Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Mayhem]

Life in solitary confinement is better than death as a punishment.

No, it is not. It's basically torture.

"People suffer in these environments, experiencing a range of what can be severe, negative psychological effects, including forms of depression and hopelessness. Sometimes they become so despondent they attempt to take their own life. The highest rates of suicide and self-harm occur in solitary confinement units."

When you have to wait days to prove you are innocent of being a criminal, that is an impact. When you ban a type of firearm that is popular with both criminals and law abiding citizens in the name of keeping them out of the hands of criminals, that is an impact.

Ok, bring it down from days, there's this new hip thing called the internet where millions of people can do stuff from the comfort of their couch with results within seconds. You don't have to ban firearms, just bring up a registry and done. This is not magic, this is done with cars, it can be done with firearms as well.

If it does become legal, then we can discuss it.

k

So you don't think having to give up something isn't an impact on the person forced to give it up?

That's just how laws and regulations work, society coped with this mechanism for quite some time. Are gun-owners just snowflakes that can't handle changing environments?

Criminal punishments serve to either dissuade the commission of the crime or to punish those not dissuaded. So, the harsher the punishment, the more likely it is to dissuade, and if it fails to dissuade ,it removes the criminal from society longer. Either makes society safer from criminals.

Again, in the history of the world, this never worked. Harsher punishments never served the purpose of dissuasion. What keeps crimes from happening is a society that has overall a high standard of living, equal chances in life, and robust health and mental care systems.

[Ghostpanther]

Mass shooting near Milwaukee
https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/20/us/wi...ing/index.html
no one seems to been killed so far,
On a side note that kid who killed two people with guns he shouldn’t have been allowed to use/owned posted bail thanks to crowdfunding
https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/20/us/ky...ase/index.html
Ain’t America grand.

I assume the kid you are referring to is the one at the routs and looting, destruction of property vandalism protests, which some of them attacked the kid, in Wis. earlier this summer?
If so, he has a good case for self defense and the decision to allow a bail is up to the judge. And nothing wrong with someone else paying for bail.

And yes, America is great. We do agree there. Wouldn't want to live anyplace else in the world.

[Felya]

I assume the kid you are referring to is the one at the routs and looting, destruction of property vandalism protests, which some of them attacked the kid, in Wis. earlier this summer?
If so, he has a good case for self defense and the decision to allow a bail is up to the judge. And nothing wrong with someone else paying for bail.

2 million... push your populism now... tell me about working class and not a party of elite billionaires. Guns are how the elite and rich control you...

[Noxx79]

Life in solitary confinement is better than death as a punishment.
When you have to wait days to prove you are innocent of being a criminal, that is an impact. When you ban a type of firearm that is popular with both criminals and law abiding citizens in the name of keeping them out of the hands of criminals, that is an impact.

If it does become legal, then we can discuss it.

So you don't think having to give up something isn't an impact on the person forced to give it up?

Criminal punishments serve to either dissuade the commission of the crime or to punish those not dissuaded. So, the harsher the punishment, the more likely it is to dissuade, and if it fails to dissuade ,it removes the criminal from society longer. Either makes society safer from criminals.

- - - Updated - - -



In order to reduce drunk driving, we are going to require every vehicle to be equipped with a breathalyzer ignition interlock. We feel this is a very minor inconvenience to those who don't drive drunk to eliminate all drunk driving deaths and injuries.

So when do people get to start shooting at the government t for violating their rights? Is it just the second amendment that’s sacred or is the rest of the constitution important?

You’ve made it clear that protestors can be gassed because someone committed a crime the night before. So the first amendment can be violated for a tangential issue. Why are you hung up on the second?

You didn’t seem to have a problem with all and any of the law-abiding innocent protestors in Lafayette square. Why is that? So since you can limit the first amendement for innocent citizens, why not the second?

[Zan15]

In order to reduce drunk driving, we are going to require every vehicle to be equipped with a breathalyzer ignition interlock. We feel this is a very minor inconvenience to those who don't drive drunk to eliminate all drunk driving deaths and injuries.

on top of mandatory insurance!
Not against it at all

was this supposed to be a "i got ya" moment?

result would most likely be less deaths and lower insurance rates for all


oh the horror

[Kellhound]

No, it is not. It's basically torture.

