Obama to Address Gun Control Soon

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Wow, this thread is garbage with not even two full pages. No wonder we can't seriously address this issue (and others) in this any country.

Gun control's a pretty devisive issue everywhere, not just in the USA, and it really lacks serious debate everywhere as well. It's mostly embty talking-points and ideological stubborness. And it's equally both sides fault really, not just the pro-gun crowd, but also people like yourself. I definatley recall you commenting that "You didn't even understand what the point of an airgun was, and that you therefore didn't understand why it was unreasonable to ban it." in an old Gun control thread. Now such a complete lack of understanding for people who likes guns, and such indifference to their side of the issue doesn't help in trying to create a serious debate. You can't just demand that the other side respect and understand your side when you're not even willing to consider their side.     

[Marokai Backbeat]

Wow, this thread is garbage with not even two full pages. No wonder we can't seriously address this issue (and others) in this any country.

Gun control's a pretty devisive issue everywhere, not just in the USA, and it really lacks serious debate everywhere as well. It's mostly embty talking-points and ideological stubborness. And it's equally both sides fault really, not just the pro-gun crowd, but also people like yourself. I definatley recall you commenting that "You didn't even understand what the point of an airgun was, and that you therefore didn't understand why it was unreasonable to ban it." in an old Gun control thread. Now such a complete lack of understanding for people who likes guns, and such indifference to their side of the issue doesn't help in trying to create a serious debate. You can't just demand that the other side respect and understand your side when you're not even willing to consider their side.     

I just did a quick search with "air" "airgun" "air gun" and "gun" through my posting history to find out what the hell you're talking about, and I didn't find a thing. I can't even remember commenting in gun control threads before the last month much at all, anyway. Before recently I didn't even care about the issue.

Stricter Gun Control- Neutral

Gun control is a major non-issue to me anyway, so I don't really care either way.

I should note that I don't really care about gun rights at all and if an individual state wanted to ban them, power to them as far as I care. I never have and likely never will handle a gun.

In fact, I've used the phrase "jump the gun" more often than I've commented about gun control in my entire history on the forum.

I commented only because it seems like there can't be a serious discussion on gun control at all on this forum, or anywhere else, because what happened in this thread is exactly what happens everywhere else. A bunch of people who don't care just stir the pot. Libertarians whine and hiss without offering any substantial comment whatsoever. People like Phil pop in just to criticize other posters instead of address the actual issue.

There are certain aspects of gun control laws we've let lapse that we should bring back. There are some things that are just stupid and ineffective. I'm not standing here and shouting "ban the guns!" And I, frankly, don't see that many other people doing that either. I see much more people on the other extreme, though, refusing to admit any gun control legislation is good at all, and just insulting anyone who attempts to engage anyone on the issue. Morgan is a perfect example of terrible posting in any gun control topic, since virtually all he does is empty quote, post incredibly unfunny pictures, or talk about how the evil liberals just ban everything. Wormyguy isn't much of a peach either, starting an absurdly disengenuous thread over on the international politics board.

If you want to shame anyone into having a serious discussion over this issue, A) Get your facts straight about what I've said or haven't said, and B) Actually target the group that makes having these discussions impossible. Because I don't think most of the problem comes from me or those with red avatars.

(And I have a lack of understanding toward guns and people who like them? Please. I've grown up in rural southern Ohio, virtually everyone in my family has and regularly uses guns as if they're some sort of toy. I've probably been exposed to gun lovers and hunting folk more often than half the people on this site.)

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Allow me to refresh your memory Marokai.

Goodness, first Australia prevents people from accessing child sex and now Scotland is banning air guns and all their many household uses. Will the world ever be free again?

Now I might have misinterpeted the meaning of this post, but I definatley felt sarcasm in it, and that you in fact see no household uses for an air gun. If it is indeed sarcasm, I'd say this would show just the sort of lack of understanding and respect for the other side, that you claim you don't have, and I'm accussing you of with no basis, comparing them to people who watch child pornography.

Now I might have given you the benefit of the doubt, that you were in a bad mood when you made that post, that you didn't mean it in that way, or that you have since changed  your mind, or that it was one of those silly sarcastic remarks all of us do sometimes. But apperently you've always been respectful and understanding of the pro-gun side and unlike the horrible blue avatars never made a post in a gun-control thread that wasn't informative and intellectual. In fact you don't even post in gun legislation threads, and you've up til now been completly neutral on the whole issue of gun legislation.   

Now my post wasn't an attack on you as a person or a poster, I didn't mean it that way, and I'm sorry that you saw it that way. Although we've had diffrences in the past, I've still always had respect for you. I was merly trying to point out that the fact that the gun debate tend to be bad and stupid is equally both sides fault. And I don't think you should try to act like you're above that when you're clearly not, or that blues, yellows, and greens, are somehow more un-serious than the reds.

Now, I'm a reasonable person, and as you, I also would support a continued ban on assult weapons, age-restrictions, and maybe even licenses when it comes to gun control. I'm just questioning if it's what Obama should be spending political capital on when he clearly wouldn't be able to get anything out of it in terms of legislation, especially when it's such a leathal issue. Now that's the thing I'd have told you in a serious discussion, but I doubt that you want to actually have a serious discussion, you just want to act condasending towards people with a different world-view.       

[Free Palestine]

Don't take our guns! How are we going to protect ourselves!!!

Be gone, troll.

[beneficii]

Glad you agree Obama's 2008 landslide was a fluke, too. And Clinton's. And Reagan's. And Roosevelt's...

Midterms are vastly different than Presidential elections, there isn't even any comparison.

Exactly.  It's also common for the first midterm in a Presidency to go against the President; this happened with both Clinton and Reagan.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Allow me to refresh your memory Marokai.

Goodness, first Australia prevents people from accessing child sex and now Scotland is banning air guns and all their many household uses. Will the world ever be free again?

Now I might have misinterpeted the meaning of this post, but I definatley felt sarcasm in it, and that you in fact see no household uses for an air gun. If it is indeed sarcasm, I'd say this would show just the sort of lack of understanding and respect for the other side, that you claim you don't have, and I'm accussing you of with no basis, comparing them to people who watch child pornography.

It had nothing to do with air guns just as that comment had nothing to do with child porn. It has to do with people acting like Australia is a totalitarian state and reacting with absurdly disproportionate rhetoric because they banned or restricted them. I understand the other side, and I understand the use of air guns, but I don't have time to deal with dooms day rhetoric from libertarians that could be replaced by a computer program designed to spit out one-liners.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

 
I don't pretend to be a nice guy. But threads like these are filled with complete wastes of time. If you think FallenMorgan or Wormyguy have advanced the discussion on this issue around this forum whatsoever, you're out of your mind. At least criticizing their entirely vacuous commentary has some sort of constructive intent.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think this is BS. I also think you don't really understand just how completely insane the gun lobby in America is. This thread is indicative of it. I don't see Democrats in congress proposing gun bans, I see them proposing very limited in scope, pragmatic reforms about the size of clips or strengthening background check laws. I see Republicans, by and large opposing even that.

After the tragedy in Tuscon, I saw Rachel Maddow go on her show with statistics on gun law regulations and highlighting individual portions of the AWB that have expired. I saw the NRA and far-right individuals start freaking out at the mere mention of new gun controls regardless of what they were. On this site, I see Wormyguy and FallenMorgan acting like total tools, and others trying to highlight issues of clip size and gun violence statistics here in comparison to other countries, and mentioning our very violent culture.

I don't see equivalence in those sets of events. I see one side consistently paranoid about the mere mention of gun control laws, and one side desperate for teeny tiny pragmatic victories and throwing around a few "I told you so"s.

Do you even understand how completely bonkers our gun laws are in some parts of the country? Arizona allows bringing guns into bars and carrying concealed weapons without licenses. Republicans in the Senate kept trying to goad Obama into opposing them by proposing allowing carrying guns into national parks or trains and tacking them onto unrelated legislation. This issue, along with a ton of others in this country, used to be on some sort of settled consensus with some working room (Reagan signed gun control legislation several times), and now, like so many others, there's only insane people, and the rest of us.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well I will act like that and say that because, on average, it's all that seems to be the case.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This tragedy sparked my interest in gun control, and I'm curious about learning and actually having an argument or two on a taboo topic in politics. This issue deserves to be discussed in more depth than what half the posters around here seem to be willing to provide. If there was ever a serious discussion ongoing on the issue, you would've seen me jump in with my questions and my comments. I haven't done that, though, because that hasn't happened at all yet.

If someone thinks that we should treat guns like toys, acts flippant toward any thread about gun control, or actually pretends like reducing ammo clip sizes (Which is, I'm sorry to say, a complete no brainer. A 30 bullet sized clip serves absolutely no innocent purpose unless you're protecting yourself from an entire gang) is a direct assault on freedom, then I'm probably less likely to smile and invite you for coffee to have a sincere discussion on the "issues." When someone decides to start a "serious gun control discussion thread" in which wormyguy or fallenmorgan are handcuffed from typing less than a paragraph, you'll see me there.

But I don't have high hopes, and it's more than a little frustrating and saddening that my country can't have a national debate about a damn thing these days.