Good to see the kids stand up

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by cwtcr hokie »

ip_law-hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:Like I posted in another thread.
Rugermini.jpg
I’m OK with banning both.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
bless your heart, sorry that some of us take seriously our basis rights in the constitution
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by cwtcr hokie »

nolanvt wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
HokieHam wrote:Emotional arguments. Typical
Maybe they should only ask for thoughts and prayers. Those have done a great job of stopping these things so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Please elaborate on what gun law change you propose that would have prevented the school shooting?
I was already in favor of banning AR-15s, which is what the killer used in this attack and what has been used in other mass shootings - there’s a reason the AR-15 is popular with mass shooters. While I support the 2A, I believe there should be reasonable exceptions on what type of weapons that civilians should be allowed to own. Now, that won’t prevent every single shooting event (nobody is arguing that and to counter argue that is silly), but banning certain assault weapons will reduce the number of deaths IMO.

But maybe we should stick with thoughts and prayers, or maybe even award medals to children who go to school and survive. I dunno.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ok. You've singled out the AR-15. It "looks scary", militaristic, and is semi-automatic. Fair enough. But a majority of handguns are semi-automatic as well. They have clips that can be easily carried and quickly changed out too. So why just AR-15s? What is the logic or rationale for just stopping there? And if you decide to extrapolate out to other similar weapons, where does it end, and are you now seriously infringing on the 2A?
I disagree that banning AR-15s is infringing on the 2A.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
then you may want to read it, it is simple comprehension
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by cwtcr hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote: An unwillingness to devote time to sensitive, insecure people with predisposed, redneck dispositions suggests that his time is more valuable than your average “mall accountant,” whatever TF that is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ah, more sanctimonious bullsh!t I see. What it actually reveals (rather than 'suggests') is that he has no well thought-out argument here. He's just spewing the emotional Democrat party line.

"If we could just outlaw AR-15s, the world would be a better place...until we figure out what the next scary looking gun is we need to outlaw."
You asked a very emotional question, why not ask for facts?

Here are 3 potential answers.

1) The destructive power of an AR15 is greater than that of a handgun. The velocity is 3x (or so) that of a normal handgun, so when it hits a bone or an organ, it destroys it. Not the case with a typical handgun.

2) AR15 and high capacity. If you have a 30 or 60 round magazine vs something like a 10 round magazine, that’s a lot less reloading. Not sure how long it takes an average person to change out a magazine, but if people are running away from you, that’s meaningful time.

3) Range. AR15 has a longer range than a handgun, so that area that can be covered by an AR15 is significantly larger than a handgun.

Thoughts?
1. That's an argument to ban all rifles. Not a winning argument and the 5.56 is at the bottom of the heap compared to any other rifle. The main criticism against it has been its ineffectiveness in combat. Also, 9mm will go right through bone.

2. Cho used a handgun. Some of his magazines were even 10rnm. Police have guns for the same reason civilians do. They find standard (not "high capacity") magazines useful for the same reason Joe blow does.

3. None of these school shootings involved long range or precision shooting. Most were just spraying bullets. The effective range of a 9mm is 1800m...or basically any distance that someone just wants to spray bullets into a crowd.
1. I'm not making an argument, I'm answering a question about the AR15, which has a higher muzzle velocity than a normal handgun. It's simply a question of physics. The kinetic energy of an AR15 round is higher than that of a normal handgun. When an AR15 hits a bone directly, it doesn't break it, or go through it, it disintegrates it, and a lot of it.

2. So?? You're not countering what I said. It's possible that in these mass shootings, the AR15s jammed. And possible they didn't. If they didn't jam, then the magazine capacity means less reloading and more shots in a given time period.

3. Again, so? I was just stating a fact. The idea that a 9mm handgun like a S&W M&P is effective at 1800mm, is silly. In this conversation, the range is something like 30 or 40m.
and again you are completely missing the point, the only long range shot where it would matter about velocity was the vegas guy, of course he had a concentrated mass of humanity and was nto aiming at anything. School shootings are so close so velocity is POINTLESS, the proximity will cause damage no matter what is used

of course if the staff is armed and is defending the people the chances a piece of shirt like the fl guy would have killed anyone is very close to zero..... he dropped his weapon and RAN the second any actual opposition appeared
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by awesome guy »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote: An unwillingness to devote time to sensitive, insecure people with predisposed, redneck dispositions suggests that his time is more valuable than your average “mall accountant,” whatever TF that is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ah, more sanctimonious bullsh!t I see. What it actually reveals (rather than 'suggests') is that he has no well thought-out argument here. He's just spewing the emotional Democrat party line.

"If we could just outlaw AR-15s, the world would be a better place...until we figure out what the next scary looking gun is we need to outlaw."
You asked a very emotional question, why not ask for facts?

Here are 3 potential answers.

1) The destructive power of an AR15 is greater than that of a handgun. The velocity is 3x (or so) that of a normal handgun, so when it hits a bone or an organ, it destroys it. Not the case with a typical handgun.

2) AR15 and high capacity. If you have a 30 or 60 round magazine vs something like a 10 round magazine, that’s a lot less reloading. Not sure how long it takes an average person to change out a magazine, but if people are running away from you, that’s meaningful time.

3) Range. AR15 has a longer range than a handgun, so that area that can be covered by an AR15 is significantly larger than a handgun.

Thoughts?
1. That's an argument to ban all rifles. Not a winning argument and the 5.56 is at the bottom of the heap compared to any other rifle. The main criticism against it has been its ineffectiveness in combat. Also, 9mm will go right through bone.

2. Cho used a handgun. Some of his magazines were even 10rnm. Police have guns for the same reason civilians do. They find standard (not "high capacity") magazines useful for the same reason Joe blow does.

3. None of these school shootings involved long range or precision shooting. Most were just spraying bullets. The effective range of a 9mm is 1800m...or basically any distance that someone just wants to spray bullets into a crowd.
1. I'm not making an argument, I'm answering a question about the AR15, which has a higher muzzle velocity than a normal handgun. It's simply a question of physics. The kinetic energy of an AR15 round is higher than that of a normal handgun. When an AR15 hits a bone directly, it doesn't break it, or go through it, it disintegrates it, and a lot of it.

2. So?? You're not countering what I said. It's possible that in these mass shootings, the AR15s jammed. And possible they didn't. If they didn't jam, then the magazine capacity means less reloading and more shots in a given time period.

3. Again, so? I was just stating a fact. The idea that a 9mm handgun like a S&W M&P is effective at 1800mm, is silly. In this conversation, the range is something like 30 or 40m.
and again you are completely missing the point, the only long range shot where it would matter about velocity was the vegas guy, of course he had a concentrated mass of humanity and was nto aiming at anything. School shootings are so close so velocity is POINTLESS, the proximity will cause damage no matter what is used

of course if the staff is armed and is defending the people the chances a piece of shirt like the fl guy would have killed anyone is very close to zero..... he dropped his weapon and RAN the second any actual opposition appeared
If I were committing such an act, it would be with a sawed off pump action shotgun.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by cwtcr hokie »

fatman wrote:Agreed. Kudos to these communities. The kids, the parents, the cops...they are spot on. Shame of those politicians who take $ from the NRA, refuse to consider changes to stop this epidemic that only exists in the US, and then repeatedly offer "thoughts and prayers." The survivors are telling this group of politicians to F@?! Themselves with their bullshit thoughts and prayers. I think this has been the case with other recent communities that have to suffer thru the slaughter of their children. That "thoughts and prayers" bullshit from pols taking big NRA $$$ is getting called out.
Its against the law to murder people...did that stop the FL idiot? he had 7 guns, so ban the scary looking one....he still kills other humans as that was what he was intent on doing. So bans all guns (not possible but ok) my bet he still figures out a way to kill other humans. The problem was this human had ZERO regard for other humans lives, so he was going to kill them one way or another. If he used a home depot truck (Like in NY ya know) we should ban home depot pickups right?

Or maybe blame the HUMAN pulling the trigger, the gun did not kill anyone, the human operating it did!
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by ip_law-hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote: Maybe they should only ask for thoughts and prayers. Those have done a great job of stopping these things so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Please elaborate on what gun law change you propose that would have prevented the school shooting?
I was already in favor of banning AR-15s, which is what the killer used in this attack and what has been used in other mass shootings - there’s a reason the AR-15 is popular with mass shooters. While I support the 2A, I believe there should be reasonable exceptions on what type of weapons that civilians should be allowed to own. Now, that won’t prevent every single shooting event (nobody is arguing that and to counter argue that is silly), but banning certain assault weapons will reduce the number of deaths IMO.

But maybe we should stick with thoughts and prayers, or maybe even award medals to children who go to school and survive. I dunno.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ok. You've singled out the AR-15. It "looks scary", militaristic, and is semi-automatic. Fair enough. But a majority of handguns are semi-automatic as well. They have clips that can be easily carried and quickly changed out too. So why just AR-15s? What is the logic or rationale for just stopping there? And if you decide to extrapolate out to other similar weapons, where does it end, and are you now seriously infringing on the 2A?
I disagree that banning AR-15s is infringing on the 2A.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
then you may want to read it, it is simple comprehension
This has been decided, cwtcr. The court agreed with Nolan. Not you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26367
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by HokieHam »

ip......you left off single payer.
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by ip_law-hokie »

HokieHam wrote:ip......you left off single payer.
Nah. But this does drive home a point from an earlier thread. You guys have done a good job convincing smart people, and cwtcr, that any reasonable gun control measure is an infringement of the Second Amendment.

We are where we are not because of the Second Amendment, but because of the NRA and lack of congressional will to enact these measures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by cwtcr hokie »

Maybe they should only ask for thoughts and prayers. Those have done a great job of stopping these things so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]
Please elaborate on what gun law change you propose that would have prevented the school shooting?[/quote]

I was already in favor of banning AR-15s, which is what the killer used in this attack and what has been used in other mass shootings - there’s a reason the AR-15 is popular with mass shooters. While I support the 2A, I believe there should be reasonable exceptions on what type of weapons that civilians should be allowed to own. Now, that won’t prevent every single shooting event (nobody is arguing that and to counter argue that is silly), but banning certain assault weapons will reduce the number of deaths IMO.

But maybe we should stick with thoughts and prayers, or maybe even award medals to children who go to school and survive. I dunno.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]
Ok. You've singled out the AR-15. It "looks scary", militaristic, and is semi-automatic. Fair enough. But a majority of handguns are semi-automatic as well. They have clips that can be easily carried and quickly changed out too. So why just AR-15s? What is the logic or rationale for just stopping there? And if you decide to extrapolate out to other similar weapons, where does it end, and are you now seriously infringing on the 2A?[/quote]

I disagree that banning AR-15s is infringing on the 2A.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

then you may want to read it, it is simple comprehension[/quote]

This has been decided, cwtcr. The court agreed with Nolan. Not you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

this has been explained to you in this very thread by people that have more actual gun knowledge than me
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26367
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by HokieHam »

ip_law-hokie wrote:
HokieHam wrote:ip......you left off single payer.
Nah. But this does drive home a point from an earlier thread. You guys have done a good job convincing smart people, and cwtcr, that any reasonable gun control measure is an infringement of the Second Amendment.

We are where we are not because of the Second Amendment, but because of the NRA and lack of congressional will to enact these measures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nah. We’re where we’re at because smart people, handwringers and people who know what’s best for everyone, wish to infringe on our personal liberties, instead of actually coming up with real solutions. It’s he same with free speech.....just look at leftist campuses and the left’s desire to shut down any dissenting thought. You can also look at smart peoples desires to take how I get my health insurance out of my hands and give it to some pointy headed dick a thousand miles away.

You guys are collectivists, big government blow job givers. You’d slurp it up night and day if you could. You are what you are.....and so is almost half the nation.
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by ip_law-hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:Maybe they should only ask for thoughts and prayers. Those have done a great job of stopping these things so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Please elaborate on what gun law change you propose that would have prevented the school shooting?[/quote]

I was already in favor of banning AR-15s, which is what the killer used in this attack and what has been used in other mass shootings - there’s a reason the AR-15 is popular with mass shooters. While I support the 2A, I believe there should be reasonable exceptions on what type of weapons that civilians should be allowed to own. Now, that won’t prevent every single shooting event (nobody is arguing that and to counter argue that is silly), but banning certain assault weapons will reduce the number of deaths IMO.

But maybe we should stick with thoughts and prayers, or maybe even award medals to children who go to school and survive. I dunno.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]
Ok. You've singled out the AR-15. It "looks scary", militaristic, and is semi-automatic. Fair enough. But a majority of handguns are semi-automatic as well. They have clips that can be easily carried and quickly changed out too. So why just AR-15s? What is the logic or rationale for just stopping there? And if you decide to extrapolate out to other similar weapons, where does it end, and are you now seriously infringing on the 2A?[/quote]

I disagree that banning AR-15s is infringing on the 2A.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

then you may want to read it, it is simple comprehension[/quote]

This has been decided, cwtcr. The court agreed with Nolan. Not you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

this has been explained to you in this very thread by people that have more actual gun knowledge than me[/quote]

You can disagree with the decision, but the decision is the rule of law. You should apologize to Nolan for being condescending, because he is right and you were wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26367
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by HokieHam »

HokieHam wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
HokieHam wrote:ip......you left off single payer.
Nah. But this does drive home a point from an earlier thread. You guys have done a good job convincing smart people, and cwtcr, that any reasonable gun control measure is an infringement of the Second Amendment.

We are where we are not because of the Second Amendment, but because of the NRA and lack of congressional will to enact these measures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nah. We’re where we’re at because smart people, handwringers and people who know what’s best for everyone, wish to infringe on our personal liberties, instead of actually coming up with real solutions. It’s he same with free speech.....just look at leftist campuses and the left’s desire to shut down any dissenting thought. You can also look at smart peoples desires to take how I get my health insurance out of my hands and give it to some pointy headed dick a thousand miles away.

You guys are collectivists, big government blow job givers. You’d slurp it up night and day if you could. You are what you are.....and so is almost half the nation.
I should add, none of your government shrine solutions have EVER worked.
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by ip_law-hokie »

HokieHam wrote:
HokieHam wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
HokieHam wrote:ip......you left off single payer.
Nah. But this does drive home a point from an earlier thread. You guys have done a good job convincing smart people, and cwtcr, that any reasonable gun control measure is an infringement of the Second Amendment.

We are where we are not because of the Second Amendment, but because of the NRA and lack of congressional will to enact these measures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nah. We’re where we’re at because smart people, handwringers and people who know what’s best for everyone, wish to infringe on our personal liberties, instead of actually coming up with real solutions. It’s he same with free speech.....just look at leftist campuses and the left’s desire to shut down any dissenting thought. You can also look at smart peoples desires to take how I get my health insurance out of my hands and give it to some pointy headed dick a thousand miles away.

You guys are collectivists, big government blow job givers. You’d slurp it up night and day if you could. You are what you are.....and so is almost half the nation.
I should add, none of your government shrine solutions have EVER worked.
Where did you graduate?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by cwtcr hokie »

ip_law-hokie wrote:
HokieHam wrote:ip......you left off single payer.
Nah. But this does drive home a point from an earlier thread. You guys have done a good job convincing smart people, and cwtcr, that any reasonable gun control measure is an infringement of the Second Amendment.

We are where we are not because of the Second Amendment, but because of the NRA and lack of congressional will to enact these measures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quo

go eff yourself Fester (subtle dig in your stupid post, not necessary)

WE have LOTS of gun control measures and laws....murder is against the law btw....it should have stopped the FL idiot, right?

damn criminals, refuse to follow our laws
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by cwtcr hokie »

ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:Maybe they should only ask for thoughts and prayers. Those have done a great job of stopping these things so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Please elaborate on what gun law change you propose that would have prevented the school shooting?
I was already in favor of banning AR-15s, which is what the killer used in this attack and what has been used in other mass shootings - there’s a reason the AR-15 is popular with mass shooters. While I support the 2A, I believe there should be reasonable exceptions on what type of weapons that civilians should be allowed to own. Now, that won’t prevent every single shooting event (nobody is arguing that and to counter argue that is silly), but banning certain assault weapons will reduce the number of deaths IMO.

But maybe we should stick with thoughts and prayers, or maybe even award medals to children who go to school and survive. I dunno.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]
Ok. You've singled out the AR-15. It "looks scary", militaristic, and is semi-automatic. Fair enough. But a majority of handguns are semi-automatic as well. They have clips that can be easily carried and quickly changed out too. So why just AR-15s? What is the logic or rationale for just stopping there? And if you decide to extrapolate out to other similar weapons, where does it end, and are you now seriously infringing on the 2A?[/quote]

I disagree that banning AR-15s is infringing on the 2A.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

then you may want to read it, it is simple comprehension[/quote]

This has been decided, cwtcr. The court agreed with Nolan. Not you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

this has been explained to you in this very thread by people that have more actual gun knowledge than me[/quote]

You can disagree with the decision, but the decision is the rule of law. You should apologize to Nolan for being condescending, because he is right and you were wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

Whatever ya say Fester
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by USN_Hokie »

ip_law-hokie wrote:
HokieHam wrote:ip......you left off single payer.
Nah. But this does drive home a point from an earlier thread. You guys have done a good job convincing smart people, and cwtcr, that any reasonable gun control measure is an infringement of the Second Amendment.

We are where we are not because of the Second Amendment, but because of the NRA and lack of congressional will to enact these measures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Banning the most popular class of firearm today is not only unreasonable, it's unconstitutional per standing Supreme Court (not 4CA) guidance.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by HokieFanDC »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: David Kopel is another, I'm sure there are more. You're standard preconceived reaction to anything you disagree with bit you again.

The results show the policies that a diverse group of people think have the highest likelihood of having an impact. Sounds like a rational way to talk about potential solutions or improvements, unless you're someone that has an irrational objection to any change.
1. Using criteria picked for them by others. That's a classic way to design a bullshirt study.

2. No, evidence-based studies are the best way to evaluate, but I reject your premise that we have to find a "solution." - again, a hallmark of a crap study.
Like I said, you are 100% against any change, so you dismiss any discussion whatsoever.
I'm in full support of the significant decline in violent crime over the last 25yrs - a period in which gun rights and guns themselves have proliferated. How's that for some evidence-based analysis?

Beyond that, why should I deal with folks who don't even acknowledge our right exists? Forget that.
Fair points. Violent crime, all types of violent crime, decreased significantly. There is no evidence that it had anything to do with gun rights or more guns. The only meaningful conclusion of those datasets is that more guns and more gun rights do not necessarily equate to more overall gun violence.

But, what type of violent crime has become more common? Mass shootings. If you feel no desire to try and do better, that's your choice. But no need to bash other people who may want to have fewer mass shootings.
And yes, anyone who doesn't acknowledge those rights is not worth dealing with, just like anyone who is against even a discussion about change, is not worth dealing with.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by 133743Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: David Kopel is another, I'm sure there are more. You're standard preconceived reaction to anything you disagree with bit you again.

The results show the policies that a diverse group of people think have the highest likelihood of having an impact. Sounds like a rational way to talk about potential solutions or improvements, unless you're someone that has an irrational objection to any change.
1. Using criteria picked for them by others. That's a classic way to design a bullshirt study.

2. No, evidence-based studies are the best way to evaluate, but I reject your premise that we have to find a "solution." - again, a hallmark of a crap study.
Like I said, you are 100% against any change, so you dismiss any discussion whatsoever.
I'm in full support of the significant decline in violent crime over the last 25yrs - a period in which gun rights and guns themselves have proliferated. How's that for some evidence-based analysis?

Beyond that, why should I deal with folks who don't even acknowledge our right exists? Forget that.
Fair points. Violent crime, all types of violent crime, decreased significantly. There is no evidence that it had anything to do with gun rights or more guns. The only meaningful conclusion of those datasets is that more guns and more gun rights do not necessarily equate to more overall gun violence.

But, what type of violent crime has become more common? Mass shootings. If you feel no desire to try and do better, that's your choice. But no need to bash other people who may want to have fewer mass shootings.
And yes, anyone who doesn't acknowledge those rights is not worth dealing with, just like anyone who is against even a discussion about change, is not worth dealing with.
Yet we have fewer guns today than 50 years ago and there were no mass shootings at that time. So why, all of a sudden, in the past 15 or so years are we seeing a spate of mass shootings? What has changed in society over that time period?
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by HokieFanDC »

133743Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: David Kopel is another, I'm sure there are more. You're standard preconceived reaction to anything you disagree with bit you again.

The results show the policies that a diverse group of people think have the highest likelihood of having an impact. Sounds like a rational way to talk about potential solutions or improvements, unless you're someone that has an irrational objection to any change.
1. Using criteria picked for them by others. That's a classic way to design a bullshirt study.

2. No, evidence-based studies are the best way to evaluate, but I reject your premise that we have to find a "solution." - again, a hallmark of a crap study.
Like I said, you are 100% against any change, so you dismiss any discussion whatsoever.
I'm in full support of the significant decline in violent crime over the last 25yrs - a period in which gun rights and guns themselves have proliferated. How's that for some evidence-based analysis?

Beyond that, why should I deal with folks who don't even acknowledge our right exists? Forget that.
Fair points. Violent crime, all types of violent crime, decreased significantly. There is no evidence that it had anything to do with gun rights or more guns. The only meaningful conclusion of those datasets is that more guns and more gun rights do not necessarily equate to more overall gun violence.

But, what type of violent crime has become more common? Mass shootings. If you feel no desire to try and do better, that's your choice. But no need to bash other people who may want to have fewer mass shootings.
And yes, anyone who doesn't acknowledge those rights is not worth dealing with, just like anyone who is against even a discussion about change, is not worth dealing with.
Yet we have fewer guns today than 50 years ago and there were no mass shootings at that time. So why, all of a sudden, in the past 15 or so years are we seeing a spate of mass shootings? What has changed in society over that time period?

I'm pretty sure we have more guns now, than 30 years ago. Certainly more now than 30 years ago.

Over the past 15 years, not sure what has changed. Maybe the number of semi-auto rifles sold? :P
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by 133743Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Like I said, you are 100% against any change, so you dismiss any discussion whatsoever.
I'm in full support of the significant decline in violent crime over the last 25yrs - a period in which gun rights and guns themselves have proliferated. How's that for some evidence-based analysis?

Beyond that, why should I deal with folks who don't even acknowledge our right exists? Forget that.
Fair points. Violent crime, all types of violent crime, decreased significantly. There is no evidence that it had anything to do with gun rights or more guns. The only meaningful conclusion of those datasets is that more guns and more gun rights do not necessarily equate to more overall gun violence.

But, what type of violent crime has become more common? Mass shootings. If you feel no desire to try and do better, that's your choice. But no need to bash other people who may want to have fewer mass shootings.
And yes, anyone who doesn't acknowledge those rights is not worth dealing with, just like anyone who is against even a discussion about change, is not worth dealing with.
Yet we have fewer guns today than 50 years ago and there were no mass shootings at that time. So why, all of a sudden, in the past 15 or so years are we seeing a spate of mass shootings? What has changed in society over that time period?

I'm pretty sure we have more guns now, than 30 years ago. Certainly more now than 30 years ago.

Over the past 15 years, not sure what has changed. Maybe the number of semi-auto rifles sold? :P
My mistake. I meant "gun ownership" has dropped over the past 50 years.

"The household gun ownership rate has fallen from an average of 50 percent in the 1970s to 49 percent in the 1980s, 43 percent in the 1990s and 35 percent in the 2000s, according to the survey data, analyzed by The New York Times."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us/ra ... shows.html

What has changed since then? Disintegration of the family unit? Lack of respect for rules, laws and authority? Coddling of children? Latchkey kids? Disintegration of morals and values? Growth and exploitation of gore, death and violence in entertainment? Desensitization to violence? On and on and on. Essentially society at large has backslid.
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by ip_law-hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
HokieHam wrote:ip......you left off single payer.
Nah. But this does drive home a point from an earlier thread. You guys have done a good job convincing smart people, and cwtcr, that any reasonable gun control measure is an infringement of the Second Amendment.

We are where we are not because of the Second Amendment, but because of the NRA and lack of congressional will to enact these measures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quo

go eff yourself Fester (subtle dig in your stupid post, not necessary)

WE have LOTS of gun control measures and laws....murder is against the law btw....it should have stopped the FL idiot, right?

damn criminals, refuse to follow our laws
That’s a silly line of thinking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by ip_law-hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:Maybe they should only ask for thoughts and prayers. Those have done a great job of stopping these things so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Please elaborate on what gun law change you propose that would have prevented the school shooting?
I was already in favor of banning AR-15s, which is what the killer used in this attack and what has been used in other mass shootings - there’s a reason the AR-15 is popular with mass shooters. While I support the 2A, I believe there should be reasonable exceptions on what type of weapons that civilians should be allowed to own. Now, that won’t prevent every single shooting event (nobody is arguing that and to counter argue that is silly), but banning certain assault weapons will reduce the number of deaths IMO.

But maybe we should stick with thoughts and prayers, or maybe even award medals to children who go to school and survive. I dunno.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ok. You've singled out the AR-15. It "looks scary", militaristic, and is semi-automatic. Fair enough. But a majority of handguns are semi-automatic as well. They have clips that can be easily carried and quickly changed out too. So why just AR-15s? What is the logic or rationale for just stopping there? And if you decide to extrapolate out to other similar weapons, where does it end, and are you now seriously infringing on the 2A?[/quote]

I disagree that banning AR-15s is infringing on the 2A.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

then you may want to read it, it is simple comprehension[/quote]

This has been decided, cwtcr. The court agreed with Nolan. Not you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

this has been explained to you in this very thread by people that have more actual gun knowledge than me[/quote]

You can disagree with the decision, but the decision is the rule of law. You should apologize to Nolan for being condescending, because he is right and you were wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

Whatever ya say Fester[/quote]

No, cwtcr, it’s what the highest courts in our country have said. Do the research.

Sometimes there ARE right or wrong answers. You were wrong before,and now you are choosing to be ignorant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by ip_law-hokie »

USN_Hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
HokieHam wrote:ip......you left off single payer.
Nah. But this does drive home a point from an earlier thread. You guys have done a good job convincing smart people, and cwtcr, that any reasonable gun control measure is an infringement of the Second Amendment.

We are where we are not because of the Second Amendment, but because of the NRA and lack of congressional will to enact these measures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Banning the most popular class of firearm today is not only unreasonable, it's unconstitutional per standing Supreme Court (not 4CA) guidance.
You should get Maryland on the phone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by ip_law-hokie »

133743Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: I'm in full support of the significant decline in violent crime over the last 25yrs - a period in which gun rights and guns themselves have proliferated. How's that for some evidence-based analysis?

Beyond that, why should I deal with folks who don't even acknowledge our right exists? Forget that.
Fair points. Violent crime, all types of violent crime, decreased significantly. There is no evidence that it had anything to do with gun rights or more guns. The only meaningful conclusion of those datasets is that more guns and more gun rights do not necessarily equate to more overall gun violence.

But, what type of violent crime has become more common? Mass shootings. If you feel no desire to try and do better, that's your choice. But no need to bash other people who may want to have fewer mass shootings.
And yes, anyone who doesn't acknowledge those rights is not worth dealing with, just like anyone who is against even a discussion about change, is not worth dealing with.
Yet we have fewer guns today than 50 years ago and there were no mass shootings at that time. So why, all of a sudden, in the past 15 or so years are we seeing a spate of mass shootings? What has changed in society over that time period?

I'm pretty sure we have more guns now, than 30 years ago. Certainly more now than 30 years ago.

Over the past 15 years, not sure what has changed. Maybe the number of semi-auto rifles sold? :P
My mistake. I meant "gun ownership" has dropped over the past 50 years.

"The household gun ownership rate has fallen from an average of 50 percent in the 1970s to 49 percent in the 1980s, 43 percent in the 1990s and 35 percent in the 2000s, according to the survey data, analyzed by The New York Times."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us/ra ... shows.html

What has changed since then? Disintegration of the family unit? Lack of respect for rules, laws and authority? Coddling of children? Latchkey kids? Disintegration of morals and values? Growth and exploitation of gore, death and violence in entertainment? Desensitization to violence? On and on and on. Essentially society at large has backslid.
People are moving from the country to the city and suburbs. Or the city and suburbs are moving to them. People in these environments don’t own firearms like they do in rural environments.

I think you are trying too hard and ignoring the obvious.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: Good to see the kids stand up

Post by 133743Hokie »

ip_law-hokie wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
133743Hokie wrote: Yet we have fewer guns today than 50 years ago and there were no mass shootings at that time. So why, all of a sudden, in the past 15 or so years are we seeing a spate of mass shootings? What has changed in society over that time period?

I'm pretty sure we have more guns now, than 30 years ago. Certainly more now than 30 years ago.

Over the past 15 years, not sure what has changed. Maybe the number of semi-auto rifles sold? :P
My mistake. I meant "gun ownership" has dropped over the past 50 years.

"The household gun ownership rate has fallen from an average of 50 percent in the 1970s to 49 percent in the 1980s, 43 percent in the 1990s and 35 percent in the 2000s, according to the survey data, analyzed by The New York Times."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us/ra ... shows.html

What has changed since then? Disintegration of the family unit? Lack of respect for rules, laws and authority? Coddling of children? Latchkey kids? Disintegration of morals and values? Growth and exploitation of gore, death and violence in entertainment? Desensitization to violence? On and on and on. Essentially society at large has backslid.
People are moving from the country to the city and suburbs. Or the city and suburbs are moving to them. People in these environments don’t own firearms like they do in rural environments.

I think you are trying too hard and ignoring the obvious.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Are you saying people in the city and suburbs don't own guns? And I still believe nationwide there are still more people moving out of the city than into it. In any case, urban revitalization is a somewhat new phenomena . I think you are ignoring reality.
Last edited by 133743Hokie on Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply