Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[BeepBoo]

since you want to ignore these competely while being on the website. so forcing people to either give up their "assault weapons" for well under what they paid or be made to pay more thats back door confiscation

Besides that, the methods he states are simply some ways he'd go about solving his STATED GOAL of getting "assault weapons out of the hands of the public."

He wants to do it, no question. Whether he can do it or will do it is irrelevant. It's a stated goal he has. We know his position 100%. This would be like saying "well, we know someone has stated nazi views, but they don't SAY they want to make people wear stars of david on their clothes. They don't SAY they'll actively pursue law in the most heinous sense to get their nazi views instilled."

Nah, the fact that he even has the view itself is essentially an attack given the position of power he is now in.

[Specialka]

Maybe once there will be less guns in the hand of US citizen, the USA will be less of a far west and looks like less like a third world country.

[Mayhem]

Well, according to @Stormdash Biden's plans are neither tyranny nor unlawful so tough luck guys.

[Ghostpanther]

Besides that, the methods he states are simply some ways he'd go about solving his STATED GOAL of getting "assault weapons out of the hands of the public."

He wants to do it, no question. Whether he can do it or will do it is irrelevant. It's a stated goal he has. We know his position 100%. This would be like saying "well, we know someone has stated nazi views, but they don't SAY they want to make people wear stars of david on their clothes. They don't SAY they'll actively pursue law in the most heinous sense to get their nazi views instilled."

Nah, the fact that he even has the view itself is essentially an attack given the position of power he is now in.

Yep. His position on gun control has been made clear many times. And when he said AR-15 style firearms "..should be illegal. Period." And then think he would not make it happen if he could, a person has to be purposely ignoring what he said.

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe once there will be less guns in the hand of US citizen, the USA will be less of a far west and looks like less like a third world country.

There are over 300 million firearms in the US and a Constitution written to give the lawful citizens the US possession of such....not going to happen within anyone alive today, life's time.

And when you have data which shows that firearms are used every year in hundreds of thousands of times in self defense, not going to be taken away. Some states will become more restrictive, but some will become even less restrictive. As it is happening now.

And if the shit hits the fan on a global world level, we know which country that looks like to some as a third world country, will come to the defense of peaceful countries being attacked.

[Specialka]

Yep. His position on gun control has been made clear many times. And when he said AR-15 style firearms "..should be illegal. Period." And then think he would not make it happen if he could, a person has to be purposely ignoring what he said.

- - - Updated - - -



There are over 300 million firearms in the US and a Constitution written to give the lawful citizens the US possession of such....not going to happen within anyone alive today, life's time.

And when you have data which shows that firearms are used every year in hundreds of thousands of times in self defense, not going to be taken away. Some states will become more restrictive, but some will become even less restrictive. As it is happening now.

And if the shit hits the fan on a global world level, we know which country that looks like to some as a third world country, will come to the defense of peaceful countries being attacked.

Like most things, the change has to come little by little.

We also have stats about guns used in robbery, murder, etc... and in quite a few case, legally owned guns. It also does not help people to be a bit less trigger happy (especially Police Officers).

[Stormdash]

Well, according to @Stormdash Biden's plans are neither tyranny nor unlawful so tough luck guys.

When exactly the fuck did I say that?

His intention to, by executive action, classify magazines as NFA items is wantonly unlawful since it ignores the actual language of the NFA *and* likely violates the 2nd Amendment. Making it ex post facto and expecting you to pay $200 (EACH) to continue to own standard capacity magazines of 10 rounds or more (i.e. probably 3/4ths of all pistol and rifle magazines?) is wantonly unconstitutional because... it's an ex post facto law.

- - - Updated - - -

And gassing people exercising their first amendment rights is not tyranny?

There is no first amendment right to vandalism, assault, arson, or larceny. Grow the hell up, little edgelord.

[Felya]

When exactly the fuck did I say that?

His intention to, by executive action, classify magazines as NFA items is wantonly unlawful since it ignores the actual language of the NFA *and* likely violates the 2nd Amendment. Making it ex post facto and expecting you to pay $200 (EACH) to continue to own standard capacity magazines of 10 rounds or more (i.e. probably 3/4ths of all pistol and rifle magazines?) is wantonly unconstitutional because... it's an ex post facto law.

Is the second Amendment the only time the ‘chicken little’ story doesn’t work? The sky is always falling... it never actually lands, but the sky is in perpetual falling. I wonder when it actually happens, if anyone will take you seriously...

There is no first amendment right to vandalism, assault, arson, or larceny. Grow the hell up, little edgelord.

You can’t tell people to grow up and call them edgelords...

[Mayhem]

When exactly the fuck did I say that?

His intention to, by executive action, classify magazines as NFA items is wantonly unlawful since it ignores the actual language of the NFA *and* likely violates the 2nd Amendment. Making it ex post facto and expecting you to pay $200 (EACH) to continue to own standard capacity magazines of 10 rounds or more (i.e. probably 3/4ths of all pistol and rifle magazines?) is wantonly unconstitutional because... it's an ex post facto law.

Since when are you on the supreme court?

But apart from that, you are like most of the time of course oh so wrong. Ex post facto laws are not wantonly unconstitutional.

Here's a gun-related example:
"Another example is the Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban, where firearms prohibitions were imposed on those convicted of misdemeanor domestic-violence offenses and on subjects of restraining orders (which do not require criminal conviction). These individuals can now be sentenced to up to ten years in a federal prison for possession of a firearm, regardless of whether the weapon was legally possessed when the law was passed. The law has been legally upheld because it is considered regulatory, not punitive; it is a status offense."

[Noxx79]

When exactly the fuck did I say that?

His intention to, by executive action, classify magazines as NFA items is wantonly unlawful since it ignores the actual language of the NFA *and* likely violates the 2nd Amendment. Making it ex post facto and expecting you to pay $200 (EACH) to continue to own standard capacity magazines of 10 rounds or more (i.e. probably 3/4ths of all pistol and rifle magazines?) is wantonly unconstitutional because... it's an ex post facto law.

- - - Updated - - -



There is no first amendment right to vandalism, assault, arson, or larceny. Grow the hell up, little edgelord.

Still waiting for the evidence of a riot in Lafayette square, psychopath.

Nobody is taking your guns. You can sleep with them every night and fuck them like you do, but just admit that it’s because you’re a coward, and because of any noble defense against tyranny.

Otherwise you’d be in favor of peaceful protestors in Lafayette square gunning down the tyrannical government that gassed them.

[Ghostpanther]

Like most things, the change has to come little by little.

We also have stats about guns used in robbery, murder, etc... and in quite a few case, legally owned guns. It also does not help people to be a bit less trigger happy (especially Police Officers).

Good point. That is why we in the US need to be concerned with, if we want to maintain our Constitutional right to use firearms for self defense. They will little by little, erode our freedoms if we let them.

I am never trigger happy. Having a firearm requires exercising respect for them and being cautious.

[Specialka]

Good point. That is why we in the US need to be concerned with, if we want to maintain our Constitutional right to use firearms for self defense. They will little by little, erode our freedoms if we let them.

I am never trigger happy. Having a firearm requires exercising respect for them and being cautious.

That is the theory. Then you have the reality.

And I guess you miss my point on purpose. If everyone is potentially armed, every robbery, mugglery etc... can escalate really quickly to several death. Same for Police Officers, they never know if the perp they are going after is not going to draw a gun to their face.

[Ghostpanther]

That is the theory. Then you have the reality.

And I guess you miss my point on purpose. If everyone is potentially armed, every robbery, mugglery etc... can escalate really quickly to several death. Same for Police Officers, they never know if the perp they are going after is not going to draw a gun to their face.

I did not miss your point. But applied it in way which you did not indicate.

I think my respect and responsible use of a firearm is representative of the large majority of gun owners. Just because a few do not respect them enough, is no reason to take them away from the majority of the citizens who do. After all, we use the same logic with automobiles. Want to compare the death rates of misuse of those with firearms?

[Ursus]

I am never trigger happy. Having a firearm requires exercising respect for them and being cautious.

Says the guy who has said previously he would automatically shoot anyone who knocked on his door past midnight.

[Specialka]

I did not miss your point. But applied it in way which you did not indicate.

I think my respect and responsible use of a firearm is representative of the large majority of gun owners. Just because a few do not respect them enough, is no reason to take them away from the majority of the citizens who do. After all, we use the same logic with automobiles. Want to compare the death rates of misuse of those with firearms?

Do a gun allow you to go to your job ? In today's society, a car is a necessity, a gun is not.

If only your skill at using bad faith argument would be as good as your skill at metaphore.

[Felya]

Do a gun allow you to go to your job ?

If only your skill at using bad faith argument would be as good as your skill at metaphore.

If only my skill at milking people out of money, was even close to on par with NRA... I’d be saying this to a hot tub full of strippers, instead of a gaming forum. /s

[Theodarzna]

Sure there are sales on lever action and bolt action rifles, those are not in demand (nor are they the first guns on most ban wish lists). Same reason you can find 7mm-08 or .270 Win easily but not common handgun ammo or 5.56/7.62x39 ammo.

Lever Action and Bolt Action though are nice designs and I prefer either one.

- - - Updated - - -

Obama commented that one of his biggest disappointments of his presidency was his lack of being able to get more gun control done. So you can be sure Biden would take away certain types of firearms if he could. He has said so. It is Congress which has blocked such efforts and the fact our Constitution, in order to be amended, needs more than even Congress to get it done. It is a fight which needs to be constant in every state to avoid such from happening.

I suspect the strategy will just be endless technicalities on the 2nd Amendment. They cannot ban it, but they can do a million other things that achieve the same ends.

[Felya]

I suspect the strategy will just be endless technicalities on the 2nd Amendment. They cannot ban it, but they can do a million other things that achieve the same ends.

Who is they?

[the game]

Who is they?

democrats.

[Krakan]

I support more (much more) gun control and I'm not a democrat. What up?

I don't really think it is as split across party lines as people like to believe. Nor do I think it is as easy as a ban. There are a lot of valid arguments that gun ownership should be stricter given the responsibly of owning and operating a weapon safetly instills.

While I support gun ownership I can see valid arguments against automatic weapons as for a civilian and even in most military applications they hold little value.

I find ideas like magazine sizes being restricted to be pushing things a bit to far. Everyone has their own preferences when it comes to what they believe is proper. Trying to make it into " I want a rpg" vs " Ban every weapon" seems a bit silly.

[Felya]

democrats.

I don’t understand... do I need to buy guns because democrats will ban guns or because they can’t? I’m confused...