Raising age to 21 wont work

[lebomb]

Most of the mass shooters have been over 21. It may help a disgruntled student from shooting up schools, but what about concerts, military bases and other gun free zones that older people go to? Personally I think banning all AR15s to the general public would help the most. Who in the hell needs and AR15 besides law enforcement and the military anyhow? Just my opinion. :claw

[Spurminator]

I agree it's fairly toothless but it's still telling how so many people are hyperventilating over it. Anything that could negativity impact gun sales is seen as a national emergency.

[Chucho]

It won't stop the maniacal kids who shoot up the schools.

The one thing that we can model after the Swiss is their gun control model. They have a high concentration of gun owners, on par with the US, and they have a great mental health evaluation/background check program that prevents this from happening.

It also helps that Swiss culture is different than that of the general US citizen experiences and I don't think they are blame-spreaders like a huge majority of us, but their gun control policy shows gun ownership/concentration isn't as much an issue as the people who access them.

[boutons_deux]

21 and bump stocks, "do something" (stupid) to look concerned, responsible

B/g checks? More bullshit dog & pony show

300M+ guns is an insoluble problem with unstoppable consequences and slaughters

[Chucho]

21 and bump stocks, "do something" (stupid) to look concerned, responsible

B/g checks? More bullshit dog & pony show

300M+ guns is an insoluble problem with unstoppable consequences and slaughters

The biggest problem isn't the guns, it's a society filled with batshit crazy sociopaths like you. There's 360 million of us here and, proportionately, too many loons like you walking around filled with hate and anger because of their perverted perceptions of reality.

[spurraider21]

The biggest problem isn't the guns, it's a society filled with batshit crazy sociopaths like you. There's 360 million of us here and, proportionately, too many loons like you walking around filled with hate and anger because of their perverted perceptions of reality.
968938936973365255

[Chucho]

968938936973365255

Batshit crazy people. Apparently they can't get the help they need because the US "rations" healthcare.

[Xevious]

Conservatives have a pretty good agument that we as a nation are a-okay sending armed 18-year-olds into foreign countries, so why should we have a problem with them purchasing a firearm for protection of their own homes here in the states?

[Pavlov]

Conservatives have a pretty good agument that we as a nation are a-okay sending armed 18-year-olds into foreign countries, so why should we have a problem with them purchasing a firearm for protection of their own homes here in the states?I don't have a problem with companies' making that decision for themselves.

Gubmit? Yeah, that's not going to change much of anything.

[spurraider21]

Conservatives have a pretty good agument that we as a nation are a-okay sending armed 18-year-olds into foreign countries, so why should we have a problem with them purchasing a firearm for protection of their own homes here in the states?
we also let them fire shoulder launched missiles in the course of their duty. and operate tanks.

[Blake]

968938936973365255

Lol

[Chris]

Gotta be Lutherans. They love to dress up.

[Blake]

Gotta be Lutherans. They love to dress up.

Pretty much all Christian religions have their goofy styles or rituals

[Chris]

Pretty much all Christian religions have their goofy styles or rituals

Pretty much you're wrong about everything always.

[Blake]

Pretty much you're wrong about everything always.

Uh huh

[koriwhat]

The biggest problem isn't the guns, it's a society filled with batshit crazy sociopaths like you. There's 360 million of us here and, proportionately, too many loons like you walking around filled with hate and anger because of their perverted perceptions of reality.

:tu

[Pavlov]

Pretty much you're wrong about everything always.Don't bogart that body of Christ, dude.

[TSA]

I agree it's fairly toothless but it's still telling how so many people are hyperventilating over it. Anything that could negativity impact gun sales is seen as a national emergency.

Do you really believe people are opposed to it because of the impact on gun sales or that 18 year olds are allowed to vote and serve in the military?

[Blake]

Do you really believe people are opposed to it because of the impact on gun sales or that 18 year olds are allowed to vote and serve in the military?

Honestly, they should make an exception for 18 year old that are actually in the military.

[TSA]

Honestly, they should make an exception for 18 year old that are actually in the military.

That's not a bad idea. Or raise the voting and enlistment age to 21.

[koriwhat]

That's not a bad idea. Or raise the voting and enlistment age to 21.

the latter would probably be the better solution.

[CosmicCowboy]

Pretty much all Christian religions have their goofy styles or rituals

Why just Christian?

[monosylab1k]

Pretty much you're wrong about everything always.

:lmao the lack of self awareness

[Spurtacular]

Most of the mass shooters have been over 21. It may help a disgruntled student from shooting up schools, but what about concerts, military bases and other gun free zones that older people go to? Personally I think banning all AR15s to the general public would help the most. Who in the hell needs and AR15 besides law enforcement and the military anyhow? Just my opinion. :cry

I'll keep my right to a militia against a corrupt government. But thanks, anyways.

[Pavlov]

I'll keep my right to a militia against a corrupt government. But thanks, anyways.To which militia do you belong?

How many AR-15s do you own?

[Spurminator]

Do you really believe people are opposed to it because of the impact on gun sales or that 18 year olds are allowed to vote and serve in the military?

I think the latter is just a more palatable explanation for the indignation, but on its own would not result in this level of controversy.

It's about gun sales, just like arming teachers, just like the "good guy with a gun" myth, and just like every other NRA talking point that keeps us from doing anything.

[TSA]

To which militia do you belong?

How many AR-15s do you own?

Why don’t you keep the one firearm you own in your home?

[monosylab1k]

Why don’t you keep the one firearm you own in your home?

Why did you push the Pizzagate lie?

[SnakeBoy]

I'll keep my right to a militia against a corrupt government. But thanks, anyways.


To which militia do you belong?


If he's between the ages of 17-45 he's a member of the reserve militia. If he's called to arms he will most certainly be fighting on behalf of the government.

[Spurtacular]

To which militia do you belong?

How many AR-15s do you own?

I'll keep my right to a militia against a corrupt government.

[spurraider21]

If he's between the ages of 17-45 he's a member of the reserve militia. If he's called to arms he will most certainly be fighting on behalf of the government.
and in that scenario, he wouldn't be issued a weapon? he'd have to bring his AR-15 from home?

[boutons_deux]

White House Says Trump Will Meet With 'Members Of The Video Game Industry' Next Week [UPDATE: Video Game Industry Had No Idea] (https://kotaku.com/white-house-says-trump-will-meet-with-members-of-the-vi-1823437500)

The White House today said that President Donald Trump will meet with executives from the video game industry to talk about violent games, a reaction to last month’s shooting in Parkland

One person familiar with executive-level matters in the video game industry, who asked not to be named, told Kotaku this was the first that they or anyone they had spoken to had heard of this meeting.

This is the second time the White House has linked the Parkland shooting to video games,

https://kotaku.com/white-house-says-trump-will-meet-with-members-of-the-vi-1823437500?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+gizmodo%2Ffull+%28Gizmodo%29

100Ms of kids play violent video games around the planet, but it's only America where there is an unstoppable slaughter by guns.

goddamn, Trash and his team are motherfucking stupid assholes. NRA spent $Ms on Trash's campaign, so 300M guns are NEVER the problem.

So what is Trash's suggestion for violent video games? Stop making them? :lol

[Xevious]

Aww yes, the age old "it's the books/music/tv/video games that are the problem" argument.

[TeyshaBlue]

Aww yes, the age old "it's the books/music/tv/video games that are the problem" argument.

As the driving cause? No. As a contributing factor? There's some merit in that discussion.

[Spurminator]

As the driving cause? No. As a contributing factor? There's some merit in that discussion.

They're symptoms, not causes.

Our pop culture isn't nearly as violent as other countries with far less of a gun violence problem.

[boutons_deux]

They're symptoms, not causes.

Our pop culture isn't nearly as violent as other countries with far less of a gun violence problem.

Which industrial countries have pop culture more violent than USA's?

[SnakeBoy]

and in that scenario, he wouldn't be issued a weapon? he'd have to bring his AR-15 from home?

It's hard to imagine a scenario where our govt had to call on the reserve militia (i.e. general populace) to rise up in defense of the nation but still had the resources to issue weaponry. So yeah he'd probably need his own weapon.

[Pavlov]

If he's between the ages of 17-45 he's a member of the reserve militia. If he's called to arms he will most certainly be fighting on behalf of the government.With his own gun?

[Pavlov]

I'll keep my right to a militia against a corrupt government.So, you're not a member of any militia.

Do you own any guns?

[Pavlov]

It's hard to imagine a scenario where our govt had to call on the reserve militia (i.e. general populace) to rise up in defense of the nation but still had the resources to issue weaponry. So yeah he'd probably need his own weapon.Red Dawn is just a movie.

[spurraider21]

It's hard to imagine a scenario where our govt had to call on the reserve militia (i.e. general populace) to rise up in defense of the nation but still had the resources to issue weaponry. So yeah he'd probably need his own weapon.
yeah when people were drafted for vietnam they weren't issued weapons

[SnakeBoy]

yeah when people were drafted for vietnam they weren't issued weapons

Being drafted into the military is entirely different than the concept of a militia that our founding fathers envisioned.


Red Dawn is just a movie.

The revolutionary war was not just a movie. If you want to make the argument that modern warfare/modern democracy/modern economy is vastly different than it was at the time of our founding and the idea of a citizen militia & the 2nd amendment is outdated then have at it. If you want to make the argument that Spurtacular has a fundamental misunderstanding of the intent of the 2nd amendment when he believes it's purpose is to allow him to rise up against his own government & people then have at it. I might even agree with you.

Or everyone can carry on arguing that the 2nd amendment doesn't mean what it means.

[spurraider21]

Being drafted into the military is entirely different than the concept of a militia that our founding fathers envisioned.
you brought up the scenario of the government calling on the general populace to rise up in defense of the nation

thats what a draft is

[SnakeBoy]

you brought up the scenario of the government calling on the general populace to rise up in defense of the nation

thats what a draft is

I specifically said the reserve militia. The draft pulls people from the general populace into military service the reserve militia is the general populace.

[Pavlov]

Well the founding fathers let the state militias refuse to act if they felt like it. The idea of the "reserve militia" as you describe it didn't come around until 1903, when the government realized irregular militias for the most part always sucked.

[Chris]

yeah when people were drafted for vietnam they weren't issued weapons

WOW :lmao

[Chris]

I specifically said the reserve militia. The draft pulls people from the general populace into military service the reserve militia is the general populace.

The fact that you have to explain this :lmao

[SnakeBoy]

The fact that you have to explain this :lmao

It got them googling :lol

[Blake]

It got them googling :lol

No need to Google when you already know everything amirite

[DMC]

we also let them fire shoulder launched missiles in the course of their duty. and operate tanks.

But we don't tell them they need to be 21 back home to do it. That's the point, Philo.

The concept of "21" is age of understanding and responsibility. That's ok for alcohol, since young folks go shit crazy with the drinking and die before they get a chance to learn to chill. With guns, many of us grew up hunting and though we didn't personally own one, we had one we thought belonged to us. We never thought about shooting anyone with it because it's basically a tool. It sat in a closet until it was time to hunt. No one ever had to remind anyone that it wasn't a toy. Everyone I knew just took it for granted that guns were normal household items. Hell, in HS half of us had rifles in the rear windows of our trucks on racks, at school.

So when we hear how you should have to be 21 to own a gun, it seems strange. I get it that some people are just fucking crazy, but we know these people are crazy most of the time and we do nothing about it in fear of offending someone. Instead, when someone we know is crazy as shit does something to validate our belief, we as a society impose restrictions on everyone to avoid singling anyone out. It's chickenshit. Whatever though, we have to live together, gotta make it work somehow.

[spurraider21]

But we don't tell them they need to be 21 back home to do it. That's the point, Philo.

The concept of "21" is age of understanding and responsibility. That's ok for alcohol, since young folks go shit crazy with the drinking and die before they get a chance to learn to chill. With guns, many of us grew up hunting and though we didn't personally own one, we had one we thought belonged to us. We never thought about shooting anyone with it because it's basically a tool. It sat in a closet until it was time to hunt. No one ever had to remind anyone that it wasn't a toy. Everyone I knew just took it for granted that guns were normal household items. Hell, in HS half of us had rifles in the rear windows of our trucks on racks, at school.

So when we hear how you should have to be 21 to own a gun, it seems strange. I get it that some people are just fucking crazy, but we know these people are crazy most of the time and we do nothing about it in fear of offending someone. Instead, when someone we know is crazy as shit does something to validate our belief, we as a society impose restrictions on everyone to avoid singling anyone out. It's chickenshit. Whatever though, we have to live together, gotta make it work somehow.
bright line rules are always going to feel odd, because personal situations are different. some people are trained marksmen at 14 and can handle a gun much more safely than some 23 year old shmuck who's never fired a weapon before but thinks it would be cool to go buy some.

there are certainly 19 year olds that will be more responsible with alcohol than 22 year olds (though research has shown that rational parts of the brain keep developing until 25, so there are medical purposes to curb alcohol consumption before that time), etc.

but there has to be a bright line rule because it would be incredibly inefficient to have a case-by-case determination for buying a gun. it would essentially be a prescription. go get a note showing you are mature enough to handle a gun before buying one? nah.

not sure if it was this thread or another, but i said i dont really have any problem carving an exception to those who have served... i just dont think its that massive an issue to get all worked up over. "OMG you're not allowing soldiers to own guns at home"... i dont see it as such a crisis. i dont see why its so necessary to give people a right to do at home what they do as part of their work/duty. but if people are going to take a hard-line stance on this issue, then sure, give it to them.

[DMC]

bright line rules are always going to feel odd, because personal situations are different. some people are trained marksmen at 14 and can handle a gun much more safely than some 23 year old shmuck who's never fired a weapon before but thinks it would be cool to go buy some.

there are certainly 19 year olds that will be more responsible with alcohol than 22 year olds (though research has shown that rational parts of the brain keep developing until 25, so there are medical purposes to curb alcohol consumption before that time), etc.

but there has to be a bright line rule because it would be incredibly inefficient to have a case-by-case determination for buying a gun. it would essentially be a prescription. go get a note showing you are mature enough to handle a gun before buying one? nah.

not sure if it was this thread or another, but i said i dont really have any problem carving an exception to those who have served... i just dont think its that massive an issue to get all worked up over. "OMG you're not allowing soldiers to own guns at home"... i dont see it as such a crisis. i dont see why its so necessary to give people a right to do at home what they do as part of their work/duty. but if people are going to take a hard-line stance on this issue, then sure, give it to them.

As far as firearm ownership, the 2nd Amendment gives them that right. If you're saying an 18 year old doesn't have a developed rationality, why are you putting a rifle in their hands at age 18 and sending them to die? Surely they cannot rationalize well enough to know that joining the military as a "way out" is really just agreeing to die for a rich white man.

[spurraider21]

As far as firearm ownership, the 2nd Amendment gives them that right. If you're saying an 18 year old doesn't have a developed rationality, why are you putting a rifle in their hands at age 18 and sending them to die? Surely they cannot rationalize well enough to know that joining the military as a "way out" is really just agreeing to die for a rich white man.
constitutional rights are all subject to regulation. we have freedom of speech, but there are laws that place certain limitations. there's nothing that says they can't put a reasonable age requirement on gun ownership. whether you think that should be 12, 18, 21 is a matter of opinion.

if you think its absolutely necessary to carve out an exception for the small minority of 18-20 year olds that serve, so be it, i'm not going to fight tooth and nail over that.

[TDMVPDPOY]

I'll keep my right to a militia against a corrupt government.

this is bs

so what happens when ur militia against the govt loses the war? do you think the govt will let you off free without charges?

what happens if you win against the govt? do you think the new govt will let you off free also? they pull a commie and kill off everyone who helped win :( :(

2nd amendment is outdated man if ur arming urself to go up against the govt one day...

as for semi automatic rifles, why do civilians need such guns? ..... jailing or executing the person wont do anything, u must pull a commie sentence, kill 3 linage of the family line to set an example

[Spurtacular]

this is bs

so what happens when ur militia against the govt loses the war? do you think the govt will let you off free without charges?

what happens if you win against the govt? do you think the new govt will let you off free also? they pull a commie and kill off everyone who helped win :( :(

2nd amendment is outdated man if ur arming urself to go up against the govt one day...

as for semi automatic rifles, why do civilians need such guns? ..... jailing or executing the person wont do anything, u must pull a commie sentence, kill 3 linage of the family line to set an example

That's just a bunch of hypotheticals. The people have the power to keep their government in check for a reason. Aside from that, nothing's guaranteed.

[DMC]

constitutional rights are all subject to regulation. we have freedom of speech, but there are laws that place certain limitations. there's nothing that says they can't put a reasonable age requirement on gun ownership. whether you think that should be 12, 18, 21 is a matter of opinion.

if you think its absolutely necessary to carve out an exception for the small minority of 18-20 year olds that serve, so be it, i'm not going to fight tooth and nail over that.

You said "I don't see why it's necessary to give people the right..."

The right was protected long long ago, and has been for over 200 years. You're not giving them anything. Same with freedom of speech. It can be taken away with a twist of the interpretation of the BoR but it cannot be given to anyone, since they already have it.

[DMC]

this is bs

so what happens when ur militia against the govt loses the war? do you think the govt will let you off free without charges?

what happens if you win against the govt? do you think the new govt will let you off free also? they pull a commie and kill off everyone who helped win :( :(

2nd amendment is outdated man if ur arming urself to go up against the govt one day...

as for semi automatic rifles, why do civilians need such guns? ..... jailing or executing the person wont do anything, u must pull a commie sentence, kill 3 linage of the family line to set an example

You seem to think the 2nd Amendment jumped from inception to now. It's come before our greatest court time and again and hasn't been deemed "out of date". Every time it gets reaffirmed, it has been decided (again) that it is still relevant.

[spurraider21]

You said "I don't see why it's necessary to give people the right..."

The right was protected long long ago, and has been for over 200 years. You're not giving them anything. Same with freedom of speech. It can be taken away with a twist of the interpretation of the BoR but it cannot be given to anyone, since they already have it.
i meant that in the context of if we changed the law of gun ownership to 21, to carve an exception for those in the 18-20 range (who have served)

the semantics of "giving" a right is not a particularly interesting path of dicussion

[SnakeBoy]

You seem to think the 2nd Amendment jumped from inception to now. It's come before our greatest court time and again and hasn't been deemed "out of date". Every time it gets reaffirmed, it has been decided (again) that it is still relevant.

It's not the court's place to decide if part of the constitution is outdated. The founding fathers gave us a process to update the constitution. This is the point I was getting at with pavlov. I may not agree but I think a rational argument can be made that the 2nd amendment is no longer needed in the modern world. They should make that argument and try to win support for it instead of pretending the 2nd amendment doesn't really mean what it says.

[Xevious]

That's just a bunch of hypotheticals. The people have the power to keep their government in check for a reason. Aside from that, nothing's guaranteed.
I'm not suggesting that we abolish the 2A, but the idea of "keeping the government in check" with a few guns in today's world is ridiculous. The US military will roll right over your AR-15, Glock 19, and grandpappy's pump action. Most Americans are too fat and happy to do anything anyway. As long as they can get the latest iPhone, most will overlook our liberties being stripped away a piece at a time.

[Chris]

I'm not suggesting that we abolish the 2A, but the idea of "keeping the government in check" with a few guns in today's world is ridiculous. The US military will roll right over your AR-15, Glock 19, and grandpappy's pump action. Most Americans are too fat and happy to do anything anyway. As long as they can get the latest iPhone, most will overlook our liberties being stripped away a piece at a time.

A group of local tribes in caves with AK47's defeated the Soviet Union. You underestimate the power of the people.

[Xevious]

A group of local tribes in caves with AK47's defeated the Soviet Union. You underestimate the power of the people.
The people have been bought off by gadgets and gizmos.

[Chris]

The people have been bought off by gadgets and gizmos.

Not all of us are using our gadgets to play Candy Crush. The Information Age is just getting started.

[DMC]

It's not the court's place to decide if part of the constitution is outdated. The founding fathers gave us a process to update the constitution. This is the point I was getting at with pavlov. I may not agree but I think a rational argument can be made that the 2nd amendment is no longer needed in the modern world. They should make that argument and try to win support for it instead of pretending the 2nd amendment doesn't really mean what it says.

"and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Easier said than done.

[DMC]

i meant that in the context of if we changed the law of gun ownership to 21, to carve an exception for those in the 18-20 range (who have served)

the semantics of "giving" a right is not a particularly interesting path of dicussion

Then change the laws for enlistment into the military to 21 as well.

Otherwise it's a double standard.

[Spurtacular]

I'm not suggesting that we abolish the 2A, but the idea of "keeping the government in check" with a few guns in today's world is ridiculous. The US military will roll right over your AR-15, Glock 19, and grandpappy's pump action. Most Americans are too fat and happy to do anything anyway. As long as they can get the latest iPhone, most will overlook our liberties being stripped away a piece at a time.

This is how brainwashed you've become. Of course, we keep the govt. in check. It's our govt. You argue that we should accept being subjected.

Last I checked, the US military are citizens to (in most cases); they can stand up to tyranny as well.

[Xevious]

This is how brainwashed you've become. Of course, we keep the govt. in check. It's our govt. You argue that we should accept being subjected.
I argued nothing of the sort. I'm saying hoarding weapons in your closet is an ineffective method of checks and balances, not that there shouldn't be any. I also said most people don't care. Case in point... some people here believe that the US government masterminded the 9/11 attacks and murdered thousands of its own citizens. I bet you not a single one marched on Washington with AR-15 in hand. No, they just whine on the internet.

[Pavlov]

I argued nothing of the sort. I'm saying hoarding weapons in your closet is an ineffective method of checks and balances, not that there shouldn't be any. I also said most people don't care. Case in point... some people here believe that the US government masterminded the 9/11 attacks and murdered thousands of its own citizens. I bet you not a single one marched on Washington with AR-15 in hand. No, they just whine on the internet.The brave ones liberate child sex slaves from pizza pedo dungeons.

http://www.washingtonblade.com/content/files/2016/12/Edgar_Maddison_Welch_insert_courtesy_Facebook.jpg

[Isitjustme?]

968938936973365255

Lmao

[Spurtacular]

I argued nothing of the sort. I'm saying hoarding weapons in your closet is an ineffective method of checks and balances, not that there shouldn't be any. I also said most people don't care. Case in point... some people here believe that the US government masterminded the 9/11 attacks and murdered thousands of its own citizens. I bet you not a single one marched on Washington with AR-15 in hand. No, they just whine on the internet.

Making a case for the govt. being implicated in 911 does not warrant war-like maneuvers, necessarily. There is such a thing as prudence. Though the more the govt. becomes inbred and entrenched in corruption the more likely I'd say such an event would happen. And I have nothing against "hoarding" weapons. It's our right to do so.

[Pavlov]

Making a case for the govt. being implicated in 911 does not warrant war-like maneuvers, necessarily.What does it warrant if you believe the government was implicated in 9/11?

[Xevious]

Making a case for the govt. being implicated in 911 does not warrant war-like maneuvers, necessarily. There is such a thing as prudence. Though the more the govt. becomes inbred and entrenched in corruption the more likely I'd say such an event would happen. And I have nothing against "hoarding" weapons. It's our right to do so.
Nor do I. I have a number of firearms myself. I just view them differently.

[pgardn]

The biggest problem isn't the guns, it's a society filled with batshit crazy sociopaths like you. There's 360 million of us here and, proportionately, too many loons like you walking around filled with hate and anger because of their perverted perceptions of reality.

Nahhh.
There are batshit lunatics in every country.


You put that with that together with easy access to killing large numbers of people with a press to report on it, you got US.

[Chris]

pgardn is an expert on batshit crazy :tu

[pgardn]

This is how brainwashed you've become. Of course, we keep the govt. in check. It's our govt. You argue that we should accept being subjected.

Last I checked, the US military are citizens to (in most cases); they can stand up to tyranny as well.


You are ripe for a good Bundification moment.

[pgardn]

pgardn is an expert on batshit crazy :tu

Very good Chris.
Go join Spurter and hold down some federal land.

Mark the territory with urine, take some junk food, and hold the bastards off.

In your head...
Only.
Please dude...

[Spurtacular]

You are ripe for a good Bundification moment.

Noob post.

[pgardn]

Noob post.

k

Have you and Chris shared brohfiles?

[Spurtacular]

k

Have you and Chris shared brohfiles?

Noob post #2, tbh.

[pgardn]

Noob post #2, tbh.

You rate those posts so brohfficialiy. Tbt

[Spurtacular]

You rate those posts so brohfficialiy. Tbt

A lot of passive aggression. You must be pretty wounded.