Assault rifle ban will fail without objective definitions because...

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by modernpaladin, Aug 9, 2019.

  1. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    26,068
    Likes Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I doubt you can provide any evidence to support that claim. Just to make it simple for you here is a simple question. How did the wars in Vietnam and Iraq benefit the American people?
     
  2. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    20,511
    Likes Received:
    5,878
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If a particular firearm is unsuitable for private ownership and use, simply because it is believed said firearm is simply too efficient at killing far too many individuals in far too short an amount of time, what possible legitimate need could the government of the united states have for possessing and using such firearms?

    Then cease trying to confuse semi-automatic firearms with military firearms, when the two are not comparable to one another in any way.
     
    Jarlaxle likes this.
  3. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    20,511
    Likes Received:
    5,878
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The legal concept in the united states is a person is innocent until proven guilty. Not suspected of being guilty, but rather being proven guilty. Meaning there is no way of addressing crimes before they can be committed, nor can the public at large be punished preemptively for something that it did not do.
     
    Reality and Turtledude like this.
  4. Toggle Almendro

    Toggle Almendro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2016
    Messages:
    1,281
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    63
    The Continental Army was an army, not a militia.


    Hardly silly. The requirements of a police weapon and the requirements of a self defense weapon are quite similar.

    Requiring the police to use civilian-available weapons will ensure that civilians will continue to have access to weapons that are effective for self defense.

    Requiring the police to use civilian-available weapons will ensure that the police will not be equipped with weapons that are inappropriately too powerful for police work.


    Who says that this is a fact?
     
    Jarlaxle and Turtledude like this.
  5. Turtledude

    Turtledude Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2015
    Messages:
    12,291
    Likes Received:
    6,727
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    well it is rather simple. when a governmental entity issues its CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES firearms -that entity is stating that those weapons are the most suitable tools for their employees to use for self defense in a CIVILIAN environment. How can the same governmental entity then claim there is NO JUSTIFIABLE REASON for other civilians to EVEN own (we aren't talking about having the authority to carry those weapons in the same areas as the police) those weapons in their own homes?
     
    Reality likes this.
  6. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    26,068
    Likes Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When is a government employee a civilian employee? If the government pays you aren’t you a government employee.

    And when has the government issued firearm to civilians?
     
  7. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    26,068
    Likes Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you opinion is that any attempt to remove guns from the mentally ill or people that threaten mass shootings is illegal? In other words no red flag laws.
     
  8. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    5,605
    Likes Received:
    3,675
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think most gun owners would support removing guns from someone that is shown to be a threat to themselves or others if due process is followed. What most object to is Red flag Laws that can be capriciously applied and abused, resulting in taking guns based on accusation, and then requiring some basically to ‘prove’ they are not a threat to recover their property... the antithesis to our tradition of of innocent until proven guilty.
    In many states, a restraining order is not just simply granted on a complaint, but require due process to be followed where the request for the restraint order is granted by a judge in a hearing. In my state, that process can take place very rapidly, in an emergency, you can get a judge to issue a temporary (ex parte) order based on credible evidence (often there are corroborating records and history in existence) and one or more sworn statements (subject to perjury violation) to be followed by a full hearing. Yet, some advocate taking of guns on mere complaint, giving opportunity for those with personal grievances to inflict a bit of pain by simply filling out a complaint.
    Declaring someone mentally Il is a tricky thing. I have heard gun advocates that have suggested the mere wanting of a firearm is a sign of mental illness and a threat to the community. Then there are those that can construe mental illness based on an spurious criteria; how many pundants (self ordained psychology experts) out there have insinuated, if not outright declared Trump mentally deficient?
     
  9. Turtledude

    Turtledude Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2015
    Messages:
    12,291
    Likes Received:
    6,727
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    gee, that's really silly. there are MILITARY employees and CIVILIAN employees. The governments -state and federal, issue lots of firearms to civilian employees. Municipal Police, state highway patrol FBI Agents, DEA Agents, Secret Service, etc
     
    An Taibhse and Reality like this.
  10. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    20,511
    Likes Received:
    5,878
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If it does not involve due process in accordance with the united states constitution, then it is no more a viable solution than preemptively killing those that are suspected of being a danger to themselves of others.

    An individual being given their day in court, long after they have been negatively impacted by the enforcement of a particular law, and leaving them continually negatively impacted for the duration between the two points, is not due process in any way, shape, or form.
     
    Jarlaxle likes this.
  11. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    20,511
    Likes Received:
    5,878
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Anyone who is not military personnel are civilian individuals, that is ultimately how the matter works. Being a government employee does not apply military status to anyone, unless the postal carriers are soldiers who hold rank and are subject to the united states uniform code of military justice.
     
    Jarlaxle, An Taibhse and Reality like this.
  12. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    5,605
    Likes Received:
    3,675
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We are not ruled by a military dictate and the military does not independently determine their operating authority. The military is subject to the authority of the government that serves with the consent of the governed (the People). As for Vietnam and Iraq, in both cases the representatives of the People responsible for the decisions for executing the wars, thought the wars justified at the time and were supported by the ballot... duly elected by the People. How did the American People benefit? In hindsight? Or, based on the narratives used to engender the support of voters before the conflicts began? ... it’s irrelevant to the discussion, the military does not independently determine foreign policy, it operates subject to government authority, those comprising the government being considered public servants, thus....
     
  13. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    26,068
    Likes Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In both cases the military acted without the consent of the government. Both were the result of Presidential actions with no authorization in advance by Congress.
     
  14. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    5,605
    Likes Received:
    3,675
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Prove your case. Pretty sure What you assert isn’t correct given my current level of knowledge of the precedence for both Conflicts, but I am always willing to be enlightened in US history. So, enlighten me.
     
  15. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    26,068
    Likes Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2019
  16. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,924
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And only one of those animals classify as a mass shooter.

    By the way Tashfeen Malik is a male not a female.

    [​IMG]
     
  17. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,924
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A rifle capable of selective fire that being either, semi-auto one round with each pull of the trigger, burst fire commonly three rounds with each pull of the trigger and full auto firing continuously when the trigger is pulled.
     
    Jarlaxle likes this.
  18. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,924
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In Garland Texas the first responder was a private citizen with an AR-15.
     
  19. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,924
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually their not employees, they are government property.
     
  20. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    11,879
    Likes Received:
    2,930
    Trophy Points:
    113
    pretty much, added the bold.
    Kind of wanted him to demonstrate his ignorance though
     
    Well Bonded likes this.
  21. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,924
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Park rangers and the postal service.
     
    Turtledude likes this.
  22. Sage3030

    Sage3030 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2014
    Messages:
    4,105
    Likes Received:
    1,941
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Mass shooting: 4 or more shot and or killed not including the shooter. All of those qualify.

    And yes Tashfeen Malik is a female. You may be thinking of the other shooter that day, her husband, Rizwan Farook.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...-bernardino-shooter-tashfeen-malik/index.html
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2019
  23. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,924
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nope your first person killed 3, the second was a male and only the third met the qualification, so your score is 30 which by any measurement standard is a F.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2019
  24. Sage3030

    Sage3030 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2014
    Messages:
    4,105
    Likes Received:
    1,941
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Snochia Mosley killed 3 and wounded 3 others. She shot 6 people. That’s more than 4.

    And dude, Tashfeen Malik was a female in the San Bernadino shootings:

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...-bernardino-shooter-tashfeen-malik/index.html

    I am 100% on my list.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2019
  25. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,924
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Trophy Points:
    113
    [​IMG]

    By Breanna Edwards · September 21, 2018September 21, 2018

    Authorities have named 26-year-old Snochia Moseley from Baltimore County as the suspect in the shooting at a Maryland warehouse that left three dead and three others wounded.

    Now you are up to 60 which is still an F.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2019

Share This Page