Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: The Official Gun Control Thread. « previous next »
Page: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 ... 40

Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 15528
Online
#165 : June 14, 2013, 07:37:00 AM

Someone ignored the law when the goal was to shoot some people? I'm shocked ::)


LOL

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17702
Offline
#166 : June 14, 2013, 11:07:52 AM

Someone ignored the law when the goal was to shoot some people? I'm shocked ::)


LOL

because some people will not wear seat bealts, dont require auto makers to include them  . . . .ugh

lol

Biggs3535

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 31382
Offline
#167 : June 14, 2013, 01:15:25 PM

There are restrictions on where and how you can carry guns, not so much on how you can acquire them. Of course, this varies from region to region, but generally speaking, it's easier to get a gun than it is to buy a case of beer if you don't have a head full of gray hair in some regions of the country. This is partly due to legal loopholes, and partly due to the fact that the ATF has been rendered virtually toothless by the gun lobby. So to say that guns are heavily restricted isn't all that accurate. They are regulated, not restricted, and even the regulatory procedures are piecemeal at best.

I am going to take the beer reference as hyperbole.

33 states don't require background checks, or even a license or ID to purchase firearms at gun shows if you are buying from a private dealer, so no, not hyperbole. In many regions of the country it is easier to legally purchase a firearm than it is a case of beer.

Are there gun shows on damn near every street corner like there are places that sell a case of beer?

Your example is the definition of hyperbole. 


VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17702
Offline
#168 : June 14, 2013, 01:24:27 PM

There are restrictions on where and how you can carry guns, not so much on how you can acquire them. Of course, this varies from region to region, but generally speaking, it's easier to get a gun than it is to buy a case of beer if you don't have a head full of gray hair in some regions of the country. This is partly due to legal loopholes, and partly due to the fact that the ATF has been rendered virtually toothless by the gun lobby. So to say that guns are heavily restricted isn't all that accurate. They are regulated, not restricted, and even the regulatory procedures are piecemeal at best.

I am going to take the beer reference as hyperbole.

33 states don't require background checks, or even a license or ID to purchase firearms at gun shows if you are buying from a private dealer, so no, not hyperbole. In many regions of the country it is easier to legally purchase a firearm than it is a case of beer.

Are there gun shows on damn near every street corner like there are places that sell a case of beer?

Your example is the definition of hyperbole.

Hyperbole (/haɪˈpɜrbəliː/ hy-PUR-bə-lee;[1] Greek: ὑπερβολή hyperbolē, "exaggeration") is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech.

I can buy an ar-15 and ammunition and have it delivered to my door without ever leaving my desk . . ..  and without ever providing a background check.

I cannot get a case of beer the same way, at least I hope I cannot, given that I should have to show a license.


VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17702
Offline
#169 : June 14, 2013, 01:31:37 PM

I keep mentioning that the inflexible stance of the pro-gun crowd will lead to an overreaction. We have a crazy person who built an ar-15 to get around the law (wait-- I thought gun resrictions do nothing . . but I digress).  However, he apparently bought 1300 rounds online.  Well, perhaps not surprising:

http://santamonica.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/santa-monica-councilman-asks-for-exploration-of-ban-on-ammunition

The Ar-15 w/o amunition is  . . .well . . . just a metal bat. It says he bought the amunition within 5 days of the event.  The gun crowd is against any sort of tracking, against baning assault rifles, against background checks and against waiting period and against . . .

add to that, this:

["This is the seventh mass shooting in the last year,'' Waxman said. "Enough is enough. It's well past time that Congress take action to keep these dangerous weapons off our streets."

http://santamonica.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/waxman-calls-for-tougher-gun-controls-following-santa-monica-shooting

or this from a citizen across the country (near Newtown):

http://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Letter-Control-bullet-sales-they-are-what-kill-4600495.php

: June 14, 2013, 01:38:03 PM VinBucFan

Biggs3535

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 31382
Offline
#170 : June 14, 2013, 02:43:48 PM

There are restrictions on where and how you can carry guns, not so much on how you can acquire them. Of course, this varies from region to region, but generally speaking, it's easier to get a gun than it is to buy a case of beer if you don't have a head full of gray hair in some regions of the country. This is partly due to legal loopholes, and partly due to the fact that the ATF has been rendered virtually toothless by the gun lobby. So to say that guns are heavily restricted isn't all that accurate. They are regulated, not restricted, and even the regulatory procedures are piecemeal at best.

I am going to take the beer reference as hyperbole.

33 states don't require background checks, or even a license or ID to purchase firearms at gun shows if you are buying from a private dealer, so no, not hyperbole. In many regions of the country it is easier to legally purchase a firearm than it is a case of beer.

Are there gun shows on damn near every street corner like there are places that sell a case of beer?

Your example is the definition of hyperbole.

Hyperbole (/haɪˈpɜrbəliː/ hy-PUR-bə-lee;[1] Greek: ὑπερβολή hyperbolē, "exaggeration") is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech.

I can buy an ar-15 and ammunition and have it delivered to my door without ever leaving my desk . . ..  and without ever providing a background check.

I cannot get a case of beer the same way, at least I hope I cannot, given that I should have to show a license.

You are incorrect, Counselor.  You can get a case of beer the same way.

Post and read the definition again for your benefit.


VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17702
Offline
#171 : June 14, 2013, 02:51:35 PM

There are restrictions on where and how you can carry guns, not so much on how you can acquire them. Of course, this varies from region to region, but generally speaking, it's easier to get a gun than it is to buy a case of beer if you don't have a head full of gray hair in some regions of the country. This is partly due to legal loopholes, and partly due to the fact that the ATF has been rendered virtually toothless by the gun lobby. So to say that guns are heavily restricted isn't all that accurate. They are regulated, not restricted, and even the regulatory procedures are piecemeal at best.

I am going to take the beer reference as hyperbole.

33 states don't require background checks, or even a license or ID to purchase firearms at gun shows if you are buying from a private dealer, so no, not hyperbole. In many regions of the country it is easier to legally purchase a firearm than it is a case of beer.

Are there gun shows on damn near every street corner like there are places that sell a case of beer?

Your example is the definition of hyperbole.

Hyperbole (/haɪˈpɜrbəliː/ hy-PUR-bə-lee;[1] Greek: ὑπερβολή hyperbolē, "exaggeration") is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech.

I can buy an ar-15 and ammunition and have it delivered to my door without ever leaving my desk . . ..  and without ever providing a background check.

I cannot get a case of beer the same way, at least I hope I cannot, given that I should have to show a license.

You are incorrect, Counselor.  You can get a case of beer the same way.

Post and read the definition again for your benefit.

link? (that could come in handy)

Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 15528
Online
#172 : June 14, 2013, 02:53:51 PM

Look at Scarecrow actually posting something of substance for once!!  Im proud of you,  Scarecrow!

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17702
Offline
#173 : June 14, 2013, 02:56:13 PM

Look at Scarecrow actually posting something of substance for once!!  Im proud of you,  Scarecrow!

hey, dont sidetrack him when he's doing so well . . lol


 . . now, let's see if he posts the link . . . .
: June 14, 2013, 03:05:15 PM VinBucFan

spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6893
Offline
#174 : June 14, 2013, 03:20:14 PM

The gun crowd is against any sort of tracking, against baning assault rifles, against background checks and against waiting period and against . . .


I have clearly demonstrated this is not the case, so why do you keep on repeating it?

Is it that you have forgotten already, or is it that you are not really interested in anything we have to say?

Add on to that you don't want to stop at banning assault rifles do you? Your proposals are a de facto ban on all fire arms.

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17702
Offline
#175 : June 14, 2013, 03:39:54 PM

The gun crowd is against any sort of tracking, against baning assault rifles, against background checks and against waiting period and against . . .


I have clearly demonstrated this is not the case, so why do you keep on repeating it?

Is it that you have forgotten already, or is it that you are not really interested in anything we have to say?

Add on to that you don't want to stop at banning assault rifles do you? Your proposals are a de facto ban on all fire arms.

Spartan, maybe I am confused, so let's just make it simple:

1. would you accept registration of all firearms?

2. are you against banning assault rifles?

3. are you against waiting periods for all purchases?

4. are you against universal background checks?

Now, before we continue with the conditional responses to everything, let's see your actual proposal for anyone of those that you provide a conditional yes to, okay? Anyone can keep the game alive by saying "under certain conditions", so let's see if your actions match the rhetoric, which, by the way . . .your rhetoric on  this subject has included a call for anonymous background checks (see #1 above), several caveats to #4, but never offering if you would accept it even with your caveats, and your comment above that a single proposal I posted was a "de facto" banning of ALL guns. That last one is untrue, but why would it matter if #2 were not true?

I dont begrudge you for being against all those things, its 100% your right and I respect your right and your opinion as well (something I think you know).  We just disagree on a lot but that is fine, I just dont have an interest in the back and forth on what you will and will not agree to.  Just state it simply and that will clear up any confusion.
: June 14, 2013, 03:46:09 PM VinBucFan

spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6893
Offline
#176 : June 14, 2013, 04:12:24 PM

I will keep it just as simple:

1. would you accept registration of all firearms?

No.

2. are you against banning assault rifles?

Yes.

3. are you against waiting periods for all purchases?

No. (If that is just firearms, ammo, accessories etc yes because it's pointless)

4. are you against universal background checks?

No. See the conditions I have laid out. I would accept that.  I wouldn't have suggested it as the basis of a plan if I wouldn't accept it. I say a basis because somebody else might come up with some other good ideas that could be included. I don't pretend to hold the monopoly on every good idea.

The "restrictions" you propose makes it pretty much impossible to own a gun legally. I take it you know that in countries like the UK and Australia which you based that on, self defense of any kind does not constitute a "need" or "necessary". Basically you are allowed a gun for vermin extermination on a farm or an organized sporting activity. That rules out 99% of the population and 99% of all guns. Bit tough not to call that a gun ban don't you think?

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17702
Offline
#177 : June 14, 2013, 04:15:23 PM

I will keep it just as simple:

1. would you accept registration of all firearms?

No.

2. are you against banning assault rifles?

Yes.

3. are you against waiting periods for all purchases?

No. (If that is just firearms, ammo, accessories etc yes because it's pointless)

4. are you against universal background checks?

No. See the conditions I have laid out. I would accept that.  I wouldn't have suggested it as the basis of a plan if I wouldn't accept it. I say a basis because somebody else might come up with some other good ideas that could be included. I don't pretend to hold the monopoly on every good idea.

The "restrictions" you propose makes it pretty much impossible to own a gun legally. I take it you know that in countries like the UK and Australia which you based that on, self defense of any kind does not constitute a "need" or "necessary". Basically you are allowed a gun for vermin extermination on a farm or an organized sporting activity. That rules out 99% of the population and 99% of all guns. Bit tough not to call that a gun ban don't you think?

just for clarity, I wasnt proposing Australia's laws, I just posted it as an example of restrictions without an outright ban

spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6893
Offline
#178 : June 14, 2013, 05:18:09 PM

just for clarity, I wasnt proposing Australia's laws, I just posted it as an example of restrictions without an outright ban

That's like only allowing buses and Nascar vehicles and saying it is not an outright ban on automobiles.

Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 15528
Online
#179 : June 14, 2013, 07:18:16 PM

just for clarity, I wasnt proposing Australia's laws, I just posted it as an example of restrictions without an outright ban

That's like only allowing buses and Nascar vehicles and saying it is not an outright ban on automobiles.

But do you really have a "reasonable" reason to need your own car when you can just take the city bus ?? I think not , good Spartan.

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           
Page: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 ... 40
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: The Official Gun Control Thread. « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools