|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Feb 25, 2018 22:09:10 GMT
If they were going to ban them anyway then there was no need for registration. Whether that was their original intent or not, registration definitely made it easier. Sure, but that is a good thing. The registration enabled them to enact a law, it was not instrumental in the confiscation. So registration enabled them to enact a law to confiscate this particular model of firearm but registration wasn't instrumental in the confiscation? I hope I'm misunderstanding you here. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 22:10:24 GMT
Yeah I gotta admit I am beginning to go Storms way and say guns are not the issue, it's the law enforcement that needs work. Law enforcement does need work given this situation. But the bigger picture, and I'm just 'what-if-ing', is that mentally unstable people don't need a gun to do violence. What if everyone who bought kitchen knives had to register them? This shooter took out seventeen people; there are serial killers, running under the radar, that have had higher body counts. So many things can be used as a weapon. Rope, rat poison, knives, vehicles; the list is endless. The mass shootings get more media attention. But the real issue is, humans are going to hurt other humans in any society; how can we legislate a completely safe society and still be free? How to deal with violence is part of the human condition. It has been ongoing as long as there have been humans. OH yeah I agree with your whatifs, in fact it is an ongoing joke of mine that spree killers do not doe very well, I think I could score in the low thirties by just running down towns main street with a sword. But the acts are made easier when a tool such as a gun which is only designed to kill is so readily available. I guess the issue is far more complex, it's not as simple as just banning guns or having better controls, it is about society as a whole in a lot of ways. I am often reminded of FUTSIES which are people in the Judge Dredd world who flip because of the pressure. I honestly don't think we as humans are supposed to be living the way we do. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 22:13:01 GMT
Sure, but that is a good thing. The registration enabled them to enact a law, it was not instrumental in the confiscation. So registration enabled them to enact a law to confiscate this particular model of firearm but registration wasn't instrumental in the confiscation? I hope I'm misunderstanding you here. Yeah a bit, or maybe we are misunderstanding each other. The registration was instrumental in enacting the confiscation, but the type of rifle was illegal regardless of registration, so the registration was not what caused the confiscation. I cannot see how registration was a bad thing in this instance, unless you want to own an illegal weapon. |
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Feb 25, 2018 22:14:30 GMT
So registration enabled them to enact a law to confiscate this particular model of firearm but registration wasn't instrumental in the confiscation? I hope I'm misunderstanding you here. Yeah a bit, or maybe we are misunderstanding each other. The registration was instrumental in enacting the confiscation, but the type of rifle was illegal regardless of registration, so the registration was not what caused the confiscation. I cannot see how registration was a bad thing in this instance, unless you want to own an illegal weapon. The SKS was perfectly legal in California prior to the registration. The confiscation law was enacted AFTER the registration was completed. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 22:17:44 GMT
Yeah a bit, or maybe we are misunderstanding each other. The registration was instrumental in enacting the confiscation, but the type of rifle was illegal regardless of registration, so the registration was not what caused the confiscation. I cannot see how registration was a bad thing in this instance, unless you want to own an illegal weapon. The SKS was perfectly legal in California prior to the registration. The confiscation law was enacted AFTER the registration was completed. Sure, but that does not mean that the registration was part of the confiscation, unless you claim that they only enacted the confiscation because of the registration, or that they would not have made it illegal if there was no registration. |
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Feb 25, 2018 22:19:42 GMT
The SKS was perfectly legal in California prior to the registration. The confiscation law was enacted AFTER the registration was completed. Sure, but that does not mean that the registration was part of the confiscation, unless you claim that they only enacted the confiscation because of the registration, or that they would not have made it illegal if there was no registration. Okay. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 22:23:39 GMT
Sure, but that does not mean that the registration was part of the confiscation, unless you claim that they only enacted the confiscation because of the registration, or that they would not have made it illegal if there was no registration. Okay. I am interested in your stance, I personally think it is quite an important distinction. |
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Feb 25, 2018 22:24:04 GMT
Law enforcement does need work given this situation. But the bigger picture, and I'm just 'what-if-ing', is that mentally unstable people don't need a gun to do violence. What if everyone who bought kitchen knives had to register them? This shooter took out seventeen people; there are serial killers, running under the radar, that have had higher body counts. So many things can be used as a weapon. Rope, rat poison, knives, vehicles; the list is endless. The mass shootings get more media attention. But the real issue is, humans are going to hurt other humans in any society; how can we legislate a completely safe society and still be free? How to deal with violence is part of the human condition. It has been ongoing as long as there have been humans. OH yeah I agree with your whatifs, in fact it is an ongoing joke of mine that spree killers do not doe very well, I think I could score in the low thirties by just running down towns main street with a sword. But the acts are made easier when a tool such as a gun which is only designed to kill is so readily available. I guess the issue is far more complex, it's not as simple as just banning guns or having better controls, it is about society as a whole in a lot of ways.
I am often reminded of FUTSIES which are people in the Judge Dredd world who flip because of the pressure. I honestly don't think we as humans are supposed to be living the way we do. Therein lies the problem. Why are we seeing this level of acting out as compared to, say 50 years ago? Same country, same Constitution; what in society contributes to more mass shootings? I don't have an answer because I don't have enough relevant information to have an opinion. But it is a discussion that should be happening now. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 22:28:17 GMT
OH yeah I agree with your whatifs, in fact it is an ongoing joke of mine that spree killers do not doe very well, I think I could score in the low thirties by just running down towns main street with a sword. But the acts are made easier when a tool such as a gun which is only designed to kill is so readily available. I guess the issue is far more complex, it's not as simple as just banning guns or having better controls, it is about society as a whole in a lot of ways.
I am often reminded of FUTSIES which are people in the Judge Dredd world who flip because of the pressure. I honestly don't think we as humans are supposed to be living the way we do. Therein lies the problem. Why are we seeing this level of acting out as compared to, say 50 years ago? Same country, same Constitution; what in society contributes to more mass shootings? I don't have an answer because I don't have enough relevant information to have an opinion. But it is a discussion that should be happening now. Society is evolving too fast for us I think, and we are seeing a rise in mental health issues, I don't know what the solution is, but yes discussion is important. I know a number of people who think we should 'go back' to a happier smaller group time, but I don't see how that would work. I do know that I found out breaking up with my wife, that I have hundreds of face book friends, but very few friends I could rely on for support. |
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Feb 25, 2018 22:39:20 GMT
Therein lies the problem. Why are we seeing this level of acting out as compared to, say 50 years ago? Same country, same Constitution; what in society contributes to more mass shootings? I don't have an answer because I don't have enough relevant information to have an opinion. But it is a discussion that should be happening now. Society is evolving too fast for us I think, and we are seeing a rise in mental health issues, I don't know what the solution is, but yes discussion is important. I know a number of people who think we should 'go back' to a happier smaller group time, but I don't see how that would work. I do know that I found out breaking up with my wife, that I have hundreds of face book friends, but very few friends I could rely on for support. Same here; the reliable ones I could count on one hand. And, as much as I think overpopulation is a factor, back in history has just as much, if not more, violence. During the Dark Ages, violence was an everyday thing. Can humans ever maintain a peaceful society? |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 22:46:23 GMT
Society is evolving too fast for us I think, and we are seeing a rise in mental health issues, I don't know what the solution is, but yes discussion is important. I know a number of people who think we should 'go back' to a happier smaller group time, but I don't see how that would work. I do know that I found out breaking up with my wife, that I have hundreds of face book friends, but very few friends I could rely on for support. Same here; the reliable ones I could count on one hand. And, as much as I think overpopulation is a factor, back in history has just as much, if not more, violence. During the Dark Ages, violence was an everyday thing. Can humans ever maintain a peaceful society? No I doubt humans will be peaceful. We need a universal enemy. It's not over population so much as changing how we live with others, We used to have a small group that you knew personally, now we have a much larger group that some of who I have never met in real life, and if I disagree with them I can de-friend them. Reality does not work like that and I think that social media in particular is setting us up for having issues around that. |
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Feb 25, 2018 22:59:07 GMT
Same here; the reliable ones I could count on one hand. And, as much as I think overpopulation is a factor, back in history has just as much, if not more, violence. During the Dark Ages, violence was an everyday thing. Can humans ever maintain a peaceful society? No I doubt humans will be peaceful. We need a universal enemy. It's not over population so much as changing how we live with others, We used to have a small group that you knew personally, now we have a much larger group that some of who I have never met in real life, and if I disagree with them I can de-friend them. Reality does not work like that and I think that social media in particular is setting us up for having issues around that. Social media as a factor; interesting concept, and I have a friend that would not only agree that it is a factor, she would say it is the only factor. WHY do humans need a universal enemy? What makes us different from other species who kill only for survival? Are our brains just not big enough? Or are they too big? |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 23:19:39 GMT
No I doubt humans will be peaceful. We need a universal enemy. It's not over population so much as changing how we live with others, We used to have a small group that you knew personally, now we have a much larger group that some of who I have never met in real life, and if I disagree with them I can de-friend them. Reality does not work like that and I think that social media in particular is setting us up for having issues around that. Social media as a factor; interesting concept, and I have a friend that would not only agree that it is a factor, she would say it is the only factor. WHY do humans need a universal enemy? What makes us different from other species who kill only for survival? Are our brains just not big enough? Or are they too big? that was sort of a joke, but most dystopian societies are built on a universal enemy. it seems to be the only way to unite us. |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Feb 26, 2018 0:20:12 GMT
Your imagined distinction changes nothing. Your words STILL should be used by leaders of countries that persecute Christians to respond to criticism. According to you now, they are entitled to scoff at those critics. (Your poverty of thought just keeps getting more and more evident.)
Of course they have the right to scoff at my criticisms. What kind of idiot would suggest otherwise? Or was this just another thinly-veiled strawman? It is your words (no need to quote them a third time) that provide them the justification to scoff. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2018 0:35:41 GMT
Of course they have the right to scoff at my criticisms. What kind of idiot would suggest otherwise? Or was this just another thinly-veiled strawman? It is your words (no need to quote them a third time) that provide them the justification to scoff. Uh, no. Life itself and their positions therein are the meaningful justifications for them being allowed to scoff and it is their own personal choice whether to scoff or not. Just because I find it amusing that someone living on the other side of the world wants to criticize America's centuries-long Bill of Rights doesn't justify anyone else doing it. If I murdered someone, would anyone be justified in copycatting? Which brings me to my final point. Comparing gun ownership to mass persecution of a religious sect is a stretch, Armstrong. |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Feb 26, 2018 1:23:46 GMT
It is your words (no need to quote them a third time) that provide them the justification to scoff. Comparing gun ownership to mass persecution of a religious sect is a stretch, Armstrong. I made no such comparison, and if you (honestly) think I did, then your ability to grasp the basic tools of argument are even worse than I had previously estimated.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 26, 2018 1:25:32 GMT
WE paid people BIG BUCKs and it didn't seem so bad! In fact many went...yay...  You mean that law where pump-action shotguns were among the banned weapons so people just replaced them with lever-action models. You're an imbecile. Your definition of imbecile = someone who disagrees with you when you know you in the wrong. Did I mention any types of weapons? No I mention that the Australian government had a buy back and many people were happy to sell their weapons to the government for good money. It was funded by a new tax and was bi-partisan and backed by the Australian public because we cared about mass shootings. Guess what? It has worked. NONE since then. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2018 1:26:55 GMT
Comparing gun ownership to mass persecution of a religious sect is a stretch, Armstrong. I made no such comparison, and if you (honestly) think I did, then your ability to grasp the basic tools of argument are even worse than I had previously estimated.
Sure. If my grasp of the basic tools of argument are so lacking, then run along boy. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 26, 2018 1:30:30 GMT
LOLOLOLOLOLOL Sorry, I KNOW I shouldn't laugh butt are you serious? Neena neena neena " MY version is better than YOUR version of religion and MY God is gonna get you and make you pay for daring to disagree with me!" Amen You wouldn't understand, Goz. It's a sort of a Bible joke. Then again, I suppose that means I shouldn't have applied it to Gadreel since he probably didn't get the reference. Why not add patronising to the litany of sins of arrogance and self-delusion? |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 26, 2018 1:37:41 GMT
No I doubt humans will be peaceful. We need a universal enemy. It's not over population so much as changing how we live with others, We used to have a small group that you knew personally, now we have a much larger group that some of who I have never met in real life, and if I disagree with them I can de-friend them. Reality does not work like that and I think that social media in particular is setting us up for having issues around that. Social media as a factor; interesting concept, and I have a friend that would not only agree that it is a factor, she would say it is the only factor. WHY do humans need a universal enemy? What makes us different from other species who kill only for survival? Are our brains just not big enough? Or are they too big? 'Tribalism' which is always under the surface of nearly every human interaction. Simply put 'them' and 'us' and MOST noticeable in religion and nationalism. Often for the disaffected ( which is sadly a growing group for the reasons you mentioned and many others) is a growing subset especially in America. If you add the mentally ill then you get a type of person who sees themselves isolated and the rest of us are 'them'. |
|
