US Senate rejects amendment to expand gun-sale checks

The will of the people is expanded background checks, taking guns away from the mentally ill and a federal gun registry.

But as today's poll suggests, they are not that willful. This is why it was low-risk to vote against it.
 
[quote name='Clak']That second poll was also effected by the campaigning of groups like the NRA. Of course that poll shows some people being happy it failed, they're the ones that the negative campaigning worked on.[/QUOTE]

Funny how Campaigning only works one way.

People don't like gun laws (The NRA is whispering in their ear, and they don't know whats good for them, those idiots.)

People do like gun laws (It is the will of the People!).......not fear, or a traumatic event, or anti gun rhetoric affecting their opinion. That would be improbable if not impossible! ;)

We know from history, fear driven legislation is the best kind!!
 
[quote name='mykevermin']post-hoc justification, thy name is Spokker.

I would like to know today so I can back it up with a poll finding in three weeks.[/QUOTE]

....I think it has been known for a while now that gun legislation is on the bottom of most Americans "to do" list. No tea leaves required.
 
I don't believing that campaigning can take a person that believes X and makes them believe Y. What it can do is inflame passions for an issue in people who already believe in that issue. The gun lobby is simply more organized and passionate, even if they are outnumbered.

I think most people want to legalize marijuana already but it will take some time for Congress to even think about acting.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='mrsilkunderwear']Yeah and a gun sale check could prevented this. :roll:[/QUOTE]
You know what else wouldn't have prevented this? Twinkies. Think about it...
 
Marketing alcohol or tobacco to kids? Hell no you better not
Marketing guns to kids? Sure, no problem

Gun rights... yeah! :roll:
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']Marketing alcohol or tobacco to kids? Hell no you better not
Marketing guns to kids? Sure, no problem

Gun rights... yeah! :roll:[/QUOTE]

LOL you completely missed the point.
 
[quote name='mrsilkunderwear']LOL you completely missed the point.[/QUOTE]

I'm making my own observation of the situation completely unrelated to any point or discussion you're involved in (hence the reason I didn't quote anyone in my post). My point was that a gun that looks like this:
fly_thumb.php
is blatantly being marketed at children which would (and should) be appalling if it had involved marketing alcohol or tobacco to children. Somehow we have no problem with marketing guns to children? That's not even addressing the issue of making guns readily accessible to children in the first place.

Not everything is about you, you're not worth it.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']I'm making my own observation of the situation completely unrelated to any point or discussion you're involved in (hence the reason I didn't quote anyone in my post). My point was that a gun that looks like this:
fly_thumb.php
is blatantly being marketed at children which would (and should) be appalling if it had involved marketing alcohol or tobacco to children. Somehow we have no problem with marketing guns to children? That's not even addressing the issue of making guns readily accessible to children in the first place.

Not everything is about you, you're not worth it.[/QUOTE]

Huh? This is not about any other discussion. Get your ignorant attitude out of this forum if you can't handle a little comment like that.

What you missed completely is that a gun is a tool vs alcohol or tobacco which are drugs. A rifle like that would teach a kid on how to be a responsible gun user under proper supervision. Unfortunately in this case that key ingredient was missing which resulted in a tragedy. With your logic we should stop marketing video games with adult themes because they could lead to other tragedies.
 
[quote name='mrsilkunderwear']Huh? This is not about any other discussion. Get your ignorant attitude out of this forum if you can't handle a little comment like that.

What you missed completely is that a gun is a tool vs alcohol or tobacco which are drugs. A rifle like that would teach a kid on how to be a responsible gun user under proper supervision. Unfortunately in this case that key ingredient was missing which resulted in a tragedy. With your logic we should stop marketing video games with adult themes because they could lead to other tragedies.[/QUOTE]

You're right. It is a tool, usually a tool for killing something or someone. A perfect item for a 5 year old.

And don't kids normally get B-B guns to be "responsible" gun owners?
 
[quote name='4thHorseman']You're right. It is a tool, usually a tool for killing something or someone. A perfect item for a 5 year old.

And don't kids normally get B-B guns to be "responsible" gun owners?[/QUOTE]

It's like a Rob Zombie Twilight Zone version of A Christmas Story...except that it happened IRL.

In the current political climate, a "reasonable" legislative act would be to require trigger locks in households with children 12 and under, but I'm a fucking commie, so what the fuck do I know. It's still light years ahead of some of the malcontents here that just throw their arms up and say "Shit Happens, but we don't need stricter gun regulations!" They can all get fucked as far as I'm concerned. Shit like this is 99.99999% PREVENTABLE.
 
[quote name='dohdough']They can all get fucked as far as I'm concerned. Shit like this is 99.99999% PREVENTABLE.[/QUOTE]

So are all the other top ways that children die. The number 1 "accidental" cause of death in children is car accidents, which I don't believe are just accidents. Guns don't even break into the top 5 unintentional causes of death for children, all 5 of which are all 99.99% preventable. If you really want to protect kids, make safe driving mainstream. They want to talk about unity and all kinds of bullshit after Sandy Hook, but there is no such thing as unity on the freeway. It's an inherently unsafe activity that is made even more unsafe by the vast majority of people who do not stop on red lights/stop signs, speed and drive distracted. Then a smaller minority harass other drivers who do make full-stops on red, obey the speed limit and allow others to merge.

Also, trigger locks, gun safes and other crap like that defeat the purpose of owning a gun in the first place. If you buy into that nonsense, it won't be there and ready when you really need it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='mrsilkunderwear']Huh? This is not about any other discussion. Get your ignorant attitude out of this forum if you can't handle a little comment like that.

What you missed completely is that a gun is a tool vs alcohol or tobacco which are drugs. A rifle like that would teach a kid on how to be a responsible gun user under proper supervision. Unfortunately in this case that key ingredient was missing which resulted in a tragedy. With your logic we should stop marketing video games with adult themes because they could lead to other tragedies.[/QUOTE]

Yeah because a five year old can distinguish between a toy and a tool.

By your logic we need to start making toy guns more realistic.
 
[quote name='mrsilkunderwear']
A rifle like that would teach a kid on how to be a responsible gun user under proper supervision.[/QUOTE]
And considering just how uncommon this incident is, and how common the practice of introducing guns to children at an early age is in these areas, you would think it would be happening every day. It doesn't. Of all the ways children unintentionally kill themselves or others, this incident is being treated differently because it involves a gun.

This is how it usually goes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVRNkgA75LE

How horrifying!
 
Guns aren't tools, they're weapons you jack ass. Maybe you were thinking of knives, which serve both purposes depending on what you're actually doing with them.
 
[quote name='Spokker']And considering just how uncommon this incident is, and how common the practice of introducing guns to children at an early age is in these areas, you would think it would be happening every day. It doesn't. Of all the ways children unintentionally kill themselves or others, this incident is being treated differently because it involves a gun.

This is how it usually goes.

How horrifying![/QUOTE]

HOLY fuck, did you even watch the goddamn video? What the hell do you think that kid would be doing if he wasn't supervised? Do you think he had any idea about how to be responsible with a gun? Hell, I don't even think he was looking down range during at least HALF of it.

With your "logic," we might as well be able to have 4 year olds sign lifetime employment contracts for a Jolly Rancher as their compensation.
 
Of course he was supervised! That's what good parents do! Fathers and sons shooting and bonding together should not end because other parents fucked up.
 
[quote name='Spokker']Of course he was supervised! That's what good parents do! Fathers and sons shooting and bonding together should not end because other parents fucked up.[/QUOTE]
WOW. I didn't realize having trigger locks will end the ability of parents bonding with their kids through firearms because one parent somewhere, fucked it up once.

Consider my mind
3721968_o.gif
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback']Yeah because a five year old can distinguish between a toy and a tool.

By your logic we need to start making toy guns more realistic.[/QUOTE]

Yeah looks like you missed the point about proper supervision. Good one.
 
Now son, your mama said we need some bonding time, so we're gonna go out and shoot somethin'.

I'm sorry, that scenario just seems hilarious. :rofl:
 
[quote name='Clak']Now son, your mama said we need some bonding time, so we're gonna go out and shoot somethin'.

