Rhode Island State Representative Wants to Tax Violent Video Games

Joined
Dec 13, 2003
Messages
2,238
...

Here, I'll go first. Good, bad and so-so ideas.
1. Smaller magazine sizes. Could it have an impact? Shooters were have to reload more often. Could lead to less killing.

2. Stop posting the faces and names of mass shooters all around the nation. Could reduce the amount of copycat killers in the future.

3. Place officers or security guards in school. Have better lockdown procedures. Could reduce the amount and/or magnitude of school shootings that there are.

4. Get rid of every single gun there is in the US. Technically no one could ever be killed by a gun again. Would it stop people from committing mass murders?

5. Better education or mandatory education about guns at early ages in school. They don't have to shoot or hold them, but they should be shown how dangerous they are, how quick they can hurt or kill someone, how powerful they are, what they should only be used for, etc. If kids respected guns at an early age, would they be less likely to kill other humans with them?

6. Restrict handguns like Canada and other countries do. Less handguns out there and harder to acquire and use could mean less shootings with them.

7. Better statistics on guns when people actually use them for good, such as defense of themselves or others. Then we can evaluate the merits of having them in the first place for good reasons.

8. Educate people on real facts about guns such as the AR-15. How it is similar to other guns, yet feared more and these others guns aren't in danger of going away. You put some plastic on a rifle and paint it black and suddenly people have an irrational fear of it. Stop watching CNN when they tell you that you should be scared more about it than handguns, when handguns quite clearly are used in far more murders.

9. Maybe everyone that hasn't fired a gun should be required to spend a day at the gun range and learn about them. Might lead to more respect and less killing.

10. Longer waiting periods before you can purchase a gun. Impulses of revenge and murder cool off after you've calmed down.

11. Higher age limit before you could legally purchase guns. 19 year olds wouldn't be able to legally buys guns and shoot up schools with them...

12. Better mental health reporting. Places like the FBI take reports more seriously and do something about it. If it's a manpower issue, then hire more people.

13. If friends and family members believe you are a threat to yourself and others, if they can prove it to authorities, then have the weapons confiscated.

The way I see it we have a few choices that we can make. We can all sit at our computers and complain, virtue signal, blame others and be internet warriors. Or we can exit the conversation because it's getting too heavy or stressful. Or we can come up with ideas on how to prevent people from dying in the future. I'd really like to choose option number 3 here.

If you don't like what I've said, please be critical of it and explain why something is not good. Or explain how something could be improved upon. Please don't bash. That doesn't save lives.



Very good points made. Should be mandatory reading for both sides of the gun debate.
 

mynamehere

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2007
Messages
1,763
Hitler blamed immigrants and diversity for a lot of problems as well. Get help.
He also teamed up with the mohammedans because they shared similar ideologies.
School shootings weren't a thang until these mental health drugs hit the market....
It was a big mistake to close down all those mental institutions. The #1 cause of mass shootings isn't firearms...it's mental problems.

All these people spouting "easy access to guns" have obviously never tried to purchase a firearm. These same people probably think that AR stands for "assault rifle". They also probably think that actual assault rifles are readily available to the public. Look up what firearms are used in most "mass shootings" and you'll find it's not an AR, or any semiauto rife got that matter. Also, look up what constitutes a "mass shooting" and you'll find that they've made it VERY easy to label an incident as a "mass shooting".
If AR stands for "assault rifle", then mine sure isn't living up to its name. I don't know anyone whose rifle has ever assaulted anyone, and I bet they don't either. You may know someone who owns a semiautomatic rifle, but I highly doubt that you know anyone who owns an assault rifle.
Fact: the weapon in two major school shootings was an ar15.
You dug down deep and only found two; and yet somehow they're the biggest problem on all of this.:confused: Fact: AR 15s are NOT used in many mass shootings period.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Fact: the weapon in two major school shootings was an ar15. Not a hypothetical weapon that could be more effective even though we have no idea what it is. Zero logic in your argument. A weapon like an ar15 or any other high rate of fire rifle makes it easy for those with emotional or mental issues to act on their rage


A hypothetical weapon?

Let's test your grasp of facts, let's start with AR-15, what does AR stand for?

When was the weapon designed and by whom?

Why was it selected over other weapons by the US Army as a service rifle?

And which of any of these answers correlates with why a couple of teenagers selected them for their purpose, other than they were the best that they happened to own at the time they decided to go bat fucking bonkers and kill other children?

And since you like stats, out of all school shootings, how many were perpetrated with AR-15s?

BTW, the shooter could killed more people with a Springfield SOCOM 16, in the crowded hallways each round fired could have killed 2 or three kids at a time, 7.62x51 having far greater penetration characteristics they could easily penetrate walls killing even more people. This "hypothetical weapon" is the same weapon, along with it's cousins, that the Army and Marines began using in Afghanistan when the shortcomings of 5.56mm rifles became apparent.

There have been several other "major" school shootings in which no AR-15s were used. Columbine for starters.

So if you want to keep arguing weapons with a US Army retiree please, I have time, bring it.
 

Ur_Mom

Fully [H]
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
20,619
Time to hit the gaming subforum and make a list of the people playing the violent games. They are going on a watch list.

It's weird that violent people will seek out things that feed those tendencies. Who would have thought... Video games, metal, etc. won't make people violent. Violent people might be attracted to those things, though.

As far as everything else... Literally Hitler status. :D
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Back in the 70's or maybe it was the 80's, Dungeons and Dragons was the evil kid on the block. Everyone that played it were Satanists and sacrificed kittens apparently. It led to all kinds of crime. When they cracked down on it, all crime went away.
I remember watching the D&D cartoon on Saturday mornings - it was awesome. It got canceled. My friend's mom also took all of his D&D books and actually burnt them. Ridiculous.
Video games are not the problem here people. Taxing them is not going to do anything except pad a few pocket books. I'd love to see how much of the money would actually got to "helping" people - more likely, it will go to cover something else that was underfunded like a pension program.


Yup, and what was the evil gun of that period in time?


Why, the Saturday Night Special of course.

...had a barrel that's blue and cold ......
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
12,916
...a combination of easy access to semi or fully automatic weapons...

Doesn't seem to be a problem in Switzerland (yeah, I know their requirements for owning one are a little more stringent) where you can readily buy both semi and full autos. Even Canada isn't that bad, and access to such weapons are not that more stringent than many states in the US.

...poor people for the prevalence of gun violence...

Well unfortunately for you, the statistics worldwide show a correlation with poor people and crime. The wealthiest countries have the least crime, and the wealthiest areas in those countries see the least crime. To say otherwise is ludicrous. In the US, the poor are blacks and Hispanics. Guess which ethnic groups commit the most violent crimes? Hint, they aren't middle easterners, east Asians or Caucasians. To ignore that is doing such a disservice to those communities (black and Hispanic) that need the most help. If you don't acknowledge the problems I can't imagine you will ever bother to help those communities.

I'm ignorant on the subject because I feel a semiautomatic rifle that can shoot a round per second is a high rate of fire weapon? Okie dokie there fella. Whatever makes you feel smarter.

It is similar to saying a horse is a fast an efficient type of transportation in 2018. :p
 
Last edited:

Master_shake_

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 9, 2012
Messages
17,794
Toronto is one of the most diverse cities in the world if not he most diverse. Explain please why there are no school shootings.

I will not be brought down to the level of blaming ethnic differences for something as tragic as this. Get help.
It's not diverse at all.

It's actually an enclave.

Each race or whatever sticks to their own.
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
A hypothetical weapon?

Let's test your grasp of facts, let's start with AR-15, what does AR stand for?

When was the weapon designed and by whom?

Why was it selected over other weapons by the US Army as a service rifle?

And which of any of these answers correlates with why a couple of teenagers selected them for their purpose, other than they were the best that they happened to own at the time they decided to go bat fucking bonkers and kill other children?

And since you like stats, out of all school shootings, how many were perpetrated with AR-15s?

BTW, the shooter could killed more people with a Springfield SOCOM 16, in the crowded hallways each round fired could have killed 2 or three kids at a time, 7.62x51 having far greater penetration characteristics they could easily penetrate walls killing even more people. This "hypothetical weapon" is the same weapon, along with it's cousins, that the Army and Marines began using in Afghanistan when the shortcomings of 5.56mm rifles became apparent.

There have been several other "major" school shootings in which no AR-15s were used. Columbine for starters.

So if you want to keep arguing weapons with a US Army retiree please, I have time, bring it.

I don't understand. Why do I want to argue with you about gun knowledge? Or the intricate details of different weapons? I don't have anything against a gun in general. I agree with the 2nd amendment. My issue with some of the commenters was that they went all white supremacist implying that a diverse society is to blame for these shootings. My beef with guns is it is too easy for someone who may have mental or emotional issues to get access to a weapon and act on those sudden moments of rage causing mass casualties.

I have no intention of engaging in a weapon knowledge argument. And being a retired soldier, I am a bit surprised that you're not pushing back on the unAmerican comments regarding diversity in our citizens being a catalyst for mass shootings.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Anyone with half a brain knows what the causes are: a combination of easy access to semi or fully automatic weapons, mental illness, and most importantly in my opinion a pervading hopelessness brought on by the current social and political climate. When people lose hope, they will eventually begin to lash out violently at everything around them. It is not one of these factors, it is all of them and then some. The only reason to lay the blame on one factor is if you are trying to push an agenda.

This is all just a distraction, to keep us fighting against each other and arguing about what the cause of these problems are. When this current debate fades, Congress will dredge up another one, likely an old classic like abortion, gay marriage, or states rights. We argue, the nation becomes more divided, nothing is accomplished. It's all just a smokescreen so the oligarchy can loot and pillage for their own greed while we fight for ever-diminishing scraps. We should all be concerned about ALL issues, not because they may or may not affect us individually, but because they effect us all as a whole. Eventually no one will be immune from the effects of this widespread hopelessness. The oligarch's greed is insatiable, and when they have squeezed everything they can from the lower and middle classes they will come gunning for the rest. White privilege will be cast down along with all the other protections that isolate the upper classes from the lower. The future of this timeline is not bright.

Don't believe me? Look at the people posting above who are stealthily blaming other races and poor people for the prevalence of gun violence, even though nearly every mass shooter is white and not poor. You are falling into their trap, and trying to make your way out by digging downward.



I don't believe you, you start out good, then you spiral right out into lah lah land.

First off, fully automatic weapons aren't even on the RADAR. Other than the Vegas shooting where a bump-stock was used for the first time in a shooting, the last time a fully automatic weapon was used in a murder in the US was about 30 years ago. According to the definition by the BATF, fully-automatic weapons are machineguns. Although anyone who isn't a prohibited possessor or lives in a State where machineguns are prohibited, (about 8), everyone else is permitted to purchase one, although it requires a Class 3 tax stamp under NFA law, and no machineguns can be imported are manufactured for sale to US citizens other than military and law enforcement, any one of us can spend on average $16,000 or more to buy a machinegun. One of just under a half million
The total number on the books as of February 24, 2016 is just under a half million
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...eveals-the-number-of-registered-machine-guns/

A half million sounds like a lot, until you understand a couple things. Many of the owners own more then one, many no longer function properly, no new ones are available as they have to have been made before 1984.

Let's put this into some perspective;
How many ar15s are in the US?

The National Shooting Sports Foundation estimates there are roughly 5 million to 10 million AR-15 rifles owned in the United States, a small share of the roughly 300 million firearms owned by Americans.Jun 13, 2016
So less than half a million machineguns, and another perhaps 10 million AR-15s out of an estimated total 300 million firearms in a country of 325 million people.

OK, all of this was just to address your idea that machineguns are everywhere and easy to get.

Now where I really have a problem, the cause of "hopelessness". It's not the rich oligarchy that is crushing hope in the US. It's the young citizens who perpetuate a false claim that there are no jobs for them and cite every excuse under the sun, it's rigged, it's foreigners, H1B visas, robots, etc etc etc.

Allow me to enlighten you. Most Americans are slaves. They are slaves to their debt. They are trained in school to use credit cards, to "manage debt", etc. They are taught that they can't own a home without getting a mortgage. That they should leave high school, go straight to college and rack up their first $60,000+ debtor's collar, get their first real job, hook up, buy a home they can not afford, etc etc, and some how save 10% of what they make for their retirement.

And I say bullshit !

Those rich bastards want you working, earning a paycheck, and giving them from 6 to 21% of everything you make. If you aren't making a wage then you are just a rock and you can't get blood from a stone, they want you working. And they want you spending. They also want you moving up, some have to move up, make things work, business and technology must evolve, they have to keep it going. The fat cats are not the ones destroying hope.

Young people who don't know how to get jobs tell others that there are no jobs.

Other who spent their money on useless degrees and training with little hope for a job add to the tales of woe.

Others that really don't even want to work sit around and echo the excuses of others.

But jobs are out there, always available, ask the people who are working. I turn away recruiters almost weekly. I see young people starting out all the time in my work place and I work in a pretty exclusive club.

The lower and middle classes can't give away their money fast enough. We have a fast population of deluded citizens living in a fantasy world ignoring the future and the realities of our day unwilling to accept that their problems are their own making and unable to recognize what they must do to improve their position in this world.

So I don't believe you, so close, but so far.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dan_D
like this

FortTaylor

n00b
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
32
If there were an option to donate at the time of purchase to help support mental health facilites, I would donate a dollar or two every time just for the sake of the people that need help. However, if you roll it into a tax I have to pay I'll fight tooth and nail everytime.
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
If there were an option to donate at the time of purchase to help support mental health facilites, I would donate a dollar or two every time just for the sake of the people that need help. However, if you roll it into a tax I have to pay I'll fight tooth and nail everytime.

Makes sense. But you may not be the majority in terms of willingness to donate. For example, the cigarette industry cost society billions and billions of dollars in health care costs so a tax is needed to offset the monetary and societal damage that cigarettes have caused. The same argument could be made for guns although I'd have no idea how to value the monetary damage per gun sale.
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
A
Makes sense. But you may not be the majority in terms of willingness to donate. For example, the cigarette industry cost society billions and billions of dollars in health care costs so a tax is needed to offset the monetary and societal damage that cigarettes have caused. The same argument could be made for guns although I'd have no idea how to value the monetary damage per gun sale.

Another thought is an gun industry funded insurance policy with premiums paid for each gun sale at point of purchase. This would go to cover coats of any potential illegal
I don't believe you, you start out good, then you spiral right out into lah lah land.

First off, fully automatic weapons aren't even on the RADAR. Other than the Vegas shooting where a bump-stock was used for the first time in a shooting, the last time a fully automatic weapon was used in a murder in the US was about 30 years ago. According to the definition by the BATF, fully-automatic weapons are machineguns. Although anyone who isn't a prohibited possessor or lives in a State where machineguns are prohibited, (about 8), everyone else is permitted to purchase one, although it requires a Class 3 tax stamp under NFA law, and no machineguns can be imported are manufactured for sale to US citizens other than military and law enforcement, any one of us can spend on average $16,000 or more to buy a machinegun. One of just under a half million

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...eveals-the-number-of-registered-machine-guns/

A half million sounds like a lot, until you understand a couple things. Many of the owners own more then one, many no longer function properly, no new ones are available as they have to have been made before 1984.

Let's put this into some perspective;

So less than half a million machineguns, and another perhaps 10 million AR-15s out of an estimated total 300 million firearms in a country of 325 million people.

OK, all of this was just to address your idea that machineguns are everywhere and easy to get.

Now where I really have a problem, the cause of "hopelessness". It's not the rich oligarchy that is crushing hope in the US. It's the young citizens who perpetuate a false claim that there are no jobs for them and cite every excuse under the sun, it's rigged, it's foreigners, H1B visas, robots, etc etc etc.

Allow me to enlighten you. Most Americans are slaves. They are slaves to their debt. They are trained in school to use credit cards, to "manage debt", etc. They are taught that they can't own a home without getting a mortgage. That they should leave high school, go straight to college and rack up their first $60,000+ debtor's collar, get their first real job, hook up, buy a home they can not afford, etc etc, and some how save 10% of what they make for their retirement.

And I say bullshit !

Those rich bastards want you working, earning a paycheck, and giving them from 6 to 21% of everything you make. If you aren't making a wage then you are just a rock and you can't get blood from a stone, they want you working. And they want you spending. They also want you moving up, some have to move up, make things work, business and technology must evolve, they have to keep it going. The fat cats are not the ones destroying hope.

Young people who don't know how to get jobs tell others that there are no jobs.

Other who spent their money on useless degrees and training with little hope for a job add to the tales of woe.

Others that really don't even want to work sit around and echo the excuses of others.

But jobs are out there, always available, ask the people who are working. I turn away recruiters almost weekly. I see young people starting out all the time in my work place and I work in a pretty exclusive club.

The lower and middle classes can't give away their money fast enough. We have a fast population of deluded citizens living in a fantasy world ignoring the future and the realities of our day unwilling to accept that their problems are their own making and unable to recognize what they must do to improve their position in this world.

So I don't believe you, so close, but so far.

What is to say that your argument is more right than his? I agree with points from both of you but to say you are more right than him is impossible to confirm. There is a lot of truth when he says that the wealthy who have strong financial influence over our elected officials are the ones benefiting exponentially more from the economic growth. Your assertion that a lack of financial discipline has some merit but can no way be quantified. What can be quantified is financial growth by economic status and it is undeniable that a tiny fraction of our country are seeing the biggest gains.
 

FortTaylor

n00b
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
32
Makes sense. But you may not be the majority in terms of willingness to donate. For example, the cigarette industry cost society billions and billions of dollars in health care costs so a tax is needed to offset the monetary and societal damage that cigarettes have caused. The same argument could be made for guns although I'd have no idea how to value the monetary damage per gun sale.
Cigarettes are different than guns and games in that there is actual evidence that they cause harm and are willingly ingested. Guns and games don't make you crazy, that was already there. Guns in total cause roughly 35,000 deaths a year however that includes over 10k in suicides, and roughly 15k in police related deaths. The rest is mostly inner city crime which don't get me wrong is a problem, but most of those weren't purchased legally anyway Less than 500 people a year are killed in mass shootings. Regardless of that, I think this is more of a cash grab for Rhode Island than it is anything else.
 

doz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
6,419
Here, I'll go first. Good, bad and so-so ideas.
1. Smaller magazine sizes. Could it have an impact? Shooters were have to reload more often. Could lead to less killing.
Reloading more often. HOLY SHIT. Seconds. How long did the MB32 shooter have? 10 minutes+ of firing? Just imagine if he could actually aim and utilize the gun. Just imagine what a good shooter with a bolt-action 223 could have done....

2. Stop posting the faces and names of mass shooters all around the nation. Could reduce the amount of copycat killers in the future.
Agreed, the glorification of these pieces of shit is horrible. Thank your liberal MSM for this. We must plaster this shit everywhere to promote our agenda.

3. Place officers or security guards in school. Have better lockdown procedures. Could reduce the amount and/or magnitude of school shootings that there are.
Agree, but at the same time, much more than that is needed.

4. Get rid of every single gun there is in the US. Technically no one could ever be killed by a gun again. Would it stop people from committing mass murders?
Obviously not. Didn't people just get run over late last year in NYC by an assault vehicle that was rented? BGC for rentals GOGOGO

5. Better education or mandatory education about guns at early ages in school. They don't have to shoot or hold them, but they should be shown how dangerous they are, how quick they can hurt or kill someone, how powerful they are, what they should only be used for, etc. If kids respected guns at an early age, would they be less likely to kill other humans with them?
You cannot educate kids about guns in school. This is a thing that should be done at home. You can attempt to educate all day long but when the kid goes home and hears mom/dad saying how guns are bad mmmmkay, it doesn't work. Not only that, gun education is far more than just a school lesson.

6. Restrict handguns like Canada and other countries do. Less handguns out there and harder to acquire and use could mean less shootings with them.
Yes, restrict handguns. That will fix the issue. You do realize that you could remove every gun from this country today and tomorrow, a federal official will overlook a shipment from Mexico illegally, right?

7. Better statistics on guns when people actually use them for good, such as defense of themselves or others. Then we can evaluate the merits of having them in the first place for good reasons.
Statistics? People actually using guns for "good" or defense? You do realize that cars kill more people than guns every year right? Oh wait... It is the driver behind the wheel. We don't ever blame the car. Every question you pose as I go down this list proves to me that you are uneducated about many things.

8. Educate people on real facts about guns such as the AR-15. How it is similar to other guns, yet feared more and these others guns aren't in danger of going away. You put some plastic on a rifle and paint it black and suddenly people have an irrational fear of it. Stop watching CNN when they tell you that you should be scared more about it than handguns, when handguns quite clearly are used in far more murders.
Real facts on guns? You want a real fact? GUNS CANNOT KILL PEOPLE! I have a gun on my hip. I keep telling that fucking gun to go shoot all the moronic liberals who want to melt him. He continues to refuse my commands. GODDAMNIT PIECE OF SHIT GUN DOES NOT WORK!

9. Maybe everyone that hasn't fired a gun should be required to spend a day at the gun range and learn about them. Might lead to more respect and less killing.
Why should anyone have to do something they do not want to do? Is that not the REAL issue at hand?

10. Longer waiting periods before you can purchase a gun. Impulses of revenge and murder cool off after you've calmed down.
Goddamn. You won't sell me a gun? Let me go down to China Town. I will come back and shoot you first. Better yet, I am going to ram you with my car.
Yet another idiotic statement.


11. Higher age limit before you could legally purchase guns. 19 year olds wouldn't be able to legally buys guns and shoot up schools with them...
Hmmmm... Yet you will give an 18 year old a weapon and allow him to go fight for the country. Seems legit. Wouldn't you be scared of him shooting up your entire squad? Scared of him killing the General in charge of the battle because he does not agree with why he is there? Again, your logic is poor.

12. Better mental health reporting. Places like the FBI take reports more seriously and do something about it. If it's a manpower issue, then hire more people.
Mental health. Who defines who needs help? Does a person ever get over mental health issues? Mental health is a part of life. Everyone goes through phases. Some are more serious and never recover. Others have minor issues and are better people in the end. So you want to take rights away from people? I would venture to say that if you have your dick cut off, that you are mentally ill. And IMO, if you are man wanting a fucking 6" x 2" cylinder shoved up your ass that you are mentally ill. Who defines mental illness?

Again, your logic and questions are fucking dumb.


13. If friends and family members believe you are a threat to yourself and others, if they can prove it to authorities, then have the weapons confiscated.
Because that person won't figure out a way to commit a crime..... When the fuck are you morons going to wake up? If someone wants to commit an act of violence, it will happen. Every read about what is going on in the middle east? See the daily car bombings? Suicide bombers? STOP BLAMING THE FUCKING GUNS!

The way I see it we have a few choices that we can make. We can all sit at our computers and complain, virtue signal, blame others and be internet warriors. Or we can exit the conversation because it's getting too heavy or stressful. Or we can come up with ideas on how to prevent people from dying in the future. I'd really like to choose option number 3 here.

If you don't like what I've said, please be critical of it and explain why something is not good. Or explain how something could be improved upon. Please don't bash. That doesn't save lives. ////END QUOTE




Keep in mind, I'm not bashing, just giving you REALITY. Taking guns from people won't save lives. The sooner people realize this and focus on REAL problems, the sooner there will be resolution. Currently, our country believes that everytime a crime is committed with a gun that we should "GUN CONTROL". All the time, energy, and resources spent on this subject is wasted and fucking stupid. Anyone who believes "gun control" works should believe in communism.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Makes sense. But you may not be the majority in terms of willingness to donate. For example, the cigarette industry cost society billions and billions of dollars in health care costs so a tax is needed to offset the monetary and societal damage that cigarettes have caused. The same argument could be made for guns although I'd have no idea how to value the monetary damage per gun sale.


Bullshit again.

Put a little common sense behind your thoughts. The additional taxes collected by Obama's increased tobacco taxation mostly went to a children's insurance program. It was an increase of something like .39 cents to $1.01 or about 62 cents a pack, over 7 dollars a carton when a carton costed $18 give or take.

Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009

The federal excise tax on cigarettes is $1.01 per pack, resulting in over $13 billion dollars in cigarette excise tax revenue for the federal government in 2014.

Now a carton may have cost $18 before this tax, and adding another $5 a carton in taxes might not have been so bad, but the States, Counties, and Cities jumped on board so that a product before taxes, that costs $15 is taxed to $70 or more at the register.

Now what you need to know is that the way Chip is funded, it's by matching funds meaning a State puts $3 million into the fund then the feds match it with another $3 million which of course is funded largely by tobacco taxes.

So how is it that you think these taxes are actually going to cover healthcare costs related to smoking?
 

FortTaylor

n00b
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
32
A

Another thought is an gun industry funded insurance policy with premiums paid for each gun sale at point of purchase. This would go to cover coats of any potential illegal

The solution should not be after the fact but prevention. All that would do is pad more money into insurance companies and not bring victims back to life. The real solution begins with people getting actual help instead of drugs. Drugs can help, but when the side effect for an anti depressant is suicidal thoughts and other harmful behavior I think we need to look elsewhere
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
The solution should not be after the fact but prevention. All that would do is pad more money into insurance companies and not bring victims back to life. The real solution begins with people getting actual help instead of drugs. Drugs can help, but when the side effect for an anti depressant is suicidal thoughts and other harmful behavior I think we need to look elsewhere

Agreed on prevention but different conversation. There should always be a prevent-first and react second strategy. You can set up the insurance policy to be non-profit of course.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
I don't understand. Why do I want to argue with you about gun knowledge? Or the intricate details of different weapons? I don't have anything against a gun in general. I agree with the 2nd amendment. My issue with some of the commenters was that they went all white supremacist implying that a diverse society is to blame for these shootings. My beef with guns is it is too easy for someone who may have mental or emotional issues to get access to a weapon and act on those sudden moments of rage causing mass casualties.

I have no intention of engaging in a weapon knowledge argument. And being a retired soldier, I am a bit surprised that you're not pushing back on the unAmerican comments regarding diversity in our citizens being a catalyst for mass shootings.


I see, so I am side tracking your argument, I get it.

Well, I am certainly not a White Supremacist, my wife is Korean, they think I'm the enemy as much as any non-White.

I think most people think the length and breadth of diversity begins and ends with the color of one's skin, but that's ridiculous. Diversity is much much more than one's race. I've known foreigners who have more in common with my beliefs than many Americans and I regard my beliefs as pretty damned American if you get my meaning.

I saw someone mention assimilation and to a large degree I back that concept, that while immigrants bring wonderful "flavor" to our culture, they need to recognize and set themselves to adopting our own, because American culture is a blend and it's ever changing. The melting pot thing is right on and this is a strength of America, not a weakness. The problem is when people come to America but don't want to be American and want to create a microcosm of their own culture here in ours, and expect us to bend over for them.

You can be with me and be different, but you can't be here and not be with me if you get my meaning.

Cloe Kim, that little girl is amazing, she makes earning a Gold in the Half-Pipe look easy. Her Mom and Dad are both Korean but that girl was raised here in the LA and she's an American to her bones, You can see it in her and hear it in her. But I bet you she loves her mom's cooking and that it's Korean cooking as well. And like my kids she'll love a good burger and Ice Cream too.

Not every immigrant to this country is trying to be an American and diversity isn't the correct term for how you guys are addressing this issue. Diversity is one side of a coin where the other side is tolerance. People who are intolerant of others is the problem, not diversity. It's intolerance that drives the hate and hate that drives the violence.
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
Bullshit again.

Put a little common sense behind your thoughts. The additional taxes collected by Obama's increased tobacco taxation mostly went to a children's insurance program. It was an increase of something like .39 cents to $1.01 or about 62 cents a pack, over 7 dollars a carton when a carton costed $18 give or take.





Now a carton may have cost $18 before this tax, and adding another $5 a carton in taxes might not have been so bad, but the States, Counties, and Cities jumped on board so that a product before taxes, that costs $15 is taxed to $70 or more at the register.

Now what you need to know is that the way Chip is funded, it's by matching funds meaning a State puts $3 million into the fund then the feds match it with another $3 million which of course is funded largely by tobacco taxes.

So how is it that you think these taxes are actually going to cover healthcare costs related to smoking?

Offset is the key word here. Taxpayers are burdened with the brunt of health care costs caused by smoking. So that tax is funding other programs. It doesn't matter where that tax money is going - those health care costs have to be offset somehow. And those taxes don't even come close to covering the total damage that is caused by cigarettes. And why add insults?
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
3,825
President Trump was blaming video games and movies the other day as well. Gotta scapegoat someone to keep that sweet, sweet lobby revenue going. Never mind all of that free political advertising the masters will do if a candidate is beholden to them.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
The solution should not be after the fact but prevention. All that would do is pad more money into insurance companies and not bring victims back to life. The real solution begins with people getting actual help instead of drugs. Drugs can help, but when the side effect for an anti depressant is suicidal thoughts and other harmful behavior I think we need to look elsewhere

Although I think I agree with what you are saying, I think you have something out of place. Swap prevention with cause. Yes if you eliminate the cause of what is motivating people to do these things then you will be preventing them, but too many people are focused on the idea that we can prevent these things from happening, as in a new law will prevent something. Laws do not prevent anything. Laws serve as justification for punishment, and a guide to the law abiding. A law abiding person is simply a person who is willing to subordinate his own wants to those of the society he lives in. I want to be part of this collective so I will live by their laws. but laws do not actually prevent anything.

Cause, why are people doing what they are doing? As others have said, it's many reasons, not one alone. Taking these guys alive and finding out what made them act is important in understanding the why.

God I'm starting to sound likes a Matrix movie.
 

Gweenz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 18, 2003
Messages
1,216
So I don't believe you, so close, but so far.

You're being extremely holier-than-thou, but based on your posting history this is par for the course. "Allow me to enlighten you?" With your tired opinions? Please. You could have saved your poorly written and poorly punctuated w-o-t diatribe by just typing "BOOTSTRAPS". Are you a boomer, or have you just been brainwashed by them? Making fun of millenials is fun (I am not one) but it is just a part of the agenda. What do you do when you see your base is getting old and dying, and young people aren't buying into your program? You denigrate them. You belittle them. You tell them their opinion doesn't matter. You ignore the fact that costs have risen and you can't buy a house for $25k and get a college education for $2k like the boomers did. Then you tell them all they need to do is work harder.

Let me enlighten you. You're not anywhere as smart as you think you are. Your thought patterns expose your close-mindedness and black-and-white thinking. Everything you say screams "If you are not with me you are against me". Good luck with that.
 

tec1500

Weaksauce
Joined
Jan 30, 2016
Messages
68
Keep in mind, I'm not bashing, just giving you REALITY.

Actually some of your comments are bashing since you've said things like my logic and questions are dumb, you called me a moron and you said since I won't sell you a gun that you'll get one illegally and shoot me or better yet run me over with your car. I said right at the beginning before the numbers that here are some good ideas, bad ideas and so-so ideas and asked that people add constructive criticism. It's ok though, I forgive you for being mean and threatening towards me. I know that some of those ideas are not good. But at least I'm trying to come up with something.

Do you have any of your own ideas you'd like to bring to the table?

(edited for bad formatting.)
 

Blown 89

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Messages
3,436
The NRA's political wing is the smallest of it's factions. They do a hell of a lot of good work in the community through safety classes, youth work, and civil rights defenses. Those of you parroting the party lines need to stop looking at these issues in such black and white terms. Some of you also need to remember that the NRA's budget comes from member contributions....they are representing a very large portion of the population that want their voices heard and donating to the NRA-ILA is the best way to do it. If our politicians would listen to what they are saying rather than screaming obscenities at them they might not be so willing to pay someone to get their point across.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Offset is the key word here. Taxpayers are burdened with the brunt of health care costs caused by smoking. So that tax is funding other programs. It doesn't matter where that tax money is going - those health care costs have to be offset somehow. And those taxes don't even come close to covering the total damage that is caused by cigarettes. And why add insults?


Do yourself some research. The people who are doing most of the smoking are the very people who are least likely or able to stop. They are also the ones least able to bear the burd3en of these taxes. Go look at the CDC's reports and finding. Most smokers are the poor, they are on financial support, they are taking tax revenue and reinvesting it into more tax revenue. It's not going to help anyone but the children and while you think the tax money is going to one thing it's going to something else, and other money is coming back around in a circle.

It's like a giant shell game, follow the ball, which shell is it under?

I mean it, go look. We are taxing the hell out of people who aren't paying taxes but instead receiving every break we can give them so we aren't helping them at all. They are hook, addicted, I know what it's liked, I smoked as much or even more then any of them. At one time I was up to three packs a day, and if I had a 24 hour shift, I smoked 5 packs.

So they are taking money from working Americans who are paying taxes, and giving it to poor people, who spend it on cigarettes and really won't ever quit smoking, and the tax revenue from those cigarettes are paying for two things, a Children's Insurance Program which was grown dramatically with the increased revenues, including new coverage for children who are illegal immigrants BTW, and of course for all the State and Federal employees who now have jobs managing this program, and feeding the insurance companies themselves and the medical community performing the actual services.

Check it out man, check it out for yourself, don't believe me alone.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
The NRA's political wing is the smallest of it's factions. They do a hell of a lot of good work in the community through safety classes, youth work, and civil rights defenses. Those of you parroting the party lines need to stop looking at these issues in such black and white terms. Some of you also need to remember that the NRA's budget comes from member contributions....they are representing a very large portion of the population that want their voices heard and donating to the NRA-ILA is the best way to do it. If our politicians would listen to what they are saying rather than screaming obscenities at them they might not be so willing to pay someone to get their point across.


Exactly, the NRA is the largest proponent of firearms training going. But the anti-gun people who call them evil insist that gun owners should need training before they can own a gun. The Anti-gun people don't really want training, they just want restrictive gun laws.
 

Gweenz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 18, 2003
Messages
1,216
Doesn't seem to be a problem in Switzerland (yeah, I know their requirements for owning one are a little more stringent) where you can readily buy both semi and full autos. Even Canada isn't that bad, and access to such weapons are not that more stringent than many states in the US.

Well unfortunately for you, the statistics worldwide show a correlation with poor people and crime. The wealthiest countries have the least crime, and the wealthiest areas in those countries see the least crime. To say otherwise is ludicrous. In the US, the poor are blacks and Hispanics. Guess which ethnic groups commit the most violent crimes? Hint, they aren't middle easterners, east Asians or Caucasians. To ignore that is doing such a disservice to those communities (black and Hispanic) that need the most help. If you don't acknowledge the problems I can't imagine you will ever bother to help those communities.

I'm going to ignore the logical fallacy you are making. Of course crime is higher among the poor. Why do you think they commit crimes, for sport? The arguments I'm seeing blaming poor people and how AR-15's are not dangerous is incredible considering this latest shooter was not poor and was using an AR-15. Are AR-15's deadly weapons? Yes. Are all AR-15's going to be used in mass shootings? Absolutely not. Do the facts of these incidents still warrant at least a discussion on semiautomatic weapons? Holy shit, yes. Why is Congress not engaging in these discussions? I'll give you three guesses.

I am not anti gun by any means. I enjoy shooting guns. Sport shooting is fun. I haven't done it in years, and wouldn't consider it a hobby. I am not even against AR-15 ownership, for those that have proven they can own them responsibly. I do like to ride and work on motorcycles. If suddenly, for whatever reason, motorcycles became a factor in mass shootings I would give up my hobby RIGHT NOW if I thought it would save the life of even one child. It's called empathy, and sadly I see less and less of it every day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TAP
like this

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
You're being extremely holier-than-thou, but based on your posting history this is par for the course. "Allow me to enlighten you?" With your tired opinions? Please. You could have saved your poorly written and poorly punctuated w-o-t diatribe by just typing "BOOTSTRAPS". Are you a boomer, or have you just been brainwashed by them? Making fun of millenials is fun (I am not one) but it is just a part of the agenda. What do you do when you see your base is getting old and dying, and young people aren't buying into your program? You denigrate them. You belittle them. You tell them their opinion doesn't matter. You ignore the fact that costs have risen and you can't buy a house for $25k and get a college education for $2k like the boomers did. Then you tell them all they need to do is work harder.

Let me enlighten you. You're not anywhere as smart as you think you are. Your thought patterns expose your close-mindedness and black-and-white thinking. Everything you say screams "If you are not with me you are against me". Good luck with that.


I don't hang titles on people like Millennial and Boomers, they are a lazy man's approach to debate. I offer each their own opinions without hanging others on them as well. I have no agenda though I have beliefs, and I have no base because I don't measure myself by a group title as you seem to do.

So a little call out, how many times have I argued my opinion guys, but told people that they don't have to agree with me?

I just gave TAP my own opinion right above but encouraged him to check it out for himself and not just believe me because I'm so sure of myself. Does that fit with what you want to think of me?

I bought my house without a mortgage it sure didn't cost $25K, it was $150K in Mar. of 2000, I bought a second house last year at $210K. I don't think I am confused or stuck in the past when it comes to home values. I did go to college in the late 70's early 80's, and again in the 90's and in the 2000's. Any technical professional today knows that education and the costs of maintaining one's relevancy never ends, not until retirement.

Gweenz, I'm not telling anyone they need to work harder. I'm telling people that the world isn't as unfair as they think. That it's not hopeless and that the people who would suck every dollar from their pockets don't have to have a stranglehold on them if they will just see things for how they really are and realize that there are other ways, better ways.

You act as if I am against the young when I am right behind them hoping they will hear me, hoping they will believe.

I have to go, they will close the doors on me and lock me in, gnight.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
I'm going to ignore the logical fallacy you are making. Of course crime is higher among the poor. Why do you think they commit crimes, for sport? The arguments I'm seeing blaming poor people and how AR-15's are not dangerous is incredible considering this latest shooter was not poor and was using an AR-15. Are AR-15's deadly weapons? Yes. Are all AR-15's going to be used in mass shootings? Absolutely not. Do the facts of these incidents still warrant at least a discussion on semiautomatic weapons? Holy shit, yes. Why is Congress not engaging in these discussions? I'll give you three guesses.

I am not anti gun by any means. I enjoy shooting guns. Sport shooting is fun. I haven't done it in years, and wouldn't consider it a hobby. I am not even against AR-15 ownership, for those that have proven they can own them responsibly. I do like to ride and work on motorcycles. If suddenly, for whatever reason, motorcycles became a factor in mass shootings I would give up my hobby RIGHT NOW if I thought it would save the life of even one child. It's called empathy, and sadly I see less and less of it every day.

Dude, all guns are deadly weapons and AR-15s are not more deadly then the others. There have been semi-automatic weapons since the early 1900s, over a century. If you think the citizens of the US giving up AR-15s or even semi-automatic weapons as a whole would save even one life then your fooling yourself.

Ask yourself this one question specific to the last shooting. What stopped the shooter?

Did he run out of ammunition? The reports say that at some point, he just dropped all his gear in a stairway and blended in with the other students leaving the school grounds. He has already told police that he began shooting at victims in the halls and even on the school grounds as well as the five classrooms he attacked. You say that you shoot, so you know how long it takes to reload a weapon. What about a pump shotgun, could he have hurt just as many people with a pump shotgun or a lever action rifle. Both of these can be reloaded a shell at a time fairly easily in between pauses in shooting. What about revolvers with speed loaders? Remember, he stopped all on his own, no one confronted him to stop him. He could have done just as much with a pump shotgun and double 00 buck.
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
12,916
I'm going to ignore the logical fallacy you are making. Of course crime is higher among the poor.

Well that is one massive back-tread. You just insisted that was not the case:

Look at the people posting above who are stealthily blaming other races and poor people for the prevalence of gun violence, even though nearly every mass shooter is white and not poor.

It is a fact that most homicides are done committed poor people. And this quote of yours implies that is not the case. Which statement do you stand by, your first or second?

Maybe you should have made the distinction between violence/homicides in general and mass shootings, because the demographics for both are wildly different. And mass shootings make up a tiny portion of all homicides or even gun homicides. I'm not even sure why the poor or other groups were even brought up in the first place, but your initial insistence that violence has no correlation with poor was flat out wrong and had to be pointed out. I didn't have much of an issue with the rest of your post.
 

Gigus Fire

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
2,275
People on the right. "Maybe if we armed teachers, we'd have less school shootings." Sounds good to me. I don't want teachers teaching my kids anyways. I'd rather they spent their time being bodyguards to my kids. /s Perhaps we need actual officers in schools to protect children, but certainly not the teachers. They already have the most important job. Teaching our children to be good, smart and don't kill in the first place.
I don't think anyone is saying arm all teachers, but since they're put on the front lines when a school shooting occurs, they should have the right to be able to defend themselves.

I don't want schools to be prisons with prison guards all over. I feel as if with the zero tolerance policies that are rampant at public schools that this would lead to kids getting in fights and being sent to prison because of a fight. Pretty sure this concern has already happened in many cases.
People on the right. "People on the left have never owned or fired a gun before. That makes them incapable of deciding what should be done with them". Wrong. When someone you know has been murdered by a gun, I think you inherit the right to say how you want to see the world become a safer place.
I think real solutions would be espoused by people that actually know what they're talking about. You know, it's like when someone in their family dies from a drunk driver and the family blames alcohol and wants to espouse prohibition as the solution or to stop people from being able to drive. Both are nonsensical, yet these are the same people who are espousing to ban guns all together.

Lets be clear about this point. We live in a society in which you don't need the right to say what you feel, you just do it. However each thought should be analyzed to see if it makes sense and if it's indeed a solution or just a knee jerk reaction to the problem.
Both sides, all people, need to stop and acknowledge that there is a problem in the US when it comes to gun violence. They need to look at the stats and find out where the biggest problems are, what is causing it and figure out solutions on how to fix it. The Swiss have higher gun ownership than most parts of the western world. How come they don't have higher gun violence? Do they have better gun control laws that people abide by? Could it be that they have better early education and their people are taught to value human life a bit more and at an earlier age? Do they have stricter laws that punish criminals more harshly?
Gun violence isn't a #1 killer in the US, it's just the most sensationalized.

Here are the leading causes of death in the US:
Where in Homicide, the number of gun deaths is a fraction in there. If we're talking about preventable deaths, it's still pretty close to the same list.

I'm just saying, if we're going to have a conversation about finding out what the big problems are, might as well start with the top killers and try and reduce them.
Here, I'll go first. Good, bad and so-so ideas.
1. Smaller magazine sizes. Could it have an impact? Shooters were have to reload more often. Could lead to less killing.
You need to review how they make magazine sizes smaller. They add a spring inside of it that's easily removable. It's stupid AF.
2. Stop posting the faces and names of mass shooters all around the nation. Could reduce the amount of copycat killers in the future.
Agreed.
3. Place officers or security guards in school. Have better lockdown procedures. Could reduce the amount and/or magnitude of school shootings that there are.
So that they can just watch from afar? I jest, but i think giving the teachers the ability to defend themselves is a cheaper and faster solution. I agree on the lockdown procedures and putting in doors that will lock down portions of the school like there exists in hospitals.
4. Get rid of every single gun there is in the US. Technically no one could ever be killed by a gun again. Would it stop people from committing mass murders?
Just get a constitutional amendment going :p Good luck.
5. Better education or mandatory education about guns at early ages in school. They don't have to shoot or hold them, but they should be shown how dangerous they are, how quick they can hurt or kill someone, how powerful they are, what they should only be used for, etc. If kids respected guns at an early age, would they be less likely to kill other humans with them?
I don't think this is a solution to be honest. The majority of students out there are already aware of guns. You're saying that the super slim minority of ones that have mental problems should cause general education to the general populace that already know these things? It's common sense.
6. Restrict handguns like Canada and other countries do. Less handguns out there and harder to acquire and use could mean less shootings with them.
Again, feel free to address the constitutional issue on this
7. Better statistics on guns when people actually use them for good, such as defense of themselves or others. Then we can evaluate the merits of having them in the first place for good reasons.
So ignore 200+ years of history with guns? Ignore that police are armed? Ignore how armed security guards actually work?
8. Educate people on real facts about guns such as the AR-15. How it is similar to other guns, yet feared more and these others guns aren't in danger of going away. You put some plastic on a rifle and paint it black and suddenly people have an irrational fear of it. Stop watching CNN when they tell you that you should be scared more about it than handguns, when handguns quite clearly are used in far more murders.
The left wants to tell you that AR-15 are machine guns that are designed to kill people. They won't mention the truth that they're just popular semi-automatic rifles with nothing special about them. How much more can you educate people about them?
9. Maybe everyone that hasn't fired a gun should be required to spend a day at the gun range and learn about them. Might lead to more respect and less killing.
That's fine. It would get the anti-gun nuts to realize they're just tools. A hammer could be a tool in the right hands, and it could be a weapon in another.
10. Longer waiting periods before you can purchase a gun. Impulses of revenge and murder cool off after you've calmed down.
I think your mind is thinking in the right direction but it's not based on historic evidence. People don't get into a fight, run off to the gun store and purchase a gun to commit murder. In most murders, the guns have been purchased long before (or stolen long before). So i'm not sure what this would solve other than good feels (which do no good).
11. Higher age limit before you could legally purchase guns. 19 year olds wouldn't be able to legally buys guns and shoot up schools with them...
Ok. But lets change the age in which you can serve in the armed forces then. Unless you're saying it's ok for 19 year olds to be trained to kill, go off to another country and be killed, yet it's not ok for them to buy/own a gun legally and use it for hunting. I'm just trying to be non-hypocritical here.
12. Better mental health reporting. Places like the FBI take reports more seriously and do something about it. If it's a manpower issue, then hire more people.
How about just better mental health care? Lets not wait until the person murders someone else that they get state funding to institutionalize someone. Wouldn't that be an even better start?
13. If friends and family members believe you are a threat to yourself and others, if they can prove it to authorities, then have the weapons confiscated.
Sounds like this could be abused easily. If i believe someone is an internet troll, can i accuse them of being one so their lose their first amendment rights?
 

Gweenz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 18, 2003
Messages
1,216
AR-15s are not more deadly then the others.

Thank you for coming down off your high horse, but I'm not sure how to respond to that other than to say WOW. That is cut-and-paste straight from the NRA playbook. You obviously own one or something similar and don't want to give up your hobby. I get it. You should be protective of your hobby, but at the same time willing to consider that there are downsides to it. I don't think that is too much to ask. Saying a semi auto weapon is equally deadly to a bolt action rifle is not based in reality. If it were true, semi autos would not need to exist.

As for making our youth's lives better, we both share that goal, but with totally different approaches. What they need is leadership. What they need is someone in Washington who is an actual human being and is capable of simple human empathy, the ability to see things from their perspective. Both Bush and Obama, despite their many faults, were so much better in that regard compared to the current President.

Maybe you should have made the distinction between violence/homicides in general and mass shootings, because the demographics for both are wildly different. And mass shootings make up a tiny portion of all homicides or even gun homicides. I'm not even sure why the poor or other groups were even brought up in the first place, but your initial insistence that violence has no correlation with poor was flat out wrong and had to be pointed out. I didn't have much of an issue with the rest of your post.

I was saying that poor people are not solely responsible for gun violence, and are not the only ones that commit it. They commit these crimes at higher rates than well-to-do whites because of some pretty obvious reasons. It doesn't excuse what they do. People who kill other people are pieces of shit, full stop. My original statement is that people are losing hope and these types of incidents are going to increase until we acknowledge the underlying problem. As the middle class shrinks we all are going to find ourselves closer, both literally and figuratively, to the damage caused by these incidents. Regulating guns is at best a band aid, and at worst completely useless. Even banning them completely will not stop all gun violence. More resources towards mental health issues would be fantastic and long overdue, but won't stop it. Both of them together will not stop it. We need to restore people's faith in this country and democracy and give them hope for the future before it jumps up and bites us all on the ass. What we have right now is not democracy. It's a rigged-game oligarchy where the nations elite get social welfare in the form of tax breaks while telling the rest of us health care is not a right, it's a privilege.
 

oldmanbal

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 27, 2010
Messages
2,613
This is your typical bullshit move by a politician that has no fucking balls to do anything about gun control, but will penalize honest citizens for their hobbies. Honestly couldn't have any less respect for this human being than I do now. If we keep letting schills like this control our political agenda you'll see your basic freedoms become moot. Good job whoever voted for this piece of shit.
 

Morphy

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
261
I didn't have to click the link to know it would be a Republican politician. But I did anyway and it was a Republican. Guess next time I'll just save myself an extra click when I read dumb stuff like this.
 

doz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
6,419
Actually some of your comments are bashing since you've said things like my logic and questions are dumb, you called me a moron and you said since I won't sell you a gun that you'll get one illegally and shoot me or better yet run me over with your car. I said right at the beginning before the numbers that here are some good ideas, bad ideas and so-so ideas and asked that people add constructive criticism. It's ok though, I forgive you for being mean and threatening towards me. I know that some of those ideas are not good. But at least I'm trying to come up with something.

Do you have any of your own ideas you'd like to bring to the table?

(edited for bad formatting.)
Again, saying that your logic and questions are dumb is REALITY. Eh, maybe I went a bit too far calling you a moron, I apologize. I never said I would run you over.... Just because I used the word "you" not not specifically imply it was directed at you. More so what could be said to the gun store clerk.

That said, what ideas do you want? Stop the gun control. IT DOES NOT FIX THE ISSUE OF PEOPLE KILLING PEOPLE! Remove all the guns tomorrow? On Sunday all you will hear is "Alluh Ackbar" and "BOOOOOOM". The more people who arm themselves out there, the better chance we have of at least LIMITING tragedies like this (possibly stopping them). Why do most of these shootings happen at schools? Oh yeah, easy targets.... GUN FREE ZONES. Wait a second.... Someone broke the law and took a gun into a school to kill people. Maybe the laws don't always work as intended and cannot prevent all tragedies? There is a concept.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
42
So please explain , Mr Lawmaker why Koreans, Swedes, Germans, Brazilians, Japanese, and Chinese who consume plenty of video games including violent ones don't have school children being killed by semi automatic rifles.

Yes people kill people. That is true. But readily and easily available AR15s sure make it easy.

The main reason being that pistols and AK’s are the preferred weapons elsewhere.
In the case of the asshole in Norway who killed 77 with a hunting rifle (not an AR15) he did it despite some of the strictest gun restrictions. Which I suppose is why every single person he ran into was defenseless.
The German school shooting that claimed 16 lives in Winnenden was just a pistol. No AR here.

The asshole Mohammed Mera used an AK an Uzi, a Sten and various pistols when he was doing his killing in France. No AR there.

The Dunblane school shooting in England that killed 16 was only pistols. No AR there.

The 2014 Moscow school shooting was Also not an AR

The asshat that attacked and killed a teacher and another student in Sweden with a sword used a Sword. That’s old school. Not an AR.

I could literally go on and on about evil and psychotic people killing other people all over the world using knifes, explosives, guns, cars, fire etc. the problem is the evil in people’s hearts and not the tool they choose to use.
 
Top