Holder wants to explore gun tracking bracelets

[UpaLoompa]

Or how about the information from the Department of Justice budget request that specifically mentions a request for $2 million in support of gun safety technology?

Why is that bad?

 

[45ACP]

It's not "it's good to take guns because X." "No, it's bad to take guns because Y." The second argument is what you see in a real topic with real disagreement. The first is what you see when it's a phony issue pushed by propagandists on one side.

It's not? You've really never seen the latter of those two arguments here? God you're hopeless.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Yes I'm a lobbyist . . . :icon_lol: Are you kidding? What I have ever posted on here to make you think I was a lobbyist?

I said that lobbyists misinterpret stuff like that and then ignorant people get mad, and you said "what did we misinterpret?"

Or how about the information from the Department of Justice budget request that specifically mentions a request for $2 million in support of gun safety technology?

Um, so do you oppose gun safety technology?

 

[spamking]

Why is that bad?

To a certain extent it isn't . . . but I don't want have to deal with yet another road-block when it comes to selling my own property or have to change some RFID chip/bracelet when I sell or buy something.

 

[spamking]

I said that lobbyists misinterpret stuff like that and then ignorant people get mad, and you said "what did we misinterpret?"

So I was wrong for extrapolating that comment to include "gun nuts" here? Right.

Are you going to answer that question?

Um, so do you oppose gun safety technology?

Some but not all . . .

 

[Human Bass]

 

[Jack V Savage]

So I was wrong for extrapolating that comment to include "gun nuts" here? Right.

No, gun nuts are the people who are getting mad, and lobbyists and other propagandists are the ones who are riling them up with these scares.

 

[UpaLoompa]

To a certain extent it isn't . . . but I don't want have to deal with yet another road-block when it comes to selling my own property or have to change some RFID chip/bracelet when I sell or buy something.

The right and disagreement on the left means you're not going to have to worry about it.
Do you think it unreasonable that gun manufacturers be required to include trigger locks with new guns?

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

What is the disagreement in the forums, though? "The left wants to take everyone's guns." "No it doesn't." "Yes it does." It's not "it's good to take guns because X." "No, it's bad to take guns because Y." The second argument is what you see in a real topic with real disagreement. The first is what you see when it's a phony issue pushed by propagandists on one side.

You've skipped the substance of my post in favor of arguing about how to characterize (in a very simplistic manner) the debates on this forum. Should we take this to mean you don't grasp the scale of the "assault weapon" market in this country and that you can't explain what the gun show loophole is?

 

[Jack V Savage]

You've skipped the substance of my post in favor of arguing about how to characterize (in a very simplistic manner) the debates on this forum. Should we take this to mean you don't grasp the scale of the "assault weapon" market in this country and that you can't explain what the gun show loophole is?

I don't know about all the other people you're speaking for, but you should take it to mean that I don't care about the details of that stuff. I made that very clear from the beginning--gun-related issues are of no interest to me. My point was that the passion on them is not symmetrical (and that there is little real disagreement), and you're just proving that.

You should also work on your reading comprehension. Given that I was deliberately simplifying the discussion in order to more clearly make a point, the accusation that my point was "very simplistic" is pretty odd.

 

[killakoy]

I don't deny that pro-gun people are extremely passionate and are willing to switch parties (and even move) based on that issue. My point is that the passion isn't equal on the other side. I don't think you'd find anyone who vote Democrat solely because he agrees with their stance on gun control or anyone who moves because they want to live somewhere with more restrictive gun laws.

I don't think this is true either. My sister is very pro-choice and for that reason you'll never see her voting for a republican. Just different areas to be passionate about.

Ignoring arguments about single or multiple issue voters, you can actually argue with that "logic".
Romney signed an AW ban.
Schwarzenegger supported the Brady Bill and signed gun control legislation.
Reagan supported the Brady Bill and AW bans.
Republicans have routinely sponsored and voted for a variety of gun control legislation.

And while you can find support for gun legislation from republicans (ie. compromise), you won't find many exceptions to being pro-2nd amendment. I realize that you're just playing devil's advocate, but I think we can all agree that the rift between some democrats and gop is vast when it comes to this issue.

 

[UpaLoompa]

And while you can find support for gun legislation from republicans (ie. compromise), you won't find many exceptions to being pro-2nd amendment. I realize that you're just playing devil's advocate, but I think we can all agree that the rift between some democrats and gop is vast when it comes to this issue.

Hard to say that signing a bill you could veto (i.e. Romney's AWB) is compromise.

I think there is a large gap between some urban democrats and much of the GOP. However there are many in the democratic party that actively oppose gun control. In contrast, to use your other example from the same post, there are very few pro-choice republicans.

 

[Protectandserve]

If my department tried to make me carry some stupid RFI chip equipped "smart gun" I would leave. If it became a state law, I would change states.*

*Unless I get a smart gun like the Lawgiver in the Judge Dredd movies because who doesn't want a gun that can fire grenades, ricochet rounds, and incendiaries...

 

[WorldofWarcraft]

So, this thread has evolved into whether or not the typical Democrat is as pro gun as a typical Republican.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I don't think this is true either. My sister is very pro-choice and for that reason you'll never see her voting for a republican. Just different areas to be passionate about.

???

That doesn't contradict what I said at all. I'm not saying that there's a general lack of passion on the left--just that the left is not as passionate about guns.

 

[GhostZ06]

we should explore methods on how to launch holder off a cliff. lol fuck off holder

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I made that very clear from the beginning--gun-related issues are of no interest to me. My point was that the passion on them is not symmetrical (and that there is little real disagreement), and you're just proving that.

If these issues are of no importance to you then I find it highly unlikely you've paid enough attention to provide an assessment with any value. Your lack of detail or citation supports this.

 

[Jack V Savage]

If these issues are of no importance to you then I find it highly unlikely you've paid enough attention to provide an assessment with any value. Your lack of detail or citation supports this.

Try again. I read stuff from the left and the right, and I read party platforms. It's clear from what I read that as a result of a well-funded gun lobby, ignorant right-wingers have been convinced that the left wants to ban guns; and it's equally clear that the left doesn't want to ban guns, and that the Democratic Party's position on guns is very similar to the Republican Party's position (and thus that it's a non-issue that only gets play because it works as a fundraiser/team-builder for fanatics on the right).

 

[5H3RD0G]

It's an interesting idea but a mechanism can always be altered. You need something a little more clever yet simple for the gun loving populace. :icon_chee Guarantee that will be hacked in 5 minutes. Keep the ideas coming a solution will spring up from billions of ideas.

 

[Kevin Rudd]

This is regularly talked about in science fiction and even contemporary action movies. I don't see a major problem if we're talking strictly about law enforcement. Of course I also think it is a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.

Good enough for Judge Dredd, good enough for America imo.