Poll

Will Trump get re-elected in 2020?

Yes
No

Author Topic: POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD  (Read 2892744 times)

In addendum, the reason that gun control has been "proven not to work" is because it hasn't actually been implemented fully. You can't control guns in one area, but refuse to control them in a geographically nearby location.
I don't know why you would want to make an overarching federal ban on guns anyway. People out in rural areas have a demonstrable need for firearms. If someone comes onto their property with the intent to kill/rob/rape them, the cops will not be able to arrive in time to stop it. This is just the reality of areas with low, sparse populations. You need to own guns out there if you want to protect your family. For that reason, it makes sense to vary levels of gun control based on the region. You don't want to apply the same gun laws used in Boston college neighborhoods to rural Kentucky.

I don't know why you would want to make an overarching federal ban on guns anyway. People out in rural areas have a demonstrable need for firearms. If someone comes onto their property with the intent to kill/rob/rape them, the cops will not be able to arrive in time to stop it. This is just the reality of areas with low, sparse populations. You need to own guns out there if you want to protect your family. For that reason, it makes sense to vary levels of gun control based on the region. You don't want to apply the same gun laws used in Boston college neighborhoods to rural Kentucky.
I feel like the problem in that case would be more reasonably resolved by improving access to emergency services and further developing the area.

excuse me while i build a police department 40 miles into the middle of nowhere to service 500 acre properties

you do realize it only takes one well-aimed thrust of a knife to kill someone and that you could break into someone you hated's house, stab them a few times, and leave in a minute or two? even if they were able to call the police and the station was only a block away you could still most likely escape the scene before they responded
« Last Edit: July 15, 2017, 07:22:57 PM by Kearn »

I feel like the problem in that case would be more reasonably resolved by improving access to emergency services and further developing the area.
That would be misappropriating the money though. Areas with low-population density have lower crime rates, meaning you would be building police stations with the same density as cities, without actually responding to the same amount of crime. It would be better to expand access to emergency services in areas that need it, while just letting country folk keep their guns.

damn seventh you woke as forget today

Fair enough. Rural areas aren't the problem. As I know it, the problem stems from guns being easily purchased in urban areas, and illegally resold in impoverished areas.

I do feel the need to reiterate, though.
In addendum, the reason that gun control has been "proven not to work" is because it hasn't actually been implemented fully. You can't control guns in one area, but refuse to control them in a geographically nearby location. Though your arguments still hold some merit when you realize guns could still be circulated via some cross-continental gun cartel, it becomes a lot less relevant when the forces driving people to gun violence are removed.

To put it in terms a CEO could understand: If the demand isn't there, the supply drops.
I realize the real problem lies with the poverty, not the guns.

Fair enough. Rural areas aren't the problem. As I know it, the problem stems from guns being easily purchased in urban areas, and illegally resold in impoverished areas.

I do feel the need to reiterate, though.I realize the real problem lies with the poverty, not the guns.

I'm a gun toting american with a big loving rooster and if you touch my guns I'll manifest destiny on your family heritage you roostersucking commie bastard

damn seventh you woke as forget today
I've always been pretty moderate on guns. The same kinds of arguments extreme liberals make about banning guns are near-identical to the ones made by conservatives about banning drugs.

I've always been pretty moderate on guns. The same kinds of arguments extreme liberals make about banning guns are near-identical to the ones made by conservatives about banning drugs.

I'm moderate on drugs myself. I mostly believe in a free market.

Even from a capitalist standpoint, it has the potential to be insanely profitable. Establishment politicians are stubborn bastards.
We can't legalize drugs because we'll lose all our prison slave labor :[

We can't legalize drugs because we'll lose all our prison slave labor :[
Never mind, I remember why they oppose it now.

i need both drugs and guns. to limit either one means i hate you.

i need both drugs and guns. to limit either one means i hate you.
So what do you think about AG Jeff Sessions trying to reignite the War on Drugs?

So what do you think about AG Jeff Sessions trying to reignite the War on Drugs?

Sessions is a loving handicap
I like Annoying Orange but forget his cabinet picks in general

yeah as much as i'm for our boy in the white house his picks are pretty forgeted up