|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67614
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Reflexx wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | Reflexx wrote:
| Quote: | | If you punish someone by taking away a right, then yes, you are presuming them guilty of something. |
They're not being punished. They're being asked to wait until they've been cleared to fly and buy. No right has been taken away. I call it a inconvenience You have to scramble some eggs to make a omelet. |
You're asking them to wait indefinitely. How long is "as long as it takes"? Days? Weeks? Months? Years?
The way it's written, the people would have to prove why they shouldn't be on the list. They have to prove their innocence.
You may see it as an inconvenience, but it is a Constitutional right that they are being denied. |
Again, they're rights aren't being denied. This isn't about rights, it's about guns.
As stated prior, it's a new undertaking, it's has kinks that have to be ironed out. |
Umm... the way they want to do it is about rights.
You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
No rights have been taken. Where is it written when you buy a gun you have the right to get it right away?
Mistakes have been and will be made. It' goes with the territory. I'd rather a person be inconvenienced by no fly, no buy if it save lives. |
I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
I value life. A life taken can't be restored. A right delayed, a inconvenience, is still in place. I still stand this is not about rights it's about guns taking lives.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67614
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 10:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | Reflexx wrote:
| Quote: | | If you punish someone by taking away a right, then yes, you are presuming them guilty of something. |
They're not being punished. They're being asked to wait until they've been cleared to fly and buy. No right has been taken away. You have to scramble some eggs to make a omelet. |
"Please wait for 5 years good sir, even though it was our bad your name made it to this list." |
That's an exaggeration but if one life is saved the inconvenience is palatable.
I'm sure something will be done to eliminate the long wait. It's a new program. It has kinks. |
Nothing will be done to eliminate the 5 year thing because Feinstein specifically wrote that in to her amendment. They want it. The media isn't reporting it but I linked the senate.gov bill back in this thread and it's clear as day. |
If you don't mind re-link the thread. |
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=A4069E82-C605-4E13-BF2C-F1AEC32C3767&SK=EECCE128D066921838CE297714934231 |
That looks like a draft. Was it ratified?
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Last edited by jodeke on Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:01 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17245
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jodeke wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | Reflexx wrote:
| Quote: | | If you punish someone by taking away a right, then yes, you are presuming them guilty of something. |
They're not being punished. They're being asked to wait until they've been cleared to fly and buy. No right has been taken away. You have to scramble some eggs to make a omelet. |
"Please wait for 5 years good sir, even though it was our bad your name made it to this list." |
That's an exaggeration but if one life is saved the inconvenience is palatable.
I'm sure something will be done to eliminate the long wait. It's a new program. It has kinks. |
Nothing will be done to eliminate the 5 year thing because Feinstein specifically wrote that in to her amendment. They want it. The media isn't reporting it but I linked the senate.gov bill back in this thread and it's clear as day. |
If you don't mind re-link the thread. |
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=A4069E82-C605-4E13-BF2C-F1AEC32C3767&SK=EECCE128D066921838CE297714934231 |
That looks like a draft. Was it adopted? |
It's what they're trying to vote on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67614
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | Reflexx wrote:
| Quote: | | If you punish someone by taking away a right, then yes, you are presuming them guilty of something. |
They're not being punished. They're being asked to wait until they've been cleared to fly and buy. No right has been taken away. You have to scramble some eggs to make a omelet. |
"Please wait for 5 years good sir, even though it was our bad your name made it to this list." |
That's an exaggeration but if one life is saved the inconvenience is palatable.
I'm sure something will be done to eliminate the long wait. It's a new program. It has kinks. |
Nothing will be done to eliminate the 5 year thing because Feinstein specifically wrote that in to her amendment. They want it. The media isn't reporting it but I linked the senate.gov bill back in this thread and it's clear as day. |
If you don't mind re-link the thread. |
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=A4069E82-C605-4E13-BF2C-F1AEC32C3767&SK=EECCE128D066921838CE297714934231 |
That looks like a draft. Was it adopted? |
It's what they're trying to vote on. |
If that's the case something can be done to eliminate the long wait.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 2:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jodeke wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | Reflexx wrote:
| Quote: | | If you punish someone by taking away a right, then yes, you are presuming them guilty of something. |
They're not being punished. They're being asked to wait until they've been cleared to fly and buy. No right has been taken away. I call it a inconvenience You have to scramble some eggs to make a omelet. |
You're asking them to wait indefinitely. How long is "as long as it takes"? Days? Weeks? Months? Years?
The way it's written, the people would have to prove why they shouldn't be on the list. They have to prove their innocence.
You may see it as an inconvenience, but it is a Constitutional right that they are being denied. |
Again, they're rights aren't being denied. This isn't about rights, it's about guns.
As stated prior, it's a new undertaking, it's has kinks that have to be ironed out. |
Umm... the way they want to do it is about rights.
You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
No rights have been taken. Where is it written when you buy a gun you have the right to get it right away?
Mistakes have been and will be made. It' goes with the territory. I'd rather a person be inconvenienced by no fly, no buy if it save lives. |
I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
I value life. A life taken can't be restored. A right delayed, a inconvenience, is still in place. I still stand this is not about rights it's about guns taking lives. |
In the name of security you're willing to trample on freedoms of the innocent without due process. Got it.
By that logic, we should eliminate freedom and have the government protect everyone from everything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakerjoshua
Franchise Player
Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 11277
Location: Bay Area
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 8:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | You're asking them to wait indefinitely. |
No one ever said that, you made it up to try and support your argument.
| Quote: | | You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
The 2nd amendment mentions nothing of waiting periods and never mentions specific weapons or even restrictions on such weapons, so this is another thing you've invented.
| Quote: | | I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
What is a "natural right" exactly? Are you saying that someone has an innate god given right to walk into a gun store and walk out with an AR15 the same day without any regulation?
| Quote: | | In the name of security you're willing to trample on freedoms of the innocent without due process. Got it. |
Again, all these "rights" you're speaking of have been invented by you to support a position that very few Americans agree with.
Let me put it to you this way, and I know it's going to very, very difficult for you to digest. We as a society could vote to restrict ALL firearm sales to the point that EVERYONE would have to have a special licence, pass several training courses and wait months or years to obtain said firearm and we still would not be violating the 2nd amendment as long as there remains some legal pathway to ownership. That's what living in a democracy is. No matter what the minority opinion is if the majority decides it's going to be that way, that's the way it's going to be. You can invent as many "rights" as you want but this is the reality.
The Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate currently so these type of regulations are a non-starter for the moment. However, the time IS indeed coming when that will not be the case, brace yourself as you're going to in for a rude awakening when the masses speak out and the left regains control of the House and Senate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17245
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakerjoshua wrote: | | Quote: | | You're asking them to wait indefinitely. |
No one ever said that, you made it up to try and support your argument.
| Quote: | | You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
The 2nd amendment mentions nothing of waiting periods and never mentions specific weapons or even restrictions on such weapons, so this is another thing you've invented.
| Quote: | | I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
What is a "natural right" exactly? Are you saying that someone has an innate god given right to walk into a gun store and walk out with an AR15 the same day without any regulation?
| Quote: | | In the name of security you're willing to trample on freedoms of the innocent without due process. Got it. |
Again, all these "rights" you're speaking of have been invented by you to support a position that very few Americans agree with.
Let me put it to you this way, and I know it's going to very, very difficult for you to digest. We as a society could vote to restrict ALL firearm sales to the point that EVERYONE would have to have a special licence, pass several training courses and wait months or years to obtain said firearm and we still would not be violating the 2nd amendment as long as there remains some legal pathway to ownership. That's what living in a democracy is. No matter what the minority opinion is if the majority decides it's going to be that way, that's the way it's going to be. You can invent as many "rights" as you want but this is the reality.
The Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate currently so these type of regulations are a non-starter for the moment. However, the time IS indeed coming when that will not be the case, brace yourself as you're going to in for a rude awakening when the masses speak out and the left regains control of the House and Senate. |
Keep repeating that line.
| Quote: | A majority of Americans oppose banning assault weapons for the first time in more than 20 years of ABC News/Washington Post polls, with the public expressing vast doubt that the authorities can prevent “lone wolf” terrorist attacks and a substantial sense that armed citizens can help.
Just 45 percent in this national survey favor an assault weapons ban, down 11 percentage points from an ABC/Post poll in 2013 and down from a peak of 80 percent in 1994. Fifty-three percent oppose such a ban, the most on record.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/now-oppose-assault-weapons-ban-doubts-stopping-lone/story?id=35778846 |
Also, about your minority/majority democracy comment, that's never been a good argument in my book. For much of this country's history, and even recently, the majority decided that minorities and those different didn't deserve the same rights as others. Just because democracy decided that didn't mean it was right.
Last edited by DuncanIdaho on Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:21 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakerjoshua wrote: | | Quote: | | You're asking them to wait indefinitely. |
No one ever said that, you made it up to try and support your argument.
| Quote: | | You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
The 2nd amendment mentions nothing of waiting periods and never mentions specific weapons or even restrictions on such weapons, so this is another thing you've invented.
| Quote: | | I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
What is a "natural right" exactly? Are you saying that someone has an innate god given right to walk into a gun store and walk out with an AR15 the same day without any regulation?
| Quote: | | In the name of security you're willing to trample on freedoms of the innocent without due process. Got it. |
Again, all these "rights" you're speaking of have been invented by you to support a position that very few Americans agree with.
