• Before posting an article from a specific source, check this list here to see how much the Orange Room trust it. You can also vote/change your vote based on the source track record.

Yet Another Mass Shooting in the US

Nonan

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
It all boils down to what are the reasons and the costs associated to changing gun rights in the us and whats the insurance that these changes will drop the number of casualties after these tights are lost.

Why are people so willing to trade their rights when someone can easily susbstitute his tool and still commit carnage?
I think two folds
1) I’m not sure unrestricted access to weapons that can lead to mass murder was envisioned by the founding fathers so not sure you’re really taking away anything. It’s more a عرف that somehow evolved through NRA lobbying and GOP complicity. It’s a bit like saying the MOF should go to the Shiites :)
2) it’s not because people can shift to something else that we shouldn’t stop the current madness. I mean after 911, we created new constraints when flying, then came the shoe bomber, and we evolved, etc...
It’s like antibiotics...
 

Iron Maiden

Paragon of Bacon
Orange Room Supporter
I think two folds
1) I’m not sure unrestricted access to weapons that can lead to mass murder was envisioned by the founding fathers so not sure you’re really taking away anything. It’s more a عرف that somehow evolved through NRA lobbying and GOP complicity. It’s a bit like saying the MOF should go to the Shiites :)
2) it’s not because people can shift to something else that we shouldn’t stop the current madness. I mean after 911, we created new constraints when flying, then came the shoe bomber, and we evolved, etc...
It’s like antibiotics...
1- its not really unrestricted, maybe the processes need to be reviewed
2- except in this case you are not paying with a bit less privacy on an airplane, you are paying for it with a constitutional right, a very unique one in the world.
Why are you letting it go so non-chalantly
 

Mrsrx

Not an expert!
Staff member
It all boils down to what are the reasons and the costs associated to changing gun rights in the us and whats the insurance that these changes will drop the number of casualties after these tights are lost.

Why are people so willing to trade their rights when someone can easily susbstitute his tool and still commit carnage?

boils down to this for me ...i am not comfortable walking into a supermarket or a bar knowing everyone has a gun ...yes i am scared and i do not want to have to carry a gun! i do not want to feel threatened at every single second of my existence that someone from 15meters away can kill me by pushing a button!
On the other hand i am less scared of knives as the person needs to be pretty close to me and it is way more personal...and being close even if my chances are slim i think i can defend myself or atleast run a bit to buy myself some time!

That is why i am for gun control ... and that is why ALOT of people are for that even when we forget the stats and mass shootings! we have evolved enough to be able to protect each others and live peacefully and i know not my gun will win against the USAF if they decide to become this tyranical!

How many times have you seen a weirdo on the street that just made you feel uncomfortable!? here in paris! alot ...imagine probability being way higher that this drunk weird guy with the empty look and is yelling at everyone can acquire a gun easily!
 

Nonan

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
1- its not really unrestricted, maybe the processes need to be reviewed
2- except in this case you are not paying with a bit less privacy on an airplane, you are paying for it with a constitutional right, a very unique one in the world.
Why are you letting it go so non-chalantly
Personally ? I am very happy to let it go. Just like the constitution was “amended” for this right, it could be amended back. Today guns are shockingly unrestricted in the US. No one is talking about banning, (not that I’d be against it), but even the smallest regulation proposals (or what you call “reviewing the process”) get shot down by the GOP and the NRA, and you have Trump proposing arming teachers at school.


So can we agree that guns should be further regulated in the US?
 

Libnene Qu7

Super Ultra Senior Member
Orange Room Supporter
First, the conservatives of America have to learn how to separate guns from Jesus. Once that initial step is done then you can talk about regulation. Until then, don't even think about touching their religion-- I mean guns.
 

The_FPMer

Well-Known Member
lmao I swear the African-Americans have created a religion of victimization. Black males in america commit an insane amount of crime, higher than any ethnic group despite their low numbers. The main reason behind that is their gangsta culture and because over 70% of black infants are born out of wedlock. They should start taking responsibility and not blaming everything on others. There are bad apples in all organizations, but it is understandable for the police to be paranoid because of the state of lawlessness that exist within the black community. Wlek they don't even know the meaning of the sentence "Don't resist arrest".
 

mikeys71

Well-Known Member
lmao I swear the African-Americans have created a religion of victimization. Black males in america commit an insane amount of crime, higher than any ethnic group despite their low numbers. The main reason behind that is their gangsta culture and because over 70% of black infants are born out of wedlock. They should start taking responsibility and not blaming everything on others. There are bad apples in all organizations, but it is understandable for the police to be paranoid because of the state of lawlessness that exist within the black community. Wlek they don't even know the meaning of the sentence "Don't resist arrest".
Man..... I am speechless....:rolleyes:
 

Walidos

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
There is nothing wrong with stand your ground law. People should be afforded every right at selfdefense.
I understand her emotional appeal, but she is not coherent in what she opposes or proposes.
The problem is not the law itself, the problem is it’s abuse... of lethal force is used to repel an assailant, one would be sympathetic. If some wako sees a person who is different, decides he/she is threatened and kill said different person, then goes free under the auspices of this law, then by all means it is unacceptable.

I find the British version of the stand your ground law far better (allows the use of reasonable force)...
 

joseph_lubnan

Legendary Member
The problem is not the law itself, the problem is it’s abuse... of lethal force is used to repel an assailant, one would be sympathetic. If some wako sees a person who is different, decides he/she is threatened and kill said different person, then goes free under the auspices of this law, then by all means it is unacceptable.

I find the British version of the stand your ground law far better (allows the use of reasonable force)...

Killing a person because they are different is not stand your ground law. It is a crime. Every law will have abuses, but I want my full rights to defend myself.

Please note how you wrote your "one would be sympathetic", and think about that for a second. If I need to defend myself, I don't need neither your permission nor your sympathy, and the law should be on my side.

If someone is charging me with clear intent to harm me while I am working in my garden, should I pause and debate where to hit him with my shovel? I do not think so... I will smack him with the shovel the most quick and expedient way to defend myself and your law better not come argue "reasonable force" semantics with me.
 
Last edited:

Walidos

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
Killing a person because they are different is not stand your ground law. It is a crime. Every law will have abuses, but I want my full rights to defend myself.

Please note how you wrote your "one would be sympathetic", and think about that for a second. If I need to defend myself, I don't need neither your permission nor your sympathy, and the law should be on my side.

If someone is charging me with clear intent to harm me while I am working in my garden, should I pause and debate where to hit him with my shovel? I do not think so... I will smack him with the shovel the most quick and expedient way to defend myself and your law better not come argue "reasonable force" semantics with me.
I understand you, and agree in principle. Now put yourself in the shoes of a young black American: he is waking down the street, listening to music and wearing his hoodie, waking at a fast pace... then some guy gets freaked out and thinks he is about to be mugged, pulls out his shovel, or more likely his gun and shoots him dead....

It is murder, but with the stand your ground law, as it is applied in the USA, the shooter is acquitted more times than not.

As I said, it’s principle is fair, but it’s abuse is easy and already happening. Hence it needs to be improved to be viable
 

joseph_lubnan

Legendary Member
I understand you, and agree in principle. Now put yourself in the shoes of a young black American: he is waking down the street, listening to music and wearing his hoodie, waking at a fast pace... then some guy gets freaked out and thinks he is about to be mugged, pulls out his shovel, or more likely his gun and shoots him dead....

It is murder, but with the stand your ground law, as it is applied in the USA, the shooter is acquitted more times than not.

As I said, it’s principle is fair, but it’s abuse is easy and already happening. Hence it needs to be improved to be viable

Honestly this is not a valid example, if someone attacks this black kid in your example, they would not be covered under stand your ground law in any court. We cannot accept taking citizen's rights to self defense away simply because we think there are bigots out there who would try to abuse laws. Bad people abuse laws all the time, not just this one.
 

proIsrael-nonIsraeli

Legendary Member
I understand you, and agree in principle. Now put yourself in the shoes of a young black American: he is waking down the street, listening to music and wearing his hoodie, waking at a fast pace... then some guy gets freaked out and thinks he is about to be mugged, pulls out his shovel, or more likely his gun and shoots him dead....

It is murder, but with the stand your ground law, as it is applied in the USA, the shooter is acquitted more times than not.

As I said, it’s principle is fair, but it’s abuse is easy and already happening. Hence it needs to be improved to be viable

"I understand you, and agree in principle. Now put yourself in the shoes of a young black American: he is waking down the street, listening to music and wearing his hoodie, waking at a fast pace... then some guy gets freaked out and thinks he is about to be mugged, pulls out his shovel, or more likely his gun and shoots him dead...."

That would be a crime and this is why we have courts that are designed what has really happen.

Still, it does not mean that stand thy ground laws must be repealed.
 

Walidos

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
Honestly this is not a valid example, if someone attacks this black kid in your example, they would not be covered under stand your ground law in any court. We cannot accept taking citizen's rights to self defense away simply because we think there are bigots out there who would try to abuse laws. Bad people abuse laws all the time, not just this one.

"I understand you, and agree in principle. Now put yourself in the shoes of a young black American: he is waking down the street, listening to music and wearing his hoodie, waking at a fast pace... then some guy gets freaked out and thinks he is about to be mugged, pulls out his shovel, or more likely his gun and shoots him dead...."

That would be a crime and this is why we have courts that are designed what has really happen.

Still, it does not mean that stand thy ground laws must be repealed.

Looks like this law is quite easy to abuse, not to mention encourages violence...

Four 'stand your ground' cases in the US

In a decision, Judge Lewis criticised the Stand Your Law even as he applied it.
He said the men had all been spoiling for a fight, both groups were armed, and none took precautions to avoid a gunfight.
"Two individuals, or even groups, can square off in the middle of a public street, exchange gunfire, and both be absolved from criminal liability if they were reasonably acting in self defence," he wrote.
"The law would appear to allow a person to seek out an individual, provoke him into a confrontation, then shoot and kill him if he goes for his gun."
 

proIsrael-nonIsraeli

Legendary Member
Looks like this law is quite easy to abuse, not to mention encourages violence...

Four 'stand your ground' cases in the US

In a decision, Judge Lewis criticised the Stand Your Law even as he applied it.
He said the men had all been spoiling for a fight, both groups were armed, and none took precautions to avoid a gunfight.
"Two individuals, or even groups, can square off in the middle of a public street, exchange gunfire, and both be absolved from criminal liability if they were reasonably acting in self defence," he wrote.
"The law would appear to allow a person to seek out an individual, provoke him into a confrontation, then shoot and kill him if he goes for his gun."

"Looks like this law is quite easy to abuse"

You are repeating yourself, you already have the answer - legal system.

"not to mention encourages violence" - right to self defense is not encouragement of violence, feel free not to defend yourself.
 

Walidos

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
"Looks like this law is quite easy to abuse"

You are repeating yourself, you already have the answer - legal system.

"not to mention encourages violence" - right to self defense is not encouragement of violence, feel free not to defend yourself.
You are also repeating yourself, and not adding any value to the conversation ! You have the opinion of a judge in my post... the law in its current form allows murderers to walk. Feel free to support it and hope no harm befalls you or a loved one from any idiot out there
 
Top