Rajon Rondo Allegedly Pulled Gun On Mom Of Kids

[GreenlyGreeny]

Pretty dishonest to try and misrepresent what I was saying in that way, but I don't really expect anything else.

I jest. I just prefer not being labeled as libertarian. Classical liberal is more appropriate.

If you cannot tell that the libertarian idea I was referring to was your "hard time understanding why anybody has any issue with what someone owns in their own private home". You cannot know someone use something for harm until the harm (in this case, violence) is already done.

We do not need the slippery slope of precogs. Ultimately, if someone breaks the law they must pay the price. Society owes it to the mentally ill to help them, of course. The great tragedy is how treatable so much mental illness is increasingly becoming. There is no need for a nation with such wealth to not ensure mental healthcare is affordable and available to those in need.

Not too hard to understand why the US is the only developed nation with this gun violence crisis is it?

Oh, it’s not as bad as the automobile crisis, though. We must control automobiles now!

330+ million people. Messed up things are going to happen every day unfortunately, especially when the media has so many perverse incentives. Locking up those who commit acts of violence and treating all with mental illness is the best way to lower morbidity and mortalities whether guns are associated, automobiles, knives, etc. 

Your last line is baffling. Impossible to take seriously, actually. If you truly believe that...

Authoritarians fear an armed populace for obvious reasons. It’s why one of Hitler’s first power plays was gun control…

And just speaking practically, there are more than one billion firearms in the US. Even if someone wanted to try to control it, it is impossible to do so. The debate is over…

[gouki88]

Pretty dishonest to try and misrepresent what I was saying in that way, but I don't really expect anything else.

I jest. I just prefer not being labeled as libertarian. Classical liberal is more appropriate.

If you cannot tell that the libertarian idea I was referring to was your "hard time understanding why anybody has any issue with what someone owns in their own private home". You cannot know someone use something for harm until the harm (in this case, violence) is already done.

We do not need the slippery slope of precogs. Ultimately, if someone breaks the law they must pay the price. Society owes it to the mentally ill to help them, of course. The great tragedy is how treatable so much mental illness is increasingly becoming. There is no need for a nation with such wealth to not ensure mental healthcare is affordable and available to those in need.

Not too hard to understand why the US is the only developed nation with this gun violence crisis is it?

Oh, it’s not as bad as the automobile crisis, though. We must control automobiles now!

330+ million people. Messed up things are going to happen every day unfortunately, especially when the media has so many perverse incentives. Locking up those who commit acts of violence and treating all with mental illness is the best way to lower morbidity and mortalities whether guns are associated, automobiles, knives, etc. 

Your last line is baffling. Impossible to take seriously, actually. If you truly believe that...

Authoritarians fear an armed populace for obvious reasons. It’s why one of Hitler’s first power plays was gun control…

And just speaking practically, there are more than one billion firearms in the US. Even if someone wanted to try to control it, it is impossible to do so. The debate is over…

You realise that we do control automobiles with fairly strict regulations surrounding what is legal for the general public, what safety measures have to be in place, and licensing? Or are you being funny?

Ah yeah, speaking "practically". The problem is so bad, and has been left untouched for so long, that the best course of action is to just let people do whatever they want? You know there are much easier ways to dissuade tyranny than through arming a populace, right?

Your trade ideas are bad enough, but these CE takes you come up with - my god!

[ozgod]

I have a very hard time understanding why anybody has any issue with what someone owns in their own private home so long as they are not using it to hurt anybody. People should be free to own and do whatever they want on their private property unless they are hurting others or pose an extremely high risk to many (which is why nobody should be able to own a nuclear reactor in their private residence, for example).

Want to decrease gun violence? Increase the punishment for using a gun during commission of a crime, and dramatically expand mental health benefits to all (yes, believe it or not someone can support expansion of health benefits via government intervention while still being extremely right on gun ownership and combating crime). Trying to strip law-abiding people of their freedom is a sure-fire way for nothing getting done to address the problem.

I think the issue in this case is he was trying to use it to hurt somebody.

[ozgod]

Pretty dishonest to try and misrepresent what I was saying in that way, but I don't really expect anything else.

I jest. I just prefer not being labeled as libertarian. Classical liberal is more appropriate.

If you cannot tell that the libertarian idea I was referring to was your "hard time understanding why anybody has any issue with what someone owns in their own private home". You cannot know someone use something for harm until the harm (in this case, violence) is already done.

We do not need the slippery slope of precogs. Ultimately, if someone breaks the law they must pay the price. Society owes it to the mentally ill to help them, of course. The great tragedy is how treatable so much mental illness is increasingly becoming. There is no need for a nation with such wealth to not ensure mental healthcare is affordable and available to those in need.

Not too hard to understand why the US is the only developed nation with this gun violence crisis is it?

Oh, it’s not as bad as the automobile crisis, though. We must control automobiles now!

330+ million people. Messed up things are going to happen every day unfortunately, especially when the media has so many perverse incentives. Locking up those who commit acts of violence and treating all with mental illness is the best way to lower morbidity and mortalities whether guns are associated, automobiles, knives, etc. 

Your last line is baffling. Impossible to take seriously, actually. If you truly believe that...

Authoritarians fear an armed populace for obvious reasons. It’s why one of Hitler’s first power plays was gun control…

And just speaking practically, there are more than one billion firearms in the US. Even if someone wanted to try to control it, it is impossible to do so. The debate is over…

You realise that we do control automobiles with fairly strict regulations surrounding what is legal for the general public, what safety measures have to be in place, and licensing? Or are you being funny?

Ah yeah, speaking "practically". The problem is so bad, and has been left untouched for so long, that the best course of action is to just let people do whatever they want? You know there are much easier ways to dissuade tyranny than through arming a populace, right?

Your trade ideas are bad enough, but these CE takes you come up with - my god!

A lot of people don't realize this. Automobiles are actually very strictly regulated. There are safety regulations, emissions regulations, performance regulations, as well as regulations when it comes to who can use them and how they can be used on roads. Traffic lights and stop signs are a form of regulation. So are emissions standards. The fact that you need a commercial driver's license to drive a tractor trailer or a vehicle with air brakes is a regulation. So are parking tickets.

I would say they are much more regulated than firearms, due to the fact that so many more people use them every day. Nobody bats an eyelid because regulating cars is not a culture war issue but if you talk about anything related to firearms it's a different story. I guess it's because the positions have been staked out - either you want guns banned or you want a Wild West free for all. Anything in between doesn't count.

[GreenlyGreeny]

Pretty dishonest to try and misrepresent what I was saying in that way, but I don't really expect anything else.

I jest. I just prefer not being labeled as libertarian. Classical liberal is more appropriate.

If you cannot tell that the libertarian idea I was referring to was your "hard time understanding why anybody has any issue with what someone owns in their own private home". You cannot know someone use something for harm until the harm (in this case, violence) is already done.

We do not need the slippery slope of precogs. Ultimately, if someone breaks the law they must pay the price. Society owes it to the mentally ill to help them, of course. The great tragedy is how treatable so much mental illness is increasingly becoming. There is no need for a nation with such wealth to not ensure mental healthcare is affordable and available to those in need.

Not too hard to understand why the US is the only developed nation with this gun violence crisis is it?

Oh, it’s not as bad as the automobile crisis, though. We must control automobiles now!

330+ million people. Messed up things are going to happen every day unfortunately, especially when the media has so many perverse incentives. Locking up those who commit acts of violence and treating all with mental illness is the best way to lower morbidity and mortalities whether guns are associated, automobiles, knives, etc. 

Your last line is baffling. Impossible to take seriously, actually. If you truly believe that...

Authoritarians fear an armed populace for obvious reasons. It’s why one of Hitler’s first power plays was gun control…

And just speaking practically, there are more than one billion firearms in the US. Even if someone wanted to try to control it, it is impossible to do so. The debate is over…

You realise that we do control automobiles with fairly strict regulations surrounding what is legal for the general public, what safety measures have to be in place, and licensing? Or are you being funny?

Ah yeah, speaking "practically". The problem is so bad, and has been left untouched for so long, that the best course of action is to just let people do whatever they want? You know there are much easier ways to dissuade tyranny than through arming a populace, right?

Your trade ideas are bad enough, but these CE takes you come up with - my god!

In many states one does not need to register an automobile so long as it is only driven on the owner’s private property. Heck, a driver’s license is not even needed if the automobile is only driven on private property.

I have absolutely no problem with licensing/registration for guns that will not be residing solely inside people’s private residential  property. I do think if someone owns a firearm strictly for their own self-defense on their own private property, that is nobody’s business but theirs unless they commit a crime against someone on their private property, but if someone transports the firearm and it is loaded, it should be licensed/registered and treated similarly to automobiles. Permits for concealed carry certainly, and make sure they have to take some reasonable training on how to safely handle the firearm in public. Just like an automobile. I would also have safe-guards against who can access those licensing/registration records, too (e.g., only law enforcement and only when they have evidence the individual may have committed a felony), to appease the truly paranoid in the US.

[RockinRyA]

Pretty dishonest to try and misrepresent what I was saying in that way, but I don't really expect anything else.

I jest. I just prefer not being labeled as libertarian. Classical liberal is more appropriate.

If you cannot tell that the libertarian idea I was referring to was your "hard time understanding why anybody has any issue with what someone owns in their own private home". You cannot know someone use something for harm until the harm (in this case, violence) is already done.

We do not need the slippery slope of precogs. Ultimately, if someone breaks the law they must pay the price. Society owes it to the mentally ill to help them, of course. The great tragedy is how treatable so much mental illness is increasingly becoming. There is no need for a nation with such wealth to not ensure mental healthcare is affordable and available to those in need.

Not too hard to understand why the US is the only developed nation with this gun violence crisis is it?

Oh, it’s not as bad as the automobile crisis, though. We must control automobiles now!

330+ million people. Messed up things are going to happen every day unfortunately, especially when the media has so many perverse incentives. Locking up those who commit acts of violence and treating all with mental illness is the best way to lower morbidity and mortalities whether guns are associated, automobiles, knives, etc. 

Your last line is baffling. Impossible to take seriously, actually. If you truly believe that...

Authoritarians fear an armed populace for obvious reasons. It’s why one of Hitler’s first power plays was gun control…

And just speaking practically, there are more than one billion firearms in the US. Even if someone wanted to try to control it, it is impossible to do so. The debate is over…

You realise that we do control automobiles with fairly strict regulations surrounding what is legal for the general public, what safety measures have to be in place, and licensing? Or are you being funny?

Ah yeah, speaking "practically". The problem is so bad, and has been left untouched for so long, that the best course of action is to just let people do whatever they want? You know there are much easier ways to dissuade tyranny than through arming a populace, right?

Your trade ideas are bad enough, but these CE takes you come up with - my god!

In many states one does not need to register an automobile so long as it is only driven on the owner’s private property. Heck, a driver’s license is not even needed if the automobile is only driven on private property.

I have absolutely no problem with licensing/registration for guns that will not be residing solely inside people’s private residential  property. I do think if someone owns a firearm strictly for their own self-defense on their own private property, that is nobody’s business but theirs unless they commit a crime against someone on their private property, but if someone transports the firearm and it is loaded, it should be licensed/registered and treated similarly to automobiles. Permits for concealed carry certainly, and make sure they have to take some reasonable training on how to safely handle the firearm in public. Just like an automobile. I would also have safe-guards against who can access those licensing/registration records, too (e.g., only law enforcement and only when they have evidence the individual may have committed a felony), to appease the truly paranoid in the US.

**** cars are in no way the same as guns. Both have different purpose.

[GreenlyGreeny]

Pretty dishonest to try and misrepresent what I was saying in that way, but I don't really expect anything else.

I jest. I just prefer not being labeled as libertarian. Classical liberal is more appropriate.

If you cannot tell that the libertarian idea I was referring to was your "hard time understanding why anybody has any issue with what someone owns in their own private home". You cannot know someone use something for harm until the harm (in this case, violence) is already done.

We do not need the slippery slope of precogs. Ultimately, if someone breaks the law they must pay the price. Society owes it to the mentally ill to help them, of course. The great tragedy is how treatable so much mental illness is increasingly becoming. There is no need for a nation with such wealth to not ensure mental healthcare is affordable and available to those in need.

Not too hard to understand why the US is the only developed nation with this gun violence crisis is it?

Oh, it’s not as bad as the automobile crisis, though. We must control automobiles now!

330+ million people. Messed up things are going to happen every day unfortunately, especially when the media has so many perverse incentives. Locking up those who commit acts of violence and treating all with mental illness is the best way to lower morbidity and mortalities whether guns are associated, automobiles, knives, etc. 

Your last line is baffling. Impossible to take seriously, actually. If you truly believe that...

Authoritarians fear an armed populace for obvious reasons. It’s why one of Hitler’s first power plays was gun control…

And just speaking practically, there are more than one billion firearms in the US. Even if someone wanted to try to control it, it is impossible to do so. The debate is over…

You realise that we do control automobiles with fairly strict regulations surrounding what is legal for the general public, what safety measures have to be in place, and licensing? Or are you being funny?

Ah yeah, speaking "practically". The problem is so bad, and has been left untouched for so long, that the best course of action is to just let people do whatever they want? You know there are much easier ways to dissuade tyranny than through arming a populace, right?

Your trade ideas are bad enough, but these CE takes you come up with - my god!

In many states one does not need to register an automobile so long as it is only driven on the owner’s private property. Heck, a driver’s license is not even needed if the automobile is only driven on private property.

I have absolutely no problem with licensing/registration for guns that will not be residing solely inside people’s private residential  property. I do think if someone owns a firearm strictly for their own self-defense on their own private property, that is nobody’s business but theirs unless they commit a crime against someone on their private property, but if someone transports the firearm and it is loaded, it should be licensed/registered and treated similarly to automobiles. Permits for concealed carry certainly, and make sure they have to take some reasonable training on how to safely handle the firearm in public. Just like an automobile. I would also have safe-guards against who can access those licensing/registration records, too (e.g., only law enforcement and only when they have evidence the individual may have committed a felony), to appease the truly paranoid in the US.

**** cars are in no way the same as guns. Both have different purpose.

Understand your position. People completely deserve complete privacy as to what firearms they own in their own home for their own self-defense. But I do think it is reasonable and rational to have licensing/registration for firearms people intend to transport in public while the firearm is loaded. That said, have strict privacy controls on who can access the licensing/registration records. And just because someone transports a firearm, that would not indicate they need to license/register the firearms they do not transport loaded in public. And an exception should be made if someone transports an unloaded firearm from their private property to someone else’s private property (e.g., shooting ranges). This seems like a rational approach to address many concerns. I see it as smart regulation, not a gun control power grab. I’d even consider only requiring the licensing/registration in urban areas if that’s what it took to get this sort of thing passed, so the debate can finally be laid to rest.