Manipulating the public is so easy.

I will list the things that this plays in their favor:

1) Trump: (wasn't he right all along? I mean these crazy Muslims should stay out ! Fuck them !!)
2)The U.S elites, capitalist army: (it's like, invading Iraq and Afghanistan wasn't so bad ! the drones and all that shit? I mean, check this out:





You see? fuck this Librals ! because of them, good " 'Mericans" die everyday.

Nuke Muslims  ! all of them!
First, come to my home. I have MS, but no problem ! I'm a terrorist deep inside, I mean we kill gays.

Shit, this is how it plays:
-Saeed Aladin wakes up; he thinks: "what do I do today, what do I do....BINGO !! BIMGO ! LET'S GO KILL SOME SODOMITES ! ALALALALA BOOM!".

Guns don't kill people..nah nah..Ali Baba kills people..With Guns 
Mite..mite..SO-DO-MITE !!!
...
Zem Muslims !!

3)Gun control laws: Obama said it before two minutes ago, lol, I told you he'll say it in my previous comment xD
4) Revise 1,2 and 3.

(June 13, 2016 at 12:51 am)Maelstrom Wrote:

(June 13, 2016 at 12:48 am)Losty Wrote: Increased education
Decreased poverty

That will not happen so long as the one percent control the social-economic system.

A change so grand must take place that most people are simply too lazy to do a damn thing.

I'm not saying I don't think it's bullshit the way things are going right now, but we have to own our part of the blame seriously. What is ever to be fixed if we all sit around moaning about how things will never be fixed.

I'm working on a very very small level here by working a not so great paying job (which I love) and working my ass off. Yes, it's just one school district in all of America. It's only elementary school. But I will do everything in my power to make sure these kids get a good education and understand how important that is.
A friend of mine who owns a blueberry farm just upped her blueberry pickers to a $15 an hour minimum pay (they're paid by the basket so they can actually make more than that but not less). Yea her contribution only affects her own employees. But we have to be responsible for our own country and our own choices. People need to do their part even if all you can do is vote for the people who seem to have the best interests in mind.


Aaaaand I went off on a rant. Sorry.

(June 13, 2016 at 12:44 am)Maelstrom Wrote:

(June 13, 2016 at 12:38 am)Tiberius Wrote: Well the interpretation of the amendment is down to the Supreme court, and in multiple decisions they have said it applies to regular citizens.

Perhaps I have not quite delved into the legalities, but even I know the supreme court is not infallible.

Their fallibility has nothing to do with the interpretation of the 2nd amendment though. What they interpret it as, is what the law / government ultimately accepts as its meaning.

So I take it you agree with me that at this moment in time, the 2nd amendment grants the right for citizens to own guns?

My question remains unanswered, which is what can we do to prevent gun crime without infringing the 2nd amendment.

Note that the Supreme Court had ruled that the 2nd amendment has limits, which is how fully automatic weapons were banned.

(June 13, 2016 at 12:53 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Smart guns programmed to only work for a licensed user who has undergone background and psych evals every year or two.

If it's hackable it'll be hacked. Something like this offers no ownership safety. Even worse, it could potentially be hacked to falsely implicate someone else.

(June 13, 2016 at 12:59 am)KevinM1 Wrote:

(June 13, 2016 at 12:53 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Smart guns programmed to only work for a licensed user who has undergone background and psych evals every year or two.

If it's hackable it'll be hacked.  Something like this offers no ownership safety.  Even worse, it could potentially be hacked to falsely implicate someone else.

wait wait wait..
you mean this??





Drebin will be there, you know !!

ID guns..you know that this is going to the Metal Gear 4 world, right?

(June 13, 2016 at 12:59 am)KevinM1 Wrote:

(June 13, 2016 at 12:53 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Smart guns programmed to only work for a licensed user who has undergone background and psych evals every year or two.

If it's hackable it'll be hacked.  Something like this offers no ownership safety.  Even worse, it could potentially be hacked to falsely implicate someone else.

Perhaps. But I'm not a big fan of letting the perfect be the enemy of the better. Airbags don't work right all the time, but they've certainly made a dent in auto fatalities.

If the programming for such guns could be limited to licensed dealers with a specialized hardware setup, I imagine that might address much, though probably not all, of the weight of this objection, fair though it is. If Apple can encrypt a phone such that the FBI with all their resources cannot get into it, why cannot that same encryption algorithm -- if not one more secure -- be used to encrypt both the digitized modeling of the biometrics upon which such a gun would presumably operate, and the programming codes used to re-/deprogram the weapon?

It would, I think, greatly reduce stolen-gun shootings, of which Newtown was one.

Of course, you'd have to collect or permanently disable all dumb guns -- an expensive proposition.

And no, I don't think such a collection/disabling program would be politically feasible under current circumstances. But perhaps if smart-gun legislation included a long-term sundown clause, say fifty years, we could address the problem in a couple of generations.

It should also be noted that no changes in the law -- including my own suggestion -- would have stopped the massacre under discussion; the murderer's weapons were legal.

The gunman pledged allegiance to al-Saud's Henchmen in Iraq and Syria. Only somebody who is severely brainwashed would do that. I call them al-Saud's Henchmen because...wait for it...they get money from Saudi. Saudi funds all of these violent imams that drive people to insanity. They are told from birth to hate homosexual people.

And now there may be yet another president who will turn a blind eye to their terrorist ally in al-Saud. The Clinton Foundation has received millions from Saudi so that shows you how much Hilary cares about homosexuals. So thank you Hillary supporters.

(June 13, 2016 at 12:43 am)The_Empress Wrote:

(June 13, 2016 at 12:35 am)Huggy74 Wrote:  
Four times as in body count

8,000 deaths vs 32,000 deaths.

8 x 4 = 32

What the actual fuck, Huggy? Why do you think you're allowed to lie? You should probably watch out for the various cactii while you're in there.

Hold up! I'm lying? About what exactly?

Here are my exact quotes.

(June 12, 2016 at 10:39 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: There were 8,124 homicides involving firearms in 2014, and according to the NHTSA, there were 32,675 traffic fatalities in 2014.

(June 12, 2016 at 11:08 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Yet four times as many people die every year from automobiles than guns.

(June 12, 2016 at 11:38 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: That's kinda the point isn't it? Automobiles aren't designed to kill, actually it's quite the opposite, they are designed to adhere to strict safety regulations, yet they kill four times as many people as the thing that's actually designed to kill.

*emphasis mine*

Last time I checked 32,000 is FOUR TIMES AS MANY as 8,000.

You quoting me as stating "four times as likely" is false.

(June 13, 2016 at 12:18 am)The_Empress Wrote: No... it's really not. People don't generally drive automobiles with the intent to injure or kill with them. Accidents happening is an unfortunate side effect that happens at a lower and lower rate as safety and security features improve. On top of that, gun deaths are on the rise, sometimes accidentally, and often intentionally.

On top of that, according to the CDC, guns are more likely to kill, so his "four times more likely" snippet is a blatant lie.

*emphasis mine*

Now who's the liar?

(June 13, 2016 at 1:59 am)Huggy74 Wrote:

(June 13, 2016 at 12:43 am)The_Empress Wrote: What the actual fuck, Huggy? Why do you think you're allowed to lie? You should probably watch out for the various cactii while you're in there.

Hold up! I'm lying? About what exactly?

Here are my exact quotes.

(June 12, 2016 at 10:39 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: There were 8,124 homicides involving firearms in 2014, and according to the NHTSA, there were 32,675 traffic fatalities in 2014.

(June 12, 2016 at 11:08 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Yet four times as many people die every year from automobiles than guns.

(June 12, 2016 at 11:38 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: That's kinda the point isn't it? Automobiles aren't designed to kill, actually it's quite the opposite, they are designed to adhere to strict safety regulations, yet they kill four times as many people as the thing that's actually designed to kill.

*emphasis mine*

Last time I checked 32,000 is FOUR TIMES AS MANY as 8,000.

You quoting me as stating "four times as likely" is false.

(June 13, 2016 at 12:18 am)The_Empress Wrote: No... it's really not. People don't generally drive automobiles with the intent to injure or kill with them. Accidents happening is an unfortunate side effect that happens at a lower and lower rate as safety and security features improve. On top of that, gun deaths are on the rise, sometimes accidentally, and often intentionally.

On top of that, according to the CDC, guns are more likely to kill, so his "four times more likely" snippet is a blatant lie.

*emphasis mine*

Now who's the liar?

What you don't seem to understand is that you need to have use rates of each item in order to compute the likelihood of death arising from usage.

Four times as many people may die in auto accidents each year, but how many people drive (or ride, for that matter -- autos kill passengers, too) how many miles each year, compared to how many people fire how many rounds each year? Those facts are needed to compute likelihood. This is why any claim of autos being "four times more likely" to cause death is empty: the requisite data hasn't been presented.