tribe,
please shorten your last post to less than 25 words...oh my bad, the one before it..

you point out one person on the thread when you know I was referring to the overall public....

I almost feel dumb for answering that...

Armistead - note how instead of staying on topic, the OP meanders off to dispute (not debate) anything stated by certain people. Sometimes, you just gotta stop feeding the troll.

This ^

I won't argue with that, most groups don't make their intentions public. The issue is when groups seek to ban, limit or make guns or types of guns unavailable to the general public as a for granted right, but instead a legal highly regulated right to the point it's impossible for many to get a gun. Many of these bans in mostly major cities get smacked down by the supreme court.
I would agree that few want ALL guns gone, they might allow you a long gun, but they make the process of most guns so complex and expensive. Many cities created laws where you had to basically prove your need for a gun or for use as protection. When govts or groups seek to deny your natural independent right to access any gun that isn't military, basically autos and explosives, they have crossed the line into basic total gun control.

Still, you can google and get numerous sites of people wanting all guns banned...how few are they, a minority for sure, but many of them have power and great influence and all of them know it will be a step by step process, a little at a time....and the movement is growing larger.

Just search - ban guns now- ....you'll get pages of people, groups and politicians that support the banning of guns...

it's not my first rodeo with the troll, if he keeps it short and makes a valid point, I may respond......

Oh, it's being watched all right. We are just at a certain point where the specific Forum Moderator is being left to run it without interference. If I think things are getting out of hand I'll take some action. Until that point I'll leave it up to him when he's back.

I apologize for the troll comments to tribesman, he has a devious method of putting words in peoples mouths then arguing against them over and over. However, he can often make valid arguments. In this case, maybe it is I that has been more out of line.....I'm not gonna go back and read it all.

I also didn't realize "troll" was off limits or that Tribe had any pituitary problems...

Sorry Tribe.....

It's pretty clear you know little about Alabama, either that, or you need a new joke wrangler. :06:

Ok, I quoted the full text to try and understand what you mean by there needs to be perhaps a focus on prevention of reoccuring crime, and multi-pronged approach and if everyone had a level playing field then things like crime might reduce. Just exactly what needs to be done "prevention of reoccuring crime, and multi-pronged approach". And the part about level playing field, I really am lost on that, could you clarify?

I'm back but off to a family funeral this afternoon.

I've spent almost an hour of my life catching up on the overnight posts (GMT time) and my impression is that this thread has run its course with neither side of opinion reaching a level of understanding or agreement to the opposing side.

What to do? Lock, delete, edit, infractions?

That will depend on the contents of any further posts but further insults and or name calling will inevitably facilitate remedial action.

Hopefully we can all stay on topic and disagree where necessary but in a more polite manner.

I need a new joke wrangler, if it was in the UK I'd have said something like Peckham. Perhaps I should have used California as a better example, I've noticed Americans here tend to pick that when they're using a derogative example for a state.

It was a bit waffley wasn't it? I really should be a politician. When I mean a multi-pronged approach, I mean that rather than just looking to enact tougher reponses for crime, one should also look at hitting the causes of crime. For example in guns, tougher sentences for those violating gun safety protocols should also be accompanyed by a campaign to inform and educate people on gun safety as well as an effort by gun manufacturers to ensure that new firearms have as many safety features as possible (although tbh I'm pretty sure that they already do) and perhaps research into whether a non-intrusive device can be made for making older firearms safer. We're living in a world of micro-electronics, I'm sure that such a thing could be possible and be built into the grip of an old pistol by a professional.
That's just an example, and to be honest it probably wouldn't go exactly that way so there's no need to start picking specific holes in it in regards to my lack of knowledge on firearms safety. It's about giving a little bit of a carrot as well as a stick.

The level playing field comes back to trying to create a more equal society, where the money isn't quite so lopsided. Now obviously this isn't going to stop crime and create a utopia, but it might help a little. Again though, it's got to be from both ends of the scale, there's no point extending a ladder down from the top if people aren't going to use it. However, equally you've got to be very careful not to punish those who legitimately are unable to work because of the actions of the fraudsters.

What you've got to try and avoid though, is the criminalisation and demonisation of the poor, which is becoming a sadly too common occurrence and it's something that appeals to that inner part of a person that likes to feel superior to someone else.
I don't know the situation in the US, but in the UK there's been a determined focus by the ConDems to fight benefit fraud, by making it tougher to gain certain benefits. Now in theory this might sound like a good solution, but in practice it's had the unfortunate side effect that many people who are legitimately in need of these benefits have been unable to get them, in particular people who are disabled. This has had a knock on effect.

That's one of the more tougher problems facing a government who wants to encourage people back to work but doesn't want to punish those who cannot. Hopefully as communications get better and medical diagnosis gets better then this might improve, but the current situation of using private medical 'practitioners' to test people for disability benefits instead of actually believing the Doctor who diagnosed them as disabled in the first place...well it doesn't work very well at all. Perhaps better emphasis should be put on the initial diagnosis of disability, and that GPs (General Practitioners...aka your local Doctor) should actually be trusted by the government rather than having to bring in a second opinion.

I know we don't agree about pay rates, and that's fair enough, that's only one part of trying to create an equal society, and to be honest, it's a pretty latter stage thing anyway and not really something likely to ever happen because of human nature. Likewise a fully equal society, sadly, is something I don't think is actually possible because there will always be people who think that they are superior to other people because of factor x or y, but we all come into this world the same way, and we all wind up back in the dirt the same way at the end of it, quite why people need to divide themselves up into groups and judge other people based on what group they're in in the middle of it all is beyond me, and it's rather sad really. Imagine what we as a race could have achieved by now if there was just a bit more co-operation in the world? :hmmm:

Still, a guy can dream, and where we can I believe that we should aim for a more equal world, full equality is never going to happen, but that shouldn't stop us from trying to make what parts we can more equal for everyone. As I'm sure that many people do. :yep:

Sorry to hear about the funeral. :(

As for this thread, how about just append it to the other big gun thread so it can be ignored. :)

Likewise, sorry for your loss.

I'd go with the merge. Me and Neal can always continue our social discussion another time or in another thread. :yep:

Strong education toward safety should be the solution the problem.
I think though it would be very hard to accomplish when there are almost no preconditions for owning firearms.
With the general ability of guns and no clear rules about carrying in public besides this nonsense about concealed/open carry, people seem to go along with what is availed on internet or marketed to them as if they where professionals.
People who have absolutely no training are represented with extreme scenarios and would be solution which often require some exercising and strict self discipline.
In reality the same people often have no tools to deal with such problems yet they act and carry with the illusion they could.

I'm not sure that using electronics and turning guns into IPhone is good idea as well.

My thoughts and prayers go out for the family of the deceased.