Ongoing Mass Shootings Thread pt 2 - Page 39 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-25-2017, 09:04 PM   #761
Refugee
 
kiwilad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Malmsbury Villa
Posts: 1,474
Local Time: 08:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick66 View Post
Are we happy to give up, say, our personal privacy on our electronic devices to make it easier for the government to catch terrorists? Or child predators?

Probably not, and I imagine the gun owners feel the same way about their weapons.
I don't think this quite works. Firstly, in my own country, I'm not seeing dozens of people die weekly in a manner that can be decreased through my privacy being compromised. If it was, and the government suggested impacting privacy to remove or reduce constant killings, I'd listen. I'd probably accept it.

I wonder if a lot of what this gun-owning insistence is, is a fear of the slippery slope - on top of what you've already mentioned re removal of the norm being unattractive.
I suspect the fear of gun restrictions leading to other restrictions is a big part of it. It's a way the US tends to differentiate itself from other nations - freedom and civil liberties.
__________________

kiwilad is offline  
Old 11-26-2017, 07:18 AM   #762
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat...
Posts: 6,663
Local Time: 08:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
So no, I don't agree with your analogy here, though I understand what you are trying to do. But the facts simply do not match your premise, because the curtailment of rights on essentially every component of our personal lives exists and is even readily accepted...except gun ownership in America, which is the golden calf that cannot be touched.
Except this simply isn't true. There are in fact restrictions on gun ownership. You just don't think they're restrictive enough (and I agree). And given that the hunter who shot that woman was already breaking the law (despite apparently owning the weapon legally), which "common sense" gun control law or additional restriction (other than an outright ban, which I'd support) would have prevented this tragedy anyway?

And we both know that there's really not much of a privacy "right" in an employment setting to give up, and it's a much different thing when it's the government involved. To that end, employers can say that employees aren't allowed to bring guns, of any type, to work, even in states where otherwise open carry or concealment is allowed. The same goes for most private property. When an Amazon warehouse employee is searched on her way out the door, there's no fourth amendment implication. That's a far cry from the government being allowed unfettered, warrantless searches of your person and property.

In any event, we're losing the plot. I'm not arguing that the gun control laws are restrictive enough. But your question was does the right to own a gun supersede that woman's right to live? Well maybe not. But similarly, does your right to privacy, and to be free from search and seizure, supersede the right of others (not to mention yourself) to be safer from terrorism? You haven't really said so. You said you accept giving up certain privacy rights to your employer...would you give up more to your government if it would make people safer?

My questions and yours, of course, are both academic anyway. Given the Bill of Rights, the government doesn't even have the ability to completely take your guns or your civil liberties, even in the name of safety.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwilad View Post
I don't think this quite works. Firstly, in my own country, I'm not seeing dozens of people die weekly in a manner that can be decreased through my privacy being compromised. If it was, and the government suggested impacting privacy to remove or reduce constant killings, I'd listen. I'd probably accept it.
While I love New Zealand (I've been many times and lived there for a while), I'm not sure comparisons between your wonderful country and the US are apt in this situation.
__________________

Nick66 is offline  
Old 11-26-2017, 09:01 PM   #763
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 03:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick66 View Post
Except this simply isn't true. There are in fact restrictions on gun ownership.
They are highly variable across state lines and need I remind you that there are states where you can purchase a gun with NO background check or gun licence? And where you do not need a concealed carry permit either?

You are doing in this debate the same thing that gun advocates, the NRA and the Republicans and many Democrats do - bringing up other issues so as to detract from the conversation at hand. You have a concern about giving up privacy rights when you go to the airport or with respect to your electronic devices? Great, pursue that as a separate issue. The notion that we should muddle the debate here with this that and the other thing is the very reason that there has been no progress made. For God's sake can we not have a gun debate on the facts and follow good precedent on introducing new restrictions without the conversation also hinging on whether or not border control has a right to your Facebook password? That is not constructive, helpful or in any way related to the conversation at hand.

And for the record, there are a lot of assumptions you've made. I've in fact given up much of my privacy in the name of security post 9/11. Both because I lived and worked in the US and go there with great frequency and live within 90 mins of the border. Perhaps it is different for you across the ocean, you've never had to go through, say, the Nexus process which I did. Which required my 3-month-old (at the time) to have his own interview with US customs, and no, I could not bring him along to my interview as that did not pass security muster. I've had my irises scanned and on file, I also have a very complex medical history which has required me on multiple occasions to undergo extra frisking at the airport, really borderline groping. All in the name of security/terrorism because I also travel with multiple injectable drugs and special permits/letters from medical providers, etc. So your notion that I would not be willing to give up privacy rights because they are important to me in the name of the greater good while requiring gun owners to do the same doesn't hold water at all. I understand that I am an anomalous case which can reasonably require extra search and an invasion of privacy regardless of the fact I don't pose any sort of threat. I understand the universe we live in and why I am subject to it. It can be annoying and uncomfortable, particularly in situations where I've been separated from my baby for these searches to be completed, but I live with it. God forbid we ask gun owners to, say, place a restriction on anyone convicted of domestic violence from owning a gun. No, that's just a step too far.

So tired of the million of excuses when it comes to this debate to be honest.
anitram is offline  
Old 11-27-2017, 09:52 AM   #764
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat...
Posts: 6,663
Local Time: 08:44 AM
Any honest, "fact-based" discussion of gun control must start with two realities for those who want more gun control...1) Personal gun ownership is protected under the Bill of Rights and; 2) "Common sense gun control" is not going stop most of these tragedies, and in fact suggesting as much is about politics, not about solving the problem.

Pro-gun types have their own realities to contend with, including the fact that, as you point out, the second amendment is costing a lot of lives and that arming everyone is going to result in more, not less, tragedies. The Blade Itself and all that.

The reason the debate isn't honest is because both sides (and yes, it's both sides, though not equally) are not being honest about the terms of the debate.
Nick66 is offline  
Old 11-27-2017, 09:57 AM   #765
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 03:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick66 View Post
Any honest, "fact-based" discussion of gun control must start with two realities for those who want more gun control...1) Personal gun ownership is protected under the Bill of Rights
Yes, but as a lawyer you must recognize that this is a matter of statutory interpretation and since the SCOTUS is a political body, which has been stacked with a majority of the right/pro-gun justices for decades, it is fairly disingenuous to state that there is an absolute right to personally own a gun. I would venture a guess that most legal academics disagree, though I have not kept up on legal research in the last decade admittedly.
anitram is offline  
Old 11-27-2017, 10:21 AM   #766
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat...
Posts: 6,663
Local Time: 08:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Yes, but as a lawyer you must recognize that this is a matter of statutory interpretation and since the SCOTUS is a political body, which has been stacked with a majority of the right/pro-gun justices for decades, it is fairly disingenuous to state that there is an absolute right to personally own a gun. I would venture a guess that most legal academics disagree, though I have not kept up on legal research in the last decade admittedly.
It's not disingenuous at all. And arguing otherwise isn't really fact based all, it's just wishful thinking. Under the US system, the Constitution means what the SCOTUS says it means (until they say something else). Now there's certainly quite of bit of scholarship, on both sides, of that particular debate (gun control as a personal vs. collective right). But it's only the opinion of the SCOTUS that matters (and more specifically, Justice Kennedy at the moment). In any event, it's not really a matter of statutory interpretation as it is Constitutional interpretation. And of course I know you know this.

Yes, we can argue the partisan nature of the court all day. But saying that the court was wrong in the Heller case is like conservatives saying it was wrong in Roe. So even though the Constitution makes no mention of a right to privacy, and certainly it doesn't mention abortion, we accept that abortion is a protected right anyway (well, reasonable people accept it) because the SCOTUS said so. So it goes with guns...the Court has interpreted the Second Amendment to be an individual right, so it is. Until it's not.

Until you change the Constitution, or get a Court that interprets it differently, gun ownership is a personal right. That's just a fact, and that's what I mean by having a fact based, honest discussion about guns.

And as a reminder, I'm fine with getting rid of all of most of the guns (I do think hunters should be allowed certain types of weapons, with registration & training). I'm just clear eyed about the obstacles to such a thing. And yes, we're going in circles I know.
Nick66 is offline  
Old 11-27-2017, 02:04 PM   #767
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 03:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick66 View Post
Until you change the Constitution, or get a Court that interprets it differently, gun ownership is a personal right.
Right, I was just confused because you seemed to be implying that the Bill of Rights is an absolute document granting absolute rights, which it really is not.

Also, the scholarship on the matter is not really about personal vs. collective rights but about the circumstances of personal ownership.
anitram is offline  
Old 11-27-2017, 03:10 PM   #768
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat...
Posts: 6,663
Local Time: 08:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Right, I was just confused because you seemed to be implying that the Bill of Rights is an absolute document granting absolute rights, which it really is not.

Also, the scholarship on the matter is not really about personal vs. collective rights but about the circumstances of personal ownership.
Of course. It's mostly just a limit on Governmental powers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Also, the scholarship on the matter is not really about personal vs. collective rights but about the circumstances of personal ownership.
That's contemporary legal scholarship...i.e. what are considered reasonable restrictions on personal gun ownership. And you're quite right that's a vigorous and ongoing debate among not only academics but advocates on both sides of the issue. And given the state of things as they stand, it's the most relevant discussion post-Heller.

But I was referring to the ongoing, and decades-old debate among Constitutional scholars and historians as to the framer's original intent with regards to the second amendment, including endless analysis of the placement of the comma after "free State." Which after all was crucial in the Heller decision. Unsurprising given that that decision came from a court dominated by textualists. Anyway, that is a collective vs. individual right debate. Albeit one settled by the Court for now.

But we've done this to death. See you after the next shooting! (it won't be long)
Nick66 is offline  
Old 02-14-2018, 03:48 PM   #769
Self-righteous bullshitter
 
BoMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Soviet Canuckistan — Socialist paradise
Posts: 16,900
Local Time: 04:44 AM
Thoughts and prayers, etc.
__________________

BoMac is offline  
Old 02-14-2018, 03:53 PM   #770
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,970
Local Time: 02:44 AM
DaveC is offline  
Old 02-14-2018, 04:00 PM   #771
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,192
Local Time: 02:44 AM
Fucking infuriating.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 02-14-2018, 04:02 PM   #772
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,720
Local Time: 01:44 AM
Here we go again . This is, what, the bazillionth school shooting/mass shooting now?

Just keep on sticking your heads in the sand, gun-loving Americans. Clearly working out so well for our country.
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 02-14-2018, 04:15 PM   #773
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,170
Local Time: 03:44 AM
A "number of fatalities".

THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS

At least he's in custody so he can't hurt or kill anyone else today.
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 02-14-2018, 04:33 PM   #774
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
YBORCITY's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: FLA
Posts: 5,384
Local Time: 02:44 AM
This time I'll add to the standard drivel that will come from the sewer that Washington dc:

Semi to semi automatic THOUGHTS
&
After market bump stock and radial trigger PRAYERS

I wonder how close to Mar a lago this was....wait, not close enough
Nothing to see here.... Hey who's winning American Idol?
YBORCITY is offline  
Old 02-14-2018, 04:43 PM   #775
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
YBORCITY's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: FLA
Posts: 5,384
Local Time: 02:44 AM
Fucking unbelievable... If this doesn't piss everyone off... I just don't know what does.
YBORCITY is offline  
Old 02-14-2018, 04:56 PM   #776
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,970
Local Time: 02:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by YBORCITY View Post
I wonder how close to Mar a lago this was....wait, not close enough
DaveC is offline  
Old 02-14-2018, 05:19 PM   #777
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat...
Posts: 6,663
Local Time: 08:44 AM
Do we know what kind of weapon it was? Was it modified? Was it legally purchased?
Nick66 is offline  
Old 02-14-2018, 07:33 PM   #778
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BEAL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: San Diego
Posts: 6,516
Local Time: 07:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick66 View Post
Do we know what kind of weapon it was? Was it modified? Was it legally purchased?


Yes. It was a gun, as is the case in all gun violence

It doesn’t matter. Nothing will be done.

Thoughts and prayers

Now isn’t the time to talk about gun control

Mental health

Etc etc
BEAL is offline  
Old 02-14-2018, 07:41 PM   #779
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,192
Local Time: 02:44 AM
Fuck their thoughts and fuck their prayers.

Your god is not solving this, assholes.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 02-14-2018, 07:50 PM   #780
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,720
Local Time: 01:44 AM
You know what I'd like to see happen from here on out? I think every single politician who is anti-gun control and who's supported the NRA should be required to spend time with the victims of these mass shootings (and other various types of gun violence), as well as their families. And they should do so for an extended period of time at that, not just meet them for a few hours and call it a day. They should accompany people to hospitals when they're getting further care for whatever long-term injuries they've suffered from being shot, and see how much the medical care is costing them and/or their families.

They should attend all the funerals for the victims. They should meet with families who've lost loved ones to these shootings and listen to their stories about their loved ones, and hear about how they're trying to cope with such a tragic loss. Stuff like that. I think they need to see the full effects of their lack of action on the people affected. I'd like to think that would change at least a few minds.

And any politician who insists this is a mental health issue while simultaneously refusing to support more affordable/universal healthcare should be called out for that by any pro-gun control politicians that run against them every chance they get.
__________________

Moonlit_Angel is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×