The Appealment Of the 2nd Amendment

Started by samhain20 pages
Originally posted by Silent Master
Everyone has the right to an opinion.

You'd think wouldn't you? A lot of people seem to think that things like being a convict removes your right to an opinion, I know of people who think people who don't vote don't have the right to an opinion. Not my beliefs to be sure, but they do exist.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
STFU you sociopath

Unlike Mr Hogg, I've actually been shot at.

Oh well damn, guess you should call up potential employers to boycott Neph's employment as well as mine because we called you a sociopath.

Originally posted by Nephthys
The way I see it, its easy for a sociopath like Silent Master or even most politicians to just ignore mass shootings because they don't affect them. They're things that happen to other people so they don't trigger any kind of empathetic response. Someone who's actually lived through it however knows the real impact they have. They've lost people they know. They've seen the consequences first hand. They have a true perspective on the issue that gives their voices weight. Their opinion is far more informed than a worm like SM who knows technical details about guns but not what the actual consequences are like.

Idol was bang on with the 9/11 connection. Try and tell me a 9/11 survivor would get this kind of response.


And after 9/11 Congress passed the patriot act without even reading it, which has allowed the government more power to invade our privacy.

Maybe making policy decisions as an emotional response to a tragedy is not a wise way to conduct policy.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Does being in the same building as a shooting grant you some magical knowledge?

Dude, I have no idea what the **** you're going on about.

Hogg understands that under the current laws, Cruz was able to legally purchase a semi-automatic rifle at the age of 18 in spite of Cruz's numerous documented behavioral, social, and psychological issues, as well as the numerous death threats he'd made. The current laws and procedures involved in purchasing such a weapon were not strict nor thorough enough to prevent someone as batshit as Cruz from getting the guns and ammo he needed to carry out his plans to kill his former classmates and teachers.

Hogg understands that the good guy with a gun tasked with protecting them utterly failed to prevent or even stop Cruz from killing and attempting to kill him, his classmates, and his teachers.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Oh well damn, guess you should call up potential employers to boycott Neph's employment as well as mine because we called you a sociopath.

Nah, you're both entitled to your opinion.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Dude, I have no idea what the **** you're going on about.

Hogg understands that under the current laws, Cruz was able to legally purchase a semi-automatic rifle at the age of 18 in spite of Cruz's numerous documented behavioral, social, and psychological issues, as well as the numerous death threats he'd made. The current laws and procedures involved in purchasing such a weapon were not strict nor thorough enough to prevent someone as batshit as Cruz from getting the guns and ammo he needed to carry out his plans to kill his former classmates and teachers.

Hogg understands that the good guy with a gun tasked with protecting them utterly failed to prevent or even stop Cruz from killing and attempting to kill him, his classmates, and his teachers.

What comments of his are you using to determine what he understands?

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Dude, I have no idea what the **** you're going on about.

Hogg understands that under the current laws, Cruz was able to legally purchase a semi-automatic rifle at the age of 18 in spite of Cruz's numerous documented behavioral, social, and psychological issues, as well as the numerous death threats he'd made. The current laws and procedures involved in purchasing such a weapon were not strict nor thorough enough to prevent someone as batshit as Cruz from getting the guns and ammo he needed to carry out his plans to kill his former classmates and teachers.

Hogg understands that the good guy with a gun tasked with protecting them utterly failed to prevent or even stop Cruz from killing and attempting to kill him, his classmates, and his teachers.


This is illegal and should've disqualified him from owning a gun but law enforcement didn't actually do their job enforcing that law. That in no way proves that the underlying policy was insufficient, it proves the enforcement of the underlying policy was insufficient.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
And after 9/11 Congress passed the patriot act without even reading it, which has allowed the government more power to invade our privacy.

Maybe making policy decisions as an emotional response to a tragedy is not a wise way to conduct policy.


Congress failed to do their jobs by not thoroughly discussing, reviewing, and revising the Patriot Act. That is different than what is going on here.

The Never Again movement started by Parkland survivors like Hogg, Gonzalez, and Corin are asking Congress to do a few very specific changes to gun laws, not pass a bunch of vague shit laws nobody's bothered to read, much less think through.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
This is illegal and should've disqualified him from owning a gun but law enforcement didn't actually do their job enforcing that law. That in no way proves that the underlying policy was insufficient, it proves the enforcement of the underlying policy was insufficient.

I don't know if this is something being demanded from the Never Again movement, but perhaps stricter accountability for law enforcement and gun dealers who fail to follow all procedures of such screenings should be considered as well.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
This is illegal and should've disqualified him from owning a gun but law enforcement didn't actually do their job enforcing that law. That in no way proves that the underlying policy was insufficient, it proves the enforcement of the underlying policy was insufficient.

Good point, law enforcement or other agencies have to actually do something about him and then report it in order for a background check to flag him. that he passed is a failure on their part. not a failure of the background check.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Congress failed to do their jobs by not thoroughly discussing, reviewing, and revising the Patriot Act. That is different than what is going on here.

The Never Again movement started by Parkland survivors like Hogg, Gonzalez, and Corin are asking Congress to do a few very specific changes to gun laws, not pass a bunch of vague shit laws nobody's bothered to read, much less think through.


That wasn't my point though. My point is I'm not going to agree with someone on policy just because they were a part of the tragedy. If I don't think it's good policy I'll argue against it, and I don't think these kids being part of a tragedy gives their policy proposals any weight, just like I don't think the emotional anguish after 9/11 made the patriot act any less of a bad policy.

Silent Master was arguing that them being in a tragedy did nothing to change the validity of their actual arguments or policy proposals, and Neph called him a sociopath and said you wouldn't say that to a 9/11 survivor, and I'm saying we shouldn't have accorded the 9/11 policy proposals less scrutiny just because tragedy.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I don't know if this is something being demanded from the Never Again movement, but perhaps stricter accountability for law enforcement and gun dealers who fail to follow all procedures of such screenings should be considered as well.

I'm pretty sure it isn't. A lot of people were criticizing the local Sheriff for the failure of his department as well as the armed guard who didn't run in (and later whoever gave him the order not to go in), and Hogg was asked about it and he basically mostly excused the sheriff and the law enforcement people who should've done something and pinwheeled back around to blaming the NRA and our current gun control policy.

I don't have an issue with if you agree with them or not, it's Silent Masters attempts to question their credibility that I'm responding to.

He absolutely should question their credibility. Being in a tragedy does not change the quality of a person's argument and the argument should stand or die on it's own instead of being awarded special credence because of whose making it.

Being involved in a shooting doesn't grant them any credibility, credibility is based on the strength of their points/arguments.

And I disagree for the reasons I stated. It's easy to not think something is that big of a deal when you're so removed from the reality of it.

Originally posted by Silent Master
What comments of his are you using to determine what he understands?

There's no need for a quote regarding the campus police. I wasn't there, but I know the school police officer opted to stay off-campus instead of engaging and returning fire on Cruz, because it was all over the news. How ****ed do you think that must look to the Stoneman Douglas students and faculty? The good guy with the gun, a member of law enforcement, completely failed to protect any of them.

As far as what he's said about current gun laws:

[quote]I was in my environmental science class when the first gunshot echoed through the hallways. We never had an active shooter drill at my school, and though we did talk about what to do in this type of situation, nothing could have prepared us for this.

Politicians and, more importantly, the American public must take action if we're going to prevent the next shooting.

To elected officials I say this: Don't lie to us. Don't make any more false promises, because when you do, children die.

For the unfortunate individuals that were at my school, I ask that this be a time of togetherness, and something that is going to be always remembered, not only as a terrible incident, but as a turning point in American history, where students speak up and speak out when the politicians won't.

I understand the importance of interest groups, and how often times they're necessary to continue a political agenda. However, when that agenda involves putting the lives of children at risk, how can you justify that?

I support the Second Amendment. But for God's sake, how can we knowingly pass bills and laws that are in direct opposition to saving kids' lives? Sandy Hook … the Pulse nightclub shooting … the Las Vegas shootings, just to name a few.

What legislation was passed in response? The answer to that question is, little, if any.

This Presidents Day, I think it's important that we come together as a nation and see each other's viewpoints and respect each other as fellow Americans.

But, this tragic event must never be forgotten. Because once it is, there will be another one. And another one.

We need to stand up, go out and vote, talk to our legislators, and get educated. Be persistent. Because these interest groups and these politicians will not listen if we don't speak up.

So as American citizens, unite, and stand up in the face of division -- not any political agenda, but for the lives of millions of schoolchildren.[quote]

Originally posted by Silent Master
Being involved in a shooting doesn't grant them any credibility, credibility is based on the strength of their points/arguments.

👆 You see Neph him "attacking their credibility" is not pulling an ad hominem, it's the opposite. It's him saying who you are doesn't make your argument more or less valid, the content of your argument should do that on its own.

It's even easier to think something is a big deal just because you think it helps your argument.