FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / MIKES GRIPES /  President Bill Clinton, Reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban Now

President Bill Clinton, Reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban Now

Started by Denny43 REPLIES859 VIEWS· 09 Aug 2019, 04:23
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
DE
DennyCaptain12,893 posts
09 Aug 2019, 04:23
#1
09 Aug 2019, 04:23#1

In one weekend, 31 people were murdered and dozens more injured in two mass shootings just hours apart in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio. The death toll may still grow. The shooters killed the young and old, men and women. In El Paso, the white-nationalist shooter’s intent was to claim as many Latino lives as possible. In both cities, the victims had their tomorrows taken or their futures forever altered by domestic terrorists as they shopped or enjoyed an evening out–everyday activities we all expect to pursue in safety. And in both cases, the gunmen used military-style assault weapons that were purchased legally.


America is reacting as we have come to expect in the wake of mass shootings. Thoughts and prayers are offered, as they should be. Communities come together, as they should, in vigils to remember those lost and injured and to remind ourselves that we shouldn’t keep letting this happen. Elected officials speak about the need for change. But the tragedies do keep happening, while the one thing that we know can reduce the number and the death tolls of mass shootings has not been done: reinstituting the ban on assault weapons and the limit on high-capacity magazines that was in effect from 1994 to 2004.

Assault weapons are designed to inflict maximum harm in a short period of time. A 2015 study by Everytown for Gun Safety found that shootings where assault weapons were used resulted in 155 percent more people shot and 47 percent more people killed than gun incidents with other types of weapons. It should come as no surprise that when we see high death and injury totals, from Sandy Hook to Las Vegas to Parkland to El Paso to Dayton, the killers have used these weapons. The Dayton killer shot 41 bullets in 30 seconds before the police got him. He killed nine people and wound

I worked hard to pass and was proud to sign the ban on these weapons of war into law, and the results were clear: mass shooting fatalities declined while they were in effect and have risen sharply since they were allowed to lapse.

For too long, America has allowed a determined, well-financed group to pretend to grieve with us while spreading paranoia among those who responsibly use guns for hunting, sport shooting and self-protection. For too long, the gun lobby and their elected allies have stalled, deflected and changed the conversation until the pressure abates and they can get back to business, heedless of the killings inevitably yet to come.

It pains me to see people in the culture I grew up in buy into the argument that banning weapons of war threatens the Second Amendment and their way of life. As the 1994 assault-weapons ban shows, deaths from mass shootings fell while the number of hunting licenses actually increased. No one has to give up their culture to save the lives of innocent people, so many of them very young.

The gun lobby often invokes the Democratic losses in the 1994 midterm elections after passing the assault-weapons ban and the Brady background-check bill to try to scare lawmakers of both parties into maintaining the status quo. Those who lost their seats in that election did cast brave votes to make our country safer and give our children the chance to grow up and live their dreams. The 2018 elections, thanks to the passionate activism of citizen groups across the country, proved that it’s a different world now. Today members of Congress will be supported if they reinstate the assault-weapons and large-ammunition magazine bans and if the Senate passes the universal-background-check law already passed by the House of Representatives.

Of course, no single action can completely end mass shootings and the wave of gun violence that plagues communities across America.

We all have to stand against, not inflame, the racial, religious and gender-based bigotries that often drive the delusions of mass killers.

The “red flag” law is a good idea. Also, we can and should do more to prevent, treat and manage mental illness. But the incidence of mental illness in America is similar to that of other wealthy nations, yet we have far more deadly mass shootings. What’s different is the sheer number of guns per capita and the widespread accessibility of weapons of war.

We know reinstating the assault-weapons ban and the ammunition limit, and making improved background checks universal, will help.

A 2018 rand study found that policies that could bring about a drop in gun deaths as small as just one percent would mean 1,500 fewer deaths in a decade. And we can do better than that.

We have talked, tweeted and delayed long enough. This is about who we are as a country, what America will look like years from now, and whether our children and grandchildren will be safer and freer to grow up.

I have always believed in the inherent goodness of people. I still do. I have spent my life trying to advance the idea that our common humanity matters more than our interesting differences and working for a world in which we are coming together, not being torn apart. We can take a big step toward that world by keeping assault weapons out of the hands of those who wish to destroy it.



CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Aug 2019, 07:20
#2
09 Aug 2019, 07:20#2

Denny

Coming from Clinton it is rich indeed,  Was the assault weapons used sold by any US shop to the insane killers?   Chances are 90% NO - the weapons were -

*  snuggled in from Mexico; or

*  converted from ordinary guns to assault weapons by local criminals.  

Stop the open border situation and make sure it is not criminals entering the USA,  Take for instance murders in the USA.  20% of all murders in the USA are committed by illegal migrants  in the USA when the migrants make up 7% of the population.  The other crime rates are worse - 72% of the drug=related charges are also from the illegal migrant population.

Without closing the porous Mexican border and stopping the inflow of smuggled firearms there is no way the present scenario would change for the better,     

SH
sharkbokCaptain23,217 posts
09 Aug 2019, 13:04
#3
09 Aug 2019, 13:04#3

20% of all murders.... What about the other 80%?

 or the fact that these mass guns killings are all white males.

Clevermike, you use of stats to build arguments are extremely weak. 

--

P-s, Mexico pails in comparison to the US arms production..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry (Notice how I quote my sources of information- something that you never do). 

Mexico "snuggle" arms...


World's largest arms exporters2012–2016 RankSupplierArms Exp1United States47,1692Russia33,1863China9,1324France8,564


DE
DennyCaptain12,893 posts
09 Aug 2019, 13:40
#4
09 Aug 2019, 13:40#4

The weapons used in the latest mass killing spree were bought over the counter, he is once again being a blatant liar. Attacking Clinton is a classic case of attacking the messenger, not the message.

He is not addressing the point which is the banning of assault rifles, the common weapon in all mass shooting killings to date.

ST
Stavanger1Pro4,532 posts
09 Aug 2019, 14:37
#5
09 Aug 2019, 14:37#5

I'm utterly grateful I live in a country where firearms are severely restricted. My brother owns a few shotguns for hunting, but they are restricted to loading no more than 3 rounds at a time. 

A person who I worked with until very recently owned several shotguns for clay pigeon and shooting competitions again restricted. He legally owns a handgun one of the few in the country that does own one and at that it was a relatively low spec/caliber hand gun that took him about two years to acquire going through the proper legal channels. Background checks and police interviews etc. 

Hell even the regular policy force here at not armed. 

I've never once in my life felt the need to carry a weapon. I can't see that changing in the foreseeable future.

I can't recall any mass shootings here.

It hard not to get frustrated watching America dance around the issue time and against hiding behind reasoning and logic that's totally flawed.

Oh if the government ever turns on the American people we will have the means to defend ourselves they say. No they won't. Because if that happens the government will have access to the most powerful, advanced battle tested military on the planet complete with tanks, artillery, aircraft, navy and missiles as well as the communications, logistics and military industrial complex to support and maintain it.  

Oh the Holocaust would never have happened if they Jews were armed. For similar reasons to the above only applying to the technology of the 1940's, nope again. Also see the Warsaw uprising.


 






CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
09 Aug 2019, 14:58
#6
09 Aug 2019, 14:58#6

"Aug 09, 2019, 07:20


Denny

Coming from Clinton it is rich indeed,  Was the assault weapons used sold by any US shop to the insane killers?   Chances are 90% NO - the weapons were -

*  snuggled in from Mexico; or

*  converted from ordinary guns to assault weapons by local criminals.  "

The chances that the guns are being smuggled in from Mexico is very slim. It is most probably the other way around. The gun laws in Mexico is way stricter  than the US. In fact, one of Mexico's biggest headaches is guns being smuggled, by drug lords, into Mexico from the USA. That was the reason for the massively failed Operation Fast and Furious under Obama. There was I similar operation under GW Bush. I have forgotten the name of that one but it was not nearly as controversial as Fast and Furious.

You cannot convert "an ordinary gun" to an "assault weapon". You are probably referring to a semi-automatic assault rifle being converted an automatic. The so-called bump stocks.

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
09 Aug 2019, 15:21
#7
09 Aug 2019, 15:21#7

Although Bill Clinton's calls for the reinstatement of the ban is political point scoring IMO, he has to be credited that violent crime did go down in his era did come down but the ban itself had no marked influence in gun violence. This is purely because killings by rifles, including assault rifles makes up a small portion of all gun homicides.

What is more, violence has come down much further after Clinton's era. Check it out

This was the number of murders in the USA by weapon in 2017. There were a total of 11,004 murders in 2017. Of those 403 were committed with rifles. There is no further breakdown to illustrate how many of those 403 were with assault rifles. Fact is that only just more than three percent of the murders were caused with rifles. And now, just to put this harping on about assault rifles into perspective, of those 11,004 murders a massive 7,032 (almost 64%) were committed with handguns!!!!

Now I ask again: "What difference is a ban on assault rifles going to make to the more or less 10,600 murders with weapons other than assault rifles?" 

Bill Clinton is pissing in the sea to try and make it more salty.

SH
sharkbokCaptain23,217 posts
09 Aug 2019, 15:31
#8
09 Aug 2019, 15:31#8
What is the difference between an assault weapon and an assault rifle? It sounds like one is a rifle.
If you had a choice of dealing with a mass shooter who had a rifle, or a pistol which one would you take? 

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
09 Aug 2019, 16:53
#9
09 Aug 2019, 16:53#9

"xxPosted by: sharkbok (9477 posts)

Aug 09, 2019, 15:31

What is the difference between an assault weapon and an assault rifle? It sounds like one is a rifle. "

And your point is?

SH
sharkbokCaptain23,217 posts
09 Aug 2019, 16:55
#10
09 Aug 2019, 16:55#10
The heading says assault weapons, not specifically rifles.
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
09 Aug 2019, 17:10
#11
09 Aug 2019, 17:10#11

The stupid is strong in this thread.

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
09 Aug 2019, 18:07
#12
09 Aug 2019, 18:07#12

"xxPosted by: sharkbok (9480 posts)

Aug 09, 2019, 16:55

The heading says assault weapons, not specifically rifles.  "

You do know that the REINSTATEMENT of THE ban on assault weapons that Clinton referred to was effectively a ban on assault rifles, don't you? 

In addition it was not renewed because it was a useless ban with no real effect.

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
17 Sept 2019, 12:11
#13
17 Sept 2019, 12:11#13

I assume that we will hear that this father of a Parkland shooting victim is just another far right gun fanatic who has no idea what he is talking about as to where the blame lies for his daughter getting killed:


PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
17 Sept 2019, 12:48
#14
17 Sept 2019, 12:48#14

Speed killed 9,717 people in the USA in 2017. That's just provable cases of speeding and not all car accidents in total.

Obesity killed (have a guess) and cost the tax payer (have a guess) in 2018.

Assault rifle deaths pale into significance when compared to other preventable causes of death.

Mass shootings have some way to go before they become a greater priority than limiting engines, regulating the food and medical industries less inline with corporate bottom line and more for the wellbeing of people.

Hell, legalizing drugs would do away with the majority of gun crime, narcotics overdoses and it would shrink prison populations more than any other legislative change could.

Nobody will tell you that. Because they don't care about people. They care about power. 

The fact that it's(guns) even discussed shows how many have wholeheartedly swallowed the moral grandstanding of politicians for their own gain.

If gun crime and fatalities are able to be drastically decreased through other means, does it even make sense to disarm people anyway? 

_ Free speech is under attack. Because speech is apparently violence :/

_ The Patriot Act has been in operation since 2001.

_The NDAA has been running since 2012 - Allows US authorities to indefinitely detain any citizen or non-citizen at home or abroad without charge or trial, if they are deemed a "terror" threat. Read sections 1021 and 1022. 

_Constant attempts to censor information on the internet through sleazy corporo-political tactics.

_Prism(Ed Snowden), where none of your online data is free from oversight by the "benign meta-data collectors at the CIA" and transcripts are made of all face time and skype conversations.

In summary. Free speech is violence, nothing you do online is private, authorities can detain you without trial or charge and assassinate you without requiring any of the procedure prescribed prior to 2012 or explaining to anyone why you had to be "offed".

...and by the way. It's homophobic to speak out against the sexual transitioning of children as young as three years old. Welcome to the age of prepubescent trannies. Please give us your guns.

Now is not the time for Americans to give up their guns. 

Indeed, q uite the opposite.

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
17 Sept 2019, 12:57
#15
17 Sept 2019, 12:57#15

"Assault rifle deaths pale into significance when compared to other preventable causes of death.  "

Well done, Plum, you are well on your way to be branded a gun toting right wing maniac. 



"Nobody will tell you that. Because they don't care about people. They care about power. 

The fact that it's(guns) even discussed shows how many have wholeheartedly swallowed the moral grandstanding of politicians for their own gain.  "

The inconvenient truth that the lefties hate to be told about.



PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
17 Sept 2019, 13:03
#16
17 Sept 2019, 13:03#16

Oh and Denny...you aware that the ever respectable Mr Clinton rode Epstein's Lolita Express more than 20 times? FACT. Read about it if you can.

At first, he denied it. Then he said that he'd only been on Epstein's jet four times. Subsequently, it emerged that he was a regular with many frequent flier miles to pedophile island.

Let's not forget that he was more than willing to throw Lewinsky under the bus and completely ruin her life. Had it not been for the famous blue dress...her life would have been completely wrecked and she'd have been entirely ostracised. 

His sexual relations with Lewinsky are the least of the problem. What he was prepared to do to a young woman only beginning her career, after the fact, that's the telling part.

Clinton is a perv, a proven liar, a disgrace and a complete deep state scumbag. 

The last person I'll take any advice from is a lying, power-hungry child rapist.

DE
DennyCaptain12,893 posts
17 Sept 2019, 13:12
#17
17 Sept 2019, 13:12#17

Plum

I'm led to believe that this message is about as indicated in the header..."The ban on assault rifles" not the morality of POTUS Clinton. If you so desire, open a new thread to discuss his morality, quite frankly I'm not interested.

The inescapable fact is...........Assault weapons are designed to inflict maximum harm in a short period of time.

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
17 Sept 2019, 13:46
#18
17 Sept 2019, 13:46#18

Heading:

"President Bill Clinton, Reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban Now"



Plum:

"Assault rifle deaths pale into significance when compared to other preventable causes of death.  "



Denny:

Plum is way out of line and off-topic. Piss off and go start your own topic that does not contradict mine.

PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
17 Sept 2019, 13:50
#19
17 Sept 2019, 13:50#19

Denny

My point is that, were it not for power-hungry moral grandstanders deceiving the public, you'd probably not have made your post. 

The same way that you've not posted about how speed is the biggest killer of males in the U.S.. Not just road speed, but general speed related activities. 

Meaning that limiting engines, tweaking road rules or improving on-board management systems would likely decrease road fatalities and bring over-all speed related deaths down significantly. It would save more lives than banning rifles. Much more. And it's no secret to legislators.

But, you didn't post about it because it's not talked about. So unless you kept up to date with research, you rely on what's in the news to formulate your ideas about social consciousness. And you'd pick a side of the debate accordingly.

Ultimately, i t's not talked about because it's not politically sexy and because the automotive industry would take hit.  

It's not politically sexy because it's a bipartisan topic with little moral currency and not much room for grandstanding and being hero for one's team.

All I'm saying is, don't get sucked into their game. 



DE
DennyCaptain12,893 posts
17 Sept 2019, 14:01
#20
17 Sept 2019, 14:01#20

".....you rely on what's in the news to formulate your ideas about social consciousness."

Really?

You would know. 

Thanx for letting me know.

PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
17 Sept 2019, 14:03
#21
17 Sept 2019, 14:03#21

I don't mean YOU, like you Denny.

I'm speaking generally and should have used "one" instead.

DE
DennyCaptain12,893 posts
17 Sept 2019, 14:07
#22
17 Sept 2019, 14:07#22

"Denny:

"Plum is way out of line and off-topic. Piss off and go start your own topic that does not contradict mine."

Actually no, my point hasn't been contradicted, which is "Assault weapons are designed to inflict maximum harm in a short period of time." 

furthermore, my point stands free of Clinton or anyone else's morals.



PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
17 Sept 2019, 14:27
#23
17 Sept 2019, 14:27#23

Assault rifles are made to kill people more efficiently than handguns...and at longer rangers with less down time. Excuse the pun. 

One can't argue that. It's obvious.

But the larger debate can't be settled in a vacuum and purely on the basis of how lethal rifles are. 

Ant poison, CO and trucks are all extremely lethal too. Without being designed to be lethal.

So is it a question of how lethal something is or how/why it was designed. Or is it a combination of these and other factors?

It's about more than just lethality, accessibility and design mandate. That's why many chemicals, machines and activities are regulated and/or banned while others aren't.

Unless you are simply and ONLY stating that assault rifles are designed to kill people quickly. Without having an opinion of whether they should be allowed or not. 

In which case I fully agree. 


PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
17 Sept 2019, 14:28
#24
17 Sept 2019, 14:28#24

Assault rifles are made to kill people more efficiently than handguns...and at longer rangers with less down time. Excuse the pun. 

One can't argue that. It's obvious.

But the larger debate can't be settled in a vacuum and purely on the basis of how lethal rifles are. 

Ant poison, CO and trucks are all extremely lethal too. Without being designed to be lethal.

So is it a question of how lethal something is or how/why it was designed. Or is it a combination of these and other factors?

It's about more than just lethality, accessibility and design mandate. That's why many chemicals, machines and activities are regulated and/or banned while others aren't.

Unless you are simply and ONLY stating that assault rifles are designed to kill people quickly. Without having an opinion of whether they should be allowed or not. 

In which case I fully agree. 


DE
DennyCaptain12,893 posts
17 Sept 2019, 14:44
#25
17 Sept 2019, 14:44#25

"Without having an opinion of whether they should be allowed or not."

Actually I have, the topic has been under discussion ad nauseam and I've always stated the same opinion , the weapon is a favourite of mass killers and should be removed from public access.

AJ
AJHPro3,183 posts
17 Sept 2019, 18:30
#26
17 Sept 2019, 18:30#26

I live close to the USA border and frequently go south to shop, visit, vacation and honestly must say that I have never ever been threatened or placed at risk at any time.

Simple solution ....stay away from inner cities and slum areas populated by scumbags.

But I must agree that I cannot for the life of me understand why automatic weapons are allowed while some claim that they are required for protection.

Perhaps a solution would be to introduce a law that requires all citizens and "Snowfl akes"to do national service in a branch of the armed forces so that they can at first hand gain the true experience of armed conflict.

Not only will it instill the fear of God in them but at the same time it will also allow them to understand just what damage can be carried out with assault and/or automatic weapons.

A great plus is that it will allow them to mature and become hard working, honest and proud citizens who respect others, their flag and country.


No exceptions on faith, health or wealth should be allowed.

 

PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
17 Sept 2019, 18:41
#27
17 Sept 2019, 18:41#27

Exactly Denny

I concluded that. Despite you saying that your point was...

Assault weapons are designed to inflict maximum harm in a short period of time."

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
17 Sept 2019, 18:47
#28
17 Sept 2019, 18:47#28

Denny

Assault weapons were banned in the USA for ten years and the legislation lapsed in 2004.   The legislation had no practical impact and did not stop the mass killings occurring from time to time and the fact is that was the reason why it was not renewed subsequently.

Banning of those weapons should be a consideration - but the more important thing is to not allow sale of any weapons to people without a thorough  background tests and any criminal should never e allowed to bear guns at all.   The fact is there were more people killed through using of guns in a month in Chicago  than were killed in El Paso and Dayton.  In Baltimore over the last two months there were 35 murders in the past three months.

The problem is not really only gun ownership - it is really gun ownership by people with serious psychological and criminal problems,   I would say ban assault weapons - but to make it effective keep it out of the hands of people that may use it for murder.         

DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
17 Sept 2019, 20:44
#29
17 Sept 2019, 20:44#29

The old cliche, guns don't kill people, people kill people. Most of the mass shooters in the last few decades were on some sort of anti depressant or other mind altering drugs, but there's no drive to look at some of the effects of these drugs... why? As soon as politicians get involved with an issue, you can be sure that it's not the actual issue....the more you regulate, the more freedom you take away. What's next?...chipping away until no individual has any personal freedom left. Enter the hive...I don't want my grand kids to be drones someday...freedom comes at a cost...safety too....we need balance of some sort.


DE
DennyCaptain12,893 posts
18 Sept 2019, 02:41
#30
18 Sept 2019, 02:41#30

Would you like for assault rifles to be legalized in South Africa?

DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
18 Sept 2019, 07:03
#31
18 Sept 2019, 07:03#31

Denny, they are, but under strict conditions. I think South Africa's gun laws are too strict. Most of the heavy duty criminals are armed with assault rifles. I'm in the lucky position that I don't need a gun ATM, but I would like to be able to buy one when the need arises...and it's just a matter of time. We are alot closer to the edge than you guys in first world countries, but even there things have gone backwards during the last 2 decades or so...winter is coming...

DE
DennyCaptain12,893 posts
19 Sept 2019, 03:40
#32
19 Sept 2019, 03:40#32

"Most of the heavy duty criminals are armed with assault rifles.."

Sold to the cri ms by corrupt police.

DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
19 Sept 2019, 06:38
#33
19 Sept 2019, 06:38#33

Sold to the crims by corrupt police.


Most are smuggled in from Mozambique....our border control are poorer than that of the USA

It's currency.  They buy stolen cars, drugs, etc with a ton of AK 47's. It will take decades to get rid of all these weapons that are already in the country. 

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
19 Sept 2019, 12:34
#34
19 Sept 2019, 12:34#34

I deliberately posted that video clip and said nothing further, bar the brief exchange following Plum's response. I wanted to see if there was anybody other than Plum, apparently, who bothered to listen to what the father of one of the victims of the shooting had to say. 

Looks like it was probably only Plum, and maybe Draad who paid attention to what the man said.

It underlines what I have said a few times. It has nothing to do with the guns itself but with the "modern" society that we found ourselves in. I put modern in "" because we are supposed to be modern but some behave like prehistoric savages.

I stand by my views that (a) just because a semi-automatic rifle looks like an automatic military rifle does not make it an automatic military rifle, and (b) banning these rifles will not have any significant decrease in the number of violent deaths, if at all, and (c) unless they seriously start hunting down criminals with ILLEGAL firearms of any kind, these senseless violent crimes will not decrease, and (d) this call for gun control has, once again, become a political toy for the left. 

In addition, more gun laws will IMO not help either, since they are not even properly enforcing existing gun laws. Had that  been done the Parkland killings, for one, would not have happened at all. It would have been prevented. Had they, the people and not the damn guns, followed up on all the numerous obvious warning signs the maniac would have been removed and he would not have been in a position to carry out the killings. What is more, given his state of mind, he would have found other ways and means of killing people, IMO.

To emphasize point (c) above..... London has become one of the cities, of its size, with the highest number of violent deaths in the world. I cannot remember if any of those deaths, in the last few years, were caused by guns. I don't know the exact figures but I am sure that the number of gun owners in London are minute compared to those in other cities of similar size. Meanwhile that clown, Sadiq Khan, spends his time either wasting time and money on useless PR exercises or trying to rubbish Donald Trump, who achieves more in one day than the fool has achieved in his entire term as mayor of London.

Banning guns outright will not have any effect. After all, what are the chances of any gang members queuing up to hand in their illegal firearms? The only ones who would end up doing that would be law abiding citizens who would not have been involved in gun crimes in any case. 

DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
19 Sept 2019, 17:35
#35
19 Sept 2019, 17:35#35

If you have much poorer weapons than the criminals, you must rely on the government to protect you...in South Africa can't even keep the lights on, prevent taxi violence or supply the most basic of services, how can we trust them to do anything.  They are directly responsible for the decline in basic morality, they are causing the problem. The time will come when we will have to protect ourselves. What will happen if they suddenly decide to forbid armed response security companies?

The left are slowly but surely regulating us into the abyss. 

BL
bluebokPro3,977 posts
20 Sept 2019, 06:00
#36
20 Sept 2019, 06:00#36
I have two main points to make on the matter. Firstly, its a mentality thing causing most of these shootings. By that I mean, if as school child you feel you're being picked on or bullied, or if you're depressed or whatever else, the option of shooting up a school and making a statement, is becoming a more and more common last resort. Think like such an American child for a moment. They have a false sense of self importance, almost like its their right to perform these atrocities, because they're very important, but nobody is listening to them bitch about a pimple on social media. I seriously place most of the issues the US is experiencing on this child centric model of raising children. It renders the youth and even adults unable to cope with a world that doesn't give a shit about them. On this point, my views are relatively conservative, because it comes down to a lack of decent discipline. When you have a country full of people with no discipline all just expecting to get there own way, all of the time, shit is going to get ugly. For every race there is only one winner, the rest are losers, folks need to get used to this reality, because the truth is, most people will never reach the top or be the best. 
My second point, as I drone on, why on earth does anyone actually need an assault rifle? In a real world American household, why do you need an assault rifle? I don't hunt because I personally feel that anyone that shoots an animal when there is no NEED to do so, just likes to kill and should question why that is. But that said, on some level I do understand the traditions behind hunting, and its cultural acceptability. So a hunting rifle or two can be explained, as can a decent hand gun or even shotgun for self defence. But when you're talking about the need for semi or fully automatic assault rifles, then you are no longer talking about freedom and rights, you are talking about ego and/or a mental issue. 
PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
20 Sept 2019, 10:18
#37
20 Sept 2019, 10:18#37

Cera

You couldn't see but just so you know, there was an extended slow clap and an urge to pour a Bells when I read that post.


PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
20 Sept 2019, 10:35
#38
20 Sept 2019, 10:35#38

Blue

There's many reasons to hunt.

From disagreeing with the state of the meat industry, to wanting to experience one of man's oldest rituals and primary functions, game meat being too expensive, learning to work a kill, conservation and and and...

A statement like the one below, for me, just ignores too many arguments on one side of the fence.

I don't hunt because I personally feel that anyone that shoots an animal when there is no NEED to do so, just likes to kill and should question why that is.

It's the equivalent of not separating animal testing by the cosmetics industry from research involving animals which is carried out in cancer, auto-immune or any other major and deadly human malady.

And that's the problem. Politicians polarise these topics so much that the conversation becomes purely emotional. In fact, that's exactly what they rely on and hope for. 

Here Blue. 

Have a look at what percentage of conservation funding in SA is drummed up through hunting. Now tell me again that there is no NEED to hunt.

It's not ideal. But those arguing against it MUST provide a viable solution. Similar to if I said cars are killing the planet, so stop driving. Your very first question will be...well how am I gonna get to all the places I want to? Until I have a solution, I have no right to demand you drop your car off at the scrap heap.

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
20 Sept 2019, 14:36
#39
20 Sept 2019, 14:36#39

Ban assault rifles like I did, says Bill Clinton. That will stop school shootings, he says. Really? More on the Parkland school shootings:


BL
bluebokPro3,977 posts
20 Sept 2019, 14:56
#40
20 Sept 2019, 14:56#40
Cera....why does a person need an assault rifle? Simple question. And I'm talking a real world answer here, not hypothetical politically driven rubbish. 
As for hunting, I don't personally see the point, I don't like the idea of killing an animal when there is no need to do so. But as I have said, I get that other people see merit in hunting as long as there is a practical reason to do so. I will add, hunting purely for sport, makes a person a doos in my book. They can sugar coat it however they want, they just kill for fun.
↓ LOAD MORE (page 2 of 2)

More from Mikes Gripes