Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Off-Topic Discussion > Debating with the enemy


Gun Control Thread- Should we?

Debating with the enemy


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-27-2012, 12:04 PM   #331
New HC, new hope!
 
RedskinRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: I'm in LA, trick!
Posts: 8,700
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giantone View Post
First I did address it and second look at post# 347,this is not a joke .There are 26 people dead 20 children some shot more then once by someone who's mother was part of out gun culture ,she would argue that she knew about gun safty and how to handle guns and it's the "other" idiots out there ,right up to the time her son shot her 4 times and killer her.
A crime was committed in order to get to the weapons. What part of that and the gun laws in place are you not understanding?

More laws aren't going to change things, except for the worse. Getting rid of all legally owned weapons leaves the power in the hands of criminals and it borders on Unicorn Leash Laws.
RedskinRat is offline  

Advertisements
Old 12-27-2012, 12:07 PM   #332
Playmaker
 
HailGreen28's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,102
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giantone View Post
First I did address it and second look at post# 347,this is not a joke .There are 26 people dead 20 children some shot more then once by someone who's mother was part of out gun culture ,she would argue that she knew about gun safty and how to handle guns and it's the "other" idiots out there ,right up to the time her son shot her 4 times and killer her.
No, you didn't. You just parroted what the desperate politician in LA said.

RR's joke does far less harm than your argument and what the paper's actions do.

And you are still ignoring that a buy back program would have done nothing to stop the Newtown massacre. It might actually help get other guns away from people desperate for money, but that has nothing to do with people with assault rifles. So you still aren't making sense. Just acting "feel good" rather than address problems stated in this thread, i guess.

Sure, legal permit owners and people willing to sell their guns are who we should go after and guilt trip. Rather than addressing problems with felons, the criminally/suicidally minded, and "glory seekers".

There's more of an "excuse the criminal" culture in this country, than a "gun culture". Unless you mean some other "gun culture" than legally owned guns for purposes other than killing people?

Firstdown already refuted your idea that the mother being part of some "gun culture" was the problem. Check out his post here (Gun Control Thread- Should we?).
HailGreen28 is offline  
Old 12-27-2012, 02:00 PM   #333
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 8,270
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

My response to the gun buyback is... who cares. No one is forcing people to turn in their guns. No one is being pressured to turn in their guns. It's simply a service being offered. The type of crime we saw at Sandyhook can shatter the foundation for some people, and they may want to get rid of a gun in a secure fashion. Why do you care if someone doesn't want their gun anymore and turns it in?

The deflective arguments of drunk driving, knives, etc. really don't focus on the real issue at hand. I feel like the questions posed, especially about drunk driving, were rhetorical, but if they weren't there are some clear differentiators between massacres and DUI deaths.

DUIs do get a lot of attention. They are a high profile issue in our society right now. DUIs are punished quite harshly, unless youíre an athlete, and DUIs should be punished harshly. Driving drunk is dangerous to everyone on the road with you. We see far too many injuries and deaths from DUIs, which is why stricter punishments continue to be implemented. Itís important to make sure that there are clear deterrents in place to curb drunk driving.
There are a few reasons why they typically donít dominate the front page every day. The American legal system relies on intent. When someone drives drunk, they typically donít have malicious intent. Nearly all of the cases with DUIs involve negligence. The person driving isnít leaving the bar to kill themselves and others. They are making a poor decision and trying to get home. That certainly is no excuse for drunk driving, but it is an important differentiator in the legal system.

Look at the difference between manslaughter and homicide. They have the same eventual outcome, but radically different circumstances leading to the same outcome. The intent and act of premeditation makes the crime more severe. Killing someone due to negligence or accidental situations should be punished, but not as severely.

Secondly, DUIs rarely kill more than a handful of people at once. Most DUI accidents have no casualties, or very few. That isnít often the case with (attempted) massacres. When that happens, they are covered briefly, but they arenít a lasting news story. I really donít think anyone is saying that DUIs are not a serious issue in our society, but thereís no reason to merge the two subjects. They are innately different.

