kelpdiver 2 #26 June 10, 2014 billvon>Alcohol prohibition doesn't work... But age limits and laws against drunk driving seem to. with twice the fatalities as guns, that's an interesting measure of success. An inconsistent one, to say the least. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #27 June 10, 2014 billvon >Alcohol prohibition doesn't work... But age limits and laws against drunk driving seem to. >Abortion prohibition doesn't work... But prohibiting partial birth abortions (or more accurately late term abortions) seems to work in many places. >Prostitution prohibition doesn't work... But requiring regular health tests in places where it's legal seems to work quite well. You've made a good argument both against bans and for regulation. "Come on baby, lets do the twist Come on bbaaaaaaaabyyyyyyyyy, lets do the twist" "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #28 June 10, 2014 rushmc ***>You've made a good argument both against bans and for regulation. "Come on baby, lets do the twist Come on bbaaaaaaaabyyyyyyyyy, lets do the twist" he didn't twist, it's a good point. but the analogy needs to be carried forward If banning late term abortions is good, perhaps two more laws banning late term abortions is even better that's a more applicable comparison (or one could even go the next obvious analogy - perhaps also banning mid-term abortions......then watch how the two hot topics are similar in arguments about 'chipping away' at rights, etc etc.) we really need to stick with proper training and respect of the youth (and today....parents) about safe gun ownership.....we really need to focus on identifying the crazy people and helping them before we have to put them down when they turn violent. none is easy, and the bias and unreasonable fear that's now PC is hurting any real solution even as it's used as a political tool against the people. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #29 June 10, 2014 rehmwa ******>You've made a good argument both against bans and for regulation. "Come on baby, lets do the twist Come on bbaaaaaaaabyyyyyyyyy, lets do the twist" he didn't twist, it's a good point. but the analogy needs to be carried forward If banning late term abortions is good, perhaps two more laws banning late term abortions is even better that's a more applicable comparison (or one could even go the next obvious analogy - perhaps also banning mid-term abortions......then watch how the two hot topics are similar in arguments about 'chipping away' at rights, etc etc.) we really need to stick with proper training and respect of the youth (and today....parents) about safe gun ownership.....we really need to focus on identifying the crazy people and helping them before we have to put them down when they turn violent. none is easy, and the bias and unreasonable fear that's now PC is hurting any real solution even as it's used as a political tool against the people. The problem as I see it Bill.. is very damn few people are willing to allow any erosion of rights like you are suggesting.. In the black and white world of the 2nd Amendment absolutists.. that is just going too far towards communism Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #30 June 10, 2014 Amazon The problem as I see it Bill.. is very damn few people are willing to allow any erosion of rights like you are suggesting.. In the black and white world of the 2nd Amendment absolutists.. that is just going too far towards communism No, the problem is the people proposing these erosions (Feinstein, HCI, etc) are all on record for their wish to eliminate all private weapons, and of their intent to do it incrementally if necessary. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #31 June 10, 2014 kelpdiver *** The problem as I see it Bill.. is very damn few people are willing to allow any erosion of rights like you are suggesting.. In the black and white world of the 2nd Amendment absolutists.. that is just going too far towards communism No, the problem is the people proposing these erosions (Feinstein, HCI, etc) are all on record for their wish to eliminate all private weapons, and of their intent to do it incrementally if necessary. Sorry, Jeanne, I understand your take on it, but I lean more towards Kelp's read on it. The anti's are MUCH more fanatical and extreme and unreasonable about the issue. Makes it extremely difficult to find a true solution when they are ridiculous and uncompromising. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #32 June 10, 2014 rehmwa ****** The problem as I see it Bill.. is very damn few people are willing to allow any erosion of rights like you are suggesting.. In the black and white world of the 2nd Amendment absolutists.. that is just going too far towards communism No, the problem is the people proposing these erosions (Feinstein, HCI, etc) are all on record for their wish to eliminate all private weapons, and of their intent to do it incrementally if necessary. Sorry, Jeanne, I understand your take on it, but I lean more towards Kelp's read on it. The anti's are MUCH more fanatical and extreme and unreasonable about the issue. Makes it extremely difficult to find a true solution when they are ridiculous and uncompromising. So at what point will it be impossible to have sane rules to stop the insane... When some atrocity so heinous that there will be no stopping the looney lefty toons from going for the whole enchilada and no one... and I do mean no one will dare oppose them.. We are a fear driven society.. and fear will win out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #33 June 10, 2014 Amazon .. We are a fear driven society.. and fear will win out. I don't believe that of mankind (at least, I don't believe that in general), even though many operate on that assumption and try to use fear to leverage power. In the end, they also will fail. It requires more government, not less, to allow that 'fearful' minority to be tyrants over the rest of us..... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #34 June 10, 2014 rehmwa ***.. We are a fear driven society.. and fear will win out. I don't believe that of mankind (at least, I don't believe that in general), even though many operate on that assumption and try to use fear to leverage power. In the end, they also will fail. It requires more government, not less, to allow that 'fearful' minority to be tyrants over the rest of us..... How much have we been led to believe we need all this "protection" right into a police state since 9/11??? Fear of the terrorists won out contrary to what harm they really did, we have done far more to ourselves to protect America from the "evil-doers" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 125 #35 June 10, 2014 New flash. TK Hayes owns guns. A lot of them, and has been shooting guns, hunting and enjoying gun sports since he was 6 years old. TK Hayes is not in favor of banning guns. Nice try though - rather than go address the arguments I have posted, you decide to go on a tangent and pretend something happened that actually did not. Please try to stick to reality. I absolutely advocate and always have that it is a complex issue. And I absolutley advocate and laways have advocated that guns and the availability of guns, the quantity of guns is part of the problem. 'Your side' advocates that 'good guys with guns' are a good thing, so I will continue to bash that down every chance I get. As I should. Because it is based in reality, not some ideology. good guys with guns are killing and murdering people very day in this country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 125 #36 June 10, 2014 The second amendment is a barrier yes. and agreed it is a constitutional right. Funny how the right has no problem with dismantling the constitutional voting rights, but stands firm when gun rights are talked about. BTW, I am all for changing the second amendment. A bullshit amendment in this day and age. Needs an overhaul. Afterall, it was an 'amendment itself' ratified many years after the start of the country. Like so many other parts of the Constitution, it could use some work. Let's change it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 125 #37 June 10, 2014 Quote"Come on baby, lets do the twist Come on bbaaaaaaaabyyyyyyyyy, lets do the twist" speaking of 'valuable contributions to the thread'..... wow. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #38 June 11, 2014 QuoteAfterall, it was an 'amendment itself' ratified many years after the start of the country. The Constitution and Bill of Rights were ratified at the same time. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #39 June 11, 2014 DanGQuoteAfterall, it was an 'amendment itself' ratified many years after the start of the country. The Constitution and Bill of Rights were ratified at the same time. Uh... No. They were not. The US Constitution was "created" on September 17, 1787 and ratified on June 21, 1788. The US Bill of Rights was "created" on September 25, 1789, adopted by the House on August 21, 1789, and the first 10 were ratified on December 15, 1791. The 11th was adopted 203 years later as the 27th Amendment. The 12th is still pending (technically, but will never be).quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #40 June 11, 2014 Okay Professor. You are technically correct. The Bill of Rights was ratified a few years after the Constitution. However, the ideas contained therein were drafted to assuage the fears of the Anti-Federalists, without whose support the Constitution would not have been ratified. In legal terms, they were separated by a few years. In concept, they went hand-in-hand. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #41 June 11, 2014 tkhayesNew flash. TK Hayes owns guns. A lot of them, and has been shooting guns, hunting and enjoying gun sports since he was 6 years old. TK Hayes is not in favor of banning guns. Nice try though - rather than go address the arguments I have posted, you decide to go on a tangent and pretend something happened that actually did not. Please try to stick to reality. I absolutely advocate and always have that it is a complex issue. And I absolutley advocate and laways have advocated that guns and the availability of guns, the quantity of guns is part of the problem. 'Your side' advocates that 'good guys with guns' are a good thing, so I will continue to bash that down every chance I get. As I should. Because it is based in reality, not some ideology. good guys with guns are killing and murdering people very day in this country. You own guns, well imagine that doesnt change the fact that you and yours (consider Feinstien) think only you and yours are qualified, smart enough, sane enough to own guns So my reality is on track Your comments, (if true) change not a damned thing Next....."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #42 June 11, 2014 rushmc ***New flash. TK Hayes owns guns. A lot of them, and has been shooting guns, hunting and enjoying gun sports since he was 6 years old. TK Hayes is not in favor of banning guns. Nice try though - rather than go address the arguments I have posted, you decide to go on a tangent and pretend something happened that actually did not. Please try to stick to reality. I absolutely advocate and always have that it is a complex issue. And I absolutely advocate and always have advocated that guns and the availability of guns, the quantity of guns is part of the problem. 'Your side' advocates that 'good guys with guns' are a good thing, so I will continue to bash that down every chance I get. As I should. Because it is based in reality, not some ideology. good guys with guns are killing and murdering people very day in this country. You own guns, well imagine that doesn't change the fact that you and yours (consider Feinstien) think only you and yours are qualified, smart enough, sane enough to own guns So my reality is on track Your comments, (if true) change not a damned thing Next..... That is on amazing assumption Marc. I also own firearms and concealed carry and always have. I do not in any way support banning any kind of guns but I do want to keep the mentally unstable nutcases that feel that the way to infamy lies in a path thru a local school or anywhere else with large amounts of innocent people to get the nutty little mitts on any kind of firearm...PERIOD. But I guess you assume that I too want to take away all your guns because I do not agree with you politically. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #43 June 11, 2014 rehmwa ****** The problem as I see it Bill.. is very damn few people are willing to allow any erosion of rights like you are suggesting.. In the black and white world of the 2nd Amendment absolutists.. that is just going too far towards communism No, the problem is the people proposing these erosions (Feinstein, HCI, etc) are all on record for their wish to eliminate all private weapons, and of their intent to do it incrementally if necessary. Sorry, Jeanne, I understand your take on it, but I lean more towards Kelp's read on it. The anti's are MUCH more fanatical and extreme and unreasonable about the issue. Makes it extremely difficult to find a true solution when they are ridiculous and uncompromising. I'm fairly outspoken here on firearms issues, as most have probably observed, and I will acknowledge it is through the lens of someone who lives in California where "compromise" means only half of all the new gun restrictions that are proposed get passed and signed into law every year. If you live somewhere where you write your representatives and get as ignored as I do but in the other direction, I empathize with you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #44 June 11, 2014 DanGOkay Professor. You are technically correct. He is simply correct and you were wrong. No need for an unnecessary adverb.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #45 June 11, 2014 rhaig***show where I have ever said we should ban guns. more rhetoric not based in reality. I would expect nothing less. look... taking lessons from kallend on not stating any opinion or making useful contribution to the conversation. Don't blame me for your inability to use a search function or your absence of reading comprehension.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #46 June 11, 2014 QuoteHe is simply correct and you were wrong. No need for an unnecessary adverb. And there was no reason for you to comment at all, yet you still chose to do so. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #47 June 11, 2014 Amazon That is on amazing assumption Marc. I also own firearms and concealed carry and always have. I do not in any way support banning any kind of guns but I do want to keep the mentally unstable nutcases that feel that the way to infamy lies in a path thru a local school or anywhere else with large amounts of innocent people to get the nutty little mitts on any kind of firearm...PERIOD. But I guess you assume that I too want to take away all your guns because I do not agree with you politically. Great - lets start with you in particular, we can throw john in if you wish, I'll pick the doctor and you can go through an interview where the doctor decides you are fit to own guns or any weapon at all, or not.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #48 June 11, 2014 turtlespeed ******No one is asking for prohibition. But sure, go ahead and be another conservative with no only no solution, but an extremist point of view not based in any reality. Ya, you are Cause you are looking for a problem to support your "solution". But you are looking at the wrong problem Guns are not the issue Your perceived evil of guns is YOUR issue If deaths really meant as much to your as you say here, then you would be talking about other things that cause WAY more deaths than nuts with guns But that does not fit your hatred for guns and gun owners Crocodile tears my friend, and you are being called out on them You are not going to convince him. It's alot like this . . . with the fence being the second amendment. They just can't seem to get through it no matter how hard they try.Gotta give them credit though - they ARE persistent.That video explains. Got to laugh at the stupidity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #49 June 11, 2014 kallend******show where I have ever said we should ban guns. more rhetoric not based in reality. I would expect nothing less. look... taking lessons from kallend on not stating any opinion or making useful contribution to the conversation. Don't blame me for your inability to use a search function or your absence of reading comprehension. There's the reading comprehension PA you're so accustomed to using. I knew it would come out soon.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #50 June 11, 2014 kelpdiver***>Alcohol prohibition doesn't work... But age limits and laws against drunk driving seem to. with twice the fatalities as guns, that's an interesting measure of success. An inconsistent one, to say the least. Gun death's in the US were roughly 10,950 most of those more than likely SUICIDE. Traffic deaths in 2013 roughly 35,200. I thought that number would have been more but that was the number I found in a quick search. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
