Unlimited "Guns, Fuck Yeah!" Thread

[The Good Reverend Roger]

No, fuck the Constitution on its own merits.

Hellooooooooo, Captain Utopia!

[AFK]

I purposefully overstated because I knew it would make you itchy.   


The Constitution, honestly, is horribly out-of-date but the framers, in one of the most brilliant mind fucks of all time, made it pretty much impossible to fix. 


But it is what it is and it's not going away so we have to make the most of it. 

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I purposefully overstated because I knew it would make you itchy.   


The Constitution, honestly, is horribly out-of-date but the framers, in one of the most brilliant mind fucks of all time, made it pretty much impossible to fix. 


But it is what it is and it's not going away so we have to make the most of it.

Every Utopian tard thinks the constitution is out of date.  You all seem to think you have better answers. 

Funny thing is, all of those answers involve telling people what to do. 

So, no.  I think I'll let you SAVE TEH CHILDREN here at PD, and have a good laugh at your pomposity.

[AFK]

I don't have better answers.  But I do know letting a clause written in the 18th century dictate (through bullshit interpretations) how we deal with 21st century guns is just plain ludicrous on its face.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I don't have better answers.  But I do know letting a clause written in the 18th century dictate (through bullshit interpretations) how we deal with 21st century guns is just plain ludicrous on its face.

Well, if you have no better answers, you could just propose some legislation you know won't work, but you can roll it into a larger package of measures, which is sort of like rolling a turd up in an apple turnover.

Clearly, you are a past-master at effective public policy.

[Trivial]

Nukes for everybody!

[AFK]

I don't have better answers.  But I do know letting a clause written in the 18th century dictate (through bullshit interpretations) how we deal with 21st century guns is just plain ludicrous on its face.

Well, if you have no better answers, you could just propose some legislation you know won't work, but you can roll it into a larger package of measures, which is sort of like rolling a turd up in an apple turnover.

Clearly, you are a past-master at effective public policy.

Clearly you have no idea of how policy-making actually works.  The common analogy is that it is like watching sausage be made.  It isn't clean and pretty.  Very often it does involve packaging strategies.  I mean, hello, the fiscal cliff deal?  Do you think that was one, single solitary strategy to avert the fiscal apocalypse?  Of course the fuck not, it was a package of strategies, because there wasn't one, neat and tidy thing that was going to fix, or in this case band-aid, the problem. 


Gun control is such a complex problem that it would have to be the same way.  The immigration reform that is being discussed is a series of strategies, it isn't just one thing.  It's amnesty, it's border security, MULTIPLE strategies rolled into one initiative.  This is how it works in the real world.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Nukes for everybody!

Get yours TODAY, before some hippy has a hissy fit!

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I don't have better answers.  But I do know letting a clause written in the 18th century dictate (through bullshit interpretations) how we deal with 21st century guns is just plain ludicrous on its face.

Well, if you have no better answers, you could just propose some legislation you know won't work, but you can roll it into a larger package of measures, which is sort of like rolling a turd up in an apple turnover.

Clearly, you are a past-master at effective public policy.

Clearly you have no idea of how policy-making actually works.  The common analogy is that it is like watching sausage be made.  It isn't clean and pretty.  Very often it does involve packaging strategies.  I mean, hello, the fiscal cliff deal?  Do you think that was one, single solitary strategy to avert the fiscal apocalypse?  Of course the fuck not, it was a package of strategies, because there wasn't one, neat and tidy thing that was going to fix, or in this case band-aid, the problem. 


Gun control is such a complex problem that it would have to be the same way.  The immigration reform that is being discussed is a series of strategies, it isn't just one thing.  It's amnesty, it's border security, MULTIPLE strategies rolled into one initiative.  This is how it works in the real world.

Ripping off Bismark doesn't answer the question.  Why would you deliberately introduce bad legislation into a package of legislation?

Oh, yeah, because this isn't about guns, same way your drug threads aren't about drugs.  They're about you being a control freak.

[AFK]

I don't agree that it is bad legislation, for starters.

[Don Coyote]

Legislation that didn't do jack the first time, and will effect the class of weapons that are involved in a very small amount of total deaths caused by weapons simply so that it will pave the way to further restrict other classes of firearms is good in your eyes?

[Malcolm]

It is safer to shoot people. If you have to actually touch someone to kill them, you could catch the flu or some other icky disease. Blood born pathogens are fucking scary.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I don't agree that it is bad legislation, for starters.

You admitted that it was.

[AFK]

Legislation that didn't do jack the first time, and will effect the class of weapons that are involved in a very small amount of total deaths caused by weapons simply so that it will pave the way to further restrict other classes of firearms is good in your eyes?

That legislation was shitty and full of holes and is an inadequate measuring stick.  Perhaps something with more teeth and less holes will work better. 

[AFK]

I don't agree that it is bad legislation, for starters.

You admitted that it was.

You are talking about the specific legislation from the Clinton administration, I'm saying that the concept of gun control isn't bad legislation.  There isn't a specific piece of legislation to comment on yet, but I would hope that the lessons of the past are heeded and a new bill would be much stronger than the piece of shit that Clinton signed.