|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Oct 1, 2020 9:26:00 GMT -6
Getting guns out of peoples hands through changing gun laws?
You almost had it. It should read "Getting guns out of criminals' hands through enforcing gun laws?" It's already illegal to use a gun in the commission of a crime. Making it more illegal does nothing. Enforce the laws we already have. Chicago complains about straw purchasers in Indiana, so set up sting ops with the FBI. Find the people doing it and punish them. Harshly. Gun store owners looking the other way on out-of-state purchases? Find them and stick it to them. Do you remember Ludco Guns in Parker City? He got caught in a sting, knowingly selling to a straw purchaser. He lost his store, paid a huge fine (well into 6 figures), and did 4 years in prison. He'll never have a license to sell guns again. As a convicted felon, he can't even OWN a gun. And that's for one offense. It's easy to pass laws, pat yourself on the back, and sit back with self satisfaction about "making a difference." Enforcing the law is hard. But if it's not going to be enforced, it doesn't mean shit. All it does is feed into the continuing circle of making laws, not enforcing them, saying "These laws aren't enough!" and starting over. All the while taking a shit on the second amendment. It's all bullshit lip service to appease liberals while taking away more rights of law abiding citizens, while doing nothing to actually curb gun violence. End rant. |
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Oct 1, 2020 9:32:23 GMT -6
I had not watched a pitch of baseball all year still have not watched the NBA. It is not at all political for me. I really do not care about "messages" or kneeling, those things do not effect me. I used to be a big NBA and MLB fan but maybe life just became to busy. I did enjoy the baseball game and will likely watch more.
I think I just figured it out.. The MLB season is just to long and a grind.. Playoff Baseball is great.
As far the nba I think part of it is I love college basketball and I enjoyed being able to watch a kid play in college for 3 maybe 4 years and then I would follow him to the NBA. That does not happen anymore
|
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 1, 2020 12:25:30 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by 00hmh on Oct 1, 2020 12:25:30 GMT -6
Getting guns out of peoples hands through changing gun laws?
You almost had it. It should read "Getting guns out of criminals' hands through enforcing gun laws?" It's already illegal to use a gun violence. End rant. I don't totally disagree. But the volume of legal guns sales put such a flood of supply out there, it's pretty hard to stop the leakage. With some types the supply should be severely limited. That kind of enforcement you suggest just isn't possible without better tracking of transactions and licensing. I'd rather license, register, and track than have an army of gun police spying on people. You just can't convince me we can't do better. |
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 1, 2020 13:50:27 GMT -6
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Oct 1, 2020 13:50:27 GMT -6
I don't totally disagree. But the volume of legal guns sales put such a flood of supply out there, it's pretty hard to stop the leakage. The volume of sales corresponds to the volume of elected politicians that want gun bans. And is inversely proportional to the amount of safety people feel. So logically, if politicians stop talking about gun bans, and clamp down on things like, say, rioting/looting/destruction of property, then it's reasonable to say that the volume of gun sales would go down. Gun registry? The joke in the gun community is that if they ever implement a federal registry, then their guns will be lost in a "tragic boating accident." You'll never sell that, because it gives the government a list of gun owners, which can easily be abused. Better tracking of transactions and licensing? If you're talking about private sales, I'm fine with background checks for those as long as there is no charge for them. If there is a tax of any kind, no deal on that. As for licensing, we can see what a joke that is in NYC and DC. People wait weeks, months, and sometimes years to get a license. Liberal cities intentionally slow down the process to essentially create a ban. Look up the Heller case. |
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 1, 2020 14:38:17 GMT -6
Post by 00hmh on Oct 1, 2020 14:38:17 GMT -6
I don't totally disagree. But the volume of legal guns sales put such a flood of supply out there, it's pretty hard to stop the leakage. The volume of sales... Gun registry?......You'll never sell that, because it gives the government a list of gun owners, which can easily be abused. Better tracking of transactions and licensing?.... Look up the Heller case. If licensing needs to be improved, focus on that. I am familiar with Heller. Seems to me while it justifies possession of firearms for self defense, it allows restriction on what level of firepower is necessary for that purpose, and a duty of care in exercising the right. The DC law being too broad does not mean better law could not be constructed.
I support responsible gun ownership, but at the same time think limitation of type of weaponry, number of weapons, how they are stored and tracking their transfer, and responsibility for harmed cause due to lack of care in owning them, and so on is reasonable.
I don't buy the gun registration list abuse argument. The gun abuse argument trumps it until we reduce the problems. There are costs to law enforcement, no free lunch. Imposing cost on the guy who makes money selling guns seems reasonable to me. If you prefer a sales tax on groceries instead, or income, that is a political matter, let it be decided that way.
|
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 1, 2020 15:10:43 GMT -6
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Oct 1, 2020 15:10:43 GMT -6
If licensing needs to be improved, focus on that. I am familiar with Heller. Seems to me while it justifies possession of firearms for self defense, it allows restriction on what level of firepower is necessary for that purpose, and a duty of care in exercising the right. The DC law being too broad does not mean better law could not be constructed.
I support responsible gun ownership, but at the same time think limitation of type of weaponry, number of weapons, how they are stored and tracking their transfer, and responsibility for harmed cause due to lack of care in owning them, and so on is reasonable.
I don't buy the gun registration list abuse argument. The gun abuse argument trumps it until we reduce the problems. There are costs to law enforcement, no free lunch. Imposing cost on the guy who makes money selling guns seems reasonable to me. If you prefer a sales tax on groceries instead, or income, that is a political matter, let it be decided that way.
Owning a firearm (or multiple firearms) is not just about self defense. That's not why the Second Amendment was put in the Constitution. In 1774 the British banned the importation of firearms and gunpowder to the Colonies, and began a confiscation program, in order to give the (British) government total control over the citizenry. The Founding Fathers realized that an unarmed citizenry was useless against foreign invaders and domestic tyranny, which is why this amendment was right after the one guaranteeing freedom of speech, religion, the press, peaceful assembly, and redress of grievances. That's how important it was to them. An armed citizenry can hold their government accountable, and rise up against them if necessary. If we restricted the weapons that police could have, I'd be more inclined to go along with some restriction for the public on the types of weapons they can own. If police can have AR-15s, then the public should be able to have them too. What seems reasonable to you is not reasonable to me. |
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 1, 2020 16:01:28 GMT -6
Post by williamtsherman on Oct 1, 2020 16:01:28 GMT -6
Appears that the LeBron James Brand will triumph this year, after moving into the largest media market and attracting the premier free agent to his team. This will no doubt play well overseas, particularly in China, and increase revenue significantly.
How exciting.
|
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 1, 2020 17:36:36 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by 00hmh on Oct 1, 2020 17:36:36 GMT -6
1774 English law did not include Constitutional protections we have, far greater than an armed citizenry.
Colonists in 1774 feared no representation and say in their government, no protection of the courts against a monarch, and no limitation of that monarch's power, that's true. The new Constitution takes care of that.
The role of a United States military force was considered necessary. The Amendment and it's role was not to encourage individual armed political violence but the existence of a well regulated state militia. We don't now have state militia.
In the Constitution the language was more relevant in terms of preserving the new United States, not to oppose the government, but to preserve it from external threat.
To imagine the idea there is to preserve a right for individuals to act in rebellion is dubious.
|
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 1, 2020 18:25:53 GMT -6
Post by ruffledfeathers on Oct 1, 2020 18:25:53 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 2, 2020 13:25:22 GMT -6
Post by frozenbaugh on Oct 2, 2020 13:25:22 GMT -6
The name of Wilma Hochstetler will never appear on an NBA or NFL uniform. Even though her murder represents something over 100 times more frequent than unarmed blacks being killed by police. Some things are fashionable to be concerned about and some things are not. Fashionable? I don't understand the use of that word.
Surely there is too much violent senseless gun crime. Sadly deaths related to gun use in crime are just not that newsworthy and we feel it is inevitable and beyond control. We do not respond with broad outrage. It is far too common.
I agree more public protest is in order, but confess I am not sure what we should target with the protest. Getting guns out of peoples hands through changing gun laws? Spending lots more taxpayer money for police presence? Urging more government action to improve education, job opportunity, for the poor? Let's get the NBA in gear on those issues.
Don't you think the point of public protest here is that where we have an incident of public police officials using excessive force that public protest is appropriate. That we feel we have more control over police use of violence supervised and controlled by public officials who are answerable to the public? Might not a broad public reaction to police policy that could prevent that kind of gun death actually produce some change, direct attention to a problem where public officials can change policing method?
As to what makes these incidents more urgent from the point of view of NBA players I'd think is that their emotions are heightened by what they see as racial prejudice being part of the equation. Sadly, I agree, many feel they must rebel against their own government and against a public order that is racist and oppressive. We agree I think that such a state of affairs should not be true, and probably agree the incident and the reaction to it are both senseless and excessive.
Are you really saying you don't understand the use of fashionable? As in they're all about protesting what is fashionable but don't have any interest in protesting things like their league having a $4B relationship with a country that is not interested in basic human rights. It's because that country makes them sh!tloads of money for them. That is not fashionable. It has been documented China has practiced genocide, mass sterilization, forced abortions, mandatory birth control and internment camps on a certain section of people. Not a peep about that from the NBA. |
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 2, 2020 13:58:44 GMT -6
Post by 00hmh on Oct 2, 2020 13:58:44 GMT -6
Fashionable? I don't understand the use of that word.
Surely there is too much violent senseless gun crime. Sadly deaths related to gun use in crime are just not that newsworthy and we feel it is inevitable and beyond control. We do not respond with broad outrage. It is far too common....
I agree more public protest is in order, but confess I am not sure what we should target with the protest. Getting guns out of peoples hands through changing gun laws? Spending lots more taxpayer money for police presence? Urging more government action to improve education, job opportunity, for the poor? Let's get the NBA in gear on those issues
Are you really saying you don't understand the use of fashionable? As in they're all about protesting what is fashionable but don't have any interest in protesting things like their league having a $4B relationship with a country that is not interested in basic human rights. It's because that country makes them sh!tloads of money for them. That is not fashionable. It has been documented China has practiced genocide, mass sterilization, forced abortions, mandatory birth control and internment camps on a certain section of people. Not a peep about that from the NBA. I think the idea of black men being treated violently by police hits closer to home. That is MORE than just being "fashionable" it is I believe heart felt. A bad relationship with police is part of a sad reality for young black men. So I don't think it is cynical, or calculated political correctness.
Accounts of dialogue between Colts coaches and players, and other teams around the NFL (no China issue there) are completely consistent with this.
I agree with people above who say sports teams should not be overly political, fans don't want it, they aren't particularly well informed on many issues. Probably especially on global human rights... But the NBA and NFL players have plenty of first hand awareness of the way the Black Community thinks about this issue and right or wrong, I totally understand their reaction and think it is sincere.
That's why I think "fashionable" is word chosen to diminish and denigrate their response, and maybe to imply the issue is somehow trivial and not a real one. I won't join the general in that. I am not surprised you or anyone else might know more about China than the NBA players.
I think we might all join in political action to oppose China on those grounds but don't particularly think international affairs and sports mix well. Would not expect or want the NBA players to be big on it.
Maybe the there have cases the NBA missed the boat with some other context like an Olympic games. Absent that or imminent award of a franchise to Beijing, I think it is not something the fans would understand, even if the players were somehow conscious of the issue.
Fans should understand THIS issue, which is immediate and is important to the players, even if they, the fans, don't agree or don't give a damn.
|
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 3, 2020 7:53:31 GMT -6
Post by williamtsherman on Oct 3, 2020 7:53:31 GMT -6
I think the idea of black men being treated violently by police hits closer to home. That is MORE than just being "fashionable" it is I believe heart felt. A bad relationship with police is part of a sad reality for young black men. This results in somewhere around 5 to 10 deaths a year that are in any way questionable. And usually even these involve something like being in the throes of an extreme fentanyl overdose, or vigorously resisting arrest and reaching into a vehicle where a weapon is known to be, or something like that. Meanwhile the death of Mrs. Hochstetler (who, by the way was innocently minding her own business, was not on drugs, and who has no history of criminal violence towards other people) represents something hundreds of times more common and more harmful to society, but yet gets next to zero attention these days, and is apparently NOT seen as any sign that some people in society need to constantly lectured on the need to change their ways and attitudes. Actually, attributing this to fashion is probably being too generous to those who have such a disgustingly skewed value system. FBI homicide stats
|
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 3, 2020 8:33:10 GMT -6
Post by 00hmh on Oct 3, 2020 8:33:10 GMT -6
So, you think because we are a violent society with too much crime, somehow it's OK for police who are supposed to be preventing that to go over the line? They should be held to a higher standard than a street thug or we are in trouble.
Besides, protest there might change something. What kind of protest by the NBA is going to end street crime?
NBA players are trying to do something about the ugly state of their communities, and have for decades spent a lot more time working on community projects and speaking to their community than they have protesting in a public political arena. You ignore that.
You sure you just don't like the focus on racism here, maybe you are in denial about it as a reality? Or is it that black guys standing up and being political offends you some way?
Right or wrong in their opinions, I'm not saying the simplistic message they convey is completely correct, you say they should not speak out when they have an opinion? I disagree.
|
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 3, 2020 8:45:12 GMT -6
Post by 00hmh on Oct 3, 2020 8:45:12 GMT -6
I think the idea of black men being treated violently by police hits closer to home. That is MORE than just being "fashionable" it is I believe heart felt. A bad relationship with police is part of a sad reality for young black men. This results in somewhere around 5 to 10 deaths a year that are in any way questionable..... Don't be an idiot. The idea BLM is about the victims some for sure who are thugs and in the wrong themselves, and that the protest is somehow to support or glorify them is just not reading this right.
BLM is more about the cases not reported, not in the press spotlight, the things the black community sees every day. It's more about "driving while black" than glorifying the life of a thug (maybe) who was mistreated by the police.
And, let's be real, it is about mistreatment. But you know our system is all about the thug having rights, too. Otherwise you have the police deciding more than who is a thug, but also who has rights and that is not their job.
Your take on this ignores the reasons reasonable people support BLM. Beware that it's not true "you doth protest too much."
If you even hinted you had some empathy and understanding of why there are protests, I wouldn't be so worried about that. A lot of what you say can be read as the position this is all about the perverse nature of black people, or of the "bad" black people at least. I hope that is not true. There is more to it than that.
|
|
|
|
NBA
Oct 3, 2020 9:50:19 GMT -6
Post by williamtsherman on Oct 3, 2020 9:50:19 GMT -6
"So, you think because we are a violent society with too much crime, somehow it's OK for police who are supposed to be preventing that to go over the line?"
That's the typical debate tactic of a jackass....misrepresent the opponents position.
I'm talking about a sense of proportion here. Clear minded people here realize I am not saying it's fine that, say, George Floyd is dead, what I am saying is that the killing of Mrs. Hochstetler is worse, and that her decisions played no part in her killing, and her death is representative of something much much more common and (should be) much more concerning to society. But yet it's not. Not by a long shot. And that is fucked up.
|
|
