Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Mayhem]

Then how would they check to make sure you are storing it properly? Or is it just another bullshit law that will never be enforced and wont actually prevent anything?

Apparently the majority of people comply with laws regardless if they´re enforcable or not.

[TZucchini]

Then how would they check to make sure you are storing it properly? Or is it just another bullshit law that will never be enforced and wont actually prevent anything?

I would assume that law-abiding gun owners would simply follow the law, correct? I mean, people keep telling me that the vast majority of gun owners are responsible and law-abiding.

In reality, it's a law that would be enforced when it's found to be broken. We have laws concerning building codes, yet the police don't randomly stop by your house and search it to make sure you're compliant. This would be the same.

[ellieg]

Apparently the majority of people comply with laws regardless if they´re enforcable or not.

Really? Name some completely unenforceable laws that people follow. Im honestly curious, no mal intent.

[Felya]

Please explain the difference. Why should a gun company be held responsible for a crime committed with their product, but the cooking knife company not held responsible for a crime committed with their product? They are both crimes. Guns aren't legally sold so you can go around shooting people with them.

Because their product has no perpouse other then to kill things. If your goal is to not kill things, than I am sure they can come up with ways making sure they are not used in such a way. It's why the person I responded to, needed to say it's perpouse is to cut meat... As if that's the crime in killing someone...

They are then free to make any adjustments to the way their guns are sold. Your rights are not abridged and your taxes are lower. What exactly is the fear here? Cigarettes are not sold to kill people, neither are class one drugs. Neither are cars which are regulated to have seatbelts. But, unlike either of those, there would be no limit to guns as dictated by the second amendment.

[ellieg]

I would assume that law-abiding gun owners would simply follow the law, correct? I mean, people keep telling me that the vast majority of gun owners are responsible and law-abiding.

In reality, it's a law that would be enforced when it's found to be broken. We have laws concerning building codes, yet the police don't randomly stop by your house and search it to make sure you're compliant. This would be the same.

And how would they check after its "been broken"? "sorry officer, he mustve got the key/combination to my safe." I just want to know what a law like this prevents.

[Felya]

There is already laws on the misuse of firearms. It is not the fault of the gun makers. But the penalties for misuse of a firearm need to be stiffer in my opinion.

Would you then call killing someone as misuse? If you can call killing people as a misuse of the fire arm, then there already is an avenue to do what I am saying.

[ellieg]

Because their product has no perpouse other then to kill things. If your goal is to not kill things, than I am sure they can come up with ways making sure they are not used in such a way. It's why the person I responded to, needed to say it's perpouse is to cut meat... As if that's the crime in killing someone...

They are then free to make any adjustments to the way their guns are sold. Your rights are not abridged and your taxes are lower. What exactly is the fear here? Cigarettes are not sold to kill people, neither are class one drugs. Neither are cars which are regulated to have seatbelts. But, unlike either of those, there would be no limit to guns as dictated by the second amendment.

I own 2 guns. I did not buy them to kill people. I bought them to shoot at a range. I will never kill anything with my gun and yet im going shooting tomorrow. You and a few others always say that a gun has no purpose to kill things, but id argue the majority of gun owners don't ever kill anything with their guns.

How do you plan on making my skeet shooting shotgun not able to kill things?

[Felya]

Then we should close down all the tobacco companies here. The resulting health care costs from the use of that product would be mind boggling to some. Also any snack food companies, gheeze, just think of all the sugar. The list gets bigger and bigger.

Why close down? We have huge taxes on tobacco products, regardless if they specifically can be linked, and an age limit on purchase. Neither of which would happen under what I am suggesting.

[Mayhem]

Really? Name some completely unenforceable laws that people follow. Im honestly curious, no mal intent.

Uhm, pretty much every law that is about acts of violence.

[ellieg]

Uhm, pretty much every law that is about acts of violence.

How so? If you see someone committing an act of violence, you enforce that shit by stopping it. Gun storage laws would take place in your house. I don't know how often cops randomly stroll through your house, but they've never been inside mine.

[TZucchini]

And how would they check after its "been broken"? "sorry officer, he mustve got the key/combination to my safe." I just want to know what a law like this prevents.

It's called investigation. It's how police solve crimes.

Plus, like I said, the vast majority of gun owners are responsible and law abiding.

[Felya]

I own 2 guns. I did not buy them to kill people. I bought them to shoot at a range. I will never kill anything with my gun and yet im going shooting tomorrow. You and a few others always say that a gun has no purpose to kill things, but id argue the majority of gun owners don't ever kill anything with their guns.

How do you plan on making my skeet shooting shotgun not able to kill things?

What safety precautions does your skeet shooting range provide? What precautions does a cooking class provide? You honestly see no differance on their use and intent?

Nothing I am saying would prevent you from going skeet shooting. In fact, all of your gun purchases are legal and have 0 limits on what other guns you can buy. So... What exactly is the issue here? You prefer having limits? You prefer paying for it as a tax payer? Other than blind 'don't harm gun manufacturers', what is the issue here?

[Mayhem]

How so? If you see someone committing an act of violence, you enforce that shit by stopping it. Gun storage laws would take place in your house. I don't know how often cops randomly stroll through your house, but they've never been inside mine.

And in the majority of places police isn´t present, still people don´t hit each other day in day out.

[Ghostpanther]

Why close down? We have huge taxes on tobacco products, regardless if they specifically can be linked, and an age limit on purchase. Neither of which would happen under what I am suggesting.

Not enough to cover the health care costs the non smokers have to pay for the use of that product. And the snack companies not held liable? You see this would open a whole can of ugly worms. There are so many things which can contribute to things we use and consume. One reason for all the warnings on the labels for items. But if a adult swallows rat poison, the manufacturer of it should be held liable?

[ellieg]

What safety precautions does your skeet shooting range provide? What precautions does a cooking class provide? You honestly see no differance on their use and intent?

Nothing I am saying would prevent you from going skeet shooting. In fact, all of your gun purchases are legal and have 0 limits on what other guns you can buy. So... What exactly is the issue here? You prefer having limits? You prefer paying for it as a tax payer? Other than blind 'don't harm gun manufacturers', what is the issue here?

What youre saying isn't fair. That's my problem with it. Gun companies don't sell weapons with the intent of people using them to kill people illegally. If they did, id agree with taxing them. They sell weapons under the assumption that people should be using them responsibly.

You said "If your goal is to not kill things, than I am sure they can come up with ways making sure they are not used in such a way." How would they modify my gun, so that I can still use it for shooting skeet, but would somehow make it impossible for me to kill someone with it?

My shooting range is outdoors. The precautions it has is a cease fire every 20 minutes or so, and a fence you are not allowed to cross. Everything else its assumed you know basic gun safety. Im not sure what precautions a cooking a class provides.

I do see the difference between the use and intent. My gun has 1 purpose. To fire projectiles when I pull the trigger. My knife has one purpose. To cut something. You cant honestly believe every gun is made/bought with the intent to kill can you?

- - - Updated - - -

And in the majority of places police isn´t present, still people don´t hit each other day in day out.

Yes but cameras are present in most places. as are witnesses. 2 things that don't happen inside my home.

- - - Updated - - -

It's called investigation. It's how police solve crimes.

Plus, like I said, the vast majority of gun owners are responsible and law abiding.

Are they going to be investigating my house for the sole purpose of checking if my gun is safely secured? That's the 4th amendment issue.

[Ghostpanther]

It's called investigation. It's how police solve crimes.

Plus, like I said, the vast majority of gun owners are responsible and law abiding.

I am happy to see you use the word "vast". So there is really not a gun misuse issue. Only by a very, very small minority which in no way shape or form, should have a impact on myself exercising my Constitutional right.

[Citizen T]

I would assume that law-abiding gun owners would simply follow the law, correct? I mean, people keep telling me that the vast majority of gun owners are responsible and law-abiding.

In reality, it's a law that would be enforced when it's found to be broken. We have laws concerning building codes, yet the police don't randomly stop by your house and search it to make sure you're compliant. This would be the same.

That has to be one of the worst analogies I've read in a long time. Building codes require inspections during construction and after any major rework. It's not like the building structure is able to change on a day to day basis. Also, the police don't enforce these. There is an entire different bureaucracy that polices these laws.

[Mayhem]

Yes but cameras are present in most places. as are witnesses. 2 things that don't happen inside my home.

What about domestic violence? What laws do you know of that are always enforcable?

- - - Updated - - -

I am happy to see you use the word "vast". So there is really not a gun misuse issue. Only by a very, very small minority which in no way shape or form, should have a impact on myself exercising my Constitutional right.

What makes you think that anything would change for you?

[TZucchini]

That has to be one of the worst analogies I've read in a long time. Building codes require inspections during construction and after any major rework. It's not like the building structure is able to change on a day to day basis. Also, the police don't enforce these. There is an entire different bureaucracy that polices these laws.

Regardless of whether or not you enjoyed my analogy, the point stands. Police can enforce a safe storage law without violating the 4th Amendment.

[ellieg]

What about domestic violence? What laws do you know of that are always enforcable?

- - - Updated - - -



What makes you think that anything would change for you?

I don't know of any laws that are 100% enforceable. I don't think anything in this world is 100% and im not gonna try and think of them. However, this "safety storage" law is damn near close to 0% enforceable and its a waste of time that only serves to make people feel good that they are doing something, when in reality, its not going to prevent any sort of gun crime.