Go Back   Fratching! > General > Social Woes

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

  #21  
Old 11-08-2017, 10:16 PM
Greenday's Avatar
Greenday Greenday is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 7,014
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjr View Post
Which would not have prevented the shooter from getting his weapons.

Again, the shooter obtained his firearms legally, and passed background checks. The Air Force made the mistake of not submitting his name to the NIC list as a felon.

Because there are people who want just that.
So because it didn't work this one time, we shouldn't enforce the laws that would stop a ton of other shootings? The logic the pro-gun crowd has slays me.

My wife haven't bought any yet but are going through the background check stage. In New Jersey, it takes around three months for the background checks to go through to determine you are eligible to purchase rifles or handguns. And every time you want a handgun, they do checks. There are no loopholes where you can buy guns from a private seller without background checks. Magazines are limited in capacity.

There's a reason NJ hasn't been in the news for mass shootings. We actually have some of the strictest laws in the country.
__________________
Violence has resolved more conflicts than anything else. The contrary opinion that violence doesn't solve anything is merely wishful thinking at its worst. - Starship Troopers
Reply With Quote

  #22  
Old 11-09-2017, 01:02 AM
Tanasi Tanasi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 756
Default

Let's say that universal background checks are the law of the land. How do stop private sales? Obviously just passing a law isn't the answer.
__________________
Cry Havoc and let slip the marsupials of war!!!
Reply With Quote

  #23  
Old 11-09-2017, 08:23 AM
Canarr Canarr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 882
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHuckster View Post
Strawman.

Greenday is talking about closing a loophole that allows people to purchase firearms without background checks. Something that is totally reasonable and is just an expansion of existing laws that restrict sales.

Greenday presumably attained his firearms by undergoing background checks and purchasing them without benefit of said loophole. Thus, he doesn't need to get rid of his guns to be consistent with his argument.
Actually, it's not a strawman. Greenday's point was explicitly

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenday View Post
My counterpoint: Because people were allowed to have guns, 26 innocent people died in the first place.
Consequently, asking about whether or not people should continue to be allowed to have guns is legitimate.

Still, Greenday's arguments are valid: passing and enforcing stricter laws for purchase, storage and handling of guns would reduce the number of gun-related deaths outside of mass shootings. Maybe even the number of mass shootings, since we'll never find out how many potential shooters had to resort to other means due to guns being unavailable to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tanasi View Post
Let's say that universal background checks are the law of the land. How do stop private sales? Obviously just passing a law isn't the answer.
Not just passing the law, of course. You would need to also enforce it. How do you stop private citizens from selling alcohol to minors? Or from selling drugs?
__________________
"You are who you are on your worst day, Durkon. Anything less is a comforting lie you tell yourself to numb the pain." - Evil
"You're trying to be Lawful Good. People forget how crucial it is to keep trying, even if they screw it up now and then." - Good
Reply With Quote

  #24  
Old 11-09-2017, 10:32 AM
Mr Hero Mr Hero is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 177
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gravekeeper View Post

If it's a white guy, he's "very sick" and it's "sad". If its a brown guy, he is an "animal" and the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth will personally calls for his death on Twitter.
Do you also want him to call for the death of the Las Vegas shooter?
Reply With Quote

  #25  
Old 11-09-2017, 12:00 PM
Talon's Avatar
Talon Talon is offline
Atheist
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 356
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Hero View Post
Do you also want him to call for the death of the Las Vegas shooter?
You do realize the LA shooter is already dead?

But to answer your moot question, no it would not be acceptable. The Tangerine Toddler undermined the justice system, where the defendant could claim he couldn't get a fair trial because of a tainted jury pool.
__________________
Customer: I need an Apache.
Gravekeeper: The Tribe or the Gunship?
Reply With Quote

  #26  
Old 11-09-2017, 12:00 PM
Gravekeeper Gravekeeper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,867
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Hero View Post
Do you also want him to call for the death of the Las Vegas shooter?
What? Of course not. Why would you even ask that? That's not the point that was being made at all. The point was that Trump has two completely different reactions to mass casualty events depending on the attacker's skin colour.

White attackers so far have been "sad" and "sick" with "mental health issues."

Non-white attackers are "animals" who should be put to death as quickly as possible. A call so completely beyond the pale for a sitting President to make that it literally threatens the legal process. Trump called for swift capital punishment and in doing so virtually guaranteed the case is going to take longer if not be tied up for years now.

He poisoned the jury pool of the entire country.

He wouldn't commit to addressing any problem with the largest mass shooting in US history or the Church shooting. Even though yet again America was staring at a pile of dead children. Some as young as a year old. The administration went so far as to be indignant that anyone would even suggest looking for a problem to begin with. Accusing them of politicizing a tragedy.

But a non-white guy runs over far less people in NYC and he immediately politicizes the attack, dehumanizes the attacker and publicly calls for his death.
Reply With Quote

  #27  
Old 11-09-2017, 10:35 PM
Tanasi Tanasi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 756
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canarr View Post
Not just passing the law, of course. You would need to also enforce it. How do you stop private citizens from selling alcohol to minors? Or from selling drugs?
OK, How you going to enforce it?
__________________
Cry Havoc and let slip the marsupials of war!!!
Reply With Quote

  #28  
Old 11-10-2017, 04:06 AM
protege protege is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,212
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenday View Post
There's a reason NJ hasn't been in the news for mass shootings. We actually have some of the strictest laws in the country.
Speaking of laws, what's the point in having them...if they're not being followed? I don't mean by the *criminals* but the people that are supposed to be following them. The military totally dropped the ball by not reporting the asshole. We can make all the laws we want, but if we have to depend on people not reporting shit...

Had the military done what they were supposed to--followed the fucking law by reporting the asshole--the incident might have been prevented. But no, they fucked up and all those people were killed
Reply With Quote

  #29  
Old 11-10-2017, 07:34 AM
Canarr Canarr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 882
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tanasi View Post
OK, How you going to enforce it?
A few things spring to mind:

1. Investigate people who are reported or otherwise come into suspicion of selling guns without valid background checks.
2. Set up sting operations trying to catch perpetrators in the act.
3. Use serial numbers to follow the trail of a gun used in a crime. Who bought it where? Who sold it to whom? Did they all follow the law?

You know, let the police investigate a potential crime. It's what they do.

Of course, private sellers could hardly perform background checks themselves. You would need some sort of "gunowner license", that confirms you have had the necessary checks done, and needs to be renewed every few years. That way, anybody selling a gun privately could just check if your license is still valid, make a copy for their records, and they'd be within the law.
__________________
"You are who you are on your worst day, Durkon. Anything less is a comforting lie you tell yourself to numb the pain." - Evil
"You're trying to be Lawful Good. People forget how crucial it is to keep trying, even if they screw it up now and then." - Good
Reply With Quote

  #30  
Old 11-10-2017, 01:10 PM
protege protege is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,212
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canarr View Post
3. Use serial numbers to follow the trail of a gun used in a crime.
Problem is, that serial numbers are very easy to remove. All you'd need is a few minutes with a grinder, and off they come. Throw on a lick of paint, forge some paperwork, and now you have a 'clean' firearm.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 07:31 AM.


vBulletin skins developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.