General Discussion

Captain Stern

(2,253 posts)

8. At some point, semantics have to matter.

Tue Jul 12, 2016, 06:40 AM

Jul 2016

When we make laws, semantics, details, and definitions are of extreme importance. Our speed limit signs don't say "don't go too fast", they have a specific number on them. We don't have drug laws that read "you can't have drugs". The laws specifically state which drugs are illegal, which ones are controlled, and which ones aren't controlled. So, saying "ban all assault rifles", and leaving it there, accomplishes nothing.

You said: if a weapon can fire as fast as a finger can twitch with a reserve of ammunition of 30+ projectiles has no business being available to the general populace. . That means that you're in favor of banning semi-automatic guns that can hold over thirty bullets. That actually means something. That's the kind of thing people should be saying.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

160 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The semantics of gun control... [View all] Photographer Jul 2016 OP

Great TeddyR Jul 2016 #1

That I believe is the key Sherman A1 Jul 2016 #2

What do you do with the billions in circulation? Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #6

Fast reply and the expected question. Sherman A1 Jul 2016 #10

It will never fly, however sensible it is. Act_of_Reparation Jul 2016 #12

Not thousands but hundreds of millions Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #20

I do not believe it impossible to accomplish Sherman A1 Jul 2016 #61

Not as difficult as you think. Jerry442 Jul 2016 #78

But more difficult than YOU think... Straw Man Jul 2016 #102

The point is not to achieve sterility, which no one believes possible. Jerry442 Jul 2016 #108

Yet only sterility achieves the goal ... Straw Man Jul 2016 #115

Oh, by the way, did I mention my law... Jerry442 Jul 2016 #119

More authoritarian daydreams. Straw Man Jul 2016 #120

Yes. NT Jerry442 Jul 2016 #122

Moral compass ... MH1 Jul 2016 #145

So ... Straw Man Jul 2016 #156

But I'd have to ask - "so then we do NOTHING?" calimary Jul 2016 #141

Look at the bright side... Jerry442 Jul 2016 #148

I think there is plenty that can be done...when in most cities, less then 1% of the people jmg257 Jul 2016 #152

Exactly. You mean there's NOTHING we can do? I can't buy that for a nanosecond. calimary Jul 2016 #154

Hear hear - Cheers! jmg257 Jul 2016 #155

I agree, way too hard to accomplish. Calista241 Jul 2016 #92

Not in 50 years; maybe 500 years, if not stored carefully. benEzra Jul 2016 #123

How do you plan on compensating the owners? Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #15

Dang that pesky 'takings' clause! n/t X_Digger Jul 2016 #33

Personally I wouldn't, however Sherman A1 Jul 2016 #60

Private citizens were still free to sell cars amongst themselves. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #69

and.... Sherman A1 Jul 2016 #72

If people are allowed to engage in private commerce they will. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #90

Yes Sherman A1 Jul 2016 #91

It's not opinion. It's observed fact and you can't just wish it away. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #98

Yes, they are going to do so Sherman A1 Jul 2016 #101

"When those are detected by law enforcement they generally have some repercussions." Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #106

So now at least 40,000,000 refuse to comply. They are all heavily armed and you have instantly made MohRokTah Jul 2016 #51

No, Sherman A1 Jul 2016 #64

Some may comply. I don't believe most will. MohRokTah Jul 2016 #66

Your opinion Sherman A1 Jul 2016 #71

If the experiences of CO, NY and VT (hardly rock-ribbed conservative bastions, they) serve as Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #70

They can be 3D printed now Lee-Lee Jul 2016 #4

"now is just a matter of getting that used 3D printer on Craigslist and downloading a program." lol. morningfog Jul 2016 #57

No - the means have been around for a while now... SeattleVet Jul 2016 #82

Look around, it's already being done Lee-Lee Jul 2016 #105

False. Kang Colby Jul 2016 #87

And when you espouse your opinions from a place of ignorance on the subject Lee-Lee Jul 2016 #3

And when you refuse to acknowledge or even recognize the problem baldguy Jul 2016 #7

The problem is a very small number of individuals who are determined to act. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #9

The problem is too many guns. baldguy Jul 2016 #11

Were there too many guns in France when the Charlie Hebdo office was attacked? Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #13

Refusing to acknowledge the problem - and slipping in a few RW talking points. baldguy Jul 2016 #18

How do you hope to effectively deal with anything, let alone something as profound as gun Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #23

Didn't you hear? If you label something an NRA talking point Calista241 Jul 2016 #93

They get angry when their initiatives fail but their initiatives fail Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #99

The problem was accurately acknowledged. beevul Jul 2016 #38

Over 8000 gun deaths in the US in just one year. Exilednight Jul 2016 #125

In a nation of 300+ million... beevul Jul 2016 #126

It's the ease of access to guns that is the biggest Exilednight Jul 2016 #129

Again, thats an opinion, not supported by ALL the facts. beevul Jul 2016 #131

yet America has the softest gun laws of Exilednight Jul 2016 #134

Threefold - the sheer number of people in the US who don't mind killing other people... jmg257 Jul 2016 #127

I'm sure other countries have just as many loons, the difference Exilednight Jul 2016 #128

What about all the places with the ease of acccess and little to no gun violence? beevul Jul 2016 #132

Every country and post industrial country in the Exilednight Jul 2016 #133

That doesn't negate the high gun ownership states in America... beevul Jul 2016 #138

At least one too many guns in each case sanatanadharma Jul 2016 #30

This can be addressed without trampling the rights of others. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #36

Yup. I likes to shoot things and killum dead. That's my right like it done said in that Photographer Jul 2016 #140

That's that same constitution thingy what lets you post banal non-answers. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #143

Ha ha - sorry - just funny that someone who ignores linguistics and logic jmg257 Jul 2016 #146

Are you suggesting the poster you responded to talks like this? Marengo Jul 2016 #147

Out of 80-100 million Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #41

More toddlers are killed by toppling televisions onto themselves each year. MohRokTah Jul 2016 #44

Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #135

Can you come up with an argument that is not a personal attack? MohRokTah Jul 2016 #136

And another reason is people crafting the proposed laws are clueless about what they try to regulate Lee-Lee Jul 2016 #14

LOL,@ "allowed". beevul Jul 2016 #37

I used to sell them back in the 80's and was a sport shooter since before you were born Photographer Jul 2016 #39

A subjective definition of 'scary' is not enough to establish law or policy... TipTok Jul 2016 #5

At some point, semantics have to matter. Captain Stern Jul 2016 #8

And when gun manufacturers start selling 29 round magazines Calista241 Jul 2016 #94

I understand what you're saying. Captain Stern Jul 2016 #95

I'm now seeing the same tactic used regarding healthcare. "Those nurses don't know the difference .. Scuba Jul 2016 #16

It appears semantics do matter because you are learning aikoaiko Jul 2016 #17

"Ignorance is strength" Taitertots Jul 2016 #19

Way simple then - ban ammunition reserve holders* with a capacity of 30+ rounds. jmg257 Jul 2016 #21

"Magazines" is the term you want. Straw Man Jul 2016 #104

Sure - 30 round mags are quite copious. jmg257 Jul 2016 #107

Of course semantics matter Matrosov Jul 2016 #22

It's really pretty simple,you put a lock down on any gun that can be used Photographer Jul 2016 #24

That isn't so clear...now you need to define "lots" & "short amount of time". jmg257 Jul 2016 #27

Australia again ? DustyJoe Jul 2016 #62

lol at "go the Australian route" AntiBank Jul 2016 #103

Because when it's time to actually form a real opinion Igel Jul 2016 #25

A BIG K&R. Gunners playing the nomenclature game is just obfuscation. Hoyt Jul 2016 #26

Legislators without understanding of specifics write pointless law. MohRokTah Jul 2016 #46

Bull. Just ban semi-autos, or write the basics of legislation and let a gun nut with integrity Hoyt Jul 2016 #47

semi-automatic weapons are the most popular and numerous type of firearm in this country. MohRokTah Jul 2016 #50

Who cares what lethal weapons are the most popular. Slavery was popular, smoking was popular, etc., Hoyt Jul 2016 #53

Slavery was only ended by a bloody war. I don't imagine you'll be joining a 'war on guns'... friendly_iconoclast Jul 2016 #54

A "bloody war" worth the sacrifice of the victors, don't you think? Hoyt Jul 2016 #55

So you would actually advocate going to civil war over guns???? MohRokTah Jul 2016 #56

Not sure you are correct, but we can start with banning future production and restricting how many Hoyt Jul 2016 #58

Not going to happen MohRokTah Jul 2016 #59

We are about to get a Supreme Court that doesn't agree with you on guns. Hoyt Jul 2016 #63

Do you think the Stevens Dissent in Heller will become the interpretation of the 2nd? jmg257 Jul 2016 #68

Actually, the legislation says people under 45. I'd like to see all the old white wingers have to Hoyt Jul 2016 #73

Pistols and rifle are both viable weapons of the militias, which I have no problem relating jmg257 Jul 2016 #75

If you want to go by a point at each word interpretation of Constitution, you gotta do it with Code. Hoyt Jul 2016 #79

They may indeed...but I don't get too worried or all worked up over it - I have lots of hobbies! jmg257 Jul 2016 #83

Not really, states will get tough on guns and Supreme Court will uphold those laws. Hoyt Jul 2016 #84

As I'm sure you are aware, that has already begun, but not all states are NY, CT or CA. jmg257 Jul 2016 #85

Ban the most commonly class of firearm sold in the world in direct violation of the Heller ruling? Statistical Jul 2016 #74

I think you need to reread Heller, as well as Stevens' Dissent. Hoyt Jul 2016 #80

You also need to look closer at Austrailia and UK laws. Actually, getting guns out of the hands of Hoyt Jul 2016 #81

Sorry; a nation of laws needs to pay attention to semantics. Brickbat Jul 2016 #28

Two semantic sides in the public safety debate": technical and moral sanatanadharma Jul 2016 #29

And your argument just left out a key specific about this issue and it is both moral and technical. MohRokTah Jul 2016 #48

Here's why semantics matter citood Jul 2016 #31

Over 1/3 of all firearms in this nation are semi-automatic. MohRokTah Jul 2016 #49

I'm a gun control advocate who knows plenty about guns. Paladin Jul 2016 #32

"You see it every day here at DU---and it needs to stop." Ask the Admins. awaits your request: friendly_iconoclast Jul 2016 #43

You can't ban your way outta guns, and you damn well can't ban free speech. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #45

Naw. Eko Jul 2016 #52

You can't ban your way out of guns HERE. DU can indeed ban free speech. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #130

Why cant we? Eko Jul 2016 #137

There isn't enough of you... beevul Jul 2016 #139

Ya, Eko Jul 2016 #142

Did I mistake you for someone who uses the terms ammosexual and gun humper? beevul Jul 2016 #153

Dont believe I have ever used those words. I tend to not use deragatory words instead of logic. Eko Jul 2016 #159

Fair enough. beevul Jul 2016 #160

You are welcome to try and change the Constitution, and then pile on the restrictions. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #149

Opinions are wonderful to form, but you need to be a bit more specific if you want to articulate, jmg257 Jul 2016 #65

This is an on-line talk site, not a Senate mark-up session. Paladin Jul 2016 #76

Gotcha - and understood. But there is often much discussion over Assault Weapon Bans, jmg257 Jul 2016 #77

Fair enough. (nt) Paladin Jul 2016 #86

I certainly understand your passion and your point bighart Jul 2016 #34

bingo Locrian Jul 2016 #35

Technical issues of semantics don't matter when you're ranting. Dr. Strange Jul 2016 #40

Actually there's very little doubt that the laws on crack cocaine... Jerry442 Jul 2016 #89

Come on Mendocino Jul 2016 #42

Cartridge limits are silly. An experienced operator can fire almost continuously, jack_krass Jul 2016 #67

Time and again, those "almost continuously" pauses are shown to save lives. Paladin Jul 2016 #110

How about some examples? hack89 Jul 2016 #111

I don't believe that, but hey if it makes you feel good, go ahead and ban the jack_krass Jul 2016 #113

Magazines can be "high capacity." Cartridges: not so much. Paladin Jul 2016 #114

Why does gun control lose every damned time? karadax Jul 2016 #88

Amazing to me yhst so many repies are from low post counts than even me. Photographer Jul 2016 #96

What's the implication ? karadax Jul 2016 #97

Take what you will from the question. Photographer Jul 2016 #100

Pro-gun advocates turn up in clusters at DU. Over and over again. Paladin Jul 2016 #112

Why the quotation marks around "good democrats"? Marengo Jul 2016 #117

I expect a typical insult Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #121

Pro-gun advocates turn up in clusters at everywhere. beevul Jul 2016 #118

I believe that poster is suggesting you are a troll. Marengo Jul 2016 #109

Fair enough. Nt. karadax Jul 2016 #116

"Semantics" is the study of the meanings of words. benEzra Jul 2016 #124

It should be as simple as the new GMO labeling act. JustABozoOnThisBus Jul 2016 #144

All this talk of gun control is just making us buy more guns. Boudica the Lyoness Jul 2016 #150

Might I recommend a Ruger 556. oneshooter Jul 2016 #157

Thank you. Boudica the Lyoness Jul 2016 #158

Agreed. deathrind Jul 2016 #151