News Shutting Current Events / Politics section down Oct - Dec

[Hit Factor]

You said ban spoons, you can now be fired from your job in the military for being fat.

You said ban cars, there are robo-taxis and automated driving systems being put in place and paid for by different entities.

How are these even remotely similar? Requiring fitness as a component of military readiness has nothing whatsoever to do with trying to reduce obesity-related deaths by criminalizing the use or possession of a tool for the public at-large (no pun intended). And how is the development of driverless vehicles by profit-seeking commercial entities related to banning cars that are involved in more deaths every year than the number of deaths involving guns? Is this really how liberals think when they try to rationalize banning inanimate objects used by millions of Americans as they exercise their constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms, and their natural right to defend themselves and others?

 

[Deleted member 16735]

You equate this with the Democrats’ never-ending push for gun control and legislation banning the use or possession of inanimate tools that are actually protected in the U.S. Constitution? We’re in more trouble than I thought.


I should point out that driving is nothing more than a privilege in the U.S., while keeping and bearing arms is a constitutionally-protected right. There is an extremely significant difference that always seems to be lost on the gun grabbers.

And fortunately, soccer moms don’t get to “let us” have standard capacity magazines; the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does. This is another major point that seems to be lost on the gun grabbers, but they will be reminded soon enough by the federal judiciary, including the U.S. Supreme Court. Maybe if the Democrats tried to ban those soccer moms’ minivans, they might start to understand.

And incidentally, isn’t it ironic that when people who want to ban guns, like those soccer moms you mention, get attacked or otherwise victimized by predators who mean them harm, the first thing they do is try to call people with guns to come and protect them. Because when seconds count, the police are only minutes away . . .

They do get to "let us" because that's how implemention of democracy and the constitution works. The constitution says that the supreme Court decides how the constitution is interpreted and currently even the conservative supreme Court is turning down 2a cases so apparently they agree with mag bans. A "right" is a legal construction and only ad good as the government that protects it. But besides that you are moving goalposts and the arguments you are making are all over the place, context matters so try to be more coherent

 

[jspringer1427]

We'll be closing this down by next week.. I opened this up thinking we could openly discuss things but apparently this section doesn't really bring people together. I think I have enough data where it causes more problems than I would like to deal with.

Instead, we'll be spending our resources on building out the new applications we're working on. We'll start to focus more on 2A. I know some people would like to discuss this but there's a lot of places to do that. I'd like to get back to being focused on building the 2A side of the site.

Please take a moment to vote on the poll...

Somethings cooking...

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

The politics section of this forum doesn't really work out well because this site is filled with a bunch of Reddit users and the typical liberal mentality conflicts with the mentality of most gun owners. Arguments happen here because this isn't Reddit where people that disagree with the liberals will be instantly banned. CALGUNS has an older and more uniform userbase with the general consensus being "F- everything the California government stands for"

 

[ikeo1]

How are these even remotely similar? Requiring fitness as a component of military readiness has nothing whatsoever to do with trying to reduce obesity-related deaths by criminalizing the use or possession of a tool for the public at-large (no pun intended). And how is the development of driverless vehicles by profit-seeking commercial entities related to banning cars that are involved in more deaths every year than the number of deaths involving guns? Is this really how liberals think when they try to rationalize banning inanimate objects used by millions of Americans as they exercise their constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms, and their natural right to defend themselves and others?

You are rationalizing sir. I’m just saying what’s happening. I’m not saying whats right or wrong, just the things you say Democrats will do are already happening. You just refuse/acknoledge to see it. Does Tesla receive government funds?

If you noticed you completely skipped over the Supreme Court comment that they could end the issue by issuing judgement on several cases. You also skipped the part about banning 2A for a particular minority group based on classification. Even the NRA is against. You also ignored the state that one calls for restrictions where you still have access vs the ban that’s being called for. If you haven’t noticed we offer a lot of training and bring in the best in the country. You’re using arguments that people use against non-2A people. Try something different

Instead, just like the SC, you ignore the part that matters to focus on the parts that don’t, even though it’s already happening.

 

[socalgunowner909]

You don’t seem to realize or acknowledge the very thing you spoke of Democrats doing are being implemented in early stages by Republicans.

You said ban spoons, you can now be fired from your job in the military for being fat.

You said ban cars, there are robo-taxis and automated driving systems being put in place and paid for by different entities. In the future you will have to pay to drive manually as it’ll be deemed less safe than automated driving as that roll out continues to propagate. It’s a systematic rollout and a plan by Elon to make driving safer. Robots don’t get tired or need to sleep.

You also seem to miss the call for a straight up ban for 2A for a minority group. Yes, democrats call for restrictions but you can still obtain/procure firearms. The flat out ban being called for, you would be barred from purchasing entirely.

Is that right or not?

The end goal for both is control, it’s the illusion of choice with the same outcome. The SC could easily repeal 9th circuit decisions, Yes or No? 6-3 majority. Yet they do not. They use it as a voter management tool. They know if they made it legal at the SC level then it becomes a non-issue

What ban on a minority group are you talking about?

Are you referring to the ban on trans people owning guns?

When you can find me an actual quote of the Trump DOJ saying something like this then we can discuss this. (And when the thread was put up about this I cleary stated this would be a no for me because its unconstitutional.)

You are making an mountain out of an ant hill on this one.

Crucial caveats and context​

• Many of the quotes come from anonymous sources or people “familiar with internal discussions” rather than publicly confirmed policy statements. (As the Washington Post noted: “people familiar with the discussions … spoke on the condition of anonymity.”) The Washington Post
• The DOJ’s official, public position in multiple statements is that no specific proposals have been advanced yet. The Washington Post+2ABC News+2
• The idea of classifying “being transgender” or “gender dysphoria” as a disqualifying mental health condition is under discussion in reported leaks; it is not yet law or regulation.
• Some quotes come from organizations reacting to the reports (e.g. NRA, legal commentators), not from government decision-makers.

LOL.... Banned me from this thread because I posted a 2A image. LOL THE MODS ARE ON A POWER TRIP TODAY>



@ikeo1 WHY BAN ME FROM THE THREAD AND THEN REPLY TO MY POST>>> Guess you dont like the back and forth.

And you banned me because I posted an image the says "What part of shall not be infringed about the 2A dont you understand" Come on now. Getting petty.

 

[ikeo1]

What ban on a minority group are you talking about?

Are you referring to the ban on trans people owning guns?

When you can find me an actual quote of the Trump DOJ saying something like this then we can discuss this. (And when the thread was put up about this I cleary stated this would be a no for me because its unconstitutional.)

You are making an mountain out of an ant hill on this one.

Crucial caveats and context​

• Many of the quotes come from anonymous sources or people “familiar with internal discussions” rather than publicly confirmed policy statements. (As the Washington Post noted: “people familiar with the discussions … spoke on the condition of anonymity.”) The Washington Post
• The DOJ’s official, public position in multiple statements is that no specific proposals have been advanced yet. The Washington Post+2ABC News+2
• The idea of classifying “being transgender” or “gender dysphoria” as a disqualifying mental health condition is under discussion in reported leaks; it is not yet law or regulation.
• Some quotes come from organizations reacting to the reports (e.g. NRA, legal commentators), not from government decision-makers.

Did you forget who banned bump stocks and needed to be overturned by the Supreme Court?

Did you forget what
/who the AG is looking to ban?

 

[PlinkyDinky]

A lot of civility could be restored over time with something as simple as getting into the habit of saying “I disagree,“ instead of “you’re wrong.“

 

[GoldensRule]

That right there is an insult, wrapped in a thin layer of a joke. Personally, I think anyone who does this kind of thing, including for example calling the President "Drumpf", should be (a) warned on the first offense, (b) get a one week ban on the second, and (c) permabanned on the third. If we want to have discussions with common sense here, we first all need to learn manners.

And that comes from one of the users (Jimi) who claims to be neutral and walk the center line politically. The hypocrisy and projected delusions are endemic in this population.

I agree they should completely shut down all political discussion, both right and left in every forum rather than have to devote time they cannot afford to waste. Discussion of pending legislation, laws and legal challenges can be done without the childish vitriol from either side. I have certainly been guilty of responding to stupid comments such as the ones made by Jimi above with equally vitriolic responses so, I am no angel, but if we all agree to leave the trolling behind, maybe things can be made less stressful for the site owner and volunteer moderators.

The major obstacle to this is people throwing written bombs, allowing those to stand and expecting others to tolerate those bombs and to not respond in kind.

 

[ikeo1]

The politics section of this forum doesn't really work out well because this site is filled with a bunch of Reddit users and the typical liberal mentality conflicts with the mentality of most gun owners. Arguments happen here because this isn't Reddit where people that disagree with the liberals will be instantly banned. CALGUNS has an older and more uniform userbase with the general consensus being "F- everything the California government stands for"

That’s not why IMO. You’re right Calguns has an older more uniform base. It goes beyond that, the people from Reddit also have an opinion, they also are 2A friendly from a different angle. They don’t go to Calguns yet they r/CAguns grew to 100k users. That tells there’s a growing interest from a different group.

The problem is some won’t allow another perspective from a different time in. There isn’t any instant bans you should take a look at r/trump or r/conservative sometime.

From my perspective seeing people come from all over, over time. It boils down to people who are open minded vs closed minded. This is what will keep 2A stuck and why I’d like to have it in the future to try to break that. If we’re able to consolidate views and come to consensus you then have an additional 108k+ voters in CA vs the ones Calguns lost for various reasons. The fight for 2A freedoms needs to continue but when you make the growing group your enemy/adversary you unwittingly keep 2A down

 

[GoldensRule]

Did you forget who banned bump stocks and needed to be overturned by the Supreme Court?

Did you forget what
/who the AG is looking to ban?

Do you notice that you get sucked into these political discussions the same way the rest of us do? People say stupid and it's nearly impossible to just let it stand.

 

[ikeo1]

The major obstacle to this is people throwing written bombs, allowing those to stand and expecting others to tolerate those bombs and to not respond in kind.

The issue is starting to have to delete threads because of the one liners. It’s the internet gotta get used to it

Do you notice that you get sucked into these political discussions the same way the rest of us do? People say stupid and it's nearly impossible to just let it stand.

yes, but if you notice no matter what they say about me. I try to respond in a way where it’s still respectful even if I’m disrespected.

If anything I try to point out logical errors and use specific examples vs make personal insults and generalizations. When they dance around it focus in on the example and drop the propaganda lines.

 

[GoldensRule]

The issue is starting to have to delete threads because of the one liners. It’s the internet gotta get used to it

yes, but if you notice no matter what they say about me. I try to respond in a way where it’s still respectful even if I’m disrespected.

If anything I try to point out logical errors and use specific examples vs make personal insults and generalizations. When they dance around it focus in on the example and drop the propaganda lines.

Everyone knows you own the site and control the accounts so, the "disrespect" directed at you doesn't compare to the disrespect and insults received by others. Pretty much the worst disrespect I have read directed at you is people disagreeing with you.

I can assure you, if you didn't have control here, you would likely be roasted and toasted. Also, to be honest, I have seen you deliver your share of vitriol too. We all delude ourselves into believing we're just "being honest" or "trying to help" the other person but in reality, those are just self delusional excuses for being s.

 

[ikeo1]

Everyone knows you own the site and control the accounts so, the "disrespect" directed at you doesn't compare to the disrespect and insults received by others. Pretty much the worst disrespect I have read directed at you is people disagreeing with you.

I can assure you, if you didn't have control here, you would likely be roasted and toasted. Also, to be honest, I have seen you deliver your share of vitriol too. We all delude ourselves into believing we're just "being honest" or "trying to help" the other person but in reality, those are just self delusional excuses for being s.

Like I said I try, this is also why we aren’t overly strict. I say I’m human often, but it’s not something that happens often.

You should see what’s said about me over at Calguns. I’ve come to the conclusion over time that it doesn’t matter. Plus to some folks they don’t like people who are soft so I treat people the way I read them, sometimes I’m wrong. But you won’t find me losing my temper here or on CGN.

It’s just the internet, you kind of have to get used to some trolling. If you want a sanitized environment let me know where you can find it. As you noted I’m not that clean either, my tolerance gets tested, but I look at it as practice. The bigger we grow, the more patience I have to build. Things are great when they’re good but things can change along with sentiment. I can relate to the CGN owner quite a bit and don’t intend on taking things for granted.

 

[GoldensRule]

Like I said I try, this is also why we aren’t overly strict. I say I’m human often, but it’s not something that happens often.

You should see what’s said about me over at Calguns. I’ve come to the conclusion over time that it doesn’t matter. Plus to some folks they don’t like people who are soft so I treat people the way I read them, sometimes I’m wrong. But you won’t find me losing my temper here or on CGN.

It’s just the internet, you kind of have to get used to some trolling. If you want a sanitized environment let me know where you can find it. As you noted I’m not that clean either, my tolerance gets tested, but I look at it as practice. The bigger we grow, the more patience I have to build. Things are great when they’re good but things can change along with sentiment. I can relate to the CGN owner quite a bit and don’t intend on taking things for granted.

We are all human with our strengths and weakness. What works for me doesn't work for you and what works for you doesn't work for others.

All of us, me, you and even the bullies should strive to learn about ourselves and from each other. You do not have all the answers, nor do I. I do know that if we are going to survive as a country, we all need to learn to communicate in a civil fashion and to try to understand why people think what they do. This can be done in a civil fashion except by those who refuse to tolerate, not criticisms of themselves personally but, criticisms of their beliefs.

You keep stressing the prevailing incivility of the Internet which is fine but, if you want to understand true incivility, put yourself in a position where people are shooting at, setting IEDs and other booby traps with the expressed intent of killing you dead. That is true incivility, compared to that, the internet is a panda cub kindergarten.

Allowing incivility and bullying to continue, unchecked, simply empowers those who resort to those behaviors to continue those behaviors. Any attempts at appeasement will only breed contempt and amplified inappropriate behaviors.

 

[ikeo1]

You keep stressing the prevailing incivility of the Internet which is fine but, if you want to understand true incivility, put yourself in a position where people are shooting at, setting IEDs and other booby traps with the expressed intent of killing you dead. That is true incivility, compared to that, the internet is a panda cub kindergarten.

Allowing incivility and bullying to continue, unchecked, simply empowers those who resort to those behaviors to continue those behaviors. Any attempts at appeasement will only breed contempt and amplified inappropriate behaviors.

I think the problem here is that you speak from this mindset where I don’t. My level of incivility differs from yours. Your level of moderation is more strict than mine. I think we’ll leave it at that and close this down too. This should be the last of it. The politics and seriousness really distracts from it and go ahead and report anything you think my comments were vitriol. We can always learn from it or maybe you’re soft, I’d need to see the example to reflect on.

This is where if you don’t like the direction or our method, you can and should attempt to create your interpretation. This is what I did with CAguns.

My whole goal is to get people out on the range and train with a little banter and talking is ok in my book.

 

[Warpspeed]

Well said /thread