zapatos Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 10 minutes ago, Ten oz said: As spoken by so many after every mass shooting for years now. Rinse and repeat. I finally get it. You don't like my choices and instead think your way is better. Thank you for telling me as otherwise how would I have known you felt that way. Okay, what steps are you taking to address the gun problem. Please be specific.
Ten oz Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 53 minutes ago, zapatos said: Okay, what steps are you taking to address the gun problem. Please be specific. What steps am I taking and not what steps do I support? Seems you are moving the goal post around a bit. To my knowledge none of us are law makers. For starters Gun Control, Climate, and Abortion are lines in the sand with me. I won't support (Vote for or give money to) candidates that hedge on those issues. I am not one of these willful ignorant types that vote for the "best" candidate is a vacuum from the policies they support. That said I am a voting resident of California. My House rep is Barbra Lee and my Senators are Harris and Feinstein. I am very pleased with them. Have have contributed money to Feinstein several times. She specifically has a very strong position on guns stemming from personal experience. I also contributed money to Harris in 2016 and have written to her.
zapatos Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 1 hour ago, Ten oz said: What steps am I taking and not what steps do I support? Seems you are moving the goal post around a bit. To my knowledge none of us are law makers. For starters Gun Control, Climate, and Abortion are lines in the sand with me. I won't support (Vote for or give money to) candidates that hedge on those issues. I am not one of these willful ignorant types that vote for the "best" candidate is a vacuum from the policies they support. That said I am a voting resident of California. My House rep is Barbra Lee and my Senators are Harris and Feinstein. I am very pleased with them. Have have contributed money to Feinstein several times. She specifically has a very strong position on guns stemming from personal experience. I also contributed money to Harris in 2016 and have written to her. I am not moving any goal posts. I simply asked a question. I wanted to know if this stance you are so adamant about translated into anything concrete. You certainly don't need to be a lawmaker to take concrete steps, such as how you vote or your efforts to influence people. I also voted for candidates who support gun control, and I also contributed to their campaigns. As it turns out my gun owning, unsuccessful, rinse/lather/repeat approach on SF has translated into exactly as much progress as your uncompromising, new way of doing business approach on SF. I don't mind you and John disagreeing with me, but I'm getting tired of this unending harping about how bad my approach is when you and I have done exactly the same amount of work to change things. If you start a movement let me know and I'll join you. But as long as all we are doing is debating and talking hypotheticals, unless you come up with something new to add that is pertinent to the conversation, FFS, please stop telling me you don't like my way of thinking. It is getting old. It's not like kids will be any safer if I see the light and agree with you.
Ten oz Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 42 minutes ago, zapatos said: but I'm getting tired of this unending harping about how bad my approach is when you and I have done exactly the same amount of work to change things. Because it is about you? You being alienated, disagreed with, laughed at, and etc. You've made it abundantly clear how you are treated is an important focus. IMO this issue is bigger than how you feel. It has been held back by those who insist on being of all sides while strongly boas to a single side. You own guns, cool, so do loads of people in the U.S.; you're average just like like every body else. No round of applause required. The difference is nuanced but clear. You are arguing for a continuation of the status quo claiming it is a useful approach. It isn't. Less could not be accomplished if we all agreed to do nothing. The way issues are discussed matter. The tone, attitude, and style all matter. You seem to believe that untapped potential exists within the stalest parts of the status qou. I strongly disagree.
zapatos Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 4 minutes ago, Ten oz said: Because it is about you? You being alienated, disagreed with, laughed at, and etc. You've made it abundantly clear how you are treated is an important focus. It seems that this is primarily about your ego. You consistently, in all threads, never give an inch. You ALWAYS think you are100% right, about everything, and there is never any room for anyone's opinion if it disagrees with yours. Time for some introspection Ten oz. Quote The difference is nuanced but clear. You are arguing for a continuation of the status quo claiming it is a useful approach. It isn't. Yes. So you've said about a dozen times now. Thanks for clarifying your position on this matter.
iNow Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 Meanwhile, people who largely agree get spun around the axle and battle at the margins. Focus on the hub. You’re allies. We’re together on this. Let’s stop sniping and start joining the orchestra of voices singing for change. 2
zapatos Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 4 minutes ago, iNow said: Meanwhile, people who largely agree get spun around the axle and battle at the margins. Focus on the hub. You’re allies. We’re together on this. Let’s stop sniping and start joining the orchestra of voices singing for change. Agreed. It is a waste of time. For the life of me I can't understand how an approach I outlined in one paragraph, with essentially no detail, can be judged to be a waste of time to the overall movement with no further discussion about the potential pros and cons. I'm more than happy to stop responding to it though and will take that approach from here on out.
MigL Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 To be fair, Zapatos, Moontanman and Raider are the last people that need convincing of the need for more effective gun control regulations. They are some of the most sensible people I've had the pleasure of knowing ( on this forum ). All three of them have stated they wish to see more effective regulations, and thanks RangerX, for being unusually understanding of Zapatos' position ( I may have misjudged you also ) and providing details of the Canadian standards. Hounding them until they pledge to give up their guns, is counterproductive, and one of the obstacles to getting an effective discourse about gun control 1
John Cuthber Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 10 hours ago, zapatos said: I think everyone can agree on two things: The 2nd Amendment is here to stay for now Why? They got rid of the 18th. 10 hours ago, zapatos said: Gun owner must have a secure location It wouldn't have mattered if Nikolas Cruz had locked his guns away. He was the owner, he had the key. 10 hours ago, zapatos said: 10 hours ago, John Cuthber said: Your approach was to say you would give up your guns- and then not actually do so. No it wasn't... 21 hours ago, John Cuthber said: On 2/17/2018 at 1:58 AM, zapatos said: I've gone so far as to say "I'd give up every gun I own starting right now if it would save lives." And, when we point out that giving up your guns would (at least statistically) save lives , you decide not to give them up... Maybe- just maybe- there's some hope here https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/02/a-nationwide-teacher-walkout-could-shake-us-out-of-our-mass-shooting-stupor.html
Ten oz Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 10 hours ago, zapatos said: I also voted for candidates who support gun control, and I also contributed to their campaigns. As it turns out my gun owning, unsuccessful, rinse/lather/repeat approach on SF has translated into exactly as much progress as your uncompromising, new way of doing business approach on SF. You vote and donate to candidates that care about the issue but you also buy guns and spend money within an industry that supports the NRA and Candidates who do nothing about guns. You are basically driving around in a giant SUV that gets 12 miles a gallon with a bumper stricter on the back that reads "Global Warming is REAL". Our approaches are not equal. I do not support the gun lobby and you do. This was the point Dimreepr was making.You are oblivious to the impact of your own actions. 9 hours ago, MigL said: To be fair, Zapatos, Moontanman and Raider are the last people that need convincing of the need for more effective gun control regulations. They are some of the most sensible people I've had the pleasure of knowing ( on this forum ). All three of them have stated they wish to see more effective regulations, and thanks RangerX, for being unusually understanding of Zapatos' position ( I may have misjudged you also ) and providing details of the Canadian standards. Hounding them until they pledge to give up their guns, is counterproductive, and one of the obstacles to getting an effective discourse about gun control Zapatos' position Is the most often repeated and well accepted one in the United States. In isolation it is emphatic, considerate of all sides, logical, and fair. However it has been around for decades, repeated by the majority of all sides for decades, and things have only gotten worse. Despite all the positive attributes it contains in isolation the position is clearly flawed. There is no good reason to double down on what hasn't worked. The gun industry is an like any industry it is fueled by money. Those who buy guns, buy ammunition, buy gun locks, buy gun safes, buy accessories, buy clay pigeons, and etc, etc, etc are fueling the industry. Zapatos has good intentions but is unwittingly contributing to the problem. Just as all the parents buying their 10yr old kids rifles that Raider mentioned are contributing to the problem. My father smoked cigarettes for many years. Did give them up till he hit his mid 60's. He was always a polite smoker. He never smoked in the house, never tossed buds on the street, and etc. Polite or not he contributed to a bad industry. Over the decades he spent thousands of dollars on cigarettes which means he was helping fuel the tobacco industry. It doesn't make my father an evil man but his actions were stupid and he would even admit as much today if you asked him about it. Zapatos, Moontanman and Raider all are supporting the very industry they concede needs to change. With their support why would it?
iNow Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 Useful info to further strengthen our alignments: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/10/upshot/How-to-Prevent-Gun-Deaths-The-Views-of-Experts-and-the-Public.html
Ten oz Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 "In fact, in 2016 the firearms and ammunition industry was responsible for as much as $51.3 billion in total economic activity in the country." https://www.nssf.org/government-relations/impact/ Yes, many of us all agree on specific policies but action is required. Doesn't matter if 100% of us agree on policy if we're going to undermine agreement by voting in Representatives that won't act or we continue fueling the industry with our money.
zapatos Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 4 hours ago, John Cuthber said: Why? Because of the current political environment. Quote It wouldn't have mattered if Nikolas Cruz had locked his guns away. He was the owner, he had the key. Agreed. Requiring gun safes would not stop all shootings. It would however reduce the frequency of shooting associated with children finding unsecured guns. School shootings are a small part of the overall problem. 46 minutes ago, iNow said: Useful info to further strengthen our alignments: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/10/upshot/How-to-Prevent-Gun-Deaths-The-Views-of-Experts-and-the-Public.html Amazing how such strong support translates into such minimal action.
John Cuthber Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 28 minutes ago, zapatos said: Amazing how such strong support translates into such minimal action. It's as if something or someone is pushing back against it.
zapatos Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 2 hours ago, Ten oz said: Zapatos, Moontanman and Raider all are supporting the very industry they concede needs to change. With their support why would it? Expecting the industry to change itself is not likely to get us very far. We need to impose the change on the industry legislatively. 2 minutes ago, John Cuthber said: It's as if something or someone is pushing back against it. I can assure you that something or someone IS pushing back against it. That part is not in doubt.
rangerx Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 In America there's a huge disparity between the right to guns and the right to life. When anything supersedes life and liberty , shitholes are created. 8 minutes ago, zapatos said: Expecting the industry to change itself is not likely to get us very far. We need to impose the change on the industry legislatively. I can assure you that something or someone IS pushing back against it. That part is not in doubt.
Ten oz Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, zapatos said: Expecting the industry to change itself is not likely to get us very far. We need to impose the change on the industry legislatively. As you pointed out in response to iNow it is amazing how little gets done despite such broad agreement. The industry in question is over $50 billion a year. You personally could impact that. This is a capitalist nation. Stop giving them your money and they will either change or go out of business. Both scenarios are better than nothing. Edited February 18, 2018 by Ten oz Typo corrected
rangerx Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 The industry feeds into the disparity and that needs to stop. 3 minutes ago, Ten oz said: Stop giving them your money and they will either change or go out of business.
zapatos Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 3 minutes ago, Ten oz said: The industry in question is over $50 billion a year. You personally could impact that. This is a capitalist nation. Stop giving them your money and they will either change or go out of business. What is the matter with you? Quit telling me how to live my life.
koti Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 9 minutes ago, zapatos said: What is the matter with you? Quit telling me how to live my life. Hi Zapatos. Please forgive me for barging in on you in such an emotional moment, Im not doing it to piss you off or have revenge for our former dissagreements. I just wanted to say that what you wrote above is exactly the crux of the problem with guns in America. I am not here to judge you but I am sure that because of this psychological mechanism of „you aint gonna tell me how to live my life” there will be no chance of resolving the gun issues in the US. In my opinion, its not the legislation where the fixing should start, it should start with changing the attitudes and changing the deeply rooted traditions of gun owning by north Americans. Is it doable? I doubt it...maybe you and Moontanman and a few others actually might be capable of such change but the vast majority of Americans arent. 1
Moontanman Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 (edited) 29 minutes ago, koti said: Hi Zapatos. Please forgive me for barging in on you in such an emotional moment, Im not doing it to piss you off or have revenge for our former dissagreements. I just wanted to say that what you wrote above is exactly the crux of the problem with guns in America. I am not here to judge you but I am sure that because of this psychological mechanism of „you aint gonna tell me how to live my life” there will be no chance of resolving the gun issues in the US. In my opinion, its not the legislation where the fixing should start, it should start with changing the attitudes and changing the deeply rooted traditions of gun owning by north Americans. Is it doable? I doubt it...maybe you and Moontanman and a few others actually might be capable of such change but the vast majority of Americans arent. The vast majority of Americans are disenfranchised from the American dream. They have been twisted and manipulated into allowing a governing body that does nothing but piss on them and hasn't the courtesy of even telling them it's rain. Many are simply fooled, some are ignorant of what is really happening, and some actually think it's a good thing for the rich and powerful to control everything. This lack of control and economic challenges makes people cling to the things that are remaining they think defines freedom. They want thing to be like the good old days never realizing the good old days never really existed the way they remember them. Guns were freely available, a big part of many peoples lives, they remember no mass shootings then (of course there were) and they liked the feeling of power and freedom they have regardless of whether or not it was real. Guns are currently one of the few things they cling to as symbols of freedom, guns bring memories of their grandparents and the smell of dew berry pie. "Guns were good then, why aren't they good now?" This is what we need to get past, guns need to stop being symbols of the good old days, I'm not sure how to do this but it lies at the heart of the problem... The problem is not a homeowner who keeps a shotgun for home defense it's people who glory in the false sense of freedom and security having more and more guns brings. For me anyone who really thinks that the number of guns correlates to their freedom and safety is a potential threat. Then there is the very real problem of violent crime perpetrated by criminals with guns. Guns are freely available on the black market (lets ignore for the moment stupid shit like gun show sales, stopping that is a high priority already) if you want a gun getting a gun doesn't involve gun dealers, it doesn't involve background checks or whether or not you are sane. It involves you have enough money to buy a gun from someone who has a gun to sell. There are so many millions of unregistered guns in this country it would be for all practical purposes impossible to take them. For sure it would result in blood shed on a scale not seen since the civil war. When such strong emotions are involved people tend toward being stupid. As i have stated earlier a Sheriff actually told me I should get a gun for home defense, he acknowledged the problem of law enforcement not being able to prevent crime, they investigate it after the fact. Edited February 18, 2018 by Moontanman
dimreepr Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 49 minutes ago, zapatos said: Expecting the industry to change itself is not likely to get us very far. We need to impose the change on the industry legislatively. How's that working out? You can't persuade people to give up something you aren't prepared to give up and you can't force them to understand why it's different for you. If you want to keep your guns, have at it, you're clearly a responsible gun owner and I'll support you all the way; but you can't eat your cake and keep it. I have suggested a way you can influence the status quo, I understand it takes courage and sacrifice and that's why it requires martyrdom, which is also why I understand your reticence; I'm not sure I would have such fortitude. But you have to understand if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem. 1
zapatos Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 14 minutes ago, koti said: Hi Zapatos. Please forgive me for barging in on you in such an emotional moment, Im not doing it to piss you off or have revenge for our former dissagreements. I just wanted to say that what you wrote above is exactly the crux of the problem with guns in America. I am not here to judge you but I am sure that because of this psychological mechanism of „you aint gonna tell me how to live my life” there will be no chance of resolving the gun issues in the US. In my opinion, its not the legislation where the fixing should start, it should start with changing the attitudes and changing the deeply rooted traditions of gun owning by north Americans. Is it doable? I doubt it...maybe you and Moontanman and a few others actually might be capable of such change but the vast majority of Americans arent. When I first started in on this thread it was to say that it was critical that people take the time to understand their opponents, use the proper vocabulary to avoid confusion, avoid generalities, and find common ground so that people can work on problems together. I don't believe we will be successful gathering allies by telling our potential allies what they should do. They need to be persuaded. If we want them to follow our path, it is our responsibility to present that path in such a way that they believe it too. If we can convince them that we are right, they will choose for themselves to join us, and we will have an ally for life. If on the other hand we do not try to understand their position and simply say "There is no gray area, there are no subtleties, there is no accommodation for your perspective. I am right, you are wrong, you must do it my way", then we've lost the battle before it has begun. Saying "don't tell me how to live my life" is not an attitude reserved for guns in the US. It is universal. It is part of personal and business interactions. I can convince my wife to do just about anything, but never if I start off with "I'm telling you what to do". I can get people to do things my way at work, but not by telling them what to do. I have to explain why it is something they want to do. People don't sell you a car by saying "you have to buy this one", they sell you a car by getting you to say "I've decided I want this car". I agree that we can't start with legislation. We need to get enough people on board so that the legislators feel it is in their best interests to pass new laws. We have to lead people to the light, not herd them to the light. 1
Moontanman Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 (edited) There is even another problem with guns that makes them hard to control. Guns are often used as currency! Guns have a value much like precious metals, the gun itself has little value but the perceived value is quite high. I have been in the situation many time in my life where I had to pawn a gun to get money, it's a crazy thing to do because of the interest rates but sometimes desperation = crazy... If it becomes illegal to own an assault rifle the value of the ones already in circulation will skyrocket many times their initial cost. This happened last time their sale was banned. It's quite a lot like the stock market in this way.. Edited February 18, 2018 by Moontanman
Recommended Posts