An Honest Gun Control Advocate - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: An Honest Gun Control Advocate (/Thread-An-Honest-Gun-Control-Advocate) Pages:
1
2
|
An Honest Gun Control Advocate - Rotobeast - 12-08-2015 I'm kind of impressed to see this level of honesty finally coming out. I suspect it is the endgame of most. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amitai-etzioni/needed-domestic-disarmame_b_8739712.html Quote:Needed: Domestic Disarmament, Not 'Gun Control' RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - Rotobeast - 12-08-2015 I'm more inclined towards this proposal. http://www.caintv.com/the-solution-20-million-traine RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - CKwi88 - 12-08-2015 While I generally agree with the sentiment, people already fall for the "they're gonna take our guns" rhetoric hook line and sinker. Imagine if they actually did... RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 01:59 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: I'm more inclined towards this proposal. Quote:It's called the Citizen Marshal Initiative. The idea is to assemble a force of at least 20 million American citizens who are trained and licensed to carry concealed weapons, have received and successfully completed very high-level training in the safe use of these weapons (safe for everyone but the crooks, of course), have passed very thorough background checks, and upon completion of all this, are able to carry their weapons pretty much everywhere at all times. So the author opposes gun control, but suggest a force who would basically be subjected to gun control measures, so they could carry guns to protect us from the others who weren't subjected to the gun control measures they themselves were subjected to IOT prove they were safe and qualified to carry a concealed weapon. But, the author is opposed to gun control? HOLY SHIT!!! Did the author read the shit he just wrote? Does he have an editor? I'm the first MFer to figure out he is proposing the shit he is opposed to? This shit is hilarious. I have a counter proposal. Instead of 20 million, let's do 300 million. RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - Rotobeast - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 02:52 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: So the author opposes gun control, but suggest a force who would basically be subjected to gun control measures, so they could carry guns to protect us from the others who weren't subjected to the gun control measures they themselves were subjected to IOT prove they were safe and qualified to carry a concealed weapon. But, the author is opposed to gun control? HOLY SHIT!!! Did the author read the shit he just wrote? Does he have an editor? I'm the first MFer to figure out he is proposing the shit he is opposed to? This shit is hilarious. It is people volunteering to being placed under higher scrutiny, to receive training, and serve their country. I would have thought you'd be behind something like that. RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - Benton - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 02:52 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: So the author opposes gun control, but suggest a force who would basically be subjected to gun control measures, so they could carry guns to protect us from the others who weren't subjected to the gun control measures they themselves were subjected to IOT prove they were safe and qualified to carry a concealed weapon. But, the author is opposed to gun control? HOLY SHIT!!! Did the author read the shit he just wrote? Does he have an editor? I'm the first MFer to figure out he is proposing the shit he is opposed to? This shit is hilarious. I wouldn't go that direction. He isn't advocating gun control for everyone, he's essentially looking for volunteer peace officers, which many communities already have. The only difference is he's saying they should be armed (some are prohibited from carrying firearms) and hidden (whereas many have shirts/jackets/id badges letting others know they're someone with a little training who can help). The feds used to put money into volunteer programs like that through grants. Then the economy tanked, we went to war and cut taxes and now that sort of stuff is "non-essential." RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - fredtoast - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 11:17 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: It is people volunteering to being placed under higher scrutiny, to receive training, and serve their country. 20 million more like George Zimmermen. Yep, that will fix everything. RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - fredtoast - 12-08-2015 Regarding the OP, all he is doing is saying that nothing can be changed because of the NRA. I don't buy that. The NRA does not have that many members. There are lots of people who own guns who do not agree with the NRA. And a total ban of guns will not work either. That is what the NRA is talking about when they say that if we take away guns from law-abiding citizens then only criminals will have guns. It would be impossible to get all the guns off the streets of America. Small measures of gun control can be effective. Let law abiding citizens keep their guns. Just require more training and responsibility of ownership. RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - Rotobeast - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 12:09 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 20 million more like George Zimmermen. But, these people would be heavily vetted and trained. Are you suggesting that the government cannot properly vet people ? I could have sworn I've seen you state the opposite, in a different thread. RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - fredtoast - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 12:20 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Are you suggesting that the government cannot properly vet people ? If you have sworn that then you were wrong. The problem with your plan is that the people who would volunteer would be trigger happy cowboys just itching for a chance to use their firearm. The country is having problems with career police officers gunning down people on the streets, and you think it would be a good idea to add 20 million more armed enforcers who are less qualified and trained than police officers? RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - Benton - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 12:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes. And no. Part of the problem is the training with a significant number of officers. Training and equipment for police officers is moving more and more toward that of the military. Plus, there's a significant number of officers who transition from military service into law enforcement. But it's not the same. Law enforcement agencies need to be as diverse as their communities. They aren't going in that direction. But maybe they could through the use of more volunteers. That said, I don't think volunteer officers should be armed with lethal weapons. RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 11:17 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: It is people volunteering to being placed under higher scrutiny, to receive training, and serve their country. I am for higher scrutiny and training. But, I call that gun control. Okay, the guy wants a force of 20 million armed volunteers. But, IOT be a part of the armed 20 million they have to undergo a back ground check and receive training to prove they're not some crazy, murderin' MFer. Why do we need this force of 20 million armed volunteers who passed the background checks and received the training? To protect us from the 280 million armed citizens that didn't do the background check or receive the training. Am I the only one who sees the irony? RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - Rotobeast - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 12:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If you have sworn that then you were wrong. Then I apologize for being mistaken. If this plan were to take place, I would hold the volunteer marshals to a much higher standard than the normal ccw citizens. The penalties should be stiffer for them and law enforcement. I also think the marshals should be extensively trained in crisis management, to attempt to de-escalate a situation before a firearm is even necessary. RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - Rotobeast - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 12:52 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I am for higher scrutiny and training. But, I call that gun control. For the record, I'm in total support of an evaluation and background check to obtain a license to own firearms. RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - PhilHos - 12-08-2015 Here's the problem with many gun control advocates: they don't seem to realize that no law, no legislation, no regulation will 100% prevent mass shootings. Even an outright ban on every single gun (from bazookas to assault rifles to handguns to friggin' toy guns) will not stop mass shootings. So realize that even with legilsation we can all agree on, it won't always stop every crime with a gun involved. This is why I usually laugh at the proposed legislation brought up by many after events like in San Bernadino. The control measures they suggest would have done nothing to stop the shooting they're decrying! With that said, there most definitely needs to be some form of gun control legislation. The question I have is, are hte measures we have in place good enough and if not, why? RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 02:46 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Here's the problem with many gun control advocates: they don't seem to realize that no law, no legislation, no regulation will 100% prevent mass shootings. Even an outright ban on every single gun (from bazookas to assault rifles to handguns to friggin' toy guns) will not stop mass shootings. So realize that even with legilsation we can all agree on, it won't always stop every crime with a gun involved. I don't believe the criminal justice system is going to 100% prevent crime. No one does. But, that doesn't mean the criminal justice system is without merit. RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - PhilHos - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 03:16 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I don't believe the criminal justice system is going to 100% prevent crime. No one does. But, that doesn't mean the criminal justice system is without merit. Agreed, yet many people seem to think that if only there was just more gun control, then mass shootings would stop, that violent crime will go down, etc. etc. RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 12-08-2015 (12-08-2015, 03:26 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Agreed, yet many people seem to think that if only there was just more gun control, then mass shootings would stop, that violent crime will go down, etc. etc. Yet, even you believe we need gun control legislation. Why? RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - michaelsean - 12-08-2015 I love how everyone blames the NRA as if they have a vote. Blame your congresspeople, and yes I know most in this case are Republican, if they aren't voting the way you want. RE: An Honest Gun Control Advocate - fredtoast - 12-13-2015 (12-08-2015, 02:46 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Here's the problem with many gun control advocates: they don't seem to realize that no law, no legislation, no regulation will 100% prevent mass shootings. Even an outright ban on every single gun (from bazookas to assault rifles to handguns to friggin' toy guns) will not stop mass shootings. So realize that even with legilsation we can all agree on, it won't always stop every crime with a gun involved. But why ignore good laws that could help, just because they wiouyld not be 100% effective. None of our laws are 100% effective, but that does nto mean they are useless. |