☆~Sleepy Joe 2021~☆

[gillbot]

Lots of words I didn't read

 

There are plenty of 2A people who aren't blanketly afraid of gun reform. They just don't agree with the knee jerk sanctions and other rules they try to put in place that typically APPEAR to target legal gun owners/buyers but not criminals who don't follow laws anyway.

 

Step up enforcement of current laws, make reforms that 2A people can't argue against.

[Geeto67]

There are plenty of 2A people who aren't blanketly afraid of gun reform. They just don't agree with the knee jerk sanctions and other rules they try to put in place that typically APPEAR to target legal gun owners/buyers but not criminals who don't follow laws anyway.

 

 

I covered that in what I wrote, If you read it you would have seen it.

 

Step up enforcement of current laws, make reforms that 2A people can't argue against.

 

This however is nonsense in the current environment. Why?

 

1) enforcement of current laws isn't the issue. There is a clear gap that needs to be addressed by laws - ghost guns, gun shows etc....existing laws are insufficient to deal with the changing landscape and guess what - it's going to continue to change, which means new laws will be needed as well.

 

The knowledge gap needs to be overcome to have meaningful laws, vs knee jerk reactionary laws based on public opinion. Also if you want enforcement to improve then stop electing officials at the state level who have taken NRA money (on both sides) and are committed to making enforcement of local gun control laws as lax as possible.

 

2) The people who define themselves as "2A people" can, have, and will argue against anything that is gun control. I am not anti-2A, I've been a gun owner and I'll probably be one again in the future but I think if you polled the usual pro-gun advocates here none of them would describe me as a "2A person".

Edited March 25, 2021 by Geeto67

[oh8sti]

I covered that in what I wrote, If you read it you would have seen it.

 

 

 

This however is nonsense in the current environment. Why?

 

1) enforcement of current laws isn't the issue. There is a clear gap that needs to be addressed by laws - ghost guns, gun shows etc....existing laws are insufficient to deal with the changing landscape and guess what - it's going to continue to change, which means new laws will be needed as well.

 

The knowledge gap needs to be overcome to have meaningful laws, vs knee jerk reactionary laws based on public opinion. Also if you want enforcement to improve then stop electing officials at the state level who have taken NRA money (on both sides) and are committed to making enforcement of local gun control laws as lax as possible.

 

2) The people who define themselves as "2A people" can, have, and will argue against anything that is gun control. I am not anti-2A, I've been a gun owner and I'll probably be one again in the future but I think if you polled the usual pro-gun advocates here none of them would describe me as a "2A person".

 

 

neither of these things are an issue. The shooter in colorado bought his gun from a store 6 days before the shooting. He somehow passed a background check with his history.

 

If you would've said something like "he shouldn't have passed a background check, that needs to be looked at" I would have had a conversation about that. But the fact that you brought up 2 things that have little to no relevance to mass shootings tells me you don't care and you just want something scary/foreign to you banned or heavily regulated.

[Geeto67]

neither of these things are an issue. The shooter in colorado bought his gun from a store 6 days before the shooting. He somehow passed a background check with his history.

 

If you would've said something like "he shouldn't have passed a background check, that needs to be looked at" I would have had a conversation about that. But the fact that you brought up 2 things that have little to no relevance to mass shootings tells me you don't care and you just want something scary/foreign to you banned or heavily regulated.

 

I brought those up as examples of how the landscape is ever changing. I am not talking about any specific incident but rather how there are holes all over the place in the existing gun laws, and yes that includes what constitutes a background check, plus many other things. We aren't all still firing black powder muskets, firearm tech evolves and regulations needs to evolve with it. The idea that it shouldn't is super dumb, almost as dumbas saying "nothing worked before so why try".

 

If you want to talk about the specific Colorado incident then yes "I think he shouldn't have passed a background check" and that probably needs to be looked at, but that is one of a dozen or more holes in the existing body of laws, which at best are only as good as their weakest one.

Edited March 25, 2021 by Geeto67

[gillbot]

I have thoughts but I prefer not to respond to droning walls of text that lack substance. You sound more like a filibuster than an actual attempt at a conversation or attempt to hear from the other side. Most of your walls of text reek of a superiority complex and drone on about how your opinions are so much better than the person you claim to be discussing things with.

