Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP Posted December 17, 2015 Report Share Posted December 17, 2015 http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/obama-mike-bloomberg-gun-control/index.html I'm skeptical because if the GOP makes it into the White House, they could just render this null and void or something. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Flyer - Sakura Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 I would certainly agree that more needs to be done to keep guns out of the hands of terrorists and those who want to commit mass genocide or whatever in this country. After the recent shootings in this country (and I swear there are new cases at least once every couple days [or daily]), this really needs to stop. As much as I believe in the Bill of Rights (and yes, the 2nd Amendment allows you to bear arms), one should not have access to military-style weapons and certainly without ease. Limiting guns may not stop the amount of senseless killings in this country, but at least Obama is trying to do something about it.We don't need another college shooting or whatever happened in Paris / San Bernadino or wherever else that got hit this year. -------But yeah, Republicans will probably throw it out if one of their own takes office, and certainly the NRA is going to fight the hell out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(GigaDrillBreaker) Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 I honestly give 0 fucks about the second amendment. It has been taken so far out of context at this point. Just get rid of all the guns, save properly licensed firearms for hunting. Hell, even those could go in my eyes. If you say that the right to bear arms protects the public from terrorism and such, you are wrong and I am tired of your sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ENMaker Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 Nothing will happen, ye're stuck with the shite that goes on from now to the end times. There'll be hundreds more senselessly killed in mass shootings next year and nothing will be actually done. Ye're just fucked really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~ P O L A R I S ~ Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 I honestly give 0 f***s about the second amendment. It has been taken so far out of context at this point. How so? Nothing will happen, ye're stuck with the shite that goes on from now to the end times. There'll be hundreds more senselessly killed in mass shootings next year and nothing will be actually done. Ye're just funked really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 Excellent, the idiot will finally get impeached hopefully It's like he learned nothing from congress's anger at his excessive use of EO aready Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agro Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 Excellent, the idiot will finally get impeached hopefully It's like he learned nothing from congress's anger at his excessive use of EO areadyJust here to remind you that he's used less EO's per year than every President since Grover Cleveland's first term in the 1880's, so idk wtf you're talking about when you say "excessive use". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 Just here to remind you that he's used less EO's per year than every President since Grover Cleveland's first term in the 1880's, so idk wtf you're talking about when you say "excessive use".Quality over Quantity DACA for example was crossing a line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agro Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 Quality over QuantityAnd past presidents have made similar scope of orders. You likely just agreed with the politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 And past presidents have made similar scope of orders. You likely just agreed with the politics.ok, yeah that's fair. I'm bias, and I've felt he's made some rather drastic EO's that being said, my image of the man has been tainted by him tarnishing out international reputation, so it's likely best I don't comment on this thread, cause my subjective thought will bleed over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agro Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 that being said, my image of the man has been tainted by him tarnishing out international reputationTbh, I've talked with too many people from outside the US to agree with the statement that Obama is the one tarnishing our international reputation. If he's done anything to do so, though, it is without question in regards to drone activity in the Middle East. You can argue something about Israel, I suppose, but every other country in the world has its criticisms of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, even politicians in Israel itself. And now, as per my usual m.o. I shall now refuse to post again in general :'> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ENMaker Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 Ye is the plural of you basically. Addressing more than one person I'd say ye rather than you, so take the rest of it from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shalltear Bloodfallen Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 Here's a hint, do go to URBAN DICTIONARY of all places when you're trying to look up a word.Also I question your choice to try and look up a word that's CLEARLY a contraction, meaning most official dictionaries wont have a full deffiniton https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ye%27rehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ye_(pronoun) And since you evidently use it as your source, here:http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Ye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epicmemesbro Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 Actually he's used less EO's compared to previous presidents. Of course one can argue that the ones he used were done in vain, as well as were they should have been implemented. His original plan was to prevent the economic recession by making a compromise with large corporations and investment banks. But instead we were all forced to switch to digital TV. Why????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nyx Avatar Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 I honestly give 0 fucks about the second amendment. It has been taken so far out of context at this point. Just get rid of all the guns, save properly licensed firearms for hunting. Hell, even those could go in my eyes. If you say that the right to bear arms protects the public from terrorism and such, you are wrong and I am tired of your sheet.I'm surprised. I agree with practically all of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bury the year Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 Let me retread this post of mine. Considering my semi-shitpost set off a nice wave of discussion (for which I'm glad!), I'm gonna back up my points with some research. Much of it's taken from this article. I have four points to argue: 1) There's great popular support for gun control: the NRA is the ones obstructing change. 88% of Americans surveyed by CBS believe that background checks are needed to purchase a gun. However, the combination of lobbying and misinformation spread by the NRA has gone a long way to restrict progress in this department. (And yes, this bullet point's been editorialized a bit.) 2) The myth of "we arm ourselves to protect ourselves!" is patently untrue. In a study of over 6 million incidents of violent crime committed in the US over four years ('07-'11), in only 0.08% of those incidents was the defendant able to protect themselves from injury with a gun. Another study showed that in home invasions where the homeowners have an unsecured gun, it was twice as likely for the intruder to use it against the occupants than the other way around. 3) More guns won't proactively stop gun violence. In the 33 states that introduced RTC (right to carry) laws, violent gun crime increased from 4% to almost 30% over the decade following their inception: not in one state did this rate drop. 4) In many other countries in which gun control measures were introduced, gun violence rates dropped significantly and quickly. Take Australia. 13 mass shootings in a 20 year period before 1996. The government then banned certain classes of guns, restricted all others and forced a buy-back program. Since 1996, there has not been a single mass shooting in the country, and now the homicide rate is one-fourth that of the US. Even if this eventually is rendered inert, I'm all for Obama actually putting his foot down on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~ P O L A R I S ~ Posted December 21, 2015 Report Share Posted December 21, 2015 Ye is the plural of you basically. Addressing more than one person I'd say ye rather than you, so take the rest of it from there. Here's a hint, do go to URBAN DICTIONARY of all places when you're trying to look up a word. For colloquialisms and idiomatic use of language, absolutely. Also I question your choice to try and look up a word that's CLEARLY a contraction, meaning most official dictionaries wont have a full deffiniton https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ye%27rehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ye_(pronoun) And since you evidently use it as your source, here:http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Ye You're chiding me for my use of sources and firing back with Wikipedia, take a seat. As for "official dictionaries" supposedly omitting contractions, I'm not sure which dictionary is official enough for you but take your pick: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/you'rehttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/you'rehttp://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/you-rehttp://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/you-re AND SINCE YOU EVIDENTLY USE IT AS YOUR SOURCE, HERE: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/you%27re Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP Posted January 5, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 Bumping this because the plan seems to have been revealed: http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/04/politics/obama-loretta-lynch-gun-control-actions/index.html I don't believe in banning guns, but I do believe in expanding background checks and better mental heath funding, so I'm pretty much okay with this. Of course, if a Republican makes it into office, they will probably tear this up day one, regardless of if it works or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 Bumping this because the plan seems to have been revealed: http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/04/politics/obama-loretta-lynch-gun-control-actions/index.html I don't believe in banning guns, but I do believe in expanding background checks and better mental heath funding, so I'm pretty much okay with this. Of course, if a Republican makes it into office, they will probably tear this up day one, regardless of if it works or not. Jesus Christ these people are retarded. Let's examine, shall we? Among other things, the actions would expand mandatory background checks for some private sales. The administration would also provide more funding for mental health treatment, FBI staff and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives agents. So, basically, enabling those who sell guns to control who they sell to, instead of giving them to just anyone with money. "No law in the world would have prevent that," Rubio told a crowd in New Hampshire, saying deaths from gun violence are a "societal issue.""We as a society need to take responsibility for our children, for our families, for our communities and begin to address what is rotten what is broken in our culture that has led people to have no respect for human life," he added. I-I'm sorry. Say again? "We as a society need to take responsibility for our children, for our families, for our communities and begin to address what is rotten what is broken in our culture that has led people to have no respect for human life," he added. So then, what you're suggesting is, we should check the mental status of our United States citizens? You know, before giving and selling guns to someone who "has no respect for human life"? funking idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP Posted January 5, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 Jesus Christ these people are retarded. Let's examine, shall we? Among other things, the actions would expand mandatory background checks for some private sales. The administration would also provide more funding for mental health treatment, FBI staff and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives agents. So, basically, enabling those who sell guns to control who they sell to, instead of giving them to just anyone with money. "No law in the world would have prevent that," Rubio told a crowd in New Hampshire, saying deaths from gun violence are a "societal issue.""We as a society need to take responsibility for our children, for our families, for our communities and begin to address what is rotten what is broken in our culture that has led people to have no respect for human life," he added. I-I'm sorry. Say again? "We as a society need to take responsibility for our children, for our families, for our communities and begin to address what is rotten what is broken in our culture that has led people to have no respect for human life," he added. So then, what you're suggesting is, we should check the mental status of our United States citizens? You know, before giving and selling guns to someone who "has no respect for human life"? f***ing idiot. It's the Republican Party. What did you expect? People like Jeb Bush are basically the NRA's b****. Speaking of the NRA, rather than do s*** like this: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/nra-tweets-image-bullets-pictures-lawmakers-article-1.2484861, why can't they promote gun safety and education? I honestly think they could care less about people. Even gun owners are probably sick of all these mass shootings and these people getting guns when they shouldn't. Well, unless they're all heartless a******s, but I doubt they are. Most gun owners are not monsters. You could be at Wal-Mart or Target and walk past someone with a gun in their house stored safely without even knowing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epicmemesbro Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 The ATF has been known for selling weapons to the drug cartels in Mexico, I trust them just as much as I trust the NRA. Clearly they have little respect for human life. Also not all Republicans are like that. Christie wants strict gun control and Trump barley even cares.On a side note why is it that the people that only want the police to have firearms are the same people who tend to make a big scene over police brutality to the point of making all law enforcement look bad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerion Brightflame Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 On a side note why is it that the people that only want the police to have firearms are the same people who tend to make a big scene over police brutality to the point of making all law enforcement look bad? Probably because those are the kinds of people who are against a violent culture. Guns and Police brutality mix into it. Given you seemingly have this culture with police of it being 'Us vs. Them', which is really sad to see from a police force. They aren't unrelated issues really. OT; Well done Obama. Even if it gets removed in a few years, well done anyway for making a step for potentially positive change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP Posted January 5, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 Probably because those are the kinds of people who are against a violent culture. Guns and Police brutality mix into it. Given you seemingly have this culture with police of it being 'Us vs. Them', which is really sad to see from a police force. They aren't unrelated issues really. OT; Well done Obama. Even if it gets removed in a few years, well done anyway for making a step for potentially positive change. It is a step, but we need a lot more change if we want to tackle this issue. American society has a issue with violence in general, I feel. I strongly emphasize a better understanding of gun safety and gun education, but even then, you're going to have these negligent people. This will sound a bit extreme, but I would like those who are negligent with their guns to be held accountable. Anyone with a brain should know not to leave a loaded gun unattended where a child can get their hands on it and potentially hurt themselves or others by mistake. Responsible gun owners should not tolerate them. At all. Again, it sounds extreme, but at this point, enough is more than enough. We lose more people to accidents than to actual violence. Some sort of way to better prevent suicides might help, but I think that might fall under mental health treatment. As for the issue of gun violence, well, we'll see if Obama's actions will help. I hope it does, but you never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 I'm really really happy that he actully hit the problem on the head and tackled the gun shows by making health checks mandatory, rather than scapegoating the issue to assault weapons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP Posted January 5, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 I'm really really happy that he actully hit the problem on the head and tackled the gun shows by making health checks mandatory, rather than scapegoating the issue to assault weapons Agreed. Besides, I remember an FBI statistic from 2011 that said more people were killed by knives than rifles. Don't know if that includes assault or semi-automatic rifles, but still. However, no matter the gun, some people should not have access to them. Of course, the NRA is going to go about their usual "it won't work" tactic, and their brainwashed supporters will believe them, but we'll see what happens. Hopefully, Obama's plan does have an effect, but, if a GOP canidate wins the election, we can kiss that goodbye. So even if it does work, it might be overturned. I hope not, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.