America's Gun Violence
Comments
-
This why this debate is lost, you equate guns to laundry detergent. One is made to clean clothes, the other to effectively kill things, including people. Golly, who knew? Might as well pass out bags of broken glass at Halloween.PJPOWER said:
We should probably start locking people up that irresponsibly let children poison themselves with laundry detergent pods, electrocute themselves by unsafe wall outlets, accidentally burn themselves with boiling water, or get mauled by the family pet as well. Neglectful supervision in all situations, right?Halifax2TheMax said:
I'd be willing to bet the NRA would be opposed to any kind of "severe punishment." You asked a question and received answers. I guess they triggered you? Too many times those "lawful" gun owners who are responsible for shootings like these don't face any repercussions of import as it's deemed "tragic" or an "accident ," usually both. Start locking these idiots up and I'd be willing to bet people will become more responsible with their thunder sticks and boom makers. Nobody talks about the tens of thousands injured by guns every year and the societal cost of that. Owning a gun carries with it a high level of responsibility that I thought republicans were all about, you know, personal responsibility and all. Start holding them accountable. And in Ronny Ray Guns words of infamy, there you go again with, "can't please any anti-gunners until you take every gun away." Talk about dismissive?mace1229 said:I find it funny that I only responded to a comment about a post that wanted "more severe punishment" for accidents like this by saying who wouldn't, and resulted in the sarcastic posts that followed like "how reassuring" as if that was a lame idea. I never said it was going to "turn this around." Someone made the comment that they don't understand why anyone would be opposed to punishing these people, I simply said I don't think anyone would be opposed to that. Jump to whatever conclusions you wish to. I guess you really cant please anyone anti-gun until you take every gun away.
And to answer the question "5 years for each victim with 2.5 to serve mandatory be okay with you?"
Absolutely. If you run a child care and allow small children access to guns under your watch, then absolutely. This was a business of protecting children, and to allow that to happen is just ridiculous.
As a poster above stated, if the possibility of your child dying is not enough of a deterrent to leaving access to something that could be potentially deadly, then threatening to lock them up probably will not do much good either.
I, for one, always keep the consequences of irresponsible firearm storage/usage in the back of my mind, but was taught at an early age the damage a firearm can do. I, for one, would also be fine with requiring everyone to take a safety class and display a card showing that you have completed that class before buying a firearm. Hunters have to take a “Hunters education” class before legally getting a hunting license... In these hunter education classes, you learn not to shoot over hills, how to handle your gun while crossing a fence, etc. What I do not understand is why so many anti-gunners appose more education...???09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
It isn't enough. Recognizing that fact isn't the same as opposing education.PJPOWER said:
Plenty, any time I mention education I am met with the “education is not enough” response. There you go again..........Halifax2TheMax said:
Which anti-gunners have opposed further gun safety education? There you go again.........PJPOWER said:
We should probably start locking people up that irresponsibly let children poison themselves with laundry detergent pods, electrocute themselves by unsafe wall outlets, accidentally burn themselves with boiling water, or get mauled by the family pet as well. Neglectful supervision in all situations, right?Halifax2TheMax said:
I'd be willing to bet the NRA would be opposed to any kind of "severe punishment." You asked a question and received answers. I guess they triggered you? Too many times those "lawful" gun owners who are responsible for shootings like these don't face any repercussions of import as it's deemed "tragic" or an "accident ," usually both. Start locking these idiots up and I'd be willing to bet people will become more responsible with their thunder sticks and boom makers. Nobody talks about the tens of thousands injured by guns every year and the societal cost of that. Owning a gun carries with it a high level of responsibility that I thought republicans were all about, you know, personal responsibility and all. Start holding them accountable. And in Ronny Ray Guns words of infamy, there you go again with, "can't please any anti-gunners until you take every gun away." Talk about dismissive?mace1229 said:I find it funny that I only responded to a comment about a post that wanted "more severe punishment" for accidents like this by saying who wouldn't, and resulted in the sarcastic posts that followed like "how reassuring" as if that was a lame idea. I never said it was going to "turn this around." Someone made the comment that they don't understand why anyone would be opposed to punishing these people, I simply said I don't think anyone would be opposed to that. Jump to whatever conclusions you wish to. I guess you really cant please anyone anti-gun until you take every gun away.
And to answer the question "5 years for each victim with 2.5 to serve mandatory be okay with you?"
Absolutely. If you run a child care and allow small children access to guns under your watch, then absolutely. This was a business of protecting children, and to allow that to happen is just ridiculous.
As a poster above stated, if the possibility of your child dying is not enough of a deterrent to leaving access to something that could be potentially deadly, then threatening to lock them up probably will not do much good either.
I, for one, always keep the consequences of irresponsible firearm storage/usage in the back of my mind, but was taught at an early age the damage a firearm can do. I, for one, would also be fine with requiring everyone to take a safety class and display a card showing that you have completed that class before buying a firearm. Hunters have to take a “Hunters education” class before legally getting a hunting license... In these hunter education classes, you learn not to shoot over hills, how to handle your gun while crossing a fence, etc. What I do not understand is why so many anti-gunners appose more education...???my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf0 -
I equated the possible consequences, not the item itself. Anything, ANYTHING, that a toddler could potentially hurt/kill themselves with should be stored in a safe place. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Insecticides and rat poison are made to kill things...so you do not leave them laying around for a child to poison themselves with, right?Halifax2TheMax said:
This why this debate is lost, you equate guns to laundry detergent. One is made to clean clothes, the other to effectively kill things, including people. Golly, who knew? Might as well pass out bags of broken glass at Halloween.PJPOWER said:
We should probably start locking people up that irresponsibly let children poison themselves with laundry detergent pods, electrocute themselves by unsafe wall outlets, accidentally burn themselves with boiling water, or get mauled by the family pet as well. Neglectful supervision in all situations, right?Halifax2TheMax said:
I'd be willing to bet the NRA would be opposed to any kind of "severe punishment." You asked a question and received answers. I guess they triggered you? Too many times those "lawful" gun owners who are responsible for shootings like these don't face any repercussions of import as it's deemed "tragic" or an "accident ," usually both. Start locking these idiots up and I'd be willing to bet people will become more responsible with their thunder sticks and boom makers. Nobody talks about the tens of thousands injured by guns every year and the societal cost of that. Owning a gun carries with it a high level of responsibility that I thought republicans were all about, you know, personal responsibility and all. Start holding them accountable. And in Ronny Ray Guns words of infamy, there you go again with, "can't please any anti-gunners until you take every gun away." Talk about dismissive?mace1229 said:I find it funny that I only responded to a comment about a post that wanted "more severe punishment" for accidents like this by saying who wouldn't, and resulted in the sarcastic posts that followed like "how reassuring" as if that was a lame idea. I never said it was going to "turn this around." Someone made the comment that they don't understand why anyone would be opposed to punishing these people, I simply said I don't think anyone would be opposed to that. Jump to whatever conclusions you wish to. I guess you really cant please anyone anti-gun until you take every gun away.
And to answer the question "5 years for each victim with 2.5 to serve mandatory be okay with you?"
Absolutely. If you run a child care and allow small children access to guns under your watch, then absolutely. This was a business of protecting children, and to allow that to happen is just ridiculous.
As a poster above stated, if the possibility of your child dying is not enough of a deterrent to leaving access to something that could be potentially deadly, then threatening to lock them up probably will not do much good either.
I, for one, always keep the consequences of irresponsible firearm storage/usage in the back of my mind, but was taught at an early age the damage a firearm can do. I, for one, would also be fine with requiring everyone to take a safety class and display a card showing that you have completed that class before buying a firearm. Hunters have to take a “Hunters education” class before legally getting a hunting license... In these hunter education classes, you learn not to shoot over hills, how to handle your gun while crossing a fence, etc. What I do not understand is why so many anti-gunners appose more education...???Post edited by PJPOWER on0 -
Education is not enough. You get your license at 16. Have you been back to driver's retraining? Whats the difference? "Responsible" car drivers get tickets for speeding and serve jail time when they kill someone with their car if they did so driving irresponsibly. They're required to have insurance. Registration. Clear title transfer. Graduated licensing. Database statistics collected. You pro-gunners want to constantly shift the blame and not hold your own responsible. Hold them responsible and I don't care how many guns you have. But yea, Obama is coming for your guns. And show me the "plenty" of opposition to gun safety education. Don't confuse the difference of "more" and "its not enough," because its not.PJPOWER said:
Plenty, any time I mention education I am met with the “education is not enough” response. There you go again..........Halifax2TheMax said:
Which anti-gunners have opposed further gun safety education? There you go again.........PJPOWER said:
We should probably start locking people up that irresponsibly let children poison themselves with laundry detergent pods, electrocute themselves by unsafe wall outlets, accidentally burn themselves with boiling water, or get mauled by the family pet as well. Neglectful supervision in all situations, right?Halifax2TheMax said:
I'd be willing to bet the NRA would be opposed to any kind of "severe punishment." You asked a question and received answers. I guess they triggered you? Too many times those "lawful" gun owners who are responsible for shootings like these don't face any repercussions of import as it's deemed "tragic" or an "accident ," usually both. Start locking these idiots up and I'd be willing to bet people will become more responsible with their thunder sticks and boom makers. Nobody talks about the tens of thousands injured by guns every year and the societal cost of that. Owning a gun carries with it a high level of responsibility that I thought republicans were all about, you know, personal responsibility and all. Start holding them accountable. And in Ronny Ray Guns words of infamy, there you go again with, "can't please any anti-gunners until you take every gun away." Talk about dismissive?mace1229 said:I find it funny that I only responded to a comment about a post that wanted "more severe punishment" for accidents like this by saying who wouldn't, and resulted in the sarcastic posts that followed like "how reassuring" as if that was a lame idea. I never said it was going to "turn this around." Someone made the comment that they don't understand why anyone would be opposed to punishing these people, I simply said I don't think anyone would be opposed to that. Jump to whatever conclusions you wish to. I guess you really cant please anyone anti-gun until you take every gun away.
