If you banned guns, you would take guns away from people who would not cause harm with them, but people who would intend to cause harm would still acquire them by illegal means. So you haven't really fixed much of anything, and you have taken the guns away from the law abiding people who had them.
It doesn't work if you are talking about something that doesn't have both parts of the argument.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
My point was that I think you are misunderstanding what they're saying.
now i remember why i don't get in arguments on the goddamn internet
I am not arguing against the people who say that we should look at underlying causes. I am arguing against the people who have specifically laid out the argument I'm addressing as I'm addressing it.
Is it really that hard to understand these two groups of people exist independently of each other?
Because you seem to think that I'm arguing against you, but if your argument is not the one I'm attacking, then I'm not.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
If you banned guns, you would take guns away from people who would not cause harm with them, but people who would intend to cause harm would still acquire them by illegal means. So you haven't really fixed much of anything, and you have taken the guns away from the law abiding people who had them.
It doesn't work if you are talking about something that doesn't have both parts of the argument.
Yes, people who do harm with guns will find ways to acquire them whether or not. But that doesn't mean we should make it easier.
In this incident, the crime was committed with weapons legally purchased by a law-abiding citizen--the shooter's mother. If the shooter's mother hadn't been allowed to purchase the guns in the first place, there's a good chance this might not have happened.
Of course not. Nothing will once you've already got the weapon. But I'm arguing that it shouldn't be so damn easy to get weapons in the first place.
Frankly, I'm just somewhat disgusted by the people who feel that their right to go into any shop on the corner and pick up deadly weapons is worth the increased likelihood of things like this year's shootings happening.
The thing is though, CA, is that they're at the practical limit of what they can do in order for a person to purchase any kind of firearm. There's already a background check, and flags that can be raised in the system before you can walk out with your newly purchased firearm.
My Mosin rifle is actually the first firearm I ever purchased, and that was January of this year here in Texas where we're probably the quickest state in the union where you can purchase a firearm. Some 18-19 year old was there with me, buying himself a Mosin as well. The procedure took around 30 minutes. First the clerk verified my identification and questioned it along with my address and other pertinent info, and then they dialed in a background check on me and the other guy. Me, I'm an honorable discharge from the Marine Corps, in my 30's, have a pristine record, so I was free to pay and leave with my dirty old 1939 rifle that I got to lovingly restore. The younger guy was told he would have to wait two weeks, for whatever reasons -- probably due to his age.
There are a hell of a lot of things that will prevent you from ever purchasing a firearm, including bad conduct in the military. If was to say, knock the shit out of my girlfriend and get a domestic called on me, that would damn sure affect my next firearm purchase even here in Texas.
In this incident, the crime was committed with weapons legally purchased by a law-abiding citizen--the shooter's mother. If the shooter's mother hadn't been allowed to purchase the guns in the first place, there's a good chance this might not have happened.
CA, with that same reasoning, if they banned sports cars, James Dean would be alive today.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
The thing is though, CA, is that they're at the practical limit of what they can do in order for a person to purchase any kind of firearm.
Except for, you know, disallowing it outright except in situations where a specific need to own a firearm can be demonstrated. You know, like in civilized countries.
CA, with that same reasoning, if they banned sports cars, James Dean would be alive today.
Indeed. But a sports car isn't specifically designed to cause harm and death to people.
I just can't understand this mindset that a person's right to own whatever deadly weapons they feel like is apparently more important than the lives of 20 children. Fuck everything.
Doctor Who reference in Pokemon B2W2? Headcanon accepted.
CA: I understand both of your arguments there, and this is where the second amendment part kicks in. Like I was telling a friend of mine yesterday, it's a freedom America enjoys and freedoms have negative consequences. Like for the freedom of speech, you're going to have to deal with the likes of Lenny Bruce in the 50's, Larry Flynt in the 70's and 80's, and Phelps currently (this is not comparing the three men here, just how they affected the issue at their respective time.)
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
I would say no, but apparently the majority of people still disagree with me.
And this is the crux of it. I think freedom is much more important than the price of security against something that will very unlikely occur to anyone in their lifetime.
Here's one thing though: It is still perfectly legal to go to a gun show and buy guns without any questions asked. At least, where I live I've heard of people doing that a lot.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
Frankly I question why the freedom to own tools designed for killing people is a freedom worth having in the first place.
Doctor Who reference in Pokemon B2W2? Headcanon accepted.
I've never been to a gun show, so I couldn't tell you. But I'm sure there's not a loophole in the laws that allows gun shows to sell to anyone who has the cash.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
Today's the annual Avenue Family Gift Exchange day!
We draw each other's names, then go to Dollar General and buy $20 worth of crap for that person.
Then for some reason we wait until Christmas Day to actually give the gifts, which seems kinda pointless, but traditions are traditions...
