Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Dillon]

Anyone objecting to this will have there hands covered in the blood of the next group of innocent victims

What a fucking disgusting thing to say.

Don't agree with MY politics? Well then, you might as well be killing the children yourself!

[Flappy]

What the fuck are you talking about? Yes, most in the military are fucking stupid losers with no other option than being enlisted, and most are fucking criminals. Very little brainwashing though, aside from how they all say the exact some catchphrases and chuckle wildly to themselves at their own wit.

I know, right! I've been saying that same thing since that military dude fucked my wife!

[IxilaFA]

A multi-party system is better.

Bob and Bill both want to go out to eat. The problem is, Bob wants burgers and Bill wants tacos. Because they can't come to a conclusion, they both settle on Italian food, since they both like Italian food.

The next night, Bob, Bill, Alice and Shane are all wanting to go out to eat. Problem is, Bob wants burgers, Bill wants tacos, Alice wants hot dogs and Shane wants Chinese. They're not getting anywhere because none of them can universally agree on a place to go and eat. Finally, Bob convinces Alice and Shane to go get burgers and that he will vote to go get hot dogs the next night and Chinese the night after. Bill is out of luck because he is outvoted the next three nights.

See how multi-party systems just fail outright? Bob and Bill can easily come to a conclusion because there's only two people to settle the issue and they can easily choose what's right for both people. The next night, four people can't agree on what to eat because they all like and hate different things, and the entire system leads itself to bribery, corruption and ultimately, failure.

[Khraine]

Sure but when something facilitates mass murder as easily as a firearm, coupled with the frequency of mass murder in the US, it's time to do SOMETHING.

And Americans really can't get high and mighty about persecuting the majority because of the actions of a minority...

Yes firearms can facilitate mass murder at greater speed and damage, but when somebody want to go on a killing spree they use whatever they can. What i'm saying is that there is a problem with the american public psyche regarding firearms, the worldwide media and their reporting of such events (case in point http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4 ). And allowing people on anti depressents being allowed access to firearms.

[whathump]

The 2nd amendment isn't for shooting dear...
When the government is shooting back, what shall we do? Hide and take it like the millions before us who were subject to tyranny by a government who prohibited weapons of self defense? Just because we live in the 21st century DOES NOT mean tyranny will never return.

Well, as long as the military is on the side of the government, there's little hope of this even working. A bunch of people armed with assault rifles have almost no chance of defeating a well-trained army equipped with tanks, battleships, fighter jets and missiles. Numbers don't really matter much when the gap in weaponry is that large. If there were to be tyranny, in the end it would be up to the military as to what the future would be. Personally, I think the US military would oppose any dictatorship that is attempted here, and as such would overthrow the prospective dictator.

[Realsykes]

I am not from US, by why wouldn't anyone support it? Like he said you don't use assault weapons to hunt deer or any other animals for that matter.

Not everyone shoots guns for hunting, many, MANY people use them at shooting ranges, and they're nice to collect/have.

Once again, having an assault weapon does not make you a killer, I still can't believe the that moronic state of mind. You can kill someone with a rock, a pencil, etc. A mental disorder is what causes someone to go through with something like mass murder.

[cjm721]

Last time I checked criminals don't follow laws or bans.

^^^ I don't understand why that is so hard to understand. If they are going to break laws they won't care about legality, and that the rifles are already in circulation and available, and by passing this law every person that tries to be legal will have to give theirs up and the felons won't which will make shooting more likely not less as if the shooter believes he can get away with it he is more likely to try.

Edit: also as Stormtrooperz said its the person behind not the item itself. Hell people driving cars kills many people each year.

[Penguirrel]

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I'm not sure how many people had actually read the second amendment, so I brought it here for you guys. Protection from the government, from others, and from foreign threats (I'm looking at you, Canada, with your healthcare and moose being envious of our more temperate climate!). While those threats seem very, very improbable the fact remains it is still a chance and having a lethal self defense weapon from a surprise attack (again I'm looking at those evil Canadians with those bright smiles thinking we don't know what you're up to) is advantageous to not having one.


P.S. I picked Canadians because I figured they could take a joke and going for Mexico would feel racist.

[araine]

You are obviously not American.

I suggest you read up on the laws that we have in USA instead of assuming things that arent true.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2385 clearly states you are NOT allowed to organize and participate in actions looking to overthrow any US elected office regardless if you consider them tyrannical. The laws clearly states that you can NOT overthrow them with your presumed 2nd amendment rights so that makes the 2nd amendment irrelevant in regards to national safety.

[This name sucks]

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I'm not sure how many people had actually read the second amendment, so I brought it here for you guys. Protection from the government, from others, and from foreign threats (I'm looking at you, Canada, with your healthcare and moose being envious of our more temperate climate!). While those threats seem very, very improbable the fact remains it is still a chance and having a lethal self defense weapon from a surprise attack (again I'm looking at those evil Canadians with those bright smiles thinking we don't know what you're up to).


