Other State Tucson to ignore Arizona ‘Second Amendment Sanctuary’ law

[WillametteWill]

No free programs for stupid people either...

This is the crux of so many issues. Agree with you in concept, our society has just proven to me that "we" do not follow through with the natural consequences and actually end up enabling users, causing more harm in the long run. However, I do support the "dangerous freedom" concept..."we" just seem to be stupid with all the trimmings around these liberties.

*"We" defined - Not the good people on this forum, but the sycophants who believe they are smarter than all of us and get elected by other "we's" who like the free stuff.

 

[WillametteWill]

IMO laws against private possession/use of almost any item, is unconstitutional and certainly infringes on Natural Rights. For firearms, the Second Amendment is even more explicit.

Like my reply above, our society has proven time and time again that we poorly handle certain freedoms. Right now we are seeing massive increases in crimes, homelessness, drunk driving injuries and fatalities, murders and so many other quality of life issues and a significant reason is drugs. IMHO the reason is nearly complete lack of consequences in 99% (likely more) of the cases. There is nearly never a consequence at the lower level to dissuade people that are going from "responsible user" to out of control tweaker who is kicking down your door trying to seal the Oxy from your medicine cabinet.

The challenging part is determining where my liberty / freedom begins and ends compared with others. Not an easy answer even though some try (i.e. the folks who believe we should not own guns because it is dangerous for them).

Healthy discussion this, really enjoy and respect the perspectives here!

 

[RobMa]

Tucson to ignore Arizona ‘Second Amendment Sanctuary’ law

Officials in Tucson plan to ignore a new "Second Amendment Sanctuary" law signed earlier this year that bars the use of any state or local resources to enforce federal gun laws that conflict with state law.

www.fox10phoenix.com

Get them out now, seriously get them all out...

 

[Jonnyuma]

Tucson is a college town, it's AZ's Austin. Tempe (home of ASU) is similarly hippified but it's small and doesn't command attention.

Plus, Tucson has been butthurt since the 90s when Mesa surpassed it as 2nd largest city in the state.

 

[bbbass]

That's a problem.

Can't refuse emergency medical care. To anyone. For any reason...

Not what I meant at all. But speaking of emerg medical care,,,, there just happens to be a shortage of the very expensive Narcan that taxpayers are providing to first responders....

What I mean by programs is no free treatment programs.... that's not emergency medical care. Nope, it's housing and counselors, meds as needed, etc, and the recidivism rate is very high... if it's provided at taxpayer expense, like it is here in Oregon, it is a waste of taxpayer funding.

 

[RVTECH]

The challenging part is determining where my liberty / freedom begins and ends compared with others. Not an easy answer even though some try (i.e. the folks who believe we should not own guns because it is dangerous for them).

This is the part I do not understand.

It's not so much those believing we should not own guns because it's dangerous for THEM but they typically impart this way of thinking onto everyone else IE knowing whats 'good' for everybody and then trying to create the illusion 'they' know whats best and how it should be handled.

It is this way with libs and ANY issue (guns of course being at the top of the list) they convince themselves is right for them they project as being right for everybody.

How did they become the exalted decision makers for everybody on what THEY believe is right?

 

[Alexx1401]

This is the part I do not understand.

It's not so much those believing we should not own guns because it's dangerous for THEM but they typically impart this way of thinking onto everyone else IE knowing whats 'good' for everybody and then trying to create the illusion 'they' know whats best and how it should be handled.

It is this way with libs and ANY issue (guns of course being at the top of the list) they convince themselves is right for them they project as being right for everybody.

How did they become the exalted decision makers for everybody on what THEY believe is right?

The one constant with the left is they exempt themselves from all those rules they want others to follow. The "useful idiots" are great for lapping up the koolaid even when they see the ones who want to rule make sure the rules are NOT for them. The current POTUS and his son are a prime example of this.

 

[RVTECH]

Another thing with ANY left/lib issue (not just guns) is they tend to only look at the 'small' picture and never the 'big'.

Kind of like 'if it just saves one life' with regard to guns.

They always operate on the 'spend $5 to save $1' position with everything.

 

[Alexx1401]

Another thing with ANY left/lib issue (not just guns) is they tend to only look at the 'small' picture and never the 'big'.

Kind of like 'if it just saves one life' with regard to guns.

They always operate on the 'spend $5 to save $1' position with everything.

They could care less about life. To those who want to rule life other than their own means nothing.

 

[CRBMoA]

 

[WillametteWill]

Kind of like 'if it just saves one life' with regard to guns.

I just want to scream when I hear this. Want to save a bunch of lives, not just one? Okay, everyone in a vehicle must wear full face helmets and 6-point restraints. We will save about 10,000 lives if we do this. "Well that is too inconvenient and will mess up my hair!" they say. Yes, anti-gunner, yes is it inconvenient. Just like firearms registration, mag cap limits and restricting STTGU's (shoulder thing that goes up) is inconvenient for me. The difference is my idea would actually save lives, yours just make you feel good.

(Excerpt from conversation with antigunners)

 

[Alexx1401]

I just want to scream when I hear this. Want to save a bunch of lives, not just one? Okay, everyone in a vehicle must wear full face helmets and 6-point restraints. We will save about 10,000 lives if we do this. "Well that is too inconvenient and will mess up my hair!" they say. Yes, anti-gunner, yes is it inconvenient. Just like firearms registration, mag cap limits and restricting STTGU's (shoulder thing that goes up) is inconvenient for me. The difference is my idea would actually save lives, yours just make you feel good.

(Excerpt from conversation with antigunners)

The BIG difference is the people who try to ram home gun laws do not do it for "life". They do it for power. If they wanted to save lives it would be easy to do. Places like Chi town people die daily. The people claiming they want to save lives want to do nothing to stop the criminals. They only want to stop the people who are not a problem.

 

[RVTECH]

(Excerpt from conversation with antigunners)

Yep - heard the same thing from my liberal family member but really never responded as it would have fallen on 'deaf ears' .

It is obvious however when 'listening' to him he NEVER took into account ANY inconveniences, time, or money wasted to accomplish all the laws and changes he wanted to take place - and for what little difference it MIGHT make. (but mostly nothing)

Libs are all very 'sanctimonious' and this dominates nearly their entire way of thinking - and life.

 

[bbbass]

They could care less about life. To those who want to rule life other than their own means nothing.

Classic sociopathic narcissism.

 

[bbbass]

Yep - heard the same thing from my liberal family member but really never responded as it would have fallen on 'deaf ears' .

It is obvious however when 'listening' to him he NEVER took into account ANY inconveniences, time, or money wasted to accomplish all the laws and changes he wanted to take place - and for what little difference it MIGHT make. (but mostly nothing)

Libs are all very 'sanctimonious' and this dominates nearly their entire way of thinking - and life.

 

[bbbass]

There is nearly never a consequence at the lower level to dissuade people that are going from "responsible user" to out of control tweaker who is kicking down your door trying to seal the Oxy from your medicine cabinet.

Not sure about tweakers (who I thought were meth users) going after Oxy.... they use it to come down???

Isn't part of the drug/theft cycle that drugs cost so much???? If they were legal and the cost came down, then only the really bad off would need to steal... I'd rather deal with that than the gansta/drug dealer culture we have now.

FWIW, when Louisianna made shooting carjackers legal, car jacking stopped.

 

[P7M13]

Just like firearms registration, mag cap limits and restricting STTGU's (shoulder thing that goes up) is inconvenient for me. The difference is my idea would actually save lives, yours just make you feel good.

2017, the year of the Vegas concert shooting, there were 117 "mass shooting deaths" and 587 injured (source).

Looking at this infographic from After-Car-Accidents.com, 434 people died from cell phone usage. Wanna save lives, have all cell phoned be disabled in a car when the car is in motion.

 

[WillametteWill]

Isn't part of the drug/theft cycle that drugs cost so much???? If they were legal and the cost came down, then only the really bad off would need to steal... I'd rather deal with that than the gansta/drug dealer culture we have now.

True story, so no bubblegum, there I was...
Boarded a Southwest flight from PDX to SoCal a few years ago, after weed was legalized in WA and IIRC just as it was about to be legal in OR. I was sitting next to a nice younger man, late 20's, with a 21-ish year old female at the isle seat, kinda edgy, alternative looking. Chatted with the guy for a while, pleasant chap.

Took off and we were all quite for while before the two of them were talking. After a few minutes it was clear that he was a marijuana grower and she was clearly a consumer. The conversation was fascinating. One of my big takeaways however was that they both despised the idea of legalization because it made the cost more for the consumer and the profit margin less for the supplier. She purchased in states were it was not legal to get a better deal. At the end of the flight he provided her with his business card (which at the time was really strange for me to see).

Add government, see price increases. Anyone surprised?

And meth addicts will steal anything they can sell or trade for their drug of choice. You are correct about the drug/theft cycle in that addicts will always get to a point were they are consuming more than they can afford. They quickly get to a point where work is not possible so they can't afford anything not provided by the government...I mean all of us.

 

[RVTECH]

I'd rather deal with that than the gansta/drug dealer culture we have now.

You make a good point but legalizing drugs would have to be on the Federal level and cover the entire US as opposed to just a few states to even begin to eliminate the gansta/drug culture. For example:

Legalizing MJ only makes it easier for the middle and upper classes to acquire MJ as they no longer need to find 'illegal' sources for it. Those who cannot afford 'legal' MJ will still need a way to acquire it - cheaper or for 'trade' and the illegal growers fill this need. Also the illegal growers supply states that have not yet, or may never legalize it,. And it has already been proven (by getting caught) some 'dispensaries' have been buying from illegal growers to cut their costs. Most end users don't know the difference.

Apply this example to all other drugs and the result will be the same.

 

[bbbass]

Whomever created the Federal War On Drugs certainly has the power to end it... prob not the will, nor the public support. We might someday legalize certain drugs, but we will never end mollycoddling those users. Esp not since so many support the European model of providing treatment.