Why not more training for cops and psych exams for cops then ? I fail to see how the proposed limits would negatively affect training on safe and effective gun handling...

LOL TBD is super mad because he learned the hard way trolling is a 2 person dance, and now he has his fingers super glued in his ears, you know, the mark of a free thinker.

Engraining safe gun handling habits during stressful situations requires experience and inoculation. The more you have, the better your are. Artificially and arbitrarily limiting access to ammo is a direct action against knowledge transfer between those who know the way and those who seek it.
I would love nothing more then for our nations LEO to get more trigger time, in addition to all the other life saving skills a 1st responder should know.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2013, 03:17 PM
RE: Debate the merits of guns in America (poll added)
(21-08-2013 03:10 PM)TheBlackKnight Wrote:  
(21-08-2013 11:57 AM)morondog Wrote:  Your proposed solution is ... ? Or you don't think there is a problem ?

Why not more training for cops and psych exams for cops then ? I fail to see how the proposed limits would negatively affect training on safe and effective gun handling...

LOL TBD is super mad because he learned the hard way trolling is a 2 person dance, and now he has his fingers super glued in his ears, you know, the mark of a free thinker.

Engraining safe gun handling habits during stressful situations requires experience and inoculation. The more you have, the better your are. Artificially and arbitrarily limiting access to ammo is a direct action against knowledge transfer between those who know the way and those who seek it.
I would love nothing more then for our nations LEO to get more trigger time, in addition to all the other life saving skills a 1st responder should know.

That would be a more constructive post without the first sentence. Dodgy

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
21-08-2013, 03:52 PM
Re: Debate the merits of guns in America (poll added)
I think it's a completely off-topic strawman. Drinking Beverage

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2013, 05:30 PM
RE: Debate the merits of guns in America (poll added)
(21-08-2013 01:29 PM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  
(20-08-2013 07:23 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Seriously? An argument about personal self-defense is all well and good. But it's not this argument.

"Armed insurrection will save us from The Government if necessary" is a ludicrous fantasy.

You have a few hundred thousand members of the armed forces against 80 million armed Americans. There's no doubt that government forces will kill a large mess of civilians in the conflict but they simply can't outlast we the people. Ba a simpleminded and myopic fool and disregard this at your own peril. There will be a rifle behind every blade of grass to greet Big Brother.

I agree that a small, but determined, force can hold off a regular army, but do you really see this happening, even if the perfect storm brought about the conditions in which it could? I mean the Taliban have 72 virgins waiting for them, so they're ready to go, but I don't see even a small minority of U.S. citizens willing to sacrifice themselves for anything, much less an ideological concept like "freedom", or for "Uncle Sam"! I can't fault them, either! I'm not signing up to die for anybody not related to me by blood (& even some of them can go jump off a bridge)! So you'd have some serious convincing to do for me to believe going out to get blown up by a predator missile targeted on U.S. soil will keep my son from (joining the resistance to avenge his father, perhaps) harm! I like the concept of having a means to fight back, but I agree with cjlr; if you're going to propose that perfect scenario, you might as well factor in "the Man's" dream scenario where nuclear weapons are authorized to be used on the resistance (orders carried out by the last 10 henchmen truly loyal to Uncle Sam), wiping it out instantly! The guns and the people willing to use them could be vaporized by far less destructive military weaponry than a Nuke, as well.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheGulegon's post
21-08-2013, 06:32 PM
RE: Debate the merits of guns in America (poll added)
(21-08-2013 03:52 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I think it's a completely off-topic strawman. Drinking Beverage

Your OP's proposals contradict each other. You built him, I just set his straw ass on fire.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2013, 09:55 PM
RE: Debate the merits of guns in America (poll added)
(21-08-2013 01:47 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(21-08-2013 01:46 PM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  What happens when the govt declares martial law and suspends elections?

What are you talking about? How is that a realistic threat? Do you really believe that both the political machine in the US and the military, would just stand by and let that happen?

If they have a significant amount of support from both the political machination and the segments within the military, yes that could happen. Any opposition can be silenced. Those considered too dangerous can be rendered harmless by whatever means necessary.

And those events are exactly what the Second Amendment was intended to address. It goes to the core of what America is about. The PEOPLE are in charge of their lives and allocate a limited amount of power to the state to handle various priorities for them. They entrust power to their representatives to be stewarded wisely. When it is abused, there are laws, checks, and balances in place to correct this. If that fails, it is ultimately the responsibility of the people to wrest that abuse even using force to do so. The firearm is the current tool and symbol of that ability of the people to do so.

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

-Thomas Jefferson
The Declaration of Independence

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

- Joel Chastnoff, The 188th Crybaby Brigade
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2013, 05:25 AM
Re: Debate the merits of guns in America (poll added)
First, who is proposing taking guns away?

Second, think about the scenario you are proposing for a minute. We live in a country where the 2 political factions can't even agree long enough to realize that constantly voting to try and repeal the affordable health care act, is counterproductive and costs us money.

In Jefferson's day we certainly had more worries about the individual civil liberties of our people. But we don't live in Jefferson's day anymore. There was no standing militia during Jefferson's day (excluding the Navy which was allowed under the Constitution and then as the Marines were being created, Jefferson wrote against the abuse of government power used to create them but then used them when he came to the presidency to attack the middle east), so the idea of people being able to protect themselves with technology comparable to military technology of the time was feasible. Today, is that still true or would the average citizen need access to much more sophisticated weapons? Do you want Joe Blow the YEC to have access to said weapons?

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2013, 11:10 AM
RE: Debate the merits of guns in America (poll added)
Is this already the end of this thread? There are at least 8 people who say guns are part of the problem and solution, but have given no indication as to how guns are part of the solution.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: