Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“Is Yiddish holy? A most ridiculous topic not worthy of comment by a Talmidchochom ”
Lol!
this is your 4th comment in this threadThis idea is silly
forcing people to go out if one of them doesn’t think its a shidduch makes zero sense. (And if anything would undermine shiduchim since instead of that evening potentially spent on a possible shiduch, it is wasted on an impossible (ok unlikely) one. )Sechel pretends that they do this in Lubavitch circles, but admits “unless there was something seriously wrong with the first date.”
In other words, they DONT automatically go on a second date“It is long past time that it was relegated to anthropologists.”
People have been saying that for centuries.
Yiddish has outlasted them all, and will outlast you too.
sorry if you find this disappointingCA
It was obviously meant as a joke.
You can easily find a war that began or ended in any year. Especially if you have no actual definition of “war” A war began or ended every yearJust WW2 has 3 start dates in this thread 1931, 1933 and 1939
“World trade center attacks.” are counted as a warIt isnt a serious thread. It is supposed to be nonsense
nope thats not how it works
Is your discovery that if you take an arbitrary number you will find a war involving some country that started or ended in intervals of that number?
“I wouldn’t call it Bipartisan when only 8 Republicans voted for it.”
Lol me neither, I dint name it. why give credit to an anti-life party.
“Until ruled otherwise, a law is torah misinai until another court replaces.”
I dont think you know what “misinai” means
and again. The ruling you cited WAS (somewhat) overturned by Freed in 71′ deeming a national registry not unconstitutional.“You are living in La La land and basing your arguments on the “What If” scenario.”
Just so I have this right , abortion is justified, and anybody who opposes it is trying to ” impose their tyrannical ideology on the masses.” correct?“1) Car registration is not federal. As you already pointed out, even gun registration is state level.”
I dont follow. Ok so let every state have mandatory gun registration. I’m fine with that. I didint mean it HAD to be at the federal level.“2) Car registration is a simple fee, same as gun licensing. The test is also very simple and majority of Americans pass it on the first try.”
I dont follow, ok so make gun registration a simple fee and a simple test. I’m not sure what you are saying“3) Car registration and licenses are revoked for a period amount of time if you misuse your car. Should the same apply with guns? No.”
Seriously? Are you saying If a person misuses his gun he should be allowed to keep it? Do I have your opinion correct? (I have to assume this was a typo of some sort)
“4) Nearly 1.25 million people die in road crashes each year, on average 3,287 deaths a day. An additional 20-50 million are injured or disabled. Based on your logic, we should ban all vehicles!”
youve asked this several times. I dont follow youll have to walk me through this point slowly how you reached that conclusion.
“So what should we discuss, 40,000 people that die from gun violence (2/3 from suicide) or the 1.25 MILLION that are killed by a dangerous weapon??”
BOTH! why limit discussions? Lets try to lower that number of people who die from gun violoence including those by sucicide AND those killed with a dangerous weapon.
” including a majority of Republicans and even a majority of nra members.” Seriously? ”
Yep, seriouslyIn congress it doesnt have support. because the NRA is blood thirsty and lines the pockets of senators wit htheir blood money.
A majority of americans, yes even Republicans and Yes even NRA MEMBERS are good people, who care about gun safety (this was the NRA’s opriginal goal unitl the 70’s when they switched to unrestricted gun ownership) support universal background checksLook up “Do majority of NRA members support background checks for guns?” On politifact .com you will fins links to many surveys showing widespread support for universal background checks
“You crack me up with your misinformation.”
Lol!Rabbi dovid choen has an excellent book “Hasafa Hakedosha” (“The holy Language”)
On Yiddish expressions“since this is the law, there is nothing that can be done besides protesting.”
Just yesterday the house passed the “bipartisan Background Checks Act” expanding background checks to all gun sales at gun shows and internet sales.
Hopefully some Republicans in the Senate will finally take a pro-life stance and vote for a measure that has wide support among the public, including a majority of Republicans and even a majority of nra members.
“If there was an amendment that everyone can own a car,”
you keep making the same silly mistake. The constitution and the supreme court are not torah Misiani lehavdil.
If you oppose abortion it doesn’t become “right” just because the supreme court says it is or even if an amendment gets added enshrining abortion as a “right”.If unrestricted access to guns is a bad idea, then even if the constitution DID grant that, (though as mentioned it doesn’t) it STILL would not become a good idea.
“However, since this is the law, there is nothing that can be done besides protesting.”
That is absurd. you have no idea how government works. Laws can change. amendments can be added (thats why they are called amendments) The supreme court can (and has) changed their opinion. these are elementary concepts as to how government works. Its is amazing that you think “nothing can be done” once a law is in place, you have made lots of wrong staments in thsi thread. but this one ” since this is the law, there is nothing that can be done besides protesting.” i’s flabbergastingI’d like to respond to your Jews part, but I dont really understand the comparison .
“There is no gun problem with law abiding citizens. ”
Ah except that there is! accidental gun deaths, are a problem too.
and besides, this line is silly, since often they are law abiding until they arent
and again we require car registries even though there is no problem. and please please dont tell me that cars arent protected, youve said thsi illogical argument 10 times it wont start making sense now (unless you can explain WHY say gun registries are bad. )“The issues arises from criminals who won;t be registering their guns and get everything illegally anyways. .
So….. lets make it easier for them and harder to trace source of htheir guns. got it.
Is that your approach to drugs too. Lets sell percocet at supermarket checkout counters since criminlas wil l get it anyway. Why penalize law abiding citizens ( in pain no less) make them go to a doctor then a pharmacy“So what you are suggesting is instead of penalizing the criminals, you also include the law abiding citizens. How’s that for democracy?”
who is penalizing anyone? I have to wait at a red light, is that a penalty? It is a rule that keeps everyone safer. That is EXACTLY how democracy works. We all give up some freedoms (eg running red lights) for the betterment of society.
you really need a civics lessonand again you havent answered my question about Abdul.
Look, as Ive said if you say, “hey I like guns I dont care that we have one of the highest gun deaths in the world. It is part of my freedom to be allowed to buy 20 guns with no questions act.
I get that I really do. we can agree to disagree on that point”.But be clear with your position, stop pretending we are forced by the constitution, or that other countries have this problem,, stop making illogical arguments like criminals will break the law anyway why try to stop them, Just recognize your own position., and be logical about it
“the court has to ruled otherwise!”
Yes obviously, I’m not saying my opinion (nor the lone dissenter’s) Trumps the court (Is that what you thought I meant?)
though it can be done in ways that fit the constituion. see U.S. v. Freed (1971) that I mentioned.“No, the constitutions protects individuals from corrupt governments that want to impose their tyrannical ideology on the masses.”
So opposing abortions is “corrupt governments that want to impose their tyrannical ideology on the masses.”
After all the supreme court ruled that it was protected. So according to you that now defines opposing it as a “tyrannical ideology”Do I have this right?
“Would you have any objection for the government to require all the Jews to register themselves in a national database?”
I don’t follow, are Jews dangerous?
” which will NOT prevent gun violence,”
Why not? (probably) helps in Israel“No, the loophole is private sellers”
I’m not sure what “no” refers to, that is what IVe been saying“Abdul can show up at a gunshow say “Hi I’m on the no-fly list but I need to buy 20 unregistered guns preferably with large magazines, but I cant pass a background check, please direct me to the private sellers where I can stock up on the 20 guns I need to protect my home from “masked thugs” ””
do you think that is something we should stop or a neccesary evil (or good !?) to avoid penalizing law abiding citizens. by having them register guns (Though for soem reason car registration is not a penalty)
Reminds me of the guy who goes to his lawyer
“Help i’m being sued for breaking Reuvein’s lamp that I borrowed.Lawyer replies ” first we will prove you never borrowed it, then we will prove that it was already broken when you borrowed it, finally we will prove that when you returned it it was fixed”
anon
“please read up on U.S. v. Haynes (1968) why a national gun registration is unconstitutional.”I have and I know. Please stop changing the subject.
youve brought up “constituional” several times.
It is an absurd argument
1. The constitution isnt absolute. Even in haynes there was a dissenter (and Marshal abstained) . Maybe today 5 justices would find it constitutional. “Separate but equal” was deemed constitutional until it wasn’t. The constitution isnt absolute
2. We arent discussing whether a registry can feasibly be created. IThe question is whether it is a good idea. If you concede ” yes it might be a good idea, but what can we do the constitution doesn’t allow it” then we can move on to discussing whether it can fit with the constitution . In other words, say we are arguing whether regarding football players kneeling. I’m arguing its disrespectful and creates bad vibes at what shouldn’t be a political event , and youre arguing that it is bringing attention to an important problem. It is silly for you to bring up “oh but the constituion allows it…” Yes it may, but we are discussing the appropriateness of the act. the constitution is a dodge.3. Please read up on U.S. v. Freed (1971)
“However, as I stated and you correctly pointed out, it is only mandatory at state level, and only some of them do it.”
Exactly! and practically speaking there isnt much difference between states. Often when driving, you may not even know what state you are in . Thus strict gun laws in , say NY are hampered by the fact that a few hours drive will get you to Pennsylvania where you DO NOT need to pass a background check to buy from a private seller (except handguns, for handguns Youd have to drive a bit further to say Ohio).
Abdul can show up at a gunshow say “Hi I’m on the no-fly list but I need to buy 20 unregistered guns preferably with large magazines, but I cant pass a background check, please direct me to the private sellers where I can stock up on the 20 guns I need to protect my home from “masked thugs” ”Do you really think that wanting to prevent that from legally occuring is a “complacent, brainless, and outright dangerous position ”
Or perhaps is the reverse true ….
“However, backgorund checks IS mandatory on a federal level.”
Nope, see 18 U.S.C § 921(a)(21)(C) only if purchased from a “dealer” this is the so-called “gunshow loophole” Ive been telling you about
“Pray tell how a national gun registry would reduce illegal guns?”
Gladly!
but first ,
where do we stand on this, you said ” I illustrated numerous times that background checks and gun registries are mandatory” Did you really?Also, You indicated in a few posts, (though perhaps never said it outright) that you support background checks/gun registries, now that you are realizing how mistaken you are, (and how little you know on the subjec)t, are you changing your mind ?
“But I never borrowed anything that would ever result in paying back..”
Exactly, So If I prove that you DID borrow (eg with a shtar), you cant say “Oh thats right, but I paid you”
When you said yu didint borrow, you also said you didnt pay me, or as you put it” I never borrowed anything that would ever result in paying back”anon
“I illustrated numerous times that background checks and gun registries are mandatory”You didnt illustrate it once , and it is demonstrably false. Look up the (poorly named) “gunshow loophole”
as for registries:
A national registry is actually illegal see 18 U.S.C. § 926(a)
and I quote :”No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established”and 28 C.F.R. § 25.9(b)(3)
“Limitation on use. The NICS, including the NICS Audit Log, may not be used by any Department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to establish any system for the registration of firearms, firearm owners, or firearm transactions or dispositions, except with respect to persons prohibited from receiving a firearm by 18 U.S.C. 922(g) or (n) or by state law. The NICS Audit Log will be monitored and reviewed on a regular basis to detect any possible misuse of NICS data.”As for states, only Hawaii requires all guns to be registered (and DC), NY has registry for handguns only (and large caliber rifle) .
some states such as FLA, DE, GA, ID, PA, RI, SD and Vt, like in the Federal Govt registries are illega.I’d be happy to cite all the above but out of mercy for the mods I’ll limit to PA since its the closest
from PA gen assembly title 18 .
“§ 6111.4. Registration of firearms.Notwithstanding any section of this chapter to the contrary, nothing in this chapter shall be construed to allow any government or law enforcement agency or any agent thereof to create, maintain or operate any registry of firearm ownership within this Commonwealth. For the purposes of this section only, the term “firearm” shall include any weapon that is designed to or may readily be converted to expel any projectile by the action of an explosive or the frame or receiver of any such weapon.”l
“What else would you like?”
i’ll settle for these two. Now that IVe shown you that your information was wrong. will you a. apologize and/or b. agree that reform is needed
(i’ll settle for b)BTW
curiosity
Using your” logic” are only those (not you r”l) who have had a loved one shot in say, a school shooting allowed to have an opinion? So in order to avoid “irtue-signaling, righteous high-horse, brain-dead liberal mishugas” They would have to have been both attacked by masked intruders AND had a child shot in school THEN they could tell us which is more importtant. do I have this right?curiosity
“once masked thugs kick your door in at 3AM with your wife and”
Wow
1. that isnt a nice thing to wish
2. I don’t follow your “logic” Are you saying people can only make arguments once they have faced an emotional trauma? Are you saying dumb arguments become better when spoken by people faced with emotianl trauma? with Are you saying that you dont have any logical defense of guns that you are forced to fall back on some mean spirited emotional retort?
you remind me of anti-vaxers who when faced with overwhelming evidence as to the stupidty o their position respond with “Oh yeah tell that to my sister whose child became autistic from vaccines” How does that contribute to the conversation
3. any such masked thug might be faced with the barrel of my Glock. you say ” but just realize that to those of us who understand the need for gun ownership” Ive said several times I understand the need for gun ownership, for all you know I have one (or several in case my buddies show up to help defend my hjome against 10 masked thugs I guess?) . I just want to try to prevent said masked intruder from being armed by requiring universal background checks, gun registries etc is that really a “complacent, brainless, and outright dangerous” position ? Does that really warrant wisihing for masked intruders?“Please leave my right for self perseveration alone.”
no can do. Here’s hoping the next president recognizes a real national emergency and finally does some thing about guns. frankly you seem a bit unhinged and I’m more afraid of the thought of you having access to a gun than I am of “masked thugs kicking in my door”
anon
“Your right”
I know“As you eloquently articulated that your opinion trumps fact.”
I am not sure where I said that“All I ask is you stop repeating the lies”
what lie a?
I wish I could say all I want is for you to do the same, but I want more than that
a. stop lieing (eg 1″they have to be registered, Yup…needs to happen too” 2. “As you eloquently articulated that your opinion trumps fact.”) among othersand b. stop changing your position (eg 1 “Comparing USA to Israel is foolish” ” vs “We should compare USA to Israel,…, all countries with heavy gun ownership” (believe it or not you made both of these statements) eg 2. Its hard to tell where you stand on gun registration you seem to think these already exist, though I cant tell if you support it.
as someone maybe dumb enough to believe you as it is the truth.”
that’s a worry I dont have, your points contradict each other. Should we compare to Israel? should guns be registered? should universal background checks exist? From you posts its impossible to tellplease educate yourself”
pot… mett kettle
“In Chicago, it is virtually impossibl…”
Some researchers are now saying that the US is bigger than Chicago
“New York requires ….”.
Some researchers are now saying that the US is bigger than New York“I cannot google all of it,”
you dont have to. This isnt my first time having this discussion.
Yes some areas do have more restrictions that others (and those staters tend to have lower rates of gun violence) but the country is big. If you cant get a gun without passing a background check in New Jersey (you can in Illionis so) no problem drive an hour to PA where you can.Thus I repeat:
““NONE of these measure exist in the US. Definitely not routinely, and most dont exist at all””you seem to support these measures, I can imagine your outrage. I’m so sorry to have to be the one to burst your bubble
What do you like to learn?
I have no idea where that other user name came from
anon
NONE of these measure exist in the US. Definitely not routinely, and most dont exist at all.
I can imagine your outrage(Though I’m a bit confused since earlier you said these measures would only work in Israel because they have a draft, and we have second amendment, of course you then said they dont exist in Israel. now you are saying they do exist in America your position and information is wildly all over the place
” Police only need to re-certify once a year.”
Lol “ONLY” once a year? thts stricter than even I intended
“Please youtube those sad but funny videos showing they can’t shoot for their life!”
Lol, is that really your argument, for looser gun regulation?“You do know that in order to obtain a license there are background checks,”
sometimes, notalways
” training with the sheriff department on the laws,”
sometimes not always” and treatment on how to handle a gun.”
sometimes not always.“New York city does not give concealed weapons permits unless you prove that you are a target.”
Um yes, I’m really not sure what your argument is anymore“If cereal equates to fruity pebbles,”
I dont know what that means“Actually, the states came from a research website that listed the countries gun laws versus homicide.”
which website?“Regardless who it is registered”
Lol, no not refardless! THAT is what we are discussing“But Israel does not have a second amendment that guarantees that right, so yes, they can add additional requirements.”
You have mane this illogical argument 3 times. It isnt becoming more logical the more you repeat it“So you worried about people killing themselves or killing others?
both“If it is themselves, then remove knives, cars, and bridges and people use them to kill themselves too.”
Not nearly as much. and again d you really need he difference explained to you?“So why legislate against the weapon of choice versus knives?”
Sigh, becasue you have to weigh the burden on society vs the benefit. I assume you agree there should be some speed limit in place on some roads at some times. Ie I assume you agree that in a school zone cars shouldnt drive 100 mph. Now does that mean you would ban all driving? or limit speed limit to 1 mph? It would obviously save more lives, so why dont we do that? Becasue the burden is too high we need to drive but not to fast so we come up with a happy medium.
Guns are fun, get it snuffing out the life of small helpless namless or smashing targets is a real rush, it makes us feel like a real powerful man. fine, great. We need to weigh that wonderful use against the harm to soceity. The US has one of the highest homicie rates, this is too high a price to pay for unfettered access to guns. We need to regulate control to guns more. No this wont stop every death, but it will help.
You brought up ars, again like Israel, if we trated guns like we do cars that would be fine. Are you sure you are not on my side? Wh ydo you keep brining examples that weaken your position?“Chicago has a high homicide rate. So it has nothing to do with the laws, but the people”
Asked and answered .“There are great papers on that.”
Yp there are,“I guess that is why people outside NYC is allowed to turn right on red, because people don’t abuse it. So yes!”
Lol, you mean so no, thats not running a red if you are “allowed to turn”. right?
Typical liberal making me wait at reds just to control my life .anon
I did not mean Burger’s view was Torah misinai. My point was that there was no outcry on his misrepresenting the historical view“However, we do have a case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the court said there is an individual constitutional right to have a handgun in one’s home for self-protection. Per our current courts, it is a right.”
Yes no argument there. In Heller the court reinterpreted the law and said there was an individual right. I said this several times. I’m not sure what you are adding .
Earlier you said “For over 200 hundred years that was exactly how it was understood” Can you provide any evidence to this claim/ (note I am not asking for evidence how it was MEANT rather how it was UNDERSTOOD).
“Bring me a realistic case for a proper response”
sure!
My paretns run a strict home and set down a rule book for how to live our lives it says :
” A healthy breakfast being critical to start the day, the right of the children to eat cereal shall not be infringed”
would this guarantee the right of the children to eat fruity pebbles?“We should compare USA to Israel, ….”
Whoa hold up! Earlier yo u said we cant compare USA to Israel and that if we do it somehow meant we had to have a draft and socialism
and besides I’m not sure where you get your stats from, with the exception of Switzerland all the countries you lsit have far fewer guns, and of course far fewer homicides than the US“While Israel has standards for gun ownership, every 18 year old carries one”
This is false. The guns are registered, psychological profiles must be passed and reassesed. Look yo ucant have it both ways if you want to compare to ISrael fine, so lets have their gn ownership and restriction. If you dont, also fine. But picking thier gun ownership but ignoring the restrictions and hoping for a better outcome is nutty.“In addition, over 65% of gun deaths are suicide, not murder. ”
Um yeah, and some scientists are now saying death by suicide is just as dead as homicide” Per your argument, we should also restrict knives.”
Are you serious? I’m happy to explain the difference if you really need it explained. But for the record, d you not see the difference?” However, the majority of gun homicides are committed against black people.”
Yep, though some studies are showing that black people are people too. I know I know thats pretty liberal of me.“Even the CDC in 2013 reported that there are over 100, 000 times guns were used for self defense,”
Did I tel you about the guy taking colace and Imodium?“While it is your opinion and right to not own a gun”
you are making lots of assumptions, who says I dont own one?“Liberals needs to stop infringing people’s rights by enforcing their own ideals.”
This is gibberish. Though it sounds cool. Do I have the right to own grenades? (ITs in the second ammendment) Can I run red lights when I pinky swear no cars are coming? Just becasue other people will abuse this priverlage means I shouldnt be allowed to run reds?anon
” As you can see, it is more effective than police.”first of all, I dont see that. I do see a cop in queens shot by a trained police officer who thought some other guy was carrying a gun.
Second and far more importantly you say ” My argument is for TRAINED citizens to bear arms.”
This has not been our argument until now.
Just so that I understand, you would support mandatory training, including background checks, registering guns . psychological tests, re-certifying every so often.IF you agree with even some of the above, then we are in agreement
anon
“For over 200 hundred years that was exactly how it was understood”
Um no. In fact I never even heard any one make that argument. conservatives say it was misinterpreted for 200 years until it was finally correctly interpreted in 2008. (See an excellent few pages on the subject in the annotated constitution available on the library of congress’s website)
In 1990 Warren Burger labeled the idea that the Second Amendment gives an unfettered individual right to a gun a”fraud on the American public.” This comment was not met by much opposition outside of some fringe groups way back in 1990. can you find any source arguing that the 2nd amendment is not limited to a militia from before say, the 70’s when the NRA shifted their focus from lobbying for gun safety to lobbying against it?
Also I can’t help but notice you havent answered my question: suppose the constitution said ” A healthy breakfast being critical to start the day, the right of the people to eat cereal shall not be infringed”
would this guarantee the right to eat fruity pebbles?“You seriously brought an example of Missouri, a STATE to make an argument why a CITY has the highest gun violence?”
sure, why not? A City is smaller than a state the more data you look at the more accurate your findinngs.
For super accurate findings look at the trend among all 50 states comparing gun restrictions vs deaths.
On second thought you may not want to, as it may force you to reevaluate your position .“USA has a second amendment. Israel does not. Period. ”
You made this argument. I just dont understand it. I am not comparing the US to ISrael, that was 2scents. I replied why the comparison was wrong.
And again if the second amendment is stupid why should we be stuck with it no matter what? This is one of the strangest arguments coming from the pro-gun side. and if it isnt stuid, argue why it is good plicy, but to just say well it is the law so too bad no matter how bad it is, just doesnt make sense.“Israel has a mandatory draft, should USA have it too? ”
No, why ?“Israel is a socialist country”
Is it? ,” should USA be too? Don’t answer that!”
[redacted at asker’s request]“Can you tell me how long it too for the Pittsburgh police to enter the shul? ”
so I had to look it up it took 40 minutes. Just so I have your argument right, you are saying that while it took trained armed SWAT team members called in to take him down, over 30 hour to subdue the gunman. It would’ve been faster for elderly untrained individuals surprised by the gunman. Is that really your argument?
and even if true. This argument is like my patient who takes both colace and Imodium.
And in no way discredits the main part of my argument, namely that gun ownership should be tightly regulated“When you get your response, you’ll know why citizens should own guns.”
Nope, I got the response and I still dont know why they “should”. and I never said they shouldn’t. so I’m not even sure where this line of “reasoning” was going1
nice
nailed it!There are a few others you forgot see here for some classic “talking points”
“People don’t live in states per se, ”
interesting. Thats something I didint know, I’m not quite sure how to respond to thatanon
“The second amendment allows a militia and people to bear arms.”nope, not necessarily that is not the way it was understood for over 200 years of its existence.
Even according to you, why is the first clause there, did the ink just spill on the paper forming those words, and they couldn’t bother to erase them?The example used last time (I think it may have been with Curiosity) suppose the constitution said ” A healthy breakfast being critical to start the day, the right of the people to eat cereal shall not be infringed”
would this guarantee the right to eat fruity pebbles?” Chicago has one of the strictest gun laws, it is still known as one of the deadliest cities”
well yes, guns are easily purchased in neighboring Missouri (47th place in gun regulation and as expected 6th in gun deaths) , So on the city level it might not hold as trueOh and FYI Illinois 8th in gun control and 31st in gun deaths so all in all a safer place to live than Missouri
“Nicely stated, when the government tried to infringe on people’s rights, like to prohibition era, organized crime increased”
fine, so make THAT argument. (which has been addressed above) but arguing that “US has a second amendment, Israel does not. End of story.” is not a reasonable argument
“please show me where I said guns should not be well regulated”
nu nu so we agree, mazel tov shalom Al yisorel!You are throwing me off though with some of your other lines “This is why debating with you is highly unpleasant.”
Are we debating or not ?regarding your other complaints. your comparisons of Guns to suicide bombings and rugs isnt a logical one . I did explain why above. These “arguments” are not original. The same silly talking points are brought up over and over (they also loves “cars kill more people than guns should we ban all cars” , these arent logical arguments, and I did explain why for example the comparison to drugs is silly.. Sean Hannity loves them. The fact that you feel uncomfortable coming up with the same arguments as he does (as you should) says more about your arguments than about my bringing him up
“I was referring to the US”
Then I’m not sure why you addressed that comment to me, I was talking about ISrael. And why comparing The US to ISrael on gun violence is silly.
“It’s a moot point comparing Israel to the US. US has a second amendment, Israel does not. End of story.”
No not end of story. hHaving a second amendment is not a n excuse for having crazy policies. amendments can be changed (that is the very definition of theterm) When people woke up and realized that prohibition was crazy the response wasn’t “US has a nineteenth amendment end of story”
Furthermore, the second amendment calls for it to be “Well regulated” and from its existence in 1791 until 2008 in Heller it was not understood as applying to an individual’s right to bear arms, so it is a constantly changing story. There is no reason to “end” it now
curiosity
“Additionally, getting high and addicted to drugs is not a use that is beneficial to society or to individuals.”Says you. And I do agree. Just because people like doing something owning something that is bad for society doesn’t mean they should be allowed to do so.
and even things that all agree are beneficial like morphine we agree should be highly regulated and not readily available.
The fact that some will not follow the above rules is not a reason not to have them.I’m not sure where it is that we disagree.
I am just pointing out flaws in the silly lines you are repeating from Hannity. That is not being intellectually dishonest.
Look the bottom line is if you think guns are a right and even if we have the highest gun death in the world as a result, since you enjoy guns or feel manly or safe or whatever. fine I get that. That is a point we can agree to disagree on.
Just try to stop repeating these absurd talking points comparing guns to suicide bombs and d rugs, and trying to use that to argue that guns should NOT be well regulated is just nonsense. And me calling you out on it is not intellectually dishonest, though I do get why pointing out the absurdities of your position is highly unpleasant“: actually there is no limit on gun ownership”
there is :
“It is also rare for a person to be authorized to own more than one firearm, ”
source: Times of Israel, Israel dismisses NRA’s claims about guns laws 12/24/12” and there is no psychiatric test.”
There is :“The law, drafted by MK David Tsur (Hatnua), requires that a person undergo psychological assessment before he or she can get a gun license.”
source: KNESSET TIGHTENS GUN CONTROL WITH NO OPPOSITION Jerusalem Post 7/23/14These are but two examples of plenty of restrictions that Israel places on gun ownership.
Lol
“allowing all citizens who had undergone combat training as a combat soldier in the army, to apply for a license. This only applies to those who have passed infantry rifle training”and those are the recent “Loosened restriction”
and from the CNN quotes “provided they have a certain amount of military or security training”
Again these are the recent “loosened restrictions” Could you imagine trying to introduce these loose restrictions in the US?
Additionally there are limits on how many guns can be owned, guns are registered, every gun purchase needs a background check, I believe there are psychiatric tests that must be passed“which is the ability to defend yourself from an attack and ability to limit the damage of the attacker.”
The argument that there are so many gun deaths, so lets arm more people, Reminds me of my patient whose medication list included both colace and Imodium. He explained that after surgery he was constipated so started colace. now things were the opposite so he added Imodium.2scents
“My point was simply a statement that I believe a lot would agree to.”Fair enough. But to use Israel to justify our (largely) free for all approach to gun ownership is disingenuous at best
2scents
“In Israel this has happened numerous times and has clearly limited the scope of damage of these attacks. ”
Israel has very strict gun regulation
If we were to enact SOME of their restrictions that would be fine.akuperma
For the first 200 years of its existence the 2nd amendment was not understood as applying to “the people”
As Warren Burger said “that the Second Amendment “has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud—I repeat the word ‘fraud’—on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime”you say
“If you believe the government is inherently benign ”how does this work? Tax day is coming up I think taxes are tyrannical do you support my right to defend my property from the tyrannical IRA when they come a’knockin?
Is there any armed rebellion uprising that you support in the past 228 years of the 2nd amendments existence?
how does this work exactly?curiosity
“You totally missed the point of the explosives conversation”
I didn’t, you were repeating silly talking points that get repeated over and over again .Yoour next 2 steps are equally silly (for example “Many potentially harmful drugs are currently illegal to own for anyone other than medical entities” is pure nonsense.
Lets keep the steps shorter and accurate:1) Drugs are harmful, they do have benefits so we keep them regulated. For example You need a prescription to get them (It is not illegal for a non-medical entity to own, Oxycodone, morphine, fentanyl etc I’m not sure hwere you got that idea from ) .
2) Guns are harmful, they do have benefits so we should keep them regulated
The one true statement was “Yes, those who deal drugs illegally will do so despite the current law” Yet you correctly realize that just because their are criminals is not a reason to make their criminal lives easier. similarly just because criminals will get guns (or explosives) even if they are regulated is not a reason not to regulate them
“There is no benefit to society since there is no productive use for these things ”
Says you! why kind of big brother are you to decide what is of benefit to me! some think there is benefit to having a gun in their home, others think being able to get high is a benefit. You do realize that their is a reason why people like cocaine right? IT isn’t because their “is no benefit”“If my seat has my nameplate on it showing that I have purchased it, NO ONE has richus to be seated, even if I don’t show up until Adon Olam.”
That sounds like midas Sedom. It is absurd that a yid has to stand throughout davening next to an empty seat that isn’t being used.
(Unless you meant Adon Olam before berachos, in which case I agree)
“
“My point is that there would be violence in these places whether or not explosive components are accessible.”
curiosity, so would you argue to make explosives more readily accessible?
“but there are no legitimate, productive uses for heroin and cocaine”
This is of course a dodge. Many drugs have quite legitimate uses. Narcotics are in fact vital to society. We of course keep it well regulated. Guns too, should be “well regulated” as the constitution calls for. The ease of buying a gun is absurd, and doubtlessly contributes to our high gun death rate.
This is something Ive wondered about
growing up all shuls had either lion on the paroches, motifs with the shevatim and their animals (donkey for yissoschar, deer for naftali, wolf for binyamin etc). OVer the past 10-15 years I have noticed these dissapearing as people get “frummer”
I’m curious when exactly this shift away from animals startedHaimy
“There are Blacks punching out frum Yidden in crown Heights, do we need to add fuel to the fire? Let’s use common sense & avoid antagonizing ainom Yehudim.”
and if there was no punching, antagonizing people would be ok?
“Actually, I was told by a Rav in the name of a highly respected Rosh Yeshiva and Posek that themed mishloach manos are stupid and, therefore, Assur to give.”
Oh yeah? Well I heard directly from a super highly respected Rosh Yeshiva that themed mishloach manos are at worst a hiddur mitzva and possibly a real chiyuv (see biur halacha 695 חייב לשלוח לחבירו וכו’ – הח”א הוכיח מן הירושלמי דאם שולח לעשיר דבר פחות אינו יוצא בזה ידי משלוח מנות וכן משמע בריטב”א לפי גירסא אחת שם בגמרא. אכן ש”פ לא הזכירו דבר זה ונכון ליזהר בזה לכתחלה:)
chazal incorporated shalach manos themes
אנא שדרי ליה חוליא ואיהו שדר לי חורפאWTP
very well put
“Its nice to make a leitzanus”
It is! Especially as you posted your hilarious purim torah on Rosh chodesh adar. I truly appreciated it thank you .
