Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Elegiac]

When I got my parking decal at UF, I remember they told us all, "you haven't bought the right to a parking space, you've bought the right to look for one". To wit, nobody gives a wet shit if you think the ostensible "last resort" Jeffersonian purpose of the 2nd Amendment would work. Just like the fact that nobody cares what you say online doesn't lead to the inference that the 1st Amendment doesn't apply to it, the efficacy of the 2nd Amendment as a guarantor of liberty is irrelevant to our right to try if needed.

It matters if you're actually trying to argue the merits of a given precept rather than try to claim "It's constitutional so it must be good".

Nor does it logically follow one bit that overthrowing tyranny --> new tyranny.

Well I guess human history isn't logical, because that is exactly what happens.

Rather bet heavy on the Milgram obedience study?

The bulk of the rank-and-file of both the armed forces and civilian law enforcement support the 2nd Amendment -- the actual, correctly interpreted by Heller understanding. How many would follow an immoral order to do mass confiscation and police the civilian population? Plenty I don't doubt. But would this be the most effective fighting force in the history of man? Or thoroughly demoralized and uncertain?

All it has to be is superior to a minority of citizens to act as an enforcement of the regime.

Again, history does not bear out your mythologised view of human behavior.

[Ghostpanther]

I'm not surprised that you don't comprehend that thoughts in those countries lead to such actions. Much like how the availability of these weapons lead to the situation in your country.

What? Are you justifying what the Japanese and Germans did during WW2?

[Stormdash]

As long as the gun jockey crowd insists that the 2nd is an ironclad defense of any and all gun control, then its repeal is an organic necessity.

Are you afraid that gun ownership won't survive public opinion?

You think you can honestly "Brer Rabbit" your way into Americans voting away their own civil rights?

[Elegiac]

Tell you what, you run for a political position with a slavery agenda and see how fast you are beat back by the public.

We're not talking about running for office.

Most, not all. You think the Jews would have gladly boarded trains like cattle if they were armed?

It's funny that you think there was no Jewish resistance to the Reich.

Please list the tyrannies which have been replaced by a liberty-loving regime by virtue of the fact the public was armed. I'll wait.

[Ghostpanther]

It matters if you're actually trying to argue the merits of a given precept rather than try to claim "It's constitutional so it must be good".



Well I guess human history isn't logical, because that is exactly what happens.



All it has to be is superior to a minority of citizens to act as an enforcement of the regime.

Again, history does not bear out your mythologised view of human behavior.

Your opinion does not mean much for us here. Just so you understand.

History does bear out the consequences of disarming a certain group of people. Dictators have loved doing that a lot. Hitler did for the Jews.

- - - Updated - - -

We're not talking about running for office.



It's funny that you think there was no Jewish resistance to the Reich.

Please list the tyrannies which have been replaced by a liberty-loving regime by virtue of the fact the public was armed. I'll wait.

The US rebellion against England.

- - - Updated - - -

Tell you what, you run for a political position with a slavery agenda and see how fast you are beat back by the public.

He can not even vote here Pete. lol!

[Elegiac]

You think you can honestly "Brer Rabbit" your way into Americans voting away their own civil rights?

It's much easier than you think.

[petej0]

It's funny that you think there was no Jewish resistance to the Reich.

Thats not the point I was trying to make. It would have been a much bloodier resistance if they were as armed as the Nazis hunting them down

Please list the tyrannies which have been replaced by a liberty-loving regime by virtue of the fact the public was armed. I'll wait.

I dont have to. The threat of an armed public keeps control on Government tyranny.

[Elegiac]

Your opinion does not mean much for us here. Just so you understand.

I'm aware that you don't like people questioning American mythology.

History does bear out the consequences of disarming a certain group of people. Dictators have loved doing that a lot. Hitler did for the Jews.

Because every Western country besides the US is a dictatorship. Okay.

The US rebellion against England

Which was not, in fact, the overthrow of a tyranny. Try again.

He can not even vote here Pete. lol!

I'm a naturalised citizen, so you might want to rethink that.

- - - Updated - - -

Thats not the point I was trying to make. It would have been a much bloodier resistance if they were as armed as the Nazis hunting them down

But still ultimately just as ineffectual.

Political change by violent means is not a good thing, ever.

I dont have to. The threat of an armed public keeps control on Government tyranny.

I have a tiger-repelling rock I'd like to sell you.

[Deleted]

Compared to other types of injuries? Not that much difference. Some are more I would think. Of course some jobs people may have, could have a higher injury chance than from the average person from firearms.

When talking about unintentional injuries https://www.statista.com/statistics/...rincipal-type/

You will notice firearms ranks very low.

I think the problem is in the intentional injuries

After a quick search on the official Centers of Disease Control and Prevention i found nothing about guns.
I dont know where you guys are getting this "researches" from.

All i found was this:

Unintentional Firearm Deaths in 2014
https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/fatal.html

followed by this saying why they couldnt post more info on the matter:

New Restrictions for Reporting State-level Death Counts and Death Rates for 2008 and Later
The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) in an agreement with the National Association of Public Health Statistics and Information Systems (NAPHSIS) has implemented a new, more restrictive rule for reporting National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) state- and county-level death data for years 2008 and later, in order to avoid inadvertent disclosure of cases. Therefore, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC) has modified WISQARS to accommodate the new data suppression rule; i.e., no figure, including totals, should be less than 10 in tabulations for sub-national geographic areas, regardless of the number of years combined with the data from 2008 and later. Tabulations, charts, and maps produced by WISQARS using only NVSS death data for years prior to 2008 are not affected by this new rule.

[petej0]

I have a tiger-repelling rock I'd like to sell you.

If a Tiger was afraid of the concept of a rock your silly joke would comparable.

[Elegiac]

If a Tiger was afraid of the concept of a rock your silly joke would comparable.

You've yet to actually demonstrate that governments are potential tyrannies kept in check by fear of a civilian uprising, point in fact.

V for Vendetta is just a movie, bub.

[petej0]

You've yet to actually demonstrate that governments are potential tyrannies kept in check by fear of a civilian uprising, point in fact.

V for Vendetta is just a movie, bub.

I dont know, the people on the left keep telling me that Trump is a dictator and evil, etc. Its only a matter of time until he turns full tyranical

http://time.com/4690676/donald-trump-tyranny/
http://robertreich.org/post/154214776275
http://www.businessinsider.com/yale-...mocracy-2017-4
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...umn/587500001/

etc..
etc..

[Elegiac]

I dont know, the people on the left keep telling me that Trump is a dictator and evil, etc. Its only a matter of time until he turns tyranical

Which would demonstrate that despite the 2nd Amendment being a thing governments are perfectly willing to give tyranny a shot, by your own logic.

[petej0]

Which would demonstrate that despite the 2nd Amendment being a thing governments are perfectly willing to give tyranny a shot, by your own logic.

Maybe, but if there was an idiot who tried, at least we have an ability to do something about it instead of lining up to head to concentration camps.

[Elegiac]

Maybe, but if there was an idiot who tried, at least we have an ability to do something about it.

And again, you've yet to demonstrate that violent uprising actually does anything. It's a circular argument that keeps coming back to American mythology.

[schwank05]

Zero. Since repealing the Second Amendment would not make firearm ownership illegal.

But you already knew that, right?



Namely that we now actually have comprehensive law enforcement and a host of other methods to enable personal defense?

Law enforcement that if they responded immediately to the call by me would take at the very least 20mins to get to my house, no thanks I will take care of myself and my own family.

[wheresmywoft]

What? Are you justifying what the Japanese and Germans did during WW2?

O do tell.

[petej0]

And again, you've yet to demonstrate that violent uprising actually does anything. It's a circular argument that keeps coming back to American mythology.

It doesnt have to do anything but give those who are uprising hope to beat back tyranny.

[Hammerfest]

My Brother in Law got one after getting back from Iraq, I got him convinced to take it out and we both squeezed a few clips through it, For a larger caliber handgun the thing felt amazing. I kinda want one.

Yeah, I wonder if it feels better than my Judge.

[PhaelixWW]

Bigger background: not just does he or she have any warrants out. But hey lets look deeper.

I don't think you have any idea what a firearm background check is like. Or the fact that it's consistent across the US.

Just like car laws changed when the cars changed, gun laws need to change to.

How have guns changed, really? Semi-automatic handguns haven't changed appreciably in over 100 years.

Unless semiautomatic handguns are restricted, restricting rifles of any kind if somewhat of a farce. And restricting semiautomatic handguns is realistically never going to happen.

It goes: ra-ta-ta-ta-ta

/facepalm

I know its a better killing machine than guns that are not "auto"

Semiautomatic is not automatic. It's not partially automatic. It's not even close to automatic. Bullets do not "spray" from a semiautomatic.

Semiautomatic firearms only fire one round for every time you pull the trigger. A revolver is not a semiautomatic, but fires at the same rate as a semiautomatic.

Zero. Since repealing the Second Amendment would not make firearm ownership illegal.

Then by that same logic, the presence of the Second Amendment has likewise accounted for zero gun violence, because firearm ownership would still be legal without it, right?

Speaking of myths; this idea that the military will magically take the side of 'the people'.

Just like the myth that the whole of the military would side with the tyrannical government and be willing to wage all-out war against the people.

The real truth is that the military would most likely fracture and it would be goverment + part of the military vs. civilians + part of the military, which is a much more potentially even scenario if the civilians were armed.

And i would really like to know the validity of this research being quoted.

It's done by the CDC. You know, that agency that you claim is blocked from gathering information?