Gun Control

[deepdiver]

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

The more difficult and expensive it is for people to acquire something, the more respect they treat it with and the more responsibility it encourages. It's simple human nature. Things difficult to attain are given more value.

I'll agree. In that vein let's dismantle the entire government educational system and let the gangbangers and problem kids who make educating all the other kids difficult pay for their education directly instead of how all the taxpayers (even us homeowners without children) do now. Being that it is no longer free they would then value it, take it seriously and everyone will be better off, not to mention that our taxes will drop dramatically. Actually, let's dismantle the entire social welfare state as if health care, basic living expenses, housing and food was more difficult and expensive to obtain, ie everyone had to work for it and pay for it everyone would give it more value. And it would save 40% of the federal budget, significantly lower taxes freeing up trillions in capital for investment, allowing a revocation of the irresponsible spending bill just signed as that money would no longer be needed, and jump starting the economy back to high gear. The death of Obama's fascist plans for the economy, freedom for millions enslaved by the social welfare system and disincentives for bad choices such as out of wedlock childbirth and the new rise of personal responsiblity will be a boon for this nation. Great idea AWD.

 

[AWDstylez]

imported post

deepdiver wrote:

AWDstylez wrote:

The more difficult and expensive it is for people to acquire something, the more respect they treat it with and the more responsibility it encourages. It's simple human nature. Things difficult to attain are given more value.

I'll agree. In that vein let's dismantle the entire government educational system and let the gangbangers and problem kids who make educating all the other kids difficult pay for their education directly instead of how all the taxpayers (even us homeowners without children) do now. Being that it is no longer free they would then value it, take it seriously and everyone will be better off, not to mention that our taxes will drop dramatically. Actually, let's dismantle the entire social welfare state as if health care, basic living expenses, housing and food was more difficult and expensive to obtain, ie everyone had to work for it and pay for it everyone would give it more value. And it would save 40% of the federal budget, significantly lower taxes freeing up trillions in capital for investment, allowing a revocation of the irresponsible spending bill just signed as that money would no longer be needed, and jump starting the economy back to high gear. The death of Obama's fascist plans for the economy, freedom for millions enslaved by the social welfare system and disincentives for bad choices such as out of wedlock childbirth and the new rise of personal responsiblity will be a boon for this nation. Great idea AWD.

I'm not sure if you were saying that half-sarcastically, expecting me to disagree with it, but I don't.

 

[buster81]

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

buster81 wrote:

So, by your theory,if you were subjected to an in depth interrogation by the State Police, FBI, and BATF before you were allowed to apply for a permit to buy a gun, then you had to wait90 daysand were required to take$2500 dollars worth of training, before you were allowed to pick it up, you would really, really, really value your gun?

Doesn't sound right to me.

What world do you live in?


What are you more likely to risk losing, something that was handed to you free or something that you have time and money invested in?

Driver's licenses in many European countries cost thousands of dollars and take extensive training to obtain. In contrast, any idiot 16 year old in the US that can drive around a city block without killing anyone can get their license for <$100. I'll let you guess where vastly more accidents and fatalities take place.

So, are you saying that you agree or disagree with the scenario I gave you?

Apparently I live in adifferent worldthan you do. It seems likeyou're saying that it is your preference to haveto paythousands of dollars for the privilege of a drivers license? Bizarre! I prefer to NOT pay thousands of dollars. Carry on Rockefeller.

 

[AWDstylez]

imported post

buster81 wrote:

So, are you saying that you agree or disagree with the scenario I gave you?

Apparently I live in adifferent worldthan you do. It seems likeyou're saying that it is your preference to haveto paythousands of dollars for the privilege of a drivers license? Bizarre! I prefer to NOT pay thousands of dollars. Carry on Rockefeller.

I'm saying I disagree. I don't WANT to have to work harder for anything, that's also human nature. But I do recognize the fact that if things were harder to obtain it'd make the average idiot appreciate them more and make him think twice before doing something stupid that would jeopardize them.

 

[buster81]

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

buster81 wrote:

So, are you saying that you agree or disagree with the scenario I gave you?

I'm saying I disagree. I don't WANT to have to work harder for anything, that's also human nature. But I do recognize the fact that if things were harder to obtain it'd make the average idiot appreciate them more and make him think twice before doing something stupid that would jeopardize them.

AWDstylez wrote:

There should be waiting periods, required training, and careful checks on who buys handguns. All these impress upon law-abiding citizens the responsibilities involved in owning firearms."

Just so happens to be the same things I'm for and for the exact same reason.

So you are in favor of "waiting periods, required training and careful checks", but just not the ones in my scenario? How long and how much training would be good with you?

 

[AWDstylez]

imported post

buster81 wrote:

So you are in favor of "waiting periods, required training and careful checks", but just not the ones in my scenario? How long and how much training would be good with you?

wat

 

[buster81]

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

buster81 wrote:

So you are in favor of "waiting periods, required training and careful checks", but just not the ones in my scenario? How long and how much training would be good with you?

wat

May I pay for another 5 minutes?

 

[wrightme]

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

buster81 wrote:

So, are you saying that you agree or disagree with the scenario I gave you?

Apparently I live in adifferent worldthan you do. It seems likeyou're saying that it is your preference to haveto paythousands of dollars for the privilege of a drivers license? Bizarre! I prefer to NOT pay thousands of dollars. Carry on Rockefeller.

I'm saying I disagree. I don't WANT to have to work harder for anything, that's also human nature. But I do recognize the fact that if things were harder to obtain it'd make the average idiot appreciate them more and make him think twice before doing something stupid that would jeopardize them.

Makes me real pleased that I am not an "average idiot." I don't have to think twice to prevent myself from "doing something stupid." It sounds like you advocate legislating to the least common denominator.

 

[AWDstylez]

imported post

wrightme wrote:

AWDstylez wrote:

buster81 wrote:

So, are you saying that you agree or disagree with the scenario I gave you?

Apparently I live in adifferent worldthan you do. It seems likeyou're saying that it is your preference to haveto paythousands of dollars for the privilege of a drivers license? Bizarre! I prefer to NOT pay thousands of dollars. Carry on Rockefeller.

I'm saying I disagree. I don't WANT to have to work harder for anything, that's also human nature. But I do recognize the fact that if things were harder to obtain it'd make the average idiot appreciate them more and make him think twice before doing something stupid that would jeopardize them.

Makes me real pleased that I am not an "average idiot." I don't have to think twice to prevent myself from "doing something stupid." It sounds like you advocate legislating to the least common denominator.

It's what we're stuck with. I advocate realism over idealism.

 

[Gordie]

imported post

Just how expensive and difficult to use should a RIGHT be?

I guess inAWD's world, only the rich and leisurely (those with the time and money to jump through hoops) would have rights.:shock:

Forget the average, they only need to do what they are told by the elite.

 

[AWDstylez]

imported post

Gordie wrote:

Just how expensive and difficult to use should a RIGHT be?

I guess inAWD's world, only the rich and leisurely (those with the time and money to jump through hoops) would have rights.:shock:

Far from it. I took it to an extreme to make an example. What I actually believe was stated multiple times already, but thanks for the strawman anyway.

 

[buster81]

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

Gordie wrote:

Just how expensive and difficult to use should a RIGHT be?

I guess inAWD's world, only the rich and leisurely (those with the time and money to jump through hoops) would have rights.:shock:

Far from it. I took it to an extreme to make an example. What I actually believe was stated multiple times already, but thanks for the strawman anyway.

You said you are for "waiting periods, required training, and careful checks".

How long do you think the waiting period should be, how much training do you think a person should have, and who does the careful checks?

 

[AWDstylez]

imported post

buster81 wrote:

You said you are for "waiting periods, required training, and careful checks".

How long do you think the waiting period should be, how much training do you think a person should have, and who does the careful checks?

I'm not for waiting periods, that was just lumped in there. If I wanted to murder someone on X date, I'd just purchase the weapon ahead of time. I never understood what waiting periods were supposed to accomplish.

A person should be trained in legal use of the weapon, which means they need to know the laws, and they should also be trained in practical use of the weapon so they can at least draw it without shooting themselves in the foot. This would be much like the required permit courses we have here in CT.

The government can do the careful checks. Background checks are objective. No matter how bad the _________ (insert government official) wants to keep you from having a gun he can't if you have a clean record.



The idea isn't to create gun owners that have mad tacticool skillz and records without even a speeding ticket (although such things are a bonus). The idea is to give people some sense of responsibility with what they've been given.

 

[buster81]

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

He clearly states what is he is for:

"Now, truth be told, a certain amount of gun control is warranted. There should be waiting periods, required training, and careful checks on who buys handguns. All these impress upon law-abiding citizens the responsibilities involved in owning firearms."


Just so happens to be the same things I'm for and for the exact same reason. He then mentions law biding citizens owning firearms, so how you could come up with him as being for a total ban is baffling.

Sorry. I guess I misread this. When you wrote "Just so happens to be the same things I'm for and for the exact same reason."I guess I thought you meant that you were for the same things for the same reason. My mistake.

 

[wrightme]

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

Gordie wrote:

Just how expensive and difficult to use should a RIGHT be?

I guess inAWD's world, only the rich and leisurely (those with the time and money to jump through hoops) would have rights.:shock:

Far from it. I took it to an extreme to make an example. What I actually believe was stated multiple times already, but thanks for the strawman anyway.

You did not need someone else to create one for you. That is exactly what you did to begin with.

 

[AWDstylez]

imported post

buster81 wrote:

AWDstylez wrote:

He clearly states what is he is for:

"Now, truth be told, a certain amount of gun control is warranted. There should be waiting periods, required training, and careful checks on who buys handguns. All these impress upon law-abiding citizens the responsibilities involved in owning firearms."


Just so happens to be the same things I'm for and for the exact same reason. He then mentions law biding citizens owning firearms, so how you could come up with him as being for a total ban is baffling.

Sorry. I guess I misread this. When you wrote "Just so happens to be the same things I'm for and for the exact same reason."I guess I thought you meant that you were for the same things for the same reason. My mistake.

Small oversight. I guess the world will be coming to an end now.

 

[Gordie]

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

buster81 wrote:

AWDstylez wrote:

He clearly states what is he is for:

"Now, truth be told, a certain amount of gun control is warranted. There should be waiting periods, required training, and careful checks on who buys handguns. All these impress upon law-abiding citizens the responsibilities involved in owning firearms."


Just so happens to be the same things I'm for and for the exact same reason. He then mentions law biding citizens owning firearms, so how you could come up with him as being for a total ban is baffling.

Sorry. I guess I misread this. When you wrote "Just so happens to be the same things I'm for and for the exact same reason."I guess I thought you meant that you were for the same things for the same reason. My mistake.

Small oversight. I guess the world will be coming to an end now.

Not if us poor, lowly,working stiffs who can't afford to pay for our rights or take time to jump through hoops have anything to say about it.

Even though we seldom agree, your rights to say and believe what you do are just as important to measmine.

 

[AWDstylez]

imported post

Gordie wrote:

Even though we seldom agree, your rights to say and believe what you do are just as important to measmine.

At least we can agree on that. :celebrate

 

[darthmord]

imported post

I'm of the mind that firearms safety training should be a part of the regular educational curriculum; that it's a function of you being a citizen of / legal alien residing in the United States.

Don't tie it to the act of obtaining a firearm, tie it to citizenship / legal residency. Every citizen should be well trained / educated in their civic duties and obligations. Of course, this goes well beyond firearms.

My oldest kid's government & history classes don't touch civic obligations at all. They don't explain why voting is such a big deal. They don't explain serving on a jury and how it plays into the idea of a government for/by/of the People.

Then again, I'm also someone who believes everyone should perform some sort of service to their community / country whether it be military service, government, civil services, medical, volunteering at shelters, etc. I strongly encourage my children to volunteer and help out when possible; to give back a little bit of what they have received as citizens.

But as I said early on, I don't want firearms training tied to gun ownership. That makes it too easy to take away guns. It's much harder to take away a person's citizenship.

 

[wrightme]

imported post

+1 and more to darthmord. :dude: