Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

The Gun Control Debate Thread

Dont Taze Me Bro

By Dont Taze Me Bro
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted (edited)

Part of the problem too is this topic induced strong opinions in knee jerk reaction, and we’re really good at that as a society, but we’re not really good at nuance and digging into statistics 

 

that pew link @Renegade7posted (only tagging you to be per of discussing if you cared) says this at the opening

 

Quote

More Americans died of gun-related injuries in 2020 than in any other year on record, according to recently published statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). That included a record number of gun murders, as well as a near-record number of gun suicides. Despite the increase in such fatalities, the rate of gun deaths – a statistic that accounts for the nation’s growing population – remains below the levels of earlier years.


But then later it says this:

 

Quote

The gun murder and gun suicide rates in the U.S. both remain below their peak levels. There were 6.2 gun murders per 100,000 people in 2020, below the rate of 7.2 recorded in 1974. And there were 7.0 gun suicides per 100,000 people in 2020, below the rate of 7.7 measured in 1977. 


now look. The people here are capable of seeing the difference. And can probably have a good debate about whether the rate or the annual # is what matters. And I don’t even know if that debate would even matter, but we could have it if we wanted to. 
 

but the bulk of people probably don’t know that second quote. Many won’t really be sure what it means to put them together. Etc. 

 

i mean for the last week the thread has been posted with tweets about how it’s the worst ever. Clearly that’s not the only way of looking at it, and usually we use rates for a reason…. Kind of like “receiving the most votes ever” doesn’t matter either unless you want to pretend population growth isn’t a thing. 
 

(It also caveats the 70’s numbers because they included explosives and 80’s forward numbers are just firearms)

Edited by tshile
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Yea, it does seem like one of the favorite passtimes of anti gun control folks is to point out how one solution won't stop a certain problem or all of them.

 

I know not everyone understands layers of security, but I'm not convinced everyone wants to either.  There's no silver bullet here, but it all adds it.


If we had a nimble government where seeking compromise and working to make things better was how you won re-election, then we could do that. 
 

instead we have a clumsy cumbersome government that only does things in big sweeping changes, while lacking the ability to ever revisit it and follow up with minor changes (cause we learn things when we try things) and re-election is based on culture wars and identity politics. 
 

Add in the constitution aspect with the second amendment and the fact that guns are just woven into the fabric of our country, and you have a problem that our government is unable to really do anything about. 
 

Let’s be honest. If Dems got a gun control bill through:

- it would be the only thing they got done on it, and there’s no reason to believe it won’t have problems

- scotus will be an issue. If you want to say it’s conservative heavy then that’s an issue. If you want yo say they’ll be fair, you have the issue of gun control getting crushed in courts at all levels 

- whatever made it through all that, will likely drop the gun violence count, but not actually stop mass shootings or change the trajectory of certain cities or the dynamics of our country

 

I’m not saying give up and do nothing. I just think recognizing the reality is important. 
 

if we were able to pass a bunch of little laws that are very specific, and go back every year and review how things are going so we can remove the ones that don’t work or cause an undue burden, and modify or add others to do better, then we could actually tackle this. 
 

 

53 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:
Edited by tshile
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
86 Snyder

86 Snyder

Posted
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, mistertim said:

I'm completely confused by the dildo limit thing in Texas.

 

Also, who enforces that? Do you have to register your dildos with the state?


Of course, it's company policy never to imply ownership in the event of a dildo. We have to use the indefinite article, "a dildo", never ... your dildo.

 

 

Edited by 86 Snyder
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, 86 Snyder said:


Of course, it's company policy never to imply ownership in the event of a dildo. We have to use the indefinite article, "a dildo", never ... your dildo.

 

 

However it is ok to combine them

 

you’re a dildo 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redskins Diehard

Redskins Diehard

Posted
Posted

The National Firearms Act of 1934 has been the law of the land for almost a century now. It has not been found in violation of the 2A. It effectively ended the proliferation of automatic weapons without banning them. It seems putting similar "well regulated" policies in place for semi automatic weapons would be a good place to start. 

