Expert Actress on Gun Control

[Thom18]

Again, you’re speaking about weapons that no one else even has on their minds right now. An AR-15 and a “mini-gun” or “rocket launcher” are vastly different things. And nuclear launch codes?

You are way off track here.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

Look at below headline. All of a sudden this girl is an expert on U.S. and State Gun Laws.

‘Big Bang Theory’ star Mayim Bialik slams NRA, calls for ‘civil disobedience’ to change gun laws

She’s no less of an expert than the TV actor that was elected president.

 

[Thom18]

And when did I say they wouldn’t do anything with a “mini-gun”? Mass murder is far from the only thing you can do with a “mini-gun” (not to mention the weapons the rest of us are actually discussing).

 

[petra22]

I heard a lot of them bashing GOP (stars and kids from Florida) but they didn’t mention that democrats take money from NRA too.

Quick search turned up this info article from HuffPo
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-helmke/democrats-take-nra-cash-b_b_621441.html

 

[IWantGod]

The point is, gun regulation is about damage control. It’s not about taking people’s favorite guns away just to be mean. Its about limiting the harm that somebody can do to members of the public.

Thats not an unreasonable concern. The qeustion is, do you even care?

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

Thats not an unreasonable concern. The qeustion is, do you even care?

You gotta wonder…

 

[Thom18]

I’m seriously wondering if cities and town have the legal right to ban certain guns? You know like Marshall Dillon on Gun Smoke? Check yer weapons here…? Would that be against the constitution? Just asking?

I think they can take certain actions, but probably not outright bans.

 

[Thom18]

What gave you the impression that I don’t care? Because I pointed out that you’re the only one bringing up such extreme weaponry?

Speaking of extremes, those are what the gun control debate is all about. Most people don’t go out and shoot up their schools. Most people don’t shoot up their places of work. But as soon as one person does, gun control advocates use those few cases to dictate what those millions of people who didn’t commit these acts may own/do. It’s fallacious.

 

[Thom18]

IWantGod:

Thats not an unreasonable concern. The qeustion is, do you even care?

You gotta wonder…

I suppose it’s always easier to just paint everyone who thinks differently than you in a bad light than address their criticisms.

 

[Theo520]

I’m seriously wondering if cities and town have the legal right to ban certain guns? You know like Marshall Dillon on Gun Smoke? Check yer weapons here…? Would that be against the constitution? Just asking?

Private businesses can restrict your open carry or concealed carry. Cities have been mostly over ruled by the courts on their ability to restrict your right to own guns.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

I suppose it’s always easier to just paint everyone who thinks differently than you in a bad light than address their criticisms.

I’m an NRA-certified Expert Marksman, and I was very much on the “don’t touch my guns!” side of the fence not too long ago. I changed my mind because I took a long, hard look at my own “side’s” arguments, and found that they really didn’t hold up.

 

[Thom18]

I used to be on the “ban all guns” side not too many years ago. So, we’re pretty much in the same position. That has nothing to do with why you feel it’s acceptable to attack a person instead of their argument (or, in my case, my criticism of the arguments of others).

 

[IWantGod]

Well, its not difficult to see that damage control is important. We don’t want certain weapons to be in the hands of lunatics, and since we don’t know who the lunatics are we need gun regulation. Gun regulation is a legitimate and reasonable way of reducing the harm that could potentially be done by a weapon. If a lunatic goes into a school with a hand gun, a larger number of people have a higher chance of survival than if they go in with an AR-15

But you don’t seem to care about that because clearly owning an AR-15 is more important to you than reducing the number of victims that would come to harm because of that weapon.

So it stands to reason that we would ask if you even care. Because it seem to us, assuming that you are a reasonable person, you would care and therefore would agree that sacrifices have to be made for the greater good.

But i apoligise. Because i cannot truly determine if you care or not and perhaps that’s not a fair thing to say. Perhaps you do care but you just cannot comprehend why gun control is more important.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

I didn’t attack anyone - I simply said “I wonder.” Also, I don’t want to ban all guns.

 

[Theo520]

Well, its not difficult to see that damage control is important. We don’t want certain weapons be in the hands of lunatics, and since we don’t know who the lunatics are we need gun regulation.

That’s not a very stable line of logic.

There are probably a million things we don’t want in the hands of lunatics, should we ban them all? Why do you think this is a sane approach?

 

[Rhubarb]

Sure, dislike what they say. Point out when it’s problematic.

My only point was that a celebrity isn’t any less a citizen than anyone, and shouldn’t be knocked just because they’re speaking their mind. Knock’em for the content.

 

[IWantGod]

There are probably a million things we don’t want in the hands of lunatics, should we ban them all? Why do you think this is a sane approach?

It depends on the degree of potential harm it can do to members of the public. This of course doesn’t take away the citizens right to defend themselves with guns, but it does call for regulation of fire-arms. The less potential damage done the better chance people have for survival and thus the potential of more lives being saved in these types of scenarios. Its an entirely reasonable argument.

 

[Theo520]

It depends on the degree of potential harm it can do to members of the public. This of course doesn’t take away the citizens right to defend themselves with guns, but it does call for regulation of fire-arms. The less potential damage done the better chance people have for survival and thus the potential of more lives being saved in these types of scenarios. Its an entirely reasonable argument.

If you apply some math, there isn’t even a weak correlation between gun ownership and violence.

 

[Thom18]

I didn’t attack anyone - I simply said “I wonder.” Also, I don’t want to ban all guns.

I didn’t say you were calling for a gun ban. I was explaining where I was however many years ago, as you explained where you had come from. And I took your, “I wonder” as agreement with what IWantGod said, which was “The questions is, do you even care?” Was I wrong to think so?

I don’t think I’m wrong to be upset about my morality being called into questioned.

 

[Thom18]

Its an entirely reasonable argument.

If it’s a reasonable argument, why have you been using extremes (mini guns and rocket launchers and nuclear codes) to make your case? Why haven’t you been discussing the AR-15 or other semi-automatic rifles, which are the subject matter? You know- realistic examples.