Guns, Guns, Guns.
POSTED BY: FREMDFIRMA
UPDATED: Monday, June 30, 2025 05:56
VIEWED: 46757
PAGE 23 of 44
I think Anthony has been extremely rational, and prolly better at communicating the essentials than anyone else mighta been.
You just don't want to HEAR it.
Which is fine.
I wanted to hold y'all up a minute, TRY to get you to stop and think, and maybe point out the slippery little slope underneath that first little "just one regulation" game - kinda like they hedged in Abortion under one little reg, and another, and another, and another, and another - a practice many of you are bloody well aware of, and yet seem to be advocating here.
And you could at least admit it.
I don't blame most of you for this, as your intentions are good - but the road to hell is paved with those, and there ARE jackboots waiting eagerly for folks like you to innocently lay down the first card of that encroachment so that they can spam the deck after.
Therefore I felt it morally necessary to point this out, to revoke that ignorance, to point out the logical consequences, but if you wish to engage in some kind of magical thinking and assumption of pure motives and no one is eeeever going to misuse this gimme you're handing out, well, okay, sure, right...
What's left to talk about ?
-Frem
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You think if we allow a ban on military grade guns, they'll find a way to make more ordinary guns fall into that category? Or maybe they'll ram through a mandatory gun insurance like with cars? Ridiculous gun registration fees?
Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
I wanted to hold y'all up a minute, TRY to get you to stop and think, and maybe point out the slippery little slope underneath that first little "just one regulation" game
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
The last time, you left for a long, long while after a particularly prolonged pro-gun rant. (Yes, it was a rant.)
Hello,
I'm sorry you feel that I ranted.
I went away because I felt personally insulted, and rather than exchange angry, hurtful words, I decided to cool off and let the matter go. I was personally and vulgarly insulted in this thread, too, but I was better prepared for it this time. I have learned that the rational thinkers in the gun control crowd sometimes lose emotional control while explaining to me how emotionally driven I am.
Given that you think I have not been trying to find accommodation with those on the other side of this issue, I'm at a loss. I have invested a great deal of time and effort into reaching accommodation and common ground. Regardless, I am viewed as immovable and unreasonable. Or to be precise, "unbalanced." Thank you, Signy.
As for not being able to put my feet into someone else's shoes... I find this to be a distinct failing of my opponents, and especially those who advocate sweeping government power without wondering about its effect on people who are not them.
I will bow out of this now, because after what I considered a formidable effort to find common ground, I have been met with this unfortunate judgment.
--Anthony
Note to Self:
Raptor - woman testifying about birth control is a slut (the term applies.)
Context: http://tinyurl.com/d6ozfej
Six - Wow, isn't Niki quite the CUNT? And, yes, I spell that in all caps....
http://tinyurl.com/bdjgbpe
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Context: http://tinyurl.com/afve3r9
“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -T. S. Szasz
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by ANTHONYT:
This makes no sense to me. Any registered firearms are registered, so the firearms can be checked to be sure they belong to me if they surface in connection to a crime. I need no permit for this.
The purpose of the permit would be so that you can own the weapons, and all firearms should be registered. Don't what a physical permit. That is fine, the police could use a searchable data base.
Quote:
Originally posted by ANTHONYT:If there is going to be a check conducted at the time of purchase, then the clerk needs no permit and certainly no list of my weapons. He is checking to see if I can buy 500 rounds of .380 ACP. The answer is Yes or No. I need no permit for this, and certainly no permit that lists my firearms.
I was envisioning more a card like a driver license that a clerk could scan to see if you could buy the ammo.
Quote:
Originally posted by ANTHONYT:Oh... I see you are proposing a system that is in some ways less secure than the present one. Nobody ever checks to see if the permit is valid. Nobody will ever know if my permit is revoked because they are not doing checks. Carry on.
No, it would be checked each time. A permit number or scannable permit card would be easier than going by name and would lean to less mistakes.
Quote:
Originally posted by ANTHONYT:In most states you don't need a permit to own a pistol. That is rare. You keep insisting on this permit and it is not only unnecessary but it is a bad idea.
Your right, you just need one to carry it in most states. So I guess if you want to buy a pistol and simply leave it at home that is good for you.
If a person needs to get a license to drive you should damn well need the like to own a gun.
Quote:
Originally posted by ANTHONYT:Or better yet, reject this terrible proposal. Tracking gun owners and people diagnosed with mental health issues, seeing who is living with whom, subtracting rights when the wrong people live together...
I think you're better off just suspending one or more Constitutional amendments. This stuff is all terrible. Just Terrible.
I can not find common ground with you on this issue if this is what you think is valid and just.
Fine, but I will vote and support ideas like this. As I said if you don't want to be on a database listing your guns don't buy any. They are not required for you to live your life.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
TONY- I was hoping we could all (not just you) take a breather and maybe come back to this is a little while. Yes, you have been insulted, and I feel sorry for that.
FREM.... the slippery slope argument? Really??? When we are facing a tragedy, and have actually been bleeding to death over the years due to gun violence, and I specifically asked that we look at this and be REALISTIC, and see whether or not our vaunted ideologies are IN FACT producing the desired results, you climb up on the slippery slope argument? Hate to say it, but that sounds just like rappy's Saddam had WMD and they might have gone to Syria. When you have to point to imaginary revolutions as a counter to the blood flowing in the classrooms and the streets, then you have slipped out of the real world and into someplace else.
I'd like to bring this argument back to REAL costs and REAL benefits, if at all possible.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Anthony, I, too, think you have made a serious effort at compromise in the past couple of pages. One person's opinion doesn't reflect all of us, please bear that in mind. For myself, I've been surprised you would accept as MANY accommodations as you have expressed you would.
Frem, I let you out of this discussion because, while I understand where your paranoia comes from, I don't think it is logical, so I won't respond to the things you wrote. Let's just agree to disagree.
Anthony:Quote:
I could never understand how one could be concerned about inherently dangerous weapons and then want over half a million people to be able to run around with them.
We're back to that "we should have as many and the same weapons as the police". Sorry, that argument fails on it's face for me. It's the police's JOB to keep the peace--and yeah, there are bad ones, there are in every facet of life. But the vast majority of them are well-trained people who are good at their job, not "jackboots". In my opinion, firepower which enables them to overpower robbers, etc., is necessary for them to have the upper hand at dealing with crime. We'll have to agree to disagree.Quote:
But does that mean you want to ban all semiautomatic weapons, or only those with certain features?
All semi-autos and autos. It is the ability to fire in rapid sequence which has nothing to do with hunting, nor does it particularly have anything to do with self-defense, only with killing as many as possible in the shortest time possible.
I didn't know automatic weapons were legal, but apparently they are, tho' difficult to own. That shocks the hell out of me.Quote:
It is legal to own an automatic weapon, but it’s not easy. Automatic weapons are "Class III" weapons, and are titled much like cars are. Most firearms dealers do not have a Class III FFL. The title transfer fee is hundreds of dollars, and you need written permission from your local police chief or county sheriff.
Individuals not otherwise prohibited by Federal, State, or local law may lawfully acquire an NFA firearm in one of three ways:
1. A registered owner of an NFA firearm may apply to ATF for approval to transfer the firearm to another person residing in the same State or to a Federal firearms licensee in another State;
2. An individual may apply to ATF for approval to make and register an NFA firearm (except for a machine-gun); or
3. An individual may inherit a lawfully registered NFA firearm. http://askville.amazon.com/legal-citizen-posess-automatic-rifle-M16/An
swerViewer.do?requestId=2723819
I did not know that was the case. I am DEFINITELY against that!!! I don't know, but are police even allowed automatic weapons??
I didn't know you had to go to a dealer to pick up a gun purchased through the internet. In that case, I withdraw my exception.
I'm glad to hear you're in favor of closing the gun-sale loophole--no, I didn't remember; there are so many ins and outs of this issue and we've discussed it so many times and at such length, I tend to forget a lot.
As far as I'm concerned, "assault weapon" = anything automatic or semi-automatic. There is no logical reason for people to own either of those, either for hunting or self-defense. I do remember all the bullshit in one discussion about being able to defend oneself with a semi-auto, but the reasons put forth were bullshit, in my estimation.
Please don't let one person reflect everyone's opinion of you, Anthony. While I do agree with Sig on some of her points, I don't agree with how she's put them forward. But you of all people MUST know that the gun issue, just like religion and politics, makes people more emotional--ON BOTH SIDES--than other issues. I regret how you've been treated in this thread too, but I know from personal experience that a sense of frustration, perhaps
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
I, for one, do appreciate your efforts, especially as they have changed my mind about your adamancy about your rights. While I still believe you are overly-sensitive to anything restricting any right, I'm gratified to know my impression was wrong about just HOW overly-sensitive you are.
Is... that a bad thing?
I mean, if you're gonna argue about something, shouldn't you argue if you think your rights are being taken away? I've not sure where sensitivity or over-sensitivity comes in.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hey Frem,
Seriously. Just you and me and the water cooler: there is no slippery slope here, because no one is actually gonna take your guns away. Sure, all manner of heartbroken and well-intentioned-but-naive citizens may want to ban guns, but you and I know that would be an impossible task in this country. You know it would take open warfare, ongoing raids on civilian homes to seize every gun. And you yourself have noted, and I think quite rightly, the excremely dangerous and profitable black market INCREASE in guns that would ensue.
After the five alarm disaster that has been the War on Drugs, do you seriously imagine that our ever-practical President is gonna launch a sure to be even more disasterous War on Guns? Let's be frank: the War on Drugs has been allowed to continue because it has from its inception targeted minorities whom most people don't care a lick about. But a War on Guns would be a war on white people. You REALLY think President Obama is gonna go there???
Our nation, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, is married to the gun. Those who wish to outlaw guns in this country have no idea what they're talking about, do they?
No amount of regulation on guns in this country, short of open warfare with its citizenry is gonna accomplish a prohibition on guns. Do you honestly think that the folk who naively call for a gun ban now, would stand for our government fighting a war on its citizens for their guns?
Look: let's be real. A lot of the public sentiment on this issue right now is just that: sentimental. Don't you know that THE MOMENT our government opens fire on ordinary white citizens whose only crime is the posession of guns, the sentimental American people would be outraged???
Anarchists gotta stop thinking like it's 1914. As a tool to ensure freedom in the 21st century, the computer has eclipsed the gun. How much shootin' has Julian Assange done? All this noise and whatever comes down in terms of actual gun legislation ain't gonna change the game. The game's been changed for a long time now.
As far as I can tell, you and Anthony are tilting at windmills here.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
We're back to that "we should have as many and the same weapons as the police". Sorry, that argument fails on it's face for me. It's the police's JOB to keep the peace--and yeah, there are bad ones, there are in every facet of life. But the vast majority of them are well-trained people who are good at their job, not "jackboots". In my opinion, firepower which enables them to overpower robbers, etc., is necessary for them to have the upper hand at dealing with crime. We'll have to agree to disagree.
I'm not sure how armed regular police are in the US. I think the police here are now armed with semi automatic pistols. I am not happy about them being armed. Personally I prefer the idea of general police not being armed with guns, and having specialist armed squads to deal with armed situations, much like the English model.
Not sure if that would work in the US where there is so many weapons around, and not likely to be reduced significantly even if some restrictions apply. But I think Anthony does have a point about having some equity between police weapons and public weapons. Anthony, I wonder if that applies to the military as well in your view?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
Niki- You have said that no amount of training should allow an exception to the ban. Then you say that police have the training needed to use banned weapons. You say that the banned weapons have no self defense value, and then say that police need the weapons to overcome robbers. There is a disconnect here.
Magons - It's nice that someone else understands my feelings. I understand that the military must contend with threats that demand arms superiority. That's fine, as long as no military forces are ever used against the American people and they never take these prohibited weapons into civilian areas. I make a distinction between the constabulary and the military, both in allowed arms and allowed duties.
If this is a public health/public safety issue, as is often argued, then you do not want half a million policemen running around with weapons which are deemed so dangerous to the public that a curtailing of Constitutional rights is seen to be warranted.
That's about all I have to add to my argument, which I add out of respect to those who have respected me.
--Anthony
Note to Self:
Raptor - woman testifying about birth control is a slut (the term applies.)
Context: http://tinyurl.com/d6ozfej
Six - Wow, isn't Niki quite the CUNT? And, yes, I spell that in all caps....
http://tinyurl.com/bdjgbpe
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Context: http://tinyurl.com/afve3r9
“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -T. S. Szasz
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME