SCOTUS abandons the Constitution and the Second Amendment

[f7ben]

52 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

Not on the second amendment I'm not. Throw me some ideas on curbing gun violence if you're so moderate.

End the war on drugs and gun violence cuts in half in a year or less .....easy

Also we didnt violate anyones constitutional rights to accomplish this .....unlike most of what you would propose

[Wildboer]

6 minutes ago, f7ben said:

End the war on drugs and gun violence cuts in half in a year or less .....easy

Also we didnt violate anyones constitutional rights to accomplish this .....unlike most of what you would propose

Ok good start, anything at all beyond ending the drug war? Because I'm all for that but cutting gun violence in half is a bit optimistic if you ask me. Gangs wouldn't disappear, they'd shrink a bit but they'd diversify.

[f7ben]

7 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

Ok good start, anything at all beyond ending the drug war? Because I'm all for that but cutting gun violence in half is a bit optimistic if you ask me. Gangs wouldn't disappear, they'd shrink a bit but they'd diversify.

ending the failed war on drugs would extend far far far beyond just gang violence. but I digress

I'd integrate the entire background check system into a streamlined inter-agency priority ...speedlined processing and a much more efficient system 

I would require anyone taking an antidepressant with violent or suicidal side effects to have that attached to their background check. I would also offer those people who are taking those various drugs significant incentives to allow their weapons to be stored for them while they are receiving care.

 

There are a lot of common sense things that could be done that dont infringe on peoples rights 

Edited July 9, 2017 by f7ben

[Wildboer]

1 minute ago, f7ben said:

ending the failed war on drugs would extend far far far beyond just gang violence. but I digress

I'd integrate the entire background check system into a streamlined inter-agency priority ...speedlined processing and a much more efficient system 

I would require anyone taking an antidepressant with violent or suicidal side effects to have that attached to their background check. I would also of those people who are taking those various drugs significant incentives to allow their weapons to be stored for them while they are receiving care.

 

There are a lot of common sense things that could be done that dont infringe on peoples rights 

I thought you weren't violating anyone's rights? The government can stay the fuck out of my medical history thank you very much.

[f7ben]

1 minute ago, Wildboer said:

I thought you weren't violating anyone's rights? The government can stay the fuck out of my medical history thank you very much.

Nope , if you are going to be medicated with some of the more significant mood altering meds then the agencies who are charged with helping to prevent the wrong people in the world from owning firearms need that info. I'm not advocating for those people to automatically lose their gun rights....just saying we could offer incentive for them to relinquish possession temporarily .....also ....dont you advocate for UHC in which the government would control the same info???

[Wildboer]

7 minutes ago, f7ben said:

Nope , if you are going to be medicated with some of the more significant mood altering meds then the agencies who are charged with helping to prevent the wrong people in the world from owning firearms need that info. I'm not advocating for those people to automatically lose their gun rights....just saying we could offer incentive for them to relinquish possession temporarily .....also ....dont you advocate for UHC in which the government would control the same info???

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of these meds, you take them long term and you can be stable and healthy while taking them, that's actually the point in taking them. Someone who is on them and stops is likely to relapse into mental illness and you are worried about whether or not they're on anti depressants? You might as well be advocating for a psych eval being required for a carry permit.

[f7ben]

Just now, Wildboer said:

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of these meds, you take them long term and you can be stable and healthy while taking them, that's actually the point in taking them. Someone who is on them and stops is likely to relapse into mental illness and you are worried about whether or not they're on anti depressants? You might as well be advocating for a psych eval being required for a carry permit.

I dont have a fundamental misunderstanding at all .....a shit ton of people have committed suicide by gun and its no secret that many antidepressants make you suicidal. 

Now I can see you are likely being treated and are on some form of script.....none the less that is a whole separate issue...fact remains though that people who are so unstable that they need to be on mood altering drugs should not be in possession of fire arms. No different than CC permit holders not being allowed to drink and carry

[f7ben]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3353604/

See , heres the thing. If these people want to kill themselves I want them to do it with Ambien or a steak knife ....because when they do it with a gun city boy faggots like yourself use it as cannon fodder to try to destroy the 2nd amendment 

[Wildboer]

1 minute ago, f7ben said:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3353604/

See , heres the thing. If these people want to kill themselves I want them to do it with Ambien or a steak knife ....because when they do it with a gun city boy faggots like yourself use it as cannon fodder to try to destroy the 2nd amendment 

I've had too much beer to counter all this stigma and misunderstanding right now, I really don't want to take away your guns though, have at em.

[GreenStreak]

6 hours ago, Wildboer said:

Not on the second amendment I'm not. Throw me some ideas on curbing gun violence if you're so moderate.

Enforce what we have.

 

[Zambroski]

17 hours ago, Wildboer said:

Really? You're going to trust that congress read it for what it was, decided it was a registry, and voted it down? You've gotta be smarter than that man, gun control debates in DC are never about the truth. It's the left and right talking past each other over and over.

He's a moderate, you're an extremist. Yeah, I already knew both of those things, thanks.

Agreed.  And there is a reason there will never be any real changes that amount to substance.  But I bet we disagree on why for sure.  Unless you can accept some harsh truths.  I bet you can...you already know them.  It's just taboo to talk about.  But they are all in the documented crime statistics.

11 hours ago, Wildboer said:

Not on the second amendment I'm not. Throw me some ideas on curbing gun violence if you're so moderate.

Again, nothing can really be done that won't cause an uproar.  The answer IS not, and WILL NEVER BE take all guns away from Americans because we have a subculture that use and abuse their second amendment rights daily.  Again, all documented statistics.  

Reality?  This is who we are as a nation.  For good and some bad.  Mostly good.  We just have an overabundance of "undesirables" that can't seem to police themselves...and history confirms they never have been able to do so.

The only real answer I see?  Make sentences for crime involving firearms so egregious that EVERYONE second thinks their actions.  In other words, pull the trigger, and your life is pretty much over.  But guess why that won't ever pass either?  Same problem as above in my first sentence.

AND AGAIN, trying to abolish the second to solve the massive crimes of a few is absurd at a level that only liberals seem to be sold on.  That's not necessarily a "dig" at you, but in general, it's just the ignorance that your team seems to sell themselves on over and over again...and are so convinced that their plan "for the greater good" is the best, that they aren't willing to really look at the issues.  I personally find it hilarious that anybody in their right mind think Americans are going to give up their weapons.  And find people mentally deranged that think that the ones primarily causing the problems are going to give theirs up.  Documented statistics show that also.

[f7ben]

I think it is folly to try and focus on mass shootings....they are shocking and sad but in reality they account for such a small fraction of gun violence its not worth addressing.

What mass shootings are is a good tool to scare people into giving up their rights.

We should be focusing on suicide prevention , domestic violence prevention and better training for those who want to own guns

[Zambroski]

7 minutes ago, f7ben said:

I think it is folly to try and focus on mass shootings....they are shocking and sad but in reality they account for such a small fraction of gun violence its not worth addressing.

What mass shootings are is a good tool to scare people into giving up their rights.

We should be focusing on suicide prevention , domestic violence prevention and better training for those who want to own guns

BEE EYE ENN GEE OOOOO!

 

[Wildboer]

5 hours ago, Zambroski said:

Agreed.  And there is a reason there will never be any real changes that amount to substance.  But I bet we disagree on why for sure.  Unless you can accept some harsh truths.  I bet you can...you already know them.  It's just taboo to talk about.  But they are all in the documented crime statistics.

Again, nothing can really be done that won't cause an uproar.  The answer IS not, and WILL NEVER BE take all guns away from Americans because we have a subculture that use and abuse their second amendment rights daily.  Again, all documented statistics.  

Reality?  This is who we are as a nation.  For good and some bad.  Mostly good.  We just have an overabundance of "undesirables" that can't seem to police themselves...and history confirms they never have been able to do so.

The only real answer I see?  Make sentences for crime involving firearms so egregious that EVERYONE second thinks their actions.  In other words, pull the trigger, and your life is pretty much over.  But guess why that won't ever pass either?  Same problem as above in my first sentence.

AND AGAIN, trying to abolish the second to solve the massive crimes of a few is absurd at a level that only liberals seem to be sold on.  That's not necessarily a "dig" at you, but in general, it's just the ignorance that your team seems to sell themselves on over and over again...and are so convinced that their plan "for the greater good" is the best, that they aren't willing to really look at the issues.  I personally find it hilarious that anybody in their right mind think Americans are going to give up their weapons.  And find people mentally deranged that think that the ones primarily causing the problems are going to give theirs up.  Documented statistics show that also.