Instead of bickering, why donít we put out some ideas on how to actually come to a compromise. Some of the ideas I like around reasonable gun control:

ē Mandatory training. This is not a one-time training. On an interval, youíre required to get recertified to have a license.
ē Mandatory Psychological Evaluations. These are also recurring and required for having a gun license.
ē Improved Gun Tracking. You must register all guns and periodically audited that you have the gun you say you have. Lack of having possession of a gun results in punishment.
ē Gun Responsibility. If you own a gun, and that gun is used in a crime. You are considered, at least partially, to blame for said crime. Any time a gun registered to your name comes up as used in a crime or found in possession of someone else it is a crime.
ē Assault Rifle Ban. I donít consider, because itís fun, to be an appropriate response to the assault weapons you can buy. Have them available at shooting ranges, but not in homes. No need for them.

Sadly, this topic really demonstrates politics in America right now. Two sides so stuck in their view that they can't really have a healthy discussion, and most importantly, unable to make compromises. We need to find a way to strike compromise to coexist, let's start here. Instead of copy and pasting links to a biased source (one side or the other) what real concessions are you willing to make?
__________________
Best. Player. Available.
Daseal is offline  
Old 12-27-2012, 02:28 PM   #334
New HC, new hope!
 
RedskinRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: I'm in LA, trick!
Posts: 8,700
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

I already had to pass a background check, take a course and a test just to own a handgun in CA.

Who will be the judge of my sanity? Someone who believes in a higher power? I don't consider them my peer. This leaves the process open to the same bias that CCW in CA has. It will only be available to rich people, poor need not apply, cos you're getting turned down.

My suggestion, Daseal, remains the same: Enforce the current gun laws.

There is no need for more gun laws.
RedskinRat is offline  
Old 12-27-2012, 02:32 PM   #335
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 8,270
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedskinRat View Post
I already had to pass a background check, take a course and a test just to own a handgun in CA.

Who will be the judge of my sanity? Someone who believes in a higher power? I don't consider them my peer. This leaves the process open to the same bias that CCW in CA has. It will only be available to rich people, poor need not apply, cos you're getting turned down.

My suggestion, Daseal, remains the same: Enforce the current gun laws.

There is no need for more gun laws.
RR, it would be a licensed medical professional. Granted you won't weed out all the bad apples, but it can definitely help. What current gun laws go unenforced right now? What laws do you see massive loopholes in? You keep saying enforce current gun laws. Get a little more specific. What issues do you see with enforcement of current laws?
__________________
Best. Player. Available.
Daseal is offline  
Old 12-27-2012, 02:39 PM   #336
New HC, new hope!
 
RedskinRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: I'm in LA, trick!
Posts: 8,700
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daseal View Post
RR, it would be a licensed medical professional. Granted you won't weed out all the bad apples, but it can definitely help. What current gun laws go unenforced right now? What laws do you see massive loopholes in? You keep saying enforce current gun laws. Get a little more specific. What issues do you see with enforcement of current laws?
How was a known felon in possession of a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle, a .38-caliber revolver and a 12-gauge shotgun, just to use the most recent example?
RedskinRat is offline  
Old 12-27-2012, 02:49 PM   #337
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 8,270
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedskinRat View Post
How was a known felon in possession of a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle, a .38-caliber revolver and a 12-gauge shotgun, just to use the most recent example?
I agree. That is a major issue. How many of those guns require background checks? I have limited experience. I do remember being 17 and drunk... walking into Wal-Mart, and purchasing a rifle. Luckily the older lady behind the counter reminded us to buy ammo as well. They didn't run anything. They didn't check IDs. They just sold us the rifle. To this day, that seems odd to me. Especially if felons aren't allowed to have guns.

What about gun shows? From what I've heard those are very popular for people to easily get guns because the sales don't have to be documented. I'm fairly ignorant on that fact and would be happy for someone to enlighten me on how those work.

RR -- how would you enforce such rules? If you want rule enforcement, there have to be ways to punish shortfalls? Do you punish the people that sold/gave to him? How do you prevent it going forward. It's a tough, nearly impossible, question to answer. That's the issue. Laws must be enforceable and have clear repurcussions.

Edit: Just want to make it clear. I'm not trying to be an asshole, just invoke some real discussion.
__________________
Best. Player. Available.

Last edited by Daseal; 12-27-2012 at 02:55 PM.
Daseal is offline  
Old 12-27-2012, 02:58 PM   #338
New HC, new hope!
 
RedskinRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: I'm in LA, trick!
Posts: 8,700
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

BATFE should be tasked with enforcing these rules if they aren't already.

Selling a firearm to a person who isn't allowed one should result in a prison term.

Society as a whole has to step up.
RedskinRat is offline  
Old 12-27-2012, 03:02 PM   #339
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 8,270
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

RR - It's easy to say enforce laws, but you're not giving any way for them to actually be executed. Thats why some of my suggestions included people who have their weapons used in crimes be partially responsible for the crime. It's a way to force people to keep track of their guns.
__________________
Best. Player. Available.
Daseal is offline  
Old 12-27-2012, 03:05 PM   #340
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 8,270
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by firstdown View Post
Today any lic. gun dealer has to run a back ground check. If your a dealer at a gun show you have to do a back ground check if your a private individual selling your guns at a gun show a back ground check is not required. That's BS to me. I think if person wants to buy a gun they need to go to a place like DMV and have a back ground check. They make it good for a period of time like a month, 2months, etc... Anyone selling a gun is required to see their back ground check and to then call it in to confirm its real.
Firstdown, I completely agree. Seems like a realistic and really just a common sense move. The technology we have now makes these type of systems much more realistic than in the past. Honestly, I'm surprised we haven't seen this in place already.
__________________
Best. Player. Available.
Daseal is offline  
Old 12-27-2012, 03:07 PM   #341
New HC, new hope!
 
RedskinRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: I'm in LA, trick!
Posts: 8,700
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

ATF Online - Firearms - Enforcement
RedskinRat is offline  
Old 12-27-2012, 07:33 PM   #342
Pro Bowl
 
Giantone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,353
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

[QUOTE=HailGreen28;980378]No, you didn't. You just parroted what the desperate politician in LA said.

RR's joke does far less harm than your argument and what the paper's actions do.

QUOTE]

Yes I did but what worse is that you being part of that gun culture are too blind to see the need for change and new laws.As for RR's joke ...tell the people in Conn it does far less harm.
__________________
....DISCLAIMER: All of my posts/threads are my expressed typed opinion and the reader is not to assume these comments are absolute fact, law, or truth unless otherwise stated in said post/thread.
Giantone is offline  
Old 12-27-2012, 08:26 PM   #343
Playmaker
 
HailGreen28's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,102
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giantone View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by HailGreen28 View Post
No, you didn't. You just parroted what the desperate politician in LA said.

RR's joke does far less harm than your argument and what the paper's actions do.
Yes I did but what worse is that you being part of that gun culture are too blind to see the need for change and new laws.As for RR's joke ...tell the people in Conn it does far less harm.
Couple things in your post I don't understand.

What "gun culture" am I a part of? And how is this "worse" than feel good gun control measures?

I think I proposed something that would be a new law earlier this thread.

Why would the people in Conn. care about RR's joke, especially now? (Kind of a segue: By the way, aren't Conn. gun laws fairly strict?)

Last edited by HailGreen28; 12-28-2012 at 09:53 AM.
HailGreen28 is offline  
Old 12-28-2012, 09:54 AM   #344
New HC, new hope!
 
RedskinRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: I'm in LA, trick!
Posts: 8,700
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giantone View Post
.As for RR's joke ...tell the people in Conn it does far less harm.
When did I make fun of the murders in Conn?

Oh, and here's another link:

Regulating the Militia


There is no legitimate exception to the Second Amendment for military-style weapons, because military-style weapons are precisely what the Second Amendment guarantees our right to keep and bear. The purpose of the Second Amendment is to secure our ability to oppose enemies foreign and domestic, a guarantee against disorder and tyranny. Consider the words of Supreme Court justice Joseph Story ó who was, it bears noting, appointed to the Court by the guy who wrote the Constitution:
The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.
RedskinRat is offline  
Old 12-28-2012, 12:12 PM   #345
New HC, new hope!
 
RedskinRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: I'm in LA, trick!
Posts: 8,700
Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?

And another link:

Celebrity Anti-gun PSA

RedskinRat is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.54642 seconds with 10 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25