GoBills808

Are you somehow missing my point? If it wasn’t clear already: since you insist on continuing to propose ridiculous half measures that nobody thinks will work, I’d make the waiting period 100 years.

Fine. I’d be willing to allow ex military and ex law enforcement access to semi automatics. That’s my concession. Now find me one single person from the other side willing to budge even one inch.

No. You really can’t. The results are in.

It’s not hate, it’s a lack of respect for pretending to straddle some undefined middle ground when anyone who hasn’t been living under a rock for the last 20 years knows it doesn’t exist. The gun rights guys I can at least understand. They have some skin in the game. So it makes sense to me logically that they oppose any further regulation on philosophical ground even as the bodies keep piling up. Folks like you, though…no idea.

That moment when you realize trying to straddle the fence on this issue doesn’t work

My reply would be in the form of a question, and that question would be would you say that FOPA was effective in dramatically limiting the public's access to automatic firearms?

Why not? Automatic weapons are illegal to acquire for all intents and purposes.

I think it's pretty sad that your threshold for a 'free society' is the ability to own firearms with no purpose other than killing humans. But I guess you can take solance in the fact that you are far from alone in that regard.

He has some strong opinions, I just thought it might be instructive if he knew a little more about what he’s talking.

Assault rifles are already restricted. I suggest you familiarize yourself with the terminology. Drug abuse is a health care issue. Gun ownership is not.

Those are very separate issues. Conflating firearms and drug use is an overused and misleading rhetorical device.

Then your characterization of these gun owners as law abiding is objectively wrong and yes, the discussion is pointless. If there are fewer guns, there are fewer illegal gun owners. What I’m proposing isn’t overreach imo, it’s merely inconvenient.

I assume you missed the incentivized part of the equation. And the argument that law abiding gun owners wouldn’t obey the law is an interesting one.

Correct.

Incentivized buyback program.

I do. Ban the sale and possession of semi automatic firearms. It’s not complicated.

Correct.

Now do semi automatics.

Coaches were absolutely to blame for the Houston loss. Offensively the playcalling was absurd (46 passes, with the lion’s share of targets going to Duke Williams🤦‍♂️) and defensively they got beat on poor blitzes in game-deciding spots as McDermott and Frazier are wont to do.

They broadcast depositions in Texas?

In hindsight I think you might be correct, but in the moment I didn’t have an issue with throwing. They were getting yards there too, Garoppolo and penalties were just leaving points on the field.

I agree that his playcalling cost the Falcons a Super Bowl but the other one was a different story imo. The Chiefs were COMING, it was clear the Niners defense had given everything they had and they (Sherman especially) was going to get beat at some point. 20 wasn’t going to be the winning number, they had to try to score again. No problem with how he called that game late for me.

I remember it pretty well tbh and by my recollection it came down to those two big plays, the blown coverage on Hill and the deep miss to Sanders. The rest of the game was a pretty good effort from the Niners defense and managing the game on offense when they had the ball…Garoppolo was throwing behind guys, having balls tipped, missing reads etc. I thought it was about as close a game as could reasonably be expected given the talent disparity at QB. I guess if there was to be a complaint about Shanahan for me it would be that he didn’t go to Kittle enough.

Also TV- JLD on Veep is absolute top notch

What was the gripe w Shanahan? Not telling Saleh he should maybe try covering Tyreek Hill 50 yards downfield?