Of course it is political. It requires legislation to at least try to fashion a way to prevent young men, with guns purchased legally, not to use those guns against other citizens. This is part of the problem: we are so senselessly divided that no one, particularly in the GOP, is willing even to try solutions.JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:28 pmI don't think anybody in our entire government can be considered "standing idly by" when it comes to this issue. Take off the rose-colored glasses and see the problem for what it really is. It's a humanitarian crisis that is not inherently political in nature. Enjoy the games this weekend.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:10 pmDiss is a longtime lacrosse official, if my memory serves me (which, sometimes, it doesn't), and is an ardent believer in the Country we all share. He disagrees, I think, that Congress needs to stand idly by while children are murdered on a weekly basis by violent, assault rifle carrying young men. He's hardly "narrow-minded;" on the contrary, he believes that church and state ought to be separate; that politics is a profession that might help people and empower the disenfranchised; that women's bodies are, in the first place, their own and not the regulatory fodder of white men who desperately cling to power through census undercounting and gerrymandering and voter suppression legislation.JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:00 pmGood to know. So in other words, he has a similar narrow-minded political ideology that for some reason you and the regular suspects feel they must defend. You have my respect, I've always made that clear. You also have other interests outside of the political threads. I can't remember the last time Dis contributed regarding lacrosse. If he likes politics so much, there are much more reputable political websites in which he can join and post with other like-minded individuals that share his intense political anger and resentment.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:52 pmHe does!!JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:51 pmYou have friends on this site?dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 1:59 pmOMG! Dumbest...err...Cradle...HAS IT FIGURED OUT! Yeah! Just BARE those arms and we'll be one safe, massacre-free nation! Boy, it's good having you here, Cradle...you and Joe really add a TUN to the discussion!!cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 12:10 pmMD you make some interesting points. I can only say that until the folks on your side find a way to circumvent the 2nd amendment your peeing in the wind. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BARE ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGE D has no ambiguity.
Question for ya, C&S: you're a bit of an originalist when it comes to the Constitution, right? Did the framers original intent revolve around the type of "arms" (bare or not) that were available in the late 18th century? Did they think that WHATEVER civilization came up with in terms to TYPES of arms would be just AOK going forward...with respect to what they thought about, in the 1780's, as "Constitutional Rights"??
Asking for a friend...
..
Joe
Joe
Contributing to the lacrosse threads is not a requirement for this little club, any more than it is a prerequisite for posting on the politics threads. He asked a good question, above: did the Framers anticipate that the Second Amendment would mean that everyone is entitled -- as a constitutional matter -- to own and wield the state of the art technology in guncraft? The late Scalia said that the answer to that question is "No."
Joe
Sensible Gun Safety
-
- Posts: 5246
- Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2022 6:49 am
Re: Sensible Gun Control
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
Of course you do. You're a zealot. You think that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be a far left nutjob.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:15 pm Percent of national Democrats? About 33% today, 1 in 3. I suspect it’s actually more than half.
Partisans think that there's no such thing as an American centrist. They think there's only far right and far left.
They're idiots.
-
- Posts: 5246
- Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2022 6:49 am
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
I work in a law firm, which once was maybe 75% GOP. My guess is that is down to about 25%, most of the Republicans having changed to Independents because their party left them looking for water in the desert.a fan wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:06 pmOf course you do. You're a zealot. You think that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be a far left nutjob.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:15 pm Percent of national Democrats? About 33% today, 1 in 3. I suspect it’s actually more than half.
Partisans think that there's no such thing as an American centrist. They think there's only far right and far left.
They're idiots.
-
- Posts: 2009
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:39 pm
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
Interesting, I currently live in a area that used to lean heavily democratic and now has shifted towards being more republican in nature. It's a two-way street.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:10 pmI work in a law firm, which once was maybe 75% GOP. My guess is that is down to about 25%, most of the Republicans having changed to Independents because their party left them looking for water in the desert.a fan wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:06 pmOf course you do. You're a zealot. You think that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be a far left nutjob.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:15 pm Percent of national Democrats? About 33% today, 1 in 3. I suspect it’s actually more than half.
Partisans think that there's no such thing as an American centrist. They think there's only far right and far left.
They're idiots.
Joe
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
Yes. Moving to the center---away from the nutjobs in both of our do-nothing parties.JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:14 pmInteresting, I currently live in a area that used to lean heavily democratic and now has shifted towards being more republican in nature. It's a two-way street.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:10 pmI work in a law firm, which once was maybe 75% GOP. My guess is that is down to about 25%, most of the Republicans having changed to Independents because their party left them looking for water in the desert.a fan wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:06 pmOf course you do. You're a zealot. You think that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be a far left nutjob.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:15 pm Percent of national Democrats? About 33% today, 1 in 3. I suspect it’s actually more than half.
Partisans think that there's no such thing as an American centrist. They think there's only far right and far left.
They're idiots.
Joe
-
- Posts: 34111
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: Sensible Gun Control
Deh using knives and clubs. Let them have more guns is the answer.cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:39 pmOn a tangential issue how come the nightly slaughter in our cities do to illegal weapons is always brushed under the rug? It never garners the national headlines like a mass shooting. If the 2nd amendment needs to be fine tuned there is a remedy for that... Amend the constitution and let the people decide. That seems to be more logical than doing an end run around it.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:10 pmDiss is a longtime lacrosse official, if my memory serves me (which, sometimes, it doesn't), and is an ardent believer in the Country we all share. He disagrees, I think, that Congress needs to stand idly by while children are murdered on a weekly basis by violent, assault rifle carrying young men. He's hardly "narrow-minded;" on the contrary, he believes that church and state ought to be separate; that politics is a profession that might help people and empower the disenfranchised; that women's bodies are, in the first place, their own and not the regulatory fodder of white men who desperately cling to power through census undercounting and gerrymandering and voter suppression legislation.JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:00 pmGood to know. So in other words, he has a similar narrow-minded political ideology that for some reason you and the regular suspects feel they must defend. You have my respect, I've always made that clear. You also have other interests outside of the political threads. I can't remember the last time Dis contributed regarding lacrosse. If he likes politics so much, there are much more reputable political websites in which he can join and post with other like-minded individuals that share his intense political anger and resentment.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:52 pmHe does!!JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:51 pmYou have friends on this site?dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 1:59 pmOMG! Dumbest...err...Cradle...HAS IT FIGURED OUT! Yeah! Just BARE those arms and we'll be one safe, massacre-free nation! Boy, it's good having you here, Cradle...you and Joe really add a TUN to the discussion!!cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 12:10 pmMD you make some interesting points. I can only say that until the folks on your side find a way to circumvent the 2nd amendment your peeing in the wind. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BARE ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGE D has no ambiguity.
Question for ya, C&S: you're a bit of an originalist when it comes to the Constitution, right? Did the framers original intent revolve around the type of "arms" (bare or not) that were available in the late 18th century? Did they think that WHATEVER civilization came up with in terms to TYPES of arms would be just AOK going forward...with respect to what they thought about, in the 1780's, as "Constitutional Rights"??
Asking for a friend...
..
Joe
Joe
Contributing to the lacrosse threads is not a requirement for this little club, any more than it is a prerequisite for posting on the politics threads. He asked a good question, above: did the Framers anticipate that the Second Amendment would mean that everyone is entitled -- as a constitutional matter -- to own and wield the state of the art technology in guncraft? The late Scalia said that the answer to that question is "No."
“I wish you would!”
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
Read the reporting on the 2 latest shooters. Consult wiki on the listings of mass shootings & school shootings.jhu72 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:49 pm... you have no proof of this. You are guessing that they might have had an impact. Some of them I would agree might be a contributing factor. At the end of the day however, it requires the means to carry through on the act, which means guns and body armor. The Austin Tower shooting is not really relevant. Special circumstances. Not just anyone could have carried that mass killing out. Todays mass shootings, anyone can carry them out. None of the items you list are necessary or sufficient, a gun with high fire rate and capacity coupled with any old human is necessary and sufficient.old salt wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 1:53 pmAll the things I listed were factors in the Uvaldea &/or Buffalo shootings.
It's not just access to semi-automatic weapons. The TX tower shooter killed 11 & wounded 31 with a bolt action rifle.
Mass shootings have increased with the advent of violent video games & social media.
The ten year ban on semi-automatic weapons did not work. Don't chase simplistic solutions.
Last edited by old salt on Thu May 26, 2022 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 34111
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
You do know what type of people the current republican party also appeals to don’t you?JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:14 pmInteresting, I currently live in a area that used to lean heavily democratic and now has shifted towards being more republican in nature. It's a two-way street.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:10 pmI work in a law firm, which once was maybe 75% GOP. My guess is that is down to about 25%, most of the Republicans having changed to Independents because their party left them looking for water in the desert.a fan wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:06 pmOf course you do. You're a zealot. You think that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be a far left nutjob.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:15 pm Percent of national Democrats? About 33% today, 1 in 3. I suspect it’s actually more than half.
Partisans think that there's no such thing as an American centrist. They think there's only far right and far left.
They're idiots.
Joe
“I wish you would!”
-
- Posts: 34111
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
They used sticks?old salt wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:32 pmRead the reporting on the 2 latest shooters.jhu72 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:49 pm... you have no proof of this. You are guessing that they might have had an impact. Some of them I would agree might be a contributing factor. At the end of the day however, it requires the means to carry through on the act, which means guns and body armor. The Austin Tower shooting is not really relevant. Special circumstances. Not just anyone could have carried that mass killing out. Todays mass shootings, anyone can carry them out. None of the items you list are necessary or sufficient, a gun with high fire rate and capacity coupled with any old human is necessary and sufficient.old salt wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 1:53 pmAll the things I listed were factors in the Uvaldea &/or Buffalo shootings.
It's not just access to semi-automatic weapons. The TX tower shooter killed 11 & wounded 31 with a bolt action rifle.
Mass shootings have increased with the advent of violent video games & social media.
The ten year ban on semi-automatic weapons did not work. Don't chase simplistic solutions.
“I wish you would!”
Re: Sensible Gun Control
cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:39 pmOn a tangential issue how come the nightly slaughter in our cities do to illegal weapons is always brushed under the rug? It never garners the national headlines like a mass shooting. There is no reason to try to distinguish between legal and illegal weapons in this discussion. Many if not most crimes are committed with legal weapons (up until the time they are used in the commission of a crime). The question you are asking is why are we allowing Americans to senselessly kill each other in criminal activities inside our largest cities. The answer is no mystery - it requires a huge, massively expensive, very dangerous effort to get guns off these streets. It is mostly criminal on criminal crime that would result in lots of non-criminals (police officers) being killed in the effort to clean it up. It is really that simple. Far more people would die in cleaning it up, than innocent civilians who are now losing their lives. If you want to volunteer ... At some point we as a nation will get the courage to clean it up.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:10 pmDiss is a longtime lacrosse official, if my memory serves me (which, sometimes, it doesn't), and is an ardent believer in the Country we all share. He disagrees, I think, that Congress needs to stand idly by while children are murdered on a weekly basis by violent, assault rifle carrying young men. He's hardly "narrow-minded;" on the contrary, he believes that church and state ought to be separate; that politics is a profession that might help people and empower the disenfranchised; that women's bodies are, in the first place, their own and not the regulatory fodder of white men who desperately cling to power through census undercounting and gerrymandering and voter suppression legislation.JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:00 pmGood to know. So in other words, he has a similar narrow-minded political ideology that for some reason you and the regular suspects feel they must defend. You have my respect, I've always made that clear. You also have other interests outside of the political threads. I can't remember the last time Dis contributed regarding lacrosse. If he likes politics so much, there are much more reputable political websites in which he can join and post with other like-minded individuals that share his intense political anger and resentment.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:52 pmHe does!!JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:51 pmYou have friends on this site?dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 1:59 pmOMG! Dumbest...err...Cradle...HAS IT FIGURED OUT! Yeah! Just BARE those arms and we'll be one safe, massacre-free nation! Boy, it's good having you here, Cradle...you and Joe really add a TUN to the discussion!!cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 12:10 pmMD you make some interesting points. I can only say that until the folks on your side find a way to circumvent the 2nd amendment your peeing in the wind. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BARE ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGE D has no ambiguity.
Question for ya, C&S: you're a bit of an originalist when it comes to the Constitution, right? Did the framers original intent revolve around the type of "arms" (bare or not) that were available in the late 18th century? Did they think that WHATEVER civilization came up with in terms to TYPES of arms would be just AOK going forward...with respect to what they thought about, in the 1780's, as "Constitutional Rights"??
Asking for a friend...
..
Joe
Joe
Contributing to the lacrosse threads is not a requirement for this little club, any more than it is a prerequisite for posting on the politics threads. He asked a good question, above: did the Framers anticipate that the Second Amendment would mean that everyone is entitled -- as a constitutional matter -- to own and wield the state of the art technology in guncraft? The late Scalia said that the answer to that question is "No."
If the 2nd amendment needs to be fine tuned - It doesn't - there is a remedy for that... Amend the constitution and let the people decide. That seems to be more logical than doing an end run around it.
STAND AGAINST FASCISM
- cradleandshoot
- Posts: 15397
- Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2018 4:42 pm
Re: Sensible Gun Control
The latest new fad in criminal on criminal shootings is to expand the target zone. That means driving by where your target lives and pumping rounds into the house. Hey if your lucky you'll hit something, even if it is a little kid. No need for spending all that money getting illegal guns off the street. It ain't like criminals pay attention to the law anyway...jhu72 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:37 pmcradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:39 pmOn a tangential issue how come the nightly slaughter in our cities do to illegal weapons is always brushed under the rug? It never garners the national headlines like a mass shooting. There is no reason to try to distinguish between legal and illegal weapons in this discussion. Many if not most crimes are committed with legal weapons (up until the time they are used in the commission of a crime). The question you are asking is why are we allowing Americans to senselessly kill each other in criminal activities inside our largest cities. The answer is no mystery - it requires a huge, massively expensive, very dangerous effort to get guns off these streets. It is mostly criminal on criminal crime that would result in lots of non-criminals (police officers) being killed in the effort to clean it up. It is really that simple. Far more people would die in cleaning it up, than innocent civilians who are now losing their lives. If you want to volunteer ... At some point we as a nation will get the courage to clean it up.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:10 pmDiss is a longtime lacrosse official, if my memory serves me (which, sometimes, it doesn't), and is an ardent believer in the Country we all share. He disagrees, I think, that Congress needs to stand idly by while children are murdered on a weekly basis by violent, assault rifle carrying young men. He's hardly "narrow-minded;" on the contrary, he believes that church and state ought to be separate; that politics is a profession that might help people and empower the disenfranchised; that women's bodies are, in the first place, their own and not the regulatory fodder of white men who desperately cling to power through census undercounting and gerrymandering and voter suppression legislation.JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:00 pmGood to know. So in other words, he has a similar narrow-minded political ideology that for some reason you and the regular suspects feel they must defend. You have my respect, I've always made that clear. You also have other interests outside of the political threads. I can't remember the last time Dis contributed regarding lacrosse. If he likes politics so much, there are much more reputable political websites in which he can join and post with other like-minded individuals that share his intense political anger and resentment.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:52 pmHe does!!JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:51 pmYou have friends on this site?dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 1:59 pmOMG! Dumbest...err...Cradle...HAS IT FIGURED OUT! Yeah! Just BARE those arms and we'll be one safe, massacre-free nation! Boy, it's good having you here, Cradle...you and Joe really add a TUN to the discussion!!cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 12:10 pmMD you make some interesting points. I can only say that until the folks on your side find a way to circumvent the 2nd amendment your peeing in the wind. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BARE ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGE D has no ambiguity.
Question for ya, C&S: you're a bit of an originalist when it comes to the Constitution, right? Did the framers original intent revolve around the type of "arms" (bare or not) that were available in the late 18th century? Did they think that WHATEVER civilization came up with in terms to TYPES of arms would be just AOK going forward...with respect to what they thought about, in the 1780's, as "Constitutional Rights"??
Asking for a friend...
..
Joe
Joe
Contributing to the lacrosse threads is not a requirement for this little club, any more than it is a prerequisite for posting on the politics threads. He asked a good question, above: did the Framers anticipate that the Second Amendment would mean that everyone is entitled -- as a constitutional matter -- to own and wield the state of the art technology in guncraft? The late Scalia said that the answer to that question is "No."
If the 2nd amendment needs to be fine tuned - It doesn't - there is a remedy for that... Amend the constitution and let the people decide. That seems to be more logical than doing an end run around it.
We don't make mistakes, we have happy accidents.
Bob Ross:
Bob Ross:
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
Last edited by jhu72 on Thu May 26, 2022 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
STAND AGAINST FASCISM
- youthathletics
- Posts: 15843
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Soren Kierkegaard
~Livy
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Soren Kierkegaard
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
... public school teacher - the worst and most underpaid job in America!
STAND AGAINST FASCISM
- youthathletics
- Posts: 15843
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
the worst, difference of opinion....most underpaid +100.
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Soren Kierkegaard
~Livy
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Soren Kierkegaard
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
STAND AGAINST FASCISM
- youthathletics
- Posts: 15843
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
A damned unlocked door UFB, may explain why the SRO was a bit behind.
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Soren Kierkegaard
~Livy
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Soren Kierkegaard
-
- Posts: 12878
- Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:19 am
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:33 pmYou do know what type of people the current republican party also appeals to don’t you?JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:14 pmInteresting, I currently live in a area that used to lean heavily democratic and now has shifted towards being more republican in nature. It's a two-way street.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:10 pmI work in a law firm, which once was maybe 75% GOP. My guess is that is down to about 25%, most of the Republicans having changed to Independents because their party left them looking for water in the desert.a fan wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:06 pmOf course you do. You're a zealot. You think that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be a far left nutjob.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:15 pm Percent of national Democrats? About 33% today, 1 in 3. I suspect it’s actually more than half.
Partisans think that there's no such thing as an American centrist. They think there's only far right and far left.
They're idiots.
Joe
Latinos?
https://www.foxnews.com/us/republicans- ... poll-shows
Re: Sensible Gun Safety
https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/part ... ation.aspx
28% D; 28% GOP; 40% Indy.
Lean GOP 45%; lean D 44%.
28% D; 28% GOP; 40% Indy.
Lean GOP 45%; lean D 44%.
Boycott stupid. If you ignore the gator troll, eventually he'll just go back under his bridge.