Now is not the time to talk about gun control (1 Viewer)

< Previous | Next >

Saintman2884

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2020
Messages
151
Reaction score
71
Age
41
Location
Mobile, Alabama
Offline
You’re not the victim here. The victims are the victims.
How in God's name did you surmise or come to that particular conclusion based on my above post?

But if we're to travel down that figurative road, if I ever were character assassinated and having my good name dragged through the mud by friends and family because they disagree with me politically and they talk shirt or spread false rumors or information behind my back as a way of being petty and vindictive, that's slander and yes, it is a prosecutable crime under the law, no matter how some ingenious, legal defense attorneys try to spin it in a civil trial as a "misunderstanding" and yes I can sue for damages if I decide too in such scenarios and I'd likely win. Also, I would be the aggrieved party, since I'm the one suing in a civil court setting for monetary damages for slanderous, malicious comments that were meant to defame my reputation publicly so yeah, I'd be the victim in these sorts of scenarios, like it or not.
 
Last edited:
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #75
OP
brandon

brandon

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
1,151
Reaction score
2,091
Online
How in God's name did you surmise or come to that particular conclusion based on my above post?

But if we're to travel down that figurative road, if I ever were character assassinated and having my good name dragged through the mud by friends and family because they disagree with me politically and they talk shirt or spread false rumors or information behind my back as a way of being petty and vindictive, that's slander and yes, it is a prosecutable crime under the law, no matter how some ingenious, legal defense attorneys try to spin it in a civil trial as a "misunderstanding" and yes I can sue for damages if I decide too in such scenarios and I'd likely win. Also, I would be the aggrieved party, since I'm the one suing in a civil court setting for monetary damages for slanderous, malicious comments that were meant to defame my reputation publicly so yeah, I'd be the victim in these sorts of scenarios, like it or not.
Uh, that’s how.
 

samiam5211

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
1,366
Reaction score
1,713
Age
43
Location
Earth
Offline
The Second Amendment, via the Heller SCOTUS case, doesn't mean what many left-leaning Democrats would prefer or like to see, either. The government doesn't have the right to tell you either you can't legally purchase a firearm, rifle, go through expanded universal background checks, pass them and then be demonized or whispered by family, friends, co-workers, or colleagues who might disagree with you politically that you're some kind of dangerous, potential wannabe vigilante who should be watched, be wary of and stay away from.

You know, like character assassination on a ordinary everyday small-town American scenario that goes on irregardless for a whole multitude of different reasons then just who own guns or how many their are. Maybe you and I have known a few butt crevasses in our own respective lives in our streets we lived on, people we worked with, some family members or friends we fall out with for political or ideological reasons or maybe its just some of them being antisocial and like to being overtly/covertly confrontational like talking shirt, or lies behind your back.
The second amendment allows the government to decide what type of arms you may own otherwise, Elon Musk could start a nuclear weapons program if he so choose.
 

Saintman2884

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2020
Messages
151
Reaction score
71
Age
41
Location
Mobile, Alabama
Offline
The second amendment allows the government to decide what type of arms you may own otherwise, Elon Musk could start a nuclear weapons program if he so choose.
Then we'd be faced with a real life James Bond possible Dr. No super villain scenario where some evil billionaire yet unhinged genius decided to use his Tesla devices as secret, converted ICBM's, or try and blackmail a highly developed nation like Japan with destruction from several stolen North Korean nukes unless Japanese civilian nuclear engineers build him a modern, halfway decent thermonuclear device in a span of 3-4 years. Which given Japan's ultra-reliance on nuclear power for civilian commercial use, wouldn't take as long, and would be done far more expediently then a nation like Iran, North Korea or even South Africa before them took to develop their separate weapons program.
 

samiam5211

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
1,366
Reaction score
1,713
Age
43
Location
Earth
Offline
Then we'd be faced with a real life James Bond possible Dr. No super villain scenario where some evil billionaire yet unhinged genius decided to use his Tesla devices as secret, converted ICBM's, or try and blackmail a highly developed nation like Japan with destruction from several stolen North Korean nukes unless Japanese civilian nuclear engineers build him a modern, halfway decent thermonuclear device in a span of 3-4 years. Which given Japan's ultra-reliance on nuclear power for civilian commercial use, wouldn't take as long, and would be done far more expediently then a nation like Iran, North Korea or even South Africa before them took to develop their separate weapons program.
Right, but my point is that we already accept the federal governments authority to regulate what types of arms people can own.

