Debate about Gun Control - Printable Version +- Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory (http://generational-theory.com/forum) +-- Forum: Fourth Turning Forums (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-1.html) +--- Forum: Current Events (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-34.html) +---- Forum: General Political Discussion (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-15.html) +---- Thread: Debate about Gun Control (/thread-194.html) |
RE: Debate about Gun Control - playwrite - 07-11-2016 (07-09-2016, 06:32 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:(07-09-2016, 05:48 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: The gun fanatics say that gun control is "prohibition," and then trot out the reasons why prohibition doesn't work. Irrelevant straw man. Or they think that banning military weapons is violating our rights. Both non-starters. Gun control is not gun prohibition, and military weapons are different from civilian guns. Whether its preparing against invasion or upholding contract law, government cannot exist without imposing prohibitions. All but the most inane anarchist wants government to prohibit - the anarchist are free to move to some war lord territory. There are government prohibitions on civilian access to grenade launchers, flame throwers, armed tanks and ICBMs; I'm not aware of any mass killings where these have been employed. What does that have to do with alcohol and drug use? Eric has pointed out at least three times now that his desired prohibition is not against all guns. What purpose does it serve to continue the ruse of looking up the word in the dictionary? RE: Debate about Gun Control - playwrite - 07-11-2016 (07-09-2016, 07:44 PM)Galen Wrote:(07-09-2016, 03:30 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: The money in my wallet and bank accounts and wherever else it's located is mine. The same applies to him. Whether it's government debt or not isn't going to matter to us or anyone who has money. The question is, do we answer the call or do we ignore the call when big government needs more money. What happens then? Questions Democrats should be asking themselves considering their going to be in up to their necks. Do we lend a bunch of self centered, lying, stealing, low life cheats wearing fancy clothes who have been insulting us for years or do we say good bye as their going down. Do you think I'm going to feel bad when Playdude jumps out a window? I think you continue pumping up the blacks as your pissing down on whites. LIBERAL WISDOM AT IT'S BEST. If the empire is reaching the end of the line, then the only question remaining is why you and Classic haven't taken over a federal bird sanctuary somewhere? I'd like the address so I can send you two some dildos and body lube for the duration. RE: Debate about Gun Control - playwrite - 07-11-2016 (07-09-2016, 10:00 PM)taramarie Wrote:(07-09-2016, 05:47 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:(07-09-2016, 05:35 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Galen is not listening to the webmaster's advice. Not everyone is a coward. RE: Debate about Gun Control - playwrite - 07-11-2016 (07-09-2016, 11:13 PM)Galen Wrote:(07-09-2016, 10:33 PM)taramarie Wrote:(07-09-2016, 10:14 PM)Galen Wrote:(07-09-2016, 10:08 PM)taramarie Wrote: Sorry just catching up now. It was late and had to go to bed. I just got back from work today. Will get myself sorted and check on your link. Yes well the kiwi is trying to part truth from fiction. What works and what doesn't. What is sustainable and what is not. Great recessions and city destroying earthquakes do that to people as reality smacks you across the face. I will bet the GI's also went through the same transition. brb. Sorry to bring some reality in, but the GIs would not have helped you take over bird sanctuaries. They might have snickered a little about your dildos but mostly they would have hauled you off to jail or put you in the Army to grow up a tad. RE: Debate about Gun Control - playwrite - 07-11-2016 (07-10-2016, 12:48 AM)Galen Wrote:(07-09-2016, 11:22 PM)taramarie Wrote:(07-09-2016, 11:13 PM)Galen Wrote: One thing I can tell you is that they did not respect those who simply gave up. They were willing to help if you payed attention to what they were saying. Got a bit of a different perspective about the Great Depression than the Lost had but then they were getting started at about that time. In many ways they were more sympathetic about what Generation X was facing in their twenties than the Boomers were. This is hilarious, suggesting the GIs were Libertarians. And the irony of a Libertarian, who cannot find their nirvana anywhere in the world or history, talking about getting things done! RE: Debate about Gun Control - playwrite - 07-11-2016 (07-10-2016, 01:02 AM)taramarie Wrote:(07-10-2016, 12:48 AM)Galen Wrote:(07-09-2016, 11:22 PM)taramarie Wrote:(07-09-2016, 11:13 PM)Galen Wrote: One thing I can tell you is that they did not respect those who simply gave up. They were willing to help if you payed attention to what they were saying. Got a bit of a different perspective about the Great Depression than the Lost had but then they were getting started at about that time. In many ways they were more sympathetic about what Generation X was facing in their twenties than the Boomers were. Taking on the government with guns is big GI thinking? Of course, you call yourself a "realistic idealist," but gad, you really should be a SNL writer! RE: Debate about Gun Control - playwrite - 07-11-2016 (07-10-2016, 04:34 AM)taramarie Wrote:(07-10-2016, 04:28 AM)Galen Wrote:Neither do i mate. That was not the purpose of why i shared the video but more to do with the spread of regression. The stats are what concern me. Yes i have been doing a bit of study I have a few more vids lined up to watch later of interviews with others educated on this topic but they will have to wait till tuesday and the following days as it is late here and i have a double shift tomorrow. Thanks for the vid i will add it to the collection(07-10-2016, 03:12 AM)taramarie Wrote: A video for liberals to consider. Gad, you three are poster children for ISIS recruitment efforts - 'Hey, 3 billion Muslims, you are just troglodytes - nay, nay, nanaynay, and you will never be as sophisticated as us Christians that want to overthrow our government with guns!" RE: Debate about Gun Control - playwrite - 07-11-2016 (07-10-2016, 02:02 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(07-10-2016, 02:27 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:Bob, I don't have issues with your so-called values. I'm sure that we have similar values. I have issues with your politicians and whether or not they truly represent certain values or if they're just using values to get ahead. I have at least three sets of values. I represent American values (classical liberal values). I have moral values. I have personal values. I get the impression that you have one set of values and that's it. I get the impression that progressive values are it as far as your values go. Although, when I press you a bit, I learn you have values we do commonly share. Values that are at odds with the progressive values that you stand for. In short, I don't like your politicians. I don't like the bulk of your base. I don't like the people your party attracts. PB is pathetic. Eric is a self centered leach. Odin is an issue waiting to happen. Hilary Clinton is Hilary Clinton. Kerry is a weasel. Al Sharpton is worthless piece of shit. Liberal today ain't what means and you're tied it. White American and portions of black America, brown America, yellow America, gay America, female America have had with your people. A large enough group to cut ties, remove the Constitution and the flag and reestablish and move on. You'll have a choice to make when this begins to happen during the 4t.(07-10-2016, 01:49 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(07-09-2016, 11:52 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: As a liberal, I can say that about the Hard Right, which I often see as slick narcissists if not sociopaths with insatiable appetites for gain and indulgence but no respect for people other than themselves. Much of what they say insults me.Hint: The ones you rely on are the ones who are more likely to screw you. You don't have to worry about me screwing you. I'm all good as far as money and property are concerned. Hint: We didn't take your jobs. The Democrats basically gave them to the world. You need to think about all the happy Mexicans and Chinese that were created with your parties sacrifice. I mean, come on, how do liberal frat boys really have in common with the working class. Really, I do feel sorry for those folks and wish they had good politicians who cared more about them and less about supporting them enough to keep themselves in office. I understand that the bulk of your base is pretty clueless and uncaring as far as the going on in the world. I understand the liberal educated get the bulk of their information networks that cater to them. Its so funny to see how they react when they when they're challenged by someone who has a bit more brain than they're accustomed too. BTW, they don't seem to care about the working class as much as they're concerned about the poor. The choice is to continue to make low-informational voters like yourself less and less politically relevant. You will still be allowed to yell at kids to get off your lawn if you decide not to take our offer to send you to Greenland all expenses paid. RE: Doing Better - playwrite - 07-11-2016 (07-10-2016, 06:17 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:(07-10-2016, 02:02 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Bob, I don't have issues with your so-called values. I'm sure that we have similar values. I have issues with your politicians and whether or not they truly represent certain values or if they're just using values to get ahead. I have at least three sets of values. I represent American values (classical liberal values). I have moral values. I have personal values. I get the impression that you have one set of values and that's it. I get the impression that progressive values are it as far as your values go. Although, when I press you a bit, I learn you have values we do commonly share. Values that are at odds with the progressive values that you stand for. In short, I don't like your politicians. I don't like the bulk of your base. I don't like the people your party attracts. PB is pathetic. Eric is a self centered leach. Odin is an issue waiting to happen. Hilary Clinton is Hilary Clinton. Kerry is a weasel. Al Sharpton is worthless piece of shit. Liberal today ain't what means and you're tied it. White American and portions of black America, brown America, yellow America, gay America, female America have had with your people. A large enough group to cut ties, remove the Constitution and the flag and reestablish and move on. You'll have a choice to make when this begins to happen during the 4t. What's funny about this is you don't see the irony of wasting your prose on Classic. 4Ts don't end with everyone joining hands around the campfire to a rousing refrain of Kumbaya. Lots of people lose. This 4T, low informational voters (including ammosexuals) are going to lose political power. Trump's replacing trickle-down meme with xenophobic ones is just another way to keep the sheeple manipulated. The elites are only going to be dealt with from the Left, and it's not going to be revolutionary but evolutionary (a Hillary before an Elizabeth) - the ship is far to0 big to turn on a dime without sinking; you seem to grasp that, but the notion of a cure from the Right is way way off. RE: Debate about Gun Control - playwrite - 07-11-2016 (07-10-2016, 11:42 PM)Galen Wrote:(07-10-2016, 04:42 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote:(07-09-2016, 06:32 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:(07-09-2016, 05:48 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: The gun fanatics say that gun control is "prohibition," and then trot out the reasons why prohibition doesn't work. Irrelevant straw man. Or they think that banning military weapons is violating our rights. Both non-starters. Gun control is not gun prohibition, and military weapons are different from civilian guns. HorseshZt. RE: Debate about Gun Control - playwrite - 07-11-2016 (07-11-2016, 02:48 AM)Galen Wrote:(07-10-2016, 11:55 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote:(07-10-2016, 11:42 PM)Galen Wrote:(07-10-2016, 04:42 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote:(07-09-2016, 06:32 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Some of that is just argument about the definition of a word. Do you want the government to prohibit stuff? If so, you can reasonably be said to favor a prohibition. Check your dictionary. I'm using a common definition. And on your side, there are those who would like to have grenade launchers if not an ICBM or two. That doesn't mean there's a chance of it happening. It's just red meat to throw out when the rest of your arguments go down the toilet. RE: Debate about Gun Control - Eric the Green - 07-11-2016 (07-11-2016, 02:48 AM)Galen Wrote:(07-10-2016, 11:55 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote:(07-10-2016, 11:42 PM)Galen Wrote:(07-10-2016, 04:42 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote:(07-09-2016, 06:32 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Some of that is just argument about the definition of a word. Do you want the government to prohibit stuff? If so, you can reasonably be said to favor a prohibition. Check your dictionary. I'm using a common definition. Maybe some obscure group that no-one follows? Quote me. Which members of the "gun control movement" say they are attempting to get a ban? When YOU support a ban, then I'll be in favor of it. How's that? RE: Debate about Gun Control - Eric the Green - 07-11-2016 DALLAS — As a demonstration against police shootings made its way downtown here on Thursday, it differed from others around the country in one startling way: Twenty to 30 of the marchers showed up with AR-15s and other types of military-style rifles and wore them openly, with the straps slung across their shoulders and backs. In Texas, it was not only legal. It was commonplace. The state has long been a bastion of pro-gun sentiment and the kind of place where both Democrats and Republicans openly talk about the guns they own and carry, on their person, in their vehicles, at their offices, at their homes and even in the halls of the Texas Capitol. And in recent years, as gun rights continued to expand, activists have exploited a decades-old freedom to openly carry a rifle in public by showing up at demonstrations with their so-called long guns. Advocates have carried their rifles at the Alamo in San Antonio and outside mosques in the Dallas suburbs. But city and county leaders said the presence of armed protesters openly carrying rifles on Thursday through downtown Dallas had created confusion for the police as the attack unfolded, and in its immediate aftermath made it more difficult for officers to distinguish between suspects and marchers. Two men who were armed and a woman who was with them were detained, fueling an early, errant theory by the police that there was more than one gunman. Mayor Mike Rawlings of Dallas suggested in an interview on Sunday that, in the wake of the attack, he supported tightening the state’s gun laws to restrict the carrying of rifles and shotguns in public. “There should be some way to say I shouldn’t be bringing my shotgun to a Mavericks game or to a protest because something crazy should happen,” said Mr. Rawlings, a Democrat. “I just want to come back to common sense.” The state’s open-carry culture, the mayor said, had imperiled people on the streets of Dallas. “This is the first time — but a very concrete time — that I think a law can hurt citizens, police and not protect them,” he said, adding that he was not anti-gun and that he owned a shotgun himself. “I think it’s amazing when you think that there is a gunfight going on, and you are supposed to be able to sort who the good guys are and who the bad guys are.” According to the authorities, Micah Johnson, 25, opened fire on police officers who were accompanying marchers protesting policing practices. Mr. Johnson, who had been in the Army Reserve, used a rifle to fire from a parking garage and while on foot on the streets below, killing five police officers. The Dallas police chief, David O. Brown, described to CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday the amount of confusion the armed protesters initially caused. He said the event had attracted “20 or 30 people” who “showed up with AR-15 rifles slung across their shoulder.” “They were wearing gas masks,” Mr. Brown said. “They were wearing bulletproof vests and camo fatigues, for effect, for whatever reason.” When the shooting started, “they began to run,” he said. And because they ran in the middle of the shooting, he said, the police on the scene viewed them as suspects. “Someone is shooting at you from a perched position, and people are running with AR-15s and camo gear and gas masks and bulletproof vests, they are suspects, until we eliminate that.” “Doesn’t make sense to us, but that’s their right in Texas,” he said. He did not say whether he supported restricting the carrying of rifles on the streets. On Saturday, President Obama also told reporters that one of the challenges for the Dallas officers who were being shot at was that Texas was an open-carry state. “Imagine if you’re a police officer and you’re trying to sort out who is shooting at you and there are a bunch of people who have got guns on them,” Mr. Obama said.......... http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/11/us/texas-open-carry-laws-blurred-lines-between-suspects-and-marchers.html?_r=1 RE: Debate about Gun Control - pbrower2a - 07-12-2016 ...I wonder how the Right thinks of "gun rights" when some terrorist exploits a peaceful protest as a pretext for killing the police. RE: Debate about Gun Control - Classic-Xer - 07-12-2016 (07-11-2016, 09:39 AM)playwrite Wrote:This low informational voter has been kicking your ass for years. Like I said, the choice will be to extend you a hand or watch you go down. I'm not concerned about the true Americans. The true Americans as a group of individuals will find ways to make do and provide for each other and their families like they always have throughout our history. I feel bad for you in a way. I always feel bad for idiots who find themselves up to their eyeballs in debt, trouble, mistakes, ect. If the so-call zombie apocalypse claims you for all the years of stupidity and reliance on someone other than one self, I will feel bad but not overly sympathetic to the emotional pain and hardship that you'll be experiencing.(07-10-2016, 02:02 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(07-10-2016, 02:27 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:Bob, I don't have issues with your so-called values. I'm sure that we have similar values. I have issues with your politicians and whether or not they truly represent certain values or if they're just using values to get ahead. I have at least three sets of values. I represent American values (classical liberal values). I have moral values. I have personal values. I get the impression that you have one set of values and that's it. I get the impression that progressive values are it as far as your values go. Although, when I press you a bit, I learn you have values we do commonly share. Values that are at odds with the progressive values that you stand for. In short, I don't like your politicians. I don't like the bulk of your base. I don't like the people your party attracts. PB is pathetic. Eric is a self centered leach. Odin is an issue waiting to happen. Hilary Clinton is Hilary Clinton. Kerry is a weasel. Al Sharpton is worthless piece of shit. Liberal today ain't what means and you're tied it. White American and portions of black America, brown America, yellow America, gay America, female America have had with your people. A large enough group to cut ties, remove the Constitution and the flag and reestablish and move on. You'll have a choice to make when this begins to happen during the 4t.(07-10-2016, 01:49 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(07-09-2016, 11:52 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: As a liberal, I can say that about the Hard Right, which I often see as slick narcissists if not sociopaths with insatiable appetites for gain and indulgence but no respect for people other than themselves. Much of what they say insults me.Hint: The ones you rely on are the ones who are more likely to screw you. You don't have to worry about me screwing you. I'm all good as far as money and property are concerned. Hint: We didn't take your jobs. The Democrats basically gave them to the world. You need to think about all the happy Mexicans and Chinese that were created with your parties sacrifice. I mean, come on, how do liberal frat boys really have in common with the working class. Really, I do feel sorry for those folks and wish they had good politicians who cared more about them and less about supporting them enough to keep themselves in office. I understand that the bulk of your base is pretty clueless and uncaring as far as the going on in the world. I understand the liberal educated get the bulk of their information networks that cater to them. Its so funny to see how they react when they when they're challenged by someone who has a bit more brain than they're accustomed too. BTW, they don't seem to care about the working class as much as they're concerned about the poor. RE: Debate about Gun Control - playwrite - 07-12-2016 (07-12-2016, 08:42 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: ...I wonder how the Right thinks of "gun rights" when some terrorist exploits a peaceful protest as a pretext for killing the police. Well, we sure know how the AR ban in California came about - How Ronald Reagan learned to love gun control Quote:In California, Reagan threw his support behind the Mulford Act after a heavily armed group of Black Panthers gathered at the state capitol while the new governor was supposed to be hosting a group of eighth-graders for fried chicken, Winkler recounts at The Atlantic. That same afternoon, Reagan told reporters that he saw "no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons." Mulford quickly added a provision to his bill barring loaded firearms from the capitol, except for when carried by law enforcement. [img][/img] Now if we can just get these guys to walk around the state capital offices in Austin and every other open carry state, I'm sure we see some immediate bans offered by some of the most NRA-friendly governors and state legislatures in the country. RE: Debate about Gun Control - Classic-Xer - 07-12-2016 (07-12-2016, 10:54 AM)playwrite Wrote:One of them took out five of our police officers in Dallas. Curious, what would you do if a large group of them invaded your blue neighborhood?(07-12-2016, 08:42 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: ...I wonder how the Right thinks of "gun rights" when some terrorist exploits a peaceful protest as a pretext for killing the police. RE: Debate about Gun Control - Eric the Green - 07-12-2016 One of them? One of whom? A deranged former soldier? Deranged people don't need to have military weapons to kill police with. Not allowing deranged former soldiers to have military weapons to kill police, does not violate your constitutional rights. RE: Debate about Gun Control - Classic-Xer - 07-12-2016 (07-12-2016, 03:01 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: One of them? One of whom? A deranged former soldier?He was a young black militant like the ones pictured. I keep listening to liberals saying the good guys with guns didn't stop the bad guys with the guns in Dallas. I'd would like to ask the smug liberal congressman or white pansycrat which group prevailed in the end. I know it wasn't the group running away or the liberal white boy with long whiskers clutching his cross and praying for Jesus to save him. RE: Debate about Gun Control - Bob Butler 54 - 07-12-2016 (07-12-2016, 04:12 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(07-12-2016, 03:01 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: One of them? One of whom? A deranged former soldier?He was a young black militant like the ones pictured. I keep listening to liberals saying the good guys with guns didn't stop the bad guys with the guns in Dallas. I'd would like to ask the smug liberal congressman or white pansycrat which group prevailed in the end. I know it wasn't the group running away or the liberal white boy with long whiskers clutching his cross and praying for Jesus to save him. The Dallas incident did break a few normal patterns. The shooter's tactics were unusual. I think the intent was to take a few shots and get away, but he took to many shots and was unable to break off contact. But spree shooters normally prefer gun free zones... schools, military bases, hospitals, etc... anywhere where prohibiting guns has made folk helpless. This guy deliberately went somewhere with a heavy police presence, police representing a target as well as a threat. This was not the usual spree shooter who wanders around picking off unarmed people at short range until the opposition arrives, then committing suicide. Some of the protestors were carrying rifles. Dallas is about as right to carry a place as you'll find in the US. From all I've heard none of the armed protestors joined the exchange of fire... on either side. Black Lives Matters protestors aren't the best friends the police have. They didn't come to the cop's aid. Still, how much of that is prudence? A black guy shooting when cops are going down, even if he is shooting towards the active shooter? They just staid out of it, and likely just as well for both them and the police. That was enough of a mess. ***
I'm used to saying the spiral of violence isn't really escalating. An awful lot of incidents lately, though. A long hot summer, to revive a phrase from the awakening? Still, with the possible exception of Dallas, kids out of school having nothing better to do than protest haven't been much of a factor. Is it thus possibly something longer term? Or is it the two incidents of police using excessive / lethal forces happening so close together. |