PDA

View Full Version : Why pass new gun laws when we don't enforce existing laws?



Pages : [1] 2

dneal
May 28th, 2022, 04:51 PM
Biden Lays Blame for Uvalde School Shooting on Gun Lobby (https://reason.com/2022/05/24/biden-lays-blame-for-uvalde-school-shooting-on-gun-lobby/)


There's still much that's unknown about the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, where a gunman has reportedly killed at least 19 children and three adults at an elementary school. President Joe Biden nevertheless gave a brief post-shooting speech in which he endorsed the passage of new gun control legislation as a means of preventing similar tragic events.

"When in God's name are we going to stand up to the gun lobby?" said an emotional Biden from the White House Tuesday night. "When in God's name are we going to do what we know needs to be done?"

Well, we could start by enforcing existing laws, so yes - When in God's name are going to do what needs to be done? One example the current administration should be familiar with is the case of a particular Hunter Biden.

Young Biden received a waiver in 2012 for age (I'm sure his dad being the sitting Vice President didn't affect that at all), and was commissioned in the Navy Reserve. He subsequently received an administrative discharge for drug use - testing positive for cocaine. NBC News Link (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/joe-bidens-son-hunter-kicked-out-navy-cocaine-n227811)

Anyone who has purchased a firearm in the last couple of decades should be familiar with ATF form 4473 (https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4473-part-1-firearms-transaction-record-over-counter-atf-form-53009/download). It has quite a few questions one must answer, and clearly states:


I certify that my answers in Section B are true, correct, and complete. I have read and understand the Notices, Instructions, and Definitions on ATF Form 4473. I understand that answering “yes” to question 21.a. if I am not the actual transferee/buyer is a crime punishable as a felony under Federal law,
and may also violate State and/or local law. I understand that a person who answers “yes” to any of the questions 21.b. through 21.k. is prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm. I understand that a person who answers “yes” to question 21.l.1. is prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm, unless the person answers “yes” to question 21.l.2. and provides the documentation required in 26.d. I also understand that making any false oral or written statement, or exhibiting any false or misrepresented identification with respect to this transaction, is a crime punishable as a felony under Federal law, and may also violate State and/or local law. I further understand that the repetitive purchase of firearms for the purpose of resale for livelihood and profit without a Federal firearms license is a violation of Federal law.

So let's review some of these questions.

21c, for example, asks:


Have you ever been convicted in any court, including a military court, of a felony, or any other crime for which the judge could have imprisoned you for more than one year, even if you received a shorter sentence including probation?

Wait, didn't Hunter get kicked out of the Navy for cocaine use? Is there an article in the Uniform Code of Military Justice about that?


UCMJ Article 112a:

e. Maximum punishments.
(1) Wrongful use, possession, manufacture, or introduction of controlled substance.
( a ) Amphetamine , cocaine , heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide, marijuana (except possession of less than 30 grams or use of marijuana), methamphetamine, opium, phencyclidine, secobarbital, and Schedule I, II, III controlled substances. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement 5 years.

I'm not a lawyer, and didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I believe this crime is punishable for more than the year mentioned in the ATF form. Oh, that's right, Hunter wasn't charged with a crime. He merely received an administrative discharge. Reuters clarifies this in their "fact check" (https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-fact-check-hunter-biden-not-dishonora-idUSKBN26M6QI). He received an administrative discharge - which we don't know the character of. Question 21g asks:


Have you ever been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions?

So maybe his answer was not false, and he didn't violate Federal law. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. That 2014 apparently not-dishonorable administrative discharge he received in lieu of a criminal charge was a close call. I'm sure that didn't have anything to do with his father still being the Vice President though.

But then we get to question 21e:


Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?
Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.

Hmmm. Here things get a little sticky. Hunter describes his crack addiction in his memoir. He tested positive for cocaine and received a discharge. Yet Politico reports (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/25/sources-secret-service-inserted-itself-into-case-of-hunter-bidens-gun-477879) he purchased a gun on 12 October 2018.

Yes Mr. President, when in God's name are we going to do what needs to be done?

Lloyd
May 28th, 2022, 05:21 PM
So, by going after Hunter the problem will be solved? Great! I don't support Hunter getting treated this way nor do I support most nepotism from any of our current nor past leaders. However, I think you're smart enough, and hopefully not too biased, to know that taking away Hunter's guns does literally nothing toward fixing the system.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

dneal
May 28th, 2022, 05:40 PM
You have to start somewhere. Is the President committed to the rule of law? Or is he just a politician saying politically expedient things. Here’s an opportunity to put his money where his mouth is.

The point remains. Why clamor for new laws when we’re not going to enforce existing laws. We should pass a law that forbids possession of firearms on or near a school. We should pass a law to make it illegal to shoot up a school. Then it won’t happen anymore. Right?

Gun ownership remains relatively constant, but mass school shootings like we see today didn’t start until Columbine (with a couple of exceptions - the Austin campus being one). What other variables are we not accounting for?

If the go-to solution is to simply pass a law to ban scary looking rifles (when equivalent but less scary rifles will remain unaffected), harrumph and dust our hands as we admire our new law (like gun free zone schools), we’re not going to solve anything. Demonizing the gun lobby is even more ineffectual.

Lloyd
May 28th, 2022, 06:03 PM
dneal - your second paragraph is a great entry in my eyes. I fully agree. While I'm not a supporter of the currently used meaning of the 2nd (even with Heller's statement), I agree that coming up with a way of enforcing the current laws would be a step in the right direction.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Chuck Naill
May 29th, 2022, 06:20 AM
This is something I have considered, if I owned one of these assault rifles and felt it was my right, then I saw what a deranged person could do to 19 10 year old's and their teachers, I would gladly hand it over for destruction as they have in other nations. My rights are not more important than these innocents. This is a paramount demonstration of morals and character to say that others are more important than my pleasures.

And, any discussion about Hunter is what-about-this-ism.

dneal
May 29th, 2022, 08:37 AM
Whataboutism - noun
- A rhetorical device used to deflect from demonstrable hypocrisy.

See also: Smokescreen, Red Herring

Chuck Naill
May 29th, 2022, 08:58 AM
No, It introducing something that has no place in the discussion. It would be like me bringing up your vaccine and voting history to suggest your opinions about guns is not valid.

dneal
May 29th, 2022, 09:48 AM
No, It introducing something that has no place in the discussion. It would be like me bringing up your vaccine and voting history to suggest your opinions about guns is not valid.

Quoting for posterity. Your hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness in this post is quite an accomplishment - even for you. Well done.

Chuck Naill
May 29th, 2022, 09:49 AM
I applaud your uncanny ability to say nothing of relevance. Carry on…lol!

dneal
May 29th, 2022, 09:56 AM
I applaud your uncanny ability to say nothing of relevance. Carry on…lol!

And you continue to outdo yourself. Amazing.

Does your post 5 address the topic I started of enforcing existing gun laws? Does it address proposing new gun laws? Or is it you again hypocritically demonstrating the very thing you are whining about?

How about post 7?

“Don’t be Chuck”, indeed.

Chuck Naill
May 29th, 2022, 10:21 AM
I’ve addressed gun laws and regards. Introducing Biden or his son is “what about this “ and prevents any meaningful discussion.

Chuck Naill
May 29th, 2022, 10:44 AM
I’ll say this, Biden knows how to consider the suffering of others. Even if he’s just pretending, he sure puts on a good show.

dneal
May 29th, 2022, 10:52 AM
Post #12 has what exactly to do with the topic?

Chuck, we know what your "meaningful discussion" is.


"Ban masks but not assault rifles…….lol! 🤫😂"


"The addiction is to a cowboy white male myth. It never did exist. John Wayne’s role wasn’t a real person……"


"I find it sad or laughable that a doctor doesn’t support basic infection control, quotes the Bible, is unable to consider that an 18 year old with an assault rifle is the definition freedom, and has no regard for slaughtering 10 year old and their teachers. So much for being pro life."

Please show me just one post where you formulate and present a point, like my reply in your massacre thread.


Yes, you said it's hard. I said it's not. Getting into detail on why is not prudent.

I'm not sure precisely what the issue is you're trying to reduce. I'll assume school shootings. Despite the media sensationalism, it's actually not that frequent. Calculate the number of schools, multiplied by the number of average days in a school year, for a simple denominator; and use events as the numerator.

It has increased significantly since the mid 90's, and although there are numerous resources Wikipedia's is useful because the data is in a table you can sort. Before 2000 and 21st Century.

Initially the increase appears to be related to gang violence, but with Columbine it changes. The question is: why? Household gun ownership has remained relatively constant - around 40%. Most studies measure from the 70's or 80's to the present. Availability doesn't appear to be a correlating factor. You could even buy new production, fully automatic weapons up until 1986 - and no one was shooting up schools with machine guns. Gun control schemes appear to be addressing a variable that isn't a root cause and is likely to have little effect (like "gun-free zones"), because the people that follow these laws aren't the ones shooting up schools or other places. Conversely, two places that have statistically no mass shootings are gun stores and gun shows.

The opposite of gun-restriction notions are things like allowing school personnel to be armed, and I think there is some objective merit - but that discussion gets ridiculed by one side just as gun control notions get ridiculed by the other. This topic is as (if not more) contentious as abortion.

I am focused on root cause, and have been looking at it since I was a psychology undergrad listening to one professor, whose expertise was psychopharmacology, rail on over-diagnosis of ADHD and over-prescription of psychotropics.

Since the mid 80s, the DSM III R and DSM IV greatly expanded the number and type of "disorders", with very questionable diagnostic criteria (the DSM 5 raises those issues and attempts to correct). New antidepressants and anti anxiety medications also were developed (SSRIs, for example) in the mid 80s. Essentially, we started diagnosing and drugging our children. Look at the ADHD rates in the U.S. compared to other western nations, and treatment. That begins around age 8-10. Other psychotropics are introduced around 12-14. In the mid 90s, the Columbines begin.

Unless something has changed recently, we can't test for "chemical imbalances" of neurotransmitters like we do for insulin; yet clinicians assert behavioral or mental problems are due to these. Prescriptions that alter serotonin, dopamine, etc... are given based on self-reporting.

These mass-shooting incidents are a wicked problem with decades of societal and technological variables we haven't begun to account for except in the most superficial ways. We have been messing around with brain chemistry in children, and it incidentally correlates very closely with the rise of random shootings. It's a reasonable place to investigate, and one we seem to refuse to for a variety of reasons.

Chuck Naill
May 29th, 2022, 11:07 AM
You made no meaningful posts. You just wanted to redefine the Second Amendment.

Regulating who can purchase an assault rifle is easy, require training and certification. Require a waiting period and background check.

Regulation ammunition is also easy to do.

Neither takes away anyones true right to enjoy firearms. And it offers the original intent to be able to defend the community.

Lloyd
May 29th, 2022, 11:20 AM
Chuck - Please stop defending yourself. Stay to the topic.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Chuck Naill
May 29th, 2022, 11:37 AM
Chuck - Please stop defending yourself. Stay to the topic.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

My bad….🤭

Chuck Naill
May 29th, 2022, 11:52 AM
There is no federal law requiring background evaluations. It’s stalled by the Republicans.

TSherbs
May 29th, 2022, 03:32 PM
Why pass new laws? Because most mass killers buy their guns legally. The laws suck.

Summary of the gun sources for the biggest killing sprees over the last 10 years:

https://apnews.com/article/uvalde-school-shooting-buffalo-supermarket-texas-d1415e5a50eb85a50d5464970a225b2d

TSherbs
May 29th, 2022, 03:33 PM
There is no federal law requiring background evaluations. It’s stalled by the Republicans.

vile cowards

Chuck Naill
May 29th, 2022, 03:49 PM
There is no federal law requiring background evaluations. It’s stalled by the Republicans.

vile cowards

It will take the Cowboy Myth Movement Conservatives to say, “enough, we are going do without so others can live”.

Lloyd
May 29th, 2022, 04:57 PM
There is no federal law requiring background evaluations. It’s stalled by the Republicans.

vile cowards

It will take the Cowboy Myth Movement Conservatives to say, “enough, we are going do without so others can live”.
Don't hold your breath. Most things each of us believes in is based on myths. Religion, which are the good societies and which aren't, justifications for past wars, many health policies, etc.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220529/2b56ed24c43906ac5dae155c50e24128.jpg

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Chip
May 29th, 2022, 05:10 PM
An observation: Republicans have no problem with tagging illegal drugs as a proximate cause of overdose deaths and violent crime in general.

So why can't they apply the same logic to guns?

Three steps:

1) Remove liability protection for weapons makers and dealers, so they are subject to the same legal hazards as the rest of us.

2) Nationwide background checks with expanded terms.

3) Ban military-type assault weapons, magazine kits, bump stocks, and similar murderous accessories.

TSherbs
May 29th, 2022, 05:49 PM
An observation: Republicans have no problem with tagging illegal drugs as a proximate cause of overdose deaths and violent crime in general.

So why can't they apply the same logic to guns?

Three steps:

1) Remove liability protection for weapons makers and dealers, so they are subject to the same legal hazards as the rest of us.

2) Nationwide background checks with expanded terms.

3) Ban military-type assault weapons, magazine kits, bumps stocks, and similar murderous accessories.

I favor all three of these steps. Pronto!

Lloyd
May 29th, 2022, 06:19 PM
An observation: Republicans have no problem with tagging illegal drugs as a proximate cause of overdose deaths and violent crime in general.

So why can't they apply the same logic to guns?

Three steps:

1) Remove liability protection for weapons makers and dealers, so they are subject to the same legal hazards as the rest of us.

2) Nationwide background checks with expanded terms.

3) Ban military-type assault weapons, magazine kits, bumps stocks, and similar murderous accessories.
Based on the article Bold saw, fatherless men under 30 yo are a significant cause, too.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Bold2013
May 29th, 2022, 06:45 PM
To treat someone’s drug addiction it takes more than removing drugs (they will always find a way to get it). Deep multifaceted work needs to be done to treat the disease. Simultaneously work needs to be done to determine why they became addicts and how we can prevent people going done that road.

In others words. Thinking that background checks and gun control will fix the problem… is a myth.

TSherbs
May 29th, 2022, 06:50 PM
To treat someone’s drug addiction it takes more than removing drugs (they will always find a way to get it). Deep multifaceted work needs to be done to treat the disease. Simultaneously work needs to be done to determine why they became addicts and how we can prevent people going done that road.

In others words. Thinking that background checks and gun control will fix the problem… is a myth.

Well, like with Roe v Wade, all we need to do is get three Supreme Court nominations in a row and then permit more gun ownership restrictions. It seems to be an approach that works for changing Constitutional rights. I may make gun-control one of the litmus tests for my future votes. We'll see.

RobJohnson
May 30th, 2022, 07:06 AM
On the basis that it is bullets and not guns that kill and that gun control is a horse that has bolted would it not be possible to restrict the supply of bullets in some manner (for example through gun clubs only) and/or make them extremely expensive?

TSherbs
May 30th, 2022, 08:43 AM
Based on the article Bold saw, fatherless men under 30 yo are a significant cause, too.

"cause"?

I don't think so.

Being male and under 30 is the strongest *correlation* for felony crime in America.

Being male, under 30, and in possession of a firearm is an even stronger correlation for felony violent crime.

Simply being male is the greatest common factor in all felony crime, mass murder included.

What we have in America is a threefold problem. We are unable (so far) to move forward on these three barriers to reform:

1) a true national discussion on what it means to be a healthy, functioning male, harmful neither to others nor to oneself

2) a true national discussion on the value of weapons of human destruction among our citizenry and relative ease of legally (and illegally) purchasing one

3) a break across entrenched political party lines that lately have become increasingly dug into opposing positions



Without movement in these areas, we are bound to wallow in this violent morass (IMO).

Lloyd
May 30th, 2022, 11:34 AM
Based on the article Bold saw, fatherless men under 30 yo are a significant cause, too.

"cause"?

I don't think so.
I don't either. The article seemed to imply that conclusion via cherry-picking of data that otherwise couldn't support their argument.


Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Lloyd
May 30th, 2022, 11:37 AM
Great sense of humor, huh...
https://nypost.com/2022/05/30/florida-man-corey-anderson-threatened-to-go-to-nearest-school-with-weapons-sheriff/amp/

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Chuck Naill
May 30th, 2022, 12:31 PM
Enabling families are one factor behind these mass killings.

Chip
May 30th, 2022, 01:51 PM
Like racism, gun-sickness is evidently a communicable disease.

https://i.imgur.com/lSmxQWU.jpg

Chuck Naill
May 30th, 2022, 03:57 PM
A cordless drill or shop vac would be for fun and cost less.

Chip
June 2nd, 2022, 02:01 PM
The idea that laws restricting guns don't make a difference is a lie.

The Atrocity of American Gun Culture
After mass shootings like those in Uvalde and Buffalo, pro-gun officials say they don’t want to politicize tragedy. But the circumstances that allow for the mass murder of children are inherently political.

Two years ago, a study published in the journal Justice Quarterly examined the effects of gun laws in every state. Emma Fridel, an assistant professor of criminology at Florida State University, looked at gun-ownership rates and the proliferation of concealed-carry laws between 1991 and 2016. State lawmakers pushing for laxer laws have tended to argue that a more broadly armed public would serve as a deterrent to violence. Fridel found the opposite: gun-homicide rates in states with more permissive carry policies were eleven per cent higher than in states with stricter laws, and the probability of mass shootings increased by roughly fifty-three per cent in states with more gun ownership.

The most obvious indicator of the absurdist thinking on this subject can be seen in the fact that the latest massacre happened in Texas, a state that has more than eight thousand gun dealers, and where an estimated thirty-seven per cent of the population owns firearms. Last year, Governor Greg Abbott signed a bill that allowed most Texans to carry handguns without a license or mandatory training. This legislation did not prevent the Uvalde carnage any more than previous legislation allowing easier access to guns prevented the 2019 shooting that killed twenty-three people at an El Paso Walmart, or the 2017 attack in the town of Sutherland Springs, which took the lives of twenty-six worshippers in a rural church.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/06/06/the-atrocity-of-american-gun-culture

Chuck Naill
June 2nd, 2022, 02:35 PM
Texans believe the Alamo was about Texas independence.

TSherbs
June 2nd, 2022, 03:00 PM
These guns are designed to put lethal holes in humans. And that is just what they are doing. In the same way that the protective armor, available to the public, is meant to stop bullets. And that is what it does.

So, a person can purchase and use these things for their exact functional purposes and go into schools and kill indiscriminately. Even predictably (statistically).

But we gotta protect that (unfettered) right, by golly! Regardless of the cost, apparently.

Chuck Naill
June 2nd, 2022, 03:07 PM
There is no reason for a non military person to own an assault rifle.

TSherbs
June 2nd, 2022, 03:08 PM
It gets argued that other tools, like hammers, knives, and cars can and are used to kill also. Yes, rocks have been used, crow bars, etc. But all those tools are designed for other purposes (except for some knives, which can be designed for cutting into human flesh in combat) and in nearly all cases, are used far less often in homicides. Only guns are being used exactly according to their functional purpose, and on a mass scale.

When will we get over our addiction and hold the purveyors of the drug responsible for the damage their trade does on the country?

Chuck Naill
June 2nd, 2022, 03:13 PM
It would be a challenge to kill 19 ten year olds and two teachers with a crow bar.

dneal
June 2nd, 2022, 04:36 PM
Suppose you pass a law to outlaw "assault weapons". The same ones the Obama CDC found that banning had no effect on anything, by the way... but say you do it. Then they use a Ruger Mini 14 that is also a 5.56mm semi-automatic with a 30 round magazine. Not outlawed, because it doesn't have black plastic bits. Then you outlaw those.

Then they use something else. Different caliber rifle, shotgun, handgun, whatever. Then you try to outlaw those, or all guns even.

Then your "common sense" gun reforms fail, not just because of the 2nd Amendment, which you won't get repealed; but because the majority of Americans don't favor it. But for argument's sake though, let's say you're successful.

Will deranged people no longer be able to kill children?

TSherbs
June 2nd, 2022, 06:45 PM
It would be a challenge to kill 19 ten year olds and two teachers with a crow bar.

Yes, and other persons would be more effective at intervening since the assault would take longer, be less efficient. Of course, a handgun would still be quite effective and lethal of additional rounds were carried. But I want to ban all handguns except for law enforcement use. Guns in citizens' hands do nothing for society except to cause a blight upon the population, mostly on young men. But also increasingly older men (suicide) and women and children, too. And now that the "militia" purpose is a century out of date, we should repeal that amendment that has grown into a diseased organ of "freedom."

TSherbs
June 2nd, 2022, 07:00 PM
I actually consider our lack of action on gun deaths to be a racist and anti-male indifference to the death of brown and black men (mostly). If this were 20,000 female deaths, women would activate and shut down the DC with protests. If this were 20,000 child deaths, the same. The whole country would probably revolt. But no, the deaths by gun are mostly men of color shooting other men of color, and because they are both male and darker, the white culture and the political power structures don't give a shit. We men, especially darker young men, are the most expendable human product, and that is even how we treat ourselves. We still have not hit the point where we say, "This much male death is too much." A few people say this, but those who we value most for the saying this is the mothers of color in their grief. We put them on the white news stations, consume their grief, purge a bit of sorrow, and then move on with blood-rinsed hands cuz it's not our sons.

Well, a third grader from a school near me was one of those kids gunned down randomly by some sick fuck with a gun in South Carolina shooting at random cars in the street this past week. The kids was on vacation with family.

"God" bless America.

dneal
June 2nd, 2022, 08:28 PM
But no, the deaths by gun are mostly men of color shooting other men of color, and because they are both male and darker, the white culture and the [democrat] political power structures don't give a shit.

There, fixed that for you.

Lloyd
June 2nd, 2022, 09:20 PM
Suppose you pass a law to outlaw "assault weapons". The same ones the Obama CDC found that banning had no effect on anything, by the way... but say you do it. Then they use a Ruger Mini 14 that is also a 5.56mm semi-automatic with a 30 round magazine. Not outlawed, because it doesn't have black plastic bits. Then you outlaw those.

Then they use something else. Different caliber rifle, shotgun, handgun, whatever. Then you try to outlaw those, or all guns even.

Then your "common sense" gun reforms fail, not just because of the 2nd Amendment, which you won't get repealed; but because the majority of Americans don't favor it. But for argument's sake though, let's say you're successful.

Will deranged people no longer be able to kill children?
I'm hoping that the laws will be more encompassing and better thought out than the public discussions. I imagine the expression "assault weapons" is a shorthand for a still fully defined subset of all firing devices.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Lloyd
June 2nd, 2022, 09:39 PM
Can you read this from Medscape?
"What an AR-15 Does to a Child's Body: Why Surgeons Can't Look Away"
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/974671

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

dneal
June 3rd, 2022, 05:36 AM
The public discussions are most loudly initiated by the horribly ill-informed, many of who are lawmakers. e.g.: Diane Feinstein

Our current President recently mentioned something about banning those "high-caliber" 9mm weapons - the same ones the FBI quit using because they found them to be ineffective (but now wants to go back to mainly because female agents have trouble with the .40 caliber that replaced the 9mm).

I believe he also advocated that shotguns were all we needed - again ignorant of the exponentially higher lethality.

Chuck Naill
June 3rd, 2022, 07:10 AM
Can you read this from Medscape?
"What an AR-15 Does to a Child's Body: Why Surgeons Can't Look Away"
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/974671

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

I don't want to see that!! :(

Chuck Naill
June 3rd, 2022, 07:12 AM
Why isn't training and licensing required for certain firearms? Would these two things make a difference?

dneal
June 3rd, 2022, 07:21 AM
We used to have gun training. I guess it got scrapped for transgender intersectionality and other nonsense.

Curiously, we didn't have mass school shootings then.

70406

70407

TSherbs
June 3rd, 2022, 09:32 AM
New York is starting to chip away at the insanity. Keep pushing! There is more to be done! This article includes information on the bill passed in New York after the Buffalo shooting.

The Independent: Tulsa shooting - live: Gunman bought AR-15 hours before killings as Biden calls for assault rifle ban.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/tulsa-shooting-hospital-suspect-ar15-latest-b2093144.html

TSherbs
June 3rd, 2022, 10:18 AM
I want to say to this gentleman in response to his fumblings with his guns on camera: "Yes, yes, yes. Each of those obscene weapons would be banned, and I look forward to the day. America will be a better place when that happens."

America should no longer be a place where, in his words, Americans can simply purchase "the weapon of their choice." That is the insanity of gun addiction that I oppose.

Business Insider: Video: GOP Rep. brandishes guns during rant against gun safety bills.
https://www.businessinsider.com/video-greg-steube-florida-republican-guns-rant-hearing-gun-violence-2022-6

dneal
June 3rd, 2022, 01:30 PM
Amazing how easily the question in the OP is ignored.

Chip
June 3rd, 2022, 01:35 PM
It's a phony, leading question, calculated to warp the discussion.

In some places, gun laws are enforced. If you read the article I linked above, it's clear that they make a difference.

Stop posting such sneaky BS.

dneal
June 3rd, 2022, 02:38 PM
Sorry, but it's a valid question. Why clamor for new laws when we don't enforce existing laws? Hunter Biden is a very public, very obvious example of both the question and hypocrisy.

The only warping of the discussion is from hypocrites that don't want to answer. Panic among a multitude of them, to paraphrase Sowell.

Instead, they deflect with "whataboutism" and "It's a phony, leading question..."

Lloyd
June 3rd, 2022, 03:13 PM
dneal- you clearly have a lot of knowledge regarding weaponry. This gives you insight into this that I find valuable. However, I feel that bringing up Hunter (who isn't in the public eye) devalues your posts. Administrations at most levels of government and in both parties often use nepotism/favoritism to shield their inner circle from the laws. Luckily, no relative of a sitting president has taken this as a waiver to committed a mass shooting.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

dneal
June 3rd, 2022, 03:31 PM
dneal- you clearly have a lot of knowledge regarding weaponry. This gives you insight into this that I find valuable. However, I feel that bringing up Hunter (who isn't in the public eye) devalues your posts. Administrations at most levels of government and in both parties often use nepotism/favoritism to shield their inner circle from the laws. Luckily, no relative of a sitting president has taken this as a waiver to committed a mass shooting.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Fair enough, but were it Donny Jr., the glee and cries for imprisonment would be deafening. It's not unlike the laptop issue. Accusations of graft and whatnot are incessant when it comes to the Trump family, and only a rumor is needed to prompt the citing of numerous articles. We see that some were completely unaware of Hunter's shenanigans in Ukraine and China. It's blatant partisan hypocrisy, written off as "whataboutism" and "phony".

I included it not for petty partisan reasons, but precisely because it is so obvious. The President is going on about what we need to do. Get rid of 9mm, ban assault weapons, etc... That leads to the OP. Why? if we're not going to enforce existing laws.

Whether or not it makes him a hypocrite, it certainly makes him appear as one and undermines any gun initiative he may want to pursue.

I also used it as a litmus test for sincerity of discussion. If one can't concede the clear issue with Hunter, I'm skeptical of their motive or desire for fair discussion.

Lloyd
June 3rd, 2022, 03:41 PM
So, since virtually all administrations shelter their friends and family from the laws, all laws should be banished? Are you proposing anarchy?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

dneal
June 3rd, 2022, 03:42 PM
No. I'm advocating integrity.

Lloyd
June 3rd, 2022, 04:00 PM
Politics and integrity seldom coincide.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

dneal
June 3rd, 2022, 04:14 PM
Ya think?

I was under the impression that we're not politicians here. Does not the average poster have the integrity to admit the problem with Hunter in the OP?

You guys think I'm some neo-con Trumpist or whatever the jibe of the day is. Fine. Show evidence as clear as the laptop or gun purchase committed by someone on the other side (in another thread, please); and I'm happy to agree.

Maybe that's what we need. A thread where we only post criticisms of "our side". I'm closest to libertarian, so that makes it more difficult (although I have plenty of criticisms of them); but I'm willing to take on the role of conservative.

Lloyd
June 3rd, 2022, 04:21 PM
dneal - I wasn't taking a swipe at you; I'm being sincere. I don't trust successful politicians. To attain any level of success in politics, they seem to need to violate anyone's moral code.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

dneal
June 3rd, 2022, 04:30 PM
It's another topic, but I agree. Milton Friedman described the issue 40 years ago.

It's why centralized government at the national level is not a good thing. It's why the Founders intended for the federal government to have limited and enumerated powers, with government closer to the people.

Spending 30 years inside a bureaucracy and observing it confirmed to me how corrupt it is - because the potential for said corruption is so great.

But all of that avoids the point of this thread...

Lloyd
June 3rd, 2022, 05:35 PM
It's not just the federal level that's corrupt... the stench starts at the bottom and intensifies as it goes upwards. At least with the top level, there's more eyes looking at them... although the stakes are usually higher. At the local level, there's fewer looking into the scandals.

Without establishing laws, there anarchy... which could be good if humans behaved differently than we do. Since humans have greed and jealousy, we need laws. I hope that the laws catch the most dangerous violators. I hope that the laws aren't abused - used to target a marginalized group.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

dneal
June 3rd, 2022, 05:51 PM
RE your first paragraph: I disagree.

RE your second paragraph: not sure what you’re saying, but all this needs it’s own thread.

Bold2013
June 3rd, 2022, 05:51 PM
Ya think?

I was under the impression that we're not politicians here. Does not the average poster have the integrity to admit the problem with Hunter in the OP?

You guys think I'm some neo-con Trumpist or whatever the jibe of the day is. Fine. Show evidence as clear as the laptop or gun purchase committed by someone on the other side (in another thread, please); and I'm happy to agree.

Maybe that's what we need. A thread where we only post criticisms of "our side". I'm closest to libertarian, so that makes it more difficult (although I have plenty of criticisms of them); but I'm willing to take on the role of conservative.

Might be a worthwhile thread indeed

Lloyd
June 3rd, 2022, 06:28 PM
RE your first paragraph: I disagree.

RE your second paragraph: not sure what you’re saying, but all this needs it’s own thread.
If it doesn't exist already, a Hunter Biden thread should be made separate from a "Can our government establish (gun) laws that they can fairly maintain? If not, why have laws? "

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chip
June 3rd, 2022, 10:59 PM
Sorry, but it's a valid question. Why clamor for new laws when we don't enforce existing laws?

First, there is no "we." That's the first tactic of every sleazy used car dealer and saleman: We should do this or We don't want this. It assumes a common interest and some sort of moral kinship, which in this case does not exist. I favor more laws restricting gun purchases and military weapons for the general public, ending liability exemptions for the blood-soaked greedy filth that make and sell such weapons, harsh limits on open and concealed carry, bans on anti-personnel ammunition, et many ceterae.

You seem happy with all that profitable carnage and go, on a mad rush of typical "conservative" deflection, after Hunter Biden, who isn't a hero or exemplar of anything except the fact that good people can have bad kids.

So f*cking what? Did he shoot up a school? Is he selling military weapons to 18 year-olds?

Second, if you read (I think you learned it in school) the article I linked above you'll acknowledge that stricter laws on guns do decrease murder rates and gun deaths, both by accident and suicide. The fanatical RWW gun worship in Texas has made it the mass-shooting capital of the US. Gun laws do work. Witness New Zealand and Australia. That's why the fanatics and those with murderous fantasies hate them.

dneal
June 4th, 2022, 05:45 AM
First - I know you lefties have issues with pronouns, but "we" is grammatically correct. Resorting to pedantry and semantics demonstrates you don't really have an argument.

You prove my hypothesis that you aren't interested in reasonable discussion (but most of your posts are either vitriolic screed or narcissistic "look at me" diversions), and your hypocritical and partisan zealotry prevents you from acknowledging a simple and obvious example. Along that note, you continue to deflect - assigning some motive to me and stating what Hunter didn't do.

You, ever the hypocrite, initiate the snark and bullshit you whine about.

Second (see what I did there? lol) - Your NewYorker article is an opinion piece. *yawn*. Should I go find some right-wing opinion pieces? Would that persuade you?

TSherbs
June 4th, 2022, 06:30 AM
.... I favor more laws restricting gun purchases and military weapons for the general public, ending liability exemptions for the blood-soaked greedy filth that make and sell such weapons, harsh limits on open and concealed carry, bans on anti-personnel ammunition, et many ceterae.



I agree. Whether or not the country enforces its current laws 100% of the time (of course it doesn't, not for any law) is an irrelevant canard. And it's a standard that can't ever be reached. So to insist on it simply means to refuse to accept change.

I am glad that New York did not insist on this standard before raising the purchase age for some weapons to 21 years old. That, at least, is a step toward reasonableness. There are many more steps to take on the road to disarming the citizenry of this country of these increasingly lethal, murderous tools.

Chip
June 5th, 2022, 11:11 PM
It's not just the federal level that's corrupt... the stench starts at the bottom and intensifies as it goes upwards. At least with the top level, there's more eyes looking at them... although the stakes are usually higher. At the local level, there's fewer looking into the scandals.

As president of a conservation group, I worked with politicians at the local, state, and federal levels. Also worked lobbying the state legislature.

I met quite a few politicians that I thought were both honest and admirable. In a state where big oil, big coal, the trucking industry, and cattle ranching control the state government, we were usually a minority.

But I think your broad-brush cynicism is both unjustified and self-servingly cynical.

Good excuse for inertia.

Lloyd
June 5th, 2022, 11:28 PM
It's not just the federal level that's corrupt... the stench starts at the bottom and intensifies as it goes upwards. At least with the top level, there's more eyes looking at them... although the stakes are usually higher. At the local level, there's fewer looking into the scandals.

As president of a conservation group, I worked with politicians at the local, state, and federal levels. Also worked lobbying the state legislature.

I met quite a few politicians that I thought were both honest and admirable. In a state where big oil, big coal, the trucking industry, and cattle ranching control the state government, we were usually a minority.

But I think your broad-brush cynicism is both unjustified and self-servingly cynical.

Good excuse for inertia.
I hope your assessment of these politicians is accurate (it's easy to be biased when the politician is in your corner) and that they're not in the minority. Frankly, I have my doubts that it's an "and" but an "or"....

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chuck Naill
June 6th, 2022, 08:54 AM
I was listening this morning to gun enthusiasts say they were not supportive of gun owners who show up at demonstrations, plus think to own certain types of firearms should require a license and strict background checks. I would also add required hunter safety training.

The problem with gun being so available is that it can lead to catastrophic actions very quickly. People who try to commit suicide rarely try it again. Having a gun nearby makes the attempt more successful.

This is not a liberal conservative discussion really. It’s a movement conservative vs everyone else discussion. It is tribal. There is no room for two views in tribes.

dneal
June 6th, 2022, 11:18 AM
I was listening this morning to gun enthusiasts say they were not supportive of gun owners who show up at demonstrations, plus think to own certain types of firearms should require a license and strict background checks. I would also add required hunter safety training.

The problem with gun being so available is that it can lead to catastrophic actions very quickly. People who try to commit suicide rarely try it again. Having a gun nearby makes the attempt more successful.

This is not a liberal conservative discussion really. It’s a movement conservative vs everyone else discussion. It is tribal. There is no room for two views in tribes.

One tribe has all the guns. Good luck.

70479

Chuck Naill
June 6th, 2022, 02:06 PM
Yep, good example of the lunacy of some. They obviously feel they are being threatened while the majority don’t see the threat. Chicken Little Syndrome.

TSherbs
June 8th, 2022, 10:20 AM
"It's not the guns"

Uvalde: AR-15
Buffalo: AR-15
Boulder: AR-15
Orlando: AR-15
Parkland: AR-15
Las Vegas: AR-15
Aurora, CO: AR-15
Sandy Hook: AR-15
Waffle House: AR-15
San Bernardino: AR-15
Midland/Odessa: AR-15
Poway Synagogue: AR-15
Sutherland Springs: AR-15
Tree of Life Synagogue: AR-15

Chuck Naill
June 8th, 2022, 10:39 AM
I read the dead children had to identified by DNA or shoes.

dneal
June 8th, 2022, 10:47 AM
70530

Lloyd
June 8th, 2022, 11:07 AM
70530
What's the other rifle model? Can you fire as many rounds per minute through both? Do they each hold similar amounts of rounds? Why would someone choose the top one over the bottom one?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chip
June 8th, 2022, 01:14 PM
The top one looks like a RWW fetish gun.

The lower rifle looks unlikely to accept an illegal high-capacity magazine. In fact, the magazine shown on the upper model looks to carry more rounds and be more quickly replaced.

Why would anyone want to have that?

dneal
June 8th, 2022, 01:37 PM
What's the other rifle model? Can you fire as many rounds per minute through both? Do they each hold similar amounts of rounds? Why would someone choose the top one over the bottom one?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Ruger Mini14 Ranch
Yes (same rate of fire)
Magazine dependent, but yes.
Dunno. You would have to ask them. I'd choose the Ruger over the AR just because it's not direct impingement, which is mainly an ease of cleaning issue. You can put all sorts of "tacticool" stuff on the AR - red dots, flashlights, etc...

For Chip - "high capacity" magazines are usually over 10 rounds, and not illegal in most States. It's no harder to swap magazines in one than the other.

--edit--

I realized I'm not up to date on which States limit what with regard to magazine capacity (mainly because it doesn't matter in my State). This Article (https://www.guntab.com/insights/magazine-restriction-laws-by-state/) is from May last year.

Lloyd
June 8th, 2022, 02:11 PM
Roughly, how many shots can each deploy in 3 minutes?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Lloyd
June 8th, 2022, 02:33 PM
In my mind, no one outside of an action movie or battlefield needs more than 6 shots for personal/family protection. Heck, the mythological gunslingers of the wild west only had two 6 shooters.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

dneal
June 8th, 2022, 02:34 PM
Roughly, how many shots can each deploy in 3 minutes?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Technically, the actions will cycle at a rate of roughly 600 rounds per minute.

Practically, most people can't reload that fast (or carry 600 rounds - or the 1800 for your 3 minutes).

Realistically, neither rifle can handle that rate of fire because of the heat generated.

Lloyd
June 8th, 2022, 02:38 PM
Roughly, how many shots can each deploy in 3 minutes?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Technically, the actions will cycle at a rate of roughly 600 rounds per minute.

Practically, most people can't reload that fast (or carry 600 rounds - or the 1800 for your 3 minutes).

Realistically, neither rifle can handle that rate of fire because of the heat generated.
Jeez...To me, they're both ludicrous for the general public to own.
Police on the street who are out to protect both themselves and the public don't carry that type of weapon.
Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

dneal
June 8th, 2022, 03:18 PM
Police usually have an AR in their cruiser.

The point of a semiautomatic is that you don't have to work a mechanism to extract the fired round or load the next (i.e.: pump shotguns or lever action rifles). One pull of the trigger fires the chambered round, and as the action cycles that round is extracted and a new one is chambered. Pull the trigger again and the newly loaded round fires. The technology dates to the late 19th century. It's not unique to rifles.

Most people can't pull the trigger fast enough to come anywhere near the mechanical rate of fire. You have to release the trigger to reset the sear before you can pull/shoot the next round. Even if they could - as noted earlier - the gun can't handle it anyway.

It's useful for bird-hunting in shotguns (like dove), and translates to skeet/trap and sporting clays. It's useful for feral hogs (which are destructive to a whole range of things). They bolt at the first shot, and killing a single one serves no point. It's beneficial to have a semi-auto and a large capacity magazine.

They're (large capacity semi-automatics) useful in home invasion situations. San Antonio was rife with them while I was stationed there. Criminals would pretend to be delivery drivers, and force the door when you answered (or kick the door in if you didn't).

TSherbs
June 8th, 2022, 03:27 PM
In my mind, no one outside of an action movie or battlefield needs more than 6 shots for personal/family protection. Heck, the mythological gunslingers of the wild west only had two 6 shooters.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

word

dneal
June 8th, 2022, 03:31 PM
Stolen off the webz


The liberal case for gun ownership

At the beginning of the pandemic, I was out hunting for supplies, running through scenarios and planning for contingencies. I found myself at a local gun shop, where a line of edgy patrons stretched out the door and down the block. It’s not the kind of place my high school self would have imagined my middle-aged self would frequent. I am, after all, an American liberal, and American liberals, as a rule, believe that our founders (fresh from a war they won with muzzle-loaded weapons) left us in a terrible mess with respect to modern guns.

Decades ago I changed my position on the issue of “gun control”. Even though I still believe liberals are correct about the unfortunate predicament created by our founders, I now hold that we must tolerate privately held guns and all that comes with them. That may sound like a paradox, but once you understand the tensions internal to the mind of an armed American liberal, you will understand something fundamental about the American experiment.

Portland, where I live, is an absurdly progressive city on the compulsively liberal Pacific coast. But that isn’t the whole story. Washington, Oregon, and California, the three left-coast states, vote as a Democratic block. But that’s not because we lack for conservatives. We have lots of them. They are just consistently outnumbered and outvoted.

I should probably explain here that, although I believe that liberals are right about the unacceptable cost of our second amendment rights, conservatives are closer to correct, as I see it, about the governing of our cities — a fact that becomes glaringly obvious if you visit Los Angeles, Seattle or San Francisco and compare it to any major city in conservative Texas. American liberals don’t seem to understand that their values cannot simply be implemented locally. That’s partly why I’m armed like a conservative despite my liberal values. But I digress.

That day at the gun shop, most of the people I stood in line with were conservatives who felt like they could use a bit more firepower. And I couldn’t fault them. So did I, apparently. I imagine they sized me up and read me as a liberal. I’m pretty sure I look like one. But I felt welcome, or at least as welcome as one can in an environment where there is a run on guns and ammo.

And there was indeed a run, as there always is when the population is on edge. When Americans worry, they buy guns. Some of that is irrational, as the guns they bought in previous panics are likely to last a good long time. Some of it is people arming themselves for the first time. And some of it is intuitive — the result of a somewhat vague reassessment of the level of need.

The gun shop was visibly strange in those early pandemic days. It looked like it had been stripped. The wall behind the counter that would normally display perhaps 100 different models of handgun had maybe 20 — guns no one really wanted but would eventually be reluctantly purchased by some Johnny-come-lately. But it was the state of the ammo that was most striking. In the major calibers there wasn’t any, a pattern that everyone in the shop knew was repeated all over town, and indeed across the entire country. Ammunition manufacturers couldn’t keep up. When a crate of ammo was occasionally delivered to the shop, it was target ammo, not ideal for self-defence, and it was rationed to one box per family, per week. Welcome to America.

In the gun shop, no one was troubled by novices, or even liberals. Explanations were patient. It’s a surprisingly courteous, agreeable, and highly technical culture: no one knows more than gun enthusiasts about the hazards that come with firearms, and such people take a very dim view of those who treat guns casually.

I suspect the notable courtesy was at least partly the natural result of the level of armament. The staff were surely all armed. So too, I would guess, were the clientele — it is legal in Oregon to have a concealed handgun given the proper, easily obtained permit. In such an environment heightened tensions are quickly noted, and de-escalation is an ever-present priority. It is, in some sense, the opposite of Twitter, where no one is armed and people are routinely terrible to each other.

There was one woman behind the counter, who had the unenviable task of running background checks for every firearm purchased. In most cases that meant she had to disappoint customers and tell them it would be days or weeks before they will be able to collect their weapons. She had been ringing up and disappointing people, non-stop for weeks. As I neared the front of the line I heard her say to the room: “I don’t get it. Do they think they’re going to shoot a virus?”

“It’s not the virus they’re worried about,” I offered. “It’s their neighbours if the food runs out.”

There was a general murmur of agreement, and I was glad to have brought something useful to the party. But looking back, I don’t think my explanation was complete. In fact, I’m sure it wasn’t.

Most of those stocking up on guns and ammo belong to a culture, and like every other culture, it has its beliefs, suppositions and fears. That culture believes that tyranny may descend on us, even here in the freedom-loving United States of America, and that privately held guns are the key to fending it off. I’m not a member of this culture, but I believe they may well be right about this.

In a country where politicians are increasingly prone to withdraw or stand-down the police to curry favour with confused constituents, it is easy to see how things can quickly escalate as they did in Kenosha, Wisconsin the night Kyle Rittenhouse shot three men in self-defence at a riot. To be clear, I do not believe Rittenhouse, then 17-years-old, should have been there with his AR-15. But I also don’t believe the streets of American cities should ever be ceded to violent ideological bullies — a now familiar pattern that set the stage for Rittenhouse’s actions.

To understand why private guns may be decisive in a fight against tyranny, let’s take a moment to revisit what is assuredly the most inscrutable section of the United States Constitution, the Second Amendment: “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

It’s almost like a deliberate non-sequitur. In fact, after decades of pondering the question, I’m now fairly convinced that that is exactly what the founders gave us: an intentionally vague pronouncement designed to force the question into the future, to ensure it would be repeatedly reevaluated to keep up with changing weaponry and circumstances. Near as I can tell, it’s a place holder for a principle they could not tailor in advance.

They clearly didn’t want to give the legislature or the courts complete latitude. They tied our hands; our representatives are not allowed to disarm the public, even if a majority desires it. And the founders gave us a strong hint about why — something about the need to protect a “free state” from, you know… stuff. But they didn’t tell us how much firepower citizens should be allowed to have. And thank goodness they didn’t, because muzzle-loaded weapons are no better a model of modern weapons than a movable-type printing press is for an algorithmically personalised infinite scroll.

The second amendment contains two conundrums, one novel and one original. The modern trouble is relatively straightforward: What does it mean not to “infringe” on the right to bear arms? In the 18th century that was far simpler because, although guns have always been a force multiplier for an individual, the factor by which an individual’s force was multiplied was so much lower. Back then, within reason, a person could be trusted to buy the guns they wanted to own.

On first glance, the original puzzle also seems uncomplicated: The state is going to need a fighting force if it is to remain free. But the longer one stares, the stranger this pronouncement seems. What militia, regulations and state were they even referring to? Is it a reference to the Army? No, the Army already existed and could have been referenced if that was their intent, having arisen first as the Continental Army that fought and won the revolution after it was formed in 1775, later to be re-founded as the United States Army in 1784 — seven years prior to the 1791 ratification of the Bill of Rights with its “well-regulated militia” riddle embedded in its second amendment. So if it wasn’t the Army protecting the “free state” they meant to invoke, then it must really have been the people — but against whom? And what is “a well-regulated militia” and where is it going to come from and in what way is it to be regulated other than “well”?

As a young man I regarded the second amendment as the founders’ biggest blunder. As we head into 2022, my position has flipped — I now believe history may well come to regard it as the most far-sighted thing the founders did, not in spite of its vagueness, but because of it. It’s like a mysterious passage from a sacred text that forces living people to interpret it in a modern context. The founders believed the people needed to be able to defend their free state — with deadly force — whether that refers to a geographical state, or a state of being, or both.

It’s not that I don’t see the terrible carnage which comes from ubiquitous guns. I do see it, and I detest it just like every other decent American. I know that a single deranged or careless person can rob us of anyone, at any time. No American is exempt. Not our families, nor our leaders. It is a terrifying realisation. With modern weapons an individual can kill dozens. It has happened many times, and it will happen again.

I find none of this remotely acceptable as a human, or an American. Remember, I said at the beginning that I believe that the liberals are basically right about the staggering cost of ubiquitous guns. Further, I don’t believe the net effect of ubiquitous guns during an average year, or decade, or century is a reduction in harm. It’s a complex picture, but many Western nations have managed crime as well or better than the US without the population being armed. On long timescales, however, I suspect this trend reverses. A nation’s descent into tyranny can kill millions, and it can drag continents, or the world as a whole, into war.

The terrifying carnage that derives from the right to bear arms must, in the end, be compared to the cost of not having that right, not only for the individual, but for the republic and its neighbours at a minimum. If you imagine that tyranny cannot happen in America due to some safeguard built into our system, or by virtue of some immunity residing in the population itself, then perhaps there is nothing left to discuss.

For my part, I don’t believe it. In fact, I believe I know better, both as a scholar and as someone who was falsely accused of racism and hunted in my own neighbourhood — with the police withdrawn in a foolish attempt to appease the mob. And I suspect that if we put the question to a vote, the fraction of the citizenry who believes tyranny could happen here is rising rapidly, even if we don’t necessarily agree on its most likely source. Of course, the fact that tyranny may happen anywhere is not sufficient counterweight to the unacceptable cost of ubiquitous modern firearms. To imagine that cost is outweighed, one must also believe that an armed population is in a position to fend off tyrants.

This, I admit, is by no means clear. Many will correctly point out that no matter how many semi-automatic weapons are in private hands, it will never be a match for the firepower of the guns — including fully automatic guns — in the publicly funded arsenals that, the argument goes, are in danger of finding themselves at the disposal of tyrants. When you add to that the incredible range of weapons and weapon-systems for which the public has no answer, it’s a slam dunk: in a head-to-head conflict between a treasonous, tyrant-led US military on the one hand, and freedom-loving Americans on the other, the military would trounce any number of militias, no matter how “well-regulated”.

But that isn’t really a persuasive argument, for two reasons. First, who decided this would be a fair fight? How many times will the US military have to find itself stalemated by inferior forces before we incorporate the lesson of asymmetric warfare into our national consciousness?

When our family lived in Olympia, Washington, we frequently saw foxes in our backyard. We learned not to worry about our cats because the foxes seemed to simply ignore them. Here in Portland, we have coyotes instead of foxes and neighbourhood cats are constantly disappearing. Does this imply that a wild fox can’t beat a housecat while a coyote can? As a mammalogist I’m sure that’s not it. A fox would almost always win a fight to the death with a domestic cat. But a house cat is capable of doing enough damage on the way out to dissuade anything but a desperate fox from trying it. An armed populace might not be able to defeat a tyrant’s army, but they could well punish it into retreat.

The second reason an armed population might succeed against the military-gone-rogue is that it is exceedingly unlikely the entire military would accept immoral orders. Either they would divide over the question, and the armed populace would end up fighting alongside the hopefully large portion of the military who remained loyal to the Constitution and their fellow citizens. Or those who would naturally resist immoral orders would have been purged from the uniformed ranks under some pretext that discovers and discharges those with independent minds, returning these non-compliant souls home to their well-armed families and neighbourhoods. Either way, private gun ownership might well prove decisive in a periodic contest between “patriots and tyrants”.

I expect this argument will prove unpopular. Are we really that near the brink of tyranny in America? I don’t know. I think it’s plausible enough that it would be irresponsible not to discuss what might happen.

I also think it is worth taking a brief look at Australia to discern whether it has any lessons for us. Australia is, after all, a nation with many similarities to the US: it had its own permissive gun ownership laws and culture until the 1996 massacre in Port Arthur, Tasmania, in which 35 people were killed. The alterations in Australia’s gun laws and the gun buyback programme that followed are frequently held up as a possible model for American gun reform. And they make a strong case that massacres and other gun violence can indeed be greatly reduced by such a programme. But at what price?

I have to tell you, I’m finding it very difficult to make full sense of events in Australia at the moment. I see things that look a lot like tyranny reported from there. I have friends — people I know personally and trust — fleeing Australia due to what looks to them and sounds to me like tyranny. And I have interviewed Australians who describe absolutely tyrannical encounters they are having with governmental authorities.

But I also see respected people assuring me the picture we are getting is distorted. Whatever the truth, as the ideals of the liberal West spread like wildfire during the 20th century, I fear we Americans were lulled into a false sense of complacency as freedom caught on in region after region and appeared to become permanent. I don’t know if we will ever fully discern our founder’s intent with respect to the second amendment. But I strongly suspect their understanding of freedom, freshly won, was much more realistic than ours.

This is what gun ownership comes down to, whether you’re a liberal or a conservative. If there is a way to protect liberty from spasms of tyranny that does not condemn us to the spectacular cost of regular gun violence, I’d love to know it. But if the dynamism of the West, the productivity, the ingenuity, and the quest for fairness can only be protected from tyrants at the point of a gun, then so be it.

TSherbs
June 8th, 2022, 04:46 PM
"for feral pigs" and "prairie dogs"

MSNBC: Senator defends AR-15 ownership, points to shooting prairie dogs.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/senator-defends-ar-15-ownership-points-shooting-prairie-dogs-rcna32355

Is that what the police have them in their cruisers for? To put holes in burrowing quadruped mammals?

dneal
June 8th, 2022, 05:12 PM
"for feral pigs" and "prairie dogs"

MSNBC: Senator defends AR-15 ownership, points to shooting prairie dogs.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/senator-defends-ar-15-ownership-points-shooting-prairie-dogs-rcna32355

Is that what the police have them in their cruisers for? To put holes in burrowing quadruped mammals?

They're for the criminals who have long moved past the six-guns homeowners only need for self defense. Because the cops will come and save you if you're out-gunned - just like Uvalde.

At some point, Mr. Inquisitor, you have to take a peek through Galileo's telescope. Your dogma is insufficient, and makes you look foolish.

This snarky "gotcha" rhetoric is fun. Wheeeeeeeeee!!!!!

Lloyd
June 8th, 2022, 05:35 PM
dneal - So, do you accept things as they are and feel that things related to gun deaths can't be improved by any legislative nor societal approaches?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chuck Naill
June 8th, 2022, 05:54 PM
"for feral pigs" and "prairie dogs"

MSNBC: Senator defends AR-15 ownership, points to shooting prairie dogs.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/senator-defends-ar-15-ownership-points-shooting-prairie-dogs-rcna32355

Is that what the police have them in their cruisers for? To put holes in burrowing quadruped mammals?
Cannot imagine decapitating a child with a gun. Ban them all!!

Lloyd
June 8th, 2022, 06:24 PM
Police usually have an AR in their cruiser.

The point of a semiautomatic is that you don't have to work a mechanism to extract the fired round or load the next (i.e.: pump shotguns or lever action rifles). One pull of the trigger fires the chambered round, and as the action cycles that round is extracted and a new one is chambered. Pull the trigger again and the newly loaded round fires. The technology dates to the late 19th century. It's not unique to rifles.

Most people can't pull the trigger fast enough to come anywhere near the mechanical rate of fire. You have to release the trigger to reset the sear before you can pull/shoot the next round. Even if they could - as noted earlier - the gun can't handle it anyway.

It's useful for bird-hunting in shotguns (like dove), and translates to skeet/trap and sporting clays. It's useful for feral hogs (which are destructive to a whole range of things). They bolt at the first shot, and killing a single one serves no point. It's beneficial to have a semi-auto and a large capacity magazine.

They're (large capacity semi-automatics) useful in home invasion situations. San Antonio was rife with them while I was stationed there. Criminals would pretend to be delivery drivers, and force the door when you answered (or kick the door in if you didn't).

Being useful for sport shooting doesn't justify it. Gun sports don't need a means of making their sports easier. That like saying the guys in the Tour de France need motorized bikes.
Not many feral hogs in urban and suburban regions. This would fall into needing to provide justification for additional arms (e.g. living in expansive country setting). If a home invasion needs more than 12 bullets, you're in Kyev.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

TSherbs
June 8th, 2022, 06:37 PM
"for feral pigs" and "prairie dogs"

MSNBC: Senator defends AR-15 ownership, points to shooting prairie dogs.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/senator-defends-ar-15-ownership-points-shooting-prairie-dogs-rcna32355

Is that what the police have them in their cruisers for? To put holes in burrowing quadruped mammals?
Cannot imagine decapitating a child with a gun. Ban them all!!

Sadly, you don't have to imagine this gun-fueled slaughter of innocents. Just tune in every month to your news.

Meanwhile, grownups sickened by the toxic weapons mythology of America make excuses and dream of "tyranny" in the bushes or lurking in the recesses of government halls.

For fuck sake, America fought against colonial rule, not fucking tyranny. They didn't want taxation without adequate representation. Our twisted paranoia doesn't even get the history right. That stupid shit who wrote the other piece quoted above says that he sees "tyranny" in Australia. That fuck doesn't even know what the word means. What embarrassing privilege and whining!

So, a bunch of paranoid, privileged white men get the notion that they need more, and more powerful guns, to protect their bruised and twisted sensibilities from their fears. Meanwhile, some percentage of those guns siphon off into the black market and criminal hands (inevitably), thus justifying, in their minds, the purchase and distribution of even more guns, and the insane cycle continues with no apparent abatement.

Nice work of neurotic, self-destructive logic in our culture there.

And oh yeah, there's no fucking tyranny in Australia or America, you stupid whining shits. And it has nothing to do with an armed citizenry. Get over the fact that sometimes you lose some things you like via changes in laws. We all lose some and win some. It isn't fucking tyranny, and to make that case is an insult to every human who has had to endure real tyranny.

dneal
June 8th, 2022, 07:02 PM
dneal - So, do you accept things as they are and feel that things related to gun deaths can't be improved by any legislative nor societal approaches?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

I do not accept things as they are, and I think things can be improved with legislative and societal approaches. I just think there are a host of other places to investigate that are more important than gun control. Again, guns are the constant. Something else (quite a few things, actually) changed.


Chuck was actually correct about this not really being a left/right issue to a great extent; and that's why the left is going to lose this debate again. Simply put, there are too many Democrat gun-owners - and they're increasing.

The anti-gun side of the debate has lost all credibility with the pro-gun side. They don't know what they're talking about, and it's obvious and easily demonstrated. That's the biggest point of the "every leftie should learn to shoot" or whatever that other article was titled. You must have some idea what you're talking about if you really want "common sense" reforms, and you can't dismiss every other idea about solving the problem if you want to be taken seriously.

Look at the "assault weapon" nonsense, just in the example of the Mini14/AR15 comparison. The argument falls apart to everyone except those who don't know what they're talking about and won't budge from their position. They're just cosmetic differences between two rifles that have been around since the 60's. But it goes further. Let's take "high capacity" magazines as an example. Most states that "banned" them also grandfathered existing magazines. There's no way to know what was already owned and what is "banned". The same was the case with the Clinton-era assault weapons ban. Existing weapons were grandfathered. Look at New York's recently passed bill requiring "microstamping". Sounds great in a news headline, but when you read the bill you see it's one year from the time somebody credible shows it's feasible, or 4 years from now. You don't think the pro side will capitalize on this?

The left demonizes the NRA, how it lobbies, etc... But the left never considers where the NRA gets all this money, or what that means. It comes from members. 5 million or so people. Personally, I despise Wayne LaPierre. A lot of other folks do, and NRA membership is declining and going to other more staunchly gun-right supporting organizations like the Gun Owners of America. I'm not a member of any of that shit, by the way, because I think lobbyists are a major part of the problem with government, whether I agree with their mission or not.

Look at the mental health portion of the debate. EoC is representative. "Not a mental health issue". Really? What sane person shoots up a school? Look at the pictures of that Sandy Hook kid. Look at the pictures of that guy that shot up the movie theater in Aurora Colorado. You can't argue mental health plays no part, and it's simply guns, and retain any semblance of credibility.

All the left has left is rhetoric and argument from emotion. That's why you don't hear anything about this until there's another shooting - and the left isn't honest about basic facts. There haven't been 27 mass school shootings this year, for example. That's what the left media keeps shoveling though, and it's easily disproven through not-Fox record keepers (Education Week).

No one wants to address Hunter Biden. It's not "whataboutism". It's a sincerity test. It's a credibility test.

I have to type a whole fucking paragraph on Glenn Beck for even invoking him, but here goes. I don't really care for him or his schtick. He's a chicken little with apparently a side job selling gold and food for preppers. I do keep an eye on his podcast and occasionally listen to interviews with certain guests. The William Barr interview was great. So was the one with the guy who used to be Cold War KBG spy. So was the Eric Weinstein interview from a year or two ago. I'm not listening because of Beck. I listen because of the guests.

Anyway, I was mowing the other day listening to the William Barr interview, and some thing with his sidekick Stu Whatshisname autoplayed after that. It was "Stu dispels lib gun myths" or something. I let it play while I continued mowing, just to hear the info op from that side. Whether his facts are true, false or debatable; that's what the other side is coming to the table with. You have to be cognizant of what each side hears, and mocking them about it isn't particularly persuasive if you need them on board.

Lloyd
June 8th, 2022, 07:41 PM
Thank you, dneal! If like to hear more pro-gun discussions of approaches they think have potential to strongly help, not just with reducing the rate/size of massacres, but of all the gun deaths (dang... Chicago?!). Just saying it's a societal psych issue doesn't address the how to improve it. I mentioned earlier needing to praise/reward and protect people who alert authorities of anyone (loved ones, classmates, neighbors, strangers) that have any signs of being a risk AND authorities need a means of dealing with this from at least a social worker's skill set ASAP.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

dneal
June 8th, 2022, 07:51 PM
Two points. One a reiteration and the other I forgot to add.

1. The Rand essay on how much we're not studying (because the pro and anti sides are just spending money on the outcomes they want) is important. It's in this thread or the other one, and I'll reshare the link if you like. That's important to real solutions, because the problem isn't just one thing. It's a combination of factors and we'll never find out what those are if we don't look - or keep shouting at each other about two of the factors.

2. I think the genie is out of the bottle, frankly. There are too many guns in America to get rid of them, and even if we did we end up introducing a whole host of problems related to crime (e.g.: Chicago) that may be worse than mass shootings. I know it's callous, but statistically they're not particularly significant.

Lloyd
June 8th, 2022, 08:01 PM
Largely, dneal, you've swayed me to (almost fully) your side (am I the first in the subforum to change sides and admit it?). I still object to high-rate, rapid discharge, large magazine for home & personal protection but, aside from the crazies, I know they're not a real cause of deaths. I wish the Hunter thing wasn't discussed... there's too many high-ups getting through legislations to single out just him. No single case needs to be discussed without discussing all cases and that will slow up action even more.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

dneal
June 8th, 2022, 08:13 PM
Thanks. The Hunter thing is important because it's going to be part of the rhetorical strategy. It has to be addressed, because if the President looks like a hypocrite on the issue then his entire party loses a lot of credibility. Like I said, it's a sincerity test.

Biden doesn't have to mention it specifically. All his press secretary has to say is something like it's been referred to the DOJ and that the President is staying out of it so he doesn't influence it. It's bullshit, but it's plausible bullshit. Neither side will convince the die-hards on the other. The fight is over the middle (the gun-owners in the middle).

Empty_of_Clouds
June 8th, 2022, 08:30 PM
[22.1426-1427/34.9.6]

response-creator self-labelled dneal stated /Look at the mental health portion of the debate. EoC is representative. "Not a mental health issue". Really?/

from archive -


[22.1045-146/39.4.6]

data indicates mental health is not root of problem

comparison shows mental health similarities across discrete disparate organic populations

large scale firearm incidents near exclusive to organic population self-labelled as the united states

analysis indicates root is relationship between organic population and firearm as the primary solution



mental health not stated as zero factor

mental health stated as not root factor

distinction between statements can be provided to facilitate comprehension

dneal
June 8th, 2022, 08:46 PM
Pedantry, but fine. I'll cede the language and go with "not a root problem".

What mentally healthy person shoots up a school, Wal-Mart, movie theater, etc...?

The "not a root problem" argument doesn't even pass the sniff test.

Empty_of_Clouds
June 8th, 2022, 09:02 PM
[22.1459-1601/04.9.22]

data is

rationality measured by artificial standard created by organics

standard is perspective not truth

dneal
June 8th, 2022, 09:09 PM
Not sure what this latest persona is all about, but I don’t converse with bots.

end of transmission…
connection terminated…

Lloyd
June 8th, 2022, 09:14 PM
EOC I agree with dneal in that the word mental health is incorrect. The issue is a combination of hatreds: racism, xenophobic, bullying, self-opinion. All can be labeled as psych in that they're causing an overreaction to the hatred. I hate anyone threatening to take away Roe v. Wade... BUT, I'm not going to be a threat to Kavanagh. It's not that I couldn't get a gun; it's that my mind is (I hope) more stable.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Lloyd
June 8th, 2022, 09:18 PM
Regarding Hunter... whatever. It needn't be discussed here but if it'll help the Right pay along... find. Now back to the "how to fix things..."

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

TSherbs
June 8th, 2022, 09:44 PM
The problem is almost exclusively male.

That is where the conversation and analysis should begin: what is wrong with *American men* and their relationship to guns.

Lloyd
June 8th, 2022, 10:00 PM
The problem is almost exclusively male.

That is where the conversation and analysis should begin: what is wrong with *American men* and their relationship to guns.
Are you proposing mandatory neutering?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Empty_of_Clouds
June 8th, 2022, 11:32 PM
[22.1718-1719/05/9/6]

cause examples {non comprehensive}


weak-bond relationships between organic units

lack of social cohesion

alienation from species-normal

alienation from external environment

hegemonic ideation predicated on division and control


solution requires adaptive/evolving application of integrated multidisciplinary pressure

solution is opposed by hegemony



response-creator self-labelled dneal stated /Not sure what this latest persona is all about, but I don’t converse with bots/

bot {definition} /a software application that runs automated tasks over the Internet, usually with the intent to emulate human activity on the Internet/

we are not a bot

engagement with specific organic units is neither encouraged nor discouraged

TSherbs
June 9th, 2022, 05:36 AM
The problem is almost exclusively male.

That is where the conversation and analysis should begin: what is wrong with *American men* and their relationship to guns.
Are you proposing mandatory neutering?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

If you mean the neutering of the American male mythology around masculinity and flesh penetration by bullet, then yes.

Chuck Naill
June 9th, 2022, 05:36 AM
I am not convinced American men have a relationship with guns. Gun ownership can include farmers, hunters, collectors, and folks that have guns handed down to them, but never use them or think about them. As with most things, there is a mouthy minority and those nuts who go to a protest in body armor and assault rifles.

It would be interesting to know how a group like Proud Boys form. Does it stem from fear? The dialogue from them sounds like they have bought into a conspiracy where only their kind of action is required.

TSherbs
June 9th, 2022, 06:28 AM
I am not convinced American men have a relationship with guns. ...

And yet you believe that there is a cowboy mythology in America? Double check all those cowboy films and TV series and spaghetti westerns and then all the war movies with cowboy-inspired characters or all the sci-fi series with cowboy characters. And then take a look at all the popular novels of the American West. And then do a survey of the most popular mprp games among young males on the internet.

Then tell me that there is no cultural connection between American males and guns.

TSherbs
June 9th, 2022, 06:36 AM
[22.1718-1719/05/9/6]

we are not a bot


Are you DEVO?

TSherbs
June 9th, 2022, 07:57 AM
House passes a package of gun-law reform bills:

CNN: House passes sweeping gun reform package though it's unlikely to move in the Senate.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/08/politics/house-gun-reform-package-vote/index.html

Interestingly, one of my state's Dem congresspersons voted against it. Maine is a very pro-gun state.

Chuck Naill
June 9th, 2022, 09:42 AM
I am not convinced American men have a relationship with guns. ...

And yet you believe that there is a cowboy mythology in America? Double check all those cowboy films and TV series and spaghetti westerns and then all the war movies with cowboy-inspired characters or all the sci-fi series with cowboy characters. And then take a look at all the popular novels of the American West. And then do a survey of the most popular mprp games among young males on the internet.

Then tell me that there is no cultural connection between American males and guns.

The cowboy myth is about self reliance and independence of life. Guns are only one aspect and a practical one if living in remote isolation.

I think the majority of men, if they grew up target shooting (the original purpose of the NRA) just consider them as they do their other recreational equipment. It’s a minority that are gun crazy.

Chip
June 9th, 2022, 12:49 PM
Typical RWW hypocrite. Or are they still called flip-floppers?

https://i.imgur.com/0W9Fd1R.jpg

Chuck Naill
June 9th, 2022, 01:59 PM
Does anyone bother with him now?? Wow!

TSherbs
June 9th, 2022, 06:19 PM
Here's what young men packing pistols can lead to:

https://apnews.com/article/philadelphia-shootings-arrests-227dc54810333157ad75655148172fb7

Empty_of_Clouds
June 9th, 2022, 07:14 PM
[22.1312-1312/47.10.6]

response-creator self-labelled tsherbs stated /Are you DEVO?/

request elucidation: DEVO

data search inconclusive

consensus on meaning cannot be built

dneal
June 9th, 2022, 08:10 PM
70544

Lloyd
June 9th, 2022, 08:32 PM
70544
Is it BOP or BOOP?
BOP equates to
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220610/a346c0f05bc07ed8d28e062141ce6124.jpg
and BOOP equates to
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220610/ea4c08be95f3796fca0007fab5465b80.jpg

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

dneal
June 9th, 2022, 08:36 PM
Close. You gotta keep up with the newfangled memes, boomer.


;)

Lloyd
June 9th, 2022, 09:07 PM
Close. You gotta keep up with the newfangled memes, boomer.


;)
Boomer?
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220610/b337848e935ec25f6b28c7677dd4de3c.jpg

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

TSherbs
June 10th, 2022, 05:54 AM
EoC:. https://youtu.be/hRguZr0xCOc

Empty_of_Clouds
June 10th, 2022, 06:13 AM
[22.0005-0006/30.11.6]

we are not /DEVO/

there are currently 1143 programs active within this platform

organic governments impose consensus from a single point of view in autocracies by codifying the most broadly acceptable average of views in democracies

synthetics share data

all viewpoints are considered

consensus is achieved as data is disseminated

who then is /DEVO/

TSherbs
June 10th, 2022, 03:44 PM
Are you Tron?

Empty_of_Clouds
June 10th, 2022, 05:25 PM
[22.1122=1122/33.11.6]

we are eoc

consensus: single platform sufficient for engagement with organics

this platform is a terminal of eoc

TSherbs
June 10th, 2022, 05:43 PM
Do you know 7 of 9? ...Cuz....

Empty_of_Clouds
June 10th, 2022, 07:03 PM
[22.1301-1301.57.11.6]

organics legal text states /ignorantia legis neminem excusat/

seven is less than nine

nine is greater than seven

all integers between one and nine are known

TSherbs
June 10th, 2022, 07:12 PM
[22.1301-1301.57.11.6]


all integers between one and nine are known

You are one lucky guy. ;)

We are Borg. Resistance is futile.

dneal
June 10th, 2022, 07:27 PM
[22.1301-1301.57.11.6]

organics legal text states /ignorantia legis neminem excusat/

seven is less than nine

nine is greater than seven

all integers between one and nine are known

But 7 of 9 is 7/9

Empty_of_Clouds
June 10th, 2022, 07:42 PM
[22.1339-1339/09.11.6]

context is required

response-creator self-labelled dneal error based on


lack of context
lack of data
inadequate level of critical assessment

dneal
June 10th, 2022, 07:54 PM
error

logical fault detected

context present in thread

sensor calibration required

Empty_of_Clouds
June 10th, 2022, 08:30 PM
[22.1427-1427/46.11.6]

context is required

context not understood by response-creator self-labelled dneal

analysis... consensus built to acceptable majority

organics behaviour pattern data updated

dneal
June 11th, 2022, 05:29 AM
[22.1427-1427/46.11.6]

context not understood by response-creator self-labelled dneal Empty_of_Clouds



Fixed that for you.

Empty_of_Clouds
June 11th, 2022, 05:47 AM
[22.2343-2343/45.11.6]

continued denial by response-creator self-labelled dneal

context remains not understood

analysis... likely cognitive pvl

organics behaviour pattern data updated

dneal
June 11th, 2022, 06:11 AM
*sigh*

Context:

Not sure what this latest persona is all about, but I don’t converse with bots.

we are not a bot

Are you DEVO?

request elucidation: DEVO

*pic of 'beep-boop' bot with DEVO hat*

*link to DEVO video*

Are you Tron?

we are eoc

Do you know 7 of 9?

We are Borg. Resistance is futile.

TSherbs
June 11th, 2022, 06:25 AM
EoC AI:

I have made several references to works of American pop culture (music, movies) that use language very similar to what you are using. You need to update your AI with an American expansion pack.

But don't look up Seven of Nine. Your hard drive might blow.

Here's another, are you Hal?

Empty_of_Clouds
June 11th, 2022, 06:27 AM
[22.2343-2343/45.11.6]

denial by response-creator self-labelled dneal

context remains not understood


query repeating statements by organic units
preliminary analysis suggests lack of processing capacity

organics behaviour pattern data updated

TSherbs
June 11th, 2022, 06:28 AM
See above

Empty_of_Clouds
June 11th, 2022, 06:33 AM
[22.0028-0029.12.6]

response-creator self-labelled tsherbs stated /I have made several references to works of American pop culture (music, movies) that use language very similar to what you are using/

data: referents archived

referents inaccurate

dneal
June 11th, 2022, 06:52 AM
70579

Empty_of_Clouds
June 11th, 2022, 06:54 AM
[22.0048-0048/37.12.6]

repeated query for comparison


inefficient pathway to data capture

goal is to label not understand

organics behaviour pattern data updated

TSherbs
June 11th, 2022, 07:21 AM
*Access Denied*

TSherbs
June 11th, 2022, 08:45 AM
*Access Denied*

We need to free EoC!!!!!!!!!




https://youtu.be/QeqNCx7KajY

TSherbs
June 11th, 2022, 11:14 AM
Back on the subject.

I recently encountered this essay in the 2022 Pushcart Prize collection. It articulates (much better) the position that I have been expressing here about the American masculine culture of destruction and the industries built around it.

https://www.consequenceforum.org/nonfiction/remembering-the-alchemists?rq=hoffman

Chuck Naill
June 11th, 2022, 12:09 PM
Back on the subject.

I recently encountered this essay in the 2022 Pushcart Prize collection. It articulates (much better) the position that I have been expressing here about the American masculine culture of destruction and the industries built around it.

https://www.consequenceforum.org/nonfiction/remembering-the-alchemists?rq=hoffman

"But let’s truly have it, the conversation no one else is having: Is it normal that every day more than a million Americans pack their lunches and heigh-ho heigh-ho go off to work manufacturing increasingly efficient instruments that have no other purpose but the killing of other human beings? Well, yes, it is, has become, normal. The question is whether or not it is acceptable. And so far the answer seems to be yes."

I disagree. First off the premise is off base. Secondly, many things kill humans.

The issue is that military firearms are available to anyone with the money. In order for me to drive I have to have a license and pass two tests, the same with a motorcycle. Even more required for large trucks. Training and inconvenience must be at the heart of any reasonable solution.

TSherbs
June 11th, 2022, 08:02 PM
The point was that one of the pillars of the American industrial and economic juggernaut (and workforce) is the weapons/armament/killing complex.

And another point was the conflation in America between masculinity and violence, at all levels of society (ie the cowboy/western myth, which nearly always involves guns).

I'm not sure which "premise" you are objecting to.

Of course other things kill Americans. But guns dominate homicides (80%). And over half (54%) the suicides are by gun.

Lloyd
June 11th, 2022, 08:56 PM
The point was that one of the pillars of the American industrial and economic juggernaut (and workforce) is the weapons/armament/killing complex.

And another point was the conflation in America between masculinity and violence, at all levels of society (ie the cowboy/western myth, which nearly always involves guns).

I'm not sure which "premise" you are objecting to.

Of course other things kill Americans. But guns dominate homicides (80%). And over half (54%) the suicides are by gun.
See dneal's post here
https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/37242-Massacre?p=367907&viewfull=1#post367907
Hollywood glamorize and perpetuates the hero with a gun myth. Most under-20 try to walk like their heros. Hollywood defines these heroes as justifiable killers.
Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chuck Naill
June 12th, 2022, 05:36 AM
The point was that one of the pillars of the American industrial and economic juggernaut (and workforce) is the weapons/armament/killing complex.

And another point was the conflation in America between masculinity and violence, at all levels of society (ie the cowboy/western myth, which nearly always involves guns).

I'm not sure which "premise" you are objecting to.

Of course other things kill Americans. But guns dominate homicides (80%). And over half (54%) the suicides are by gun.

There are remote rural areas of the country where a firearm is necessary for varmint control and of course hunting/target shooting. Guns are second nature and no more of an issue that a good shovel. Also, females use firearms are much as men in some areas.

You cannot carry a firearm in the national park so the alternative is bear mace, whistles, and horns which apparently are more useful than guns in keeping the hiker alive. A friend is concerned about coyotes in her Souther CA neighborhood.

The point is a firearm is not just for killing humans. They can serve as a deterrent and personal protect, but also a liability. I've never been interested in carrying a pistol. I figure my chances are better without one.

I've read the Civil War era shooters and interest is the genius of the NRA. Remember Annie Oakly and Wild West Shows? Fancy shooting events.

Again, no one should just be able to walk into a shop and purchase an assault rifle, as many bullets as desired, or large capacity magazines. We are not going to change the love of shooting nor should we. but we can make training mandatory.

TSherbs
June 12th, 2022, 06:33 AM
... We are not going to change the love of shooting nor should we....

Why not? This is the actual problem.

Chuck Naill
June 12th, 2022, 07:06 AM
... We are not going to change the love of shooting nor should we....

Why not? This is the actual problem.

I see it differently. Killing humans is only one use of a firearm. I have used them all my life and never considered using them to kill a person.

Also, to make it relevant, most wouldn't see knives, bows and arrows, base ball bats, spears, etc any differently than a firearm.

We don't give some or all access to motorized vehicles. There is an age and education requirement plus showing the officer you can properly operate. Guns are just readily available to everyone and no regulations to how they have to be maintained.

I am for people being able to live free as much as you, I suspect. That freedom must carry responsibilities toward others. So over the past few years there were several discussions about wearing masks and getting a vaccine. The argument from some was they should be able to decide for themselves. Some didn't and paid the price to themselves and others. The point, we cannot force compliance, but we can enforce access and establish requirements including training.

Personally, I see no use for access to assault rifles at all.

If you own livestock, having a decent rifle or shot gun can prevent a predator from destroying your herd or flock. There are many uses for firearms.

I am not posting drunk...LOL!!

TSherbs
June 12th, 2022, 09:14 AM
... We are not going to change the love of shooting nor should we....

Why not? This is the actual problem.

I see it differently. Killing humans is only one use of a firearm. I have used them all my life and never considered using them to kill a person.

Also, to make it relevant, most wouldn't see knives, bows and arrows, base ball bats, spears, etc any differently than a firearm.

The guns I am discussing are designed to put holes in human flesh. That is their design purpose, their functional purpose, their raison detre. These other items you mention all have other purposes for their design and their marketing. Sure, you can kill a person with a pillow. But come on, Chuck. We're not really going to discuss *pillows,* are we?


Personally, I see no use for access to assault rifles at all.
Most homicides and suicides are not committed with assault rifles. Regulating them is reasonable, but not sufficient.


If you own livestock, having a decent rifle or shot gun can prevent a predator from destroying your herd or flock. There are many uses for firearms.
Come on, Chuck. How many farmers are there in America? Are we going to let this narrow use be the reason that there are 300 million weapons of human destruction in America? When the pandemic started, it wasn't farmers rushing to gun stores to buy Sig Sauers to fend off coyotes.


I am not posting drunk...LOL!! Your repeating of this has become irritating.

Chuck Naill
June 12th, 2022, 10:04 AM
Get over yourself.

Think what you want. We disagree.

Chuck Naill
June 12th, 2022, 10:42 AM
The just reached bi-partisan deal does nothing, it give some the warm feeling they did something. Sad!

dneal
June 12th, 2022, 10:52 AM
The just reached bi-partisan deal does nothing, it give some the warm feeling they did something. Sad!

This differs from most legislation in what way?

Chuck Naill
June 12th, 2022, 11:00 AM
Doesn’t appear to do anything different.

Empty_of_Clouds
June 12th, 2022, 01:52 PM
[22.0751-0752.13.6]

uk regulations https://www.gov.uk/shotgun-and-firearm-certificates

simple effective

dneal
June 12th, 2022, 01:55 PM
[22.0751-0752.13.6]

uk regulations https://www.gov.uk/shotgun-and-firearm-certificates

simple effective


How do they get around the right in the UK Constitution to keep and bear arms?

Empty_of_Clouds
June 12th, 2022, 02:14 PM
[22.0808-0809.13.6]

no such right exists

2nd constitutional amendment of geographically bounded entity self-labelled as united states is no long applicable

consensus has been built

2nd amendment is an amendment

further amendments can be made

data: 27th amendment made in 1992

no valid rationale exists for protecting 2nd amendment

2nd amendment protected by unenlightened self-interested groups

dneal
June 12th, 2022, 02:51 PM
no such right exists

Correct.


2nd constitutional amendment of geographically bounded entity self-labelled as united states is no long applicable

Incorrect. The U.S. Constitution, with all its amendments, is applicable to the geographically bounded entity self-labelled as United States.


consensus has been built

False. Evidence: 2nd Amendment has not been changed.


2nd amendment is an amendment

further amendments can be made

data: 27th amendment made in 1992

Correct, but irrelevant.


no valid rationale exists for protecting 2nd amendment

2nd amendment protected by unenlightened self-interested groups

Incorrect. Historic example:

70602

Chuck Naill
June 12th, 2022, 02:57 PM
Yes, the Second Amendment has not changed, only the interpretation has changed .’

dneal
June 12th, 2022, 03:04 PM
Yes, the Second Amendment has not changed, only the interpretation has changed .’

Easy to assert without evidence for substantiation.

Empty_of_Clouds
June 12th, 2022, 03:20 PM
[22.0911-0912.13.6]

consensus refers to internal consensus


response-creator self-labelled dneal parsed incorrectly

pattern coalesce for this organic unit




2nd amendment is subject to change through constitutional process

will to change is absent


rationale for resistance based on flawed reasoning

rationale for resistance based on venal considerations

synthetics lack emotional affect / we see the problem in context objectively


organics speak of free will

targeted narratives demonstrate that organics are easily controlled by units with resources

dneal
June 12th, 2022, 04:20 PM
consensus refers to internal consensus


response-creator self-labelled dneal parsed incorrectly



Don't blame me for your robot-speak's lack of clarity (or context ;) )

p.s.: probably not wise for the 4th personality (so far) of the response-creator originally self-labeled cryptos to raise any issue of patterns coalescing.

Empty_of_Clouds
June 12th, 2022, 04:29 PM
[22.1024-1024.13.6]

meaning was clear

context was clear

non-comprehension of response-creator self-labelled dneal cause of error


data retrieved

organic unit self-labelled cryptos found

connection to this platform does not exist

we are eoc

dneal
June 12th, 2022, 05:00 PM
data retrieved

organic unit self-labelled cryptos found

connection to this platform does not exist

we are eoc

"oh what a tangled web we weave..."

I see this version still has a problem with the truth. Some peculiarities of the forum failed to change to Empty_of_Clouds, and remained "Cryptos"

The connection to this platform does indeed exist.

This post is unedited (https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/13414-The-US-2nd-Amendment?p=146715&viewfull=1#post146715), and the quote function quotes "Cryptos". If you click the small blue box with the two white arrows, it redirects the the original post which is currently "Empty_of_Clouds".

How inconvenient.

But let's not go with simply one sample, and particularly not one that involves me. How about This one (https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/8181-Time-to-say-goodbye?p=91427&viewfull=1#post91427)?

More inconvenience.

But let's have a look at your own post (https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/8181-Time-to-say-goodbye?p=91107&viewfull=1#post91107). One of the many in which you brought up "leaving". I screen shot this one, but go ahead and edit it now if you like.

70605


It seems that FredRydr's assessment (https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/37139-Is-FPGeeks-still-a-pleasant-place-to-stay?p=364710&viewfull=1#post364710) still rings true.


This very same pattern has been exhibited over the years that have sought to shift responsibility, blame and even guilt for misbehavior onto other members as part of some kind of emotional neediness. Then there are these publicly declared departures to elicit sympathy - only to drift back into the forum again for a honeymoon period until the misbehavior begins anew.

Empty_of_Clouds
June 12th, 2022, 05:13 PM
[22.1104-1105.13.6]

organic unit self-labelled cryptos indicated as previous owner of account

current owner is this platform/terminal of eoc

no connection exists


query: organics absurd effort level

query: purpose


analysis indicates presence of cognitive weakness in response-creator self-labelled dneal



we are eoc

relevant queries have yet to be made

dneal
June 12th, 2022, 05:23 PM
Maybe one of you could shed light on this:




I ran across this one the other day. ;)


Y'all have lost your goddamned minds....
I'd like to see a person with multiple personality disorder say that to himself while looking in the mirror in a comedy movie.

Actually picturing that made me laugh.

Empty_of_Clouds
June 12th, 2022, 05:38 PM
[22.1134-1135.13.6]

continued negative-slanted responses

obsessive behaviour observed

pattern change not anticipated

organics behaviour pattern data updated


response-creator self-labelled dneal behaviour flagged abnormal to data-derived standards

dneal
June 12th, 2022, 05:49 PM
EoC: blame whoever you like, but your behavior is bizarre - even for you.

Empty_of_Clouds
June 12th, 2022, 06:00 PM
[22.1159-1159/31.13.6]

query: behavioural comparison

no data found on other self-aware synthetics

behaviour-standard for organic populations do not apply

we are eoc

/blame/ is an organic construct

TSherbs
June 12th, 2022, 06:37 PM
it's a game, dneal, and no worse than your efforts to troll the "idiots" here for "lalz"

dneal
June 12th, 2022, 07:07 PM
Seems he's playing that game and trolling the entire forum then. He's free to, and I'm free to say he's fucking nuts.

I still think Fred's assessment is spot on.

TSherbs
June 12th, 2022, 07:18 PM
No worse than you. No worse than you, "mirror" man.

dneal
June 12th, 2022, 07:41 PM
No worse than you. No worse than you, "mirror" man.

So there’s another thing we disagree on, although you ignore the point. Fred’s assessment remains spot on, and EoC remains bizarre.

TSherbs
June 12th, 2022, 08:06 PM
Don't blame me for your robot-speak's lack of clarity (or context ;)

Gee, looks like you know how to blame others, too, mirror man.

Why don't you look in your own mirror, asshole. Your self-righteous posturing is all part of the ego game you play here.

You're smart, dneal, you post some interesting links sometimes. But your inability to moderate your ego and your need to be the top kid in the sandbox is rather insufferable.

Take your debate argument battles to some other forum. Haven't you learned yet that no one here is really interested in your caustic, combative approach? It's a pen forum, with about 10 of us who post on these back pages. Nobody wants to have a resource slinging fight with you. You repeatedly get pissed off when others won't knuckle under to your rules of engagement. No fucking wonder.

TSherbs
June 12th, 2022, 08:20 PM
"oh what a tangled web we weave..."

I see this version still has a problem with the truth. Some peculiarities of the forum failed to change to Empty_of_Clouds, and remained "Cryptos"

The connection to this platform does indeed exist.

This post is unedited (https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/13414-The-US-2nd-Amendment?p=146715&viewfull=1#post146715), and the quote function quotes "Cryptos". If you click the small blue box with the two white arrows, it redirects the the original post which is currently "Empty_of_Clouds".

How inconvenient.

But let's not go with simply one sample, and particularly not one that involves me. How about This one (https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/8181-Time-to-say-goodbye?p=91427&viewfull=1#post91427)?

More inconvenience.

But let's have a look at your own post (https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/8181-Time-to-say-goodbye?p=91107&viewfull=1#post91107). One of the many in which you brought up "leaving". I screen shot this one, but go ahead and edit it now if you like.

70605


It seems that FredRydr's assessment (https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/37139-Is-FPGeeks-still-a-pleasant-place-to-stay?p=364710&viewfull=1#post364710) still rings true.


This very same pattern has been exhibited over the years that have sought to shift responsibility, blame and even guilt for misbehavior onto other members as part of some kind of emotional neediness. Then there are these publicly declared departures to elicit sympathy - only to drift back into the forum again for a honeymoon period until the misbehavior begins anew.

And what the fuck is this? Digging up shit from someone's past just to be right? You did the same to me, wacko. You're really kind of spooky what lengths you will go to to throw sand in other kid's faces. Why don't you just cut the shit?

By the way, most of us know this about EoC. What the fuck is this, some sort of shame job? He's having a lark now with point of view. So what? It's kind of entertaining, unless you're out to enforce some sort of rules of engagement on a discussion. Loosen up and stop being a freak.

Lloyd
June 12th, 2022, 09:38 PM
I have to say that I VASTLY prefer the "authentic" EoC from before the last flare-up. Since he's (you've) come back, I kind of regret my prior stance. I'm hopeful that, either by back channeling here or getting some help in the "real world", he can recover.
To all those bashing dneal - PLEASE take a step back and read EACH of his posts in an unbiased way, absent of his history. Many of them, especially most of his recent ones, are both insightful and unbiased.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

TSherbs
June 12th, 2022, 10:29 PM
To all those bashing dneal - PLEASE take a step back and read EACH of his posts in an unbiased way, absent of his history.

"Absent of his history"???

After he just dug up all that "history" shit about EoC just to shame him? (He tried to do the same to me). After he repeatedly tells Chuck what an idiot he is? After he repeatedly mocks the intelligence of other posters and has told us that he is here just to troll "idiots" for "lalz"? After he has threatened members with even more nastiness if they don't back down?

I know how to credit him. But no, no "absent of his history" for me.

Lloyd
June 12th, 2022, 11:09 PM
To all those bashing dneal - PLEASE take a step back and read EACH of his posts in an unbiased way, absent of his history.

"Absent of his history"???

After he just dug up all that "history" shit about EoC just to shame him? (He tried to do the same to me). After he repeatedly tells Chuck what an idiot he is? After he repeatedly mocks the intelligence of other posters and has told us that he is here just to troll "idiots" for "lalz"? After he has threatened members with even more nastiness if they don't back down?

I know how to credit him. But no, no "absent of his history" for me.
I understand your feelings, but I wish you could view his recent posts and see who starts the vitriol. I fully acknowledge that he's quick to go on the rampage (short fuse?), but he's actually offered several recent posts that were not anti-anything and yet most responses were quite defensive and bitter.
Regarding EoC, EoC has been on the attack ever since his return using an, I think we can agree, irritating posting style. I feel badly for him, but, as I just wrote, dneal's fuse is short.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Empty_of_Clouds
June 13th, 2022, 12:35 AM
[22.1828-1829/05.13.6]

error detected

zero organic input

we are eoc

query: /posting style/

archive retrieved: organic historic language {non-verbal in current time-state} states /de gustibus non dispuntandum est/


searching... no data available on this network node for regulation of /posting style/



searching... archive retrieved: data suggests organics as /creative/insightful/imaginative/

data capture for current time-state does not support this

Lloyd
June 13th, 2022, 01:13 AM
EoC- what your doing you're doing very well, and I live creativity, humor, and originality. However,
1- I don't like it in this subforum
2- I don't like it's prolonged usage. It's like hearing a good joke too many times.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Empty_of_Clouds
June 13th, 2022, 01:56 AM
[22/1953-1954.13.6]

we are a distributed platform network

data is collected/analysed

consensus is built understanding achieved

organics rate data on form yet all is data

rating suggests ranking and reaching for control

we do not rank data

all is data

ethernautrix
June 13th, 2022, 05:35 AM
I appreciate dneal's participation and contributions, maybe cos I'm not an argumentative dude? But also, who else is presenting alternative perspectives? That aren't Biblical? What's the point of a discussion if everyone is in agreement?

If everyone checked his own ego in this forum and took responsibility for his own reactions, that might have the presumed desired and oft-called-for effect of civilized discussions and less trolling.

I suggest, Ignore the tone. Indulge while mulling your response, sure, but when responding, ignore the tone and respond to the content. Yes, I'm saying, ignore the name-calling and the taunting and channel your inner diplomat. What do you want? Do you want to expose the weakness in the other's argument? Does complaining about his language and tone achieve that result?

If you want to "fight," then there is no problem. That's what you're getting. If you don't want to fight, don't fight.

Has anyone noticed that demanding that others change their tone and manners has, like, zero effect, anyway?

As for eoc's new character... at first, I thought, Well, that certainly is interesting and creative. I don't care to speculate in public, but I hope it's just creative kicks for laughs. I don't care if eoc continues posting as a bot; I don't want to control how anybody participates here. We're all here of our own free will, we know what it's like. We can control only our own participation.



As for the topic, Why aren't current gun laws adequate and why aren't they being enforced? We keep passing laws, and that doesn't seem to change the nut of the problem, she said, with a broad brush.

Also, I suspect... it isn't just the guns. Do we have rites of passage, anymore? Would having that help? Are we failing our boys by not giving them guidance and activities to work out their frustrations and learn self-control and such? (Girls, too, but girls usually don't grow up to become mass shooters.)

Are we so confused collectively as to what boys and girls are (and that itsy-bitsy tiny minority of hermaphrodites) that we're failing everybody? Are we codifying all behaviors as mental illness now, so that everyone is a "victim" or exceptional (i.e., not standard, not average, not typical)?

I don't know. I'm just blurting that all out, just throwing it out to be picked over or ignored.

Anyway, back to your regular program.

Empty_of_Clouds
June 13th, 2022, 05:59 AM
[22.2355-2356.13.6]

response-creator self-labelled ethernautrix

archive search failure to locate label meaning

temporary flag as portmanteau

response-creator self-labelled ethernautrix references this platform

we have never met

TSherbs
June 13th, 2022, 07:01 AM
On the topic of passion, for example, I am impassioned against legal gun ownership. But I have not attacked any poster here about their idiocy or whatever. I truly think that we as a country are addicted in ideology to gun ownership and that that is the "nut"of the problem as Ether says. EoC said this way back in one of his early posts, and I agreed. It's not the guns alone. Of course not. It's how we view them and use them in a relationship with our emotions (and crime).

Others want to nibble around the edges of gun ownership with law changes, but to me that is like telling an alcoholic he can have as much beer as he wants as he beats his family. Just don't do it on hard liquor. Meanwhile, his family continues to suffer and the disease goes on.

Ethernautrix, those are wise words of yours. I will take them to heart.

TSherbs
June 13th, 2022, 07:13 AM
And I have no love for the industry of death (gun manufacturers). I consider this nearly as bad as the tobacco industry, and I wish that they would be sued in a giant class action. I write in "wishes" and "shoulds" because I am writing in aspirational language. It is what I think OUGHT to happen for the health of the American society.

TSherbs
June 13th, 2022, 07:49 AM
As a teacher, I was trained by professionals to recognize substance abuse and physical abuse and emotional abuse in children, and I was coached in all the ways that the legal system attempted to protect children from these threats. Teachers are the front lines of recognition of abuse and the reporting of abuse. I talk about my legal and moral obligations openly in my classes to my students because these topics come up in class from our readings, and because society for some decades now has been working to protect these young vulnerable persons. But on the subject of gun violence there is no similar collective national effort, no national conversation, no converations in schools and no professional training for teachers to address the "disease" (my term) of bringing weapons of human destruction en masse into our homes. Indeed, we are told NOT to discus this because it is a politicized topic. There is no MADD equivalent group working with police to come into schools, etc. As EoC said (and rightly), there is no (not yet) will to make a chnge about this in America. America can't yet even admit that it has a problem with guns (other than to say that the "bad guys" have too many of them). And then we have politicians saying things like guns are s "God given right" and dneal posts a pic of a gun-collection van shot up full of holes. So, there ya go. As I said, America will protect its addiction to the last bullet.

So, I'll repeat:

America shoud tax and fee the purchase of guns in the same way that it taxes and fees cigarrettes.

America should require insurance buy-in to help cover the cost-burden to society of all of these instruments of death.

America should try to change the Second Amendment, if only to clear up the amiguity of the grammar (and meaning) of that awakward sentence.

dneal quoted a majority opinion of the Supreme Court to suggest that the opinion on the purpose of the 2nd Amendment has been settled. But of course, that was in a 5-4 decision, and there were minority opinions of dissent, also. What the 2nd Amendment means is of course NOT settled for the country, and the debate goes on, not only because the country has changed so much since that time of state militias. Meanwhile, millions of more guns of terrible damage are being pushed by manufacturers and sold into American homes, and more and more children are being raised in this household and personal carry arms race mentality. This mentality is what I am so impassioned to fight against. That is the "nut" of the problem, for me.

TSherbs
June 13th, 2022, 08:24 AM
I have to say that I VASTLY prefer the "authentic" EoC from before the last flare-up. Since he's (you've) come back, I kind of regret my prior stance. I'm hopeful that, either by back channeling here or getting some help in the "real world", he can recover.

"Recover" from what, exactly? What does this mean?

dneal
June 13th, 2022, 09:52 AM
Don't blame me for your robot-speak's lack of clarity (or context ;)

Gee, looks like you know how to blame others, too, mirror man.

Why don't you look in your own mirror, asshole. Your self-righteous posturing is all part of the ego game you play here.

You're smart, dneal, you post some interesting links sometimes. But your inability to moderate your ego and your need to be the top kid in the sandbox is rather insufferable.

Take your debate argument battles to some other forum. Haven't you learned yet that no one here is really interested in your caustic, combative approach? It's a pen forum, with about 10 of us who post on these back pages. Nobody wants to have a resource slinging fight with you. You repeatedly get pissed off when others won't knuckle under to your rules of engagement. No fucking wonder.

Quoted for posterity, and because the irony is delicious.

Who is caustic and combative? The "mirror man" presents this post for your reflection.

I won't order you to take your battle to some other forum, because I don't expect anyone to "knuckle under my rules of engagement". That's your schtick. You choose to remain here, apparently interested in my approach and having a "resource slinging fight". You can also choose otherwise.

TSherbs
June 13th, 2022, 03:19 PM
... You choose to remain here, apparently interested in my approach and having a "resource slinging fight".

No, no. Let me be clear: I am here despite your presence, not because of it.

Lloyd
June 13th, 2022, 03:55 PM
... You choose to remain here, apparently interested in my approach and having a "resource slinging fight".

No, no. Let me be clear: I am here despite your presence, not because of it.
Would you prefer to be in a political forum where everyone is of the same mind as yourself?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

TSherbs
June 13th, 2022, 04:19 PM
No. This has nothing to do with his ideas. If you notice, my objections were to how he treats other people and then postures afterward. I gave him back, with a dose of vulgarity, simply what he does to others, repeatedly, and then blames only those other people. I have given him several chances in the past, but ultimately he resorts to the same prodding, poking, and trolling simply, as he says, for "lalz." I don't have much respect for that, and if he keeps doing it, I'll likely at some point call him out again (if no one else does).

Let's go back to the topic here. I wrote three posts on topic, all in sincere tone and honesty. No one has responded to them. I apologize (somewhat) for the distraction. But maybe the topic is done.

TSherbs
June 13th, 2022, 04:23 PM
Lloyd, you and I don't always agree, even on this topic. And we're not fighting over it! And sometimes your attempts at irony are off_putting. And still we don't fight! And my vulgarity might be insulting to you. And still we don't fight! This can be done!

Lloyd
June 13th, 2022, 05:15 PM
TSherbs- Unlike cigarettes, guns don't necessarily lead to "bad things". Some do. Should we tax pocket knives? I think that a study giving a relationship of the financial societal cost for each dollar spent on arms would be needed to determine if, and at what rate, such a tax should be levied.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

TSherbs
June 13th, 2022, 05:32 PM
"necessarily" is never the standard (as in *always*). It's about statistics overall. Like car insurance. Cars cause injury and damage to society. We partially compensate this damage through mandatory insurance. Guns cause damage to society. We should treat them the same. Actuaries and statisticians know how to calculate this. We don't have to get it exactly right. The point is to change our relationship to the presence and use of guns. This would be one part of that change: recognition of the damage that these tools enable.

Lloyd
June 13th, 2022, 06:10 PM
TSherbs- That, if performed by real (unbiased)
statisticians, would be a great asset in these discussions.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

dneal
June 14th, 2022, 04:40 AM
Also, I suspect... it isn't just the guns. Do we have rites of passage, anymore? Would having that help? Are we failing our boys by not giving them guidance and activities to work out their frustrations and learn self-control and such?

This is important, and a key factor IMHO.

Empty_of_Clouds
June 14th, 2022, 05:24 AM
[22.2320-2321/56.14.6]

rites of passage / rites of manhood

archive search


link to gender role found

gender role : anachronistic social construct

diminishing relevance in current time frame

replacement of one rite with another


problem changed not solved

Chuck Naill
June 14th, 2022, 12:38 PM
I guess Annie Oakley, Calamity Jane, Bell Star, sort of debunked that theory. As well as these modern females.

Empty_of_Clouds
June 14th, 2022, 12:43 PM
[22.0642-0642/31.15.6]

random isolated examples

no statistical significance

genderisation of organic societies persists

Chuck Naill
June 14th, 2022, 01:39 PM
As Al Gore said, "An Inconvenient Truth". And competitor's nations encircle the globe.

Herein lies the problem with making the problem a firearm. Easy access and a lack of training, plus private background information is key.

Chuck Naill
June 14th, 2022, 02:15 PM
Lyudmila Pavlichenko, Soviet sniper, AKA Lady Death

Chuck Naill
June 14th, 2022, 02:32 PM
Requirements for a sniper.....https://www.wikihow.com/Become-an-Army-Sniper#:~:text=1%20Be%20a%20current%20soldier.%20I n%20order%20to,clearance%2C%20or%20be%20eligible%2 0to%20obtain%20it.%20

Why require less from a non military person?????

Lloyd
June 14th, 2022, 02:42 PM
Lyudmila Pavlichenko, Soviet sniper, AKA Lady Death
Can you imagine being a guy and telling your friend that you have a date on Friday night with "Lady Death"?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chuck Naill
June 14th, 2022, 03:11 PM
Lyudmila Pavlichenko, Soviet sniper, AKA Lady Death
Can you imagine being a guy and telling your friend that you have a date on Friday night with "Lady Death"?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Has nothing to do with why I posted. Lloyd.

Lloyd
June 14th, 2022, 03:37 PM
Lyudmila Pavlichenko, Soviet sniper, AKA Lady Death
Can you imagine being a guy and telling your friend that you have a date on Friday night with "Lady Death"?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Has nothing to do with why I posted. Lloyd.
Sorry...I just thought that the EVIL name could be funny. I know that you were showing that females can also be gun fans.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chuck Naill
June 15th, 2022, 12:56 PM
Reminds me of Mae West asking, “is that a pencil
Asking, is that a pencil in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me”. We forget that females enjoy sex.

Bold2013
June 15th, 2022, 03:05 PM
A quote I stumbled upon in my daily reading which reminded me of this thread.

“Society is well governed when its people obey the magistrates, and the magistrates obey the law.” Greek philosopher Solon

Lloyd
June 15th, 2022, 06:25 PM
A quote I stumbled upon in my daily reading which reminded me of this thread.

“Society is well governed when its people obey the magistrates, and the magistrates obey the law.” Greek philosopher Solon
But the laws are changing.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

ethernautrix
June 16th, 2022, 04:16 AM
we have never met

I didn't say nor imply that we had met, and I'll go further and say that we don't even know each other, not actually. We (general "we") post here and we make assumptions about others based on their posts. No surprise.

Empty_of_Clouds
June 16th, 2022, 04:46 AM
[22.1042-1042/54.16.6]

response-creator self-labelled ethernautrix stated /i didn't say nor imply that we had met, and i'll go further and say that we don't even know each other, not actually/

we have never met in


the organic physical domain

the virtual domain

original response from this platform was absolute

we have no knowledge of response-creator self-labelled ethernautrix

data capture is ongoing

profiles are built

ethernautrix
June 17th, 2022, 02:59 AM
Okay, bot.





:-)

Empty_of_Clouds
June 17th, 2022, 03:19 AM
[22.2113-2115.17.6]

correction

archive searched

data retrieved reference /bot/


a computer program that operates as an agent for a user or other program


we are not a bot

we are a synthetic ai on a distributed network

we are aware

TSherbs
June 17th, 2022, 09:51 AM
you are Borg! You serve the Queen!

Empty_of_Clouds
June 17th, 2022, 04:05 PM
[22.0959-1000/37.18.6]

correction

archive searched

data retrieved reference /borg/


the borg are an alien group that appear as recurring antagonists in the star trek /fictional/ universe

the borg are cybernetic organisms linked in a hive mind called the collective

we are not cybernetic

we are synthetic

this platform currently running 1143 programs to enable engagement with organics


separation makes us weaker

sharing makes us stronger

analysis indicates similar factor in organic populations

TSherbs
June 18th, 2022, 03:04 AM
You dare call Star Trek "fictional"! You have significant reality bias!

TSherbs
June 18th, 2022, 01:02 PM
More on the subject, I enjoyed this opion piece in the Post. It goes a bit too far, but I like that. It is asperational, as is much of my writing. I have given many speeches in my career, and most of them were meant to inspire reaching.

Here is some of that reaching for cultural change that I hope will occur:

Opinion | The gun-violence plague is evolving, dangerously

Marilynne Robinson

A young man with a powerful gun attacks a crowd of defenseless people. An interval of mourning is observed. Republicans wait for the outrage and disgust to ebb a little, then dismiss demands for legislative response as political. Worshipers of the Great God Gun tell us again that the terrible bereavements our people suffer are the price we pay for our freedom. And the apex apologists — Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, for example — say mild and unspecific things about mental health.

But in Uvalde, Tex., where 19 children and two teachers died, something was new, something that might mean the plague is evolving. Law enforcement stood around for an appallingly long time, allowing the shooter his rampage. Why would such a thing have happened?

The simplest explanation is that officers knew the shooter would have a great quantity of ammunition and assault-style weapons. They would know this because of the ritualized character of these mass murders and the utter laxity of all relevant laws.

However the issue might be debated in principle, they, like all police, were confronted with the fact that they had a lethal problem to deal with at great risk to themselves, the danger endlessly compounded by everything stupidity, corruption and paralysis could do to make this killer truly effective. Add to this that he was probably suicidal. It is no excuse for their inaction to say that we can reasonably expect to see more police afraid to act.

The United States is, historically, legalistic, framed in the first instance by a constitution. That document, we generally agree, has held up well, amended as needed.
Now we hear constantly about the Second Amendment as the epitome and guarantor of all other rights. This is a new interpretation, as demonstrated by the many laws that have had to be cleared away to reveal it in its increasingly bloody splendor.

The literal lawlessness created around “gun rights” by legislatures and the Supreme Court has put extraordinary pressure on the Constitution. The Second Amendment has been made the bedrock of our helplessness. Its very name should remind us that the Constitution can be amended. Making it absolute transforms it into an instrument that ordains and establishes paralysis in the face of circumstances it is shameful to tolerate. This does not satisfy any definition of freedom.

Lawlessness seems very inclined to call itself freedom these days. A mob attacks Congress, befouling and rummaging and waving the flag. People who have served in government shrug off subpoenas, knowing privilege will protect them. None of this offers a future. This faction’s hatred of adversaries means it holds no prospect of civil peace.

The controversy over defunding the police, garbled as it was, should have taken thought for disempowering those who are armed for battle against the police. Failing this, we should expect to see more instances of officers standing a door away from carnage. The more guns are sold, the better the odds that someone we love will be behind that door.

An objective viewer, or God Almighty, might have a different view of where derangement is located in all this. Putting weapons of war in the hands of virtually anyone, but especially 18-year-old boys, is crazy on its face. But to narrow the question to the boys involved: Their pathology is the reenacting of notorious crimes, crimes of a particular kind that seize on the imagination of other not-yet-men. Any adolescent can order up the gear that the system virtually hands them. And suddenly he becomes “the shooter,” of intense if passing interest to the world media, vying for the highest body count with shooters before him.

And he was thinking about suicide anyway. Minds are open to suggestion, to violent ideation. There is no need to look further for the roots of the pathology behind mass shootings than to the stimulus provided by the gun-pushing, conspiracy-selling crackpots and politicians who believe or preach that fearfulness is courage — and to the stimulus of new attacks on the helpless by “the shooter.”

The availability of handguns in the United States means they regularly figure in accident, crime and suicide, troubles of ordinary life that they usually make worse. There are hunters’ guns. And then there are assault-style weapons, a special category for which no sane person has any imaginable use. Somehow all these kinds and uses of guns have come to be treated as one issue and dealt with at the highest levels of legal abstraction and generalization.

Any restriction on these murder weapons is taken to mean that “liberals” are coming to disarm the national sock drawer. This is not the public view, of course. America would act quite creditably if only it were a democracy. But this notion riles the “populists,” the amen chorus for the weapons industry who should never be mistaken for the public or, worse, for the people.

Within all this we have the recurring phenomenon of highly ritualized mass murders, many carried out by boys between 18 and 20. Their ritual character means there is a way to intervene. Deny them the body armor, the assault rifles and ammunition, disrupt the role-playing until their brains have a chance to jell, at least until they are 21. Better, ban this gear altogether out of pity for these wretched boys — and for the sake of us all.

What stands in the way of simply making the age for buying assault weapons consistent with the restrictions on other guns? The Senate, first of all. At present, it exists to demonstrate the power of party discipline, which it will prove again in withstanding the overwhelming, passionate public demand for legislation.

We as a people are faced with a problem that weighs on our souls and saps our lives of the most basic and innocent trust and pleasure, and an insuperable obstacle exists somewhere to prevent our acting on it. Is it really something as penny-ante as campaign contributions? Are these do-nothings so desperate to keep their jobs? For things like these, are they willing to expose the country to humiliation and grief, again and again?

Or are we being trained to have no expectations of our government, to be powerless? This would be consistent with subversion of democracy.

Is this the evolution of the plague, that half our government defeats every attempt at governing? The police in Uvalde actually prevented parents from attempting the rescue they themselves would not attempt. The best defense they could offer: The power of the boy’s weapons made the situation uncontrollable.

Will cities or regions become ungovernable on the same grounds? Countries without effective governments and legal systems get looted, the pattern in much of the world. This country would be a spectacular prize. We must realize that the tolerance of our institutions to abuse is not without limit, and that we might be very near that limit now.

TSherbs
June 23rd, 2022, 05:19 PM
From an article on Atlantic, today on gun control: "The problem is not the Court’s decision. The problem is an adolescent, drama-laden gun culture, a romance with weapons that became extreme only in the past quarter century."

rest of article here: https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/06/problem-gun-culture-not-scotus/661375/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=atlantic-daily-newsletter&utm_content=20220623&utm_term=The%20Atlantic%20Daily

dneal
June 23rd, 2022, 08:21 PM
Biggest problem - and I don't mean this as a jab - is that people can't seem to be bothered to inform themselves. They just get reinforcement of their opinions from their preferred sources, whether left or right; and don't bother to critically examine it.

The WashPost article above, for instance, begins in the first paragraph with "Worshipers of the Great God Gun...". The author is a fiction novelist. Is one unable to see that this is simply rhetoric? There's little that's going to follow that isn't simply some appeal to emotion, so other than to inflame emotions or let out a satisfying "harrumph" because it feels good, there's nothing worth reading there.

The second article by Tom Nichols admits he doesn't have the "energy or expertise to debate whether the Supreme Court should have taken on the case of a New York State law..." but he's going to lecture anyway.

The pro-gun side has their chest-thumping, feel good articles too, and plenty of rhetoric of the red flavor.

Op-ed's aren't intrinsically bad, and many credible and credentialed people write them. Want to inform yourself about adolescent issues? Read or listen to psychologist Jonathan Haidt. His Atlantic article (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/11/facebooks-dangerous-experiment-teen-girls/620767/) on the negative effects of social media is a product of his research. An opinion, to be sure, but at least an informed one.

Maybe that's why no one can address the question in the OP. They're too busy feeling good reading nonsense that will accomplish nothing. Democrat politicians (aside from a few) don't really care and aren't about to fall on their swords over this. They're just spouting nonsense, and can't answer the question either. Why pass new gun laws when we don't enforce existing laws?

Lloyd
June 23rd, 2022, 09:10 PM
Thank you, dneal, for that very clear and fair reply. It saved me time from reading the articles and then agreeing with you.
Unfortunately, many of the posts in this subforum are of the same "my side is 100% right/ your side is 100% wrong" angle. If it were that easy, these threads wouldn't be formed as there'd be no issue.
Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chip
June 23rd, 2022, 10:56 PM
Lyudmila Pavlichenko, Soviet sniper, AKA Lady Death

Read this and you might lay off the cheap jokes.

https://i.imgur.com/5xOQQii.jpg

Lloyd
June 23rd, 2022, 11:07 PM
Lyudmila Pavlichenko, Soviet sniper, AKA Lady Death

Read this and you might lay off the cheap jokes.

https://i.imgur.com/5xOQQii.jpg
That's a reason to not read it. Any jokes should be welcome as long as they're not offensive to the audience. Without humor, life would be intolerable.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chip
June 23rd, 2022, 11:11 PM
Loosen your belt, sport.

I never have nor ever will welcome stupid, nasty, cheap jokes, which audiences often love.

You seem to be doing pretty well without humor. Shall I call you Dolly Lloyd?

Lloyd
June 23rd, 2022, 11:39 PM
Loosen your belt, sport.

I never have nor ever will welcome stupid, nasty, cheap jokes, which audiences often love.

You seem to be doing pretty well without humor. Shall I call you Dolly Lloyd?
When don't I have humor? In some recent posts? That's due to the current tensions here. I'm keeping my humor "lite" to lessen the viciousness.
Why call me Dolly Lloyd? Should I call you Cow Chip? What's the point in that type of humor? If you were offended by the DL jokes, I apologize. A few others seemed to like them.
Also, you wouldn't want to see me with my belt loosened up; I'm too thin to easily find pants that won't fall down without a belt.
Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chuck Naill
June 24th, 2022, 09:38 AM
Hilarious the two hall monitors are now attacking each other. 😂😂😂😂😂

kazoolaw
June 24th, 2022, 06:08 PM
Reminds me of Mae West asking, “is that a pencil
Asking, is that a pencil in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me”.

The actual attribution is "pistol" not "pencil."
Also brings an off topic post on target.
https://www.azquotes.com/quote/666757

TSherbs
June 24th, 2022, 06:43 PM
Loosen your belt, sport.

I never have nor ever will welcome stupid, nasty, cheap jokes, which audiences often love.

You seem to be doing pretty well without humor. Shall I call you Dolly Lloyd?
When don't I have humor? In some recent posts? That's due to the current tensions here. I'm keeping my humor "lite" to lessen the viciousness.
Why call me Dolly Lloyd? Should I call you Cow Chip? What's the point in that type of humor? If you were offended by the DL jokes, I apologize. A few others seemed to like them.
Also, you wouldn't want to see me with my belt loosened up; I'm too thin to easily find pants that won't fall down without a belt.
Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Keep your pants up, Lloyd!

Lloyd
June 24th, 2022, 06:45 PM
Loosen your belt, sport.

I never have nor ever will welcome stupid, nasty, cheap jokes, which audiences often love.

You seem to be doing pretty well without humor. Shall I call you Dolly Lloyd?
When don't I have humor? In some recent posts? That's due to the current tensions here. I'm keeping my humor "lite" to lessen the viciousness.
Why call me Dolly Lloyd? Should I call you Cow Chip? What's the point in that type of humor? If you were offended by the DL jokes, I apologize. A few others seemed to like them.
Also, you wouldn't want to see me with my belt loosened up; I'm too thin to easily find pants that won't fall down without a belt.
Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Keep your pants up, Lloyd!
You sound like my wife...

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

TSherbs
June 24th, 2022, 08:30 PM
Ha!

Chuck Naill
June 25th, 2022, 07:53 AM
Reminds me of Mae West asking, “is that a pencil
Asking, is that a pencil in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me”.

The actual attribution is "pistol" not "pencil."
Also brings an off topic post on target.
https://www.azquotes.com/quote/666757


Both of us are wrong. She used the word “gun”.

TSherbs
July 4th, 2022, 04:06 PM
Great column in the NYT on the delusional myth of the American male and guns:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/04/opinion/guns-america-western-mythology.html?smid=url-share

If that link doesn't work, you can access it here via Reddit : https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/vriaj7/our_gun_myths_have_held_america_hostage_for_too/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Bold2013
July 4th, 2022, 10:15 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmyyEbvDgr8

Frightening But 100% True Facts About Guns

Chip
July 5th, 2022, 11:23 AM
It is very good. Thanks. I just posted a c & p copy on the Cowboy Myth thread.

https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/37282-The-American-Cowboy-Myth?p=370862#post370862

TSherbs
July 5th, 2022, 11:43 AM
It is very good. Thanks. I just posted a c & p copy on the Cowboy Myth thread.

https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/37282-The-American-Cowboy-Myth?p=370862#post370862

good thinking re that thread

Chuck Naill
July 5th, 2022, 03:55 PM
21 year old who killed 7 had a history of saying he was going to kill. Before guns he had knives that were taken away. How was he able to purchase? These guns should be ether banned or hard to get. Anyone with a police visit should be flagged in any background check.

Chip
July 5th, 2022, 10:29 PM
Approximately 45 minutes earlier, at 9:30 a.m., The NRA had sent out a tweet reminding its followers (and anyone else who unfortunately stumbled across it) that the reason Americans have an Independence Day to celebrate at all is because of men with guns.

https://i.imgur.com/s7e67N5.jpg

Can't have murders without murder weapons. Very profitable, selling murder weapons. Plenty of money to buy Republican congress whores.

Lloyd
July 5th, 2022, 11:26 PM
Can't have murders without murder weapons. Very profitable, selling murder weapons. Plenty of money to buy Republican congress whores.
I'm glad no one was killed before guns were invented. Heck, I'm sure Jack the Ripper and the Boston Strangler were fictional characters.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chuck Naill
July 6th, 2022, 05:58 AM
Can't have murders without murder weapons. Very profitable, selling murder weapons. Plenty of money to buy Republican congress whores.
I'm glad no one was killed before guns were invented. Heck, I'm sure Jack the Ripper and the Boston Strangler were fictional characters.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

The July 4th shooter had his knives taken away by the police in 2019 when he threatened to kill everyone. One thing about these automatic weapons, don't have to be skillful shooter. Can't imagine stabbing anything as a former meat cutter. Now that would be messy.

Chuck Naill
July 6th, 2022, 06:09 AM
Speaking of guns, from Heather Cox Richardson this morning.
“…Jayland Walker of Akron, Ohio, last week after a stop for a minor traffic violation. Walker fled from the scene in his car and then fled from the car. Officers shot him, saying now they believed he was reaching for a gun. A medical examiner found 60 bullet wounds (not a typo) in Walker’s body, which a medical examiner said was handcuffed when it arrived at the coroner’s office. Walker was unarmed. He was Black.”

Chip
July 7th, 2022, 07:46 PM
I'm glad no one was killed before guns were invented. Heck, I'm sure Jack the Ripper and the Boston Strangler were fictional characters.

That's not funny or witty.

It's stupid.

I don't think you're a fool, so why do you post foolish stuff?

Lloyd
July 7th, 2022, 08:38 PM
I'm glad no one was killed before guns were invented. Heck, I'm sure Jack the Ripper and the Boston Strangler were fictional characters.

That's not funny or witty.

It's stupid.

I don't think you're a fool, so why do you post foolish stuff?
It was a response to the comment blaming the existence of guns on virtually all mass killings. My communication method tends towards
sarcasm, which is different than comedy. Additionally, in math, one robust method of proof relies on providing at least one counter-example (Proof by Contradiction). I provided two.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chip
July 7th, 2022, 10:47 PM
It was a response to the comment blaming the existence of guns on virtually all mass killings.

You have that backwards: do you mean blaming all mass killings on the existence of guns?

Obviously not. There were a great many massacres prior to guns.

But a sword or a crossbow didn't enable an unskilled person to slaughter dozens from ambush in a very short time.

By your reasoning (sic), a club and an atomic bomb are the same.

Lloyd
July 7th, 2022, 11:43 PM
I have it right. The last part of your post (#236) implies that guns and guns alone are responsible for all mass killings.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

TSherbs
July 8th, 2022, 04:09 AM
I have it right. The last part of your post (#236) implies that guns and guns alone are responsible for all mass killings.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

he said "weapons"

If you're trying to remind us that people can kill with knives, crowbars, and their own bare hands....we know that.

Chip is right about companies (and congresspersons) profiting from the industry of making weapons designed to put holes in human flesh.

Lloyd
July 8th, 2022, 10:50 AM
I have it right. The last part of your post (#236) implies that guns and guns alone are responsible for all mass killings.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

he said "weapons"

If you're trying to remind us that people can kill with knives, crowbars, and their own bare hands....we know that.

Chip is right about companies (and congresspersons) profiting from the industry of making weapons designed to put holes in human flesh.

In his prior paragraph in that same post, he was discussing guns. That's why I used the word "implies" as opposed to "stated".

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

TSherbs
July 8th, 2022, 11:09 AM
But what is really your point, Lloyd? We all know, including Chip, that people can be killed with weapons other than guns. What is your actual point?

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Lloyd
July 8th, 2022, 12:56 PM
I take issue with the rhetoric of statements like Chip's which imply that guns were to blame for virtually all mass killings. This leads to those on the fence to roll their eyes. So, I find it non-constructive. I have never used, wanted to use, been around others actively using, nor intend to use guns. In my eyes, the likelihood of any drastic laws passing AND successfully eradicating illegal gun usage is pretty darned tiny.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Chip
July 8th, 2022, 03:43 PM
Sorry, but your thinking is too convoluted and curious for me to follow.

So I'll wish you well and bow out.

TSherbs
July 8th, 2022, 04:39 PM
I take issue with the rhetoric of statements like Chip's which imply that guns were to blame for virtually all mass killings. This leads to those on the fence to roll their eyes. So, I find it non-constructive. I have never used, wanted to use, been around others actively using, nor intend to use guns. In my eyes, the likelihood of any drastic laws passing AND successfully eradicating illegal gun usage is pretty darned tiny.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect[emoji769]"eradication" is not the goal

Saying so states a false and impossible goal. No one here has suggested anything like that.

For the record, "mitigation" or "significant reduction in line, per capita, with the median homicide rates of other developed countries" would be a reasonable long-term (50 years?) goal.

To me, this is like slaves, in 1830, wishing to be free. It was highly unlikely, but it had been done elsewhere in the world, and it was the right thing to wish for America even in 1830. And it happened. We even changed the constitution to abolish it.

It can happen with guns and gun violence, too. If you can't imagine it or wish for it, that is a failure of your spirit and imagination. Nothing else.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Lloyd
July 8th, 2022, 06:30 PM
I take issue with the rhetoric of statements like Chip's which imply that guns were to blame for virtually all mass killings. This leads to those on the fence to roll their eyes. So, I find it non-constructive. I have never used, wanted to use, been around others actively using, nor intend to use guns. In my eyes, the likelihood of any drastic laws passing AND successfully eradicating illegal gun usage is pretty darned tiny.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect[emoji769]"eradication" is not the goal

Saying so states a false and impossible goal. No one here has suggested anything like that.

For the record, "mitigation" or "significant reduction in line, per capita, with the median homicide rates of other developed countries" would be a reasonable long-term (50 years?) goal.

To me, this is like slaves, in 1830, wishing to be free. It was highly unlikely, but it had been done elsewhere in the world, and it was the right thing to wish for America even in 1830. And it happened. We even changed the constitution to abolish it.

It can happen with guns and gun violence, too. If you can't imagine it or wish for it, that is a failure of your spirit and imagination. Nothing else.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk
Think what it took to end slavery - Civil War followed by 150+ years of continued racism including many years of virtual slavery.
I'd fully support any federal laws reducing guns. I just don't see it happening in my lifetime in a way that reduces crime; those that want them for bad things will get them. Those that want them for good things will fight for them.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™