Brandon Strikes Again

[KansasTiger 3,256]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

What the left here does not understand is that they are telegraphing to our government that they want them (the government) to take control.  They don’t have faith in their fellow law abiding citizens and can’t distinguish us from the criminals.  This is exactly the opposite of what the Constitution was written for.

If a leftist wants you to have a gun, they will tell you what kind of gun you should have.  They know best after all.  Biden says all you need is a double barrel shotgun.  That might have been OK in his day when most people respected the law, not today.

Like you said, the left wants a feel good law to satisfy their urge to control.  No bail, defund the police, make the police the bad guy; what could go wrong?

You're right about control. I will only add that I do think think they are sincere that they believe it will help the overall gun violence situation. I dont think it will. Heck, protesters in France were using fully auto guns just recently. Guess that gun ban worked.

This eventually boils down to perceived safety vs individual rights. A battle where safety has been winning over rights for some time now. Whether it's the patriot act, local gun laws in liberal cities, covid mandates, etc. as a society we lean toward safety and security over freedom when that choice presents itself. 

[KansasTiger 3,256]

19 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

"Banning guns" has never been mentioned as an option.  Banning the sale of that style weapon has. There is no way to defend an 18 year old in Uvalde,  Texas being able to walk into a gun shop and buy that gun and hundreds of rounds of ammunition. 

Had he been forced to purchase a regular rifle or shotgun, many of those kids that are dead today would be alive.  There were other mistakes made that day,  but there is no getting around that fact.

You guys pretend like there are not other guns that aren't 'styled' like an AR that would still be purchasable and do the same things that an AR does. Your banning a look, not a function. It still fires 1 bullet per trigger pull, just like other rifles and just like handguns. Yes there are mods that change that, which are already illegal. 

[aubaseball 2,660]

5 hours ago, AU9377 said:

We all have a responsibility to keep our communities safe.  We have a society built around laws and a moral conscious.  We should want our children to live in a community that is as safe or safer than the one we were born into.  None of that should be controversial.  That means that we give up some things if we see doing so as making our communities better.  The cost benefit of those weapons doesn't add up.  You want them to play with, but they aren't toys.  Is your life made less enjoyable by not owning them?  No.  Is the community more safe with fewer of then on the street?  Yes.

Sorry, but that’s a liberal talking point just like you say the other is an NRA talking point.   If keeping kids safe are your top priority…why not do away with liquor and beer?  Cell phones for teenagers? Junk food?  All of those things cause death and bad health for kids.   And that’s just some.   What about  cannabis?   Cigarettes?  You know teens all use that stuff and only causes damage to an underdeveloped brain.   
I love it that you take one thing and say that it’s oh so bad for the community but I bet you alcohol has killed more people than any 30 round magazine.   
 

Edited July 20, 2023 by aubaseball

[KansasTiger 3,256]

27 minutes ago, aubaseball said:

Sorry, but that’s a liberal talking point just like you say the other is an NRA talking point.   If keeping kids safe are your top priority…why not do away with liquor and beer?  Cell phones for teenagers? Junk food?  All of those things cause death and bad health for kids.   And that’s just some.   What about  cannabis?   Cigarettes?  You know teens all use that stuff and only causes damage to an underdeveloped brain.   
I love it that you take one thing and say that it’s oh so bad for the community but I bet you alcohol has killed more people than any 30 round magazine.   
 

Not to mention many of us consider more guns a safer environment in many cases. In my rural catholic small town, how many people do you think conceal carry? A ton. And I've never felt safer. Not just because I trust them, but I know if someone tried to shoot up a place, he'd get shot six ways to Sunday.

Which leads me to a conclusion many reach, this is a culture problem and a degeneration of societal values that we are attempting to band aid fix by banning certain types of guns. The sick people that want to hurt people will then buy hand guns and other rifles to shoot people, and they will then call for those to be banned next. 

Edit: I have to edit this because I made a few errors. People that wanted to hurt others would still be able to obtain ARs and hand guns and other rifles. While our rights get restricted further.

Edited July 20, 2023 by KansasTiger

[auburnatl1 5,093]

56 minutes ago, KansasTiger said:

Not to mention many of us consider more guns a safer environment in many cases. In my rural catholic small town, how many people do you think conceal carry? A ton. And I've never felt safer. Not just because I trust them, but I know if someone tried to shoot up a place, he'd get shot six ways to Sunday.

Which leads me to a conclusion many reach, this is a culture problem and a degeneration of societal values that we are attempting to band aid fix by banning certain types of guns. The sick people that want to hurt people will then buy hand guns and other rifles to shoot people, and they will then call for those to be banned next. 

Edit: I have to edit this because I made a few errors. People that wanted to hurt others would still be able to obtain ARs and hand guns and other rifles. While our rights get restricted further.

See any pattern?

Or here?

[AU9377 5,050]

2 hours ago, aubaseball said:

Sorry, but that’s a liberal talking point just like you say the other is an NRA talking point.   If keeping kids safe are your top priority…why not do away with liquor and beer?  Cell phones for teenagers? Junk food?  All of those things cause death and bad health for kids.   And that’s just some.   What about  cannabis?   Cigarettes?  You know teens all use that stuff and only causes damage to an underdeveloped brain.   
I love it that you take one thing and say that it’s oh so bad for the community but I bet you alcohol has killed more people than any 30 round magazine.   
 

We do regulate who can buy alcohol and tobacco products.  Can you honestly say that it makes sense that an 18 year old can walk into a gun store and buy an arsenal, but can't walk into a grocery store and buy a 12 pack of beer?

[KansasTiger 3,256]

34 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

See any pattern?

Or here?

Only that you can make statistics show you whatever you want. I learned that even more during covid. I'm sure I could go and find data showing how gun deaths in major gun free cities like Chicago show gun laws aren't helping there. Unfortunately, I have some other things to do tonight.

What I do know is that guns with the right culture don't result in mass shootings. And that my neighbors will die protecting their kids.

[KansasTiger 3,256]

Just now, AU9377 said:

We do regulate who can buy alcohol and tobacco products.  Can you honestly say that it makes sense that an 18 year old can walk into a gun store and buy an arsenal, but can't walk into a grocery store and buy a 12 pack of beer?

And if you were here just advocating to raise the age requirement to buy a firearm that would be a different discussion probably met with different answers. But that's not what you're arguing for. You're just pairing down and changing your argument to attempt to gain a leg up.

[AU9377 5,050]

2 hours ago, KansasTiger said:

Not to mention many of us consider more guns a safer environment in many cases. In my rural catholic small town, how many people do you think conceal carry? A ton. And I've never felt safer. Not just because I trust them, but I know if someone tried to shoot up a place, he'd get shot six ways to Sunday.

Which leads me to a conclusion many reach, this is a culture problem and a degeneration of societal values that we are attempting to band aid fix by banning certain types of guns. The sick people that want to hurt people will then buy hand guns and other rifles to shoot people, and they will then call for those to be banned next. 

Edit: I have to edit this because I made a few errors. People that wanted to hurt others would still be able to obtain ARs and hand guns and other rifles. While our rights get restricted further.

I have said the same thing a million times..... There is no one fix to this problem.  There is no magic pill.  Mental health is something that needs to be addressed.  There are other things as well, but why do you make it easier for these troubled individuals to attain a weapon capable of doing maximum harm?  That doesn't make sense.  This debate has not been about conceal and carry hand guns. Nobody is going to take those away.  Nobody has even suggested as much.

[KansasTiger 3,256]

13 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

I have said the same thing a million times..... There is no one fix to this problem.  There is no magic pill.  Mental health is something that needs to be addressed.  There are other things as well, but why do you make it easier for these troubled individuals to attain a weapon capable of doing maximum harm?  That doesn't make sense.  This debate has not been about conceal and carry hand guns. Nobody is going to take those away.  Nobody has even suggested as much.

I didn't bring up concealed carry because you might ban them, but to show how that protects our town. I've mentioned before, it was also implemented at my parent's church and has worked well. 

But since we are on that subject, if you want to ban an AR cause it looks scary and it allegedly happens to be the 'weapon of choice', what happens when that weapon of choice changes? Cause you'll want to ban that next cause you haven't fixed the root of the issue yet.

And that switch of weapon of choice may not even happen, cause I still haven't heard a great way to take ARs out of circulation that isn't going to involve raiding homes and criminalizing millions of people to do it. Cause if you think the people that own them would EVER voluntarily hand them over to the govt, you don't understand their culture.

Edited July 20, 2023 by KansasTiger

[AU9377 5,050]

5 minutes ago, KansasTiger said:

Only that you can make statistics show you whatever you want. I learned that even more during covid. I'm sure I could go and find data showing how gun deaths in major gun free cities like Chicago show gun laws aren't helping there. Unfortunately, I have some other things to do tonight.

What I do know is that guns with the right culture don't result in mass shootings. And that my neighbors will die protecting their kids.

Every thought you have on this seems to be clouded by a belief that you cannot make even the most sensible of compromise on the issue.  That will eventually result in much harsher restrictions than needed when society has finally had enough.

This topic is known as Scalia's hypocrisy by some because of his opinion that the 2nd Amendment was broad and in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) held that the 2^nd Amendment “protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in the militia.” Isn't it funny how someone that preaches strict construction and rails against intent ignores those ideas when they don't fit the argument they are making?

[AU9377 5,050]

4 minutes ago, KansasTiger said:

I didn't bring up concealed carry because you might ban them, but to show how that protects our town. I've mentioned before, it was also implemented at my parent's church and has worked well. 

But since we are on that subject, if you want to ban an AR cause it looks scary and it allegedly happens to be the 'weapon of choice', what happens when that weapon of choice changes? Cause you'll want to ban that next cause you haven't fixed the root of the issue yet.

And that switch of weapon of choice may not even happen, cause I still haven't heard a great way to take ARs out of circulation that isn't going to involve raiding homes and criminalizing millions of people to do it. Cause if you think the people that own them would EVER voluntarily hand them over to the govt, you don't understand their culture.

In other words, we should just do nothing and hope for the best.  This is the same approach that the far right has to health care as well.  That is working marvelously.

Also.. it has absolutely nothing to do with how it looks.  It has everything to do with the damage it inflicts.

Edited July 20, 2023 by AU9377

[KansasTiger 3,256]

Just now, AU9377 said:

In other words, we should just do nothing and hope for the best.  This is the same approach that the far right has to health care as well.  That is working marvelously.

Not even close to what I said.

[KansasTiger 3,256]

2 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

Every thought you have on this seems to be clouded by a belief that you cannot make even the most sensible of compromise on the issue.  That will eventually result in much harsher restrictions than needed when society has finally had enough.

I've never heard a liberal make a better argument for never compromising on this constitutional right. Take heed my fellow conservative minded friends. Give up some of your guns now, and more and more slowly, or all of them eventually. Either way, they eventually want to take away as many as possible by the end. Never compromise on your rights.

[auburnatl1 5,093]

47 minutes ago, KansasTiger said:

Only that you can make statistics show you whatever you want. I learned that even more during covid. I'm sure I could go and find data showing how gun deaths in major gun free cities like Chicago show gun laws aren't helping there. Unfortunately, I have some other things to do tonight.

What I do know is that guns with the right culture don't result in mass shootings. And that my neighbors will die protecting their kids.

