If only there was something we could do...

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/03/u...elections.html

Do more than nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skiJ

My thought is if you think gun rights is about the Second amendment, You have the right to join the National Guard...

( if you think it gives you the right to amass a personal armory see the comments up-thread about the plagues of Fear and plague of Hate... )


tj

---

The 2nd A is about "arms" I think of "arms" as weapons of war, not tools designed to hunt game.. Back to the no high body count designed firearms in the hands of random unregulated folks..

re trying to say if we ban guns people will just use cars trucks, knives, bats, etc.. We give up far less net social utility banning semi auto weapons than we do banning cars and knives for citizens. Definitely not apples to apples to say we have to ban xyz if we ban guns.. No, we don't. We only need to ban the things that are strictly recreational but highly dangerous if repurposed to harm others. Banning legit productivity tools is totally different than banning recreational stuff..

There's a lot of discussion in this thread about the fact mass shootings account for only a small portion of gun deaths. Mass shootings on the other hand also evoke large policy responses but not in a way most outside observers might expect. Instead of increasing gun control, mass shootings in America result in a loosening of gun restrictions.

In reality Democrat-controlled legislatures tend not to enact restrictions after a mass shooting while Republican-controlled legislatures loosen restrictions: "when looking at bills that were actually enacted into law, the impact of mass shootings depends on the party in power. The annual number of laws that loosen gun restrictions doubles in the year following a mass shooting in states with Republican-controlled legislatures. We find no significant effect of mass shootings on laws enacted when there is a Democrat-controlled legislature, nor do we find a significant effect of mass shootings on the enactment of laws that tighten gun restrictions. " + "This effect increases with the extent of media coverage."

Source: https://www.nber.org/papers/w26187

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SumJongGuy

re trying to say if we ban guns people will just use cars trucks, knives, bats, etc.. We give up far less net social utility banning semi auto weapons than we do banning cars and knives for citizens. Definitely not apples to apples to say we have to ban xyz if we ban guns.. No, we don't. We only need to ban the things that are strictly recreational but highly dangerous if repurposed to harm others. Banning legit productivity tools is totally different than banning recreational stuff..

---

Reminds me of the quote "don't let perfect be the enemy of good." Yes, there are people who will still manage to kill innocent people without guns, but I predict it would be a whole lot less.

Not sure if it's been posted yet this go around, but helpful viewing

Maybe the solution is to give the GOP carte blanche for a solution. Give them,say, five years, and if they haven't solved the shootings, they have to give the dems.five years of legislative carte blanche.

No doubt we will be sacrificing a lot of.people, including kids, but save millions(?) In the long run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The AD

Reminds me of the quote "don't let perfect be the enemy of good." Yes, there are people who will still manage to kill innocent people without guns, but I predict it would be a whole lot less.

---

Having to smash 8 year olds in the head with a framing hammer sounds difficult. Even going full bore Jack Torrance with an axe is beyond the ability of most maniacs bent on mayhem. Only way to perpetrate mass murder on the scale we are now so used to seeing is with a gun. Sure you could do something with a bomb but explosives are highly regulated. Oh, right.

Quote:

---

Tranel was a aid to Burns, in his knee walking drunk days.( 4 months in 2005/06) Somehow she is the reasonable choice( Well there is Neuman and a dead guy). The USA is exceptionally self centered and diluted. (you are not wrong)

---

I don't like the dehumanization of murder victims into stats and percentages that look small and tidy and therefore it's an argument to not change our country. There are more victims of these shootings than simply who is killed. It goes beyond their relatives, it even affects people who have never met the victims.

And I don't buy the 'against tyranny' or 'home protection' arguments - I've met, am friends and hung out with you gun guys, let's get real on why you want your rights. People want to shoot guns for fun and feel macho - but they hide behind the argument of needing guns to protect their families and not let the government take over, and they are not going to sacrifice their fun (I mean their rights) for anyone because look at the small percentages guys! Look at how everything that tried to regulate guns has failed! Let's keep things as they are so I have the right to play with guns! My hands are tied!

And thanks PNWBrit for the link - I'll look into it later.

Attachment 417380


Sent from the Utility Muffin Research Kitchen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muted reborn

I've met, am friends and hung out with you gun guys, let's get real on why you want your rights. People want to shoot guns for fun and feel macho - but they hide behind the argument of needing guns to protect their families and not let the government take over, and they are not going to sacrifice their fun (I mean their rights)

---

I just want a couple bolt action hunting rifles for deer and elk (I do have some inherited family heirlooms and revolvers but don't "need" any of them). If it came down to a gun ban, I could still hunt with my bow and would be a bit grumpy but still turn in my stuff. I think both sides need to watch their alienating generalizations as I am one who has written and called my legislators for stronger firearm controls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conundrum

I just want a couple bolt action hunting rifles for deer and elk. If it came down to a gun ban, I could still hunt with my bow and would be a bit grumpy but still turn in my stuff. I think both sides need to watch their alienating generalizations as I am one who has written and called my legislators for stronger firearm controls.

---

I don't think anyone is coming for bolt actions or advocating for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bunion 2020

^^^ Word.

Congressional race here in MT for a new seat created after the last Census. Choice looks like Ryan Zinke VS a D.

There are some interesting candidates. Monica Tranel looks to be the best of the lot from the D side. https://monicatranel.com/issues/

The thought of Ryan Zinke back in the house brings anger to the surface. Really? Ryan FUCKING Zinke? https://www.google.com/search?client...+FUCKING+Zinke

---

MIND = BLOWN.

I know both of them very well. As in, first name basis and both parties recognize each other walking down the street.

I guess that’s the beauty of living a long time in a state with a low population.

Monica is cool. She was living in Missoula and was loosely in my circle of friends. I always thought the working for Conrad Burns thing was weird, as she clearly did not aline with his politics, but she explained it away as great work experience. You could tell she was going places. Glad to hear life has been good to her. She bought my Jeep CJ-5 from me.

And Ryan was in the Navy with me. We lived in the same barracks together and sometimes sat at the same table for meals. He was a stereotypical dumb jock, and I am surprised he has attained the level he has.

And the two of them are running against each other for congress ? Unreal.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

1) Guns have profound cultural significance for some people. I don't discount this. And for others they have recreational significance (like skis). I don't discount this either. Other arguments for why we need unfettered access to guns are the stuff of childish fantasies and barely disguised White supremacist fear mongering. Republicans slurp on these lies like dogs greedily licking up their own vomit. There is no point in attempting dialog or compromise with deluded zealots.

2) Republicans may be the party of White supremacy, unfettered exploitation of people, places and things, and throbbing hordes Dunning-Kruger delusionals, but the Democrats are the party of tacitly condoning institutional racism and corporate profiteering, and peddling the depressing status quo to the dopey White moderate, while being consistently out maneuvered by the bigots across the aisle. Pelosi and Schumer need to get the fuck out of the way. They're longtime losers who lack any vision or ethical backbone.

3) Our constitution is outdated drivel incapable of supporting a functioning democracy.

4) You, Canada, how are things up there? You open?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schuss

I don't think anyone is coming for bolt actions or advocating for that.

---

muted was basically saying anyone with a gun is overcompensating for a tiny wee wee. To further any conversations on guns in the USA, painting with those broad strokes isn't going to go far. People need to remember there is a whole bunch of people in the middle that would be fine with regulations that may prevent mass shootings. Calling those people macho and not understanding their reasons for firearm ownership is not going to help.

You guys can condescend people's reasons as much as you want but you're not going to be able to overturn the second, any gun control you want to actually pull off is going to be things gun owners can support, not your favorite emotionally gratifying most radical disruptive ideas. In order to do that you're going to have to come from a place of understanding your ideological adversaries and finding ways to find common cause in things you can both support. If you can't do that you should tend your own garden and vent your anger into a pillow first.

Perfect microcosm of america today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conundrum

muted was basically saying anyone with a gun is overcompensating for a tiny wee wee. To further any conversations on guns in the USA, painting with those broad strokes isn't going to go far. People need to remember there is a whole bunch of people in the middle that would be fine with regulations that may prevent mass shootings. Calling those people macho and not understanding their reasons for firearm ownership is not going to help.

---

you aren’t wrong, but they don’t translate that position into support either way. “Reasonable” regulation isn’t a viable political concept, and that’s in part because of the inputs to it. “crime” and “warning” signs aren’t treated as things, but baubles.

i don’t think he’s necessarily wrong, cabelas used rack is full of grandpa guns that nobody wants and traded it in on something Matt black and new. Maybe after hearing of a coworkers uncle that blew through 5-figures of inheritance on guns and prepper paranoia I just think it’s something not good they should acknowledge

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

There's a lot of discussion in this thread about the fact mass shootings account for only a small portion of gun deaths. Mass shootings on the other hand also evoke large policy responses but not in a way most outside observers might expect. Instead of increasing gun control, mass shootings in America result in a loosening of gun restrictions.

In reality Democrat-controlled legislatures tend not to enact restrictions after a mass shooting while Republican-controlled legislatures loosen restrictions: "when looking at bills that were actually enacted into law, the impact of mass shootings depends on the party in power. The annual number of laws that loosen gun restrictions doubles in the year following a mass shooting in states with Republican-controlled legislatures. We find no significant effect of mass shootings on laws enacted when there is a Democrat-controlled legislature, nor do we find a significant effect of mass shootings on the enactment of laws that tighten gun restrictions. " + "This effect increases with the extent of media coverage."

Source: https://www.nber.org/papers/w26187

---

I remember well being in a mall type sporting goods store in Reno right after sandy hook. The massive gun dept was like filenes basement during the big sale and practically sold out. That said everything to me about guns in America. It’s the land of chicken hawk cowards

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leroy jenkins

You guys can condescend people's reasons as much as you want but you're not going to be able to overturn the second, any gun control you want to actually pull off is going to be things gun owners can support, not your favorite emotionally gratifying most radical disruptive ideas. In order to do that you're going to have to come from a place of understanding your ideological adversaries and finding ways to find common cause in things you can both support. If you can't do that you should tend your own garden and vent your anger into a pillow first.

Perfect microcosm of america today.

---

I think you're right here. Just like everything else nowadays the middle ground seems to get completely trounced on by the extreme views on either side. As a result nothing ever gets done and people just become further entrenched.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds!

4) You, Canada, how are things up there? You open?

---

Knock knock knock - “Hey, it’s Dave. Let me in man.”

“Who, Dave? Dave’s not here man.”



Seriously though, this tragedy breaks my heart. And reading much of this thread angers me not a little. Big hugs to my 9yo daughter the past couple days.

Two tropes often repeated about gun control are 'Chicago' and 'Why don't we enforce the laws on the books?' The problem with both arguments is the laws are purposely toothless making it possible for gun sellers to get off easy even after repeatedly selling guns to criminals:

Over the past two decades, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has let some of the Chicago area’s most notorious gun sellers off the hook for serious violations of federal law that included selling to straw purchasers, transferring guns without background checks and doctoring sales records.
...

ATF can revoke a gun dealer’s license only if the seller willfully violates the law. That’s different from most areas of civil and criminal law, in which defendants can’t use ignorance as an excuse for wrongdoing. To revoke a license, ATF inspectors have to prove a gun dealer intentionally disregarded the rules.

Proving that a dealer disregarded these laws intentionally can be difficult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The AD

I think you're right here. Just like everything else nowadays the middle ground seems to get completely trounced on by the extreme views on either side. As a result nothing ever gets done and people just become further entrenched.

---

Of course in the real world gun owners like Leroy won’t support a fucking thing, because he’s an extremist freak. I own a gun, but don’t count, because I don’t identify ammosexual

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TahoeJ

I no longer care about arguing with people about universal background checks, abortions, climate change, etc. It doesn't work. Simply volunteer to help get voters out in mass in a few Senate swing states and these assholes (a controlling minority) are completely marginalized. We're so close it's only a matter of a time, but the sooner the better. It's the only realistic solution. Not saying the Democrats are perfect by any means, but at least they aren't the GOP.

---

more and more, I am Here with the first part of this - And I wonder and I worry. with the 'conservatives' now holding a 'super-majority' on the SC, does it really matter ( for the next six to twelve years... )

The Constitution was intended to be a living document., And the Democracy was intended to be a representative, citizen government - That's Why Washington declined to be appointed king
( why is the president the only one with a term limit ) ...
... 'of the people, by the people, and for the people... ' has rung-hollow to me for a long time. ...

anyway -
I am /// the pups are going to take me for a Walk...
my friend sent his 'Pops' into the after-Life today. Pops was Ninety-one.

amen. tj

Waiting 30-45 min for swat before entering the classroom. M
I’d imagine they could hear what was happening inside. And I understand it would probably mean suicide for the first guy or two in the room, but Jesus.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harry

And Ryan was in the Navy with me. We lived in the same barracks together and sometimes sat at the same table for meals. He was a stereotypical dumb jock, and I am surprised he has attained the level he has.
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

---

You're surprised a tall mediocre white dude with a strong jaw attained success? That's pretty much the story of America forever.

