NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Duck and cover
User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3067
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby ElectricMonk » Tue Apr 12, 2016 11:10 am

Samatha Bee demonstrated that the NRA has set up the perfect test case for control:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usgOsNhkKVE
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10177
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Apr 12, 2016 9:17 pm

Total obfuscation. Guns would be absent from the American scene if it were up to common sense or democratic vote. BUT ITS NOT. Gun ownership has been held to be a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. That is the core/operant condition. Make for comedy, but not analysis, to confuse this foundational element with other non-constitutional issues. In this case, the FREEEEEEEEDOM for private individuals to sell costumes however they wish. Another constitutional issue totally ignored by the comedy.

Turn your mind off..... it is funny. Turn your mind back on...... we still have guns and gun stupidity to deal with. We need a new 5-4 supreme court that can read the first 10 words of the Second Amendment. Why are those words there?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19447
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Tue Apr 12, 2016 9:52 pm

That's the 2A say before the first comma?
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10177
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Apr 12, 2016 11:18 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:That's the 2A say before the first comma?

A good learning moment: quite appropriate to say: Make google your friend.

The reference is not arcane, and mostly like one you already know and are just continuing your .......... manner.

You know, when you call yourself a troller for idiots, you might listen to yourself.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19447
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:00 am

You really need to stop biting those hemorrhoids. My point, for the reading challenged, was that the 2A was meant for an age when the locals had to get together to defend themselves from Indians, British, pirates and the like. It's not meant for this age. If we let the gun huggers cherry pick the 2A it's our fault for not calling them out on that. The only use they have for the Constitution is to justify owning their toys even if it means children have to die. Call them on their hypocrisy and they stop waving the Constitution around.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Paul Anthony
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2783
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:23 pm
Custom Title: The other god
Location: The desert
Contact:

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby Paul Anthony » Sat Jun 18, 2016 6:47 am

The "well-regulated state militias" morphed into the National Guard, which was under the control of state Governors until the Iraq war. Now, the National Guard has become a federal reserve under the command of the President.

The militias were considered a safeguard against the potential of an oppressive federal government. Well, that happened and we don't have militias anymore,
People who say ALWAYS and NEVER are usually wrong, part of the time.
Science answers questions, Philosophy questions answers.
Make sense, not war.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19447
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Jun 18, 2016 9:06 am

Paul Anthony wrote:The "well-regulated state militias" morphed into the National Guard, which was under the control of state Governors until the Iraq war. Now, the National Guard has become a federal reserve under the command of the President.

The militias were considered a safeguard against the potential of an oppressive federal government. Well, that happened and we don't have militias anymore,

Oh, crap. The militias were intended to be a cheap substitute for a standing army. In the days when animal power or wind was the only way to get around there wasn't time to deploy a centralized military force to react to Indian raids or pirate attacks. So the locals were supposed to dutifully form up and drill regularly. This meant they had to tote their long guns through town at times, and the rule was put in place so they could get to the drills without running into local ordinances regarding firearms in the villages.

This system worked so well that Washington was burned by British forces in 1814 without any significant resistance. The same thing would happen today if we depended on urban cowboys with their toys. The NRA promotes this lie at the demand of the gun industry.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Paul Anthony
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2783
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:23 pm
Custom Title: The other god
Location: The desert
Contact:

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby Paul Anthony » Sat Jun 18, 2016 6:33 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
Oh, crap. The militias were intended to be a cheap substitute for a standing army. In the days when animal power or wind was the only way to get around there wasn't time to deploy a centralized military force to react to Indian raids or pirate attacks. So the locals were supposed to dutifully form up and drill regularly. This meant they had to tote their long guns through town at times, and the rule was put in place so they could get to the drills without running into local ordinances regarding firearms in the villages.



No. There are plenty of historic letters between the founders that expressed their fear of a standing army. They were fearful of a strong central government like the one they were fighting to escape, and more fearful of a strong central government with a strong standing army. They also realized that the central government's army might not be available to help them locally - or could be used against them. That's why the National Guard created, but it has been usurped by the federal government because a volunteer army can't fight all the wars we've gotten into. It was either re-institute the draft (which would have met with a lot of resistance after Viet Nam) or just "draft" all the National Guard troops who had already enlisted. To my knowledge, Texas is the only state that still has a state militia. It's called the Texas Rangers, and it answers only to the Governor.

Now, I see a potential problem: We still have laws preventing the government from using the army on US soil, (and that is also a direct result of the fear of a strong militarily-backed central government) but no laws preventing the government from using the National Guard against civilians.

I suggest re-instituting a volunteer state militia system. (1) It provides protection from martial law enacted by the central government against states that disagree politically, and (2) It provides a legitimate way to regulate guns. If you want to own an AR-15 or any of its equivalents, you'd have to be a member of your state's militia. Those who want to own military-looking guns would likely join willingly. Anyone who doesn't join can't buy those guns.
People who say ALWAYS and NEVER are usually wrong, part of the time.
Science answers questions, Philosophy questions answers.
Make sense, not war.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12218
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby JO 753 » Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:06 pm

Not hard to see where that idea goez rong.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

Aztexan
King of the Limericks
King of the Limericks
Posts: 7847
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:39 pm

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby Aztexan » Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 pm

A volunteer militia (that is not the National Guard) is a very bad idea because 1) it would consist of pretty much the same idiots who are maniacally and fanatically gung ho about the 2nd amendment and 2) the guns are already out there and any attempt to register them would be met with violence/resistance.
This is a sentence. tHi5 iz a seN+3nce oN drUgs!!!

"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty"--sign seen at Occupy Wall St. protest.

Aztexan
King of the Limericks
King of the Limericks
Posts: 7847
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:39 pm

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby Aztexan » Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:13 pm

I'm telling you, JO 753, we need to partner up and capitalize on our new national past time. Small caskets in school colors for the kids who weren't fast enough. Flagpoles pre-cut to half size to save time lowering them each week. You in?
This is a sentence. tHi5 iz a seN+3nce oN drUgs!!!

"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty"--sign seen at Occupy Wall St. protest.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3067
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby ElectricMonk » Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:44 pm

Most people don't realize that this whole issue is a rather new one: only in the early 70's was there a campaign to interpret the 2nd A to mean a general right to guns, not just in the context of a militia - until then, no court ever had interpreted it that way.

Since then, the number of privately owned guns has risen 7-fold.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19447
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Jun 18, 2016 10:35 pm

Paul Anthony wrote:
Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
Oh, crap. The militias were intended to be a cheap substitute for a standing army. In the days when animal power or wind was the only way to get around there wasn't time to deploy a centralized military force to react to Indian raids or pirate attacks. So the locals were supposed to dutifully form up and drill regularly. This meant they had to tote their long guns through town at times, and the rule was put in place so they could get to the drills without running into local ordinances regarding firearms in the villages.



No. There are plenty of historic letters between the founders that expressed their fear of a standing army. They were fearful of a strong central government like the one they were fighting to escape, and more fearful of a strong central government with a strong standing army. They also realized that the central government's army might not be available to help them locally - or could be used against them. That's why the National Guard created, but it has been usurped by the federal government because a volunteer army can't fight all the wars we've gotten into. It was either re-institute the draft (which would have met with a lot of resistance after Viet Nam) or just "draft" all the National Guard troops who had already enlisted. To my knowledge, Texas is the only state that still has a state militia. It's called the Texas Rangers, and it answers only to the Governor.

Now, I see a potential problem: We still have laws preventing the government from using the army on US soil, (and that is also a direct result of the fear of a strong militarily-backed central government) but no laws preventing the government from using the National Guard against civilians.

I suggest re-instituting a volunteer state militia system. (1) It provides protection from martial law enacted by the central government against states that disagree politically, and (2) It provides a legitimate way to regulate guns. If you want to own an AR-15 or any of its equivalents, you'd have to be a member of your state's militia. Those who want to own military-looking guns would likely join willingly. Anyone who doesn't join can't buy those guns.

Like I said, crap.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19447
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Jun 18, 2016 10:37 pm

Aztexan wrote:A volunteer militia (that is not the National Guard) is a very bad idea because 1) it would consist of pretty much the same idiots who are maniacally and fanatically gung ho about the 2nd amendment and 2) the guns are already out there and any attempt to register them would be met with violence/resistance.

The reason these idiots want militias is because it gives them more chances to play with their guns. There's this maximum dubiousness about the dedication that would be needed to form a effective militia, it would more likely become a drinking club with guns.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Paul Anthony
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2783
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:23 pm
Custom Title: The other god
Location: The desert
Contact:

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby Paul Anthony » Sat Jun 18, 2016 10:46 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
Aztexan wrote:A volunteer militia (that is not the National Guard) is a very bad idea because 1) it would consist of pretty much the same idiots who are maniacally and fanatically gung ho about the 2nd amendment and 2) the guns are already out there and any attempt to register them would be met with violence/resistance.

The reason these idiots want militias is because it gives them more chances to play with their guns. There's this maximum dubiousness about the dedication that would be needed to form a effective militia, it would more likely become a drinking club with guns.


Maybe, but at least you'd know who had them.

The craziest wouldn't join. Anarchists won't accept the authority of any government. They don't now, and they have their own "militias". This way, their guns would be illegal and could legally be confiscated. It would be a messy affair, but it's an issue that needs to be addressed eventually.
People who say ALWAYS and NEVER are usually wrong, part of the time.
Science answers questions, Philosophy questions answers.
Make sense, not war.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10177
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jun 18, 2016 11:18 pm

Paul Anthony wrote: I suggest re-instituting a volunteer state militia system. (1) It provides protection from martial law enacted by the central government....

Ya got any more of those?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19447
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: NRA proves: Gun control is possible

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Jun 18, 2016 11:39 pm

Paul Anthony wrote:
Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
Aztexan wrote:A volunteer militia (that is not the National Guard) is a very bad idea because 1) it would consist of pretty much the same idiots who are maniacally and fanatically gung ho about the 2nd amendment and 2) the guns are already out there and any attempt to register them would be met with violence/resistance.

The reason these idiots want militias is because it gives them more chances to play with their guns. There's this maximum dubiousness about the dedication that would be needed to form a effective militia, it would more likely become a drinking club with guns.


Maybe, but at least you'd know who had them.

The craziest wouldn't join. Anarchists won't accept the authority of any government. They don't now, and they have their own "militias". This way, their guns would be illegal and could legally be confiscated. It would be a messy affair, but it's an issue that needs to be addressed eventually.

You trying to viral the new version of "The Purge"? :roll:
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.


Return to “Guns”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest