Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the gun worshippers hadn’t been bought off by the billionaires and made up the 2nd Amendment interpretation out of whole cloth, reasonable people wouldn’t have to take your guns that kill people.
But you did. You got suckered by the rich.
And we do. Just like Australia did and Canada does.
Ban handguns, federally. Then unpack the courts. Hell, fill them with a lot of Nixon conservatives if you want. Because everyone who’s not a Fed Soc bloodthirsty power grabber knows that the 2nd Amendment is about militias and handguns should be effectively banned in civilized societies.
Because you’re afraid of them? Or because you’re afraid of your own rage and what you might do with one.
It is indisputable that firearms, including handguns, have legitimate social utility. It is likewise indisputable that the individual Constitutional right to keep and best arms was never “collective” and is not the product of packed courts, or anything like it.
Anonymous wrote:If the gun worshippers hadn’t been bought off by the billionaires and made up the 2nd Amendment interpretation out of whole cloth, reasonable people wouldn’t have to take your guns that kill people.
But you did. You got suckered by the rich.
And we do. Just like Australia did and Canada does.
Ban handguns, federally. Then unpack the courts. Hell, fill them with a lot of Nixon conservatives if you want. Because everyone who’s not a Fed Soc bloodthirsty power grabber knows that the 2nd Amendment is about militias and handguns should be effectively banned in civilized societies.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Charles Allen says he hasn't commented on any of this because his Twitter account got hacked, because that's the only way to communicate?
https://twitter.com/CMCharlesAllen/status/1419034932790321154?s=19
Going to guess his advisers are telling him that each time he opens his mouth about crime he loses voters.
So how to get him and his sympathizers off our city council?
Stop electing only liberal Democrats. There needs to be some checks and balances on the council to hold back this woke stampede to the bottom.
This.
Totally agree. I'm thinking of forming a political committee to start distributing some shirts & signs about Charles Allen supporting crime. Let me know if you're interested. I think step #1 is for us to show a viable challenger there is support for getting rid of Allen and others. If anyone else is interested I'll be starting a thread and group on this.
This is either sock puppetry or the Qnon bat-signal went out for trumptrolls to start disrupting this thread. I’ve reported all your posts.
There is one, and ONLY ONE, solution to this problem: getting rid of every single gun in this country. Period. End of discussion. That’s the only thing that stops this. There iso need to discuss any other factors but that. It’s the guns. Nothing else. Full stop.
First of all, this isn’t true about guns any more than it’s true about drugs, hammers, knives, poisons, pots and pans, fire, automobiles, toilet tank covers or any other inanimate object criminals misuse.
Second, this will never happen. It cannot be accomplished lawfully, and even if it could, it cannot be accomplished practically.
Continuing to advocate for a fantasy solution does nothing to address the problem.
Banning handguns, as Canada effectively does, would get us to the low levels of gun crime that exist in Canada.
However, banning handguns is not possible with our current Federalist Society/billionaire-handpicked court.
Phil Anschutz, the billionaire who paid to help put Gorsuch on the court, knows that gun politics gets votes for tax cuts for Phil Anschutz.
That is why the Fed Soc judges made up a view of the second amendment that prohibits handgun bans. It’s pure politics. Votes for rightwing billionaires.
And the 2nd Amendment really is made up. We all know that Scalia and the Fed Soc made up an individual right, yes? The 2nd Amendment is about militias. Period.
The second amendment was to grant the militia (and therefore the army/military) the right to keep guns, not every hillbilly and criminal.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No “blood” is “on the hands” of anyone but the person who commits unlawful violence.
Further, I’m sure you have no intention of banning handguns from police or military. What about security personnel? What about business owners subject to robbery and assault? What about people facing threats to their lives? What about professionals at high risk of assault because they, for example, have access to narcotics? What about elderly, weak or small statured people, especially women? What about judges? Political office holders?
Magical solutions sound great until one examines the fact that firearms have specific utility for plenty of decent people.
And from a practical standpoint the more “illegal” guns are the more incentive there is for illicit manufacture, smuggling, theft from government stockpiles and so forth. Criminals import actual tons of unlawful drugs every year. Do you really believe anti-firearm legislation will stop them? Felons are already prohibited from possessing firearms. It is already unlawful to carry a firearm without a license. Armed robbery, assault and murder are already unlawful.
The “magic magnet” doesn’t exist and wouldn’t work if it did. Focus on the criminals, not inanimate objects.
Blood is on the hands of every single person who fought to make it easier for criminals to get guns, starting with the NRA and gun lobby. We need, at a minimum, complete accountability and traceability of all guns. Maybe that should start with mandatory registration and documentation for every gun transfer and periodic verification that the guns are still in their owners possession. Also, there should be limits on how many guns people can buy, to reduce the pipeline feeding criminals. You DO NOT need to buy 20 glocks a year.
No one, ever, least of all the NRA (which you critique but obviously know nothing about) has ever “fought to make it easier for criminals to get guns.” Well, except maybe a certain administration with its “Fast and Furious” program.
Mandatory registration. Why? What does that get you? Other than a confiscation list? Surely you don’t think criminals will register anything.
Documentation for every transfer. Because criminals will do that?
Periodic verification? Gosh, no Fourth or Fifth Amendment problem there.
Fantasy solutions. Juvenile list-making without reference to reality.
Lock up the criminals.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Charles Allen says he hasn't commented on any of this because his Twitter account got hacked, because that's the only way to communicate?
https://twitter.com/CMCharlesAllen/status/1419034932790321154?s=19
Going to guess his advisers are telling him that each time he opens his mouth about crime he loses voters.
So how to get him and his sympathizers off our city council?
Stop electing only liberal Democrats. There needs to be some checks and balances on the council to hold back this woke stampede to the bottom.
This.
Totally agree. I'm thinking of forming a political committee to start distributing some shirts & signs about Charles Allen supporting crime. Let me know if you're interested. I think step #1 is for us to show a viable challenger there is support for getting rid of Allen and others. If anyone else is interested I'll be starting a thread and group on this.
This is either sock puppetry or the Qnon bat-signal went out for trumptrolls to start disrupting this thread. I’ve reported all your posts.
There is one, and ONLY ONE, solution to this problem: getting rid of every single gun in this country. Period. End of discussion. That’s the only thing that stops this. There iso need to discuss any other factors but that. It’s the guns. Nothing else. Full stop.
First of all, this isn’t true about guns any more than it’s true about drugs, hammers, knives, poisons, pots and pans, fire, automobiles, toilet tank covers or any other inanimate object criminals misuse.
Second, this will never happen. It cannot be accomplished lawfully, and even if it could, it cannot be accomplished practically.
Continuing to advocate for a fantasy solution does nothing to address the problem.
Banning handguns, as Canada effectively does, would get us to the low levels of gun crime that exist in Canada.
However, banning handguns is not possible with our current Federalist Society/billionaire-handpicked court.
Phil Anschutz, the billionaire who paid to help put Gorsuch on the court, knows that gun politics gets votes for tax cuts for Phil Anschutz.
That is why the Fed Soc judges made up a view of the second amendment that prohibits handgun bans. It’s pure politics. Votes for rightwing billionaires.
And the 2nd Amendment really is made up. We all know that Scalia and the Fed Soc made up an individual right, yes? The 2nd Amendment is about militias. Period.
Anonymous wrote:What we need to do is outlaw murder.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Charles Allen says he hasn't commented on any of this because his Twitter account got hacked, because that's the only way to communicate?
https://twitter.com/CMCharlesAllen/status/1419034932790321154?s=19
Going to guess his advisers are telling him that each time he opens his mouth about crime he loses voters.
So how to get him and his sympathizers off our city council?
Stop electing only liberal Democrats. There needs to be some checks and balances on the council to hold back this woke stampede to the bottom.
This.
Totally agree. I'm thinking of forming a political committee to start distributing some shirts & signs about Charles Allen supporting crime. Let me know if you're interested. I think step #1 is for us to show a viable challenger there is support for getting rid of Allen and others. If anyone else is interested I'll be starting a thread and group on this.
This is either sock puppetry or the Qnon bat-signal went out for trumptrolls to start disrupting this thread. I’ve reported all your posts.
There is one, and ONLY ONE, solution to this problem: getting rid of every single gun in this country. Period. End of discussion. That’s the only thing that stops this. There iso need to discuss any other factors but that. It’s the guns. Nothing else. Full stop.
First of all, this isn’t true about guns any more than it’s true about drugs, hammers, knives, poisons, pots and pans, fire, automobiles, toilet tank covers or any other inanimate object criminals misuse.
Second, this will never happen. It cannot be accomplished lawfully, and even if it could, it cannot be accomplished practically.
Continuing to advocate for a fantasy solution does nothing to address the problem.
Anonymous wrote:gun control has to be done on a federal basis. It is useless on the state level---particularly in DC, where guns just flood in from Virginia. Throughout the 70s, 80s and 90s, DC had some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, and it had no effect on gang violence/underclass culture of shootouts.