Harsher sentencing? It's gun violence, they're already risking murder charges. That's about as realistic as thinking we can take away the guns. I mean look how wonderfully mandatory minimums have worked in the drug war. We can't incarcerate our way out of the problem.

[Zambroski]

20 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

Harsher sentencing? It's gun violence, they're already risking murder charges. That's about as realistic as thinking we can take away the guns. I mean look how wonderfully mandatory minimums have worked in the drug war. We can't incarcerate our way out of the problem.

Who said anything about incarceration?  ....let's circle back to that and the rest of that vagueness of what one may be "risking".

First, let's accurately and precisely identify "the problem".  Or, if not accurately and precisely, I may be interested in your (your side's) thought on the "problem".

Wanna take a shot at it?  Get the pun?

 

[Wildboer]

27 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

Who said anything about incarceration?  ....let's circle back to that and the rest of that vagueness of what one may be "risking".

First, let's accurately and precisely identify "the problem".  Or, if not accurately and precisely, I may be interested in your (your side's) thought on the "problem".

Wanna take a shot at it?  Get the pun?

 

Gun homicides and suicides. Mass shootings and accidental shootings shouldn't be totally ignored, but the real problem is the 30,000 murders and suicides a year.

[f7ben]

3 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

Gun homicides and suicides. Mass shootings and accidental shootings shouldn't be totally ignored, but the real problem is the 30,000 murders and suicides a year.

mass shootings absolutely should be ignored from a standpoint of gun control. There is absolutely zero you can do to stop a lone wolf bent on killing as many as he can. If he didnt have a gun he'd use a truck or any other number of methods to inflict max damage. YOU CAN NOT STOP THEM 

[Wildboer]

3 minutes ago, f7ben said:

mass shootings absolutely should be ignored from a standpoint of gun control. There is absolutely zero you can do to stop a lone wolf bent on killing as many as he can. If he didnt have a gun he'd use a truck or any other number of methods to inflict max damage. YOU CAN NOT STOP THEM 

You were the one saying we shouldn't allow the mentally ill to have guns, lone wolves are pretty much all mentally ill...

[f7ben]

3 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

You were the one saying we shouldn't allow the mentally ill to have guns, lone wolves are pretty much all mentally ill...

I never said anything like that you fucking moron ....can you not read?

I said people taking meds that by virtue of need or by virtue of side effect ....may be more prone to violence..should have that info attached to their background checks and we should offer incentive for them to voluntarily let their arms be stored until they are treated or medically cleared. No where would I ever advocate forcing them to give up their rights.

Work on your fucking reading comprehension you city boy faggot 

[Wildboer]

1 minute ago, f7ben said:

I never said anything like that you fucking moron ....can you not read?

I said people taking meds that by virtue of need or by virtue of side effect ....may be more prone to violence..should have that info attached to their background checks and we should offer incentive for them to voluntarily let their arms be stored until they are treated or medically cleared. No where would I ever advocate forcing them to give up their rights.

Work on your fucking reading comprehension you city boy faggot 

Woah there, I forgot the voluntary part. I mean it's a good idea but it's not going to make any kind of dent in gun death numbers.

[Zambroski]

16 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

Gun homicides and suicides. Mass shootings and accidental shootings shouldn't be totally ignored, but the real problem is the 30,000 murders and suicides a year.

1st: OK, we know that!  But let's focus on actual gun violence.  That's what seems to be the most politically charged.  Let's face it, people that kill themselves with guns aren't of much concern to anyone other than their own family and friends...as sad as that may be.  So, let's look at the people involved in a shooting that are not willingly there.  That leads to the second bold. There are actually around 80k violent incidents per year involving guns.  Now, if we are to start curbing this violence (which is our current subject), we need to look at the largest perpetrators of it and solve that first.  Do you know why we aren't doing that?  We know where and who is committing it.

Undoubtedly by now you know I am leading you somewhere you probably don't want to go.  That's ok.  I understand.  But that doesn't make the facts change.  IT IS however the reason nothing will probably ever be done about gun violence in America.  

Or, is it too early to tell that I am leading you somewhere?  Sometimes I don't like to drag this shit out.

[Wildboer]

17 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

1st: OK, we know that!  But let's focus on actual gun violence.  That's what seems to be the most politically charged.  Let's face it, people that kill themselves with guns aren't of much concern to anyone other than their own family and friends...as sad as that may be.  So, let's look at the people involved in a shooting that are not willingly there.  That leads to the second bold. There are actually around 80k violent incidents per year involving guns.  Now, if we are to start curbing this violence (which is our current subject), we need to look at the largest perpetrators of it and solve that first.  Do you know why we aren't doing that?  We know where and who is committing it.

Undoubtedly by now you know I am leading you somewhere you probably don't want to go.  That's ok.  I understand.  But that doesn't make the facts change.  IT IS however the reason nothing will probably ever be done about gun violence in America.  

Or, is it too early to tell that I am leading you somewhere?  Sometimes I don't like to drag this shit out.

I'm a bit disturbed by your casual disregard for suicide victims and their families but it's a totally separate issue from inner city gun violence so we'll set it aside. Poor urban neighborhoods with primarily Black and Hispanic communities have alarming rates of gun violence. It's the Chicago problem.

[f7ben]

23 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

Woah there, I forgot the voluntary part. I mean it's a good idea but it's not going to make any kind of dent in gun death numbers.

I know ...but it just makes sense to me. I would offer someone free psychiatric counseling and a discount on their meds if they agreed to let their arms be stored until they either dont need their meds or they are stabilized on them and their counselor feels they are ready to be cleared. I would also stipulate that once they voluntarily enter the program they cannot demand their weapons back without a clearance.

It would cost very little and could save some lives and just makes sense. 

There is no magic bullet here and a many pronged approach is warranted 

[SnowRider]

37 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

1st: OK, we know that!  But let's focus on actual gun violence.  That's what seems to be the most politically charged.  Let's face it, people that kill themselves with guns aren't of much concern to anyone other than their own family and friends...as sad as that may be.  So, let's look at the people involved in a shooting that are not willingly there.  That leads to the second bold. There are actually around 80k violent incidents per year involving guns.  Now, if we are to start curbing this violence (which is our current subject), we need to look at the largest perpetrators of it and solve that first.  Do you know why we aren't doing that?  We know where and who is committing it.

Undoubtedly by now you know I am leading you somewhere you probably don't want to go.  That's ok.  I understand.  But that doesn't make the facts change.  IT IS however the reason nothing will probably ever be done about gun violence in America.  

Or, is it too early to tell that I am leading you somewhere?  Sometimes I don't like to drag this shit out.

 You're not leading anyone anywhere you fucking Dummy  

[Zambroski]

4 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

I'm a bit disturbed by your casual disregard for suicide victims and their families but it's a totally separate issue from inner city gun violence so we'll set it aside. Poor urban neighborhoods with primarily Black and Hispanic communities have alarming rates of gun violence. It's the Chicago problem.

Most might.  I don't have a whole lot of human empathy.  I consider suicide a personal choice.  And a selfish one.  But I also understand that some people are just wired incorrectly. I've got some personal experience with it also.  Truth?  Sometimes somebody that is "miswired" is better off (and safer) to everyone else by ending their own life.  I know it sounds hard.  But the culling of the mentally inept that either do not seek help or cannot be helped can come in many ways.  Told you that would sound harsh...take a minute and catch your breath.............

 

Now, yes, gun violence is primarily perpetrated by minorities.  It's the reason liberals go the route they always do....they won't acknowledge the problem, just find a broad brush to try and paint over it.  Usually (always) taking personal and constitutional rights away from peaceful, law abiding citizens that have nothing to do with it.  Which really, is the part of society that all that the laws/registries proposed will actually affect.

Let me say this in short, and while factual, it is going to sound brutal (again).  The United States has a unique problem with Negros and Hispanics (primarily Mexicans) when it comes to guns and gun rights in relation to trying to fend off gun violence (among other issues).  As brought up here in this thread many times.....mass murders do NOTHING but act as fodder for gun control advocates and their media...but nothing will be done.  Especially since the side doing the screaming about it is also the side that wants to bring in a group who fundamentally approves of mass killings in the name of their deity.

This is probably where you are thinking of calling me a "racist" and ending this conversation.  Don't worry, I'm used to it.  MANY of us are.