"People suffer in these environments, experiencing a range of what can be severe, negative psychological effects, including forms of depression and hopelessness. Sometimes they become so despondent they attempt to take their own life. The highest rates of suicide and self-harm occur in solitary confinement units."



Ok, bring it down from days, there's this new hip thing called the internet where millions of people can do stuff from the comfort of their couch with results within seconds. You don't have to ban firearms, just bring up a registry and done. This is not magic, this is done with cars, it can be done with firearms as well.



k



That's just how laws and regulations work, society coped with this mechanism for quite some time. Are gun-owners just snowflakes that can't handle changing environments?



Again, in the history of the world, this never worked. Harsher punishments never served the purpose of dissuasion. What keeps crimes from happening is a society that has overall a high standard of living, equal chances in life, and robust health and mental care systems.

I didn't mean it was better punishment from the view of the criminal. I really don't care about the well being of violent felons.

Internet doesn't help if background checks are used to keep transactions in limbo intentionally. It also doesn't seem to help if you have either very common or very odd full names.

The very term "cope" denotes negative impact on those affected. Since I was referring to negative impact, my comment stands.

A certain amount of people will be dissuaded, the rest punished. And thank you for admitting that gun control is not what keeps crime from happening.

- - - Updated - - -

So when do people get to start shooting at the government t for violating their rights? Is it just the second amendment that’s sacred or is the rest of the constitution important?

You’ve made it clear that protestors can be gassed because someone committed a crime the night before. So the first amendment can be violated for a tangential issue. Why are you hung up on the second?

You didn’t seem to have a problem with all and any of the law-abiding innocent protestors in Lafayette square. Why is that? So since you can limit the first amenement for innocent citizens, why not the second?

There are limits to both the 1st and 2nd. Transient violations by underlings are for courts to decide.

[Zan15]

I assume the kid you are referring to is the one at the routs and looting, destruction of property vandalism protests, which some of them attacked the kid, in Wis. earlier this summer?
If so, he has a good case for self defense and the decision to allow a bail is up to the judge. And nothing wrong with someone else paying for bail.

And yes, America is great. We do agree there. Wouldn't want to live anyplace else in the world.

So great that 48% of the country supports a guy who is outright trying to destroy democracy and our elections.
While you remain quiet about it.

So quiet.

and you are worried about looting.....and some kid who is going to jail for a long time

[Noxx79]

I didn't mean it was better punishment from the view of the criminal. I really don't care about the well being of violent felons.

Internet doesn't help if background checks are used to keep transactions in limbo intentionally. It also doesn't seem to help if you have either very common or very odd full names.

The very term "cope" denotes negative impact on those affected. Since I was referring to negative impact, my comment stands.

A certain amount of people will be dissuaded, the rest punished. And thank you for admitting that gun control is not what keeps crime from happening.

- - - Updated - - -



There are limits to both the 1st and 2nd. Transient violations by underlings are for courts to decide.

So you have no problem with “innocents” being “punished” by rules affecting gun ownership.

So let’s not hear any more about “punishing” legal gun owners.

When are you going to turn yourself into to thecops because someone committed a crime in your neighborhood.

Thanks!

[Kellhound]

on top of mandatory insurance!
Not against it at all

was this supposed to be a "i got ya" moment?

result would most likely be less deaths and lower insurance rates for all


oh the horror

It would be more effective at saving lives than gun control, so you should be pushing for it.

[Noxx79]

It would be more effective at saving lives than gun control, so you should be pushing for it.

And gassing non-violent protestors because someone committed a crime the night before is A-OK!

[Kellhound]

So you have no problem with “innocents” being “punished” by rules affecting gun ownership.

So let’s not hear any more about “punishing” legal gun owners.

When are you going to turn yourself into to thecops because someone committed a crime in your neighborhood.

Thanks!

I have significant issue with non-criminals being punished by laws enacted in the name of combating crime.

That is what gun control is though, punishing all for the acts of a few.

That makes no sense.

- - - Updated - - -

And gassing non-violent protestors because someone committed a crime the night before is A-OK!

Again, transient violation. And tear gas is just tear gas, not VX.

[Noxx79]

I have significant issue with non-criminals being punished by laws enacted in the name of combating crime.

That is what gun control is though, punishing all for the acts of a few.

That makes no sense.

- - - Updated - - -



Again, transient violation.

Yet you approved of it. You said they deserved to be gassed because someone committed a crime the night before.

Are you finally admitting the constitution was indeed violated?

Because that would go against your bloodthirsty declaration that the cops should stay out of protests and allow you and your gun nuts to murder peaceful protestors.

[Kellhound]

Yet you approved of it. You said they deserved to be gassed because someone committed a crime the night before.

Are you finally admitting the constitution was indeed violated?

Because that would go against your bloodthirsty declaration that the cops should stay out of protests and allow you and your gun nuts to murder peaceful protestors.

I neither approved or disapproved of it, just stated it was a transitory violation for the courts to decide if it was justified.

That is a far more broad statement than asking about a single amendment.

I have said nothing of the sort.

[Noxx79]

Nah just make it a gun control law. i'm sure criminals will follow it.

So murder should be legal.

[Eviscero]

It would be more effective at saving lives than gun control, so you should be pushing for it.

Claims based on feels are fun.

Your analogy is stupid. Mandatory background checks on guns is sensible and basically what is already done everywhere: looking up driving record before issuing a license to drive.

Pro tip: when you resort to analogy instead of data, it's easy to spot that you're full of shit.

[Zan15]

It would be more effective at saving lives than gun control, so you should be pushing for it.

Manditory insurance already exist for cars and they already at least force breathalyzers on convicted drunk drivers.

Now can we do the same for guns, then we will get back to pushing for more on cars.

and btw you know ya can do more than one thing at a time right?

[Mayhem]

I didn't mean it was better punishment from the view of the criminal. I really don't care about the well being of violent felons.

So how is it better then? What was your point?

Internet doesn't help if background checks are used to keep transactions in limbo intentionally. It also doesn't seem to help if you have either very common or very odd full names.

Sure it does, I can sign documents with a government app on my phone. Make an automated system with a registry that can only be looked into by law enforcement if a judge gives the order to do so. Automated documentation that civilians can look into themselves with the required access code so that you yourself can look it up if you might get in contact with the police or fear prosecution. Every sale would be registered, every purchase would be registered, every gun lost or stolen would be registered. It would immensely help law enforcement.

Why do you think transactions are kept in limbo?

The very term "cope" denotes negative impact on those affected. Since I was referring to negative impact, my comment stands.

So almost every law or regulation has a negative effect on law-abiding citizens then, cool ok, that's just how it is or else society wouldn't work. It would be awesome if we could just trust everyone doing the right thing but that's just not how it works.

A certain amount of people will be dissuaded, the rest punished. And thank you for admitting that gun control is not what keeps crime from happening.

People got their hands chopped off for stealing do you think that stopped theft? What you get with harsher punishments for lesser crimes is criminals rather getting rid of witnesses than risk being caught because the punishment is virtually the same and law-abiding citizens fearing others will accuse them of something they didn't commit. It's a very useful tool for authoritarian governments to get their citizens to monitor each other.

Gun control keeps the crimes from escalating, so fewer people die. I never once said gun control keeps crimes from happening, and I don't remember anyone else ever saying this so no idea what you think I was admitting.

[Zython]

I live in a blue college town, in a blue state, in New England.

And you don’t know the difference between liberals and anarchists? I’ve heard of social distancing, but this is ridiculous.

[the game]

Australians speaking about about gun control

[Kellhound]

Claims based on feels are fun.

Your analogy is stupid. Mandatory background checks on guns is sensible and basically what is already done everywhere: looking up driving record before issuing a license to drive.

Pro tip: when you resort to analogy instead of data, it's easy to spot that you're full of shit.

Based on numbers not feels.

Drivers license not needed to buy a car.