Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[igualitarist]

I know this may be a controversial opinion to people who hump guns, but not everyone who shoots another person, or multiple people, is mentally ill. Some of them are just "bad guys with guns"

And i know this is controversial opinion as well, but bad guys will get their guys anyway

Also, 99,99% among the hundreds of millions of gun owners in America dont use them to kill people.

[Drusin]

How about we let them keep they guns, but ban ammo :P

I'm confident in my mechanical ability enough to make my own ammo moreso than making an actual firearm.

- - - Updated - - -

And i know this is controversial opinion as well, but bad guys will get their guys anyway

I kind of want to make a video of this to show just how easy it is but I'm afraid that I'll be shot by the gentleman selling me my weapon

[Draco-Onis]

And i know this is controversial opinion as well, but bad guys will get their guys anyway

So we need to make it as easy as possible for them to do it? I don't get your point. By that logic bad guys will do terrorist attacks anyways let's not do anything about it.

[Guy4123]

I'm confident in my mechanical ability enough to make my own ammo moreso than making an actual firearm.

- - - Updated - - -



I kind of want to make a video of this to show just how easy it is but I'm afraid that I'll be shot by the gentleman selling me my weapon

That's one of the dumbest things about Californias new ban on buying ammo online.

I can buy the powder, the bullets, the shells, the primers, and the press with grain counter all online shipped directly to my door.

But buying them whole, well now only a crazy person would do such a thing.

[Ghostpanther]

How about we let them keep they guns, but ban ammo :P

Would be effectively making arms not useful, thus a violation of the Constitution. Because you would not be able to use one for self defense if it has no ammo. :P

Also here is another example of a self defense shooting...http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/02/25...uor-store.html

[PhaelixWW]

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Fo...469044393.html

Oh my word, think of the children! Books have no place in the classroom! #MakeClassroomsBookFreeZones /s

Or, you know, false equivalency. Because smacking a kid in the back of the head with a book is not the same thing as actually beating their head in or shooting them. And feel free to find enough of these events to point to it being a common occurrence in either case. Because teachers are not going to suddenly going to start killing their students in droves anytime soon.

So we need to make it as easy as possible for them to do it? I don't get your point. By that logic bad guys will do terrorist attacks anyways let's not do anything about it.

Way to trot out that tired, old strawman.

[igualitarist]

So we need to make it as easy as possible for them to do it? I don't get your point. By that logic bad guys will do terrorist attacks anyways let's not do anything about it.

No matter how easy it is, bad guys will get guns. Bad guys have contact in crime, so acessing black market will be as easy as buying heavy drugs. On the other hand, you will screw up 99,99% of the population, you know, those guys who have guns to defend their loved ones, but they expect to never use it.

Criminals fear more armed citizens than cops. Cops will just tell them their rights and arrest them, an armed citizen will do whatever it takes to protect himself, his family and his home.

So, inefficient regulations should not exist in first place. Fucking in the ass 99,99% of the people because 0,01% is so damn ridiculous. Specially because that 0,01% will get the guns anyway.

America always had guns, and mass shootings are a recent thing. So the obvious conclusion is obvious - the problem isn't the guns. There's a wave on mental health problems taking place in America, and its pretty damn easy for them to get fire weapons. So regulations should focus on it, not on screwing up that 99,99% who just want a gun for defense purposes.

And just to finish this post, an interesting read:

http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/cli...305AttachB.pdf

[Draco-Onis]

No matter how easy it is, bad guys will get guns. Bad guys have contact in crime, so acessing black market will be as easy as buying heavy drugs. On the other hand, you will screw up 99,99% of the population, you know, those guys who have guns to defend their loved ones, but they expect to never use it.

Criminals fear more armed citizens than cops. Cops will just tell them their rights and arrest them, an armed citizen will do whatever it takes to protect himself, his family and his home.

So, inefficient regulations should not exist in first place. Fucking in the ass 99,99% of the people because 0,01% is so damn ridiculous. Specially because that 0,01% will get the guns anyway.

America always had guns, and mass shootings are a recent thing. So the obvious conclusion is obvious - the problems are not the guns. There's a wave on mental health problems taking place in America, and its pretty damn easy for them to get fire weapons. So regulations should focus on it, not on screwing up that 99,99% who just want a gun for defense purposes.

And just to finish this post, and interesting read:

http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/cli...305AttachB.pdf

So by your logic let's not have any laws but you yourself said inefficient regulations I don't think you are going to get an argument against putting efficient regulations in place. So we agree let's get rid of inefficient gun regulations which are on the books and plug holes to fix the system. I am not sure where you are getting this 99.99% statistics but pretty sure it is not based on actual fact feel free to correct me.

Last but not least the study you are quoting are very old not really sure how relevant or accurate it is 85 years later another reason we need updated data and analysis on the matter.

[igualitarist]

So by your logic let's not have any laws but you yourself said inefficient regulations I don't think you are going to get an argument against putting efficient regulations in place. So we agree let's get rid of inefficient gun regulations which are on the books and plug holes to fix the system. I am not sure where you are getting this 99.99% statistics but pretty sure it is not based on actual fact feel free to correct me.

Last but not least the study you are quoting are very old not really sure how relevant or accurate it is 85 years later another reason we need updated data and analysis on the matter.

If you can't differ a law from a regulation, there's no pointing on continue replying your posts. But ill try a bit.

Laws should exist, despite their efficiency, because their goal is to define what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable by a determined society. They will exist anyway, even if they are not written, through customs and traditions.

Regulations are the process and means of monitoring and enforcing the laws. So they need to be efficient in order to grant the application of the laws of a country. If they aren't, the country will be basically wasting resources and impairing the rights of its citizens for nothing.

About the study i linked, no matter how old it is, its still a valid source of information. If its not valid, debunk it instead of attacking its age. Thats how things should work.

[Draco-Onis]

If you can't differ a law from a regulation, there's no pointing on continue replying your posts. But ill try a bit.

Laws should exist, despite their efficiency, because their goal is to define what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable by a determined society. They will exist anyway, even if they are not written, through customs and traditions.

Regulations are the process and means of monitoring and enforcing the laws. So they need to be efficient in order to grant the application of the laws of a country. If they aren't, the country will be basically wasting resources and impairing the rights of its citizens for nothing.

About the study i linked, no matter how old it is, its still a valid source of information. If its not valid, debunk it instead of attacking its age. Thats how things should work.

Both laws and regulations need reform when it comes to guns because we have a lot of bad laws on the books. And your study's age does matter most of the people involved are dead it even predates the assault weapons ban by 10 years.

A lot has changed in terms of well everything we are talking about a study that predates AOL.

[Pyro1990]

How about we let them keep they guns, but ban ammo :P

Many avid shooters make there own ammo because it is cheaper. It would be incredibly difficult to enforce.

[Stormdash]

ITT:

Dumbass Americans.


"HURRR DURRR MY SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS"


It's called an Amendment. You've changed them before. Some of you need a dictionary.

Remember slavery?

Yes. Difference is, getting rid of slavery following the War had substantial available public support that made ratifying the 13th Amendment possible. Repealing the 2nd Amendment is a marginal fringe position in the US. Even running on hard line gun control is one of the biggest losing propositions there is in American politics. I would love love love for Democrats to decide to run their 2018 mid-term campaign on banning all semi-automatic weapons, would wipe them out.

[igualitarist]

ITT:

Dumbass Americans.


"HURRR DURRR MY SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS"


It's called an Amendment. You've changed them before. Some of you need a dictionary.

Remember slavery?

- - - Updated - - -





Fuck regulations. You need laws. Your country is a joke.


I can still get a bag of coke if I really try.

Should we just remove all drug laws then? Because you can't fully stop it - it's not even worth enforcing?


Oh look. A hole in your retarded bulletproof logic!

You look mad bro.

I recommend you the reading of my previous post on this thread, that you ignored, and that adress the "points" you just made. Specially this "Hurrr Durrr laws and regulations are the same thing" common mistake.

But yeah, i think drugs like marijuana should be allowed because they cause no social damage and all the regulations trying to remove it from market just failed hard. So as i already said, inefficient regulations are bad and should not exist, mmmkey ?

About the heavy drugs (cocaine, crack, heroin...), i am still not sure yet about whats the best thing to do.

[Draco-Onis]

Yes. Difference is, getting rid of slavery following the War had substantial available public support that made ratifying the 13th Amendment possible. Repealing the 2nd Amendment is a marginal fringe position in the US. Even running on hard line gun control is one of the biggest losing propositions there is in American politics. I would love love love for Democrats to decide to run their 2018 mid-term campaign on banning all semi-automatic weapons, would wipe them out.

The majority of the country supports an assault weapons ban, when the first one which expired when into law it had bi partisan support including from the liberal RONALD REAGAN. That same "liberal" also supported the Brady bill which is a 7 day waiting period for gun buyers. You see gun legislation for most of the country is a bipartisan thing because most gun owners are responsible and have nothing to fear from thoughtful laws and regulations to keep guns away from bad people.

[Stormdash]

So.....

My original point stands. Dumbass Americans who literally can't grasp logic.


Australia has 10 mass shootings in 10 years. Then has worst mass shooting in history. John Howard bans guns outright. Many politicians who supported him commit political suicide - but they know its for the best.



Australia has no more mass shootings.




"HURRR WE NEED GUNS TO RISE UP AGAINST CORRUPT GOVERNMENT"


Yeah have fun bringing a handgun to a drone fight. What do they make them tanks out of these days?

Fundamental difference between a society of citizens and a society of subjects, I suppose.

The majority of the country supports an assault weapons ban, when the first one which expired when into law it had bi partisan support including from the liberal RONALD REAGAN. That same "liberal" also supported the Brady bill which is a 7 day waiting period for gun buyers. You see gun legislation for most of the country is a bipartisan thing because most gun owners are responsible and have nothing to fear from thoughtful laws and regulations to keep guns away from bad people.

The one that's tenure saw an increase in gun crime, and only had legal effect of banning combinations of cosmetic features? It is lucky to have expired before Heller since it surely couldn't have survived litigation under it.

[Stormdash]

You're not sure yet? Or you just don't want to admit drug laws work because it defeats your bulletproof logic!

I'll quote Jim Jeffries:

"Oh shit a home intruder! You've messed with the wrong family tonight bro! You just wait there while I go and get my gun out of the gun safe. Hey honey was it 15 right or 15 left? Just wait there mister robber. Hold up I gotta load the thing too."


This isn't only about mass shootings. They're just bringing to light the inherent problem with your dumbass country. Your gun homicide rate is higher than anywhere else in the world.

Your arguments are retarded.

Retarded would be knowing Americans so little as to think this rhetorical style won't make us take the position opposite of what you want just as a raised middle finger to your attitude.

[Macaquerie]

Oh my word, think of the children! Books have no place in the classroom! #MakeClassroomsBookFreeZones /s

Or, you know, false equivalency. Because smacking a kid in the back of the head with a book is not the same thing as actually beating their head in or shooting them. And feel free to find enough of these events to point to it being a common occurrence in either case. Because teachers are not going to suddenly going to start killing their students in droves anytime soon.

Nobody is claiming that it will be common, but if teachers start carrying on a regular basis, then it is inevitable that one day, one of them will snap and murder one of their students. On the other hand, it's highly unlikely that we'll ever hear about an armed teacher stopping a school shooting.

[Stormdash]

Nobody is claiming that it will be common, but if teachers start carrying on a regular basis, then it is inevitable that one day, one of them will snap and murder one of their students. On the other hand, it's highly unlikely that we'll ever hear about an armed teacher stopping a school shooting.

That is not "inevitable". Perhaps in the very broadest reading of the law of averages, but in terms of statistical likelihood, quite the opposite. In point of fact, there are few if any demographics you can pick in the US that is less likely to commit a violent crime, than licensed CCW holders.

[Macaquerie]

Oh my word, think of the children! Books have no place in the classroom! #MakeClassroomsBookFreeZones /s

Or, you know, false equivalency. Because smacking a kid in the back of the head with a book is not the same thing as actually beating their head in or shooting them. And feel free to find enough of these events to point to it being a common occurrence in either case. Because teachers are not going to suddenly going to start killing their students in droves anytime soon.

Nobody is claiming that it will be common, but if teachers start carrying on a regular basis, then it is inevitable that one day, one of them will snap and murder one of their students. On the other hand, it's highly unlikely that we'll ever hear about an armed teacher stopping a school shooting.

Retarded would be knowing Americans so little as to think this rhetorical style won't make us take the position opposite of what you want just as a raised middle finger to your attitude.

Christ, speak for yourself. Not all of us can go around acting like immature brats and get away with it, some of us have actual problems to deal with and not just the hypothetical threat that someone will take away our man Barbies.

[Stormdash]

HAHAHA.

Here we go.

An American who thinks America is the "land of the free".

Yeah man - in Australia we're all subjects. Slaves to the Queen!

I bet you've never even left America.

Spain and Canada. I wasn't being glib, though, it's an essential difference in one's understanding of the proper relationship between the individual citizen and the government. Most of the British progeny other than the United States unfortunately still retain the false premise that governments are somehow above them, that it is parent to the people. Not so. Governments exist solely as means to organize the protection of individual liberty so people can live, die, succeed, or fail according to their own choices and enterprise.