Author Topic: Another school shooting (Read 491441 times)

Dr Rick Daris · « **Reply #4650 on:** February 22, 2018, 10:40:40 AM »

stop the sale of guns and gun parts that allow you to go into a place and mow down craploads of people within seconds. initiate a gun buy back program with a long grace period that can be funded at least in part by the sale of new guns and gun insurance or gun taxes on the purchase of new guns. if you have a gun that is on the new banned list, you have five or ten years to sell it back to the gov't at a more than fair current market price. if you are caught with one of the banned guns after the actual ban takes place (five/ten years from now) then you are going to jail for a long time if convicted.

K-S-U-Wildcats! · « **Reply #4651 on:** February 22, 2018, 10:43:21 AM »

I was hoping for a more mature and reasoned discussion last night. CNN seemed content to just let the stacked audience boo, scream, and heckle.

Also allowing 16yos to vote.

Do you even remember what a dumbass you were at 16? I'm not saying people get smarter as they get older - they don't. But most folks do get wiser and more mature. I would actually favor bumping the age of eligibility back to 25 or 26 unless you serve in the military. Get a rough ridin' job first and be self-sufficient before you start voting, you smartass, sheltered little assholes.

What does it say about your politics that you think adding 16yos to the voter roles will help advance your causes?

sunny_cat · « **Reply #4652 on:** February 22, 2018, 10:51:19 AM »

Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 10:43:21 AM

I was hoping for a more mature and reasoned discussion last night. CNN seemed content to just let the stacked audience boo, scream, and heckle.

Also allowing 16yos to vote. Do you even remember what a dumbass you were at 16? I'm not saying people get smarter as they get older - they don't. But most folks do get wiser and more mature. I would actually favor bumping the age of eligibility back to 25 or 26 unless you serve in the military. Get a rough ridin' job first and be self-sufficient before you start voting, you smartass, sheltered little assholes.

What does it say about your politics that you think adding 16yos to the voter roles will help advance your causes?

yep don't want those libtard someone who makes me uncomfortable 18 year olds voting anymore!!!

star seed 7 · « **Reply #4653 on:** February 22, 2018, 10:51:43 AM »

What does it say about your politics when you only want to allow white male property owners to vote?

K-S-U-Wildcats! · « **Reply #4654 on:** February 22, 2018, 10:52:24 AM »

The vilification of the NRA is pretty gross, and was on full display last night. The NRA is not some shady top-down cabal - it is an association of millions of law-abiding gun owners. That's where it gets it's power and influence. I'm not a gun owner or an NRA member, but I support the rights of millions of gun owners to associate and lobby to protect their 2A rights.

The "you've got blood on your hands" argument is intended to shut down reasoned debate on the issues, which is exactly what the leftists want. It's what they always want. Make it about emotion. Make it about virtue. It's the same thing they did when ramming Obamacare through.

DQ12 · « **Reply #4655 on:** February 22, 2018, 10:54:05 AM »

Read an opinion piece in the WSJ the other day that I thought had some good ideas. It pointed out that

Quote

A University of Chicago study found that only 3% of Windy City gun crimes were committed with legally purchased guns. A federal study in 2004 put the percentage of gun crimes committed with legal guns at 11%. By and large the problem isn’t guns—it’s that people who shouldn’t have them are getting them and using them.

As for mass shootings, almost all of them have involved mentally ill young men. Some used pistols, some used rifles, some had both—but as with street crime, people who shouldn’t have weapons got them.

It suggested three ideas that could help stop gun violence:

1. Dramatically increase penalties for stealing guns. It suggested mandatory 4 year term for illegally possessing firearm and a 6 year term for selling stolen firearm. Make it so burglars avoid taking the victim's gun.

2. Enforce laws against straw purchases. Federal law already makes this a crime punishable by a $250k fine and up to 10 years. This doesn't require a new law, just make it a priority.

3. This one is tricky, but they basically advocated finding a constitutionally permissible way of preventing mentally ill people from acquiring guns. Author didn't offer much of an explanation here.

Anyway, I thought points 1 and 2 made a lot of sense that should be agreeable to everyone. Point 3 is a good aspiration if it can be achieved.

K-S-U-Wildcats! · « **Reply #4656 on:** February 22, 2018, 10:55:06 AM »

Quote from: libliblibliblibliblib on February 22, 2018, 10:51:43 AM

What does it say about your politics when you only want to allow white male property owners to vote?

Nah, I'm good with all genders and races, and I don't think property ownership is the best test. I'd prefer some minimum level of taxation to vote, to cull the moochers.

Dr Rick Daris · « **Reply #4657 on:** February 22, 2018, 10:56:56 AM »

Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 10:43:21 AM

I was hoping for a more mature and reasoned discussion last night. CNN seemed content to just let the stacked audience boo, scream, and heckle.

Also allowing 16yos to vote. Do you even remember what a dumbass you were at 16? I'm not saying people get smarter as they get older - they don't. But most folks do get wiser and more mature. I would actually favor bumping the age of eligibility back to 25 or 26 unless you serve in the military. Get a rough ridin' job first and be self-sufficient before you start voting, you smartass, sheltered little assholes.

What does it say about your politics that you think adding 16yos to the voter roles will help advance your causes?

it was never going to be a mature and reasoned discussion last night because the two people answering questions in the already decided upon town hall format, wanted to do nothing but pat the people asking questions on the head and then not answer the questions being asked while continuing to try and advance their own agenda.

in regards to wanting 16 year olds to vote. i'd love for it to happen. 16 year olds are unfettered with the bullshit and absurd personal agendas that a lot of 40, 50 and 60 years year olds are. they just want a good world to live and grow up in, which should be the common goal held by all of us. but a lot of older people get super rough ridin' weird and care about things like whether people on food stamps are buying steaks instead of 20 pound bags of rice. I would love a world where 16 year olds can start voting because they care about other kids and the future for the next 60 years and not just about whether their effective tax rate is 14% or 19%, etc.

star seed 7 · « **Reply #4658 on:** February 22, 2018, 10:59:51 AM »

Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 10:55:06 AM

Quote from: libliblibliblibliblib on February 22, 2018, 10:51:43 AM
What does it say about your politics when you only want to allow white male property owners to vote?

Nah, I'm good with all genders and races, and I don't think property ownership is the best test. I'd prefer some minimum level of taxation to vote, to cull the moochers.

Then why do so many of your posts indicate otherwise?

ChiComCat · « **Reply #4659 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:00:02 AM »

Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 10:52:24 AM

The "you've got blood on your hands" argument is intended to shut down reasoned debate on the issues, which is exactly what the leftists want. It's what they always want. Make it about emotion. Make it about virtue. It's the same thing they did when ramming Obamacare through.

LaPierre said "[Democrats'] goal is to eliminate the Second Amendment and our firearms freedoms so they can eliminate all individual freedoms" which is absolutely intended to shut down reasoned debate on the issue. Quit acting like the NRA wants to have an adult conversation.

DQ12 · « **Reply #4660 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:02:21 AM »

Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 10:55:06 AM

I'd prefer some minimum level of taxation to vote, to cull the moochers.

Pretty gross.

Also, I don't have a problem with the NRA activities in principle. I don't think they're some evil cabal or shadow group. I get that they're mostly grassroots funded. That said, I do not understand the NRA's rationale for opposing expanded background checks though. Allow an appeal process for the background checks and call it good.

K-S-U-Wildcats! · « **Reply #4661 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:03:25 AM »

Quote from: Dlew12 on February 22, 2018, 10:54:05 AM

Read an opinion piece in the WSJ the other day that I thought had some good ideas. It pointed out that

Quote
A University of Chicago study found that only 3% of Windy City gun crimes were committed with legally purchased guns. A federal study in 2004 put the percentage of gun crimes committed with legal guns at 11%. By and large the problem isn’t guns—it’s that people who shouldn’t have them are getting them and using them.

As for mass shootings, almost all of them have involved mentally ill young men. Some used pistols, some used rifles, some had both—but as with street crime, people who shouldn’t have weapons got them.
It suggested three ideas that could help stop gun violence:

1. Dramatically increase penalties for stealing guns. It suggested mandatory 4 year term for illegally possessing firearm and a 6 year term for selling stolen firearm. Make it so burglars avoid taking the victim's gun.

2. Enforce laws against straw purchases. Federal law already makes this a crime punishable by a $250k fine and up to 10 years. This doesn't require a new law, just make it a priority.

