Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

aurelius2112

(60 posts)
56. I can appreciate conjecture........but........
Tue Apr 26, 2016, 12:40 PM
Apr 2016

(First, I'll apologize for leaving this thread open, since it was time to clock out yesterday.)
Now back to the thread for a bit.....

Although I have chuckled at your attempts to try and judge my character and genuineness, as I read the previous posts, I can ascertain, that you view everyone who is anti-gun as not sincere with their posts and full of "pretense".
Oh boy, good thing I have alot of patience to handle your stubbornness.

Point one:
Knotty problem.
As I have tried to propose many different ideas to reduce the amount of firearm deaths, you relish in tearing them down.
Yet you never propose anything yourself except the status quo.

May I ask you to look in the mirror and say the word pretentious? If you know so much more about the issue and all of the facts and figures, then what is your proposal to keep all semi-automatic guns,high caliber, open carry, etc while reducing the number of firearm deaths? (here is where you typically respond with your own question, which dodges mine)

Point two:
Solution based strategy.
Lets use your data from the FBI and DOJ (hopefully we can get CDC data in the future)
Shall we break up the deaths into the FBI categories, and start naming ideas to reduce the death ratios by category?
Shall we separate the guns into categories and list what guns are off limits and what guns should have more ownership filters?
How would you like the solution analysis to work? (another chance for you to dodge with your own question, yet there's more chances coming.......)

Point three:
Trade off?
What would you like me to trade off on? Free bullets? No ban on semi-autos?
I've been waiting for at least one objective from the pro-gun side other than the typical "hell no" to any change.
What is the pro-gun cause?
Just say no to everything?
If its just say no, then may as well vote Tea Party, so at least you will know your congressman will do nothing, when he goes to the floor.

Point four:
Gun Control Knowledge
Although I do a better job at researching, than reading bumper stickers, this group has a vast amount of knowledge concerning the gun control issue.
I have learned alot from reading your posts and also can appreciate the pro-gun points.
The more I discuss this subject, the more I understand the deep divisions within the 2 sides.
In the end, both sides are pretentious to a point, about certain specifics concerning gun control.

There are small things we can do to improve gun control but the bigger issues like economic, education and social status will bring more success to reduce the death rates.

Point five:
I never said anyone was dumb who owned a gun.
There are "intellectually challenged" people wherever you go and owning a gun is not a criteria.
Name calling only indicates that you have run out of intelligent things to say.

Point six:
You mentioned magazine limits.
Is there a scenario that would be dangerous with a larger magazine?
I'm thinking for the average American, that the answer is no.
Magazine limits usually are brought up after mass killings, but in reality it would do little to deter the mass killing in the first place.
Guess I'm back to social inequality issues to reduce the number of mass killings.


Final points? What I've learned so far......
1. Increased enforcement of current gun laws - (funding for ATF)
2. Increased mandatory training for new gun owners (to reduce the amount of accidental deaths.)
3. Mental Health Evaluation - (This is a sticky topic for sure, but would help reduce the overall deaths by stopping gun ownership for people with dementia and similar brain diseases. Not to stop someone who has depression or a less serious mental illness)
4. Add new law to force background checks at every level i.e. gun shows. (is there a reason to object to this?)
5. If both sides can agree to at least 2 or 3 points, then I know we could accomplish change in our system. (both sides are very passionate and will follow through until completed - basically 2 sides with one very LOUD voice)

That's about it for now....
Let the flagging begin


Cruz’s Gun Control Deception [View all] SecularMotion Apr 2016 OP
This message was self-deleted by its author CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #1
Glad I'm not voting for Cruz. Anyway... jmg257 Apr 2016 #2
What I see TeddyR Apr 2016 #3
Chicago rate = 14.35, DC rate = 14.72 discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2016 #5
This message was self-deleted by its author CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #4
Who gives a rip what Cruz says? GreydeeThos Apr 2016 #6
re: "In 2014, Washington, D.C., reported 15.9 murders for every 100,000 people..." discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2016 #7
Except that flooded the streets with guns... scscholar Apr 2016 #28
I'm legitimately not sure what point you are trying to make TeddyR Apr 2016 #30
Really??? discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2016 #37
Is The NRA Wrong? New Study Shows Guns Rarely Used For Self-Defense aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #8
Why are you bringing up the NRA, nobody else is? DonP Apr 2016 #9
What's this "we" nonsense? SecularMotion Apr 2016 #10
Oooh look, it can speak DonP Apr 2016 #11
Wow, a response Duckhunter935 Apr 2016 #12
Fair enough - Although credible sources could be a matter of opinion. aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #16
"Or should we do nothing and watch the numbers rise? " DonP Apr 2016 #18
One firearm death is one too many..... aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #19
"how can we move to a consensus to protect the 2nd and the rest of Americans?" beevul Apr 2016 #20
An open minded discussion allows for good conversation...... aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #23
Except anti-gunners do not have open minds. beevul Apr 2016 #25
Gun Control talking points..... aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #32
Yup. beevul Apr 2016 #33
All we need is an unbiased SC who rejects the monstrosity known as "Heller" and Actor Apr 2016 #26
Why do you think the 2d limits gun ownership to militia members TeddyR Apr 2016 #29
In other words, you want a biased court. beevul Apr 2016 #34
"The majority of Americans DO want gun control - based on polling data. " DonP Apr 2016 #24
gun studies by the VPC is like a climate change study gejohnston Apr 2016 #13
All very good points TeddyR Apr 2016 #14
The control side has to buy into some myths DonP Apr 2016 #15
The "Do Nothing" approach isn't working to reduce firearm deaths aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #17
"The "Do Nothing" approach..." beevul Apr 2016 #21
Of course we do nothing. aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #27
You can stop with the pretense. beevul Apr 2016 #31
Unfettered access to guns? - Sounds like the middle east! aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #38
Ahh, more pretense. beevul Apr 2016 #42
OK - maybe unfetterred was not the best word to use aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #43
It was predictable. beevul Apr 2016 #49
Ahhh, there's that word again; Compromise - "What are you willing to give up?" DonP Apr 2016 #52
Ed Zachary. beevul Apr 2016 #53
I think they just desperately want to think of themselves as "moderates" on gun control DonP Apr 2016 #55
I can appreciate conjecture........but........ aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #56
Its not conjecture. beevul Apr 2016 #59
Simple Definition of conjecture : an opinion or idea formed without proof or sufficient evidence aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #61
"I have come here...with the objective of trying to draw some consensus" I doubt that very much friendly_iconoclast Apr 2016 #67
Glad you came to post! aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #70
OK, which *extant* gun regulation(s) would you be willing to give up, in exchange for others? friendly_iconoclast Apr 2016 #71
I have learned alot from this forum but... aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #74
You can't help but double down, can you. beevul Apr 2016 #69
Texas Hold'em Poker! aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #72
I'll stand pat. beevul Apr 2016 #75
Gonna fold for now...you have given me plenty to ponder aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #76
Fair enough. beevul Apr 2016 #78
You've pointed out once again the gun controller's fraudulent version of 'reasonableness': friendly_iconoclast Apr 2016 #73
Almost missed this post aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #79
an assault weapon is any gun gejohnston Apr 2016 #39
Interesting talking points on assault weapons aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #41
still not one valid argument gejohnston Apr 2016 #44
Valid argument? Who's arguing? aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #48
"Assault weapons" are civilian non-automatics (mostly small caliber), not machineguns. benEzra Apr 2016 #50
I can appreciate being specific in this forum aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #58
They are indeed rifles. The most common rifles in U.S. homes, in fact. benEzra Apr 2016 #68
Thank you benEzra! aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #77
Shrug? Straw Man Apr 2016 #22
Good points aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #40
A few more clarifications. Straw Man Apr 2016 #45
Thanks aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #47
You're welcome. Straw Man Apr 2016 #54
I didn't say anything about doing nothing gejohnston Apr 2016 #35
This is a perfect example of why... beevul Apr 2016 #36
Very interesting analysis aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #46
"Assault weapons" are legal in Germany, Sweden, France, Norway, Hungary, Switzerland, Finland... benEzra Apr 2016 #51
Informative post! aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #57
Is your goal saving lives or culture war? gejohnston Apr 2016 #60
Hmmm...it is reducing deaths, but it is quickly becoming a culture war aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #62
It has always been about culture gejohnston Apr 2016 #64
Thank you gejohnston aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #66
Were it not for the ongoing Holy War against lawful and responsible ownership, benEzra Apr 2016 #63
Great post! aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #65
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Cruz’s Gun Control Decept...»Reply #56