Question for both of those on the left and the right

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by q64ceo, Sep 8, 2012.

  1. q64ceo macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    #1
    I am curious to see the diversity of answers.

    I am curious, why do Republicans fight tooth and nail against any firearms regulations that Democrats find "reasonable"? Why do Democrats fight tooth and nail against abortion regulations that Republicans find "reasonable"?

    As for my opinion, I think its just ******** hyper-partisanship. Obviously both of those are individual rights, so you would think that we would get a bit of consistency on this subject from both. Either you agree with reasonable regulations on rights or you dont. Plain and simple.
     
  2. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #2
    Right to bear arms is in the constitution. That being said I don't particularly have many issues with handgun training requirements and not allowing anyone with a criminal background to own/possess one. Also there should be harsher penalties on possessing a handgun that is not registered/lawfully owned. I think 10 years minimum sentence should do it.

    There should be a mandatory waiting period while a background check is done on all firearms.

    Lastly, I don't really care about abortion, it's the woman's choice.
     
  3. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #3
    It's all about personal liberty and government control.

    The government has no business telling me whether or not I can own a gun, or require me to register it with them.

    If I commit a crime with a gun, you can kill me. I have no problem extending the death penalty to all gun assisted crimes.

    If I have broken no laws however, it's none of your da** business whether or not I own a gun.
     
  4. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #4
    I think there's some burden of proof on your part to show that Democrats have fought tooth and nail against abortion restriction.

    Surely if one looked at the voting results for these restrictions they would find some support amongst Democrats as well as Republicans.

    Your question is too black and white. Reality is far grayer.
     
  5. k995 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    #5
    Democrats dont, if any gun laws have grown less strickt under obama. Wich doesnt stp republicans from saying the eternal ' its just a ruse he will ban even air guns'.

    As for republicans, i dont get it eother. What do they think to gain by proposing things where vast mayority of women is against . Its seems they reverted several generations back .
     
  6. Iscariot macrumors 68030

    Iscariot

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Toronteazy
    #6
    I'm far less interested in regulating firearms than I am in improving national education in the hopes of tempering the virtually absurdist nature of gun culture in the US.
     
  7. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #7
    So educated people choose to not have guns?
     
  8. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #8
    As a practicing Absurdist I find your use of the word as a pejorative to be absurd.
     
  9. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #9
    The problem is you are trying to apply logic to politics. ;)

    I'll one up you and say, stereotypically, Republicans will get up in arms (no pun intended) about 2nd Amendment restrictions but seem to have little problem chipping away at the 1st Amendment. How's that for inconsistency?


    Educated people are less likely to commit crimes (especially violent crimes) so the "I will solve this problem by shooting someone" mentality is less likely to be there.
     
  10. Rampant.A.I. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    #10
    Indeed. Every time the issue comes up, it's painted in terms of who supports super-late-term, about-to-start-preschool Abortion and is therefore a slobbering fiendish baby murdering ghoul.

    Most pro-choice supporters seem to believe in reasonable regulations and deadlines for an abortion.

    On the other hand, this is an issue packed to the gills with disinformation and outright BS. The average person still seems to believe the RU-487 or Morning After Pill is a type of "Abortion," when it blocks conception from occurring.

    It's a form of contraception, and yet it still gets brought up as a talking point.

    So yes, I suppose you could say that Dems have fought tooth and nail against abortion restriction: when that restriction is so far-reaching in the pro-lifer's mind that Abortion includes any form of birth control.
     
  11. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #11
    Time and time again, it turns out that the same people who are bitterly opposed to abortion are also strongly opposed to contraception. But, they mostly keep quiet about it, since they realize that open opposition to contraception will lose politically. At least until this year, when many Republican politicians and their surrogates openly challenged contraception.

    Show me some large, organized groups that are strongly in favor of contraception but favor some restrictions on abortion, and, we probably have something to talk about. Dialog, debate. But the current Republican voices are mostly silent about contraception because they know that the Mandatory Motherhood crowd will withdraw their support otherwise.
     
  12. Iscariot macrumors 68030

    Iscariot

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Toronteazy
    #12
    I submit for your approval firearm absurdism:

    "Referring to the conflict between the human tendency to seek inherent value and meaning in gun ownership and the human inability to find any"
     
  13. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #13
    MONEY

    Cause the only thing Republicans find reasonable is no abortion at all. They don't want any compromise, period.

    Actually, gun regulations don't take away any rights. I'm a gun owner myself in NYC which has strict regulations. I don't mind those regulations at all. I don't feel like my rights are being hindered or tested. Don't understand why politicans and citizens of some other states feel like their rights would be violated. Makes no sense. In the end, it's all about the business/money, and the NRA does a good job scaring folks in believing their right to bear arms will be taken away.

    As for abortion ....... IMO it just always been the GOP's tool to connect with religious voters. GOP's stance on abortion seems to be less effective every 4yrs.
     
  14. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #14
    Until you get this knock on your door.

    "Mr. Live? We are here to take away the firearm registered to you. It's our understanding that you had an argument with your boss, and with workplace violence on the rise we have determined that you are too high a risk to posses a firearm at this time. After completing counseling, your appeal will be considered by the fair use council."
     
  15. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #15
    Wow.

    Paranoid much?
     
  16. q64ceo thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    #16
    Yes, gun regulations do take from your rights. Remember the DC v Heller case? SCOTUS ruled that their restrictions were too harsh. One of those restrictions that was struck was that it was mentioned by name in law that no gunshops could exist in the city. DC responded by rezoning the whole city to ensure that no gun shops could open whatsoever along with even stricter licensing terms for gun buyers to skirt the ruling. Just like Republicans do with abortion, the DC politicians were attempting to take away your rights to own firearms by redtaping the thing to death.
     
  17. NickZac macrumors 68000

    NickZac

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    #17
    Because the two-party system is failing. Starting in the 60s and continuing through this day, the ability to 'compromise' is not something our politicians have
     
  18. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #18
    That's not going to happen. You need to break the law before you can have rights taken from you. Owning a weapon is a right not privilege.

    Now they can take away my driver's license for a non criminal reason(such a failure to pay tickets) as driving is a privilege not a right, but they can't touch my gun permit based on assumption as that's my right.

    NY state regulations is not even close to that type of strictness of what that case is about. Nor is any of the regulations that are being proposed or already exist in other states. What you stated has nothing to do with the proposed and the existing regulations of today. Bad example to compare to but I understand the point you were making.
     
  19. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #19
    Unfortunately that's not the reality of the world we live in. From Jim Crow to McCarthyism to the Patriot Act... this country has a long history of people in power attempting to curtail the rights of U.S. citizens for the 'betterment' or 'safety' of the country. Not to imply that this is uniquely American, because it's not, but to think that the government will not attempt to curtail your rights is naive.


    Lethal
     
  20. MorphingDragon macrumors 603

    MorphingDragon

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Location:
    The World Inbetween
    #20
    Because that happens all the time in New Zealand and Australia.
     
  21. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #21
    Ugh. The death penalty is an incredibly barbaric broken system. A big problem is absolute proof. Innocent people have been sentenced to death in the past, exonerated after execution. Every form of evidence that people trust has some margin of error. I don't think it's a suitable punishment when you cannot absolutely prove such a thing. In terms of gun ownership in general, why should it be untrackable?
     
  22. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #22
    Your right to a degree, but I never implied that in general. I'm speaking about the specific situation. Not saying it can't happen, but America would have to be in a completly differ atmosphere and time in order to refuse the right to bear arms towards the law abiding. Some resrictions is one thing and makes sense, but total refusal without due process is another. People of America simply wouldn't go for that, and it's the people who vote.
     
  23. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #23

    The extent and depth of your paranoid fantasies are comical.
     
  24. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #24
    What's "reasonable" in the abortion instance??? In the Dems case, it is seen as unreasonable, in a free country, to start telling half of the population what they can and cannot do and have government get into the doctors office with her. It's also unreasonable to ban something that women will still find a way to do anyway, either through something that endagers their own life, or by going to another country. Either way, the baby is still not brought to term so the regulation fails.
     
  25. q64ceo thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    #25
    Mississippi has been able to ban the last abortion clinic in its state via red tape. Its open for now, but it may shut its doors soon. How did Mississippi do it? By requiring abortion clinics to have emergency rooms and having one doctor on staff who has hospital admittance rights at a local hospital.

    Those restrictions would be seen as reasonable to many people, and, there is actual valid medical reasons to have these restrictions. But at the same time its ******** that a right was taken via red tape.
     

Share This Page