March for our lives is flawed.

it is your lord and savior, thee famous nhjed. i basically am an adminstrator at this point, ive been on this server longer than youve been alive.

i've joined meepcraft when i was 12, and now im nearing 17. crazy how time flies man. this server has taken up 1/4 of my life.

its been a long road for us all, meepcraft has had 6 long years of ups, downs, corrupt ownership, etc. logging on is like poking a dead horse

i doubt this will even get views honestly

tries to find a point so i could actually get this thread going

what is your opinion on march for our lives.

quite personally, i believe it's flawed. we need to take in account opposing viewpoints, and stop glorifying that guns kill people without fact checking it. the best option is not on one side or the other, the best option is somewhere in between.

 

here's the problem with removing guns from Americans:
1 - anyone intending to do harm will still have a weapon. Banning guns just means we can't defend ourselves. Imagine a country where nobody, even our police, have guns. Anyone with half a brain and a couple thousand dollars could grab a gun and go on a mass killing spree.
2 - the American Population (by gun count) would be the largest army in the world. Obviously, some people would willingly give up their guns, but MANY won't. I'm not saying there'd be a mass rebellion, but it does create a dangerous situation for police.
3 - it isn't necessary. We don't have that many school shootings, maybe one every couple months. School shooters rarely even kill large amounts of civilians, usually less than 20. Our population is rising; we're going to have a few people who go off the edge. But should we ALL have to be defenseless because a couple schizo's went dangerous?

I truly believe there will always be "bad guys". Making a bomb and surrounding it in pointy metal bits will still be possible. There will ALWAYS be a way for someone to hurt groups of people. What's foolish is wasting money on arguing over gun control, when it could be used for other things (maybe even schizophrenia research)

 

I personally think it should be handled like this:

-First step is to make buying guns reasonably controlled. I believe people should be able to own guns and sell them to others, but more restrictions should be added.

-Second step is to make it nearly impossible for the mentally ill to get guns. Also, there is currently a law in most states (if not all) that children above the age of 14 cannot have a psychological evaluation without their consent (or a court order), which is pretty ridiculous. I think there should be a certain amount of psychological evaluations that a parent could have their child take. After a few, they would have to have their child’s consent or a court order. Perhaps a psychological evaluation would be a requirement for public school. Many shooters, prime example being Nikolas Cruz, could have easily been at under monitoring if he had had a psychological evaluation.
-Third step is that there should be some sort of system that anyone selling a gun would have to use, or else they may be charged if they sell a mentally ill person a gun. This would include Id checks, but some other sort of verification system would be necessary, like a Gun ID or something. The charges that would come with arming a shooter would cause people to be more careful who they sell to.

Personally I think these problems should be dealt with first and foremost.

 

I personally believe there should be a basic competency test as well

 

Why wasn’t there marches after the 9 school shootings during the Obama presidency

 

wow just reading the first sentence made me hate u

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 31, 2018, Original Post Date: Mar 31, 2018 ---

they should be marching for whatever they believe in...?

 

I don’t understand the politicians that think guns should be fully removed from shelves. It doesn’t make any sense, meth isn’t on the shelf but people still obtain it? How would that be any different for guns? And I saw on twitter than some highschool is making student wear clear plastic backpacks. I was in the car with my dad and I told him that and we instantly came up with an idea for how a kid could sneak in a gun, carve out a book, put it in a folder? Gun laws can be altered but those alterations won’t stop someone from getting a gun and shooting people if they really wanted to. And I think all the kids walking out of schools protesting about the school shootings are stupid as well. They need to stay in the school and actually learn something. If you notice everyone wants to blame the NRA for gun violence which is stupid. The NRA teaches about gun safety and doesn’t support violence on others with guns.

 

this thread is centrism at its best tbh

I clicked on this thread because i thought you might actually mention the two flaws it does have, recognized even by those who generally support the movement. Those flaws are that:

1) disarming a population but not its police leaves the population vulnerable to their corruption and violence (disproportionally POC)
2) the calling for mental health databases to be accessible demonizes mentally ill people, endangers them, and disregards their right to privacy.

the movement is led by kids even younger than me, so it's not going to be perfect, but its general message of banning military-grade weapons is very popular among voters (do i even need to cite this), so if nothing else I hope it can atleast accomplish that. Their point about how politicians receiving money from the NRA have been bought out is simply facts y'all, I'd like to remind you that the NRA has banned even the research of how gun violence effects america. We can't even have this argument on equal footing due to missing those stats, instead everyone has been lead to believe there wont be any worth note.

The roasting of Marco Rubio that they did? Simply amazing, though he just got voted in last year so we have to suffer with him for another 3. Their message of voting out those who receive NRA bloodmoney is definitely taking traction, but will be fruitless in the face of current gerrymandering.

it's exhausting to read all of your comments, it's like I've stumbled onto foxnews

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 31, 2018, Original Post Date: Mar 31, 2018 ---

japan

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 31, 2018 ---

wow? wow. we have more school shootings than any other country, that's not an issue to you ? at all? and need i remind you NONE of the school shooters were actually mentally ill, they were white guys with a bunch of entitlement. stop using this conversation to demonize the mentally ill, they aren't the violent ones here. Also really? overpopulation? you getting all social Darwinism on us?

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 31, 2018 ---

AGAIN. the violent ones ARE NOT the mentally ill. A much more suitable step would be to prevent anyone with a history of domestic abuse from having or buying a gun, which is a much more common thread among shooters. GOD you guys stop at nothing to demonize mentally ill people

 

whats wrong with some good old natural selection?

 

Look how they turned out

People have killed each other forever. Since it's in a high school means we have to care more?

Where did I mention overpopulation?

We aren't demonizing mentally ill people, but we should make efforts to help them, NOT to make a useless defenseless population.

What's wrong with Fox News? Jesus, next are you going to make a pro-choice pro-communism thread?

 

This is a relatively new talking point so Im curious about where it originates originated from: do you have any sort of credible data or analysis to show some sort of white entitlement leads to school shootings?
(Edit: I did some research and the best proof I could find to support this was the disproportionate amount of mass shooters who are white men - from where do you infern these white men are killing because of how they are entitled?)

I'd like to point out that terms like "military grade" can be misleading. If you mean weapons with the same technical capabilities as military weapons I would point to the uncontroversial fact that class 3 weapons (weapons with automatic capability) are used in an insignificant amount of crime due to them starting at around 10,000$ and requiring a liscensing process at the expense of the liscensee.

You can't in good faith be suggesting that the NRA is just some sort of rifle club. It has a PAC funded by individual donations. I can't find a link but cnnmoney and bloomberg both did an analysis of the NRA's tax filings so you can see where their money comes from and where it goes.
(Edit: I found the cnnmoney article: The money powering the NRA)

 

You missed my point

 

haha nice try google and/or facebook employee you're just trying to find out what my political party is to give me more advertisements!!!

edit 1 second later: this is the dumbest thing i have ever said online

 

Their marching will do nothing, waste of time.

 

Did you guys hear that Al Sharpton’s (the Al Sharpton) brother was at an anti gun march, then after the march he drove his friend to his friends ex’s house so he could shoot her in the head? Was in my state; he’s being charged with either murder or assisting in murder.
Kinda ironic huh.

 

Take a shot every time you see a straw man fallacy or unnecessarily aggressive attitude.

 

Mass suicide: 14 dead after dangerous online drinking game, worldwide panic as minecraft cult claims lives in the US, UK, and Australia