Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Nakura Chambers]

It also is supposed to only bear upon the states ability to have militias, not individual's rights to firearms, but that has changed recently-ish as well. Of course if you had read the past couple pages and examined the posted links, you would already know that.

Are you the Doctor? Because you seemingly have no comprehension of linear time. For the first 150 years, the Second Amendment referred to an individual right. It wasn't until so-called "progressive" Supreme Court justices changed that in the 1930s with United States v. Miller. Even United States v. Miller though didn't change anything though, as United States v. Miller ruled that: "These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense."

[Beavis]

I was thinking more in terms of regulation on storage and checkups, it is a reasonable start. People allowed their guns to be stored wherever they see fit is retarded.
Wasnt it yesterday some 11 kid in Utah just took one of his parents gun to school waving it cos he was afraid of a shooting there.
Regulations doesn't fix the entire problem but pro-gunners attitude to buy their heads in the sand pretending that anything that isnt 100% waterproof is bad, why the fuck would you want to make it easier for criminals got get hold of firearms
Also mental/health/training required on a yearly basis or something along those lines.
A ban is not even on the drawing table in regards of any rational weapon used to defend ones home, hunting, life.

Ah, ok. That's different. I totally agree that gun safes should be mandatory.

[Felya]

I'm for gun rights, but people keep bringing this up. It's stupid and needs to stop being said as a defense of gun rights. Car deaths happen because there are millions of people on the road every day and accidents are bound to happen. That's a completely different thing from homicide. The number of homicides by car is vanishingly small.

It's comparing things that could be weapons to justify actual weapons.

I think it's funny that we have a right to own gun, but not toys that look like them.

[Moadar]

I'm for gun rights, but people keep bringing this up. It's stupid and needs to stop being said as a defense of gun rights. Car deaths happen because there are millions of people on the road every day and accidents are bound to happen. That's a completely different thing from homicide. The number of homicides by car is vanishingly small.

Innocent deaths are innocent deaths. Deaths by drunken drivers is higher than gun deaths. I guess its ok to be killed or suffer life altering injuries so someone can have a good time though.

[Bakis]

See the problem is that people are fine with banning something they aren't part of or don't enjoy. People will ban the tool but ignore the cause, especially when the cause might be something they do enjoy. Violent media has a strong tie to these crimes but now you targeting something these people enjoy and they get up in arms.

Considering Obamacare which is pretty weak in itself took years I have a hard time seeing the population being okey with spending more money on preventive meassures.
Pro-gunners keep saying that is the cause and I bet hardly anyone of them are willing to pay for it via taxes. Just a cheap cop out.

[Beavis]

Yes, but they would have a finite number of those who own guns. Making it much easier to track if one goes missing.

There's already a finite number of guns and they're already tracked. Ever firearm in this country has a serial number and is registered to a specific owner.

[Nakura Chambers]

What the founding fathers wrote, beyond the actual legislation they wrote, is not law. The founding fathers were not some sort of superhuman paragons of decency and supreme wisdom that could see into the future and know all challenges that the nation they started setting up would encounter.

I'm absolutely baffled at the idolization of the founding fathers stances on certain things (that didn't even make it into any laws or constitution) but the complete disregard for their opinions on things like equal rights, slavery, and women voting.

Interpretation of the Constitution comes only from the original intent of the authors (Founding Fathers), so yes, it is entirely relevant.

[Chrysia]

See the problem is that people are fine with banning something they aren't part of or don't enjoy. People will ban the tool but ignore the cause, especially when the cause might be something they do enjoy. Violent media has a strong tie to these crimes but now you targeting something these people enjoy and they get up in arms.

Wait, so are you honestly trying to imply that everyone who has ever touched a violent video game is a sociopath waiting to happen? Because that's what it sounds like.

[Nakura Chambers]

No, it was not effective. But very harsh gun restriction (by American standard) work in other western countries.

Incorrect, see my post.

There should be a new rule, only people who know what they are talking about can post in political threads.

[Beavis]

Innocent deaths are innocent deaths. Deaths by drunken drivers is higher than gun deaths. I guess its ok to be killed or suffer life altering injuries so someone can have a good time though.

No, innocent deaths are not innocent deaths. That's why you get charged with different crimes when you shoot somebody in the face with a shotgun on purpose and when you plow into somebody with a car unintentionally, even if you're drunk. This is a fallacious argument and it makes gun rights people look moronic.

[Moadar]

Wait, so are you honestly trying to imply that everyone who has ever touched a violent video game is a sociopath waiting to happen? Because that's what it sounds like.

I dunno are you implying that everyone who has touched a gun is a sociopath waiting to happen?

[Felya]

There's already a finite number of guns and they're already tracked. Ever firearm in this country has a serial number and is registered to a specific owner.

There are people buying guns, the number is not finite, but is growing.

[Moadar]

No, innocent deaths are not innocent deaths. That's why you get charged with a different crimes when you shoot somebody in the face with a shotgun and when you plow into somebody with a car. This is a fallacious argument and it makes gun rights people look moronic.

Not exactly. One side is claiming to try be saving lives but they don't want to start at the top, they target one segment and use it as a scape goat.

[Rukentuts]

Interpretation of the Constitution comes only from the original intent of the authors (Founding Fathers), so yes, it is entirely relevant.

How do you know the Founding Fathers intended for private citizens to possess weapons capable of mowing down dozens of innocents within minutes? Are you a medium?

[Kasierith]

Interpretation of the Constitution comes only from the original intent of the authors (Founding Fathers), so yes, it is entirely relevant.

So the founding fathers magically predicted that the US would become the international hegamon, in this dramatically different and more sophisticated world that we live in today? Even the concept of the internet blows so much of their personal views away. Interpretation of the constitution should not be what they would have done in their day and time, but examine their intentions in terms of inalienable human rights and interpret how exactly protecting these rights fit into modern day.

[Nakura Chambers]

Yeah London riots would have turned out well with guns on both sides.
You picked up a good example.

The police didn't have guns during the London riots (barring a few special tactics units). The law-abiding citizens who had their lives and property destroyed didn't have guns either.

[Trunksee]

See the problem is that people are fine with banning something they aren't part of or don't enjoy. People will ban the tool but ignore the cause, especially when the cause might be something they do enjoy. Violent media has a strong tie to these crimes but now you targeting something these people enjoy and they get up in arms.

Its actually scary how the democrats ignore the real issues in favor of their political agenda. People are messed up yet we give.them disability checks, housing, and utilities for being messed up and leave them on the streets. They are the problem. The mentally ill are the problem not the tool they use. These kids all kill themselves or you can see how fucked up they are like the joker kid. Most people show signs of violence pre doing these things. Parents need an outlet to lock these kids up so they.can get treatment. People are scared.to impose on their rights to be in society yet they attempt to destroy it. I have not heard many legaslatures saying this kid had violent tendencies fed with violence in the media to the point in his mind killing is a good idea.

Not all people are effected by violence they see but some are. These people act like they are in a fps, but we cant talk about freedom to fake kill because we like fps games. Yes yoir not influenced but some are. We need as a society to either pay more attention to the mentally ill or make it as difficult as possible for parents to keep it out of their hands.

[Felya]

How do you know the Founding Fathers intended for private citizens to possess weapons capable of mowing down dozens of innocents within minutes? Are you a medium?

Or for that mater, how are those guns supposed to save you from a government that uses unmanned drones? Using rocks is nearly as effective.

[Chrysia]

I dunno are you implying that everyone who has touched a gun is a sociopath waiting to happen?

No, my only stance is that a 30 round clip allows for a greater rate of sustained fire than any person actually needs to maintain, and thus I can fully support a limit on clip size sold to the public.

[Nakura Chambers]

All together now:

Correlation does not imply causation.

Every single liberal post in this thread is "Europe got no gun, Europe got no crime; 'MURICA got gun, 'MURICA got crime."

You're telling that to the wrong person, friend.