zoony Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 "those who would pretend to be persecuted on the internet deserve it. Or something" -Thomas Jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoEd Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 One can argue that the biggest "sweeping generalization" of all is the NRA-pushed notion that the Second Amendment means Absolutely NO Restrictions on Gun Ownership of Any Type.The "well-regulated" part of the Second Amendment doesn't exist in their world. But neither side is willing to sit down and work out the issue. Why? I would argue that the well intended pursuit of stricter policies and regulations in the form of a bill, gets bogged down with verbose legal mumbo jumbo that's so vague it's interpretation enables a foot in the door for use to target other guns besides the ones it was initially intended for. All of these "riders" that are attached that bog down the process allowing political posturing during future elections. You know the ones, "He voted against the use of widgets on innocent baby seals!" Well, the widget-seal bill had a rider attached that called for the mass production of Cowboy jerseys, requiring every American to purchase one or be fined! The problem isn't gun restrictions, the problem is politics! PERIOD! The problem is multifaceted and there's no easy solution. Being depressed and a thug are cool, it's part of the "culture". 5 year olds are playing call of duty and the perception of the value of life is effected. I went to see Django the other night and a couple had a FIVE year old in the theater! Our society has cultivated the "everybody wins" generation. No matter how much effort, how much you suck at it, by God here's your trophy, ribbon or pat on the back with a "nice try Johnny". We are not preparing these kids for the "real" world! They show up to work 15 minutes late and expect it to be okay because "hey, I tried to get here on time, pay me!". They're used to putting out minimal effort and thought and still receiving the same benefits and attention as the kids showing up, busting their asses and putting in the work to succeed. That's why they feel entitled. That's why they think they can leave HS and get a job making $60K a year. That's why when I ask my future Career Academy Students what they want to be when they grow up and I get answers like engineer and they're at a 7th grade math level; doctor and they can't write a simple sentence and read on a 6th grade level. They're don't "fit in" at all and we call it "socially awkward" which can absolutely be the case. However, when they're socially awkward and spend 6+ hours a day living in a fantasy world of video games full of violence and made up characters, it tends to change their prespective on reality. But we're so concerned with hurting their itty bitty little feelings or crushing their dreams, we send them off into the real world unequipped for reality and when they realize this they decide they're going to just be the bad ass they are on Call of Duty and go gun down innocent people! Tightening the grip on guns will have same effect tightening the grip on drugs has had. We see how that has worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Poman, as an owner of multiple guns, can you talk about the process you went through to acquire those guns? Are existing laws (State... FLA? and Federal) too onerous or unwieldy? I ask this as an honest question, not being too familiar with the process. I probably fall somewhere in the middle of the gun control debate - I think that some restriction on large capacity semi-automatic weapons is reasonable but that any further restriction is probably fruitless given the vast number of guns out there now. And even with semi-automatics - so called "assault-weapon" ban - the devil is in the details, as the previous ban proved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Tightening the grip on guns will have same effect tightening the grip on drugs has had. We see how that has worked. As evidenced by all the developed nations who have fairly successfully tightened the grip on guns. :maniac: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poman Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I'm not trying to ridicule you, but you shouldn't use false quotes. If you believe in something, just say that you believe in it. Don't try to claim that Thomas Jefferson said something that he did not.There is no evidence that Thomas Jefferson ever said the second quote. It does not appear anywhere before 1986. If you grew up with it, that is probably because the quote was made up while you were young. It's fine that you believe in the principle. But don't try to falsely attach Thomas Jefferson's name to it. Also, just to emphasize that I'm not picking on you specifically. Someone else used one of those quotes two years ago, and I called him on it then too: http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?325250-quot-Gather-your-armies-quot-%28Update-Barber-fails-to-gather-an-army-loses-primary%29&p=7609424&viewfull=1#post7609424 Cheer bro I will be more astute in my quote selections from here on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I assume you are referring to the need of the 2nd Amendment to be modernized? Is Alex Jones doing what? I was referring to your statement that discussion of the Second Amendment needs to be measured and thoughtful. I didn't even know who he was prior to this thread. And again, not that I agree with all of it, but there is historical evidence to back up some people's fears of a government they don't fully trust unarming them. I personally think its a good thing that so many people get fired up about a change to the constitution. Thats how it should be. Changes to the Constitution should not be taking lightly. Intellectual debate is a neccesity instead of dismissing one side out of hand. It's not intellectual debate when people start ranting about Hitler. That is what we are dismissing out of hand. ---------- Post added January-9th-2013 at 01:19 PM ---------- The first quote is from his Commonplace Book, where he quoted a passage. The quote is not attributed to him in my post. The second one, people have recently challenged the validity of, but there is not evidence that he did not say it. It's one I grew up with. Maybe they are not exact, but they are things I believe in. So now that you have