Page 1 of 2
#3
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin

This sums up how I see the volume (in both senses) of pro-2nd amendment groups/individuals.
#4
Quote by danielh123.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin

This sums up how I see the volume (in both senses) of pro-2nd amendment groups/individuals.


I don't care. The political ramifications are interesting, but yet another gun control thread is not.

Quote by EyeNon15
Seems pretty logical to me
No way that could go badly


It could. It probably won't/wouldn't.

Do you think this affects the political positions and standing of those stumping for President?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#8
Quote by Arby911
I don't care. The political ramifications are interesting, but yet another gun control thread is not.


It could. It probably won't/wouldn't.

Do you think this affects the political positions and standing of those stumping for President?


This.

And as an outsider looking in on the American political sphere I can't really tell anymore what is happening policy or position wise.

Just didn't want to see a gun thread with people commenting on things they know nothing about.
the wicked flee when no man pursueth but the righteous are as bold as a lion
#10
Quote by Fat Lard
It really depends on the petition author's true intent.


I don't think it does. The signatures exist, independent of the author's intent.

How should the GOP folks respond?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#11
Quote by Arby911
I don't think it does. The signatures exist, independent of the author's intent.

How should the GOP folks respond?

Sentry guns.
#12
Quote by slapsymcdougal
Sentry guns.


TBF there will be armed security in any case, so that's nothing new. Without seeing the room and diagrams I can't say where the overwatch will be, but it will be there. I don't think the candidates can claim that's good enough that allowing carry isn't necessary and come out looking like anything but hypocrites.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Last edited by Arby911 at Mar 28, 2016,
#14
Quote by Rossenrot
The Secret Service will be there. There will be no guns allowed. Petition is stupid.


But how do the candidates say that without looking like assholes?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#15
Quote by Arby911
TBF there will be armed security in any case, so that's nothing new. Without seeing the room and diagrams I can't say where the overwatch will be, but it will be there. I don't think the candidates can claim that's good enough that allowing carry isn't necessary and come out looking like anything but hypocrites.

Yea, but sentry guns are cool, and as long as I'm safe from them, I advocate their use at all times.
#16
Quote by Arby911
TBF there will be armed security in any case, so that's nothing new. Without seeing the room and diagrams I can't say where the overwatch will be, but it will be there.


Yes. And it will be a massive headache for those tasked to provide it. Can't really see this going through but
the wicked flee when no man pursueth but the righteous are as bold as a lion
#17
Quote by slapsymcdougal
Yea, but sentry guns are cool, and as long as I'm safe from them, I advocate their use at all times.


the wicked flee when no man pursueth but the righteous are as bold as a lion
#18
Quote by Arby911
I don't think it does. The signatures exist, independent of the author's intent.

How should the GOP folks respond?


However they should respond, it shouldn't be an acceptance if and only if they're pressured into it. The need to demonstrate their integrity on their positions depends I guess.


Like, if you were a pro-surveillance/etc politician, would you want everyone reading your emails? oh damn, wait
.
#19
Quote by robbmgdt
Yes. And it will be a massive headache for those tasked to provide it. Can't really see this going through but


It's a hard spot for some because if you honestly believe that law-abiding citizens should have the right to carry (as I do, and the candidates claim they do) then why would this be different?

Even if one nutjob got in and wanted to shoot up the place, it's reasonably likely he/she/it would have gotten in anyway. As you are well aware, security at a public venue like that is problematic at best.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#20
Quote by Arby911
It's a hard spot for some because if you honestly believe that law-abiding citizens should have the right to carry (as I do, and the candidates claim they do) then why would this be different?

Even if one nutjob got in and wanted to shoot up the place, it's reasonably likely he/she/it would have gotten in anyway. As you are well aware, security at a public venue like that is problematic at best.

TBH, I think the big issue is that when you have a buttload of armed people crammed together, and one of them shoots, what happens with all the others?

There's a risk it'll basically be this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BACQc9f6pGs
#21
Quote by Arby911
It's a hard spot for some because if you honestly believe that law-abiding citizens should have the right to carry (as I do, and the candidates claim they do) then why would this be different?

Even if one nutjob got in and wanted to shoot up the place, it's reasonably likely he/she/it would have gotten in anyway. As you are well aware, security at a public venue like that is problematic at best.


Agree with all. Its harder to stop one individual. As we've all seen many times. And yes problematic for sure, but at least contained (while that can be problematic as well). Tough call either way.
the wicked flee when no man pursueth but the righteous are as bold as a lion
#22
Quote by slapsymcdougal
TBH, I think the big issue is that when you have a buttload of armed people crammed together, and one of them shoots, what happens with all the others?

There's a risk it'll basically be this:



I know the argument. I don't find it entirely convincing. I've been in venues many times where everyone or nearly everyone was armed and thus far every one has finished without serious incident. (Not that my anecdotal evidence means fuck-all in the grand scheme of things.)

I will say that many gun shows in the US prohibit loaded firearms on the rationale that it's not the lawful firearms aficionado that's likely to cause a problem, it's the hoplophobe that wants to create a cause. That may be a rational justification here but I don't know if it would assuage the base.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Last edited by Arby911 at Mar 28, 2016,
#23
Quote by Arby911
I know the argument. I don't find it entirely convincing. I've been in venues many times where everyone or nearly everyone was armed and thus far every one has finished without serious incident. (Not that my anecdotal evidence means fuck-all in the grand scheme of things.)

TBH, I doubt it'll happen(for at least 3 or 4 reasons, probably more if I actually think about it) too.

But the video is cool, though.
#24
Quote by slapsymcdougal
TBH, I doubt it'll happen(for at least 3 or 4 reasons, probably more if I actually think about it) too.



I'm inclined to agree, but how will the issue affect the candidates?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#26
If Trump wins he'll probably have to devise an Iron Man suit just to fend off the various assassination attempts

even Sanders is less viable a target than Trump imo

outside of the little corner of the political spectrum that Trump's supporters inhabit he seems to be almost universally hated.
Quote by EndTheRapture51
who pays five hundred fucking dollars for a burger
#27
Actually, the reason Trump has gained so much support is because he's drawing in people from across the spectrum. So you could say he's acrually universally loved.
Quote by Overlord
It's not hard to be nice, but it's nice to be hard
#28
I really really doubt that right-libertarians, classical liberals, left-authoritarians, commies and social democrats would support him - by nature, if they do, they are not those things. His politics are modern neoliberal/corporatist with a few dashes of nationalist beliefs thrown in - if people follow him based on rhetoric, they simply are not from areas of the spectrum that would oppose him.

In terms of pure ideology, he can only really draw from one corner of the grid, so to speak. People further afield, weren't. If they're only sold on the anti-establishment stuff...
Quote by EndTheRapture51
who pays five hundred fucking dollars for a burger
Last edited by Banjocal at Mar 28, 2016,
#29
While Trump is a little hard to stomach - ok, so he's very hard to stomach - he has raised the awareness of the people about their thieving government. What's doubly sad is the machine trots out a woman who has supported a serial philanderer for personal and political gain, and is a hypocritical Wall Street puppet, as the other candidate. Good thing for the Republicans she is gong to be placed as the winner - business as usual.
#32
Quote by Banjocal
I really really doubt that right-libertarians, classical liberals, left-authoritarians, commies and social democrats would support him - by nature, if they do, they are not those things. His politics are modern neoliberal/corporatist with a few dashes of nationalist beliefs thrown in - if people follow him based on rhetoric, they simply are not from areas of the spectrum that would oppose him.

In terms of pure ideology, he can only really draw from one corner of the grid, so to speak. People further afield, weren't. If they're only sold on the anti-establishment stuff...


Well many of these factions of voters share similar goals, so they coalesce behind trump to achieve that goal (or because they think he will achieve that goal). Also, people don't always vote according to their ideology, they probably vote according to character a lot of the time. But most importantly, yes, this is what being universally loved entails. For ex, he's drawing in Democrats, so yes, they would no longer be voting Democrat. For reasons, I just mentioned a few.
Quote by Overlord
It's not hard to be nice, but it's nice to be hard
#33
Quote by Arby911
So it may be a hoax/troll/ruse, but does that matter?

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article68642767.html

Is the best option for the candidates to simply pretend it doesn't exist?

When I first saw it, I was 95% sure it was a masterful troll. The amazing part is you know that a significant portion of the signatures are sincere.

And yes, there's no other option than for the candidates to pretend it doesn't exist. There's no response that makes them look good.
#34
I honestly bet nothing of interest would happen if they allowed it.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#35
I don't know, the image of politicians openly touting holstered firearms as some sort of evidence of their second amendment support is pretty stupid. It's cheap. Like I can imagine stuff like this on the campaign trail, or someone who builds it into their image (open carry @ debates, a guy in a rancher outfit with a porcelain handle revolver using the campaign slogan "The Straight Shooter").


It would be so American, though. Not in the fist-pumping way, more like how a French person would go "ah, you Americains and your silly firearms" before condescendingly putting out their cigarette into their wine glass.
Last edited by ali.guitarkid7 at Mar 28, 2016,
#36
Quote by JustRooster
I honestly bet nothing of interest would happen if they allowed it.


If I was in charge of security my primary concern wouldn't be the supporters, it would be the one outsider (or more likely, small group) that wanted to make a point.

The tone of the Trump campaign and some of his supporters would give me pause though, TBH. Approving of violence in the process, no matter how tacitly and at arms-length it's done, ratchets up the concern significantly.

If it's a contested convention it's a powder keg in a room full of matches anyway, guns or no guns...
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#37
downside: Probable increased chance of folks getting harmed.
upside: GOP now literally shooting self in foot.
#38
I feel like if someone tries something everyone else will immediately try to help stop it

like that guy in the Darwin Awards many years ago that decided he'd try to rob a gun store which had a police car out the front with two armed officers, an officer inside the store, four armed customers and the armed clerk.
He didn't even draw his weapon fully IIRC
A poem.
Quote by yoman297
no girl, movember isnt for you. shave your stache pls

I can out-bore you any day
#39
Quote by Pastafarian96
I feel like if someone tries something everyone else will immediately try to help stop it

like that guy in the Darwin Awards many years ago that decided he'd try to rob a gun store which had a police car out the front with two armed officers, an officer inside the store, four armed customers and the armed clerk.
He didn't even draw his weapon fully IIRC


That is one possible outcome, and perhaps the second best one. (The best being that no incidents take place.)

But it's far from a given.

Quote by Aeolian Harmony
upside: GOP now literally shooting self in foot.


I legit LOL'd!
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#40
Quote by Arby911


I legit LOL'd!


Day made, 10/10, would make crazy old man on internet laugh again
Page 1 of 2