Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[misterpuk]

I was expecting one day a week of daycare, not 5.

I had family members who had committed to watching my kids while my wife was pregnant, who then bailed as soon as it was time to actually lend a hand.

Not that my personal finances are remotely relevant to a discussion on gun control.

The point it demonstrates is that people expect things to be done for them, at the expense of others, regardless of their lack for personal responsibilities.

[Deleted]

I and the majority of Americans - not too mention the The Constitution, the Congress, The President, and the Supreme Court - disagree.

So a piece of paper says that its not needed? Is that your defense? I would like to ask the victims to see if they would disagree, but of course we cant, because they are dead. There are a lot of kids now who seem to agree with me, the rest of the world seems to agree with me. Weird that it is just one country that doesn't want to agree.. I wonder if it has anything to do with the gun sales and gun lobby.

I'm not sure what registration has to do with telling what happened. You mentioned buying dozens of guns. The only way to buy dozens of guns (even at a gun show) is to purchase from a dealer which is required by law to run a background check. Sure someone may illegally buy a gun or two from a gun show but if you're trying to say this is a huge percent of gun violence then you're going to have to prove that with some type of source. The reason being is that it just isn't true.

So you are not sure why it would be handy for the police to know where something came from? And you can buy a single gun without a problem, without a background check. If you can do it once, you can do it twice, and you can do it a dozen times as well.

You're the one being paranoid that some law-abiding citizen carrying a gun with a CCW license is going to walk up and shoot you.

Lol, right, somehow the numbers do not agree with that statement. There are more people shot in the US by people with a CCW then there are in Europe, the guns do not make anything safer.

It's not a disingenous argument to compare to other things in our daily lives that can cause harm. While any death is a tragedy, the number of deaths due to firearms is a small fraction of the deaths that occur each year.

But it is disingenuous to compare two things that are made to serve different functions. If you want to compare two things then you can compare cars to trains, to transport devices that claim lives. You can't compare one thing that is only useful to kill against something that is absolutely needed in our society for it to actually survive.

There about 2.7M deaths per year in the US.

Automobile accident deaths annually - ~38,000 sub category: drunk driving - ~10,000
Accidental fall deaths annually - ~34,000
Accidental poisoning deaths annually - ~ 48,000

Non-suicide firearms deaths annually - ~12,000

Less than one half of one percent of deaths in the US are due to firearm violence. You are 4 times more likely to die to accidental poisoning than to a firearm. Perhaps we need ban most household cleaners to help this.

Again with the fallacy, all these things have an actual use in society, guns do not.

- - - Updated - - -

I didn't use Hitler as a specific example, but he did restrict guns from specific groups. Groups he later had gassed.

You are failing to grasp that Tyranny is not a binary event.
One day off, next day on.

It doesn't just happen over night (in most cases).
It is implemented a little at a time.
With each new restriction for the good of the masses.

When countries begin convicting comedians for bad attempts at humor, I would be concerned.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa5CNf7pMAM

And you would take guns from people you disagree with too if you where a dictator. Again, just because a tyrannical government does something doesn't make everything a tyrannical government does by default tyrannical.

Its absolutely paranoid to think that your government is out to get you, and if they wanted to get you then they are more then capable of doing so.

[misterpuk]

The real problem you're over looking when talking about turning the army on the populace is that the Army is part of said populace.

None of them are required to uphold an unconstitutional order. Many would just say no. Others would actively fight against, and the remainder that went along with it would have to go to war over it.

If it came to pointing the army at millions of our own Citizens, that's EXACTYLY the reason 2A exists.

[Mullet Man]

Its absolutely paranoid to think that your government is out to get you, and if they wanted to get you then they are more then capable of doing so.

Then you fail to understand the Founding and History of the United States.

Please read the Declaration of Independence for a better understanding:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...ed_declaration

[Dystemper]

https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...ments-against/


Three Simple Reasons Why an Assault-Weapons Ban Is Bad Policy

It’s always remarkable to me that assault-weapons bans dominate the gun-control conversation after mass shootings. Yes, I understand that AR-15s or similar weapons have been used in a number of recent attacks, but when we slow down, take a breath, and look at actual gun crime, the logic for banning the kind of weapon that millions of Americans use for entirely lawful purposes (including self-defense) starts to disappear.

Let’s break this down by three broad categories of gun deaths.
First, an assault-weapons ban is irrelevant to suicide deaths. The large majority of gun deaths are suicides, and there is no credible argument that an assault-weapons ban will have the slightest effect on suicide. I’m not sure that I’ve ever even heard anyone make the argument.

Second, an assault-weapons ban is statistically meaningless to homicide deaths. Rifles of all kinds kill fewer people annually than knives or even feet or fists. An assault-weapons ban (really a ban on future sales; proposed laws would not take a single so-called assault weapon off the streets) would be aimed at a firearm that is rarely used to kill.

Third, there’s no evidence that banning assault weapons would prevent mass shootings. This is a key point. The post-shooting debate is often conducted as if folks think that if a mass shooter can’t get an assault weapon, he won’t shoot at all. Blocking access to a new AR-15 is not remotely the same thing as stopping a mass shooting.

In reality, the move to ban AR-15s rests on a different idea — the notion that the ban will possibly decrease the lethality of any given mass shooting. Aside from the most unusual circumstances (such as the Las Vegas shooting), this is speculative. After all, the history of mass shootings demonstrates that men wielding handguns are capable of inflicting terrible losses, and handguns are generally the weapon of choice for mass killers.

An assault-weapons ban represents the worst form of gun control. We know it would burden the self-defense rights of law-abiding Americans without meaningfully addressing the problems it’s purportedly designed to address. We know it wouldn’t impact overall gun death rates. We don’t have evidence it would prevent mass shootings. Given that reality, it looks much less like rational policy-making and much more like legislative emoting — a moral gesture with the primary impact of diminishing American constitutional rights.

- - - Updated - - -

Mehmeh you say guns have no place in society. That is false. They serve as a force multiplier tool for self defense. They are used for hunting. They are used for sport shooting and competition shooting. You are simply a hoplophobe

[Deleted]

Then you fail to understand the Founding and History of the United States.

Please read the Declaration of Independence for a better understanding:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...ed_declaration

And how exactly does this matters?? This happened over two centuries ago, to still be paranoid of England returning is rather silly. And to think that you own government is coming for you is rather tin foil hatty at best.

We are living in a new age where we generally do not want wars, especially when they are on our own soil. We have a rule of law, a law that is made and maintained by the people through democratic rule. I get it though, the American democratic system has been failing for some time now by a corrupt 2 party system. But to think that they are coming for you is a whole new level of crazy.

- - - Updated - - -

Mehmeh you say guns have no place in society. That is false. They serve as a force multiplier tool for self defense. They are used for hunting. They are used for sport shooting and competition shooting. You are simply a hoplophobe

There is no need for a force multiplier if you live in a safe society. Its paranoid to belief that they are out to get you.

[Shadowferal]

Lol, right, as if that is going to matter even one millimeter. Just like the CIA isn't supposed to operate inside the US.. When push comes to shove then they will send the big guns.

I'm sure you want to believe that conspiracy nonsense.

Obviously you think just because you live in a big country everything is different Right, its as if problems do not occur everywhere in this world, news flash, everyone is dealing with the same problems, it is just that they are dealt with differently and more effectively in other countries.

Newsflash, if things weren't different this conversation wouldn't be happening.
You want to believe in some imaginary homogenization but history, culture, way of living, etc...all different. (Is it legal to defend yourself in your own home using lethal force? I'll bet it isn't.)
This is why I don't like arguing with your ilk. You're unable to comprehend the differences and seem to imagine that every country can be the same.

[Deleted]

The real problem you're over looking when talking about turning the army on the populace is that the Army is part of said populace.

None of them are required to uphold an unconstitutional order. Many would just say no. Others would actively fight against, and the remainder that went along with it would have to go to war over it.

If it came to pointing the army at millions of our own Citizens, that's EXACTYLY the reason 2A exists.

The problem here is thinking that the government is out to get you in the first place. If the army wanted to they could drone the shit out of these citizens and be done with it. You are not going to win from a government with small arms, that is the point.

[Mullet Man]

And how exactly does this matters?? This happened over two centuries ago, to still be paranoid of England returning is rather silly. And to think that you own government is coming for you is rather tin foil hatty at best.

We are living in a new age where we generally do not want wars, especially when they are on our own soil. We have a rule of law, a law that is made and maintained by the people through democratic rule. I get it though, the American democratic system has been failing for some time now by a corrupt 2 party system. But to think that they are coming for you is a whole new level of crazy.

It matters because it is a historical fact, and tyrannical governments have been a reoccurring theme throughout history.

I don't think that the US Government is coming after me, because of the safeguards introduced by the founding fathers in the Constitution.
The 1st, 2nd, and 10th Amendments being the most important.

[Dystemper]

And how exactly does this matters?? This happened over two centuries ago, to still be paranoid of England returning is rather silly. And to think that you own government is coming for you is rather tin foil hatty at best.

We are living in a new age where we generally do not want wars, especially when they are on our own soil. We have a rule of law, a law that is made and maintained by the people through democratic rule. I get it though, the American democratic system has been failing for some time now by a corrupt 2 party system. But to think that they are coming for you is a whole new level of crazy.

- - - Updated - - -



There is no need for a force multiplier if you live in a safe society. Its paranoid to belief that they are out to get you.

You are incredibly naive , are you saying there is no violent crime in any other country? Force multiplier tool allows someone who is weaker , the eldery , the handicapped, women etc to be Able to defend Thier lives against a attack. There is no having a rational discussion with you. Good bye

[Deleted]

I'm sure you want to believe that conspiracy nonsense.

Right, https://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/27/w...27cnd-cia.html So you are saying that the CIA never operates in the US, even after declassified information proved that they did. Just because it doesn't fit your agenda doens't make it a "conspiracy".

Newsflash, if things weren't different this conversation wouldn't be happening.
You want to believe in some imaginary homogenization but history, culture, way of living, etc...all different. (Is it legal to defend yourself in your own home using lethal force? I'll bet it isn't.)
This is why I don't like arguing with your ilk. You're unable to comprehend the differences and seem to imagine that every country can be the same.

I can defend my life with lethal force if that is what it takes, but i cant kill someone because he tries to steal my tv. Anything other then this would be barbaric in every sense of the word.

I comprehend the difference, the difference is much less death and despair. That you are unwilling to see this is on you, not the rest of the world were we actually feel safe.

- - - Updated - - -

You are incredibly naive , are you saying there is no violent crime in any other country? Force multiplier tool allows someone who is weaker , the eldery , the handicapped, women etc to be Able to defend Thier lives against a attack. There is no having a rational discussion with you. Good bye

No, that is a strawman you are setting up, not even close to what ive said.

These people would not need a force multiplier in a society where they feel safe.

[Citizen T]

So a piece of paper says that its not needed? Is that your defense? I would like to ask the victims to see if they would disagree, but of course we cant, because they are dead. There are a lot of kids now who seem to agree with me, the rest of the world seems to agree with me. Weird that it is just one country that doesn't want to agree.. I wonder if it has anything to do with the gun sales and gun lobby.

I see you conveniently left out the majority of the people and every branch of the government that says so. And yes, the most important reason is that "piece of paper" That "piece of paper" enumerates and forces the government to recognize the unalienable rights of the American people.

So you are not sure why it would be handy for the police to know where something came from? And you can buy a single gun without a problem, without a background check. If you can do it once, you can do it twice, and you can do it a dozen times as well.

The right of each individual to be private in his/her belongings outweighs the government's desire for control of citizens. This is the very reason our Constitution was created.

Lol, right, somehow the numbers do not agree with that statement. There are more people shot in the US by people with a CCW then there are in Europe, the guns do not make anything safer.

Well, Europe doesn't have a CCW equivalent for private citizenss to my knowledge. If you mean that CCW holders shoot more people than are shot in all of Europe then I must throw the BS flag and require a source. CCW holders are many times less criminal and violent than the general populaton. Considering that each and every one of them has been subjected to a background check, it's not really surprising.

But it is disingenuous to compare two things that are made to serve different functions. If you want to compare two things then you can compare cars to trains, to transport devices that claim lives. You can't compare one thing that is only useful to kill against something that is absolutely needed in our society for it to actually survive.

Again with the fallacy, all these things have an actual use in society, guns do not.

Chorine bleach, ammonia, and other harmful chemicals are absolutely needed to clean homes? Accidental poisonings kill 4 times as many people as firearms - with a much greater proportion of children being victims.

And you would take guns from people you disagree with too if you where a dictator. Again, just because a tyrannical government does something doesn't make everything a tyrannical government does by default tyrannical.

Its absolutely paranoid to think that your government is out to get you, and if they wanted to get you then they are more then capable of doing so.

Sure, if I were a dictator, I'd want to disarm the public. I'd be foolish not to do so as those arms could be used against me and my regime. In a free society, the citizens can be armed if they so wish.

[Deleted]

It matters because it is a historical fact, and tyrannical governments have been a reoccurring theme throughout history.

I don't think that the US Government is coming after me, because of the safeguards introduced by the founding fathers in the Constitution.
The 1st, 2nd, and 10th Amendments being the most important.

History is long, but for a long time we haven't had such tyrannical governments, and it had nothing to do with everyone having guns.

Your faith in a piece of paper is rather disturbing, specially when you look at the current state of your country.

[misterpuk]

Its not a piece of paper, though. Its a collective set of rules we've all collectively agreed to. If you want to change those rules, see Article V and go to it.

[Deleted]

I see you conveniently left out the majority of the people and every branch of the government that says so. And yes, the most important reason is that "piece of paper" That "piece of paper" enumerates and forces the government to recognize the unalienable rights of the American people.

Right, and the rest of the world laughs at you for that.

The right of each individual to be private in his/her belongings outweighs the government's desire for control of citizens. This is the very reason our Constitution was created.

The right of the safty of the rest of the population outweighs your personal liberties every time. And again with hte piece of paper, its really nothing special and only is hindering progress at this point.

Well, Europe doesn't have a CCW equivalent for private citizenss to my knowledge. If you mean that CCW holders shoot more people than are shot in all of Europe then I must throw the BS flag and require a source. CCW holders are many times less criminal and violent than the general populaton. Considering that each and every one of them has been subjected to a background check, it's not really surprising.

Nope, there isn't any CCW here, and no one get shot by them, see how good this works!

Chorine bleach, ammonia, and other harmful chemicals are absolutely needed to clean homes? Accidental poisonings kill 4 times as many people as firearms - with a much greater proportion of children being victims.

Yes they are, just go and try to clean your bathroom with green soap.

Sure, if I were a dictator, I'd want to disarm the public. I'd be foolish not to do so as those arms could be used against me and my regime. In a free society, the citizens can be armed if they so wish.

No, you would not disarm the public, you would only disarm those of the public that are against you. In a free society there is no need for guns, as you are free to speak your mind.

[Mullet Man]

Right, https://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/27/w...27cnd-cia.html So you are saying that the CIA never operates in the US, even after declassified information proved that they did. Just because it doesn't fit your agenda doens't make it a "conspiracy".



I can defend my life with lethal force if that is what it takes, but i cant kill someone because he tries to steal my tv. Anything other then this would be barbaric in every sense of the word.

I comprehend the difference, the difference is much less death and despair. That you are unwilling to see this is on you, not the rest of the world were we actually feel safe.

- - - Updated - - -



No, that is a strawman you are setting up, not even close to what ive said.

These people would not need a force multiplier in a society where they feel safe.

I agree with a previous poster.

You are very naive, and live a sheltered life.

You need to visit other countries, get outside of the cities, spend time alone in the woods and deserts.
Travel across America and Europe on a limited budget. Stay at European hostels and American rest stops.
Visit a third world country, and travel to the non-tourist areas.

We don't live in a made up world.

- - - Updated - - -

History is long, but for a long time we haven't had such tyrannical governments, and it had nothing to do with everyone having guns.

Your faith in a piece of paper is rather disturbing, specially when you look at the current state of your country.

Not for a very long time???
How old are you?

[Deleted]

Its not a piece of paper, though. Its a collective set of rules we've all collectively agreed to. If you want to change those rules, see Article V and go to it.

It is just a piece of paper, just like any other law book.

[Citizen T]

It is just a piece of paper, just like any other law book.

Just like the UN charter, EU charter, all country laws, human rights conventions, etc. So by your argument, the world should be entirely the strong ruling the weak. Since all of these laws are just pieces of paper.

[Shadowferal]

Its not a piece of paper, though. Its a collective set of rules we've all collectively agreed to. If you want to change those rules, see Article V and go to it.

Such applies to those that are actually Americans.
Anyone else thinking that they can change things here is living in a fantasy.

[Jerot]

So, basically, you had kids without being financially prepared to take care of them and you're waiting for them to hit a certain age for a government handout. Thanks for making my taxes higher.

If you're really concerned about it, then you need to step up and take personal responsibility for the sake of your children and make any and all sacrifieces you need to for them.

Go get a second job. Deliver pizzas, drive an uber, there's tons of jobs you can take on to addres your finincial situation.

Your reading comprehension just isn't up to snuff. They already said it was also because taking that second job wouldnt be good for the kids. You need to spend time as a family or they'll turn out messed up like you. Besides, an additional 1200 is a ton of money for the majority of families.

You should be happy your tax money is going towards helping the next generation to be more educated. Maybe they'll be smart enough to pass modern gun laws the rest of the world have already adopted.

If you really cared about your taxes, maybe you should take a look at exorbitant military spending, corporate tax havens, and throwing money at "allies" that support terrorists and commit war crimes in yemen.