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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

bongbong

(5,436 posts)
57. The Talking Point
Wed Jan 9, 2013, 11:56 AM
Jan 2013

is "we can't ban guns because nobody would follow the law". Yours is a variant - the interrogative form.

it's all part of deligitimating gun control BainsBane Jan 2013 #1
We're trying to point out two things Recursion Jan 2013 #18
two more points... farminator3000 Jan 2013 #35
Good points both Recursion Jan 2013 #45
some of the pending bills do specify number of rounds, generally ten BainsBane Jan 2013 #51
Magazines are a different matter, and I'm all for a high-cap ban Recursion Jan 2013 #56
we don't like guns that spit out a 100 rounds in a few seconds BainsBane Jan 2013 #49
Me neither. Those have been essentially banned for close to 80 years Recursion Jan 2013 #52
the Aurora shooter used one BainsBane Jan 2013 #58
The "if it were up to you plan" would actually do something; I would support it if the party does Recursion Jan 2013 #60
no, it doesn't BainsBane Jan 2013 #62
Doesn't it simply ban the AR platform by name? Recursion Jan 2013 #63
don't you think you should read the legislation BainsBane Jan 2013 #65
I have read her website. That's why I mentioned the "by name" problem. Recursion Jan 2013 #68
that summary is cursory to say the least BainsBane Jan 2013 #70
It's a one-test ban with most of the features from the 94 ban listed... Recursion Jan 2013 #71
don't you think they have the ATF helping them with that legislation? BainsBane Jan 2013 #73
It would surprise me if the ATF were helping Recursion Jan 2013 #74
I did't say that BainsBane Jan 2013 #75
I have written my (non-voting) Congresswoman Recursion Jan 2013 #76
Who defines what has a chance politically? Marr Jan 2013 #121
Handguns are the vast majority of murder weapons Recursion Jan 2013 #122
Exactly, voters. Marr Jan 2013 #124
I am perfectly okay with the 2nd Amendment's right to keep & bear arms Sherman A1 Jan 2013 #2
So if I want to follow the 1st admendment, can I only do it with technology from the 1700's Travis_0004 Jan 2013 #12
Do you know when movable type & the printing press were invented? baldguy Jan 2013 #14
The army was founded in 1775. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2013 #140
This message was self-deleted by its author Sherman A1 Jan 2013 #19
No, not quite. It was the 1980s when NRA friendly judges nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #55
Not so. The individual RKBA is acknowledged (even by controllers) as Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #78
Recently, tribe "came around." nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #88
Can I keep my Winchester .03 .22, made in 1905? Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #90
That is not an assault weapon nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #91
Why isn't it? While enshrining my "classic," could I keep a Remington M8 (1906)? Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #94
Lets start with detachable magazines. nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #110
So the Model 8 & 81 are to be outlawed or not? Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #113
I see what you doing nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #116
So, just another "NRA tactic," eh? Try a specific argument, then 'poof?' Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #118
ask the VP of tbe US nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #125
Actually, I support the universal NICS and strengthening reporting requirements. Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #137
So you are arguing just to argue? nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #138
Check the mirror... Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #139
Now it's an "assault gun?" Pray tell, what is that? Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #115
This sarisataka Jan 2013 #130
LOL! Thanks for light moment. Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #136
Earliest SCOTUS case I know which treats RKBA as an individual right is from 1857. dairydog91 Jan 2013 #82
And we both know how right Justice Tanney was nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #89
Exactly-- and if you're willing to ignore the "militia" part, why should anyone else accept Marr Jan 2013 #123
But you're not advocating constructionism, you're advocating turbo-originalism. dairydog91 Jan 2013 #25
Misreading. 2A says "arms," not muskets. 1A says "press." Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #77
This message was self-deleted by its author Sherman A1 Jan 2013 #79
Your answers... Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #93
This message was self-deleted by its author Sherman A1 Jan 2013 #105
Glad to be of assistance! Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #114
In a correlation to Cigarettes rightsideout Jan 2013 #3
How about putting Surgeon Generals warnings on firearms too ... OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #15
How about making gun free zones around and in all public buildings like smoke free zones? appleannie1 Jan 2013 #28
We pretty much have as far as I know (nt) Recursion Jan 2013 #29
For frack face the warning on my ammo box nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #67
The last chef knife I bought said "Blade is sharp; avoid contact" on the package Recursion Jan 2013 #72
I have a Ruger .22 handgun Jenoch Jan 2013 #80
That is merely the NRA/RW talking point used to end discussions on a message board Kolesar Jan 2013 #4
The primary objection is that some people don't want OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #5
see 4. Kolesar Jan 2013 #6
I'm sorry, but statistics and real world occurrences are not "talking points". OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #13
Good old games with statistics! bongbong Jan 2013 #39
So MJ is another NRA "talking point" promoter? Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #81
LOL bongbong Jan 2013 #83
"Games with statistics"? LOL, it's a numerical count of gun crime. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #99
numbuz bongbong Jan 2013 #101
LOL wut? Gun deaths from semi-automatic mass shootings should somehow count more than OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #102
Your stats are flawed bongbong Jan 2013 #104
They're not my stats, they are the FBI's. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #107
Those numbers don't support your argument bongbong Jan 2013 #108
There are no raw numbers of assault weapon crime, just rifle crime. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #111
thank you Duckhunter935 Jan 2013 #8
unsupportable comment Kolesar Jan 2013 #10
I also have bolt action rifles Duckhunter935 Jan 2013 #20
"a) Assault weapons actually make up VERY little crime"=NRA-deflection Kolesar Jan 2013 #43
Why is it a deflection to point that out? Recursion Jan 2013 #48
Stop with facts we are talking guns! former-republican Jan 2013 #54
Sounds like a repeal of the 2nd Amendment and a complete ban on all guns is what we need. LonePirate Jan 2013 #22
Well, here's a petition for that Recursion Jan 2013 #27
LOL bongbong Jan 2013 #37
So, tell me? How much? Recursion Jan 2013 #47
The Talking Point bongbong Jan 2013 #57
So, tell me, what do you think the compliance rate would be? Recursion Jan 2013 #59
Once we start tacking on 5-20 year prison terms for gun possession, ownership rates will drop. LonePirate Jan 2013 #41
Do you think fewer people do meth now than would if it were legal? Recursion Jan 2013 #46
Twenty some kids might disagree with you. RC Jan 2013 #92
I'm sure alot more than just 20 kids disagree with me. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #96
Maybe I should have said dead first graders. RC Jan 2013 #97
So what's worse, "NRA Talking Points" or "Logical Fallacies" (ie: emotional appeal) OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #100
Sorry but being an idiot doesn't prevent you from getting a gun. dkf Jan 2013 #7
you're the expert! bettyellen Jan 2013 #117
We all do. But unless laws are passed that would actually accomplish that goal, jmg257 Jan 2013 #9
Expect the gunboarders to act like you never posted that comprehensive summary...eom Kolesar Jan 2013 #11
ok Duckhunter935 Jan 2013 #21
More detail... jmg257 Jan 2013 #24
Because our last major Federal gun control law was completely pointless, because of definitions Recursion Jan 2013 #16
the tone of this OP really makes me want to answer backwoodsbob Jan 2013 #17
Pro-Gun Activists Are Attempting To Control The Vocabulary..... Paladin Jan 2013 #23
Everyone on every side of every debate does the same thing slackmaster Jan 2013 #61
Widely Used Debate Technique, No Doubt. (nt) Paladin Jan 2013 #84
The answer is that statutes must be reasonably related to their goals to be Constitutional. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #26
THAT's the one you pick?? Clips vs mags??? jmg257 Jan 2013 #32
The word "clip" doesn't appear in that definition .... oldhippie Jan 2013 #44
It certainly didn't fail to do what they wanted it to do...ban hi capacity mags. jmg257 Jan 2013 #53
It was amended by the BATFE to exclude tubular magazines oneshooter Jan 2013 #103
In my neck of PA people sell guns at yard sales. It amazes me how easy it is in appleannie1 Jan 2013 #30
There should be a multifaceted solution to the problem of mass shootings. Thinkingabout Jan 2013 #31
Alaskan State Troopers: disturbing scene koiwoman53 Jan 2013 #33
Police and prosecutors have discretion. dairydog91 Jan 2013 #87
AK gun laws Publiuus Jan 2013 #135
I posted on this subject last year bongbong Jan 2013 #34
My objection is the potential for "control" leading to the unjust taking of property slackmaster Jan 2013 #36
It is a deliberate strategy to discredit MineralMan Jan 2013 #38
It's called "baffle them with bullshit" gollygee Jan 2013 #40
Because precise language is critical for effective laws hack89 Jan 2013 #42
And I Repeat What I Said, Up-Thread: Paladin Jan 2013 #66
ok. nt hack89 Jan 2013 #95
Nice To Find Agreement With You. Honestly. (nt) Paladin Jan 2013 #98
Not agreement. Weariness is more accurate. hack89 Jan 2013 #112
My Mistake. (nt) Paladin Jan 2013 #119
No big deal. nt hack89 Jan 2013 #120
It's a distraction tactic nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #50
The tricky part is drawing the line kudzu22 Jan 2013 #64
Theology is out of place at revival meetings. nt rrneck Jan 2013 #69
It's what Gungeoneeers do best Hugabear Jan 2013 #85
I should probably skip this sarisataka Jan 2013 #86
If you can't define what you are legislating... Coyote_Tan Jan 2013 #106
Perhaps because you can't ban something you cannot define? Duh. cthulu2016 Jan 2013 #109
I think it is important to distinguish a couple of things here. CTyankee Jan 2013 #133
I want to be able to go where I want in this town without the chance of being caught between patrice Jan 2013 #126
It comes down to one thing for me: AndyA Jan 2013 #127
Most of the gunner memes are distractions. upaloopa Jan 2013 #128
it's a common internet board trick to insert minutia instead of the big picture graham4anything Jan 2013 #129
Because without precise terminology Jenoch Jan 2013 #131
K&R nt Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #132
The Constutional Issue Publiuus Jan 2013 #134
There is no reason to believe draconian regulations on guns will decrease the levels of violence Taitertots Jan 2013 #141
Human nature loose wheel Jan 2013 #142
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why is it that the main o...»Reply #57