3. This one is tricky, but they basically advocated finding a constitutionally permissible way of preventing mentally ill people from acquiring guns. Author didn't offer much of an explanation here.

Anyway, I thought points 1 and 2 made a lot of sense that should be agreeable to everyone. Point 3 is a good aspiration if it can be achieved.

Regarding Point 3, the idea gaining popularity is Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVROs). I could support something like this if appropriate due process protections were put in place. Keeping guns out of the hands of the violent mentally ill, and better securing our schools, might actually be effective.

Banning AR-15s is idiotic. I'm not a gun owner but I have talked to many knowledgeable gun owners, including current and former military, and there is nothing about the AR-15 that makes it a superior "mass shooting" weapon over virtually any other modern hunting rifle.

K-S-U-Wildcats! · « **Reply #4662 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:06:08 AM »

Quote from: ChiCat on February 22, 2018, 11:00:02 AM

Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 10:52:24 AM
The "you've got blood on your hands" argument is intended to shut down reasoned debate on the issues, which is exactly what the leftists want. It's what they always want. Make it about emotion. Make it about virtue. It's the same thing they did when ramming Obamacare through.

LaPierre said "[Democrats'] goal is to eliminate the Second Amendment and our firearms freedoms so they can eliminate all individual freedoms" which is absolutely intended to shut down reasoned debate on the issue. Quit acting like the NRA wants to have an adult conversation.

Most democrats absolutely would prefer to eliminate the 2A. So I would agree with that much of LaPierre's comment. And that's kind of the point. You have to keep that in mind when assessing gun control proposals.

K-S-U-Wildcats! · « **Reply #4663 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:08:50 AM »

Quote from: Dr Rick Daris on February 22, 2018, 10:56:56 AM

Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 10:43:21 AM
I was hoping for a more mature and reasoned discussion last night. CNN seemed content to just let the stacked audience boo, scream, and heckle.

Also allowing 16yos to vote. Do you even remember what a dumbass you were at 16? I'm not saying people get smarter as they get older - they don't. But most folks do get wiser and more mature. I would actually favor bumping the age of eligibility back to 25 or 26 unless you serve in the military. Get a rough ridin' job first and be self-sufficient before you start voting, you smartass, sheltered little assholes.

What does it say about your politics that you think adding 16yos to the voter roles will help advance your causes?

it was never going to be a mature and reasoned discussion last night because the two people answering questions in the already decided upon town hall format, wanted to do nothing but pat the people asking questions on the head and then not answer the questions being asked while continuing to try and advance their own agenda.

in regards to wanting 16 year olds to vote. i'd love for it to happen. 16 year olds are unfettered with the bullshit and absurd personal agendas that a lot of 40, 50 and 60 years year olds are. they just want a good world to live and grow up in, which should be the common goal held by all of us. but a lot of older people get super rough ridin' weird and care about things like whether people on food stamps are buying steaks instead of 20 pound bags of rice. I would love a world where 16 year olds can start voting because they care about other kids and the future for the next 60 years and not just about whether their effective tax rate is 14% or 19%, etc.

Mmmmkay. The "kids have great bullshit detectors" argument. They're also immature, inexperienced, emotional, and irresponsible. I understand why liberals can relate. Granted, there's very little difference between a 16yo and an 18yo, but let's not make it worse than it already is.

Phil Titola · « **Reply #4664 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:09:35 AM »

Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 10:52:24 AM

The vilification of the NRA is pretty gross, and was on full display last night. The NRA is not some shady top-down cabal - it is an association of millions of law-abiding gun owners. That's where it gets it's power and influence. I'm not a gun owner or an NRA member, but I support the rights of millions of gun owners to associate and lobby to protect their 2A rights.

The "you've got blood on your hands" argument is intended to shut down reasoned debate on the issues, which is exactly what the leftists want. It's what they always want. Make it about emotion. Make it about virtue. It's the same thing they did when ramming Obamacare through.

You forgot money launderer for Russia. I think it's in their mission statement.

What did you want CNN to do to the crowd exactly?

Gooch · « **Reply #4665 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:12:27 AM »

Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 11:03:25 AM

Quote from: Dlew12 on February 22, 2018, 10:54:05 AM
Read an opinion piece in the WSJ the other day that I thought had some good ideas. It pointed out that

Quote
A University of Chicago study found that only 3% of Windy City gun crimes were committed with legally purchased guns. A federal study in 2004 put the percentage of gun crimes committed with legal guns at 11%. By and large the problem isn’t guns—it’s that people who shouldn’t have them are getting them and using them.