“The point is that we see a hint in the world to the concept of Mashiach.”
Exactly! and the more hints the better.“And evrything is working towards or against the jewish people.”
And many Jewish people Love falafel (probably more than Trump) proof positive that Moshiach is in the air.” According to kabalah, רק refers to torah shebichsav. מה refers to torah shebal peh. Birak, through rak, ubamah, and throughh mah.”
Exactly! and Marak (soup מרק ) combines the Torah shebalpeh (מה) with torah shebal peh ( רק) And as we all know according to kabbalah , if all of klal yisroel would dip their felafel into their marak moshiach would come immediately.
alas instead of us eating falafel marak we are busy writing Purim Torah on online forums“Do you feel you accomplish your life’s mission, at your job or business. What if you spent that time finishing shas?”
Asking and evaluating life’s decisions is always appropriate.
Look to chazal for guidance, TLIK provided some excellent sources .hopefully those not working are doing the same.
As R’ Avrhom Yehosua is quoted as having said: when you look at some seforim published today, after meah veesrim they will be asked “where are all the shoes you could have made”)Sure I am sure those who are not working spoke to their Rosh Hayeshiva and got a heter to take the easy way out, after all not everybody is cut out for working and there are probably heteirim to not work .
But Reevaluating is always healthySo we already know that chatzi maneh felafel is the gematria mashiach ben dovid.
(Anyone who says that gematrias dont work with non lashon hakodesh simply is incorrect, as the gemara does so on at least 2 occasions that I have seen, and I have not seen a lot.)
This proves that if we were to just eat more felafel moshiach would come, it also might prove that moshiach is ion fact a felafel sandwich (Though its a machlokes if a falafel is actually a sandwich ayin the debates over whether a hotdog is a sandwich)
do mekubalim double as shadchanim? Or are you looking to go out with a mekubal
“The Five Towns have enjoyed an unfairly positive image on the internet as a whole, which is misleading. Anything that can be done to correct that should be done”
So the point of this thread is just to put down fr the sake of putting down, just so that they don’t enjoy a “positive image” ?
As an aside online you will find a far worse image of the five towns regarding tznius than “mere ” dress.
“People have a yetzer hora, and do things they shouldn’t, and know they shouldn’t, and would be embarrassed if they were discovered.”
If only. In one of the shuls I grew up in, people gloated about how they kept separate books in order to claim “entitlements” they werent entitled too. In order to have a seat on the mizrach vant you had to have done some time in jail for tax evasion.
My rebbeim growing up taught us that it is a “mitzvah” to cheat on taxes. These were the rebbeim we were taught to look up toThere is a prominent case of a fellow who is viewed as celebrity in spite of (and to some because of – yes I heard this outright) having committed bank fraud. and I know sure there are all sorts of lomdishe reasons why it wasn’t technically wrong and that everybody does it he had no choice. Please spare me, every group has their own things they struggle with. I am not saying that the group being charged by OP is innocent.
I am just saying that all this holier than though attitude is baloney. You like looking down at them because its easy too. They (and I ) are doing the same (though Glorifying a convicted bank felon is not my nisayon, I do see why others struggle with that
” In which communities do tax evaders, child molestors or people stealing government benefits like Medicaid or section 8 parade their crimes in public?”
Lol! youre kidding right?
Look this thread is silly (not that I don’t love silly threads) nobody is coming to YWN to look for advice on this and nobody is changing their behavior based on a comment on YWN.
This is nothing more than an easy way to feel superior. I may not be so honest in business but hey at least I dress tznius. Of course I’m doing the same I may not dress tznius but hey at least I don’t come on to YWN with a fake holier than thou attitude pretending I have holy motives .You want a geshmake thread to put down others so you can feel superior without working on yourself.
go for it!
just dont pretend its anything more than that.i’m not.
what on earth makes yo uthink many of them are unvaccinated?
Unlike , many here they care about their children (thats why they often are coming in the first place) and do their best to protect them from diseases including vaccines
“why can’t they feel for those of us Ashkenazim who can’t stand to see a Jewish person driving a German car?”
I dont really understand. why do they have to chaneg thier habits to satisfy your meshugas.
Ok perhaps “meshugas” is a bit strong, but it certainly isnt based on anything logical. Just because the grandfather of today’s shareholders were horrible people, is a reason not to but the cars ?
Ok, if it bother s you dont buy it . but why do others have to agree with you?