Atlanta Braves Thread (I HURT MYSELF TODAY TO SEE IF I STILL FEEL)

Status
Not open for further replies.
#10,763
#10,763
GreatWhiteNorth said:
Wow. Really?
Click to expand...

She apparently loved shooting it, until her kid stole her gun and killed her with it and then killed a bunch of kids for no reason.

My 7 year old daughter has barely been able to sleep all week because her class had a so-called “lockdown drill” on Monday, where they practice hiding from a murderer. Our schools have to stage these drills because anybody in America can easily buy a weapon capable of slaughtering people by the roomful. I’m generally okay with personal ownership of handguns for self-defense but the stuff we let people walk around with is insane. I mean, it’s a lot of fun drinking 10 beers and driving 90 mph down the highway too, but normally we all understand that it's okay to limit our personal freedoms in the interest of public safety. I have no idea why guns are apparently completely exempt from that.

(I.e. I'm with Brown. USA USA.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10,764
#10,764
Right. I'm sure if she had never owned an AR-15, her son would have gone on to become an upstanding contributor to our community.

You can blame the guns all you want, but that narrative is just masking a larger societal issue. I hate to tell you, but I could walk into a school and kill 20 people with a handgun just as easily as with a rifle. The problem isn't the guns.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#10,765
#10,765
You are a US Marshal. You could probably walk into an elementary school and kill 20 people with a can opener before anyone could stop you. The problem is that easy ownership of assault-style rifles allows untrained Jerry McFsckfaces to walk into a building and murder 20+ people right off the bat. Maybe you don't think in principle there's no difference between 3 or 4 people being killed in a shooting before being stopped or 20, but I do.

Obviously we're never going to agree on this, but perhaps you can at least sort of appreciate my position, which is this: my family is at a higher risk of dying in mass shootings because of the easy availability of a class of weapons which are legal because, as far as I can tell, they are fun to shoot. Nobody I know who keeps a gun for self-defense owns an AR-15.

I'll use the example again: everyone in America is cool with limitations on their automotive freedom. Speed limits, driver's licenses, license plates, insurance, DUI laws, mandatory safety features on cars, etc etc etc. We accept all this because we understand that from a public safety standpoint, we have to operate under the (largely correct) assumption that many people are irresponsible and/or inattentive drivers and therefore everyone's freedom needs to be curtailed just a little bit to protect us all. Yet when it comes to guns, the idea seems to be that the default position of the law has to be that people should all be treated as pristine responsible ideal gun owners until proven otherwise. (Despite this being a country where a toddler finds a gun and shoots somebody once a week.) It's like having no DUI laws or speed limits or driver's licenses and saying, well, go crazy and we'll only prosecute you after you kill somebody with your car. Enjoy!
 
#10,766
#10,766
Vercingetorix said:
You are a US Marshal. You could probably walk into an elementary school and kill 20 people with a can opener before anyone could stop you. The problem is that easy ownership of assault-style rifles allows untrained Jerry McFsckfaces to walk into a building and murder 20+ people right off the bat. Maybe you don't think in principle there's no difference between 3 or 4 people being killed in a shooting before being stopped or 20, but I do.

Obviously we're never going to agree on this, but perhaps you can at least sort of appreciate my position, which is this: my family is at a higher risk of dying in mass shootings because of the easy availability of a class of weapons which are legal because, as far as I can tell, they are fun to shoot. Nobody I know who keeps a gun for self-defense owns an AR-15.

I'll use the example again: everyone in America is cool with limitations on their automotive freedom. Speed limits, driver's licenses, license plates, insurance, DUI laws, mandatory safety features on cars, etc etc etc. We accept all this because we understand that from a public safety standpoint, we have to operate under the (largely correct) assumption that many people are irresponsible and/or inattentive drivers and therefore everyone's freedom needs to be curtailed just a little bit to protect us all. Yet when it comes to guns, the idea seems to be that the default position of the law has to be that people should all be treated as pristine responsible ideal gun owners until proven otherwise. (Despite this being a country where a toddler finds a gun and shoots somebody once a week.) It's like having no DUI laws or speed limits or driver's licenses and saying, well, go crazy and we'll only prosecute you after you kill somebody with your car. Enjoy!
Click to expand...

You're right. We're not going to agree on it. I know plenty of people that own rifles for home defense as well as recreational shooting. There are even people out there who own such weapons for use against their own government, should the need arise. As far as I can tell, that's what the second amendment is for.

You can tell me all about the limits on personal liberties we so willingly accept and it rings completely hollow as these choads on I-40 blow past me at 95mph.

If you want to ban assault rifles or other guns, I respect your right to believe that and to vote your conscience. However, new laws only affect law-abiding citizens, which is not really the target audience here. If you want to get a gun, you can...just like you can get drugs, child porn, fake IDs, and all kinds of other illegal things. Restrictive gun laws don't work. Look at Chicago.

Again...my belief is there is a root problem with us as a people that goes deeper than the guns. If a toddler gets a gun and shots themselves or someone else with it, it is due to blatantly irresponsible parenting. These are the angles I believe we should be focusing on...not eliminating the guns themselves.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#10,767
#10,767
GreatWhiteNorth said:
You're right. We're not going to agree on it. I know plenty of people that own rifles for home defense as well as recreational shooting. There are even people out there who own such weapons for use against their own government, should the need arise. As far as I can tell, that's what the second amendment is for.

You can tell me all about the limits on personal liberties we so willingly accept and it rings completely hollow as these choads on I-40 blow past me at 95mph.

If you want to ban assault rifles or other guns, I respect your right to believe that and to vote your conscience. However, new laws only affect law-abiding citizens, which is not really the target audience here. If you want to get a gun, you can...just like you can get drugs, child porn, fake IDs, and all kinds of other illegal drugs. Restrictive gun laws don't work. Look at Chicago.

Again...my belief is there is a root problem with us as a people that goes deeper than the guns. If a toddler gets a gun and shots themselves or someone else with it, it is due to blatantly irresponsible parenting. These are the angles I believe we should be focusing on...not eliminating the guns themselves.
Click to expand...

To me, blaming guns seems to be an easy way of avoiding a number of harder questions. Something about blaming the tool because it is good at it's job hits me wrong when doing so allows you to ignore any number of other, pressing issues such as (as you said) irresponsible parenting, mental health, socio-economic factors, etc.
 
Last edited:
#10,768
#10,768
BigOrange15 said:
To me, blaming guns seems to be an easy way of avoiding a number of harder questions. Something about blaming the tool because it is good at it's job hits me wrong when doing so allows you to ignore any number of other, pressing issues such as (as you said) irresponsible parenting, mental health, socio-economic factors, etc.
Click to expand...

People with all of those issues are still going to have those issues. Those issues have always and will always exist. People have killed people all the way back to the 3rd and 4th humans to walk planet earth. The ACTUAL problem is that people with those issues can mow down a large amount of people from an impersonal distance with no experience or expertise. So yes, guns are in fact THE issue.
 
#10,769
#10,769
Vercingetorix said:
She apparently loved shooting it, until her kid stole her gun and killed her with it and then killed a bunch of kids for no reason.

My 7 year old daughter has barely been able to sleep all week because her class had a so-called “lockdown drill” on Monday, where they practice hiding from a murderer. Our schools have to stage these drills because anybody in America can easily buy a weapon capable of slaughtering people by the roomful. I’m generally okay with personal ownership of handguns for self-defense but the stuff we let people walk around with is insane. I mean, it’s a lot of fun drinking 10 beers and driving 90 mph down the highway too, but normally we all understand that it's okay to limit our personal freedoms in the interest of public safety. I have no idea why guns are apparently completely exempt from that.

(I.e. I'm with Brown. USA USA.)
Click to expand...

Verc+Brown 2020
 
#10,770
#10,770
So, I just want to be sure I'm clear, because I feel like we're on two different topics now...you're advocating gun control...specifically, banning assault rifles... for the sole reason of reducing the amount of victims during an active shooter event?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10,774
#10,774
GreatWhiteNorth said:
So, I just want to be sure I'm clear, because I feel like we're on two different topics now...you're advocating gun control...specifically, banning assault rifles... for the sole reason of reducing the amount of victims during an active shooter event?
Click to expand...

I'm not advocating gun control. I'm advocating the total absence of guns. I realize that is not possible.

I do have a significant issue with the ease of getting a gun and using it to kill a mass amount of people. Someone else choosing when your life ends is not a liberty under the constitution IIRC.

So sure, I'm advocating less freakin assault rifles because why the hell does anyone need an assault rifle?

If you have a problem ranging anywhere from mental illness to your coworker spilling water on your shoe, I'm not getting caught in the crosshair of a fist fight or a stabbing or smashing someone's skull with a rock. Whatever method you want to kill someone with, be my guest. The only way to achieve mass murder is guns and bombs. Otherwise people can intervene and put an end or victims can defend themselves.

I think my stance is pretty straight forward.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top