Sad week in Orlando

I don't think a lot of Americans are blind to it, I simply think they have a different perspective on it. I'm sure there also is education about the issue, but that's less "sexy" in the news and doesn't get reported the same way as various traumatic attacks do. That's a media/media consumption issue more than a gun issue really.

At the end of the day you can ban anything you want, you can educate and you can restrict, but a hatefilled person intent on doing violence is likely to find a waay to do that violence. It's a sad and horrible thing, and while I can understand the knee-jerk reactions of shouting terrorism or gun-laws, it only seems to foster a tense and inhospitable environment that furthers no real changes and only becomes something of a screaming match.
 
Bluebird said:
How do you know I'm not educated on it? You shouldn't base an argument on assumptions or opinions - it is a fallacy.
Click to expand...

Assumptions no, opinions yes. The day we stop people from having opinions is the day we step closer to a fascist society.
 
Taake said:
I don't think a lot of Americans are blind to it, I simply think they have a different perspective on it. I'm sure there also is education about the issue, but that's less "sexy" in the news and doesn't get reported the same way as various traumatic attacks do. That's a media/media consumption issue more than a gun issue really.

At the end of the day you can ban anything you want, you can educate and you can restrict, but a hatefilled person intent on doing violence is likely to find a waay to do that violence. It's a sad and horrible thing, and while I can understand the knee-jerk reactions of shouting terrorism or gun-laws, it only seems to foster a tense and inhospitable environment that furthers no real changes and only becomes something of a screaming match.
Click to expand...

Okay you tell me what the answer is then? Because it seems reasonable to me when things are just getting worse all the time to suggest that things are not right in the culture and that drastic steps need to be taken. And since this thing about the media white washing the issue again has been brought up I will respond. Yes a lot of the media distort the truth, in fact I'm sure its fair to say that a lot of the media flat out lie. Of course reporting like anything else on television (films, TV, etc..) normally is taking something from one angle or the other. But just like I cannot tar all Americans with the same brush (which I wasn't doing by the way) you guys cannot tar the media with same brush. For example I read the Guardian. Yes like every other newspaper they have a political agenda, but unlike many of the glossy rags they report the news in balanced way, and do offer comment from each side of the debate. As for the American attitude on the matter? Just after I believe it was the cinema shootings I heard an on air interview (so that's live) with an American gun owner who was totally passive to the issue. He gave no good argument for why being Pro Guns was a good thing and all he seemed bothered about was the thought of him as a gun owner being punished by the suggestion that Guns are part of the problem. He was clueless. And before you guys ask, that on air interview was on the BBC. You might have heard of them😉
 
Bluebird
Bluebird
You based your point on your assumption of my education lol
Mr Trick said:
Okay you tell me what the answer is then? Because it seems reasonable to me when things are just getting worse all the time to suggest that things are not right in the culture and that drastic steps need to be taken. And since this thing about the media white washing the issue again has been brought up I will respond. Yes a lot of the media distort the truth, in fact I'm sure its fair to say that a lot of the media flat out lie. Of course reporting like anything else on television (films, TV, etc..) normally is taking something from one angle or the other. But just like I cannot tar all Americans with the same brush (which I wasn't doing by the way) you guys cannot tar the media with same brush. For example I read the Guardian. Yes like every other newspaper they have a political agenda, but unlike many of the glossy rags they report the news in balanced way, and do offer comment from each side of the debate. As for the American attitude on the matter? Just after I believe it was the cinema shootings I heard an on air interview (so that's live) with an American gun owner who was totally passive to the issue. He gave no good argument for why being Pro Guns was a good thing and all he seemed bothered about was the thought of him as a gun owner being punished by the suggestion that Guns are part of the problem. He was clueless. And before you guys ask, that on air interview was on the BBC. You might have heard of them😉
Click to expand...

Dude, drop the freakin' tude.
And the "You might have heard of them *winky face*" is down right insulting. It's not cutesy, it's boorish.
 
Basically, you are allowed to own a firearm for lawful purposes in your home/business/vehicle. Each state, however, has its own laws about who is able to carry weapons outside of their home. Some have different steps for open and concealed carrying.

In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that the US government could not restrict having a gun in your own home, but could make prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons, possession by felons and the mentally ill, possession in schools or government buildings, the conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms, possession of dangerous and unusual weapons (e.g., machine guns), and that this list is not intended to be exhaustive.

So you can't carry a gun, even if you have a permit to, inside a school or airplane etc. And there are laws about for how long after being convicted of a crime felons/people on a controlled substance/in mental institutions/if you have a restraining order on you/if you are convicted of domestic abuse can't purchase weapons, minors can't purchase/own weapons (other than hunting rifles/shotguns and then there are restrictions). Then there is a list of prohibited firearms (saw-ed off shotguns, silencers, machine guns, armor piercing ammo etc). To own these you have to get special permission I believe from the Bureau of Firearms.
 
Washburne
Washburne
Thank you.
Buffy Summers said:
So you can't carry a gun, even if you have a permit to, inside a school
Click to expand...
But different states have different views on that as they are now starting to allow teachers that have carry permits TO carry in school. As long as it is locked up in their room I believe.
 
You're right. I guess it's more accurate to say the governments are able to legislate on who is able to carry guns in these places, rather than saying they prohibit it. Law enforcement, for example, is allowed to carry a weapon. (I think it's just when they're on duty, but I could be wrong. I know FBI must carry their weapon at all times, so I'm not sure.)
 
Buffy Summers said:
You're right. I guess it's more accurate to say the governments are able to legislate on who is able to carry guns in these places, rather than saying they prohibit it. Law enforcement, for example, is allowed to carry a weapon. (I think it's just when they're on duty, but I could be wrong. I know FBI must carry their weapon at all times, so I'm not sure.)
Click to expand...
I think law enforcement has to even when off duty, as, at least in this state, they are expected to assist in the event of a crime, etc, even if off duty so it would only make sense to have a firearm. I am just not sure if it can be their issued firearm, I think it has to be their personal, but on that I am not certain.
 
Bluebird said:
He's actually worse. He built upon the groundwork Bush left, and there's been far more drone strikes under Obama. At least Bush was fairly upfront about it.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Obama's campaign speeches derided Bush's "war-mongering" and promised to end America's involvement in Middle East conflicts...yet we see how THAT worked out.
And whether anyone disagrees with me or not, Bush commanded respect. Putin certainly didn't provoke him.
 
I think the problem with the gun argument is how overheated people can get over it. I am definitely not a fan of guns, and I find things like FPS games to be kinda gross. But as I grew up I learned to respect opposing opinions and understood that everyone has led a different life, with a different culture and their own experience and education of the world. I surely can't claim to be open minded if I don't allow myself to at least try to understand and respect another individual's opinions and beliefs. As it is how I would want others to treat me.
 
Thanks for your answer Buffy. I just need help understanding one thing better.

Buffy Summers said:
possession of dangerous and unusual weapons (e.g., machine guns)
Click to expand...
What qualifies as a dangerous weapon? Since in my head all weapons are dangerous. Just some more than others. Is there a drawn line? Or is it a mix of being both dangerous and unusual, even if so, to me, it had been enough to say unusual weapons.
 
Mr. Pole said:
Automatic machine guns. Probably medium or higher.
Click to expand...
Ah. Shows how little I know about machine guns. Medium or higher referring to bullets fired/certain time?
 
Washburne said:
Ah. Shows how little I know about machine guns. Medium or higher referring to bullets fired/certain time?
Click to expand...
Not so much at a certain time per se, as a sub machine gun can fire- i believe- the same amount; medium is generally belt fed (so they can fire thousands of rounds versus a clip at a time as found on rifles or subs) and they fire full power fully automatic (as opposed to semi-automatic like the rifles)

Sub machine guns used to be the hot topic in the late 80s with uzis and AK47s being used often in crimes, but they have been cut down own because of their age.
 
Washburne
Washburne
Thanks for keep on answering.
Buffy Summers said:
Oh right. Again, you are right. Man, you should go play the lottery today 🙂
Click to expand...
I would rather just stay on here and keep hearing you say "you're right" it's like a dream come true. The second best thing you could say to me. I fear these are but portents of the apocalypse.
 
I just found this

Irony: Jeh Johnson Says Gun Control Now a Matter of Homeland Security...Orlando Terrorist Worked For DHS

Apparently, the shooter was a licensed security guard whose employer was a subcontractor for the Department of Homeland Security, despite being under investigation by the FBI for over 10 months. If the Government had done its job in investigating this gun purchase during the required waiting period, which is the primary reason for the delay between purchase and acquisition, he would never been allowed to buy the rifle in the first place.

Bottom line, the gun dealer did his job properly, the BATF dropped the ball.
 
I know as of last year Florida waived the wait period if you have a concealed carry license- which the shooter reportedly had. Unless the laws have recently changed the wait period in this instance is/was a moot point.
 
According to NBC

The Orlando gunman's wife has told federal agents she tried to talk her husband out of carrying out the attack, NBC News has learned.

Omar Mateen's wife, Noor Zahi Salman, told the FBI she was with him when he bought ammunition and a holster, several officials familiar with the case said. She told the FBI that she drove him to the gay nightclub, Pulse, because he wanted to scope it out.

Authorities are considering filing criminal charges against Noor for failing to tell them what she knew before the brutal attack, law enforcement officials say, but no decision has been made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom