GoBills808

You’re wrong

I think he’s injured a lot

I don’t need to read it. It’s just as bad an argument from you as it was from him. Israel doesn’t have anything resembling a 2nd Amendment, nor the collective fascination with firearms it engenders. If you want to see a good comparison look at Australia and their 1996 NFA. Problem solved.

Here:

That trying to explain mass shootings by any means other than the widespread availability of semi automatic weapons and its reflection as a whole in US gun culture is a red herring.

I haven’t seen studies comparing media coverage of mass shootings in other countries but I’d have to imagine it’s of a similar tone.

How so?

No doubt. And it’s been very successful. But it hasn’t contributed greatly to Jackson’s market value or longevity, which is a grievance I don’t fault him for.

I'm just saying...Ravens lowball Jackson after greatly reducing his market value in Roman's high school system plus rack up the mileage w/read option, how many guys are going to want to play for them after that?

If they actually let a 25 year old NFL MVP walk then they deserve everything that’s coming to them.

Do other countries not have Facebook or Twitter?

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.