President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

I don't think that's necessarily so. An amendment such as @Dick Whitman envisions could give gun control states some real teeth when it comes to enforcing their laws.

 

I'm not sure what hill it is YF is intent to die on or why, but...

 

Sometimes I feel like Trump is just here to teach us a lesson and that as soon as every last one of us apologizes for all the names we called Obama/Clinton or Reagan/W. Bush he will disappear or we'll wake up or something.

 

I don't know why y'all are getting so pissy about this. If @YankeeFan's take is the proper one, that redounds even more to the benefit of the "we've gotta do something about the guns" argument. If the Vegas shooter was firing an automatic weapon, then there's really no need for any new laws because existing laws had long prohibited his weapon of choice. If I were arguing for more/stricter gun laws, the last thing I'd want would be for the guy to have been using already-illegal weaponry.

 

I never suggested this wasn't the case. My contention was that it was highly unlikely that he had acquired a highly regulated automatic weapon.

I also doubted that he had made an illegal modification to a legally acquired weapon. Yes, there are YouTube videos, but it's very rare for a fully automatic weapon, or an illegally modified weapon to be used in a crime like this.

It would have been a very rare diversion from the norm, and it made sense to wait for actual reporting before declaring he had an automatic weapon (or an illegally modified weapon).

And, what he used, and how he obtained them, is important for the policy discussions that will follow.

There's also an economical way to write "technically correct". I prefer to just write "correct".

 

I'm agreeing you.

 

Sure. But the reason this nit is being picked is for the implicit "If you guys can't get the exact definition that we're setting arbitrarily right, then you don't have any standing to make any argument about guns."

 

Yeah, I was kind of thinking this, too.

 

Call him out for THAT logical fallacy once he presents it then.

 

I'm not offended by initial reports that are wrong -- especially when the reports come with usual disclaimers.

It's the ongoing reporting that concerns me. Folks who insist -- despite a lack of evidence -- that an automatic weapon was used are not practicing journalism.

 

"Automatic weapon" doesn't necessarily mean "fully automatic gun" anymore. That itself is a serious gun issue now.

 

Ah. Well, carry on them.