Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 04-13-2019, 09:24 AM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW.
Posts: 11,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
As I've already pointed out, you seem to be the only one having trouble grasping the conflict. That indicates to me that my OP was plenty clear.
Actually, I don't think anyone has risen to take your bait.

Maybe you should try your luck on something easier like "Didn't Obama say we could keep our health plan if we liked it?"
  #52  
Old 04-13-2019, 09:27 AM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,793
Total doom! Where can we find another candidate at this late date?
  #53  
Old 04-13-2019, 10:44 AM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
Possibilities:
1) Democraps are massive hypocrites, and HD just pwned the libruls.
2) Lacking a cult leader like Trump, Democrats are willing to disagree among themselves about policies and don't face excommunication for doing so. Harris's willingness to own a gun doesn't make other Democrats wrong, nor does their unwillingness to one one make Harris wrong.
3) HD fundamentally doesn't get the rationale behind gun control, and the hypocrisy he delights in pointing out is really just his own misunderstanding. That misunderstanding may be due to lack of intellectual curiosity, willful misunderstanding, or a failure to think the issue through successfully; I don't know.
  #54  
Old 04-13-2019, 10:45 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,149
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
Total doom! Where can we find another candidate at this late date?
As recently as the 20th century Bernie Sanders drove a gasoline-powered automobile, so I guess he's out too.

I guess it may be difficult to find a Democratic candidate with the same level of morality and sincerity as the Republicans.
  #55  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:21 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,534
I should be surprised at all the right-wingers having a hissy fit because someone wants a gun for self-protection...but I guess supporting those who do so only extends to those of the correct political persuasion and/or religion and/or race. What I get from threads like these is that it doesn't really matter what people like her do-it will be wrong no matter what.
  #56  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:40 AM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW.
Posts: 11,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
I should be surprised at all the right-wingers having a hissy fit because someone wants a gun for self-protection...but I guess supporting those who do so only extends to those of the correct political persuasion and/or religion and/or race. What I get from threads like these is that it doesn't really matter what people like her do-it will be wrong no matter what.
Exactly. Imagine if she said she didn't want to own a gun. The horror.
  #57  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:46 AM
sps49sd is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 298
I'd like to know if she owns a pistol that is on Cali's banned list (okay, not on the approved list).

Harris is behaving like a typical California democrat. She is allowed things the rest of us are not. Because of laws and restrictions she has been part of creating and enforcing. It was okay for Dianne Feinstein to have a concealed weapon, until she decided she didn't, but CC is not allowed for the peasants.

Her 'status' shouldn't mean crap. People in certain neighborhoods are in more danger than this peace officer woman of color candidate, but they cannot get a CC permit, nor can they afford bodyguards to carry firearms. And if I want to gift one of mine to my daughter, i have to get a background check done on her and pay a FFL dealer for the privilege.

But this changes little. We already knew Harris is a hypocrite. Like the other Democrats.

Like every politician, unfortunately.
  #58  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:47 AM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
I should be surprised at all the right-wingers having a hissy fit because someone wants a gun for self-protection...but I guess supporting those who do so only extends to those of the correct political persuasion and/or religion and/or race. What I get from threads like these is that it doesn't really matter what people like her do-it will be wrong no matter what.
We're not having a hissy fit. We're pointing and laughing.
  #59  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:49 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
We're not having a hissy fit. We're pointing and laughing.
Thank you for pointing out why talking about the subject with you is a total waste of time.
  #60  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:49 AM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
We're not having a hissy fit. We're pointing and laughing.
Nelson Muntz is a helluva role model.
  #61  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:50 AM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Nelson Muntz is a helluva role model.
Marge and Lisa like him.
  #62  
Old 04-13-2019, 12:03 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW.
Posts: 11,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
We're not having a hissy fit. We're pointing and laughing.
I don't get the joke. Harris is doing something that (I presume) is perfectly legal. Very few Democrats* have taken the position that keeping a legal handgun in your residence for personal protection is, or should be, illegal.



*I am unaware of any, but I won't say "none" because there could be an outlier or two.
  #63  
Old 04-13-2019, 12:09 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
I don't get the joke. Harris is doing something that (I presume) is perfectly legal. Very few Democrats* have taken the position that keeping a legal handgun in your residence for personal protection is, or should be, illegal.



*I am unaware of any, but I won't say "none" because there could be an outlier or two.
Mainly, we're pointing and laughing because of a few very vocally anti-gun members here, who are also big time Democrats, who routinely slander gun owners as perverts and murderers-in-waiting. I, personally, don't care whether she owns one gun, a thousand guns, or no gun at all. Any of those choices are her right as a citizen of this country.
  #64  
Old 04-13-2019, 12:15 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Thank you for pointing out why talking about the subject with you is a total waste of time.
Aw, now my feelings are hurt. Both of them.

Last edited by Scumpup; 04-13-2019 at 12:15 PM.
  #65  
Old 04-13-2019, 12:17 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW.
Posts: 11,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
Mainly, we're pointing and laughing because of a few very vocally anti-gun members here, who are also big time Democrats, who routinely slander gun owners as perverts and murderers-in-waiting. I, personally, don't care whether she owns one gun, a thousand guns, or no gun at all. Any of those choices are her right as a citizen of this country.
That could be true and I've just missed it. But the "anti-gun" sentiment I've seen around here is more aligned with "let's have sensible gun laws," not "let's ban personal possession of handguns."
  #66  
Old 04-13-2019, 12:17 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
Mainly, we're pointing and laughing because of a few very vocally anti-gun members here, who are also big time Democrats, who routinely slander gun owners as perverts and murderers-in-waiting. I, personally, don't care whether she owns one gun, a thousand guns, or no gun at all. Any of those choices are her right as a citizen of this country.
So this is actually a childish pitting of a small amount of unnamed posters?
  #67  
Old 04-13-2019, 12:37 PM
HurricaneDitka is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
That could be true and I've just missed it. But the "anti-gun" sentiment I've seen around here is more aligned with "let's have sensible gun laws," not "let's ban personal possession of handguns."
You've definitely missed it. For example, this was posted yesterday:

Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
I don't trust your source as far as I can throw it, but if you're proposing that we should grab and destroy all the guns, I will commend you on your forward thinking plan.
  #68  
Old 04-13-2019, 12:40 PM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,182
The Democratic Party is a big tent, and that some Democratic members and elected officials happen to own guns is not a dealbreaker for me. I happen to be in the minority even among Democrats, I would like guns to be banned, confiscated, and melted down. But I'm not going to let the good be the enemy of the perfect, so if one Democratic candidate is a gun owner, is for sensible gun controls, and is reasonably aligned with my views, I'm perfectly willing to vote for him or her.
  #69  
Old 04-13-2019, 12:54 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
You've definitely missed it. For example, this was posted yesterday:
You sure showed us. Pwned, y'all!
  #70  
Old 04-13-2019, 12:55 PM
sps49sd is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
The Democratic Party is a big tent, and that some Democratic members and elected officials happen to own guns is not a dealbreaker for me. I happen to be in the minority even among Democrats, I would like guns to be banned, confiscated, and melted down. But I'm not going to let the good be the enemy of the perfect, so if one Democratic candidate is a gun owner, is for sensible gun controls, and is reasonably aligned with my views, I'm perfectly willing to vote for him or her.
From your post, I suspect you will find any gun controls to be sensible. But Harris (and most California Democrats) promotes stupid gun controls that infringe Constitutional rights without reducing violent crime.

And, again, the laws are not applied to everyone. Peace officers may own firearms which I may not? My niece is a local police officer now, but she in no way has training nor experience which I do not. Harris, as a peace officer, Senator, or just being well-connected, apparently has rights I can not exercise because I am not allowed either open carry or concealed carry of a firearm.
  #71  
Old 04-13-2019, 12:58 PM
sps49sd is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
You sure showed us. Pwned, y'all!
And then there is the post just before your reply!

Last edited by sps49sd; 04-13-2019 at 12:59 PM. Reason: my italics didn't sho :(
  #72  
Old 04-13-2019, 01:13 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
Mainly, we're pointing and laughing because of a few very vocally anti-gun members here, who are also big time Democrats, who routinely slander gun owners as perverts and murderers-in-waiting.
Speaking as someone who likes to "point and laugh" at SDMB gunslingers, I can attest that you are wrong about me and many other rational Dopers. I've thought of getting a gun myself for self-protection.

We don't point and laugh at you because you own guns. We point and laugh because of your complete lack of logic (e.g. as in this very thread), at the contortions you go through to pretend gunslinging (even without a background check) is a "natural right", at your need to defend cowardly cops or scum like Zimmerman, and at your pompous but misplaced faith in your own self-righteousness.

Hope this helps.
  #73  
Old 04-13-2019, 01:16 PM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by sps49sd View Post
From your post, I suspect you will find any gun controls to be sensible. But Harris (and most California Democrats) promotes stupid gun controls that infringe Constitutional rights without reducing violent crime.

And, again, the laws are not applied to everyone. Peace officers may own firearms which I may not? My niece is a local police officer now, but she in no way has training nor experience which I do not. Harris, as a peace officer, Senator, or just being well-connected, apparently has rights I can not exercise because I am not allowed either open carry or concealed carry of a firearm.
We're going to disagree about what is Constitutional. I interpret the 2nd as saying that you may own a gun WHILE YOU ARE A MEMBER OF AN ORGANIZED MILITIA, which in these times means the National Guard.
  #74  
Old 04-13-2019, 01:20 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by sps49sd View Post
And then there is the post just before your reply!
I mean, so what? Some Democrats want to cut down drastically on the number of privately-owned firearms in the country. Some don't. Some want to cut down on them, but while they're legal, also want to own one.

There are a variety of different takes on firearms. There's no Trump figure among Democrats who enforces groupthink. We can disagree.

This is a super lame attempt at pwnage, the kind of thing I coulda smacked down in junior high.
  #75  
Old 04-13-2019, 01:21 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW.
Posts: 11,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by sps49sd View Post
Harris, as a peace officer, Senator, or just being well-connected, apparently has rights I can not exercise because I am not allowed either open carry or concealed carry of a firearm.
Caveat, I didn't read the article. But from the description, she owns a firearm for personal protection. She didn't say she carries it with her outside of her home. So, I'm not sure she has any rights you don't have.
  #76  
Old 04-13-2019, 01:21 PM
RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomndebb View Post
Bait and switch much?
Your cited article says nothing about any Democratic Party (or individual) arguing to confiscate weapons. All the positions involve controlling for irresponsible distribution with not one effort for confiscation. So the article does nothing to support your belief in "gun grabbers."
Silly tom. It's a matter of applied linguistics, don't'cha know? In the pro-gun culture, to be a 'gun-grabber' doesn't have its literal English meaning, but rather it means that one favors restrictions on guns (e.g. background checks for sales at gun shows) that don't currently exist.

If someone (like me!) were to actually favor confiscation of some types of firearms, they'd have to come up with a new term to describe them, to differentiate that person from the people they already call 'gun grabbers.'
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
I don't get the joke. Harris is doing something that (I presume) is perfectly legal. Very few Democrats* have taken the position that keeping a legal handgun in your residence for personal protection is, or should be, illegal.
I'm an advocate of some pretty stringent gun control measures, but even I have no opposition to keeping a handgun in your home in case your deadbolts and window locks just don't do the job. I think it's a hell of a bad idea unless you live in a very dangerous neighborhood, but it's each person's choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
Mainly, we're pointing and laughing because of a few very vocally anti-gun members here, who are also big time Democrats, who routinely slander gun owners as perverts and murderers-in-waiting.
Ah, nutpicking then.
  #77  
Old 04-13-2019, 01:23 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by sps49sd View Post
And, again, the laws are not applied to everyone. Peace officers may own firearms which I may not? My niece is a local police officer now, but she in no way has training nor experience which I do not. Harris, as a peace officer, Senator, or just being well-connected, apparently has rights I can not exercise because I am not allowed either open carry or concealed carry of a firearm.
There's some stuff to unpack here.

First, of course cops have laws that apply to them differently. They're tasked with enforcing the state's monopoly on violence. There's nothing at all remarkable about that.

As for Harris, though, what specific rights do you think she has that you do not? Are you allowed open carry in the same places she is, for example?
  #78  
Old 04-13-2019, 02:05 PM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
You've definitely missed it. For example, this was posted yesterday:
If you wanted to pit begbert2, why didn't you just pit begbert2 instead of this weird half assed non-pitting of people who might post like him?
  #79  
Old 04-13-2019, 02:23 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
So this is actually a childish pitting of a small amount of unnamed posters?
This isn't a Pitting, at all, chief. This is Elections.
  #80  
Old 04-13-2019, 02:26 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Speaking as someone who likes to "point and laugh" at SDMB gunslingers, I can attest that you are wrong about me and many other rational Dopers. I've thought of getting a gun myself for self-protection.

We don't point and laugh at you because you own guns. We point and laugh because of your complete lack of logic (e.g. as in this very thread), at the contortions you go through to pretend gunslinging (even without a background check) is a "natural right", at your need to defend cowardly cops or scum like Zimmerman, and at your pompous but misplaced faith in your own self-righteousness.

Hope this helps.
No, I understand you and the other gun control mavens perfectly well after having read your opinions here many times. I will leave it at that since I don't want to derail this into gun control thread #1,000, 000 where no new points will be made and no minds will be changed

Last edited by Scumpup; 04-13-2019 at 02:26 PM.
  #81  
Old 04-13-2019, 02:29 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
We're going to disagree about what is Constitutional. I interpret the 2nd as saying that you may own a gun WHILE YOU ARE A MEMBER OF AN ORGANIZED MILITIA, which in these times means the National Guard.
You can interpret the 2nd however you like. Your interpretation means fuck-all, of course. Come back with your interpretation when you land a seat on SCOTUS. Failing that, come back with your interpretation when you get a SCOTUS ruling that agrees with it.
  #82  
Old 04-13-2019, 02:58 PM
The Tooth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,675
I don't blame her. If I found myself in the US I might carry one too.* I'm willing to believe that I'd eventually find it useful for nothing but weighing my pants down, though. It's not a symbol of my individuality and belief in personal freedoms, it's a tool I may or may not prefer to have when surrounded by people whose seem to center a good chunk of their lives around their little guns.



*A Walther PPK or some variation of same. I don't need to punch fist-sized holes in people with it, I just need to change their immediate plans. It would be black with green trim and I would name it 'Buttercup' because I'm a grownup and we're allowed to do such things.
__________________
"It would never occur to me to wear pink, just as it would never occur to Michael Douglas to play a poor person." - Sarah Vowell
  #83  
Old 04-13-2019, 03:00 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
You can interpret the 2nd however you like. Your interpretation means fuck-all, of course. Come back with your interpretation when you land a seat on SCOTUS. Failing that, come back with your interpretation when you get a SCOTUS ruling that agrees with it.
If only someone had wagged their finger like that at the NRA in 2003.
  #84  
Old 04-13-2019, 03:04 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
And before then, it wasn't, like it or no.

You say "She said that gun laws that were unconstitutional were perfectly OK." Was she doing that when they were unconstitutional, or when they weren't?
Yes, and slavery at one time was perfectly Constitutional. What's your point?

Her law was ruled UnConstitutional by the Supreme Court.
  #85  
Old 04-13-2019, 03:10 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
I don't get the joke. Harris is doing something that (I presume) is perfectly legal. Very few Democrats* have taken the position that keeping a legal handgun in your residence for personal protection is, or should be, illegal.



