General Politics Discussion [ARCHIVED] • Page 116

I think it was done because a lot of anti-gun control people will use the "cars kill people, should we ban cars too!" argument...which is dumb lol. The main difference is that a gun is solely used to kill, it's not an unintended accident (like a car crash). You can't really parallel guns to any other device...the closest is something that requires licensure to use. That's why I liked Obama's argument...if getting a license for a car is so rigorous, why don't we have similar barriers to gun ownership. If we can study other events that lead to death (like car accidents) why can't gun violence be studied?

On a personal level...in some states, physicians are not allowed to ask if a patient has a gun in their home. I focus on questions on diet and exercise because that will prevent long-term diseases but I can't ask if there's a gun in the house which can kill the patient in an instant. It's absurd to me...my job is to keep you from dying and I will know every chemical in your body...but I can't caution you against firearms.

 

Bernie will address his supporters on Thursday:

I assume this will be him officially suspending his campaign, but no idea if he will also use the time to endorse Clinton

 

I find it hard to imagine he'll do that before the convention.

 

Suspend his campaign or endorse Clinton?

 

This probably won't be looked at, but here are the factors which would rule out someone from purchasing a gun in California.

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/firearms/forms/prohibcatmisd.pdf?

There is also a safety course that is required prior to purchasing any gun in California, this is new, like the last 5 years or so.

So, technically, the process to purchase/own/operate a vehicle is more lenient than the process to purchase/own/operate a gun in California. You can't buy a gun if you have a mental illness that would potentially cause you to harm yourself or others...so why should you be allowed to operate a vehicle with the same illness?

It's already tough enough to get a weapon in California, I'm not sure how much more strict these laws need to be in my state especially.

 

Endorse Clinton. Sorta depends on who she ends up going with for VP and how Bernie-favorable they are.

Of course that brings the bigger issue of his entitlement with the DNC

EDIT: Also, he was originally going to concede today; I assume it was pushed back because of Orlando.

 

He was? I didn't see any news about that

 

Yeah, there are still many places that are fine. I have a friend who travels down to Culiacan for work, and he constantly sees armed guards walking around with AK's and whatnot in many places. He does not travel there at night.

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/283172-sanders-clinton-to-meet-tuesday

just realizing now how ambiguous the article is and that it's actually probably not him publicly/formally conceding-moreso him and Clinton discussing how to strategically move forward

 

The military down there are the ones walking around armed to the teeth, and they should be avoided if you aren't a resident there. The police are cool, though they'll look for a hand out if they pull you over and you don't have Baja California plates.

 

I think that's an awesome starting model but I think states like Florida have nothing remotely close to that. The bigger issue is also enforcement of these regulations. When you have guns being given out at public events and promotions, there's clearly no regulation going on.

 

True.

Do you remember Bowling for Columbine and Moore made it a point to show that a bank gave him a rifle? Well he had to do a background check for that rifle, he didn't just "get" it as he portrayed. That might be a similar to what happens in other parts of the country.

California wised up though, because 5 years ago, I could go buy a 12 gauge shotgun or a .223 rifle without any sort of paper work except my California ID and some money, that's all. Now, you have to follow that list I linked. Handguns were always like this, by the way, and I think CA finally realized "hey wait, you can kill people with rifles too!"

Go look at Kansas gun laws if you really want to get annoyed.

 

Yeah, I'm thinking that he will basically tell his supporters on Thursday that the meeting with Clinton went well, that they're on the same page, that she is committed to furthering his message, etc. but we'll see

 

Sorry I am a little late commenting on this, but this isn't necessarily true. AR-15s are often used to hunt predators who feed on deer and pack hogs who destroy over a billion dollars in crops a year. The AR-15 is the best platform to perform this method of hunting because pack traveling predators can be dispatched quickly.

But, to your point, your average person or family living in urban or suburban America probably has no practical reason to own one of these weapons.

 

Boar hunters use an AR-15 especially.

On a practical level, an AR-15 would have too much penetrating power to be useful for home defense. If you shoot someone in your home with one of these, there is a good chance it will go through them and enter your kids room.

A little off topic, but if you're a person who wants a gun for home defense, a 20g shotgun is probably the best option due to it's ease of use and lack of kickback compared to a 12g.

 

Yeah, I actually spoke with a (rational) gun enthusiast friend and he said the same thing. Trying to figure out where the line is drawn for sufficient reason to weild an arm, then...

 

Agreed, and they even sell non-fatal rock salt rounds. I have a handgun but a friend of mine has a shot gun and only has rock salt rounds in the house.

 

does rock salt work the same as buckshot? The only reason I ask is because in a panic, a typical person in their home isn't going to aim when firing at an intruder.

I think you're the first person I cam across here that said they actually have a gun.

 

I am going to be brutally honest about something that is probably going to piss a lot of people off.

The truth of these mass shootings are, they are a byproduct of America's freedom coupled with it's diverse population. Diversity has always invited violent conflict. Whether it's diversity of skin color, ideas, religion etc... This is just another example of that.

When I read a lot of the posts on this very message board, there is SO MUCH HATE. I hope we can all learn to discuss difficult topics without resorting to hateful, and unhelpful, accusations of various "isms" or else I don't see this violence ending any time soon.

All that said, I don't think there is one silver bullet that solves these problems. Banning guns doesn't, neither does banning Muslims. I think we just all try to raise better kids and hope for the best.

 

Yeah, the purpose of the rock salt is to mimic the buck shot without killing someone. Don't get me wrong, I bet that rock salt will put someone down pretty effectively, just without killing them.

 

yikes

 

I think mental illness plays the biggest role in all of this, more than anything else. You're always going to have some psycho using some weapon to hurt people, period. Guns are the best way of accomplishing your goal, but it isn't the only way.

Even if you did ban Muslims, what about the other people who will still shoot up random places? It's just a stupid thing to even propose.

 

Happened in Kill Bill Vol. 2 if you've seen it. Rock salt will penetrate the skin and sting, obviously. I'm saying this for people who don't know; think of it as a more painful (and longer lasting) paintball.

 

I hope I didn't imply that I in anyway support banning anyone from anywhere, If I did then it was definitely unintentional.

 

I'm not the type to twist your words around.

The people that agree with Trump regarding banning Muslims are forgetting that other groups of people are doing the same shit, just maybe not in the name of God, or whatever. It's just dumb, all of it.