• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The speech that sparked a revolution.

Durask

Member
This is one area of the culture war that the left has decisively lost for at least a generation, so if you wait on that to change, it could be a while, and if you try to force change now you may just get Trump re-elected.

I'm not sure really.
I can easily see blue states slowly squeezing gun rights - "assault weapon" ban, then keep slowly expanding to various other kinds of firearms.
 
I'm not sure really.
I can easily see blue states slowly squeezing gun rights - "assault weapon" ban, then keep slowly expanding to various other kinds of firearms.

That’s not doable. The Supreme Court has affirmed that the second amendment clearly protects the right of people to own revolvers barring a compelling reason (such as a history of violence, extremist views, or threats of violence).

At the same time, and this is what the NRA and Guns rights advocates leave out, the Supreme Court has repeatedly refused to expand second amendments rights to apply to anything other than revolvers. The NRA had tried over a dozen times to get the Supreme Court to expand the second amendment to apply to things beyond revolvers and the court refused them on every turn. Even Anthony Scalia said that that’s not something he was ready to do.

Therefore, as per the law of the land, the 2nd amendment applies, but it applies to revolvers only. Both blue states and federal laws may impose restrictions on any firearms except for revolvers. And this is by design, eventhe most conservative Supreme Court in history reaffirmed this interpretation of the second amendment.

And the NRA is well aware of this fact, because they are the people that have been asking the Supreme Court to review cases to try to get the second amendment to apply to other types of guns as well for decades, and have failed every time.

I agree with the Supreme Court. The states and the nation can and should make new purchases of long range high capacity semiautomatic rifles illegal. As long as they do not impose restrictions on the sales of revolvers, they are completely in line with the second amendment.

But no one should ever impose restrictions on revolvers. The only individuals that can be made unable to buy or keep revolvers are those explicitly found by the courts or by law enforcement (pending court review within 72 hours) not to be safely able to own a gun. This is exactly what is done with psychotic people. The laws allow law enforcement to involuntarily send people with psychosis to mental health hospitals for 72 hours. But within 72 hours of them being sent to the hospital, they have to be seen by a psychiatrist and if the psychiatrist feels they are not safe for release, they have to have a court hearing to determine if they should be forced to stay in the hospital and be made to take medication to get better initially for 30-90 days based on how severe the illness is before needing to have another court hearing to extend this stay further if indicated.
 
Last edited:

BANGS

Banned
Feelings over facts doesn't move me, sorry...

If you want to influence me, you gotta bring something of value to the table...
 
Feelings over facts doesn't move me, sorry...

If you want to influence me, you gotta bring something of value to the table...

The OP is literally nothing but facts. The speech is packed full of facts as well. But taking into account your criticism, I edited the op and split it up into different sections so that the facts are easier to read.
 
Last edited:

blu

Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
This is absolutely fallacious. The assault rifle doctrine is amount using reduced power cartridges that allows for a lighter more maneuverable gun and allows the infantryman to carry a larger number of rounds.
I said 'tactical range', not 'maximal range'. Of course you can't have the same magazine capacity for long-range cartridges as you could for intermediate cartridges. But during WW2, when the AR doctrine was invented, it turned empirically that for most troops' intents intermediate range was just as lethal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermediate_cartridge said:
Therefore, the potential of the full-power rifle ammunition at longer ranges was seldom needed.
"...if hasty wartime training was such that he [the infantryman] had no better than a fifty percent chance of hitting a target at 300 yards (270 m), there was no logical reason to give him a rifle and ammunition designed to kill at 2,000 yards (1,800 m)"
— Ian V. Hogg, Modern Small Arms​
It also allows the Army to issue one caliber and one weapon for most roles from support troops to front line combat troops. It is not at all about doing more damage to the target(in fact there is evidence that the reduced lethality of the intermediate round was eventually seen as a benefit because it takes more of the enemy out of the fight because of the need for stretcher bearers etc.), it was almost entirely a logistics decision.
I never questioned the universality of the ammo. But there's no 'reduced lethality' of AR rounds -- for their target range they are the most lethal ammo, fullstop. Actually, throughout the entire history of 7.62 cartridges development in the USSR ('7.62 Soviet'), the penetration properties of the projectile have been constantly improved upon. This is effectively light-machine-gun ammo proliferated across other firearms segments. And before you say 'but 7.62 was superseded by 5.45' -- that is actually worse in terms of damage across tissues.

The same is true for handgun rounds as well. There is no 'safe' place to be shot, even by a .22 LR.
Please. If you had the choice to be shot in the leg by a .22LR or by a 5.56 NATO you'd chose the latter?

Civilians do not have free unchecked access to assault rifles, which are NFA regulated items. AR pattern semi autos however have been the most popular rifle in the country for decades, so banning them clearly wouldn't meet Heller's 'in common use' standard anyway. Regulation and licensing could pass constitutional muster, but the main bill the democrats are pushing now is an overreach of hilarious proportions that is going to do little but help Republicans in 2018.
And yet somehow a kid could get an AR along with the respective ammo, and incur devastating damage. Not much longer after an adult had done the same in Las Vegas with a friggin personal arsenal. Where's the common sense regulation?
 
Last edited:

Ecto311

Member
Now even Trump wants to take your guns away before due process. Isn’t that what he said Hillary would do??
From Anthony cumias Twitter:
Relax. Has anyone read The Art Of The Deal?
This is a bargaining strategy he’s used before. He used it with DACA. Tell them what they want to hear and bargain from a sympathetic position.
He’s playing these politicians. He’s very good at this. https://t.co/2mG3b2oKIB

Never read the book my self and can't think Trump is good at anything really but I never considered this angle.
 

MazeHaze

Banned
From Anthony cumias Twitter:
Relax. Has anyone read The Art Of The Deal?
This is a bargaining strategy he’s used before. He used it with DACA. Tell them what they want to hear and bargain from a sympathetic position.
He’s playing these politicians. He’s very good at this. https://t.co/2mG3b2oKIB

Never read the book my self and can't think Trump is good at anything really but I never considered this angle.
Yeah, certainly that ridiculous meeting was a result of Trump being TOO smart. The idea that anyone could think maybe he's just a colossal fucking idiot and has no idea what the hell he's doing is preposterous.
 

Hitman

Edmonton's milkshake attracts no boys.
Just read this thread. From a Logic and rational argument standpoint user Nintendo Switch is wiping the floor with all counter arguments.
 

Blam

Member
Honestly I hate this entire movement. I hate the monetization. The greed of the people trying to push the kids into the spotlight pushing their ratings higher.

Truly fucking disgusting. The premise behind it is good, but the actual way it's being done sickens me.
 

TrainedRage

Banned
I need to buy an AR. This thread has done it's job in scaring me to buy another rifle before they are banned. I want an AUG or SCAR but they are so pricy compared to an AR4. 😠
 
FL raised age to buy firearms to 21 and bumpstops are banned. Nice job kids!!

Yes. These kids achieved something that seemed impossible a month ago. They convinced the Florida GOP to put logic ahead of ideology and defy the NRA. I hope the national GOP have the balls to do the same.
 
Last edited:

Jag

Member
Honestly I hate this entire movement. I hate the monetization. The greed of the people trying to push the kids into the spotlight pushing their ratings higher.

Truly fucking disgusting. The premise behind it is good, but the actual way it's being done sickens me.

How else should it be done? The survivors of a massacre want the spotlight so other kids don't have to experience the horror of
watching their friends bodies get shredded during school. The kids are speaking directly to the people. They are using social media the way it is supposed to be used. I know because I'm following it. They lived through this horror. They have a right to be pissed.

It is gaining ground and exposure. That is the only way change will happen. The NRA has an absolute stranglehold on the FL legislature. These kids need all the fucking help they can get.
 
Last edited:

rokkerkory

Member
Honestly I hate this entire movement. I hate the monetization. The greed of the people trying to push the kids into the spotlight pushing their ratings higher.

Truly fucking disgusting. The premise behind it is good, but the actual way it's being done sickens me.

You must absolutely hate all the money that goes into lobbying then
 

Blam

Member
I have a feeling our problems with guns would be solved much much better without lobbying including ratings from NRA for each congress member.
Worst part is if you're gonna go out and publically challenge them. More then not you're going to be shot by some stupid gun nut.
 

David___

Banned
Worst part is if you're gonna go out and publically challenge them. More then not you're going to be shot by some stupid gun nut.
The obvious solution here is to make sure you have a gun to shoot them with before they shoot you
/s
 
Last edited:
I can’t believe the NRA has the balls to sue Florida for the tiny sliver of common sense reforms that the gop agreed to pass. I hope they get their ass handed to them.
 

BANGS

Banned
There's really something Orwellian about the government telling us what to protest about... poor kids...

edit: found this below...

This "school walkout" thing is giving me serious '1984' vibes.

Schools are sanctioning it, so it isn't actually a walkout. It's actually students conforming to the government authority by speaking a government-approved opinion in a government-approved venue. And that opinion is that they have their own rights taken away by the government whose opinion they are expressing.

You have students marching with the sanction of the state to demand less freedom from the state... and everyone is pretending that their doing so is somehow brave and rebellious.

If my kids weren't already home schooled, this would probably tip the balance.

-Josh Hugo
 
Last edited:

Basilisk

Neo Member
There's really something Orwellian about the government telling us what to protest about... poor kids...
What do you mean exactly? Like politicians saying they shouldn’t be doing this or bad mouthing them? Or are you saying these kids are just being manipulated and couldn’t possibly want to do this on their own?
 
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...t-sends-message-on-gun-violence-idUSKCN1GQ155
Chanting “Hey hey, ho ho, the NRA has got to go!” students, many of whom will be able to vote in 2020, marched to the U.S. Capitol, where Democratic lawmakers emerged from the white-domed landmark to praise them.

This lie had been debunked multiple times in this thread already. The kids are protesting for what they believe in. It’s obvious to anyone that bothers to listen to what they are saying.

The only people who are being spoon fed what to say are the politicians that are in the NRAs pockets.

65% of Americans support gun legislation. When 2/3rds of people want something but politicians won’t do it because of a tiny special industry funded by gun manufacturers, that has 1984 written all over it.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.po...018/02/28/gun-control-polling-parkland-430099
 

David___

Banned
The kids are taking a free day off from school, don't kid yourself...
Or maybe they dont feel like getting shot in fucking school, or at all for that matter.

Its amazing people say with a straight face that these people arent smart enough to act on their own or feel emotion towards others.
 
Last edited:

TrainedRage

Banned
The kids are taking a free day off from school, don't kid yourself...
I work at a school. The kids were GIVEN 17 minutes to walk out of school, but not off school property. About half the students that were "protesting" just walked off to get fast food for lunch. A bunch came back two or so hours later and they were not allowed back in the school. You are kidding yourself if you think ALL these kids who walked out care even a bit about changing national gun laws. They wanted to get out of class and go eat at Mc Donalds. I would say about 1/4 knew what it was actually about and cared about the conversation.
 

prag16

Banned
Or maybe they dont feel like getting shot in fucking school, or at all for that matter.

Its amazing people say with a straight face that these people arent smart enough to act on their own or feel emotion towards others.
The odds of getting killed in a school shooting are insanely low. Like we're talking somewhere between getting struck by lightning and getting mauled by your neighbor's siberian Tiger.

Apparently at the high school a friend of mine works at, most of the kids didn't even know what was going on, and a lot tagged along in a "oh, we can get out of class and go walk around outside for a while? Sweet!" type of way. I'm sure a lot of them are sincere, but to cast this as some powerful message is disingenuous. It sounds like a ton of schools were actively sanctioning or even encouraging this, and we know how in-the-pocket of the Democratic party all teachers unions are. This wasn't exactly "brave" or anything". And pundits and Democratic politicians insisting "wow this sends a message" doesn't necessarily mean anything.
 
Last edited:
The kids are taking a free day off from school, don't kid yourself...

If there was any legitimacy to your claim, they wouldn’t be outside protesting and marching to their government state houses on their “free day off from school”, they would be indoors playing video games and watching tv.
 
Last edited:

Basilisk

Neo Member
The kids are taking a free day off from school, don't kid yourself...

Ok. even if some of them are taking off just for the fun of it, does that downplay the fact that many are protesting, especially those that were there at that high school? Do they not get to protest without it somehow being them manipulated by politicians in your eyes?
 
The odds of getting killed in a school shooting are insanely low. Like we're talking somewhere between getting struck by lightning and getting mauled by your neighbor's siberian Tiger.

Apparently at the high school a friend of mine works at, most of the kids didn't even know what was going on, and a lot tagged along in a "oh, we can get out of class and go walk around outside for a while? Sweet!" type of way.

The odds of being killed in a mass shooting are actually pretty damn high in the US. Far far higher than the odds of being mauled by a tiger or being struck by lightning.

In countries where guns are better regulated, you are absolutely correct, the odds of being killed in a mass shooting are almost nonexistent, and way lower than the odds of getting struck by lightning. But I don’t see how this supports your argument.

Your third hand account ancedote whether real or made up does nothing to discredit the tens of thousands of students holding home made signs, giving speeches, marching and petitioning law makers for a cause they clearly believe in.
 
Last edited:
The odds of being killed in a mass shooting are actually pretty damn high in the US. Far far higher than the odds of being mauled by a tiger.

Most "mass shootings" happen in the inner cities.
Avoid that and your odds are more like being struck by lighting whilst being eaten by a tiger.
 

prag16

Banned
The odds of being killed in a mass shooting are actually pretty damn high in the US. Far far higher than the odds of being mauled by a tiger or being struck by lightning.
The United States averages ~50 lightning strike deaths per year. The total of school shooting deaths since Sandy Hook has yet to reach 100 total.
 
The United States averages ~50 lightning strike deaths per year. The total of school shooting deaths since Sandy Hook has yet to reach 100 total.

If you are going arbitrarily limit this stat to school shootings instead of mass shootings, you should also limit light strike deaths to lighting strike deaths that occurred on school grounds only.

We have had hundreds of people killed in mass shootings just in the past few months, and thousands in the handful of years since the assault weapons ban expired.

The vegas shooter alone killed more people in a few minutes than lighting strikes kill in a whole year. Same with the pulse night club shooter. Just mass shootings done with AR15s alone far outnumber the number of lightning strike deaths.
 
Last edited:
Most "mass shootings" happen in the inner cities.
Avoid that and your odds are more like being struck by lighting whilst being eaten by a tiger.

You’re wrong. Try again.

Newtown, Parkland, Columbine, Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook and countless others were not the inner city.

Cities (including Chicago) have lower per capita gun violence deaths than the suburbs and rural areas.

Per capita, red states with lax gun regulations have far far higher gun violence and gun deaths... https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/death-by-gun-top-20-states-with-highest-rates/21/

If your point is that more people die where more people live (in the cities), duh. But if you compare number of deaths as a proportion of the number of people living there, cities are among the safest places to live.
 
Last edited:

TrainedRage

Banned
Look at all these statistics... Wait, none of them have been backed up by any sort of source. You know what kills more people every year than guns? Sugar. Can we protest sugar please. I feel like no one should ever be allowed to buy sugar.
 

gioGAF

Member
I think the reason the speech sparked a "revolution" is because of how quickly all of the gun control advocates jumped on it. These gun control children have been plastered all over the media, while children from the same school with different view points are all but unknown to the general public.

I would also like to take the time to say that just because you have experienced a traumatic event in life, you aren't suddenly gifted with expertise on our laws and policies. I agree that some people need to get off their asses and fix the situation, but most of the things these children are saying aren't based on anything but their "feelings". We don't make laws based on people's "feelings". This is basically an opinion piece.

I agree that we need to tighten up the laws around the acquisition of firearms, but I believe this so-called "assault weapon" furor is just hot air from people who are ignorant. The same media that clamors for "assault weapon" bans are the same idiots that do stories on such weapons, in effect glorifying them for the uneducated masses and driving up their sales. The same media that turns any mass shooter into a celebrity then buckles down on gun control.

The media, which has gifted us with gems such as the term "fully semi-automatic", bears some of the responsibility for these shootings, but no one seems to care about that. An "assault weapon" ban would accomplish NOTHING. Anyone who knows anything about firearms knows this. The vast majority of people talking about this are either parrots repeating what they heard or people with a specific agenda.

I GUARANTEE that if "assault weapons" are banned, we will not see a decrease in these atrocities.

Many people refuse to give up a right under our constitution and I don't blame them. This should not be an all or nothing argument. We should be delineating workable solutions. Banning "assault weapons" is not a workable solution, it is actually just another stupid cosmetic nuisance that does nothing but punish non-criminals.

How about raising the age to 21 to purchase any semi-automatic weapon and any ammunition? How about improving response by law enforcement authorities to possible threats (this Florida idiot was reported to local law enforcement over 30 times and to federal authorities at least twice)?
 
Last edited:
Look at all these statistics... Wait, none of them have been backed up by any sort of source. You know what kills more people every year than guns? Sugar. Can we protest sugar please. I feel like no one should ever be allowed to buy sugar.

Great straw man you have there. Obesity does kill a lot of people and the government should do an even better job of encouraging exercise, but that has absolutely jackshit to do with this topic.

As for stats, here you go... https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/death-by-gun-top-20-states-with-highest-rates/21/

Pretty damning
 

gioGAF

Member
Lol, CBS is your source. FYI, most of the gun violence in the US takes place in places with the strictest gun laws.

Suicide is lumped in there as well. What happens when you remove firearms? Hangings go up.
 
Last edited:
Hmm... who sounds like a more reliable source?

CBS sourcing AP

Or

A random forum user named geoGAF not bothering to offer any sourcing

As for your claim about suicides...

John Roman, senior fellow at the Urban Institute, an economic and social policy think tank told USA Today that states with the highest rates of suicide also usually had the strongest culture of gun ownership. "There are many more suicides in places where it's easy to get a gun," he said.
 
Last edited:

3rdman

Member
I'm not even sure why this is a controversy...they are only asking for sane things. Background checks, end of loop holes, keep crazies from getting them, etc. I really question the sanity and/or motivation of those who don't want these things. Whatever....
 
Top Bottom