JustUsBoys.com gay porn forum

logo

remove these banner ads by becoming a JUB Supporter.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 123 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 192
  1. #51
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by TX-Beau View Post
    Guns don't kill people, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE!!!

    REGULATE PEOPLE WITH GUNS!!!!
    That's what Article I Section 8 is about: you can't keep competent people from having firearms, but you can establish rules barring the incompetent from acquiring them, and specifying responsible handling, transportation, storage, and use for those who can have them.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  2. #52
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,061

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    I have no problem with responsible people having guns. I grew up with people with guns. A gun is a TOOL, it is NOT security, it is NOT a solution, it is not FREEDOM, it is NOT manhood, it is NOT a big fucking cock - and really, the problem we have with guns and gun regulation, is people mistaking guns for all of that.

    Because a bunch of people with money have sold guns to us as all of that.
    Last edited by TX-Beau; May 26th, 2014 at 10:08 PM.
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  3. #53
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Almost all of the recent mass murderers in America have been under some kind of therapy for mental/medical issues.

    None of them were stopped beforehand, because none of them were recognized as particularly dangerous. Because medical science has no way to determine that, except in retrospect.
    False. Most of those who have done mass shootings while Obama has been in office were known to be dangerous. The issue is that Congress hasn't done anything to tweak the NICS system so people known to be dangerous can be blocked from purchasing weapons.

    Then there are the ones who didn't purchase them, but walked off with ones belonging to someone else. Again, that's Congress' failure; leaving your firearms around where someone else can take them and misuse them is not a characteristic of a "well-regulated militia".

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Wearing a firearm on your waistband is threatening a person with violence. Period.

    Wearing a firearm is threatening violence. If there is no chance that you will use it, why are you carrying it?
    That's no more true than getting behind the wheel of a vehicle is threatening to ram someone, or carrying a pocket knife means you're planning to stab someone.

    Wearing a firearm is saying, "I'm prepared". It's also taking on the responsibility of acting to protect others should such a situation arise. Drawing your sidearm is what constitutes threatening violence --and that's not even always true.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Correct. America has a culture of solving problems through violence.
    But that's a subset of the problem. America has a culture that says "I have to win!" -- and that's what feeds the violence.

    In fact, that's what drives the "Stand Your Ground" or "No Retreat" laws: it isn't about safety, it's about winning. It's about winning because in the American mind, retreating means losing.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  4. #54
    PerScientiam AdJustitiam bankside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    The Middle of Snowwhere.
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Married (to a man)
    Posts
    15,985
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by JustMe5 View Post
    Three of his victims were stabbed to death. So the anti-gun nuts have no business meddling in this.
    oh wait, we'll ban machetes too.
    Americans need to keep their guns so they can protect themselves from gun violence just like Nancy Lanza did. And like Chris Kyle did. And like Gabby Giffords did. And like Tom Clements did. And like Michael Piemonte. And Joseph Wilcox.

  5. #55
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by MystikWizard View Post
    So what do you propose on the Mental Health issue, then? I hear this viewpoint, but rarely do I hear solutions for those that want to focus on the Mental Health issue.
    Simple: make a provision for mental health professionals (real ones, not amateurs with social worker degrees) to report to the NICS that a person is a danger to self and/or others; also that public institutions such as universities, maybe even churches, can make the same kind of report. People reported in this manner would be blocked from purchasing either firearms or ammo-- though I'd extend it to any projectile weapons at all, not just guns.

    The block wouldn't be permanent; the reporting professional or agency would have to renew it. But if the person stopped seeing a mental health professional, the block would remain in place for a minimum of six months after the person starts seeing one again.

    Of course it would help if we had an actual mental health program available to people at a cost adjusted according to their income. But as long as the GOP continues to believe that we aren't really a country, but just a collection of individuals scrambling to trample everyone else in order to succeed, that's not happening.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  6. #56
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by TX-Beau View Post
    Are you fucking kidding? If you'd care to you'd hear solutions all the fucking time, the only "solutions" that appear to be acceptable unfortunately are the ones that ignore your very concern.

    Google the fuck out of it and you will find a thousand "solutions," unless of course you happen to be La Pierre's butt boy in which case you will hear no "solutions" fair nor foul.
    La Pierre has actually proposed a solution, though I suspect he did it for appearances since he knows the GOP isn't going to vote for any program that might actually help our fellow citizens. They keep blocking legislation to help our veterans; there's no way in hell they'll approve anything that would help anyone else.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  7. #57
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by TX-Beau View Post
    I have no problem with responsible people having guns. I grew up with people with guns. A gun is a TOOL, it is NOT security, it is NOT a solution, it is not FREEDOM, it is NOT manhood, it is NOT a big fucking cock - and really, the problem we have with guns and gun regulation, is people mistaking guns for all of that.

    Because a bunch of people with money have sold guns to us as all of that.
    My tired brain just came up with the idea that the size of a handgun one could own would be based on dick size....



    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  8. #58
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,620

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    False. Most of those who have done mass shootings while Obama has been in office were known to be dangerous.
    That's an interesting claim, since there is no known way to determine who is dangerous.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    The issue is that Congress hasn't done anything to tweak the NICS system so people known to be dangerous can be blocked from purchasing weapons.
    Since there is no known way to determine who is dangerous, there is no way to stop such people from acquiring firearms.

    And you seem to overlook that, were we to try to establish a criteria for determining who is dangerous, the most obvious such criteria would be whether or not the person in question had access to or a desire to acquire a gun! Duh!

    Perhaps what we should do, then, is make it illegal for anyone who wants a gun to acquire one by any means.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Then there are the ones who didn't purchase them, but walked off with ones belonging to someone else. Again, that's Congress' failure; leaving your firearms around where someone else can take them and misuse them is not a characteristic of a "well-regulated militia".
    No doubt that Adam Lanza would not have stolen his mother's guns if only Congress had made it illegal to steal someone else's guns.

    And, if only Mrs. Lanza had had a gun or two, she could have defended herself against Adam!


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    That's no more true than getting behind the wheel of a vehicle is threatening to ram someone, or carrying a pocket knife means you're planning to stab someone.
    Neither a car nor a pocket knife is designed to kill people, so it would be silly to assume that someone controlling such implements intended to use them in such an awkward and inefficient way. In fact, both of those things are specifically designed to try and avoid hurting people.

    A gun, on the other hand, has no function other than to kill people in the vicinity of the bearer. Brandishing such a weapon sends a pretty clear threat of harm to everyone.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Wearing a firearm is saying, "I'm prepared". It's also taking on the responsibility of acting to protect others should such a situation arise. Drawing your sidearm is what constitutes threatening violence --and that's not even always true.
    Appreciating the fact that, statistically, an armed individual is far more likely to hurt the people around him than he is to "protect" them, it is the height of irresponsibility for those you love to carry around a firearm. The only usefulness of guns is to make the bearer feel powerful. Period.
    Last edited by T-Rexx; May 27th, 2014 at 12:17 AM.

  9. #59
    BOO!!! Mwahahahaha!!!!! Willie Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    WhereIam
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    43,524

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by sa11 View Post
    MRAs are stupidly being blamed too.
    MRAs? Meals Ready to attack? So people think it was something in his food?
    It's never too early in the year,
    to spread some goodwill cheer!

  10. #60
    Thankfully Liberal & Gay
    frankfrank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Illinois (Agent Provocateur and Refujiunderground you can do it)
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    15,212
    Blog Entries
    5

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    'Your dead kids don't trump my Constitutional rights'
    - Joe Wurzelbacher, 2014 ["Joe the Plumber"]

    Disgusting.
    "All legal U. S. residents who are 18 years or older, shall have an unconditional right to vote." - 28th Amendment, US Constitution?
    "But, hey, who cares about women and their rights when the religious liberty of a nationwide chain of arts and crafts stores is at stake?" - Daily Kos, 30 June 2014
    "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires" - Susan B. Anthony

  11. #61
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    That's an interesting claim, since there is no known way to determine who is dangerous.

    Since there is no known way to determine who is dangerous, there is no way to stop such people from acquiring firearms.

    And you seem to overlook that, were we to try to establish a criteria for determining who is dangerous, the most obvious such criteria would be whether or not the person in question had access to or a desire to acquire a gun! Duh!

    Perhaps what we should do, then, is make it illegal for anyone who wants a gun to acquire one by any means.
    You really ought to pay attention to the world. Most of the shooters while Obama has been in office had already been determined to be dangerous. Playing your little mind game here doesn't change that.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    No doubt that Adam Lanza would not have stolen his mother's guns if only Congress had made it illegal to steal someone else's guns.

    And, if only Mrs. Lanza had had a gun or two, she could have defended herself against Adam!
    Maybe you really ought to read my posts. [Text: Removed]

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Neither a car nor a pocket knife is designed to kill people, so it would be silly to assume that someone controlling such implements intended to use them in such an awkward and inefficient way. In fact, both of those things are specifically designed to try and avoid hurting people.

    A gun, on the other hand, has no function other than to kill people in the vicinity of the bearer. Brandishing such a weapon sends a pretty clear threat of harm to everyone.
    Keep telling those lies -- but only those who like lies are going to believe.
    Both cars and pocket knives are for the most part designed very nicely for killing people.

    I've been around when easily a quarter million rounds have been fired. Not a single one of them harmed a human being.

    And brandishing has a definite legal definition, [Text: Removed] It certainly doesn't involve "a pretty clear threat of harm to everyone".

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Appreciating the fact that, statistically, an armed individual is far more likely to hurt the people around him than he is to "protect" them, it is the height of irresponsibility for those you love to carry around a firearm.
    You're lying with statistics. Some four to ten billion rounds of ammunition are sold and used in the United States each year. If your claim were true, we'd all be invalids by now.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    The only usefulness of guns is to make the bearer feel powerful. Period.
    [Text: Removed] I don't know anyone who carries a gun who feels more powerful because of it. Anyone who does ought to seriously re-examine their motives.
    Last edited by opinterph; May 31st, 2014 at 08:20 AM. Reason: removed interpersonal commentary

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  12. #62
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,620

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    ^ Yes, I'm well aware of your insistence that all of the data in the established medical journals is fabricated by doctors who don't want people to be safe.

    The NRA had to get you people to pass laws to gag pediatricians from giving to their patients the advice their profession recommends.

    Because, you know, only gun people understand medical studies.
    Last edited by T-Rexx; May 28th, 2014 at 08:23 PM.

  13. #63
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    ^ Yes, I'm well aware of your insistence that all of the data in the established medical journals is fabricated by doctors who don't want people to be safe.

    The NRA had to get you people to pass laws to gag pediatricians from giving to their patients the advice their profession recommends.

    Because, you know, only gun people understand medical studies.
    More dishonesty.

    No surprise.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  14. #64
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,620

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    ^ Please explain why medical science is so "dishonest" about guns.

    Please explain to us (yet again) why ALL of the medical studies are wrong, and you are right.

    Please cite for us a single study in a peer-reviewed, scientific journal which does not conclude that the primary consequence of carrying a firearm is that the bearer or his family members will be killed.
    Last edited by T-Rexx; May 30th, 2014 at 07:56 AM.

  15. #65
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    ^ Please explain why medical science is so "dishonest" about guns.

    Please explain to us (yet again) why ALL of the medical studies are wrong, and you are right.

    Please cite for us a single study in a peer-reviewed, scientific journal which does not conclude that the primary consequence of carrying a firearm is that the bearer or his family members will be killed.
    More dishonesty.

    Firearms aren't a medical issue. They aren't contagious, they don't grow in a culture dish. Medical personnel have no more expertise on firearms than dance instructors.

    And common sense is all that's required to knock down your final claim -- if it were true, then why are there hundreds of thousands of instances each year where citizens defend themselves from crime with firearms? If the claim were true, then the number of people killed annually by firearms in the US would have to be on the order of half a million to a million.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  16. #66
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,620

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    More dishonesty.

    Firearms aren't a medical issue. They aren't contagious, they don't grow in a culture dish. Medical personnel have no more expertise on firearms than dance instructors.
    Of course firearms are a medical issue.

    Guns kill people. The medical profession tries to save lives. Duh!

    If you can save lives by preventing the disease in the first place, you have done far more to promote health than dealing with the problem after the fact.

    The NRA is so afraid of the truth that it has influenced congress to pass legislation to prevent the CDC from studying firearm deaths. And the NRA got Florida to pass legislation to prevent pediatricians from discussing the risks with families.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-n...esearch-2013-1

    http://boingboing.net/2011/05/08/nra...orida-gag.html

    If you guys are so clearly in the right, why are you afraid for anyone to investigate your claims scientifically? And why to you need to gag professionals from speaking?


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    And common sense is all that's required to knock down your final claim -- if it were true, then why are there hundreds of thousands of instances each year where citizens defend themselves from crime with firearms?
    There aren't "hundreds of thousands" of lives saved every year as a result of firearms. As the medical studies clearly show, the most likely consequence (if any) of brandishing a firearm is that the bearer or someone close to him will be killed. Period.

  17. #67
    Lil' Demon Beggar MakeDigitalLove's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Voorhees
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    1,753

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    More dishonesty.
    How is he dishonest in asking for sources or claims?

  18. #68
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Of course firearms are a medical issue.

    Guns kill people. The medical profession tries to save lives. Duh!

    If you can save lives by preventing the disease in the first place, you have done far more to promote health than dealing with the problem after the fact.
    Firearms are not a "disease".

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    The NRA is so afraid of the truth that it has influenced congress to pass legislation to prevent the CDC from studying firearm deaths. And the NRA got Florida to pass legislation to prevent pediatricians from discussing the risks with families.

    If you guys are so clearly in the right, why are you afraid for anyone to investigate your claims scientifically? And why to you need to gag professionals from speaking?
    "Professionals"? I like to hear from professionals. But are those pediatricians firearms experts? I've met one doctor who knew what he was talking about WRT firearms; he was military, NRA, and police certified to teach firearm safety. Most doctors probably can't even give the three primary rules of firearm safety -- so they don't count as professionals on the topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    There aren't "hundreds of thousands" of lives saved every year as a result of firearms. As the medical studies clearly show, the most likely consequence (if any) of brandishing a firearm is that the bearer or someone close to him will be killed. Period.
    No, the medical studies don't show that, because they don't show half a million or more deaths a year from firearms. By the definition you've been using of "brandishing", it would be necessary to show five or six million firearms deaths a year to sustain that thesis.

    And that's why the NRA fought to block doctors from "studying" firearms issues: the CDC, etc. are already lying, so there's no point to funding more lies.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  19. #69
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by MakeDigitalLove View Post
    How is he dishonest in asking for sources or claims?
    He's dishonest because he lies in order to try to make points.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  20. #70
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Brandishing [a gun] sends a pretty clear threat of harm to everyone.
    What does the term “brandishing” mean to you?

  21. #71
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    La Pierre publicly calls for such legislation
    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    La Pierre has actually proposed a solution
    Can you be more specific?

  22. #72
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Again, that's Congress' failure; leaving your firearms around where someone else can take them and misuse them is not a characteristic of a "well-regulated militia".
    Your statement implies that the militia should be regulated at the federal level. True?

  23. #73
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Everyone competent is the militia, so everyone competent can bear arms -- that's the law.
    The US militia includes only able-bodied 17 through 44-year-old male citizens (or males of the same age who have made a declaration of their intent to become citizens) and male or female citizens who are members of the National Guard.


  24. #74
    JUB Addict chrisrobin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,021

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    A bit of logic, perhaps:

    I own a car. I consider driving a privilege. Required are the following:
    1. A drivers license.
    2. Auto insurance. (lower rates if you are a new driver having taken driver's ed).
    3. Reasonable knowledge of traffic regulations.
    4. Passing a vision test.

    The state requires the car to have:
    1. Registration number.
    2. Passed auto emissions test.
    3. License plates

    Why shouldn't guns and gun owners have regulations similar to drivers?


    Why shouldn't guns have regulations too?

    Why should anyone have to know anything? - Sheldon Cooper

  25. #75

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    I’m sure I’ve said this here many times before, but guns have no part in a civilized society.


    http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com...ype=blogs&_r=0

  26. #76
    Lil' Demon Beggar MakeDigitalLove's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Voorhees
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    1,753

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisrobin View Post
    A bit of logic, perhaps:

    I own a car. I consider driving a privilege. Required are the following:
    1. A drivers license.
    2. Auto insurance. (lower rates if you are a new driver having taken driver's ed).
    3. Reasonable knowledge of traffic regulations.
    4. Passing a vision test.
    Which you have to take a test for before getting a permit and then you have to take a driving test. In New Jersey where I live there is a 3 month probation period where you can officially take a test to get a full fledged license, you can only drive with a licensed person in the Car. And it makes me laugh when the pro gun crowd tries to use Cars as a viable argument in comparison to guns, because cars are capable of killing people.

  27. #77
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,620

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Firearms are not a "disease".
    Of course they are!

    They kill people.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    "Professionals"? I like to hear from professionals.
    No, you don't.

    You even said below that medical research needs to be suppressed.

    What you want is to hear from "yes men" who tell you what you want to hear. All other speech, however authoritative or factual, should be suppressed.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    But are those pediatricians firearms experts?
    They are experts on the risks to health of children.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    No, the medical studies don't show that, because they don't show half a million or more deaths a year from firearms. By the definition you've been using of "brandishing", it would be necessary to show five or six million firearms deaths a year to sustain that thesis.
    I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    And that's why the NRA fought to block doctors from "studying" firearms issues: the CDC, etc. are already lying, so there's no point to funding more lies.
    In other words, the entire medical profession worldwide all lies about guns in the same way. Because they have some secret agenda against gun people, which no one (including you) can specify.

    Kinda like all the world's climate scientists are lying about global climate change. And all the world's biologists are lying about evolution.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    He's dishonest because he lies in order to try to make points.
    To gun people, citing data from scientific studies is lying. That's pretty obvious, since science keeps concluding that guns are dangerous.


    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    What does the term “brandishing” mean to you?
    Displaying in an ostentatious fashion.
    Last edited by T-Rexx; May 31st, 2014 at 06:37 PM.

  28. #78
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,620

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Firearms are not a "disease".
    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Of course they are!

    They kill people.
    Let me just add that more than 30,000 people die every year in the USA of gunshot wounds.

    Only about 15,000 Americans die of AIDS ever year.

  29. #79
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    Can you be more specific?
    The mental health bit. I don't know if he believes in it or not, but it's definitely good PR. Of course, for years now the NRA has been run by a PR firm; I doubt Wayne does much thinking at all these days, just says what they say will make the bucks flow.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  30. #80
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    Your statement implies that the militia should be regulated at the federal level. True?
    No -- the Constitution gives Congress the power to "regulate" the official armed forces; here's what it says of the militia:

    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
    The only rules Congress can set for the militia are those regarding "organizing, arming, and disciplining", the latter meaning establishing disciplined behavior, not the modern meaning of correcting and punishing. So Congress could require everyone with a firearm to be part of a local militia;that comes under "organizing". Congress could give tax credits for purchasing specified firearms it wants the militia to have; that would come under "arming". And Congress can make rules for handling, storing, carrying, etc.; that comes under discipline.

    That discipline is what makes a militia "well-regulated". A well-regulated militia, according to General George Washington, is one that is well supplied, properly armed, knows how to care for its weapons and does so, obeys its officers, has good morale, can advance and retreat in good order, does not use its weapons frivolously but takes them seriously, and is aware of the responsibility that keeping and bearing arms entails.

    When the militia is called to service of the federal government, they technically cease to be militia because they've become "regulars". A "regular" is a soldier who has been "regularized" or "regulated", which meant to conform to a common training and discipline so that they could fight as a coherent force (as opposed to levees called up from the forces of nobles, where each noble had his own system of training, maneuvers, tactics, etc., which made fighting together as a unified force difficult).

    The National Guard comprises a middle ground; they're a "regular militia", meaning they're trained to the standards of regular soldiers, but are not a standing army. When called up by a state governor, they're militia; when called up by the federal government, they cease to be militia.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  31. #81
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    The US militia includes only able-bodied 17 through 44-year-old male citizens (or males of the same age who have made a declaration of their intent to become citizens) and male or female citizens who are members of the National Guard.

    The letter of the law lags behind the spirit of the militia concept, yes. It's weird that males are automatically counted as militia, but females have to join the official militia to be so counted. This is another reason we need a new Militia Act: we have numerous females who are effectively militia, but are not so under law.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  32. #82
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisrobin View Post
    A bit of logic, perhaps:

    I own a car. I consider driving a privilege. Required are the following:
    1. A drivers license.
    2. Auto insurance. (lower rates if you are a new driver having taken driver's ed).
    3. Reasonable knowledge of traffic regulations.
    4. Passing a vision test.

    The state requires the car to have:
    1. Registration number.
    2. Passed auto emissions test.
    3. License plates

    Why shouldn't guns and gun owners have regulations similar to drivers?


    Why shouldn't guns have regulations too?
    There is no right to drive. Keeping and bearing arms is a right. Treating it as a privilege is an infringement of that right.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  33. #83
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by EastMed View Post
    I’m sure I’ve said this here many times before, but guns have no part in a civilized society.


    http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com...ype=blogs&_r=0
    This is a joke:

    It’s also a delusion to suppose that the government in a liberal democracy such as the United States could become so tyrannical that armed insurrection, rather than democratic procedures, would be the best means of constraining it.
    The current GOP is an excellent example of why we still need the full depth of the Second Amendment -- they are bound and determined to turn this country into a plutocratic oligarchy. When politicians are owned by corporations, "democratic procedures" become meaningless.

    His thesis that police forces are "democratically accountable" is also a joke. Cops protect their own; they get away with shooting innocent people at ten times or more the rate regular citizens do -- even when they get the wrong dwelling, break down the door and kill the residents, they aren't sent to prison for murder as they should be.

    He's a total moron on the subject of self-defense: guns aren't just the route of defense when the criminal has a gun, but always. The firearm is what makes the weak able to resist the strong, thus democratizing the playing field.

    Finally, his belief that guns can be kept from criminals is total foolishness. People can, and do, make firearms at home. The tools to do so are available in stores such as Home Depot. And if criminals aren't able to buy guns or steal them, they'll make them.

    A people who have been disarmed are no longer a civilized people, they're just pawns living in the borderlands of tyranny. All one need do is look at the way the Nazis used the exact same sort of laws that liberals long for here to enslave a nation.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  34. #84
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Displaying in an ostentatious fashion.
    Nice little private definition.

    I didn't respond to the rest if your post, because I'm tired of your dishonesty -- or maybe your delusion... maybe you really do believe the lies you keep telling.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  35. #85
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,382
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Let me just add that more than 30,000 people die every year in the USA of gunshot wounds.
    But by the figures from the "professionals" you keep citing, the figure should be at least a hundred times that.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  36. #86

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    This is a joke:



    The current GOP is an excellent example of why we still need the full depth of the Second Amendment -- they are bound and determined to turn this country into a plutocratic oligarchy. When politicians are owned by corporations, "democratic procedures" become meaningless.

    His thesis that police forces are "democratically accountable" is also a joke. Cops protect their own; they get away with shooting innocent people at ten times or more the rate regular citizens do -- even when they get the wrong dwelling, break down the door and kill the residents, they aren't sent to prison for murder as they should be.

    He's a total moron on the subject of self-defense: guns aren't just the route of defense when the criminal has a gun, but always. The firearm is what makes the weak able to resist the strong, thus democratizing the playing field.

    Finally, his belief that guns can be kept from criminals is total foolishness. People can, and do, make firearms at home. The tools to do so are available in stores such as Home Depot. And if criminals aren't able to buy guns or steal them, they'll make them.

    A people who have been disarmed are no longer a civilized people, they're just pawns living in the borderlands of tyranny. All one need do is look at the way the Nazis used the exact same sort of laws that liberals long for here to enslave a nation.


    Paranoid libertarianism succinctly expressed: militaristic and anti-democratic.

    So what are you and your libertarian friends going to do? Surround some corporate headquarters with your guns and threaten them to mend their ways?

  37. #87
    Lil' Demon Beggar MakeDigitalLove's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Voorhees
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    1,753

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post

    He's a total moron on the subject of self-defense: guns aren't just the route of defense when the criminal has a gun, but always. The firearm is what makes the weak able to resist the strong, thus democratizing the playing field.
    I found this part most interesting.

  38. #88
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,620

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Nice little private definition.
    Ummm... ...that's the standard definition of "brandish."


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    I didn't respond to the rest if your post, because I'm tired of your dishonesty -- or maybe your delusion... maybe you really do believe the lies you keep telling.
    You keep referring to me as "dishonest" because I cite published facts. You keep insisting that the scientific literature is all wrong, that the entire scientific community worldwide is out to get you because of some agenda you cannot describe, and you keep insisting that you are right simply because you know you are right and it is therefore not permissible for anyone to challenge you with facts.

    I appreciate that you have a disdain for evidence, reason, and scholarship. But most people regard objective data as more honest than somebody's biased opinion


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    But by the figures from the "professionals" you keep citing, the figure should be at least a hundred times that.
    Why should it be a hundred times that?

    We're talking about data here. We draw conclusions based on the available data - not what you think the data should be.


    Quote Originally Posted by MakeDigitalLove View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    The firearm is what makes the weak able to resist the strong, thus democratizing the playing field.
    I found this part most interesting.
    Yeah. That says quite a lot, doesn't it?

  39. #89
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    La Pierre publicly calls for such legislation
    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    La Pierre has actually proposed a solution
    Can you be more specific?
    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    The mental health bit. I don't know if he believes in it or not, but it's definitely good PR. Of course, for years now the NRA has been run by a PR firm; I doubt Wayne does much thinking at all these days, just says what they say will make the bucks flow.
    My curiosity involves his proposed solution. What are the key elements of legislation he proposed?

  40. #90
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    What does the term “brandishing” mean to you?
    Displaying in an ostentatious fashion.
    I’m not sure ostentatious is the best word. The specific definition varies by state, though not all states include the word “brandish” in their code or legal definitions.


    In most states, it is a felony to exhibit a weapon in an angry or threatening manner. In the rest it is a misdemeanor with very unpleasant consequences. The term may not be specifically defined. It has usually been construed in cases involving threats, either general or specific. To be a crime, a weapon must actually be displayed. Obviously some people have a lower threshold for fear than others.

    … Displaying anger while in possession of a weapon is considered a sufficient substitute for threats. One cannot be found guilty of brandishing a weapon unless one is shown to have been angry or threatening. This is an excellent reason to keep one’s temper and mind one’s manners.

    Brandishing Law (United States Concealed Carry Association)
    Application Notes:

    1. The following are definitions of terms that are used frequently in the guidelines and are of general applicability (except to the extent expressly modified in respect to a particular guideline or policy statement):

    C) "Brandished" with reference to a dangerous weapon (including a firearm) means that all or part of the weapon was displayed, or the presence of the weapon was otherwise made known to another person, in order to intimidate that person, regardless of whether the weapon was directly visible to that person. Accordingly, although the dangerous weapon does not have to be directly visible, the weapon must be present.

    §1B1.1. Application Instructions (United States Sentencing Commission)

  41. #91
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,095

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisrobin View Post
    A bit of logic, perhaps:

    I own a car. I consider driving a privilege. Required are the following:
    1. A drivers license.
    2. Auto insurance. (lower rates if you are a new driver having taken driver's ed).
    3. Reasonable knowledge of traffic regulations.
    4. Passing a vision test.

    The state requires the car to have:
    1. Registration number.
    2. Passed auto emissions test.
    3. License plates

    Why shouldn't guns and gun owners have regulations similar to drivers?


    Why shouldn't guns have regulations too?
    All of which can be applied to cars by two reasons; one there is no constitutional right to own and operate a car, and two they can apply and enforce these requirements because most cars are operated on publicly owned roads and thus the state has the right to set standards for using those roads. You don't need any of those things in most states if you operate your vehicle exclusively on private property for private use. By that analogy, you could make an argument that the state and businesses have a right to regulate the use and management of firearms on public property and businesses have a right to regulate them on their own property which for the most part they already do.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  42. #92
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,061

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Puh-LEEZ, the fed ALREADY regulates firearms with ABSOLUTELY NO CONSTITUTIONAL BAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    And since you seem to want to get technical, the constitution DOES NOT MENTION GUNS!
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  43. #93
    JUB Addict
    andysayshi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Available
    Posts
    4,288

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    So which country in this list is getting something wrong?


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	lastyearhandgunskilled_thumb.jpg 
Views:	91 
Size:	99.3 KB 
ID:	1047536

  44. #94
    JUB Addict
    andysayshi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Available
    Posts
    4,288

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    All of which can be applied to cars by two reasons; one there is no constitutional right to own and operate a car, and two they can apply and enforce these requirements because most cars are operated on publicly owned roads and thus the state has the right to set standards for using those roads. You don't need any of those things in most states if you operate your vehicle exclusively on private property for private use. By that analogy, you could make an argument that the state and businesses have a right to regulate the use and management of firearms on public property and businesses have a right to regulate them on their own property which for the most part they already do.
    30,000 gun deaths each year seem to suggest that whatever regulations DO currently exist are not doing a very good job.

  45. #95
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,061

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Wayne paid a lot of money for that.
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  46. #96
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,095

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by TX-Beau View Post
    Puh-LEEZ, the fed ALREADY regulates firearms with ABSOLUTELY NO CONSTITUTIONAL BAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    And since you seem to want to get technical, the constitution DOES NOT MENTION GUNS!
    And you are pointing this is why? I'm not saying that guns are not and cannot be regulated, I'm simply pointing out that using the example of how cars are regulated is not a good comparison. There are some similarities that can be drawn though, as long as the right is taken into consideration the state can regulate use on public property and owners can regulate on private property.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  47. #97
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,095

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by andysayshi View Post
    30,000 gun deaths each year seem to suggest that whatever regulations DO currently exist are not doing a very good job.
    Amazingly enough that is what the NRA says too. Unfortunately, how to reform the existing laws and create effective ones that don't infringe on the protected right is difficult when neither side of the gun debate trusts the other.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  48. #98
    Oranje rareboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    32,527

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    bran·dish
    ˈbrandiSH/
    verb
    verb: brandish; 3rd person present: brandishes; past tense: brandished; past participle: brandished; gerund or present participle: brandishing

    wave or flourish (something, especially a weapon) as a threat or in anger or excitement.
    just for accuracy.....

  49. #99
    Oranje rareboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    32,527

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by andysayshi View Post
    So which country in this list is getting something wrong?


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	lastyearhandgunskilled_thumb.jpg 
Views:	91 
Size:	99.3 KB 
ID:	1047536
    It is funny that instead of giving the appearance of strength....Americans' obsessions with guns and having their own private arsenals to fight against their own government and each other is actually viewed as a sign of weakness in many countries.

  50. #100
    Lil' Demon Beggar MakeDigitalLove's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Voorhees
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    1,753

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by rareboy View Post
    It is funny that instead of giving the appearance of strength....Americans' obsessions with guns and having their own private arsenals to fight against their own government and each other is actually viewed as a sign of weakness in many countries.
    Well, there is a post in this thread that did say that guns are for the weak against the strong. So the view is apparently not wrong.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About JustUsBoys.com | Site Map | RSS | Webmasters | Advertise | Link to JUB | Report A Bug on this Page

Visit our sister sites: Broke Straight Boys | CollegeDudes.com | CollegeBoyPhysicals.com | RocketTube
All models appearing on JustUsBoys.com were over 18 at the time of photography. The records for sexually explicit images required by U.S. 2257 are kept by the
individual producers of the images. The location of the records is available by clicking the Custodian of Records link at the bottom of each gallery page.
© 2012 JustUsBoys.com. The JustUsBoys.com name and logo are registered trademarks. Labeled with ICRA and RTA. Member of ASACP and The Free Speech Coalition.