Gun control is coming

Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Kola_Kreator said:
If Trump actually had the balls he brags about he would start jailing pharma execs and cleaning up all the dirty money that is systemically rotting the entire political system like a fucking cancer.
Click to expand...
LOL. "If Trump actually had the balls" he'd go after the status quo like a real man! I mean, where do you get your image of Trump? From his digital trading card collection?

1705813526439.png

No, man. He does deals with those people, he wants to make money from them, he wants to BE one of them. He doesn't do anything that would disturb their income. LOL at the thought.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
The 90% rule applies. Maybe 80%. Sometimes I drive over the speed limit. Sometimes I fart in public. Sometimes I leave the toilet seat up. I'm rebel.

That said, a law is a law. If you don't believe it is right, don't just ignore it and then complain if you face consequences. If you don't like a law work to change it. People claim they shouldn't pay taxes too. People claim they shouldn't have to go to the DMV to get a license to drive. Some say pedophilia is OK.
Click to expand...
It counts if laws are moral and ethical, the Nuernberg laws of Nazi Germany were unworthy of respect as are some in Russia. In a liberal democracy, liberal is the operative word and if it isn't illegal, it is legal, laws are generally just, but a 10-year-old girl should not be denied an abortion after being raped. Likewise pot laws were unjust, we all knew we were breaking them, but were prepared for the consequences. Laws against homosexuality were broken too because they were unjust and unethical.
 
Last edited:
V

VaSmile

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
The 90% rule applies. Maybe 80%. Sometimes I drive over the speed limit. Sometimes I fart in public. Sometimes I leave the toilet seat up. I'm rebel.

That said, a law is a law. If you don't believe it is right, don't just ignore it and then complain if you face consequences. If you don't like a law work to change it. People claim they shouldn't pay taxes too. People claim they shouldn't have to go to the DMV to get a license to drive. Some say pedophilia is OK.
Click to expand...
I never complained about the consequences I faced. I also feel zero guilt for the actions I took. It was a calculation and risk assessment. Now that I have children the risk assessment changed. Now that the laws have changed I do not seek exspongment the law was what it was and i chose to violate it anyway. I feel much the way about the student loan issue. Of course higher education and advanced job training should be affordable and accessible to all people but most people currently struggling with student debt were adults and understood the agreements they signed and should honor those agreements.( I understand predatory loans and greed of financial officials pay a role and should be addressed in a more detailed conversation) I obey the law not because I feel any moral obligation to do so but because I owe it to my children not to give the state any cause to take me away from them. My states plant count and carry limit are stupid and serve no purpose to the wellbeing of the general public but I comply for my kids sake.
 
K

Kola_Kreator

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
The "both sides are bad" trope has rendered foolish by the extremism of today's Republicans.

At one time one could use that trope and sound edgy. Now they sound old, tired, cliché and wrong.
Click to expand...
Fogdog said:
LOL. "If Trump actually had the balls" he'd go after the status quo like a real man! I mean, where do you get your image of Trump? From his digital trading card collection?

View attachment 5363138

No, man. He does deals with those people, he wants to make money from them, he wants to BE one of them. He doesn't do anything that would disturb their income. LOL at the thought.
Click to expand...
Biden chows down on the same sloppy pharma jizz juice as Trump. There's no winners in this idiotic partisan debate.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
VaSmile said:
I never complained about the consequences I faced. I also feel zero guilt for the actions I took. It was a calculation and risk assessment. Now that I have children the risk assessment changed. Now that the laws have changed I do not seek exspongment the law was what it was and i chose to violate it anyway. I feel much the way about the student loan issue. Of course higher education and advanced job training should be affordable and accessible to all people but most people currently struggling with student debt were adults and understood the agreements they signed and should honor those agreements.( I understand predatory loans and greed of financial officials pay a role and should be addressed in a more detailed conversation) I obey the law not because I feel any moral obligation to do so but because I owe it to my children not to give the state any cause to take me away from them. My states plant count and carry limit are stupid and serve no purpose to the wellbeing of the general public but I comply for my kids sake.
Click to expand...
The problem is not just bad people, but fucking evil ones are making unethical, unconstitutional and socially harmful laws. Look at your average republicans FFS, has their nose shoved up an authoritarian criminal's ass, are aiding and comforting an insurrection against the constitution and are making laws while breaking them.
 
K

Kola_Kreator

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
The "both sides are bad" trope has rendered foolish by the extremism of today's Republicans.

At one time one could use that trope and sound edgy. Now they sound old, tired, cliché and wrong.
Click to expand...

Both sides of politics are full of characters who hold large investments in the big pharma. This obviously creates a significant conflict of interest which makes them unqualified to be involved in the law making process.
 
V

VaSmile

Well-Known Member
Kola_Kreator said:
Biden chows down on the same sloppy pharma jizz juice as Trump. There's no winners in this idiotic partisan debate.
Click to expand...
Both party's are bad. For the same reasons. Both party's sell out our well being to big pharma and big agg. Both party's give away our collective wealth to the military industrial complex and corporate greed. Both party's export terror warfare and poverty. That mostly ends my list of gripes with the Ds. However my list of gripes with the Rs would fill pages beyond that.
 
K

Kola_Kreator

Well-Known Member
@Fogdog

The democrats did sign in an act which helped to reduce the costs of some medications. And I commend this action.

In 2018 the Republicans signed in the Patient Right to Know Drug Prices act which prevented PMB's from putting gag clauses on chemists preventing them from informing patients of cheaper price medications.

In my opinion both of these acts are helpful in some way. But the actual problem is that corruption is allowed to operate on the open market and there is no constitutional protection for the public against these unethical practises. If either party actually cared about the general public why not protect the public by amending the bill of rights and putting an end to the bullshit. If a business acts against the well being of the public they should be punished with jail time. If an amendment like this would be proposed it would receive unanimous public bipartisan support. So with all of the absolute bullshit that had gone down causing widespread damage to the public's physical and financial health why hasn't it already been put forward?? The answer to this question is why I take the position that both parties are bad.
 
rasterman

rasterman

Member
Fogdog said:
I'm not expecting that a person who wants high capacity military style rifles to be sold at gun shows that enable convicts and mentally disabled people to be able to circumvent a background check and buy them to agree with this law. Then again, some people are members both the NRA and pedophile associations. I wouldn't expect those people to support stricter gun laws or child protection laws as well. Nor would I expect that they would even know what those laws say. They are simply against them.

Which is why I don't expect you to know that elements of Oregon Measure 114 are already on the books in other states, have passed US Constitutional challenges and have been shown to save lives. The only real obstacle to this measure becoming law in Oregon was a ruling by an elected judge in a rural county with less than 7500 people living in that county. So, yes, the judge in Harney County says the law is unconstitutional according to his interpretation of the law and his interpretation of Oregon's Constitution. That doesn't mean he's right, it just means we'll see what happens when better judges review his ruling and the arguments made by the state to defend Measure 114. Its the same old story. NRA's lawyers will face off in court with Oregon State's attorneys and we'll see if Rasterman's ruling holds up.

The measure is reasonable, it doesn't restrict anybody who already has the right to own a gun regardless of their reasons from owning a gun. It grandfathers in all the other murder weapons that people might already own. It was written to save lives, not take away anyone's gun, not even people who shouldn't own a gun and don't go on to commit a crime or menace others with the gun. If we lose in court, we'll be given a reason for the failure and can go back to rewrite one that will pass review. Our purpose is to reduce gun deaths, which I hope you would find to be a reasonable purpose. Other reasonable people support the kinds of measures spelled out in this one. Including many gun owners. This measure could not have passed without their support.
Click to expand...
And it's unconstitutional, and an example of how mob rule works. Eventually it'll be struck down.
 
rasterman

rasterman

Member
Fogdog said:
I believe that we should follow the rule of law. Including following unreasonable laws and working to get them changed.
Click to expand...
I used to believe that. But now I believe it's our duty to refuse to follow unreasonable laws-even if those laws don't seem to affect us personally.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Kola_Kreator said:

Both sides of politics are full of characters who hold large investments in the big pharma. This obviously creates a significant conflict of interest which makes them unqualified to be involved in the law making process.
Click to expand...
Big pharma is a beer fart compared to big fossil energy, big internet (look where Skum puts his money!) and and big money (insurers, investment banks etc.) Why you being so selective?

Also, would you consider a law barring public officeholders from investing in securities to be just or useful?

We have bigger problems. The Heritage Foundation, the Federalist Society and the spectacularly misnamed Alliance Defending Freedom. These are the folks behind the appointment of small-government charlatans and wrecking-ball justices in the pockets of fascism-friendly billionaires.
 
Last edited:
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
rasterman said:
I used to believe that. But now I believe it's our duty to refuse to follow unreasonable laws-even if those laws don't seem to affect us personally.
Click to expand...
What is unreasonable about sane gun control?

It is a legitimate public safety issue and the leading cause of death among children. Such laws are neither immoral or unethical and no different than licensing and insuring your car and obtaining a driver's license. That is the differece, the moral and ethical validity of the arguments.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Here is the logical problem with those who love guns and support Trump. He wants to be a dictator with total arbitrary unchallenged power in the land of the free and home of the brave. If he were to succeed and obtain it, then he could do anything he wants, if he can step on your 1st amendment rights, he can eliminate your 2nd amendment rights, that's what the destruction of the US constitution means.

What happens if someone takes a shot at dictator Trump and maybe wings him? "Grab the guns" as he once said and the nightmare of the ATF and FBI collecting guns with robocop and robodog would become a reality pretty fast. Pathological means you harm yourself and others and anybody who is concerned about their 2nd amendment rights would be a fool to vote republican or Trump! So, I guess it comes down to a choice between your gun and your racism really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top