PDA

View Full Version : Yet another anti-gun thread... but interesting...



Vince Brennan
02-20-2013, 12:15 AM
Look: I do NOT want to start a dialog with the Gun Nuts. (I am NOT one)

I do NOT want to hear the dialectic on Gun ownership and the (Freakin') Second Amendment.

Here's a really interesting insight as to acceptance of firearm possession by the General Pubic: (The absence of the "l" is deliberate.)

...........
The University of Pennsylvania Hospital system has today announced that effective (See Don? Us LibTards Kin Ues The Lenggidge!) July 01 2013 they will no longer offer employment to any person who uses tobacco (inhaled, chewed or transdermally ingested (other than "quit" patches) and that this condition of employment is non-negotiable.
...........

Way back when I was a Freshman in High School (poor High School... it survived me...somehow...) in 1961, the Surgeon General allowed as how smoking just might be a bad thing and contribute to lung cancer.

That was 1961.

Probably some farther back than the majority of Bilgers can remember, and before quite a few of youse were born.

It was generally greeted (except for a MINORITY of the Medical Community) as hogwash. After all, how could something so friggin' American be bad for you? I mean, Sergeant STRYKER lit 'em up in "The Sands Of Iwo Jima", just before those dastardly Oriental Warriors snuck that sneaky shot into the Ol Sarge's helmet....

(Oh, yeh... Lung Cancer...)

But Cigars were still cool... Even Saint JFK liked to fire up a Cohibo or a Dulcineto (all the while contemplating the destruction of the whole freakin' Island they came from)...

Whoops... not so fast... They ALSO are Cancer Cuties...

Well, Chewing can't be bad... I mean, it's not inhaled or like that.... really? Lip and tongue cancer? Damn.

Cigarettes, cigars and pipes were common in most Courtrooms, Hospital rooms only had a "no smoking" sign if there was Oxygen in use, and you could smoke in just about any space you cared to. people who forbade smoking in their homes were considered 'odd' and shunned by most of the general public.
...........

And so we come to 2013. Fifty-three years (more or less) after the initial pronouncement. You ASK if you can smoke in someone's house, you do NOT use tobacco in any Public building in most cities as it is illegal, you cannot smoke or spit in the vast majority of Public spaces, on any Public Transport, in the waiting areas for the same, in ANY airport or their environs and, (as I recently discovered) within a City-Block range of many Medical Establishments.

This ALL has come to pass and yet the RWWN Gun Nuts think to continue their status quo as to the ownership and proliferation of firearms OTHER than those used for hunting?

I assure them that within yet another Fifty years (and possibly a DEAL sooner) they will (and will wonder at their former attitude) avow the sanity of total firearms control.

Would you light up a cigarette in a Courtroom? No more will you consider it proper to own a handgun, or an assault-style shoulder-arm.

You think now that this is not possible?

Really?

...........

Ask your Slave his opinion.
...........

:rolleyes:

I urge you to think about it without jingoistic overlays and see if the reasonable superiority of such a position is not inevitable and eminently desirable.

Larks
02-20-2013, 12:18 AM
Well it's proven possible here in Australia, why not there??

htom
02-20-2013, 12:43 AM
Just when nicotine patches were being discovered to be safe and effective treatment for ADHD (and other things.) Not cures, but effective treatment.

Larks
02-20-2013, 12:47 AM
To take the tobacco and guns analogy a bit further, why not tax the daylights out of ammo? Cigarettes are becoming prohibitively expensive only due to taxes. Do the same to ammo. After all, guns don't kill people, the projectiles do. No need to "take our guns away", just make feeding them too expensive.
The tax revenue could be used to fund something important, like Police or Homeland Security. (Phillip should appreciate that). ;)

Doesn't work. The bigger taxes on cigarettes just mean that people who can least afford it spend more money on cigarettes and less on looking after themselves and feeding their kids properly. It doesn't stop people from smoking. Gotta wonder why so many people still seem to be able to support a heavy smoking habit but still scream for welfare to feed their kids and pay their rent.

BrianW
02-20-2013, 12:58 AM
To take the tobacco and guns analogy a bit further, why not tax the daylights out of ammo?

Sportsman already pay a 11% Federal tax on ammo as per the Pittman-Robertson Act...

http://www.ct.gov/deep/cwp/view.asp?a=2723&q=326164


The purpose of this Act was to provide funding for the selection, restoration, rehabilitation and improvement of wildlife habitat, wildlife management research, and the distribution of information produced by the projects.
The Act was amended October 23, 1970, to include funding for hunter training programs and the development, operation and maintenance of public target ranges.

...I can see eliminating that tax, if you want to add more taxes to ammunition.

Let the so called 'greenies' pay the difference for wildlife habitat improvements. Maybe a 11% tax on latte's?

BrianW
02-20-2013, 01:00 AM
You think now that this is not possible?



Which is exactly why groups like the NRA oppose any new restrictions.

They give an inch today, and you'll want a mile tomorrow.

Just the way it is...

Meli
02-20-2013, 01:04 AM
When i first worked in an office, 30 years ago, everybody smoked, continually.
on bloke was so bad, his white phone was mustard yellow and if you answered it in his absence, you had to hold it 8" away from your face to avoid the smell.
unimaginable now, I'm a heavy smoker but would hate tne smell in my home or workplace.
p

Good comparison, you could also compare it to manditory seat belts, child restraints, pool fences.
Loads of people bitched but now.... No one even thinks about it.

Daylight savings however still upsets Queensland cows. Idle buggers :)

Paul Girouard
02-20-2013, 01:27 AM
Which is exactly why groups like the NRA oppose any new restrictions.

They give an inch today, and you'll want a mile tomorrow.

Just the way it is...


Did you here about this bill currently in the Washington State legislature?

http://www.therightscoop.com/washington-state-gun-control-bill-calls-for-annual-police-inspection-of-gun-owners-home-for-compliance/

That’s no gun-rights absolutist talking, but Lance Palmer, a Seattle trial lawyer and self-described liberal who brought the troubling Senate Bill 5737 to my attention. It’s the long-awaited assault-weapons ban, introduced last week by three Seattle Democrats.


Responding to the Newtown school massacre, the bill would ban the sale of semi-automatic weapons that use detachable ammunition magazines. Clips that contain more than 10 rounds would be illegal.
But then, with respect to the thousands of weapons like that already owned by Washington residents, the bill says this:
“In order to continue to possess an assault weapon that was legally possessed on the effective date of this section, the person possessing shall … safely and securely store the assault weapon. The sheriff of the county may, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to ensure compliance with this subsection.”
In other words, come into homes without a warrant to poke around. Failure to comply could get you up to a year in jail.

PeterSibley
02-20-2013, 01:39 AM
Doesn't work. The bigger taxes on cigarettes just mean that people who can least afford it spend more money on cigarettes and less on looking after themselves and feeding their kids properly. It doesn't stop people from smoking. Gotta wonder why so many people still seem to be able to support a heavy smoking habit but still scream for welfare to feed their kids and pay their rent.

What it has done is stop a lot of kids from taking up smoking, price is very important to a 16 year old.

PeterSibley
02-20-2013, 01:42 AM
Which is exactly why groups like the NRA oppose any new restrictions.

They give an inch today, and you'll want a mile tomorrow.

Just the way it is...

Eternal vigilance is the price of keeping America unsafe eh ?

Oysterhouse
02-20-2013, 01:51 AM
Concerning the original post:
The biggest problem that I see with the implementation of your fantasy is that the ownership and/or use of tobacco has never been enshrined as a fundamental right. The ownership and use of firearms has been enshrined as a right, and in recent years SCOTUS decisions have further defined and strengthened those rights.

Furthermore, tobacco is an addictive substance, with only minor arguable benefits. Firearms are tools, useful for both beneficial and destructive purposes. I doubt that anyone has ever attempted to defend themselves with a pack of Menthols. Firearms have been, and are continuously used to defend human life and safety. Both as a tangible tool and as a psychological deterrent.

The ownership, possession and purchase of tobacco, with the exception of a minimum age, is unregulated (as it should be). Only the usage, on property other than your own, is restricted (as it should be)--- and then only so far as it affects other people.

No offense, but your analogy is ill formed and worse fitting---if not downright ludicrous.

Larks
02-20-2013, 01:52 AM
What it has done is stop a lot of kids from taking up smoking, price is very important to a 16 year old.

Not from what I've seen on the Gold Coast and in Rockingham WA, though I'd have to say it's primarily young girls hanging outside of shopping malls and movie theatres that I see taking it up. All trying to look cool no doubt, I really feel like stopping and telling them that it's one of the biggest turn offs for blokes, but as if they'd listen and give a shyte.....

alvin greenwood
02-20-2013, 01:59 AM
let me understand you.

you do not want a discussion so its just a lecture.

Im .

.a 'nut".

You dont wanna hear about the 'freaking" constitution..

You dont wanna stop hunting and do not wanna take away guns.

Just handguns and 'assault" weapons .

Somehow a smoking comparison will bring sense to it all .

Got it vince,

Of course you dont wanna hear it.

guess you can always "win" a debate by your rules.

LOL

Oysterhouse
02-20-2013, 02:03 AM
Somehow a smoking comparison will bring sense to it all .


Perhaps a smoking gun??:d

Meli
02-20-2013, 02:20 AM
I think the point is that people do not like change, any change.
the analogy about smoking regulation, pool fences regulation, seat belts regulation an gun ownership regulation is quite apt from that point of view.
All of the former examples people screamed about. 12 months later when they settle down a little and it's all done and dusted, few people notice any difference to their lives. The hard line howlers become a stubborn and disgruntled minority.

PeterSibley
02-20-2013, 04:10 AM
Not from what I've seen on the Gold Coast and in Rockingham WA, though I'd have to say it's primarily young girls hanging outside of shopping malls and movie theatres that I see taking it up. All trying to look cool no doubt, I really feel like stopping and telling them that it's one of the biggest turn offs for blokes, but as if they'd listen and give a shyte.....

I checked the stats a while ago on this subject Greg and yes, price is a major determinate for kids starting . There is a reduction but there are always kids with poor self esteem who feel a fag will make them look cool. There's no helping them except their girlfriend telling them they taste like an ashtray .

Meli
02-20-2013, 04:28 AM
I think the pictures on the boxes have been more effective than anything.
grow up looking at images of death and cancer and gangrene makes a strong impression on a young mind.

Larks
02-20-2013, 04:43 AM
I checked the stats a while ago on this subject Greg and yes, price is a major determinate for kids starting . There is a reduction but there are always kids with poor self esteem who feel a fag will make them look cool. There's no helping them except their girlfriend telling them they taste like an ashtray .

It's the girls that are doing the smoking. If it wouldn't have been so creepy I would have taken a photo of the three very young girls sitting on the ground in their school uniforms smoking outside Rockingham shopping centre when I went to pick up my glasses this arvo, each with their own pack of smokes sitting in their lap. Pretty much the scene that I see every day there but not one that I ever see boys taking part in. Other than a few apprentices I rarely see that many young guys smoking anymore, but a lot of young girls.

PeterSibley
02-20-2013, 06:31 AM
It's the girls that are doing the smoking. If it wouldn't have been so creepy I would have taken a photo of the three very young girls sitting on the ground in their school uniforms smoking outside Rockingham shopping centre when I went to pick up my glasses this arvo, each with their own pack of smokes sitting in their lap. Pretty much the scene that I see every day there but not one that I ever see boys taking part in. Other than a few apprentices I rarely see that many young guys smoking anymore, but a lot of young girls.

In that case it might be their boyfriend telling them they taste like an ashtray .:(

PeterSibley
02-20-2013, 06:51 AM
Phil, our smoking rates are reducing each year and have been for 25 years, Oz has run endless anti smoking campaigns and increased prices a LOT. It's worked.

The reason being the government has a dollar in the game, we have an effective universal health care system so the bean counters care too.

PeterSibley
02-20-2013, 06:54 AM
yep

it seems that people can buy cigarettes when the money is tight and people in utopian groups can insulate themselves from the more ugly truths

people in utopian cultures still seek to control all other people

if you mean I don't want my children dying of emphysema like my Dad or lung cancer like my father in law ? ...yes, to that extent I'm all in favour of controlling other people's lives .

Go visit a chest hospital some time and watch all the old blokes spitting little bits of lung into their tissues ..... it not a good way to die.

Paul Pless
02-20-2013, 06:58 AM
But Cigars were still cool... Even Saint JFK liked to fire up a Cohibo or a Dulcineto (all the while contemplating the destruction of the whole freakin' Island they came from)...

Whoops... not so fast... They ALSO are Cancer Cuties...Vince, you can have my Romeo y Julieta when you pry it from my cold dead hand. . .

Larks
02-20-2013, 06:59 AM
Phil, our smoking rates are reducing each year and have been for 25 years, Oz has run endless anti smoking campaigns and increased prices a LOT. It's worked.

The reason being the government has a dollar in the game, we have an effective universal health care system so the bean counters care too.


I think here in Oz smoking is on the decline because of the anti smoking campaigns and huge anti social aspect now, smokers are seen almost as pariah's here. I really don't think it has that much to do with the cost, surely something to do with it, but I doubt that it is the biggest factor.

Peerie Maa
02-20-2013, 07:00 AM
Concerning the original post:
The biggest problem that I see with the implementation of your fantasy is that the ownership and/or use of tobacco has never been enshrined as a fundamental right. The ownership and use of firearms has been enshrined as a right, and in recent years SCOTUS decisions have further defined and strengthened those rights.

Furthermore, tobacco is an addictive substance, with only minor arguable benefits. Firearms are tools, useful for both beneficial and destructive purposes. I doubt that anyone has ever attempted to defend themselves with a pack of Menthols. Firearms have been, and are continuously used to defend human life and safety. Both as a tangible tool and as a psychological deterrent.

The ownership, possession and purchase of tobacco, with the exception of a minimum age, is unregulated (as it should be). Only the usage, on property other than your own, is restricted (as it should be)--- and then only so far as it affects other people.

No offense, but your analogy is ill formed and worse fitting---if not downright ludicrous.

and a bullet does'nt? Yea right.

PeterSibley
02-20-2013, 07:09 AM
I think here in Oz smoking is on the decline because of the anti smoking campaigns and huge anti social aspect now, smokers are seen almost as pariah's here. I really don't think it has that much to do with the cost, surely something to do with it, but I doubt that it is the biggest factor.

Sorry to keep disagreeing but it the starting smokers who are affected by the cost. Established addicts will smoke and use any money they have to support the habit, the stuff is as addictive as heroin!

Kids however have far more difficulty finding the cash to maintain the habit to addiction. I think that is the main case for increased prices ...and of course paying for treatment in State health hospitals as they die of tobacco caused disease.

Larks
02-20-2013, 07:21 AM
Sorry to keep disagreeing but it the starting smokers who are affected by the cost. Established addicts will smoke and use any money they have to support the habit, the stuff is as addictive as heroin!

Kids however have far more difficulty finding the cash to maintain the habit to addiction. I think that is the main case for increased prices ...and of course paying for treatment in State health hospitals as they die of tobacco caused disease.

don't worry about it, I'm used to it :d

PeterSibley
02-20-2013, 07:25 AM
don't worry about it, I'm used to it :d


Good, me too! ;)

PeterSibley
02-20-2013, 07:26 AM
the neighbor boy at 15 started smoking and within a very few months he began bragging that he had been trying to quit. If that 'oddness' needs to be explained, it's gonna be tough to tell ya because it is so basic... kids spend much of their mental energies posturing to others... for whatever reasons, this kid thought "I've been trying to quit" made him look more mature, a desirable effect of his posturing.

the point being is that cash spent of cigarettes is really being spent on posturing... much harder to get round than mear addiction

There's no cure for dumb but if a motorbike or fuel for his car is even cooler the higher price brings pressure to bear. If smokes are cheap he can do it all.

Nicholas Scheuer
02-20-2013, 08:48 AM
Taxing ammo; beautiful!

Paul Pless
02-20-2013, 09:12 AM
Taxing ammo; beautiful!Chris Rock on gun control. <explicit language>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuX-nFmL0II

ucb4ume
02-20-2013, 09:14 AM
Look: I do NOT want to start a dialog with the Gun Nuts. (I am NOT one)

I do NOT want to hear the dialectic on Gun ownership and the (Freakin') Second Amendment.



How typical. You want to give your argument for more gun control, but you are closed minded when it comes to listening to other opinions.

alvin greenwood
02-20-2013, 11:24 AM
How typical. You want to give your argument for more gun control, but you are closed minded when it comes to listening to other opinions..

Vince likes to stir the pot but lacks the ability to follow up and defend any position he takes.

Vince is a Troll.

His MO is to let other libs chime in..

These my friends are the people that want to take guns away......

David W Pratt
02-20-2013, 03:07 PM
How about a semi neutral party, say the CDC, looks at all the things proposed to reduce gun violence, magazine capacity limits, waiting periods, prohibitions of specific guns, etc. and decides which ones actually work? Then we can go from there

Horace
02-20-2013, 03:14 PM
How about a semi neutral party, say the CDC, looks at all the things proposed to reduce gun violence, magazine capacity limits, waiting periods, prohibitions of specific guns, etc. and decides which ones actually work? Then we can go from thereI was under the impression that there was some difference of opinion as to whether the CDC had displayed neutrality, or 'semi-neutrality,' in the past.

Cuyahoga Chuck
02-20-2013, 03:31 PM
I was under the impression that there was some difference of opinion as to whether the CDC had displayed neutrality, or 'semi-neutrality,' in the past.

Your "impressions" won't get you much, Horace. To pass this course you have to write a couple of expository sentences as to just what you are refering to.