Serious Gun Control Question

[War Eagle!!!]

Just like his stance on how women who have abortions "should be punished", Trump is trying to imitate what he imagines a conservative position to be without understanding them.

http://nypost.com/2016/06/19/nra-says-trumps-orlando-comments-defy-common-sense/

I gave a full "what the fuck are you talking about?" when I heard him say that someone should have had a gun in the bar. That's fucking stupid. Trump really needs to stop going out there and spouting off at the mouth. He called the mechanical bull a "horse" while in Texas. Really dude?

I think he says shit without thinking it through. I am sure his premise was for advocating gun rights, but come on man.

[AUChizad]

I gave a full "what the fuck are you talking about?" when I heard him say that someone should have had a gun in the bar. That's fucking stupid. Trump really needs to stop going out there and spouting off at the mouth. He called the mechanical bull a "horse" while in Texas. Really dude?

I think he says shit without thinking it through. I am sure his premise was for advocating gun rights, but come on man.

Because he doesn't think like you or other conservatives. He wants you to think he does. He's like a pod person trying to imitate the positions of his base.

[Snaggletiger]

I gave a full "what the fuck are you talking about?" when I heard him say that someone should have had a gun in the bar. That's fucking stupid. Trump really needs to stop going out there and spouting off at the mouth. He called the mechanical bull a "horse" while in Texas. Really dude?

I think he says shit without thinking it through. I am sure his premise was for advocating gun rights, but come on man.

This right here is what I've been saying all along.  He apparently has no one in his ear, or at least no one that he will listen to, prepping him for what to say before he spouts off.  The Orlando massacre has obviously been at the forefront of all the news. People want to know what Trump and Hilary and Obama have to say about it. What we get from Trump is, "Give those sissies a piece and let em' blow the sumbitch away".  Woo Hoo!!!

[AUChizad]

This right here is what I've been saying all along.  He apparently has no one in his ear, or at least no one that he will listen to, prepping him for what to say before he spouts off.  The Orlando massacre has obviously been at the forefront of all the news. People want to know what Trump and Hilary and Obama have to say about it. What we get from Trump is, "Give those sissies a piece and let em' blow the sumbitch away".  Woo Hoo!!!

Serious, sincere question.

Y'all are perfectly ok with that kind of thoughtless hair trigger being the leader of the free world? You can't possibly foresee any problems that might cause?

[Snaggletiger]

Serious, sincere question.

Y'all are perfectly ok with that kind of thoughtless hair trigger being the leader of the free world? You can't possibly foresee any problems that might cause?

My serious answer is the two remaining, viable candidates disgust me in just about every way. It's repulsive to me that I have to decide between these two and I honestly haven't made my mind up on what .I'm going to do.  I'm scared for this country either way,

[AUChizad]

My serious answer is the two remaining, viable candidates disgust me in just about every way. It's repulsive to me that I have to decide between these two and I honestly haven't made my mind up on what .I'm going to do.  I'm scared for this country either way,

We are simpatico.

Except there is a third option. If people would stop feeding the self-fulfilling prophecy and jump on board we can save this country from its downfall.

Or not.

[GH2001]

Prob doesn't belong here but worth noting since you guys have been talking about trump the last page or so...but

Trump just fired his campaign manager.

Actually expected this 2 months ago when he hired Paul Manafort. Lewandowski is about as experienced in this large of a campaign as trump is. Which is 0. Prob a good move for trump as the current guy operates about like trump with no filter. Manafort will be more calculated in what trump says and does I think.

Lewandowski is also known for being the guy at the center of the scandal with Michelle fields. Assault, grabbing whatever you wanna call it. I honestly think the size of trumps campaign had outgrown him. Manafort is more built for his kind of campaign. He is a veteran who has worked with ford, Reagan and bush.

[GH2001]

We are simpatico.

Except there is a third option. If people would stop feeding the self-fulfilling prophecy and jump on board we can save this country from its downfall.

Or not.

Two things:

1. there are some huge glaring things I (and others) don't like about Johnson. Whether you or others like it or not, it's a glaring concern for some. And they are not trivial and to be glossed over. Austin Peterson was a much better 3rd party option to me.

2. Wanting him to be viable. And thinking he should be. Are both much different than him ever being viable. I would love a 3rd party to be viable. But it just isn't so right now. There is a hope and a reality. And they are far apart at the moment.

[CCTAU]

I gave a full "what the fuck are you talking about?" when I heard him say that someone should have had a gun in the bar. That's fucking stupid. Trump really needs to stop going out there and spouting off at the mouth. He called the mechanical bull a "horse" while in Texas. Really dude?

I think he says shit without thinking it through. I am sure his premise was for advocating gun rights, but come on man.

So you leave your gun home when you go out?

I don't. The NRA is WRONG. I'm sure there were several people in that place NOT drinking and snorting coke.

I carry EVERYWHERE there are no metal detectors. Trump is right on this one!

[War Eagle!!!]

So you leave your gun home when you go out?

I don't. The NRA is WRONG. I'm sure there were several people in that place NOT drinking and snorting coke.

I carry EVERYWHERE there are no metal detectors. Trump is right on this one!

In Texas, you leave your gun at home or in the car when you are attending a place that has more than 51% of the sales in alcohol. It's illegal. And honestly, not smart if you are drinking.

But whatever...

Edited for:

Businesses posting a compliant "51% sign" - It is a felony to carry a firearm while on the premises of a business that makes more than 51% of its revenue from the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption (colloquially "bars", "nightclubs", "taverns", "saloons", etc.). A person with a CHL that is in violation has a defense that the establishment did not post the proper signage, as required by the Government Code section 411.204. The proper signage contains similar language as is required of all liquor license holders, but with the addition of a couple of words to prohibit licensed as well as unlicensed carry, and a background containing a red "51%" to make it obvious at a glance that the sign applies to CHL holders.

[AUChizad]

Two things:

1. there are some huge glaring things I (and others) don't like about Johnson. Whether you or others like it or not, it's a glaring concern for some. And they are not trivial and to be glossed over. Austin Peterson was a much better 3rd party option to me.

2. Wanting him to be viable. And thinking he should be. Are both much different than him ever being viable. I would love a 3rd party to be viable. But it just isn't so right now. There is a hope and a reality. And they are far apart at the moment.

Unlike Peterson, Johnson AND HIS RUNNING MATE William Weld were both extremely successful two-term REPUBLICAN governors in VERY BLUE states.

That speaks to both of your points 1 & 2.

1. They are more Republican than Trump is. They have the credentials, the voting history, and frankly the stated policy positions to prove it.

2. They were hugely successful Republicans in Blue states, but can't be successful in a general? But Trump with his daily idiotic statements like the one we are discussing today, flip-flopping, and flat out left-authoritarian policies is somehow more viable? The Celebrity Apprentice guy?

[wesfau2]

2. They were hugely successful Republicans in Blue states, but can't be successful in a general? But Trump with his daily idiotic statements like the one we are discussing today, flip-flopping, and flat out left-authoritarian policies is somehow more viable? The Celebrity Apprentice guy?

Not to speak for GH, but it looked like he was blaming the system and not the quality of candidate.

[CCTAU]

In Texas, you leave your gun at home or in the car when you are attending a place that has more than 51% of the sales in alcohol. It's illegal. And honestly, not smart if you are drinking.

But whatever...

Edited for:

GA does not have that law! Not sure what Orlando (FL) has.

And we have not had any issues with it so far!

So yes, whatever!

[AUChizad]

Unlike Peterson, Johnson AND HIS RUNNING MATE William Weld were both extremely successful two-term REPUBLICAN governors in VERY BLUE states.

That speaks to both of your points 1 & 2.

1. They are more Republican than Trump is. They have the credentials, the voting history, and frankly the stated policy positions to prove it.

2. They were hugely successful Republicans in Blue states, but can't be successful in a general? But Trump with his daily idiotic statements like the one we are discussing today, flip-flopping, and flat out left-authoritarian policies is somehow more viable? The Celebrity Apprentice guy?

Related:

http://reason.com/blog/2016/06/17/4-other-reasons-to-be-bullish-on-gary-jo

4 Other Reasons to Be Bullish on Gary Johnson’s Polling
Beyond drawing nearly 10%, the Libertarian is disproportionally attracting independents and Millennials, despite low name recognition

Matt Welch|Jun. 17, 2016 3:05 pm

The headline interest in the Libertarian Party's prospects this November were tidily summed up by FiveThirtyEight three weeks ago: "Pay Attention To Libertarian Gary Johnson; He's Pulling 10 Percent vs. Trump And Clinton." That number has settled to about 9 percent nationwide since, but the basic set-up remains the same: Johnson is polling around four times higher than he was at this time in 2012, in a Black Swan political year featuring historically loathed and remarkably statist major-party candidates. It's an unprecedented opportunity for limited-government politics and argument.

And those aren't the only reasons for Libertarian (and libertarian) optimism lurking within these recent polls. Here are four more:

1) Pollsters are actually including Gary Johnson. Five of the seven national presidential election polls (as gathered by the ever-useful RealClearPolitics) since the Libertarian National Convention last month have also included Johnson. (He has averaged 10 percent in those.) The surveys that excluded Johnson, in case you want to send a candygram, were Rasmussen Reports and Economist/YouGov.

From the moment he sewed up the L.P. nomination, Johnson pivoted to one major message: include me in the polls. That's not as straightforward as you might expect—before the major-party conventions in 2012, for example, Johnson was also included in a total of five national polls, but only across five months, not two weeks. (He averaged slightly less than five percent in those.)

Ten percent is within shouting distance of 15 percent, which is the ticket to nationally televised presidential debates. It's also a nice round number that generates attention and headlines, in theory helping to inch those results still higher. If Johnson is being included in three-quarters of the national surveys and averaging double-digits in those, it's going to be awfully hard for polling companies to exclude him.

2) Johnson is competitive among the largest and fastest-growing political bloc: independents. The Libertarian candidate's single most shocking poll result thus far was a June 5-8 Fox News survey that found him edging out Hillary Clinton among independents, 23 percent to 22 percent (Donald Trump topped both, with 32 percent).

Johnson beating Clinton among independents is an outlier, but his overall competitiveness among that bloc is not. The former New Mexico governor averages twice as much support among non-Democrats/Republicans as he does overall.

Here's a quick snapshot in reverse chronological order of how the three leading presidential candidates are doing among independents. In the parentheses are the polls' universe of independents compared to Democrats and Republicans:

HC 24% DT 24% GJ 12%, Reuters/Ipsos June 11-15 (Dem/Rep/Ind 44%/34%/13%)

HC 30% DT 29% GJ 17%, CBS News June 9-13 (D/R/I 35%/29%/36%)

DT 30% HC 23% GJ 16%, Guardian/SurveyUSA June 8 (D/R/I 33%/26%/38%)

DT 32% GJ 23% HC 22%, Fox News June 5-8 (D/R/I 41%/35%/20%)

DT 33% HC 27% GJ 19%, IBD/TIPP May 31-June 5 (D/R/I 35%/31%/33%)

DT 36% HC 29% GJ 10%, Quinnipiac May 24-30, (D/R/I 35%/29%/26%)

For going on three decades, Gallup has been asking voters whether they consider themselves to be Democrats, Republicans, or independents. The latter category has held the top slot every month since December 2012, and every year since 2008. Independents were 33 percent of the electorate in 1988; 45 percent last month.

Independents are not automatically libertarians, but libertarians are more likely to appear among their ranks, and are far more likely to be independent themselves. More importantly, even those majority of independents who otherwise adhere predictably to one of the two main political groupings are still more open to ideas and politicians outside their tribe. Their disloyalty, combined with the shrinking popularity of party affiliation and America's ongoing calamity of misgovernance, make our political moment continuously dynamic and unpredictable. 

When Gary Johnson and the L.P. do disproportionately well among a growing and dynamic political bloc, that softens the ground for more libertarian argumentation across the political spectrum. Particularly among the most unaffiliated demographic of them all, Millennials.

3) The Libertarian message is doing best among Snake People Millennials. In every presidential poll with an age breakdown conducted since the Libertarian National Convention, Gary Johnson has performed better among 18-to-34-year-olds than any other age group, usually by a lot.

Here is a list of how the three candidates are faring among Millennials, followed in parentheses by Johnson's overall support, and his second-most popular demographic:

HC 41% DT 27% GJ 10%, Guardian/SurveyUSA (6% overall, 6% for ages 50-64)

HC 38% DT 29% GJ 18%, Fox News (12% overall, 12% 35-54)

HC 29% DT 28% GJ 24% (ages 18-24), IBD/TIPP (11% overall, 16% 25-54)

HC 40% DT 28% GJ 8%, Quinnipiac (5% overall, 8% 35-49)

Many dreams have crashed on the rocky shores of Millennial political affection, but Gary Johnson certainly believes there's some there there, and he's joined in this analysis by pollster John Zogby, at the end of last month argued that "the Libertarians could have a breakthrough year," due to their potentially "very special appeal to Millennials." From Zogby's analysis:

They will decide the outcome in 2016. Donald Trump's support is miniscule among this group and Clinton does not generate any enthusiasm among younger voters because she appears to many to be a combination of too establishment and too disingenuous….To be sure, many will hold their nose and vote for Clinton because of their fear of a Trump victory. But the real question is will there be enough excitement to get Millennials out to vote. While early reports on the Libertarian ticket of former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson and former Massachusetts governor Bill Weld suggest that they may draw votes away from Trump, I think they may actually hurt Clinton even more. […]

Johnson and Weld just may have the most compelling message for Millennials. They are running as fiscal conservative purists and can draw from a group that is deeply concerned about both college debt and unparalleled public debt. And they are social libertarians: pro-choice, anti-government meddling in matters of personal privacy, decriminalization of most drugs, and they oppose United States meddling in foreign adventures and war. These young people are America's First Global generation and they are diverse and less inclined to see other peoples and cultures as the "other."

While this radiates more optimism than even I am willing to muster, it is worth noting that early polling does show Johnson to be pulling evenly from Clinton and Trump. Now just imagine if anyone actually knew who he was!

4) Nobody knows who Gary Johnson is, but they're willing to learn. The recent Bloomberg poll asked people to answer three questions about the candidates who were not their first choice: Could you ever support them, would you never support them, or are you not sure?

Only 6 percent of non-Hillary voters said that they could ever support her, and only 7 percent of non-Trumpites said they could conceive of Team Orange. Johnson? A full 22 percent of respondents imagined that they could vote for him, and a further 25 percent said they were not sure (compared to just 2 percent and 1 percent for Clinton and Trump, respectively). The Quinnipiac poll found that 83 percent didn't know enough about Johnson to have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of the man.

So will that change? CNN is hosting a townhall meet-the-Libertarians broadcast next week for Johnson and William Weld. Soon, millions of Americans will be in position to get to know the Libertarian ticket. It will be fascinating to see what they think.

[AUChizad]

Not to speak for GH, but it looked like he was blaming the system and not the quality of candidate.

But I thought everyone here was team "Fuck the GOP" / "I'm voting for Trump to burn down the system"? Only when it suits your argument? Only when Trump commands you to say that?

I think if Trump (and Sanders for that matter) have proven anything it's that this election cycle is unlike any other and as is often said about the Iron Bowl, you can "throw out the history books".

[wesfau2]

But I thought everyone here was team "Fuck the GOP" / "I'm voting for Trump to burn down the system"? Only when it suits your argument? Only when Trump commands you to say that?

I think if Trump (and Sanders for that matter) have proven anything it's that this election cycle is unlike any other and as is often said about the Iron Bowl, you can "throw out the history books".

Again, just my interpretation of what he said, but it read to me like "I'd love for a 3rd party to be viable...but until it is part of the regular election cycle, I'm voting for/against ______________."

[GH2001]

But I thought everyone here was team "Fuck the GOP" / "I'm voting for Trump to burn down the system"? Only when it suits your argument? Only when Trump commands you to say that?

I think if Trump (and Sanders for that matter) have proven anything it's that this election cycle is unlike any other and as is often said about the Iron Bowl, you can "throw out the history books".

Don't assume too too much. I say things at face value. And yes Wes is right in his assumption. I'm just disgusting by it all. Even the libertarians who I generally like, I don't think put the best guy up there. Gary Johnson just doesn't do it for me. I'm sure he's a nice guy and it's great he did well in New Mexico but I just have some concerns over him. And each party in this race , all 3 picked non optimal candidates. They all picked the candidates who were the most known, the loudest or who had the most money. Else you would have Austin Peterson, Cruz or Rubio, and Sanders or O Malley. Who I think ALL have more conviction than the ones that were actually put up there whether someone agrees with them or not.

[GH2001]

Again, just my interpretation of what he said, but it read to me like "I'd love for a 3rd party to be viable...but until it is part of the regular election cycle, I'm voting for/against ______________."

You complete me. Just for that next beers on me.

[GH2001]

GA does not have that law! Not sure what Orlando (FL) has.

And we have not had any issues with it so far!

So yes, whatever!

I'm with we!!

I love the 2a dude. I do. Love guns.

But with them comes some respect and common sense. I don't think it's the best idea in the world to have a room full of drunks with loaded guns even if law abiding. Shit happens. Tempers flare. That could be considered public endangerment if things escalate and innocent people could be the end result.

I don't think the 2a is wide open. You do need some common sense rules around it. Like we do any other right granted to us. We don't give guns to kids. Or baboons. We don't serve beer to 13 year olds. We don't let people slander other people even though we have 1a rights. All I'm saying is just exercise common sense. At the end of the day a gun is a deadly weapon and should be treated accordingly.

[CCTAU]

I'm with we!!

I love the 2a dude. I do. Love guns.

But with them comes some respect and common sense. I don't think it's the best idea in the world to have a room full of drunks with loaded guns even if law abiding. Shit happens. Tempers flare. That could be considered public endangerment if things escalate and innocent people could be the end result.

I don't think the 2a is wide open. You do need some common sense rules around it. Like we do any other right granted to us. We don't give guns to kids. Or baboons. We don't serve beer to 13 year olds. We don't let people slander other people even though we have 1a rights. All I'm saying is just exercise common sense. At the end of the day a gun is a deadly weapon and should be treated accordingly.

There can be as many drunks as you like as long as the carrier is not drinking. That is GA law. It works!