So radical lefties ... is it time to start the alcohol ban discussion too?

[Wyovanian]

59 minutes ago, Jack Bauer said:

Agreed.  That said, there's nothing to keep someone from walking in a school with 5 or 6 hand guns and still getting a high body count.  Didn't this guy obtain the rifle from a white supremacy group?  I just think there's already too many guns out there to make some sort of regulation effective.

Nope. He legally purchased it despite having been reported to the FBI as a threat by two different individuals. FBI screwed the pooch on this one. Thank God we have the federal government around to protect us from people like him... 

[Jack Bauer]

1 minute ago, Wyovanian said:

Nope. He legally purchased it despite having been reported to the FBI as a threat by two different individuals. FBI screwed the pooch on this one. Thank God we have the federal government around to protect us from people like him... 

 I had read yesterday someone gave the weapon to him, so obviously the article I read was mistaken.  I'm with you on the government, they can't even wipe their own asses and some people want to put them in charge of more things.  

They don't enforce current laws much of the time, but that's a different argument.

My point in asking the questions on this thread is that I'm ok if they want to regulate it more, and that will probably make some people feel better about things, but I don't think it will result in the changes people think it will.  I've upset a few friends on Facebook by posing similar questions and I have yet to hear a response that makes me think increasing regulation will really deter people that want to do this stuff.

I feel like these issues are much more based in access to mental health care than a gun issues, but that is another discussion all together.  

 

[Wyovanian]

53 minutes ago, renoskier said:

Yes, but we have to start somewhere, otherwise in 20 years there will be even more in the hands of deranged folks.

Like I've said before, there's no real reason anyone "needs" high capacity magazines. 

And yet, as gun ownership goes up, gun violence goes down...

[Del Scorcho]

Just now, Wyovanian said:

And yet, as gun ownership goes up, gun violence goes down...

well then clearly the answer is we should arm everyone, if only those kids at Sandy Hook were packing

[Wyovanian]

2 minutes ago, Jack Bauer said:

 I had read yesterday someone gave the weapon to him, so obviously the article I read was mistaken.  I'm with you on the government, they can't even wipe their own asses and some people want to put them in charge of more things.  

They don't enforce current laws much of the time, but that's a different argument.

My point in asking the questions on this thread is that I'm ok if they want to regulate it more, and that will probably make some people feel better about things, but I don't think it will result in the changes people think it will.  I've upset a few friends on Facebook by posing similar questions and I have yet to hear a response that makes me think increasing regulation will really deter people that want to do this stuff.

I feel like these issues are much more based in access to mental health care than a gun issues, but that is another discussion all together.  

 

And that's where I have a problem. Feelings should never be the justification for legislation or the abridgment of rights. Look at TSA and flying. It's all window dressing at tremendous cost to make people "feel" safe. Cockpit doors are reinforced and locked now. Just have the possibility of armed pilots and train airport security in the art of threat profiling and let's dispense with the useless idiocy of what is our current airport security,

[Wyovanian]

2 minutes ago, Del Scorcho said:

well then clearly the answer is we should arm everyone, if only those kids at Sandy Hook were packing

If Adam Lanza had thought there was a possibility a teacher was, I'd wager good money he'd have just killed his mom and himself.

[Jack Bauer]

4 minutes ago, Wyovanian said:

And that's where I have a problem. Feelings should never be the justification for legislation or the abridgment of rights. Look at TSA and flying. It's all window dressing at tremendous cost to make people "feel" safe. Cockpit doors are reinforced and locked now. Just have the possibility of armed pilots and train airport security in the art of threat profiling and let's dispense with the useless idiocy of what is our current airport security,

You make compelling points, which I agree with.

[Rebelbacker]

10 minutes ago, Jack Bauer said:

 I had read yesterday someone gave the weapon to him, so obviously the article I read was mistaken.  I'm with you on the government, they can't even wipe their own asses and some people want to put them in charge of more things.  

They don't enforce current laws much of the time, but that's a different argument.

My point in asking the questions on this thread is that I'm ok if they want to regulate it more, and that will probably make some people feel better about things, but I don't think it will result in the changes people think it will.  I've upset a few friends on Facebook by posing similar questions and I have yet to hear a response that makes me think increasing regulation will really deter people that want to do this stuff.

I feel like these issues are much more based in access to mental health care than a gun issues, but that is another discussion all together.  

 

I agree and we should have that discussion.

[Jack Bauer]

Just now, Rebelbacker said:

I agree and we should have that discussion.

No doubt.  I'm not entirely sure that would have helped this individual.  A big problem with mental health is lack of access.  Another big problem is that people refuse to seek/accept/comply with the help they are given.

[Rebelbacker]

3 minutes ago, Jack Bauer said:

No doubt.  I'm not entirely sure that would have helped this individual.  A big problem with mental health is lack of access.  Another big problem is that people refuse to seek/accept/comply with the help they are given.

With this guy all the signs were there and the FBI knew and did nothing. 

[Jack Bauer]

4 minutes ago, Rebelbacker said:

With this guy all the signs were there and the FBI knew and did nothing. 

This isn't the first time either

[BSUTOP25]

27 minutes ago, Wyovanian said:

And yet, "assault" weapons account for far fewer deaths than other guns...

Has anyone coined the term "assault alcohol" yet?

 

[happycamper]

 

26 minutes ago, Wyovanian said:

Most alcohol-related deaths and mayhem are not a result of driving.

And over half of my points were not about driving. Amazing!

15 minutes ago, Wyovanian said:

And yet, as gun ownership goes up, gun violence goes down...

Sigh

There are so many ways this chart is stupid.

One, while guns per person have gone up, gun ownership per person has gone down. Seeing as how a brosef with 50 guns in his bunker and one on his person is exactly as armed as a brosticrat who is carrying his single piece, it's a nonsense statistic.

Secondly, there are so many things that correlate with homicides going down that to imply causation with any of them you need way, way, way more evidence. Increased access to broadband? Sure! Internet stops murder! Increased access to medical and then legal marijuana? Yes! Craft breweries per capita? I sure feel like shooting the bartender when the beer options are "bud, bud light, miller, miller light, coors, and michelob". Decreased population exposed to super high levels of environmental lead as children? You betcha! Brain damage can cause violence! Overall decreased age of the nation, as it is generally the youths shooting themselves and a better track of gun homicides per person would be tracked by age cohort? Umm, yes. 

Third, apparently there's a breakpoint at 1.1 guns per person when more guns just doesn't do much. So... regulate it so there are about 35% less guns out there?

Just now, BSUTOP25 said:

Has anyone coined the term "assault alcohol" yet?

 

 

I think that's just called "alcohol"

[bluerules009]

8 hours ago, retrofade said:

You do realize that you're comparing apples and oranges, right? This is the problem with attempting to engage in an intelligent discussion regarding gun violence in the US --- both sides end up implying that the other wants ridiculous extremes and no solution can ever be even discussed. 

You are not intelligent enough to even have a conversation as your response to this proves Obamaboy.

[renoskier]

37 minutes ago, Wyovanian said:

And yet, "assault" weapons account for far fewer deaths than other guns...

Was I not clear? If we can't stop the shootings, and I don't belive we can, I at least think we should do what we can to lower the body count.

[Wyovanian]

5 minutes ago, renoskier said:

Was I not clear? If we can't stop the shootings, and I don't belive we can, I at least think we should do what we can to lower the body count.

And there is the perfect example of trading liberty for a little "safety".

What do you suppose your odds of being killed by an "assault" weapon are? How about your odds of dying in a car accident?

[BSUTOP25]

10 minutes ago, renoskier said:

Was I not clear? If we can't stop the shootings, and I don't belive we can, I at least think we should do what we can to lower the body count.

So let's get down to brass tacks. Are you for abuse, rape, and murder or will you join me in calling for a ban on alcohol?

[renoskier]

1 hour ago, Wyovanian said:

And there is the perfect example of trading liberty for a little "safety".

What do you suppose your odds of being killed by an "assault" weapon are? How about your odds of dying in a car accident?

This is a complete false equivalency.

Do you think that if 3 or 4 fewer kids had been murdered it would matter to their families? I get it, you believe your right to go out and empty a 30 round mag in a matter of seconds is more important than the a few peoples lives. Why?

 

[BSUTOP25]

Just now, renoskier said:

This is a complete false equivalency.

Do you think that if 3 or 4 fewer kids had been murdered it would matter to their families. I get it, you believe your right to go out and empty a 30 round mag in a matter of seconds is more important than the a few peoples lives. Why?

 

I've clearly demonstrated, using the WHO, World Bank, CDC, and UK government, how alcohol is a much bigger killer than cancer and guns yet none of you lefties want to ban it. This bewilders me.

[renoskier]

6 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

I've clearly demonstrated, using the WHO, World Bank, CDC, and UK government, how alcohol is a much bigger killer than cancer and guns yet none of you lefties want to ban it. This bewilders me.

I know you're being snarky with the alcohol thing.

You don't get your panties in a bunch about stronger DUI laws, how come you're so triggered by the mention of any possible gun legislation?