Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Mayhem]

Ah, semantics. Someone intent on committing a heinous crime (prospective criminal) will be neither stopped nor hindered by the fact that it's against the law.

Yeah Semantics. Now you´re trying to explain how the word criminal implies tendency with the words intent and prospective? But on his way to commit said crime he will not break every other law there is. You can guess why that is so. (of course we´re talking about a prospective criminal with a brain and not a lunatic)

Laws are a declaration of what is prohibited and the consequences thereof. Prohibition is not prevention.

That´s what laws are and thanks to the consequences they also serve as prevention. Yes laws won´t stop idiots/lunatics because they don´t care for the consequences, can´t grasp the consequences. Laws won´t stop criminals that weight the consequences against the gains and see the gains as worth the risk. Laws prevent people all the time from commiting crimes. They´re called lawful citizens.

[Ghostpanther]

Unless you can show a correlation, these points are meaningless.

Also, yeah i believe australia tops the US in terms of huge ass space between farms.

There was a correlation. You just failed to see it. So the country layout in terms of distances police may have to travel to save you from harm does have a bearing. :P

- - - Updated - - -

That´s what laws are and thanks to the consequences they also serve as prevention. Yes laws won´t stop idiots/lunatics because they don´t care for the consequences, can´t grasp the consequences. Laws won´t stop criminals that weight the consequences against the gains and see the gains as worth the risk. Laws prevent people all the time from commiting crimes. They´re called lawful citizens.

Laws are no better than the wiliness of a society to enforce them and the effort to do so. Mexico for example has very strict gun control laws and even a mandatory firearm registration which is laughable because it is widely ignored.

[Deleted]

Do people who learn CPR think that they're going to need that training everywhere they go? No, they learn it because they may one day encounter a scenario where knowing it will save someone's life, their own included. Some people feel the same way about carrying a handgun or a knife, or about learning martial arts. They want the ability to physically defend themselves or someone else from a potential attacker should that situation ever arise. That situation may never occur, but, like many things, better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

As far as How, exactly, would you know? The whole point of concealed carry is that the only people who know the gun is there are the people who are carrying them and those they choose (or are legally obligated) to tell. You could sit next to someone in church every day for the rest of your life and never know they're carrying a firearm. You could commute back and forth to work and not know.


No one is saying you MUST own a gun and carry it everyday. What they are arguing for is the ability for each person to be able to make the choice for themselves.

That seems a very stupid idea to me, the thing is, people should not be able to make those decisions for them selves. People who want to carry a gun everywhere are generally not the people i want carrying a gun.

[Saucexorzski]

That seems a very stupid idea to me, the thing is, people should not be able to make those decisions for them selves. People who want to carry a gun everywhere are generally not the people i want carrying a gun.

i guess no one should be allowed to vote either because they make stupid decisions...right?

[Deleted]

i guess no one should be allowed to vote either because they make stupid decisions...right?

That is a stupid thing to say, your vote won't kill people at random.

[starlord]

i guess no one should be allowed to vote either because they make stupid decisions...right?

in america the founding fathers made the electoral college for that very reason.

[Saucexorzski]

That is a stupid thing to say, your vote won't kill people at random.

Voting in fools who like war is an american past time. I'm pretty sure it can lead to much more death then any one individual roaming around with a gun.

- - - Updated - - -

in america the founding fathers made the electoral college for that very reason.

im just playing out the "ban guns becuase peoples is stupid" argument and applying it to other aspects of humn life.

[starlord]

Voting in fools who like war is an american past time. I'm pretty sure it can lead to much more death then any one individual roaming around with a gun.

war is a big contribution to the gun (& other arms) industry.
its no coincidence that the politicians who like war also like guns.

[Saucexorzski]

war is a big contribution to the gun (& other arms) industry.
its no coincidence that the politicians who like war also like guns.

indeed just like hospitals like sick people, and firefighter like fires!

[starlord]

indeed just like hospitals like sick people, and firefighter like fires!

gun lobbyists have deep pockets, and government contracts are quite lucrative for any business. more wars, more money. everyone wins, except the soldiers and the taxpayers of course.

[Saucexorzski]

gun lobbyists have deep pockets, and government contracts are quite lucrative for any business. more wars, more money. everyone wins, except the soldiers and the taxpayers of course.

and the "enemy" but this is not what i was talking about, lets get back to why we should ban gun because people are stupid or rather why that is a seriously silly reason to do so.

[Deleted]

and the "enemy" but this is not what i was talking about, lets get back to why we should ban gun because people are stupid or rather why that is a seriously silly reason to do so.

No it is not silly, crazy people should not have guns, it asking for problems. And thinking you need a gun to be safe is paranoid, so generally the people wanting guns are the people who should not have them. Guns are for the army, police, sport shooting and those kind off things, not for "protection", as the rest of the civilized world has shown by now that this is a flawed concept. The only reason criminals in the US have as many guns as they do now is because of the retarded gun policy of the USA.

[Stormdash]

No it is not silly, crazy people should not have guns, it asking for problems. And thinking you need a gun to be safe is paranoid, so generally the people wanting guns are the people who should not have them. Guns are for the army, police, sport shooting and those kind off things, not for "protection", as the rest of the civilized world has shown by now that this is a flawed concept. The only reason criminals in the US have as many guns as they do now is because of the retarded gun policy of the USA.

They've got pretty strict gun laws in France and in Tunisia, both of which have seen mass shootings of the sort that supposedly only happen in American gun culture in the past 6 months.

- - - Updated - - -

That is a stupid thing to say, your vote won't kill people at random.

Your gun won't kill people at random either. In fact, left to its own devices, it will sit there like a dumb, inert shit. Your vote is an expression of will to cause a result. Your gun is 1.5-2.5lbs of polymer or steel or aluminum.

- - - Updated - - -

in america the founding fathers made the electoral college for that very reason.

Shortest explanation of the electoral college is that they wanted something made up the way Congress is to elect a President, but not the actual Congress because it opens up too many avenues of corruption. So every four years we convene a special, single purpose version of Congress.

[Deleted]

They've got pretty strict gun laws in France and in Tunisia, both of which have seen mass shootings of the sort that supposedly only happen in American gun culture in the past 6 months.

Right, terrorist attacks are totally the same as some weirdo acting out his personal grudges...

- - - Updated - - -

They've got pretty strict gun laws in France and in Tunisia, both of which have seen mass shootings of the sort that supposedly only happen in American gun culture in the past 6 months.

- - - Updated - - -



Your gun won't kill people at random either. In fact, left to its own devices, it will sit there like a dumb, inert shit. Your vote is an expression of will to cause a result. Your gun is 1.5-2.5lbs of polymer or steel or aluminum.

- - - Updated - - -



Shortest explanation of the electoral college is that they wanted something made up the way Congress is to elect a President, but not the actual Congress because it opens up too many avenues of corruption. So every four years we convene a special, single purpose version of Congress.

Right the gun is only an object "facepalm"... Not only did you not read what was being discussed, you throw out some stupid notion that the gun is "only a tool" So, actually double facepalm.

[Stormdash]

Right, terrorist attacks are totally the same as some weirdo acting out his personal grudges...

You are splitting an asinine hair. Isn't the official party line that Roof is a white supremacist terrorist?

BTW, that "stupid notion" is also what we call an objective, empirical reality. You could put any firearm you like under any observational protocol you like and observe it for a hundred years just sitting there, it has no will, it has no anima, it will take no action and cause no harm. It is an extension of its master's will, and nothing more.

[Saucexorzski]

No it is not silly, crazy people should not have guns, it asking for problems. And thinking you need a gun to be safe is paranoid, so generally the people wanting guns are the people who should not have them. Guns are for the army, police, sport shooting and those kind off things, not for "protection", as the rest of the civilized world has shown by now that this is a flawed concept. The only reason criminals in the US have as many guns as they do now is because of the retarded gun policy of the USA.

You do relies that police and military forces use guns and other arms as a means of..protection. Hell i've "protected" my livestock against a bear and a mountain lion with a gun, it worked just fine..well not for the one duck in the lions mouth...but for the rest it did quite well in the protection role. Now its also true that those incidents were rare..but that is really why its there..in the off case i need it.
As to why other might desire to carry i do not know. My BiL carries every where he goes, and most the time you would never know hes armed. I do not see him as being stupid for desire to carry, he is just more prepared then i desire to be. You call the laws in the US retarded..and i agree, because most of these laws are feel good nanny state laws meant to make the .gov look like its doing something. A good deal of them are unenforceable. Now you want to see where gun crime is? Drugs. Us war on drugs has done more to increase gun violence then it has had an effect on stopping drug use.

[Deleted]

You are splitting an asinine hair. Isn't the official party line that Roof is a white supremacist terrorist?

BTW, that "stupid notion" is also what we call an objective, empirical reality. You could put any firearm you like under any observational protocol you like and observe it for a hundred years just sitting there, it has no will, it has no anima, it will take no action and cause no harm. It is an extension of its master's will, and nothing more.

Terrorism would be if he was part of some group and acted in accordance with them, not some pathetic dude that blames other people and happens to have a gun.
Yes, it is a stupid notion, specially if you read what the context is. It was about concealed carrying, not the gun in of its own. And acting like that is what is said is downright stupid.

- - - Updated - - -

You do relies that police and military forces use guns and other arms as a means of..protection. Hell i've "protected" my livestock against a bear and a mountain lion with a gun, it worked just fine..well not for the one duck in the lions mouth...but for the rest it did quite well in the protection role. Now its also true that those incidents were rare..but that is really why its there..in the off case i need it.
As to why other might desire to carry i do not know. My BiL carries every where he goes, and most the time you would never know hes armed. I do not see him as being stupid for desire to carry, he is just more prepared then i desire to be. You call the laws in the US retarded..and i agree, because most of these laws are feel good nanny state laws meant to make the .gov look like its doing something. A good deal of them are unenforceable. Now you want to see where gun crime is? Drugs. Us war on drugs has done more to increase gun violence then it has had an effect on stopping drug use.

Yes, try to spin it around, you know perfectly well what i said, and that is not it. And, yes, your friend is stupid for wanting to carry always, its not being prepared it is being paranoid.
And comparing guns to drugs is just stupid. You can compare drugs to alcohol because alcohol is a drug. You can not do the same with guns, guns are not drugs and they do not have the same impact when denied access to them.

[Stormdash]

Terrorism would be if he was part of some group and acted in accordance with them, not some pathetic dude that blames other people and happens to have a gun.

The Tsarnaevs were terrorists, self-activated. Your premise if false.

Yes, it is a stupid notion, specially if you read what the context is. It was about concealed carrying, not the gun in of its own. And acting like that is what is said is downright stupid.

CCWs save their own lives and the lives of others far more than they unlawfully take anyone else's. By wide margin. It's actually a newsworthy event, after all, when a CCW does something even perceived as unlawful with their gun (and may still not turn out to have been, such as the Sanford case). In other words, a CCW going off the reservation with their CC weapon is a "man bites dog" story; a CCW using their weapon legally to prevent themselves or someone else being the victim of a crime is pretty ordinary and mundane, news-wise.

[Deleted]

The Tsarnaevs were terrorists, self-activated. Your premise if false.



CCWs save their own lives and the lives of others far more than they unlawfully take anyone else's. By wide margin. It's actually a newsworthy event, after all, when a CCW does something even perceived as unlawful with their gun (and may still not turn out to have been, such as the Sanford case). In other words, a CCW going off the reservation with their CC weapon is a "man bites dog" story; a CCW using their weapon legally to prevent themselves or someone else being the victim of a crime is pretty ordinary and mundane, news-wise.

Right, extreme Islam isn't a thing...

That people "prevent crime" with guns is something that isn't really right either, just because someone stole something doesn't mean he deserves do die or get shot at. It is called vigilante justice, and that is not something that you should be proud off imo.

[Mayhem]

CCWs save their own lives and the lives of others far more than they unlawfully take anyone else's.

You have the numbers at hand that shows that, right?