Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Felya]

I don't know why you are talking to me as if I said anything to you really. But here we are. I didn't tag you so its not personal. I said you are against ever banning guns, what else do you want?

Explain what this big push you are pushing is about? It seems pretty obvious... no reason to make it personal...

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think it's personal. I'm just wondering where tilting at this no-fly list ban windmill came from. Because it kinda came outta nowhere.

Tim Pool, as always:

https://twitter.com/timcast/status/1...485255?lang=en

The truth:

Man featured in viral video was not placed on no-fly list for participating in Capitol riot
https://www.thedenverchannel.com/new...n-capitol-riot

[Theodarzna]

I don't think it's personal. I'm just wondering where tilting at this no-fly list ban windmill came from. Because it kinda came outta nowhere.

You sure do act like it, and given I didn't address you and you seem pretty accusational about it, to put it simply you asked me to the dance so to speak, so what is this?

[Felya]

You sure do act like it, and given I didn't address you and you seem pretty accusational about it, to put it simply you asked me to the dance so to speak, so what is this?

Asking what the big push you mentioned, actually means... has nothing to do with you addressing anyone. Just pretend you are defining the big push, without anyone asking. Pretend you feel the need to clarify, because you want people to understand.

[Edge-]

You sure do act like it, and given I didn't address you and you seem pretty accusational about it, to put it simply you asked me to the dance so to speak, so what is this?

It's not all about you Theo, seriously. There was a post that I was confused by, I responded to get more information. If anyone had made the post I would have posted the exact same response. I was seeking clarity on why you (or whoever else would have posted) are bringing up a topic that wasn't a part of the discussion in this thread, nor is it part of any national discussions. And hasn't been for years. I was trying to figure out what prompted it and what it added to the discussion.

I'm a bad dancer though Theo, I wouldn't make you or anyone else suffer by asking you to dance with me.

[Felya]

I'm a bad dancer though Theo, I wouldn't make you or anyone else suffer by asking you to dance with me.

Guns and bad dancing, that can get someone injured...



- - - Updated - - -

I have no idea what you're saying here, sorry.

They were asking for a discussion on what needs to be done. They presented an idea that they knew was flawed, as a basis for discussion.

[Theodarzna]

It's not all about you Theo, seriously. There was a post that I was confused by, I responded to get more information. If anyone had made the post I would have posted the exact same response. I was seeking clarity on why you (or whoever else would have posted) are bringing up a topic that wasn't a part of the discussion in this thread, nor is it part of any national discussions. And hasn't been for years. I was trying to figure out what prompted it and what it added to the discussion.

I'm a bad dancer though Theo, I wouldn't make you or anyone else suffer by asking you to dance with me.

Then why the accusations? If you wanted to just say "Hey, I don't support that" then this whole interaction could go differently.

Yeah, I didn't respond to anyone since it was a thought that occurred to me, does it matter? Why react with such indignant outrage like I'm not allowed to say "Hey, that idea, that idea about gun control? I think its bad for X, Y, and Z reason." Plus a quick search of "Gun + No-Fly" reveals that was discussed on this thread at least as of last summer so its not like its not some idea out there, and the search feature here isn't perfect. So, I, not responding to ANYONE post a statement about a policy that has been floated around and you flip out as if I'm suggesting you personally support it or as if I'm like violating some unspoken new rule here by mentioning it and a problem with it.

Here, I'll give you it again, Edge- does not support any form of gun control. What else do you want out of me?

[Edge-]

Guns and bad dancing, that can get someone injured...

I at least have the common sense to...

- Stay off the dance floor
- Not carry a loaded gun with me to a club
- Not carry a loaded gun with a round in the chamber and the safety apparently off
- Not carry a gun outside of a secure holster
- Not do backflips because holy shit I don't wanna break my fuckin neck

- - - Updated - - -

Then why the accusations? If you wanted to just say "Hey, I don't support that" then this whole interaction could go differently.

Theo, are you reading posts I don't make again? What accusation? I asked for clarity on a topic you brought up that I was confused about. I didn't accuse you, or anyone else, of anything.

Here, I'll give you it again, Edge- does not support any form of gun control. What else do you want out of me?

I don't want anything out of you personally, Theo. I was just asking a question, not nailing you to a cross.

And I support whatever will reduce gun violence, gun control or not. You don't have to like, pretend to placate me like my feelings are hurt. I assure you, they're not.

[Felya]

I at least have the common sense to...

- Stay off the dance floor
- Not carry a loaded gun with me to a club
- Not carry a loaded gun with a round in the chamber and the safety apparently off
- Not carry a gun outside of a secure holster
- Not do backflips because holy shit I don't wanna break my fuckin neck

FBI agent... no jail time... :/

Stumbled on this... it’s viral advertising for one of the planet of the apes movies...

[Theodarzna]

Theo, are you reading posts I don't make again? What accusation? I asked for clarity on a topic you brought up that I was confused about. I didn't accuse you, or anyone else, of anything.

Your big bugaboo when respond to me was in essence, Why are you talking about this?

Has this even been discussed in the past like...3 years? I know House Democrats passed a few bills earlier this year but I'm not seeing anything about mentions of no-fly lists?

tilting at this no-fly list ban windmill

So, you know, your first salvo is 'Why are you even talking about this' and to imply I'm crazy, but hey, at least this is better than say just calling me a putz.

So you have been rather rude, so pardon me for not wanting to really play whatever game you are wanting to play here. Anyway, you got your backup to come cheer you on so can this interaction be over now? I think you got the praise you wanted from me and others.

[Felya]

So, you know, your first salvo is 'Why are you even talking about this' and to imply I'm crazy, but hey, at least this is better than say just calling me a putz.

Can we end it on this note?

Check this out... this is from India:



From 45 sec on word... what a boss...

[Theodarzna]

Theo you are absolutely hilarious! But for real, why are you talking about this? You need to hush and just let the "bigly push" happen, ok?

Bigly Push? Sorry, is this a Television term from some show?

[Mayhem]

They were asking for a discussion on what needs to be done. They presented an idea that they knew was flawed, as a basis for discussion.

Oh were they? I must've misread the post then. And they started with an idea that they themselves couldn't get behind. Well, what a brilliant way to start a discussion.

Let's talk about the problem, here is a solution that I believe is useless and does nothing, now you.

[Felya]

Oh were they? I must've misread the post then. And they started with an idea that they themselves couldn't get behind. Well, what a brilliant way to start a discussion.

Let's talk about the problem, here is a solution that I believe is useless and does nothing, now you.

It’s the tone, I snapped on them a couple of time, then realized it was on me both times.

To be fair... his conclusion to even his own idea, is spot on for gun rights in US... I have not heard an idea that would work, without causing “enthusiasts” to be whipped into a frenzy. Look what happens when someone asks what they mean... they treat it like a fucking insult.

As flawed as it may seem, his conclusion is pretty much what we are facing... I don’t think I’ve posted a suggestion, after we had 3 shootings in two weeks. I don’t see a point, beyond just talking shit, to coming up with solutions. No mater what it is... it will fail... they don’t care and there is too much money in scaring the shit out of them...

Edit: Saw a debate yesterday, won’t post it since it’s 2 hours long and the gun portion is relatively short. But, the enthusiasts were completely reasonable, even if wrong or I disagreed... I’d mention their topics, but it would cause people to reply off topic... but, the only subject that the right wing panel was straight up unreasonable, not just wrong, was guns... arguing that if military can have it, so can they.

In said context, where the populace has to match the artillery of government... what if we kill two birds with one stone, to draw down military weaponry, to match what the public has? If the argument relies on protection from government and the power their weapons wield... How about instead of everyone getting nukes, we burn the other end of the dichotomy and target military complex?

I’m at this level of nonsense... :/

- - - Updated - - -

Bigly Push? Sorry, is this a Television term from some show?

I’m sorry, but can you not pretend people asking you to clarify are crazy? This is crossing a lot of lines...

I now understand why there is such a big push to get a bill passed for "Well if they are on a no-fly list they shouldn't be able to own guns"

You now understand why “big push” is happening, but not sure what television show it’s from? Not television... as I already posted, it’s from Tim Pool YouTube... that’s where you got it.

Edit:

I think we need to return to the “big push” from when people were pushing for minorities to get guns, due to the shootings and boogaloos... I think it’s a brilliant idea... it even ties to the voting comparison. The more minorities own guns, the more likely we are to pass gun control. Remember how they lost their shit, when “black Panther” showed up with guns?

The only realistic gun control, will come when minority and disenfranchised groups, start rivaling gun ownership of militias and wannabe... Look at voting... more minorities voting, we get regulations on rights. Look at speech... private companies pretend to care about minorities, we get demands on limiting speech.

Liberal? Leftist? Concerned citizen fearful of being shot? Buy a gun... buy a dozen... buy a dozen for every member of your family. Don’t worry, in a short few years, your investment in those guns, will be retuned... when republicans pass gun buy back programs, as part of major gun control. You’ll get your money back and the gun control you want...

How many AK 47 can I afford? Let’s ask mr owl...

[Felya]

If that doesn't remind us all why the 2nd Amendment is so damned important I just don't know what will.

I believe he lost his government position over this... in US, that would have been a campaign video, with step dancing.

[Mayhem]

It’s the tone, I snapped on them a couple of time, then realized it was on me both times.

To be fair... his conclusion to even his own idea, is spot on for gun rights in US... I have not heard an idea that would work, without causing “enthusiasts” to be whipped into a frenzy. Look what happens when someone asks what they mean... they treat it like a fucking insult.

And I agreed with him. Pretending that to be a start to a discussion is laughable though.

As flawed as it may seem, his conclusion is pretty much what we are facing... I don’t think I’ve posted a suggestion, after we had 3 shootings in two weeks. I don’t see a point, beyond just talking shit, to coming up with solutions. No mater what it is... it will fail... they don’t care and there is too much money in scaring the shit out of them...

See and that is what Edge was talking about. Maybe sometime something will be done if the people start caring.

[PhaelixWW]

Oh were they? I must've misread the post then. And they started with an idea that they themselves couldn't get behind. Well, what a brilliant way to start a discussion.

Let's talk about the problem, here is a solution that I believe is useless and does nothing, now you.

You need to fucking learn how to read. Seriously.

Let's replay this a bit, and see how massively you're strawmanning what you claim to be my response.

Idaho could certainly use a safe-storage law. There's very, very little downside to safe-storage laws, even though they are rarely (if ever) enforced. Responsible gun owners would already be storing their firearms safely. Irresponsible gun owners would likely just ignore the law with impunity. If their own kids' safety isn't enough motivation to properly secure their firearms (as they should), then a law with no teeth is hardly going to make much of a difference. There would, however, still be some benefit felt for the the people on the borderline, for whom such a law would tip them over the edge to safety.

Safe-storage laws are more about unintentional and self-inflicted firearm deaths, though, not this.

So to be clear, since you clearly have to be spoonfed information (despite this information all being fairly clearly laid out in the above post):

• Safe-storage laws are worthwhile
• They have more of an impact on accidental or self-harm injuries, though less on assault or homicide.
• There's almost no downside

So when you say shit like this:

So you propose a law that you acknowledge probably does nothing?

...or this:

So we're even then? None of us provided anything of value.

...or this:

On their own, yeah, can't be enforced, does absolutely nothing for what it should be doing, yep I agree with your assertion, worthless.

...or this:

Anything else you want to provide or was bringing up a law you yourself think is worthless was your best attempt?

...then you're entirely, embarrassingly, wrong about what I said.

You want to know why people don't normally bother engaging with you? Because you routinely lie about what they said. And I should know, because despite the fact that you whined about people not responding to you, a quick search reveals that I've quoted and responded to you in 300 posts over the course of this thread.


Back to a more on-topic discussion:
CNN: Judge dismisses NRA's bankruptcy petition, allowing New York AG lawsuit to move forward

A federal judge has dismissed the National Rifle Association's petition for bankruptcy, saying it was filed in "bad faith" in order to avoid litigation by the New York Attorney General's Office, which has sued to dissolve the NRA for allegedly misusing charitable funds.

Tuesday's decision means the NRA will not have bankruptcy protections, which it has said is needed to protect against a "barrage of litigation" the organization is facing.

The decision from Judge Harlin Hale, of the Northern District of Texas, came after a month-long trial in which NRA attorneys and officials argued that their bankruptcy case should move forward in Texas. New York Attorney General Letitia James' office intervened in the case and asked to dismiss the petition, saying the NRA's decision to file for bankruptcy in Texas and ask to be reincorporated there was a way to "remove the NRA from regulatory oversight."

Hale agreed with James' office's argument in his ruling issued Tuesday.

"The Court finds there is cause to dismiss this bankruptcy case as not having been filed in good faith both because it was filed to gain an unfair litigation advantage and because it was filed to avoid a state regulatory scheme," Hale wrote in his decision.

Hale also declined to appoint a trustee or examiner to oversee the NRA's finances.

CNN has reached out to a spokesman for the NRA for comment.

"Today's order reaffirms that the NRA does not get to dictate if and where it will answer for its actions," James said in a statement. "The rot runs deep, which is why we will now refocus on and continue our case in New York court. No one is above the law, not even one of the most powerful lobbying organizations in the country."

Hale declined to dismiss the case with prejudice, meaning the NRA could still decide to file a bankruptcy petition in another venue, but Hale warned that if the NRA choses to file a new bankruptcy case, his court would immediately take up some of its concerns about "disclosure, transparency, secrecy, conflicts of interest of litigation counsel," among others, which could lead to the appointment of a trustee to oversee the organization's affairs. A spokesman for the NRA has not responded to CNN's request for comment on if the organization plans to file for bankruptcy elsewhere.

Brian Mittendorf, a professor of accounting at Ohio State University who has followed the NRA's finances for several years, said the ruling has implications for the various lawsuits the NRA is facing, as well as its financial future.

"In many ways it was a high-risk gambit to think that a bankruptcy court would allow them to bypass some of that litigation," Mittendorf told CNN. "The ruling just clears up that fact that that litigation is going to continue and that there isn't this remedy that entailed a third-party effectively running the organization in the meantime."

Despite the fact that I'm appreciative of the efforts of the NRA-ILA in fighting legal battles surrounding 2A, the NRA as an organization bears little to no resemblance to its original form, and it's certainly true that there's a lot of hideous rot in the upper management and their practices.

It'll be interesting to see how this all continues to unfold. I, for one, would be thrilled if the NRA was stripped of the rot and returned to its roots as a legitimate non-profit.

[Mayhem]

It's almost as if context matters. Not for you of course, because in your mind you made a really awesome post, that was totally on point and worthwhile reading.

I mean, apart from these laws doing nothing if they are not enforced because the people that as you yourself said care about safety will lock away their guns already and those that don't will ignore the law, your post was also in response to school shootings. Not about suicidal or borderline people, but about 12-year-olds getting their hands on guns and shooting classmates.

So not only did you make the point against these laws yourself, but you also acknowledged that these laws have less of an impact but probably none (or going by your own words "If their own kids' safety isn't enough motivation to properly secure their firearms (as they should), then a law with no teeth is hardly going to make much of a difference.") regarding homicide and assaults, which the topic was at the time.

Can't wait for another round of outrage, let's see what you've got. Maybe call me a liar again because I called out your bullshit attempt of building a bridge.

[Theodarzna]

Despite the fact that I'm appreciative of the efforts of the NRA-ILA in fighting legal battles surrounding 2A, the NRA as an organization bears little to no resemblance to its original form, and it's certainly true that there's a lot of hideous rot in the upper management and their practices.

It'll be interesting to see how this all continues to unfold. I, for one, would be thrilled if the NRA was stripped of the rot and returned to its roots as a legitimate non-profit.

I doubt a successor organization to protect gun rights can ever be allowed to exist without be harassed out of existence. Manipulating procedural outcomes is a heck of a thing.

[Felya]

I doubt a successor organization to protect gun rights can ever be allowed to exist without be harassed out of existence. Manipulating procedural outcomes is a heck of a thing.

Why wouldn’t it succeed, without the corruption of the current? If you remove the embezzlement, NRA would be extremely profitable. Even with it, they ran their own news channel and pretty much king makers in politics.

[Stormdash]

I doubt a successor organization to protect gun rights can ever be allowed to exist without be harassed out of existence. Manipulating procedural outcomes is a heck of a thing.

The GOA is pretty active in litigation and there's a few others I can think of, NSSF is one. There's another I'm just blanking on. What the NRA-ILA has done so well is just... take the hits, man. Even when they've done a shoddy or inconsistent job of actually advocating for gun rights they take the brunt of the criticism and demagoguery.