LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Forum for posts that are not hockey-related.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby bh on Wed Apr 17, 2013 2:34 pm

GaryRissling wrote:OBL couldn't care less about the freedoms of Americans. He wanted to punish us for our involvement in the ME (presence in Saudi Arabia, sanctions of Iraq in the 1990's, treatment of Palestinians, etc). He tried justifying attacking US citizens by saying that we were the ones financing the actions he decried; but I can't imagine that he'd find any consolation in an even more totalitarian US government.
I think a more restrictive government is part of the punishment on the citizens and I do think that OBL would take comfort in that fact. He wanted to cause as much damage as possible of any kind and instill fear. How much money was wasted in the ensuing wars? How much money was wasted in new improved body scanners? How much money was lost in financials? Really this was the start to the big downslide in the economy. That one highly effective act effected the country and really the entire world in a big way.
bh
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 4,605
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 12:48 am

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby GaryRissling on Wed Apr 17, 2013 2:37 pm

tifosi77 wrote:Perhaps a better way to phrase it then would be we lost the war almost before it ever began.


That would depend on who "we" is, and what the goal of the war is. Are "we" winning the war on drugs? Some people are.
GaryRissling
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,635
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby GaryRissling on Wed Apr 17, 2013 2:49 pm

bh wrote:I think a more restrictive government is part of the punishment on the citizens and I do think that OBL would take comfort in that fact. He wanted to cause as much damage as possible of any kind and instill fear. How much money was wasted in the ensuing wars? How much money was wasted in new improved body scanners? How much money was lost in financials? Really this was the start to the big downslide in the economy. That one highly effective act effected the country and really the entire world in a big way.


We would know a lot more about his motivations if we captured him alive and forced him to stand trial, wouldn't we?

That aside, your point about "how much money was wasted": How about how much money was made? Military contractors, lobbyists, investment bankers, etc. It's more power, more money, and bigger government. It is the same as the war on drugs.

Edit: And it isn't as though we had to waste trillions in iraq to respond to 9/11. And it isn't as though we had to stay in Afghanistan for a decade. These aren't things ALQ imposed on us through 9/11. Our government did it with almost no clear objectives. No goals. Just make it big, messy, and expensive.
GaryRissling
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,635
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby bh on Wed Apr 17, 2013 3:27 pm

GaryRissling wrote:
bh wrote:I think a more restrictive government is part of the punishment on the citizens and I do think that OBL would take comfort in that fact. He wanted to cause as much damage as possible of any kind and instill fear. How much money was wasted in the ensuing wars? How much money was wasted in new improved body scanners? How much money was lost in financials? Really this was the start to the big downslide in the economy. That one highly effective act effected the country and really the entire world in a big way.


We would know a lot more about his motivations if we captured him alive and forced him to stand trial, wouldn't we?

That aside, your point about "how much money was wasted": How about how much money was made? Military contractors, lobbyists, investment bankers, etc. It's more power, more money, and bigger government. It is the same as the war on drugs.

Edit: And it isn't as though we had to waste trillions in iraq to respond to 9/11. And it isn't as though we had to stay in Afghanistan for a decade. These aren't things ALQ imposed on us through 9/11. Our government did it with almost no clear objectives. No goals. Just make it big, messy, and expensive.

I agree with it all. Nothing I can do about it though.
bh
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 4,605
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 12:48 am

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby ExPatriatePen on Wed Apr 17, 2013 3:33 pm

GaryRissling wrote: How about how much money was made?


I know you're already aware of this GR, but...

Made by who? Taken from who?

The money that was "made", was first confiscated from the middle class. Then it was redistributed to those in the "crony capitalist" state.

Particulary under GWB and with respect to Haliburton.
ExPatriatePen
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,691
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Source, Destination, Protocol, Port, size, sequence number, check sum... Yep, that about covers it.

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Geezer on Wed Apr 17, 2013 4:42 pm

shafnutz05 wrote:I disagree. I don't deny how ignorant many Americans are of the actions of their own government, but I think salt of the earth Americans are generally empathetic/kind. And I don't think it is necessarily deliberate ignorance.

On your previous point...didn't I make a point to state that while there have been claims from the usual sources that this was an Islamic terror attack, there have been many, MANY sources also claiming this was some kind of right-wing plot?

On another note...

http://www.salon.com/2013/04/16/lets_hope_the_boston_marathon_bomber_is_a_white_american/

If recent history is any guide, if the bomber ends up being a white anti-government extremist, white privilege will likely mean the attack is portrayed as just an isolated incident — one that has no bearing on any larger policy debates. Put another way, white privilege will work to not only insulate whites from collective blame, but also to insulate the political debate from any fallout from the attack.


The above quote, like the rest of the article, is completely asinine. Whenever a couple white psychos decided to shoot up a movie theater and school, the federal government moved to restrict the rights of tens of millions of gun owners based on the actions of a few.

To add, most white murder incidents lately, well, HAVE been isolated incidents. It is generally a quiet psychopath who leaves some kind of manifesto. The fact is, people like Holmes, the Columbine Shooters, etc didn't belong to any sort of militia or overarching religion/creed. They just had a vendetta against the world.

also...

Jay Mohr

What bothers me most about today is that we're getting used 2 it. ENOUGH. 2nd amendment must go. Violence has 2 stop. Culture MUST change


:face: :face: :face:

We also need backround checks on pressure cookers. I'll even go along with not selling pressure cookers at yard sales without a waiting period.
Geezer
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,752
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:24 am

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Pitt87 on Wed Apr 17, 2013 4:44 pm

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., a sponsor of the background check amendment, pleaded with his colleagues to remember the 26 people who died Dec. 14 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

"If you want to remember those 20 babies -- beautiful children -- and the six brave teachers ... and you want to honor the most courageous family members I have ever met, please vote for this bill," he said.


Not-so-thinly veiled attempt at politicizing a violent act by a deranged individual. Their bill would not have changed the outcome of the Sandy Hook shooting.
Pitt87
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,399
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Admin wrote:Rooting for the Flyers is not allowed here. Seriously.

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Shyster on Wed Apr 17, 2013 4:50 pm

Pitt87 wrote:
Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., a sponsor of the background check amendment, pleaded with his colleagues to remember the 26 people who died Dec. 14 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.
"If you want to remember those 20 babies -- beautiful children -- and the six brave teachers ... and you want to honor the most courageous family members I have ever met, please vote for this bill," he said.

Not-so-thinly veiled attempt at politicizing a violent act by a deranged individual. Their bill would not have changed the outcome of the Sandy Hook shooting.

As I just posted in the gun-owners thread, it didn't pass. This almost certainly means that gun-control efforts at the national level are dead for the foreseeable future.
Shyster
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,754
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 4:32 pm
Location: Here and there

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Geezer on Wed Apr 17, 2013 4:59 pm

Shyster wrote:
Pitt87 wrote:
Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., a sponsor of the background check amendment, pleaded with his colleagues to remember the 26 people who died Dec. 14 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.
"If you want to remember those 20 babies -- beautiful children -- and the six brave teachers ... and you want to honor the most courageous family members I have ever met, please vote for this bill," he said.

Not-so-thinly veiled attempt at politicizing a violent act by a deranged individual. Their bill would not have changed the outcome of the Sandy Hook shooting.

As I just posted in the gun-owners thread, it didn't pass. This almost certainly means that gun-control efforts at the national level are dead for the foreseeable future.

What;s scarier is the efforts that states are making that could be mimiced on a national level. So me states are trying to impose heavy "gun" insurance on gun owners. That's a major reason to oppose expanded backround checks. The feds as well as the states can't be trusted to delete backround check info once someone's cleared. It will become a registry. Once the politicians have the info they can leverage owners into getting rid of guns with exhorbinant gun insurance; heavy taxes on guns as part of heathcare costs,etc. They're also likely to tax the Hell out of ammo. Any regular shooters would be wise to obtain their own re-loading equipment.
Geezer
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,752
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:24 am

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby MWB on Wed Apr 17, 2013 4:59 pm

shafnutz05 wrote:I disagree. I don't deny how ignorant many Americans are of the actions of their own government, but I think salt of the earth Americans are generally empathetic/kind. And I don't think it is necessarily deliberate ignorance.



Agree with this completely. Patton Oswalt's quoted post in the bombing thread summed it up well.
MWB
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,749
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 1:36 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Sarcastic on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:00 pm

shafnutz05 wrote:Whenever a couple white psychos decided to shoot up a movie theater and school, the federal government moved to restrict the rights of tens of millions of gun owners based on the actions of a few.


But, shaf, restrict doesn't mean take away. There is nothing wrong with expanding background checks and creating a national database and, at least, trying to prevent guns from falling into hands of wrong people through something like a private sale where any crazy bastard can easily purchase a weapon. Law-abiding citizens could still get their guns for whatever reason they need them, but there should be some better way of doing things than what we have had up to now. Gun owners could do themselves a huge favor in agreeing to some of these restrictions as it would actually allow them to keep their shooters and remove some of the criticism. Lack of background checks at private sales and events, for one, is a huge issue for me.
Sarcastic
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,336
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:49 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Sarcastic on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:02 pm

Geezer wrote:We also need backround checks on pressure cookers. I'll even go along with not selling pressure cookers at yard sales without a waiting period.


Gun is a weapon used for killing and a pressure cooker is used for cooking. By your logic, we need to do background check for people who buy pencils, as you can sharpen those up really well and kill people. Let's not get silly with the logic.
Sarcastic
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,336
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:49 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Shyster on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:04 pm

Here's the list of amendments the Senate is voting on:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... this-week/
So far, 1, 2, and 3 have failed to pass. Of the remaining ones, 9 is perhaps the only one that may have a chance of passing.
Shyster
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,754
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 4:32 pm
Location: Here and there

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Geezer on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:13 pm

Sarcastic wrote:
shafnutz05 wrote:Whenever a couple white psychos decided to shoot up a movie theater and school, the federal government moved to restrict the rights of tens of millions of gun owners based on the actions of a few.


But, shaf, restrict doesn't mean take away. There is nothing wrong with expanding background checks and creating a national database and, at least, trying to prevent guns from falling into hands of wrong people through something like a private sale where any crazy bastard can easily purchase a weapon. Law-abiding citizens could still get their guns for whatever reason they need them, but there should be some better way of doing things than what we have had up to now. Gun owners could do themselves a huge favor in agreeing to some of these restrictions as it would actually allow them to keep their shooters and remove some of the criticism. Lack of background checks at private sales and events, for one, is a huge issue for me.

Liberal politicians could do the country a great favor by focusing on criminals and deranged individuals. The high profile mass shootings at the theater, Virginia Tech, Arizona, and the grade school were all done by psychos. The highest number of shootings are being done by inner city blacks; these shootings are mainly handguns. Nothing that the politicians propose will address either problem.
thirty - forty years ago laws were made to outlaw "Saturday Night Specials". cheap .22 ,.25 caliber automatics that cost$10 or $20. That was going to cure big city gun crimes. Problem definitely not solved; it's a helluva lot more violent now than 40 years ago.
Geezer
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,752
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:24 am

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Geezer on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:17 pm

Sarcastic wrote:
Geezer wrote:We also need backround checks on pressure cookers. I'll even go along with not selling pressure cookers at yard sales without a waiting period.


Gun is a weapon used for killing and a pressure cooker is used for cooking. By your logic, we need to do background check for people who buy pencils, as you can sharpen those up really well and kill people. Let's not get silly with the logic.

Since pressure cookers were used in the Boston bombing it uses similar logic that the gun haters use. It was s a r c a s m.
Geezer
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,752
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:24 am

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby MWB on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:33 pm

Geezer wrote:Liberal politicians Everyone could do the country a great favor by focusing on criminals and deranged individuals.


Edited.

Some people focus on banning guns and some people focus on how people try to restrict guns, depending on view. If everyone just accepted that guns are here and aren't going anywhere then maybe we could focus on why people go nuts, how those people can be recognized at an early stage, and what might be an effective way to deal with it. Maybe we could also focus on why some people find it's easier to join a gang than it is to be a productive member of society and find an effective way to deal with that as well. Too many people just want to focus on guns, one way or the other though.
MWB
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,749
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 1:36 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Sarcastic on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:35 pm

Geezer wrote:
Sarcastic wrote:
Geezer wrote:We also need backround checks on pressure cookers. I'll even go along with not selling pressure cookers at yard sales without a waiting period.


Gun is a weapon used for killing and a pressure cooker is used for cooking. By your logic, we need to do background check for people who buy pencils, as you can sharpen those up really well and kill people. Let's not get silly with the logic.

Since pressure cookers were used in the Boston bombing it uses similar logic that the gun haters use. It was s a r c a s m.


I hope so. You get pretty pissed at these debates lately. :)
Sarcastic
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,336
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:49 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Geezer on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:42 pm

MWB wrote:
Geezer wrote:Liberal politicians Everyone could do the country a great favor by focusing on criminals and deranged individuals.


Edited.