I know you believe what you believe.  Btw I don’t know one parent who wouldn’t die for their kids. That’s being a parent. The point is the number of children that have been literally executed in schools and their parents didn’t have the chance

Edited July 20, 2023 by auburnatl1

[Mikey 16,751]

8 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

I missed this and just want to make sure I’m understanding .  The thinking is that a bunch of guys in lower Alabama, north Georgia, Wyoming, whatever, with badass guns, are going to repel the US military (lead by a “tyrannical gov”). A $900b military that’s designed to defeat China and Russia on 2 fronts and have room for home defense.

Thats the argument for AR15s and large mags? Right?

You do not understand the situation as it would evolve.

There are more Americans with hunting licenses east of the Mississippi River than there are soldiers in all the standing armies of the world. "A bunch of guys" won't repel the army. We would each attempt to pick off one before they killed us. Some wouldn't get their man, others would get two or three. The army would be ruined before it ever crossed the Appalachians. These millions of licensed hunters don't even include gun hobbyists and other non-hunting gun owners. This invisible army is yet another reason why foreign enemies won't invade us. It's also another reason to stand by the 2nd. amend.

[auburnatl1 5,093]

2 hours ago, Mikey said:

You do not understand the situation as it would evolve.

There are more Americans with hunting licenses east of the Mississippi River than there are soldiers in all the standing armies of the world. "A bunch of guys" won't repel the army. We would each attempt to pick off one before they killed us. Some wouldn't get their man, others would get two or three. The army would be ruined before it ever crossed the Appalachians. These millions of licensed hunters don't even include gun hobbyists and other non-hunting gun owners. This invisible army is yet another reason why foreign enemies won't invade us. It's also another reason to stand by the 2nd. amend.

Actually it’s the 3-6 thousand miles of ocean around us that protects. Well that’s quite a military plan. And even more big thinking: combine all the hunters (ps I have license) into the worlds largest duck dynasty militia group. An invisible army…

Seriously? Dear lord. Picking off American soldiers?  I can’t decide what’s whackier: that you actually spend time thinking about this stuff or that you believe you’d last over 4 secs.  This thread alone proves that they’ll sell a gun to anyone.

I can’t wait for football season.

Edited July 20, 2023 by auburnatl1

[aubiefifty 16,928]

2 hours ago, KansasTiger said:

Then, sadly, that makes two of us. When you make agreeing with you a condition of friendship and your judgement, you've missed the boat.

ok maybe i spoke out because i was mad of you saying i was making it political. i do care about those kids. when you are dead you have no rights. i will always believe that. we are not protecting our kids. when do we stop it? when everyone is dead. you going to want a tank next? and yes i stay upset about it because nothing is getting done about it. nothing.

[aubiefifty 16,928]

13 hours ago, AU9377 said:

"Banning guns" has never been mentioned as an option.  Banning the sale of that style weapon has. There is no way to defend an 18 year old in Uvalde,  Texas being able to walk into a gun shop and buy that gun and hundreds of rounds of ammunition. 

Had he been forced to purchase a regular rifle or shotgun, many of those kids that are dead today would be alive.  There were other mistakes made that day,  but there is no getting around that fact.

he is a lot like the rest he just talks nicer. when i was in grade school they used to make us crawl under our desks or kneel in a hallway over nukes and it scared everyone. now they are scared of their own countrymen coming in and killing them because too many folks carrying guns should in fact not be allowed anywhere near them. and for the record i am talking assault weapons. and yes they do make a difference. one hell of a difference.

Edited July 20, 2023 by aubiefifty

[Mikey 16,751]

8 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

Seriously? Dear lord. Picking off American soldiers?  I can’t decide what’s whackier: that you actually spend time thinking about this stuff or that you believe you’d last over 4 secs.  This thread alone proves that they’ll sell a gun to anyone.

You should read more thoroughly. The premise that we are already in an armed revolution against the government was the background of the discussion. You stated that a bunch of good ol' boys couldn't stop the army. I showed exactly how that could/would happen. Not all hunters would participate? No, but not all shooters are hunters either. It would more than balance out, numbers-wise.

Thankfully, unless Bungling Biden gets elected again we aren't likely to have the government turn the army against American citizens.

And... I might not last more than four seconds after I shot my man, but in all likelihood I'd get him first. 1/10 of us do that and as I stated, the army is ruined before it crosses the Appalachians.

[I_M4_AU 8,012]

10 hours ago, AU9377 said:

In other words, we should just do nothing and hope for the best.  This is the same approach that the far right has to health care as well.  That is working marvelously.

Also.. it has absolutely nothing to do with how it looks.  It has everything to do with the damage it inflicts.

We have laws on the books that will take care of most of your concerns.  It’s not that we just throw our hands up and give up, it’s that we are looking for legislation that can be enforced and not some legislation that, over time, will erode because it can’t be implemented properly.

We could go the way of Canada in health care.  That would fix the problem at both ends.  The wait time for procedures are so horrendous the Canadian government will assist in your death legally if you can’t wait that long.  Win, win.

[KansasTiger 3,256]

24 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

We have laws on the books that will take care of most of your concerns.  It’s not that we just throw our hands up and give up, it’s that we are looking for legislation that can be enforced and not some legislation that, over time, will erode because it can’t be implemented properly.

We could go the way of Canada in health care.  That would fix the problem at both ends.  The wait time for procedures are so horrendous the Canadian government will assist in your death legally if you can’t wait that long.  Win, win.

What's happening as a whole to Canada as a country under Trudeau is just scary.

[I_M4_AU 8,012]

9 minutes ago, KansasTiger said:

What's happening as a whole to Canada as a country under Trudeau is just scary.

Yes, it’s called tyranny.  I wonder if they are allowed to own weapons? 

Trudeau believes you can’t use a gun for self defense:

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has told listeners of an American podcast that firearm owners in Canada don’t have the right to use their weapon in self-defence.

Trudeau made the comment on the Crooked Media podcast in Los Angeles where he was attending the Summit of the Americas.

“We have a culture where the difference is guns can be used for hunting or for sport shooting in Canada and there’s lots of gun owners and they’re mostly law respecting and law abiding.”

“But you can’t use a gun for self-protection in Canada, that’s not a right that you have, in the constitution or anywhere else.”

https://www.westernstandard.news/news/trudeau-says-canadian-gun-owners-cant-use-them-for-self-defence/article_51712f16-e9b1-11ec-86f0-e7992fd91edd.html

He is a dangerous man.  But it can’t happen here, right?

[aubaseball 2,660]

8 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

He is a dangerous man.  But it can’t happen here, right?

I think I remember an FBI agent say something similar, “he will never get elected right “.   And he did.    They left want you to think that banning one particular weapon will somehow diminish killing in America.   America has a criminal and mental health problem, not a gun problem.   That’s what they don’t want to deal with.   Let’s just blame it on the weapon.   They want the government to run healthcare and look at the VA and Social Security!   It’s a complete mess.   But hey, let’s make more government bureaucracy 

[AU9377 5,050]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

We have laws on the books that will take care of most of your concerns.  It’s not that we just throw our hands up and give up, it’s that we are looking for legislation that can be enforced and not some legislation that, over time, will erode because it can’t be implemented properly.

We could go the way of Canada in health care.  That would fix the problem at both ends.  The wait time for procedures are so horrendous the Canadian government will assist in your death legally if you can’t wait that long.  Win, win.

The wait times in the U.S. are similar to those in Canada.  There is emergency medical treatment provided in Canada for conditions that require.  In fact, to see a specialist, 32% of the people in Canada wait more than 30 days, while 28% in the U.S. wait more than 30 days.  That difference isn't something to crow success over in the U.S.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/health-care-wait-times-by-country

This is what the U.S. government spends per person in the U.S. compared to other similar countries.  We spend this, yet get far less and are still gouged for additional costs when we need health care.  The insanity knows no end.