Ghost Guns

[kylemcintyre67]

How were we suppose to stay home when there has been zero mechanism provided to do so? People who make 29k a year dont have that choice. I spent the last year trying fighting the temptation to kill myself because of the absolute terror I experienced thinking I would bring this contagion home to my son who is fighting cancer. None of my coworkers have been willing to do the right thing. I'm not superstitious so I ain't going to argue about your god. No one asked you to impoverish yourself. Refusing to make the most basic sacrifices in the face of a global pandemic absolutely does makeyou selfish and evil.

 

[ImBillT]

How were we suppose to stay home when there has been zero mechanism provided to do so? People who make 29k a year dont have that choice. I spent the last year trying fighting the temptation to kill myself because of the absolute terror I experienced thinking I would bring this contagion home to my son who is fighting cancer. None of my coworkers have been willing to do the right thing. I'm not superstitious so I ain't going to argue about your god. No one asked you to impoverish yourself. Refusing to make the most basic sacrifices in the face of a global pandemic absolutely does makeyou selfish and evil.

It means that I believe something different from you. It does not make me selfish or evil. If I do not believe that I’m causing anyone harm, and am not forcing them to have any close contact with me, then I am not morally accountable for doing anything wrong. Had I believed that I was endangering someone against their will, that would make selfish, and perhaps evil.

I am one of those people with no choice but to go to work, and I did not appreciate those who could work from home asking me, or anyone else to do so.

I had a wife and 1yr old at home, but I had no fear. You may call that superstition if you want. It took me a few weeks to come to that, but I view view things through a different lens now. I know a book you might give a deep read or two if you can ever bring yourself to it. That book has nothing to do with what I believe about covid-19, but it has a lot to do with a lack of fear.



I’ll be more than happy to discuss this further in pm.

I am very sorry that your son has to deal with cancer.

 

[MTGomer]

I used to believe this high minded silliness too. The last year taught us that all those voluntarist/ libertarian ideals are hot garbage.

Lol. Yeah, we sure took a libertarian approach over the last year.

 

[stevejfarms]

With all due respect, cut the condescending "math" crap. Not everyone in the 49% has good healthcare. Luckily, my mom and her side of the family is Canadian so I know for myself how their system works and how sometimes you have to wait for elective surgery but nobody goes bankrupt for the audacity of having cancer.

My wife had the “ audacity“to have cancer... We’re not bankrupt. Thank God we didn’t have to rely on gov’t health care.

 

[Dave N]

Uh, what about the guns?

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Uh, what about the guns?

I think we decided on post #2 we were in favor of them, kinda went downhill after that.

 

[BucksnDucks]

Uh, what about the guns?

Ghostly thread, the original topic just disappeared

 

[LaSportsman]

"ghost guns" - an alliteration people love to use because it sounds great, but they can't actually decide what it means. Apparently, the marketing value is worth more than the supposed concern.

First "ghost guns" were polymer and other non-ferrous guns that would avoid metal detectors and x-ray machines at airports. Then "ghost guns" were made using 3-D printing machines at home using public domain "blueprints". Now they are 80% finished lowers that lack a serial number and don't require a background check. I wonder what scary thing they will refer to in 3 years.

To the "common sense" gun folks, enough with the ever-morphing, but oh so catchy term. Say what you mean and let the discussion begin, quit with catchy phraseology - ghost guns, pink slime, etc - pejorative terms that serve no thoughtful purpose and only serve to whip the unknowing into a suitable state of panic.

My 870 Remington circa 1982 will be a ghost gun at some point.

 

[LaSportsman]

The problem with the mental health argument is it arguably (and we will) encourages folks to not seek help for fear of being put on a list that prevents gun ownership. These aren't the ones likely to commit mass murder but they may be the ones at risk for suicide.

 

[Wildabeest]

I now have vastly inferior coverage under my wife’s employer at almost triple the price....actually my sex change will be a lot cheaper under my new coverage.

 

[Shangobango]

Seems kind of aggressive.

View attachment 180079

My favorite ad, ever.

 

[Beignet]

My health insurance sucks too, but back to guns. I remember this opinion piece from a few years back, A Gun Nut's Guide to Gun Control That Works, and thought it sounded pretty sensible. If you're legally able to own a gun you can have as many of pretty much any semi-auto weapon you'd want (even the ghastly ones). Meanwhile, the bolt-gun and over-under "Fudds" wouldn't be punished by the restrictive gun laws of many major urban areas.

I'd particularly love to hear opinions on this from anyone who considers themselves to be one of the "big 2A folks" cause I admittedly run with a bunch of Fudds.

 

[ImBillT]

My health insurance sucks too, but back to guns. I remember this opinion piece from a few years back, A Gun Nut's Guide to Gun Control That Works, and thought it sounded pretty sensible. If you're legally able to own a gun you can have as many of pretty much any semi-auto weapon you'd want (even the ghastly ones). Meanwhile, the bolt-gun and over-under "Fudds" wouldn't be punished by the restrictive gun laws of many major urban areas.

I'd particularly love to hear opinions on this from anyone who considers themselves to be one of the "big 2A folks" cause I admittedly run with a bunch of Fudds.

He addresses my biggest concern

“The gun rights side would be justifiably concerned that a hostile Congress and president could one day attempt to use the licensing scheme to limit the gun rights of large, law-abiding sections of the population, possibly on some arbitrary pretext.”

and he does not offer any semblance of a fix(unless I missed it...I did skim it quickly)and the man currently in office, along with his back-up and the current congress are exactly the administration I would fear under such an arrangement.

In a perfect world, I really wouldn’t have a problem with it, but of course a perfect world, I wouldn’t need guns for self defense anyway. In today’s world, I do need guns for self defense, and I really don’t have much issue with current gun laws. Why would I negotiate some of my rights away?

 

[VikingsGuy]

My health insurance sucks too, but back to guns. I remember this opinion piece from a few years back, A Gun Nut's Guide to Gun Control That Works, and thought it sounded pretty sensible. If you're legally able to own a gun you can have as many of pretty much any semi-auto weapon you'd want (even the ghastly ones). Meanwhile, the bolt-gun and over-under "Fudds" wouldn't be punished by the restrictive gun laws of many major urban areas.

I'd particularly love to hear opinions on this from anyone who considers themselves to be one of the "big 2A folks" cause I admittedly run with a bunch of Fudds.

There are a lot of "details" I would prefer to be different, but more broadly, I agree with the author's desire to have a nationwide solution that makes more sense than the current state. I wish we could get a grand compromise. A national set of constitutionally acceptable boundaries (just like every other constitutional right) such as universal background checks in form of pre-licensure rather than purchase by purchase, universal conceal carry, dropping the NFA for short-barrelled rifles, and suppressors, etc. and pre-emption of the hodge-podge of local/state restrictions. But there is ZERO chance that happens in the next decade. The two sides have decided to make this an all-or-nothing litmus test - so we will get max regulations in states/cities controlled by one side and little to no regulations in those controlled by the other side and have gridlock at the fed.

 

[ImBillT]

There are a lot of "details" I would prefer to be different, but more broadly, I agree with the author's desire to have a nationwide solution that makes more sense than the current state. I wish we could get a grand compromise. A national set of constitutionally acceptable boundaries (just like every other constitutional right) such as universal background checks in form of pre-licensure rather than purchase by purchase, universal conceal carry, dropping the NFA for short-barrelled rifles, and suppressors, etc. and pre-emption of the hodge-podge of local/state restrictions. But there is ZERO chance that happens in the next decade. The two sides have decided to make this an all-or-nothing litmus test - so we will get max regulations in states/cities controlled by one side and little to no regulations in those controlled by the other side and have gridlock at the fed.

I mostly agree, but have two questions.

1) What other constitutional amendments within the Bill of Rights besides the second, have as many laws RESTRICTING them, or even about them? I’m genuinely curious because you seem to be asserting that there are very clear boundaries and limitations on things like “freedom of speech”, “freedom of the press”, “freedom of religion”, “unreasonable search and seizure” etc. While I am aware that all of those have some sort of boundaries, I would say that A) the boundaries are not that clear(each one of them ends up in court every year) and B) their protections seem to be much broader than 2A protections(from a non-lawyer perspective, the above mentioned constitutional rights, more often than not, seem to be an automatic win whenever someone claims that whatever seemingly unrelated thing they were doing deserves protection based on one of those rights) Again, I’m not asserting much. You’re the lawyer, and I’d like to know your take on those things. Also, I realize that I may be taking your statement differently from you meant it. I suppose you could mean that all of the restrictions and laws etc. are a sign of considerable contention, and the cause of the lack of clarity about the 2nd amendment.

2) What do you mean when you say that the two sides are “all or nothing”? From my perspective, there are quite a few on the left that would like to see all guns go away period, even if they don’t admit it, and that’s their end game, BUT I’m not convinced that most of them want that. I think that MOST of them want something closer to European gun laws(which would be terrible). I don’t think that’s all or nothing. Then on the right, I don’t think more than a handful of people on the planet want absolutely zero gun laws. I almost everyone on the right, especially elected folks, are all for background checks by dealers. It’s similar for fully automatic weapons, tanks, bazookas, missiles etc. If there is one single elected politician who is pushing “the right to keep and bear arms” as a right for anyone to own any weapon, then I have somehow missed them.

 

[mxracer317]

Here's one from two years ago:
View attachment 180080

The imagery in the Bravo Company ad is familiar. The whole "Patriot" theme is militia-speak 101 as is the tactical cos-play. There's a lot of money to be made off of this kind of stuff, and it's worth looking at how companies can advertise.

We didn't allow cigarettes or alcohol to be advertised on television for decades because of the imagery & message that it sends to young people. I don't think it's that much of a stretch to see the same kind of emotional advertising in the gun world.

Do you issues with video games like Call of Duty? Just wondering... cause that is the stuff I’d be more worried about.

 

[FI460]

Do you issues with video games like Call of Duty? Just wondering... cause that is the stuff I’d be more worried about.

Don't they have Call of Duty in other countries?

 

[mxracer317]

Don't they have Call of Duty in other countries?

I’m sure they do. My point was, I wouldn’t be so much concerned about manufactures spending the money marketing to adults that can afford to be “tactic-cool”.

I would be more worried that video game manufactures on a daily basis sell tens of millions of copies of games that promote killing and thus desensitizes the regard for human life.

 

[FI460]

I’m sure they do. My point was, I wouldn’t be so much concerned about manufactures spending the money marketing to adults that can afford to be “tactic-cool”.

I would be more worried that video game manufactures on a daily basis sell tens of millions of copies of games that promote killing and thus desensitizes the regard for human life.

Human entertainment has always had a fascination with war. While we probably agree that firearms manufacturers marketing isn't much of a problem I don't see any way we can attribute video games to violent crime. The majority of males I grew up with played Call of Duty or something similar and the majority grew up well adjusted young men. The rise in popularity of violent video games coincided with a decreasing trend in violent crime nationally. I just don't see it.

 

[mxracer317]

Human entertainment has always had a fascination with war. While we probably agree that firearms manufacturers marketing isn't much of a problem I don't see any way we can attribute video games to violent crime. The majority of males I grew up with played Call of Duty or something similar and the majority grew up well adjusted young men. The rise in popularity of violent video games coincided with a decreasing trend in violent crime nationally. I just don't see it.

I grew up playing games like contra and doom, and turned out just fine.

I think the difference was how today’s games are realistic, as in scary realistic.

There’s no way you can take a young kid and put them in a situation where they’re actively killing people over and over again, and not say that it is desensitizing the value of human life.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on the effects it has on a person. Especially people more prone to mental health issues.