Gun Politics

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Smoove_B »

And there you go. It's on.

SCOTUS is letting private citizens in Texas sue to stop abortion?!

If that's the precedent then we'll let Californians sue those who put ghost guns and assault weapons on our streets.

If TX can ban abortion and endanger lives, CA can ban deadly weapons of war and save lives.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 20331
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Skinypupy »

Excellent, although I'm sure it'll get shot down pretty quickly. They'll just have to say guns are protected by 2A and abortion is not (when RvW is struck down).
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Unagi »

Where did I read it?

The Vagina just needs to be reclassified as a semi-automatic baby-launcher, and it will avoid all regulations.
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Gun Politics

Post by hepcat »

"semi-automatic"??? Good lord man, what species are you working with???
Covfefe!
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Unagi »

One with a menstrual system that automatically reloads the chamber after each cycle?
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Gun Politics

Post by hepcat »

What happens when you add a bump stock?
Covfefe!
User avatar
Daehawk
Posts: 63524
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 1:11 am

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Daehawk »

Unagi wrote: Sun Dec 12, 2021 9:35 am Where did I read it?

The Vagina just needs to be reclassified as a semi-automatic baby-launcher, and it will avoid all regulations.
Over in political randomness. I posted the Twit.

--------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk
"Has high IQ. Refuses to apply it"
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Unagi »

Thanks. I knew it must have been somewhere here.
User avatar
stessier
Posts: 29816
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 12:30 pm
Location: SC

Re: Gun Politics

Post by stessier »

What's good for the goose... This is not a good thing.

How California plans to copy Texas abortion tactics for gun control
California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Saturday that his administration will push for a new measure, modeled after Texas’s controversial abortion ban, to limit the sale of assault weapons and “ghost guns” in the state.

The proposed bill, according to a press release from Newsom, would allow Californians to sue “anyone who manufactures, distributes, or sells an assault weapon or ghost gun kit or parts” for damages — the same injunction-skirting mechanism Texas has used to ban all abortions after six weeks, which has so far been permitted by the Supreme Court.

“If that’s the precedent then we’ll let Californians sue those who put ghost guns and assault weapons on our streets,” Newsom said in a tweet Saturday. “If TX can ban abortion and endanger lives, CA can ban deadly weapons of war and save lives.”
I require a reminder as to why raining arcane destruction is not an appropriate response to all of life's indignities. - Vaarsuvius
Global Steam Wishmaslist Tracking
Running____2014: 1300.55 miles____2015: 2036.13 miles____2016: 1012.75 miles____2017: 1105.82 miles____2018: 1318.91 miles__2019: 2000.00 miles
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41243
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Gun Politics

Post by El Guapo »

I dunno, I think the bill is a good idea, while also a sign of the ongoing decline of our constitutional structure. Newsom is right that if SCOTUS is going to allow this type of side-stepping of the constitution, then there's no reason to abandon the method so that it only gets used by Republicans. And by doing so it makes it more likely that SCOTUS eventually shuts the whole thing down (and/or more clearly exposes it to people as right wing hypocrisy if/when SCOTUS disallows it only when it's used against Republican policy preferences).

It is definitely not a great sign for the health of our institutions, but the logic behind doing the bill is pretty ironclad I think.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Pyperkub »

El Guapo wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 10:39 am I dunno, I think the bill is a good idea, while also a sign of the ongoing decline of our constitutional structure. Newsom is right that if SCOTUS is going to allow this type of side-stepping of the constitution, then there's no reason to abandon the method so that it only gets used by Republicans. And by doing so it makes it more likely that SCOTUS eventually shuts the whole thing down (and/or more clearly exposes it to people as right wing hypocrisy if/when SCOTUS disallows it only when it's used against Republican policy preferences).

It is definitely not a great sign for the health of our institutions, but the logic behind doing the bill is pretty ironclad I think.
Of course, it requires actual, well, you know, logic on behalf of SCOTUS. These aren't the droids you're looking for...
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
stessier
Posts: 29816
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 12:30 pm
Location: SC

Re: Gun Politics

Post by stessier »

El Guapo wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 10:39 am It is definitely not a great sign for the health of our institutions,
This was my point. It's really not good. I get that adhering to principles just means your side loses, but it's still a very slippery slope to the point where here in SC I'm living in a different country than people in California.
I require a reminder as to why raining arcane destruction is not an appropriate response to all of life's indignities. - Vaarsuvius
Global Steam Wishmaslist Tracking
Running____2014: 1300.55 miles____2015: 2036.13 miles____2016: 1012.75 miles____2017: 1105.82 miles____2018: 1318.91 miles__2019: 2000.00 miles
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur »

Chicago
On Monday, a 54-year-old man with a concealed carry license shot a 32-year-old who he was involved in a physical altercation with outside a Jewel-Osco on Chicago’s Southwest Side.

Shortly after 5 p.m., police say the 54-year-old was leaving the grocery store in the 5300 block of S. Pulaski Rd. in the West Elsdon neighborhood when he became involved in a "physical altercation" with the 32-year-old.
...
Police said the 54-year-old has a valid FOID card and Concealed Carry License (CCL).

An employee of the Jewel, who asked not to be named, said he saw the two men fighting near the entrance to the store one fired multiple shots.

That man was then wounded, possibly by his own firearm. "Just shows he shouldn’t have a gun," the employee said.

At the scene, workers moved around the parking lot collecting carts but the store was to remain closed for the rest of the night. Shoppers continued to show up but were turned away.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Smoove_B wrote: Sat Dec 11, 2021 11:36 pm And there you go. It's on.

SCOTUS is letting private citizens in Texas sue to stop abortion?!

If that's the precedent then we'll let Californians sue those who put ghost guns and assault weapons on our streets.

If TX can ban abortion and endanger lives, CA can ban deadly weapons of war and save lives.
I certainly agree on the equivalence (I think I even proposed this strategy back when Texas started on their anti-abortion law) but unfortunately women aren't protected under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) is a United States law that protects firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when crimes have been committed with their products. However, both manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible in much the same manner that any U.S.-based manufacturer of consumer products is held responsible. They may also be held liable for negligent entrustment when they have reason to know a gun is intended for use in a crime.

The PLCAA is codified at 15 U.S.C. §§ 7901–7903.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
Roman
Posts: 1133
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 4:13 pm
Location: Earth

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Roman »

While feeding all the beasties out back I let a nice big fart. The smell followed all the way back to the house. It's like it was my baby and felt abandoned.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Kyle Rittenhouse's friend, who bought him an assault-style rifle when he was only 17, has agreed to plead no contest to contributing to the delinquency of a minor, a non-criminal citation, and avoid convictions on the two felonies he'd been facing.

...

On Friday, Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger filed a proposed plea agreement. It suggested Black would plead no contest to a pair of citations, and pay a $2,000 fine, and the felony counts would be dismissed. The proposed deal was first reported by kenoshacountyeye.com.

Judge Schroeder could reject the deal, or still just dismiss the original felony counts based on his ruling about the minors-with-firearms law in the Rittenhouse case.[/quote

https://news.yahoo.com/supplier-gun-use ... 41858.html
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Grifman »

I can't believe this guy was acquitted:

Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
dbt1949
Posts: 25687
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:34 am
Location: Hogeye Arkansas

Re: Gun Politics

Post by dbt1949 »

Everyone here knows how much I love my guns. If the government decided to try and take everyone's guns I would become a criminal.
That being said when I read the second amendment it sounds like it's talking about some kind of national guard or something. How that would be organized under the amendment I don't know.
When it was written they were talking about "real" citizen soldiers. Especially considering muskets compared to assault rifles.
I don't understand how the 2nd amendment can be interpreted to mean many guns for everybody who wants them.
Ye Olde Farte
Double Ought Forty
aka dbt1949
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

dbt1949 wrote: Fri Jun 03, 2022 1:13 pm I don't understand how the 2nd amendment can be interpreted to mean many guns for everybody who wants them.
The NRA saw an opportunity to weaponize the 2A (no pun intended) to gain political power. It was sometime in the 70s IIRC. When the ILA was created.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
coopasonic
Posts: 20966
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:43 pm
Location: Dallas-ish

Re: Gun Politics

Post by coopasonic »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Fri Jun 03, 2022 1:32 pm
dbt1949 wrote: Fri Jun 03, 2022 1:13 pm I don't understand how the 2nd amendment can be interpreted to mean many guns for everybody who wants them.
The NRA saw an opportunity to weaponize the 2A (no pun intended) to gain political power. It was sometime in the 70s IIRC. When the ILA was created.
Full Frontal with Samantha Bee just did a segment on exactly that.

-Coop
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43487
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Blackhawk »

dbt1949 wrote: Fri Jun 03, 2022 1:13 pm That being said when I read the second amendment it sounds like it's talking about some kind of national guard or something. How that would be organized under the amendment I don't know.
When it was written they were talking about "real" citizen soldiers. Especially considering muskets compared to assault rifles.
I don't understand how the 2nd amendment can be interpreted to mean many guns for everybody who wants them.
A decade ago I never would have believed I'd be saying this.

When it comes right down to it, the Constitution was designed for a society. That society existed far closer to the European Renaissance than it does to ours. Literally - the Constitution was written closer to Michelangelo's lifetime than it was my own kids' births, and closer Shakespeare's world than to my parents'. That society does not exist at all today. The language the constitution was written in is very different from ours (the old example of "Last time I saw her, we had awful intercourse" is a good example - it means that they had an amazing conversation.)

Trying to apply the Constitution today isn't working because it is essentially taking the guidelines written for another society in another time, written in a language that we barely understand, and trying to apply it to our modern world. What did the founding fathers say about [topic]? Probably not what the words mean when the read them today, and even if we figured it out, so what? Their thoughts on society have no real relevance to our own situation beyond the philosophical ideas behind them.

It was a great document, for it's time, but it is like a dictionary or encyclopedia - it has to be updated from time to time or the information just isn't going to be useful. And we haven't done a great job of updating it.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Smoove_B »

You might want to sit down

Republican leadership just sent out a notice telling all House Republicans to vote against common-sense gun safety bills tonight because the NRA opposes them— they told them all to refer to the Protect Our Kids Act as the “Unconstitutional Gun Restrictions Act.”
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Victoria Raverna
Posts: 5012
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:23 am
Location: Jakarta

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Victoria Raverna »

User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Gun Politics

Post by hepcat »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Fri Jun 03, 2022 1:32 pm
dbt1949 wrote: Fri Jun 03, 2022 1:13 pm I don't understand how the 2nd amendment can be interpreted to mean many guns for everybody who wants them.
The NRA saw an opportunity to weaponize the 2A (no pun intended) to gain political power. It was sometime in the 70s IIRC. When the ILA was created.
The Gangster Capitalism podcast you hipped people to a while back has a great segment on just how awful the NRA is. It’s quite informative.
Covfefe!
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by noxiousdog »

Thomas Jefferson wrote: I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Smoove_B »


Rep. Katie Porter: ‘This is absurd. After *one* child died using a Peloton treadmill last year, the Consumer Product Safety Commission intervened & recalled the product. But when hundreds of children die using guns, there is no federal response!’
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43487
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Blackhawk »

Well, yeah - the gun didn't malfunction! It did exactly what it was designed to do.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Smoove_B »

Ok Senate, you're up:
The House on Wednesday passed a sweeping gun bill that would raise the minimum age to purchase an assault rifle in the U.S. from 18 to 21, even though the legislation doesn't stand much of a chance in the Senate.

The bill, called the Protecting Our Kids Act, would also bar the sale of large-capacity magazines and institute new rules that dictate proper at-home gun storage.

The Democratic-held chamber approved the legislation in a 223-204 vote. It passed in a mostly party line vote: Five Republicans supported the measure, while two Democrats opposed it.
Details on who:
Two Democrats, Reps. Jared Golden (Maine) and Kurt Schrader (Ore.), bucked the party in opposing the measure. Five Republicans — Reps. Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), Anthony Gonzalez (Ohio), Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Chris Jacobs (N.Y.) and Fred Upton (Mich.) — supported it.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Smoove_B »

Ok Senate, you're up again:
The House approved a “red flag” bill Thursday that would allow families, police and others to ask federal courts to order the removal of firearms from people at extreme risk of harming themselves or others.

It’s the Democratic-controlled chamber’s latest response to U.S. mass shootings and likely stands little chance in the Senate.

Nineteen states and the District of Columbia currently have such “red flag” laws. Under the House bill, a judge could issue an order to temporarily remove and store the firearms until a hearing can be held, up to two weeks later, to determine whether the firearms should be returned or kept for a specific period. The bill passed on a mostly party-line vote of 224-202.
That's two pieces of legislation on guns sent off to "world's greatest deliberative body" in less than 24 hours.
Five Republican lawmakers voted for the bill: Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio, Chris Jacobs of New York, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois and Fred Upton of Michigan. Only Fitzpatrick is seeking reelection. Rep. Jared Golden of Maine was the only Democratic member to vote no.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Unagi »

Jared Golden of Maine, has some serious problems.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Defiant »

User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Smoove_B »

NEWS: We have a deal. Today a bipartisan group of 20 Senators (10 D and 10 R) is announcing a breakthrough agreement on gun violence - the first in 30 years - that will save lives.

I think you’ll be surprised at the scope of our framework.

Here’s what it includes:

Major funding to help states pass and implement crisis intervention orders (red flag laws) that will allow law enforcement to temporarily take dangerous weapons away from people who pose a danger to others or themselves.

Billions in new funding for mental health and school safety, including money for the national build out of community mental health clinics.

Close the “boyfriend loophole”, so that no domestic abuser - a spouse OR a serious dating partner - can buy a gun if they are convicted of abuse against their partner.

First ever federal law against gun trafficking and straw purchasing. This will be a difference making tool to stop the flow of illegal guns into cities.

Enhanced background check for under 21 gun buyers and a short pause to conduct the check. Young buyers can get the gun only after the enhanced check is completed.

Clarification of the laws regarding who needs to register as a licensed gun dealer, to make sure all truly commercial sellers are doing background checks.

Will this bill do everything we need to end our nation’s gun violence epidemic? No. But it’s real, meaningful progress. And it breaks a 30 year log jam, demonstrating that Democrats and Republicans can work together in a way that truly saves lives.
EDIT: Article here
Maybe next year, maybe no go
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by malchior »

Here is my prediction how this will go:

1) Very serious people will tell us how bipartisanship isn't dead and the system works.

2) The furor covering Uvalde will inevitably quiet down.

3) The bill drafting will drag out a month or two.

4) Senators key to the negotiations will waffle about language under pressure and we'll see the usual provocateurs in the House talk about how imperfect this is.

5) Everyone pivots to the mid-terms.

6) Democrats smashed in mid-terms. McConnell says that Americans signal they don't want this. It's shelved.

7) NY Times et. all will write post-mortems about why it fell apart that glosses over all the institutional issues and diffuses the blame.

I'm hoping this isn't close. Getting something passed - even imperfect as this sounds would be a good sign.
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Unagi »

You beat me to it.

I was going to say: this will give them just enough cover for a month or two, and then bail.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by malchior »

Too bad we don't live in a functional democracy.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

It's ridiculous that background checks (above NICS/4473) aren't being implemented yesterday. Same with the age restriction.

Red flag laws require a bit more care in construction but should have at least been passed in principle. These are getting punted to the states.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

malchior wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 10:20 am Too bad we don't live in a functional democracy.

Fairly certain that was intended by FOX to rile the minority against any "tyranny of the majority." Don't see anyone getting fired for that.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43487
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Blackhawk »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 11:14 am
malchior wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 10:20 am Too bad we don't live in a functional democracy.

Fairly certain that was intended by FOX to rile the minority against any "tyranny of the majority." Don't see anyone getting fired for that.
That's the sad thing - the 12% is enough to sway the elections over the 88%.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
Carpet_pissr
Posts: 19978
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Carpet_pissr »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 11:14 am Fairly certain that was intended by FOX to rile the minority against any "tyranny of the majority." Don't see anyone getting fired for that.
Wow, that is so fucking cynical, and probably 100% accurate. I can totally see that put up as a red flag to 2a'ers:

"DANGER!!! Look at this data, THEY"RE COMING (fur yer guns!)!!!!! Even if they aren't actively knocking on your door to collect, they WANT to...that's the next step!"
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by malchior »

It seems something lit a fire under everyone because not only did they suddenly rush out a bill but it sped through the Senate overnight. Showing us that problem solving is possible. What's interesting is why this bill? And why now? Uvalde was different. The police incompetence kept it in the news. We have mid-terms coming up and I suspect the GOP wants to take this issue off the table for the Democrats. And all they really gave up was background checks which have 80%+ support. Also most of the GOP yes votes don't face voters this year. It also highlights how broken the Senate is. When they want to get something done they can snap their fingers and it happens (this gun bill + the Supreme Court protections). When they don't it drags on for years such as the common sense privacy protections for federal judges like Salas.

Post Reply