Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Kasierith]

http://www.policymic.com/articles/20...pakistan-alone

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-chi...-obama/5320570

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-campaign.html

Is that good enough for you? Or do I need to make it be on CNN, MSNBC, or FOX and sit you in front of a television for you to believe it?

Ooooo, 176 for Pakistan + 37 for Yemen + 3 for Somalia. So, 216 unless I'm too brain dead from studying to add properly.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states

2011: 32,1635
2010: 31,6726
2009: 31,347
2008: 31,593
2007: 31,224
2006: 30,896
2005: 30,694
2004: 29,569
2003: 30,136
2002: 30,242
2001: 29,573
2000: 28,663
1999: 28,874

Check my last post, go look in a mirror, tell yourself "I will not be so closed minded anymore" over and over until it works.

or change the wording to "I will not be so ignorant", may work better.

Perhaps the ignorant one here is the individual who lacks a concept of a linear timeline?

[hakujinbakasama]

Ooooo, 176 for Pakistan + 37 for Yemen + 3 for Somalia. So, 216 unless I'm too brain dead from studying to add properly.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states

2011: 32,1635
2010: 31,6726
2009: 31,347
2008: 31,593
2007: 31,224
2006: 30,896
2005: 30,694
2004: 29,569
2003: 30,136
2002: 30,242
2001: 29,573
2000: 28,663
1999: 28,874

You're obnoxiously not staying on point. If you're going to argue kids then argue kids. Don't complain about someone not providing "proof" and then jump to countering with numbers which hold zero relevance to the subject.

[lockedout]

How do you "Ban assault weapons" when the term "Assault Weapon" has no definition and is a made up blanket term for ANY rifle that is semi automatic such as a hunting rifle.

[Kasierith]

You're obnoxiously not staying on point. If you're going to argue kids then argue kids. Don't complain about someone not providing "proof" and then jump to countering with numbers which hold zero relevance to the subject.

A statement was made that more children are killed by drone strikes every day than any shootings in the US combined. Please point out how my relating children killed by drone strikes vs gun casualties in the US is somehow not relevant.

[Bytch]

Ooooo, 176 for Pakistan + 37 for Yemen + 3 for Somalia. So, 216 unless I'm too brain dead from studying to add properly.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states

2011: 32,1635
2010: 31,6726
2009: 31,347
2008: 31,593
2007: 31,224
2006: 30,896
2005: 30,694
2004: 29,569
2003: 30,136
2002: 30,242
2001: 29,573
2000: 28,663
1999: 28,874



Perhaps the ignorant one here is the individual who lacks a concept of a linear timeline?

Just over 8600 gun related murders in 2012. Of which over 700 of them were "righteous" or in defense. Ask yourself, why did the woman that founded MADD, leave her own organization.


BTW. Govts through out history have killed more innocent people than any wars combined. Once they took the guns, Dictators killed their own citizens. Democide. 290+million.

[hakujinbakasama]

How do you "Ban assault weapons" when the term "Assault Weapon" has no definition and is a made up blanket term for ANY rifle that is semi automatic such as a hunting rifle.

Assault Weapon has a very specific definition and has had one for 80 years or so. The problem is that semi-automatic doesnt' sound scary in the Media and the Media has an Agenda to make money.

I've touched on it elsewhere but this is all a never ending circle jerk between the modern Media and Politicians. It's really hard to scare people into joining a witch hunt if you can't create a mental picture of a witch.

[Kasierith]

Complete Disarmament via UN Arms Treaty. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8BO00B20121225

From your own article:

U.S. officials say they want a treaty that contributes to international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and proliferation but protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade.

"We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms," a U.S. official told Reuters last month.

Just over 8600 gun related murders in 2012. Of which over 700 of them were "righteous" or in defense. Ask yourself, why did the woman that founded MADD, leave her own organization.

Shifting goal posts now? You made a statement based on ignorance. Accept that and move on.

[GreatOak]

Feasible? Really? I would love to see how either of them are feasible that doesn't involve references to Modern Warfare 2 or Red Dawn. PS. the last time the US had to deal with a military invasion was 1812.

The feasibility of a Tyrannical government just shows how out of touch you are with how your own government even works.

Why didn't I quote it?

PS. as for invasions, France has allowed it's citizens private ownership of guns for centuries, only enabling very minor restrictions in 1939. They have faced two invasions in the past century, obviously having armed citizens helped prevent that...oh wait.



Good argument. Note quotation marks around "responsible gun owners." As in, facetious.

You said all responsible gun owners are anarchists no? Several of us ITT would prove you wrong.

[Tradewind]

It's based on locked second treatise

I assume you mean Locke's not "Locked", as in John Locke. While it details the obligation of revolution against tyranny I'm not sure how one can connect the creation of the 2nd amendment entirely to it.

[Laize]

It's funny since most other civilized countries don't have it within their constitutions or bill of rights to the unrestricted ownership of weapons or a right to bare arms. I guess America is the only place any of these scenarios can take place?

I posted about this a page or so back but it appears no one read it... a shame since it took a while to write it all out.

But I'll reiterate.

The 2nd amendment is unique among every world constitution. It exists not as a right to simply own a gun, but a right to armed revolt when the overwhelming majority of citizens believe the government no longer represents our best interests.

So no... we are not the only nation where tyranny of government is a risk (Even though most Europeans outright dismiss that claim... even though come on World War 2 is still in living memory)... we are the only nation with a constitutional contingency plan for such, however.

There can be no doubt that that is the primary purpose of the Second Amendment. It's evident in the Founders' correspondence and speeches:

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.

And it's just as evident by its position in the Bill of Rights. So important was the American right to arms (We are, after all, a nation born from armed revolt) that it was written SECOND of all 10 of the original Amendments. They decided, while drafting the Bill of Rights, that it was more important to guarantee the American people the failsafe option of armed revolution than it was to guarantee our rights to decline warrantless and unreasonable searches and seizures (4th), avoid self-incrimination (5th), due process (6th), a jury trial (7th) and our right to be free from torture (8th).

The right to have a guarantee that our government will forever represent us (or fall in attempting to do otherwise) is one of our most fundamental rights. That is why we view it as so incredibly important. We treat attempts to abridge our Second Amendment rights as seriously as we treat attempts to abridge our First Amendment rights, and duly so.

And to those who claim "HOW CAN YOU STAND UP TO THE US MILITARY WITH HUNTING RIFLES?!" I say that THAT particular decision is not yours to make. If, in the extremely unlikely event of governmental tyranny, you would rather live unharmed but in subservience and fear... then Ben Franklin has some choice words for you.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Yes. I would absolutely face certain death than live under an American version of Stalin or Mao. I would do it without even thinking twice if the presence of a tyrant in control of our government were inarguable. And I strongly believe about 100 million other Americans would do the same.

I must reiterate. I'm not AGAINST gun control. I simply am against banning guns. REASONABLE controls that don't hinder citizens' rights to bear arms are perfectly acceptable.

Banning certain types of guns because they look scary and you don't understand that not a single attachment you've listed in your assault weapons ban have no effect on the gun's lethality? That's entirely unacceptable, ineffective and downright ignorant.

[lockedout]

Assault Weapon has a very specific definition and has had one for 80 years or so. The problem is that semi-automatic doesnt' sound scary in the Media and the Media has an Agenda to make money.

I've touched on it elsewhere but this is all a never ending circle jerk between the modern Media and Politicians. It's really hard to scare people into joining a witch hunt if you can't create a mental picture of a witch.

Actually possessing the operational features, such as full-auto, is not required for classification as an assault weapon; merely the possession of cosmetic features is now enough to warrant such classification as an assault weapon.[13] Semi-automatic firearms, when fired, automatically extract the spent cartridge casing and load the next cartridge into the chamber, ready to fire again. They do not fire automatically like a machine gun. Rather, only one round is fired with each trigger pull.

[Bytch]

From your own article:

U.S. officials say they want a treaty that contributes to international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and proliferation but protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade.

"We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms," a U.S. official told Reuters last month.



Shifting goal posts now? You made a statement based on ignorance. Accept that and move on.

You believe that rhetoric?

[hakujinbakasama]

Just over 8600 gun related murders in 2012. Of which over 700 of them were "righteous" or in defense. Ask yourself, why did the woman that founded MADD, leave her own organization..

You do realize that what you posted doesn't make any sense?

[Kasierith]

You said all responsible gun owners are anarchists no? Several of us ITT would prove you wrong.

You have to recognize that, as rational as your statement is and as much as I agree with it, it becomes a bit tricky to fully accept that when you have members who express a desire to take a chainsaw to the legislators who set up restrictions on nuclear material.

[Tradewind]

You said all responsible gun owners are anarchists no? Several of us ITT would prove you wrong.

It was poorly worded then, my bad :P I of course mean people like Bytch who feel they should have access to military grade weaponry as a right.

[Deadvolcanoes]

How do you "Ban assault weapons" when the term "Assault Weapon" has no definition and is a made up blanket term for ANY rifle that is semi automatic such as a hunting rifle.

There's this thing called a "bill" that specifies which modifications are exempt under the law.

[Kasierith]

You believe that rhetoric?

Yes, I believe that.. "rhetoric," as I do any person who has studied international law and knows that the US doesn't approve of anything that infringes on its sovereignty. The US didn't even join the ICC for that very reason.

[hakujinbakasama]

Actually possessing the operational features, such as full-auto, is not required for classification as an assault weapon; merely the possession of cosmetic features is now enough to warrant such classification as an assault weapon.[13] Semi-automatic firearms, when fired, automatically extract the spent cartridge casing and load the next cartridge into the chamber, ready to fire again. They do not fire automatically like a machine gun. Rather, only one round is fired with each trigger pull.

Which is all well and good for the morons out there who listen to it and wrote it, but the United States Military defined Assault Weapon back in the 30's (ish) and it held well into the 80's. This new wave "Assault Weapon" bullshit is the fictional creation Witch Hunt by people like Diane Fuckstein.

[ShaggySweetness]

Ooooo, 176 for Pakistan + 37 for Yemen + 3 for Somalia. So, 216 unless I'm too brain dead from studying to add properly.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states

2011: 32,1635
2010: 31,6726
2009: 31,347
2008: 31,593
2007: 31,224
2006: 30,896
2005: 30,694
2004: 29,569
2003: 30,136
2002: 30,242
2001: 29,573
2000: 28,663
1999: 28,874



Perhaps the ignorant one here is the individual who lacks a concept of a linear timeline?

You're saying all of those deaths are all children? You also link to a anti-gun site that could easily change numbers to their liking to push their agenda? Not noticing most of those deaths are gang related and took place in heavily gun controlled areas like chicago? Way to counter.

[Kasierith]

You're saying all of those deaths are all children? You also link to a anti-gun site that could easily change numbers to their liking to push their agenda? Not noticing most of those deaths are gang related and took place in heavily gun controlled areas like chicago? Way to counter.

Nope, I didn't say those deaths were all children. Please do not attempt to shift goal posts away from the origin of this line of discussion.