More Thoughts & Prayers

[Tank]

7 minutes ago, red321 said:

Has anyone posted this yet?

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/03/during-nra-conventions-gun-injuries-drop-20-nationwide-63-in-hosting-state/

When gun enthusiasts gather for the National Rifle Association’s annual conventions, rates of gun-related injuries and deaths drop by 20 percent nationwide—and a whopping 63 percent in the hosting state—according to an analysis published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The finding was based on an analysis of insurance data on gun injury rates during NRA conventions from 2007 through 2015, as well as rates three weeks before and three weeks after each of the conventions. The researchers behind the work—health policy expert Anupam Jena, MD, PhD of Harvard Medical School and economist Andrew Olenski of Columbia University—also looked at crime rates during those times....

....Though the analysis can only provide a correlation—not causation—Jena and Olenski suggest it may refute a common argument among gun proponents. That is, that gun accidents happen primarily in the hands of inexperienced users and that practice and training—promoted by the NRA—can greatly reduce or eliminate safety concerns and accidents

maybe they should hold their convention in chicago and change it to a monthly thing.

[Spirit]

3 hours ago, UndertheHalo said:

People still run red lights.  What the point of having them ? 

 

Exactly!  Another reason we need to ban vehicles!

 

 

[Spirit]

2 hours ago, UndertheHalo said:

No one in this thread and very few gun control advocates talk about “banning guns”

 

 

Wrong.  I think we should ban all guns.

 

 

[mtangelsfan]

1 hour ago, UndertheHalo said:

round and round we go.  

Guess so

[mtangelsfan]

1 hour ago, Taylor said:

Woah, wait ...

Montana has carpool lanes?

Lol

[UndertheHalo]

Real solutions !

 

[Spirit]

52 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

Real solutions !

 

 

Soooo ... her friend is a dude.

 

 

[Spirit]

A 20-month-old boy and a 4-year-old girl were killed in a Brooklyn intersection on Monday, struck by a car that slammed into them and the girl's pregnant mother. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/05/nyregion/park-slope-children-killed-by-driver.html

 

 

[Jason]

5 hours ago, UndertheHalo said:

No one in this thread and very few gun control advocates talk about “banning guns” keep running with that straw man though.  

No one is saying gun control is the magic pill for curing the short comings of human beings.  Another excellent straw man you’ve got going. 

 

Amongst politicians, I agree as it is political suicide to suggest it. Just the suggestion of banning weapons that look militaristic can have a negative political impact for them. With anti gun groups like the Brady Campaign and Everytown, I'm not so sure. They'd love it. I think the majority of Democrats would be more than happy if the 2nd amendment was repealed and gun ownership was no longer a right. 

[UndertheHalo]

3 minutes ago, Jason said:

Amongst politicians, I agree as it is political suicide to suggest it. Just the suggestion of banning weapons that look militaristic can have a negative political impact for them. With anti gun groups like the Brady Campaign and Everytown, I'm not so sure. They'd love it. I think the majority of Democrats would be more than happy if the 2nd amendment was repealed and gun ownership was no longer a right. 

Repealing the 2nd amendment is not the same as banning guns. 

Edited March 6, 2018 by UndertheHalo

[Jason]

1 minute ago, UndertheHalo said:

Repealing the 2nd amendment is not the same as banning guns. 

That would be the first necessary step

[Jason]

California is a liberal Democrat haven. If you look at the progression of our gun laws here you'll see what the true goal is. I know you've said you approve of these laws so I won't argue about that. Our laws are way past what others believe to be common sense yet it will never be enough. 

"While I am proud to say that California is home to some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, you know there is still work to be done," said Assemblyman Bill Quirk of Hayward.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/article202243089.html#storylink=cpy

[UndertheHalo]

Y you do dis. 

[Jason]

1 hour ago, UndertheHalo said:

Y you do dis. 

This method of typing is unique to you. I assume you are partaking in some adult beverages right now. 

[Spirit]

On 3/1/2018 at 2:06 PM, Tank said:

i like what dick's and walmart are doing, but i wonder how legal it is to do this. if a 19 year old walks in and wants to buy a particular gun, can the store rightfully deny him the ability to purchase one when federal law says he can?

 

And here's your lawsuit ...  http://www.9news.com/article/news/oregon-man-sues-dicks-walmart-over-new-gun-policies/526234491

 

 

[floplag]

No business can make a policy that violates the law.  Weve seen this in discrimination cases, it applies equally here.  If you choose to sell the product, you do so by all laws that govern it.  

I've personally never understood some of these laws regarding age and at what point a person is considered an adult as they have never made any sense to me. 
if a person is a legal adult with the associated rights and responsibilities then how does it make any sense to say, oh but this other thing is too dangerous as youre too young?   Either are adult responsible or they are not.  If they are not then the age for such things should be raised to 21 across the board for all things considered adult, including voting.  

I feel like the biggest problem we face is a complete lack of consistency.  In some states you can legally marry before you can vote, you can buy a gun but not a beer, you can buy a bar but you can enter it.  All things that we typically associate with being an adult. 

[Blarg]

I don't think their policy violates any law. They just decided (primarily their risk management lawyers decided) they would institute a store policy about how they offer a product to the public. That public can choose other outlets for that product with fewer restrictions.

[mtangelsfan]

51 minutes ago, Blarg said:

I don't think their policy violates any law. They just decided (primarily their risk management lawyers decided) they would institute a store policy about how they offer a product to the public. That public can choose other outlets for that product with fewer restrictions.

Tell that to cake bakers.

[Blarg]

The cake bakers got that ruling overturned. 

[floplag]

51 minutes ago, Blarg said:

I don't think their policy violates any law. They just decided (primarily their risk management lawyers decided) they would institute a store policy about how they offer a product to the public. That public can choose other outlets for that product with fewer restrictions.

IDK bit of a gray area, but if the law says you can buy at 18 it would seem a violation of that for the store to say no.  Can a liquor store decide to sell to 18 year olds?   If we can force a bakery to go against its personal viewpoints, how is this acceptable?  
A view being popular doesnt make it legal. 
Besides its bullshit anyway they just sell them in thier lesser specialty stores without the same restrictions anyway in the case of Dicks 

[mtangelsfan]

3 minutes ago, Blarg said:

The cake bakers got that ruling overturned. 

It is at SCOTUS right now.

[floplag]

22 hours ago, mtangelsfan said:

It is at SCOTUS right now.

It never should have gotten that far IMO.  
Lower courts pushed agenda over law or didnt have the balls to make the call.  
Rights cut both ways, especially when it comes to religion versus gay rights.   I support both, 100%.  Yes that creates gray areas but most things do. 
In my opinion the religious have a right to object if they wish in observance of their religion, its one of our fundamental rights.  Just as i also believe people should be free to marry whomever they choose.  Both can co-exist, it doesnt have to be one or the other.
Im not religious, at all, nor am i gay.. i dont have a dog in this fight, but to me its a fight that never should have happened.   

[Jason]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/20/shooting-at-great-mills-high-school-in-maryland-school-confirms.html

Thankfully this resource officer had some balls.

[floplag]

1 hour ago, Jason said:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/20/shooting-at-great-mills-high-school-in-maryland-school-confirms.html

Thankfully this resource officer had some balls.

I'm guessing well see minimal coverage at best in MSM, when they should give this man 10 times what they do the cowards that perpetrate these acts. 
But... that wont fit the agenda so i wont hold my breath.  
This guy should be made sheriff of Broward county tomorrow. 

[Jason]

10 minutes ago, floplag said:

I'm guessing well see minimal coverage at best in MSM, when they should give this man 10 times what they do the cowards that perpetrate these acts. 
But... that wont fit the agenda so i wont hold my breath.  
This guy should be made sheriff of Broward county tomorrow. 

It boosts the idea of having more armed personnel on campus