Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 09-17-2019, 05:19 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Ah, respected seniors jurists legal opinions aren't any good since they disagree with a laymans.
Okay, if 5 of them were that, what were the other 4? And what were the Justices who rendered the Miller ruling?

You'd do a lot better here by supporting your position yourself.
  #202  
Old 09-17-2019, 07:49 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirkrapine View Post
Not necessarily. Eminent domain is a form of confiscation, but always compensated.
Beto was also proposing compensation. The eminent domain comparison is a valid one.

Mandatory gun buyback programs have been run successfully. Australia did it in 1996 and again in 2003, and the nation did not fall. New Zealand followed suit this year after the Christchurch massacres:

Quote:
Following attacks on two Christchurch mosques, New Zealand's parliament voted overwhelmingly to ban most semi-automatic weapons along with certain kinds of ammunition and large-capacity magazines.

In June, officials announced a gun buyback program that pays gun owners to turn in their firearms or other newly prohibited items. ... Officials set aside about $200 million New Zealand dollars ó roughly $129 million U.S. dollars ó to pay for the program.
https://www.npr.org/2019/08/12/75052...uyback-program

and

Quote:
After a shooter killed 35 people and wounded dozens more in Australia in 1996, officials there instituted a mandatory buyback program. About 650,000 weapons were collected. Research since has shown that firearm homicides and suicides by gun have both reduced dramatically in Australia.
ibid
  #203  
Old 09-18-2019, 03:19 PM
sps49sd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
Beto was also proposing compensation. The eminent domain comparison is a valid one.

Mandatory gun buyback programs have been run successfully. Australia did it in 1996 and again in 2003, and the nation did not fall. New Zealand followed suit this year after the Christchurch massacres:

https://www.npr.org/2019/08/12/75052...uyback-program

and

ibid
The numbers of firearms turned in are a very low percentage in both countries. NZ is still in the early stages, of course.
  #204  
Old 09-18-2019, 04:59 PM
MacTech is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Posts: 6,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
Beto was also proposing compensation. The eminent domain comparison is a valid one.

<Snip>
The typical entry-level AR ranges from $450-750, high end AR range from $800+, typically around $1200 to $2500, 30 round mags generally are under $40 per mag

most "buybacks" I've heard of offer a paltry $50-200, or gift cards, not even close to what was spent on the items in question, if they intend "buybacks" to be fair and have any chance of succeeding, they must offer something close, or even exceeding the value of the rifle in question.

offer someone who spent $400+ on their AR a $50/100 gift card/cash for their AR, don't be surprised if they don't want to sell.

Offer the same person what they paid for the same rifle, and they'd probably consider it, lowballing will only work for the ones who don't know what they're worth (inherited guns and the like)
__________________
Freakazoid> dumb, Dumb, DUMB!, NEVER tell the villain how to trap you in a cage!
Gutierrez> You probably shouldn't have helped us build it either...
F!> I know, DUMB!
  #205  
Old 09-18-2019, 05:42 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Okay, if 5 of them were that, what were the other 4? And what were the Justices who rendered the Miller ruling?

You'd do a lot better here by supporting your position yourself.
A difference of opinion, almost all the best SCOTUS cases have been dissented. The other justices are also solid jurists.

Heller did not overule Miller. Miller ruled only that a sawed off shotgun wasnt legal, and that was only due to the fact that no defense was raised, Miller being what we call "dead".
  #206  
Old 09-18-2019, 05:46 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
What you are saying seems to be Beltway conventional wisdom. But it is wrong.
That post and cite doesnt mean what you think it means. It says about half of Americans are in favor of a buy back. So? How about the 70 million gun owners? Only 37% of them like the idea. In other words, 63% dont.

How about the swing voters in the swing states?
  #207  
Old 09-18-2019, 06:34 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,747
It polls much better than taking away private health insurance. IOW it’s not a “third rail”.
  #208  
Old 09-19-2019, 08:24 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,065
What O'Rourke has done is to show that the Overton Window has moved and is - very slowly - continuing to move. That doesn't mean that there is a clear acceptance of greater gun control, but it does take us out of the territory of "the majority of voters definitely won't stand for any gun control measures". Perhaps people are becoming tired of having their children either killed or living under the threat of death on a daily basis, and of having that situation mocked and ignored by the pro-gun faction.
  #209  
Old 09-19-2019, 06:06 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,747
Right. In a big primary field, and with an incumbent president a slight majority of Americans strongly dislike, his proposal doesn’t have to be massively popular among a supermajority of the overall electorate. It just has to be popular among Democrats (check) and not so unpopular among the wider population as to sink his chances to win a general election (check).
  #210  
Old 09-20-2019, 12:28 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Right. In a big primary field, and with an incumbent president a slight majority of Americans strongly dislike, his proposal doesnít have to be massively popular among a supermajority of the overall electorate. It just has to be popular among Democrats (check) and not so unpopular among the wider population as to sink his chances to win a general election (check).
No, it just sunk the dems chances of winning vs trump.
  #211  
Old 09-20-2019, 05:23 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
No, it just sunk the dems chances of winning vs trump.

We are supposed to be fact based around here. I and others have posted data showing that his proposal is not nearly unpopular enough to sink Democrats. In fact it looks to have a slight majority of support in some polls, and no poll shows it being any worse than roughly tied. So you are just arguing from your own feelings. (The same way people talk themselves into thinking no one likes their private health insurance.)
  #212  
Old 09-20-2019, 08:01 AM
carnivorousplant is offline
KB not found. Press any key
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Central Arkansas
Posts: 59,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
No, it just sunk the dems chances of winning vs trump.
I don't believe a Democrat could win here in Arkansas anyway. I don't know enough about other states that regularly vote Republican.
__________________
You callous bastard! More of my illusions have just been shattered!!-G0sp3l
  #213  
Old 09-20-2019, 01:53 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
We are supposed to be fact based around here. I and others have posted data showing that his proposal is not nearly unpopular enough to sink Democrats. In fact it looks to have a slight majority of support in some polls, and no poll shows it being any worse than roughly tied. So you are just arguing from your own feelings. (The same way people talk themselves into thinking no one likes their private health insurance.)
70 million gun owners, more than voters for either trump or Hillary. only 35% of them support the idea. That's like 50 Million against. That will sink any candidate.
  #214  
Old 09-20-2019, 07:56 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,747
Polls of actual voters show otherwise.

ETA: 65% of 70 million is actually only 45.5 million, which is almost 20 million fewer voters than Trump got in 2016. That’s assuming that 65% were opposed and that there were no undecideds, which I doubt. You didn’t actually link to any poll, so I’m just speculating and taking your word for the little amount you did provide.

Last edited by SlackerInc; 09-20-2019 at 08:00 PM.
  #215  
Old 09-21-2019, 03:31 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Polls of actual voters show otherwise.

ETA: 65% of 70 million is actually only 45.5 million, which is almost 20 million fewer voters than Trump got in 2016. Thatís assuming that 65% were opposed and that there were no undecideds, which I doubt. You didnít actually link to any poll, so Iím just speculating and taking your word for the little amount you did provide.
Yes, they show a 50/50 split.


And the data was in the poll earlier linked to.
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 04:43 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 © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017