• S.D. Law Maker Introduces Bill To Force Everone 21+ To Buy A Gun Mocking Health Care Law
    129 replies, posted
this is pretty stupid but at the same time if it passes it could be the best scientific test of whether more guns in the hands of citizens actually leads to more deaths or not with a huge sample. I for one doubt the deaths will go up anywhere near as much as some of you Europeans do.
[QUOTE=Broseph_;27792988]Why couldn't you simply sell a gun or two to pay to patch up your foot? [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] Flamethrowers are still legal and you can buy them for the same price as a SKS [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] Pay the fine[/QUOTE] oh god where TELL ME WHERE i'd only want it for self defense obviously
Universal healthcare, safety regulations, maximum work hours of 12 and mandatory guns for adults are all fine ideas but stuff like minimum wages and unemployment subsidies are silly.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;27793144]Universal healthcare, safety regulations, maximum work hours of 12 and mandatory guns for adults are all fine ideas but stuff like minimum wages and unemployment subsidies are silly.[/QUOTE] Because we should pay people $2/hr and let them fucking suffer. Right? That's how we'll do it in America, just like the fucking Gilded Age.
[QUOTE=SM0K3 B4N4N4;27793060]this is pretty stupid but at the same time if it passes it could be the best scientific test of whether more guns in the hands of citizens actually leads to more deaths or not with a huge sample. I for one doubt the deaths will go up anywhere near as much as some of you Europeans do.[/QUOTE] What about the massive drop in crime in D.C. following Heller Vs DC? [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Kagrenak;27793239]Because we should pay people $2/hr and let them fucking suffer. Right? That's how we'll do it in America, just like the fucking Gilded Age.[/QUOTE] Nobody is forcing you to take a shit wage, and all minimal wage has done is killed off many jobs that traditionally formed the bottom steps on the job ladder forcing you to waste massive amounts ot money on useless degrees to replace those steps Meanwhile, why do we still have labor unions for all these jobs when regulations and minimal wage have effectively made them redundant?
A similar law currently exists in Kennesaw, Georgia. [I][Sec 34-21[U]][/U][/I][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-12"][/URL] [INDENT] (a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore. (b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony. [/INDENT]The law is actually unenforced. But when it was passed the crime rates dropped a little. And yes plenty of people did buy a gun. It was more of a symbolic gesture, and it is probably unconstitutional but no one to my knowledge has challenged it yet (because I figure no one has ever been fined pursuant to said law).
This could make a great compromise to appease the Republican party - everyone in America gets health insurance, but has to have a gun too. It even has synergy.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;27789912]Then prices should meet the higher wages. Relatively low wage jobs will always pay the bare minimum quality of life, as wages increase so do prices. This is a fundamental law of economics.[/QUOTE] in a completely closed system maybe :rolleyes:
[quote]“suitable to their temperament, physical capacity, and preference.”[/quote] Does this mean Arnold Schwarzenegger can buy an M134 Minigun for self defence? [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] [img]http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/T2JDHandheldMinigun-9.jpg[/img]
I love how they think car insurance isn't a valid example because YOU DON'T HAFTA DRIVE HURR Yeah because reliable public transportation is obviously there and everything is in walking distance including your job it's so easy not to own a care in this society.
[QUOTE=Sector 7;27789477] everyone owns an assault rifle and has been trained to use it correct me if I'm wrong.[/QUOTE] you're wrong. The government officially owns the assault rifles and people are only allowed to fire them in government sanctioned ranges. Citizens can take the rifle home with them but aren't allowed to own ammo for it. [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Broseph_;27793264]Nobody is forcing you to take a shit wage, [/QUOTE] no one in particular may be forcing you to take a poorly-paying job, but the looming threat of homelessness and lack of health insurance sure can. Don't act like, if someone isn't completely satisfied with their environment and it's (lack of) opportunities, they can just choose to go somewhere else. People oftentimes don't have that luxury [QUOTE=Broseph_;27793264] and all minimal wage has done is killed off many jobs that traditionally formed the bottom steps on the job [/QUOTE] nope that was outsourcing. Maybe if there were stronger tariffs we wouldn't have that problem
[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;27796627]you're wrong. The government officially owns the assault rifles and people are only allowed to fire them in government sanctioned ranges. Citizens can take the rifle home with them but aren't allowed to own ammo for it.[/QUOTE] Actually you are wrong. Everyone in active service is required to have a box of 50 rounds of ammunition at home. There are odd laws surrounding ammunition purchases I believe, but they are generally unenforced and ignored. You can still legally have ammunition at home even following the laws. Given that you can keep the assault rifles after your service is up (they are converted to semi auto) and pistols issued, I tend to doubt the government retains ownership of them afterwards.
[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;27796627]you're wrong. The government officially owns the assault rifles and people are only allowed to fire them in government sanctioned ranges. Citizens can take the rifle home with them but aren't allowed to own ammo for it.[/QUOTE] You're wrong too. The citizens can buy the assault rifles from the government after their service is up and use them at their leisure after the fully automatic function is disabled (Which really doesn't limit the lethality of the weapon in any way). And during their service, they are actually REQUIRED to have a certain amount of ammo at home in case a war breaks out and they need to fight their way to a garrison. [quote]Each such individual is required to keep his army-issued personal weapon (the 5.56x45mm Sig 550 rifle for enlisted personnel and/or the 9mm SIG-Sauer P220 semi-automatic pistol for officers, medical and postal personnel) at home with a specified personal retention quantity of government-issued personal ammunition (50 rounds 5.56 mm / 48 rounds 9mm) [/quote] [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=GunFox;27796844] *Post that beat mine* [/QUOTE] Damnit Gunfox.
I support this.
Uh... Doesn't the [b]right[/b] to bear arms mean that we have the freedom to choose whether or not we want a gun or not? Republicans... being anti-second amendment?
I fucking love America. [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] Land of the fucking free!
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;27788806]No, guns are tools used for ranged killing. That's their exact purpose, whether those killings are good or not is up to the user. In fact when using a gun to "protect from death" somebody is [I]still getting killed[/I].[/QUOTE] what happens if you get robbed and you shoot the guy thats robbing you in the kneecap or leg? No Death, you Protected yourself, and the Gun saved the day. hell when you pull out a gun they get scared and run off
[QUOTE=Kagrenak;27793239]Because we should pay people $2/hr and let them fucking suffer. Right? That's how we'll do it in America, just like the fucking Gilded Age.[/QUOTE] You aren't forced to be paid a minimum wage, and minimum wages screwed up the labour market. Trade unions are also stupid as they always keep pushing for less working hours and higher wages. Anything less than 40 hours of work a week is seriously retarded.
This is fucking insane, pathetic and childish. Are they trying to say, that forcing you to own a tool made exclusively for killing other people and having medical insurance to make sure you don't die if you get sick and you're not rich is the same? [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Sobotnik;27798834]You aren't forced to be paid a minimum wage, and minimum wages screwed up the labour market. Trade unions are also stupid as they always keep pushing for less working hours and higher wages. Anything less than 40 hours of work a week is seriously retarded.[/QUOTE] Everyone was much happier when the workers were being abused by the wealthy. Everyone.
guns are fine when used properly like for hunting and sometimes defense
I'll buy a Water Gun
No one gets a joke, people do this constantly in the lawmaking process. Most of the time they're presenting laws to 2 or even just a single person who bothered to come to work that day. It's a form of protest towards lazy lawmakers and stupid laws.
[QUOTE=The Chef;27799459]I'll buy a Water Gun[/QUOTE] Get a Super Soaker CPS2000 Shit's so powerful, it can almost be lethal against weak people.
Works for me, will give me an excuse to get out and buy that P226 I've been wanting for a while now.
[QUOTE=sp00ks;27799088]This is fucking insane, pathetic and childish. Are they trying to say, that forcing you to own a tool made exclusively for killing other people and having medical insurance to make sure you don't die if you get sick and you're not rich is the same? [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] Everyone was much happier when the workers were being abused by the wealthy. Everyone.[/QUOTE] So you support the increase of minimum wages and decrease working hours.
I actually don't mind this law.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;27795559]Does this mean Arnold Schwarzenegger can buy an M134 Minigun for self defence? [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] [img_thumb]http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/T2JDHandheldMinigun-9.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] That would be an NFA-regulated weapon. You could theoretically buy one of the small handfull registered before 1986, but it'd cost you millions of dollars for the gun alone and you need to get a tax stamp from the BATFE first. The NFA is the National Firearms Act passed in 1934. The BATF is the Beaureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. They enforce laws like the 1934 NFA.
Do it!
[QUOTE=AlienFanatic;27799239]guns are fine when used properly like for hunting and sometimes defense[/QUOTE] Jesus christ your avatar
The only difference is that health care is useful.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.