volkom said: »
treat all the gangsminorities as terrorists!
Politicians/Media Refuse "proudly Gun Free" Sign |
||
|
Politicians/Media refuse "proudly gun free" sign
volkom said: » treat all the Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » But of-course the rest of middle america just assumes he was caught up in gang-violence. Because they know so much about the family in the Bronx and Compton. Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Not a good comparison. You rights end when you begin to impede the rights of others or threaten others, like shouting Fire or making a verbal realistic threat. Just because we have the right to own guns does not mean that we have the right to point them at someone randomly. A background check or submitting to a mental evaluation isn't impeding on the rights of others when the current path of "unlimited guns" impedes on the life and liberty of those living in the inner city as opposed to their suburban/rural counterparts who face far lower rates of gun violence. I'm willing to concede that ammo limitations are an impediment but I turn the debate back to the NRA who have nothing to say other than "buy more guns, it'll keep you safe". Because what was the issue at hand? What was the issue they were supposedly trying to fix? They were trying to make children safer at schools. The NRA provided a solution they believe is the best way to do that. It wasn't simply MORE GUNS! It was trained armed security at schools; retired police officers and military etc. If your goal is to protect children at schools then there you go. They have been made fun of for pointing out that the President's daughters go to a private school that has armed security. That argument is met with sarcasm "well of course they are the President's kids etc." Well we want the best protection for the President's kids right? And that protection at school is armed security. If it made the school more dangerous would they be there? And how do you keep guns out of the hands of criminals or wayward youth that have designs to kill people on a mass scale?
You put up barriers. Simple barriers like a background check or a mental evaluation before you get to buy guns. The same way we don't give anyone who turns 16 the right to drive without passing both a written and road test. That's how you start to combat violence. You make it harder for criminals to get guns and don't hand me the "well, they'll use illegal channels" because many of the kids who have incited these massacres only could get access to guns because things have been so lax it's almost trivial to pick up an arsenal. Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » And how do you keep guns out of the hands of criminals or wayward youth that have designs to kill people on a mass scale? You put up barriers. Simple barriers like a background check or a mental evaluation before you get to buy guns. The same way we don't give anyone who turns 16 the right to drive without passing both a written and road test. That's how you start to combat violence. You make it harder for criminals to get guns and don't hand me the "well, they'll use illegal channels" because many of the kids who have incited these massacres only could get access to guns because things have been so lax it's almost trivial to pick up an arsenal. people don't have the right to drive. how do you prevent criminals from getting guns? how about keeping them in jail where they belong? No! that's how you combat gun violence, you don't give two shits about violence. and yes, they will use the illegal channels, and I disagree with your assessment. Carbuncle.Skulloneix said: » So clean up gangs! I would rather give police the tools (laws, lack of red tape, weapons, etc) needed to fight gangs then to infringe on the right of Americans to own guns. But that is what is trying to be done. Punish/restrict law abiding citizens for the actions criminals do rather than GO AFTER CRIMINALS. You two don't seem to digest this point well. 1) you're assuming gun-regulation = total ban on guns. 2) the "law abiding citizens" aka middle WASP america, don't really need guns(for self-protection) to begin with since they aren't having 2pac or JLo shoot them up! Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » Carbuncle.Skulloneix said: » So clean up gangs! I would rather give police the tools (laws, lack of red tape, weapons, etc) needed to fight gangs then to infringe on the right of Americans to own guns. But that is what is trying to be done. Punish/restrict law abiding citizens for the actions criminals do rather than GO AFTER CRIMINALS. You two don't seem to digest this point well. 1) you're assuming gun-regulation = total ban on guns. 2) the "law abiding citizens" aka middle WASP america, don't really need guns(for self-protection) to begin with since they aren't having 2pac or JLo shoot them up! 2. fortunately that wasn't your decision to make. also like how you just claimed that every non "wasp" is a criminal, you could really do to stop being so *** racist. Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Because what was the issue at hand? What was the issue they were supposedly trying to fix? They were trying to make children safer at schools. The NRA provided a solution they believe is the best way to do that. It wasn't simply MORE GUNS! It was trained armed security at schools; retired police officers and military etc. If your goal is to protect children at schools then there you go. They have been made fun of for pointing out that the President's daughters go to a private school that has armed security. That argument is met with sarcasm "well of course they are the President's kids etc." Well we want the best protection for the President's kids right? And that protection at school is armed security. If it made the school more dangerous would they be there? It was buy more guns and the ridiculous notion of arming every guard in schools with a veritable treasure trove of weaponry is going to address the ease of getting weapons brought to you by the NRA. It's classic deflection from the main issue at hand: The ease of anyone to get their hands on firearms. The NRA and the gun lobby are in this for money and with every statement they make only further proves that. Well, that and the stupidity of ***like this: YouTube Video Placeholder
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » main issue at hand: The easy of anyone to get their hands on firearms. Jetackuu said: » also like how you just claimed that every non "wasp" is a criminal, you could really do to stop being so *** racist. Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » Carbuncle.Skulloneix said: » So clean up gangs! I would rather give police the tools (laws, lack of red tape, weapons, etc) needed to fight gangs then to infringe on the right of Americans to own guns. But that is what is trying to be done. Punish/restrict law abiding citizens for the actions criminals do rather than GO AFTER CRIMINALS. You two don't seem to digest this point well. 1) you're assuming gun-regulation = total ban on guns. 2) the "law abiding citizens" aka middle WASP america, don't really need guns(for self-protection) to begin with since they aren't having 2pac or JLo shoot them up! And no, I assume that the banning of a gun type, is a slippery slope to go down, and will only lead to more guns being banned for citizens and let only criminals to have them. Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Because what was the issue at hand? What was the issue they were supposedly trying to fix? They were trying to make children safer at schools. The NRA provided a solution they believe is the best way to do that. It wasn't simply MORE GUNS! It was trained armed security at schools; retired police officers and military etc. If your goal is to protect children at schools then there you go. Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » Jetackuu said: » also like how you just claimed that every non "wasp" is a criminal, you could really do to stop being so *** racist. it doesn't matter if it was in *** pixie dust. stop lying, it doesn't matter how many times you repeat it, it doesn't make it true. Carbuncle.Skulloneix said: » Quit with the minority ***. I take you as a studied and intelligent person. Quote: Q:Why dont we see minorities supporting zero-gun-regulation/NRA?A:Dunno, lack of education among Hispanics? Jetackuu said: » it doesn't matter how many times you repeat it, it doesn't make it true. Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » But again my point stands blacks/latinos no where in this country are standing up for MOAR GUNS! Christ, Jet took words out of my mouth! Plenty of blacks in my region are pissed about the gun laws.
Carbuncle.Skulloneix said: » Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » But again my point stands blacks/latinos no where in this country are standing up for MOAR GUNS! Christ, Jet took words out of my mouth! yuck! Carbuncle.Skulloneix said: » Christ, Jet took words out of my mouth! Shiva.Arana said: » Plenty of blacks in my region are pissed about the gun laws. If you think I was trying to insult you, I was NOT. I just had no answer. Next time, I will just make up some lie and scream it at the top of my lungs and claim it is true. Getting good notes from you.
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » Because Condi represents the majority of the African-American population.... Condoleeza Rice is a republican which nullifies any minority status in America.
Carbuncle.Skulloneix said: » Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » Because Condi represents the majority of the African-American population.... Quote: Show me minority activists supporting moar guns... Common I'm waiting for the citations and evidence. Carbuncle.Skulloneix said: » . And no, I assume that the banning of a gun type, is a slippery slope to go down, and will only lead to more guns being banned for citizens and let only criminals to have them. And in the fear whipped up by the gun lobby, gun sales skyrocket. Again, military weapons are banned though you could make the 2nd amendment argument that I'm entitled to a SAM, a mortar or a grenade launcher. I didn't see us tumble down the slippery slope there and outlawing firearms completely hasn't been taken seriously unless you count Piers Morgan as speaking for America. Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Condoleeza Rice is a republican which nullifies any minority status in America. Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » Carbuncle.Skulloneix said: » Christ, Jet took words out of my mouth! Shiva.Arana said: » Plenty of blacks in my region are pissed about the gun laws. Show me a minority activist that speaks out against President Obama on one thing.
Shiva.Arana said: » Huh i live in north east Texas think you've got me mixed up with Zah. ;^^ Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » Carbuncle.Skulloneix said: » Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » Because Condi represents the majority of the African-American population.... Quote: Show me minority activists supporting moar guns... Common I'm waiting for the citations and evidence. you were answered, when you didn't like the response you changed your question. please, stop trying to pursue your race card. Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Show me a minority activist that speaks out against President Obama on one thing. You must not look very far on the internet. Remember all those people here on XIAH bashing Obama for not getting single payer passed? Right. Democrats are known for cannibalizing their elected officials afterall. Sidiov said: » Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Because what was the issue at hand? What was the issue they were supposedly trying to fix? They were trying to make children safer at schools. The NRA provided a solution they believe is the best way to do that. It wasn't simply MORE GUNS! It was trained armed security at schools; retired police officers and military etc. If your goal is to protect children at schools then there you go. |
||
|
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2025 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|
||