Jump to content
JimG

Beto O'Rourke just did Republicans a massive favor on guns

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, JimG said:

Gonna take away guns?  One of the dumbest things I've heard. Anyone this ignorantly divisive is not a good leader at this time. 

More division is not what this country needs. 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/13/politics/beto-orourke-guns-debate/index.html

The thing is, statistically, this makes no sense, the vast majority of gun crimes are committed with handguns.  In 2017, there were more people killed with blunt objects than All rifles combined, it's just designed to give gun grabbers warm fuzzy feelings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, carolina_corpsman said:

The thing is, statistically, this makes no sense, the vast majority of gun crimes are committed with handguns.  In 2017, there were more people killed with blunt objects than All rifles combined, it's just designed to give gun grabbers warm fuzzy feelings. 

Well it sounds like counter-Trump rhetoric....say something radical and pick up followers. 

And one of the outcomes is more division and possibly new members joining the NRA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, TheKOB said:

We've moved from "no one wants to take your guns" to "don't worry he won't win the nomination". 

 

You really think any of those wouldn't do the same?

I'm also not concerned about what crazy positions Trump's primary challengers take if that helps. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, STS said:

it is an unelectable platform...the fact that someone actually said it is what is startling to me

maybe, maybe not. I mean I never thought mexican immigrants are rapists and murders, so I'm going to make mexico pay to build a wall was an electable platform. The one good I see in his statement is that we had a politician react to his constituents being killed by gun violence like a grieving parent. Maybe it was over the top but at least he didn't check with his corporate sponsors or the NRA president before caring about the american people.

 

(FTR, I think he's just as likely to be able to take everyone's automatic weapons as trump was of making mexico build a wall. I also think both solutions are just as likely to solve the underlying problems aka not at all.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is a difference IMO in building a wall for supposed national security and taking a dump on the bill of rights 

The fact that he said that will be tough for him to own moving forward as it is not only unobtainable but likely unconstitutional

Honestly it is something along the lines of what I would expect from Trump in terms of solving a problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sporkgod50 said:

He's the only one being discussed here in this thread about him. Have I missed non-fringe candidates saying this?

Pick someone with a D next to their name, they all support bans, the difference is to what extent. I do think most of them are smart enough to not come out and say it quite so explicitly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, carolina_corpsman said:

Pick someone with a D next to their name, they all support bans, the difference is to what extent. I do think most of them are smart enough to not come out and say it quite so explicitly.

Why in the world wouldn't everyone with any letters in their name support some type of bans. Are you in favor of giving prisoners the right to buy guns while in prison? thats a ban. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, carolina_corpsman said:

Pick someone with a D next to their name, they all support bans, the difference is to what extent. I do think most of them are smart enough to not come out and say it quite so explicitly.

Do you support everyone being able to own surface to air missiles? That's a ban.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sporkgod50 said:

all this  pearl grabbing because a fringe candidate said something during a debate? Are all gun access advocates so afraid of the world?

https://www.thetrace.org/2019/06/democratic-candidates-2020-gun-policy/

 

They all support an assault weapons ban. All but two support a buyback plan.  Only Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Ryan, Warren, and Yang said it would be voluntary (lol). Booker, de Blasio, O'Rourke, and Swalwell (RIP) explicitly said it was gonna be mandatory.  

Dems are consistently moving towards confiscation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Dems are consistently moving towards confiscation. 

And that really is the whole point of the extremist language.  You keep putting extremism out enough, and it becomes common language.   It's no longer extreme...it has become normalized.  That's how you shift the middle.  The whole socialism thing is a perfect example.  Ten years ago, a socialist label would have been the death knoll for an American politician.  Bernie Sanders has changed that -- he's attempted to normalize the concept and the language.

Go ultra extreme, and you can sell less extreme ideas as normal.  Ideas that would have previously been considered extreme until the ultra extremes are introduced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dems are consistently moving towards confiscation. 
And that really is the whole point of the extremist language.  You keep putting extremism out enough, and it becomes common language.   It's no longer extreme...it has become normalized.  That's how you shift the middle.  The whole socialism thing is a perfect example.  Ten years ago, a socialist label would have been the death knoll for an American politician.  Bernie Sanders has changed that -- he's attempted to normalize the concept and the language.
Go ultra extreme, and you can sell less extreme ideas as normal.  Ideas that would have previously been considered extreme until the ultra extremes are introduced.


Exact same thing happening on the right with Nazis / anti immigrant propaganda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheKOB said:

https://www.thetrace.org/2019/06/democratic-candidates-2020-gun-policy/

 

They all support an assault weapons ban. All but two support a buyback plan.  Only Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Ryan, Warren, and Yang said it would be voluntary (lol). Booker, de Blasio, O'Rourke, and Swalwell (RIP) explicitly said it was gonna be mandatory.  

Dems are consistently moving towards confiscation. 

so yes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Spur's Addiction said:

And that really is the whole point of the extremist language.  You keep putting extremism out enough, and it becomes common language.   It's no longer extreme...it has become normalized.  That's how you shift the middle.  The whole socialism thing is a perfect example.  Ten years ago, a socialist label would have been the death knoll for an American politician.  Bernie Sanders has changed that -- he's attempted to normalize the concept and the language.
Go ultra extreme, and you can sell less extreme ideas as normal.  Ideas that would have previously been considered extreme until the ultra extremes are introduced.


Exact same thing happening on the right with Nazis / anti immigrant propaganda.

at this point I'm so sick of gun violence, I'd listen to any solution. I just haven't heard anything concrete from the GOP. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the thing about restrictions, once implemented they aren't rescinded even if they don't work.  We're 18 years past the Twin Towers attack, and are still paying the price of loss of privacy since the event.

I think refusal to publicize the perpetrator's name would be a good start.  Publicity/notoriety seems a likely reason for all of the copycatting.  Although, I don't know how you would attempt to implement that kind of a reporting ban.  I don't think it could come from the government, maybe just some agreed upon policy by the major media outlets.  Although as long as they are getting clicks, I don't really see them choosing a more subdued path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Spur's Addiction said:

Do you support everyone being able to own surface to air missiles? That's a ban.

In theory yes, however it is not practical. I would argue that the founders would not take issue with it either given that at the time they wrote it there were many privately owned war ships and private armys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sporkgod50 said:

Why in the world wouldn't everyone with any letters in their name support some type of bans. Are you in favor of giving prisoners the right to buy guns while in prison? thats a ban. 

Ok, they all support "assault weapons bans" I admit I should have been more descriptive. It is misguided and only serves to drum up far left support. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...