*I am unaware of any, but I won't say "none" because there could be an outlier or two.

Harris has taken that very position. Sure her owning a gun is legal, but she is/was in favor of banning all private handgun possession. Thus hypocritical.

We make fun at "Family values" GOP candidates with six divorces, and call then hypocrites. Even tho six divorces is legal, isnt it? So thus, Harris is being hypocritical.

But yes, despite her attempts it is legal to keep a handgun in your residence for personal protection.
  #86  
Old 04-13-2019, 03:12 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
We're going to disagree about what is Constitutional. I interpret the 2nd as saying that you may own a gun WHILE YOU ARE A MEMBER OF AN ORGANIZED MILITIA, which in these times means the National Guard.
The Supreme Court and the US Congress disagrees, since all white males over 21 are members of the militia.
  #87  
Old 04-13-2019, 03:25 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
You've definitely missed it. For example, this was posted yesterday:
...the same question to you again: whats your thesis? begbert2 said something. In a Great Debate. How does what begbert2 say relate to your OP? How does it relate to Harris?

And in context the thing that begbert2 looked mightily sarcastic. Do you not understand the context? Does context not matter to you?
  #88  
Old 04-13-2019, 03:27 PM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
The Supreme Court and the US Congress disagrees, since all white males over 21 are members of the militia.
I've seen that argument. I don't consider it any more valid than I do deeds that forbid sales to minorities.
  #89  
Old 04-13-2019, 03:32 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...the same question to you again: whats your thesis? begbert2 said something. In a Great Debate. How does what begbert2 say relate to your OP? How does it relate to Harris?

And in context the thing that begbert2 looked mightily sarcastic. Do you not understand the context? Does context not matter to you?
There were a couple of posters in that same thread that advocated banning all guns. One suggested banning everything but single shot shotguns, bolt action rifles and single-action revolvers.

Banning all semi-automatics is the current catchphrase.

So, yeah, there are people who want to ban all handguns (Harris)or all semi-automatics and yes, a few that want to ban all guns.

But this is getting to be a hijack. I think we can agree that only a few people want to ban all guns. But about 25% of American want to ban a large and significant number of them (all handguns, all semi-automatics).
  #90  
Old 04-13-2019, 03:34 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
I've seen that argument. I don't consider it any more valid than I do deeds that forbid sales to minorities.
There is a federal law that says that. It hasnt been repealed. I concede it is a bit outdated. But maybe we can get back to Harris and her gun, not discuss what SCOTUS has already settled (that Militai does not have anything to do with owning a gun for self defense). That's the current law of the land.
  #91  
Old 04-13-2019, 03:35 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
There were a couple of posters in that same thread that advocated banning all guns. One suggested banning everything but single shot shotguns, bolt action rifles and single-action revolvers.

Banning all semi-automatics is the current catchphrase.

So, yeah, there are people who want to ban all handguns (Harris)or all semi-automatics and yes, a few that want to ban all guns.

But this is getting to be a hijack. I think we can agree that only a few people want to ban all guns. But about 25% of American want to ban a large and significant number of them (all handguns, all semi-automatics).
...again: what does any of this have to do with the OP of this thread? How does it connect?
  #92  
Old 04-13-2019, 03:36 PM
Vinyl Turnip is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 20,091
I knew that pledging an oath of fealty to begbert2 was bound to come back and bite us all on the ass. I just didn't know it would be HurricaneDitka delivering the killing stroke.

Oh well. We had a good run.
  #93  
Old 04-13-2019, 04:01 PM
HurricaneDitka is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
If you wanted to pit begbert2, why didn't you just pit begbert2 instead of this weird half assed non-pitting of people who might post like him?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...the same question to you again: whats your thesis? begbert2 said something. In a Great Debate. How does what begbert2 say relate to your OP? How does it relate to Harris? ...
The begbert2 quote was not in relation to the OP, at least not any way but very tangentially. Procrustus was apparently unaware of Dopers wanting to ban guns, so I was being helpful and providing him a handy example, from yesterday:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
That could be true and I've just missed it. But the "anti-gun" sentiment I've seen around here is more aligned with "let's have sensible gun laws," not "let's ban personal possession of handguns."
That's why I, you know, quoted that post.

Last edited by HurricaneDitka; 04-13-2019 at 04:01 PM.
  #94  
Old 04-13-2019, 04:07 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
So, yeah, there are people who want to ban all handguns (Harris)
Cite for the parentheses?
  #95  
Old 04-13-2019, 04:15 PM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
The begbert2 quote was not in relation to the OP, at least not any way but very tangentially.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Various Dopers have, in the past, argued that guns don't actually enhance one's personal safety and are actually a detriment to it.
Who are the various Dopers you are trying to argue with here? We can cross begbert2 off the list. Why not call them out directly instead of this semi-pitting non-put thread?
  #96  
Old 04-13-2019, 04:16 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
The begbert2 quote was not in relation to the OP, at least not any way but very tangentially. Procrustus was apparently unaware of Dopers wanting to ban guns, so I was being helpful and providing him a handy example, from yesterday:
...but you've taken that quote out of context. I read it in context, and it reads mightily sarcastic to me. Which is why cherry-picking statements from other debates is a poor set-up for a thread like this. Is begbert2 one of the "various dopers" that you talked about in the OP?

Quote:
That's why I, you know, quoted that post.
So that still leaves my initial question to you unresolved.

What is your thesis here? What is your argument? Whats the debate?

You are perfectly free to hijack your own thread. But as your OP specifically talks about "various dopers", and it appears that begbert2 is one of the "various dopers" you were talking about, then I don't think its a hijack at all.
  #97  
Old 04-13-2019, 04:23 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...again: what does any of this have to do with the OP of this thread? How does it connect?
You quoted me, but seemed to miss "But this is getting to be a hijack. "
  #98  
Old 04-13-2019, 04:28 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Cite for the parentheses?

She was the DA of SF when this was put on the ballot:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Fr...sition_H_(2005)

As DA she had to sign off and approve any proposition for the ballot as legal. She supported it in public.
  #99  
Old 04-13-2019, 04:34 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
You quoted me, but seemed to miss "But this is getting to be a hijack. "
...you quoted me, but you seemed to miss that I was entirely on-topic.
  #100  
Old 04-13-2019, 04:51 PM
sps49sd is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 298
BobLibDem
>We're going to disagree about what is Constitutional. I interpret the 2nd as saying that you may own a gun WHILE YOU ARE A MEMBER OF AN ORGANIZED MILITIA, which in these times means the National Guard.

The amendment doesn't even read that way (organized), that clause is a justification not a requirement, the Supreme Court disagrees, and you appear to believe that the older and less fit among us- who arguably need it more- have no right to possess a firearm for self defense. Okay!

Procrustes- In the version of the item on CNN.com it is mentioned that she keeps it locked up in a safe place, which implies she does not carry it on her person. It might be in her car, but we don't know.

LHoD
>First, of course cops have laws that apply to them differently. They're tasked with enforcing the state's monopoly on violence. There's nothing at all remarkable about that.

Bull. They are private citizens, civilians, just like I am. If all other law abiding citizens are forbidden standard magazines and pistols not on California's 'approved' list, they should be subject to the same laws. They are not even supposed to exceed the speed limits, either, but they rarely enforce that on each other. It still isn't right.

>As for Harris, though, what specific rights do you think she has that you do not? Are you allowed open carry in the same places she is, for example?

Open carry (and closed carry) is illegal in California, so I am not allowed carry anywhere here. But as one who lives where Kamala was AG and DA, I contend that the laws she and others use to get votes do not apply to them. Feinstein is an example, and I am sure Gavin Newsome is either armed or has armed bodyguards.

And in addition to her California positions, she led prosecutors in supporting Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban. Good thing she didn't live there.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:22 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017