 

And for that reason, I’m out.

[Geeto67]

I have thoughts but I prefer not to respond to droning walls of text that lack substance.

Clearly they have some substance because there was at least one point on which you and I agreed (that knee jerk reaction legislation was bad).

 

You sound more like a filibuster than an actual attempt at a conversation or attempt to hear from the other side.

 

What's the "other side" in this case? That we just "need to enforce existing laws"? Dude that's an old argument, I've heard it a thousand times, been down that rabbit hole chasing it's merit and the only value it has is that fixing lax enforcement may be part of a broader solution but it isn't the only solution. It has been my experience that those who suggest it as an only solution don't usually understand who creates enforcement strategies for law enforcement, that it is resource dependent, that is dependent on having well written laws a body of statistical research, and strong jurisprudence, and it is not in the purview of the legislative branch of government.

 

 

And for that reason, I’m out.

 

Suit yourself.

Edited March 26, 2021 by Geeto67

[gillbot]

As I said, instead of trying to engage in a conversation you get on your high horse and preach. Thanks for further proving that point by omitting the bulk of what I said. I’d guess you did what you claim everyone else does, you didn’t even read what I said.

[Mallard]

neither of these things are an issue. The shooter in colorado bought his gun from a store 6 days before the shooting. He somehow passed a background check with his history.

 

Also see where I said:

Also, the gun that was used in Boulder skirts the definition of a rifle and is classified as a pistol. Had it been classified as a short barrel rifle there would have been a lengthy background check that would have included fingerprints, a photo, a $200 tax, and would need to be purchased from a specialized dealer.

His purchase should have been scrutinized more heavily, for sure, and the gun should not be classified the way it is.

 

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[oh8sti]

Also see where I said:

 

His purchase should have been scrutinized more heavily, for sure, and the gun should not be classified the way it is.

 

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

its actually classified exactly the way the law is written. It is also enforced.

 

I have several restricted NFA items. The SBR needs to be taken off NFA list. Its no longer a novelty gun. It is a common use weapon used by civilians and police. There is no advantage to that weapon in lethality compared to a standard 16" barrel AR. In fact, you could argue you are at a disadvantage with a shorter barrel due to lack of accuracy at longer distances. Same with suppressors. Those need to be taken off as well. There should be no regulation on short barreled guns whatsoever. Its idiotic and makes 0 sense. This is a preference in appearance IMO. Some people want a Mini Cooper, others want a Tahoe. They both do the same thing, but the guy wanting the Mini Cooper likes that style and size more than the Tahoe.

 

The boulder guy had no advantage using a pistol variant of the AR. Lets not let the media, who knows little to nothing about current gun laws and regulation, tell you what to be afraid of.

 

Also, he should have never been approved to buy the gun in the first place. Thats a failure of the systems in place. Not a failure of the object that was used. Adding more regulation to a failing system compounds the issue and brings law abiding people into the line of fire that have no reason in being there.

[Otis Nice]

Who do I vote for that will campaign to end using the term "assault rifle"?

[gillbot]

Who do I vote for that will campaign to end using the term "assault rifle"?

 

[oh8sti]

Anyone else finding this constant media/social pushed narrative of white supremacy strange?

 

The Atlanta shootings sparked a huge conversation over Asian hate crimes (even though there is no indication the shooter targeted the women due to race, that we know of yet). Well, something odd was showing up in the data. The media was telling us it was white people committing racist and violent acts towards Asians, but the arrest records show that’s it’s actually fellow POC that are being arrested for violence, hate and murder of Asians. Was the media just saying “hey, this is a problem!” But not wanting to highlight the perps of this hate? I honestly don’t know the answer.

 

Another strange thing that happened is when you use the definition of “mass shooting” according to the left, the data looks very convincing that it is not white men committing mass shootings. Now, I will be the first to state their definition of mass shooting is intended to show as many as they can to justify gun control, but the reality is it’s showing how few white people are involved in that definition of “mass shooting”.

[Mace1647545504]

What I find amazing is the ATL shootings should bring out the talk of sex slaves. The Asian massage parlors are hiding prostitution or human trafficking ..why isn't the media talking about it ?????

 

The CO. shootings was a nut job man of color(syria) that shot up a bunch of whites in the market. But again the medial isn't really pushing that point.

 

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

[CRed05]

Anyone else finding this constant media/social pushed narrative of white supremacy strange?

 

The Atlanta shootings sparked a huge conversation over Asian hate crimes (even though there is no indication the shooter targeted the women due to race, that we know of yet). Well, something odd was showing up in the data. The media was telling us it was white people committing racist and violent acts towards Asians, but the arrest records show that’s it’s actually fellow POC that are being arrested for violence, hate and murder of Asians. Was the media just saying “hey, this is a problem!” But not wanting to highlight the perps of this hate? I honestly don’t know the answer.

 

Another strange thing that happened is when you use the definition of “mass shooting” according to the left, the data looks very convincing that it is not white men committing mass shootings. Now, I will be the first to state their definition of mass shooting is intended to show as many as they can to justify gun control, but the reality is it’s showing how few white people are involved in that definition of “mass shooting”.

Do I find it strange? No, it's to be expected now. Boulder shooter (and previous shooters) had all these reporters and Twitter "blue checkmarks" saying "oh see, another white man bla bla bla racism". Then it turns out it's a black man or a Syrian immigrant. The Asian thing also turned out that it had nothing to do with racism, but the dude has a sex addiction problem.

 

I know all too well where this is leading to. White people are evil racists, therefore we can make it harder to get them into universities, harder to get a job, harder to start/own a business, harder to get financial aid, harder to own property.

 

Filibusters are also racist now, it makes Jim Crow look like "Jim Eagle" - Joe Biden

 

Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk

[10phone2]

yes we really do have a terrible white people gun violence problem.

[Mace1647545504]

yes we really do have a terrible white people gun violence problem.

 

Right..just asked the lib media and the democratic communists

[RedRocket1647545505]

Do I find it strange? No, it's to be expected now. Boulder shooter (and previous shooters) had all these reporters and Twitter "blue checkmarks" saying "oh see, another white man bla bla bla racism". Then it turns out it's a black man or a Syrian immigrant. The Asian thing also turned out that it had nothing to do with racism, but the dude has a sex addiction problem.

 

I know all too well where this is leading to. White people are evil racists, therefore we can make it harder to get them into universities, harder to get a job, harder to start/own a business, harder to get financial aid, harder to own property.

 

Filibusters are also racist now, it makes Jim Crow look like "Jim Eagle" - Joe Biden

 

Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk

 

Starting to sound an awful lot like South Africa.

[Buck531]

[oh8sti]

I want Biden to do well. I want him to unite the country on common ground. But, we are watching a woke dictator emerge. He doesn’t want compromise. He wants to rule via executive order. The woke horde doesn’t want to compromise or have logical discussions either. They want blood.

 

I’m really not sure how they expect conservatives, indys and right leaning lefts are going to respond to that.

[Otis Nice]

Who do I vote for that will campaign to end using the term "woke"?

[gillbot]

I didn’t see much compromise but a bunch of executive orders from trump too, just sayin.

[Otis Nice]

[oh8sti]

I didn’t see much compromise but a bunch of executive orders from trump too, just sayin.

 

I think its important to keep this in perspective though and use the data we have available to date.

 

Biden criticized trump for doing the exact thing he is doing now though. I thought the left was of a moral fabric that was better than the right?....Does he all the sudden have no shame about lying to the faces of the people that elected him?

 

Trumps first 60 days - 17 EO's, 4 prior Obama orders revoked

 

Bidens first 60 days - 37 EO's, 61prior trump order revoked

 

Who did CNN breathlessly call a dictator by executive order?....

[gillbot]

I’m not defending or taking a side but the immediate response is that he needs to in an effort to undo everything trump did. Regardless if that’s true, it sure is a convenient excuse.

[oh8sti]

I’m not defending or taking a side but the immediate response is that he needs to in an effort to undo everything trump did. Regardless if that’s true, it sure is a convenient excuse.

 

I get that - it’s a bullshit excuse, but I get it. His policies have had a direct negative impact on the US.

 

He should probably focus less on vengeance and more on the crisis he created at the border.