This is not normal
- This topic has 70 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Jake,
There are laws regulating guns used in the commission of crimes? NO. There are criminal laws against the aforementioned criminal acts.
Including criminals acts done with guns, silly. The fact fact that you make this distinction also indicates that these crimes can be done without guns too, rendering gun control laws and regulations far from a panacea for crime.
There may or may not be regulations or laws regarding possession and use of firearms.( Laws are statutes passed by the legislature that may for instance define criminal conduct. Regulations are typically promulgated by agencies and are utilized to produce rules that enforce policies of various acts.)
“To regulate” and it’s variants can be used in a generic sense, as it is here:
But if you wish to parse between legislative law by elected officials and administrative regulations by unelected bureaucrats (Unconstitutional, by the way, since Congress has no power to delegate it’s lawmaking powers,) then there are in the U.S. 20,000+ laws and regulations on Federal, State, and Local levels related solely to arms. Not one has ever stopped anyone bent upon murder and mayhem. Not. One.
See, people who have no regard for Life, Liberty, and Property tend not to be stopped by laws and regulations and certainly not those related to arms, a commodity they desire for their evil ends. Only the law-abiding and innocent are constrained by those laws and regulations, which puts them at a decided disadvantage against the aforementioned thugs.
You are arguing that we have criminal laws that obviate the need for control of personal firearms. Mightn’t it make sense to deny citizens or certain citizens certain firearms? A blanket of free access to firearms will result in greater numbers of rape, kidnapping and a litany of crimes mentioned and unmentioned.
Uh, no. See references to Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine mentioned above. These States have very few restrictions on arms, yet no explosion of crime as seen in in tighter-restricted Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and California.
Should first graders have unlimited access to firearms and be allowed to take to school?
Dragging children and dumb animals into a debate about objects that clearly require an age of agency and accountability is a sure mark of desperation and a dead-bang loser. It’s no different for Hoplophobic Gun Control Freaks than it is for Holy Rollers railing against alcohol, drugs, sex, and pornography for consenting adults.
Should the most lethal firearms now and in future be free access to ALL citizens? I could go on and on but it is pretty obvious how stupid your stance is.
Uh, no. It is not obvious.
Laws against arms fall apart logically, philosophically, morally, politically, and economically with just the slightest amount of thought and research.
And BTW is this stance on unnecessary laws analogous to your brilliant stand against hate cri? You know, those TRICK LAWS!
When a commodity like arms or drugs is ubiquitous and becomes outlawed, it is impossible to enforce across the board. The laws then become an invitation to selective enforcement against some and not others. So yep, gun control laws become trick laws very easily.
Many times gun control laws are explicitly trick laws, such as Sha’ria laws against non-Muslims riding horses or bearing arms, Jim Crow laws against freed slaves owning arms, New York’s Sullivan Act prohibiting arms to “bad characters” such as those thoughts to come here from Ellis Island, The Law of Weapons in Germany in 1935, and all of those passed in Communist nations worldwide.
Robert,
I wonder why we never have any RPG or hand grenade killings? Let’s sell 100’s of millions of them to the public and see what happens, LOL. I’m sure we will all be even safer.
Assuming argument not found in evidence. Strawman thoroughly smoked, pollen blown away, rats sent scurrying to the wild cat’s gully.
The more guns=safety argument is simply idiotic and proven wrong by every country that has strongly regulated arms. Sure, we have the NRA’s target audience; millions of under-fathered, man-boys who feel emasculated or left out because of recent societal changes and want an “equalizer”. Maybe we can work on fixing that that root cause. And the stupid ass movie makers can’t think of anything else except shoot-outs and car chases.
And you’re the Big Brother provide the proper amount of “fathering” to the unwitting patients of your amateur psych practice, including “fathering” to grown-ass movie watchers?
Pardon Me While I Laugh! 🤭😆😅😂🤣
PopeBeanie,
Even not having clicked on one of many videos and other links posted in this topic, I’ll bet this one (above) is probably not an unreasonable way to deal with short-term threats, or for those insisting on living with the threats long term — which is the context I meant by “stay-in-place”. If I still had a family, moving to a safer place would be an option to consider.
The video is solid, scholarly, and based upon law enforcement experience, is only a handful of minutes, and once you watch it, your assessment is sure to go from a double negative to a full positive. 😊 And the advice is applicable whether you stay in one place or move elsewhere. (In fact, moving if you can to areas with less crime would be a meta-version of “Avoid.”)
Jeebus, what a time sink this thread is now. I’m not surprised that Belle’s not participating in her now-hijacked topic.
If someone posted some biz-op spam or their Instagram page or some urban legend, that would be hijacking the thread.
A discussion about violent crime is going to include discussion about guns and whether they cause crime or can be one tool of many in fighting crime. It can get long in the tooth, sure, but it’s not irrelevant and not done with intention of hijacking the thread.
I’ve no idea of to what you’re referencing there. I plead ignorance, with a large dose of who-gives-a-fuck anyway.
The Marquess of Queensberry Rules are the 1867 rules, applied and expanded, and used to this day in modern boxing. These are what you do not follow in a fight for survival.
In these rabbit holes of soapboxes, I’m just skimming all posts in this topic… and again, I’m not blaming only you for all of the diversions. It’s more like you and others are handing each other golden opportunities to make lengthy off-topic responses, on silver platters.
I admit I may have veered off-course with the stats on pool drownings and auto accidents, but I wanted to make the point that the mere presence of potentially dangerous things is not what creates danger, but the knowledge, mental demeanor, and intentions of the user.
(I’m thinking my main on-topic response might be “Actually, this is increasingly normal, for many in USA, including kids.”).
Sadly that is true. All the more reason this problem of violent crime needs rational discussion and rational solutions, not blind emotionalism and hysteria.
For your information, when I was in high school, 16 to 18-year-old members of the Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC the prelude to ROTC in college,) trained with strict adult supervision to disassemble, re-assemble, clean, and target practice with .30 M-1 Garand Rifles such as used in World War II.
I was an Army Cadet (Upper Navigator Cadets) we did the same thing as those 16-18 year old members of the Junior Reserve you referenced. Being an Army cadet, between the ages of 13 and 16 allowed me one thing; It prepared me for my enlistment in the U.S. Navy at the age of 19. Where drill instructors and Chief Petty Officers could mold my 19 year old, still developing mind, to do shit like work in one of the most dangerous environments in the world, the deck of a U.S. aircraft carrier. Probably would not have handled it as well at a later age. At 19 I was indestructible.
You’ve already worked out how you are going to take out the tanks when they roll in on your imagined revolution. Have you ever been in the armed forces? Have you ever been in battle? My brother was. He served in Viet-Nam. When he returned he never spoke about it. Not to me anyway, I was a 14 year old kid in the Upper Navigator Cadets who aspired to be just like him. Thing is what ever Raymond was exposed to ended up killing him. He’s buried at Calverton Veterans Cemetery. What did Raymond do in Viet-Nam? Because of his height he was tasked with flushing out VC from their holes. It’s the same with my cousins Raymond and Vinny. They never talk about it. Never.
That’s great though. All those kids growing up on farms learning how to responsibly handle a weapon. I’m all for that. Now if we can get you down to the Ravenswoods Houses in Long Island City, NY or Fredrick Douglas Houses in Harlem, New York City. . Let’s get out there and teach those kids “Responsible Gun Handling.” No? No good?
Here is the question though, do you think that people under 21 years of age living amongst us in GenPop should be allowed to purchase and own semi automatic military style weapons? You know like the Bushmaster XM15-E2S that 20 year old Adam Lanza borrowed from his mother and used to kill 26 people, 20 of them children, in Sandy Hook Elementary in Connecticut. He was carrying ten magazines with 30 rounds each. Balls of steel that guy had. Charging into an elementary school to do major damage when no one was shooting back at him. If only all those 10 and 12 year olds were taught proper gun safety and handling and had their Sig’s in their backpacks all of that could have been avoided. Too bad none of the teachers weren’t armed. But then again I remember being the bratty kid who tortured some of my teachers. Imagine if they had guns in the class room back then. Mrs. Diamond fighting back tears and reaching for the Glock in her pocket book to get even with that idiot kid who made her cry.
Man, you will never convince me and most of America that more guns is the panacea to the mass shootings (murders) that have overtaken our country and continues unabated. We are an embarrassment to most of the developed nations of the world. They think we’re nuts. I gotta’ agree. We are batshit fucking crazy
@Enco
As for better and worse places to go, yes, there are those. In the United States, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine have almost no gun restrictions, yet have none of the crime and mayhem found in New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and California, which are all tight on gun control. If I could get to New Hampshire from North Carolina by ferry boat and avoid the Babylon in between, I surely would.2021 CDC Homicide Mortality by state per 100,000:
New York – 918
North Carolina – 991
New Jersey – 409
New Hampshire – 15In New Jersey the death rate is 4.8 per 100k. North Carolina it’s 9.7. New York? 4.8!
Sorry that North Carolina has turned into such a shit hole.
Oh yeah New Hampshire and Maine. You’re right. Lowest homicide rate. But more to do with population density than gun restrictions. I’m sure the 10 people living in New Hampshire would agree.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/homicide_mortality/homicide.htm
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.