Bullshit. I fart in your general direction and demand a cite.
I listed what I want upthread. I would be satisfied with universal background checks, without a waiting period or the rest of it.
I don’t enjoy alcohol. I think over my adult life, I’ve averaged one alcoholic beverage a month, if that. Somewhere in my house is half a bottle of Napoleon brandy I could never both to finish. It’s probably gone bad by now, or whatever brandy does - go for a walk through a silent town, I guess. So this is merely the latest of your wrong assumptions.
Incidentally, I very much dislike tobacco use, in case your next hypocrisy accusation involved cigarettes in some way.
Oh, your paranoid fantasies are getting enough of an indulgence in this thread - a second would be redundant. Besides, my question in such a thread wouldn’t be “Am I a gun-grabber?” but “So, do you agree that Kable’s ‘gun-grabber’ accusations are immature bullshit?” But since I don’t care about popularity contests, the whole exercise would be moot.
Well, I’d make it available to them at low- or no-cost, but “putting” them on it sounds forced, intrusive and probably counterproductive.
This statement would be less stupid if the relevant violent crime rates were comparable. Sure, there’s been a steady decline, but the murder rate in the U.S. is still three times that of Canada, and handgun murders specifically about ten times that of Canada.
Besides, Canadians haven’t sacrificed liberty - we can get licenses for handguns if we want them, and with less expense and hassle than getting a driver’s license (long-gun licenses are easier). What’s rare here is something comparable to a concealed carry permit. So far, there is insufficient political will to change this, just like the Americans lack sufficient political will to address their relatively high crime rates.
Heck, I had a Possession and Acquisition License back in the 1990s. When it lapsed after five years, I didn’t bother renewing it because I had never felt the need to actually get a firearm, in part because I don’t live in terror of my fellow citizens.
You can also use this method to spot people who can read and understand relevant sentence clauses. It’s a skill you could master if you put your mind to it.
I think Americans could benefit from being a little more Canadian.
Oh, of all the things I might accuse you of, originality is way down the list.
I know your definition is useless, and I don’t see why urbandictionary, of all places, has any authority I need respect.
All Americans have red blood. There’s a random sample of 10,000 handgun-murder victims each year, and surely we’d have heard if anyone them bled an unusual colour.
Heh, this cite undermines your claims if you’d bothered to read it. So 49% of the poll’s respondents say gun laws should be more strict, which you are taking as a victory. But the poll’s error margin is plus or minus four percentage points, so the actual rate (assuming this poll is representative) could be as high as 53%, a majority. Also, only 13 percent said gun laws should be less strict, suggesting the remaining 38% either said gun laws were fine as they were or had no opinion. Since it’s safe to assume you believe current gun laws are already too “grabby”, that suggests a whopping (49+38) 87% of your fellow Americans are gun grabbers or tolerant of gun grabbing, as you’re using the term.
Your opinion is still the minority, if that matters to you.
Yum, every time you accuse me of hypocrisy, I feed on the deliciousness of your fear and weakness.
Well, this the kind of statistical analysis that can help determine with confidence if semi-auto handguns are a significant element in gun crime. It may turn out to not be a factor except in mass-murders (themselves well-publicized, but actually relatively rare) where a perpetrator fires dozens of rounds, and even then of limited impact. My point is that I’d be willing to consider it, while Kable stopthoughts with his knee-jerk “gun grabber!” circuitry lighting up like a pinball machine.
I’m operating on the working hypothesis that this is because he is dumb and I am not.
(Emphasis added in sneering derision)
That, and the fact that they can spell.
They’re just desperate for something to be done. Registration, background checks and strict controls over gun selling would do the trick. But nooooo, can’t do anything that would work.
And what ever happened to waiting periods? NRA shoot that down? Seems like the Navy Yard shooting could have been prevented with a short waiting period.
As I recall the cant, he would’ve simply used the homicidal bad guy’s second choice weapon, a swimming pool.
Or alcohol. It kills, like, 75000 Americans a year.
Funny thing. When Texas Republicans got up their voter ID laws, they got to strictly demanding state-issued photo ID’s for voter registration. Student ID’s, issued by state universities and sporting crisp photo portraits, don’t count as state issued photo ID. However, a concealed carry permit, which does not have a photo, is acceptable.
Some surly and discontented voices mutter that this has to do with the political reliability of persons who seek concealed carry permits. Such that Texas Republicans are anxious that they not be inconvenienced.
Damned white of them.
Do “bare” arms take a Freudian clip?
I’ve always thought that you have a…shall we say, unhealthy association with guns.
Just to clarify for those who didn’t care to click through to various links, Damuri Ajashi thought he had really undone the cite from madmonk28.
Unfortunately he cut and pasted a “debunking” of a completely different study to the one cited by madmonk28. Different journal, different methodology, different statistics, different implications.
The guy is really just plain dumb. He had no idea what the one study was, what the differences were, nor what were the meaning of the points raised in either study. All he knows is that the study said something bad about guns, and the website claimed to show why the (entirely different study) should be discounted.
Of course, the debunking of thr other study is largely facile and wrong too, but that’s a different story, and a different study.
You clipped out the immediately preceding and following sentences, the context was important.
“There is no “we” That is just the cocktail of gun control that you favor. The only consensus you see among gun grabbers is banning all guns. Not all gun grabbers believe this and not all of them believe it as forcefully as the rest but more gun grabbers seem to believe this than anything else.”
So YOU may be satisfied with what you listed but that is not the gun grabber position. As a gun nut, I support licensing and registration but I would be hard pressed to say that “we” would be willing to live with this. To the extent there is any agreement among gun nuts, we generally agree that banning things is stupid. Not every gun nut believes this but more gun nuts believe this than anything else.
Similarly, to extent that there is any agreement about anything among gun grabbers, more gun grabbers believe that we should ban all guns more than anything else (of course they can only get rid of guns in the hands of the law abiding but they can’t be bothered with those sort of details). So like I said, there is no “we” in your scenario, and to the extent there is a “we,” that “we” wants to ban guns.
I agree that it would be useful for someone to try and keep track of this sort of data but I suspect that most gun murders are the result of very few shots being fired. But even if this weren’t the case, there are currently 100 million handguns out there, about half of them are pistols. How do you get rid of them. You have the same menu of problems you have with any sort of ban.
Then why do they spend so much time and effort over things that won’t work (like an AWB)? I think they would have had background checks at gun shows if that was their original position after Newtown but they went straight for the AWB. Why is that?
Prevented or delayed? I mean he would still have been able to buy the shotgun, right? Its not like the guy was in his right mind and just had a bad day and it would all blow over after a few days.
I have yet to hear a good solution to crazy people doing crazy things from either side of the debate.
IIRC, swimming pools were brought up largely in the context of whether it was safe to have a gun in the home.
And this is why people have just started to ignore you. Insults are the crux of all your arguments.
Blame the NRA. People go after what they think they can get passed. It was the gun manufacturers who mocked those laws and rendered the distinctions between assault weapons like the AR15 and “regular hunting rifles,” etc. meaningless. Plus, many Democrats are gun owners and believe in a basic right to own guns, and will vote with their conscience either because they don’t completely agree with a certain law, or they’re terrified of the NRA machine.
Regarding waiting periods:
The guy was hearing voices, and was under the care of the VA. Yes, a 7-day wait could easily have been long enough for him to see his psychiatrist and maybe get into a 72-hour psych hold. He bought his gun only a couple days prior? Yes, that is what waiting periods are for. Sometimes people go a little nutso, then they come to their senses, or get in to see mental health professionals, or possibly get picked up by the police for running down the street naked or something. That could get them a court-ordered psych hold, which would make him ineligible to buy guns. The problem with that, thanks to the NRA, is that states don’t bother updating that information into the national database the FBI uses to verify the background check that gets destroyed- by NRA sponsored law - every 24 hours. That isn’t nearly enough time to conduct a serious bg check. That isn’t incompetence on the part of law enforcement or gun regulation proponents. That’s just normal NRA meddling in the process to render it barely functional, so they can turn around and use it as a bullet point about how our current laws are ineffective, so why have any laws?
It’s all pretty transparent when you look at it objectively and rationally.
Oh, I don’t think you can get rid of them, barring a generational change in attitude. I personally think you should and your country would be better off for it, but that’s less a matter for legislation than it is for the waving of magic wands. Trying to “grab” the guns before an attitude change happens (if it ever does) may play into Kable’s paranoid fantasies but is unworkable. If you announce something along the lines of “a ban on the sale of handgun type X or handgun model Y goes into effect on January 1st”, all it does is ramp up sales for that type/model, as fast as they can be manufactured or imported. Even a hint this might happen has that effect; the result of fear and the cynical exploitation of fear that can disguise itself as “liberty”.
Have they? I hadn’t noticed. How can you tell?
No. Statistics and research methodology are the crux of my arguments. You just cannot respond to those so you like to claim that all I do is insult people.
You have still failed to answer whether the Violence Policy Center stated that there were a total of 12 homicides by CCW people? You based a whole “analysis” on the assertion that this was the case, when in fact they specifically say that their numbers reflect only a small proportion of the cases. Was that a smart thing to do?
You recently posted a rebuttal to a study cited by madmonk28 that was a cut and paste “rebuttal” of a completely different study. Was that a smart thing to do?
If you didn’t regularly make claims about all the empirical evidence being on your side, about gun control advocates responding with nothing but emotion and invective, I would probably take a softer tone. As it is, you routinely make such statements, make assertions about “we have established” this or that.
As such, I think it’s crucial for people to understand that you do not understand a thing about what you’re talking about and are totally out of your depth. All you can do is repeat what other gun advocates tell you.
Blame the NRA for the gungrabber’s fixation on an AWB? Really???
You can blame the NRA (and mroe importantly its supporters) for all sorts of things but they didn’t make Feinstein and company push for an AWB.
No, waiting periods for guns are largely for the same reason you have waiting periods for abortions. You are erecting hurdles to dissuade an otherwise legal activity. Abortions are more time sensitive than gun waiting periods in most cases but waiting periods are about making it more of a pain in the ass to buy a gun. Sure there are other rationales that can be used to jsutify them but then there are all sorts of rationales to justify abortion wiaint periods too.
You mean if you look at it from your point of view. There is another point of view that is no less objective and rational than yours.
I’m sorry did you say something?
I’m still waiting to hear how many incidents of defensive gun use you think occur every year.
I’m sorry that you are losing the debate so horribly but your reliance on insults is not going to improve your argument much mroe than it already has.
Your side has lost the gun debate for the time being. I should take Kable’s example and just ignore you guys after it was clear that you had no dry powder left (having spent it all on an AWB). Despite a strained effort by the gun grabbers to make some hay out of the navy yard massacre, your efforts were so dismissable that gun prices barely registered a hiccup.*** You guys have lost so thoroughly that the NRA can’t even raise money on the recent anti-gun rhetoric surrounding the Navy yard massacre. The gun store owners are disappointed in you, you should really step up your game.
***I think there has been a slight drop in prices for AR-15s (or at least a larger supply of AR-15s at current prices) because there are a lot of folks that are sitting on inventory that they bought above current market prices and they were holding out for a price bounce and when even a massacre like the Navy Yard couldn’t do it they just gave up and they may be chasing the price down.
I have to wonder about the mental stability of people who hoard ar15s and ammo because we have a black Democrat president. They’re like the Mayan 'the world is ending!"
And yet, it never does. Huh.
You never hear about these guys hoarding pre-natal vitamins and diapers.
You want them successfully reproducing?
Yes, yes, I do. One thing about kids, they keep your ass busy!
I won’t be ignored, SDMB!!!
You’re going to find your collective pet rabbits in a pot on your collective stoves if you keep this up!
The distinction between “assault weapons” and “hunting rifles” was meaningless nonsense to begin with. “Assault weapons” were defined according to features that were almost entirely cosmetic in nature; and which did not render any gun so defined any more or less suitable for criminal use or for any legitimate use.
How dumb would one have to be not to realize that all gun manufacturers would have to do to work around the law would be to change the cosmetic features of a gun, so that a gun that was mechanically- and ballistically-identical to a banned “assault” rifle could be made and sold without running afoul of that law?