Republicons Are Responsible For U.S. Mass Shootings

[ETGator1]

Jun 5, 2022 17:22:00 GMT -5 Walter said:

Jun 5, 2022 16:49:11 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

No, but I'm not in congress so why ask me?

If you won't support a member of Congress who promises to vote in favor of universal background checks, then saying you 'will support it' if it became law is meaningless.
All else being equal, you don't support it enough to vote for the guy who favors it.

To be honest, I don't know that we don't already have background checks or if "universal" background checks are needed. Are we enforcing the laws we have on the books now? Gun control and attempting to violate the 2nd Amendment is not something I will support.

In Florida, I vote R just as you vote D in Blackifornia. That's never going to change for either of us.

I have to ask about enforcement of existing gun laws as we are not following our immigration laws with the full approval of the Biden Administration. Without some dumb judge in Louisiana who is going to be overturned, we'd already have no southern border, and anyone can come over at will.

[Walter]

Jun 6, 2022 8:14:55 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Jun 6, 2022 7:47:35 GMT -5 Walter said:

I specifically noted 'all else being equal' in two candidates.
That tells us the true sentiment about a position taken.
ET opposes UBC.

Most gun owners would accept extended background checks and even eliminating private sale exemptions. If it ended there. Their concern, however, is what comes next? The gun issue in this country is cultural and law abiding gun owners resent the hell out of being lumped in with criminals and nut cases.

The "...if it ended there" argument is BS and a cop-out. If we use automobiles as the template, is anyone asking, "If it ended with license plates, insurance and registration, we'd accept it...if it ended there." Really?

Most law-abiding gun owners resent the hell out of being lumped in with criminals and nut cases? Here's an idea then. Quit acting like them. Quit acting like a street thug and selling your guns to people you don't know. Quit buying guns for other people. (Almost one in 12 gun sales is a straw purchase). Quit acting like a nut case/mass murderer and claiming you NEED 100 round magazines and bump stocks. Understand that if you support the same things a criminal or a nut case supports, you may get lumped in with them.

In short, display some common sense and perhaps the rest of us would have more respect for you.

[ETGator1]

Jun 6, 2022 9:14:34 GMT -5 Walter said:

Jun 6, 2022 8:14:55 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Most gun owners would accept extended background checks and even eliminating private sale exemptions. If it ended there. Their concern, however, is what comes next? The gun issue in this country is cultural and law abiding gun owners resent the hell out of being lumped in with criminals and nut cases.

The "...if it ended there" argument is BS and a cop-out. If we use automobiles as the template, is anyone asking, "If it ended with license plates, insurance and registration, we'd accept it...if it ended there." Really?

Most law-abiding gun owners resent the hell out of being lumped in with criminals and nut cases? Here's an idea then. Quit acting like them. Quit acting like a street thug and selling your guns to people you don't know. Quit buying guns for other people. (Almost one in 12 gun sales is a straw purchase). Quit acting like a nut case/mass murderer and claiming you NEED 100 round magazines and bump stocks. Understand that if you support the same things a criminal or a nut case supports, you may get lumped in with them.

In short, display some common sense and perhaps the rest of us would have more respect for you.

You have 100% lost you focus and ability to think. You have always been messed up, but you are especially so with stupid comments like this comparing law abiding gun owners to criminals. 

[Walter]

Jun 6, 2022 8:37:30 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

Jun 5, 2022 17:22:00 GMT -5 Walter said:

If you won't support a member of Congress who promises to vote in favor of universal background checks, then saying you 'will support it' if it became law is meaningless.
All else being equal, you don't support it enough to vote for the guy who favors it.

To be honest, I don't know that we don't already have background checks or if "universal" background checks are needed. Are we enforcing the laws we have on the books now? Gun control and attempting to violate the 2nd Amendment is not something I will support.

In Florida, I vote R just as you vote D in Blackifornia. That's never going to change for either of us.

I have to ask about enforcement of existing gun laws as we are not following our immigration laws with the full approval of the Biden Administration. Without some dumb judge in Louisiana who is going to be overturned, we'd already have no southern border, and anyone can come over at will.

