USA and gun control

Politics US Politics
41

Don’t know, but neither do you. You’re just guessing, and in that spirit I’ll guess that you’ve never owned or used or even fired a firearm in your life. [/quote]

I expect I’d enjoy playing with guns as much as anyone if common sense didn’t persuade me that it’s best for a society to strictly control gun possession, and that it’s better for me to give up the right to have guns to play with for the sake of having a much safer place to live in.

I don’t object at all to people going to shooting ranges to fire at targets, if that’s what they like to do for recreation. But the handling of guns and ammunition should be tightly controlled at those ranges, just as they were at the rifle ranges where I used to do my shooting as a lad. We had to account for every bullet, and return exactly the same number of empty casings as the strictly limited number of bullets we signed out from the armoury.

I might even be inclined to go and do a bit of range shooting even now, if I had access to such places and had enough free time available for it. I certainly enjoyed shooting those guns in my youth, and earning that rifle marksman’s badge in the school air force cadets was almost as much fun as getting behind the controls of gliders and small planes.

Though not quite such a good thing, I presume, for the tens of thousands of shooting victims and those in mourning for them.

42

Let them kill each other…who cares? I doubt anyone really gave a shit in Taiwan, the Taiwanese news channels just reported about it due to the lack of youtube videos that day. By the way, yesterday I saw Taiwanese mormons on bicycles wtf?, as if those imported mormons wouldn’t be annoying enough…

43

Oh of course the US is FILLED TO THE BRIM with ‘Oh Canada’ clubs. Red state America is just PACKED with red maple leaf logos. Canada is HUGE in the South.

The fuck out.

Believe me, nobody outside the NE corridor, plus a handful on the left coast and a sprinkling of relatives on the northern border, wants anything from Canada but tourism dollars.[/quote]

REAL ‘MERKA. WE EAT RED MEAT, N’ DRIVE PICKUP TRUCKS.

AND FUCK OUR SISTERS, UH-HUH. SOOOOOOOOIE.

44

[quote=“Dr. McCoy”]If you’re in the another state, and you go into Oklahoma, they stop you at the border and check to see if you have any guns.

And if you don’t have any, they give you some.[/quote]

Lmao , very good.

45

And now for a dose of impassioned truth and sanity:

46

Thank the good Christ Almighty for the Atlantic.

47

Amen to that, brother. :thumbsup:

48

Truth and sanity? Haha! Right! That guy is a fucking liar. He does this so often:

Here’s a partial transcript of the beginning of the video where that moron lies about what Ron Johnson says (I’m not going to transcribe the entire video… :sunglasses:) :

Ron Johnson said: [color=#0000FF]I don’t think society can keep sick demented individuals from obtaining any type of weapon to kill people. I mean, somebody who wants to purposely harm an other individual is going to find a method of doing it. This isn’t an issue about guns. This is an issue about sick demented individuals, and its a tragedy, and I don’t think there’s a solution here in Washington to solve this problem.[/color]

Now, here’s how the liar misrepresents Ron Johnson’s remarks:

Moron Fred Flintstone dude: [color=#800000]No no no. God forbid we should try to solve the problem. Is there crazy people all over the country? Of course. Everybody agrees there is. I’m sure Ron Johnson agrees. And what Ron Johnson says is, we should have no solution, so they should all be able to buy AR 15s and shotguns and all that stuff and kill as many people in your local area as they possibly can…[/color]

I have no problem with anyone who disagrees with Ron Johnson on the issue of gun control or on what Ron Johnson believes the issue to be. But, WTF? I do have a problem with misrepresenting Ron Johnson’s remarks. Johnson didn’t say that we shouldn’t try to solve the problem. He simply stated that he does not believe that the solution is in Washington. You might disagree. But, how can anyone honestly read/hear Ron Johnson’s remarks and understand them as an argument against looking for a solution? Is this what you call truth, chris? Johnson made no such statement. Your guy is being a ass, as usual, and totally misrepresenting Johnson’s statements. Johnson did not state that crazy people should be able to buy guns and kill as many people as possible… Its dishonest to make such a misrepresentation, as your hero did.

How can you criticize Rush and people who listen to him and then turn around and worship this moron, who, as far as I can tell, does exactly what liberals accuse Rush of doing? Don’t answer… that’s a rhetorical question…

Are you Mr. Pot or Mr. Kettle?

49

Truth and sanity? Haha! Right! That guy is a fucking liar. He does this so often:

Here’s a partial transcript of the beginning of the video where that moron lies about what Ron Johnson says (I’m not going to transcribe the entire video… :sunglasses:) :

Ron Johnson said: [color=#0000FF]I don’t think society can keep sick demented individuals from obtaining any type of weapon to kill people. I mean, somebody who wants to purposely harm an other individual is going to find a method of doing it. This isn’t an issue about guns. This is an issue about sick demented individuals, and its a tragedy, and I don’t think there’s a solution here in Washington to solve this problem.[/color]

Now, here’s how the liar misrepresents Ron Johnson’s remarks:

Moron Fred Flintstone dude: [color=#800000]No no no. God forbid we should try to solve the problem. Is there crazy people all over the country? Of course. Everybody agrees there is. I’m sure Ron Johnson agrees. And what Ron Johnson says is, we should have no solution, so they should all be able to buy AR 15s and shotguns and all that stuff and kill as many people in your local area as they possibly can…[/color]

I have no problem with anyone who disagrees with Ron Johnson on the issue of gun control or on what Ron Johnson believes the issue to be. But, WTF? I do have a problem with misrepresenting Ron Johnson’s remarks. Johnson didn’t say that we shouldn’t try to solve the problem. He simply stated that he does not believe that the solution is in Washington. You might disagree. But, how can anyone honestly read/hear Ron Johnson’s remarks and understand them as an argument against looking for a solution? Is this what you call truth, chris? Johnson made no such statement.[/quote]
You do realize that the word “Washington” means “the government”, right?

It’s the government’s purpose to solve problems the country faces, and maniacs running around shooting people in theaters with assault weapons is a problem. Yet Johnson says there’s nothing the government can do. Cenk called him out on that.

50

Truth and sanity? Haha! Right! That guy is a fucking liar. He does this so often:

Here’s a partial transcript of the beginning of the video where that moron lies about what Ron Johnson says (I’m not going to transcribe the entire video… :sunglasses:) :

Ron Johnson said: [color=#0000FF]I don’t think society can keep sick demented individuals from obtaining any type of weapon to kill people. I mean, somebody who wants to purposely harm an other individual is going to find a method of doing it. This isn’t an issue about guns. This is an issue about sick demented individuals, and its a tragedy, and I don’t think there’s a solution here in Washington to solve this problem.[/color]

Now, here’s how the liar misrepresents Ron Johnson’s remarks:

Moron Fred Flintstone dude: [color=#800000]No no no. God forbid we should try to solve the problem. Is there crazy people all over the country? Of course. Everybody agrees there is. I’m sure Ron Johnson agrees. And what Ron Johnson says is, we should have no solution, so they should all be able to buy AR 15s and shotguns and all that stuff and kill as many people in your local area as they possibly can…[/color]

I have no problem with anyone who disagrees with Ron Johnson on the issue of gun control or on what Ron Johnson believes the issue to be. But, WTF? I do have a problem with misrepresenting Ron Johnson’s remarks. Johnson didn’t say that we shouldn’t try to solve the problem. He simply stated that he does not believe that the solution is in Washington. You might disagree. But, how can anyone honestly read/hear Ron Johnson’s remarks and understand them as an argument against looking for a solution? Is this what you call truth, chris? Johnson made no such statement. Your guy is being a ass, as usual, and totally misrepresenting Johnson’s statements. Johnson did not state that crazy people should be able to buy guns and kill as many people as possible… Its dishonest to make such a misrepresentation, as your hero did.

How can you criticize Rush and people who listen to him and then turn around and worship this moron, who, as far as I can tell, does exactly what liberals accuse Rush of doing? Don’t answer… that’s a rhetorical question…

Are you Mr. Pot or Mr. Kettle?[/quote]

Even though I sort of disagree with the idea that we should ban high capacity magazines, you’re misrepresenting what Cenk Uygur is saying.

He’s saying the issue is obviously about guns being extremely easy to get. Ron completely ignores the reality that, and simply says that the reason all these people died is because crazy people exist. He ignores the absolute, incontrovertible fact that if you deregulate weapons to the point where you do not have to pass strict tests to get them, crazy people will use them to kill many people extremely quickly. On the other hand, if people had to actually pass background checks, or we had some more restrictions on the types of weapons(which are, by the way, instruments of committing harm) people could carry, crazy people, and criminals would not be able to kill civilians so easily. [color=#FF0000]Arming everyone, and throwing them into a crowded, smoke filled theater is not going to solve the problem, but making it more difficult for random people to attain any weapon of any firepower they want, will.[/color]

Ron: “You simply can’t keep these weapons out of the hands of sick demented individuals that want to do harm-- And when you try to do it, you restrict our freedoms.”

Cenk: "No, but you can keep them out of their hands, but you’re choosing not to. And by the way, in the Second Amendment, the very first phrase is “A well regulated militia.”

A militia is not well regulated when Republicans vote down bills that would prevent convicted terrorists from getting guns, which they literally did.

Do you disagree that these things are true?

51

My aunt and cousin were shot and killed by my cousin’s jealous husband. Another aunt killed herself with a gun. Three people were killed and another three injured by a shooter at the university I was attending two years ago. I am in favor of much stricter gun controls.

But I know there won’t be any more gun controls in my lifetime. Perhaps never. Americans love guns and they don’t see the connection between guns and gun violence. No, it doesn’t matter that keeping a gun in the house doubles the risk that a household member will kill himself or herself. No, it doesn’t matter that an American is 50% more likely to be shot dead by his or her own hand than to be shot dead by a criminal assailant. No, it doesn’t matter that 30,000 Americans injure themselves with guns every year.

Republicans enjoy widespread legitimacy and popularity with the pro-gun plank of their platform, regardless of the number of gun-related tragedies we experience. Moderate Republicans who stray from the party line are targeted by the NRA and drummed out during primaries. The NRA holds press conferences to brag about rolling over American politicians who dared suggest civilians may not need powerful machine guns that can fire hundreds of rounds within seconds. But the truth is that the NRA would be powerless without public support, which they most definitely have in spades.

52

Of course. I also realize that Washington refers to the federal, as opposed to the various state and local governments…

In some cases. But, that’s beside the point. The point is that Cenk completely misrepresented Johnson’s argument.

No. Johnson argued that the federal government is not able to solve the problem of sick, demented people who wish to obtain some/any weapon to kill people. Cenk didn’t call Johnson out. Cenk is either too stupid to understand what he hears or too dishonest to address his target’s actual argument.

I thought you guys on the left were good at nuance? It doesn’t take a lot of skill with nuance to know the difference between the federal government and the various state and local governments.

53

I am not misrepresenting what Cenk said. I quoted both Johnson and Cenk exactly as they both spoke. Cenk misrepresented Johnson’s remarks. Its as plain as the words I cited.

I’m not agreeing with Johnson or Cenk. But, if you cannot see that Cenk is a political hack, then you’re either blind or you have your eyes shut.

54

I agree.

55

I don’t think he misrepresented him at all. Look at what Johnson says next:

[quote]
Interviewer: Is there anything that we as a society can to protect ourselves from these kind of twisted minds?

Johnson: No, unfortunately I don’t believe so. I wish there was. I wish I could wave a magic wand and make this tragedy go away, I wish I could wave a magic wand and make a law to prevent something like this in the future. But the fact of the matter is I really don’t think there is, other than look to our families, look to our communities, certainly take a look at our education system, you know, we’ve got to reinstate values into what we’re teaching our children.[/quote]

Johnson is saying there is no government solution, period. Uygur is simply calling him out on this point. Only government could possibly outright prevent people from buying such weapons. It’s just a simple, and rather calmly stated, refutation of Johnson’s viewpoint.

56

[quote=“Tempo Gain”]I don’t think he misrepresented him at all. Look at what Johnson says next:

[quote]
Interviewer: Is there anything that we as a society can to protect ourselves from these kind of twisted minds?

Johnson: No, unfortunately I don’t believe so. I wish there was. I wish I could wave a magic wand and make this tragedy go away, I wish I could wave a magic wand and make a law to prevent something like this in the future. But the fact of the matter is I really don’t think there is, other than look to our families, look to our communities, certainly take a look at our education system, you know, we’ve got to reinstate values into what we’re teaching our children.[/quote]

Johnson is saying there is no government solution, period. Uygur is simply calling him out on this point. Only government could possibly outright prevent people from buying such weapons. It’s just a simple, and rather calmly stated, refutation of Johnson’s viewpoint.[/quote]

Yes, that is how I saw it too especially when you get the last bit about reinstating values. As if this is a problem of values (and values as conservatives see them) and not regulation.

This is the first time I’ve ever seen Cenk, and while I don’t particularly like his style, nor find him very convincing or well argued, he doesn’t strike me at all as Tigerman would have it, as the equivalent of Rush Limbaugh. I would know too as I used to watch Rush unlike Tigerman who always denied knowing much about his show or having any strong opinions. :laughing:

Michael Moore is the Rush equivalent on the left, not Cenk as far as I can tell from this small bit of exposure.

57

Sigh… Cenk reasonably interpreted Johnson’s statement as meaning “The government can do nothing about it”, and responded in turn: there are things the government can do about it. If he did misinterpret Johnson’s meaning, he certainly wasn’t doing so deliberately.

One thing Limbaugh does is to tell deliberate lies and to make up deliberate strawmen for the express purpose of misinforming the public. Uygur does NOT do this.

58

I’ve only seen Uygur’s show a few times, but my impression is that he uses humor and exaggeration to make his point. Limbaugh, like all Republican radio show hosts, makes up lies and knocks down strawmen, just as you say. And he, again like all right-wing talk show hosts, does so with a nasty edge of bile and hatred. The CEO of the NRA repeatedly lambasts President Obama as being anti-gun, and yet Obama has scarcely talked about gun control during his entire administration. It is the lowest priority of his administration, if it’s a priority at all (seems like not).

Mucha Man is right. Republicans are constantly angry and paranoid. Even on the issue of gun control, which as MM says is completely nuts since Republicans have handily defeated Democrats again and again on gun control in the courts and in Congress. Here are the facts.

Issue: Gun violence in the United States, including person-to-person violence/murder, self-inflicted injuries, and suicide, is among the highest in the industrialized world (second only to South Africa, but much several times higher than any other industrialized nation).

Democratic Solution: Issue tighter gun controls by restricting the type of guns civilians may own, close open market and internet sale loopholes, and strengthen penalities for gun statute/regulation violations.

Republican Solution: More guns.

Winner: Republicans.

59

I watched him give a talk (on Youtube) a year or so back and he admitted that gun laws under Obama has eased that the president actually seemed to be a good for gun freedom…BUT…and then it just went into cloud cookoo land.

Obama’s real agenda won’t be revealed until his second term when he will do all manner of damage to gun freedom based on his liberal views of the world.

It was just the most surreal moment, especially since this wasn’t theatre. Here was a man literally suggesting that Obama was going to pull a 180 if he got re-elected despite all lack of evidence to the contrary.

And the audience ate it up. That’s collective insanity.

60

Republicans win because Democrats are idiots when it comes to the 2nd amendment. For example, one aspect the Dems can’t seem to grasp is that gun and ammo sales are a VENT that lets Americans express their support for the 2nd amendment with minimal violence (note that I did not say NO violence). Only an idiot closes that vent, i.e. Democrats.

By the way, gun and ammo sales are THROUGH THE ROOF since Friday. These are just the lawful sales. Americans love guns and the 2nd amendment, full stop.

If Dems were HALF as concerned with more regulation as they are with elections, they’d never let the words “more gun control” slip past their lips. They’re either idiots or the most cynical political party in America. Personally my vote is both stupid AND cynical.