You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
July 21, 2018, 09:01:04 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Las Vegas  (Read 5416 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Doomblade403xxx

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #50 on: October 05, 2017, 06:36:40 AM »
Well lemme put it to you this way...if you take the murder rates of Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, New Orleans, and St. Louis from the equation in regards to firearms...the united states wouldnt even crack the top 20.

Online LisztesFerenc

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #51 on: October 05, 2017, 06:42:48 AM »
  That's a common misconception. Removing those cities drops the murder rate yes, but not by much.

Offline Vekseid

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #52 on: October 05, 2017, 06:59:41 AM »
Removing New York would raise the national murder rate. Removing LA would not significantly change it, as it pretty closely tracks the total us murder rate.

Online Regina MinxTopic starter

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #53 on: October 05, 2017, 07:13:28 AM »
The primary issue in this country is the lack of values.

Citation needed.

Online LisztesFerenc

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #54 on: October 05, 2017, 07:30:54 AM »
Each side can produce of pile of factoids that may or may not be accurate to back up their claims.

  Going by this thread so far, gun control advocates have statistical comparison with other western countries and the gun advocate have pushing made up facts about how removing cities would significantly change the US's homicide ranking and vague statements about declining values and the essence of freedom. The two sides cannot really be compared as equal and then dismissed.

  If both sides have piles of factoids, can we hear a few more from the other side?
« Last Edit: October 05, 2017, 07:34:54 AM by LisztesFerenc »

Offline DominantPoet

  • Winter Prince, Emperor Goofball
  • Suspended
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Location: Ontario
  • Gender: Male
  • Who's to say that love needs to be soft and gentle
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #55 on: October 05, 2017, 07:42:09 AM »
Well lemme put it to you this way...if you take the murder rates of Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, New Orleans, and St. Louis from the equation in regards to firearms...the united states wouldnt even crack the top 20.

Yeah, no.

Just going by per 100,000 population, and back in 2013, the highest state with gun deaths was actually Alaska. Going per city that you listed there, Illinois was 40th overall, New York was 48th, California was 42nd, and Missouri was 13th. In fact, Louisiana was the only one of the five to be overly high on the list. http://www.vpc.org/fact-sheets/state-firearm-death-rates-ranked-by-rate-2013/

Is the US the worst country in the world for gun-related deaths? No. But it's certainly quite high on the list, and taking the murder rates of five cities away would not magically make it drop such a huge amount, sorry to say.

Online Valerian

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #56 on: October 05, 2017, 07:51:53 AM »
The "good guy with a gun" theory always gets a lot of traction after a mass shooting.  This is probably largely because it's such a popular trope in movies -- the brave hero charging to the rescue, outnumbered and outgunned, who always saves the day somehow.

Unfortunately this is something that will rarely, if ever, work in real life.

This is a statement from Caleb Keeter, a musician who was at the festival.

Quote
I’ve been a proponent of the 2nd amendment my entire life.

Until the events of last night. I cannot express how wrong I was. We actually have members of our crew with CHL licenses and legal firearms on the bus.

They were useless.

We couldn’t touch them for fear police might think that we were part of the massacre and shoot us. A small group (or one man) laid waste to a city with dedicated, fearless police officers, desperately trying to help, because of access to an insane amount of fire power.

Enough is enough.

Writing my parents and the love of my life a goodbye last night and a living will because I felt like I wasn’t going to live through the night was enough for me to realize that this is completely and totally out of hand. These rounds were powerful enough that my crew guys just standing in a close proximity of a victim shot by this f---ing coward received shrapnel wounds.

We need gun control RIGHT. NOW.

My biggest regret is that I stubbornly didn’t realize it until my brothers on the road and myself were threatened by it.

We are unbelievably fortunate not to be among the number of victims killed or seriously wounded by this maniac.

Online Lustful Bride

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #57 on: October 05, 2017, 07:54:36 AM »
And now there is a rash of people calling it a hoax. This makes me so depressed.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/04/las-vegas-shooting-youtube-hoax-conspiracy-theories

Online LisztesFerenc

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #58 on: October 05, 2017, 07:57:38 AM »
And now there is a rash of people calling it a hoax. This makes me so depressed.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/04/las-vegas-shooting-youtube-hoax-conspiracy-theories

  Its never fails to amaze me how people can simultaneously think the US is some chest playing masterfully fabricating these events to manipulate the media and public, pulling on strongs from the shadows, and yet forgets to recruit a fresh set of faces for each gig.

Online Valerian

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #59 on: October 05, 2017, 08:04:00 AM »
I also don't understand why anyone would assume that this shadowy Illuminati-style group would continue to fake gun massacres when clearly, faking gun massacres isn't accomplishing anything at all.  If they have the time, people, and resources to manufacture something on this scale, then surely they must be able to come up with another sort of fake that would be more effective.

Offline DominantPoet

  • Winter Prince, Emperor Goofball
  • Suspended
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Location: Ontario
  • Gender: Male
  • Who's to say that love needs to be soft and gentle
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #60 on: October 05, 2017, 08:15:57 AM »
And now there is a rash of people calling it a hoax. This makes me so depressed.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/04/las-vegas-shooting-youtube-hoax-conspiracy-theories

This happens with every large-scale event in the US really. You can honestly look up most any instance of things similar to this, or even just events in general in the US, and somewhere out there, are people who are convinced it was a hoax, it didn't happen, etc etc. There are people who are still convinced the Earth is actually flat, after all.

Offline Retribution

  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: First star to the right straight on till morning
  • Gender: Male
  • When I'm good I'm good when I'm bad I'm better
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #61 on: October 05, 2017, 08:50:43 AM »
I believe this is as unbiased a citation as I can come up with

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

I think most would say wikipedia for the most part has no real political agenda. The article also covers all kinds of statistics from a wide range. And as I said I am not wading into  debate that is well going in the direction I anticipated  :-) If I was feeling difficult I could produced statistics spit out by the NRA or other such organizations that would be summarily dismissed by those with an opposing view. I do not feel like being difficult.

Here is the thing guys "The Congressional Research Service in 2009 estimated there were 310 million firearms in the U.S." and here is another "n Gallup's 1972 survey, 43% reported having a gun in their home, while GSS's 1973 survey resulted in 49% reporting a gun in the home; in 1993, Gallup's poll results were 51%, while GSS's 1994 poll showed 43%.[28] In 2012, Gallup's survey showed 47% of Americans reporting having a gun in their home,[29] while the GSS in 2012 reports 34%.[28]
In 1997, estimates were approximately 44 million gun owners in the United States."

Do you really think passing gun control is going to make these vanish? Great Britain and Australia are frequently cited as a proper response to mass shootings. In those places one had what was essentially abolishment of private firearm ownership. Okay I will bite firearms in private hands are abolished in the US tomorrow I do not think it will make -points up- those vanish. The genie is out of the bottle. I could see this working about as well as nuclear none proliferation has, North Korea anyone? Wanting to do something is all well and good, but lets be realistic.


Online Lustful Bride

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #62 on: October 05, 2017, 08:53:14 AM »
I also don't understand why anyone would assume that this shadowy Illuminati-style group would continue to fake gun massacres when clearly, faking gun massacres isn't accomplishing anything at all.  If they have the time, people, and resources to manufacture something on this scale, then surely they must be able to come up with another sort of fake that would be more effective.

+1 I am so amazed that people think the government, or the illuminati or whatever, are actually competent enough to do anything like this. I can tell you from 3 generations of family doing government work they are absolutely not that competent.

Online Valerian

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #63 on: October 05, 2017, 09:13:26 AM »
+1 I am so amazed that people think the government, or the illuminati or whatever, are actually competent enough to do anything like this. I can tell you from 3 generations of family doing government work they are absolutely not that competent.

I've always found this study to be very interesting, on the estimated numbers of people required to make a conspiracy theory happen, and the resulting likelihood that one of those people will give the whole game away.

Quote
Using secrecy as a key criterion of success for a potential conspiracy, [David Robert] Grimes applied his model to four alleged plots, estimating the maximum number of people required to be in on the intrigue, and how long it would take for them to unravel.

Through his equations, Grimes calculated that hoax moon landings (410,000 people) would have been revealed in three years eight months, climate change fraud (405,000 people) in three years and nine months, a coverup of unsafe vaccinations (22,000) in three years and two months and a suppressed cancer cure (714,000 people) in three years and three months.

“My results suggest that any conspiracy with over a few hundred people rapidly collapses, and big science conspiracies would not be sustainable,” he said.

And my brother worked for the government in various capacities for many years.  You're quite right that most government agencies lack the basic organization to allow anything remotely like a conspiracy to work for more than ten minutes.  :P

Do you really think passing gun control is going to make these vanish? Great Britain and Australia are frequently cited as a proper response to mass shootings. In those places one had what was essentially abolishment of private firearm ownership. Okay I will bite firearms in private hands are abolished in the US tomorrow I do not think it will make -points up- those vanish. The genie is out of the bottle. I could see this working about as well as nuclear none proliferation has, North Korea anyone? Wanting to do something is all well and good, but lets be realistic.


I don't think anyone imagines that gun control laws will make anything vanish.  But how is doing nothing the answer?  If there's any chance that stricter background checks, to name the single most popular option*, could reduce the numbers of gun deaths in this country, don't you want to take that chance?


*Citation here -- polls indicate that about 90% of the U.S. population supports stricter enforcement of background checks.

Offline DominantPoet

  • Winter Prince, Emperor Goofball
  • Suspended
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Location: Ontario
  • Gender: Male
  • Who's to say that love needs to be soft and gentle
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #64 on: October 05, 2017, 09:26:17 AM »
I believe this is as unbiased a citation as I can come up with

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

I think most would say wikipedia for the most part has no real political agenda. The article also covers all kinds of statistics from a wide range. And as I said I am not wading into  debate that is well going in the direction I anticipated  :-) If I was feeling difficult I could produced statistics spit out by the NRA or other such organizations that would be summarily dismissed by those with an opposing view. I do not feel like being difficult.

Here is the thing guys "The Congressional Research Service in 2009 estimated there were 310 million firearms in the U.S." and here is another "n Gallup's 1972 survey, 43% reported having a gun in their home, while GSS's 1973 survey resulted in 49% reporting a gun in the home; in 1993, Gallup's poll results were 51%, while GSS's 1994 poll showed 43%.[28] In 2012, Gallup's survey showed 47% of Americans reporting having a gun in their home,[29] while the GSS in 2012 reports 34%.[28]
In 1997, estimates were approximately 44 million gun owners in the United States."

Do you really think passing gun control is going to make these vanish? Great Britain and Australia are frequently cited as a proper response to mass shootings. In those places one had what was essentially abolishment of private firearm ownership. Okay I will bite firearms in private hands are abolished in the US tomorrow I do not think it will make -points up- those vanish. The genie is out of the bottle. I could see this working about as well as nuclear none proliferation has, North Korea anyone? Wanting to do something is all well and good, but lets be realistic.

Gun control in general is not about getting it out of the hands of those who already have them. It's a constitutional right, and we do live in a world where people feel safer if they can protect themselves from potential law breaking citizens. Gun control generally is about restricting the rather free market that the US has for not only guns, but ammo in general as well. Putting stricter regulations on the acquiring of said guns and ammo. Perhaps reducing the rather large list of events where guns are sold or traded and what not as well.

http://gunshows-usa.com/

That's just for the next two weeks.

Legally, in many states, it's not that difficult to get a gun. Just for example, in Canada, were I to want to purchase a gun, I first have to take a safety course including a test to acquire an application form for a licence, fill that out, mail it to the government, wait a few weeks, and get my licence. And even then, what I can buy is MUCH smaller than what you could typically buy in most US states at any given gun store, or at said gun shows and the like.

Furthermore, it's quite literally illegal to carry a handgun unless we can prove it's required for our profession. Never mind any other guns. Not to mention it costs roughly 200 dollars for us to take the class and the license fee and the like, before we can even purchase any guns, more so if we want to get a restricted license which lets us buy some restricted weaponry, which is still highly regulated as well.

That's not to say illegal firearms don't exist in the country, of course they do. That's the nature of law breakers - to break laws. To do things that they are told they cannot or should not do, after all. But I certainly think the US in general could do with a whole hell of a lot of tightening up on regulating gun sales in general. And typically, in my experience, the main reason people are opposed to it isn't so much they think their guns will be taken away - it's just more so they don't want the inconvenience of having to go through additional steps or paying more to protect themselves.


