• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Slaughter in vegas

PhDeac said:
I think he is saying concert goers should be trained and carry a single scoped/bolt rifle just in case.

#murica
Click to expand...

"Craig, stop scanning the windows of nearby buildings for targets. Put the rifle down and enjoy the fucking concert."
 
Probably topical evidence against the cowboy arg: roadies for one of the bands apparently were packing but decided not to unholster their weapon because they didn't want to confuse police officers.
 
TenaciousKory said:
Probably topical evidence against the cowboy arg: roadies for one of the bands apparently were packing but decided not to unholster their weapon because they didn't want to confuse police officers.
Click to expand...

Big Government preventing god-fearin' citizens from defending themselves
 
dot com said:
Boots? Check.
Cowboy hat? Check.
Wild Turkey mini bottles? Check.
Scoped sniper rifle? Ah god damn, i knew I forgot something for the country music concert.
Click to expand...

No worries, you can pick up a rifle at the concession stand with a stock signed by your favorite country star.
 
ELC doesn't have any ideas about how to stop gun violence. He is CERTAIN, however, that your ideas are wrong.
 
RJKarl said:
Having sane gun laws is not "gun grabbing", you are going way off the deep end.

Insurance is only like poll taxes to extremists. You can't throw a vote at someone and kill, injure or maim them. A neighbor's child can't steal your absentee ballot and kill himself or someone else.

Insurance on guns is 100% about personal responsibility.
Click to expand...

It's like a poll tax because it's a specific and additional financial requirement in order to exercise a Constitutional right. We don't require anything similar for any other Constitutional right. If you spend any time at all looking at the history of HCI and groups like it, you will know that their goal is to make ownership as onerous as possible absent a complete ban. It is their articulated strategy.

Funny that you'd say votes can't kill when there are people arguing on this thread that GOP votes did just that.
 
Well the analysis isn't "would the gun insurance be like a poll tax (specific and additional financial requirement in order to exercise a Constitutional right." It would be "does the government have a compelling interest to require insurance" and infringe on the constitutional right to bear arms.

Similarly, I read an article a few months ago (maybe after the Pulse shooting) that discussed the potentially "cost-prohibitive" nature of insurance and apparently the NRA offers private insurance (or at the least facilitates it) and you can get a $100,000 policy for like 140 bucks a year.
 
smekwl.jpg


It's hard to argue there isn't a problem with mass shootings.

ETA Link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catego...States_by_year
 
Last edited:
Deacon923 said:
I have had conversations like this before with gun rights absolutists. My brother was all hot and bothered about some obscure Obama-era treaty with Germany that might have possibly raised the price of guns imported from Germany by a few bucks. He insisted this was an infringement on his Second Amendment rights.

Obviously, anything that is done to make guns more safe or make it harder for people to get guns who shouldn't have them will raise costs (whether in dollars or in time and trouble). Also obviously, any meaningful reform has to result in less guns in circulation. If the litmus test for conservative support for gun safety laws is whether a given measure "impedes gun ownership," then clearly there is no gun safety law that will pass muster.
Click to expand...

Your brother's contention is pointless to this debate. Higher prices for German guns in no way impacts the price of a S&W or Beretta or Taurus, etc... Nobody's right would be infringed upon by a higher cost in a small portion of the market, nor would their safety be impacted in any way. If we are going to use car analogies, it would be like having to settle for a Lexus or Caddy when you want a BMW.
 
It's not all like a poll tax. You can't get guns for free vs. voting being free by law.

There are many costs when buying and using a gun. Insurance should be no different than having to pay for ammo. You don't have to pay for anything to vote.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Most of Obama's policies were your run-of-the-mill Democrat ideas. Again, the level of disdain for Obama is absurd.
Click to expand...

And at 10,000 feet they were fine. But the devil is in the details of implementation, and his implementation details were complete shit. Expanding healthcare for the less fortunate is a great idea and should be done; his implementation details were garbage. Ending the middle eastern conflict was a great idea and should have been done; his implementation details were garbage. The list goes on and on. He spouted off at the 10,000-foot level, but it was clear from the jump that his details never made any sense.
 
That's BS and you know it. You just disagree with most of his policies because he was in fact a run of the mill Democrat. You hated that he's charismatic, you hated that the GOP lost to him (twice), and your continued disdain for him based on his lack of experience ("community organizer" barb you trotted out for years) manifested well before he ever even had an opportunity to damn himself on "details of implementation."

He could have obtained absolute world peace and you'd condemn him for damaging the American military-based economy.
 
SDeacz said:
smekwl.jpg


It's hard to argue there isn't a problem with mass shootings.
Click to expand...

can we juxtapose a similar timeline showing gun legislation/regulation changes? I honestly don;t know what they are or if that trend you posted corresponds
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
That's BS and you know it. You just disagree with most of his policies because he was in fact a run of the mill Democrat. You hated that he's charismatic, you hated that the GOP lost to him (twice), and your continued disdain for him based on his lack of experience ("community organizer" barb you trotted out for years) manifested well before he ever even had an opportunity to damn himself on "details of implementation."

He could have obtained absolute world peace and you'd condemn him for damaging the American military-based economy.
Click to expand...

This is the part that is hilarious. He did nothing, and the O-pologists awarded him the Nobel Peace Prize. Nice projection.
 
jhmd2000 said:
This is the part that is hilarious. He did nothing, and the O-pologists awarded him the Nobel Peace Prize. Nice projection.
Click to expand...

I don't believe he should've won the Nobel Peace Prize but as far as I know, the people who select winners aren't even Americans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top