johnnydoom Neither vaccines or mass shootings are political. What is political is the ideology that uses government power to force unproven solutions onto those that do not wish to accept them. Demonstrate that something is actually going to be good for the common and it will not need to be implemented by force

Disagree completely on “unproven solutions”. Mass shootings are uniquely American that other countries don’t have nearly the epidemic of. They all have mental illness. But there’s one thing they don’t have. Easy access to guns / lax gun laws. So other countries compared to ours have proven there’s a cause and effect.

Vaccines have proven over the years that they are the most significant medical discovery in history and saved more lives than any other by far.

In both cases guns and vaccines. Government hasn’t forced anything on anyone. But again, both should not be political. Both should be public health and safety issues.

People are offended reading this stuff. So further discussion should be in the Water Hazard. Come in the water is fine. Lol

Me and you probably disagree on many issues. But you are civil in your disagreements. I appreciate that approach. Many can’t control their emotions and the personal attacks and F bombs start flying.

      Sneakylong I understand that you disagree and appreciate your numbers concerning the effectiveness that other countries have in controlling mass shootings. However, Americans are not fleeing to those countries to enjoy that benefit. Generally speaking, it is the other way around and people will go where they have the most freedom to choose what is best for them as individuals even if it comes with additional risk.

          johnnydoom understand that you disagree and appreciate your numbers concerning the effectiveness that other countries have in controlling mass shootings. However, Americans are not fleeing to those countries to enjoy that benefit. Generally speaking, it is the other way around and people will go where they have the most freedom to choose what is best for them as individuals even if it comes with additional risk.

          Poll after poll say that the vast majority want common sense gun laws. In many states we’ve gone the other way. We regulate cars more. No one would be in favor of letting someone drive with such lax laws as to obtain a gun.

          The cause and effect is clear, but we choose to do nothing. Yes people do want to come here for the freedom and opportunity, no question. But again polls show the majority are for change regarding guns.

          Mass shootings / gun violence is a high price we pay for unrestricted access to guns. They should also be such an abhorrent aberration that should not be accepted as normal.

          But not to worry. There seems to no amount of mass shootings / gun violence that is a tipping / inflection point. We as Americans have shown that we have an extremely high level of tolerance regarding this violent epidemic. The sad thing is we don’t really try to curtail this.

          This country did something to at least try to do something about drunk driving. Can’t we at least try to do something to prevent idiots from obtaining a gun legally?

              Sneakylong Poll after poll say that the vast majority want common sense gun laws

              Then politicians running on that message will win, the laws will be passed, and it will be so.

                  johnnydoom Then politicians running on that message will win, the laws will be passed, and it will be so

                  I wish. But sadly it’s not high enough on people’s list. That says more about us than anything else. And not in a good way. That we accept this as normal.

                      Sneakylong I explain it above. It was fundamental to our founding and risk/benefits will always exist in the world. Your priorities and mine are different and that is where both of us having the freedom to choose what we want for ourselves is important. To choose what you want others to do is a different matter and for most of our history Americans have not wished to have others tell them what to do.

                          johnnydoom explain it above. It was fundamental to our founding and risk/benefits will always exist in the world. Your priorities and mine are different and that is where both of us having the freedom to choose what we want for ourselves is important. To choose what you want others to do is a different matter and for most of our history Americans have not wished to have others tell them what to do.

                          Yup, very different. We have regulation by government in every aspect of life. We have the rule of law in this country. So we have guidelines as to what people can or can’t do. So people can’t do whatever they feel like doing.

                          As a civilized society this is how it works. In a civilized society ones persons freedom shouldn’t infringe on another person’s right to live.

                              Sneakylong e have regulation by government in every aspect of life. We have the rule of law in this country.

                              And there are many of us, including myself that think it has gone way too far already and that now the law is a weapon against us and not a protection for us. How many laws do we have? Thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands? Is there a judge, lawyer, law enforcement officer in the country that can even claim to know what ten percent of them are?

                                  Sneakylong

                                  Sneakylong Shooting at the Super Bowl Parade in Kansas City. Multiple people injured. Initial reports say at least 10 people shot. Three critical and 5 serious. At least one dead. Parade ruined because of idiots with guns. Another new low for the country.

                                  This is what got you idiots all riled up 6 days ago? Find a hobby and grow up. 6 days ago…🙄

                                        johnnydoom

                                        Maybe we can find some common ground, or maybe not. Are you in favor of idiots being able to purchase assault rifles / weapons of war with no training or license and walk around in society?

                                        Would you be in favor of the same regarding driving an automobile?

                                            Sneakylong Would you be in favor of the same regarding driving an automobile?

                                            Are you trying to tell me any idiot can't drive an automobile? Last time I was at the DMV the place was full of people I might never give any responsibility to given a small snapshot of their behavior, but most left with a license.

                                            To answer your other question, yes. I believe the founders had good judgement.

                                                johnnydoom Are you trying to tell me any idiot can't drive an automobile?

                                                Thought it was clear. You have to pass a test to drive a car. Need a license.

                                                Some states don’t even make idiots pass a test or get a license to own a gun. Let alone a weapon of war designed for inflicting as much damage to an human and as quickly as possible.

                                                Again, most people who want more done don’t want to take guns away from responsible gun owners. But how about we make it a little more difficult to keep guns out of the hands of idiots?

                                                At least be consistent in your argument. Be in favor of idiots driving legally with no training, no license along with those same idiots to own and operate an assault weapon, or any gun for that matter.

                                                We make people jump thru all kinds of hoops for safety reasons. Why no hoops for idiots or anyone to jump thru for guns?

                                                The founders had great common sense, judgement and insight. That’s why they gave us the constitution and the bill of rights.

                                                Not sure they’d be ok with the carnage we see today in this country regarding guns. Even the conservative justice Scalia said in the Heller case that the 2nd amendment isn’t absolute.

                                                Municipalities can decide on regulations. But for some reason in many cases we don’t.

                                                    Sneakylong Looking at the automotive death curves over the years, the per capita rate didn't change much from 1930 - 1970 when the drivers testing requirements were implemented. They did drop after seat belts and air bags became mandatory, but there is no obvious evidence that testing affected anything.

                                                        johnnydoom

                                                        Disagree. But where would you draw your line. Allow a 10 year old to drive a car? No requirement or test to pass to prove you know the rules of the road? What regulations / training would you put on operating a vehicle?

                                                        To have the same requirements (none) to drive as we have for guns would be ludicrous.

                                                            Sneakylong Allow a 10 year old to drive a car?

                                                            If they can pass the test then why not? You just provided the answer as to why testing is virtually worthless. 10 year olds aren't allowed to drive because they are known by and large not to understand consequences of behavior and responsibility. Having said that, there are many 10 year olds that I would trust behind the wheel more so than many adults that are cleared to legally drive. Fatal accidents generally don't happen because of a lack of operator skill, but is much more likely because the operator is impaired, distracted, aggressive, or reckless.

                                                                johnnydoom If they can pass the test then why not? You just provided the answer as to why testing is virtually worthless. 10 year olds aren't allowed to drive because they are known by and large not to understand consequences of behavior and responsibility. Having said that, there are many 10 year olds that I would trust behind the wheel more so than many adults that are cleared to legally drive. Fatal accidents generally don't happen because of a lack of operator skill, but is much more likely because the operator is impaired, distracted, aggressive, or reckless.

                                                                I think we've reached the bottom of the rabbit hole. lol Let's just leave it that we disagree completely. Which is ok. Again, appreciate the civil discussion / disagreement. Life goes on..............

                                                                  johnnydoom there are many 10 year olds that I would trust behind the whee

                                                                  I think this movie was already on Netflix

                                                                    @Sneakylong

                                                                    Comparing auto ownership/driving to firearm ownership is not really a comparison…Auto ownership/ Driving is a privilege granted by the State, thus the need for a license and insurance. Firearm ownership is a Right of a citizen affirmed by the Constitution. The Supreme Court has affirmed that Constitutional Rights are not subject to conditions - for example, poll tax, reading tests to vote, etc. also, many, if not all, State Constitutions also contain clauses affirming the Right to firearm ownership. There are rules and regulations around firearms, actually several thousand, but effectively there are 300 unique laws around firearms. What law would you propose that would have stopped/prevented the shooting in Kansas City, short of a ban????