SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Fine print: The following are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Journal by fustakrakich
Not gonna spoil it. You'll have to watch, or just move along
Here, this will settle your stupid gun control fight!
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 32 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
(1)
Trying to be happy is like trying to build a machine for which the only
specification is that it should run noiselessly.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 13 2021, @07:31PM (8 children)
Thanks for the laugh.
Now, I hope one of the anti-gun crusaders will actually hold a principled position and demand the dissolution of the military and disarmament of the state before demanding the same of the common people.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 13 2021, @08:01PM (7 children)
You gave me an excellent idea! Apply the same rules and regulations to "the common people" that they do for military and police weapons.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 13 2021, @08:12PM
AhhhYUP! That's just about what the Second says. Weeee don't need no steeeenking army, because weeee is the army!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 13 2021, @08:21PM (1 child)
Spoken like a true fascist.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 14 2021, @01:16AM
I see you studied at the Austrian School for Dumbasses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 14 2021, @02:42AM (1 child)
Will we get to hurl insults such as virgin, incel, pussy or even woman at men who don't attend weekly drills in the town square?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 14 2021, @06:51PM
Obviously
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 14 2021, @04:48AM (1 child)
The US military still has some absurd gun control rules left over from the Clinton administration, like domestic military bases being gun free zones. It would be unconstitutional to apply this to the civilian population. There also used to be civilian training programs meant to bring the general public up to basic standards, but those have also been eliminated. Police, on the other hand, don't seem to follow any rules at all, both in what weapons they are allowed to have and how they use them. The general public would face arrest at minimum and very likely public execution without trial if they emulated the police.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 14 2021, @06:53PM
Dirty cops aside, their firearms are extremely regulated and require training. Nice attempted distraction broooooo.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Monday September 13 2021, @09:19PM (13 children)
What if only the good guys had guns and the bad guys didn't? (or had fewer)
(somewhat) More Realistically, what if some people who were an obvious danger couldn't have guns. There's no perfect definition. There would be some false positives and false negatives. But it seems there are some people who obviously should not have guns.
If a minstrel has musical instruments attached to his bicycle, can it be called a minstrel cycle?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday September 13 2021, @10:54PM (10 children)
But the problem with that is how do you decide who obviously should or shouldn't have a freedom? My take is that in a democratic society the standard should be pretty high, erring in favor of the citizen. Which means to me that it's not really going to be a good approach to reducing firearm assaults or whatever it is that we're concerned about. Conversely, any tyranny will quickly use such laws to better establish control over the public.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 14 2021, @10:30AM (1 child)
Believe me, khallow, there are more ways to suicide than "by cop" only.
If the state decides "you're an obvious danger and ships you off to a concentration camp", then having one or more guns won't help you a bit.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday September 14 2021, @03:20PM
How about ten million more guns?
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday September 14 2021, @01:42PM (7 children)
Isn't that the exact reason that your side argues that the good guys should have guns? (I'm not arguing that point.)
So then why do you ignore the real issue of bad guys having guns and not actually want to address it? I know it seems to have no easy answers. But we do have a very real problem that you want to ignore.
If a minstrel has musical instruments attached to his bicycle, can it be called a minstrel cycle?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday September 14 2021, @03:21PM (5 children)
Because nobody has 1) a reliable way to determine who the bad guys are, and 2) no compelling reason to address that.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Tuesday September 14 2021, @04:48PM (4 children)
There is no perfect way to address who the bad guys are. Some are obvious. Others are not.
As for no compelling reason, we will just have to disagree. You seem to be blind to the problem. You just don't want to see it for political reasons. I don't have a problem with good people having guns. I'm willing to work for a policy that works for a majority of people on a divisive issue.
The reason the issue is divisive is because we have a problem. But you refuse to even acknowledge it. Not a good point to have any meaningful discussion.
If a minstrel has musical instruments attached to his bicycle, can it be called a minstrel cycle?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday September 14 2021, @07:05PM (3 children)
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday September 14 2021, @08:48PM (2 children)
The normal citizens are not the ones who should be banned from access to firearms. You misrepresent what I am saying.
There are bad people. Some are obvious. Others are not so obvious.
An example. A person who has brandished firearms at others, and has been court ordered to have no contact with someone and take an anger management class might be an obvious example of someone who probably should not have a firearm.
Everyone else around that person probably should have a firearm.
If a minstrel has musical instruments attached to his bicycle, can it be called a minstrel cycle?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 15 2021, @01:05AM (1 child)
Brandishing is already a felony, those people will already be barred from legally owning weapons...
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Wednesday September 15 2021, @02:36AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 27 2021, @08:42AM
Because every law thus far has been an attempt to get guns out of the hands of "bad guys" without having an effect on the "good guys". I don't see any fewer bad guys with guns.
Show me a law that doesn't primarily harm the good guys that would have stopped the Vegas shooting. Guy was an insane millionaire and even though he didnt use automatic weapons could have easily afforded them (250 for tax stamp, ??? For FBI background check that would have come through clean, and 25k-ish per weapon)
The only thing that worked was stop and frisk, horribly unconstitutional but if we are going to discuss efficacy it should be on the table.
I would be less bothered by the gun control crowd if they were going after handguns more and rifles less, handguns range up to 20k/year while rifles and shotguns are each down around 300.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 15 2021, @11:50PM (1 child)
What if a "good guy", who gets a gun, becomes bad? IE, maybe having that gun brings out something bad, but unknown, that was deep in his subconscious?
FWIW, I'm not arguing either way, just making a devil's advocate counterpoint.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 16 2021, @12:15AM
Really, man! A stray cosmic ray could flip the evil bit in his brain, and BAM! Game on!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday September 13 2021, @10:56PM (8 children)
(Score: 2, Informative) by aristarchus on Monday September 13 2021, @11:33PM (4 children)
I can't watch it. Geoblocked. So sad!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 14 2021, @04:53AM (3 children)
Of course you are geoblocked. "123.234.56.789" isn't a valid IP address.
(Score: 3, Informative) by aristarchus on Tuesday September 14 2021, @05:56AM (2 children)
How genteel of you to notice! However, you might notice as well, that I never claimed that was my actual IP, just the one that janrinok is working off of.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 14 2021, @02:29PM (1 child)
should it not be then:
"123.456.78.901"
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday September 14 2021, @07:09PM
Yes, it should have been. But one cannot always choose one's dynamic IP address!
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday September 13 2021, @11:37PM
Not gonna do it.. Wouldn't be prudent.. na-ga-da...
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 14 2021, @08:43AM (1 child)
It's basically; "because an idiot is in favor of second amendment rights then gun control is a good thing." Not really an argument, I can find an idiot in favor of (or opposed) to any policy you want (or don't want).
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 14 2021, @10:59PM
But when that idiot is Runaway1956, well, the argument is more than half won, is it not?