Other Resources The Political Joe » Vegas Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 3
 
 
2017-10-07 8:22 AM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Expert
2373
20001001001002525
Floriduh
Subject: RE: Vegas
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by Oysterboy I think that the extremes: Ban ALL firearms vs anything goes (the NRA position) is not where to start this conversation. There are some provisions that just make sense, like, why can those on terrorist watch lists legally purchase guns? These bump fire stocks and other gizmos that, in essence, make semi autos operate in an automatic fire fashion need to be illegal and any firearm equipped with them needs to be illegal. Beyond this, I personally see no reason for high capacity magazines, and have never heard any good arguments other than the NRA default "slippery slope" position. I think much can be done that 90% of americans agree with, we just need some backbone in DC.

In spirit I get where you're coming from, but there's one challenge with the terror watch list and banning of firearms.  With a constitutional right there has to be due process involved before it can be removed.  Things such as having a felony conviction are a result of you being able to defend yourself in the criminal justice system and if unsuccessful you then lose your right to own firearms.
With the terror watch list it's an administrative list that isn't even public where people are placed on it for all kinds of reasons and many of them are bogus.  For example you could be put on it for shopping for pressure cookers at an Iranian ebay store and have no clue.  Then when you go to purchase a gun you're just denied and have no clue why.
The other issue is that once you're placed on the list there is no due process method for you to be removed.  You're simply on it until they decide to take you off it.

In spirit I'm with you that people on a terrorist watch list shouldn't be allowed to legally purchase firearms, but there are big problems with the terrorist watch list itself that leave me opposing it.



This is the damn slippery slope argument. Because there may be a handful of folk that got their name erroneously placed on a list that restricts their ability to purchase (not own mind you) a firearm we should have no way to block dangerous people from purchasing firearms. It's not a good argument.


2017-10-16 12:04 PM
in reply to: dmiller5

User image

Veteran
485
100100100100252525
Elmira, ON
Subject: RE: Vegas
Originally posted by dmiller5

So if we can have a serious civil conversation about this...

Why do people need rifles?  I would say the exception is a rancher living on the fringes of yosemite, or in alaska...




As a Canadian....and someone who doesn't have a constitutional right but owns firearms...its kind of the wrong question to ask. Hear me out for a second..

Its these type of questions that put us in a mindset of a "black/white" situation with no middle ground. I could ask the same question about owning a dog, or a bicycle...if you don't NEED...so why HAVE it? And my answer is....its a personal preference and I enjoy using firearms. I dont need it for any practical reason..like many things I own. But I do enjoy shooting, and trying to be the best I can at it.

There needs to be a civilized discussion on what firearms are, and what they are not. I think the media, the propaganda, the lobbyists...all spin people around...and instead of looking at all the issues, and realizing there is no definitive right and wrong answer..but a multitude of pros and cons...and as a society coming to a consensus...the circus continues back and forth.....moreso after a shooting tradgedy.




2017-10-17 7:33 AM
in reply to: dmiller5

User image

Pro
6838
5000100050010010010025
Tejas
Subject: RE: Vegas
Originally posted by dmiller5

So if we can have a serious civil conversation about this...

Why do people need rifles?  I would say the exception is a rancher living on the fringes of yosemite, or in alaska...




So Dave, we all responded in a civil and logical (IMO, your mileage may vary) manner. You haven't responded, so what's your take on the positions we've posted up so far?
2017-10-17 9:32 AM
in reply to: mdg2003

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Vegas

Back to the topic of this thread.  Is anyone else seriously weirded out by how little information we're getting on this?

Talk about ripe for conspiracy theories.  yeesh.

Things that bother me.  There was an obvious full page hand written letter on the stand in the room (seen in pictures).  Police say it was nothing, just him calculating out ballistics for shooting.  OK, then show us the letter!!!
Supposedly there was a security guard that was investigating an open door alarm on the shooters floor (unrelated to the shooting) and he apparently saw him on his hallway camera so shot at him 6 times and wounded him.  This guard has been heralded a hero and had several media appearances scheduled a week or two ago.  He no showed all the appearances and has disappeared from the face of the earth. 

We have zero motive, zero information, etc.

The only conclusion that I've been able to come up with is that we can pretty much guarantee he's not a Trump supporter or conservative because if he was it would have been the lead story on every news outlet for the past several weeks.  ;-)

2017-10-17 9:38 AM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Vegas

I agree........If you are a conspiracy theory type your tin foil hat has likely melted. 

2017-10-17 9:42 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Vegas

Originally posted by Left Brain

I agree........If you are a conspiracy theory type your tin foil hat has likely melted. 

I read something the other day where somebody seriously believed that this was all just a big hoax and there really wasn't a shooting.  Because we'd know more by now if it were real... uh boy...



New Thread
Other Resources The Political Joe » Vegas Rss Feed  
 
 
of 3