Why don’t you demonstrate your keen powers of written persuasion by rebutting anything that I originally posted to the OP in GD (which he/she/it/nobody ever responded to). I have been doing this gun-rights / gun-control debate thing for a while for real from the pro-gun side and I can converse about it on all levels, respectful and reserved and completely cited and supported or down in the gutter. I can operate effectively and comfortably in either setting.
So, have a go superstar, because here is why this pro-gunner thinks the OP was poisoning the well . . . Interesting is that the OP of that thread affirms the disingenuousness of his/her/its “can’t we just talk” thread HERE . . .
START--------->
Of course it is. Problem is that the noble endeavor of fighting crime and protecting society has been co-opted by those who desire to control citizens and serve a political agenda.
Is the NRA or any other notable gun rights organization fighting for a complete dismantling of gun laws / regulations and handing out guns to everyone? Would an initiative to achieve that get the NRA’s endorsement? As an active Endowment Member for 14 years and an active Life Member for 15 years before that, I think I have a grasp on their positions and I would argue NO, they don’t want that.
OTOH, would the organizations who would be leading and framing the “discussion” from the anti-gun side like the Brady Campaign and VPC, Million Mom March, StopHandgunViolence, Gun Control Network, etc, etc, etc, accept and support an initiative to ban guns? Of course they would, they already have done so for local handgun bans and local, state and national “Assault Weapon” bans.
Do you really think that they have any concern for the traditions and heritage of hunting or target shooting in this nation or the destructive to society “rights” claimed by gun owners LOL? Is it really unreasonable to believe they wouldn’t jump on the chance to push lawmakers to write laws completely disarming the general population of the USA?
Can we have an honest conversation about trying to curb gun violence in America or are gun-haters too focused on demonizing “law-abiding” gun owners as criminals who just haven’t been convicted yet and portraying the NRA as a terrorist organization that only wants to sell six year old’s full auto revolver bullet hoses and putting nuclear bombs on the playground instead of dangerous Jungle Gyms?
Your side must prove first that preserving / protecting the Constitution is actually a priority. Up to now the question of constitutionality is never a concern during the crafting of crime / gun policy, it only becomes important when the law is challenged. Then we have the goofy situation of government defending gun control laws written under the commerce clause as legitimate under Congress’ authority to regulate the militia. That’s why the power of appointment of judges and Justices is so important and why installing ones that will dismiss / ignore / violate the Constitution is such a priority for the left.
Well, I don’t believe you. You can claim to not want our sporting guns but if you wish to argue that the groups noted above wouldn’t take them given the chance to throw them in the bag with “Assault Weapons” and handguns, then I must respectfully disagree with you. I would like to hear your argument though, just for argument’s sake . . .
I have been debating gun control / gun rights for over 20 years with thousands of anti-gun people and the popular term now of “gun violence” is a dog whistle term that is nothing but a head fake and this thread is evidence of that . . . All this concern for how gun-owners will react and your reassurance above as to your motives in wanting to begin a discussion on gun violence tells us that while willing to dismiss the havoc caused by the murderers, rapists and robbers walking in your midst you are willing to use that behavior as the benchmark for setting public policy. Because someone might use a gun you focus your attention on the gun and those who have the audacity to defend owning such a destructive device.
We gun rights supporters are demonized as standing in the way, being an unreasonable impediment to installing the societal structures you embrace, including but not limited to “common sense” gun control (which is why it is important to paint the NRA as not just a gun rights org. but a radical right wing org supporting all manner of right wing causes). Anti’s consider legal gun owners to be the savages of society primarily for claiming the dangerous and unnecessary right of self-defense (not recognizing the incongruity LOL).
Another reason I don’t trust you is that the people most vocal claiming to want to design gun policy are usually completely ignorant of firearms and their nomenclature; they demonstrate complete ignorance of the most simple functions of firearms as mechanical objects (full-auto / semi=auto), let alone technical aspects like ballistics (medium caliber “Assault Weapons” being “high powered”).
What it comes down to and what poisons the discussion now is that anti’s ‘just know’ that guns are ‘bad’ and no amount of reason based discussion will dissuade that emotional based position. In fact, such ignorance is worn as a badge of honor because anti’s don’t want to seen sharing anything, even knowledge, with Neanderthal gun-nuts.
I live and raised my kids in Killadelphia. What are you gonna tell me about violent urban areas? More to the point, what are you really willing to discuss about violent urban areas?
Oh yeah, another reason I don’t trust you. Because you constantly portray us so uncaring about violence that we relax at the end of a long day shooting puppies with recordings of the “cries of mothers grieving their dead children from gun violence”. well, at least when we aren’t kicking it to Es zittern die morschen Knochen.
**More laws we do not need, become more laws they will not enforce, which becomes further evidence that more laws are needed.
**
That’s the siren song of gun control; the ineffectiveness of each new enactment proves the need for further restrictions . . . Jamaica is a perfect example of the failure of laws, now they have turned to the only thing remaining, draconian enforcement.
That is the scenario that fuels the frustration that gun owners feel and fuels our resistance to your “common sense” gun laws. The present confrontational level of discourse is a natural outcome of the constant blame for criminal or psychopathic behavior placed on gun owners and their “evil instrumentality” the NRA. This laying of moral blame for violent crime at the feet of the law-abiding, and the implicit absolution of violent criminals for their misdeeds, naturally infuriates me and other honest gun owners.
The failure (that’s really being kind, failure means at least an attempt was made) to prosecute and incarcerate those who do break the law and your (the anti-liberty side’s) willingness to single out and demonize the law-abiding is illegitimate, unconscionable and in the end, unforgivable.
One might, if one wasn’t concerned with being PC, claim that your side and the government are the*** real ***co-conspirators and accomplices of murderers, rapists, and thugs. Government’s inaction enforcing laws and your constant blame of law-abiding gun owners (which equates a tacit absolution of criminal’s aberrant behavior) states loudly that you believe the disorganized, random havoc created by criminals are far less a threat to your concept of “society” than are men and women who believe themselves free and independent, and act accordingly.
Guess what, we might finally agree on something!
<----------------END
So, are you game (more to the point of the intellectual capacity of leftist anti-gunners, are you still with me or was that TLDR)?
Awaiting my being wowed by your skilz Yog (or anyone else)..