Gun Control

[DOR]

It's pretty insulting to Democrats to call Donald Trump a Democrat, and if I'm being fair, it is only slightly less insulting to Republicans to call him a Republican (less, because that's how he self-identifies).

[Sanjac]

I suppose we should consider the possibility that Trump is running for President as a red herring. Perhaps he is there to lampoon and ridicule by appearing absurd while at the same time saying what many people are thinking. It gives the media someone to hate and ridicule so that they can lead people away from rational points of view.

[Parihaka]

Whether he's a red herring or not he's certainly blindsided the left wing media. By this time we'd have seen multiple hit pieces concocted against the other republican candidates but Trump is eating all their attention and vitriol with gusto and coming back for more. McCain's affair, Romneys dog and 47%, Bush's national guard service, Palins stupidity, try as they might they've managed one insipid hit piece over Rubio's finances and that's it. We may even get a situation where they can't settle down to any serious libels until the eventual candidate is actually named and by then even they won't be able to take themselves seriously.

[GVChamp]

I have always assumed that Trump is a Democrat based on what politicians he panders to and that he really had to be part of that political machine to get rich in New York, but isn't he running as a Republican now?

(I might have mentioned that I don't watch television. I s'pose now it really shows!)

Trump is for Trump and his particular brand of Trump-ism. He'll run under whatever label he feels will give him the best chance of success.

Right now he's running on immigration restrictions which means the Republican Party is his place to go. The base of the party largely wants restrictions while the leadership wants open-er borders. This has been an issue for the Republican Party for over a decade now.

Most of Trump's positions are more left-wing than Republican ideology and message. This includes his position on gun control.

There are many good reasons to have restrictions on immigration; infact it isn't unreasonable to be totally against any immigration whatsoever. But excluding a entire set of people based solely on their religion, while not racist per se (as Islam isn't a race) is almost as deplorable. Infact it isn't unreasonable to assume that some people who support Trump on this ban think of Islam as a religion of mostly brown people and can be closet racists.

Again I dont think most Republicans or even many Trump supporters are racist; many are naturally afraid and angry after years of attacks by Islamic extremists. But one does expect more from a mainstream politician running for the most powerful office than play to people's emotions like this.

Infact, Trump seems a bit too extreme even for Marie Le Pen

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewir...ump-muslim-ban

But I'm not talking about Trump. I think we can find common ground that banning all Muslims is wrong-headed. I'd say Constitutional, and I would STRESS that, but I agree that it's wrong-headed.

The issue are the #FeeltheBern types. They don't have a homogenous position, anymore than the Republicans do, obviously. But the MEDIAN position, so far as I can tell, is that immigration restrictions are THE RACISSS!

I'll see if I can find the Aaron Sorkin newsroom rant that sums up the zeitgeist around here. "How dare you call someone an illegal immigrant?"

[Chanakya]

Please watch and hear out this excellent debate about the latest efforts by the POTUS to reduce the incidence and prevalence of mass shooting and consequent death or grievous and deleterious physical and mental injury from the present extremely lenient gun-control laws existing in the US and how even measures envisaged by the executive actions by the current POTUS are almost cosmetic in nature !

[Chanakya]

Its a well-orchestrated canard spawned and propagated by those folks who look up to the IInd amendment as though it's a divine diety , the NRA and Gun manufacturing lobbies , that so-called Left Leaning Supreme Court, the socialist POTUS and "left-leaning liberal media" are determined to disarm gun owners ! That's an absolute red-herring borne out by facts ! To qoute a recent article written by John Donohue, C Wendell and Edith M Carlsmith Professor of Law, Stanford University. This article was originally published on The Conversation--"The gun culture’s worship of the magical protective capacities of guns and their power to be wielded against perceived enemies—including the federal government—is a message that resonates with troubled individuals from the Santa Barbara killer, who was seeking vengeance on women who had failed to perceive his greatness, to the Charleston killer, who echoed the tea party mantra of taking back our country.

I’ve been researching gun violence—and what can be done to prevent it—in the U.S. for 25 years. The fact is that if NRA claims about the efficacy of guns in reducing crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialized nations instead of the highest homicide rate (by a wide margin).

The U.S. is by far the world leader in the number of guns in civilian hands. The stricter gun laws of other “advanced countries” have restrained homicidal violence, suicides and gun accidents—even when, in some cases, laws were introduced over massive protests from their armed citizens. " Source of the article: http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-...untries-379105

[troung]

Its a well-orchestrated canard spawned and propagated by those folks who look up to the IInd amendment as though it's a divine diety

It's in our constitution - so it's a bit more relevant than the divine.

Please watch and hear out this excellent debate about the latest efforts by the POTUS to reduce the incidence and prevalence of mass shooting

AJA - you must have been literally the only person to have watched this crap. That DC guy is an assclown, and my God to bring in a Eurowussie... I am not sure why people think carting in some sissy from a place which wears wooden shoes is supposed to show sophistication.

There is no gun epidemic. Some areas need to crack down on drugs and gangs, but we people in the suburbs are not machine gunning each other on the metro.

[gunnut]

Its a well-orchestrated canard spawned and propagated by those folks who look up to the IInd amendment as though it's a divine diety , the NRA and Gun manufacturing lobbies , that so-called Left Leaning Supreme Court, the socialist POTUS and "left-leaning liberal media" are determined to disarm gun owners ! That's an absolute red-herring borne out by facts ! To qoute a recent article written by John Donohue, C Wendell and Edith M Carlsmith Professor of Law, Stanford University. This article was originally published on The Conversation--"The gun culture’s worship of the magical protective capacities of guns and their power to be wielded against perceived enemies—including the federal government—is a message that resonates with troubled individuals from the Santa Barbara killer, who was seeking vengeance on women who had failed to perceive his greatness, to the Charleston killer, who echoed the tea party mantra of taking back our country.

I’ve been researching gun violence—and what can be done to prevent it—in the U.S. for 25 years. The fact is that if NRA claims about the efficacy of guns in reducing crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialized nations instead of the highest homicide rate (by a wide margin).

The U.S. is by far the world leader in the number of guns in civilian hands. The stricter gun laws of other “advanced countries” have restrained homicidal violence, suicides and gun accidents—even when, in some cases, laws were introduced over massive protests from their armed citizens. " Source of the article: http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-...untries-379105

Gun control doesn't work just like "gun free zones" don't work.

The only way gun control will work is a total and complete ban of guns.

I am all for that as long as we start with the Secret Service and the police first. After all, if we ban guns, that means criminals won't have guns, right? If so, what do the police and Secret Service need guns for?

[Officer of Engineers]

Its a well-orchestrated canard spawned and propagated by those folks who look up to the IInd amendment as though it's a divine diety , the NRA and Gun manufacturing lobbies , that so-called Left Leaning Supreme Court, the socialist POTUS and "left-leaning liberal media" are determined to disarm gun owners ! That's an absolute red-herring borne out by facts ! To qoute a recent article written by John Donohue, C Wendell and Edith M Carlsmith Professor of Law, Stanford University. This article was originally published on The Conversation--"The gun culture’s worship of the magical protective capacities of guns and their power to be wielded against perceived enemies—including the federal government—is a message that resonates with troubled individuals from the Santa Barbara killer, who was seeking vengeance on women who had failed to perceive his greatness, to the Charleston killer, who echoed the tea party mantra of taking back our country.

I’ve been researching gun violence—and what can be done to prevent it—in the U.S. for 25 years. The fact is that if NRA claims about the efficacy of guns in reducing crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialized nations instead of the highest homicide rate (by a wide margin).

The U.S. is by far the world leader in the number of guns in civilian hands. The stricter gun laws of other “advanced countries” have restrained homicidal violence, suicides and gun accidents—even when, in some cases, laws were introduced over massive protests from their armed citizens. " Source of the article: http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-...untries-379105

Your argument is the Red Herring. You are talking about taking away a fundamental right enshrined by your Constituion Writers away from your citizens. Hello Hitler, Mao, and Stalin.

[gunnut]

It's pretty insulting to Democrats to call Donald Trump a Democrat, and if I'm being fair, it is only slightly less insulting to Republicans to call him a Republican (less, because that's how he self-identifies).

Wasn't Trump a democrat long time ago?

[citanon]

Your argument is the Red Herring. You are talking about taking away a fundamental right enshrined by your Constituion Writers away from your citizens. Hello Hitler, Mao, and Stalin.

"Like"

[antimony]

Gun control doesn't work just like "gun free zones" don't work.

The only way gun control will work is a total and complete ban of guns.

I am all for that as long as we start with the Secret Service and the police first. After all, if we ban guns, that means criminals won't have guns, right? If so, what do the police and Secret Service need guns for?

Not a for/ against argument but an observation: Most police forces across former/ current British colonies (not sure about Canada) do not carry guns (for the policemen and officers on the street).

[antimony]

Its a well-orchestrated canard spawned and propagated by those folks who look up to the IInd amendment as though it's a divine diety , the NRA and Gun manufacturing lobbies , that so-called Left Leaning Supreme Court, the socialist POTUS and "left-leaning liberal media" are determined to disarm gun owners ! That's an absolute red-herring borne out by facts ! To qoute a recent article written by John Donohue, C Wendell and Edith M Carlsmith Professor of Law, Stanford University. This article was originally published on The Conversation--"The gun culture’s worship of the magical protective capacities of guns and their power to be wielded against perceived enemies—including the federal government—is a message that resonates with troubled individuals from the Santa Barbara killer, who was seeking vengeance on women who had failed to perceive his greatness, to the Charleston killer, who echoed the tea party mantra of taking back our country.

I’ve been researching gun violence—and what can be done to prevent it—in the U.S. for 25 years. The fact is that if NRA claims about the efficacy of guns in reducing crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialized nations instead of the highest homicide rate (by a wide margin).

The U.S. is by far the world leader in the number of guns in civilian hands. The stricter gun laws of other “advanced countries” have restrained homicidal violence, suicides and gun accidents—even when, in some cases, laws were introduced over massive protests from their armed citizens. " Source of the article: http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-...untries-379105

Chanakya

From the article you quoted:

Handguns are seen for sale in a display case at a store in Missouri, November 13, 2014. If NRA claims about guns reducing crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialized nations, the author writes.

Maybe you can also ask the author why crime rates have fallen since the '90s, even as gun ownership has risen. I am not trying to say that rising gun ownership brought crime down, I am trying to point the danger of linking unrelated phenomenon

[antimony]

The only way gun control will work is a total and complete ban of guns.

That is exactly what Chanakya is proposing when he shares stats from Europe :)

Why don't the damn emoticons work ? :(

[gunnut]

Not a for/ against argument but an observation: Most police forces across former/ current British colonies (not sure about Canada) do not carry guns (for the policemen and officers on the street).

See, there you go. It has worked and it will work again. Let's disarm our police. BlackLivesMatter!!!