posted by like_that

Bones Jones is one of the few guys who doesn’t need a gun lmao.
 

https://twitter.com/chisanga_malata/status/1267398536322338816?s=21

JR held his own, too.

I don't care who it is.  If it's a professional athlete, you run.  They're probably able to stomp your ass.

(Or don't damage property in the first place.)
 

posted by justincredible

I like this guy.

https://twitter.com/MoneyTeamAlpha/status/1267331151699554304

Unfortunately, the part about seeing people inciting violence is probably necessary.
 

posted by SportsAndLady

A gun will never be a necessity for me. So your comment about it being a necessity is maybe accurate for some but not all. 

By extension, are you also confident that you'll never need assistance from anyone with a gun?  I mean, I know the police aren't really high on anyone's trust radar these days, but you just don't think that'll ever be necessary?

Nobody will ever want to beat you within an inch of your life?

Nobody will ever break into your house armed?  If you see their face, telling them they can take whatever they want might not be enough.  Or maybe they get antsy and start shooting once they know you see them, and you don't have a chance to start a dialogue about how they can have whatever they want.

Nobody with some cognitive impairment will go on an assault or murder spree while you're out and about?

Most people in America probably go through life without ever needing one (by most, I just mean over 50%, not some overwhelming majority), but if you count the people who possibly stopped any assault or aggression against themselves by wielding one, the number is probably higher than you or I think.

And I'd bet that anyone who has needed one will/would have been glad to have one in that moment.
 

posted by SportsAndLady

I skimmed through this. You’re really trying super hard to be Otrap aren’t you?

HEY!

/lol

posted by justincredible

George Floyd's brother speaks.

https://twitter.com/jason_howerton/status/1267466257344933888

I get why people are angry.  I get why people are demonstrating, protesting, rioting, and maybe even looting.  Doesn't make it all okay, but even in the midst of anger, I hope people have enough of a moment of clarity to consider this.

I'm a militia of one and have regulated myself. I can get on board with that.

posted by like_that

Those numbers are a bit exaggerated, but sure.  Are you implying the media is overplaying the riots?  Big possibility considering theri track record.  I am no longer in DC, so I can't personally speak to it, but a lot of my friends don't seem to think it's being overplayed and a lot of them are pretty scared the rioting is going to work its way to their homes.  You do bring a good point that there are bad apples in this protest just like there are bad apples in our law enforcement.  I don't think anyone is being fair if they only apply the bad apple argument to one side.

Overall Justin's post above yours said it better than me.  I can't get behind the "it will never happen to me" attitude, especially with the shit going on now. I always thought it was a good idea to arm yourself and this situation makes that argument stronger.   I will agree to disagree with you personally that if you don't want to own a gun you are free to do so.  I will take the insurance policy.  I am willing to bet the people living in the riot cities wish they had that insurance policy right now. 

Maybe “it will never happen to me” was poorly worded on my part—but I made my comment because I live in a heavily guarded high rise on the 30th floor. I am extremely confident that no one is going to even get to my door, let alone get in the door. I mean look at the videos of magnificent mile on Saturday, if I was in any danger, that would have been it! 

And of course the media is overplaying the riots lol that’s what they do. There were so many peaceful protests all across the country but they kept showing people getting pulled from their vehicles, cops being dicks and having shit flung at them. It was such a small % of the protesting but that’s what it all became about. Do I think the riots were serious? Of course. Do I think the media fed the fire and spread fear? Of course. 
 

You ever notice when something comes up now a days, be it covid or these protests, that it’s THE WORLD IS ENDING! And then some time passes and all is good. That’s because of the media—they do that on purpose so people will start watching the news again. In a few weeks, this will all blow over and we’ll look back and say wow that was blown way out of proportion. (Just like we probably will with covid)

posted by SportsAndLady

Maybe “it will never happen to me” was poorly worded on my part—but I made my comment because I live in a heavily guarded high rise on the 30th floor.

:)

Otrap—you really gotta stop with the multi quote lol makes it hard for me to quote what you responded to me. In regards to your response to my quote:

That’s extremely unfair to make the argument of will I ever need someone with a gun. Especially if it’s the police. Of course I’ll Maybe need an armed police officer one day. Hell I had two gang members break into my house in 2014 and steal all our electronics. Thankfully my door was locked but my two roommates doors were not locked and they woke up to dudes standing by their beds. My roommates complied and gave them what they asked for and they left. We called cops, they said there were multiple break ins similar to this so they concluded gang initiation of “whoever can bring back the most electronics gets in” type thing. Cops showed up right away and we were glad they did. I’m NOT anti-gun. I’m just saying I don’t think I’ll ever own a gun because I can’t see a reason why I’d need one in a high rise. If I ever move, maybe that’ll change. But even then, I don’t think I’d have the ability to shoot someone. 

posted by justincredible

:)

Lol. 
 

I got a good deal on it. One of my clients sold it to me for practically nothing because he has “fuck you money”. I’m not a baller

posted by Laley23

 

posted by justincredible

Indeed. Regulated in that time did not mean the govt got to tell you what you could or couldn't own. Private citizens owned warships when the 2A was written.

I want it to be regulated by a private citizen, appointed by the “militia”. Not the government. Regulating themselves, so to speak. Not to make it sound like a club...but like a club lol.

 

lol gotcha.  I misread your post then.  I can't and will never get behind anyone other than myself regulating my own property, but this is much better than the Government regulating it.  I am with Justin, I am currently a militia of 1, but it can turn into a larger militia is needed (note: pretend I am not in Italy right now lol). 

posted by SportsAndLady

Maybe “it will never happen to me” was poorly worded on my part—but I made my comment because I live in a heavily guarded high rise on the 30th floor. I am extremely confident that no one is going to even get to my door, let alone get in the door. I mean look at the videos of magnificent mile on Saturday, if I was in any danger, that would have been it! 

And of course the media is overplaying the riots lol that’s what they do. There were so many peaceful protests all across the country but they kept showing people getting pulled from their vehicles, cops being dicks and having shit flung at them. It was such a small % of the protesting but that’s what it all became about. Do I think the riots were serious? Of course. Do I think the media fed the fire and spread fear? Of course. 
 

You ever notice when something comes up now a days, be it covid or these protests, that it’s THE WORLD IS ENDING! And then some time passes and all is good. That’s because of the media—they do that on purpose so people will start watching the news again. In a few weeks, this will all blow over and we’ll look back and say wow that was blown way out of proportion. (Just like we probably will with covid)

Not everyone has the luxury of your position though.  For instance DC there aren't many high rise apartments.  Whether you are extremely rich, average, or poor, most people are living in row houses.  The security isn't there for them outside of owning a gun.  Even before riots, I don't think I would ever bank on the cops protecting me 24/7.

I agree on the media though.  Both sides for the last 20+ years have been chipping away and dividing the country day by day.  They deserve a lot of credit for what is going on today.  I always say cable news and now social media is one of the worst additions to our country. 

posted by like_that

lol gotcha.  I misread your post then.  I can't and will never get behind anyone other than myself regulating my own property, but this is much better than the Government regulating it.  I am with Justin, I am currently a militia of 1, but it can turn into a larger militia is needed (note: pretend I am not in Italy right now lol). 

posted by SportsAndLady

Maybe “it will never happen to me” was poorly worded on my part—but I made my comment because I live in a heavily guarded high rise on the 30th floor. I am extremely confident that no one is going to even get to my door, let alone get in the door. I mean look at the videos of magnificent mile on Saturday, if I was in any danger, that would have been it! 

And of course the media is overplaying the riots lol that’s what they do. There were so many peaceful protests all across the country but they kept showing people getting pulled from their vehicles, cops being dicks and having shit flung at them. It was such a small % of the protesting but that’s what it all became about. Do I think the riots were serious? Of course. Do I think the media fed the fire and spread fear? Of course. 
 

You ever notice when something comes up now a days, be it covid or these protests, that it’s THE WORLD IS ENDING! And then some time passes and all is good. That’s because of the media—they do that on purpose so people will start watching the news again. In a few weeks, this will all blow over and we’ll look back and say wow that was blown way out of proportion. (Just like we probably will with covid)

Not everyone has the luxury of your position though.  For instance DC there aren't many high rise apartments.  Whether you are extremely rich, average, or poor, most people are living in row houses.  The security isn't there for them outside of owning a gun.  Even before riots, I don't think I would ever bank on the cops protecting me 24/7.

I agree on the media though.  Both sides for the last 20+ years have been chipping away and dividing the country day by day.  They deserve a lot of credit for what is going on today.  I always say cable news and now social media is one of the worst additions to our country. 

 

Yes, my comment isn’t for everyone. It’s just for me personally because someone asked if I’d ever need a gun to protect myself. Obviously other people need them and that’s perfectly fine I’m not against that at all. 

posted by SportsAndLady

Otrap—you really gotta stop with the multi quote lol makes it hard for me to quote what you responded to me. In regards to your response to my quote:

That’s extremely unfair to make the argument of will I ever need someone with a gun. Especially if it’s the police. Of course I’ll Maybe need an armed police officer one day. Hell I had two gang members break into my house in 2014 and steal all our electronics. Thankfully my door was locked but my two roommates doors were not locked and they woke up to dudes standing by their beds. My roommates complied and gave them what they asked for and they left. We called cops, they said there were multiple break ins similar to this so they concluded gang initiation of “whoever can bring back the most electronics gets in” type thing. Cops showed up right away and we were glad they did. I’m NOT anti-gun. I’m just saying I don’t think I’ll ever own a gun because I can’t see a reason why I’d need one in a high rise. If I ever move, maybe that’ll change. But even then, I don’t think I’d have the ability to shoot someone. 

LOL Noted.  I use the multi-quote feature mostly for expedience, since I'm not on all the time.  Helps me catch up.

I know you're not anti-gun.  I assure you I'm not accusing you of being anti-gun.

Suppose those robbers (burglars sounds wrong, since it involved a planned confrontation?) had killed your roommates after they got the stuff, so they couldn't be identified.  I can appreciate a good response time from the cops, but I daresay that, with the thieves already in the place, their response time probably isn't THAT good.

And what about when you're out of your place?  I can understand the security of a place like yours being robust enough for peace of mind, but I'd wager you're not an agoraphobic hermit.  I'm sure you go out.  Work, dinners, bars, coffee shops, etc. are probably more vulnerable than your home, not to speak of the transit to and from such places.

I'm not saying you should feel any true obligation to have one, but the confidence with which you said you'd (probably) never need one caught my attention.

I brought up the extension of need of people who have guns to mostly just illustrate that if you think you might ever need a person with a gun, it'd likely be faster to be that person with a gun.  As such, if time is ever an element, you might indeed find yourself in a position of needing a gun, whether or not you have one.

But the beauty of liberty is not just the freedom to exercise a right, but the freedom to refrain from exercising a right, so I assure you I'm not here to push you into changing your mind about whether or not to own one.  Do your thing.

posted by Laley23

Yeah, that’s my bad. I fully meant the automatic. No issues with the semi ones that reload automatically, but I think pulling a trigger should release a single bullet, not 20.

Same here with semi-auto's. Was more referring to auto's until I realized it would be near to impossible to get one unless you modified a semi.

Also agree on the "self regulating" when it comes to the government. Those a-holes are already up in our business enough. Pisses me off that we pay as much taxes as we do. Don't want anyone telling me what I can/can't own if it were to come to guns.

posted by Laley23

I’m not sure how you can say you are Pro-2A, and then say this isn’t the time to need a gun. 

I am pro the entire constitution/amendments, but lean more towards the actual language of 2A — someone actually regulating all the guns in your state/county that are owned. Yearly check-ups, etc.

Don’t need to take all the guns, but no need for an auto or semi-auto. I understand it wouldn’t happen overnight, but over time (a long time, like a generation) I think you could eliminate a majority of them from the country.

This is the worst I have ever seen our country. Granted I’m only 34, but it’s a really sad and scary time. I would own a shotgun/handgun if I could, but there is not much of a chance to stay married if I did lol. 

If you believe the original language of the 2A allows for someone to “regulate” with “years checkups” on our guns then I don’t think you have read it and/or the commentary around it’s wording by the founding fathers that wrote it. 
 

The “shall not be infringed” part comes to mind. 

posted by Laley23

As it stands, yes. But no rights are being infringed on if the law changes. People forget the first part of that amendment. That the right to bear arms, as written, coincides with a well regulated militia. My point is, I think we need to have that part of it be much more, well, regulated. 

No, read again the “well regulated militia” was given as an EXAMPLE” of why we can bear arms. It was not the only reason. It was just one reason given. 

posted by Laley23

Yeah, that’s my bad. I fully meant the automatic. No issues with the semi ones that reload automatically, but I think pulling a trigger should release a single bullet, not 20.

And no civilian gun that you can buy is automatic. No gun shoots 20 rounds with one pull of the trigger. All civilian guns (well, basically all but that is a whole story) are semi-auto. 1 pull equals 1 bullet. 

posted by jmog

No, read again the “well regulated militia” was given as an EXAMPLE” of why we can bear arms. It was not the only reason. It was just one reason given. 

More or less.  It was sort of set up as a foundational reason the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.  In effect, it'd be like saying, "Because a well-regulated militia is necessary for a free state, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed."

So you're right; it doesn't make the latter contingent on the former.  The former is why, in their view, it is necessarily a right they were going to protect explicitly in the Bill of Rights.

Frankly, though, even if you wanted to make the claim that a well-regulated militia was necessary for any right to bear arms, how does one form a well-regulated militia without arms?  Arms are, in effect, necessary for any such militia.  Otherwise, it's basically an outdoors club.

posted by jmog

And no civilian gun that you can buy is automatic. No gun shoots 20 rounds with one pull of the trigger. All civilian guns (well, basically all but that is a whole story) are semi-auto. 1 pull equals 1 bullet. 

I don't know if you've seen it, but they've tasked some firearms experts with speedy trigger fingers to see how close you could get to firing just as fast as a fully-automatic with a semi-auto.  With some practice (more than a little bit, but you don't have to be the "fastest guns in the west, either), you can make the difference mostly negligible.

And frankly, the fact that we have to qualify that statement with "civilian guns" means that there's already regulation and infringement, but I get put into a "gun nut" category when I bring that up.

posted by O-Trap

LOL Noted.  I use the multi-quote feature mostly for expedience, since I'm not on all the time.  Helps me catch up.

I know you're not anti-gun.  I assure you I'm not accusing you of being anti-gun.

Suppose those robbers (burglars sounds wrong, since it involved a planned confrontation?) had killed your roommates after they got the stuff, so they couldn't be identified.  I can appreciate a good response time from the cops, but I daresay that, with the thieves already in the place, their response time probably isn't THAT good.

And what about when you're out of your place?  I can understand the security of a place like yours being robust enough for peace of mind, but I'd wager you're not an agoraphobic hermit.  I'm sure you go out.  Work, dinners, bars, coffee shops, etc. are probably more vulnerable than your home, not to speak of the transit to and from such places.

I'm not saying you should feel any true obligation to have one, but the confidence with which you said you'd (probably) never need one caught my attention.

I brought up the extension of need of people who have guns to mostly just illustrate that if you think you might ever need a person with a gun, it'd likely be faster to be that person with a gun.  As such, if time is ever an element, you might indeed find yourself in a position of needing a gun, whether or not you have one.

But the beauty of liberty is not just the freedom to exercise a right, but the freedom to refrain from exercising a right, so I assure you I'm not here to push you into changing your mind about whether or not to own one.  Do your thing.

 

My comment on the response time of the cops wasn’t to prove a point or anything, i don’t even know why I put it in there. Moreso just to say that we actually did get robbed in the middle of the night, no one had guns, but no one was hurt. And we had renters insurance so everything that was stolen was paid back to us (+ a few electronics that we probably didn’t have stolen..lol). 
Obviousky that could have gone way different (could have been murdered) but I’d argue that If one of my roommates puller out a gun It would have made the situation worse. Thankfully we’ll never have to know if that statement is true or not, but overall we learned a valuable lesson (don’t get too drunk and forget to close the windows when you live on the ground floor) and no one was hurt. 
 

and going out of my apartment, I don’t worry about needing protection lol. If something happens, something happens. I’m a) not going to worry about it and b) certainly not going to carry a gun everywhere I go in case something does. 
 

I realize that not everyone feels the same way as me. I’m not saying my process is how others should go about their lives. But honestly there’s a 0% chance I’d ever carry a gun on me going around my own city or anywhere else. 

posted by jmog

If you believe the original language of the 2A allows for someone to “regulate” with “years checkups” on our guns then I don’t think you have read it and/or the commentary around it’s wording by the founding fathers that wrote it. 
 

The “shall not be infringed” part comes to mind. 

I clarified later, I don’t mean by the government. The government works for us, we should be controlling what they do, so I am absolutely against them regulating it with agendas etc. I do however think something needs to be done in some fashion, which is why I think having to be a member of the state/county/however you want to segregate it militia would be a good step. From there, appoint a member to “regulate”. Check up to make sure people are practicing safe standards, don’t have dementia, etc. 

posted by jmog

No, read again the “well regulated militia” was given as an EXAMPLE” of why we can bear arms. It was not the only reason. It was just one reason given. 

I do not read it that way, and unfortunately the Constitution and BOR has many ambiguous phrases/sentences. So, I certainly see where you do read it that way. I’m more the way O-Trap read it. A well regulated militia being the first portion, leading into the free state being necessary says to me the reason to bear arms is to keep the state free, via a militia. I think it would’ve been written with a well regulated militia later on in the amendment had it been more of an example vs the primary reason.

But again, not gonna quibble there. Certainly understand the opposite way of looking at it.

posted by jmog

And no civilian gun that you can buy is automatic. No gun shoots 20 rounds with one pull of the trigger. All civilian guns (well, basically all but that is a whole story) are semi-auto. 1 pull equals 1 bullet. 

Yeah, I’m aware of that and the strict regulations. This is where I think the government needs to step in regarding the importing and distribution of illegal arms. You can’t catch them all, but more resources and stricter laws would be a solid start. Maybe stop trying to win the war on drugs in year 55 and start cracking down on this? Literally just spitballing, but something more drastic than what has been going on needs to happen to get those off the street.

Also Justin/Like That, forgot your quote your posts: but regarding militia of one. I really don’t think my idea is that great (lol), I just would like to see a way where we can start to regulate stuff and make sure just because you once owned a gun you should still own it. I don’t want the government to be the ones, so my theory is more a club type. I really don’t know if it would even come close to working, though. When you here of kids getting access to parents guns though, I could see where some kind of random check-up from your militia leaders to make sure you’re following safe practices, etc would be a way to curb that. Not gonna catch them all, obviously.

Also sorry for steering the thread this direction. We can get back on track. 

posted by Laley23

Also sorry for steering the thread this direction. We can get back on track. 

Well, well, well.

https://twitter.com/NTerryEllis/status/1267530485691035664

BREAKING: Independent autopsy finds that George Floyd's death "was homicide caused by asphyxia due to neck and back compression that led to a lack of blood flow to the brain."

posted by justincredible

Well, well, well.

https://twitter.com/NTerryEllis/status/1267530485691035664

Was this the 90s expert Michael Baden if I remember his name right? From HBO?

posted by justincredible

Well, well, well.

https://twitter.com/NTerryEllis/status/1267530485691035664

Lol so MN has lied about almost everything. This should be cut and dry case now.

posted by iclfan2

Lol so MN has lied about almost everything. This should be cut and dry case now.

They were trying to limit their liability in a lawsuit. Was pretty obvious to see that. Anyone who watched the video knew that was a homicide. 

posted by iclfan2

Lol so MN has lied about almost everything. This should be cut and dry case now.

I don't know if it's quite that clear cut.  This "independent" examination was requested by his family.  Now it was conducted by a former NY medical examiner, but one who also happens to have performed "independent" autopsies on Eric Garner and Michael Brown.

So let's see how the trial goes with cross-examination of both sides medical experts, because I wouldn't say either side had a truly unbiased opinion.  Just saying expert "opinions" are usually chosen with a pretty good idea of where that opinion is going to land.

IMO, there may have been contributing factors.  But as JMOG was saying before that it is a choke move, then the contributing factors could be irrelevant if the move was applied far beyond a lethal period of time.  If it had been only 60 seconds, then you might have a plausible defense that the death was because of other factors.  It doesn't mean MN is lying, just that they've put forth in invalid excuse