Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,475 posts)
37. Point by point
Thu Dec 29, 2016, 01:32 PM
Dec 2016

A: I have a problem with the "bake time" on your "recipe".

Remove handguns from the batter and wait 80 years.



B: All rights are to be respected? Can you narrow the focus of the question, please?


C: True, failing to follow a law is illegal. Should I infer that your answer to fighting crime is to create more criminals?


D: I conclude that, since the war on drugs is going so well, you propose starting a war on handguns.


E: Harder? Well in some ways but not others. Cops are harder to find than civilians because there are fewer of them. OTOH cops are easy to identify (uniform, car...) and they mostly all open carry. As a side note, look up the percentage of cops that favor handgun bans.


F: I infer you mean owning an armed AAM. Disarmed missiles are legal. The explosive portion is regulated by some complicated laws but can be had after enough time, money and background checks by local LE and the ATF. I drive a Chevy not a Grumman. A personal defense tool like a handgun is the topic. Crew served area and theater scale weapons are outside the topic.



"Godwin": absolutely but I like the picture. I think the police have attributes that make them different from civilians and some of them don't deal with those differences too well. I'm referring to the cops who kill civilians with insufficient justification. The infusion of military weapons, the ones the general public is mostly restricted from, isn't working all that well, but that's is a different problem.

Guns and heroin: Cutting off the supply of heroin (or alcohol or marijuana) is, in some ways, a different task than banning handguns. A bit of heroin is single use while a handgun may be used over a course of decades and its mere presence as a threat often serves the purpose of the holder, good or evil.

From inmates serving time for crimes such as robbery and burglary the number one concern wasn't police or alarms, it was encountering an armed victim. To paraphrase Will Smith, 'That's what I call a close encounter.'

A medium length answer about full-auto: I support removing the 1986 limit on full-auto guns. I don't see that full-autos will have the impact that handguns do on crime. When full-autos could be bought at a local hardware store, they were never popular. The gangsters who used them generally stole them from law enforcement or the military.
They're not known for thinking ahead even one step...nt HAB911 Dec 2016 #1
Submitted for reference HAB911 Dec 2016 #2
Deserves, no, demands an OP of it's own. nt flamin lib Dec 2016 #4
Fake study. Kang Colby Dec 2016 #20
Not known for thinking at all. flamin lib Dec 2016 #10
I suggest that this is less of a... discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #3
All throughout President Obama's term sarisataka Dec 2016 #5
Huh? 1965Comet Dec 2016 #6
I misunderstood your sarisataka Dec 2016 #7
No worries, we are on the same side here. 1965Comet Dec 2016 #8
your website isn't a valid source gejohnston Dec 2016 #9
My source 1965Comet Dec 2016 #11
the FBI excludes gang related gejohnston Dec 2016 #13
I don't understand why we need to differentiate... 1965Comet Dec 2016 #14
because gejohnston Dec 2016 #17
more 1965Comet Dec 2016 #25
It is my belief that rights are innate in humans. They cannot be "taken away". discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #27
Ok 1965Comet Dec 2016 #28
re: "...the right to self-defense has nothing to do specifically with hand guns..." discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #29
One could say the same thing about the gun in the hand of the criminal. 1965Comet Dec 2016 #34
re: "...we already do not allow certain weapon systems...the right is not absolute." discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #38
just a few things gejohnston Dec 2016 #32
Further looking into things 1965Comet Dec 2016 #12
their definition includes gejohnston Dec 2016 #15
more 1965Comet Dec 2016 #16
even more gejohnston Dec 2016 #19
MORE more 1965Comet Dec 2016 #21
"... if we were to just ban handguns..." discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #23
That is all nice, 1965Comet Dec 2016 #24
Name anything... discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #26
I agree that pistols are excellent for self defense 1965Comet Dec 2016 #30
Point by point discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2016 #37
Since the #1 priority of the gun control lobby is outlawing the most popular *rifles*, benEzra Jan 2017 #43
no. gejohnston Dec 2016 #31
mass shooting tracker is an admitted propagandist pushing an ideology. 1965Comet Dec 2016 #33
he inflates the numbers gejohnston Dec 2016 #35
The definition 1965Comet Dec 2016 #36
"Confirmed: Heat-seeking Missile Flies up Gun-controllers' Own Arse." Eleanors38 Dec 2016 #18
Uh, this was a right-wing attempt to smear the President, 1965Comet Dec 2016 #22
Oh, I am aware of the RW posting; they don't miss many opportunities, Eleanors38 Dec 2016 #39
I haven't seen this... 1965Comet Dec 2016 #40
I don't really care whether anyone wants to use the new Mass Shooting measure... Eleanors38 Dec 2016 #41
" writing in Yahoo, Nov. 10, 1915." oneshooter Dec 2016 #42
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Anti-Gun Control argument...»Reply #37