2013 America (and Friends!) Gun Violence Thread No Plows Allowed!

[Melena]

For some reason when I read it I saw it as the senate not the house, my bad on that one.




I dunno what to do about you anymore, dude. That's exactly what I've been saying.

1. Focusing on mass shootings is a baby step.

2. Focusing on stopping all shootings will be banging your head.


I have from post one been focusing on #1 and said #2 is a bad idea.

I have never said all shootings. I said focus on the everyday shit we see, the gang violence, armed robberies, and that ilk. Never once have I said shut down all gun violence and it ends mass shootings, because by that very definition, if there was no gun violence ever, there wouldn't be any fucking mass shootings.

[Ksandra]

I have never said all shootings. I said focus on the everyday shit we see, the gang violence, armed robberies, and that ilk. Never once have I said shut down all gun violence and it ends mass shootings, because by that very definition, if there was no gun violence ever, there wouldn't be any fucking mass shootings.

I never said you did. Holy crap, dude. YOU jumped on ME when all I said is gang violence and mass shootings REQUIRE DIFFERENT FOCUSES.

Do you think they require difference focuses? Because that is LITERALLY the only thing I said when you have been jumping on me for several posts.

Say yes or no. If you agree then you've been trying to fucking argue with me over absolute dick.

If you say no, then explain why they all need the same focus.

[Melena]

I never said you did. Holy crap, dude. YOU jumped on ME when all I said is gang violence and mass shootings REQUIRE DIFFERENT FOCUSES.

Do you deny they require difference focuses? Because that is LITERALLY the only thing I said when you have been jumping on me for several posts.

Say yes or no. If you agree then you've been trying to fucking argue with me over absolute dick.

If you say no, then explain why they all need the same focus.

Yes they do need different focuses, but what i've been saying from the beginning is that the stuff for mass shootings will have to come later. With republicans and some right leaning democrats in the pockets of the NRA, it's something that is going to have to be done at a state level, starting small, and build up to what people want. People are screaming ban all assault rifles now when you can't even define what an assault rifle is, never mind the fact that what you can buy as a civilian is completely different then what is given to Military/Law Enforcement.

Focus on the small shit, fix the background check loopholes. Push for required testing to own a firearm. Push for more common sense ways to lose your privilege to own a gun (there is already a standard set for losing constitutional rights as shown by convicted felons in jail, on parole or probation can't even vote which is a constitutional right), and as people get accustomed to these rules, then you can start going after the bigger shit. But until a universal definition of an assault rifle is defined, good luck on ever getting them banned. Education and training will go a long way. Hell, i'd be happy to get rid of carry conceal as well, and this is coming from a gun proponent. If you get caught in public with a gun on your body (transportation in a locked container is fine as people do need the ability to go to a range for practice), it's immediately confiscated and sent to DoJ to be destroyed and you have a 5 year gun prohibition. Violate it again or refuse to surrender what you own, and it's permanent.

These are all simple common sense ways to lower the amount of guns. I could go on and on, on ways to regulate guns, but sadly despite being common fucking sense, until the NRA loses it's political clout, we will have to make do with the tiniest of steps until you can reach the greater goal.

[Ksandra]

Yes they do need different focuses, but what i've been saying from the beginning is that the stuff for mass shootings will have to come later. With republicans and some right leaning democrats in the pockets of the NRA, it's something that is going to have to be done at a state level, starting small, and build up to what people want. People are screaming ban all assault rifles now when you can't even define what an assault rifle is, never mind the fact that what you can buy as a civilian is completely different then what is given to Military/Law Enforcement.

Focus on the small shit, fix the background check loopholes. Push for required testing to own a firearm. Push for more common sense ways to lose your privilege to own a gun (there is already a standard set for losing constitutional rights as shown by convicted felons in jail, on parole or probation can't even vote which is a constitutional right), and as people get accustomed to these rules, then you can start going after the bigger shit. But until a universal definition of an assault rifle is defined, good luck on ever getting them banned. Education and training will go a long way. Hell, i'd be happy to get rid of carry conceal as well, and this is coming from a gun proponent. If you get caught in public with a gun on your body (transportation in a locked container is fine as people do need the ability to go to a range for practice), it's immediately confiscated and sent to DoJ to be destroyed and you have a 5 year gun prohibition. Violate it again or refuse to surrender what you own, and it's permanent.

These are all simple common sense ways to lower the amount of guns. I could go on and on, on ways to regulate guns, but sadly despite being common fucking sense, until the NRA loses it's political clout, we will have to make do with the tiniest of steps until you can reach the greater goal.

1.Everything you just posted would reduce mass shootings, so it wouldn't come later, now would it?

2. I wasn't arguing against any of that shit.

[Melena]

1.Everything you just posted would reduce mass shootings, so it wouldn't come later, now would it?

2. I wasn't arguing against any of that shit.

Yes it would, but you were lambasting me on saying focus on the every day stuff and the mass shootings would come down as well by going off about how this needs to be done now to curb mass shootings. That's the whole damn point i've been arguing.

[Ksandra]

but you were lambasting me on saying focus on the every day stuff and the mass shootings would come down as well by going off about how this needs to be done now to curb mass shootings.

Wrong, I am saying there is nothing wrong if legislation for mass shootings come up now. We don't HAVE to focus on gang violence until it ends before we focus on mass shootings. This may come as a shock to you, but you can come up with legislation as they come and it's OK if that legislation is for mass shootings, and it's OK if that legislation is for gang violence. Currently the legislation is focused on mass shootings, understandably considering what happened, and THAT's OK.

[Ragnus]

https://www.periscope.tv/w/1nAKEqbgqEbKL

Congressional Democrats are staging a sit in over the failed measures taken after the Pulse tragedy.

Scott Peters is currently live streaming it on Periscope. Hearing rumors that the GoP are denying traditional media from broadcasting it. Coverage is spotty because I think high viewer count is crashing the stream.

EDIT: Pretty much confirmed that Congressional members are killing the C-SPAN cameras.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/p...span/86249466/

[Melena]

Wrong, I am saying there is nothing wrong if legislation for mass shootings come up now. We don't HAVE to focus on gang violence until it ends before we focus on mass shootings. This may come as a shock to you, but you can come up with legislation as they come and it's OK if that legislation is for mass shootings, and it's OK if that legislation is for gang violence. Currently the legislation is focused on mass shootings, understandably considering what happened, and THAT's OK.

And what i've been saying is that due to the NRA, as we are already seeing, any legislation is getting immediately shit canned. At this point it almost feels like lip service from our elected officials on both ends as this has happened too many times and it's always boiling down to the same reason nothing happens. The NRA says I have rights cause MERICA! Hence the focus on the everyday shit will actually do more to end mass shootings then what's being done now.

[Ksandra]

And what i've been saying is that due to the NRA, as we are already seeing, any legislation is getting immediately shit canned.

Hopefully not with this sit-in.

And I see nothing wrong with both congress and local officials working on gun reform. They can happen at the same time. And I never said we can't focus on the local levels, either. It's like you want to argue with someone so just decided to pick me, without actually seeing if I disagree with anything you think.

[Ragnus]

To all the people who were shitting on Bernie when it wasn't him filibustering, he just joined the sit in.

[Ksandra]

To all the people who were shitting on Bernie when it wasn't him filibustering, he just joined the sit in.

I am very glad to hear it.

[Ghost_Wheel22]

And what i've been saying is that due to the NRA, as we are already seeing, any legislation is getting immediately shit canned.

Again you're giving the NRA-ILA way too much credit. But if the NRA was so OP then why did Cornyn's proposal get shit canned when the NRA publicly supported it?

[dasva]

Again you're giving the NRA-ILA way too much credit. But if the NRA was so OP then why did Cornyn's proposal get shit canned when the NRA publicly supported it?

Because due process is scary and bad when guns are involved. Though the supposed reason was it's too hard to require the government to prove someone should be denied.

[archibaldcrane]

Though the supposed reason was it's too hard to require the government to prove someone should be denied.

within 72 hours*

[dasva]

I'm sure they could be inclined to adjust the time period slightly. But I seriously doubt that would all of a sudden change the outcome given 1) it was mostly a party line vote to begin with like all too many things. 2) Feinsteins bill that excludes the due process part had almost exactly the opposite vote

[Melena]

Again you're giving the NRA-ILA way too much credit. But if the NRA was so OP then why did Cornyn's proposal get shit canned when the NRA publicly supported it?

You do realize the nRA rates senators and house representatives based on gun control laws and use that for propaganda to help keep or defeat candidates based on which side they are on. Once elected people will do whatever it takes to keep their job

[Ghost_Wheel22]

You do realize Bloomberg/MDA/MAIG does the exact thing only he has a much bigger wallet? And the Brady Campaign does the same rating bullshit on states/officials for their positions on gun control? Heck even my state pro-gun group (Oregon Firearms Federation) does a grading scale of how they rate Oregon reps, senators, governors, and candidates. Big whoop.

[archibaldcrane]

I'm sure they could be inclined to adjust the time period slightly.

The Republicans don't want this to pass, they want to put out a virtually unenforceable non-solution, vote for it, and then say "see, the Democrats refuse to work with us!"

[Melena]

You do realize Bloomberg/MDA/MAIG does the exact thing only he has a much bigger wallet? And the Brady Campaign does the same rating bullshit on states/officials for their positions on gun control? Heck even my state pro-gun group (Oregon Firearms Federation) does a grading scale of how they rate Oregon reps, senators, governors, and candidates. Big whoop.

Then explain why so many candidates on the right want the NRA's blessing/backing? If they didn't have so much political clout, there are quite a few politicians who are terrified of pissing them off and having them support someone else.

[Ghost_Wheel22]

Money? Ideology? Party policy? Constituent votes?

Much the same reason the many members on the left want that sweet sweet Bloomberg teat.