Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Edge-]

I thought it was obvious. Sometimes you do need to be able to do the job yourself, and not simply because "policing is fundamentally broken". Adequate policing won't alleviate the issue in many places.

Weird that this doesn't seem to be a necessity in most other developed nations?

The Constitution certainly allows for people to make the decision for themselves. And the fear of being a victim of a home invasion attack is clearly no less valid than the fear of being in a mass shooting. Yet you champion one and scoff at the other.

Yes, something I strongly disagree with as a right but clearly am in the minority on while folks still pretend they give a shit about peoples lives more than they do about owning a sick-ass gun.

Again, feeling teh need to be armed at home to protect against home invasion because you can't trust the police to respond quickly is pretty much the exact kind of "failed state" shit I'm talking about.

That this is, again, a uniquely American issue seems to lead us to two conclusions -

Americans are just inherently a lot more violent and murderous and criminal and consequently law-abiding citizens who can't rely on the police need to have the tools to defend themselves.

Problems that are faced in the rest of the developed world are exacerbated by the comparatively easy access to guns, yet people would prefer to ensure they have their Second Amendment right rather than even meaningfully consider alternatives that might continue to grant people the privilege of owning firearms for practical purposes (hunting, shooting at the range, self defense) while following policies that have elsewhere shown considerable reductions in gun violence and related crimes.

Because it often results in needless deaths like this - https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile...custody-fight/

Which, even more wildly, is apparently a completely legal shooting for some completely batshit crazy reason.

[Elegiac]

It wasn't mainstream anywhere, though. They were collectively ahead of their cultural time, though they still had work to be done. But the seed of that idea is what continued later to fight for an even better and more fair expression of equality down the road.

Which is precisely why their intent should not be taken at face value when it comes to examining the system they created. It does not service the needs of a fair and just society.

And yes, we've faced lasting problems in the lingering counter-ideals of slavery and other forms of oppression. Other countries have been able to use the same idea and progress faster without the dogged opposition of the ranks of bigoted asshats.

And a factor in their ability to progress faster is that they haven't created an effective cult of personality around certain historical figures and insisted the system they created is without reproach.

[Mayhem]

Except "the range" isn't always a place of business. Sometimes, it's a dedicated section of unincorporated land, or private property.

Then buy them on your way to the range?

- - - Updated - - -

Ammo is way more expensive at the range than just about anywhere else that sells it. It's a durable, long lasting product that is easy to buy in bulk and save money, especially when there's a shortage.

Regulate prices so ranges can't sell overpriced ammo.

[Endus]

I thought it was obvious. Sometimes you do need to be able to do the job yourself, and not simply because "policing is fundamentally broken". Adequate policing won't alleviate the issue in many places.

In pretty much any country but the USA, there is no "job" that you'd have to "do yourself", in the first place.

Because we don't have a heavily-armed populace with easy access to weaponry.

It's not that we have better police or faster response times, we're never having to worry about violent home invasions as a statistical possibility in the first place.

[Roxinius]

Playing around with a piece of equipment specifically designed to kill something is the real joke around here.

Go collect baseball cards or diddle your fiddle if you want a hobby. Why does a murder machine have to be the center of your "fun".

That's always been super weird for me and I never understood it my entire life. Hunting used to be a necessity, that's just not the case anymore for 99% of people living in the US. Guns are just some super weird obsession y'all have because reasons.

what an absolute braindead take we arent playing around with firearms taking them to the range or going to shooting competitions arent playing around just because YOU dont like then doesnt disqualify the hobby

[Spectral]

None, you get them at the range.

I am not aware of any ranges in my area that have my preferred 22LR ammunition or that have 6.5 Creedmoor ammo at all. Obviously, there are going to be many more examples of things that a range isn't likely to have on hand. This is not a practical solution for most people. Why in the world would I prefer something so impractical to simply ordering what I want online and picking it up from the mailroom?

[Tentim]

Again, this is some big "failed state" shit. Y'all still don't seem to realize how damning this is to hold this belief in a developed nation, much less the wealthiest, most powerful nation in the world.

