View Poll Results: Do you Support Assault Weapons Ban?

Voters
4675. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    2,818 60.28%
  • No

    1,857 39.72%
  1. #29581
    The Insane Daelak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    15,744
    Quote Originally Posted by Eroginous View Post

    Telling me I need to see a psychiatrist because I have mental health problems is an attack on my character, no matter what you think or say. It's a comment deliberately meant to derail any merit my posts might bring to the conversation. 'Don't listen to the crazy guy, he's paranoid delusional and off his meds.'

    The fact that you keep building this strawman is a sign you have nothing of value to contribute to the discussion. Feel free to move on and spend your time more wisely, I'm done feeding this troll.
    You are the one talking about how the government is holding all your personal information, you are the one talking about how police officers cannot be trusted, you are the one talking about the 'supposed' benefits of being armed.

    I am not de-railing, it just seems to me you spend an inordinate amount of time and energy being wary and cautious of something that you would have no control over, none whatsoever.

    I am not building a strawman, you won't even address my points.
    Quote Originally Posted by zenkai View Post
    There is a problem, but I know just banning guns will fix the problem.

  2. #29582
    what? alright, are you just against anything i say at this point?
    No, I genuinely don't believe there's a reason to make background checks mandatory on private gun sales. There's no evidence or data to support their effectiveness, much less justify their implementation, and there's no actual way to enforce such a law to begin with. It's basically the honor system all over again.

  3. #29583
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    21,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Eroginous View Post
    No, I genuinely don't believe there's a reason to make background checks mandatory on private gun sales. There's no evidence or data to support their effectiveness, much less justify their implementation, and there's no actual way to enforce such a law to begin with. It's basically the honor system all over again.
    they are ineffective because they aren´t mandatory for every purchase
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  4. #29584
    they are ineffective because they aren´t mandatory for every purchase
    No, they are ineffective because it's impossible to contrast the number of background checks done against the ones that aren't. They are ineffective because it's impossible to know how many denied prohibited persons get guns anyway. They are ineffective because the process stops at the background check instead of being pursued until conviction of prohibited persons. They are ineffective because no police force in any state has the manpower to monitor gun ownership in real time to make sure the laws are being followed. They are ineffective because no data was being collected on the number of private background checks already being done, prior to them becoming mandatory via state/federal law.

    You can cite Colorado's nearly 5k private background checks in 2013 all day, that doesn't change anything I typed out above. Five thousand compared to what? How many private background checks were being done before they became mandatory? How many of those 72 denied persons were actually felons? How many of them did or did not obtain a gun via other means?

    When you talk about effectiveness, you can't just throw out that 5k number and ignore all the other variables in the equation. The total number of guns being privately bought/sold is what's important. Being unable to contrast the before/after on the number of private background checks being done makes the matter entirely moot.

  5. #29585
    The Unstoppable Force Ghostpanther's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    USA, Ohio
    Posts
    22,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Eroginous View Post
    No, I genuinely don't believe there's a reason to make background checks mandatory on private gun sales. There's no evidence or data to support their effectiveness, much less justify their implementation, and there's no actual way to enforce such a law to begin with. It's basically the honor system all over again.
    It could be enforced. If every gun manufactured in say the US or any being imported to be sold here is required by law to have it's serial number put into a national data base. And I consider myself to be a Gun Rights advocate, but I see no issue with guns being sold or traded after a certain date be licensed. Trying to make it mandatory now for all guns here would be a futile effort however. Too many have already passed under the bridge. :P But I fail to see how a license system for guns would negatively impact those who want to keep and bear arms. As it is now, in my state, if I want to get a carry and conceal permit for a gun, the serial number of the weapon is recorded and background checks are done.

  6. #29586
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    hence my question, can a licensed dealer just sell himself weapons, therfor making company property, private property
    I'm not really reading the entire thread anymore, and this may be answered elsewhere, but;
    A dealer can transfer a firearm from his business inventory to himself (we'll call it private inventory), but if that firearm is then sold within a year, it must be re-entered into the business inventory and sold through the business. After that 1 year, they can sell it as any other private person could. In addition, you cannot mix "private inventory" (the dealers or anyone elses) firearms with the business inventory in a sale place. If Dealer's friend Bob wants to sell guns at Dealers table or on his store shelves, they are Dealer Inventory and must be booked in and out.

    I will not speak to enforcement or anything, just letting you know the actual rules.

  7. #29587
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoNineMarine View Post
    Oh I don't want biometeric readers in weapons themselves.
    Me either but Eric Holder does.
    Socialism is the only economic system that requires billionaires to exist.
    https://i.redditmedia.com/P8UE8DAGeB...c1ef120404fdbd
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    This term isn't far off, though it would need the word "scientific" in front of it.
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    Accessibility, ownership, availability; these are all essentially the same thing.

  8. #29588
    Pit Lord Roxinius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,256
    http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/06/fa...cter-gun-laws/

    omg i nearly pissed myself laughing at this family of someone who was shot and killed committing armed robbery calling for stricter gun laws and wanting the person who stopped the robbery to be charged how stupid can you be
    Well then get your shit together.
    Get it all together. And put it in a backpack. All your shit. So it’s together. And if you gotta take it somewhere, take it somewhere, you know, take it to the shit store and sell it, or put it in a shit museum, I don’t care what you do, you just gotta get it together.
    Get your shit together

  9. #29589
    Legendary! Jaxi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Yogurt.
    Posts
    6,037
    Quote Originally Posted by Roxinius View Post
    http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/06/fa...cter-gun-laws/

    omg i nearly pissed myself laughing at this family of someone who was shot and killed committing armed robbery calling for stricter gun laws and wanting the person who stopped the robbery to be charged how stupid can you be
    "The family of Williams says that Harrison didn’t need to shoot and shouldn’t have felt threatened."

    Well now we know stupidity runs in that family.
    Quote Originally Posted by Imadraenei View Post
    You can find that unbiased view somewhere between Atlantis and that unicorn farm down the street, just off Interstate √(-1).

  10. #29590
    I'm not sure how you avoid feeling threatened when two armed men wearing masks walk into the diner you're eating to rob the place. The best part of that story was the fact it was a younger guy who had his CCP who used deadly force to defend himself and others, pretty much destroying the 'pro gun' stereotype of old white guys belonging to the NRA.

    It's regrettable that someone lost their life, but hey. That's what happens when you choose the life of a criminal.

  11. #29591
    Pit Lord Roxinius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaxi View Post
    "The family of Williams says that Harrison didn’t need to shoot and shouldn’t have felt threatened."

    Well now we know stupidity runs in that family.
    so what the family is saying is even though he had a gun he wasn't a threat sounds like that entire gene pool needs to be erased
    Well then get your shit together.
    Get it all together. And put it in a backpack. All your shit. So it’s together. And if you gotta take it somewhere, take it somewhere, you know, take it to the shit store and sell it, or put it in a shit museum, I don’t care what you do, you just gotta get it together.
    Get your shit together

  12. #29592
    Legendary! Jaxi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Yogurt.
    Posts
    6,037
    Quote Originally Posted by Roxinius View Post
    so what the family is saying is even though he had a gun he wasn't a threat sounds like that entire gene pool needs to be erased
    The threat of violence with a weapon is exactly what makes it an armed robbery to begin with.
    Quote Originally Posted by Imadraenei View Post
    You can find that unbiased view somewhere between Atlantis and that unicorn farm down the street, just off Interstate √(-1).

  13. #29593
    Pit Lord Roxinius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaxi View Post
    The threat of violence with a weapon is exactly what makes it an armed robbery to begin with.
    im sure the antis will be along to say he didnt need to kill the guy and backing the family
    Well then get your shit together.
    Get it all together. And put it in a backpack. All your shit. So it’s together. And if you gotta take it somewhere, take it somewhere, you know, take it to the shit store and sell it, or put it in a shit museum, I don’t care what you do, you just gotta get it together.
    Get your shit together

  14. #29594
    Quote Originally Posted by Roxinius View Post
    im sure the antis will be along to say he didnt need to kill the guy and backing the family
    He didn't however shoot the unarmed accomplice even after he tried to grab his gun where as a cop would have.
    Socialism is the only economic system that requires billionaires to exist.
    https://i.redditmedia.com/P8UE8DAGeB...c1ef120404fdbd
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    This term isn't far off, though it would need the word "scientific" in front of it.
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    Accessibility, ownership, availability; these are all essentially the same thing.

  15. #29595
    The Undying Cthulhu 2020's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rigging your election
    Posts
    33,440
    Quote Originally Posted by Eroginous View Post
    No, they are ineffective because it's impossible to contrast the number of background checks done against the ones that aren't. They are ineffective because it's impossible to know how many denied prohibited persons get guns anyway. They are ineffective because the process stops at the background check instead of being pursued until conviction of prohibited persons. They are ineffective because no police force in any state has the manpower to monitor gun ownership in real time to make sure the laws are being followed. They are ineffective because no data was being collected on the number of private background checks already being done, prior to them becoming mandatory via state/federal law.

    You can cite Colorado's nearly 5k private background checks in 2013 all day, that doesn't change anything I typed out above. Five thousand compared to what? How many private background checks were being done before they became mandatory? How many of those 72 denied persons were actually felons? How many of them did or did not obtain a gun via other means?

    When you talk about effectiveness, you can't just throw out that 5k number and ignore all the other variables in the equation. The total number of guns being privately bought/sold is what's important. Being unable to contrast the before/after on the number of private background checks being done makes the matter entirely moot.
    You either missed the statistic where something in the range of ~110 gun sales are denied per day due to background checks. "We don't know how many of those go ahead and get black market guns" is not an excuse to not make it universal. If you don't know then you don't know, so you have no room to say it is ineffective. The only way you could do that is if you knew every single one of those people denied guns via BGC then went and got one.
    "Nazis are like cats. If they like you, it's probably because you're feeding them." -John Oliver
    Quote Originally Posted by Knadra View Post
    I don't care if he committed tax fraud. Scoring political victories and crushing the aspirations of your political opponents is more important than adhering to moral principles.
    Knadra finally just admitting Trumpkins care more about political victories than morals.

  16. #29596
    He didn't however shoot the unarmed accomplice even after he tried to grab his gun where as a cop would have.
    I love it how the guy ended up shooting a bunch of innocent bystanders and injured himself just because he was armed with a gun.

    You either missed the statistic where something in the range of ~110 gun sales are denied per day due to background checks. "We don't know how many of those go ahead and get black market guns" is not an excuse to not make it universal. If you don't know then you don't know, so you have no room to say it is ineffective. The only way you could do that is if you knew every single one of those people denied guns via BGC then went and got one.
    1. That statistic isn't relevant to the context of the current conversation, which is specifically about background checks between private citizens.

    2. I'm not making excuses for why it shouldn't be done. Instead, I'm suggesting that you do it while I'm also pointing out the host of factors that have to go ignored before you can say that Colorado's UBC law was effective at stopping private sales to felons.

  17. #29597
    I am Murloc! GreatOak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Chicago, USA
    Posts
    5,107
    Guy at 8:30 makes a great point

    I vehemently disagree with anyone who is opposed to allowing this go to the market. If the government decides to try to force us to have them for all guns I'll vehemently disagree with that as well. I probably wouldn't buy one because the tech isn't fleshed out, I don't like the watch aspect (something else would be better), and I want more variety. It's also too expensive for poorer people to own. However, the choice should be there for anyone who does want to buy it.


    Last edited by GreatOak; 2014-05-07 at 02:51 AM.
    In the fell clutch of circumstance
    I have not winced nor cried aloud.
    Under the bludgeonings of chance
    My head is bloody, but unbowed.

  18. #29598
    Scarab Lord TwoNineMarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Man Cave Design School
    Posts
    4,233
    Quote Originally Posted by Daelak View Post


    Oh that's a good policy, just hopey changey that they will get firearms training on a whim.
    And that's all you can do. You can force people to get the training if they purchase a weapon from a licensed dealer, but if someone sells their son or their friend a gun then how do you enforce that that person go through training?

    It's not possible. That's how. And you know it.

    I know you'd love to do away with all private firearms sales but it won't happen and you know it. Just like all the other things the government tries to prevent from being sold, it still happens.

    I personally am not for the smart guns because there is no point to it. You need to teach people responsibility for their actions as well as teaching them the value of life. Not coddle them so they can't hurt themselves with the scary things.

    I'm especially against it if it requires finger print shenanigans or the microchip implanted in the gun owner. That's just stupid. Plus if I want to teach my two boys to shoot I no longer can because they don't have that chip in them.

    Then again I'd never let them or myself or my friends and family get a chip implanted in them.
    "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.” - General James Mattis

  19. #29599
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoNineMarine View Post
    I'm especially against it if it requires finger print shenanigans or the microchip implanted in the gun owner. That's just stupid. Plus if I want to teach my two boys to shoot I no longer can because they don't have that chip in them.

    Then again I'd never let them or myself or my friends and family get a chip implanted in them.
    Implanted chips: It's going to be pretty much mandatory within our lifetimes (I'm assuming, I don't know how old you are). Not mandatory as in "evil government made me" but mandatory in the sense of interacting with the society around you.

    I'm trying to remember the last time I wrote a paper check... (that may seem unrelated, but it's not).

    Let's all ride the Gish gallop.

  20. #29600
    Scarab Lord TwoNineMarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Man Cave Design School
    Posts
    4,233
    Quote Originally Posted by belfpala View Post
    Implanted chips: It's going to be pretty much mandatory within our lifetimes (I'm assuming, I don't know how old you are). Not mandatory as in "evil government made me" but mandatory in the sense of interacting with the society around you.

    I'm trying to remember the last time I wrote a paper check... (that may seem unrelated, but it's not).
    I'm only 27 but I doubt that general societal stuff will require it. I imagine if you want to work for the government and need special clearance to access certain computers or something then sure.

    Definitely not a fan of having an RDIF chip in me lol
    "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.” - General James Mattis

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •