201–210 of 373 posts
Can we ban bad faith posters like this? This is pure flamebait.
1) He's technically correct, the best kind of correct.
2) That's tptacek you're suggesting to ban. He's a fixture here and has been an outstanding contributor to this community since near the beginning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Neither of these undermine the point that liberty and self-defence are actually lowered by gun ownership.
Care to prove that point?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blaming the NRA is popular, but people leave out that the academic tide turned against the 1960s view as well: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/us/06firearms.html > There used to be an almost complete scholarly and judicial consensus that the Second Amendment protects only a collective right of the states to maintain militias. That consensus no longer exists — thanks largely to the work over the last 20 years of se…
There’s more in the Atlantic version of the article: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/05/john-paul-... “ Colonial history contains many examples of firearm regulations in urban areas that imposed obstacles to their use for protection of the home. Boston, Philadelphia, and New York—the three largest cities in America at that time—all imposed restrictions on the firing of guns in the city limits. Boston e…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's because it's easier to divide and conquer with 'big scary assault rifles meant for the battlefield' - it helps gather some people who are in the middle, and agree with Heller in that people should be able to defend themselves especially at home... if you say assault rifle bad - no one needs one to hunt with - you get some people nodding... so it's easier to pass and claim a victory lap. I saw a definitio…
> Frankly if the grandma next door needs to use a weapon, I would hope that she is not limited by regulations such as that - I would like her to have as good of a grip and sighting options as absolutely possible. I'd rather her have an easily controllable SBR type of weapon, expandable stock and maybe 30 rounds of 22 winmag - this would be much safer for her and for the neighbors I think if something went down... JB'…
I think it depends on where you live, and how valuable you are in terms of theft and attractiveness.
For examples - the super rich in Miami probably need more security than the richer in Beverly Hills. If you are attractive / sexy in Miami you are probably not more in danger than if you are that sexy in like St Louis or Newark NJ / Detriot.
There was a country girl in the news a couple years back, she was young and very pretty. The whole town knew her husband had died / had a funeral - a couple weeks later she needed firearms to stop bad things happening at her house.
I've been in Nashville (TN) and the suburbs of it for many years, and I will say that you won't need weapons everyday, but the crime, especially with violent younger people is increasing at a rate that is kind of shocking. We have multiple armed robberies all around us. Last week someone put a knife to a convenience store customer;s throat in order to rob the gas station.
People and places are being robbed left and right around here these days - and many of them get extra violent without reason. Some have been caught on door cams lately. With the 'gentrification' that certain places are bringing - it's not going to get any better.
I spent more than a decade working the nightshift downtown. It was during those times it became clear to me, when you need help, if you have time to call the cops - it will take a long time for them to get to you.
My neighbor who is grandma age has had her house attempted to be broken into multiple times throughout the years. Partially because it is off the main road enough to be secluded for privacy in attacks.
People around her are busting into cars, jacking mail from mailboxes a lot.. that is not usually violent, but when you catch these people doing these things, sometimes they pop off with all kinds of crazy, sometimes with stolen guns.
I don't know what it's like in the part of the world you are in, but around here it's not everyday you in the thick of it - not like SE DC was in the 80s.. but everyday there is lots of crime all around us (like within a 1/2 mile and lots within 5 miles) - it's just a matter of time before you are in a normal place at a bad time.
Hopefully you can run / drive away and maybe just use a pepper spray and whistle.. but the criminals around here have really stepped up the violence and guns the past few years. There are signs it's getting worse. I would suggest the possible need for weaponry during the daylight hours is much more often now than it was a decade ago I'd say only those who worked at night needed to really be extra aware of surroundings and such.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless pills and rope are never fatal, that doesn't really matter, because we still need to solve it for the times that they are. And if we do then it doesn't matter how fatal the method is because there is no longer an attempt.
That's not a particularly compelling argument. It suggests we should never attempt to solve any problem, because other smaller problems will continue to exist and we need to solve them to.
If your house has a gas leak and someone says "don't turn on the light, it's dangerous" then even if they're right, the real solution is to do something about the gas leak, not to sit in darkness and do nothing while your house is full of gas. And once the gas is out of your house there is no reason not to turn on the light.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is gang violence somehow more acceptable than "regular" violence? Minors are victims of "gang violence" too. And TBH, I don't really give a shit about the age of the victims. It's the same result, a life ended prematurely by someone else. While you can make an argument that and adult who died by gun violence got more of a chance at life than child who died from the same, you can't really say that the crime is any…
I feel some control over whether or not I’m in a gang, but little over whether I happen to be shopping at the mall at the wrong time. That’s why gang violence is more acceptable I guess?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not only that, support for banning hand guns has collapsed: https://news.gallup.com/poll/150341/record-low-favor-handgun... . In 1959, 60% of people favored a handgun ban, to 36% opposed. By 2011 that had flipped to 73% opposed and just 26% in favor. People focus on rifles, which are responsible for relatively few deaths, because banning handguns is wildly unpopular. (Heck Kamala Harris owns a handgun.)
Rifles have none of the legitimate uses that gun advocates go on about so its a low reward but 0 loss situation to ban them. Unless someone is proposing you need to defend your house against a zombie invasion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Care to prove that point?
Numerous studies and meta-analyses have shown that gun ownership, even when controlled for other factors, produces an increase of gun deaths in a household of 3x. What would be sufficient proof to satisfy you of this fact?
What do you say to this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Frankly if the grandma next door needs to use a weapon, I would hope that she is not limited by regulations such as that - I would like her to have as good of a grip and sighting options as absolutely possible. I'd rather her have an easily controllable SBR type of weapon, expandable stock and maybe 30 rounds of 22 winmag - this would be much safer for her and for the neighbors I think if something went down... JB'…
a mag full of 22 win mag is not really 'serious firepower' - I mean it is, but I think people would consider like a SCAR or M60 to be serious - and lots of people chuckle at someone using '22'... I think it depends on where you live, and how valuable you are in terms of theft and attractiveness. For examples - the super rich in Miami probably need more security than the richer in Beverly Hills. If you are attractive…
lots of people chuckle at someone using '22'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Ron...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s a common contention of the gun advocacy community that it’s ignorance that drives awb, but that flies in the face of the evidence that veterans are disproportionately represented in elected officials, police officers are consulted when drafting the legislation & its a subject that is easily researchable. I think it’s more likely that the people who are politically motivated around this issue represent the extrem…
Right. The point that gets missed is that the contention is often less about the nuances of any particular firearm's capabilities and more about the common intentions of their use. EVERY gun is violent in the hands of someone trying to commit violence. Yet, mass shooters (who kill people in a particularly cruel manner, randomly, and that which is difficult for the average person to guard against) gravitate to assault…
mass shooters... gravitate to assault rifles