I'm sorry, that scenario just seems hilarious. :rofl:[/QUOTE]

Uhhhh, that's actually fairly common in a lot of rural regions of this country. I don't hunt, but I know a ton of people who do as their main hobby. Sharing it with their children is their right, and you finding it hilarious seems to go against your "tolerant" liberal world view...:roll:
 
[quote name='mrsilkunderwear']Yeah looks like you missed the point about proper supervision. Good one.[/QUOTE]

Nope I didn't miss that part. I don't buy the logic that simply providing proper supervision is going to deter a child from not thinking what they have in their hand is a toy. Kids that age have far too active of imaginations and are not grounded enough in logic and reason to understand the consequences of what their actions could be. No kid is going to fully comprehend that a gun is an instrument of destruction and its ultimate purpose is to eliminate what it is targeting. They are going to laugh and smile at the noise it makes and the hole in the target that it causes.


It boggles the mind that we let children shoot guns, but we ban Lawn Darts because they kill each other with them. A gun is cool, but a metal dart we ban.
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback']Nope I didn't miss that part. I don't buy the logic that simply providing proper supervision is going to deter a child from not thinking what they have in their hand is a toy. Kids that age have far too active of imaginations and are not grounded enough in logic and reason to understand the consequences of what their actions could be. No kid is going to fully comprehend that a gun is an instrument of destruction and its ultimate purpose is to eliminate what it is targeting. They are going to laugh and smile at the noise it makes and the hole in the target that it causes.


It boggles the mind that we let children shoot guns, but we ban Lawn Darts because they kill each other with them. A gun is cool, but a metal dart we ban.[/QUOTE]

Well we differ in that opinion. I can see some children believing that but a very small number. My father was a policeman and took me to shoot a gun when I was 7 years old, I never took it for a toy. Ever since that moment I have not touched a gun until I was teenager.

Please keep in mind that a gun is not a tool of destruction, it is just a tool. A purpose is set by the wielder.

Did you also know that people in Switzerland love guns and parents frequently go target shooting with children.
 
[quote name='mrsilkunderwear']Well we differ in that opinion. I can see some children believing that but a very small number. My father was a policeman and took me to shoot a gun when I was 7 years old, I never took it for a toy. Ever since that moment I have not touched a gun until I was teenager.

Please keep in mind that a gun is not a tool of destruction, it is just a tool. A purpose is set by the wielder.

Did you also know that people in Switzerland love guns and parents frequently go target shooting with children.[/QUOTE]

Eh, I think you're stretching a bit, the primary purpose of a gun is destruction, which is fine, but pretending it's not is silly.
 
[quote name='soulvengeance']Eh, I think you're stretching a bit, the primary purpose of a gun is destruction, which is fine, but pretending it's not is silly.[/QUOTE]

Actually I think the primary purpose of the gun is defense or possibly hunting. The only ones who use it for destruction would be the government and criminals. Background checks would not resolve this issue.
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback']A gun is cool, but a metal dart we ban.[/QUOTE]

Wham-o should legally classify it as an aerial weapon and then appeal on second amendment grounds.
 
[quote name='mrsilkunderwear']Actually I think the primary purpose of the gun is defense or possibly hunting. The only ones who use it for destruction would be the government and criminals. Background checks would not resolve this issue.[/QUOTE]

It still involves killing stuff, no? I'm not really arguing about the background checks, but in general, the sole purpose of the gun is to kill, even target shooting is really just practice for the real thing.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Wham-o should legally classify it as an aerial weapon and then appeal on second amendment grounds.[/QUOTE]

full_of_win.jpg
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback']
It boggles the mind that we let children shoot guns, but we ban Lawn Darts because they kill each other with them. A gun is cool, but a metal dart we ban.[/QUOTE]

Right back to where we started which is that we, as a society, protect children from everything that might hurt them or they aren't intelligent enough to handle but guns. You have to be 16 to drive a car or 15 with a parent in the car but there's no age limit on guns? Its staggeringly backward.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']Right back to where we started which is that we, as a society, protect children from everything that might hurt them or they aren't intelligent enough to handle but guns. You have to be 16 to drive a car or 15 with a parent in the car but there's no age limit on guns? Its staggeringly backward.[/QUOTE]

If they're old enough to kill someone, they're old enough to drink, smoke, work in coal mines and inside heavy industrial equipment.

Didn't you hear that a kid will learn more from cleaning up a school than actually getting an education in it?
 
Don't forget the outrage over how dangerous bucky balls were to kids. They're dangerous because kids might swallow them, but hey, handing a 5 year old a rifle and teaching them to shoot it is A-OK.
 
[quote name='Clak']Don't forget the outrage over how dangerous bucky balls were to kids. They're dangerous because kids might swallow them, but hey, handing a 5 year old a rifle and teaching them to shoot it is A-OK.[/QUOTE]

I think 5 seems a bit young myself, but, unlike Melissa on MSNBC says, kids do not belong to us all. What laws are you going to enact that are actually going to stop a parent who feels that their child is ready and responsible enough to handle a firearm? Predator spy drones circling every neighborhood? This tragedy was the result of an adult's negligence, not the gov't refusal to pass a law for every single safety contingency that might exist.
 
[quote name='egofed']I think 5 seems a bit young myself, but, unlike Melissa on MSNBC says, kids do not belong to us all. What laws are you going to enact that are actually going to stop a parent who feels that their child is ready and responsible enough to handle a firearm? Predator spy drones circling every neighborhood? This tragedy was the result of an adult's negligence, not the gov't refusal to pass a law for every single safety contingency that might exist.[/QUOTE]
Substitute cars for guns in your argument and tell me why it is different, unless you think we should repeal minimum driving ages as well...
 
Did you know that it's perfectly legal for an underage child to operate a motor vehicle?

Weird, eh?

More weird how, at one moment, "right-wingers" are stupid for making bad comparisons between (guns, health insurance, etc.) to cars... meanwhile, it's all "substitute cars there!" It's just like when Obama tried to liken health insurance to automotive insurance. None of the usual crowd called him out on that.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']Substitute cars for guns in your argument and tell me why it is different, unless you think we should repeal minimum driving ages as well...[/QUOTE]


I totally agree with Bob, but also want to add that driving down a busy highway and learning responsible firearms handling out in the middle of the woods or in a legitimate shooting range are very different indeed also. Most urban areas have laws about discharging firearms without reason in public. Did you really think that I meant people should take their five year old to the mall or out in the front yard and let him start practicing?:roll: I feel like Dark Helmet in Spaceballs, "What's with you man? Come on!";)
 
[quote name='egofed']What laws are you going to enact that are actually going to stop a parent who feels that their child is ready and responsible enough to handle a firearm?[/QUOTE]

I totally agree. Why even have any laws at all if select people are going to deliberately not follow them, right?

How many fires per year do arson laws stop, man?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I totally agree. Why even have any laws at all if select people are going to deliberately not follow them, right?

How many fires per year do arson laws stop, man?[/QUOTE]

I think it is perfectly reasonable to think certain laws aren't there as preventative measures, but are there to give the government the ability to bring justice.

No arson law means no charges filed, means the arsonist gets away and starts another fire.

No 7-10 bullet maximum law means the police can't charge that mass murderer who just killed 20 people for loading more than seven bullets. Darn let's hope those murder charges stick. It doesnt prevent the guy from doing anything if he has the motivation. It only prevents law abiding citizens who don't want to be charged from loading seven bullets, and whether or not it even will be effective in doing that is debatable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Purple Flames']Just look at the way this guy stood up to government tyranny:

http://freakoutnation.com/2013/05/0...-his-car-were-books-about-militias-terrorism/[/QUOTE]

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/05/middlefield_police_still_wonde.html
"He was a scumbag, and a terrorist, and he's dead," Stanko said at a news conference on Friday.
Click to expand...

I wonder if our usual suspects will come out and talk about how society is to blame and how we shouldn't just call this individual defective.
 
Anyone see Marc Maron on Real Time last night night? When they were taking about the company selling rifles for kids he made a comment of something like "Whose tyranny are they fighting against, their parents?". I actually thought that was rather funny considering comments from the NRA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top