Would you agree then that not everyone should have to register their car, or get a driver's license, or have insurance if they want to drive? Should it be optional? After all, are we enforcing the laws we have on the books now? Hell, we have US Congressmen driving on revoked licenses. Until we fix that, why have more laws, right?

[ETGator1]

Jun 6, 2022 9:20:22 GMT -5 Walter said:

Jun 6, 2022 8:37:30 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

To be honest, I don't know that we don't already have background checks or if "universal" background checks are needed. Are we enforcing the laws we have on the books now? Gun control and attempting to violate the 2nd Amendment is not something I will support.

In Florida, I vote R just as you vote D in Blackifornia. That's never going to change for either of us.

I have to ask about enforcement of existing gun laws as we are not following our immigration laws with the full approval of the Biden Administration. Without some dumb judge in Louisiana who is going to be overturned, we'd already have no southern border, and anyone can come over at will.

Would you agree then that not everyone should have to register their car, or get a driver's license, or have insurance if they want to drive? Should it be optional? After all, are we enforcing the laws we have on the books now? Hell, we have US Congressmen driving on revoked licenses. Until we fix that, why have more laws, right?

I don't own a gun. I do support the 2nd amendment. Whatever congress ultimately thinks is best, I'll support it. As Governor Ron DeSantis is already proving, schools can be hardened at the state level.

If Blackifornia has the next mass murder in an elementary school. That will be on you and the D party in Blackifornia you vote for.

Finis on gun control.

[Walter]

Jun 6, 2022 9:25:12 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

Jun 6, 2022 9:20:22 GMT -5 Walter said:

Would you agree then that not everyone should have to register their car, or get a driver's license, or have insurance if they want to drive? Should it be optional? After all, are we enforcing the laws we have on the books now? Hell, we have US Congressmen driving on revoked licenses. Until we fix that, why have more laws, right?

I don't own a gun. I do support the 2nd amendment. Whatever congress ultimately thinks is best, I'll support it. As Governor Ron DeSantis is already proving, schools can be hardened at the state level.

If Blackifornia has the next mass murder in an elementary school. That will be on you and the D party in Blackifornia you vote for.

Finis on gun control.

DeSantis is proving that schools can be hardened at the state level?
How? With signs that say, "no mass shooters allowed past this point"?
You'll believe anything press release that comes out of his office.

[DrSchadenfreude]

[oujour76]

Jun 6, 2022 9:14:34 GMT -5 Walter said:

Jun 6, 2022 8:14:55 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Most gun owners would accept extended background checks and even eliminating private sale exemptions. If it ended there. Their concern, however, is what comes next? The gun issue in this country is cultural and law abiding gun owners resent the hell out of being lumped in with criminals and nut cases.

The "...if it ended there" argument is BS and a cop-out. If we use automobiles as the template, is anyone asking, "If it ended with license plates, insurance and registration, we'd accept it...if it ended there." Really? Automobiles are a false equivalence to guns for several reasons. The most important one being one is a right, the other is a privilege. Licensing, insurance and registration issues differ state by state. Are you suggesting Federal laws on that as well?

Most law-abiding gun owners resent the hell out of being lumped in with criminals and nut cases? Here's an idea then. Quit acting like them. Quit acting like a street thug and selling your guns to people you don't know. Quit buying guns for other people. (Almost one in 12 gun sales is a straw purchase). Quit acting like a nut case/mass murderer and claiming you NEED 100 round magazines and bump stocks. Understand that if you support the same things a criminal or a nut case supports, you may get lumped in with them. I've done none of the above. So why would I be linked with those that do? Here's an idea...stay on topic. We were talking about background checks and bingo, you go on a rant.

In short, display some common sense and perhaps the rest of us would have more respect for you. Respect? After that rant above, you clearly don't know the meaning of the word.

[oujour76]

Jun 6, 2022 9:20:22 GMT -5 Walter said:

Jun 6, 2022 8:37:30 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

Would you agree then that not everyone should have to register their car, or get a driver's license, or have insurance if they want to drive? Should it be optional? After all, are we enforcing the laws we have on the books now? Hell, we have US Congressmen driving on revoked licenses. Until we fix that, why have more laws, right?

What new law would fix it?

[daleko]

Jun 6, 2022 7:47:35 GMT -5 Walter said:

Jun 5, 2022 22:54:35 GMT -5 daleko said:

You are assuming any one issue is a determination of a vote to support, solo. While that is the focus of this thread, it is not the solo focus of a vote. JMO, to the vast majority.

I specifically noted 'all else being equal' in two candidates.
That tells us the true sentiment about a position taken.
ET opposes UBC.

I think the better Q is would you discount voting for X if. All other things being equal rarely is and assumes an equal stature on public issues and equal solutions.

[Walter]

Jun 6, 2022 11:10:33 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Jun 6, 2022 9:14:34 GMT -5 Walter said:

The "...if it ended there" argument is BS and a cop-out. If we use automobiles as the template, is anyone asking, "If it ended with license plates, insurance and registration, we'd accept it...if it ended there." Really? Automobiles are a false equivalence to guns for several reasons. The most important one being one is a right, the other is a privilege. Licensing, insurance and registration issues differ state by state. Are you suggesting Federal laws on that as well?

Most law-abiding gun owners resent the hell out of being lumped in with criminals and nut cases? Here's an idea then. Quit acting like them. Quit acting like a street thug and selling your guns to people you don't know. Quit buying guns for other people. (Almost one in 12 gun sales is a straw purchase). Quit acting like a nut case/mass murderer and claiming you NEED 100 round magazines and bump stocks. Understand that if you support the same things a criminal or a nut case supports, you may get lumped in with them. I've done none of the above. So why would I be linked with those that do? Here's an idea...stay on topic. We were talking about background checks and bingo, you go on a rant.

In short, display some common sense and perhaps the rest of us would have more respect for you. Respect? After that rant above, you clearly don't know the meaning of the word.

1. The 'right'/'privilege' argument is a straw man. It doesn't get to the gist of the argument. Whether right or privilege, ain't nobody worried about the big, bad government coming to take your car.
Using that to hide behind in the gun debate is BS, IMO.
2. To use an analogy, just because you haven't robbed a bank doesn't mean I should cut you slack for supporting bank robbers.
100 round magazines? Okay? Private, unregulated sales? Okay? Bump stocks? Flash suppressors? Okay?

If you're this well-reasoned gun-owner looking out for what's best for society and don't want to be associated with criminals, tell us your positions, stand by them and most important of all, speak up when Wayne LaP and the boys start hollering their nonsense about how 'they're coming for our guns'.

[oujour76]

Jun 6, 2022 11:40:13 GMT -5 Walter said:

Jun 6, 2022 11:10:33 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

1. The 'right'/'privilege' argument is a straw man. Rights and privileges are different things. If you don't get that, fine. It doesn't get to the gist of the argument. Whether right or privilege, ain't nobody worried about the big, bad government coming to take your car. Have never said a word about big, bad government in this discussion. You throw shit in there that nobody has even said in the first place. Why is that?
Using that to hide behind in the gun debate is BS, IMO.
2. To use an analogy, just because you haven't robbed a bank doesn't mean I should cut you slack for supporting bank robbers. Dumb analogy. You want things to fit into a neat, little box here and it doesn't work that way. Doesn't work that way on many (if any) issues, but certainly not on this one. 
100 round magazines? Okay? Private, unregulated sales? Okay? Bump stocks? Flash suppressors? Okay?

If you're this well-reasoned gun-owner looking out for what's best for society and don't want to be associated with criminals, There you go again. tell us your positions, stand by them and most important of all, speak up when Wayne LaP and the boys start hollering their nonsense about how 'they're coming for our guns'. My positions are pretty well known. I would not object to expanded background checks, including the private sale exemption. I don't favor a national registry. I think the 100 round magazine thing is a straw man argument. Empty calories. Have no issue with banning or regulating bump stocks. Flash suppressors is another straw man argument imo.  Usually used by those who have little to no idea what they are for.I also believe the gun issue in this country is cultural...have said so many times. I don't believe the "only purpose" of the AR-15 is to kill people. If it were, a lot more people would be dead. There are millions of people that own one (or more) and the truth is about 300 people are killed each year in incidents involving an AR-15. If the only purpose is to kill people looks like millions of folks didn't get the memo. Finally, if you're this well-reasoned non gun-owner looking out what's best for society, tell us your positions.  And why you believe they can be implemented and how they will accomplish your goals.  And by all means, speak up when Beto O'Rourke and the boys holler their nonsense about gun confiscation.

[oujour76]

Jun 6, 2022 11:40:13 GMT -5 Walter said:

Jun 6, 2022 11:10:33 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

1. The 'right'/'privilege' argument is a straw man. It doesn't get to the gist of the argument. Whether right or privilege, ain't nobody worried about the big, bad government coming to take your car.
Using that to hide behind in the gun debate is BS, IMO.
2. To use an analogy, just because you haven't robbed a bank doesn't mean I should cut you slack for supporting bank robbers.
100 round magazines? Okay? Private, unregulated sales? Okay? Bump stocks? Flash suppressors? Okay?

If you're this well-reasoned gun-owner looking out for what's best for society and don't want to be associated with criminals, tell us your positions, stand by them and most important of all, speak up when Wayne LaP and the boys start hollering their nonsense about how 'they're coming for our guns'.

Pretty good article in my view. www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2022/06/06/matthew-mcconaughey-editorial-time-responsible-choices-guns/7528142001/

In your view, I suppose he's just another criminal "associate" with a straw man argument. The nerve...talking about gun responsibility and not gun control! And a focus on keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people! Straw man! Straw man!

[Walter]

Jun 6, 2022 12:49:08 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Jun 6, 2022 11:40:13 GMT -5 Walter said:

1. The 'right'/'privilege' argument is a straw man. Rights and privileges are different things. If you don't get that, fine. It doesn't get to the gist of the argument. Whether right or privilege, ain't nobody worried about the big, bad government coming to take your car. Have never said a word about big, bad government in this discussion. You throw shit in there that nobody has even said in the first place. Why is that?
Using that to hide behind in the gun debate is BS, IMO.
2. To use an analogy, just because you haven't robbed a bank doesn't mean I should cut you slack for supporting bank robbers. Dumb analogy. You want things to fit into a neat, little box here and it doesn't work that way. Doesn't work that way on many (if any) issues, but certainly not on this one. 
100 round magazines? Okay? Private, unregulated sales? Okay? Bump stocks? Flash suppressors? Okay?

If you're this well-reasoned gun-owner looking out for what's best for society and don't want to be associated with criminals, There you go again. tell us your positions, stand by them and most important of all, speak up when Wayne LaP and the boys start hollering their nonsense about how 'they're coming for our guns'. My positions are pretty well known. I would not object to expanded background checks, including the private sale exemption. I don't favor a national registry. I think the 100 round magazine thing is a straw man argument. Empty calories. Have no issue with banning or regulating bump stocks. Flash suppressors is another straw man argument imo.  Usually used by those who have little to no idea what they are for.I also believe the gun issue in this country is cultural...have said so many times. I don't believe the "only purpose" of the AR-15 is to kill people. If it were, a lot more people would be dead. There are millions of people that own one (or more) and the truth is about 300 people are killed each year in incidents involving an AR-15. If the only purpose is to kill people looks like millions of folks didn't get the memo. Finally, if you're this well-reasoned non gun-owner looking out what's best for society, tell us your positions.  And why you believe they can be implemented and how they will accomplish your goals.  And by all means, speak up when Beto O'Rourke and the boys holler their nonsense about gun confiscation.

What is the reason for your opposition to a national registry?

[oujour76]

Jun 6, 2022 15:52:59 GMT -5 Walter said:

Jun 6, 2022 12:49:08 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

What is the reason for your opposition to a national registry?

Long story short, I view it as an unnecessary intrusion on legal gun owners.