Let me put it to you this way, and I know it's going to very, very difficult for you to digest. We as a society could vote to restrict ALL firearm sales to the point that EVERYONE would have to have a special licence, pass several training courses and wait months or years to obtain said firearm and we still would not be violating the 2nd amendment as long as there remains some legal pathway to ownership. That's what living in a democracy is. No matter what the minority opinion is if the majority decides it's going to be that way, that's the way it's going to be. You can invent as many "rights" as you want but this is the reality.
The Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate currently so these type of regulations are a non-starter for the moment. However, the time IS indeed coming when that will not be the case, brace yourself as you're going to in for a rude awakening when the masses speak out and the left regains control of the House and Senate. |
All of that would still apply equally to all citizens and whether it villages the 2nd Amendment would be Setyembre by the Supreme Court. It still would not deny people rights for simply being on a list that they were our on without due process. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakerjoshua
Franchise Player
Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 11277
Location: Bay Area
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | Quote: | | You're asking them to wait indefinitely. |
No one ever said that, you made it up to try and support your argument.
| Quote: | | You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
The 2nd amendment mentions nothing of waiting periods and never mentions specific weapons or even restrictions on such weapons, so this is another thing you've invented.
| Quote: | | I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
What is a "natural right" exactly? Are you saying that someone has an innate god given right to walk into a gun store and walk out with an AR15 the same day without any regulation?
| Quote: | | In the name of security you're willing to trample on freedoms of the innocent without due process. Got it. |
Again, all these "rights" you're speaking of have been invented by you to support a position that very few Americans agree with.
Let me put it to you this way, and I know it's going to very, very difficult for you to digest. We as a society could vote to restrict ALL firearm sales to the point that EVERYONE would have to have a special licence, pass several training courses and wait months or years to obtain said firearm and we still would not be violating the 2nd amendment as long as there remains some legal pathway to ownership. That's what living in a democracy is. No matter what the minority opinion is if the majority decides it's going to be that way, that's the way it's going to be. You can invent as many "rights" as you want but this is the reality.
The Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate currently so these type of regulations are a non-starter for the moment. However, the time IS indeed coming when that will not be the case, brace yourself as you're going to in for a rude awakening when the masses speak out and the left regains control of the House and Senate. |
Keep repeating that line.
| Quote: | A majority of Americans oppose banning assault weapons for the first time in more than 20 years of ABC News/Washington Post polls, with the public expressing vast doubt that the authorities can prevent “lone wolf” terrorist attacks and a substantial sense that armed citizens can help.
Just 45 percent in this national survey favor an assault weapons ban, down 11 percentage points from an ABC/Post poll in 2013 and down from a peak of 80 percent in 1994. Fifty-three percent oppose such a ban, the most on record.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/now-oppose-assault-weapons-ban-doubts-stopping-lone/story?id=35778846 |
|
Well, lets take a macro view and see if that opinion holds true.
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm
Last edited by lakerjoshua on Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:27 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17245
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | Quote: | | You're asking them to wait indefinitely. |
No one ever said that, you made it up to try and support your argument.
| Quote: | | You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
The 2nd amendment mentions nothing of waiting periods and never mentions specific weapons or even restrictions on such weapons, so this is another thing you've invented.
| Quote: | | I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
What is a "natural right" exactly? Are you saying that someone has an innate god given right to walk into a gun store and walk out with an AR15 the same day without any regulation?
| Quote: | | In the name of security you're willing to trample on freedoms of the innocent without due process. Got it. |
Again, all these "rights" you're speaking of have been invented by you to support a position that very few Americans agree with.
Let me put it to you this way, and I know it's going to very, very difficult for you to digest. We as a society could vote to restrict ALL firearm sales to the point that EVERYONE would have to have a special licence, pass several training courses and wait months or years to obtain said firearm and we still would not be violating the 2nd amendment as long as there remains some legal pathway to ownership. That's what living in a democracy is. No matter what the minority opinion is if the majority decides it's going to be that way, that's the way it's going to be. You can invent as many "rights" as you want but this is the reality.
The Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate currently so these type of regulations are a non-starter for the moment. However, the time IS indeed coming when that will not be the case, brace yourself as you're going to in for a rude awakening when the masses speak out and the left regains control of the House and Senate. |
Keep repeating that line.
| Quote: | A majority of Americans oppose banning assault weapons for the first time in more than 20 years of ABC News/Washington Post polls, with the public expressing vast doubt that the authorities can prevent “lone wolf” terrorist attacks and a substantial sense that armed citizens can help.
Just 45 percent in this national survey favor an assault weapons ban, down 11 percentage points from an ABC/Post poll in 2013 and down from a peak of 80 percent in 1994. Fifty-three percent oppose such a ban, the most on record.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/now-oppose-assault-weapons-ban-doubts-stopping-lone/story?id=35778846 |
|
Well, lets take a macro view and see if that opinion holds true.
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm |
Did you read your link? There's opinions all over the place there on a multitude of polling subjects. We can each use those numbers to spin whatever narrative we want. This link doesn't do anything to advance either yours or my position.
I could pull the numbers that say voters favor stricter enforcement to stricter control laws by 49% to 32% and I'd be correct.
Last edited by DuncanIdaho on Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:27 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakerjoshua
Franchise Player
Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 11277
Location: Bay Area
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | Quote: | | You're asking them to wait indefinitely. |
No one ever said that, you made it up to try and support your argument.
| Quote: | | You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
The 2nd amendment mentions nothing of waiting periods and never mentions specific weapons or even restrictions on such weapons, so this is another thing you've invented.
| Quote: | | I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
What is a "natural right" exactly? Are you saying that someone has an innate god given right to walk into a gun store and walk out with an AR15 the same day without any regulation?
| Quote: | | In the name of security you're willing to trample on freedoms of the innocent without due process. Got it. |
Again, all these "rights" you're speaking of have been invented by you to support a position that very few Americans agree with.
Let me put it to you this way, and I know it's going to very, very difficult for you to digest. We as a society could vote to restrict ALL firearm sales to the point that EVERYONE would have to have a special licence, pass several training courses and wait months or years to obtain said firearm and we still would not be violating the 2nd amendment as long as there remains some legal pathway to ownership. That's what living in a democracy is. No matter what the minority opinion is if the majority decides it's going to be that way, that's the way it's going to be. You can invent as many "rights" as you want but this is the reality.
The Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate currently so these type of regulations are a non-starter for the moment. However, the time IS indeed coming when that will not be the case, brace yourself as you're going to in for a rude awakening when the masses speak out and the left regains control of the House and Senate. |
Keep repeating that line.
| Quote: | A majority of Americans oppose banning assault weapons for the first time in more than 20 years of ABC News/Washington Post polls, with the public expressing vast doubt that the authorities can prevent “lone wolf” terrorist attacks and a substantial sense that armed citizens can help.
Just 45 percent in this national survey favor an assault weapons ban, down 11 percentage points from an ABC/Post poll in 2013 and down from a peak of 80 percent in 1994. Fifty-three percent oppose such a ban, the most on record.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/now-oppose-assault-weapons-ban-doubts-stopping-lone/story?id=35778846 |
|
Well, lets take a macro view and see if that opinion holds true.
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm |
Did you read your link? There's opinions all over the place there on a multitude of polling subjects. We can each use those numbers to spin whatever narrative we want. This link doesn't do anything to advance either yours or my position. |
Actually, it does. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17245
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | Quote: | | You're asking them to wait indefinitely. |
No one ever said that, you made it up to try and support your argument.
| Quote: | | You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
The 2nd amendment mentions nothing of waiting periods and never mentions specific weapons or even restrictions on such weapons, so this is another thing you've invented.
| Quote: | | I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
What is a "natural right" exactly? Are you saying that someone has an innate god given right to walk into a gun store and walk out with an AR15 the same day without any regulation?
| Quote: | | In the name of security you're willing to trample on freedoms of the innocent without due process. Got it. |
Again, all these "rights" you're speaking of have been invented by you to support a position that very few Americans agree with.
Let me put it to you this way, and I know it's going to very, very difficult for you to digest. We as a society could vote to restrict ALL firearm sales to the point that EVERYONE would have to have a special licence, pass several training courses and wait months or years to obtain said firearm and we still would not be violating the 2nd amendment as long as there remains some legal pathway to ownership. That's what living in a democracy is. No matter what the minority opinion is if the majority decides it's going to be that way, that's the way it's going to be. You can invent as many "rights" as you want but this is the reality.
The Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate currently so these type of regulations are a non-starter for the moment. However, the time IS indeed coming when that will not be the case, brace yourself as you're going to in for a rude awakening when the masses speak out and the left regains control of the House and Senate. |
Keep repeating that line.
| Quote: | A majority of Americans oppose banning assault weapons for the first time in more than 20 years of ABC News/Washington Post polls, with the public expressing vast doubt that the authorities can prevent “lone wolf” terrorist attacks and a substantial sense that armed citizens can help.
Just 45 percent in this national survey favor an assault weapons ban, down 11 percentage points from an ABC/Post poll in 2013 and down from a peak of 80 percent in 1994. Fifty-three percent oppose such a ban, the most on record.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/now-oppose-assault-weapons-ban-doubts-stopping-lone/story?id=35778846 |
|
Well, lets take a macro view and see if that opinion holds true.
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm |
Did you read your link? There's opinions all over the place there on a multitude of polling subjects. We can each use those numbers to spin whatever narrative we want. This link doesn't do anything to advance either yours or my position. |
Actually, it does. |
No, it doesn't. So the CNN poll is better than a ABC/Washington Post poll? Maybe? who knows.
Last edited by DuncanIdaho on Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:34 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakerjoshua
Franchise Player
Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 11277
Location: Bay Area
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | Quote: | | You're asking them to wait indefinitely. |
No one ever said that, you made it up to try and support your argument.
| Quote: | | You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
The 2nd amendment mentions nothing of waiting periods and never mentions specific weapons or even restrictions on such weapons, so this is another thing you've invented.
| Quote: | | I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
What is a "natural right" exactly? Are you saying that someone has an innate god given right to walk into a gun store and walk out with an AR15 the same day without any regulation?
| Quote: | | In the name of security you're willing to trample on freedoms of the innocent without due process. Got it. |
Again, all these "rights" you're speaking of have been invented by you to support a position that very few Americans agree with.
Let me put it to you this way, and I know it's going to very, very difficult for you to digest. We as a society could vote to restrict ALL firearm sales to the point that EVERYONE would have to have a special licence, pass several training courses and wait months or years to obtain said firearm and we still would not be violating the 2nd amendment as long as there remains some legal pathway to ownership. That's what living in a democracy is. No matter what the minority opinion is if the majority decides it's going to be that way, that's the way it's going to be. You can invent as many "rights" as you want but this is the reality.
The Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate currently so these type of regulations are a non-starter for the moment. However, the time IS indeed coming when that will not be the case, brace yourself as you're going to in for a rude awakening when the masses speak out and the left regains control of the House and Senate. |
Keep repeating that line.
| Quote: | A majority of Americans oppose banning assault weapons for the first time in more than 20 years of ABC News/Washington Post polls, with the public expressing vast doubt that the authorities can prevent “lone wolf” terrorist attacks and a substantial sense that armed citizens can help.
Just 45 percent in this national survey favor an assault weapons ban, down 11 percentage points from an ABC/Post poll in 2013 and down from a peak of 80 percent in 1994. Fifty-three percent oppose such a ban, the most on record.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/now-oppose-assault-weapons-ban-doubts-stopping-lone/story?id=35778846 |
|
Well, lets take a macro view and see if that opinion holds true.
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm |
Did you read your link? There's opinions all over the place there on a multitude of polling subjects. We can each use those numbers to spin whatever narrative we want. This link doesn't do anything to advance either yours or my position. |
Actually, it does. |
No, it doesn't. So the CNN poll is better than a ABC/Washington Post poll? Maybe? who knows. |
There are multiple sources of polling info in that link and the majority of them excluding the one you linked show that most are in favor of stricter gun laws. It's just your one ABC poll that bucks the trend. Is it an anomaly? I don't know. But the numbers are right there and paint a pretty clear picture when you look at them as a whole. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17245
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | Quote: | | You're asking them to wait indefinitely. |
No one ever said that, you made it up to try and support your argument.
| Quote: | | You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
The 2nd amendment mentions nothing of waiting periods and never mentions specific weapons or even restrictions on such weapons, so this is another thing you've invented.
| Quote: | | I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
What is a "natural right" exactly? Are you saying that someone has an innate god given right to walk into a gun store and walk out with an AR15 the same day without any regulation?
| Quote: | | In the name of security you're willing to trample on freedoms of the innocent without due process. Got it. |
Again, all these "rights" you're speaking of have been invented by you to support a position that very few Americans agree with.
Let me put it to you this way, and I know it's going to very, very difficult for you to digest. We as a society could vote to restrict ALL firearm sales to the point that EVERYONE would have to have a special licence, pass several training courses and wait months or years to obtain said firearm and we still would not be violating the 2nd amendment as long as there remains some legal pathway to ownership. That's what living in a democracy is. No matter what the minority opinion is if the majority decides it's going to be that way, that's the way it's going to be. You can invent as many "rights" as you want but this is the reality.
The Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate currently so these type of regulations are a non-starter for the moment. However, the time IS indeed coming when that will not be the case, brace yourself as you're going to in for a rude awakening when the masses speak out and the left regains control of the House and Senate. |
Keep repeating that line.
| Quote: | A majority of Americans oppose banning assault weapons for the first time in more than 20 years of ABC News/Washington Post polls, with the public expressing vast doubt that the authorities can prevent “lone wolf” terrorist attacks and a substantial sense that armed citizens can help.
Just 45 percent in this national survey favor an assault weapons ban, down 11 percentage points from an ABC/Post poll in 2013 and down from a peak of 80 percent in 1994. Fifty-three percent oppose such a ban, the most on record.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/now-oppose-assault-weapons-ban-doubts-stopping-lone/story?id=35778846 |
|
Well, lets take a macro view and see if that opinion holds true.
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm |
Did you read your link? There's opinions all over the place there on a multitude of polling subjects. We can each use those numbers to spin whatever narrative we want. This link doesn't do anything to advance either yours or my position. |
Actually, it does. |
No, it doesn't. So the CNN poll is better than a ABC/Washington Post poll? Maybe? who knows. |
There are multiple sources of polling info in that link and the majority of them excluding the one you linked show that most are in favor of stricter gun laws. It's just your one ABC poll that bucks the trend. Is it an anomaly? I don't know. But the numbers are right there and paint a pretty clear picture when you look at them as a whole. |
I see a pretty consistent picture from your link that people want better background checks (duh), better enforcement (duh), and better laws surrounding mental health (duh). Where things get murky is when the word "control" pops up. Also there's a stark difference in answers when the question is about "assault" rifles or handguns.
| Quote: | "In general, do you think laws covering the sale of guns should be made more strict, less strict, or kept as they are now?"
6/13 & earlier: "In general, do you think gun control laws should be made more strict, less strict, or kept as they are now?" |
Also, I see numbers ebb and flow depending on whether there's been a recent mass shooting. They go up after Sandy Hook, then dip, up after San Bernardino, then dip, up after Orlando, etc.
Democrats are pretty consistent, but Republicans and Independents show that sine wave.
Also, I don't think the ABC/WaPo poll is an outlier. The CBS poll around the same timeframe shows the same numbers:
In December '15: total 44/50 for/against, and after Orlando 57/38 for.
| Quote: | "Do you favor or oppose a nationwide ban on assault weapons?"
Favor Oppose Unsure/
No answer
% % %
6/13-14/16
57 38 6
Republicans
45 50 5
Democrats
78 18 3
Independents
47 45 8
12/4-8/15
44 50 6
Republicans
25 69 6
Democrats
64 32 4
Independents
42 51 7 |
I expect a poll in October to have the Republicans and Independents back down again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakerjoshua
Franchise Player
Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 11277
Location: Bay Area
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | Quote: | | You're asking them to wait indefinitely. |
No one ever said that, you made it up to try and support your argument.
| Quote: | | You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
The 2nd amendment mentions nothing of waiting periods and never mentions specific weapons or even restrictions on such weapons, so this is another thing you've invented.
| Quote: | | I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
What is a "natural right" exactly? Are you saying that someone has an innate god given right to walk into a gun store and walk out with an AR15 the same day without any regulation?
| Quote: | | In the name of security you're willing to trample on freedoms of the innocent without due process. Got it. |
Again, all these "rights" you're speaking of have been invented by you to support a position that very few Americans agree with.
Let me put it to you this way, and I know it's going to very, very difficult for you to digest. We as a society could vote to restrict ALL firearm sales to the point that EVERYONE would have to have a special licence, pass several training courses and wait months or years to obtain said firearm and we still would not be violating the 2nd amendment as long as there remains some legal pathway to ownership. That's what living in a democracy is. No matter what the minority opinion is if the majority decides it's going to be that way, that's the way it's going to be. You can invent as many "rights" as you want but this is the reality.
The Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate currently so these type of regulations are a non-starter for the moment. However, the time IS indeed coming when that will not be the case, brace yourself as you're going to in for a rude awakening when the masses speak out and the left regains control of the House and Senate. |
Keep repeating that line.
| Quote: | A majority of Americans oppose banning assault weapons for the first time in more than 20 years of ABC News/Washington Post polls, with the public expressing vast doubt that the authorities can prevent “lone wolf” terrorist attacks and a substantial sense that armed citizens can help.
Just 45 percent in this national survey favor an assault weapons ban, down 11 percentage points from an ABC/Post poll in 2013 and down from a peak of 80 percent in 1994. Fifty-three percent oppose such a ban, the most on record.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/now-oppose-assault-weapons-ban-doubts-stopping-lone/story?id=35778846 |
|
Well, lets take a macro view and see if that opinion holds true.
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm |
Did you read your link? There's opinions all over the place there on a multitude of polling subjects. We can each use those numbers to spin whatever narrative we want. This link doesn't do anything to advance either yours or my position. |
Actually, it does. |
No, it doesn't. So the CNN poll is better than a ABC/Washington Post poll? Maybe? who knows. |
There are multiple sources of polling info in that link and the majority of them excluding the one you linked show that most are in favor of stricter gun laws. It's just your one ABC poll that bucks the trend. Is it an anomaly? I don't know. But the numbers are right there and paint a pretty clear picture when you look at them as a whole. |
I see a pretty consistent picture from your link that people want better background checks (duh), better enforcement (duh), and better laws surrounding mental health (duh). Where things get murky is when the word "control" pops up. Also there's a stark difference in answers when the question is about "assault" rifles or handguns.
| Quote: | "In general, do you think laws covering the sale of guns should be made more strict, less strict, or kept as they are now?"
