TRUMP 2020!

[Leo]

I have never blamed the gun. I do blame the lax way we allow it to be kept and used. I dont blame fast cars. I love them. I have raced them. But not on a public highway where my joy comes at tge risk of other peoples grief. I adore motor-bikes. I adore riding them at speed. But not on the sidewalk.

Personal responsibility does not mean just holding your hands up when you eff up and doing the time resultant. It means taking responsibility to ensure you never have to put your hands up and accept guilt.

+1

[Argo]

DANIK: Re: another post made on atheism : no, it is not a 'religion' anymore than stamp collecting is a 'religion'. It, like stamp-collecting, can bear similarities in having proponents who act with a like zealotry or obsessive evangelising manner but atheism is not a religion. A religion requires acceptance and worship of a higher being or beings, generally non-human, and according to a set of beliefs and dogmas about the nature of those beings. Atheists simply do not believe in such beings.

It is not a given that as an athiest may hold to, or value, moral or ethical ideals shared with some religions that they thus become 'religious' themselves. Organised religion does not hold an exclusive monopoly on moral standards or ethical behaviours. If anything, observation indicates that the abiding tenets of organised religion are hypocrisy, exclusion and the justification of hatred towards those who do not share their belief structure.

>>>>>A religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being, (or beings, for polytheistic faiths) nor must it be a mainstream faith.” Thus, the court concluded, atheism is equivalent to religion for purposes of the First Amendment and Kaufman should have been given the right to meet to discuss atheism ...

Is Atheism a Religion? Recent Judicial Perspectives on the ...academic.oup.com › jcs › article-pdfPDF

2 cents : I believe religious dogma IS dangerous. I also believe we grow through religion into our own spirituality and independence

[DezNutz]

I have never blamed the gun. I do blame the lax way we allow it to be kept and used. I dont blame fast cars. I love them. I have raced them. But not on a public highway where my joy comes at tge risk of other peoples grief. I adore motor-bikes. I adore riding them at speed. But not on the sidewalk.

Personal responsibility does not mean just holding your hands up when you eff up and doing the time resultant. It means taking responsibility to ensure you never have to put your hands up and accept guilt.

+1

So we should do away with guns because some people can't be personally responsible?

Should we do away with hammers, knives, forks, bats, lumber, axes, saws, glass bottles, etc. Seems some people can't be personally responsible enough to not kill or hurt others with them.

[Most Lee Harmless]

Never said do away with them. My position is we should exercise more control over them in the same way we exercise controls over and regulate other lethal technologies and equipment.

Just because some idiot jumps in their car, drives like a fool and wipes out some other road-user is no argument for refusing to regulate or control car use. But apparently, that is fine with gun use.

[DezNutz]

Never said do away with them. My position is we should exercise more control over them in the same way we exercise controls over and regulate other lethal technologies and equipment.

Almost anything can be used as a lethal instrument.

Regulating to what extent. As I said before, should we regulate, bats, knives, forks, hammers, screwdrivers, glass/metal bottles, rope? They are all lethal instruments, that have been used to kill someone.

Do you understand that laws do not stop criminals?

Do you know what the purpose of a gate arm is for on a parking lot?

[Most Lee Harmless]

Again, you justify doing nothing on the basis that some-one can ignore social mores and laws to use something else to achieve the same end. That is not an argument for laxity in gun control, that is an argument that any law is of no purpose because it could theoretically be broken.

Why not agree its fine for me to walk around with a hungry lion on a leash because, you know, I could walk around with a hungry alligator if you stopped me walking my lion.

[DezNutz]

Again, you justify doing nothing on the basis that some-one can ignore social mores and laws to use something else to achieve the same end. That is not an argument for laxity in gun control, that is an argument that any law is of no purpose because it could theoretically be broken.

Why not agree its fine for me to walk around with a hungry lion on a leash because, you know, I could walk around with a hungry alligator if you stopped me walking my lion.

No, laws only keep good people honest. Criminals don't care about laws. If laws prevented criminals from committing crime they wouldn't be criminals.

[Dmanwuzhere]

I have never blamed the gun. I do blame the lax way we allow it to be kept and used. I dont blame fast cars. I love them. I have raced them. But not on a public highway where my joy comes at tge risk of other peoples grief. I adore motor-bikes. I adore riding them at speed. But not on the sidewalk.

Personal responsibility does not mean just holding your hands up when you eff up and doing the time resultant. It means taking responsibility to ensure you never have to put your hands up and accept guilt.

lax ... explain lax with current gun laws the actual process to get them its anything but lax
i can build guns from a gas pipe and a nail if i want better than that i add springs a trigger and make my own clip or tube fed system
i can make pipe bombs and utilizing old tvs make them remote activated and a generic fuel that is hard to put out
i can make a flamethrower

all of those are lax because every thing needed is not in anyway related to the form of damage it can create so its off the radar
guns however are not lax to get

glad you think so at least you admit the decision is on the shooter and they decided to shoot sheesh you had me worried ive been watching my guns all night hoping i made it to today thankfully none of them acted up and im here
so you need something that binds crazy folks from enacting crazy fantasies as they are the ones in the wrong
instead of every law abiding gun owner
good luck with that

[Mack]

what new regulations would be good to add i wonder?

[Most Lee Harmless]

Mmmm... seems a contradictory attitude to hold. You need a gun because you dont trust other folk not to attack you... but you trust them to have a gun and not attack you with it.

Sure, making Amatol is simple. Makes you wonder why they bother regulating explosives. Stick them in the aisle next to the weedkiller and Draino...