My gun control compromise

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by Maccabee, Jan 4, 2020.

  1. Thingamabob

    Thingamabob Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2017
    Messages:
    14,267
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Will I need a bullet-proof vest to do that?
     
  2. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Turn the other cheek. Meaning give the individual a second chance. It does not say turn the other cheek indefinitely, no matter how many times they demonstrate that they will engage in violence. The first time could be written off as an accident in the heat of the moment. The second time demonstrates a willful and deliberate act.
     
  3. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And yet it is indeed quite necessary, as the world is a violent place. Those who suggest running away from problems are acknowledging such to be the basic reality of the situation. They are simply saying that private individuals should not be legally allowed to use violence, but rather only government should be in charge of deciding who it can and cannot be violent with.

    The real world does not operate on the basis of idealistic beliefs, nor can it be made to do such.
     
  4. Thingamabob

    Thingamabob Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2017
    Messages:
    14,267
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    “The world” is responsible for natural catastrophes such as earthquakes, volcano eruptions, and flooding. You can call them “violent” but they're not perpetrated against man by design.

    Those who say “violence is a fact of life” are weak and too confused in order to find solutions to problems.

    Whatever individuals are saying is irrelevant if they are not willing to correct what is wrong with society/government.

    The natural world – is made up of difficulties, most of which have been circumnavigated my modern technology and this “technological world” is now the “real world”. We made it and we must continue to improve it. Denying a portion of humanity the possibility of surviving without shooting someone to death is our fault and distributing guns to every man, woman and child (instead of taking care of our fellow man) is actually “running away” from our responsibility. So you are chewing on the problem from the wrong end.
     
  5. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Meaningless and irrelevant drivel intended to steer the discussion further off topic.

    There are certain problems in the real world for which deadly force is the only answer. Such is a fact that has existed for as long as the human species has existed. It is not going to cease anytime soon simply because some wish for it to be the case.

    What is ultimately wrong stems from the people themselves. In any given society, in any given country, there are individuals who have demonstrated conclusively, beyond all reasonable doubt, that they simply will not abide by the rules of society, and cannot be made to do such, no matter what degree of punishment is used against them. They do things their own way and only their own way.

    There are only two solutions for dealing with such individuals. The first is to keep them indefinitely confined to the appropriate facilities for the duration of their natural lives, so they cannot commit harm to anyone except themselves. But such a proposal is deemed to be too costly as it would require taxes for all the facilities which would need to be produced and maintained.

    The second solution is to allow the private individuals who would be their potential victims, to use deadly force in their own defense against those that would victimize them, and thus allow an immediate and permanent end to be put to the reign of the problematic individuals who view other members of society as their victims.

    Explain, in precise details, how preventing private individuals from legally owning firearms for their own defense, serves to fix the supposed problem.
     
    Well Bonded likes this.
  6. pitbull

    pitbull Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    6,149
    Likes Received:
    2,857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  7. Thingamabob

    Thingamabob Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2017
    Messages:
    14,267
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    pitbull likes this.
  8. M.A. Survivalist

    M.A. Survivalist Newly Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2020
    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    79
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Any kind of small arm the police or military has access to I should have access to.
     
    TedintheShed and Longshot like this.
  9. ChoppedLiver

    ChoppedLiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2015
    Messages:
    5,703
    Likes Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why would either of you want to compromise on what is a God (Or whoever the creator of all things is to you) given right?
     
  10. ChoppedLiver

    ChoppedLiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2015
    Messages:
    5,703
    Likes Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sure "big mags" and "high-powered guns" are in the second amendment.
    Those are listed right next to where it says "Muskets".
     
  11. M.A. Survivalist

    M.A. Survivalist Newly Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2020
    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    79
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Back when the Constitution was written the military and police had access to muskets, now they've got access to big mags and high powered guns so I should have access to them too.
     
  12. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How else can the militia hope to succeed in its role to assist/resist the standing army?
     
    Longshot likes this.
  13. ChoppedLiver

    ChoppedLiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2015
    Messages:
    5,703
    Likes Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Who said that the standing army would not be on the side of the militia?
     
  14. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, you never know - that's why I said assist/resist.
    Point was, of course, the militia has several roles, all of which require certain standard for equipment.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2020
  15. ChoppedLiver

    ChoppedLiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2015
    Messages:
    5,703
    Likes Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The gun-grabbers always idiotically tout, "Your AR-15 ain't good enough to fight against an army with tanks and planes etc..."
    That statement would assume that the standing army would not be on the side of the citizen soldier(s).
    And an AR-15 or three would have come in handy when they were protesting in Venezuela and those personnel vehicles were running over a slew of protesters.
     
    M.A. Survivalist likes this.
  16. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Those who do not believe a small % of Americans, armed an motivated to the task, could not effectively resist the US government, do not have any idea what they are talking about.
     
  17. Rugglestx

    Rugglestx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2018
    Messages:
    4,161
    Likes Received:
    3,145
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Agreed.

    The only way for anybody to defeat the US Military would be thru a LIC style of warfare over a long period of time.

    But then the current US military is not turning their guns on the citizens anyways so mute point.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2020
  18. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,706
    Likes Received:
    21,104
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Because if limited compromise prevents a war, its worth considering.
     
  19. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Compromise with the anti-gun left only hastens a war, as it emboldens them to demand more concessions.
     
    ChoppedLiver and Well Bonded like this.
  20. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Exactly what is the other side giving up in exchange for what it is getting?

    If one side gets to retain everything is presently has, and only has to accept less than it was originally asking for, while simultaneously giving up nothing it already possesses, it is not compromise.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2020
    Well Bonded likes this.
  21. Rugglestx

    Rugglestx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2018
    Messages:
    4,161
    Likes Received:
    3,145
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    All my guns were lost in a tragic boating accident. Bottom of the ocean. Very sad.
     
  22. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,706
    Likes Received:
    21,104
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The compromise is detailed in the OP.

    The general premise; one I happen to agree with, is that we have enough gun laws. If folks want to try more, then get rid of others. That, in conjunction with sunset provisions, will allow the experimentation required to see what is effective and whats not, without following the current dynamic of gradual erosion of the right to bear arms by many small cuts.

    Perhaps one day we can effect govt to simply repeal some of the less useful restrictions. Until then, OP (or similar) type of compromise may be better than the unstoppable force vs immovable object approach we're stuck at now.
     
  23. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There would be nothing to prevent such legislation from being later amended to remove the sunset provisions through rider amendments on unattached pieces of legislation, thus making the firearm-related restrictions permanent in a defacto manner, long after the fact. Once the firearm-related restrictions is implemented into law, there is nothing to stop it from being modified in any manner imaginable.
     
  24. M.A. Survivalist

    M.A. Survivalist Newly Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2020
    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    79
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Exactly.
     
  25. M.A. Survivalist

    M.A. Survivalist Newly Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2020
    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    79
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Then citizens should be able to get tanks and planes, which they can.
     

Share This Page