P.S. I picked Canadians because I figured they could take a joke and going for Mexico would feel racist.

Still a bit jumpy from 1812?

[cjm721]

I suggest you read up on the laws that we have in USA instead of assuming things that arent true.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2385 clearly states you are NOT allowed to organize and participate in actions looking to overthrow any US elected office regardless if you consider them tyrannical. The laws clearly states that you can NOT overthrow them with your presumed 2nd amendment rights so that makes the 2nd amendment irrelevant in regards to national safety.

I suggest you read up on the actions we have done in USA.

Declaration of Independence.

[Cybran]

Bob and Bill both want to go out to eat. The problem is, Bob wants burgers and Bill wants tacos. Because they can't come to a conclusion, they both settle on Italian food, since they both like Italian food.

The next night, Bob, Bill, Alice and Shane are all wanting to go out to eat. Problem is, Bob wants burgers, Bill wants tacos, Alice wants hot dogs and Shane wants Chinese. They're not getting anywhere because none of them can universally agree on a place to go and eat. Finally, Bob convinces Alice and Shane to go get burgers and that he will vote to go get hot dogs the next night and Chinese the night after. Bill is out of luck because he is outvoted the next three nights.

See how multi-party systems just fail outright? Bob and Bill can easily come to a conclusion because there's only two people to settle the issue and they can easily choose what's right for both people. The next night, four people can't agree on what to eat because they all like and hate different things, and the entire system leads itself to bribery, corruption and ultimately, failure.

When was the last tim e Bill and Bob agreed on anything? One of them has said that he do everything in his power to hinder the other. Whith a multi party system parties unwilling to compromise get kicked out of the parlament.

[Flappy]

I suggest you read up on the laws that we have in USA instead of assuming things that arent true.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2385 clearly states you are NOT allowed to organize and participate in actions looking to overthrow any US elected office regardless if you consider them tyrannical. The laws clearly states that you can NOT overthrow them with your presumed 2nd amendment rights so that makes the 2nd amendment irrelevant in regards to national safety.

Still doesn't make you an American. You, araine, are not American. You can pretend to be if that's what makes you think your arguments are valid, just know that I see through your veil of deceit.

[Rommon64]

Still a bit jumpy from 1812?

I see you rebuilt your White House, real shame if it was burnt down again.

[Kivimetsan]

Great. Your ak-47 knockoff will be a highly effective defense against a 500lbs bomb laser-guided onto your head or a cruise missile sent from the other side of the country to fly up your ass.

Tell that to the Taliban.

[kivipää]

Are you suggesting a single-party system would be more functional than a bipartisanship with two extremes working against the others to develop laws that are best for everyone involved?

You're the only one who mentioned a single-party system, and thinking that bipartisanship works or or gets anything positive done at all is a big stretch at best. It certainly doesn't in US, the government is basically dysfunctional.

As others pointed out, multi-party system works. Single party would just do what they want, and as we have seen in US, two-party system will just deadlock into petty grudges and squabbles while everything falls apart around them. 3 or more major parties with differing ideologies ensures that the compromise you seem to yearn for (yet advocate a system that doesn't form compromises, go figure) is almost always reached by a majority.
Bipartisanships are also arguably worse than single party systems. At least the single party gets something done.

[Riidii]

So, we want to create another violent black market?

FUCK to the NO!

[Palmatum]

Are you suggesting a single-party system would be more functional than a bipartisanship with two extremes working against the others to develop laws that are best for everyone involved?

You're right, that's totally what happens in the US... lol

---------- Post added 2012-12-16 at 09:08 PM ----------

Assault weapons are already illegal. Only pistols were used for this last shooting.

And an AR15.

[Realsykes]

Do you live in the world of Mad Max? Is it really that crazy where you live?

It's not crazy, how do you think people killed others when guns didn't exist, or they don't have access to guns?

One person, Typhoid Mary, look her up if you don't know who she is. She infected 51 people, all of them hospitalized, 3 of them died.

You have Graham Young, poisoned 70 people, 3 of his family of whom died, and two others who died. This was without access to current day house hold chemicals that could kill you in several minutes if mixed correctly, and with the correct knowledge. IMAGINE if Mary and Young had access to these things, and went on their poisoning rampages. Poison is the 4th biggest killer in younger ages, a GUN is not the only thing that can kill someone. You have pipe bombs, knives, so many things, im sick of this gun control bullshit.

A gun is a convenience.

[Ebildays]

Something is really wrong with our laws when you can buy a rifle at age 18 but cannot drink a beer until you are 21.

The Second Amendment states:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

No where does it state that people have the right to bear all types of arms, so I am for banning certain types of weapons from public use.

Stormtrooperz no one is saying take guns away just limit the types that the public has access to. A guy with a knife is a lot easier to take out than a guy with an assault weapon. Guns are not just a convenience they are the most effective when you plan to do the most damage in the shortest about of time. Poison is for the people who want to hide what they are doing.