attempted to ridicule me, do you have anything intelligent to add? What the? It is perfectly intelligent to point out that cut-and-paste quotes attributed to Thomas Jefferson were not, in actuality, said by Thomas Jefferson. The fact that the cut-and-pasting might reflect poorly on you and the sources of information on which you rely is just a side effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 It's not intellectual debate when people start ranting about Hitler. That is what we are dismissing out of hand. Exactly my point, the absurdity is thinking that every "he's Hitler" rant is a sign of intellectual discourse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 But neither side is willing to sit down and work out the issue. Why? I would argue that the well intended pursuit of stricter policies and regulations in the form of a bill, gets bogged down with verbose legal mumbo jumbo that's so vague it's interpretation enables a foot in the door for use to target other guns besides the ones it was initially intended for. You are correct. The NRA's lobbyists are masterful at watering down and confusing proposed gun laws so that in the rare circumstances where they are passed, they are essentially useless and unenforceable. They have been doing it for decades. I assume that is what you mean. The problem isn't gun restrictions, the problem is politics! PERIOD! The problem is multifaceted and there's no easy solution. Being depressed and a thug are cool, it's part of the "culture". 5 year olds are playing call of duty and the perception of the value of life is effected. I went to see Django the other night and a couple had a FIVE year old in the theater! Our society has cultivated the "everybody wins" generation. No matter how much effort, how much you suck at it, by God here's your trophy, ribbon or pat on the back with a "nice try Johnny". We are not preparing these kids for the "real" world! They show up to work 15 minutes late and expect it to be okay because "hey, I tried to get here on time, pay me!". They're used to putting out minimal effort and thought and still receiving the same benefits and attention as the kids showing up, busting their asses and putting in the work to succeed. That's why they feel entitled. That's why they think they can leave HS and get a job making $60K a year. That's why when I ask my future Career Academy Students what they want to be when they grow up and I get answers like engineer and they're at a 7th grade math level; doctor and they can't write a simple sentence and read on a 6th grade level. They're don't "fit in" at all and we call it "socially awkward" which can absolutely be the case. However, when they're socially awkward and spend 6+ hours a day living in a fantasy world of video games full of violence and made up characters, it tends to change their prespective on reality. But we're so concerned with hurting their itty bitty little feelings or crushing their dreams, we send them off into the real world unequipped for reality and when they realize this they decide they're going to just be the bad ass they are on Call of Duty and go gun down innocent people! I just... are there any other conservative concerns you want to express. You are all over the place in this thread. I agree with part of what you say (and disagree with other parts of it) but I don't see how it is relevant to the discussion except in a generalized "the world is going to hell in a handbasket get off my lawn" sort of way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 "those who would pretend to be persecuted on the internet deserve it. Or something"-Thomas Jefferson Leave it to Zoony to take a Thomas Jefferson quote entirely out of context and apply it to gun control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Cheer bro I will be more astute in my quote selections from here on. Just so you know, it is not just a simple "quote selection" issue. Your assumption that the Founding Fathers agreed with your position on gun control is based, I suspect, in large part on quotes of that sort. As far as I know, there is very little direct evidence explaining exactly what the Founding Fathers meant by the language of the Second Amendment (hence the perceived need, by some people) to make up quotes on the issue and attribute them to a Founding Father in order to legitimize their point of view. I'm not saying you made up the quotes or knew they were false, or anything. But someone did, and they had the effect that person wanted - they led you to believe that your views were aligned with those of the great Thomas Jefferson, and hence are more legitimate than the views of those who support gun control. There are literally millions of people who believe those quotes are accurate. Heck, I have no doubt that Alex Jones is one of them. The intellectual debate that you suggest has been poisoned from the start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 The appeal to authority is a powerful temptation, yet still a logical fallacy....especially when the quotes in the appeal are fictional. It reminds me of this quote, "Don't believe every quote you read on the internet." ~Abraham Lincoln Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Care to elaborate or is my opinion so far below your intellect it's not worth the effort? Hmm, inaccurate aspersions about a person you've never met? Judging by post #72 in this very thread, you object to that behavior from others. But now you've gone ahead and indulged in the very same behavior yourself. Interesting... and telling. Will we get to read an excuse for it? Bated breath. As for your original question: Alex Jones is fairly unique in his degree of insanity, an observation which requires no elaboration in light of the Morgan video. If you have some other point to make, then by all means make it and post video evidence as required. But that's on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Changes to the Constitution should not be taking lightly. except when it's to protect us from the gheys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Poman, as an owner of multiple guns, can you talk about the process you went through to acquire those guns? Are existing laws (State... FLA? and Federal) too onerous or unwieldy? I ask this as an honest question, not being too familiar with the process. I probably fall somewhere in the middle of the gun control debate - I think that some restriction on large capacity semi-automatic weapons is reasonable but that any further restriction is probably fruitless given the vast number of guns out there now. And even with semi-automatics - so called "assault-weapon" ban - the devil is in the details, as the previous ban proved. Or any other gun owner want to address this? It might be a good way to start a discussion of what laws currently exist, what the gaps might be, which laws overreach, etc. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Or any other gun owner want to address this? It might be a good way to start a discussion of what laws currently exist, what the gaps might be, which laws overreach, etc. ... Start with the bad idea that guns should be regulated by the laws of the individual states rather than by the federal government. That alone is a guarantee that they won't be effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoEd Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Do you agree with Alex Jones's paranoid rant in the original post? Do you think the analogy with Adolf Hitler and the fear of a "new world order" is accurate?If not, why are you getting your panties in a bunch when people make fun of Alex Jones? Is your self-esteem so tied up in your guns that any discussion that involves a crazy person (who happens to rant about guns along with everything else he rants about) is necessarily an attack on you and your conservative values and your Christianity and your intelligence? There seems to be a lot of unfocused resentment under the surface there. Why would this be the thread that would bring it out? If you actually took the time to read my original post in this thread you'd see where I stand on guns, policy and enforcement. I was responding to someone who quoted me and giving an opinion on the overall "culture" of a group of poster's on the board who categorize every opposing view as stupid and attack instead of discuss. Last I checked this is a discussion board, not an I'm right, you're stupid board. I was agreeing with Poman, is that not allowed? However, you're WAY to intelligent to actually take the time to scroll back a little, instead you ignore the bulk of what is said and cherry pick your arguements. Bravo! I don't agree with Jones, he's the type of extremist that diminishes the credibility of conservatives. Please show me where I ever said I agreed. I don't necessarily agree 100% with the NRA either. However, like I've already stated, because of our legislative system and it's many loopholes and "interpretations" it very easy for the target of an intended law (assault weapons) to all of a sudden be used to restrict ownership of a gun that wasn't never the target (a semi-automatic shotgun). I think we need to be EXTREMELY careful anytime politics are envolved because it's enevitable that an attempt to do right for the public is a vehicle for political posturing. Is that too extreme of a view? Which politicians are pushing bans on a constitutional right? Are you suggesting that the 2nd amendment should be without any limitations and that it's your right to own whatever gun you choose? I don't think a single person on here is advocating banning all guns. To paraphrase your own rant you seem to be "making your opinion on what's happening a fact . Never suggested there shouldn't be limitations, did I? Care to read my first post on this topic. So you don't think there's politicians in America who feel like our gun laws should be as extreme as Englands? You don't think there's politicians that would love to get stricter laws passed that open the door for gov't removal of weapons from its citizen based off of guidelines THEY'VE established? Just like in school, rules are made for a reason, but it's how they're interpreted and enforced by teachers is a whole other story. The handbook says "males can't wear hats or hoodies". Well, the intent is obvious, I mean common sense should tell you that. However, it was in the low 30's, high 20's here in MS a few weeks ago and the guy beside was chasing kids down for wearing a stocking hat or hoodie on campus. Seriously? You can't tell the difference between a kid trying to represent a "set" and a kid covering his ears because it's godforsaken cold outside? So, a law is written making it harder to own an AK47, which I don't know why the average Joe should need one. But suddenly I can't have my semi automatic shotgun because the magazine capacity and action could be turned into an "assault" rifle. All it takes is for one ******* to interpret and enforce differently. Hmm, inaccurate aspersions about a person you've never met? Judging by post #72 in this very thread, you object to that behavior from others. But now you've gone ahead and indulged in the very same behavior yourself. Interesting... and telling.Will we get to read an excuse for it? Bated breath. As for your original question: Alex Jones is fairly unique in his degree of insanity, an observation which requires no elaboration in light of the Morgan video. If you have some other point to make, then by all means make it and post video evidence as required. But that's on you What you quoted was my statement about it being a "knee jerk reaction". Care to debate that? I mean, that's all you quoted. To me, it's knee jerk. I don't thinking spending billions on gun control will fix anything. Just like spending billions on the "war on drugs" has solved anything. The focus and resources should be focused on the real issue, the users. Lets really focus on the issue for once in our lives. Too much to ask? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 except when it's to protect us from the gheys. The Second Amendment protects us all from the gheys. :paranoid: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poman Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Or any other gun owner want to address this? It might be a good way to start a discussion of what laws currently exist, what the gaps might be, which laws overreach, etc. ... Sure Dan. I own two handuns which I use for personal protection, though I hope I never need them. For both purchases my information was run through the FBI database to ensure that I could, in fact, legally purchase a handgun. The process took about 15 minutes each time. As I have no violent criminal history, the process was very easy. EDIT The first time I bought a handgun, I was shocked that I could walk in and out the same day. I expected a waiting period, which I believe is a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoEd Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 You are correct. The NRA's lobbyists are masterful at watering down and confusing proposed gun laws so that in the rare circumstances where they are passed, they are essentially useless and unenforceable. They have been doing it for decades.I assume that is what you mean. I just... are there any other conservative concerns you want to express. You are all over the place in this thread. I agree with part of what you say (and disagree with other parts of it) but I don't see how it is relevant to the discussion except in a generalized "the world is going to hell in a handbasket get off my lawn" sort of way. So NRA lobbyists are the only ones doing this? The ability to "water down" legislature is not limited to just them is it? You seem to have made my point for me, it's our political system and the subjective interpretation and enforcement thats the problem. As for the second part of my post you quoted, I'm not all over the place. I simply don't think our countries tactics of targeting supply to effect demand has ever worked and will fail in regards to guns as well. What our country needs to focus on are the social issues that are causing crazy mother ****ers to pick up guns and kill innocent people, especially children. Newtown hit very close to home for me. Not only am I teacher, but I have three kids in elementary school and it terrifies me! The thought of someone taking the life of one of my kids shakes me to the core. But with all of that being said, I still don't believe targeting the guns is enough. My fear is, the politicians will get their victory and break their arms patting themselves on the back by making Americans safer for passing stricter gun laws. Done, wash our hands, re-****ing elect us! And that's where it will stop. The real issues will go untargeted and unacknowleged and this same **** will happen again. Because crazy people will find a way to carry out their ****ed up ****! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poman Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I still don't believe targeting the guns is enough. My fear is, the politicians will get their victory and break their arms patting themselves on the back by making Americans safer for passing stricter gun laws.! I agree. I think our country should lean more towards researching how to identify people with mental disorders, and helping them while trying to keep the public safe. Deranged people can use anything as a weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Speaking of comparing Obama to Hitler....http://www.drudgereport.com/ Except Hitler loosened gun restrictions on Germans. Even lowered the age to buy/possess one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I agree. I think our country should lean more towards researching how to identify people with mental disorders, and helping them while trying to keep the public safe. Deranged people can use anything as a weapon. What would we do differently that we already do as far as "identifying people with mental disorders." I think the bigger problem is that people with identified mental disorders are able to get their hands on guns without having to notify anyone that they have diagnosed mental disorders. No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poman Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 What would we do differently that we already do as far as "identifying people with mental disorders." I think the bigger problem is that people with identified mental disorders are able to get their hands on guns without having to notify anyone that they have diagnosed mental disorders. No? I'm not smart enough to figure out a solution to identify mental disorders. But I agree with you completely about people with disorders not being able to legally purchase a gun. The system definitely needs an upgrade in that regard. But I think such a person is easily able to aquire a gun illegally as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 If you actually took the time to read my original post in this thread you'd see where I stand on guns, policy and enforcement. I was responding to someone who quoted me and giving an opinion on the overall "culture" of a group of poster's on the board who categorize every opposing view as stupid and attack instead of discuss. Last I checked this is a discussion board, not an I'm right, you're stupid board. I was agreeing with Poman, is that not allowed? However, you're WAY to intelligent to actually take the time to scroll back a little, instead you ignore the bulk of what is said and cherry pick your arguements. Bravo! I don't agree with Jones, he's the type of extremist that diminishes the credibility of conservatives. Please show me where I ever said I agreed. I want the thread to be about Alex Jones and his madness, and the madness of gun nut extremists like him. You are the one who keeps making the thread about you rather than Alex Jones, and keeps thinking that people are attacking your intelligence and your conservative values. No one is attacking you or mainstream conservatives, and I have no idea why you think they are. :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I think the bigger problem is that people with identified mental disorders are able to get their hands on guns without having to notify anyone that they have diagnosed mental disorders. No? I'm not smart enough to figure out a solution to identify mental disorders. But I agree with you completely about people with disorders not being able to legally purchase a gun. The system definitely needs an upgrade in that regard. But I think such a person is easily able to aquire a gun illegally as well. Certainly does, but it's something we would need to approach very thoughtfully and delicately. Lack of availability of mental health services, and disinclination to use them due to social stigma or other reasons, are both big problems in this country. The last thing we want to do is even further disincentivize people who need help from seeking it. If they're going to be put on some list for the rest of their lives, denied certain rights, be treated like 2nd class citizens or felons, you risk doing just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.