  • Like 3
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CobraCommander

CobraCommander

Posted
Posted (edited)

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/uvalde-gop-trump-guns-strategy-1362970/

‘Ignore Guns, Talk Inflation’: Memos Show GOP Strategy After the Uvalde Massacre

 

“Ignore guns, talk inflation,” one such memo, written for a top-tier GOP Senate candidate, succinctly reads, citing polling data of voter concerns ahead of the critical 2022 midterm elections. Other documents predictably decried liberal desires for “gun-grabbing” and “gun confiscation,” and made whataboutism-type references to gun violence in Chicago.

 

 

This will continue because the GOP will ignore it until the next senseless murder of small children at which point they will offer thoughts and prayers and demonize the left for making it a political issue. The Pro-Life party ladies and gentelmen.

Edited by CobraCommander
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captain Wiggles

Captain Wiggles

Posted
Posted
Quote

Republicans think better mental health treatment, armed security and more religion in people’s lives would be more effective.

 

Ok one of those solutions is ****ing useless so we'll skip it. 

 

As for the other two....

 

Who's paying for this armed security force that will essentially have to be everywhere? Don't we already pay a boat load of money for one? 👮‍♂️👮‍♀️

 

Republicans are suddenly willing to fund mental health facilities? Expanding the ACA and Medicaid could certainly help in that regard but we all know how Republicans feel about that. Mental Health Block Grants are another way to help. That involves the federal government tho which means the "socialism". 😬

 

Meanwhile 44% of Republicans think mass shootings are something we have to accept. 🤷

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

This must be the new "they're inflating covid deaths"

No, not really. It’s a point some of us have been making about the issue in general - although I think we’ve done a better job of not coming across as a belligerent asshole ranting about it…

 

the whole mass shooting and school shooting numbers are inflated to the point it’s ruined the ability to discuss it. Most people think of mass shooting as indiscriminate targeting and a motive of simply killing as many people as possible. 
 

That’s not what these numbers capture. 
 

im willing to accept the people who made up the definitions for these didn’t do it for the purpose of inflating the numbers. 
 

but I’m not willing to accept pretending that most of the people pushing it, aren’t aware they’re pushing inflated/meaningless numbers, and that they’re ok with it because they see it as helping further their agenda. 

1 hour ago, Redskins Diehard said:

It seems putting similar "well regulated" policies in place for semi automatic weapons would be a good place to start. 

Gonna go out on a limb and say there is zero chance that will happen and also withhold scotus scrutiny. 
 

Semi automatic describes basically most guns these days. So. Good luck with that. 

Edited by tshile
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redskins Diehard

Redskins Diehard

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, tshile said:

 

Gonna go out on a limb and say there is zero chance that will happen and also withhold scotus scrutiny. 
 

Semi automatic describes basically most guns these days. So. Good luck with that. 

Of course it does. Because there's no regulation that differentiates between revolvers and bolt action and semi automatic. Like there's a regulation that differentiates between automatic and the rest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Renegade7

Renegade7

Posted
Posted

Police confiscate things from American citizens all the time, with or without due process.

 

I mean, this is Virginia's red flag law, this ain't due process?  It even has a means for appeal:

 

Quote

What Happens When You Request an ESRO


Upon the reporting of a credible concern to the Office of the Commonwealth Attorney or a law-enforcement officer of the Alexandria Police Department will:  

Conduct an independent investigation, which determines whether or not the subject of the order possesses a substantial risk to themselves or others in the near future by being in possession of or acquiring a firearm. 

 

Seek a court order from a magistrate or judge of the Circuit Court, General District Court, or Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court to temporarily remove a gun or guns from individuals who have been determined to be an immediate danger to themselves or others. 

 

There will be a court hearing within 14 days of issuance. 

The ESRO law requires, for the duration of the order: 

temporary removal of all guns from the subject of the order 

the subject of the order must relinquish their concealed handgun permit to the courts 

prohibits new gun purchases by the subject of the order, while the order is in effect

 

The ESRO law allows for the subject of an order to file an appeal to dissolve the order, no earlier than 30 days from the date the order was issued. 

 

https://www.alexandriava.gov/public-safety/virginia-red-flag-law

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...