The second amendment makes no distinction between nuclear weapons and a 9mm pistol.
 

zztop

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
1,096
Reaction score
1,389
Age
121
Location
in a van down by the river
Offline
so... anyone want to guess what this picture is about? :unsure:
Also,apparently SD has a "trail of governors' which has a bunch of bronze statues of ex SD governors or something
 

DaveXA

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Messages
2,521
Reaction score
1,839
Location
Vienna, VA (via Lafayette)
Offline
so... anyone want to guess what this picture is about? :unsure:
Also,apparently SD has a "trail of governors' which has a bunch of bronze statues of ex SD governors or something
If people keep acting like dumb arses, well, don't be surprised when they get what's coming to them. I generally support people's right to own guns...but idiots like this guy makes me wonder why I should continue to support that right.
 

SaulGoodmanEsq

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2020
Messages
601
Reaction score
989
Age
42
Location
New Orleans
Offline
Considering that mass shootings account for less than 1% of the yearly 16k-20k shootings a year, why would you think reinstating the assault weapons ban would make much of a difference?
Not that I think guns, per se, are the problem but... it would make a difference to those people who were killed in the mass shootings.
Too bad there's that pesky Constitution.
That document is vastly overrated. The UK doesn't really have a similar provision in their Constitution and they seem to be doing okay. But, of course, there will always be a part of American society that are obsessed with firearms.
 
Last edited:

samiam5211

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
1,366
Reaction score
1,713
Age
43
Location
Earth
Offline
We are about 10 years away from whatever replaces the NRA releasing a video where Dana Loesch is warning us all that if we don’t get these mentally ill people off the streets we may as well kiss our second amendment rights goodbye.
 

Saintman2884

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2020
Messages
151
Reaction score
71
Age
41
Location
Mobile, Alabama
Offline
Not that I think guns, per se, are the problem but... it would make a difference to those people who were killed in the mass shootings.

That document is vastly overrated. The UK doesn't really have a similar provision in their Constitution and they seem to be doing okay. But, of course, there will always be a part of American society that are obsessed with firearms.
The UK doesn't have a written constitution, most of their laws dating back to the Anglo-Saxon period of the mid-5th century CE are based on endless legal statitutes, concepts from common law, property law, criminal reform laws that were enacted, revised, and reevaluated again and again over the centuries. Its been labeled an "organic sort of legal, judicial, and political process" where legal codes, different judicial interpretations sort of change or adapt gradually and slowly over a long period of time. Unlike France and Germany who've had written constitutions, multiple ones in Germany's case since 1871.

Labor unions and strikes werent even allowed or permitted until mid 1870's and it wasnt until the 1901 Taff vs. Vale decision that working-class industrial interests and complaints really began to gain political prominence first with the Liberals under David Lord George then Labour Party. Some British historians have even argued that Taff v. Vale may have been the essential catalyst that made Labour Party a force from being just a left-wing, bourgeiouse Fabian Society discussion group. Without the Fabian Society emerging as a left-wing intellectual vis-a-via political activist group in the late 19th century, their never wouldve been a Labour Party.
The UK does have a Bill of Rights but that in of itself doesn't constitute a written, legal constitution. And trying to argue and insinuate the Magna Carta should be seen or regarded as a medieval early "proto-constitution" isnt historically accurate, reaching and most British or even legal historians argue its a very radical and unsubstantiated position.

I would also highly suggest you be mindful and careful in saying the US Constitution is a highly overrated document, because while your intentions are I'm sure are more subtle and honest, their might be more then a few radical right-wingers on the opposing spectrum listening or eavesdropping on similar conversations all over this nation and quietly, smugly nodding their heads in agreements but their alternatives are far more extreme and deadly for most Americans like me and you. Words have meanings, far beyond whatever original contexts they were spoken or meant to be argued or directed at or for due to being diluted, co-opted, hijacked, disproportionately used. The Trump administration have proven that mantra or that systematic mindset even more bitterly acute and accurate.

15 years ago, the Dems were the minority party under the Bush 43 administration and they launched a very successful TV campaign aimed at preserving the filibuster as a safeguard to prevent majority party ramming through legislation without the 60 votes minimum. Now, they risk the same dilemma occurring again Heaven forbid if they eliminate or severely curtail the filibuster if the GOP just so happen to regain both Houses and who knows what shenanigans theyll pull or push and theyll point to this moment in time to Dems who'll be opposing their legislation and say, "You started the brushfire, don't blame us too much now that the wildfire exploded, went out of control and threatens to burn down your homes". Its all about analyzing and keeping a sharp perspective on how power politics will play out, develop and what it might resemble in the medium-long term and in the time period of US politics, that can end up being a remarkably short period of time.
 

Saintman2884

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2020
Messages
151
Reaction score
71
Age
41
Location
Mobile, Alabama
Offline
If people keep acting like dumb arses, well, don't be surprised when they get what's coming to them. I generally support people's right to own guns...but idiots like this guy makes me wonder why I should continue to support that right.
We don't need more Wacos or Ruby Ridges, Dave. If right-wing militias start seeing that the Biden administration wants to or maybe some progressive guns control advocates starts pushing them for more stringent restrictions, irregardless of how common-sense they might try and word or phrase it, theyll use these laws as "evidence" the feds maybe do want to come and take away "some of your guns" and they'll likely convince more people this time than the original militia movement did in in the early 1990's and we don't more Waco's popping up all over the place and the FBI, NSA, ATF having to explain at numerous press conferences why their continuing to combat and attack these militia compounds.

Waco was not a good textbook example of domestic conflict-resolution you want to teach and instruct to any potential leader or member of an FBI taskforce who'll have to deal with these future scenarios. If Waco standoff had somehow had been solved more peacefully, I really do believe we couldve avoided the Oklahoma City government Building explosion in 1995 by a embittered, ex-soldier whose dabbling in white supremacy saw the Waco tragedy as another example justifying his paranoia of an overreaching, oppressive federal government to hit back and exchange his own large, pound of flesh which led to the US worst domestic terrorist attack until 9/11.
 

Taurus

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
629
Reaction score
1,404
Age
52
Location
Yacolt, WA
Online
We don't need more Wacos or Ruby Ridges, Dave. If right-wing militias start seeing that the Biden administration wants to or maybe some progressive guns control advocates starts pushing them for more stringent restrictions, irregardless of how common-sense they might try and word or phrase it, theyll use these laws as "evidence" the feds maybe do want to come and take away "some of your guns" and they'll likely convince more people this time than the original militia movement did in in the early 1990's and we don't more Waco's popping up all over the place and the FBI, NSA, ATF having to explain at numerous press conferences why their continuing to combat and attack these militia compounds.

Waco was not a good textbook example of domestic conflict-resolution you want to teach and instruct to any potential leader or member of an FBI taskforce who'll have to deal with these future scenarios. If Waco standoff had somehow had been solved more peacefully, I really do believe we couldve avoided the Oklahoma City government Building explosion in 1995 by a embittered, ex-soldier whose dabbling in white supremacy saw the Waco tragedy as another example justifying his paranoia of an overreaching, oppressive federal government to hit back and exchange his own large, pound of flesh which led to the US worst domestic terrorist attack until 9/11.
Their job would be rendered infinitely easier if they'd simply call them what they are. Terrorists

It's easy to explain why you raided a terrorist compound, shot up a few and confiscated their illegal weapons.
 

Roofgardener

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2021
Messages
457
Reaction score
144
Location
East Midlands, UK
Offline
Their job would be rendered infinitely easier if they'd simply call them what they are. Terrorists

It's easy to explain why you raided a terrorist compound, shot up a few and confiscated their illegal weapons.
In what way where the Branch Davidians terrorists ? What terrorist actions did they plan, threaten, or commit ?
 

DaveXA

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Messages
2,521
Reaction score
1,839
Location
Vienna, VA (via Lafayette)
Offline
In what way where the Branch Davidians terrorists ? What terrorist actions did they plan, threaten, or commit ?
They weren't terrorists, but they certainly were religious and political zealots. That said, one of the worst run operations in the history of the ATF and federal government. There were a whole lot of better ways to handle this than attempting to brute force them out.
 

NoPartyMike

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Messages
123
Reaction score
153
Location
American Dreamland
Offline
As data continues to come out, it appears most of the recent mass shooters obtained their guns by narrowly getting through the background check process. Many were on the radar and recently involved with law enforcement incidences, but didn't meet the requirements to prevent a firearm purchase. The simplest solution seems to be to broaden the parameters at which a background check can prohibit a gun sale.
 

zztop

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
1,096
Reaction score
1,389
Age
121
Location
in a van down by the river
Offline
I read briefly that Biden is possibly going to make an executive order on gun reform.

Jen Psaki told reporters at a briefing that she couldn’t offer an “exact time frame” on when those orders would move off Biden’s desk, but said they were “one of the levers that we can use ... to help address the prevalence of gun violence and address community safety around the country.”
 

Denzien

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2020
Messages
19
Reaction score
28
Age
41
Location
Austin, TX
Offline
The second amendment allows the government to decide what type of arms you may own otherwise, Elon Musk could start a nuclear weapons program if he so choose.
No - the second amendment is a restriction on the power of government. That restriction may not be considered absolute today, even if the language is, but your angle of attack here is strange and perverse because nowhere does it say that government *is allowed* to do anything.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

< Previous | Next >

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Advertisement

General News Feed

Fact Checkers News Feed

Sponsored

Top Bottom