Offline Retribution

  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: First star to the right straight on till morning
  • Gender: Male
  • When I'm good I'm good when I'm bad I'm better
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #65 on: October 05, 2017, 10:05:25 AM »
Alright I have gotten sucked into debate despite not wanting to be lol.

Look at this point I have no problem with more gun control. I was an adult during the much hyped assault weapon ban and it did not change my life. At times the silliness gets to me: I once won a gun in a raffle and had to hang onto my ticket while the waiting period expired, last year when I bought new firearm I showed up after waiting period to pick it up 15 minutes early and since it is an electronic system I could not pick it up legally 15 minutes early. Alright so I went and bought a cause of ammo during those 15 minutes, but whatever. Minor inconveniences but they vex me as I do not see it doing anything other than irritating me. And color me skeptical, but I doubt mass shooters are buying raffle tickets. To my Canadian friend I cancelled a hunting trip to Canada that would have brought some tourist bucks because well the bureaucracy was starting to make my head hurt and I swear I only planned on being a threat to ducks.

At anyrate! I keep mentioning compromise so here I will offer up what I would like to see. It will never happen, but I would like to see it. Then I will sign out of this debate as it gets us no place but angry.

-Do away with all state gun laws and replace them with one federal umbrella. It is just plain confusing and inefficient. And when one travels a lot with firearms like I do I have found myself in violation of the law with crossing of a state line. For the control crowd what you get is a removal of loop holes and a standardization that would possibly tighten things up.

-Create a nation wide data base. In that include mental and criminal records nation wide. No I would oppose a record of what firearms each person has as I think that is ripe for abuse. But if we had such a functioning data base scans could be made instantly determining who could legally purchase a firearm. Hell, I have a banking app so why could this not be linked to an app on like a phone? Private gun sales as well as gun shows would then have the ability to do a check and submit the appropriate data electronically from any place.

-Drastic improvements to mental health care as well as a health care system that funds such things. Not gun control per say, but I do not believe you do something like this unless you are a sick person. Track such matters in the above listed system so that they can be monitored for firearms purchases. Int he case of Sandyhook I am not sure how I feel...was a family member using another family member's firearms. Penalizing someone for having a mentally disabled family member makes me leery.

-Licensing and classes. While such classes are often just plain silly I have sat through hunter safety four times and taught it twice. I can do it again. But I often run into people that have not been around firearms and such ignorance leads to carelessness as well as nervousness that all leads to danger. I am a  father of two and both my kids think nothing about firearms. They were raised around them and know how to respect them, there is no mystery there. Thus no curiosity and curiosity can indeed kill.

-When a felon commits a crime with a gun, tries to obtain a gun, uses a gun in a crime. Pardon my French, but throw the fucking book at them and lock them up and throw away the key. During the Obama administration the President touted felons stopped from buying guns. Okay if you google Justice Department statistics you will find that none of them were thrown in jail for the attempt. My reaction to this is WTF?

And last this is not gun control per say, but the horse I was trying to ride when I chimed in here. If you watch the news wire today there are rumblings that this POS planned on escaping and possibly did not act alone. That he may have been radicalized in some form or another. I do not know what it is in our modern society that is causing this in many shapes and forms, but we sure need to do some studies and figure out what it is and take steps. If you look at the link I cited you will find statistically mass shootings make up a small number of deaths and have actually decreased in some cases. That does not matter they are still horrendous that make an impact on us not unlike 911. Then the conspiracy theorists all chime in  and we all do a lot of thinking not unlike what I have done. We need to pursue all avenues including how to prevent people from going down this road. Or on a larger scale address the inner city poverty and hopelessness that breeds gun crime.

But I think a lot just plain starts with being less angry with each other and accepting that we all have different life styles and views and just because someone does not agree with me that does not per say make them evil. Treat one another well it costs nada and goes a long way.

Have a great day everyone I am out.

~R~

Offline Oniya

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #66 on: October 05, 2017, 12:01:14 PM »
Retribution, if someone could get the list that you proposed through Congress, I would call them a fucking hero.  And this is from one of those (self-declared) crazy-ass liberals.

Offline Retribution

  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: First star to the right straight on till morning
  • Gender: Male
  • When I'm good I'm good when I'm bad I'm better
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #67 on: October 05, 2017, 12:05:27 PM »
LoL see there is hope! I tend conservative as you can guess. But with the above list both sides would reject it. Left would say not enough, right would say too much and the band plays on.

Offline Oniya

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #68 on: October 05, 2017, 12:19:26 PM »
LoL see there is hope! I tend conservative as you can guess. But with the above list both sides would reject it. Left would say not enough, right would say too much and the band plays on.

I'm pretty sure you and I have had this conversation specifically.  :-) 

I look at it this way:  we constantly hear the argument that 'cars are more dangerous than guns and we don't ban those'.  So, treat guns like cars.  For any given car, law enforcement, and I think car dealers can plug in the VIN and know who has owned it (legally) since the time it rolled off the assembly line.  You can find out if it's been in an accident.  You have to have a license to buy one, and take regular assessments to keep that license.  If you have too many incidents with your car, they can take away your license.  If you have certain medical conditions, your doctor can flag that you are unable to drive (my vision isn't up to snuff, I've had friends with seizure disorders, and a co-worker of Mr. Oniya's got a temporary restriction due to a concussion).

As far as I can see, all those things are covered by your list.

Offline Retribution

  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: First star to the right straight on till morning
  • Gender: Male
  • When I'm good I'm good when I'm bad I'm better
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #69 on: October 05, 2017, 12:32:02 PM »
Should have been I lean right. And if you look at my list above you will find I see compiling of such lists an area that could be abused. Storm trooper knocking on the door and saying you have this, this, and this. Such makes me nervous.

So I would like an initial tracking via serial. But then that info goes someplace inaccesible other than via court order.

But in the event of a crime such an order is issued and the initial sale offers a starting point. But do not crusify the buyer because his firearm was stollen or the like. That is not their fault.

Online LisztesFerenc

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #70 on: October 05, 2017, 12:40:28 PM »
LoL see there is hope! I tend conservative as you can guess. But with the above list both sides would reject it. Left would say not enough, right would say too much and the band plays on.

  I think overall the left would accept that list. Many would probably want more yes, but when an actual bill is before them and not just theoretical stuff, I think they'd be more than willing to make compromises. They could always try adding more later, and if subsequent years had a drop in gun violence, they have some good talking points to make that case.

Offline Retribution

  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: First star to the right straight on till morning
  • Gender: Male
  • When I'm good I'm good when I'm bad I'm better
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #71 on: October 05, 2017, 01:15:48 PM »
  I think overall the left would accept that list. Many would probably want more yes, but when an actual bill is before them and not just theoretical stuff, I think they'd be more than willing to make compromises. They could always try adding more later, and if subsequent years had a drop in gun violence, they have some good talking points to make that case.

See that is the rub for me as a gun owner. Though until I became disillusioned and left I was a voting member of the NRA (means had been a member long enough that I had rights to vote on policy). But for years leading up to the Brady Bill the stance was give them an inch and they will take a mile. If the gun owning public gives in on one thing the gun control crowd will use it as just the first step in restrictions, bans, and ultimately confiscation. I simply did not believe this.

But then the Brady billed passed as well as the assault weapons ban. I watched the news on TV and the ink from Clinton signing was not even dry and Mrs. Brady was there saying "now we can really go after guns." I am paraphrasing of course. My reaction was holy shit the NRA was right it is a conspiracy. So yeah, the creep is what scares me about gun laws.

Online LisztesFerenc

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #72 on: October 05, 2017, 01:27:09 PM »
See that is the rub for me as a gun owner. Though until I became disillusioned and left I was a voting member of the NRA (means had been a member long enough that I had rights to vote on policy). But for years leading up to the Brady Bill the stance was give them an inch and they will take a mile. If the gun owning public gives in on one thing the gun control crowd will use it as just the first step in restrictions, bans, and ultimately confiscation. I simply did not believe this.

But then the Brady billed passed as well as the assault weapons ban. I watched the news on TV and the ink from Clinton signing was not even dry and Mrs. Brady was there saying "now we can really go after guns." I am paraphrasing of course. My reaction was holy shit the NRA was right it is a conspiracy. So yeah, the creep is what scares me about gun laws.

  I know you probably don't mean it that way, but "creep" is a bit disingenuous here. You're not going to wake up one day and find that the gun control bill you supported suddenly gives the government authority to take your guns or something. It will be a new bill, with new debates and new votes, and if the second bill goes too far in your mind, you can oppose that one and keep the first one you supported.

Online Valerian

Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #73 on: October 05, 2017, 01:29:35 PM »
I agree with your list, Retribution, and I think those guidelines would do a lot to help this country. 

But I have one fundamental disagreement with the approach most people are taking to those ideas.  Most people are still throwing up their hands and saying, "But if you expect anything to change, you're dreaming!  Never happen in a million years!"  And that is unbelievably frustrating.

Of course this entire list won't happen quickly or all at once.  Any change will come bit by painful bit, but here's the thing: more people have to WANT change enough to MAKE it happen.  It doesn't matter that the previously mentioned 90% of the country agrees on these things if less than half the country is actually fighting for these things, and right now it feels like a great deal less than half.

If every U.S. citizen reading this right now contacted their elected officials and talked to them about these ideas, it would make a difference.  If each of us also urged a friend or relative to call, we'd be getting somewhere.  Unfortunately, the GOP is counting on voter apathy, and they're right to do so.  In another few days or weeks, the furor about Las Vegas will die down and we'll be back to business as usual until the next major mass shooting.  The smaller ones don't even register anymore.



See that is the rub for me as a gun owner. Though until I became disillusioned and left I was a voting member of the NRA (means had been a member long enough that I had rights to vote on policy). But for years leading up to the Brady Bill the stance was give them an inch and they will take a mile. If the gun owning public gives in on one thing the gun control crowd will use it as just the first step in restrictions, bans, and ultimately confiscation. I simply did not believe this.

But then the Brady billed passed as well as the assault weapons ban. I watched the news on TV and the ink from Clinton signing was not even dry and Mrs. Brady was there saying "now we can really go after guns." I am paraphrasing of course. My reaction was holy shit the NRA was right it is a conspiracy. So yeah, the creep is what scares me about gun laws.

Considering that the Brady Bill passed a quarter of a century ago and as yet almost exactly nothing more has changed except to make gun restrictions LESS strict -- heck, the Brady Bill itself isn't even uniformly enforced -- I suspect it's all right to stop worrying about that now.  Both sides will never be happy, of course, but people in this country are forgetting that there's still a middle path.  We just have to find it.

Right now half of the guns in the entire country are owned by about 3% of the population.  That 3% should not have the sole say in the gun debate and right now it seems like they do.

Offline Retribution

  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: First star to the right straight on till morning
  • Gender: Male
  • When I'm good I'm good when I'm bad I'm better
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Las Vegas
« Reply #74 on: October 05, 2017, 01:55:37 PM »
LoL I am probably one of that 3%. My dear, liberal, wife of 26 years blinks when she sees inventories of the numbers of firearms criminals have as she thinks hell Ret has a lot more than that. Then she has a moment of "oh my god I am part of the gun culture" then her and I have a good laugh. Almost as funny as when she is trying to pin me and my adult son down on how many are around the house and each of us keeps blaming the other until she gives up. In all seriousness though we have fun with it as a family and most realize I am more anal about proper handling of firearms than the nut jobs people always seem to be pointing a camera at.

But Valerian (great name BTW I love Kushiel's Dart) and LisztesFernec here is the thing for me. If the system worked as it is supposed to what you say would be totally true. If more laws that I oppose were proposed in the democratic process I could take a stance, make a difference. Thing is in reality the system does not work that way. I have been a government investigator for 30 years and by all accounts I am very good at what I do. But I am daily saddled with doing things I simply do not agree with. The system is horribly broken. I think if any of us look at the political process we see the same thing, a broken system that no one has any faith in. Hell, what I propose probably could not be pulled off the government fucks up everything it touches.

Should we do nothing? No we need to try, but I just have such a fear when we start with something I consider one of my fundamental rights. Mrs. Brady really scared me that night I watched her 30 years ago. She chose entirely the wrong words to reassure someone like me. If we are going to experiment I like it to start with mental health, getting past the anger in society, things like that. Not something I consider essential to my way of life. Show me that can be done without being screwed up then I might feel a bit less nervous about telling me essentially Retribution you and your way of life are now illegal.

I hope that makes some sense.