Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Rukentuts]

Humans and their desire to take what other humans have.

Humans and their desire to ignore science and instead cling to fear.

[Deleted]

Humans and their desire to take what other humans have.

Humans and their irrational fear that the other humans will rip them apart if they aren't armed.

We don't want to take away the guns to create a safe enviroment for everybody, we want to take away the guns so we can rob people blind.

[Twotonsteak]

"You don't need guns to protect yourself. If something happens, just call the police."

Yeah...store owners did that in Ferguson, MO. The police told them they were on their own.

[MagusHenosis]

I am all for gun control.

People need to have good solid control over their firearms, since how else could they hit what they aim at?

- - - Updated - - -

"You don't need guns to protect yourself. If something happens, just call the police."

Yeah...store owners did that in Ferguson, MO. The police told them they were on their own.

In the small town I grew up in it literally takes the police about 30 minutes to respond to calls.

How absurd to claim that the police will always be able to protect you.

Also everyone needs to keep in mind that there are a ton of small towns in the states. Ever hear of the saying "small town USA?"

[Svifnymr]

You'll have to show us where assault weapons ban has showed up in any force since sometime around early 2013. I haven't seen it in this thread for awhile aside from ridicule. "Lol assault weapon ban stoopid libruhl" "I know man right how dumb can they be?" "Right lololololol"

Did you honestly miss the part about the judge ruling in favor of Marylands AWB that started this last digression into discussing assault weapons?

Though yeah, sometimes folks just hop in and say "Assault weapons aren't blah blah blah", mostly folks that are new to the discussion, read the first page like it's a new topic and reply without bothering to notice it's now page 1775.

- - - Updated - - -

The push is universal background checks, but we can't do that because of the all powerful and conveniently vague "we don't enforce current laws enough (but refuse to do anything about it)".

I'm not sure there is any concerted push right now on a federal level, but it's certainly nothing to do with UBC. That's a recurring discussion in THIS thread, sure, but has nothing to do with laws or proposals or anything at the moment. For your other snide comment ("but refuse to do anything about it"), it's mostly because anti-gun folks lump all pro-gun folks into the republican camp and assume we want the budget to go to the military and nothing else, or something.

For myself, I feel that the root cause of lack of enforcement is the long standing political nature of convictions and such. They want big stories of busting a guy with 50 guns, not little stories of spending thousands to prosecute some thug with a gun. So they'd prefer to watch someone who straw purchases until he has enough to make the papers.

- - - Updated - - -

You also can't have a conversation about gun control in good faith with the constant fact/science/statistic denial. But most sensible people have abandoned seriously participating in this particular conversation long ago.

There's been plenty of rebuttals that were ignored, and then there's some things that seem logical to one side and not the other. Like the survey showing how many gun owners answer a phone survey about owning a gun truthfully. Some might herald 87% as telling the truth, indicative of how accurate the polls are, while I think 13% of folks lying on the phone survey spells out inaccuracy. That's ignoring the margin of error as well.

The simple fact that you consistently present your side as accurate while ignoring rebuttals and harping on slips of phrases, is indicative of why there's no meaningful dialogue overall. The fact that both sides do it and that others engage you in it and feed the multi-page semantic arguments is why this thread is so big.

[Sunseeker]

In the small town I grew up in it literally takes the police about 30 minutes to respond to calls.

How absurd to claim that the police will always be able to protect you.

Also everyone needs to keep in mind that there are a ton of small towns in the states. Ever hear of the saying "small town USA?"

It all depends on how rich you are. For a while I lived about 2 miles from the police station. Good response time you'd think when my car was stolen and then my other car vandalized? Took them an hour and a half for the first one, and over two hours for the second. I knew folks who lived in the better-off part of town and they could get <15 minute response times. I did actually get my car back, and it was FILLED with junk whoever stole it had left in there, lots of stuff with names on it too. I asked the police if they wanted any of it for evidence and they told me "No that's not necessary." and I'm like "Tha fuck?"

I don't even own a gun (can't afford one), but I know damn well that sometimes the cops just don't give a shit.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Humans and their desire to ignore science and instead cling to fear.

Although let's be honest (cracked ran a perfectly wonderful article about this recently) a lot of it comes down to defending a really expensive hobby. You ask a comic book collector why he spent $700 on a comic, he'll say it was an investment. You ask an avid gun collector why he does it, he'll say self defense.

[Sunseeker]

Although let's be honest (cracked ran a perfectly wonderful article about this recently) a lot of it comes down to defending a really expensive hobby. You ask a comic book collector why he spent $700 on a comic, he'll say it was an investment. You ask an avid gun collector why he does it, he'll say self defense.

To be fair, your average gun costs about 100x the cost of your average comic book.

[Ghostpanther]

Humans and their irrational fear that the other humans will rip them apart if they aren't armed.

We don't want to take away the guns to create a safe enviroment for everybody, we want to take away the guns so we can rob people blind.

You do not feel a need to have a gun. And maybe you do not were you live. But do not assume everyone else is in the same situation you are. Is it irrational to have a smoke detector? Or to wear a seat belt when you get on a airplane? Or wear safety glasses when you are weed whacking or mowing grass?r Or wearing a respirator when you are dealing with harmful flumes? A gun is a tool for self defense for many people. You choose to not have one, which is fine.

- - - Updated - - -

Although let's be honest (cracked ran a perfectly wonderful article about this recently) a lot of it comes down to defending a really expensive hobby. You ask a comic book collector why he spent $700 on a comic, he'll say it was an investment. You ask an avid gun collector why he does it, he'll say self defense.

Pretty damn cheap for me. I have 2 handguns, which were given to me as a gift years ago. My shotgun and 22 rifle I bought back in 1970's for less than 100 bucks for them both. Not cost me nothing more than a few ammo rounds since then to keep in practice. Much less than what a yearly sub would cost to play WoW for sure.

[Rukentuts]

Sweet, I see we're back to false comparisons for rationalization of ignoring science.

[lockedout]

Sweet, I see we're back to false comparisons for rationalization of ignoring science.

You know science is wrong sometimes?

Detroit seems to finally be waking up. Police tell Detroiters to buy guns in city riven by race issues and crime. City police chief has encouraged residents to arm themselves as stark racial disparities in ‘shoot first’ laws become clear.

Detroit police chief James Craig – nicknamed “Hollywood” for his years spent in the LAPD and his seeming love of being in front of the camera – has repeatedly called on “good” and “law-abiding” Detroiters to arm themselves against criminals in the city.

His words have not fallen on deaf ears. “The police are not going to protect you when something is being perpetrated on you. They may turn up after the fact and run after that person, but you have to protect yourself,” Champion says.

Champion’s fears of facing a threat in her home are not ill-founded. Besides having the worst homicide rate among large American cities, Detroit experienced 12,935 burglaries last year. With around 250,000 households, that means Detroiters have roughly a 1 in 20 chance of being burgled. To residents who have been victims of crime, being allowed to carry a weapon, whether openly or concealed, is not just reassuring, it’s part of the pragmatic reality of living in the Motor City. Wayne County, which encapsulates Detroit and its metro area, counted 83,950 active concealed-pistol permits as of 1 August 2014 – meaning one permit for every 21 households.

Patricia Champion, a 63-year-old lifelong Detroiter, a grandmother and retired educator, decided to get her concealed pistol license -- a CPL -- two years ago after her son said he was increasingly worried for her safety. Champion, a resident of northwest Detroit, mostly keeps her gun, a 9mm Glock 19 that set her back $600, in her house.

“That’s why I got it: because I’m going to be in the house. Now, if somebody chooses to come in and I didn’t invite you, between the Glock and the dog, you’re gone. If one doesn’t get you, the other one will.” http://www.theguardian.com/money/201...ce-cost-issues

[Eroginous]

You know science is wrong sometimes?

Detroit seems to finally be waking up. Police tell Detroiters to buy guns in city riven by race issues and crime. City police chief has encouraged residents to arm themselves as stark racial disparities in ‘shoot first’ laws become clear.

Detroit police chief James Craig – nicknamed “Hollywood” for his years spent in the LAPD and his seeming love of being in front of the camera – has repeatedly called on “good” and “law-abiding” Detroiters to arm themselves against criminals in the city.

His words have not fallen on deaf ears. “The police are not going to protect you when something is being perpetrated on you. They may turn up after the fact and run after that person, but you have to protect yourself,” Champion says.

Champion’s fears of facing a threat in her home are not ill-founded. Besides having the worst homicide rate among large American cities, Detroit experienced 12,935 burglaries last year. With around 250,000 households, that means Detroiters have roughly a 1 in 20 chance of being burgled. To residents who have been victims of crime, being allowed to carry a weapon, whether openly or concealed, is not just reassuring, it’s part of the pragmatic reality of living in the Motor City. Wayne County, which encapsulates Detroit and its metro area, counted 83,950 active concealed-pistol permits as of 1 August 2014 – meaning one permit for every 21 households.

Patricia Champion, a 63-year-old lifelong Detroiter, a grandmother and retired educator, decided to get her concealed pistol license -- a CPL -- two years ago after her son said he was increasingly worried for her safety. Champion, a resident of northwest Detroit, mostly keeps her gun, a 9mm Glock 19 that set her back $600, in her house.

“That’s why I got it: because I’m going to be in the house. Now, if somebody chooses to come in and I didn’t invite you, between the Glock and the dog, you’re gone. If one doesn’t get you, the other one will.” http://www.theguardian.com/money/201...ce-cost-issues

Oh you and your anecdotes...

Everyone knows that the police are going to be just around the corner, ready and waiting to catch a bad guy in the act!

I mean, that's what the police are for! Patrolling the streets, stopping crimes from happening...

[Rukentuts]

Now we can prey on fear to ignore science. Which is of course, the cornerstone to claiming guns are valid for "defense" anyway.

[Eroginous]

Now we can prey on fear to ignore science. Which is of course, the cornerstone to claiming guns are valid for "defense" anyway.

Because chalking people's lives up to statistics is how you have a meaningful discussion...

'I'm sorry sir, but you can't be allowed to protect yourself because having a weapon makes you 25% more likely to be killed by that same weapon.'

Right? Is that your dream world? Where everyone just blindly listens to the results of telemarketer surveys and conforms their thoughts and beliefs to them? A study says you can't reasonably expect to protect yourself, might as well not even try!

[Rukentuts]

Because chalking people's lives up to statistics is how you have a meaningful discussion...

I believe I have your views of science succinctly in my sig. So don't talk about "meaningful" discussions, at least in what the dictionary says the definition is.

[Eroginous]

I believe I have your views of science succinctly in my sig. So don't talk about "meaningful" discussions, at least in what the dictionary says the definition is.

Would you care to explain what you think that quote means, or what you think I intended it to mean?

Or does that detract from your mission of filling the forums with hyperbole ridden garbage posts?

Infracted - please post constructively

[Rukentuts]

Considering its context is trying to justify drawing scientific conclusions from raw data, it's self-evident. Trying to have a "meaningful" talk with someone that thinks control doesn't matter is futile. They can't understand why control is even important even though we learned exactly why before senior high.

[TZK203]

Considering its context is trying to justify drawing scientific conclusions from raw data, it's self-evident. Trying to have a "meaningful" talk with someone that thinks control doesn't matter is futile. They can't understand why control is even important even though we learned exactly why before senior high.

Ruken, at the rate you're going with your "science," you'll soon be saying that having guns in society is dangerous because it is a more effective tool in killing someone than a knife or a baseball bat. So you'll be calling for the destruction of the 2nd Amendment.

[xskarma]

This thread needs to stick to discussing facts and opinions and leave snide personal attacks out of it.

[lockedout]

Would you care to explain what you think that quote means, or what you think I intended it to mean?

Or does that detract from your mission of filling the forums with hyperbole ridden garbage posts?

Apparently if someone has a sig that offends you, you can report them and they will have to remove it.