Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[NYC17]

...And who has the right to decide whether its absolute of not? The very government who's using tax money to buy up hollow tips rounds, like they're pez candies?...I think I'll be keeping mine, tyvm.

Whether you "keep yours" or not has no bearing on whether a right is absolute or not.

What an odd post.

[Synros]

Whether you "keep yours" or not has no bearing on whether a right is absolute or not.

What an odd post.

I'll ask you AGAIN, because all you're doing is running around the question. Who has the right to say its absolute or not? Because for the last 230 years, we've been able to own them. Why even mention it in the Constitution, if it was NEVER meant for the public? Meanings change throughout history. Contrary to what you've been told, the Founders weren't retarded, and worded it like that for a reason. If it was simply meant for police and government, it would say just that.

[NYC17]

I'll ask you AGAIN, because all you're doing is running around the question. Who has the right to say its absolute or not? Because for the last 230 years, we've been able to own them. Why even mention it in the Constitution, if it was NEVER meant for the public? Meanings change throughout history. Contrary to what you've been told, the Founders weren't retarded, and worded it like that for a reason. If it was simply meant for police and government, it would say just that.

You answered your own question earlier so I assumed it was rhetorical. Do you actually not know? The courts have that right. Ultimately the final decision rests with SCOTUS, and the conservative's darling Scalia himself stated that it is not an absolute right.

I'm not sure you understand what the argument is here in regards to absolutism. I've made no connection between it being absolute and only "police and government"(whateverthefuck). How you came to this conclusion is a mystery.

[Rooflesstoofless]

...And who has the right to decide whether its absolute of not? The very government who's using tax money to buy up hollow tips rounds, like they're pez candies?...I think I'll be keeping mine, tyvm.

Supreme Court has that right. Its their job to decide the Constitutionality of various issues.

[Kellhound]

At this point it is a question on what constitutes a reasonable constraint on the right to bear arms. Absolute bans have been struck down as has the argument no restrictions should exist at all.

[PhaelixWW]

At this point it is a question on what constitutes a reasonable constraint on the right to bear arms. Absolute bans have been struck down as has the argument no restrictions should exist at all.

I think the important thing to remember is that, as a Constitutionally protected right, there needs to be a compelling reason to restrict it.

Not that there won't always be argument over what is and what is not considered a compelling reason, but the view that I hate is the one that thinks that, once any restriction is allowable, then all restrictions are fair game.

[Dolus]

Interesting.

http://www.sagepub.com/press/2013/de...dsbkgchecks.sp

[lockedout]

Interesting.

http://www.sagepub.com/press/2013/de...dsbkgchecks.sp

Gun grabbers want to get rid of guns "to save lives" what a crock of shit.
Guns kill people so we need to get rid of guns.
Drunk drivers kill people and a lot more than guns.
Which do we ban cars or alcohol?
I mean we need to save lives why not start with something where more lives are lost?

[TZucchini]

Gun grabbers want to get rid of guns "to save lives" what a crock of shit.
Guns kill people so we need to get rid of guns.
Drunk drivers kill people and a lot more than guns.
Which do we ban cars or alcohol?
I mean we need to save lives why not start with something where more lives are lost?

It's funny, because literally everyone is on board with 1). Making cars safer, and 2). Cracking down on drunk driving.

On the other hand, try to pass some firearm restrictions and many people flip the fuck out. Want to make firearm storage safer by requiring safes? Fuck you, stop infringing. Want to require background checks for private sales? Fuck you, stop infringing. Want to make gun owners liable for the unsafe use of their firearms? Fuck you, stop infringing. Want to require mandatory firearm training every year? Fuck you, stop infringing.

[Deleted]

Gun grabbers want to get rid of guns "to save lives" what a crock of shit.
Guns kill people so we need to get rid of guns.
Drunk drivers kill people and a lot more than guns.
Which do we ban cars or alcohol?
I mean we need to save lives why not start with something where more lives are lost?

Basically what the poster beneath you posted. Cars constantly get more safety regulations, new technology and in the(near) future don't even need a driver anymore. Cars get used by millions upon millions every day in "hard" situations. Cars (transport in general) is what made and still makes up a major part of our civilization.

But yeah, nice anology with guns.

[lockedout]

Were talking about drunk driving. We don't need alcohol. How many people would be saved every year if we made alcohol illegal?
What about making cigarettes illegal also they kill so many people. No one cares about that because media doesn't shove it down your throat everytime someone dies from either. Guns however are just good media and a hot topic so people who are ignorant think making laws on top of laws or total bans will suddenly make gun crime go away.

[Deleted]

Were talking about drunk driving. We don't need alcohol. How many people would be saved every year if we made alcohol illegal?
What about making cigarettes illegal also they kill so many people. No one cares about that because media doesn't shove it down your throat everytime someone dies from either. Guns however are just good media and a hot topic so people who are ignorant think making laws on top of laws or total bans will suddenly make gun crime go away.

You're aware that drunk driving IS illegal, right? They tried to make alcohol illegal, know what happened? Let's make medicin illegal too, because you can't drive while on specific medication either. Again, automated vehicles pretty much nullify this to some extend. Yet they keep there actual use and keep improving on it. Guns however ..

[TZucchini]

No one cares about that because media doesn't shove it down your throat everytime someone dies from either.

Every time someone in my state dies in a drunk driving accident, it's reported on in the news. If a drunk driver kills multiple people, the media follows the trial closely, even years after the accident.

People die from lung cancer caused by smoking every day. The media has reported the shit out of these stories. 2nd hand smoking. Huge reports, studies conducted. Laws passed in nearly every single State.

So what fantasy land are you living in where the media doesn't report on these deaths?

[rhandric]

You're aware that drunk driving IS illegal, right? They tried to make alcohol illegal, know what happened? Let's make medicin illegal too, because you can't drive while on specific medication either. Again, automated vehicles pretty much nullify this to some extend. Yet they keep there actual use and keep improving on it. Guns however ..

You know what else is illegal? Murder...including with guns

[Deleted]

You know what else is illegal? Murder...including with guns

Drinking isn't illegal. Driving isn't illegal. Murder simply is. Let's ban murder! That or you know, try to cut down the amounts of murders, you know, like we do on continues basis with car safety, both for people inside the car and outside the car?

[lockedout]

Drinking isn't illegal. Driving isn't illegal. Murder simply is. Let's ban murder! That or you know, try to cut down the amounts of murders, you know, like we do on continues basis with car safety, both for people inside the car and outside the car?

Maybe drinking should be illegal I mean that is the logic used against guns.
Either that or make more laws against something that is already illegal making it harder for the people who actually follow laws.
More laws don't hinder criminals, either ban all guns which will never happen or choose not to have one.

[Laize]

I wish I could live in your hivemind. Then again, I'm a rational human insect.

I think it's been more than made evident that civilians should :
-not be allowed to carry firearms outside of their homes
-should have every single firearm in their possession registered (because I'm pretty sure police officers have to follow a similar procedure)
-should be limited to one (because really, give a solid reason for needing more than one)
-nor be able to purchase any caliber of gun greater than a handgun (because what the hell do you need them for)

We allow it still because why? Because we, "MURICA", are retarded. Very retarded.


[Infracted]

Some states DON'T allow open or concealed carry. I live in one of them.

You cannot give one good reason we should not be permitted to own more than one gun, though.

In addition, I'm not sure you know what "caliber" means because I can get a handgun of such caliber as to shoot through a car and everyone inside.

[TZucchini]

More laws don't hinder criminals

Of course more laws could hinder criminals. Safe storage laws would make it much more difficult for criminals to steal weapons. Mandatory background checks on private sales would hinder criminals from obtaining firearms from private individuals, especially through online meetup websites, like Armslist. Making gun owners liable for their firearms would hinder straw purchases. There's a whole host of laws we could pass that would hinder criminals.

[Laize]

Of course more laws could hinder criminals. Safe storage laws would make it much more difficult for criminals to steal weapons. Mandatory background checks on private sales would hinder criminals from obtaining firearms from private individuals, especially through online meetup websites, like Armslist. Making gun owners liable for their firearms would hinder straw purchases. There's a whole host of laws we could pass that would hinder criminals.

Almost all of which (but especially safe storage laws) seek to punish someone who is a victim.

[rhandric]

Drinking isn't illegal. Driving isn't illegal. Murder simply is. Let's ban murder! That or you know, try to cut down the amounts of murders, you know, like we do on continues basis with car safety, both for people inside the car and outside the car?

Critical thinking is lacking in this one

What isn't illegal: drinking, driving, gun ownership, gun use
What is illegal: drunk driving, murder

Is it that hard to connect the dots?