Since everyone wants to talk about taking away gun rights again...
🇳🇱
@freemo@qoto.org
@pthenq1 No, what the hell are you talking about... automatic weapons have been illegal since the 70s.
@freemo They said nothing about "taking away gun rights again". But if you are going to twist what they said, why could I not twist what you said? 👀
@pthenq1 yes they did, they are talking about banning certain types of guns, therefore taking away our right to access to those guns.
@freemo okay. I support the right of get weapons.
Still, nobody can get always the guns they want. Today, for example, I would like portable small atomic bombs. You know, the ones handy to blow up 1 or 2 blocks.
They do not let us put our hands on that... and other weapons.
@pthenq1 Its even illegal for nations to have nuclear weapons, even the ones that have it arent allowed to as they were required to disarm ages ago and didnt... so no, bad example buddy.
@freemo same story. When/If they declare some weapon illegal and you have it, you will have to surrender it.
Other than that, perhaps someone wants a semiautomatic to defend himself from bears.
I want a nuclear mini-nuke to combat field mices. We are all tuned against dangerous environments... 
@pthenq1 Nope, not how it works in america. Automatic weapons were made illegal in the 70's but since they were legally bought they can only block you from buying new ones, cant take back what you already have.. thats why everyone who owned automatic weapons before the ban in the 70's now still legally has them. You can even buy automatic weapons but only ones that were in circulation before the ban. So they cost HUGE amounts of money and illegal to buy new but legal to sell the old ones.
In short, if they become illegal my 5,000$ AR-15 will be worth 50,000$ .. and I cant buy anymore but can sell or keep what I have.. So if anything **more** of an incentive to buy them.
@freemo I was thinking in get one. They are fun.
@pthenq1 you should, its a wonderful sport, lots of fun, and no reason not to really.
@pthenq1 Also an AR-15 and pretty much any other semi-automatic would be useless against bears. You'd use a slugged shotgun for that or some other single-shot style weapon most likely.
@freemo or you just leave them alone ;)
@pthenq1 kill them with lonliness, I like your style :)
Yup, they can only prevent people buying new ones, or the making of new ones... freedom baby!
> as is necessary for a well regulated militia
they really desperately want to interpret this as a loophole to inject all their gun grabs
> the right to keep and bear arms
> shall not be infringed
they have a hard time understanding how not infringing works.
and this is an enumerated right, meaning the tenth amendment cannot even give states the privilege to gun control you.
they only do it because SCOTUS is literally worthless and won't hear cases. which basically is itself a violation of your right to due process. which they can also just refuse to hear cases on.
remind me why we haven't spaced them
If they actually played by the rules they would just make a new amendment, legal, no problem.. oh wait.. they cant get the votes! So instead they try to erode it in other ways.
@freemo No. They cannot. It is just about banning weapons on mentally impaired people..
@icedquinn should be enumerated. Almost all the massive shootings were done by those 2 types of personalities (psychopaths and psychotics). Those mind conditions can be easily diagnosed.
you just ignored all the concerns raised and reiterated your point... so your basically telling people that if they are found to have a condition they loose rights and thus are punished for seeking medical treatment if they feel they have a mental disorder... worst suggestion ive ever heard.
@freemo No Freemo. You do not get psychopathy or Psychotic: you are born like that. Or your are not (and you are called neurotic) and you can go to the mental institution and all good.
those conditions describe how is mechanically your brain wired. It does not change with medical treatment.
@icedquinn
@mystik like the last one in Boulder? Or the one in Boston? @icedquinn @freemo
@mystik @icedquinn @freemo @pthenq1 WTF ever did happen at Sandy Hook? I remember Alex Jones going batshit about people circling around the building in a loop or something? I don’t remember much about the outcome of the investigations. (I should have looked at wikipedia maybe before asking)
@icedquinn They can be triggered for anything. That is why they should not be able to access to them. @freemo
@icedquinn The one that destroyed mental institutions was Reagan. Long time ago. @freemo
There are two things you can mean by that.. banning it for people who were commited against their will by commiting a crime, those people are already banned from having guns..
Or your suggesting the right to bare arms should be revoked for anyone who voluntarily chooses to go to a psychiatrist and has been treated?
The second one is the only one where they can currently get tguns.. but it makes no sense. There is no public registry where people who seek psychiatric treatment on their own get registered and publicly can be "pinged" in a check... so your suggesting something quite obscene, that if I decide to call a psychiatrist and seek help then I will get on a public registry where gun shops can look me up, and my rights become revoked...
For one having a public registry where people are punished for seeking mental health is beyond a horrible idea, doubly so if the consequence is to loose your fundemental rights.
Do you really think anyone who is struggling with a mental disorder who feels they need to see a psychiatrist is going to do it if the law states that should they go to get treated they forfit a basic right for the rest of their life?
God what a horrible idea.
@icedquinn no. Only for psychotics and psychopaths
Normal people (neurotics) looking for mental help are OK with weapons. We have the brain correctly wired (and perhaps we are fuck up because family or life history). The other 2 groups have broken brains basically.
@freemo
So a psychotic o psychopath who wants to get help.. only they will be forced not to get help?
And schizophrenics who hallucinate people that arent there, them your cool having guns?
@freemo schizophrenics have are a type of psychotic. All of them share the same problem: They do not have a real perception of reality. Except (perhaps) with pills.
Neurotics have a good check of reality. And that never changes. Even when someone get LCD and "see things" they know it is because the LCD. And they will be OK after the effect is gone.
Normal people (neurotics)'s rights will be OK. With or without treatment.
I know what they are but you havent addressed the problem.. You are suggesting a system where my friend who was schizofrenic should have continued to hide his condition and avoid a psychiatrist to retain his rights, something he did successfully for years, making him far more of a risk than a medicated person with their rights in tacts and condition treated.
@freemo @icedquinn No. Those conditions can be managed. But they cannot be fixed.
A psychopath have not moral boundaries. That is because they are incapable to feel remorse. There is not fix for that. They live in society by imitating neurotics (us), so they are no necessarily criminals.. But they do not feel remorse or moral boundaries. No treatment possible.
Example: Charles Manson.
Psychotic is a condition where the brain cannot process information correctly. It cannot be cured. Just treated. But if the pills stop being effective... of they forget to eat it or they run out of those pills...
Example are the people hearing voices or having hallucinations.
The first group will only have weapons to carry their will and attack people as part of some plan. The second group cannot process information and could use weapons following instructions given by god, the voices, etc.
Those 2 groups of people cannot be fixed and they should not have access to weapons.
You still havent addressed the fundamental concern.. you are proposing a situation where if a person goes to a therapist to get treatment they automatically forfeit part of their rights, for life.. so you are effectively discouraging people from going to psychiatrists. Sounds like a pretty shitty solution that will cause way more harm than good.
@freemo NO. A person going to the therapist is a neurotic. Please check the definitions of neurotic, psychopath and psychotic. Normal people going to therapy are neurotic.
Psychopath and psychotic are born in that way. And stay in the same way until that person die.
Nobody can transit from one condition to the other.
Psychopaths are also neurotic.. he is using the terminology wrong. Psychopaths do not expiernce delusion or hallucination and therefore would be a neurotic.
@freemo @icedquinn We are all neurotic. That is the "normal thing".
No you are using the terms absolutely wrong, a neurotic person is one with a mental disorder, but where the mental disorder does not include delusion or hallucination... Normal people who have no mental disorders are not neurotic.
@freemo No. They want to take away automatic weapons from people with mental issues.
People like you and me will be happy owners of the needed rocket launchers for personal defense against bears.