Doctor Who reference in Pokemon B2W2? Headcanon accepted.
This Christmas is going to be odd for me. One of my friends in Japan already has a gift, and I need to go pick up some gifts for the kids of my other friend's family.
One time I saw a bumper sticker that said that the US was founded by "right-wing extremists."
And I thought "Well, that certainly is something that isn't true."
The Constitution was definitely heavily right leaning compared to The Articles of Confederation, and it was also put into place in direct opposition to how The Articles of Confederation stated amendments should be put in place.
As such, The Constitution can be seen as essentially a right-wing takeover of the US government, backed by various important businessmen and wealthy families.
My point was that I think you are misunderstanding what they're saying.
now i remember why i don't get in arguments on the goddamn internet
I am not arguing against the people who say that we should look at underlying causes. I am arguing against the people who have specifically laid out the argument I'm addressing as I'm addressing it.
Is it really that hard to understand these two groups of people exist independently of each other?
Because you seem to think that I'm arguing against you, but if your argument is not the one I'm attacking, then I'm not.
You realize I wasn't disagreeing with you, really, right? I was just trying to explain something.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
how about everyone shuts the hell up about how gun control would perfectly solve these issues/would be a terrible infringement of our freedoms, because why is THIS the debate that recurs every time one of these events happen, rather than what the debate SHOULD be: i.e. this man had some mental issues, clearly, that were not sufficiently picked up on, and THAT is what allowed him to kill rather than gun control laws.
if someone wants to flip out and kill people, if guns are banned, theyll find some other way, or they will get guns anyway.
what we should be asking is: how can we help people like this BEFORE they decide that their life isnt worth it and theyd rather top themselves and take as many people with them as possible?
oh wait gun control is the issue that pops up every time because gun control is far more a politicised issue than mental health, and people will take any fucking opportunity to use a tragedy to ram their politics down everyones throats even when 16 children are dead. if you are talking about gun control then quite frankly fuck you and fuck your politics. that is not the issue we should be talking about.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
@sunn wolf: I'm not sure I understand this idea that advocating for gun control and advocating for better mental health treatment are mutually exclusive.
Is there any particular reason I can't support both?
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
how about everyone shuts the hell up about how gun control would perfectly solve these issues/would be a terrible infringement of our freedoms, because why is THIS the debate that recurs every time one of these events happen, rather than what the debate SHOULD be: i.e. this man had some mental issues, clearly, that were not sufficiently picked up on, and THAT is what allowed him to kill rather than gun control laws.
if someone wants to flip out and kill people, if guns are banned, theyll find some other way, or they will get guns anyway.
what we should be asking is: how can we help people like this BEFORE they decide that their life isnt worth it and theyd rather top themselves and take as many people with them as possible?
oh wait gun control is the issue that pops up every time because gun control is far more a politicised issue than mental health, and people will take any fucking opportunity to use a tragedy to ram their politics down everyones throats even when 16 children are dead. if you are talking about gun control then quite frankly fuck you and fuck your politics. that is not the issue we should be talking about.
First of all: calm down.
Secondly, we just had this argument and I really don't think anyone's wanting to have it again.
@sunn wolf: I'm not sure I understand this idea that advocating for gun control and advocating for better mental health treatment are mutually exclusive.
Is there any particular reason I can't support both?
I think his point is more WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT GUN CONTROL WHEN TALKING ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH WOULD BE MORE PRODUCTIVE AND LESS DIVISIVE FOR CHRISSAKES, not that the two are mutually exclusive
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
Seriously, though, I'm kinda offended by this assumption people seem to be making that because I advocate for gun control that means I don't give a fuck about mental health treatment.
please go ahead and support whatever you want, im not saying the two issues are mutually exclusive.
what i am saying is the fact that gun control debates spring up fucking everywhere after these tragedies is really annoying and it shouldnt happen. any opportunity for people to politically try and get one over on other people and by now it feels like theyre using the deaths of 16 children to do that, and just ugh.
Seriously, though, I'm kinda offended by this assumption people seem to be making that because I advocate for gun control that means I don't give a fuck about mental health treatment.
Seriously, though, I'm kinda offended by this assumption people seem to be making that because I advocate for gun control that means I don't give a fuck about mental health treatment.
Well, given that we seem to be talking much more about gun control, people would assume that that is more cared about.
We can fix this, however, very easily.
By discussing mental health treatment issue stuff.
Seriously, though, I'm kinda offended by this assumption people seem to be making that because I advocate for gun control that means I don't give a fuck about mental health treatment.
please go ahead and support whatever you want, im not saying the two issues are mutually exclusive.
what i am saying is the fact that gun control debates spring up fucking everywhere after these tragedies is really annoying and it shouldnt happen. any opportunity for people to politically try and get one over on other people and by now it feels like theyre using the deaths of 16 children to do that, and just ugh.
I said yesterday that I'm quite disgusted that this is apparently "what it takes" to get people talking about this kind of thing. No one cares about these issues when they're actually worth talking about, and before something happens (and by "these issues" I mean both gun control, mental health, and whatever you care to relate to the shooting).
Seriously, though, I'm kinda offended by this assumption people seem to be making that because I advocate for gun control that means I don't give a fuck about mental health treatment.
I think his point is more WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT GUN CONTROL WHEN TALKING ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH WOULD BE MORE PRODUCTIVE AND LESS DIVISIVE FOR CHRISSAKES, not that the two are mutually exclusive.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
by now it feels like theyre using the deaths of 16 children to do that, and just ugh.
I'll say this much, for what it's worth.
I can see why you'd feel that way, and in the past I've felt that way myself.
But as for myself--and I speak only for myself here--it's not that I'm trying to use the deaths of the 20 children to push an agenda, but rather that I can't stand by and see the deaths of 20 children without standing up and speaking out. I'll be honest; prior to this I didn't even feel strongly about gun control one way or the other.
Comments
the line of reasoning is:
If you banned guns, you would take guns away from people who would not cause harm with them, but people who would intend to cause harm would still acquire them by illegal means. So you haven't really fixed much of anything, and you have taken the guns away from the law abiding people who had them.
It doesn't work if you are talking about something that doesn't have both parts of the argument.
I just got the terms mixed up because I wanted to end the convo and I wasn't really caring. Also
The US has an urban percentage of 80%
Happy now?
And who cares about James Dean anyways
man i love having food
I just can't understand this mindset that a person's right to own whatever deadly weapons they feel like is apparently more important than the lives of 20 children. Fuck everything.
^ ^ But would those kids be alive if we banned guns? Would the shooter have acquired guns illegally instead?
I dunno.
Honestly, I'm not the sort of person who would really venture a guess either way.
But it seems to me that the efforts allocated to banning guns outright would be better allocated to figuring out why the fuck this keeps happening.
That is all I have to say really I guess.
^ yes.
I would say no, but apparently the majority of people still disagree with me.
And there are whole bunches of others who do so too.
As such, The Constitution can be seen as essentially a right-wing takeover of the US government, backed by various important businessmen and wealthy families.
how about everyone shuts the hell up about how gun control would perfectly solve these issues/would be a terrible infringement of our freedoms, because why is THIS the debate that recurs every time one of these events happen, rather than what the debate SHOULD be: i.e. this man had some mental issues, clearly, that were not sufficiently picked up on, and THAT is what allowed him to kill rather than gun control laws.
if someone wants to flip out and kill people, if guns are banned, theyll find some other way, or they will get guns anyway.
what we should be asking is: how can we help people like this BEFORE they decide that their life isnt worth it and theyd rather top themselves and take as many people with them as possible?
oh wait gun control is the issue that pops up every time because gun control is far more a politicised issue than mental health, and people will take any fucking opportunity to use a tragedy to ram their politics down everyones throats even when 16 children are dead. if you are talking about gun control then quite frankly fuck you and fuck your politics. that is not the issue we should be talking about.
It's fine. It's honestly genuinely distressing to see you freak out like that just because you're normally so calm.
You gonna be alright?
Also my "o" key is not wanting to type.
Things like this just kinda bring me to the end of my rope...
you should listen to this if they're just going to give it to you. The album version of "New God Flow" is a really good song.
First of all: calm down.
Secondly, we just had this argument and I really don't think anyone's wanting to have it again.
Thirdly
tell PETA my mink is dragging on the floor
please go ahead and support whatever you want, im not saying the two issues are mutually exclusive.
what i am saying is the fact that gun control debates spring up fucking everywhere after these tragedies is really annoying and it shouldnt happen. any opportunity for people to politically try and get one over on other people and by now it feels like theyre using the deaths of 16 children to do that, and just ugh.
We can fix this, however, very easily.
By discussing mental health treatment issue stuff.
So let's do that.
I will bite you, Corporal.
I said yesterday that I'm quite disgusted that this is apparently "what it takes" to get people talking about this kind of thing. No one cares about these issues when they're actually worth talking about, and before something happens (and by "these issues" I mean both gun control, mental health, and whatever you care to relate to the shooting).
I can see why you'd feel that way, and in the past I've felt that way myself.
But as for myself--and I speak only for myself here--it's not that I'm trying to use the deaths of the 20 children to push an agenda, but rather that I can't stand by and see the deaths of 20 children without standing up and speaking out. I'll be honest; prior to this I didn't even feel strongly about gun control one way or the other.