Gun Control - What's the Problem?

[Oddball]

I would only add that if government gets involved in trying to solve, fix or control anything, it is with only one objective in mind:

1. Because it will grow them power.
2. Because it will make them money.
3. Because they will fuck it up while thinking they did good.

I don't believe for a moment that any of them honestly believe that they're doing any good.

Oh no, trust me, they really do (most of them) and that not only can they do a better job than the private sector, that somehow it is their destined right and duty to do it. They are above you. The rest simply don't care because it's their job and pays their bills.

While generally correct, I'm speaking of an overall theme of how The State "works".

If they solve a problem, the constituency goes away....If they solve a problem, nobody needs them anymore.

 

[toobfreak]

I would only add that if government gets involved in trying to solve, fix or control anything, it is with only one objective in mind:

1. Because it will grow them power.
2. Because it will make them money.
3. Because they will fuck it up while thinking they did good.

I don't believe for a moment that any of them honestly believe that they're doing any good.

Oh no, trust me, they really do (most of them) and that not only can they do a better job than the private sector, that somehow it is their destined right and duty to do it. They are above you. The rest simply don't care because it's their job and pays their bills.

While generally correct, I'm speaking of an overall theme of how The State "works".

If they solve a problem, the constituency goes away....If they solve a problem, nobody needs them anymore.

Bullseye. The role of government is to MANAGE problems, not solve them.

 

[Slade3200]

"Law's won't keep guns out of the hands of criminals" I agree, if somebody really wants a gun then they will be able to get one. Just like if somebody wants to get into your house or car then can do it by just breaking a window, but we still lock our doors and get security systems."

I'm still not hearing an argument that I understand that counters the efforts being made to help solve a small part of a very big problem. Isn't something better than nothing? Why aren't we working together on this? Yes, efforts to improve law enforcement and focus on mental health will help, along with many other ideas, but those are a different conversation... Focusing on the simple propositions by the president... Why the opposition and how are they hurting our rights??

Because none of the "solutions" being floated will solve any problem.....Not even a small part of it.

You really cannot be so naive to believe that politicians are really interested in solving the problem, can you?

I don’t think too much about what politicians want. It’s irrelevant to this discussion

It's relevant because the laws are being made by the politicians, fool.

Then let’s discuss the laws and policies that make sense... debating the sincerity and character of politicians is useless

 

[Slade3200]

Whoever writes the bill and votes to pass it. Hopefully it is bipartisan

I'm talking about after the bill passes.

So we have this law that mentally unstable people and those who are "deemed" violent cannot own a firearm. Again, if Democrats are in power, who gets to decide that?

I'm currently having a gun discussion in another topic with JoeB whom I'm sure we all know. JoeB told me that he has no problem confiscating guns from people he deems as racist. He would have no problem with the government confiscating my gun because of my avatar.

This is what I'm talking about. We all know the ultimate goal for Democrats is a disarmed society. Such a law using the Thought Police to determine who can exercise their constitutional right of firearm ownership is a pandoras box. When in charge, Democrats could come take my guns away because of something stupid like my avatar. Democrat talking heads have stated repeatedly that Trump supporters are also racist. So if we had that law now, would that mean government could go out and revoke the ability to own a gun simply because we support Donald Trump???

Don't open that door. You don't want to see what's on the other side of it.

A database and background check system would need to be put in place that is coordinated with law enforcement and medical doctors to flag at risk people. It’s not a simple solution as many conflicts exists I understand that. But progress needs to be made and those debates should be had

I can't trust my doctor to get my cough medicine straight nor to put my interests ahead of the insurance company paying him, now you want him to decide if I get to own guns? No thank you.

You think I’m calling on your cough doctor to determine if you should get a gun?! What a stupid way to frame the argument.

You're the one who made it. At least the guy kinda sorta KNOWS ME. Maybe you have some shrink somewhere who knows you better? As a student of psychology, I know that some of the most fucked up people are psychologists.

You make a protocol based on symptoms actions medications etc and the follow it. Put an appeal process in there if you dont agree with the verdict

 

[Slade3200]

People who are deemed violent and or mentally unstable

And when Democrats are in power, who would decide that?

Whoever writes the bill and votes to pass it. Hopefully it is bipartisan

I'm talking about after the bill passes.

So we have this law that mentally unstable people and those who are "deemed" violent cannot own a firearm. Again, if Democrats are in power, who gets to decide that?

I'm currently having a gun discussion in another topic with JoeB whom I'm sure we all know. JoeB told me that he has no problem confiscating guns from people he deems as racist. He would have no problem with the government confiscating my gun because of my avatar.

This is what I'm talking about. We all know the ultimate goal for Democrats is a disarmed society. Such a law using the Thought Police to determine who can exercise their constitutional right of firearm ownership is a pandoras box. When in charge, Democrats could come take my guns away because of something stupid like my avatar. Democrat talking heads have stated repeatedly that Trump supporters are also racist. So if we had that law now, would that mean government could go out and revoke the ability to own a gun simply because we support Donald Trump???

Don't open that door. You don't want to see what's on the other side of it.

A database and background check system would need to be put in place that is coordinated with law enforcement and medical doctors to flag at risk people. It’s not a simple solution as many conflicts exists I understand that. But progress needs to be made and those debates should be had

Right, and who would be those doctors, the ones the left picks that agree with the disarmament of American citizens?

Haha, no ray. How about I’ll stand with you to not let the Left pick the anti gun doctors to take away your guns. Feel better?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I would only add that if government gets involved in trying to solve, fix or control anything, it is with only one objective in mind:

1. Because it will grow them power.
2. Because it will make them money.
3. Because they will fuck it up while thinking they did good.

I don't believe for a moment that any of them honestly believe that they're doing any good.

Oh no, trust me, they really do (most of them) and that not only can they do a better job than the private sector, that somehow it is their destined right and duty to do it. They are above you. The rest simply don't care because it's their job and pays their bills.

While generally correct, I'm speaking of an overall theme of how The State "works".

If they solve a problem, the constituency goes away....If they solve a problem, nobody needs them anymore.

Bullseye. The role of government is to MANAGE problems, not solve them.

Kind of reminds me of something that happened several years ago before Commie Care was passed.

I was standing in a long line at the post office. a black lady in line turned towards the person in front of me and said how stupid it was that we are in line waiting all this time and they only have one person at the counter trying to take care of all of us. The post officer workers eyes just moved up to look at the elderly woman, but of course didn't say anything.

So I told the lady "Don't look now, but these are the same people that want to run our healthcare!" The black lady just turned around and gave me a dirty look. Obviously an Obama supporter.

The question here is, when was the last time the federal government ever solved a problem. In contrast, when was the last time the federal government made a problem worse?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

And when Democrats are in power, who would decide that?

Whoever writes the bill and votes to pass it. Hopefully it is bipartisan

I'm talking about after the bill passes.

So we have this law that mentally unstable people and those who are "deemed" violent cannot own a firearm. Again, if Democrats are in power, who gets to decide that?

I'm currently having a gun discussion in another topic with JoeB whom I'm sure we all know. JoeB told me that he has no problem confiscating guns from people he deems as racist. He would have no problem with the government confiscating my gun because of my avatar.

This is what I'm talking about. We all know the ultimate goal for Democrats is a disarmed society. Such a law using the Thought Police to determine who can exercise their constitutional right of firearm ownership is a pandoras box. When in charge, Democrats could come take my guns away because of something stupid like my avatar. Democrat talking heads have stated repeatedly that Trump supporters are also racist. So if we had that law now, would that mean government could go out and revoke the ability to own a gun simply because we support Donald Trump???

Don't open that door. You don't want to see what's on the other side of it.

A database and background check system would need to be put in place that is coordinated with law enforcement and medical doctors to flag at risk people. It’s not a simple solution as many conflicts exists I understand that. But progress needs to be made and those debates should be had

Right, and who would be those doctors, the ones the left picks that agree with the disarmament of American citizens?

Haha, no ray. How about I’ll stand with you to not let the Left pick the anti gun doctors to take away your guns. Feel better?

I would if we had that kind of control, but we won't if Democrats get enough power to make those decisions.

 

[toobfreak]

I'm talking about after the bill passes.

So we have this law that mentally unstable people and those who are "deemed" violent cannot own a firearm. Again, if Democrats are in power, who gets to decide that?

I'm currently having a gun discussion in another topic with JoeB whom I'm sure we all know. JoeB told me that he has no problem confiscating guns from people he deems as racist. He would have no problem with the government confiscating my gun because of my avatar.

This is what I'm talking about. We all know the ultimate goal for Democrats is a disarmed society. Such a law using the Thought Police to determine who can exercise their constitutional right of firearm ownership is a pandoras box. When in charge, Democrats could come take my guns away because of something stupid like my avatar. Democrat talking heads have stated repeatedly that Trump supporters are also racist. So if we had that law now, would that mean government could go out and revoke the ability to own a gun simply because we support Donald Trump???

Don't open that door. You don't want to see what's on the other side of it.

A database and background check system would need to be put in place that is coordinated with law enforcement and medical doctors to flag at risk people. It’s not a simple solution as many conflicts exists I understand that. But progress needs to be made and those debates should be had

I can't trust my doctor to get my cough medicine straight nor to put my interests ahead of the insurance company paying him, now you want him to decide if I get to own guns? No thank you.

You think I’m calling on your cough doctor to determine if you should get a gun?! What a stupid way to frame the argument.

You're the one who made it. At least the guy kinda sorta KNOWS ME. Maybe you have some shrink somewhere who knows you better? As a student of psychology, I know that some of the most fucked up people are psychologists.

You make a protocol based on symptoms actions medications etc and the follow it. Put an appeal process in there if you dont agree with the verdict

Human beings are far too complex for that. People don't follow protocols. You can take two people and put them both under the same conditions and through the same stuff. One will crack up and go nuts. The other with pass with flying colors and shrug it off like nothing. Personally, I don't need the government having some deep psych-ops profile on every tiny detail of my family and life in order to even come close to making that work. Because if they can do that, they can predict my attitudes, likes, preferences, choices, fears, interests and everything else to have total control of my life. I chose not to live in 1984. Bye.

 

[2aguy]

I would only add that if government gets involved in trying to solve, fix or control anything, it is with only one objective in mind:

1. Because it will grow them power.
2. Because it will make them money.
3. Because they will fuck it up while thinking they did good.

I don't believe for a moment that any of them honestly believe that they're doing any good.

Oh no, trust me, they really do (most of them) and that not only can they do a better job than the private sector, that somehow it is their destined right and duty to do it. They are above you. The rest simply don't care because it's their job and pays their bills.

While generally correct, I'm speaking of an overall theme of how The State "works".

If they solve a problem, the constituency goes away....If they solve a problem, nobody needs them anymore.

Bullseye. The role of government is to MANAGE problems, not solve them.

Kind of reminds me of something that happened several years ago before Commie Care was passed.

I was standing in a long line at the post office. a black lady in line turned towards the person in front of me and said how stupid it was that we are in line waiting all this time and they only have one person at the counter trying to take care of all of us. The post officer workers eyes just moved up to look at the elderly woman, but of course didn't say anything.

So I told the lady "Don't look now, but these are the same people that want to run our healthcare!" The black lady just turned around and gave me a dirty look. Obviously an Obama supporter.

The question here is, when was the last time the federal government ever solved a problem. In contrast, when was the last time the federal government made a problem worse?

See....it is people like you....who keep bringing up these things about the government that just forces the left wing, big government types to start digging mass graves....

 

[Rustic]

Who are the wrong hands?

Who gets to decide that?

Whatcha gonna do when big government decides YOU are the wrong hands?

If anyone actually had an accurate predictive way to know in advance whose hands would be truly wrong, we'd already be preventing 90% of all gun murders and would be able to re-institute automatic weapons while removing 90% of the gun laws off the books.

People who are deemed violent and or mentally unstable

And when Democrats are in power, who would decide that?

Whoever writes the bill and votes to pass it. Hopefully it is bipartisan

Lol
Universal background checks equals firearm registration equals firearm confiscation... At that point the rest the constitution will be meaningless Gibberish...

None of that is true. Stop lying

Lol
It is true... absolutely

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't believe for a moment that any of them honestly believe that they're doing any good.

Oh no, trust me, they really do (most of them) and that not only can they do a better job than the private sector, that somehow it is their destined right and duty to do it. They are above you. The rest simply don't care because it's their job and pays their bills.

While generally correct, I'm speaking of an overall theme of how The State "works".

If they solve a problem, the constituency goes away....If they solve a problem, nobody needs them anymore.

Bullseye. The role of government is to MANAGE problems, not solve them.

Kind of reminds me of something that happened several years ago before Commie Care was passed.

I was standing in a long line at the post office. a black lady in line turned towards the person in front of me and said how stupid it was that we are in line waiting all this time and they only have one person at the counter trying to take care of all of us. The post officer workers eyes just moved up to look at the elderly woman, but of course didn't say anything.

So I told the lady "Don't look now, but these are the same people that want to run our healthcare!" The black lady just turned around and gave me a dirty look. Obviously an Obama supporter.

The question here is, when was the last time the federal government ever solved a problem. In contrast, when was the last time the federal government made a problem worse?

See....it is people like you....who keep bringing up these things about the government that just forces the left wing, big government types to start digging mass graves....

All one has to do is observe the government to see what our future holds.

During the summer, OSHA regulations are that something has to be in front of a dock door if you have that door open for fresh air. Most companies put up a plastic chain in front of the doors, and this is acceptable by the government standards.

So it's against regulations to have an open dock door, but a plastic chain will stop a person from falling off the dock or a one ton tow motor from breaking through???

That's how these people think. Create regulations that don't solve any problems.

 

[Slade3200]

Whoever writes the bill and votes to pass it. Hopefully it is bipartisan

I'm talking about after the bill passes.

So we have this law that mentally unstable people and those who are "deemed" violent cannot own a firearm. Again, if Democrats are in power, who gets to decide that?

I'm currently having a gun discussion in another topic with JoeB whom I'm sure we all know. JoeB told me that he has no problem confiscating guns from people he deems as racist. He would have no problem with the government confiscating my gun because of my avatar.

This is what I'm talking about. We all know the ultimate goal for Democrats is a disarmed society. Such a law using the Thought Police to determine who can exercise their constitutional right of firearm ownership is a pandoras box. When in charge, Democrats could come take my guns away because of something stupid like my avatar. Democrat talking heads have stated repeatedly that Trump supporters are also racist. So if we had that law now, would that mean government could go out and revoke the ability to own a gun simply because we support Donald Trump???

Don't open that door. You don't want to see what's on the other side of it.

A database and background check system would need to be put in place that is coordinated with law enforcement and medical doctors to flag at risk people. It’s not a simple solution as many conflicts exists I understand that. But progress needs to be made and those debates should be had

Right, and who would be those doctors, the ones the left picks that agree with the disarmament of American citizens?

Haha, no ray. How about I’ll stand with you to not let the Left pick the anti gun doctors to take away your guns. Feel better?

I would if we had that kind of control, but we won't if Democrats get enough power to make those decisions.

Which is why it should be a bipartisan deal.

 

[Slade3200]

A database and background check system would need to be put in place that is coordinated with law enforcement and medical doctors to flag at risk people. It’s not a simple solution as many conflicts exists I understand that. But progress needs to be made and those debates should be had

I can't trust my doctor to get my cough medicine straight nor to put my interests ahead of the insurance company paying him, now you want him to decide if I get to own guns? No thank you.

You think I’m calling on your cough doctor to determine if you should get a gun?! What a stupid way to frame the argument.

You're the one who made it. At least the guy kinda sorta KNOWS ME. Maybe you have some shrink somewhere who knows you better? As a student of psychology, I know that some of the most fucked up people are psychologists.

You make a protocol based on symptoms actions medications etc and the follow it. Put an appeal process in there if you dont agree with the verdict

Human beings are far too complex for that. People don't follow protocols. You can take two people and put them both under the same conditions and through the same stuff. One will crack up and go nuts. The other with pass with flying colors and shrug it off like nothing. Personally, I don't need the government having some deep psych-ops profile on every tiny detail of my family and life in order to even come close to making that work. Because if they can do that, they can predict my attitudes, likes, preferences, choices, fears, interests and everything else to have total control of my life. I chose not to live in 1984. Bye.

I’m not calling for government run deep psychological ops. A majority of Americans would agree that they dont think mentally unstable people should have guns. So we should determine a set of indicators and criteria that can be used to flag at risk people and then make sure those people dont have easy access to weapons. It’s not a difficult concept to get behind.

I get that you want to protect your guns. Maybe you are a looney tune so you are fighting back against this I don’t know. But most dont think crazy people should have guns. Simple concept

 

[Slade3200]

People who are deemed violent and or mentally unstable

And when Democrats are in power, who would decide that?

Whoever writes the bill and votes to pass it. Hopefully it is bipartisan

Lol
Universal background checks equals firearm registration equals firearm confiscation... At that point the rest the constitution will be meaningless Gibberish...

None of that is true. Stop lying

Lol
It is true... absolutely

Lol
It’s false... absolutely

Is it fun for you to debate like a tard?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I'm talking about after the bill passes.

So we have this law that mentally unstable people and those who are "deemed" violent cannot own a firearm. Again, if Democrats are in power, who gets to decide that?

I'm currently having a gun discussion in another topic with JoeB whom I'm sure we all know. JoeB told me that he has no problem confiscating guns from people he deems as racist. He would have no problem with the government confiscating my gun because of my avatar.

This is what I'm talking about. We all know the ultimate goal for Democrats is a disarmed society. Such a law using the Thought Police to determine who can exercise their constitutional right of firearm ownership is a pandoras box. When in charge, Democrats could come take my guns away because of something stupid like my avatar. Democrat talking heads have stated repeatedly that Trump supporters are also racist. So if we had that law now, would that mean government could go out and revoke the ability to own a gun simply because we support Donald Trump???

Don't open that door. You don't want to see what's on the other side of it.

A database and background check system would need to be put in place that is coordinated with law enforcement and medical doctors to flag at risk people. It’s not a simple solution as many conflicts exists I understand that. But progress needs to be made and those debates should be had

Right, and who would be those doctors, the ones the left picks that agree with the disarmament of American citizens?

Haha, no ray. How about I’ll stand with you to not let the Left pick the anti gun doctors to take away your guns. Feel better?

I would if we had that kind of control, but we won't if Democrats get enough power to make those decisions.

Which is why it should be a bipartisan deal.

Spying on Americans and determining their ability to own a gun is not what our founders intended this federal government for. Once any law is in place, it's subject to manipulation by those in power down the road.

DumBama made a regulation that those on SS that cannot even write their own checks to pay bills not be allowed to own a firearm. Like how many old people on SS that couldn't pay bills became killers using a gun???

But this is what we are talking about here: party abuse. There are just some people in this country (and world) who have proven themselves never to be trusted. The Democrat party are those people.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Gun Control - What's the Problem?

Easy, many 'less than sharp knives' equate their guns to freedom in America

The even less sharper consider it their d*ck

~S~

This is pretty stupid.

You have freedom of speech, and other freedoms, because we have arms.

Only a 'less than sharp' knife would see it otherwise.

So, yeah. Go fuck yourself.

.

 

[Slade3200]

A database and background check system would need to be put in place that is coordinated with law enforcement and medical doctors to flag at risk people. It’s not a simple solution as many conflicts exists I understand that. But progress needs to be made and those debates should be had

Right, and who would be those doctors, the ones the left picks that agree with the disarmament of American citizens?

Haha, no ray. How about I’ll stand with you to not let the Left pick the anti gun doctors to take away your guns. Feel better?

I would if we had that kind of control, but we won't if Democrats get enough power to make those decisions.

Which is why it should be a bipartisan deal.

Spying on Americans and determining their ability to own a gun is not what our founders intended this federal government for. Once any law is in place, it's subject to manipulation by those in power down the road.

DumBama made a regulation that those on SS that cannot even write their own checks to pay bills not be allowed to own a firearm. Like how many old people on SS that couldn't pay bills became killers using a gun???

But this is what we are talking about here: party abuse. There are just some people in this country (and world) who have proven themselves never to be trusted. The Democrat party are those people.

When did I say anything about spying?

Why do you have to make shit up? Let’s have an honest debate here

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Right, and who would be those doctors, the ones the left picks that agree with the disarmament of American citizens?

Haha, no ray. How about I’ll stand with you to not let the Left pick the anti gun doctors to take away your guns. Feel better?

I would if we had that kind of control, but we won't if Democrats get enough power to make those decisions.

Which is why it should be a bipartisan deal.

Spying on Americans and determining their ability to own a gun is not what our founders intended this federal government for. Once any law is in place, it's subject to manipulation by those in power down the road.

DumBama made a regulation that those on SS that cannot even write their own checks to pay bills not be allowed to own a firearm. Like how many old people on SS that couldn't pay bills became killers using a gun???

But this is what we are talking about here: party abuse. There are just some people in this country (and world) who have proven themselves never to be trusted. The Democrat party are those people.

When did I say anything about spying?

Why do you have to make shit up? Let’s have an honest debate here

How much more honest can we be? The last two shooters were invisible to government, but left a trail of disturbing posts on social media. The only way to stop those people from getting guns is if we spied on their posts and determined they were a danger to the public.

 

[Slade3200]

Haha, no ray. How about I’ll stand with you to not let the Left pick the anti gun doctors to take away your guns. Feel better?

I would if we had that kind of control, but we won't if Democrats get enough power to make those decisions.

Which is why it should be a bipartisan deal.

Spying on Americans and determining their ability to own a gun is not what our founders intended this federal government for. Once any law is in place, it's subject to manipulation by those in power down the road.

DumBama made a regulation that those on SS that cannot even write their own checks to pay bills not be allowed to own a firearm. Like how many old people on SS that couldn't pay bills became killers using a gun???

But this is what we are talking about here: party abuse. There are just some people in this country (and world) who have proven themselves never to be trusted. The Democrat party are those people.

When did I say anything about spying?

Why do you have to make shit up? Let’s have an honest debate here

How much more honest can we be? The last two shooters were invisible to government, but left a trail of disturbing posts on social media. The only way to stop those people from getting guns is if we spied on their posts and determined they were a danger to the public.

How much more honest can you be you ask? Much more... you can start by not saying I said things like “spy” when I never said anything I’d the sort. That would be a good start.

Spying on Americans is not the only way, there are many ways to flag somebody at risk. It can be done by doctors, family, friends employers. And there would be a process to evaluate.

What would you propose Ray? Do nothing to prevent mental people from getting guns except for Arm those around them so they can defend themselves? What are your bright ideas?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I would if we had that kind of control, but we won't if Democrats get enough power to make those decisions.

Which is why it should be a bipartisan deal.

Spying on Americans and determining their ability to own a gun is not what our founders intended this federal government for. Once any law is in place, it's subject to manipulation by those in power down the road.

DumBama made a regulation that those on SS that cannot even write their own checks to pay bills not be allowed to own a firearm. Like how many old people on SS that couldn't pay bills became killers using a gun???

But this is what we are talking about here: party abuse. There are just some people in this country (and world) who have proven themselves never to be trusted. The Democrat party are those people.

When did I say anything about spying?

Why do you have to make shit up? Let’s have an honest debate here

How much more honest can we be? The last two shooters were invisible to government, but left a trail of disturbing posts on social media. The only way to stop those people from getting guns is if we spied on their posts and determined they were a danger to the public.

How much more honest can you be you ask? Much more... you can start by not saying I said things like “spy” when I never said anything I’d the sort. That would be a good start.

Spying on Americans is not the only way, there are many ways to flag somebody at risk. It can be done by doctors, family, friends employers. And there would be a process to evaluate.

What would you propose Ray? Do nothing to prevent mental people from getting guns except for Arm those around them so they can defend themselves? What are your bright ideas?

Let's be honest, shall we.

Arming yourself is the only way to really be sure that you can protect yourself. You can't rely on others.

I know that sucks for people who have an irrational fear of firearms, but the alternative is tyranny, and you seem to be all on board with it. Why is that?

.