Some people focus on banning guns and some people focus on how people try to restrict guns, depending on view. If everyone just accepted that guns are here and aren't going anywhere then maybe we could focus on why people go nuts, how those people can be recognized at an early stage, and what might be an effective way to deal with it. Maybe we could also focus on why some people find it's easier to join a gang than it is to be a productive member of society and find an effective way to deal with that as well. Too many people just want to focus on guns, one way or the other though.

Totally agree on the mental health need. I have no idea of how to solve the social ills and haven't seen any proposals or attempts that significantly improved inner city violence and crime.
Geezer
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,752
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:24 am

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Tico Rick on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:46 pm

MWB wrote:
Geezer wrote:Liberal politicians Everyone could do the country a great favor by focusing on criminals and deranged individuals.


Edited.

Some people focus on banning guns and some people focus on how people try to restrict guns, depending on view. If everyone just accepted that guns are here and aren't going anywhere then maybe we could focus on why people go nuts, how those people can be recognized at an early stage, and what might be an effective way to deal with it. Maybe we could also focus on why some people find it's easier to join a gang than it is to be a productive member of society and find an effective way to deal with that as well. Too many people just want to focus on guns, one way or the other though.

:thumb:
I feel the same way about the so-called war on drugs: all the government's efforts go to stopping the supply, without looking into why there is a demand.
Tico Rick
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,866
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 9:12 am
Location: Disco is dead.

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby JS© on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:49 pm

Obama saying that voting against the bill might hurt the individual politician's career and that this bill did not pass due to politics.

Yeah, that's been the story with the Senate for years. It's probably been the same way that certain things have passed. Welcome to politics, Obama.

This is why the country is in the shape that it's in.
JS©
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 21,369
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 11:52 am
Location: hello guv'nor

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Sarcastic on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:52 pm

Geezer wrote:
Sarcastic wrote:
shafnutz05 wrote:Whenever a couple white psychos decided to shoot up a movie theater and school, the federal government moved to restrict the rights of tens of millions of gun owners based on the actions of a few.


But, shaf, restrict doesn't mean take away. There is nothing wrong with expanding background checks and creating a national database and, at least, trying to prevent guns from falling into hands of wrong people through something like a private sale where any crazy bastard can easily purchase a weapon. Law-abiding citizens could still get their guns for whatever reason they need them, but there should be some better way of doing things than what we have had up to now. Gun owners could do themselves a huge favor in agreeing to some of these restrictions as it would actually allow them to keep their shooters and remove some of the criticism. Lack of background checks at private sales and events, for one, is a huge issue for me.

Liberal politicians could do the country a great favor by focusing on criminals and deranged individuals. The high profile mass shootings at the theater, Virginia Tech, Arizona, and the grade school were all done by psychos. The highest number of shootings are being done by inner city blacks; these shootings are mainly handguns. Nothing that the politicians propose will address either problem.
thirty - forty years ago laws were made to outlaw "Saturday Night Specials". cheap .22 ,.25 caliber automatics that cost$10 or $20. That was going to cure big city gun crimes. Problem definitely not solved; it's a helluva lot more violent now than 40 years ago.


We will always have psychotic people around and there is not much the government can do about it. Unless you want to provide mental evaluations to every individual in the country, at taxpayers' expense? And how do you focus more on criminals... what exactly do you do?

Making sure only the right people get can get weapons is one way to help the problem and, as I said, it does not have to affect regular people. I do believe that every purchased gun should be recorded in a national database. I don't see anything wrong with that. Maybe if we did that and also made sure each weapon produced is also recorded, maybe there wouldn't be so many on the black market.

But I guess that wouldn't satisfy some gun owners because they feel there is a people vs government war coming, or the lobby because they want sales to remain high for maximum profit.

There is a way to satisfy both sides, if they only wanted to compromise somewhat. The pro-gun side, imo, is too combative in this regard.
Sarcastic
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,336
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:49 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby tifosi77 on Wed Apr 17, 2013 6:06 pm

Geezer wrote:Problem definitely not solved; it's a helluva lot more violent now than 40 years ago.

While I don't disagree with the folly of banning guns, it is not more violent now than 40 years ago, never mind a helluva lot. In fact, nationally it's quite a lot less. The violent crime rate per 1,000 population is 15 today, versus nearly 48 in 1973. And in the oft-cited metropolis of Chicago, there were nearly 1,000 murders in 1974; last year, the number was right around 500.
tifosi77
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 14,084
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:33 pm
Location: White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Geezer on Wed Apr 17, 2013 6:11 pm

Sarcastic wrote:
Geezer wrote:
Sarcastic wrote:
shafnutz05 wrote:Whenever a couple white psychos decided to shoot up a movie theater and school, the federal government moved to restrict the rights of tens of millions of gun owners based on the actions of a few.


But, shaf, restrict doesn't mean take away. There is nothing wrong with expanding background checks and creating a national database and, at least, trying to prevent guns from falling into hands of wrong people through something like a private sale where any crazy bastard can easily purchase a weapon. Law-abiding citizens could still get their guns for whatever reason they need them, but there should be some better way of doing things than what we have had up to now. Gun owners could do themselves a huge favor in agreeing to some of these restrictions as it would actually allow them to keep their shooters and remove some of the criticism. Lack of background checks at private sales and events, for one, is a huge issue for me.

Liberal politicians could do the country a great favor by focusing on criminals and deranged individuals. The high profile mass shootings at the theater, Virginia Tech, Arizona, and the grade school were all done by psychos. The highest number of shootings are being done by inner city blacks; these shootings are mainly handguns. Nothing that the politicians propose will address either problem.
thirty - forty years ago laws were made to outlaw "Saturday Night Specials". cheap .22 ,.25 caliber automatics that cost$10 or $20. That was going to cure big city gun crimes. Problem definitely not solved; it's a helluva lot more violent now than 40 years ago.


We will always have psychotic people around and there is not much the government can do about it. Unless you want to provide mental evaluations to every individual in the country, at taxpayers' expense? And how do you focus more on criminals... what exactly do you do?

Making sure only the right people get can get weapons is one way to help the problem and, as I said, it does not have to affect regular people. I do believe that every purchased gun should be recorded in a national database. I don't see anything wrong with that. Maybe if we did that and also made sure each weapon produced is also recorded, maybe there wouldn't be so many on the black market.

But I guess that wouldn't satisfy some gun owners because they feel there is a people vs government war coming, or the lobby because they want sales to remain high for maximum profit.

There is a way to satisfy both sides, if they only wanted to compromise somewhat. The pro-gun side, imo, is too combative in this regard.

No perfect answers to either of those , but I think there are steps that could be taken. As far as violent criminals it makes sense to put criminals who commit a crime with a gun or own a gun illegally away for a long time as in decades. With prisons overcrowded other crimes need to be de-emphasized. The only answer would seem to be to drastically reduce the numbers in jail for drug crimes. The "war on drugs" is not winnable and may not even make sense from an individual rights standpont.
The mental illness issue is much more dicey. Individual rights need to be balanced against people's rights to be protected from the violently mentally ill. In many states a person can't be committed for evaluation until he harms someone. It's a catch 22 that prevents even family members from getting help for even the obviously sick people. t
Geezer
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,752
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:24 am

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby tifosi77 on Wed Apr 17, 2013 6:34 pm

Sarcastic wrote:Making sure only the right people get can get weapons is one way to help the problem and, as I said, it does not have to affect regular people.

The problem with this line of argument is that it is entirely dependent upon the presumption that legal purchasers of firearms are then turning around and using them to commit crimes. That's just not the case.

I do personally support the expansion of background checks to cover all handgun sales. But not because I think it will have any sort of deterrent effect on crime.

Sarcastic wrote:I do believe that every purchased gun should be recorded in a national database. I don't see anything wrong with that.

When the ACLU is sounding the alarm bells about potential violations of civil liberties and privacy rights in a gun control measure, there is something amiss with the measure.

Sarcastic wrote:The pro-gun side, imo, is too combative in this regard.

As has frequently been pointed out, that's largely a by-product of being asked to surrender a measure of individual liberty.

Imagine: "There have been far too many riots incited by hate speech of late. We should curtail the speech rights of everyone to make sure this number is reduced." That doesn't seem..... logical, does it?
tifosi77
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 14,084
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:33 pm
Location: White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby MRandall25 on Wed Apr 17, 2013 6:39 pm

Punishing all gun owners because of the actions of the equivalent of .01% of all gun owners is the reason why people are, as you say, "combative".

Not counting the fact that that .01% is probably even less, considering the majority of gun deaths are caused by illegally owned arms.
MRandall25
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 19,687
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2011 6:11 pm
Location: BOBROVSKY!!!

PreviousNext

Return to NHR

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


e-mail