Why isn't it?

I don't expect police officers to teleport to my residence in case of trouble and their ability to actually do anything once they arrive is deeply suspect from what we have seen since cameras became a thing.

Instead of going off on a failed state make a competent argument against why I shouldn't have a right to secure my home.

- - - Updated - - -

If you've got to worry about needing a gun to defend your home, your nation's already a systemic failure. It isn't normal. This isn't how any developed nation in the free world feels about anything, other than the USA itself.

I can't say I agree with you. I've traveled most of the EU and been to canada more then the states and it isnt a rare belief that you should have a firearm for protection.

There are other uses like hunting of course but in the prairies more of my colleagues are armed then not.

[Tentim]

That ls literally ''playing around'' with them in both of your examples lmao. I'm pretty sure a country in Europe even officially stated so in their laws idr which though.

It can be. It can also be to familiarize yourself with the tool. It's a weird mocking way of putting it...

Do you play around with a hammer and crowbar when you use them as well?

[Tentim]

Hammers and crowbars are also not commonly used to end numerous innocent lives at the whim of socially outcasted, fed up, angry extremists either.

They actually are quite commonly... more happens in the world then the 60mins of news they show on television.

[Tentim]

I only did a cursory google search, I could find serial killers who used them, and a few small-scale killings or harmings, but I absolutely could not find weekly occurrences, even if looking worldwide. A few home intruder instances.

I posit the question to you; how many innocent people is an acceptable price to pay for your freedoms? At what point/number do you stop and consider that at least tighter gun control COULD help, even if such things means you would need to relinquish or downsize?

When people start a post off on the internet saying " yes you are right" why is it that never ends that line of argument?

Still your question is comedically flawed. Once you find a way to stop criminals from breaking the law and illegally arming themselves perhaps I will entertain an argument about stripping my freedoms away.

Only perhaps though it's such a weak emotional and pathetic argument I doubt I would seriously consider it.

[Roxinius]

That ls literally ''playing around'' with them in both of your examples lmao. I'm pretty sure a country in Europe even officially stated so in their laws idr which though.

once again since you seem fairly slow here no gun owner considers range time or competition "playing around" with guns

[Tentim]

Okay, so innocents need to die to assuage your paranoia then. Good to know. May want to take some time to look up what happened when other first-worlds enacted stronger gun control in between your hourly patrols of your front door.

Its varied and mostly dependent on the local culture... you don't have arguments you have emotions.

Your rebuttal was how many rights am I willing to sacrifice in hopes criminals respect the law. I answered you. None.

[Edge-]

Why isn't it?

I don't expect police officers to teleport to my residence in case of trouble and their ability to actually do anything once they arrive is deeply suspect from what we have seen since cameras became a thing.

Instead of going off on a failed state make a competent argument against why I shouldn't have a right to secure my home.

My point remains: This largely is not a concern in most developed nations. Outside of certain specific circumstance, this is simply not a thing that's thought of.

I'm not saying guns are the only reason, but I am say that we're also the only nation with a Constitutional right to own guns and with by far the highest levels of gun ownership in the developed world.

I'm saying that the kinds of countries where feeling that you need a personal firearm in case of home invasion, are largely not the types of countries one views as "developed" or even "stable". That's not to criticize them as many face incredibly difficult circumstances, often following gross exploitation by European countries, but it is the reality of it.

- - - Updated - - -

They actually are quite commonly... more happens in the world then the 60mins of news they show on television.

Surely you can show statistics that mass-murder attacks with crowbars are remotely commonplace in any country, right?

[Tentim]

My point remains: This largely is not a concern in most developed nations. Outside of certain specific circumstance, this is simply not a thing that's thought of.

I'm not saying guns are the only reason, but I am say that we're also the only nation with a Constitutional right to own guns and with by far the highest levels of gun ownership in the developed world.

