User Tag List

First 91011121321 Last

Results 101 to 110 of 212

  1. #101
    Senior Member ZPowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    What do you base that conclusion on, that debate is is more or less finished? States and municipalities constantly try to pass new laws and regulations on guns. There was a Supreme Court decision on that very topic not that long ago.
    I'll admit I was referring more to a national level. I imagine whatever state or local laws limiting guns have appeared on the books are appearing in very liberal areas almost exclusively, and I hear a lot more about states expanding gun rights. Even then, here in Colorado a few months back University of Colorado at Boulder (the most liberal area in Colorado, probably one of the most liberal in the nation) began allowing concealed carries on campus. It seems the national trend is not going towards gun control. Even those Court cases you mentioned went in the direction of preserving gun rights. In fact, both actually took power away from state and local govs to limit gun rights, and had nothing to do with actually enacting gun control on a national level (in fact, every Supreme Court ruling relating to guns I can see dating back decades is about whether federal felons and guns, guns traveling interstate, failing to register weapons, etc. None actually considered placing any limit on what an average citizen could purchase).
    Does he want a pillow for his head?

  2. #102
    Senior Member ZPowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Gun rights are only protected by a 5-4 Supreme Court decision, and most of the media/entertainment industry (which has significant capacity to frame the debate, whether deliberately or otherwise) is at least somewhat hostile to the entire concept; the former can change very quickly (almost certainly in the opposite direction if Obama replaces a Republican appointee with one of his choosing) and the latter is unlikely to change anytime soon. The 'paranoia' might be excessive, but its not without a fair amount of justification.
    As I noted above, those SC cases dating back decades aren't actually about limiting which guns you can buy or who can buy them (exception: gun laws regarding felons). They're more about regulating what power state and local governments have in gun laws, what to do when guns cross state lines, issues regarding registration, what is legally meant by having a gun "on your person," etc.
    Does he want a pillow for his head?

  3. #103
    morose bourgeoisie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,859

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sprinkles View Post
    Are you suggesting that a .45 or .38 don't serve the same purpose?

    I'd understand if you said this about all guns. I'd disagree with it, but at least it would make sense and be consistent. Saying it about .50 caliber is just weird and actually kind of shows a lack of critical thought.

    Edit: and on that note, .50 just isn't all that popular. Nobody goes around doing massacres with .50 cal weapons. Police don't carry them, soldiers don't carry them except on vehicles, unless they are snipers or EOD, and even then their intended purpose is to take out vehicles, armored targets, or bombs. They do get used on people but that is their secondary purpose.
    You missd the point. I won't bother explaining it to you.

  4. #104
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZPowers View Post
    As I noted above, those SC cases dating back decades aren't actually about limiting which guns you can buy or who can buy them (exception: gun laws regarding felons). They're more about regulating what power state and local governments have in gun laws, what to do when guns cross state lines, issues regarding registration, what is legally meant by having a gun "on your person," etc.
    What the recent cases were really about is whether or not the Second Amendment protects an individual right to gun ownership; the dissenting opinion rejects that interpretation. Hence, gun rights are not particularly secure right now.

  5. #105
    Senior Member ZPowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    What the recent cases were really about is whether or not the Second Amendment protects an individual right to gun ownership; the dissenting opinion rejects that interpretation. Hence, gun rights are not particularly secure right now.
    Are you referring to overturning the DC gun ban being? The thrust of that was whether DC had that right as a federal enclave, not even as a state or local gov (even if upheld, the ruling wouldn't have applied to proper states) and was struck down anyways. 2010 lowered gun control in state and local. I suppose it could be disconcerting if that ruling had gone differently to see that stuff were applied elsewhere, but that'd require some ballsy politicians and would be very, very difficult to pass in most places.

    As for a more direct case about on gun control, rather than state powers/federal enclave issues, I kind of think the court would intentional avoid a case that high-profile, much as they avoid significant gay marriage or abortion cases by and large.
    Does he want a pillow for his head?

  6. #106
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default



    Btw, while I think you've performed admirably, ZPowers, I have to give the upperhand in this argument to the two-headed monster that is edgar the lowtech redneck. It seems there is warranted concern on the parts of the guns rights crowd, and that you're making the real threat out to be less than what it really is, as you're not exactly a pro-guns rights kinda guy. I mean, I don't hear you bellowing in the same manner when it comes to the abortion rights lobby, and we know how much that issue gets a large swath of the left going, and the right to abortion isn't nearly as clearly spelled out in the Constitution (if it really is at all) as the right to bear arms, leads to far more deaths each year than guns in this country, and the real threat to each, from my purview, is rather comparable.

  7. #107
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nebbykoo View Post
    You missd the point. I won't bother explaining it to you.
    Was there a point to even miss?

    I think I get your point that there aren't many uses for .50 caliber that don't involve blowing huge holes in things. I get that it really isn't a hunting round for example.

    What I don't get is why it's special when not only are the smaller calibers also deadly to humans, they are also more often used for killing humans.

    Purpose doesn't mean a whole lot in light of what happens pragmatically. If you're going to question why a particular caliber is legal, it would make more sense to go for the middle ones - the ones that kill the most people.

  8. #108
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZPowers View Post
    Are you referring to overturning the DC gun ban being? The thrust of that was whether DC had that right as a federal enclave, not even as a state or local gov (even if upheld, the ruling wouldn't have applied to proper states) and was struck down anyways. 2010 lowered gun control in state and local. I suppose it could be disconcerting if that ruling had gone differently to see that stuff were applied elsewhere, but that'd require some ballsy politicians and would be very, very difficult to pass in most places.

    As for a more direct case about on gun control, rather than state powers/federal enclave issues, I kind of think the court would intentional avoid a case that high-profile, much as they avoid significant gay marriage or abortion cases by and large.
    The thrust of of the recent SC decisions was that gun ownership is a Contstitutionally protected individual right, and that state and local governments must therefore operate under the same parameters as the federal government. It is this Constitutional interpretation that determines whether or not a right is secure in the medium to long-term, and that interpretation was explicitly rejected by the dissenting Justices. Most gun owners or aspiring gun owners may very well live in localities that are unlikely in the medium term to restrict gun ownership, but a.) a large number do not and b.) public opinion on this issue is subject to wide, generational fluctuations, especially if the news or entertainment media regards it as an important issue for a sustained period of time. Gun rights advocates have no reason to feel secure* about the current legal protections.

    *though I agree that many go beyond reasonable insecurity and into the realm of paranoia.

  9. #109
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    @xisnotx

    Yes, I think laws are there so that people keep responsibility in mind.

    I don't think that they are there to keep you safe (though safety is most often the side effect) because I don't believe in telling people what they can't do, for their own good or for the good of society. In my opinion it turns people into robots who aren't allowed to manage themselves on anything significant.

    Laws maintain responsibility among autonomous agents. I don't believe in a law that effectively prevents one from being autonomous by taking their ability to decide. That just punishes everyone to mitigate the few who are irresponsible.

    As far as devices of mass destruction goes, such as nukes and bio weapons, I think these are limited for practical military security purposes - not because of some moral or ethical ground. It would make zero sense to have treaties for disarming nukes if the weapons aren't in control of the military.

  10. #110
    Senior Member ZPowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    The thrust of of the recent SC decisions was that gun ownership is a Contstitutionally protected individual right, and that state and local governments must therefore operate under the same parameters as the federal government. It is this Constitutional interpretation that determines whether or not a right is secure in the medium to long-term, and that interpretation was explicitly rejected by the dissenting Justices. Most gun owners or aspiring gun owners may very well live in localities that are unlikely in the medium term to restrict gun ownership, but a.) a large number do not and b.) public opinion on this issue is subject to wide, generational fluctuations, especially if the news or entertainment media regards it as an important issue for a sustained period of time. Gun rights advocates have no reason to feel secure* about the current legal protections.

    *though I agree that many go beyond reasonable insecurity and into the realm of paranoia.
    Indeed. When the concern expressed towards a certain person or institution is reasonable and fair, as your's seems to be in this case, I have no issue with it (even with issues I feel somewhat uncertain or conflicted about, like this one). And the SC always has the potential to be a bit of a wild card in terms of national issues.
    Does he want a pillow for his head?

Similar Threads

  1. The Gun Appreciation Thread
    By Rainman in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 506
    Last Post: 12-20-2012, 12:19 PM
  2. Gun Control in the UK
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 249
    Last Post: 12-09-2009, 09:16 AM
  3. Gun Control in the UK (Not Gone, Is Being Fixed...)
    By Halla74 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-08-2009, 11:29 PM
  4. American Gun Control (Version 2!)
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 234
    Last Post: 12-08-2009, 02:24 PM
  5. Gun Control
    By Kiddo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 06-13-2008, 03:24 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO