Oklahoma hospital shooting

[Vol8188]

Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall. My data cited "gun homicide" because that's the topic of discussion., try to keep up.

Why would that be the topic? That’s what I’m trying to get to. I can’t tell if you’re trolling or just incapable of comprehension.

I would assume your goal in limiting guns is not to limit gun related homicides merely to have them replaced by non gun related homicides.

So why would we not look at general homicide rates?

 

[Septic]

So it was roughly 4500 deaths. Of those around 1400 were the result of homicide and not suicide. That alone should tell you of the mental health issues. Aside from that in 2019 there were over 600,000 abortions and I assume it was very similar, if not more, in 2020. What’s the argument you’re trying to make again?

That both sides must compromise to help fix this issue.

 

[Septic]

Why would that be the topic? That’s what I’m trying to get to. I can’t tell if you’re trolling or just incapable of comprehension.

I would assume your goal in limiting guns is not to limit gun related homicides merely to have them replaced by non gun related homicides.

So why would we not look at general homicide rates?

It's literally the topic of the thread you dolt.

I don't know how else to dumb this down for you, stay on topic or we're done.

 

[Vol8188]

That both sides must compromise to help fix this issue.

What's the issue?

 

[Septic]

Since you know where the journey begins, to be candid, if you don't put yourself in a position of facilitating the journey the question is do you really give a sh*t that kids are dying (to put it in your words)?

What are you asking specifically?

 

[whodeycin85]

I stated from the beginning that both sides are the problem. Your "n0 c0mPrOmiZse!" myopia clearly didn't recognize that.

The rest is just deflection from having to acknowledge that you simply don't give a sh*t about the epidemic of mass shootings.

Shouldn't we concentrate on the reason for the shootings? You have to have a mental illness to see a item and say im going to kill someone with this item.. Mental illness is the cause and instead of correcting it. We over medicate and indulge it causing the illness to run wild....restricting guns, knives, blunt objects will only lead to other means of crazy people killing.

 

[Vol8188]

It's literally the topic of the thread you dolt.

I don't know how else to dumb this down for you, stay on topic or we're done.

IDK how else to dumb this down for you. You've intentionally selected an indicator that doesn't reflect the actual objective. The objective of gun legislation is to reduce homicides in general. Not just homicides by gun. Because if it doesn't reduce homicides in general, why would anyone support it?

The obvious answer is they wouldn't.

 

[Septic]

Shouldn't we concentrate on the reason for the shootings? You have to have a mental illness to see a item and say im going to kill someone with this item.. Mental illness is the cause and instead of correcting it. We over medicate and indulge it causing the illness to run wild....restricting guns, knives, blunt objects will only lead to other means of crazy people killing.

Absolutely. Mental illness is the root of the problem, it needs to be dealt with in a real, meaningful way instead of just the bureaucratic lip service it's been given.

No one is advocating for knives and blunt object to be restricted, those aren't being used to slay classrooms full of kids.

 

[McDad]

What are you asking specifically?

If you give a sh*t that kids are dying and you know where the journey begins, then would in not be crummy of you to not pursue a position where you can facilitate?

Fyi, I am completely serious. People are motivated to do things beyond their perceived scope by their passion. You can, too.

 

[whodeycin85]

Absolutely. Mental illness is the root of the problem, it needs to be dealt with in a real, meaningful way instead of the lip service it's been given.

No one is advocating for knives and blunt object to be restricted, those aren't being used to slay classrooms full of kids.

Where do you think crazy people will turn to once gun legislation "limits" gun access? People will kill with whatever they can kill with. If a crazy person bars kids in a building and starts it on fire..are you gonna call for legislation on things that might start a fire??

 

[Septic]

Where do you think crazy people will turn to once gun legislation "limits" gun access? People will kill with whatever they can kill with. If a crazy person bars kids in a building and starts it on fire..are you gonna call for legislation on things that might start a fire??

I'm not "calling" for legislation on anything.

I'm simply pointing out that if the US want's to get ahead of what we alone seem to have a unique problem with, the debate will need to have people stop talking past one another.

 

[0nelilreb]

So let me rephrase and please tell me if I'm wrong.

We can't have a discussion (you won't have a discussion) because the anti 2a crowd doesn't know enough about firearms to meet your threshold of competence on the subject?

Let me ask you - how many more kids have to die before it doesn't matter that our elected leaders don't know what a gas impingement system is on an AR?

If you want to take an inalienable right away from me , and you want me to consider your reasons why I should , you need to know about the subject matter that you are trying to take away from me because spouting propaganda at me from some lazy ass , power/ money driven MSM or politician will not hold my attention long enough for me to hear you out . 2a supporters are under fire 24/7 from agenda driven , buzz word using anti gun activists that have zero desires to have any meaningful discussion . All the “anti gun “ people have done is increased the resolve of gun owners to the point that we don’t believe anything they say anymore . You have Dem congressmen now say that they will pass their new gun control bill even if it means doing away with the filibuster and expanding SCOTUS , while the POTUS is pushing to ban 9 mms . This is why you can’t give an inch .. you know what happens after that .

 

[whodeycin85]

I'm not "calling" for legislation on anything.

I'm simply pointing out that if the US want's to get ahead of what we alone seem to have a unique problem with, the debate will need to have people stop talking past one another.

ok, the scenario i laid out with fire. How much comprimise should be given, when 1 side indulges the root cause of problem, mental illness. Its also the same side that is lenient on crimials....wheres the comprise when the kid that shoots up a school, for example has 20 felonies, make violent threats, had been interviewed by authorities, but released none then less.

 

[Septic]

If you give a sh*t that kids are dying and you know where the journey begins, then would in not be crummy of you to not pursue a position where you can facilitate?

Fyi, I am completely serious. People are motivated to do things beyond their perceived scope by their passion. You can, too.

well, I guess that would be said about any issue in these forums.

The journey begins with empathy and a common goal to fix the issue, there doesn't seem to be a willingness by either side to do that. Not really.

I find it funny however, that my position of both sides need to work together is being solely attacked and ridiculed by one side. The no compromise folks are why it will be virtually impossible to move past this with anything meaningful.

 

[Septic]

If you want to take an inalienable right away from me , and you want me to consider your reasons why I should , you need to know about the subject matter that you are trying to take away from me because spouting propaganda at me from some lazy ass , power/ money driven MSM or politician will not hold my attention long enough for me to hear you out . 2a supporters are under fire 24/7 from agenda driven , buzz word using anti gun activists that have zero desires to have any meaningful discussion . All the “anti gun “ people have done is increased the resolve of gun owners to the point that we don’t believe anything they say anymore . You have Dem congressmen now say that they will pass their new gun control bill even if it means doing away with the filibuster and expanding SCOTUS , while the POTUS is pushing to ban 9 mms . This is why you can’t give an inch .. you know what happens after that .

Would you trade a AR15 and similar law change to "21 and over with mental health screening" for example with an in person, two forms of ID required voting system?

 

[Vol8188]

I'm not "calling" for legislation on anything.

I'm simply pointing out that if the US want's to get ahead of what we alone seem to have a unique problem with, the debate will need to have people stop talking past one another.

What exactly is this unique problem?

 

[whodeycin85]

Would you trade a AR15 and similar law change to "21 and over with mental health screening" for example with an in person, two forms of ID required voting system?

Changing the law to a more rigourous mental health screening would be a start. In exchange for the 2 ID in peraon voting would be a start. But not banning a weapon..thats a non starter

 

[Septic]

Changing the law to a more rigourous mental health screening would be a start. In exchange for the 2 ID in peraon voting would be a start. But not banning a weapon..thats a non starter

Lots of weapons are already banned from civilian use and purchase. I mean, I can't buy a M16... Is that a violation of an inalienable right?

There's no right or wrong answer, I'm just curious where other folks would be on compromising voter ID requirements with AR15 age limits. Sounds like you're open to compromise, you're the first.

 

[Vol8188]

Lots of weapons are already banned from civilian use and purchase. I mean, I can't buy a M16... Is that a violation of an inalienable right?

There's no right or wrong answer, I'm just curious where other folks would be on compromising voter ID requirements with AR15 age limits.

The missing part of this conversation is what will banning ARs accomplish?

If you wish to limit something the burden is on you to first establish that the item needs limiting

 

[whodeycin85]

Lots of weapons are already banned from civilian use and purchase. I mean, I can't buy a M16... Is that a violation of an inalienable right?
yes, IMO it goes against what the orginal intention of the 2A was for. Remeber they allowed cannons which were the most power weapon at that time.

There's no right or wrong answer, I'm just curious where other folks would be on compromising voter ID requirements with AR15 age limits.

 

[0nelilreb]

Would you trade a AR15 and similar law change to "21 and over with mental health screening" for example with an in person, two forms of ID required voting system?

No . I would be willing to listen to proposition of applying the same requirements to voting as to the requirements of owning a firearm as I believe they carried the same weight and can both be just as harmful to society if used improperly . How do we as a “ developed society “ put more emphasis on owing a firearm than we do voting for office holders that determine how we live our lives ? If all rights are important why do we so heavily restrict one and try to losses restrictions on the others ? We are starting off on unequal ground and asking for even more from the people just trying to hold onto what they have . Once we lose it , we will never get it back . I think this is the position of most 2a supporters .

 

[Septic]

The missing part of this conversation is what will banning ARs accomplish?

If you wish to limit something the burden is on you to first establish that the item needs limiting

FFS. Where did I say anything about banning AR's?

This is why it's such a chore to try and hold a conversation with you and why you're probably ignored by more people in this forum than any other. You move goal posts, insist you didn't and then blame the other person for not having the discussion you've straw manned. The problem is that you do this without even trying to squeeze in a cogent argument.

Bye Felicia.

 

[Septic]

yes, IMO it goes against what the orginal intention of the 2A was for. Remeber they allowed cannons which were the most power weapon at that time.

You'll have a hard time convincing me that our founding fathers did what they did with clear foresight of mass civilian and school murders.

 

[NorthDallas40]

You'll have a hard time convincing me that our founding fathers did what they did with clear foresight of mass civilian and school murders.

I’d guess they would be more shocked at what a spineless, responsibility avoiding, cesspool of human nature our population has become. Which I think enables the behavior you’re trying to leverage frankly. Remember these guys settle far less offenses than the crap we see daily on the news with firearms at 10 paces.

 

[Septic]

No . I would be willing to listen to proposition of applying the same requirements to voting as to the requirements of owning a firearm as I believe they carried the same weight and can both be just as harmful to society if used improperly . How do we as a “ developed society “ put more emphasis on owing a firearm than we do voting for office holders that determine how we live our lives ? If all rights are important why do we so heavily restrict one and try to losses restrictions on the others ? We are starting off on unequal ground and asking for even more from the people just trying to hold onto what they have . Once we lose it , we will never get it back . I think this is the position of most 2a supporters .

Well, then you get your guns and we as a 'developed society' have more school shootings. win, win?