6/13 & earlier: "In general, do you think gun control laws should be made more strict, less strict, or kept as they are now?" |
Also, I see numbers ebb and flow depending on whether there's been a recent mass shooting. They go up after Sandy Hook, then dip, up after San Bernardino, then dip, up after Orlando, etc.
Democrats are pretty consistent, but Republicans and Independents show that sine wave.
Also, I don't think the ABC/WaPo poll is an outlier. The CBS poll around the same timeframe shows the same numbers:
In December '15: total 44/50 for/against, and after Orlando 57/38 for.
| Quote: | "Do you favor or oppose a nationwide ban on assault weapons?"
Favor Oppose Unsure/
No answer
% % %
6/13-14/16
57 38 6
Republicans
45 50 5
Democrats
78 18 3
Independents
47 45 8
12/4-8/15
44 50 6
Republicans
25 69 6
Democrats
64 32 4
Independents
42 51 7 |
I expect a poll in October to have the Republicans and Independents back down again. |
On a side note, you seem genuinely honest in your opinions and assessments and I respect that - so I apologize if I come off a bit harsh. It's refreshing to have an honest conversation based in real facts. Although we have differing opinions that does not mean you are entirely wrong or that I'm entirely right.
And I missed this in your previous post:
| Quote: | | Also, about your minority/majority democracy comment, that's never been a good argument in my book. For much of this country's history, and even recently, the majority decided that minorities and those different didn't deserve the same rights as others. Just because democracy decided that didn't mean it was right. |
I do agree with this, there are times when this has worked for us as a society and also worked against us as a society and there will always be a voice of opposition on either side. I suppose that's where the saying "on the right side of history" comes into play. Hindsight is 20/20. We learn what works through trial and error and try not to repeat the mistakes of the past.
Last edited by lakerjoshua on Fri Jun 24, 2016 10:01 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17245
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakerjoshua wrote: | | On a side note, you seem genuinely honest in your opinions and assessments and I respect that - so I apologize if I come off a bit harsh. It's refreshing to have an honest conversation based in real facts. Although we have differing opinions that does not mean you are entirely wrong or that I'm entirely right. |
Thank you. It's refreshing to hear that and the feeling is mutual.
And I agree: it is good to have an honest conversation. On this particular instance we're not on the same page, but that's okay. I'm registered D, voted D my whole life, but on this one subject I buck the standard party line (and the standard LG line  ). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67614
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 10:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Reflexx wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | Reflexx wrote:
| Quote: | | If you punish someone by taking away a right, then yes, you are presuming them guilty of something. |
They're not being punished. They're being asked to wait until they've been cleared to fly and buy. No right has been taken away. I call it a inconvenience You have to scramble some eggs to make a omelet. |
You're asking them to wait indefinitely. How long is "as long as it takes"? Days? Weeks? Months? Years?
The way it's written, the people would have to prove why they shouldn't be on the list. They have to prove their innocence.
You may see it as an inconvenience, but it is a Constitutional right that they are being denied. |
Again, they're rights aren't being denied. This isn't about rights, it's about guns.
As stated prior, it's a new undertaking, it's has kinks that have to be ironed out. |
Umm... the way they want to do it is about rights.
You may not care about those rights, but they are rights. |
No rights have been taken. Where is it written when you buy a gun you have the right to get it right away?
Mistakes have been and will be made. It' goes with the territory. I'd rather a person be inconvenienced by no fly, no buy if it save lives. |
I see you value natural rights far less than I do. |
I value life. A life taken can't be restored. A right delayed, a inconvenience, is still in place. I still stand this is not about rights it's about guns taking lives. |
In the name of security you're willing to trample on freedoms of the innocent without due process. Got it.
By that logic, we should eliminate freedom and have the government protect everyone from everything. |
In the name of saving lives I'm on board with to not being able to get on a plane or be able to buy a gun if you're on a no fly list. I'm a advocate for no fly, no buy. You can add any other freedoms that fit your narrative. You're really embellishing to make your point. I'm focused on NFNB.
Again, there are bumps in the road. I'm of a mind they will be smoothed with time. Time that, if things remain as is, some may not have.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Last edited by jodeke on Fri Jun 24, 2016 10:19 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17245
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 10:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jodeke wrote: | In the name of saving lives I'm on board with to not being able to get on a plane or be able to buy a gun if you're on a no fly list. I'm a advocate for no fly, no buy. You can add any other freedoms that fit your narrative. You're really stretching to make your point. I'm focused on NFNB.
Again, there are bumps in the road. I'm of a mind they will be smoothed with time. Time that, if things remain as is, some may not have. |
Can you name an instance off the top of your head where government relinquished power back to the people? Nothing is ever temporary. Last one I can really think of is the 17th Amendment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67614
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | In the name of saving lives I'm on board with to not being able to get on a plane or be able to buy a gun if you're on a no fly list. I'm a advocate for no fly, no buy. You can add any other freedoms that fit your narrative. You're really stretching to make your point. I'm focused on NFNB.
Again, there are bumps in the road. I'm of a mind they will be smoothed with time. Time that, if things remain as is, some may not have. |
Can you name an instance off the top of your head where government relinquished power back to the people? Nothing is ever temporary. Last one I can really think of is the 17th Amendment. |
Where in NFNB has any power been taken?
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakerjoshua
Franchise Player
Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 11277
Location: Bay Area
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 10:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | In the name of saving lives I'm on board with to not being able to get on a plane or be able to buy a gun if you're on a no fly list. I'm a advocate for no fly, no buy. You can add any other freedoms that fit your narrative. You're really stretching to make your point. I'm focused on NFNB.
Again, there are bumps in the road. I'm of a mind they will be smoothed with time. Time that, if things remain as is, some may not have. |
Can you name an instance off the top of your head where government relinquished power back to the people? Nothing is ever temporary. Last one I can really think of is the 17th Amendment. |
I can and it's quite relevant to the topic at hand:
| Quote: | | Why did the ban lift in 2004? The original assault weapons law was written so that it would expire after ten years. When 2004 came around, some Democrats tried to renew it, but there wasn't much interest in Congress. A few states, including New York, Massachusetts and New Jersey, still have their own versions of the law on the books. |
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17245
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | In the name of saving lives I'm on board with to not being able to get on a plane or be able to buy a gun if you're on a no fly list. I'm a advocate for no fly, no buy. You can add any other freedoms that fit your narrative. You're really stretching to make your point. I'm focused on NFNB.
Again, there are bumps in the road. I'm of a mind they will be smoothed with time. Time that, if things remain as is, some may not have. |
Can you name an instance off the top of your head where government relinquished power back to the people? Nothing is ever temporary. Last one I can really think of is the 17th Amendment. |
I can and it's quite relevant to the topic at hand:
| Quote: | | Why did the ban lift in 2004? The original assault weapons law was written so that it would expire after ten years. When 2004 came around, some Democrats tried to renew it, but there wasn't much interest in Congress. A few states, including New York, Massachusetts and New Jersey, still have their own versions of the law on the books. |
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/
|
Touché. So what you're saying is this NFNB needs a sunset provision  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakerjoshua
Franchise Player
Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 11277
Location: Bay Area
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | In the name of saving lives I'm on board with to not being able to get on a plane or be able to buy a gun if you're on a no fly list. I'm a advocate for no fly, no buy. You can add any other freedoms that fit your narrative. You're really stretching to make your point. I'm focused on NFNB.
Again, there are bumps in the road. I'm of a mind they will be smoothed with time. Time that, if things remain as is, some may not have. |
Can you name an instance off the top of your head where government relinquished power back to the people? Nothing is ever temporary. Last one I can really think of is the 17th Amendment. |
I can and it's quite relevant to the topic at hand:
| Quote: | | Why did the ban lift in 2004? The original assault weapons law was written so that it would expire after ten years. When 2004 came around, some Democrats tried to renew it, but there wasn't much interest in Congress. A few states, including New York, Massachusetts and New Jersey, still have their own versions of the law on the books. |
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/
|
Touché. So what you're saying is this NFNB needs a sunset provision |
Indeed.
Oops, did I just reveal my inner moderate? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17245
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | lakerjoshua wrote: | | DuncanIdaho wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | In the name of saving lives I'm on board with to not being able to get on a plane or be able to buy a gun if you're on a no fly list. I'm a advocate for no fly, no buy. You can add any other freedoms that fit your narrative. You're really stretching to make your point. I'm focused on NFNB.
Again, there are bumps in the road. I'm of a mind they will be smoothed with time. Time that, if things remain as is, some may not have. |
Can you name an instance off the top of your head where government relinquished power back to the people? Nothing is ever temporary. Last one I can really think of is the 17th Amendment. |
I can and it's quite relevant to the topic at hand:
| Quote: | | Why did the ban lift in 2004? The original assault weapons law was written so that it would expire after ten years. When 2004 came around, some Democrats tried to renew it, but there wasn't much interest in Congress. A few states, including New York, Massachusetts and New Jersey, still have their own versions of the law on the books. |
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/
|
Touché. So what you're saying is this NFNB needs a sunset provision |
Indeed.
Oops, did I just reveal my inner moderate? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersken80
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38775
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| They won't sell beer or cigarettes without checking your ID to make sure one is of legal age. Sorry, but if somebody wants to purchase firearms they better show they are a citizen of the US, pass a background check and are of good mental standing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52652
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote trees people . . . quote trees . . . come on man! Reign them in a bit please! 
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
