That's not the question in the OP. Please address the OP or make your own thread.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
It's the Guns.
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
That's not the question in the OP. Please address the OP or make your own thread.
Naturally, it's too much to ask folks to address the OP. Please start your own thread or address the OP.
Maybe you should ignore that argument and address the OP.
Cacotopia
Let's go full Trottle
Maybe a federal registry for firearms, updated and brought into the modern era of cataloging technology of course. Maybe institute a bio-signature lock on all firearms for their specific owners. If the gun changes hands the bio signature can only be changed after you re-register the weapon at a federal gun registry facility. This I think would also prevent accidental deaths in the household (children handling parent's firearms) and in home invasion/robbery should the perpetrator ever gain access to your own firearms.
Oh, this is one of those threads.
Yes. The only true constant in the world is change. HIstorically we see over and over again that the status quo lasts a long time with all attempts to change it significantly defeated. But then, seemingly overnight in historical terms, there's a dramatic change. This was true of American independence, the end of legal slavery, women getting the vote, gay rights and so forth.
I don't have a timetable but the continual unnecessary mass slaughter of innocents sooner or later will translate into action.
This is one area where fantasy dies hard. Some like to believe that a number of people armed with AR-15's or similar weapons can defeat a military armed with tanks, bombs and the like.
I figure things might start moving fast soon. There's more than one mass shooting on average every day now, the annual death toll is in the tens of thousands, kids are being murdered, etc. But maybe most important, there's a growing outrage that nothing is being done. The refusal to compromise by the status quo crowd could come back to bite it.
You can outlaw the guns and the ammo and the criminals still don't care. Even if you couldn't buy ammo there is enough empty brass and powder around for the next 1,000 years. The rise of violence in the schools has nothing to do with guns, but rather the liberal mind control program. Destroy the family (and its standards), promote mental conditions as OK/and/or medicate, and destroy religion so there is no moral compass. Every violent youth has the same patterns: mentally affecting drugs, one parent, and no involvement in their community in either s spiritual, practical, or economic sense. If you take away family values, make people dumber with stuff like gender studies or women's studies, and destroy spiritual paths the moral foundation of America becomes nothing. If you have no family (broken home, etc) then you officially have nothing to stop you from behaving like a wild animal. Mind you, I am not for "religious" groups in general as I am a Satanist with an eastern bent, but I think the "normies" need a set of rules to play by or they lose their ****. I can't see how destroying that is beneficial to anyone.
Also, the gun ownership in states like Alabama is 100% - but they're highly religious and moral, they have like 2-3 murders a year. The guns have nothing to do with it - it's the erosion of common sense, morality, and base values and the lack of compassion caused by "me,me,me". But, to some extent I see why people are like that - they can't count on anyone else in their lives, so they can only depend on themselves. However, it is the core problem that causes all of the issues mentioned in this thread. Something that the government forces such as law enforcement and education are doing jack squat about.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Wonder if the ammunition will be 3D. ;0)
How is it begging for enslavement? Who do you anticipate will enslave us?
The US military is what created the police-surveillance state. Our own government is the greatest threat to our liberties. The patriots are our greatest threat.
Just so you know liberal and mind control are oxymorons.
Liberal
open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.
Synonyms unbiased
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
Because, as we all know, every country in which the populace isn't armed (or has more restrictions on their arms than the US) is a slave state.
Last edited:
There is a dictionary definition of the word and what something is in practice. If you fail to find the distinction there is not much we can discuss on this topic.
Modern liberals are anything but unbiased, open to new or differing behavior, and other nonsense. In terms of traditional values that's only because "me" is first, it's not something done for some altruistic end. For the purposes of politics in modern times, socialist=leftist=liberal. (though no one is truly 100% anything...) If you wan't to roll that back about 100 years then liberal means something entirely different politically. Classical liberals have no direct modern equivalent ideology but they were about as close to the dictionary meaning of the word as you could get. It's interesting how things change over time...
Woberts
The Perfumed Seneschal
Too many noids. When you get two you get paranoid.
I was raised in a rural world with guns, but the contemporary gun's rights movement has taken on a dangerous military gun militia agenda with literally millions military guns, and a dangerous view that guns can solve problems,
Last edited:
PureX
Veteran Member
First, ownership should be licensed, and all guns should be registered. And these licenses should come with mandatory education and testing, and periodic re-testing, graduating in intensity depending on the type of weapons one wants to own, use, and/or carry in public. The licenses should be deniable based on the applicant's past and probable future capacity for being socially responsible. That means no licenses to people convicted of DUI, drunk in public, stalking, fighting, domestic abuse, violent threats, multiple disturbing the peace complaints, and so on. As these are people who are already showing us that they have no regard for the well-being of their fellow citizens. Exactly the kind of people we do not want to have guns.
The problem is not citizens owning guns. The problem is that we currently allow any fool, regardless of how irresponsibly they behave toward others, to buy and use any kind of gun they want. And as a result, these same fools are abusing the privilege, and killing themselves, each other, and everyone else at a shocking rate. It's not the guns we need to eliminate. It's their easy access to the fools among us. We don't need to ban guns, we need to stop the fools from getting hold of them.
Last edited:
In First World countries with gun controls? Or are you comparing America to theocracies and the Third World now?
You think it's private citizens with rifles preventing invasion?
You realise your country spends $618 billion dollars per year on the military, right?
More than three times what China spends, and roughly equal to the next 8 countries combined?
First step is to do actual research...
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/abc...vernment-study-gun-violence/story?id=50300379
Yeah sure because believing in civil liberties means socialist to you.There is a dictionary definition of the word and what something is in practice. If you fail to find the distinction there is not much we can discuss on this topic.
For the purposes of politics in modern times, socialist=leftist=liberal. (though no one is truly 100% anything...) If you wan't to roll that back about 100 years then liberal means something entirely different politically. Classical liberals have no direct modern equivalent ideology but they were about as close to the dictionary meaning of the word as you could get. It's interesting how things change over time...
Sorry no, being against bias doesn’t make a person bias.