And to answer the question "5 years for each victim with 2.5 to serve mandatory be okay with you?"
Absolutely. If you run a child care and allow small children access to guns under your watch, then absolutely. This was a business of protecting children, and to allow that to happen is just ridiculous.
As a poster above stated, if the possibility of your child dying is not enough of a deterrent to leaving access to something that could be potentially deadly, then threatening to lock them up probably will not do much good either.
I, for one, always keep the consequences of irresponsible firearm storage/usage in the back of my mind, but was taught at an early age the damage a firearm can do. I, for one, would also be fine with requiring everyone to take a safety class and display a card showing that you have completed that class before buying a firearm. Hunters have to take a “Hunters education” class before legally getting a hunting license... In these hunter education classes, you learn not to shoot over hills, how to handle your gun while crossing a fence, etc. What I do not understand is why so many anti-gunners appose more education...???09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
I sure the other parents will be appropriately compensated for their damages. Homeowner's insurance covers this, right?PJPOWER said:
I equated the possible consequences, not the item itself. Anything, ANYTHING, that a toddler could potentially hurt/kill themselves with should be stored in a safe place. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Insecticides and rat poison are made to kill things...so you do not leave them laying around for a child to poison themselves with, right?Halifax2TheMax said:
This why this debate is lost, you equate guns to laundry detergent. One is made to clean clothes, the other to effectively kill things, including people. Golly, who knew? Might as well pass out bags of broken glass at Halloween.PJPOWER said:
We should probably start locking people up that irresponsibly let children poison themselves with laundry detergent pods, electrocute themselves by unsafe wall outlets, accidentally burn themselves with boiling water, or get mauled by the family pet as well. Neglectful supervision in all situations, right?Halifax2TheMax said:
I'd be willing to bet the NRA would be opposed to any kind of "severe punishment." You asked a question and received answers. I guess they triggered you? Too many times those "lawful" gun owners who are responsible for shootings like these don't face any repercussions of import as it's deemed "tragic" or an "accident ," usually both. Start locking these idiots up and I'd be willing to bet people will become more responsible with their thunder sticks and boom makers. Nobody talks about the tens of thousands injured by guns every year and the societal cost of that. Owning a gun carries with it a high level of responsibility that I thought republicans were all about, you know, personal responsibility and all. Start holding them accountable. And in Ronny Ray Guns words of infamy, there you go again with, "can't please any anti-gunners until you take every gun away." Talk about dismissive?mace1229 said:I find it funny that I only responded to a comment about a post that wanted "more severe punishment" for accidents like this by saying who wouldn't, and resulted in the sarcastic posts that followed like "how reassuring" as if that was a lame idea. I never said it was going to "turn this around." Someone made the comment that they don't understand why anyone would be opposed to punishing these people, I simply said I don't think anyone would be opposed to that. Jump to whatever conclusions you wish to. I guess you really cant please anyone anti-gun until you take every gun away.
And to answer the question "5 years for each victim with 2.5 to serve mandatory be okay with you?"
Absolutely. If you run a child care and allow small children access to guns under your watch, then absolutely. This was a business of protecting children, and to allow that to happen is just ridiculous.
As a poster above stated, if the possibility of your child dying is not enough of a deterrent to leaving access to something that could be potentially deadly, then threatening to lock them up probably will not do much good either.
I, for one, always keep the consequences of irresponsible firearm storage/usage in the back of my mind, but was taught at an early age the damage a firearm can do. I, for one, would also be fine with requiring everyone to take a safety class and display a card showing that you have completed that class before buying a firearm. Hunters have to take a “Hunters education” class before legally getting a hunting license... In these hunter education classes, you learn not to shoot over hills, how to handle your gun while crossing a fence, etc. What I do not understand is why so many anti-gunners appose more education...???0 -
WTF are you even talking about...once again.CM189191 said:
I sure the other parents will be appropriately compensated for their damages. Homeowner's insurance covers this, right?PJPOWER said:
I equated the possible consequences, not the item itself. Anything, ANYTHING, that a toddler could potentially hurt/kill themselves with should be stored in a safe place. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Insecticides and rat poison are made to kill things...so you do not leave them laying around for a child to poison themselves with, right?Halifax2TheMax said:
This why this debate is lost, you equate guns to laundry detergent. One is made to clean clothes, the other to effectively kill things, including people. Golly, who knew? Might as well pass out bags of broken glass at Halloween.PJPOWER said:
We should probably start locking people up that irresponsibly let children poison themselves with laundry detergent pods, electrocute themselves by unsafe wall outlets, accidentally burn themselves with boiling water, or get mauled by the family pet as well. Neglectful supervision in all situations, right?Halifax2TheMax said:
I'd be willing to bet the NRA would be opposed to any kind of "severe punishment." You asked a question and received answers. I guess they triggered you? Too many times those "lawful" gun owners who are responsible for shootings like these don't face any repercussions of import as it's deemed "tragic" or an "accident ," usually both. Start locking these idiots up and I'd be willing to bet people will become more responsible with their thunder sticks and boom makers. Nobody talks about the tens of thousands injured by guns every year and the societal cost of that. Owning a gun carries with it a high level of responsibility that I thought republicans were all about, you know, personal responsibility and all. Start holding them accountable. And in Ronny Ray Guns words of infamy, there you go again with, "can't please any anti-gunners until you take every gun away." Talk about dismissive?mace1229 said:I find it funny that I only responded to a comment about a post that wanted "more severe punishment" for accidents like this by saying who wouldn't, and resulted in the sarcastic posts that followed like "how reassuring" as if that was a lame idea. I never said it was going to "turn this around." Someone made the comment that they don't understand why anyone would be opposed to punishing these people, I simply said I don't think anyone would be opposed to that. Jump to whatever conclusions you wish to. I guess you really cant please anyone anti-gun until you take every gun away.
And to answer the question "5 years for each victim with 2.5 to serve mandatory be okay with you?"
Absolutely. If you run a child care and allow small children access to guns under your watch, then absolutely. This was a business of protecting children, and to allow that to happen is just ridiculous.
As a poster above stated, if the possibility of your child dying is not enough of a deterrent to leaving access to something that could be potentially deadly, then threatening to lock them up probably will not do much good either.
I, for one, always keep the consequences of irresponsible firearm storage/usage in the back of my mind, but was taught at an early age the damage a firearm can do. I, for one, would also be fine with requiring everyone to take a safety class and display a card showing that you have completed that class before buying a firearm. Hunters have to take a “Hunters education” class before legally getting a hunting license... In these hunter education classes, you learn not to shoot over hills, how to handle your gun while crossing a fence, etc. What I do not understand is why so many anti-gunners appose more education...???0 -
I never said it has to be a child care center. And my point was the criticism wasn't about asking who would be opposed, which in my mind was a rheotical question because I thought (and still do) that everyone would be okay with a form of punishment in this situation. Maybe I'm wrong about that and it should have been a real question. But the point was it doesn't seem to please anti-gun people to do anything short of taking away all guns because the solution for punishment was asked from the anti-gun perspective, to which I agreed, and instead of addressing the actual question it was followed by other anti-gun remarks or comments like "well that won't stop it" and criticizing the fact that I agree.Halifax2TheMax said:
Why does it have to be a child care center? Why not the "responsible" gun owner in their home, car or grocery store? You answered the question and followed it up with one of your own which was to question who might oppose punishment. The NRA and "responsible " gun owners, that's who. If it were different, we wouldn't be having this conversation.mace1229 said:
I didn't ask the question. It "triggered" me because I answered the question which was an anti-gun stance question, then everyone who criticized the question to begin with directed it at me with, who didn't even ask it.Halifax2TheMax said:
I'd be willing to bet the NRA would be opposed to any kind of "severe punishment." You asked a question and received answers. I guess they triggered you? Too many times those "lawful" gun owners who are responsible for shootings like these don't face any repercussions of import as it's deemed "tragic" or an "accident ," usually both. Start locking these idiots up and I'd be willing to bet people will become more responsible with their thunder sticks and boom makers. Nobody talks about the tens of thousands injured by guns every year and the societal cost of that. Owning a gun carries with it a high level of responsibility that I thought republicans were all about, you know, personal responsibility and all. Start holding them accountable. And in Ronny Ray Guns words of infamy, there you go again with, "can't please any anti-gunners until you take every gun away." Talk about dismissive?mace1229 said:I find it funny that I only responded to a comment about a post that wanted "more severe punishment" for accidents like this by saying who wouldn't, and resulted in the sarcastic posts that followed like "how reassuring" as if that was a lame idea. I never said it was going to "turn this around." Someone made the comment that they don't understand why anyone would be opposed to punishing these people, I simply said I don't think anyone would be opposed to that. Jump to whatever conclusions you wish to. I guess you really cant please anyone anti-gun until you take every gun away.
And to answer the question "5 years for each victim with 2.5 to serve mandatory be okay with you?"
Absolutely. If you run a child care and allow small children access to guns under your watch, then absolutely. This was a business of protecting children, and to allow that to happen is just ridiculous.
And I doubt the NRA would be opposed to laws against leaving guns in access to children while in a daycare. I seriously doubt that. For a small child to get a gun and shoot it, it was likely left in the open and loaded. Now if it was a high school kid who broke into a poor quality safe and did it, yes I could see the NRA being against putting those people in prison. But a small child in daycare? I don't see them being against that.
So then what is appropriate? If you're against guns, you can't be against punishing those who allow children access to guns? So what was the point? WHat do you suggest, ban all guns?
Guns are not going to be banned. SO require proper storage and punish those who don't.0 -
I thought we were done equating cars to guns... So if a toddler gets in a car and accidentally turns it on and runs over another toddler, what should the consequences for the parents of said toddler be? If a person accidentally shoots another person, then you better believe there are consequences to that.Halifax2TheMax said:
Education is not enough. You get your license at 16. Have you been back to driver's retraining? Whats the difference? "Responsible" car drivers get tickets for speeding and serve jail time when they kill someone with their car if they did so driving irresponsibly. They're required to have insurance. Registration. Clear title transfer. Graduated licensing. Database statistics collected. You pro-gunners want to constantly shift the blame and not hold your own responsible. Hold them responsible and I don't care how many guns you have. But yea, Obama is coming for your guns. And show me the "plenty" of opposition to gun safety education. Don't confuse the difference of "more" and "its not enough," because its not.PJPOWER said:
Plenty, any time I mention education I am met with the “education is not enough” response. There you go again..........Halifax2TheMax said:
Which anti-gunners have opposed further gun safety education? There you go again.........PJPOWER said:
We should probably start locking people up that irresponsibly let children poison themselves with laundry detergent pods, electrocute themselves by unsafe wall outlets, accidentally burn themselves with boiling water, or get mauled by the family pet as well. Neglectful supervision in all situations, right?Halifax2TheMax said:
I'd be willing to bet the NRA would be opposed to any kind of "severe punishment." You asked a question and received answers. I guess they triggered you? Too many times those "lawful" gun owners who are responsible for shootings like these don't face any repercussions of import as it's deemed "tragic" or an "accident ," usually both. Start locking these idiots up and I'd be willing to bet people will become more responsible with their thunder sticks and boom makers. Nobody talks about the tens of thousands injured by guns every year and the societal cost of that. Owning a gun carries with it a high level of responsibility that I thought republicans were all about, you know, personal responsibility and all. Start holding them accountable. And in Ronny Ray Guns words of infamy, there you go again with, "can't please any anti-gunners until you take every gun away." Talk about dismissive?mace1229 said:I find it funny that I only responded to a comment about a post that wanted "more severe punishment" for accidents like this by saying who wouldn't, and resulted in the sarcastic posts that followed like "how reassuring" as if that was a lame idea. I never said it was going to "turn this around." Someone made the comment that they don't understand why anyone would be opposed to punishing these people, I simply said I don't think anyone would be opposed to that. Jump to whatever conclusions you wish to. I guess you really cant please anyone anti-gun until you take every gun away.
And to answer the question "5 years for each victim with 2.5 to serve mandatory be okay with you?"
Absolutely. If you run a child care and allow small children access to guns under your watch, then absolutely. This was a business of protecting children, and to allow that to happen is just ridiculous.
As a poster above stated, if the possibility of your child dying is not enough of a deterrent to leaving access to something that could be potentially deadly, then threatening to lock them up probably will not do much good either.
I, for one, always keep the consequences of irresponsible firearm storage/usage in the back of my mind, but was taught at an early age the damage a firearm can do. I, for one, would also be fine with requiring everyone to take a safety class and display a card showing that you have completed that class before buying a firearm. Hunters have to take a “Hunters education” class before legally getting a hunting license... In these hunter education classes, you learn not to shoot over hills, how to handle your gun while crossing a fence, etc. What I do not understand is why so many anti-gunners appose more education...???
“Obama is coming for your guns”, give me a break. Obama only attempted to “come for the ammo”, lol. He did effectively raise the price of guns for a short time with the “ban assault weapons” rhetoric though.Post edited by PJPOWER on0 -
I disagree about it ruling out those things. You may be against them for other reasons and thats fine. But open carry doesn't impact safe storage. Mainly because its not being stored, it is in your possession. You are implying a toddler would overpower an adult and take his weapon if he open carries. That just doesnt happen. Open carry, or even concealed carry, doesn't permit you to leave the gun in the glove box somewhere off your body when children are around, but that is different.oftenreading said:
If we look into the nitty gritty of that, preventing children from getting their hands on guns means preventing guns from being kept in handbags and briefcases and in holsters on belts. It means going back to what we've talked about on here many times - safe storage. It rules out open carry, and in fact any carry, where children are in the vicinity. And given that, I don't believe that the NRA would be in support.mace1229 said:
I didn't ask the question. It "triggered" me because I answered the question which was an anti-gun stance question, then everyone who criticized the question to begin with directed it at me with, who didn't even ask it.Halifax2TheMax said:
I'd be willing to bet the NRA would be opposed to any kind of "severe punishment." You asked a question and received answers. I guess they triggered you? Too many times those "lawful" gun owners who are responsible for shootings like these don't face any repercussions of import as it's deemed "tragic" or an "accident ," usually both. Start locking these idiots up and I'd be willing to bet people will become more responsible with their thunder sticks and boom makers. Nobody talks about the tens of thousands injured by guns every year and the societal cost of that. Owning a gun carries with it a high level of responsibility that I thought republicans were all about, you know, personal responsibility and all. Start holding them accountable. And in Ronny Ray Guns words of infamy, there you go again with, "can't please any anti-gunners until you take every gun away." Talk about dismissive?mace1229 said:I find it funny that I only responded to a comment about a post that wanted "more severe punishment" for accidents like this by saying who wouldn't, and resulted in the sarcastic posts that followed like "how reassuring" as if that was a lame idea. I never said it was going to "turn this around." Someone made the comment that they don't understand why anyone would be opposed to punishing these people, I simply said I don't think anyone would be opposed to that. Jump to whatever conclusions you wish to. I guess you really cant please anyone anti-gun until you take every gun away.
And to answer the question "5 years for each victim with 2.5 to serve mandatory be okay with you?"
Absolutely. If you run a child care and allow small children access to guns under your watch, then absolutely. This was a business of protecting children, and to allow that to happen is just ridiculous.
And I doubt the NRA would be opposed to laws against leaving guns in access to children while in a daycare. I seriously doubt that. For a small child to get a gun and shoot it, it was likely left in the open and loaded. Now if it was a high school kid who broke into a poor quality safe and did it, yes I could see the NRA being against putting those people in prison. But a small child in daycare? I don't see them being against that.
