Another Mass Shooting In Las Vegas

[grean]

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

every time TTH posts, he screams "I am an Elitist Liberal".. challenged to come up with a solution, this is what he comes up with. there were a few items that started to make a little sense, but ultimately he arrived at an elitist conclusion.. the Proletariat isn't smart enough to handle gun ownership, the all-knowing Federal Government must stop these uninformed, uneducated Hooligans from owning firearms.

I appreciate the sentiment he is trying to convey. I don't think it's elitist. I do think his proposals are based on assumptions that will prove to be untrue.

Maybe they don't take all the factors into account.

[rexdutchman]

There is a good post in the national threads . We will NEVER know the truth form the Media or the Government about what happened.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by grean

I appreciate the sentiment he is trying to convey. I don't think it's elitist.

I appreciate the attempt at a solution.. but the solution shuts out all but the most wealthy from gun ownership.. it suggests gun crime is reserved for the poor.

the wealthy Vegas Murderer could pay that proposed gun tax.. your average Jason Aldean fan couldn't come close.

[grean]

A baby unicorn must have just been born. The WH and NRA suggested that "bump" stocks be more restricted.

[DentBick]

The olive branch has been extended. Let's see what they do with it.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by DentBick

So you want to make gun ownership an elitist thing?

Hahahahaha!!!! Great idea.

Again, you're not comprehending the purpose of the second amendment.

No, I want to make it impossible to own any thing but a single shot rifle, a shotgun, or a low capacity handgun. And I want ownership of those to reflect their real cost through internalizing their external costs via insurance.

The purpose of the Second Amendment was to allow States to have citizens militias in contemplation of no national standing army. This was important to Southern States because they feared slave rebellions. I fully comprehend that.

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

I appreciate the attempt at a solution.. but the solution shuts out all but the most wealthy from gun ownership.. it suggests gun crime is reserved for the poor.

the wealthy Vegas Murderer could pay that proposed gun tax.. your average Jason Aldean fan couldn't come close.

I think handguns and the legitimate sporting weapons would be relatively still be relatively affordable. Drop the tax if we’re williing to use something else for increased mental health funding. Tax third or fourth gun purchases in each category. You just need to get the total number of guns, even those with a legitimate purpose down.

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

No, I want to make it impossible to own any thing but a single shot rifle, a shotgun, or a low capacity handgun. And I want ownership of those to reflect their real cost through internalizing their external costs via insurance.

Tax third or fourth gun purchases in each category. You just need to get the total number of guns, even those with a legitimate purpose down.

but if you can't afford the Insurance component, you don't get the gun.. like Health Care, without Obamacare subsidies, millions are uncovered. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't yank healthcare from the poor.. right?

I can get behind a tax on the 3rd, 4th, and more gun.. that is wealthy folks hoarding.. I also support the inheritance tax and the 3.8 Medicare tax on the wealthy Bastards.. for hoarding financial resources.. but that's another subject.

[grean]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

The purpose of the Second Amendment was to allow States to have citizens militias in contemplation of no national standing army. This was important to Southern States because they feared slave rebellions. I fully comprehend that.

No, sir. That is absolutely not the reason behind the second ammendment.

It was to be a check against the standing army. The founders were terrified by the idea of a standing army. They had seem first hand the British army oppress citizens at will. Soldiers could just come and take over your house, hence the subject of the 3rd ammendment.

Southern states? Slavory was wide spread at the time of 2As ratification. It was absolutely not a factor in their decision.

Mass shootings? They also experienced Shays just prior to the 2A ratification and the Bacon rebelliona hundred years prior plus a handful of other lesser known skirmishes in between. They still said we to have an army so we must allow the citizens to be armed.

It is not as many believe to be an inferred right to forcefully remove the government. That's what our right to vote is to be used to accomplish.

Where did you learn that rubbish?

[DFWClubgoer]

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

is banning abortion your crusade, so much that you felt the need to hijack a gun-control thread?

is that you, Tim Murphy?

https://www.click2houston.com/news/p...et-an-abortion

Absolutely not, I was pointing out the knee “JERKS” reactions of the far left and right. Looks like you proved my point for me!

When it comes to hot button issues both sides are have extremists that will block any meaningful legislation.

Examples:

The right hates the thought of abortion but thinks the death penalty is just fine.

While the left treats abortion like a god given right and screams about the death penalty.

Righteous Indignation doesn’t suit whore mongers like us! Opinions and assholes we both have’em.

RELAX!

[2short@desky]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

No, I want to make it impossible to own any thing but a single shot rifle, a shotgun, or a low capacity handgun. And I want ownership of those to reflect their real cost through internalizing their external costs via insurance.

The purpose of the Second Amendment was to allow States to have citizens militias in contemplation of no national standing army. This was important to Southern States because they feared slave rebellions. I fully comprehend that.



I think handguns and the legitimate sporting weapons would be relatively still be relatively affordable. Drop the tax if we’re williing to use something else for increased mental health funding. Tax third or fourth gun purchases in each category. You just need to get the total number of guns, even those with a legitimate purpose down.

TTH here you go making assumptions. Two of which are grossly incorrect. First, your solution to trim down ownership of what you perceive as dangerous firearms mimics Swedish and Norwegian law. So explain Anders Behring Breivik and the 2011 mass murders.

Secondly, I find it ironic that you are completely devoid of any appreciation of the liberties you enjoy. You simply take them for granted. Such was the beauty and brilliance of the Founding Fathers in that the guarantees they placed lack any acknowledgement or understanding as to why they were initiated. You can go on about your static life and never understand why a soldier isn't knocking down your door, confiscating your food, and diminishing your liberties. You assume it can never happen here. Well it cannot as long as the 2A is understood and not tampered with. The 2A was placed and written in such a wording that the populace could have firearms that could offer resistance to an out of control government just in case something did go wrong...so that citizens could have a last say. It's the elephant in the room placed there for this specific reason. This was extremely important to them, and still is. To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The Fathers knew this and placed this guarantee so that an opposite reaction could manifest itself should events dictate.

I quote an author who saw both sides of this issue in real life, that uniquely defines your positions.
"The greatest guilt of today is that of people who accept collectivism by moral default; the people who seek protection from the necessity of taking a stand, by refusing to admit to themselves the nature of that which they are accepting; the people who support plans specifically designed to achieve serfdom, but hide behind the empty assertion that they are lovers of freedom, with no concrete meaning attached to the word; the people who believe that the content of ideas need not be examined, that principles need not be defined, and that facts can be eliminated by keeping one's eyes shut. They expect, when they find themselves in a world of bloody ruins and concentration camps, to escape moral responsibility by wailing: "But I didn't mean this!"
— Ayn Rand

[rexdutchman]

Why are we ( society , media , gov ) blaming a inanimate object for what a person does , just saying - let blaming a car for the drunk accidents . We as a society need to look into why people feel the need to murder people for no reason.

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by rexdutchman

Why are we ( society , media , gov ) blaming a inanimate object for what a person does , just saying - let blaming a car for the drunk accidents . We as a society need to look into why people feel the need to murder people for no reason.

exactly.. we don't, because that takes too much introspection, too much work.. takes too long.. it's easier to blame objects than hearts.

[Copierguy0]

So, after 7 pages and 103 posts:
NO ONE STILL HAS A FUCKING CLUE ON HOW TO FIX, SLOW DOWN, OR STOP THE SHOOTINGS?

I have read all the blah blah blah about guns are not to blame BS but, the question remains:
WHY DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE BUTT STOCK, UNLIMITED SIZE MAGAZINE'S TO GO HUNTING, TO GO SHOOTING, TO PROTECT YOUR FAMILY?
the answer is: YOU DO NOT.
BETTER GUN CONTROL/SCREENINGS IS THE ANSWER

next time i go hunting to shoot a deer:
I will need a fucking machine gun or home made bomb to catch one.


CG

[DentBick]

Well, we now know he was a hobbyist.

[Copierguy0]

Originally Posted by DentBick

Well, we now know he was a hobbyist.

you cant even spell HOBBYIST with your 1 lonely review newbie.
or are you hiding behind a new handle because you fucked the last one up?

CG