Gun control

Big Phoenix

Big Phoenix

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Gold Donor>
44,612
93,155
Well California just went and banned center fire rifles with detachable magazines.

aka "common sense gun legislation"
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,850
137,944
One of the Conservatives Who Beat Gun Control in Colorado Explains How They Did It

- Hispanics: In the heavily Democrat, hispanic district in Pueblo, hispanics are strong 2nd amendment supporters.

- Women: There were many women behind this Recall movement, beginning when the gun control bills were heard in the State Legislature. A new radio ad out in the final weekend of the election featured Kimberly Weeks, a victim of rape, who testified in the State Legislature and took Senator John Morse to task on why she would be robbed of her right to defend herself. Other women's groups were the first to run ads against Senator John Morse on the theme of "a woman's right to choose... how to defend herself" which pushed the narrative. And even the Spokesperson for the effort (me) is a woman, and I, too, was one of the first women to testify against the gun control bills back in February. I got in under the wire to testify before they shut down the testimony from the public.

- Blue collar: 3 of the 3 Founders of the Pueblo Recall are blue collar workers. 2 of them are plumbers and 1 is an electrician. They connected very well with the demographics of Pueblo, which is a blue collar former-steel worker town. 1 of the founding members of the Morse Recall is also blue collar, he wears a hard hat and spends about 100 hours per week out in an oil field in steel toed boots, then would go home at night and work on the Recall.

From the beginning, we had interesting demographics on our side. Again, by the numbers:More Democrats & Independents combined signed the Recall petition than Republicans.I believe this goes back to #1 above, it struck a populist nerve that appealed to independents. When we saw the turnout on Election Day was spiking with Independent/unaffiliated voters, we were ecstatic because we knew that a majority of those votes would likely break our way.
Click to expand...
 
Erronius

Erronius

Macho Ma'am
<Gold Donor>
16,461
42,372
fanaskin_sl said:
ctl+f, search for word "gun", 0 found.

what the hell was the point of that retarded straw man?
Click to expand...
I can understand khalid or whoever not getting the reference, but you should be ashamed of yourself, Mr."Piggy would have been safer and not have had a boulder encave his skull if he'd had a gun".
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,850
137,944
Jesus h Christ seriously? you honestly think the whole book of intimidation would have occurred if piggy didn't relent to their bullying? you keep missing the point that most conflicts are avoided without an actual confrontation occurred merely by presence and intimidation. it's highly possible they never would have tried to attack piggy to begin with if he didn't act like a gigantic pussy to them, instead you are picking apart a single incident completely devoid of narrative and context.

It's exactly as pedantic and stupid as the initial impression a person reading that article was left with asking themselves "wtf is this doing here"
 
Erronius

Erronius

Macho Ma'am
<Gold Donor>
16,461
42,372
I guess I should have used a fuckton of smiley faces there to signify that I was ribbing you and not looking to start that debate anew (nevermind the random nature of the article and my not writing out any type of stance/position).


Sorry fanaskin!
frown.png
frown.png
frown.png
frown.png
frown.png
frown.png




Big Phoenix_sl said:
Well California just went and banned center fire rifles with detachable magazines.

aka "common sense gun legislation"
Click to expand...
I would hope that the misleading language there was a mistake, so that the part that states"...with the capacity to accept no more than 10 rounds"would be amended to"...with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds"but I doubt that it is sadly. If the intent was to ban all rifles with a detachable magazine entirely, I don't see why they would need to include any mention of capacity at all. Perhaps they're bound by the existing legislation that addresses"large capacity"magazines @ 10 rounds...

What's bizarre to me is that SB 374 isn't even the only Bill that is seeking to ban magazines altogether. Good luck with all that, California...

http://smartgunlaws.org/tracking-sta...s-legislation/
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...-outside-home/

The question was whether it was constitutional for a person to carry a firearm on your person or in a vehicle that was loaded or immediately accessible. This should make me feel a bit safer now when going through IL with a loaded firearm in my trunk and is a huge victory in one of the most anti-gun states (well, Chicago is, rest of IL not so much).
 
Araysar

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO
<Gold Donor>
75,308
148,146
khalid_sl said:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...-outside-home/

The question was whether it was constitutional for a person to carry a firearm on your person or in a vehicle that was loaded or immediately accessible. This should make me feel a bit safer now when going through IL with a loaded firearm in my trunk and is a huge victory in one of the most anti-gun states (well, Chicago is, rest of IL not so much).
Click to expand...
IL always had fairly reasonable transportation laws. But I assume thats not what you meant by "going through IL".
 
tad10

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,518
583
US History textbook guts the second Amendment under the guises of "summary" of Amendments.

rrr_img_43758.jpg
 
chaos

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor
17,324
4,839
Hrm, that is annoying. I have always thought that the militia part of it was important, but that is just misrepresentation.
 
chaos

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor
17,324
4,839
The idea, as I understand it, is that the language was meant to extend beyond official state "militias" or the National Guard, but implied the possibility of forming a militia for whatever reason.
 
Lithose

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,035
Yes. It was meant to support groups like the ones that arose during the revolution. It doesn't have to be a state sponsored militia and given the nature of the writers, and the time, it was probably their intent that it was NOT a state sponsored militia.
 
BrutulTM

BrutulTM

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun.
<Silver Donator>
14,431
2,218
Back then the US did not maintain a large standing army when we were not at war. As Lithose said though, the purpose of the Bill of Rights is to limit the power of government to infringe on the rights of the individual, so an amendment allowing the government to arm their own militias doesn't make any sense.
 
Sulrn

Sulrn

Deuces
2,159
360
Lithose_sl said:
Yes. It was meant to support groups like the ones that arose during the revolution. It doesn't have to be a state sponsored militia and given the nature of the writers, and the time, it was probably their intent that it was NOT a state sponsored militia.
Click to expand...
This is spot on. The framers had portrayed a pretty specific idea of the power of the individual/minimalist government. Empower the individual so when times of duress arise they can come together to create a stronger solution together; whether it were an invading nation or wide spread famine. Supposedly that's also the core concept of the Republican party platform as well... I think we all know better than that though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.