There is no excusing going into another person's property and pulling a gun on him. You have the right to be offended, however.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
3 arrested for trashing Trump supporters sign, pulling gun on him
- Thread starter BennyBlanco
- Start date
- Status
There is no excusing going into another person's property and pulling a gun on him. You have the right to be offended, however.
Leithkorias
Member
Seriously. If I were a Mexican I don't think I'd be wanting to do anything that might prove trump right in anybody's eyes.
When someone is the victim of a crime, victim blaming is the process of making observations or commentary about behavior of the victim (in this case presenting a political sign) that is possibly exculpatory for the perpetrator.
Phrases like "is [the victim] at all...I dunno, surprised that..." and "To be fair..." are hints that someone is doing this. It doesn't mean that the phrase "[the victim] asked for [it]," must be used; though that is obviously a more direct line of blaming the victim.
If you've spent enough time in other threads about crime, you probably recognize that this is true. It is possible that the victim's membership in a group that you do not approve of has obscured it for you.
I'm sure you recognize that observing an "offensive sign" is no excuse for violent intimidation, so why bring it up?
You can't ban crazy people with malicious intent though. Guns are just one weapon they can use.
You think that gun was legally obtained, that's cute.
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
I totally blame the victim for intending to vote for a giant bigot, I also made the consequence of it clear. Which would be me moving away if I lived there, that's hardly condoning threats, nor violence.
Jesus, if somebody is willing to cause harm to others coz they took away their favourite toy then something has to be said about their mental condition, in which case they probably shouldn't even be owning a gun in the first place. Are guns too ingrained into American culture the citizens NEED to have them?
I would in a heartbeat voluntarily hand over my firearm if a new law passed. It's not like they would be taking away a necessity like water, it's a freaken weapon.
Also does anyone honestly believe the U.S government would turn to tyrants? This isn't the 1800's, nor are they N.Korea. This is the 21st century.
You don't. It's too ingrained into America that it'll take the lives of gun owners who resist. It will be necessary.
buttery fistful
Member
it will also never happen
Demoskinos
Member
Except that is an antiquated idea. If the government is coming after you and wants you dead you're a dead man walking.
Absolutely disgusting.
I'm glad we here in the states can own guns. Our government doing shit like shitting a bunch of unmarked/untraceable guns into the winds of mexico has nothing to do with legal upstanding people deciding "wow i want to buy a firearm for reasons"
Personally I don't like guns. I think they're lame. I think a good compromise would be background checks, training, and having a title for your gun like a car. If you want to give a gun as a gift? You have to get the title transferred. I'm not a huge fan of concealed/open carry, but to be honest the people who will blow my brains out for disliking them defacing my personal property and belittling my opinions arent *super* concerned with laws. If the neighbor didn't have a firearm, the guy from the story could have easily just been dead in the street with his sign.
"Oh but if we ban guns we'll stop school shootings" just like prohibition banned alcohol for real and the war on drugs was a good idea. There are far too many firearms out in the wild completely illegally. I think background check + training + a gun title is roughly as much responsibility as we expect for teens to drive giant metal death machines, it should be nbd for a cool adult to deal with that.
Buying a gun for cash at a convention is asinine. Why cant I do that with my car? or medical expenses? or a house?
lol so a bunch of people will die protecting their constitutional rights to bear arms against the tyrannical government that will, according to you, be totally cool gunning down people who aren't cool giving up our rights. Then criminals will just get more stabby, or still use guns. Because they dont follow the law.
Personally I don't like guns. I think they're lame. I think a good compromise would be background checks, training, and having a title for your gun like a car. If you want to give a gun as a gift? You have to get the title transferred. I'm not a huge fan of concealed/open carry, but to be honest the people who will blow my brains out for disliking them defacing my personal property and belittling my opinions arent *super* concerned with laws. If the neighbor didn't have a firearm, the guy from the story could have easily just been dead in the street with his sign.
"Oh but if we ban guns we'll stop school shootings" just like prohibition banned alcohol for real and the war on drugs was a good idea. There are far too many firearms out in the wild completely illegally. I think background check + training + a gun title is roughly as much responsibility as we expect for teens to drive giant metal death machines, it should be nbd for a cool adult to deal with that.
Buying a gun for cash at a convention is asinine. Why cant I do that with my car? or medical expenses? or a house?
lol so a bunch of people will die protecting their constitutional rights to bear arms against the tyrannical government that will, according to you, be totally cool gunning down people who aren't cool giving up our rights. Then criminals will just get more stabby, or still use guns. Because they dont follow the law.
So stop being brown, speaking Spanish, and being of Latin decent. Got it.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Fucking seriously.
Instead of talking about how this came to pass, this will be the story:
Leithkorias
Member
Subpar Scrub
Banned
Enjoy getting bombed to shit. This is the problem with Americans and the second amendment; if the government wants to be tyrannical, you're bringing a pistol to a drone fight.
This isn't the thread for that, lightning. If a classroom full of small children being blown apart by assault rifle fire won't change the minds of Americans, someone getting a pistol pulled on them definitely won't.
Best we can hope for is the government giving free Frozen and Cars themed ballistic vests to school children.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Aren't a lot of US police ex military? They don't seem to have a problem roughing up and killing Joe and Jane Q.
Soyongdori
Member
That's why NRA is trying to legalize rocket launchers.
It'd be a long term goal rather than short term. Shit is just going to break down or get lost and you'd have the numbers resembling normal.
But I think we mainly need a very narrow definition of the second amendment, as in you have the right to bear arms but it has to be a heavily restricted right for the sake of national safety. Just like free speech doesn't entitle you to yell fire in a crowded theater.
It amazes me how people think it's that simple or that the US military is some sort of autonomous entity. Good luck getting a meaningful amount of US military personnel (who are generally pro-gun) to murder the people they swore to protect.
Guns are not like cars. They're not complex machines. They last a very, very long time. I own several working guns that are over 100 years old, and many people own guns that are hundreds of years old. And the parts most likely to break are things like extractors, springs, and other small stuff that's super easy to fix. And considering how valuable guns would be after a ban would grandfather in existing guns (see prices for pre-1986 NFA machine guns), people would not just let their guns waste away.
Who's piloting the drone?
XT Vengeance
Member
I love how many of you skipped over that that is my interpretation of what the writers of said law meant. Of course it is antiquated, but do you really think that it is going to change? The American constitution was designed to be difficult to change so that said changes would be harder to abuse.
The guy who lost his family to a regular American Sunday gun massacre and is now lusting for revenge against the people who keep allowing it to happen to innocents all around the nation?
No you dont.
The majority didnt want guns banned in Aus. The PM said fuck you and banned em anyway.
A little while later everyone came around.
Yup, it was not exactly a popular decision but the politicians who did it and sacrificed their careers should be counted as heroes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pOiOhxujsE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYbY45rHj8w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVuspKSjfgA
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
This is a brash assessment of why people view the second amendment as important, and honestly seeing this constant view point parroted is rather annoying because it simply turns the conversation into an insult match.
You're not going to ban guns, period. Yes, the second amendment is an amendment and by definition can be changed, but the idea of literally wiping away one of the ten amendments in the Bill of Rights is not going to sit well with a lot of people, even people who don't own guns.
Especially when the act of completely removing one of the amendments of the BoR would be done under non-wartime conditions or some type of national event There have been events in American history where government had suspended Habeas corpus, which meant that the government could arrest protestors and other groups/acts that are viewed as disruptive or deemed dangerous to the cause of the war.
Some people have a deep mistrust with the Federal government. Personally I don't have that mistrust, but when you have an issue that has been so insanely polarized you're going to need to see subjects from opposing points of views in order to find proper solutions and compromises. There are plenty of people who wouldn't give up their guns, if I had a handgun that was legally obtained I don't think I would give it up if there was literally a complete gun ban enacted. I don't think you would see a civil war or insane blood shed, but I think you would see major protest and probably a huge increase in fringe right wing groups and militias, more so than the last eight years.
this
This is delusional though, and what every person that supports the second believes. First off, if it goes tyrannical, not everyone that owns a gun is going to side against the government, so let's get that out of the way now. So the people left have handguns and maybe some rifles vs a tyrannical government that controls airplanes, bombers, helicopters, tanks, missiles, drones and and any number of sophisticated technology made for killing. You're not going to bring down a tyrannical government with handguns and rifles. Also what world do these people live in where you have so little trust in your government you think at any moment it's going to go tyrannical. The paranoia is beyond measure in some people.
Lil'DigiOp
Member
Thats the problem though. America took a deep dive after 9/11 in a paranoia state. This is directly because of government propaganda and our 24/7 media cycle. America is a super paranoid, militarized, surveillance state. The question isn't will it bubble over, Its when will it bubble over?
Been on this road for a while now.
Shake Appeal
Member
Your username suggests you're from the UK. I would suggest not trying to understand America's gun culture. It will make your head hurt and your heart sad.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
Nobody(well I can't say that, but I would argue most people) says you're going to completely topple the US government in a head to head war against a civilian population.
Realistically, if there was some situation where a "revolution" I would imagine a large portion of the armed forces would split off from the Federal government and not turn on their own people (depending on the situation of course, if we're talking Civil War II with parts of the country seceding that's going to change things).
The situation would play out like any occupying force, sections of the population would revolt and you have a guerrilla war on your hands in your own homeland with portions of the military refusing orders and the heavily armed populations causing insane chaos in major metropolitan areas.
You wouldn't need to topple the government, you would just need to be a pain in the ass to the point where the economy crashes and it's not wroth it to wage war on your own people.
of course that's never going to happen, but the idea that a H2H war is the inherent outcome of a revolution is just wrong.
That lack of self awareness.
hemo memo
Gold Member
I think we are passed the the point of control to ban now because this is seriously getting out of hand.
How?
Until the NRA gets their next bit of legislation which forbids businesses from disallowing open and concealed carry.
iamBlkpleAsedoNt
Banned
The poster under you just advocated that bloodshed to take these guns are necessary, meanwhile we are on the verge of electing the greatest bigot in modern American history who wants to ban Muslims, build a wall next to Mexico, and thinks Japanese intern camps were a good idea!!!!!!
The only reason America needs guns is that it has to protest itself from itself. I'm not arguing that we actually need guns and would actually prefer a gun ban but not at the expense of what it would cost. Only when the populace comes to that decision willingly would I be comfortable with it. Is it just me or do some of people advocating gun bans sound like evil warmongering conservatives when they are ready to wipe out Americans citizens so readily.
tfur
Member
There are a few here that also want to ban free speech as well. It is important to note, that the "ban da gunz" people are a vocal minority.
As someone mentioned in another thread in the past, the few would be considered Authoritarian Progressives. They are not liberal at all.
Anyhow, the 2nd amendment is a principle that will not be changed. The same goes with the 1st amendment.
Also, the military and the NRA work closely together. Anyone I have ever done gun training with were current or retired military who are also NRA members.
it is also important to note that the "ban 'em" people are part of the problem in any form of gun legislation not being discussed. It is like the cry of a child ignorant of the law and history. It makes the discussion with them a non starter because of lack of understanding.
What we should be discussing is methods to help improve gun education. Idea like tax incentives for taking a certain number of courses per year(or whatever way to motivate and reward education). Somehow rewarding education to help prevent the outliers of accidents that should almost never happen. Education on safe storage and vaults etc. Education on conflict resolution.
The knee-jerk meme of "just ban em" does absolutely nothing to address the reason of why people think is is acceptable to kill another person. It scapegoats the real investigation that really needs to happen.
Do you actually believe that this is what all supporters of the second amendment believe?
NoblesseOblige
Banned
Steert.
God. Use spellcheck WRCBTV.
I can't believe the things people are willing to die for in the US
- grow up
- schooling
- family
- shot dead defending Trump sign
- grow up
- schooling
- shot dead walking around with buddies for being an asshole and pulling out someone's Trump sign
Your whole fucking life could have led up to either of those scenerios
- grow up
- schooling
- family
- shot dead defending Trump sign
- grow up
- schooling
- shot dead walking around with buddies for being an asshole and pulling out someone's Trump sign
Your whole fucking life could have led up to either of those scenerios
If I was hyperbolic (regarding everyone believing they need the second to stop a tyrannical government) that's one thing, saying that does not make me paranoid because I an not afraid of it, nor am I mistrusting of people. The fact that second amendment supporters by and large tout out the line about a well regulated militia to stand against tyranny as if that were even someone to worry about today is paranoia.
Too many Republicans do because do exactly because they think they government serves no function. It's why the Tea Party faction was in favor of the government shutdown.
We have a reactionary element in our country that will resort to spilling blood.
It does make sense why someone would even think of using lethal force. How would you feel with a looming threat of you or your relatives being forcefully removed from this country? How would you feel if you were special status as a legal citizen means very little when entire countries with backgrounds related to your own are branded as enemies of the state? How would you feel if the price for any job is to be under the crushing heel of a very unfair social order?
Some people who don't think through their options will resort to violence as the expedient answer.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
All of you are making the erroneous assumption that the military would comply with these orders and not turn against those who issue the orders. You're also mistakenly assuming that these people live in places that you could even bomb without massive collateral damage.
Yup. This would be an insane nightmare. People seem to think you would only be engaging dumb hicks in trailer parks. Wrong. You'd have both massive urban warfare and guerilla warfare in the hills. Even assuming the military was complicit, it wouldn't be as simple as bombing people. You don't even need a high intensity conflict to cause problems.
Fair enough. I guess I'm surrounded by more moderate gun supporters so that seems very outlandish.
I myself have owned several guns and only stopped because I moved into an apartment and no longer saw it as being practical in concerns of necessity (home defense/ feelings of personal safety/hobby). I am pro gun control, anti gun ban, and think the militia/ tyranny excuse is an unrealistic excuse on both sides of the argument.
It might be that those that use the militia excuse do so only to not talk about change and don't actually believe it, but they are much much more vocal than say people like you. From an outsiders perspective and even as many insiders can attest, it seems that rhetoric is more the norm rather than a vocal minority.
- Status