Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You are assuming that reason and logic can be used with the proponents of gun control.I'm not trying to stir anything up. Gun violence is a matter of human agency, the gun being inert until used. My fear is that unless the gun owners come up with some idea on how to deal with the violence and move the discussion meaningfully to the issues of mental illness and crime, the largely urban population will see gun violence as a tool-issue and be very comfortable simply restricting access to the tools.
as a practical matter, are there any good ideas for gun control? any reasonable approaches?
Yep! Like throwing petrol at the sun. We MUST take pages from the gay rights movement (The Spartans of political and cultural warfare)You are assuming that reason and logic can be used with the proponents of gun control.
R
I thought you might say “steady breath and focus”
as a practical matter, are there any good ideas for gun control? any reasonable approaches?
EXECUTE, not prosecute.Why yes there is a good, nay great, idea for gun control,...stop blaming the gun and prosecute the person.
Social media is a big one. The rise of social media and mass shootings concurrently is no accident.
Walk through it.Give the man a cigar
Walk through it.
Is this like video games cause violence because they desensitize people, or, that social media amplifies emotions, or, social media gives publicity?
It ain't the guns, it's the people using them that we gotta deal with.
That is what we have to deal with but that isn’t the end goal of the gun grabbers.
Gun grabbers and left leaning fucks hate freedom. It threatens them. Owning a firearm is the ultimate freedom.
Think about it
You speak of gun violence, gun control, and mental illness.. who has the right to define these things? Take a “crazy” person for example. If you go read many definitions of crazy the common denominator is it’s a term to describe someone’s actions when you don’t understand them or it makes no sense to you. That being said if you don’t understand a nucular physicist like Albert Einstein you say he is crazy because your not on his level. So who should be given the power to say “I don’t understand you because I’m no where near as smart as you so obviously you must be “crazy” because I am that self righteous”?I'm not trying to stir anything up. Gun violence is a matter of human agency, the gun being inert until used. My fear is that unless the gun owners come up with some idea on how to deal with the violence and move the discussion meaningfully to the issues of mental illness and crime, the largely urban population will see gun violence as a tool-issue and be very comfortable simply restricting access to the tools.
No it’s much simpler.. 2ND Admendment.I think it is more than this.
We are a democracy and the rights granted are subject to conditions expressed in law and regulations. That's just fact. Violence is just another word for crime and if deeper or more consistent punishment is proposed, i can fully support it. But, to not offer a recognition that gun violence is occurring in our schools and on our streets is dishonest. And, if we recognize the violence and want to preserve our effective rights to gun ownership, we need to start encouraging the national organizations and leadership to propose measures that address the former and preserve the latter.
The proposed legislation does neither. My grandmother always said " you cannot beat smething with nothing" and the legislation is the "something". Unless the community has an alternative, we have nothing.
I do not know the answer which is why I proposed the question.
Social media is never “off”. It’s always there and always on. Most people addicted to it won’t turn off their device to access it like a drug. People who are somewhat alienated become totally alienated and take it completely seriously. It’s not just bullying, but social pressure too. Obviously young girls (killing themselves in greater numbers) and young boys are most susceptible, because they want to be cool and accepted, and if they’re not this turns from alienation to loathing, and that’s what leads to violence. Every one of these people has a social media footprint the size of Asia, and it’s the first place the detectives go, because it’s usually broadcast power intentions, or crazy, or violence, or whatever justification. Normal people don’t shoot or hurt random people. You have to stop seeing them as human and stop empathizing with them. Social media does these things to some people.Walk through it.
Is this like video games cause violence because they desensitize people, or, that social media amplifies emotions, or, social media gives publicity?
It ain't the guns, it's the people using them that we gotta deal with.
Oh, I'm for the constitution all the way, but that's not the issue. The issue is that 2a advocates seem to only frame the issues of gun usage in the absolute language of a constitutional right. This approach induces the other side to consider regulations like that cited by the OP which erode the right. Tactically, it would be better to change the conversation - recognize the issue and offer alternatives.No it’s much simpler.. 2ND Admendment.
From my cold dead hands. If you are not for the constitution you are against it. I took a oath and I will uphold it.
yes.....actually there is.I'm not trying to stir anything up. Gun violence is a matter of human agency, the gun being inert until used. My fear is that unless the gun owners come up with some idea on how to deal with the violence and move the discussion meaningfully to the issues of mental illness and crime, the largely urban population will see gun violence as a tool-issue and be very comfortable simply restricting access to the tools.
My apology goatboy. I’d been taking your posts a bit to serious while you were apparently just being devils advocate.. the problem with your questions is the same problem as the Israel Palestine thing I mentioned in that the gun grabbers won’t be happy until they are all taken and we are like Australia or England or any other country.. Once you recognize that one simple fact, should you yield one inch peasfully knowing it will never satisfy and you will never regain ground?Oh, I'm for the constitution all the way, but that's not the issue. The issue is that 2a advocates seem to only frame the issues of gun usage in the absolute language of a constitutional right. This approach induces the other side to consider regulations like that cited by the OP which erode the right. Tactically, it would be better to change the conversation - recognize the issue and offer alternatives.
As to your question, I live in Virginia.
My apology goatboy. I’d been taking your posts a bit to serious while you were apparently just being devils advocate.. the problem with your questions is the same problem as the Israel Palestine thing I mentioned in that the gun grabbers won’t be happy until they are all taken and we are like Australia or England or any other country.. Once you recognize that one simple fact, should you yield one inch peasfully knowing it will never satisfy and you will never regain ground?
I think you're a fucking trollI think it is more than this.
We are a democracy and the rights granted are subject to conditions expressed in law and regulations. That's just fact. Violence is just another word for crime and if deeper or more consistent punishment is proposed, i can fully support it. But, to not offer a recognition that gun violence is occurring in our schools and on our streets is dishonest. And, if we recognize the violence and want to preserve our effective rights to gun ownership, we need to start encouraging the national organizations and leadership to propose measures that address the former and preserve the latter.
The proposed legislation does neither. My grandmother always said " you cannot beat smething with nothing" and the legislation is the "something". Unless the community has an alternative, we have nothing.
I do not know the answer which is why I proposed the question.
I think it is more than this.
We are a democracy and the rights granted are subject to conditions expressed in law and regulations. That's just fact. Violence is just another word for crime and if deeper or more consistent punishment is proposed, i can fully support it. But, to not offer a recognition that gun violence is occurring in our schools and on our streets is dishonest. And, if we recognize the violence and want to preserve our effective rights to gun ownership, we need to start encouraging the national organizations and leadership to propose measures that address the former and preserve the latter.
The proposed legislation does neither. My grandmother always said " you cannot beat smething with nothing" and the legislation is the "something". Unless the community has an alternative, we have nothing.
I do not know the answer which is why I proposed the question.