I'm saying that the kinds of countries where feeling that you need a personal firearm in case of home invasion, are largely not the types of countries one views as "developed" or even "stable". That's not to criticize them as many face incredibly difficult circumstances, often following gross exploitation by European countries, but it is the reality of it.

- - - Updated - - -



Surely you can show statistics that mass-murder attacks with crowbars are remotely commonplace in any country, right?

Except your not. Per person more Canadians own a gun or did ( the numbers I heard of were from almost a decade ago). I think you are confusing that with guns per person that is a different statistic.

I also think you are really overplaying the rational of having a gun for security. It's no different then owning an alarm or an insurance policy. There isn't a wish to use it or even the expectation to but it costs little and can make quite a difference.

- - - Updated - - -

oof, your emotional response of paranoia guides this decision. The fact the US is the only developed nation with a mass-shooting problem, while nations that have curbed gun ownership to a healthier amount don't have an increased issue of home invasion or homocide that is correlated is all the "emotions" I need.

America's issue with mass shootings are not gun ownership issues. Much like knife ownership isn't the issue around stabbings.

Rather then blame the tool look at the reasons people are committing the violence.

[Tentim]

Except the issues that cause this to be a view are not being resolved either, and we can look at the 2 options in viability:

Eradicating poverty, expanding homelessness, destruction of the GQP, Education improvements, MUCH harsher, stronger control of dangerous misinformation (which means 1A fixing), inequality issues, systemic racism. . .

or

Tighter gun reform with potential buyback scales.

Both are big undertakings, but which one seems more feasible?

You will not convince me that stripping freedoms from people will ever be an effective or even acceptable way of trying to get criminals to stop breaking the law.

Blame whatever tool you want it's all pointless when you accept the underlying problems are incurable.

[Tentim]

So why even bother coming into a forum? You'd be better served with an soundbooth, or a closed bathroom with a large mirror. Safe to just end any discussion here then.

I mean if that is how you react to an opposing view point then I guess so. A forum isn't a " everyone will agree with me and not challenge me zone"

[Endus]

You will not convince me that stripping freedoms from people will ever be an effective or even acceptable way of trying to get criminals to stop breaking the law.

Blame whatever tool you want it's all pointless when you accept the underlying problems are incurable.

Why would the underlying problems (wildly high rates of gun violence/mass shootings) be "incurable" when literally every developed nation on the planet but the USA has cured them?

[Tentim]

Why would the underlying problems (wildly high rates of gun violence/mass shootings) be "incurable" when literally every developed nation on the planet but the USA has cured them?

Given the rules of the forum I have to tip toe around the conversation. Ultimately it comes down to cultural differences. American has to many conflicting cultures and value to effectively integrate everyone into society.

[Endus]

Given the rules of the forum I have to tip toe around the conversation. Ultimately it comes down to cultural differences. American has to many conflicting cultures and value to effectively integrate everyone into society.

That isn't a valid argument. It also appears to be an empty dogwhistle, since there's only one thing I can see that you'd be dancing around.

[Specialka]

Playing around with a piece of equipment specifically designed to kill something is the real joke around here.

Go collect baseball cards or diddle your fiddle if you want a hobby. Why does a murder machine have to be the center of your "fun".

That's always been super weird for me and I never understood it my entire life. Hunting used to be a necessity, that's just not the case anymore for 99% of people living in the US. Guns are just some super weird obsession y'all have because reasons.

Because shooting at a range is fun. Period.

- - - Updated - - -

Except your not. Per person more Canadians own a gun or did ( the numbers I heard of were from almost a decade ago). I think you are confusing that with guns per person that is a different statistic.

I also think you are really overplaying the rational of having a gun for security. It's no different then owning an alarm or an insurance policy. There isn't a wish to use it or even the expectation to but it costs little and can make quite a difference.

- - - Updated - - -



America's issue with mass shootings are not gun ownership issues. Much like knife ownership isn't the issue around stabbings.

Rather then blame the tool look at the reasons people are committing the violence.

Does Canade not have some kind of screening process to own a gun ? A think that the US does not have ?