Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Kellhound]

Life sentences for assault is complete crazy pants.

Why? If you commit a violent act against another, why should you be allowed to walk the streets with those who have not?

[Svifnymr]

I really hate this whole "I refuse to support things I do want unless you can promise me I also get to win all the debates in the future."

That shit can diaf.

It's the obvious problem with each generation coming forward with "common sense gun laws" to add to last generations "common sense gun laws" that were the final step (until they weren't). Slippery Slope or no, if there's a history of incremental laws, why would you trust that "this time, we mean it!".

[Wells]

I am willing to go beyond what I want to secure a final solution to gun control. There is nothing wrong with saying "I will go this far, but I want security that you will push me no farther."

There's no such big as a final solution. Laws have to change as time and need passes.

This is like saying I'll only agree to crackdowns on welfare fraud if we never ever cut welfare spending ever.

Its just fucking awful governance.

- - - Updated - - -

Why? If you commit a violent act against another, why should you be allowed to walk the streets with those who have not?

Because taking away your freedom forever for punching a guy is absolutely over the top. I thought you were big on the constitution.

[Kellhound]

if they know they are never going to be released if caught then they will fight literally to the death. there is a reason cops dont support 3 strikes laws

Well, dead criminals never commit another crime....

[Wells]

It's the obvious problem with each generation coming forward with "common sense gun laws" to add to last generations "common sense gun laws" that were the final step (until they weren't). Slippery Slope or no, if there's a history of incremental laws, why would you trust that "this time, we mean it!".

Wait you mean to tell me each generation might want to craft its own laws? How horrible. How dare they not want to live under laws that were written before they were ever alive.

[Eroginous]

Why? If you commit a violent act against another, why should you be allowed to walk the streets with those who have not?

Violence doesn't just happen because people are psychopaths. Sometimes it happens between entirely sane people for completely different reasons. People make mistakes, and getting an assault charge should not necessarily mean life in prison.

I am willing to go beyond what I want to secure a final solution to gun control. There is nothing wrong with saying "I will go this far, but I want security that you will push me no farther."

Final solution on gun control? Can you explain to me why the current gun control is not good enough, without blaming gun crimes on the existence of guns themselves?

[Wells]

Seriously. What's the point to evening voting for people if we want to demand laws that will never be changed?

[Svifnymr]

Wait you mean to tell me each generation might want to craft its own laws? How horrible. How dare they not want to live under laws that were written before they were ever alive.

So then each generation should anticipate that there is no future proofing, and fight tooth and nail to preserve as much as they can, which is how it works. Not like it matters, if you have the support to get a registry, then you'd simply amend the law barring the registry to read "you can'[t have a registry until the time when you can have a registry".

[Kellhound]

There's no such big as a final solution. Laws have to change as time and need passes.

This is like saying I'll only agree to crackdowns on welfare fraud if we never ever cut welfare spending ever.

Its just fucking awful governance.

- - - Updated - - -


Because taking away your freedom forever for punching a guy is absolutely over the top. I thought you were big on the constitution.

Even the Constitution can change when the time is right, but that doesn't mean it must be easy. And you see it as awful only because of your view point, from the other side it is stupid to make an agreement that will serve only to further the agenda of your enemy.

I am big on the Constitution, being in jail is neither cruel nor unusual.

[Wells]

Even the Constitution can change when the time is right, but that doesn't mean it must be easy. And you see it as awful only because of your view point, from the other side it is stupid to make an agreement that will serve only to further the agenda of your enemy.

I am big on the Constitution, being in jail is neither cruel nor unusual.

No you're not. There is no definition of cruel that does not cover life in prison for throwing a punch.

- - - Updated - - -

You're literally demanding that future generations be deprived of their ability to govern themselves by demanding a law never be changed. Its stupid.

[smelltheglove]

There was a funny study when California had the idea to mail a letter to everyone that purchased a gun. The letter basically said "your purchase is registered and if you transfer the gun without following the appropriate laws, you will be prosecuted" sort of deal. It led to a sharp increase in the number of guns reported stolen.

coupled with storage laws, no reason for this not to be a crime. we are way too easy on "oh, my gun was stolen". this should be a big deal, not a mantra to repeat to law enforcement

two camps of thought in opposition to the storage thing. One, the increased cost (most safes are expensive if good). Easy enough to manage if you want to subsidize things, but who is willing to foot the bill on a goverment budget? More likely they'd mandate the gun owner buy one, which is the poll-tax thing all over again.

constitution doesnt say guns or gun ownership should be free. it is however very specific on voting

Secondly, some folks do not want to lock up their defensive weapon and add to the time to retrieve it.

this is a no brainer. if you dont have your gun it's in a safe. you want to take out said gun to put in your nightstand or w/e then fine. only locked up when you dont have possession/custody of it

And of course, there's the enforcement issue. Random inspections to insure the usage is out of the question, so we then come to the "attacking the victim" thing. Currently we have a law saying you cannot leave a gun within access of a minor. When some kid gets the gun and does something bad, you certainly won't see a prosecutor going after the grieving parents.

i wish they would tbh. if lanza'a mom hadnt died id want to see her ass in prison. knowing he's crazy and keeping the guns in a fucking closet?!? how stupid is that?

Obviously the average person falls between the two extremes, that's what makes it average, but we can hope that the two extreme sides even out to letting the rest of us live in peace. I'm of the opinion that compromise doesn't generally work with the gun-control measures, so I err on the side of rights rather than restrictions and hoping something comes of it. Most of the time the money could be better spent on social issues, but that would come to folks agreeing on what is actually the answer for such and that won't happen any time soon.

As I've said before, it's all about measuring the cost ($ and hassle) vs the benefits. The proposed UBC law was a good example of something that had no real chance of giving any actual benefit (in crime reduction), but would greatly increase hassle for many law abiding folks, so I considered it a very bad bill. Same with Assault weapons ban, no actual benefit IMO, lots of hassle and $. A magazine limit might actually have SOME benefit, but falls on the side of more cost than benefit still. Current background check system, good cost/benefit. I think a voluntary background check system as I mentioned above would be good benefit/cost. I think folding a lot of the enforcement of the gun laws into the FBI (rather than ATF) would be a good cost/benefit, for example.

i dont see it being as expensive as made out. UBC would be effective with a registry, and there would be no need for "assault weapon" ban imo. proper legislation allows for relaxing of goofy laws that are there to try to work around the lack of a registry. and that's not to say i think money cant be spent in other areas to good benefit, because it can

[Wells]

How about the inverse. What if I agreed to deregulation x that i support if you agreed to never attempt more deregulation?

Sound fair?

[Kellhound]

Violence doesn't just happen because people are psychopaths. Sometimes it happens between entirely sane people for completely different reasons. People make mistakes, and getting an assault charge should not necessarily mean life in prison.



Final solution on gun control? Can you explain to me why the current gun control is not good enough, without blaming gun crimes on the existence of guns themselves?

If they can show the reason to not be charged with a felony, they will be fine. I never said the definition of a felony needed to stay as open as it is now.

I would say that current gun cotrol laws are too restrictive as it is, but I am willing to compromise to not have to fight every year to keep them as they are.

- - - Updated - - -

No you're not. There is no definition of cruel that does not cover life in prison for throwing a punch.

- - - Updated - - -

You're literally demanding that future generations be deprived of their ability to govern themselves by demanding a law never be changed. Its stupid.

No, you think it is cruel, that does not make it cruel.

As I said before, even the Constitution can be changed, but change does not need to be easy.

- - - Updated - - -

How about the inverse. What if I agreed to deregulation x that i support if you agreed to never attempt more deregulation?

Sound fair?

Depending on the details, yes.

[Wells]

What the shit is life in prison for a punch supposed to solve?

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Final solution on gun control? Can you explain to me why the current gun control is not good enough, without blaming gun crimes on the existence of guns themselves?

Improved Background checks. I'm sure there's a talent for that in the Gun Control Talent Tree.

What the shit is life in prison for a punch supposed to solve?

Nothing. It's an Unusual Punishment. One punch=FO LIFE BRO


Stupid stupid stupid concept.

[Kellhound]

What the shit is life in prison for a punch supposed to solve?

For a simple punch? Shouldnt be a felony, thus not really an issue.

[Svifnymr]

constitution doesnt say guns or gun ownership should be free. it is however very specific on voting

I'd say a government fee is an "infringement", I'm sure the people that wrote the 2nd amendment would too.

i wish they would tbh. if lanza'a mom hadnt died id want to see her ass in prison. knowing he's crazy and keeping the guns in a fucking closet?!? how stupid is that?

The usual case is "little kid gets a gun and shoots self/friend", would you want to be the prosecuter going after the parents of a dead child for not securing the firearm? It needs to affect people BEFORE it gets to that stage, obviously, but that's the difficult part to make happen.

i dont see it being as expensive as made out. UBC would be effective with a registry, and there would be no need for "assault weapon" ban imo. proper legislation allows for relaxing of goofy laws that are there to try to work around the lack of a registry. and that's not to say i think money cant be spent in other areas to good benefit, because it can

They're still going after silencers for fucks sake. Even when there IS full registration of an item, they still try to hinder it.

[smelltheglove]

I'd say a government fee is an "infringement", I'm sure the people that wrote the 2nd amendment would too.

is the cost of the gun an infringement too? and we werent talking govt fee, we were talking a gun safe, which is property

The usual case is "little kid gets a gun and shoots self/friend", would you want to be the prosecuter going after the parents of a dead child for not securing the firearm? It needs to affect people BEFORE it gets to that stage, obviously, but that's the difficult part to make happen.

there are ways to deal with this... like gun safes. which also helps against the ungodly number of gun thefts every year

They're still going after silencers for fucks sake. Even when there IS full registration of an item, they still try to hinder it.

do those things even work? i see no reason to be going after them, im with you here. and i feel things like this are because of the derpy setup we have to regulate guns

[Kellhound]

is the cost of the gun an infringement too? and we werent talking govt fee, we were talking a gun safe, which is property



there are ways to deal with this... like gun safes. which also helps against the ungodly number of gun thefts every year




do those things even work? i see no reason to be going after them, im with you here. and i feel things like this are because of the derpy setup we have to regulate guns

Yes, silencers do work, though the bullet needs to be sub-sonic or its "crack" will defeat the purpose for the most part.

[smelltheglove]

Yes, silencers do work, though the bullet needs to be sub-sonic or its "crack" will defeat the purpose for the most part.

isnt the "crack" the loud part anyway? dont bullets have about the same amount of powder as a firecracker?