0 -
And the exaggerated rhetoric equating carrying of weapons to leaving them sitting around on tables for toddlers to get to is exactly the reason gun owners fear legislation and exactly why nothing will get done. The old “give an inch take a mile” adage.mace1229 said:
I disagree about it ruling out those things. You may be against them for other reasons and thats fine. But open carry doesn't impact safe storage. Mainly because its not being stored, it is in your possession. You are implying a toddler would overpower an adult and take his weapon if he open carries. That just doesnt happen. Open carry, or even concealed carry, doesn't permit you to leave the gun in the glove box somewhere off your body when children are around, but that is different.oftenreading said:
If we look into the nitty gritty of that, preventing children from getting their hands on guns means preventing guns from being kept in handbags and briefcases and in holsters on belts. It means going back to what we've talked about on here many times - safe storage. It rules out open carry, and in fact any carry, where children are in the vicinity. And given that, I don't believe that the NRA would be in support.mace1229 said:
I didn't ask the question. It "triggered" me because I answered the question which was an anti-gun stance question, then everyone who criticized the question to begin with directed it at me with, who didn't even ask it.Halifax2TheMax said:
I'd be willing to bet the NRA would be opposed to any kind of "severe punishment." You asked a question and received answers. I guess they triggered you? Too many times those "lawful" gun owners who are responsible for shootings like these don't face any repercussions of import as it's deemed "tragic" or an "accident ," usually both. Start locking these idiots up and I'd be willing to bet people will become more responsible with their thunder sticks and boom makers. Nobody talks about the tens of thousands injured by guns every year and the societal cost of that. Owning a gun carries with it a high level of responsibility that I thought republicans were all about, you know, personal responsibility and all. Start holding them accountable. And in Ronny Ray Guns words of infamy, there you go again with, "can't please any anti-gunners until you take every gun away." Talk about dismissive?mace1229 said:I find it funny that I only responded to a comment about a post that wanted "more severe punishment" for accidents like this by saying who wouldn't, and resulted in the sarcastic posts that followed like "how reassuring" as if that was a lame idea. I never said it was going to "turn this around." Someone made the comment that they don't understand why anyone would be opposed to punishing these people, I simply said I don't think anyone would be opposed to that. Jump to whatever conclusions you wish to. I guess you really cant please anyone anti-gun until you take every gun away.
And to answer the question "5 years for each victim with 2.5 to serve mandatory be okay with you?"
Absolutely. If you run a child care and allow small children access to guns under your watch, then absolutely. This was a business of protecting children, and to allow that to happen is just ridiculous.
And I doubt the NRA would be opposed to laws against leaving guns in access to children while in a daycare. I seriously doubt that. For a small child to get a gun and shoot it, it was likely left in the open and loaded. Now if it was a high school kid who broke into a poor quality safe and did it, yes I could see the NRA being against putting those people in prison. But a small child in daycare? I don't see them being against that.
0 -
Can the education include that you and those around you aren't safer when you have a gun?PJPOWER said:
Plenty, any time I mention education I am met with the “education is not enough” response. There you go again..........Halifax2TheMax said:
Which anti-gunners have opposed further gun safety education? There you go again.........PJPOWER said:
We should probably start locking people up that irresponsibly let children poison themselves with laundry detergent pods, electrocute themselves by unsafe wall outlets, accidentally burn themselves with boiling water, or get mauled by the family pet as well. Neglectful supervision in all situations, right?Halifax2TheMax said:
I'd be willing to bet the NRA would be opposed to any kind of "severe punishment." You asked a question and received answers. I guess they triggered you? Too many times those "lawful" gun owners who are responsible for shootings like these don't face any repercussions of import as it's deemed "tragic" or an "accident ," usually both. Start locking these idiots up and I'd be willing to bet people will become more responsible with their thunder sticks and boom makers. Nobody talks about the tens of thousands injured by guns every year and the societal cost of that. Owning a gun carries with it a high level of responsibility that I thought republicans were all about, you know, personal responsibility and all. Start holding them accountable. And in Ronny Ray Guns words of infamy, there you go again with, "can't please any anti-gunners until you take every gun away." Talk about dismissive?mace1229 said:I find it funny that I only responded to a comment about a post that wanted "more severe punishment" for accidents like this by saying who wouldn't, and resulted in the sarcastic posts that followed like "how reassuring" as if that was a lame idea. I never said it was going to "turn this around." Someone made the comment that they don't understand why anyone would be opposed to punishing these people, I simply said I don't think anyone would be opposed to that. Jump to whatever conclusions you wish to. I guess you really cant please anyone anti-gun until you take every gun away.
And to answer the question "5 years for each victim with 2.5 to serve mandatory be okay with you?"
Absolutely. If you run a child care and allow small children access to guns under your watch, then absolutely. This was a business of protecting children, and to allow that to happen is just ridiculous.
As a poster above stated, if the possibility of your child dying is not enough of a deterrent to leaving access to something that could be potentially deadly, then threatening to lock them up probably will not do much good either.
I, for one, always keep the consequences of irresponsible firearm storage/usage in the back of my mind, but was taught at an early age the damage a firearm can do. I, for one, would also be fine with requiring everyone to take a safety class and display a card showing that you have completed that class before buying a firearm. Hunters have to take a “Hunters education” class before legally getting a hunting license... In these hunter education classes, you learn not to shoot over hills, how to handle your gun while crossing a fence, etc. What I do not understand is why so many anti-gunners appose more education...???0 -
Once again on the “give an inch take a mile”. I would say that it should focus more on what a firearm can do and why to safely store them and other basic firearm handling/cleaning areas. The statistics you refer to could iron themselves out based on more people having knowledge of how to be safe and why to be safe at all times...Go Beavers said:
Can the education include that you and those around you aren't safer when you have a gun?PJPOWER said:
Plenty, any time I mention education I am met with the “education is not enough” response. There you go again..........Halifax2TheMax said:
Which anti-gunners have opposed further gun safety education? There you go again.........PJPOWER said:
We should probably start locking people up that irresponsibly let children poison themselves with laundry detergent pods, electrocute themselves by unsafe wall outlets, accidentally burn themselves with boiling water, or get mauled by the family pet as well. Neglectful supervision in all situations, right?Halifax2TheMax said:
I'd be willing to bet the NRA would be opposed to any kind of "severe punishment." You asked a question and received answers. I guess they triggered you? Too many times those "lawful" gun owners who are responsible for shootings like these don't face any repercussions of import as it's deemed "tragic" or an "accident ," usually both. Start locking these idiots up and I'd be willing to bet people will become more responsible with their thunder sticks and boom makers. Nobody talks about the tens of thousands injured by guns every year and the societal cost of that. Owning a gun carries with it a high level of responsibility that I thought republicans were all about, you know, personal responsibility and all. Start holding them accountable. And in Ronny Ray Guns words of infamy, there you go again with, "can't please any anti-gunners until you take every gun away." Talk about dismissive?mace1229 said:I find it funny that I only responded to a comment about a post that wanted "more severe punishment" for accidents like this by saying who wouldn't, and resulted in the sarcastic posts that followed like "how reassuring" as if that was a lame idea. I never said it was going to "turn this around." Someone made the comment that they don't understand why anyone would be opposed to punishing these people, I simply said I don't think anyone would be opposed to that. Jump to whatever conclusions you wish to. I guess you really cant please anyone anti-gun until you take every gun away.
And to answer the question "5 years for each victim with 2.5 to serve mandatory be okay with you?"
Absolutely. If you run a child care and allow small children access to guns under your watch, then absolutely. This was a business of protecting children, and to allow that to happen is just ridiculous.
As a poster above stated, if the possibility of your child dying is not enough of a deterrent to leaving access to something that could be potentially deadly, then threatening to lock them up probably will not do much good either.
I, for one, always keep the consequences of irresponsible firearm storage/usage in the back of my mind, but was taught at an early age the damage a firearm can do. I, for one, would also be fine with requiring everyone to take a safety class and display a card showing that you have completed that class before buying a firearm. Hunters have to take a “Hunters education” class before legally getting a hunting license... In these hunter education classes, you learn not to shoot over hills, how to handle your gun while crossing a fence, etc. What I do not understand is why so many anti-gunners appose more education...???0 -
ya know? fuck steve scalise. you have an A+ rating from the NRA? maybe it would have been serendipitous for you to die from gun violence.If I had known then what I know now...
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14Philly I & II, 16Denver 22
Missoula 240 -
edit - ?Wobbie said:ya know? fuck steve scalise. you have an A+ rating from the NRA? maybe it would have been serendipitous for you to die from gun violence.
Post edited by PJfanwillneverleave1 on0 -
Gun violence gun violence, many hurt and at least 2 killed on the Las Vegas strip. Another SAD day in America.
Peace*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)0 -
20+ killed and 100+ injured.
All done with historic and hunting weapons with small clips, I'm sure.Monkey Driven, Call this Living?0 -
What a terrible tragedy.Monkey Driven, Call this Living?0
-
The world sucks. Flat out sucks right now.0
-
Nasty stuff out there. Intense videos.
Propped himself on the 32nd floor of Mandalay Bay and opened up on the crowd.
View of a concert from a couple years ago from a similar vantage point.
And so you see, I have come to doubt
All that I once held as true
I stand alone without beliefs
The only truth I know is you.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help