TheGreatGamble

13 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Too many guns? Buyback program it is!

Yeah, cuz Americans are gonna sell their guns to the government

1 hour ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

That's not true, where are you getting that statistic? Best numbers put it at over 1:1 in the US, and just over 1:3 in Canada. The US has 3x more guns per capita than Canada: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country

 

Also what is ISA?

 

Somehow instead of "uSA", I hit "ISA" in predictive text on my phone. Don't ask me what it means, just a typo. 

I had read that Canada was estimated at 35m, but then just now read its estimated to be 21m. But they don't even know, just like here in the USA. There are millions of unrecorded guns all over NA> 

2 minutes ago, SFLUFAN said:

I wonder if law requiring a license to purchase ammunition meets both the letter and the spirit of the Second?

I have no problem with this. 

1 minute ago, Emblazon said:

Well, buddy, then so are all the mass shootings. And gun violence in general. But if I had to guess, you're more likely than not of a Christian denomination, so you confess your sins, and sleep like a baby. 

 

But make no mistake--that blood is on the hands of all who support the laws that currently protect the 2nd amendment. 

Nope, the blood is on the hands of the killers, nobody else. Neither myself, or my guns, have ever killed anyone. Also not religious, but if you want to blame something for fostering hate, you just named the biggest hate group in history, christians. 

1 minute ago, legend said:

 

Seeking to get handguns banned doesn't mean embracing a dumb strategy of proposing a bill to do it and calling it a day when it doesn't work.

 

Social reform is never that simple for anything.

America is never, ever going to support a handgun ban. 

Like I said, go after things that make sense. High capacity magazines, bump stocks, shit like that. At least reasonable gun owners support that and might back you. Hardly any of us will ever support a ban on semi-auto's and handguns. Like I said above, espousing that banning them is a good idea is what drives more gun owners to support the NRA and local firearms groups, and makes us fight ANY legislation, because we know that giving some will only result in anti-gun groups trying to take more. Death by a thousand cuts. Thats why the gun lobby is so strong, we know if we give an inch on weapon types, some will look to take a mile. 

Just now, Emblazon said:

You mean according to half the Supreme court. And I'm sure the founding fathers intended every civilian to own guns that could shoot hundreds of rounds in minutes. 

 

Different time, different age. 99% of guns have no place in a modern society. 

It doesn't matter that its half the supreme court, because thats not the way the supreme court works. They decided you are wrong, so by law, you are wrong. 

And the second part is your opinion. For half of us, they have a very important place in this country, and again, the law is on our side. 

28 minutes ago, foosh said:

but thats it works though. they are going to start by looking at D1P. then they are going to see where all the communications from D1p are coming from until they get close to the target individual. but while they are doing that, they are grabbing everyone's communication as well.

So do it with a bill that only allows you to target groups that are actually legally deemed as hate groups. 

16 minutes ago, Emblazon said:

 

You mean like creating sensible gun regulations in Indiana? That would stifle the Chicago gun market quite a bit. 

 

On a different note, I'm all for the abolishment of the second amendment. Or at least enforce it as it was originally intended. Not this "gun ownership is a right for all" crap. 

 

My (extreme) solution would be to ban any and all guns that can hold more than 5 rounds at a time. I'm also 1000% for mandatory biometrics. 

According to the supreme court, it is enforced as intended. Shall not infringe, and all that. It doesn't say there is a limit to what types of arms you can bare. 

16 minutes ago, foosh said:

its posted anonymously. and to drill down to figure out who the user is, it creates other issues of privacy. everything you do on the internet is for the public the see. PRISM did this by standing outside people's houses and capturing all digital comms leaving a residence (ok, they really did this to a company).

 

NSA and PRISM are still active today but corporations have been working hard to encrypting messages.

I think trying to intercept private communications is different than investigating things posted publicly online.

8 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

Wah.

Can you not read?

5 minutes ago, foosh said:

 

you can't really get into this without removing everyone's right to online privacy. we saw that happened when people found out about the NSA and PRISM.

When you post stuff where everyone can see, privacy really isn’t an issue 

1 minute ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

Frankly, I am in favor of sweeping up all guns, then starting over with a much tougher system and far more regulated laws for gun ownership. Making even owning guns as a collector difficult and expensive. 

 

But I also know that won’t happen with this society. 

 

But I wish we could treat it like a debate or negotiate. If we start with the most reasonable, sensible option, by the time we even get a bill written there have been so many concessions that the bill is toothless and ineffective. Something stupid, like instead of being able to able ban 100 round magazines we just make it so you’re limited to purchasing one magazine per transaction. Just as an extreme example. 

 

Think of it as the political equivalent of starting with the mark up price, so that after negotiations you’re not settling at a point of losing money. 

I’m all for magazine capacity restrictions. I’m also for bi-yearly mental health examination at the gun owners expense. As well as getting rid of items like bump stocks. I am not for banning more types of guns.

honestly, I think investigating people involved with online hate groups would do more to stop this stuff. Seems all of these shooters are a part of one.

2 minutes ago, PaladinSolo said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/during-el-paso-hospital-visit-trump-compared-his-and-orourkes-crowd-sizes-at-political-rallies-video-shows/2019/08/08/573a3e68-b9eb-11e9-bad6-609f75bfd97f_story.html

 

 

During his remarks, Trump thanked the fire department for allowing 10,000 people in the El Paso County Coliseum, beyond its stated capacity, and said “tens of thousands” of additional people were watching on screens outside.

A fire department spokesman told the Times that 6,500 people were inside the venue and no special accommodations were made.

He really is obsessed with size. Stormy must have really fucked with his head.

2 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

I had a long response to this but D1P dropped my post...but basically, while I am not disagreeing with the end-result of the registry in Canada, there was more to it than it just failing. The cost overruns were ridiculous, and it never fully went into effect because of the delays and political opposition. Imagine hiring the military to build homes, and then finding out that each nail costs $200 due to contractors milking/gouging. That's what happened with the LGR in Canada. In general, Canada has fewer gun crimes because there are fewer guns. Full stop. There are gun crimes of course, mostly from gang violence as a result of guns smuggled from the US. But there are far fewer guns in homes (with the exception of many long guns in the homes of farmers) and as a result there are fewer crimes of passion. Fewer guns = fewer gun crimes, basically. A registry is a good idea if it is executed properly, but in Canada it was not (much like many public projects that go through RFPs and are awarded to bad companies). Another good recent example is the Phoenix Pay System in Canada, which was supposed to be the new payment system for all government employees, but was awarded to a company that could not handle it, resulting in thousands of public workers having missed paycheques, etc. But that issue (public tender) is entirely different from the arguments around the efficacy of a properly-set-up system.

Canada has about a 1:1 gun ratio, just like the USA, so fewer guns isn’t much of an argument. I truly believe it’s a difference in culture. The ISA is breeding hate right now.

6 hours ago, legend said:

 

Oh, well if you don't think so I guess we shouldn't even try to get there. 

I mean, every time you say something like “make handguns illegal”, you just entrench reasonable gun owners deeper into fighting every proposed gun law, pushing us further to the “breitbart gun owners” as I like to call them. If your answer to the problem is banning semi’s and handguns altogether, no gun owner is going to support you.

Of course. It’s only terrorism if their skin is brown.

Thing is, in Texas those stadiums make pro-sports type of money, so it makes it worthwhile to build pro sports stadiums. Not to mention the rich donors who donate huge sums just for football.

3 hours ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

That system is pointless if you don't have to register guns.

 

Titling, licensing, insuring. The title information would be held by FFL dealers, the government can only get title information with a judicial warrant. When you sell, buy, or otherwise transfer a gun it must be to and from someone who is licensed, and verified by a third party (e.g. a FFL dealer who would be required to do this for a maximum of a legally defined small fee) who also can pass a background check. The title is transferred once there is a proof of insurance from the buyer. Stolen and lost guns must be reported to police and your insurance. Failure to report can make you liable for crimes committed with that gun. Similar to a fishing license, if someone you are associating yourself with doesn't have a license (for reasons other than age), you basically can't have your gun on you (if you're fishing with a license and your buddy doesn't have one, the game warden will have an issue). If you have more than two incidences of lost or stolen guns, you lose your license for a couple of years, and your gun insurance rates get jacked. People with continued infractions get more and more time losing their license. Licensees need annual firearms training and vision checks. Maybe even an occasional required psych eval (which would be covered under a good universal healthcare system since I'm writing fiction anyway)

 

All of this I find reasonable, and has analogs to cars and other similar existing restrictions. If we insist on having guns in our society, it needs to be regulated, because what we have doesn't need a moderate tweak for things to be fine. We have tens of thousands of people who die every year, and this doesn't happen anywhere else that has close to our level of wealth. 

Gun registration didn’t work in Canada with only 35m guns. No way it’ll get anywhere with 400m. There’s a reason Canada shut it down, the cost was ridiculous and it had no effect on crime.

4 hours ago, SFLUFAN said:

Hopefully this means that their awful-sounding "Confederate" project for HBO is well and truly dead.

nope, i heard it talked about last week, its still on so far.

52 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Actually there are both oil wars and water wars that bring the collapse of society in Mad Max. 

 

Separately, I've been worrying about water availability for a few years now. I see it begins . . . 

Thankfully North America is flush with fresh water. But it's going to be a massive problem in the middle east, india, much of china and the far east. Russia has lots of fresh water, as well. 

6 hours ago, RedSoxFan9 said:

soon it will be illegal to vaccinate your kids in orange county 

Do you just keep a list of stupid comments to interject randomly into any conversation?

21 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Damn two threads back to back? I thought my Spidey sense was tingling...

Sounds like he has a crush. How sweet. 

37 minutes ago, sexy_shapiro said:

 

And success means everything, amirite? Your mind is as simple as Donald Trump’s. If it gets good ratings then it must be good and totally worth it.

Success is pretty damn important. Regardless of if his movies are good, only an idiot could say the Rock isn't massively successful. 

1 hour ago, SoberChef said:

Personally, while this bundle deal is absolutely awesome, I would like to have an option wherein the UFC PPV's are included at a higher rate/month for ESPN+ (not unlike how you can get WWE Network at a monthly rate and get access to their PPV shows.)

Never gonna happen. UFC loves the PPV model, and refused to deal with ESPN without their own version. 

1 hour ago, CastlevaniaNut18 said:

His type always does that. 

 

It's weird how these types of men think that just because you call out their bullshit you're obsessed with them. Smh. 

I'm actually surprised he didn't throw in a "Bitches be crazy!".

On 8/5/2019 at 5:27 PM, Zaku3 said:

I have noticed that if the battery completely dies you have to use the Nintendo charger. Nothing else will charge it in that state.

I have never had this problem.