You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > US politics
March 29 2024 3.55pm

US politics

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 233 of 609 < 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 >

 

View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 25 May 22 10.19am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by georgenorman

What the anthrax? Enough to defend yourself with?

Personally the only defence I have is my missus's bad cooking.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
BlueJay Flag UK 25 May 22 10.22am

Originally posted by Nicholas91

Agree with logic but the whole thing really is so bemusing.

I still stand aghast at the fact that just about anyone can go in to what is virtually their, I don't know, Sainsburys/Argos and just buy a f**king assault rifle. Isn't Walmart still the biggest gun retailer?

You have to ask at what stage is somebody going to go 'Hang on a jif, maybe the answer to gun violence isn't more guns'??

It's so unbelievably tragic, certainly beyond my articulation, for something like this to happen.

I agree. It's unrealistic to make big changes to the American gun ownership mindset (likely impossible) and besides in plenty of less angry countries gun ownership 'is' widespread yet responsible. That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be sensible restrictions though. There is a difference between defending yourself and buying guns able can cause carnage. If people want to whine about 'slippery slope' and view it all as a backdoor to dems removing everyones guns (something that will never happen anyway) then fine, but realistically people opposing sensible gun laws are closer to blood on their hands than anyone advocating for a more sensible and balanced approach, who actually cares about lives lost in situations like this above politics. Is it really a good idea for a kid to have an 'AR-15 semi-automatic rifle with high-capacity magazines'?

As you say, the US gun crazy mindset has hardly done them any favours, so more checks and limits on the types of guns that can be purchased is a sensible move. Buying high powered guns and bullets shouldn't be like buying a pack of gum.

Edited by BlueJay (25 May 2022 10.25am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
W12 25 May 22 10.38am

Originally posted by georgenorman

How about a tank or missle launcher or a nuclear weapon or anthrax?

We are talking about guns. That's a ridiculous argument.

Anyway.....

2022-05-25 10.35.27.jpg Attachment: 2022-05-25 10.35.27.jpg (60.42Kb)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 25 May 22 11.20am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

I've lived long enough to see that the slippery slope argument isn't actually a fallacy at all.

When civil partnerships were introduced we heard it then, so actually sometimes it's true.

There are 400 million guns in the US even before criminal gang gun ownership is counted. I think some restrictions are just sensible, however there already are restrictions.

It's a question for individual states.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
W12 25 May 22 11.28am

I think it's very simple actually. Having armed citizens is the last protection citizens have against a tyrannical regime.

It's no coincidence that said regimes will always push for the disarming of citizens while arming themselves to the teeth. That's why governments always use these incidents (like Dunblane) to introduce gun control.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
W12 25 May 22 11.31am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I've lived long enough to see that the slippery slope argument isn't actually a fallacy at all.

When civil partnerships were introduced we heard it then, so actually sometimes it's true.

There are 400 million guns in the US even before criminal gang gun ownership is counted. I think some restrictions are just sensible, however there already are restrictions.

It's a question for individual states.

Agreed on the slippery slope but remember "cthulhu only swims left"

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View georgenorman's Profile georgenorman Flag 25 May 22 11.58am Send a Private Message to georgenorman Add georgenorman as a friend

Originally posted by W12

I think it's very simple actually. Having armed citizens is the last protection citizens have against a tyrannical regime.

It's no coincidence that said regimes will always push for the disarming of citizens while arming themselves to the teeth. That's why governments always use these incidents (like Dunblane) to introduce gun control.

It's not the only thing that's simple around here then.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View georgenorman's Profile georgenorman Flag 25 May 22 11.59am Send a Private Message to georgenorman Add georgenorman as a friend

Originally posted by W12

We are talking about guns. That's a ridiculous argument.

Anyway.....

You think they should be allowed to have any sort of gun?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 25 May 22 12.04pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by W12

Agreed on the slippery slope but remember "cthulhu only swims left"

True, he does....until he meets land.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
W12 25 May 22 12.34pm

Originally posted by georgenorman

You think they should be allowed to have any sort of gun?

Yes

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View SW19 CPFC's Profile SW19 CPFC Flag Addiscombe West 25 May 22 12.54pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by W12

I think it's very simple actually. Having armed citizens is the last protection citizens have against a tyrannical regime.

It's no coincidence that said regimes will always push for the disarming of citizens while arming themselves to the teeth. That's why governments always use these incidents (like Dunblane) to introduce gun control.

You really have gotten significantly worse.

On balance the American public want some form of gun control. It’s the lobbyists that hold all the power. Why everything always has to be oversimplified and reduced to the us and them narrative… It’s pretty obvious to a sane, rational and objective person why this is hardly revolutionary, or even controversial.

Steve Kerr puts the argument for gun control across far more passionately and eloquently than most of us ever could.

 


Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View SW19 CPFC's Profile SW19 CPFC Flag Addiscombe West 25 May 22 12.58pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Full transcript, for ref

“I’m not going to talk about basketball. Nothing’s happened with our team in the last six hours. We’re going to start the same way tonight. Any basketball questions don’t matter.

“Since we left, shootaround, 14 children were killed 400 miles from here, and a teacher. In the last 10 days, we’ve had elderly black people killed in a supermarket in Buffalo. We’ve had Asian churchgoers killed in Southern California. Now, we have children murdered at school.

“When are we going to something? I’m tired, I’m so tired of getting up here and offering condolences to the devastated families that are out there. I’m tired of the moments of silence. Enough.

“There’s 50 senators, right now, who refuse to vote on HR-8, which is a background check rule that the House passed a couple years ago. It’s been sitting there for two years. There’s a reason they won’t vote on it: to hold onto power.

“I ask you, Mitch McConnell, and ask all of you Senators who refuse to do anything about the violence, the school shootings, the supermarket shootings, I ask you: ‘are you going to put your own desire for power ahead of the lives of our children, our elderly, and our churchgoers?’ Because that’s what it looks like. That’s what we do every week. I’m fed up, I’ve had enough.

“We’re going to play the game tonight, but I want every person here, every person listening to this to think about your own child or grandchild, mother or father, sister or brother. How would you feel if this happened to you today? We can’t get numb to this. We can’t sit here and just read about it and go well, let’s have a moment of silence. Yay, go Dubs. Come on Mavs, let’s go. That’s whate we’re going to do. We’re going to go play a basketball game.

“Fifty Senators in Washington are going to hold us hostage. Do you realize 90 percent of Americans, regardless of political party, want universal background checks? We’re being held hostage by 50 senators in Washington who refuse to even put it to a vote, despite what we, the American people, want. They won’t vote on it, because they want to hold onto their own power. It’s pathetic. I’ve had enough.”

 


Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 233 of 609 < 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > US politics