As for mass shootings, almost all of them have involved mentally ill young men. Some used pistols, some used rifles, some had both—but as with street crime, people who shouldn’t have weapons got them.
It suggested three ideas that could help stop gun violence:

1. Dramatically increase penalties for stealing guns. It suggested mandatory 4 year term for illegally possessing firearm and a 6 year term for selling stolen firearm. Make it so burglars avoid taking the victim's gun.

2. Enforce laws against straw purchases. Federal law already makes this a crime punishable by a $250k fine and up to 10 years. This doesn't require a new law, just make it a priority.

3. This one is tricky, but they basically advocated finding a constitutionally permissible way of preventing mentally ill people from acquiring guns. Author didn't offer much of an explanation here.

Anyway, I thought points 1 and 2 made a lot of sense that should be agreeable to everyone. Point 3 is a good aspiration if it can be achieved.

Regarding Point 3, the idea gaining popularity is Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVROs). I could support something like this if appropriate due process protections were put in place. Keeping guns out of the hands of the violent mentally ill, and better securing our schools, might actually be effective.

Banning AR-15s is idiotic. I'm not a gun owner but I have talked to many knowledgeable gun owners, including current and former military, and there is nothing about the AR-15 that makes it a superior "mass shooting" weapon over virtually any other modern hunting rifle.

No rough ridin' way you believe this crap. It is designed to kill as quickly and lethally as possible right down to the round. the round is designed to tumble when entering flesh causing as much damage as possible without being a hollow point round. This is due to the Geneva convention banning hollow points in war time use. This gun is strictly a military person killing machine.

ChiComCat · « **Reply #4666 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:16:25 AM »

Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 11:06:08 AM

Quote from: ChiCat on February 22, 2018, 11:00:02 AM
Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 10:52:24 AM
The "you've got blood on your hands" argument is intended to shut down reasoned debate on the issues, which is exactly what the leftists want. It's what they always want. Make it about emotion. Make it about virtue. It's the same thing they did when ramming Obamacare through.

LaPierre said "[Democrats'] goal is to eliminate the Second Amendment and our firearms freedoms so they can eliminate all individual freedoms" which is absolutely intended to shut down reasoned debate on the issue. Quit acting like the NRA wants to have an adult conversation.

Most democrats absolutely would prefer to eliminate the 2A. So I would agree with that much of LaPierre's comment. And that's kind of the point. You have to keep that in mind when assessing gun control proposals.

No legit democratic politician has proposed eliminating the 2A. Even if you believe that was some end goal, LaPierre's comment threw out a far more fear-mongery straw man than that, which is the point. He doesn't want to have any discussion on making America safer if it involves guns at all.

wetwillie · « **Reply #4667 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:17:16 AM »

The NRA spreads it’s money to the Democrats as much as Republicans so everyone has blood on their hands really.

Phil Titola · « **Reply #4668 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:17:32 AM »

This isn't hard

* Fix background check system (shame on all past administrations for failing here)

* License including registration fee and Insurance to own

* More help for schools to detect problem kids (they aren't mentally ill to be locked into a hospital many times)

* More restrictions on who can own a gun (abusers, criminals, mentally ill for example)

* Penalties if your licensed gun is used in a crime (help people to be more responsible in securing their legal guns...so many are now stolen out of cars etc)

* Buyback programs

Let's see where this gets us...not one thing is getting rid of guns...but maybe I'm not a good libbot or whatever the fun term is now.

Phil Titola · « **Reply #4669 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:18:36 AM »

Quote from: wetwillie on February 22, 2018, 11:17:16 AM

The NRA spreads it’s money to the Democrats as much as Republicans so everyone has blood on their hands really.

Would be so great to get rid of lobbying money....

michigancat · « **Reply #4670 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:18:54 AM »

Quote from: Dlew12 on February 22, 2018, 10:54:05 AM

Read an opinion piece in the WSJ the other day that I thought had some good ideas. It pointed out that

Quote
A University of Chicago study found that only 3% of Windy City gun crimes were committed with legally purchased guns. A federal study in 2004 put the percentage of gun crimes committed with legal guns at 11%. By and large the problem isn’t guns—it’s that people who shouldn’t have them are getting them and using them.

As for mass shootings, almost all of them have involved mentally ill young men. Some used pistols, some used rifles, some had both—but as with street crime, people who shouldn’t have weapons got them.
It suggested three ideas that could help stop gun violence:

1. Dramatically increase penalties for stealing guns. It suggested mandatory 4 year term for illegally possessing firearm and a 6 year term for selling stolen firearm. Make it so burglars avoid taking the victim's gun.

2. Enforce laws against straw purchases. Federal law already makes this a crime punishable by a $250k fine and up to 10 years. This doesn't require a new law, just make it a priority.

3. This one is tricky, but they basically advocated finding a constitutionally permissible way of preventing mentally ill people from acquiring guns. Author didn't offer much of an explanation here.

Anyway, I thought points 1 and 2 made a lot of sense that should be agreeable to everyone. Point 3 is a good aspiration if it can be achieved.

The first two are positive steps. I think 1) also needs some degree of punishment for not reporting stolen firearms and/or not properly storing them. I don't know how it would be enforced, but it should be. There's been multiple shootings in SF (including the Katie Steinle shooting) where a cop left their guns on the front seat of their cars and they were stolen and used in shootings. IMO they were not properly storing their guns and should be punished for that.

Agree point 3 is stupid. A rational person can't claim gun ownership is a constitutional right yet deny it to "mentally ill" people.

OK_Cat · « **Reply #4671 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:19:01 AM »

Ksuw just called kids who had their school shot up and friends murdered ‘sheltered kids’

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OK_Cat · « **Reply #4672 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:20:02 AM »

Sorry. ‘Sheltered little assholes’

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dr Rick Daris · « **Reply #4673 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:25:26 AM »

Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 11:08:50 AM

Quote from: Dr Rick Daris on February 22, 2018, 10:56:56 AM
Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 22, 2018, 10:43:21 AM
I was hoping for a more mature and reasoned discussion last night. CNN seemed content to just let the stacked audience boo, scream, and heckle.

Also allowing 16yos to vote. Do you even remember what a dumbass you were at 16? I'm not saying people get smarter as they get older - they don't. But most folks do get wiser and more mature. I would actually favor bumping the age of eligibility back to 25 or 26 unless you serve in the military. Get a rough ridin' job first and be self-sufficient before you start voting, you smartass, sheltered little assholes.

What does it say about your politics that you think adding 16yos to the voter roles will help advance your causes?

it was never going to be a mature and reasoned discussion last night because the two people answering questions in the already decided upon town hall format, wanted to do nothing but pat the people asking questions on the head and then not answer the questions being asked while continuing to try and advance their own agenda.

in regards to wanting 16 year olds to vote. i'd love for it to happen. 16 year olds are unfettered with the bullshit and absurd personal agendas that a lot of 40, 50 and 60 years year olds are. they just want a good world to live and grow up in, which should be the common goal held by all of us. but a lot of older people get super rough ridin' weird and care about things like whether people on food stamps are buying steaks instead of 20 pound bags of rice. I would love a world where 16 year olds can start voting because they care about other kids and the future for the next 60 years and not just about whether their effective tax rate is 14% or 19%, etc.

Mmmmkay. The "kids have great bullshit detectors" argument. They're also immature, inexperienced, emotional, and irresponsible. I understand why liberals can relate. Granted, there's very little difference between a 16yo and an 18yo, but let's not make it worse than it already is.

not even close to what I said. I would love to have 16 year olds voting because they are more concerned with the future of the world and the people in it than they are their own personal agendas. also and I mean this in the nicest way possible, you come off as very insecure for a person who seems to be somewhat well off with a decent level of education.

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #4674 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:28:09 AM »

Quote from: Phil Titola on February 22, 2018, 11:18:36 AM

Quote from: wetwillie on February 22, 2018, 11:17:16 AM
The NRA spreads it’s money to the Democrats as much as Republicans so everyone has blood on their hands really.
Would be so great to get rid of lobbying money....

Not really. If anything, the NRA is a shining example of why lobbying is important. A grassroots organization with millions of members who are willing to donate to the cause should have a lot of influence over any democratic government, whether you agree with their cause or not. Hopefully their current positions cause them to lose membership until they become more reasonable.