This is the hat, indicating his graze wound, veteran BORTAC Border Patrol agent was wearing when he breached the classroom with a tactical team:

Attachment 417382

Worth mentioning if it hasn't been already, even three good guys with three guns weren't able to stop the shooter initially "Two Uvalde police officers and a school resource officer fired at the shooter, but it did not stop him from entering the building."

Gun control at local levels will never be effective gun control.. Customs and border control are required for effective gun control or really any contraband matters. It's only going to be effective at national border levels. Saying bla bla bla but Chicago/DC sure seems to get a lot of traction and I have no idea why nobody ever points out that there are no practical efforts to control the flow of guns across the city limit border at all... That's NOT "gun control".. it's lip service with no teeth..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skiJ

more and more, I am Here with the first part of this - And I wonder and I worry. with the 'conservatives' now holding a 'super-majority' on the SC, does it really matter ( for the next six to twelve years... )

---

With a majority in the senate the Dems can add justices to the court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TahoeJ

With a majority in the senate the Dems can add justices to the court.

---

Only if they nuke the filibuster first... and calling Manchin a democrat is questionable.. Calling Sinema anything is questionable..

yeah (yes) - but 'stacking the court' shouldn't be the 'balance' -

the senate should not have been able to prevent Garland's appointment in 2016.

( f. politics. ) skiJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TahoeJ

With a majority in the senate the Dems can add justices to the court.

---

Not w Manchin and Sinema. That majority is not really a majority and def others not willing to add justices besides those two

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST8rKQOPDII

don't pay any attention to these shootings cause it's not healthy we are a sick society in need of much help
but was reading the wall street journal and this was at the top of the headlines just now

I was never sure of what I thought of beto orourke kind though he was a solid and kinda of total clown
I have high praise for him today

the steve kerr shit was top too, we need lots more of this shit from lots more people

To open carry at a news conference about this shooting is the height of twistedness.

And that scumbag Cruz posturing in the spotlight.

How long do the overlords allow us rabble to poly ass rant outside of polyass before shutting it down and moving it? Statute of limitations seems to be expanding since Ukraine..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cinnepa

Republican governor blaming it on mental issues now.....the status quo will remain, nothing will change. Both parties blow.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hikesalot

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...4741996c47.jpg

---

Excellent idea. Seems totally logical according to the pro life pro gun party.

There’s one party preventing sensible gun control! And those who vote for the GOP vote for this shit to continue.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

This is the hat, indicating his graze wound, veteran BORTAC Border Patrol agent was wearing when he breached the classroom with a tactical team:

Attachment 417382

Worth mentioning if it hasn't been already, even three good guys with three guns weren't able to stop the shooter initially "Two Uvalde police officers and a school resource officer fired at the shooter, but it did not stop him from entering the building."

---

Awe, so that is why conservatives are calling g for four armed officers at every school in America.

Of course that leaves the churches, synagogues and grocery stores to fend for themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conundrum

I just want a couple bolt action hunting rifles for deer and elk (I do have some inherited family heirlooms and revolvers but don't "need" any of them). If it came down to a gun ban, I could still hunt with my bow and would be a bit grumpy but still turn in my stuff. I think both sides need to watch their alienating generalizations as I am one who has written and called my legislators for stronger firearm controls.

---

Do you think the emails you send or the money you spend moves the needle more?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SumJongGuy

Only if they nuke the filibuster first... and calling Manchin a democrat is questionable.. Calling Sinema anything is questionable..

---

Right, that's why I'm talking about November 2022.

Man, does that Texas governor sure come across as a greasy, do-nothing sumbitch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hutash

Awe, so that is why conservatives are calling g for four armed officers at every school in America.

Of course that leaves the churches, synagogues and grocery stores to fend for themselves.

---

School is mandated by the government for children to attend.

Grocery stores, churches, synagogues, etc are optional.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulster2626

Man, does that Texas governor sure come across as a greasy, do-nothing sumbitch.

---