Not at all, but thanks for proving that you don't know how to read.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
No, it's a strawman because that wasn't even close to the reason I gave for his idea not working. as for your idea of ban everything you don't like. you haven't actually given a valid reason for doing so.
I already said that I support mental health checks, just not as a prerequisite of exercising a consitutional right. but I'd be willing to support it, if it was applied to all consitutional rights.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
Not at all, my point was that I don't think it'd pass at all and that even if it did and was hack/disable proof. all it would do is create a demand on the back market for guns without sed devices.
IOW, I don't see it lowering the number of "mass shootings" at all.
The statement is rather straight forward, what don't you understand?
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
I was looking for an explanation because I don't believe you understand the implications of your statement.
Mental health checks for free speech......so everytime I express myself? Mental health checks prior to every vote........last time i checked running into a school with a megaphone shouting rhetoric doesn't/hasn't killed anyone........
I also explained why high capacity magazines should be banned, they have ZERO impact on your right to bear arms, yet they clearly make guns MORE lethal and dangerous.
Obvious is obvious, otherwise, if it didn't matter the military would still be using bolt-action rifles with 5 round magazines as standard issue to all troops.
If we go with your idea, just treat it like a regular license. they have to be renewed every X months/years.
Your explanation is that they're not needed, I don't see that as a valid reason to ban something.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
Come to think of it, isn't requiring an ID to purchase a gun racist against minorities? Just like the voting ID thing. Poor guys, we're so mean to these people
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Well you were concerned about costs of geofencing. Something that supermarkets use to disable shopping carts within a certain distance of a store. I've seen examples of it implemented that cost stores $18,000 and that included the disabling mechanisms on over 150 carts. A cost that would be borne by the purchaser of an outfitted weapon rather than the school/public body. And this is one of the more expensive potential solutions.
The concern of technology being circumvented is also a red herring.
Why bother having a lock on your front door is people can just break them anyway. Not having door locks wouldn't result in an increase in home robberies.
Why bother having alarms, steering locks and engine immobilisers in cars if people can still steal them anyway. They haven't resulted in any decrease in car thefts at all. Except the 60% decrease since the 1990s.
That is only HALF of what I said, they make semi-automatic weapons MORE lethal giving them a higher uptime for shooting and less time reloading, fewer magazines to carry. High capacity magazines make it easier to shoot more rounds faster, banning them doesn't affect your ability to bear arms, especially as it pertains to public safety.
Just like silencers make guns more lethal in the sense they can mask a lot of noise and prevent people from hearing the gun firing, silencers have nothing to do with your right to bear arms especially as it pertains to public safety.
Bump stocks, allow unskilled/low skilled shooters the ability to fire more rounds faster, hence more lethal. Not required for you to have the right to bear arms especially as it pertains to public safety.
So when we look at items on the list I discuss "talking about safety" none of them say ban a gun, not one of my ideas. So public safety is #1 then toys for them AR "style" weapons come in the last place.
Among other things yes, But I specifically brought up the cost because you mention the costs of mental health care. A much bigger problem though however would be that I doubt people will be all that happy with allowing the government to have the ability to essentially turn off their guns. as that goes directly against the 2nd amendment.
Or as another poster said.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
My bad, I forgot voting was a constitutional right.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
"More lethal" also isn't a valid reason for banning them. I mean using the more lethal argument. why not just ban all cartridges above a .22? after all doing so wouldn't ban a gun?
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
Because comparing lethality of specific rounds as opposed to the number of rounds is more important in a non-combatant situation.
Why have speed limits....why why why..........public safety AND you still get to keep all your guns (without high capacity mags, bump stocks, silencers.) Total win for everyone.
Yeah, I made the suggestion months ago. The problem was basically the implementation and how well such a measure would be sustained. Too hard to implement thoroughly and too easy a bypass.
A simpler measure where the control would be out of the hands of the shooter would be better.
As we are just repeating ourselves, let's move on to a different point. What do you classify as a high-capacity magazine?
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
IMO, the main problem is the people committing the crimes so that is where we should be focusing.
That said, I'm all for making guns safer as long as it doesn't involve taking things away from law abiding citizens.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
Are we back to blameshifting movies and videos games for the actions of people because it's Trump's new thing? And here I thought it was just "leftist" who didn't hold people accountable for their own actions. Weird.
KMC Community Forums
Feb 22nd, 2018 12:52 PM
